Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T21:52:33.280Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Image Analysis in Quantitative Particle Studies of Archaeological Ceramic Thin Sections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2017

Chandra L. Reedy ,
Jenifer Anderson ,
Terry J. Reedy  and
Yimeng Liu
Chandra L. Reedy
Affiliation:
Center for Historic Architecture & Design, University of Delaware, 240 Academy Street, 331 Alison Hall, Newark, DE 19716 ([email protected])
Jenifer Anderson
Affiliation:
Center for Historic Architecture & Design, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716; and Historic Sugartown Inc., Malvern, PA 19355
Terry J. Reedy
Affiliation:
Independent Statistical Consultant, Newark, DE 19711
Yimeng Liu
Affiliation:
Center for Historic Architecture & Design, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716; and China Railway Construction Corporation (International) Ltd., Beijing 100855 P. R., China
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Thin-section petrography is a crucial tool for the study of archaeological ceramics, and in recent years, image analysis has emerged as a powerful quantitative enhancement of that tool. Exploratory applications of image analysis to archaeological ceramic thin sections, and related work by sedimentary geologists, have indicated its usefulness to the field. In this paper, we first present the results of experimental work testing the consistency and reproducibility of image analysis. We identify procedures for fast and reliable analysis of thin sections using laboratory-prepared ceramic specimens of simple clay-sand systems. We then show how those procedures can be slightly modified to accommodate more complex archaeological specimens. We conclude with a discussion of the role of image analysis within the overall context of thin-section petrography of ceramic materials, as one among a repertoire of techniques, adding quantitative data and increasing the usefulness of ceramic thin sections for addressing archaeological research questions.

La petrografía de lámina delgada constituye una herramienta fundamental para el estudio de cerámicas arqueológicas y en los últimos años, ha surgido el análisis de imágenes como una mejora cuantitativa importante para dicha herramienta. El uso exploratorio del análisis de imágenes en láminas delgadas de cerámicas arqueológicas, junto con trabajos relacionados realizados por sedimentólogos, han demostrado su utilidad en ese campo. En este trabajo presentamos en primer lugar los resultados de investigación sobre la consistencia y reproducibilidad del análisis de imágenes. Identificamos los procedimientos para el análisis rápido y confiable de láminas delgadas, utilizando muestras de cerámica preparadas en laboratorio a partir de sistemas arcillo-arenosos simples. Luego mostramos cómo estos procedimientos pueden ser ligeramente modificados para adecuarse a muestras arqueológicas más complejas. Finalizamos con una discusión sobre el rol del análisis de imágenes dentro del contexto general de la petrografía de lámina delgada de cerámicas, como una entre muchas técnicas, que agrega datos cuantitativos e incrementa la utilidad de las láminas delgadas de cerámicas para abordar estudios de investigación arqueológica.

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in Archaeological Practice , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , November 2014 , pp. 252 - 268
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 2014

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.)

