Archaeological Chemistry VIII

452 Pages·2013·14.72 MB·English

by  Ruth Ann Armitage

Archaeological Chemistry VIII
1
0
0
w
7.f
4
1
1
3-
1
0
2
k-
b
1/
2
0
1
0.
1
oi:
d
3 |
1
0
2
5,
1
er
b
o
ct
O
b):
e
W
e (
at
D
n
o
ati
c
bli
u
P

In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R., et al.;
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013.
1
0
0
w
7.f
4
1
1
3-
1
0
2
k-
b
1/
2
0
1
0.
1
oi:
d
3 |
1
0
2
5,
1
er
b
o
ct
O
b):
e
W
e (
at
D
n
o
ati
c
bli
u
P

In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R., et al.;
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013.
1147
ACS SYMPOSIUM SERIES
Archaeological Chemistry VIII
Ruth Ann Armitage, Editor
Eastern Michigan University
Ypsilanti, Michigan
1
0
0
w James H. Burton, Editor
7.f
14 University of Wisconsin-Madison
1
3- Madison, Wisconsin
1
0
2
k-
b
1/
2
0
1
0.
1
oi:
d
3 |
1
0
2
5,
1
er
b
o
ct
O
b):
e
W
e (
at
D
n
atio Sponsored by the
c
bli ACS Division of History of Chemistry
u
P

AmericanChemicalSociety,Washington,DC
DistributedinprintbyOxfordUniversityPress
In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R., et al.;
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013.
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
ArchaeologicalChemistryVIII/RuthAnnArmitage,editor,EasternMichiganUniversity,
Ypsilanti,Michigan,JamesH.Burton,editor,UniversityofWisconsin-Madison,Madison,
Wisconsin.
1
0 pagescm.-- (ACSSymposiumseries;1147)
0
w "SponsoredbytheACSDivisionofHistoryofChemistry."
47.f Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
1
1 ISBN978-0-8412-2924-2(alk.paper)
13- 1. Archaeologicalchemistry--Congresses. I.Armitage,RuthAnn.II.Burton,JamesH.
0
2 (JamesHutson),1950-III.AmericanChemicalSociety.DivisionoftheHistoryof
k-
b Chemistry.
1/
2 CC79.C5A7342013
0
0.1 930.1--dc23
oi: 1 2013038018
d
3 |
1
0
2
5,
1
ber ThepaperusedinthispublicationmeetstheminimumrequirementsofAmericanNational
o
ct Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials,
O
b): ANSIZ39.48n1984.
e
W Copyright©2013AmericanChemicalSociety
e (
Dat DistributedinprintbyOxfordUniversityPress
n
o
ati AllRightsReserved. ReprographiccopyingbeyondthatpermittedbySections107or108
c
bli oftheU.S.CopyrightActisallowedforinternaluseonly,providedthataper-chapterfeeof
Pu $40.25plus$0.75perpageispaidtotheCopyrightClearanceCenter,Inc.,222Rosewood

Drive,Danvers,MA01923,USA.Republicationorreproductionforsaleofpagesinthis
bookispermittedonlyunderlicensefromACS.Directtheseandotherpermissionrequests
toACSCopyrightOffice,PublicationsDivision,115516thStreet,N.W.,Washington,DC
20036.
Thecitationoftradenamesand/ornamesofmanufacturersinthispublicationisnottobe
construedasanendorsementorasapprovalbyACSofthecommercialproductsorservices
referenced herein; nor should the mere reference herein to any drawing, specification,
chemicalprocess, orotherdataberegardedasalicenseorasaconveyanceofanyright
or permission to the holder, reader, or any other person or corporation, to manufacture,
reproduce,use,orsellanypatentedinventionorcopyrightedworkthatmayinanywaybe
relatedthereto. Registerednames,trademarks,etc.,usedinthispublication,evenwithout
specificindicationthereof,arenottobeconsideredunprotectedbylaw.
PRINTEDINTHEUNITEDSTATESOFAMERICA
In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R., et al.;
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013.
Foreword
The ACS Symposium Series was first published in 1974 to provide a
mechanism for publishing symposia quickly in book form. The purpose of
the series is to publish timely, comprehensive books developed from the ACS
sponsoredsymposiabasedoncurrentscientificresearch. Occasionally,booksare
01 developed from symposia sponsored by other organizations when the topic is of
0
w keeninteresttothechemistryaudience.
7.f
4
1
1 Beforeagreeingtopublishabook,theproposedtableofcontentsisreviewed
3-
1 forappropriateandcomprehensivecoverageandforinteresttotheaudience. Some
0
2
k- papersmaybeexcludedtobetterfocusthebook;othersmaybeaddedtoprovide
b
1/ comprehensiveness. When appropriate, overview or introductory chapters are
2
0
1 added. Draftsofchaptersarepeer-reviewedpriortofinalacceptanceorrejection,
0.
oi: 1 andmanuscriptsarepreparedincamera-readyformat.
d
3 | As a rule, only original research papers and original review papers are
1
20 included in the volumes. Verbatim reproductions of previous published papers
15, arenotaccepted.
er
b
o
ct
O
eb): ACSBooksDepartment
W
e (
at
D
n
o
ati
c
bli
u
P

