[go: up one dir, main page]
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
4.1
2.2
Journals
Minerals
Special Issues
Archaeological Mineralogy
share announcement

Archaeological Mineralogy

A special issue of Minerals (ISSN 2075-163X). This special issue belongs to the section "Crystallography and Physical Chemistry of Minerals & Nanominerals".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 December 2023) | Viewed by 8647

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Daniela Pinto

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Earth and Geo-environmental Sciences, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Via Edoardo Orabona, 4, 70126 Bari, Italy
Interests: applied mineralogy; crystallography; artificial materials (ceramics, mortars, plasters, pigments, geopolymers); clays; X-ray diffraction
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Dr. Giovanna Fioretti

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Earth and Geoenvironmental Sciences Department, University of Bari Aldo Moro, 70121 Bari, Italy
Interests: archaeomineralogy; archaeometry; natural rock materials (lithic materials, decorative stone, building rocks, marbles) and artificial lapideous material (ceramics, mortars, plasters, pigments)

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The study and identification of minerals used over the centuries as raw materials for the manufacturing of objects and tools, as well as for the construction of buildings and for the execution of decorative works, represents an effective strategy to deepen the knowledge on these resources and to reconstruct the social, cultural, and economic relationships of ancient communities. One of the most positive aspects is that mineralogy studies are based on accurate methods of analysis, and therefore, their application in the field of archaeological materials leads to satisfactory and concrete results. Moreover, in recent years, due to the increasingly urgent need to operate on the archaeological heritage through non-invasive and in situ approaches, increasingly sophisticated and effective portable mineralogical investigation techniques have been developed in addition to traditional mineralogical characterization techniques.

The main aim of this Special Issue is to collect contributions regarding case studies and application of mineralogical methods in the field of archaeological materials.

For this Special Issue on “Archaeological Mineralogy”, original research articles and reviews are welcome. Research topics may be on (but not limited to) the following interest areas:

  • Lithic materials: siliceous rocks, obsidian, gemstones, and other minerals and rocks used for the manufacturing of tools and objects;
  • Ceramic materials, both for vessels and tiles and refractory ceramics, and their parts (clay, pottery, tempers, glazes);
  • Pigments and binders found in decorative works in archaeological sites, i.e., paintings, mosaics;
  • Historical mortars with construction or bedding function;
  • Decorative and dimensional stone, i.e., marbles, granites, limestone.

Dr. Daniela Pinto
Dr. Giovanna Fioretti
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Minerals is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • minerals
  • ceramics
  • pigments
  • stone
  • binders
  • mortars
  • archaeology
  • gems
  • artworks
  • raw materials

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (5 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

31 pages, 20186 KiB  
Article
The Use of Lime over the Centuries: The Complexity of the Apulian Built Heritage
by Giacomo Eramo, Marina Clausi, Giovanna Fioretti and Daniela Pinto
Minerals 2024, 14(1), 91; https://doi.org/10.3390/min14010091 - 12 Jan 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1375
Abstract
In the field of historical buildings, the wide use of lime as a binder in various contexts of application emerges from a series of artistic and archaeological evidence in the Apulia (Italy) from the 4th century BCE to the 15th century CE. The [...] Read more.
