Latest / El futuro fue ayer con Juan Guillermo Martín / Arqueometría, la ciencia de los materiales antiguos

Transcript

Arqueometría, la ciencia de los materiales antiguos · El futuro fue ayer con Juan Guillermo Martín

0:05
The future was yesterday? It' s an archaeology podcast where ghosts, conspiracy
0:14
theories and aliens have no place. I am Juan Guillermo Martín, archaeologist and
0:24
university professor and with different specialists. It would be scientifically addressing our fascinating past,
0:31
a past that offers us answers to face the future. Welcome to the
0:48
podcast The future was yesterday? I' m Jua Guillermo Martín archaeologist. For
0:52
some years now, in archaeological research we have heard more frequently in terms of
0:58
neutronic activation analysis, mass spectrometry, scanning electron microscopy, X- ray infringement,
1:04
among others. It is a set of methods and techniques of physical and
1:11
chemical analysis applied to archaeological evidence that we know generically as archaeometry, because to
1:18
talk about such a specialized topic we have a prominent researcher. This is Javier
1:23
Iñanes, Javier welcome hello, very well found. Juan Guillermo is delighted that
1:30
you have me here today and that I can build this podcast that is really
1:36
very interesting, that already has several followers from Spain and that nothing that I
1:44
hope can shed a little light on what is archaeometry and, in particular,
1:49
the geometry of ceramics. That' s what Javier will be like. For
1:55
those who do not know him, Javier Iññez holds a degree in History and
1:59
a PhD in archaeology from the University of Barcelona. He has been a postdoctoral
2:04
researcher at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington since the twelfth. He is part of
2:08
the research teaching team of the University of the Basque Country and postdoctoral researcher of
2:15
the Ramonica Hall program. He has participated in numerous research projects on archaeology and
2:20
archaeometry. His main research interest focuses on the study through the archaeometry of trade,
2:25
cultural exchange and ancient ceramic and glass technology in medieval and modern times in
2:31
the Peninsurcular North, as well as European colonialism in North Africa and America.
2:39
He is a member of the archaeometry society, applied to the cultural heritage of
2:45
the sociedaety Ford Historical Archaeology, and leads the line of research on archaeometry within
2:50
the Gepack research group of the University of the Basque Country, Bueno Javier.
2:54
To begin with, we start from the beginning in terms of people looking at
3:00
what archaeometry is all about, what its origins are, and what materials we
3:06
can apply to. Well, archaeometry is a branch of archaeology. That is,
3:14
as we must understand, It is one more tool that brings us knowledge,
3:21
It contributes to expand the knowledge that we obtain means of archaeology. So,
3:28
that' s why the issues we raise are not the same. We
3:31
raise questions in archaeology about the knowledge of the societies of the past and good
3:38
also of the present, their organizations, cultures, dynamics, adaptations, changes.
3:46
But of course, what we are really seeing is the cultural aspect of
3:49
these artifacts. We are in archaeology, we are above all studying the materiality
3:54
and cultural aspect of that materiality to understand a little how that is. Ancient
3:59
and good societies, as I said, present as well. So the basic
4:02
questions are the same. What materials, where they come from, how old
4:09
they are, how they were used, what they cooked or what they ate.
4:15
That is, how that material was used or what was eaten in such
4:18
containers or in such dishes. Then there are some questions that clearly can be
4:26
answered through cultural characteristics, but there are others that have to take into account
4:30
the natural side. So, this is where we introduce a concept that,
4:38
well in origin, was coined by a good Czech archaeologist. And here I
4:42
hope that our Czech colleagues will forgive me for mistreating the Czech language, because
4:46
I have no idea and I do not know very well how the Czech archologist
4:51
who said it is very sorry and zen nutupni that already in the seventies he
5:00
said that any artifact, any archaeological object has two aspects. One is cultural
5:05
and the other is natural. And it' s the natural thing because it
5:12
' s made of material it is. A material can already be a ceramic,
5:14
a mental, a bone, a plant, everything has, that is,
5:19
a tree, for example, a wood. Then everything has a verente,
5:21
also material. So, since it is this natural aspect that we study
5:30
from archaeometry, then we can study, for example, chemical elements. It
5:35
' s composed of minerals, which molecules, if it' s something organic,
5:43
for example, we can study their genetics. Well, it depends on
5:46
organic material, then nothing. In the end, what archaeometry does is combine
5:53
that natural knowledge. Let' s say natural sciences with cultural knowledge, human
5:59
sciences. So, well, a possible definition or a definition one between them,
6:06
because there are many. This would be the application of techniques and methodologies,
6:12
of scientific techniques, as they can be, of the natural sciences,
6:15
of chemistry, of physics, of biology, of geology, to the study
6:18
of archaeological artifacts and, above all, in an objective that is to answer
6:24
archaeological questions. Then this would become one of the possible definitions of archaeometry.