In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R., et al.;
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013.
Preface
The 12th Archaeological Chemistry Symposium was held as part of the
Spring ACS National Meeting in New Orleans, Louisiana, April 7–11, 2013.
ThisvolumeisacompilationofpresentationsfromtheSymposium,thelatestin
alongtraditionthatbeganattheACSNationalMeetinginPhiladelphiain1950.
1 The numbering of the symposia is, however, somewhat in question. According
0
0
pr to Brill (1), “…memories of only the First and Third Symposia remained clear
7.
4 [atthe4thSymposium]…Weleaveit(withablush)tothehistorians…todecide
1
1
3- upontherealityoftheSecondSymposium…”
1
20 The symposium consisted of four half-day symposia, an evening poster
bk- session,andakeynoteaddressbyDr. A.MarkPollard,EdwardHallProfessorof
1/
2 ArchaeologicalScienceandDirectoroftheResearchLaboratoryforArchaeology
0
1
0. and the History of Art at the University of Oxford. We choose four broad
1
oi: categories for the symposia: Pigments, Residues and Material Analysis, X-Ray
d
3 | Fluorescence Spectroscopy, and Isotopes in Archaeology. These categories are
01 by no means comprehensive. Rather, they serve as a snapshot perspective of
2
5, archaeological chemistry today and are necessarily biased toward our areas
1
er of expertise and those of the participants in a chemistry meeting. Notably,
b
cto studies of ancient DNA and other advances in biomolecular archaeology are
O
b): underrepresentedinthisvolume.
e Thepapershereinshowthatarchaeologicalchemistrytodayismorethanthe
W
e ( usualstudiesoftraceelementsinpotteryandlithics,whichcontinuetocontribute
Dat to our understanding of human behavior in the past. New areas of research
on include more focus on portability to analyze pigments in situ and artifacts in
cati museums, nascent developments in non- and minimally destructive chemical
ubli characterization,newapplicationsofisotopicanalyses,andanincreasinginterest
P
inarchaeologicalbiomolecules.
This volume is divided into sections that roughly follow those of the
Symposium. The first section, Pigments and Dyes, begins with a review of
manuscript pigments by Dr. Mary Virginia Orna, the organizer of the 9th
Archaeological Chemistry Symposium and Editor of Archaeological Chemistry:
Organic,Inorganic,andBiochemicalAnalysis(2). Eachofthefollowingsections
beginswithareviewpaperfromoneofourinvitedspeakers. Dr. ValerieSteele,
nowattheUniversityofBradfordintheDepartmentofArchaeologicalScience,
provides an overview of the state — for better and for worse — of analyses of
archaeological residues. Portable X-ray fluorescence instruments are becoming
extremely common in archaeological chemistry investigations; Dr. Aaron
ShugarofBuffaloStateUniversityprovidesinhischaptersomeperspectivesand
warningsagainsttheindiscriminateuseofthistechnology. Finally,Dr. Matthew
xi
In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R., et al.;
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013.
Sponheimer gives an overview of the contributions of stable carbon isotope and
tracemetalstudiesinunderstandingearlyhominindiets.
The final chapter of the book provides a perspective on the earliest work
in archaeological chemistry in the 18th century and brings us up to today’s
challenges. We find ourselves in Dr. Pollard’s text, carrying out our own
research“onawingandaprayer,”asboththesolitarychemistsupportedbyher
institution in part for the accessible public interest aspect of her research and a
scientist within an anthropology department, fighting for funding in this era of
sequestration and downsizing. We hope that this volume contributes toward the
“open,respectful,meaningfulanditerativedialogueacrossthemanydisciplinary
boundaries”encounteredinarchaeologicalchemistry(3).
We thank all of the contributors and reviewers for their time and effort.
We especially thank technical editor Arlene Furman of ACS Books for her
1
0
0 patience and help in producing this volume, and Seth Rasmussen, Tom Strom,
pr
7. andVeraMainzfromtheDivisionoftheHistoryofChemistry(HIST)foralltheir
4
1
1 help in organizing and running the Symposium. HIST and the ACS Divisional
3-
1 Activities Committee provided the majority of the funding for the Symposium,
0
2
k- withadditionalsupportfromtheSocietyforArchaeologicalSciencesandBruker
b
1/ Corporation.
2
0
1
0.
1
oi:
d References
3 |
1
0
2
5, 1. Brill, R. H. In Science and Archaeology; Brill, R. H., Ed.; MIT Press:
1
er Cambridge,MA,1968,px−xi.
ob 2. Archaeological Chemistry: Organic, Inorganic, and Biochemical Analysis;
ct
O Orna,M.V.,Ed.;ACSSymposiumSeries625;AmericanChemicalSociety:
b): Washington, DC,1996.
e
W
e ( 3. Pollard, A. M. In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R. A., Burton
at J. H., Eds.; ACS Symposium Series 1147; American Chemical Society:
D
n Washington, DC,2013.
o
ati
c
bli
u
P
RuthAnnArmitage
Professor,DepartmentofChemistry,EasternMichiganUniversity
Ypsilanti, Michigan48197
734-487-0290(telephone)
[email protected](e-mail)
JamesH.Burton
Director,LaboratoryforArchaeologicalChemistry,DepartmentofAnthropology
1180ObservatoryDrive,UniversityofWisconsin-Madison
Madison, Wisconsin53706
608-262-4505(telephone)
[email protected](e-mail)
xii
In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R., et al.;
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013.
©2013AmericanChemicalSociety
inmanuscriptsbetweenthe10thand16thcenturiesforthefollowingpurposes:
theirera. Thispaperwillreviewthescientificidentificationofartists’colorsused
pursuitofcraftingthemanuscriptstheyhandedontousasprecioustreasuresof
yet to come, color, for them, was the most visual and pervasive reality in their
observationsincetheformaldisciplineofchemistrywouldnotexistforcenturies
ourlives”(1). Thoughmedievalartistscouldnothaverealizednorexpressedthis
“Coloristhemostvisual,pervasiveexampleoftheimportanceofchemistryto
Introduction
medievalmanuscriptsisalsodiscussed.
pigment usage. The technical future of chemical analysis of
01 involvedwithhandlingmanuscriptsdirectly,andanachronistic
0
ch usage between Armenian and Byzantine artists, the problems
7.
4 several important artists’ pigments, the difference in pigment
1
1
3- manuscript production, clarifying periods of known usage of
1
20 influence and interconnection between medieval centers of
bk- collaborative building of a pigment database, tracing lines of
1/
2 more about the artistic process itself. This paper reviews the
0
1
0. profound,importancetothehistorianasatoolforunderstanding
1
oi: analysis of pigments can have a broader, and perhaps a more
d
3 | painting practices of the artist or period. In addition, the
01 or dating of a painting based on comparison with the known
2
5, main purposes. It can confirm or deny the alleged attribution
1
er Forthearthistorian,chemicalanalysisofpigmentsservestwo
b
o
ct
O
b):
e
W
e ( *E-mail: [email protected]
Dat NewRochelle,NewYork10805,U.S.A.
on DepartmentofChemistry,TheCollegeofNewRochelle,
ati
c
Publi Mary Virginia Orna*