In the field of historical buildings, the wide use of lime as a binder in various contexts of application emerges from a series of artistic and archaeological evidence in the Apulia (Italy) from the 4th century BCE to the 15th century CE. The large availability of carbonate rocks in the geological substratum from Daunian Subappennines to Salento areas strongly influenced the material culture of the region. In this paper, significant study cases were presented to bring to light the technological complexity, almost completely cancelled by the widespread presence of industrial products, in the use of lime over the centuries. Through examples of use from antiquity to the modern age in Apulia (Egnatia, Lamapopoli, Tertiveri, Siponto, Lucera and Monopoli sites), technological solutions indicating an ecological dimension of production were discussed, bearing witness to technologies on a human scale and sustainability. The comparison of petrographical (POM, SEM-EDS) and mineralogical (XRPD) results indicated the technological trend and custom for lime production in the Apulian region that starts from the choice of the stone to be calcined and the aggregates and passes through the modalities of lime hydration and preparation of the mixture up to the laying. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Archaeological Mineralogy)
►▼ Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Simplified geological map of Apulia and positions of the sites discussed in the text [<a href="#B33-minerals-14-00091" class="html-bibr">33</a>], modified after Pieri et al. [<a href="#B23-minerals-14-00091" class="html-bibr">23</a>].</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flow chart of lime mortar production. In beige are depicted the geomaterials, in water green the transformation processes and in dark red the products. * The use of impure limestones and/or reactive aggregates add hydrate phases to the hardened mortar.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Classification of lime nodules. The proposed scheme takes into account the possible origin of nodules and their simple (continuous line) or complex (dashed line) path to the hardened mortar.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Types of lime nodules: (<b>a</b>) underburnt relic of oolitic limestone found in a bedding mortar of Siponto (XP); (<b>b</b>) underburnt relic of siliceous calcarenite identified in a bedding mortar of the tower of Tertiveri (XP); (<b>c</b>) non-reacting relic of overburnt lime (P); (<b>d</b>,<b>e</b>) hydration nodules of lime (XP); (<b>f</b>) mixing nodule (XP).</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Examples of lime nodules analyzed by SEM-EDS (white rectangles) to determine lime composition (<a href="#minerals-14-00091-t003" class="html-table">Table 3</a>): (<b>a</b>) underburnt relics and slaking nodules identified in a bedding mortar of the tower of Tertiveri (BSE image); (<b>b</b>) slaking nodule in a fine textured mortar in the wall belt of Lucera (layered EDS map on BSE image). White squares represent the measured areas with EDS.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>XRPD spectra of mortars composed of air lime and weathered calcarenite (ME29) (<b>a</b>), and littoral sand (ME03) (<b>b</b>) from Egnazia; or natural hydraulic lime (TER11) (<b>c</b>) from Tertiveri. Abbreviations key: Arg = aragonite; CAH = calcium aluminate hydrates; Cal = calcite; CSH = calcium silicate hydrates; Dol = dolomite; Fls = feldspars; Hal = halite; Mg-Cal = Mg-rich calcite; Q = quartz. Calcite’s peaks are related to both aggregate and carbonation products.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Types of the aggregate identified: (<b>a</b>) fine sand in bedding mortars from Lucera; fragments of coccipopesto (XP); (<b>b</b>) and carbonized fragments and ash of herbaceous vegetation (XP); (<b>c</b>) from the lining plaster of the cistern in Palatium of Lucera (P); pozzolanic reaction rim around the chert clasts (<b>d</b>) and marls (<b>e</b>) in the bedding mortars of the tower of Tertiveri (XP); (<b>f</b>) seriate fragments of <span class="html-italic">terra rossa</span> in the filling mortars of Monopoli’s city walls (P).</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Types of aggregates identified: (<b>a</b>) layered plaster with calcarenite grains (A) and spathic calcite (B) from the thermal baths of Egnazia; (<b>b</b>) littoral sand in bedding mortars from the thermal baths of Egnazia; cocciopesto mixed with alluvial sand in Egnazia (<b>c</b>) and Lamapopoli (<b>d</b>); calcarenite rubbles (<b>e</b>) and very fine sand (<b>f</b>) in plasters from Lamapopoli.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Types of aggregates identified in Siponto (<a href="#minerals-14-00091-t004" class="html-table">Table 4</a>): (<b>a</b>) very fine clayey sand (Group S); (<b>b</b>) seriate clasts of calcarenite (Group K); (<b>c</b>) combined use of fine sand and calcarenite rubbles (Group SK); (<b>d</b>) cocciopesto (Group CP).</p> Full article ">
50 pages, 15378 KiB  
Article
Characterizing Archaeological Rhyolites in the Nenana Valley, Interior Alaska
by Angela K. Gore, Kelly Graf and Joshua J. Lynch
Minerals 2023, 13(9), 1146; https://doi.org/10.3390/min13091146 - 30 Aug 2023
Viewed by 1091
Abstract
Portable X-ray fluorescence (pXRF) is a useful geochemical technique employed to explore toolstone procurement strategies in the lithic record, commonly utilized in sourcing obsidians. Non-obsidian volcanic toolstones (e.g., dacites, rhyolites, basalts, and andesites) are abundant in interior Alaskan assemblages yet understudied compared to [...] Read more.