References

References Cited

Arnold, Dean E. 1972 Mineralogical Analyses of Ceramic Materials from Quinua, Department of Ayacucho, Peru. Archaeometry 14:93–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouchain, Isabelle, and Velde, Bruce 2001 Grain Distribution by Image Analysis of Thin Sections in Some Gaulo-Roman Common Ware, St. Marcel (Indre) France. In Archaeology and Clays, edited by Druc, Isabele C., pp. 71–80. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.Google Scholar
Coster, Michel, and Chermant, Jean-Louis 2001 Image Analysis and Mathematical Morphology for Civil Engineering Materials. Cement &Concrete Composites 23:133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Melissa R., and Budhu, Muniram 2008 A Practical Approach to Grain Shape Quantification. Engineering Geology 96:1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, Peter M., and Wilson, David E. 1998 Consuming Power: Kamares Ware in Protopalatial Knossos. Antiquity 72:350–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Keyser, Thomas L. 1999 Digital Scanning of Thin Sections and Peels. Research Methods Papers. Journal of Sedimentary Research 69:962–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickinson, William R. 1970 Interpreting Detrital Modes of Graywacke and Arkose. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 40:695–707.Google Scholar
Dickinson, William R., and Shutler, Richard Jr. 1979 Petrography of Sand Tempers in Pacific Islands Potsherds: Summary. Geological Society of America Bulletin 90:993–995.Google Scholar
Fieller, Nicholas R. J., and Nicholson, Paul T. 1991 Grain Size Analysis of Archaeological Pottery: The Use of Statistical Models. In Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology, edited by Middleton, Andrew and Freestone, Ian, pp. 71–111. British Museum, London.Google Scholar
Forte, Maurizio 1994 Archaeometric and Digital Computer Analysis on Etruscan Bucchero from Marzabotto. In The Ceramics Cultural Heritage: Proceedings of the International Symposium of the 8th CIMTEC World Ceramic Congress and Forum on New Materials, edited by Vincenzini, Pietro, pp. 529–39. TECHNA, Faenza.Google Scholar
Francus, Pierre 1998 An Image Analysis Technique to Measure Grain-size Variation in Thin Sections of Soft Clastic Sediments. Sedimentary Geology 121:289–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freestone, Ian C. 1995 Ceramic Petrography. American Journal of Archaeology 99:111–117.Google Scholar
Freestone, Ian C., Johns, Catherine, and Potter, Tim (editors) 1982 Current Research in Ceramics: Thin-Section Studies. British Museum Research Laboratory, London.Google Scholar
Gazzi, Paolo 1966 Le Arenarie del Flysch Sopracretaceo dell’Appennino Modenese: Correlazioni con il Flysch di Monghidoro. Mineralogica e Petrografica Acta 12:69–97 Google Scholar
Hansen, Eric F. 2000 Ancient Maya Burnt-lime Technology: Cultural Implications of Technological Styles. Ph.D. dissertation, Archaeology Program, University of California, Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Heidke, James M., and Miksa , Elizabeth J. 2000 Correspondence and Discriminant Analysis of Sand and Sand Temper Compositions, Tonto Basin, Arizona. Archaeometry 42(2):273–299.Google Scholar
Hutchison, Charles S. 1974 Laboratory Handbook of Petrographic Techniques. John Wiley &Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Kerr, Paul F. 1977 Optical Mineralogy. McGraw Hill, Boston.Google Scholar
Layman, John M. II 2002 Porosity Characterization Utilizing Petrographic Image Analysis: Implications for Identifying and Ranking Reservoir Flow Units, Happy Spraberry Field, Garza County, Texas. Master’s thesis, Geology Department, Texas A & M University.Google Scholar
Leese, Morven N. 1983 The Statistical Treatment of Grain Size Data from Pottery. In Proceedings of the 22nd Symposium on Archaeometry, edited by Aspinall, Arnold and Warren, Stanley E., pp. 47–55. University of Bradford.Google Scholar
Livingood, Patrick C. 2007 Plaquemine Recipes: Using Computer-Assisted Petrographic Analysis to Investigate Plaquemine Ceramic Recipes. In Plaquemine Archaeology, edited by Rees, Mark A. and Livingood, Patrick C., pp. 108–126. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
