Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:46:08.578Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mortar Dating Methodology: Assessing Recurrent Issues and Needs for Further Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 December 2017

Roald Hayen ,
Mark Van Strydonck ,
Laurent Fontaine ,
Mathieu Boudin ,
Alf Lindroos ,
Jan Heinemeier ,
Åsa Ringbom ,
Danuta Michalska ,
Irka Hajdas  and
Sophie Hueglin
...Show all authors
Roald Hayen*
Affiliation:
Royal Institute for Cultural Heritage, Jubelpark 1, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
Mark Van Strydonck
Affiliation:
Royal Institute for Cultural Heritage, Jubelpark 1, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
Laurent Fontaine
Affiliation:
Royal Institute for Cultural Heritage, Jubelpark 1, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
Mathieu Boudin
Affiliation:
Royal Institute for Cultural Heritage, Jubelpark 1, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
Alf Lindroos
Affiliation:
Dept. of Geology and Mineralogy, Åbo Akademi University, Finland
Jan Heinemeier
Affiliation:
Aarhus AMS Centre, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Aarhus University, Denmark
Åsa Ringbom
Affiliation:
Department of Art History, Åbo Akademi University, Finland
Danuta Michalska
Affiliation:
Institute of Geology, Adam Mickiewicz University, ul. Bogumiła Krygowskiego 12, 61-680 Poznań, Poland
Irka Hajdas
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Ion Beam Physics, ETHZ, Otto-Stern-Weg 5, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland
Sophie Hueglin
Affiliation:
School of History, Classics and Archaeology, Newcastle University, United Kingdom
Fabio Marzaioli
Affiliation:
CIRCE and Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli, Dip. di Scienze Ambientali, Italy
Filippo Terrasi
Affiliation:
CIRCE and Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli, Dip. di Scienze Ambientali, Italy
Isabella Passariello
Affiliation:
CIRCE and Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli, Dip. di Scienze Ambientali, Italy
Manuela Capano
Affiliation:
CIRCE and Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli, Dip. di Scienze Ambientali, Italy
Francesco Maspero
Affiliation:
CUDAM, Università di Milano-Bicocca, piazza della Scienza 4, 20126 Milan, Italy, and INFN
Laura Panzeri
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienza dei Materiali, Università di Milano-Bicocca, via R. Cozzi 55, 20125 Milan, Italy, and INFN
Anna Galli
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienza dei Materiali, Università di Milano-Bicocca, via R. Cozzi 55, 20125 Milan, Italy, and INFN CNR-IFN, Piazza L. Da Vinci 32, 20133 Milan, Italy
Gilberto Artioli
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Geoscienze, Università di Padova, Italy
Anna Addis
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Geoscienze, Università di Padova, Italy
Michele Secco
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Geoscienze, Università di Padova, Italy
Elisabetta Boaretto
Affiliation:
Max Planck-Weizmann Center for Integrative Archaeology and Anthropology, D-REAMS Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory, Weizmann Institute, Israel
Christophe Moreau
Affiliation:
LMC14, CEA/Saclay, France
Pierre Guibert
Affiliation:
IRAMAT-CRP2A, UMR5060 CNRS-Université Bordeaux Montaigne, Maison de l’Archéologie, Esplanade des Antilles, 33607 Pessac, France
Petra Urbanova
Affiliation:
IRAMAT-CRP2A, UMR5060 CNRS-Université Bordeaux Montaigne, Maison de l’Archéologie, Esplanade des Antilles, 33607 Pessac, France
Justyna Czernik
Affiliation:
Poznań Radiocarbon Laboratory, Poznań Park of Science and Technology, ul. Rubież 46, 61-612 Poznań, Poland
Tomasz Goslar
Affiliation:
Poznań Radiocarbon Laboratory, Poznań Park of Science and Technology, ul. Rubież 46, 61-612 Poznań, Poland Faculty of Physics, Adam Mickiewicz University, ul. Umultowska 85, 61-614 Poznań, Poland
Marta Caroselli
Affiliation:
Univ. of Applied Sciences of Southern Switzerland, Switzerland
*
*Corresponding author. Email: roald.hayen@kikirpa.be.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Absolute dating of mortars is crucial when trying to pin down construction phases of archaeological sites and historic stone buildings to a certain point in time or to confirm, but possibly also challenge, existing chronologies. To evaluate various sample preparation methods for radiocarbon (14C) dating of mortars as well as to compare different dating methods, i.e. 14C and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL), a mortar dating intercomparison study (MODIS) was set up, exploring existing limits and needs for further research. Four mortar samples were selected and distributed among the participating laboratories: one of which was expected not to present any problem related to the sample preparation methodologies for anthropogenic lime extraction, whereas all others addressed specific known sample preparation issues. Data obtained from the various mortar dating approaches are evaluated relative to the historical framework of the mortar samples and any deviation observed is contextualized to the composition and specific mineralogy of the sampled material.

Keywords

limemortar datingOSLradiocarbon AMS dating
Type
Method Development
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 59 , Special Issue 6: 8th International Symposium, Edinburgh, 27 June – 1 July, 2016 Part 2 of 2 , December 2017 , pp. 1859 - 1871
Copyright
© 2017 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

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.)