Portable X-ray fluorescence (pXRF) is a useful geochemical technique employed to explore toolstone procurement strategies in the lithic record, commonly utilized in sourcing obsidians. Non-obsidian volcanic toolstones (e.g., dacites, rhyolites, basalts, and andesites) are abundant in interior Alaskan assemblages yet understudied compared to obsidian. Geochemical analyses of these non-obsidian materials offer the potential to gain new insights into ancient toolstone provisioning behaviors. This paper presents a synthesis of geochemical (pXRF) analyses of rhyolite artifacts, systematic regional raw material surveys, and lithic technological analyses collected from nineteen late Pleistocene and Holocene assemblages from the Nenana valley, interior Alaska. Previous research studies on archaeological rhyolites from the region are replicated, new rhyolite artifact groups are identified, and one new rhyolite source is reported and described here. Ultimately, this paper contributes to a growing body of geochemical research seeking to provide a more nuanced look at the complex late Pleistocene and Holocene record of eastern Beringia. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Archaeological Mineralogy)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of archaeological sites, sample locations, and survey boundaries in the Nenana River valley. Rhyolite outcrops: 1: Triple Lakes; 2: Sugarloaf Mountain; 3: Ferry 1; 4: Ferry 2; 5: Ferry 3; 6: Ferry 4; 7: Ferry 5; and 8: Calico Creek rhyolite (approximate location reported by Coffman and Rasic [<a href="#B98-minerals-13-01146" class="html-bibr">98</a>]; this location was not sampled during survey). Rhyolite alluvial samples: 1: Bear Creek; 2: California Creek; 3: Savage and Teklanika Confluence; 4: Teklanika River.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Logged (base 10) biplots of principal component 1 and 2 scores for rhyolites sampled from seven rhyolite outcrop locations in this study. Ellipse confidence intervals drawn at 90%.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Logged (base 10) biplots of rhyolite outcrop samples comparing principal components 2 and 4 scores of Ferry 3, Ferry 5, and Sugarloaf rhyolites (<b>a</b>) and Nb and Zr (ppm) values for Ferry 3, Ferry 5, Sugarloaf, and Triple Lakes rhyolites (<b>b</b>). Ellipse confidence intervals drawn at 90%.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Logged (base 10) 3D plots of rhyolite outcrops sampled in this study, comparing (<b>a</b>) principal components 1, 2, and 4 scores of the Ferry 1 and Ferry 3 rhyolites and (<b>b</b>) principal components 2, 3, and 5 scores of the Ferry 3 and Triple Lakes rhyolites.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Logged (base 10) biplots comparing alluvial and outcrop samples by (<b>a</b>) principal components 1 and 2 scores and (<b>b</b>) principal component 1 and 3 scores. Ellipse confidence intervals drawn at 90%.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Logged (base 10) biplots of (<b>a</b>) rhyolite artifact samples and their assigned groups by scores of principal components 1 and 2, (<b>b</b>) principal components 1 and 3, (<b>c</b>) principal components 1 and 4, and (<b>d</b>) principal components 1 and 5. Unassigned artifacts denoted by black crosses in all plots. Ellipse confidence intervals drawn at 90%. TM = Talkeetna Mountains source area, formerly “group G;” CC = Calico Creek source area, formerly “group H.”.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Logged (base 10) biplot comparing rhyolite artifact groups (ellipses) and unassigned artifacts with alluvial samples by scores of principal components 1 and 2. Alluvial samples overlapping with artifact rhyolite groups are highlighted in red. Ellipse confidence intervals drawn at 90%. TM = Teklanika Mountains source area; CC = Calico Creek source area.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Logged (base 10) biplots comparing select rhyolite artifact groups (ellipses) with alluvial samples by scores of principal components 1 and 3 (<b>a</b>) and principal components 3 and 5 (<b>b</b>). Alluvial samples positioned within or near a group ellipse in <a href="#minerals-13-01146-f007" class="html-fig">Figure 7</a> are shown here in red. CC = Calico Creek source area. Ellipse confidence intervals drawn at 90%.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Logged (base 10) biplots comparing unassigned artifacts and alluvium by (<b>a</b>) principal components 1 and 2, (<b>b</b>) principal components 1 and 3, and (<b>c</b>) principal components 1 and 4. Unassigned artifacts discussed in text denoted by red crosses and the label “UA”; alluvial samples discussed in text denoted by blue alluvial symbol and labeled. ST = Savage and Teklanika Confluence sample; T = Teklanika River sample.