4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Evaluation of relative comparator and k 0-NAA for characterization of Aboriginal Australian ochre

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10967-011-1236-2

Keywords

Neutron activation analysis; k(0)-Neutron activation analysis; Nuclear archaeometry; Method comparison; Ochre

Funding

  1. Australian Institute of Nuclear Science and Engineering (AINSE) [8103]
  2. Australian Research Council (ARC) [LP0882597]
  3. MURR National Science Foundation (NSF) [0802757]
  4. ANSTO
  5. MURR
  6. Australian Research Council [LP0882597] Funding Source: Australian Research Council
  7. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci
  8. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [0802757] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ochre is a significant material in Aboriginal Australian cultural expression from ceremonial uses to its application on many types of artifacts. However, ochre is a complex material, with associated surrounding minerals potentially challenging the overall analysis. In recent literature several studies have attempted to characterize ochre by a variety of techniques to understand procurement and trade. However, ochre is difficult to differentiate on major elemental or mineralogical composition and requires a detailed analysis of its geochemical fingerprint. Neutron activation analysis (NAA) provides the high sensitivity (sub-ppm), precision and accuracy in multi-elemental analysis required for ochre. The elements of interest for ochre generally include rare earth elements (REEs) and certain transition metal elements as well as arsenic and antimony. Data from relative comparator NAA (MURR, University of Missouri, USA) is compared with data from k (0)-NAA OPAL (ANSTO, Lucas Heights, Australia). A discussion of the two methods will be examined for their utility in fingerprinting the provenance of ochre. The continuing importance of NAA to archaeometry will also be discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available