6:32
Here, yes, you want, we can also come in to debate,
6:38
because it is a sufficient debate, quite interesting that took place above all more
6:42
years ago and I think it is already quite over. But from time to
6:46
time it comes that it is the theme of how archaeometry is known in the
6:51
closachon world. It is often called archological science, of course in Spanish.
6:58
I believe that, fortunately, we do not define this field as scientific archaeology
7:05
or as scientifically based archaeology, because, of course, I think you will
7:10
agree that defining it this way implies that there is a scientific archaeology and an
7:15
archaeology that is not scientific, is not scientific, and very different is the
7:20
pseudo archaeology or fantastic archaeology, that that is another matter. But I don
7:23
' t think I do exact non- scientific archaeology. That is precisely archaeology
7:29
is based on science, a scientific theoretical cuerpus and is the most scientific of
7:40
all humanities. Well, then I' m a little clear about continuing with
7:46
archaeometry. What we studied with archaeometry, since we can study any field from
7:55
diet, for example, that was eaten in ancient times, that ate more
8:03
meat, more fish in a region maybe ate. There is a supply of
8:07
fish that is brought from a more distant area. And well, there are
8:13
networks of exchange of hierarchies that should be studied in trade, for example.
8:20
Also many questions about ancient technology. How things were done, how the products
8:24
were made, the artifacts, what kind of materials they used, what knowledge
8:30
there was about that production, what recipes. Well, and then, because
8:35
we can also go further on bioarchaeology issues, as diseases, ancients, human
8:41
relationships, remote sensing, dating. Here' s the field is vast and
8:54
then we can do it this way. What archaeometry really is is very broad,
8:58
because any application of these techniques or of these disciplines for the study and
9:09
answers of archaeological questions could define it with marquemetry and, in fact, I
9:15
agree with that definition. The point is that, definitely, the interest,
9:22
of course, of archaeology will largely be concentrated on those materials that we recover
9:28
in an archaeological excavation process and a lot of questions arise that even if a
9:35
few decades we could answer them, as you well said, from a cultural
9:39
perspective, but that we can now approach them in another way, that is,
9:45
when we try to get closer to the composition of the raw materials of
9:50
these different artifacts, for example, ceramics, because they will allow us to
9:58
know already specific details of where it is produced or at least where the raw
10:01
materials come from. And that is key to the extent that it allows us
10:05
to know how human beings relate to their environment, to their environment, or
10:09
how they establish business connections with other societies, etc. And in that I
10:16
think archaeometry works in a very very precise way and there is one of these
10:22
analyses that apply to these materials, which is that of neutron activation. And
10:26
in that, then, I would assume that it is like one of those
10:31
pioneering techniques. I would like you to explain to us how the neutron activation
10:39
works and specifically what information it offers us in the field of archaeology. Yeah,
10:45
yeah, thanks, that' s what I' m gonna do to
10:48
you. Neutron really is one of the analytical techniques, or techniques that are
10:52
used in narcometry, which is one of the most reliable, that is,
10:58
is the most accurate and most accurate that exists to do elementary chemical quantification analysis.
11:07
It' s a rather complex technique. That' s right, that
11:11
' s right, well. It' s based on your showing the irradiates
11:15
with a neutron flow, so the atoms in that sample some capture, some
11:22
of those neutrons become unstable. Therefore, radioactive isotopes and these radioactive isotopes are
11:31
created. What they' re looking for, they' re decaying and they
11:39
' re looking for more stable configurations and in that process they' re simplifying
11:43
a lot. What they do is emit a radiation, a gamma radiation energy
11:50
in this case, and this radiation that is emitted is characteristic of each chemical
11:56
element, that is, sodium, has a characteristic radiation to some specific wavelengths,
12:01
iron to others, silicon to others. So, with high- precision
12:11
detectors, we can actually count how much radiation comes from each element and thus
12:20
quantify the percentage or quantity of that element in our sample. So it'
12:31
s pretty interesting. It is also quite interesting the origin of this technique,
12:37
because you have to look for it in the middle of the 20th century,
12:43
right with the famous Good, who has long before. But as the final
12:48
end is the Manhattan project, where the atomic bomb was developed, so,
12:52
of course, after that, of that achievement I don' t know how
13:01
to define it. All right, sometimes scientific achievement. Perhaps, human misfortune.