Connections—A Review
Manuscripts: Tracing Artistic Influences and
Artists’ Pigments in Illuminated Medieval
Chapter 1
In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R., et al.;
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013.
4
workshops: oneusedazurite(basiccopper(II)carbonate)andhighqualitynatural
theemploymentofthebluepigmentsindicatedtheinvolvementoftwodifferent
specifyingattributionsamongdifferentpaintersinthemanuscript. Differencesin
onlyyieldedhelpfulinformationregardingconservation, butalsowashelpfulin
Analysis of the Gladzor (Glajor is an alternative spelling) Gospel Book not
preciousdocuments.
helpful to curators and conservators who must control the handling of such
virtuallylightfastoverindefiniteperiodsoftime. Suchanalysesareenormously
work from light would not be a principal concern since mineral pigments are
was used extensively in the manuscript, one could safely say that shielding the
usedextensivelyfromancienttimes(6). Sinceneitheroftheseorganicpigments
colorant taken from the sap or ooze of trees of the genus Garcinia. It, too, was
substrate such as aluminum hydroxide (5). Gamboge was another plant-derived
often used as a dye, it could also be used as a pigment if precipitated on a solid
1
0
0 describedbyStrabo,PlinytheElder,DioscoridesandtheTalmud. Thoughmost
h
c
7. of the Rubiaceae family. It has been known from ancient times, having been
4
11 MadderwasderivedfromtherootsoftheRubiatinctorumandothermembers
3-
1 TableI;examplesoftwoofthepigmentsisshownbelowinFigure1.
0
k-2 thetwomasterpainters(3,4). Asummaryofpigmentusagebyatelierisgivenin
b
1/ usedbythethree“apprentice”artistswhoworkedinanatelierotherthanthatof
2
10 employedbyallfiveoftheartistswhoworkedonthemanuscript,andofgamboge,
0.
1 were of mineral origin with the exception of red (madder) lake, which was
doi: ratherstartlinginformation: virtuallyallofthepigmentsusedinitsmanufacture
3 | transforminfraredspectroscopyandrefractiveindexmeasurementsyieldedsome
1
0
2 of very extensive study. Analysis of its palette by X-ray diffraction, Fourier
5,
1 The Gladzor Gospel Book (Armenian MS 1, UCLA) has been the subject
er
b
o
ct Pilot Project: The Gladzor (Glajor) Gospel Book of UCLA
O
b):
e
W
ate ( early10thcenturytothelate16thcentury.
D
n Armenian and Byzantine workshops; the dates of their creation range from the
o
ati Themanuscriptsdescribedandanalyzedinthisworkcamefromavarietyof
c
bli insitu. Thevalueofthesemethodswillbediscussedlaterinthispaper.
u
P ofnewer,non-invasivetechniquesthatallowtheanalystaccesstothemanuscript

