Microfacies and Archaeology

  • Erik Flügel


Archaeologists are faced with the problem of the provenance of materials used in ancient buildings, sculptures or ceramics. Archaeometric methods applied to source studies include analyses of element distributions, stable isotope patterns and studies of the mineralogical and petrographical composition (Herz 1987; Riederer 1987; Herz and Waelkens 1988; Gibson and Woods 1990; Walsh 1990; Waelkens et al. 1992; Orton 1993; Rapp and Gifford 1995; Herz and Garrison 1998; Pollard 1999). ‘Geoarchaeology’ (Rapp and Gifford 1998) is an exciting and promising interdisciplinary approach.


Clay Sandstone Shrinkage Turkey Beach 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Basics: Archaeology and microfacies

  1. Attanasio, D., Armiento, G., Brilli, M., Emanuele, M.C., Platania, R., Turi, B. (2000): Multi-method marble provenance determinations: the Carrara marbles as a case study for the combined use of isotopic, electron spin resonance and petrographical data. — Archaeometry, 42, 257–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbin, V., Ramseyer, K., Decrouez, D., Burns, S.J., Chamay, J., Majer, J.L. (1992): Cathodoluminescence of white marbles: an overview.-Archaeometry, 34, 175-183Google Scholar
  3. Barbin, V., Ramseyer, K., Fontignie, D., Burns, S., Decrouez, D. (1992): Differentiation of blue-cathodoluminescing white marble. — In: Waelkens, M., Herz, N., Moens, L. (eds.): Ancient stones: Quarrying, trade and provenance. Interdisciplinary studies on stones and stone technology in Europe and Near East from the Prehistoric to Early Christian period. — Acta Archaeologica Lovaniensia, Monographiae, 4, 231–235Google Scholar
  4. Benea, M., Müller, H.W., Schwaighofer, B. (1993): Korngrößenuntersuchung zur Differenzierung von Marmoren. — Studia Universitatis, Babes-Bolyai, Geologia, 38, 71–74Google Scholar
  5. Bergamini, M.L., Fiori, C. (1995): Characterization of limestones, marbles and other stones used in ancient mosaics. —ASMOSIA IV, Proceedings, 1999-207Google Scholar
  6. Cabanot, J., Sablayrolles, R., Schenck, J.-L. (eds., 1995): Les marbres blancs des Pyrénées, approaches historiques et scientifiques. Entretiens d’archéologie et d’histoire. — 312 pp., Saint-Bertrand-de-Comminges (Musée archéologique départemental)Google Scholar
  7. Chavalas, M.W. (1999): Building in Egypt: Pharaonic stone mansonry (review). — 316 pp., Oxford (Oxford Univer-sity Press)Google Scholar
  8. Craig, H., Craig, V. (1972): Greek marbles: determination of provenance by isotope analysis. — Science, 176, 401–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Degryse P., Muchez, P., Loots, L., Vandeput, L., Waelkens, M. (2003): The building stones of Roman Sagalassos (SW Turkey): facies analysis and provenance. — Facies, 48, 9–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dodge, H. (1991): Ancient marble studies; recent research. — Journal of Roman Archaeology, 4, 28–50Google Scholar
  11. Dolenz, H. (2001): Die österreichisch-tunesischen Ausgrabungen der Jahre 1996 und 1997 in Saalbau und der Me-moria des Pilgerheiligtums Damous-el-Karita in Carthago. — Österreichisches Archäologisches Institut, Sonderschriften, 35, 235 pp.Google Scholar
  12. El-Sammak, A., Tucker, M. (2002): Ooids from Turkey and Egypt in the eastern Mediterranean and a love-story of Antony and Cleopatra. — Facies, 46, 217–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eingartner, J., Flügel, Ch. (1999): Der Kopf einer weiblichen Gottheit in der Prähistorischen Staatssammlung München. — Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter, 64, 377–379Google Scholar
  14. Fiori, C., Barboni, R., Saragoni, L. (1998): Marmi e altre pietre nel mosaico antico e moderno. — Quaderni Istituto Ricerche Tecnologiche per al Ceramica, 8, 302 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Flügel, Ch. (1999): Der Auerberg III. Die römische Keramik. — Münchener Beiträge zur Vor-und Frühgeschichte, 47, 237 pp.Google Scholar
  16. Flügel, Ch., Flügel, E., Häusler, W, Joachimski, M., Koller, J., Baumer, U., Wagner, U. (2004): Roman coarse ware from Bavaria, Austria and Northern Italy. — In: Wagner, U. (ed.): Mössbauer spectroscopy in Archaeology. — Hyperfine Interactions Topical Issue, 1, 24 pp., Dordrecht (Kluwer) (www.kluweronline.com/issn/0304-3843)Google Scholar
  17. Flügel, Ch., Flügel, E., Joachimski, M., Wagner, U. (1997): Auerberg black fabric — an archaeological and archaeometric approach to Roman rough ware. — Rei Cretariae Romanae Factorum Acta, 35, 85–88Google Scholar
  18. Flügel, Ch., Joachimski, M., Flügel, E. (1997): Römische Keramik mit Marmormagerung: Herkunftsbestimmung mit Hilfe von stabilen Isotopen (Auerbergtöpfe aus Süddeutschland). —Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, 27, 265–284Google Scholar