13:07
We don' t know. Yes, because there was an attempt to
13:13
look for civil applications, civil applications to that technology and it has many,
13:20
many, one of them, one of them Well, for example, also
13:26
in cancer treatments. Many medicines from these dichymeotherapy, for example, are made
13:35
through these types of processes. It is not the same, but and then,
13:43
one of the applications that developed was already in the 1950s, applying this
13:50
technology to see if they could determine the concentrations of materials and, in this
13:58
case, ceramics and archaeological glass. So, well, here' s a
14:07
good person mainly who is the great driver of this application in archaeology, which
14:11
is seir, which already in the fifties begins to do these first analyses.
14:18
And then that' s when you realize that we can measure the elements,
14:26
especially trace elements, those that have a very, very small composition in our
14:30
sample and that can be characteristic of specific areas. So, knowing that there
14:37
are areas that have compositions with characteristics of these elements, we can attribute them,
14:46
attribute those unknown samples to those regions or to those productions or those productions.
14:54
So, of course, as I was saying, it' s a
15:03
very good technique at the analytical level, it' s one of the best.
15:05
In fact, it is used to contrast other techniques, to verify that
15:09
the other techniques are reliable. You can measure almost the entire periodic table at
15:16
very low levels of accuracy and concentration. The only little problem he has is
15:24
that you need a nuclear rector. So, of course I was going to
15:31
ask you. It sounds great, but I think there' s a detail
15:33
and it' s in the ske that I was going to comment on what
15:37
it takes. Looks like, uh, neutron activation. Sure, sure,
15:41
it' s the little handicap that this technique has, well, small or
15:46
large. So, of course, of course, of course they are very
15:52
expensive equipment, because they are nuclear reactors dedicated to research, not to electrical
15:56
production. So, they are expensive you need, very delicate and very expensive
16:04
equipment. Well staffed, very well trained. So, of course, because
16:10
we don' t really have in the world, there aren' t so
16:15
many reactors dedicated to these issues. Therefore, alternatives to neutron activation have always
16:18
been sought. Although we know it' s the best way to chemically analyze
16:23
a sample. There are other alternatives that are cheaper, more available, that
16:32
are easy to buy. I don' t know in any analysis team it
16:37
can be worth fifty hundred two hundred zero euros whatever, but of course this
16:44
is a lot more expensive, at least to install. Then, well,
16:45
functioning will be more or less cheap. I don' t know anymore,
16:51
then. That is why, for example, there is one very much of
16:56
a long tradition and a lot of prestige that is in America. There'
17:00
s miss Es, the Missouri University Research Reactor, which is in Columbia,
17:06
Missouri, and that' s really a benchmark in the field, in the
17:11
field of archaeology and heritage. There are also more sites in Mexico, in
17:15
Portugal, well, but the tendency is that there is less and less in
17:22
respect to the need to implement other analytical techniques, of course, that result
17:33
from much more widespread and easier access and with staff or not so much staff,
17:38
specialized and, of course, the infrastructure of an atomic reactor that must
17:45
be very complicated to maintain. And there is another one of these analytical techniques
17:52
that also applies to archaeological materials and that is mass spectrometry. You could explain
17:59
to us how, how it works and what the scopes and limits are,
18:03
considering that you already mentioned that there are also limitations in neutron activation. Yes,
18:11
of course, mass spectrometry or CPMS, which is mass spectrometry with inductively
18:18
coplated plasma. That name' s been pretty long. It' s really
18:26
a very widespread technique. I allow an elementary analysis of most of the elements
18:34
in the periodic table to be made much cheaper than a neutron activation. Of
18:40
course, setting up the equipment is much cheaper. Well, when I say
18:47
much cheaper, it' s in proportion, because analytical equipment is really quite
18:53
expensive in general. But well, then this technique really came up a little
19:03
bit like the substitute for neutron activation. It was like that great referent from
19:11
all over the world wants to use it, because of course it is simpler,
19:15
cheaper to use. You don' t need a nuclear rector. That
19:21
' s how he' s been doing the sorcery to the neutronic activation for
19:27
years now. But it' s still not as precise or as accurate as
19:33
the neuronic activation. The problem you have. Well, the problem is a
19:37
matter of sample preparation especially which is a little cumbersome. You could say because
19:45
there are various types of preparation, but they all go through. Your solid
19:49
to liquid sample. I mean, you have to either melt or digest,
19:56
but you have to always put it in liquid, which in the neutron,
20:00
the electronic terration is like that reliable old car that you' ve always had
20:06
to make noise, but you can put it in any way that it'
20:08
s going to take you. On the other hand, the ICPM is more
20:12
expectatometry at times, because it seems to be as delicate as it is good,
20:15
if not under the specific conditions. Well, it gets a little worse.
