Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T17:32:06.531Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Diversity of Newly Discovered Deterioration Patterns in Ancient Egyptian Pigments: Consequences to Entirely New Restoration Strategies and to the Egyptological Colour Symbolism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2011

Solveig Schiegl
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, P.O. 103980, 6900 Heidelberg 1, Germany
Karl L. Weiner
Affiliation:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Theresienstr. 41, 8000 München 2, Germany
Ahmed El Goresy
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, P.O. 103980, 6900 Heidelberg 1, Germany
Get access

Abstract

Polished cross sections through more than 1000 pigment samples from ancient Egyptian monuments (5th Dynasty to Roman Times) were investigated in reflected light, with SEM, and with electron microprobe techniques (EMPA). These combined analytical techniques allow many insights into the painting layers and down to the substrate. Textural relations of both the primary paintings and of the deterioration products can then be delineated. They also discern the stages of the various deterioration processes and the degree of damage of the painting layers.

The textural patterns of six deterioration processes not known before are discussed in detail and are documented in BSE-micrographs. Five of these processes commence in synthetic Cu-pigments (Egyptian Blue, glass pigment, and Green Frit) and Fe-bearing glass pigments. The 6th process leads to the formation of complex phosphates and is mainly exogenous. It causes severe damage to natural and synthetic pigment layers. These processes result in destruction of the primary pigments and coloured decorations.

Consequences as to the colour symbolism and future treatment of befallen paintings are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1992

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

1. Terrace, E.L.B., Egyptian Paintings of the Middle Kingdom. (Braziller,New York, 1968), p. 167168.Google Scholar
2. Riederer, J., Archaeometry 16, 102 (1974).Google Scholar
3. Jaksch, H., Ph.D. dissertation, Universitit Heidelberg, 1985.Google Scholar
4. Goresy, A. El, Jaksch, H., M. Abdel Razek and Weiner, K.L., Ancient Pigments in Wall Paintings of Egyptian Tombs and Temples, (Max-Planck-Institut ftir Kernphysik, Heidelberg, 1986); in Interdisziplinires Gespr~ichedited by Trenkwalder, H., Purtscheller, F., Lukas, W. and H. Seidl (Studia, Innsbruck, 1987), p. 157.Google Scholar
5. Schiegl, S., Weiner, K.L. and A. El Goresy, Naturwiss. 76, 393 (1989).Google Scholar
6. Sharkey, J.B. and Lewin, S.Z., Am. Mineral. 56, 179 (1971).Google Scholar
7. Helzl, E. (private communication).Google Scholar
8. Lucas, A. revised by Harris, J.R., Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries, 4th ed. (Edward Arnold Ltd, London, 1962), p. 172174.Google Scholar
9. Wulff, H.E., Wulff, H.S. and Koch, L., Archaeology 21, 98 (1968).Google Scholar
10. Kiefer, C. and Allibert, A., Archaeology 24, 107 (1971).Google Scholar
11. Vandiver, P.B., in Ancient Egyptian Faience, edited by A. Kaczmarzykand R.E.M. Hedges (Arris & Phillips Ltd., Warminster, England, 1983), Appendix A.Google Scholar
12. Lauer, J.-P., Annales du service des antiquitds de l'tgypte 38, 551 (1938).Google Scholar
13. Schiegl, S., Weiner, K.L. and A. El Goresy, Erzmetall 43, 265 (1990).Google Scholar
14. Noll, W., Fortschr. Min. 57, 203 (1979).Google Scholar
15. Wilson-Yang, K.M. and Burns, G., Can. J. Chem. 66, 2348 (1988).Google Scholar
16. Shedid, A.G. (private communication).Google Scholar
17. Schiegl, S., Weiner, K.L. and A. El Goresy, Geowiss. 2, 199-209 and 241-246, 1991.Google Scholar
18. Schiegl, S., Ph.D. dissertation, Universitidt Heidelberg, 1991.Google Scholar