Footnotes

Selected Papers from the 8th Radiocarbon & Archaeology Symposium, Edinburgh, UK, 27 June–1 July 2016

References

Baxter, MS, Walton, A. 1970. Radiocarbon dating of mortars. Nature 225(5236):937–938.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Binda, L, Baronio, G. 1988. Survey of brick/binder adhesion in powdered brick mortars and plasters. Masonry International Journal 2(3):87–92.Google Scholar
Blake, EM. 1959. Roman Construction in Italy from Tiberius Through the Flavians. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Boynton, RS. 1980. Chemistry and Technology of Lime and Limestone. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley Interscience. 592 p.Google Scholar
Folk, RL, Valastro, S. Jr. 1976. Successful technique for dating of lime mortars by carbon-14. Journal of Field Archaeology 3:203–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folk, RL, Valastro, S. Jr. 1979. Dating of lime mortar by 14C. In: Berger R, Suess HE, editors. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Radiocarbon Dating, 1976. Los Angeles/La Jolla.Google Scholar
Hajdas, I, Lindroos, A, Heinemeier, J, Ringbom, Å, Marzaioli, F, Terrasi, F, Passariello, I, Capano, M, Artioli, G, Addis, A, Secco, M, Michalska, D, Czernik, J, Goslar, T, Hayen, R, Van Strydonck, M, Fontaine, L, Boudin, M, Maspero, F, Panzeri, L, Galli, A, Urbanova, P, Guibert, P. 2017. Preparation and dating of mortar samples—Mortar Dating Inter-comparison Study (MODIS). Radiocarbon 59(6):this issue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayen, R, Van Strydonck, M, Boaretto, E, Lindroos, A, Heinemeier, J, Ringbom, Å, Hueglin, S, Michalska, D, Hajdas, I, Marzaoili, F, Maspero, F, Galli, A, Artioli, G, Moreau, C, Guibert, P, Caroselli, M. 2016. Analysis and characterisation of historic mortars for absolute dating. In: Proceedings of the 4th Historic Mortars Conference (HMC 2016). 10–12 October 2016. Santorini. In press.Google Scholar
Heinemeier, J, Jungner, H, Lindroos, A, Ringbom, Å, von Konow, T, Rud, N. 1997. AMS 14C dating of lime mortar. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 123(1-4):487–495.Google Scholar
Hueglin, S. 2011. Medieval mortar mixers revisited, Basle and beyond. ZAM Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Middelalters 39:189–212.Google Scholar
Hueglin, S. 2017. Time framing Early Medieval stone building north of the Alps—a discussion of recent challenging results. Radiocarbon 59(6):this issue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labeyrie, J, Delibrias, G. 1964. Dating of old mortars by the carbon-14 method. Nature 201(4920):742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancaster, L. 2005. Concrete vaulted construction in imperial Rome. Innovations in Context. 58–59.Google Scholar
Lindroos, A, Heinemeier, J, Ringbom, Å, Braskén, M, Sveinbjörnsdóttir, Á. 2007. Mortar dating using AMS 14C and sequential dissolution: examples from Medieval, non-hydraulic lime mortars from the Åland Islands, SW Finland. Radiocarbon 49(1):47–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindroos, A, Heinemeier, J, Ringbom, Å, Brock, F, SonckKoota, P, Pehkonen, M, Suksi, J. 2010. Problems in radiocarbon dating of Roman pozzolana mortars. Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 128 . Societas Scientiarum Fennica. p 214–230.Google Scholar
Marzaioli, F, Nonni, S, Passariello, I, Capano, M, Ricci, P, Lubritto, C, De Cesare, N, Eramo, G, Castillo, JAQ, Terrasi, F. 2013. Accelerator mass spectrometry 14C dating of lime mortars: methodological aspects and field study applications at CIRCE (Italy). Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 294:246–251.Google Scholar
Michalska, D, Czernik, J. 2015. Carbonates in leaching reactions in context of 14C dating. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 361:431–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michalska, D, Czernik, J, Gosar, T. 2017. Methodlogical aspect of mortars dating (Poznań, Poland, MODIS). Radiocarbon 59(6):this issue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nawrocka, D, Michniewicz, J, Pawlyta, J, Pazdur, A. 2005. Application of radiocarbon method for dating of lime mortars. Geochronometria 24:109–115.Google Scholar
Nawrocka, D, Czernik, J, Goslar, T. 2009. 14C dating of carbonate mortars from Polish and Israeli sites. Radiocarbon 51(2):857–866.Google Scholar
Ringbom, Å, Heinemeier, J, Lindroos, A, Brock, F. 2011. Mortar dating and Roman pozzolana, results and interpretations. Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 128 . Societas Scientiarum Fennica. 187–208.Google Scholar
Ringbom, Å, Lindroos, A, Heinemeier, J, Sonck-Koota, P. 2014. 19 years of mortar dating: learning from experience. Radiocarbon 56(2):619–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sjöberg, P, Lindroos, A, Ringbom, Å. 2011. Radiocarbon dating of the medieval churches of the Åboland Archipelago. In: Hansson J, Ranta H, editors. Archaeology and History of Churches in the Baltic Region. p 171–195.Google Scholar
Sonninen, E, Jungner, H, Erametsa, P. 1984. Dating of mortar and bricks from the castle of Kastelholm. In: Edgren T, Junger H, editors. Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on the Application of Scientific Methods in Archaeology. Helsinki: Iskos.Google Scholar
Sonninen, E, Jungner, H. 2001. An improvement in preparation of mortar for radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon 43(2A):271–273.Google Scholar
Urbanova, P, Hourcade, D, Ney, C, Guibert, P. 2015. Sources of uncertainties in OSL dating of archaeological mortars: the case study of the Roman amphitheatre Palais-Gallien in Bordeaux. Radiation Measurements 72:100–110.Google Scholar
Urbanova, P, Guibert, P. 2017. Methodological study on single grain OSL dating of mortars: comparison of five reference archaeological sites. Geochronometria. https://doi.org/10.1515/geochr-2015-0050.Google Scholar
Van Strydonck, M, Dupas, M, Dauchot-Dehon, M, Pachiaudi, C, Marechal, J. 1986. The influence of contaminating (fossil) carbonate and the variation of δ13C in mortar dating. Radiocarbon 28(2A):702–710.Google Scholar