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Logged (base 10) biplots comparing artifact rhyolite group ellipses, unassigned artifacts, and outcrop samples (ellipses) by (<b>a</b>) scores of principal components 1 and 2, (<b>b</b>) principal components 1 and 3, (<b>c</b>) principal components 1 and 4, and (<b>d</b>) principal components 2 and 3. Artifacts assigned to Triple Lakes denoted by red crosses and labeled according to site assemblages (Moose Creek C3 (MC); Owl Ridge C3 (OR1 and OR2)). TM = Talkeetna source area; CC = Calico Creek source area. Ellipse confidence intervals drawn at 90%.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Logged (base 10) 3D plot of rhyolite outcrops sampled in this study, comparing Sr, Nb, and Rb (ppm) values of Group B artifacts and Ferry 5 outcrop samples.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Spatial distribution and proportion of rhyolite artifact groups A, B, C, D, E, F, I, J, K, L, M, N, TM (Talkeetna Mountains), CC (Calico Creek), and TRL (Triple Lakes) at sites in the Nenana valley. Density circles are representative of the number of rhyolite artifacts analyzed from each site.</p> Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Stacked bar charts showing (<b>a</b>) proportions and numbers of rhyolite artifact groups by time, and (<b>b</b>) cortex amount by group by time. CC = Calico Creek artifacts; TM = Talkeetna Mountain artifacts; TRL = Triple Lakes artifacts; UNA = unassigned artifacts. Raw counts are given within each bar section, and percentages are measured along the y-axis.</p> Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Stacked bar chart showing proportions and numbers of local and nonlocal rhyolites within each assemblage. Assemblages proceed chronologically, oldest to youngest, from left to right. Raw counts are given in each bar section, and percentages are measured along the y-axis.</p> Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Linear regression graph comparing number of rhyolite groups (y-axis; log base 10) with total number of rhyolite artifacts sampled (x-axis; log base 10). The slope coefficient is 0.369; the intercept coefficient is 0.336; Pearson’s correlation coefficient (R) is 0.824; the R<sup>2</sup> value is 0.659. Assemblages are color coded by time period. WR is Walker Road; DC 1, DC 2, and DC 4 are Dry Creek C1, Dry Creek C2, and Dry Creek C4, respectively; MC 1, MC 2, MC 3, and MC 4 are Moose Creek C1, Moose Creek C2, Moose Creek C3, and Moose Creek C4, respectively; OR 1, OR 2, and OR 3 are Owl Ridge C1, Owl Ridge C2, and Owl Ridge C3, respectively; PC 1, PC 2, and PC 3 are Panguingue Creek C1, Panguingue Creek C2, and Panguingue Creek C1, respectively; ER is Eroadaway; TW 3 is Teklanika West C3; HOU is Houdini Creek; and LPC is Little Panguingue Creek C2.</p> Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Bar chart showing mean standardized residuals (y-axis) for each archaeological assemblage (x-axis), color coded by time period. WR is Walker Road; DC 1, DC 2, and DC 4 are Dry Creek C1, Dry Creek C2, and Dry Creek C4, respectively; MC 1, MC 2, MC 3, and MC4 are Moose Creek C1, Moose Creek C2, Moose Creek C3, and Moose Creek C4, respectively; OR 1, OR 2, and OR 3 are Owl Ridge C1, Owl Ridge C2, and Owl Ridge C3, respectively.</p> Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Bar chart showing proportion and numbers of rhyolite toolstone in each assemblage compared with the proportion and number of rhyolite groups within each assemblage, presented in chronological order from left to right; percentages measured along the y-axis.</p> Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Stacked bar chart showing proportions of toolstone types within each assemblage, with percentages measured along the y axis; raw material type scored during lithic analysis of these assemblages.</p> Full article ">
21 pages, 12896 KiB  
Article
Trade Networks in the Neighbouring Roman Provinces of Aquitania-Tarraconensis on the Bay of Biscay: Evidence from Petrographic and Chemical Analyses of Common Coarse Ware Pottery
by Ainhoa Alonso-Olazabal, Maria Cruz Zuluaga, Ana Martínez-Salcedo, Milagros Esteban-Delgado, Maria Teresa Izquierdo-Marculeta, François Rechin and Luis Ángel Ortega
Minerals 2023, 13(7), 887; https://doi.org/10.3390/min13070887 - 29 Jun 2023
Viewed by 1183
Abstract
Common non-wheel-thrown Roman pottery from the southern Aquitania and north-eastern of Tarraconensis provinces (CNT-AQTA) of the Early and Later Roman Empire (1st to 5th centuries AD) has been studied. Petrological, mineralogical, and chemical analyses were conducted to contrast with the archaeological study of [...] Read more.