Livingood, Patrick C., and Cordell, Ann 2009 Point/Counter Point: The Accuracy and Feasibility of Digital Image Techniques in the Analysis of Ceramic Thin Sections. Journal of Archaeological Science 36: 867–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livingood, Patrick C., and Cordell, Ann 2014 Point/Counter Point II: The Accuracy and Feasibility of Digital Image Techniques in the Analysis of Pottery Tempers Using Sherd Edges. In Integrated Approach in Ceramic Petrography, edited by Ownby, Mary F., Masucci, Maria, and Druc, Isabelle. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, in press.Google Scholar
Lombard, James P. 1987 Provenance of Sand Temper in Hohokam Ceramics, Arizona. Geoarchaeology 2(2): 91–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthew, A. J., Woods, Ann J., and Oliver, C. 1991 Spots Before the Eyes: New Comparison Charts for Visual Percentage Estimation in Archaeological Material. In Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology, edited by Middleton, Andrew and Freestone, Ian, pp. 211–263. British Museum Occasional Paper No. 81. British Museum Research Laboratory, London.Google Scholar
Middleton, Andrew P., Freestone, Ian C., and Leese, Morven N. 1985 Textural Analysis of Ceramic Thin Sections: Evaluation of Grain Sampling Procedures. Archaeometry 27(1):64–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Middleton, Andrew, and Freestone, Ian C. (editors) 1991 Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology. British Museum Occasional Paper No. 81. British Museum Research Laboratory, London.Google Scholar
Miriello, Domenico, and Crisci, Gino Mirocle 2006 Image Analysis and Flatbed Scanners. A Visual Procedure in Order to Study the Macro-porosity of the Archaeological and Historical Mortars. Journal of Cultural Heritage 7:186–192.Google Scholar
Nijboer, Albert J., Attema, Peter A. J., and Van Oortmerssen, Gert J. M. 2006 Ceramics from a Late Bronze Age Saltern on the Coast Near Nettuno (Rome, Italy). Palaeohistoria 47/48:141–205.Google Scholar
Norbury, David 2010 Soil and Rock Description in Engineering Practice. Whittles, Dunbeith, Scotland.Google Scholar
Orton, Clive 2000 Sampling in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Peacock, David P. S. 1970 The Scientific Analysis of Ancient Ceramics: A Review. World Archaeology 1:375–389.Google Scholar
Persson, Anna-Lena 1998 Image Analysis of Shape and Fine Aggregates. Engineering Geology 50:177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettijohn, Francis J. 1975 Sedimentary Rocks. 3rd ed. Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
Protz, R., and VanderBygaart, A. J. 1998 Towards Systematic Image Analysis in the Study of Soil Micromorphology. Sciences of Soils 3:34–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinn, Patrick S. (editor) 2009 Interpreting Silent Artefacts: Petrographic Approaches to Archaeological Materials. Archaeopress, Oxford.Google Scholar
Quinn, Patrick S. 2013 Ceramic Petrography: The Interpretation of Archaeological Pottery &Related Artefacts in Thin Section. Archaeopress, Oxford.Google Scholar
Reedy, Chandra L. 2006 Review of Digital Image Analysis of Petrographic Thin Sections in Conservation Research. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation 45:127–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reedy, Chandra L. 2008 Thin-Section Petrography of Stone and Ceramic Cultural Materials. Archetype, London.Google Scholar
Reedy, Chandra L. 2012 Image Analysis-Aided Light Microscopy of Glazed Ceramics: Identifying Technological Innovation and Style. Studies in Conservation 57(S1):227–233.Google Scholar
Reedy, Chandra L., Anderson, Jenifer, and Reedy, Terry J. 2014 Quantitative Porosity Studies of Archaeological Ceramics by Petrographic Image Analysis. In Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology X, edited by Vandiver, Pamela B., Li, Weidong, Sciau, Phillip, and Maines, Christopher. Cambridge University Press, in press.Google Scholar
Reedy, Chandra L., and Kamboj, Sachin 2003 Comparing Comprehensive Image Analysis Packages: Research with Stone and Ceramic Thin Sections. In Development of a Web-Accessible Reference Library of Deteriorated Fibers Using Digital Imaging and Image Analysis, edited by Merritt, Jane. National Park Service, Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, 159–166.Google Scholar
Rice, Prudence 1987 Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Russ, John C. 2011 The Image Processing Handbook. CRC, Boca Raton, Florida.Google Scholar
