4.6 Article

Non-destructive in situ study of Mad Meg by Pieter Bruegel the Elder using mobile X-ray fluorescence, X-ray diffraction and Raman spectrometers

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.sab.2014.04.006

关键词

Non-destructive in situ analysis; Mobile XRF/XRD spectrometer; Mobile Raman spectrometer; Flemish primitives painting; Pigment identification

资金

  1. MEMORI project
  2. European Commission [265132]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mad Meg, a figure of Flemish folklore, is the subject of a famous oil-on-panel painting by the Flemish renaissance artist Pieter Bruegel the Elder, exhibited in the Museum Mayer van den Bergh (Antwerp, Belgium). This article reports on the in situ chemical characterization of this masterpiece by using currently available state-of-the-art portable analytical instruments. The applied non-destructive analytical approach involved the use of a) handheld X-ray fluorescence instrumentation for retrieving elemental information and b) portable X-ray fluorescence/X-ray diffraction instrumentation and laser-based Raman spectrometers for obtaining structural/molecular information. Next to material characterization of the used pigments and of the different preparation layers of the painting, also the verification of two important historical iconographic hypotheses is performed concerning the economic way of painting by Brueghel, and whether or not he used blue smalt pigment for painting the boat that appears towards the top of the painting. The pigments identified are smalt pigment (65% SiO2 + 15% K2O + 10% CoO + 5% Al2O3) for the blue color present in all blue areas of the painting, probably copper resinate for the green colors, vermillion (HgS) as red pigment and lead white is used to form different colors. The comparison of blue pigments used on different areas of the painting gives no differences in the elemental fingerprint which confirms the existing hypothesis concerning the economic painting method by Bruegel. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据