Common non-wheel-thrown Roman pottery from the southern Aquitania and north-eastern of Tarraconensis provinces (CNT-AQTA) of the Early and Later Roman Empire (1st to 5th centuries AD) has been studied. Petrological, mineralogical, and chemical analyses were conducted to contrast with the archaeological study of the pottery. The chemical composition of many pottery samples displays different patterns of burial chemical modification, limiting their use for provenance and diffusion studies. Particular emphasis has been paid to the petrographic features of the fabrics, as they do not change during burial, reflecting the nature of the raw material and making it possible to identify the provenance areas of the raw materials. Around the Bay of Biscay, the same pottery tradition continued in the neighbouring provinces during Roman times. Petrographic studies make it possible to determine the distribution of pottery and the changes in trade networks during the Roman period across the area of the Bay of Biscay being studied. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Archaeological Mineralogy)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Geographic location of the archaeological sites where samples were analysed around the Bay of Biscay: sites of Aloria (Amurrio, Araba); Iruña-Veleia (Iruña de Oca, Araba); Forua-Peña Forua (Forua, Bizkaia); Getaria-Zarautz Jauregia (Getaria, Gipuzkoa); Santa Maria La Real (Zarautz, Gipuzkoa); Arbium (Zarautz, Gipuzkoa); Santa Elena (Irun, Gipuzkoa); Santiagomendi (Astigarraga, Gipuzkoa) in Tarraconensian province, Spain. Sites of Saint-Paul-en-Born (Landes, Nouvelle-Aquitaine); Moliets-et-Maa (Landes); Bayonne (Nouvelle-Aquitaine); Dax (Landes, Nouvelle-Aquitaine); Lalonquette (Pyrénées-Atlantiques, Nouvelle-Aquitaine); Pardies (Peyrehorade, Landes); Sorde-l’Abbaye (Landes, Nouvelle-Aquitaine); Lescar (Pau, Nouvelle-Aquitaine) in Aquitanian province, France.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Synoptic sketch of macroscopic and microscopic features of the three main pottery productions. Fresh sample photographs: diameter corresponds to 1 cm. Photomicrographs: width of field corresponds to 2.4 mm. Geometric symbols in the synoptic sketch correspond to inclusions of different compositions.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Distribution of petrographic fabrics at the study sites. Each point represents one sample. Right: location of the sites. Each symbol represent a different petrographic fabric.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Representative thin section photomicrographs of the G1 fabric ceramic from different sites. (<b>a</b>): Fabric TP 1.1 from Arbium site (sample ARBI-10, PPL). (<b>b</b>): Inclusions of calcite spar, carbonate fragments and epidote included in TP 1.1 fabric from Bayonne site (sample BAY-36, PPL). (<b>c</b>): Calcite, epidote, and pyroxene inclusions of the TP 1.1 fabric from Zarautz site, (SNR-18, PPL). (<b>d</b>): Texture of the TP 1.2 petrographic fabric from Dax, (DAX-79-19, XPL), PPL: parallel-polarised light, XPL: cross-polarised light.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Photomicrographs showing petrographic features of the G2 fabric group. (<b>a</b>): Sandy matrix end subgroup showing bimodal distributions of angular inclusions distinctive of TP 2.1 fabric (sample SNR-33, XPL). Note sillimanite-bearing rock fragment at the centre. (<b>b</b>): The clayey matrix end subgroup shows coarse angular inclusions of TP 2.1 fabric (sample F-55, XPL). (<b>c</b>): Representative TP 2.2 fabric showing sub-rounded to sub-angular quartz with idiomorphic plagioclase inclusions (sample BAY-39, XPL). (<b>d</b>): Polygenic character of the TP 2.3 fabric; note the elongated slate fragment (sample GEA-8, PPL); PPL: parallel-polarised light, XPL: cross-polarised light.