Rye, Owen S. 1976 Keeping Your Temper under Control: Materials and the Manufacture of Papuan Pottery. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 11:106–137.Google Scholar
Schäfer, Michael 2002 Digital Optics: Some Remarks on the Accuracy of Particle Image Analysis. Particle and Particle Systems Characterization 19:158–168.3.0.CO;2-8>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schäfer, Andreas, and Teyssen, Thomas 1987 Size, Shape and Orientation of Grains in Sand and Sandstones—Image Analysis Applied to Rock Thin-Sections. Sedimentary Geology 52:251–171.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Anne 1993 Apports et limites de la petrographie quantitative: Application au cas des amphores de Lyon. Review d’Archéométrie 17:51–63.Google Scholar
Shepard, Anna O. 1971 Ceramics for the Archaeologist. Originally published 1956, Publication 609, Carnegie Institute, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Smith, John V., and Beermann, Eberhard 2007 Image Analysis of Plagioclase Crystals in Rock Thin Sections Using Grey Level Homogeneity Recognition of Discrete Areas. Computers and Geosciences 33:335–356.Google Scholar
Stoltman, James B. 1989 A Quantitative Approach to the Petrographic Analysis of Ceramic Thin Sections. American Antiquity 54:147–160.Google Scholar
Stoltman, James B. 2001 The Role of Petrography in the Study of Archaeological Ceramics. In Earth Sciences and Archaeology, edited by Goldberg, Paul, Holliday, Vance T., and Reid Ferring, C., pp. 297–326. Kluwer/Plenum, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoops, Georges 2003 Guidelines for Analysis and Description of Soil and Regolith Thin Sections. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Streeten, Anthony D. F. 1982 Textural Analysis: An Approach to the Characterization of Sand-tempered Ceramics. In Current Research in Ceramics: Thin-Section Studies, edited by Freestone, Ian C., Potter, Tim, and Johns, Catherine, pp. 123–134. British Museum, London.Google Scholar
Tafesse, Solomon, Robison Fernlund, Joanne M., Sun, Wenjuan, and Bergholm, Fredrik 2013 Evaluation of Image Analysis Methods Used for Quantification of Particle Angularity. Sedimentology 60:1100–1110.Google Scholar
Tarquini, Simone, and Armienti, Pietro 2003 Quick Determination of Crystal Size Distribution of Rocks by Means of a Color Scanner. Image Analysis and Stereology 22:27–34.Google Scholar
Udden, Johan A. 1914 Mechanical Composition of Clastic Sediments. Geological Society of America Bulletin 25:655–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Den Berg, Elmer H., Bense, Victor F., and Schlager, Wolfgang 2003 Assessing Textural Variation in Laminated Sands Using Digital Image Analysis of Thin Sections. Journal of Sedimentary Research 73:133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velde, Bruce, and Druc, Isabelle. C. 1999 Archaeological Ceramic Materials: Origin and Utilization. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
Wentworth, Chester K. 1922 A Scale of Grade and Classifications for Clastic Sediments. National Research Council Bulletin 30:377–392.Google Scholar
Whitbread, Ian K. 1986 The Characterisation of Argillaceous Inclusions in Ceramic Thin Sections. Archaeometry 28(1):79–88.Google Scholar
Whitbread, Ian K. 1991 Image and Data Processing in Ceramic Petrology. In Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology, edited by Middleton, Andrew and Freestone, Ian, pp. 369–386. British Museum Occasional Paper No. 81. British Museum Research Laboratory, London.Google Scholar
Whitbread, Ian K. 1995 Greek Transport Amphorae: A Petrological and Archaeological Study. Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper, 4. British School at Athens.Google Scholar
Williams, David F. 1983 Petrology of Ceramics. In The Petrography of Archaeological Artefacts, edited by Kempe, David R. C. and Harvey, Anthony P., pp. 301–329. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Wolf, Sophie 2002 Questions, Answers, and Limitations: Chemical, Mineralogical, and Petrographic Distinction between Three Medieval Brick Productions in Switzerland. In Archaeometry 98, edited by Jeremy, Erzsebet, Biró, Katalin T., and Rudner, Edina, pp. 256–261. British Archaeological Reports International Series No. 1043 (II), Archaeolingua, Central European Series No. 1. Archaeopress, Oxford.Google Scholar