Journal Highlight: Comparison of analytical techniques for analysis of archaeological bronze

Comparison of analytical techniques for analysis of archaeological bronze

Archaeometry, 2015, 57, 677-686
V. Lyubomirova, R. Djingova and I. Kuleff

Abstract: While many analyses of archaeological bronzes have been reported in the literature, in practice it is very difficult to compare them. To assess the present status of the chemical analysis of bronze two ancient objects—a flat axe (arsenic bronze) and a sickle (tin bronze)—were cut into pieces weighing about 2 g each and were distributed to 11 laboratories. The participants used the following methods for analysis: INAA, ED–XRF, PIXE, TRXRF, FAAS, ICP–AES, ICP–MS, SEM–EDS, LA–ICP–MS and PGAA. The samples were analysed in at least quadruplicate. Dixon's and Iglewicz and Hoaglin's tests were used to detect outliers. The majority of methods provided comparable results, especially for macroelements, independent of the technique and standards used. The number of determined elements depended on the method and, naturally, on the concentration level. Therefore an important recommendation that can be made is to supply, with each archaeometric investigation, data from the analysis of appropriate Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) used in the study.

• This paper is free to view for all users registered on spectroscopyNOW.com until the end of October 2015.
  After this time, you can purchase it using Pay-Per-View on Wiley Online Library.

• Click here to access the abstract of this paper >>>
  From the abstract page you can progress to read the full paper.

• Click here for more information about Archaeometry >>>

Follow us on Twitter!