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Photomicrographs showing petrographic features of the G3 fabric group. (<b>a</b>): Petrographic fabric TP 3.1 presenting rounded chessboard pattern quartz (sample DAX-79-3, XPL). (<b>b</b>): Idiomorphic plagioclase distinctive of the TP 3.2 fabric (sample F-16, XPL). (<b>c</b>): Highly spherical and rounded quartz grains embedded in a very fine clayey matrix distinctive of the TP 3.3 fabric (sample GEA-4, XPL). (<b>d</b>): The TP 3.4 fabric includes polygenic inclusions such as slates and schists, biotitic-amphibole granodiorites and sandstones (sample Lescar-10, PPL). (<b>e</b>): Clayey matrix with very fine quartz grains with random coarse quartz fragments of TP 3.5 fabric (sample STGR-17, XPL). (<b>f</b>): TP 3.6 fabric showing moderately sorted polygenic inclusions (sample DAX-5, XPL). PPL: parallel-polarised light, XPL: cross-polarised light.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>XRD patterns of representative samples for main G1, G2 and G3 pottery fabric groups. Mineral abbreviations after Whitney and Evans [<a href="#B41-minerals-13-00887" class="html-bibr">41</a>]: Cal (Calcite), Ilt (Illite), Ms (Muscovite), Kfs (Potasium feldspar), Pl (Plagioclase), Hem (Hematite), Brk (Brookite) and Qz (Quartz).</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Scanning electron microscopy photomicrograph and elemental analysis (EDX) of fan-type habit phosphate aggregates filling a fracture.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Bivariate plots of P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> vs. Sr and P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> vs. Ba show different correlations according to the archaeological site. Dotted line corresponds to the limit between modified and unmodified pottery samples.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Hierarchical cluster analysis dendrogram based on Ward’s method (according to Euclidean distances) for the significant variables. Colours correspond to fabric groups: red for the G1, green for the G2 and blue for the G3 fabric group. A, B and C represent cluster A, cluster B and cluster C.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Principal component analysis of chemical data performed on the low P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> (&lt;0.5% wt) content, i.e., the “<span class="html-italic">non modified</span>” chemical dataset of the three fabric groups. (<b>a</b>) Plot of pc1 versus pc2, representing 27% and 14% of total variance, respectively. (<b>b</b>) Loading plot of variables considered for pc1 versus pc2.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Geological map of the studied region. Brown: Palaeozoic and Permian; Pink: Palaeozoic Ursuya massif; Red: granitoids; Purple: Triassic; Blue: Jurassic; Green: Cretaceous; Orange: Paleogene; Yellow: Eocene; Light brown and Grey: Quaternary. Stars indicate the location of the sites: 1: Aloria, 2: Iruña-Veleia, 3: Forua-Peña Forua, 4: Getaria-Zarautz Jauregia, 5: Arbium 6: Santa Maria la Real, 7: Santiagomendi, 8: Santa Elena, 9: Bayonne, 10: Moliets, 11: Saint-Paul-en-Born, 12: Pardies, 13: Dax, 14: Sordes l’Abbaye, 15: Lescar, 16: Lalonquete. The geological maps of Spain and France are available at the Spanish (IGME) and French Geological Survey (BRGM) geological services [<a href="#B69-minerals-13-00887" class="html-bibr">69</a>,<a href="#B70-minerals-13-00887" class="html-bibr">70</a>].</p> Full article ">
14 pages, 3107 KiB  
Article
Spectroscopic Investigation of a Color Painting on an Ancient Wooden Architecture from the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Prince Dai’s Mansion in Jiangsu, China
by Kezhu Han, Hong Yang, Gele Teri, Shanshuang Hu, Jiaxin Li, Yanli Li, Ersudai Ma, Yuxiao Tian, Peng Fu, Yujia Luo and Yuhu Li
Minerals 2023, 13(2), 224; https://doi.org/10.3390/min13020224 - 3 Feb 2023
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2079
Abstract
This research sheds light on the analysis of pigments and adhesives applied on a color painting on wooden architecture in Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Prince Dai’s mansion, located in Changzhou, Jiangsu Province in China. Four samples were collected from the painting above the building [...] Read more.