20:22
Then you have to always destroy. Your sample, of course, is
20:26
the nectronic activation. Also that is considered a sample, a destructive technique and
20:33
you pass from what you do is to measure your sample the passes through different
20:41
cones, by different magnets in an entire process in which it is ionized,
20:48
the sample becomes a plasma or is practically volatilized and you end up measuring.
20:56
You end up separating by the mass of the different elements, different atoms or
21:03
trillions by the detector, that is, you end up separating it and there
21:07
you end up measuring, which is the composition, that is how much it
21:14
shows how many ion numbers you have of a certain element that you know its
21:15
mass. So, you can count them and measure them. Not then,
21:19
well, it' s a pretty reliable technique and that' s why it
21:33
' s quite successful lately very well there' s another kind of material analysis
21:38
that I think is the one that has been most strongly positioned in recent years
21:45
and above all by terms of portability and it' s about X- ray
21:49
diffraction. We could explain to them how it works and, above all,
21:55
what the advantages of this particular technique are. Yeah, here we have X
22:02
- ray technology. There are several types of equipment. Well, it'
22:11
s the X- rays that all of us have. That is not the
22:15
most common thing, and it is an application of the most common and,
22:22
fortunately, thanks to technology, because we have had it for about a hundred
22:26
years, already or some more. So, well, that would be one.
22:32
Then we' d have the X- ray florescence and then the X
22:37
- ray diffraction. X- ray inflorescence is a technique used to measure the
22:41
elementary composition of a sample. What it does is the equipment emits a sample
22:52
as an x- ray of a specific characteristic wavelength, and what it does
22:57
is excite the sample within that sample. Well, there' s a series
23:04
of interactions between the atoms in the sample and what you get is basically emitting
23:14
an energy characteristic of each element. So, with a proper detector, of
23:19
course, what you do is okay, because I have this energy, I
23:23
have so many accounts of this other energy, I have so many then you
23:30
can characterize your sample elementally. Then you have, well, silicon, I
23:33
have fifty percent aluminum, twenty- three iron, seven, etcetera. No,
23:40
then it' s a quantitative and good and qualitative elementary technique could also
23:45
be either. Instead, X- ray diffraction, although an X- ray
23:52
is also used, what is physics behind that technique is different. It is
23:59
based on that it is only possible to measure crystalline elements, that is,
24:03
crystalline materials, for example, minerals could be crystalline material, because a crystalline
24:11
material is that which in its molecules is ordered repeatedly in space and will always
24:19
be so and is characteristic of that mineral or crystalline compound. It' s
24:26
always gonna be that way. So, if you radiate with the X-
24:33
roll and the X- ray, what it does is penetrate that crystal and
24:37
from a certain depth, it goes through the layers of the molecules and from
24:45
a certain depth, well, what it does is diffraction or shoots out that
24:51
gap out at a specific angle. And that particular angle, if it fulfills
24:59
the life of you, which is what is based on this principle, you
25:06
can measure, then you measure, what are those angles, those differences,
25:11
those diffraction patterns, and you have a spectrum, then spectrum. What you
25:18
can do is compare it with international patterns that exist bookstores. And so just
25:26
what you do is compare And you say it' s okay, because I
25:29
have here at this point, at this point, at this point I have
25:33
a peak, because I see which of the minerals that exist in the world
25:37
that have been analyzed, coincide with these peaks. And then there I can
25:40
say okay, because these three peaks match this one. So, it'
25:42
s quartz, because whatever it is in matites. I' m not iron,
25:51
so it' s a technique that' s very common in use.
25:53
Really in archaeometry, it' s used, it' s used a lot
25:59
because it has. It is qualitative, mainly, mainly a qualitative technique.
26:06
That is, basically what we get that information of absence or presence is such
26:11
a mineral or such compound, but it gives us a lot of information.
26:17
It gives us a lot of information, for example, to know what kind
26:21
of pigments we have, for example, in a ceramic or in a painting
26:26
or in another element. Well, let' s see if that ceramic is
26:30
painted, then in some red colors. And so, let' s see
26:33
if it' s iron oxide, for example, or if it' s
26:37
cinnabar, that would be its mercury fur. Sure, it changes, it
26:41
changes a lot, and well, that then gives us reason to think,
26:44
because if it is cinnabar, then where it comes from alcin opened in the
26:45
area. Or there had to be a transport, there had to be an
26:49
exchange. Everyone used cinnabar in their decorations, at home, or in their
26:57
pots, or there is an elite that does, then, well, all
27:03
that gives us the opportunity to talk about all these aspects. I mean,
27:07
what we' re also trying is that it' s not just a pure
27:12
and hard determination to have this compound, and that' s good, that
27:17
' s what it means on an archaeological level. I think that' s
27:18
what basically lies in the potential of archaeometry not trying to answer that. Yes,
27:26
yes, that' s exactly what I was going to point to,
27:30
because in the end we do get quantitative or qualitative data from elements, but
27:38
we also need contrast information, which would be regional geology that allows us to
27:45
contrast and know this one well. These raw materials and these characteristics are here
27:48
me there and, of course, will come in to answer. Finally,
27:52
what interests us is not to have a little data there and to know this
27:56
is of such material, but that material how it gets there, it is
28:03
local production, the raw material they brought it from the other side, is
28:07
result of their presence of an exchange in populations, of a network of commerce.