of refractive index, this approach is now questionable in light of the availability
analysis by means of X-ray diffraction, infrared spectroscopy and measurement
method used and described here consisted of extracting minute samples for
objective description of method, and restoration. Although the identification
In addition to these objectives, Robert Feller (2) lists two additional ones:
• Tospecifyattributionsamongdifferentpaintersinamanuscript.
• Touncoverforgeries(de-authentication);
• Torecommendconservation&handlingpracticebasedonthecontent;
cultures;
• To trace lines of influence between and among painting schools and
• Todetermineorconfirmplaceoforiginanddate;
In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R., et al.;
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013.
5
orpiment,gambogeandmassicot
massicot,orrealgarmixedwith
Yellow Orpiment Gamboge,ororpimentmixedwith
White Calcinedbonemixedwithquartz Whitelead
Red Vermilion Vermilion
Purple Ultramarinemixedwithredlake
01 minium
0
h Orange Miniumororpimentmixedwith
c
7.
4
1 Olive Gamboge
1
3-
1 whitelead
0
k-2 Magenta Redlakeorredlakemixedwith Redlake
b
21/ traceofvermilion
0
1 withultramarine ultramarineplusanhydriteanda
0.
1 Green Orpimentmixedwithazuriteor Orpimentmixedwithgambogeor
oi:
3 | d Gold Gold Gold
1
0 gamboge,gypsumandanhydrite
2
5, Flesh Orpimentmixedwithrealgar Orpimentmixedwithrealgar,
1
ber whitingandhydratedironoxide
o
ct gypsumandcharcoalblack orpiment,gypsum,charcoalblack,
O
b): Brown Vermilionmixedwithorpiment, Vermilionmixedvariouslywith
e
W Blue Azurite;Ultramarine Ultramarine+UltramarineAsh
e (
at Black Charcoalblack Charcoalblack
D
n
o Hue “MasterPainter”Atelier “Apprentice”Atelier
ati
c
bli TableI.PigmentsListedbyAtelierasUsedintheGladzorGospelBook(3,4)
u
P

amongthepigmentsofthefirstworkshop(4).
workshop. Likewise, gamboge, used in the second workshop was not found
and ultramarine; this occurred nowhere in the miniatures attributed to the first
workshop also used a purple pigment that consisted of a mixture of red lake
ultramine, while the other used lesser quality natural ultramarine. The second
In Archaeological Chemistry VIII; Armitage, R., et al.;
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2013.