Macroscopic, petrographic, and chemical data on ceramics from the Paphos Gate site in Nicosia, Cyprus
Authors/Creators
- 1. The Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade, Serbia
- 2. The Cyprus Institute STARC
Description
This dataset concerns the Ottoman-period (the late 16th-19th centuries) pottery from the Paphos Gate site in Nicosia, Cyprus. It was generated as part of the project 'Byzantine and Ottoman ceramic workshops in the Eastern Mediterranean' funded by the A.G. Leventis Foundation. The project was carried out at the Cyprus Institute STARC (PI Thilo Rehren). As part of research, samples of 80 ceramic vessels were selected for scientific analysis with the permission of the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus. Sampling strategy was designed based on the archaeological study of the entire assemblage. These samples were classified into wares and petrographic fabrics (Table 1). During the macroscopic examination, the cross-sections of samples were recorded (Cross sections_Figures 1-80). Ceramic petrography analysis was carried out at the Archaeological Science Laboratories of the Cyprus Institute (Petrographic description of fabrics). Petrographic photomicrographs of thin sections can be found in the folder 'Petrographic photomicrographs Figures 1-44'. A sub-set of 39 samples was submitted to the Fitch Laboratory of the British School at Athens for wavelength dispersive X-ray fluorescence (WD-XRF) analysis. The chemical data concerning ceramic bodies obtained with WD-XRF are given in Table 2. For the chemical analysis of slips and glazes, scanning electron microscopy with energy dispersive spectrometry (SEM-EDS) was used at the Archaeological Science Laboratories of the Cyprus Institute. The chemical composition of slips determined through SEM-EDS analysis is given in Table 3. The comparison between chemical compositions of ceramic bodies and slips (SEM-EDS) is presented in Table 4. The chemical analysis of glazes determiend through SEM-EDS is given in Table 5. The comaprison betwen compositions (SEM-EDS) of different layers of ceramic samples is given in Table 6. All SEM photomicrographs are collected in the folder 'SEM photomicrographs Figures 1-38'.
Other (English)
Acknowledgments: I would like to thank A.G. Leventis Foundation for funding the research, the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus for granting me permissions to study ceramics, analyse samples and published the results, Polina Christofi for support, provision of space for the macroscopic examination of ceramic collection and access to her fieldwork documentation, Thilo Rehren for guidelines and support, Maria Dikomitou-Eliadou for helpful advice regarding ceramic petrography and Rafail Evzonas for the preparing samples for scientific analyses.
Methods (English)
For the ceramic petrography analysis, the Zeiss Axiolab 5 optical microscope was used. For the description of fabrics, a modified system or Ian Whitbread was followed (see Quinn 2022).
The WD-XRF analysis of ceramics was conducted on the instrument BRUKER S8 TIGER with a 4 kW Rh X-ray tube. It measures 26 elements (Na, Mg, Al, Si, P, K, Ca, Ti, Fe, V, Cr, Mn, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Rb, Sr, Y, Zr, Ba, La, Ce, Nd, Pb and Th). The custom calibration of the instrument was based on 43 certified reference materials (Georgakopoulou et al. 2017). Two certified reference materials - CRMs: PMS and GSR-1 - were analysed together with the samples in order to monitor the instrument performance.
The SEM instrument Zeiss EVO 15 with an attached EDS Oxford Instruments Ultim Max EDS with a 65 SSD detector was used for the chemical analysis of slips and glazes. The analysis was run in high vacuum conditions, at an accelerated voltage of 20 kV, working distance 8.50 mm, process time 4 and acquisition time 30s livetime. The instrument’s performance was monitored with analysis of the Corning C glass (Adlington 2017). The accuracy, measured as ((xcert – xmeas)/ xmeas) x 100, was below 14.4% for major and minor elements, except for Co where it is 23% and Ti where it is 33%. The precision, estimated as relative standard deviation, was below 4.7% except for Fe where it was 11.7% and Co where it was 21.8%.
Files
Cross sections_Figures 1-80.zip
Files
(777.0 MB)
| Name | Size | |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:cb6c0cfabe18275f44877e89fe9b6c7d
|
13.0 kB | Download |
|
md5:a56a6c6f65ad8a3ce58c069107c248c4
|
3.4 MB | Preview Download |
|
md5:71ed1a36fb663bed1ec5a4600ff76117
|
162.2 kB | Preview Download |
|
md5:c18782e6d1af7cc4516b30c7b98cae59
|
729.8 MB | Preview Download |
|
md5:9c9c07e60537ed2071ea19f608ba7194
|
43.6 MB | Preview Download |
|
md5:7431eba8d4522c73929460d39a3e685d
|
12.7 kB | Download |
|
md5:f92c5546cbd53345d870077a7d5da81c
|
17.2 kB | Download |
|
md5:b7a42cd40e49358abe15eb06c027f29f
|
12.9 kB | Download |
|
md5:2103ee618c978fae146aa5a9a8694fea
|
13.1 kB | Download |
|
md5:779550371939337fe312452c2b9103cd
|
13.6 kB | Download |
|
md5:518fe39cf46a32830b1a4154295de63c
|
15.2 kB | Download |
Additional details
Funding
- A G Leventis Foundation
- Byzantine and Ottoman ceramic workshops in the Eastern Mediterranean