28:11
It is a material that is restricted to a population group, in a
28:17
community, in a city that is directed towards archaeometry. Finally, that'
28:22
s true, that' s totally okay. It' s that sure really
28:27
good. This would give for a very broad debate, but not so long
28:33
ago, what is archaeometry has been dominated mainly by chemicals, physicists, geologists
28:40
and some with greater or lesser concern for these debates. Archaeological something more epistemological.
28:52
Then, of course, it was quite recurrent. I believe that less
28:56
and less and more we are in a much more truly interdisciplinary world, where
29:04
there is a really active discussion and collaboration among all the agents who collaborate in
29:11
an investigation. But until not so long ago, unfortunately, it wasn'
29:15
t like that. Then it was very common to see a publication where the
29:22
archaeologist said something, did his studies, his archaeological analyses and there was an
29:30
appendix with archaeometric analysis, which could even go as far as to refute what
29:37
had been said first. Then of course there was no such dialogue. Then
29:38
it was a little bit to rub the absurd, or even less and less,
29:47
as I say, to go to determine the identified crystalline. I don
29:52
' t know what crystal and such and worth very well, very interesting.
29:57
It' s a very interesting thing, but as an analytical exercise, as
30:03
an exercise in chemistry or geology. But archaeologically, what does it mean to
30:07
know, that ceramics such there is, I don' t know what mineral,
30:15
which is something process has been obtained through a natural process. I don
30:17
' t know what, I don' t know how many. All right,
30:18
but it has some explanation to have some role in the debate. Archeological,
30:23
we can know something clearer. That' s what we have to attack.
30:32
Let' s just say improve on the looks of all the agents.
30:37
Yes, there is another technique that is also frequently applied and that has to
30:42
go with scanning electron microscopy and this technique how it works and what it serves
30:51
us in archaeology, because this technique is one of my favorite. I really
30:57
like it because it' s really very eye- catching. It' s
31:04
a technique, as you say, a technique of microscopy. Therefore, it
31:07
is an image technique, but instead of the optical micropropies, it uses light
31:11
and lenses, between mirrors and lenses, to move the light from one place
31:21
to another, channel it, focus it and so on and get a magnification.
31:26
The electron microscope he uses is electrons. It emits a flow of electrons
31:36
that interact with the sample and depend. There are several types of interaction.
31:41
So, with that interaction in the sample, what we get is a topography
31:45
of our sample thanks to and instead of mirrors, the electron microscope, like
31:55
it works with electrons that are negatively charged, what it does is use magnets.
32:01
There are more things, but as we imagine as a system of magnets
32:06
in which in a column we manage to pass a flow of electrons and we
32:13
can focus on our sample and obtain magnifications of the order of fifty zero magnifications.
32:22
It really has a very great potential. In addition to obtaining large increases,
32:31
we can go to see microscopic and even nanometric details. We can also
32:43
like, for example, they could be I don' t know small minerals
32:46
that tell us about a contamination, or study the clay structures of ceramics and
32:54
then, with that, try to see if a ceramic is more or less
32:59
cooked. Or also study pigments, for example, layers, if they have
33:08
decoration, if they do not have, if that decoration is intentional or is
33:13
good intentional, if there are stains and are decorations or not, if it
33:17
has some kind of preparation, that shows if it has glazed how it is
33:22
what characteristics. Then it allows for a very large microscopic knowledge and then,
33:32
besides, it also allows, as you are working with electrons. In this
33:37
interaction there are also phenomena of florescence in which you allow to characterize the sample
33:47
chemically elementally. Then you can get to see with less precision than the other
33:53
techniques we talked about before, the ethematries more or the nectronic activity. But
33:58
we can come to know if our sample has a quantity of silicon, a
34:02
quantity of aluminum, an amount of iron and good, and that also serves
34:07
us, then, a little to characterize a pigment, for example, or
34:10
to characterize a glaze. That could be one of the applications. For example,
34:19
I can think of a case, which is that of majolicas from Panama,
34:25
for example, in which, using this technique, we studied different glazed
34:34
decorated ceramics from the old colonial period of Panama that would be up to one
34:40
thousand six hundred seventy- one, from seventeen and then from the old town.
