Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSchotsmans, Eline M.J.*
dc.contributor.authorToksoy-Köksal, F.*
dc.contributor.authorBrettell, Rhea C.*
dc.contributor.authorBessou, M.*
dc.contributor.authorCorbineau, R.*
dc.contributor.authorLingle, A.M.*
dc.contributor.authorBouquin, D.*
dc.contributor.authorBlanchard, P.*
dc.contributor.authorBecker, K.*
dc.contributor.authorCastex, D.*
dc.contributor.authorKnüsel, C.J.*
dc.contributor.authorWilson, Andrew S.*
dc.contributor.authorChapoulie, R.*
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-30T10:40:59Z
dc.date.available2019-05-30T10:40:59Z
dc.date.issued2019-08
dc.identifier.citationSchotsmans EMJ, Toksoy-Köksal F, Brettell RC et al (2019) ‘Not All That Is White Is Lime’—White Substances from Archaeological Burial Contexts: Analyses and Interpretations. Archaeometry. 61(4): 809-827.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10454/17084
dc.descriptionYes
dc.description.abstractArchaeological burial contexts may include a variety of white substances, but few analyses have been published. This study reports on the physico‐chemical characterization of such residues from seven archaeological sites. It is often assumed that white materials from burial contexts are lime. Our findings demonstrate that they can be gypsum, calcite (chalk), aragonite, brushite, degraded metal, natural (gum) resins or synthetic polymer–based products. These may be present as the result of diagenetic processes, funerary practices or modern contamination. This paper provides an analytical approach for the holistic investigation of white materials encountered in burial contexts.
dc.description.sponsorshipInvestments for the future’ (IdEx Bordeaux ANR‐10‐IDEX‐03‐02). Grant Number: ANR‐10‐IDEX‐03‐02; Collaborative Projects of the France‐Stanford Center for Interdisciplinary Studies; Collaborative Projects of the France–Stanford Center; French State. Grant Number: IdEx Bordeaux ANR‐10‐IDEX‐03‐02; Northern Archaeological Associates Ltd; PACEA; Wessex Archaeology; INRAP; Mersea Island Museum Trust; Vatican's Pontifical Commission for Sacred Archaeology; University of Reading; IRAMAT-CRP2A; University of Bradford; CEREGE
dc.language.isoen
dc.rights© 2019 Wiley. This is the peer-reviewed version of the following article: Schotsmans EMJ, Toksoy-Köksal F, Brettell RC et al (2019) ‘Not All That Is White Is Lime’—White Substances from Archaeological Burial Contexts: Analyses and Interpretations. Archaeometry. xx(xx): xxx-xxx, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/arcm.12453. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.
dc.subjectTaphonomy
dc.subjectDiagenesis
dc.subjectFunerary deposits
dc.subjectGypsum
dc.subjectCalcite
dc.subjectBrushite
dc.subjectXRD
dc.title‘Not All That Is White Is Lime’—White Substances from Archaeological Burial Contexts: Analyses and Interpretations
dc.status.refereedYes
dc.date.application11/01/2019
dc.typeArticle
dc.type.versionAccepted manuscript
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1111/arcm.12453
dc.rights.licenseUnspecified
dc.openaccess.statusopenAccess
dc.date.accepted12/11/2018


Item file(s)

Thumbnail
Name:
schotsmans_et_al_2019.pdf
Size:
1.121Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record