Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T04:29:26.111Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

AMS Radiocarbon Dating: Its Current and Future Role in Art Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2013

D.C. Stulik  and
D.J. Donahue
Get access

Extract

Since the development of 14C dating by W.F. Libby in the 1940s and 1950s, the method has proved to be the best absolute method for chronometric dating of organic and some carbon-containing inorganic materials. It has become an essential research tool for both archaeologists and geologists. Even broader application horizons have been opened to radiocarbon dating by use of the accelerator mass spectrometer, which allows routine analysis of submilligram samples. Art curatorship and art conservation directly benefit from this development.

There are pronounced similarities between application of radiocarbon dating in archaeology and art research but there are also major differences which make it difficult to simply take a methodology developed for archaeological research and apply it directly to radiocarbon dating of art objects.

In both fields the application of dating techniques focuses on dating an object of unknown age or cross-checking the age of an object previously dated by other methods.

Type
Art and Technology
Information
MRS Bulletin , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , January 1992 , pp. 53 - 60
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Taylor, R.E., Radiocarbon Dating: An Archaeological Perspective (Academic Press, London, 1987).Google Scholar
2.Geyh, M.A. and Schleicher, H., Absolute Age Determination (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Hedges, R.E.M., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 52 (1990) p. 428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Hester, J.J., J. Field Archaeol. 14 (1987) p. 445.Google Scholar
5.Gillespie, R., Radiocarbon User's Handbook (Oxford Committee for Archaeology, Oxford, 1984).Google Scholar
6.Harbottle, G., Sayre, E.V., and Stoenner, R.W., Application of Science in Examination of Works of Art, edited by van Zelst, P.A. and van Zelst, I. in England (Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, 1985).Google Scholar
7.Donahue, D.J., Jull, A.J.T., and Toolin, L.J., Nucl. Instrum. and Meth. B 52 (1990) p. 224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Suter, M., Nucl. Instrum. and Meth. B 52 (1990) p. 211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Vogel, J.S., Southen, J.R., Nelson, D.E., and Brown, T.A., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 5 (1984) p. 289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Slota, P.J., Jull, A.J.T., Linick, T.W., and Toolin, L.J., Radiocarbon 29 (1987) p. 363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Gillespie, R. and Hedges, R.E.M., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 5 (1984) p. 294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Donahue, D.J., Linick, T.W., and Jull, A.J.T., Radiocarbon 32 (1990) p. 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Proceeding of the 12th International Radiocarbon Conference June 24-28, 1985, Trodheim, Norway, edited by Stuiver, M. and Kra, R., Radiocarbon 28 No. 2B (1986).Google Scholar
14.Stuiver, M. and Pearson, G.W., Radiocarbon 28, No. 2B (1986) p. 805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Anthes, R., The Head of Queen Nofretete (Gebr. Mann Verlag, Berlin, 1986).Google Scholar
16.Wiedemann, H.G. and Bayer, G., Anal. Chem. 54 (1982) p. 619A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Wiedemann, H.G., private communication.Google Scholar
18. M. Elston, private communication.Google Scholar
19.Cipriani, R., All the Paintings of Mantegna, Vol. 2 (Hawthorn Books, New York, 1963) p. 101.Google Scholar
20.Rothe, A., private communication.Google Scholar
21.Stulik, D.C., Donahue, D.J., Jull, A.J.T., and Toolin, L.J., Radiocarbon 33 (1991) p. 248.Google Scholar