34:44
And we compared whether there was any difference in these ceramics that had different
34:50
chronologies. And indeed, with this technique we saw how they used much more
34:55
strange in those that are older, while those that are more modern in the
35:00
old town, because they use less strange and more inclusions in the glaze.
35:06
And that' s the historical explanation because you were trying to get an opaque
35:15
white glaze as opaque as possible. Then you have the traditional way is with
35:21
tin and instead, already in the eighteenth century, well, there are also
35:24
more difficulties to get to Panama. Really then we are all in the crisis
35:31
of the late 17th and 18th, all the wars in which the entire Spanish
35:39
empire embarks, with all the rest of the empires and where there really begins
35:46
to be a shortage of some metals. So, well, we can attribute
35:52
that technology, that technological adaptation, to that periododic, to that historical context.
36:00
In the end, of course, we are also approaching recipes for the
36:07
elaboration of objects that are specifically talking about technology, advances adaptations of that technology
36:15
over time. That does, and this is a pretty, pretty interesting field
36:25
in archaeometry. It is a little trying to understand how things were done and
36:34
how things are changing over time, how that production, those recipes, can
36:39
be modified according to needs or external conditioning. There may also be environmental conditioning.
36:47
Let' s say that at some point, because you' re in
36:52
an area where there aren' t proper clays or there' s no more
36:57
water for whatever, or there' s water stress for whatever. Or just
37:02
because you have less lead and less tin and then you have to look for
37:07
life to try to make the same product as you did before, or change
37:13
the product or make the same adaptation then there are several cases. For example,
37:19
it occurs to me in the bask country that we did a study.
37:22
Here there is a traditional listening production here near Vitoria, which is called in
37:28
the Oshu in mayerías that has already been known since at least the 17th century,
37:35
and there it was done in a traditional way. It was a glazed
37:39
ceramic tin during the Civil War until the civil war. It remains so in
37:49
the Spanish Civil War, which is from one thousand nine hundred thirty- six
37:52
to thirty- nine. Well, then, for production. And when one
37:55
of the holes is taken up, a return to production in the 1940s,
38:01
when that resumes, because it was really scarce, there were metal shortages,
38:07
it was a serious problem. Then he could not devote enough tin and lead
38:12
metal to those productions. So what it does is it invents a way to
38:20
reproduce what was done in the past, but with the shortages it had,
38:24
with the materials it had at the time. Then, because it uses as
38:28
an engobe or a very white layer of a very white clay, then it
38:32
puts a very thin transparent glaze to make it look white. Well, let
38:37
' s just say it looks a little. But good is the whole process
38:45
of adaptation, of adaptation of resilience. It could even be called through archaeometry,
38:51
because we could document clearly with great precision. That is, it is
38:55
clear that all these analytical techniques that you have explained to us give us extremely
39:06
accurate information, but there is a criticism in some cases that with the samples,
39:13
with the groups of samples that are worked with in these techniques are usually
39:19
limited, that is, we can not in an excavation five or six zero
39:22
ceramic fragments can be released, cannot be analyzed all and the decision is made
39:29
to define a sample of study in the particular case and of your experience in
39:36
this topic, how we define that number of specimens so that it really becomes
39:45
statistically representative. Sure, this is a big question. I think that'
39:52
s the big question. Sure. We have to start from the beginning that
40:01
in both narcometry and archaeology, what has come to us is a tiny part
40:07
of what really existed. So we' re always going to be playing somehow
40:15
with sample samples of your samples. We' re really going to have a
40:22
very very partial vision. Now I don' t remember who said archaeology was
40:27
like trying to make a puzzle with very few pieces you have and without having
40:32
a picture of what the original puzzle was like. So, to me it
40:37
has always seemed very destructive that image and really clear in archaeometry would still be
40:43
to take a small part of how little we already have clear here. It
40:51
depends here, it depends like a whole sampling the wider, since more representative
41:00
it will be here. There are many studies on what percentage would be useful,
41:10
of course, ten percent, fifteen percent, twenty percent of the total.
41:16
The problem. The problem is, it' s gonna be expensive.
41:22
As I said before, then the tests are quite expensive. So, of
41:28
course you' re very limited in that respect. Not then, for example,
41:30
if in an excavation six thousand fragments come out in a campaign, well,
41:36
we talk about an excavation it doesn' t matter in one in a
41:39
field, not six thousand fragments let' s say individual single fragments or minimum
41:45
number. Not sure, 10%. It' s already six hundred fragments.
41:57
It' s a barbarity to money that' s worth just a technique.
42:01
If you want to use several techniques, well, I don' t
42:06
know, because we could be easily talking about twenty or thirty zero euros.