  19. Flügel, E. (1999): Microfacies-based provenance analysis of Roman imperial mosaic and sculpture materials from Bavaria (Southern Germany). — Facies, 41, 197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Flügel, E., Flügel, Ch. (1997): Applied microfacies analysis: Provenance studies of Roman mosaic stones. — Facies, 37, 1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Flügel, E., Flügel-Kahler, E. (1997): Der rote Korallenkalk in der Hethiter-Mauer von Bogazköy (Anatolien): Mikrofazies und Herkunft. — Geologische Blätter für Nordost-Bayern, 47, 321–338Google Scholar
  22. Frankovich, R. (ed., 1992): Archeometria della Ceramica. Problemi di Metodo. — Atti 8 SIMCER — Simposio Internazionale della Ceramica, Rimini, 150 pp., Bologna (Centro Ceramico)Google Scholar
  23. Gálan, E., Carretero, M.I., Mayoral, E. (1999): A methodology for locating the original quarries used for constructing historical buildings: application to Málaga Cathedral, Spain. — Engineering Geology, 54, 287–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gibson, A., Woods, A. (1990): Prehistoric pottery for the archaeologist. — 293 pp., Leicester (Leicester Univ. Press)Google Scholar
  25. Hagn, H. (1985): Angewandte Geologie und Mikropalä-ontologie in der Keramikforschung. — Razprave IV, RazredaSAZU, 26, 185–198Google Scholar
  26. Herrmann, B. (ed., 1994): Archäometrie. Naturwissenschaftliche Analyse von Sachüberresten. — 212 pp., Berlin (Springer)Google Scholar
  27. Herz, N. (1985): Isotopic analysis of marble. — In: Rapp, G., Jr., Gifford, J.A. (eds.): Archaeological Geology. —331–351, New Haven (Yale University Press)Google Scholar
  28. Herz, N. (1987): Carbon and oxygen isotopic ratios: a data base for classical Greek and Roman marble. — Archaeo-metry, 29, 35–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Herz, N. (1992): Provenance determination of Neolithic to classical Mediterranean marbles by stable isotopes. — Archaeometry, 34, 185–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Herz, N., Garrison, E.G. (1998): Geological methods for archaeology. — 343 pp., New York (Oxford University Press)Google Scholar
  31. Herz, N., Waelkens, M. (eds., 1988): Classical marble: Geochemistry, Technology, Trade. — NATO Advanced Science Institute Series, E, Applied Sciences, 153, 481 pp., Dordrecht (Kluwer)Google Scholar
  32. Kars, H., Broekman, A. (1981): Early-mediaval Dorstad, an archaeo-petrological study. Part IV: The mortars, the sarcophagi, and other limestone objects. Petrography and provenance of the limestone material. — Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzock, 31, 415–151Google Scholar
  33. Klemm, R., Klemm, D.D. (1973): Steine und Steinbrüche im alten Ägypten. — 465 pp., Berlin (Springer)Google Scholar
  34. Lamprecht, H.O. (1993): Opus caementitium. Bautechnik der Römer. 4. Auflage. — 264 pp., Düsseldorf (Beton Verlag)Google Scholar
  35. Maniatis, Y, Herz, N., Basiakos, Y (eds., 1995): The study of marble and other stones used in antiquity. — ASMOSIA III Athens. Transactions of the 3rd Symposium of the Association for the Study of Marbles and other Stones used in Antiquity, 302 pp., London (Archetype Publication)Google Scholar
  36. Margolis, S.V., Showers, W. (1990): Ancient Greek and Roman marble sculpture: Authentication, weathering and provenance determinations. — In: Walsh, J. (ed.): Marble. Art, historical and scientific perspectives on Ancient sculpture. — 283–299, Malibu, Ca. (John Getty Museum)Google Scholar
  37. Matarangas-Varti, M. Matarangas, D. (1994): Lithofacies determinations and geological origin of building stones of the Asklepieion, at Epidavro: their correlation to ancient quarries. — Pact, 45, 15–24Google Scholar
  38. Matthew, A.J., Woods, AJ., Oliver, C. (1991): Spots before eyes: new comparison charts for visual estimation in archaeological material. — In: Middleton, A., Freestone, I. (eds.): Recent developments in ceramic petrology. — British Museum London, Occasional Paper, 81, 211–263Google Scholar
  39. Middleton, A., Freestone, I. (eds., 1991): Recent developments in ceramic petrology. — British Museum London, Occasional Paper, 81, 410 pp.Google Scholar
  40. Moens, L., Roos, P., De Rudder, J., De Paepe, P., van Hende, J., Waelkens, M. (1990): Scientific provenance determinations of Ancient white marble sculptures using petro-graphical, chemical and isotopic data. — In: Walsh, J. (ed.): Marble art, historical and scientific perspectives on Ancient sculpture. — 111–124, Malibu, Ca. (John Getty Museum)Google Scholar
  41. Mommsen, H. (1986): Archäometrie. Neuere naturwissenschaftliche Methoden und Erfolge in der Archäologie. — 306 pp., Stuttgart (Teubner Studienbücher)Google Scholar