This research sheds light on the analysis of pigments and adhesives applied on a color painting on wooden architecture in Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Prince Dai’s mansion, located in Changzhou, Jiangsu Province in China. Four samples were collected from the painting above the building beam in the mansion, and the samples were analyzed and identified using a series of techniques, including polarized light microscopy (PLM), scanning electron microscope coupled with an energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM-EDS), micro-Raman spectroscopy (m-RS) and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). The results indicate that the red, black, blue, and green pigments were identified to be cinnabar, ivory black, indigo, and phthalocyanine green, respectively. The green pigment was inferred to be a lately repainted pigment based on its production age, suggesting that this ancient building had been refurbished or repaired. Given the good stability and visual effect of this green pigment, it is suggested to be used in future conservation processes. The pyrolysis-gas chromatography/mass Spectrometry (Py-Gc/Ms) results indicate that glue containing protein was used as a binder for the pigment samples, and that walnut oil might have been applied to the wooden architecture as a primer before painting. Our findings can well inform curators and conservators of the selection of appropriate restoration materials if necessary, and also provide data support for conservation of similar ancient buildings in southern China. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Archaeological Mineralogy)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) The location of the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Prince Dai’s mansion (the red dot), situated in Jintan County, Changzhou, Jiangsu Province; (<b>b</b>) Satellite image of the location of Dai Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Prince Dai’s mansion (The red dot represents the location of the mansion); (<b>c</b>) The color painting executed on the wooden beams in Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Prince Dai’s mansion.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Four pigment samples (left) collected from the color painting (right) on the northern beam of the main hall in the mansion (<b>a</b>) red, (<b>b</b>) black, (<b>c</b>) blue, and (<b>d</b>) green pigment), as labeled with yellow dots.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>PLM images observed under horizontal and perpendicular polarized light for (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) red, (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) black, (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>) blue, and (<b>g</b>,<b>h</b>) green pigments. All samples were observed under 20× magnifications. The sampling positions are shown in <a href="#minerals-13-00224-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a>.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Raman spectrum of the (<b>a</b>) red and (<b>b</b>) black pigment samples.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Raman spectrum and (<b>b</b>) FT-IR spectrum for the blue pigment sample (indigo,C<sub>16</sub>H<sub>10</sub>N<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub>); (<b>c</b>) Raman spectrum and (<b>d</b>) FT-IR spectrum for the green pigment (phthalocyanine green, CuC<sub>32</sub>N<sub>8</sub>Cl<sub>16</sub>).</p> Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Raman spectrum and (<b>b</b>) FT-IR spectrum for the blue pigment sample (indigo,C<sub>16</sub>H<sub>10</sub>N<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub>); (<b>c</b>) Raman spectrum and (<b>d</b>) FT-IR spectrum for the green pigment (phthalocyanine green, CuC<sub>32</sub>N<sub>8</sub>Cl<sub>16</sub>).</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The total ion chromatogram (TIC) of the red pigment samples.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The relative concentrations of fatty acids for the red pigment sample obtained by Py-GC/MS; carboxylic acid with carbon numbers of n.</p> Full article ">
22 pages, 4117 KiB  
Article
Multilayer Technology of Decorated Plasters from the domus of Marcus Vipsanus Primigenius at Abellinum (Campania Region, Southern Italy): An Analytical Approach
by Sabrina Pagano, Chiara Germinario, Maria Francesca Alberghina, Marina Covolan, Mariano Mercurio, Daniela Musmeci, Rebecca Piovesan, Alfonso Santoriello, Salvatore Schiavone and Celestino Grifa
Minerals 2022, 12(12), 1487; https://doi.org/10.3390/min12121487 - 23 Nov 2022
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 1838
Abstract
Situated on the left bank of the Sabato river, the city of Abellinum (Campania region, southern Italy) represents a tangible testimony to the influence of the Roman civilization in Irpinia. At the site, where the remains of the public area of [...] Read more.
Situated on the left bank of the Sabato river, the city of Abellinum (Campania region, southern Italy) represents a tangible testimony to the influence of the Roman civilization in Irpinia. At the site, where the remains of the public area of the town are preserved, archaeological excavations unearthed a monumental Pompeian domus, likely owned by Marcus Vipsanius Primigenius, a freedman of Agrippa, son-in-law of Augustus. The rooms preserved fine wall paintings of 3rd and 4th Pompeian style, reflecting the social status of the owner. From four rooms overlooking the peristyle, eight specimens of decorated plasters were collected, and petrographic and spectroscopic analyses were carried out to investigate the plastering and painting technology. Thin sections of all plasters depicted a multilayer technology, although differences in mix designs of the supports were highlighted. Some samples are pozzolanic plasters, containing volcanic aggregate, others can be classified as cocciopesto because of the presence of ceramic fragments mixed to the volcanic aggregate. Finally, the presence of marble powder also permitted the identification of marmorino. Moreover, the pigments, applied using a fresco or lime-painting techniques, consist of pure or mixed Fe- and Cu-based pigments to obtain yellow, orange, red, pink, and blue decorations. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Archaeological Mineralogy)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) Sketch map of <span class="html-italic">Campania</span> region, with the location of the ancient city of <span class="html-italic">Abellinum</span> (modified from [<a href="#B8-minerals-12-01487" class="html-bibr">8</a>]); (<b>b</b>) Map of the ancient city of <span class="html-italic">Abellinum</span> where the <span class="html-italic">domus</span> was unearthed (modified from [<a href="#B9-minerals-12-01487" class="html-bibr">9</a>]); (<b>c</b>) Plan of the <span class="html-italic">domus</span> (investigated rooms are reported in the red box).</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Rooms of the <span class="html-italic">domus</span> decorated with floral motifs (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) and imitation of precious marbles and stones (<b>c</b>); plaster of room I (<b>d</b>) containing ceramic fragments (inset in (<b>d</b>)); plaster of room L (<b>e</b>) on which the pictorial layer is still preserved (inset in (<b>e</b>)); plasters of room M (<b>f</b>), characterised by an inner layer of mortar containing ceramic fragments, on which an outer decorated plaster’s layer was applied (inset in (<b>f</b>)).</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Stratigraphic sections of <span class="html-italic">cocciopesto</span> samples, showing the <span class="html-italic">arriccio</span> and in <span class="html-italic">intonachino</span> layers characterised by the presence of ceramic fragments (indicated by the arrows in the stratigraphic sections of samples) as aggregate, coarser in the sample AB2 sample (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>), finer in the samples AB5 (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) and AB8 (<b>g</b>–<b>i</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Stratigraphic sections of pozzolanic plasters containing volcanic aggregate, visible both in the <span class="html-italic">arriccio</span> and <span class="html-italic">intonachino</span> layers. (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) sample AB1; (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>), sample AB3; (<b>g</b>–<b>i</b>) sample AB4.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Stratigraphic sections of <span class="html-italic">marmorino</span> samples, made with lime binder in which volcanic aggregate was mixed into the <span class="html-italic">arriccio</span> and marble dust into the <span class="html-italic">intonachino</span>. (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) sample AB6; (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) sample AB7.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>From macro to micro: pictorial layers of the samples AB1 (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>), AB3 (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>), AB4 (<b>i</b>–<b>l</b>), AB6 (<b>m</b>–<b>p</b>), AB7 (<b>q</b>–<b>t</b>) under Digital and Polarized Light Microscopy, with their microstratigraphic sketch.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Representative spectra of the analysed colours obtained via pXRF, ATR-FTIR and FORS spectroscopy.</p> Full article ">
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-5
Back to TopTop