42:09
I don' t know. It depends, well, it depends, there
42:14
are many factors that coincide here, but well, then clear here a strategy
42:20
would be to try to do, above all to choose reliable contexts, that
42:28
is to say with texts, archaeological ones, that we know that they are
42:36
good, that we have elements to be able to date them, elements of
42:44
consumption or use that we can really differentiate from others and make one, that
42:51
is, for example, not to take elements superficial fragments, because that is
42:53
often what happens many times, that is good, since they are going to
42:57
be destroyed, because well give them those cacheros that not that totally caught them
42:59
here next to, that I don' t know even what they are.
43:00
Not sure, that' s not worth anything. It won' t do
43:02
me any good, and neither will you. I' m not gonna be
43:05
able to give you an answer to what you might ask yourself. So we
43:10
have to try, between the archaeologist and the archaeologist to see what are the
43:19
questions to answer and what can be analyzed and with what techniques, that is,
43:25
what can be destroyed and what cannot be destroyed. So, there'
43:32
s some percentage here. Not before they do random sampling studies, for example,
43:42
for everyone we have a bias and then of course that the one doing
43:47
the sampling, because it also has a bias It is best that he is
43:52
interested, because certain typologies, or he likes them more then, well,
43:55
he gets more into that bag of analysis, or he wants to do a
44:05
type of studies, because I don' t know. Maybe he' s
44:06
more interested in colonial pottery than the local one. I don' t know,
44:10
then, well. It' s really a very difficult question to answer.
44:16
It is very difficult to respond, that is, how many samples would
44:21
be needed, because the better, that would be the answer. That'
44:24
s the best answer. And orbe is also aimed at the questions that one
44:29
has in research, to the knowledge that one has in the collection. Surely
44:34
if one knows and well you put the case of the Panamanian mayolics, if
44:37
one knows them well their typologies, then surely it does not have to know.
44:43
In addition, because some previous studies have already been done, which are
44:47
already defined as recipes by potters. Then one can delve into some questions and
44:55
surely also limit the number of copies to be analyzed and, in addition,
45:02
decide what kind of analytical technique to use the one that fits improves to solve
45:07
that question. An issue that I think is important to mention now that we
45:14
are talking about, and it has to do with those colleagues who are starting
45:20
to work on archaeology, who are eager to do archaeometric studies and, at
45:25
times, because this is like a shot into the air, they start to
45:34
wrongly explore what would you suggest to start an archaeometric study of an archaeological collection?
45:40
What criteria should that colleague take into account before saying here is it worth
45:46
doing an archaeometric study? Sure. This question is quite recurring, not clear
45:57
and the answer, well, whenever he tried to answer it. My head
46:04
' s coming. The song of being famous and great singer, which was
46:08
pau ones and the group stick syrup. I don' t know if you
46:14
know him anymore. They had a very good song, very nice, plus
46:19
it was titled. Depends. That' s right, it really depends.
46:24
There are many factors that play in this game. For example, we would
46:34
first have to see what material we have at our disposal. No. If
46:37
it' s a ceramic, it' s one thing, if it'
46:40
s a metal, it' s another, if it' s a glass,
46:42
is it another? If it is something organic, then it will have
46:46
other things then also good, because there is mainly to see which questions we
46:52
want to answer. That' s the first thing. First, first you
46:54
have to ask yourself what I want to know, because it is not the
47:00
same to know age, to know the origin, to know the technology,
47:07
to know if it is authentic, for example, could be another question,
47:13
whether it is something authentic or not the function of that piece. What function
47:15
it could have, since we can aim with archaeological studies, but with archaeometric
47:21
studies. Maybe it also depends on whether there is any residue or any rest
47:23
that we can analyze, because all these are questions that need to be assessed
47:34
before making any decisions. I mean, what do I want to answer if
47:38
I want to know the source, that is, where each piece comes from
47:43
to do an exchange or trade study, because that' s going to lead
47:47
us to a number of techniques. So, or if I want technology,
47:52
it' s going to lead us to another one, that is, it
47:53
' s coming, because maybe what we' re trying to do is a
47:57
chemical analysis. It could be a petographic analysis, which we talked about,
48:00
but well, there' s also more techniques. So, of course,
48:04
a chemical allasis, for example, because or I can be, as we
48:07
said, ICP, neutron activation, X- radii fluorescence. Well, there
48:12
are several. If we want an analysis, solve a technological question, how
48:21
was that piece made, not what is it made of? It has glaze
48:25
that glaze is of lead plomonos which type of material composes it. Well,
48:31
that would all be another kind of other techniques requiring it It could be,
48:37
for example, electronic microscopy, for example, it would be a good technique
48:45
to try to explore those questions. And then the other big question, the
48:51
other big question that needs to be assessed is worth it very well, I
48:58
want to know this and for that I have to use this technique. Okay.
49:01
You can either destroy the piece or you can' t destroy it.
49:06
I think that' s the basis of any study. There are techniques that
49:13
are destructive by nature, as we have seen, such as neutron activation or
49:17
mass spectrometry and others that may or may not be, such as X-
49:22
ray florescence, diffraction or electron microscope may not be destructive. Then, there
49:29
you have to value. I have enough samples. Yeah, they' re
49:35
significant. Then I can do a destructive analysis. Perfect. I can'
49:40
t do a descriptive ansis, because I only have one sample call is complete
49:45
and it' s in a showcase at the museum. There with lights and
49:47
posters. Of course, perhaps we cannot benefit from that destructive analysis, not
49:54
compensate to destroy that piece that is perhaps one in the region. I don
50:00
' t know. So, all these issues are important to value. And
50:07
then one that you often don' t forget, but I don' t
50:14
know where you should put it in that whole scheme is how much it costs,
50:22
because it really seems like it' s a little thing. But tests
50:23
like I said are expensive, they' re usually expensive. So, well,
50:29
the important thing or my Council, at least for all listeners, would
50:34
be to try to collaborate with institutions that do these analyses and tempt against funding.
50:42
Obviously not, but good. We often know it' s complicated,
50:46
but collaborating can open many doors, because it' s not just ordering an
50:52
analysis. It takes my sample to analyze it. We are not going to
50:55
ask a joint project, we are going to see what questions we can answer
51:00
and from that dialogue, which is very enriching for both parties, a project
51:06
or a less analytical strategy will emerge, it is much more robust, with
51:13
much more solid results, which will surely bring much more to the Community.
51:17
Clear from a discussion between the questions and who is fit and who can do
51:24
the analyses. The technique, the number of copies and, of course,
51:31
the budgetary resources required to carry these studies forward will surely be precise. Finally,
51:40
Javier, in conclusion, I want to ask you how science and technology
51:46
are now moving forward in a very fast way, what are the big questions
51:53
that are now coming to archaeometry and that will seek to resolve in the near
52:00
future where geometry will be directed in the near future. I believe that this
52:07
is my opinion, my opinion based on my experience and the congresses I have
52:14
attended lately and the publications that you see are increasingly being published. I believe
52:21
that at least one of the great fields to which archaeometry is directed is really
52:27
towards non- destructive analysis. I think it' s not only one of
52:32
the big fields, but it' s one of the most necessary fields.
52:37
From what we were saying, there are no materials that cannot necessarily be destroyed.
52:45
Like it or not we might say if we could analyze, I don
52:47
' t know what' s already clear, but it' s just that
52:52
it' s unique is that that piece actually has a museum value in itself,
52:58
has an intrinsic value or even has a cultural value for a population group.
53:02
Then it cannot be destroyed, but perhaps non- destructive techniques could be
53:08
used. So that' s where you' re going to archeometry recently,
53:14
in the last ten years, a lot of equipment has been developed, not
53:20
only non- destructive, but also portable. So more and more you see
53:27
even the own excavations, going with a portable equipment, analyzing, insitu the
53:32
material that you have just excavated or even with chemical analyzers of florescence of radios
53:38
x portable, analyzing, for example, soil a stratum, trying an area,
53:45
trying to see if there is any marker that tells us if one more
53:52
area of habitat or a bonfire or an industrial zone, then do as a
53:57
kind of chemical prospecting. That' s getting more and more common and we
54:04
' re going there. Of course we could also talk that if genetic,
54:07
that if good bioarchaeology as if not. In my field, I can'
54:13
t talk much about not being able to expand on that either. But what
54:15
is inorganic materials. The non- destructive anthesis is definitely going to revolutionize.
54:22
Or it' s already revolutionizing, because it' s really already revolutionizing what
54:27
is the field of archaeometry here not so many years. I don' t
54:31
know how we treat ourselves archaeologically. I predict that destructive analyses will become more
54:39
and more residual, that is, in fact, increasingly tend to make non
54:45
- destructive assis and they will be more precise, more accurate and truly we
54:52
will all benefit. I think it' s going that way, the field,
54:55
it' s going inexorably that way. Javier, thank you so much
55:01
for your time, for your generosity and for sharing your experience. It has
55:06
been as always a taste, although there has been no beer to talk to
55:12
you and good we will continue to produce scientific content in this podcast, the
55:15
future Neck. Thank you very much. It has been a pleasure for me
55:21
to be with you and discuss these very interesting issues. Thank you very much
55:24
for my herma.