  42. Noll, W. (1991): Alte Keramiken und ihre Pigmente. Studien zu Material und Technologie. — 334 pp., Stuttgart (Schweizerbart)Google Scholar
  43. Orton, C., Tyers, P., Vince, A. (1993): Pottery in archaeology. — Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology, 269 pp., Cam-bridge (University Press)Google Scholar
  44. Pollard, A.M. (1998): Archeological reconstructions using stable isotopes. — In: Griffith, H. (ed.): Stable isotopes. Integration of biological, ecological and geochemical processes. — 285–301, Oxford (Bios Scientific Publisher)Google Scholar
  45. Pollard, A.M. (ed., 1999): Geoarchaeology; exploration, environments, resources. — Geological Society of London, Special Publication, 165, 180 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pollini, J., Herz, N., Polikreti, K., Maniatis, Y (1998): Parian Lychnites and the Prima Porta Statue: new scientific tests and the symbolic value of the marble. — Journal of Roman Archaeology, 11, 275–284Google Scholar
  47. Rapp, G., Jr., Gifford, J.A. (eds., 1985): Archaeological geology. — 435 pp., New Haven (Yale University Press)Google Scholar
  48. Rapp, G., Jr., Gifford, J.A. (1985): A selective bibliography of archaeological geology. — In: Rapp, G., Jr., Gifford, J.A. (eds.): Archaeological geology. — 377–431, New Haven (Yale University Press)Google Scholar
  49. Riederer, J. (1987): Archäologie und Chemie. Einblicke in die Vergangenheit. — 276 pp., Berlin (Rathgen-Forschungslabor)Google Scholar
  50. Riederer, J. (1994): Echt oder falsch. Schätze der Vergangenheit im Museumslabor. — 332 pp., Berlin (Springer)Google Scholar
  51. Rottländer, R.C.A. (1983): Einführung in die naturwissenschaftlichen Methoden in der Archäologie. — Archaeologica Venatoria, 6, 604 pp., Tübingen (Institut für Vorgeschichte Univ.)Google Scholar
  52. Schmid, J., Ambühl, M., Decrouez, D., Müller, S., Ramseyer, K. (1999): A quantitative fabric analysis approach to the discrimination of white marbles. —Archaeometry, 41, 239–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schneider, G. (1978): Anwendung quantitativer Materialanalysen auf Herkunftsbestimmungen antiker Keramik. — Berliner Beiträge zur Archäometrie, 3, 63–122Google Scholar
  54. Schneider, G. (ed., 1989): Naturwissenschaftliche Kriterien und Verfahren zur Beschreibung von Keramik. — Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica, 21, 7–39, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  55. Schneider, G. (1995): A short note on project planning and sampling for laboratory analysis of archaeological ceramics. — KVHAA Konferenser, 34, 23–27Google Scholar
  56. Schubert, P. (1986): Petrographical modal analysis — a necessary complement to chemical analysis of ceramic coarse ware. —Archaeometry, 28, 163–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Thiedig, F., Wappis, E. (2003): Römisches Bauen aus naturwissenschaftlicher Sicht in der Stadt auf dem Magdalensberg. — Carinthia II, 193, 33–128Google Scholar
  58. Tyers, P. (1996): Roman pottery in Britain. — 228 pp., London (Batsford)Google Scholar
  59. Waelkens, M., Herz, N., Moens, L. (eds., 1992): Ancient stones: Quarrying, trade and provenance. Interdisciplinary studies on stones and stone technology in Europe and Near East from the Prehistoric to Early Christian period. —Acta Archaeologica Lovaniensia, Monographiae, 4, 295 pp.Google Scholar
  60. Wagner, U., Wagner, F.E., Riederer, J. (1986): The use of Mössbauer spectroscopy in archaeometric studies. — In: Olin, J.S., Blackman, M.J. (eds.): Proceedings of the 1984 Symposium on Archaeometry, Washington D.C. — 129–142, Washington (Smithsonian Institution Press)Google Scholar
  61. Walsh, J. (ed., 1990): Marble. Art historical and scientific perspectives on Ancient sculpture. — 299 pp., Malibu, Ca. (John Getty Museum)Google Scholar
  62. Wenner, D.B., Herz, N. (1992): Provenance signatures for classical limestones. — In: Whitbread, I.K. (1986): The characterization of argillaceous inclusions in ceramic thin sections. — Archaeometry, 28, 79–88Google Scholar
  63. Williams, D.F. (1983): Petrology of ceramics. — In: Kempe, D.R.C., Harvey, A.P. (eds.): The petrology of archeological artefacts. — 301–329, Oxford (Clarendon Press)Google Scholar
  64. Important references dealing with provenance, restoration and conservation studies of ancient limestones and marbles used for works of art can be found in ASMOSIAI to VII. http://www.eeescience.utoledo.edu/ASMOSIA/Transactions/Trans_List.htm
  65. Further reading: K209Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Erik Flügel
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of PaleontologyErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations