Ufa Archaeological Herald

Elemental analysis of archaeological finds is crucial for establishing sources of metal raw materials, assessing the advancement of metalworking, and characterizing trade and economic ties of the ancient population. Portable X-ray fluorescence analyzers are used for express analysis the most often. They are relatively affordable and easy to handle. At the same time, they provide the necessary measurement accuracy. However, complex composite products require local analysis methods. An electron microscope with an energy-dispersive spectrometer allows selecting the most distinctive areas with minimal contamination in studies with submicron resolution. Meanwhile, physical differences between these two methods and the characteristics of archaeological samples result in study findings significantly differing. The paper compares the X-ray fluorescence analysis (XRF) and electron probe microanalysis (EPMA) findings of a number of samples of archaeological non-ferrous metal. The difference in the findings is associated with different depths of analysis. The scope of EPMA analysis includes only superficial heavily contaminated and oxidized layers, while XRF also captures the internal layers of non-corroded metal. EPMA research on the sections surface with regards to the XRF signal output area allows obtaining comparable data. It is shown that along with the zinc concentration increasing, the elemental composition of the patina is close to the composition of the original metal.

Middle Ages, Cheptsа River basin, Polomskaya Chepetskaya archaeological culture, nonferrous metal, scanning electron microscope, energy dispersive spectrometer, X-ray fluorescence analyzer

• Arkhipov, B.A., 1973, The Mari people of the IX–X centuries. On the question of the origin of the people. Mari Publishing House, Yoshkar-Ola, 200 p. (In Russ.)
• Belavin, A.M., Krylasova, N.B., 2008, Ancient Afkula: An archaeological complex near the village of Rozhdestvensk. PGPU, Perm, 603 p. (In Russ.)
• Goldina, R.D., 2012, “On the dating of the Poloma culture”, The Antiquity of the Kama Region of the Iron Age (VI century BC – XV century AD): chronological attribution, ed. R.D. Goldan, UdGU, Izhevsk, pp. 399–414. (Materials and research of the Kamsko-Vyatka archaeological expedition, vol. 25) (In Russ.)
• Yeniososva, N.V., Mitoyan, R.A., 2014, “X-ray spectral method of archaeological metal analysis: advantages, limitations and traps in the process of measurement and interpretation”, Proceedings of the IV (XX) All-Russian Archaeological Congress in Kazan, vol. 1, Otechestvo, Kazan, pp. 143–146. (In Russ.)
• Zakharov, S.D., 2004, The ancient Russian city of Beloozero. Indrik, Moscow, 592 p. (In Russ.)
• Ivanova, M.G., 2004, “Research of the Udmurt archaeological expedition of the Udmurt Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences (1969–2003)”, Udmurt archaeological expedition turns 50. Proceedings of the All-Russian scientific conf. June 16–18, 2004, UIIYаL UrO RAN, Izhevsk, pp. 30–40. (In Russ.)
• Kazantseva, O.A., 2019, “Divide or study (the integrity of archaeological collections: opportunities and challenges of scientific research)”, Archaeology of the Eurasian Steppes, no. 5, pp. 57–65. (In Russ.)
• Krylasova, N.B., 2001, The history of the Kama costume. Costume of the medieval population of the Permian Urals. PGPU, Perm, 220 p. (In Russ.)
• Krylasova, N.B., Danich, A.V., 2020, “Threads of Metal Beads and Tube Beads in the Middle-Age Finno-Ugrian Costume of the Perm Cis-Urals”, The Volga River Region Archaeology, no. 4 (34), pp. 50–66. (In Russ.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.24852/ра2020 .4.34.50.65
• Lakhtin, Yu.M., Leontieva, V.P., 1990, Materials Science. Mashinostroenie, Moscow, 528 p. (In Russ.)
• Loboda, A.Yu., Tereshchenko, E.Yu., Antipenko, A.V., Retivov, V.M., Presnyakov, M.Yu., Kolobylina, N.N., Kondratiev, O.A., Shishlina, N.I., Yatsishina, E.B., Kashkarov, P.K., 2018, “Local and Integral Techniques in Metal Compositional Analysis of Archaeological Objects with Surface Corrosion Layers and Small Sample Quantities”, The Volga River Region Archaeology, no. 4 (26), pp. 203–221. (In Russ.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.24852/2018.4.26.203.221
• Russkih, E.L., Beltyukov, A.N., 2022, “Bottle-shaped pendants in the archaeological collections of the Cheptsa river basin: new data”, The Herald of the ASRB, vol. 43, no. 2 (106), pp. 88–96. (In Russ.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.24412/1728-5283_2022_2_88_96
• Russkih, E.L., Sabirova, T.M., 2020, “Non-ferrous metal of the burial grounds of the Chepetsk culture (Kuzminsky, Kushmansky I, Idnakarsky I)”, Perm University Herald. History, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 97–109. (In Russ.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.17072/2219-3111-2020-1-97-109
• Sabirova, T.M., Russkih, E.L., 2022, The treasures of Idnakar. UFIC UrO RAN, Izhevsk, 112 p. (In Russ.)
• Sabirova, T.M., Russkih, E.L., Beltyukov, A.N., Averkiev, I.K., 2021, “Investigation of metal products from the tombs of the Idnakar settlement of the 9th–13th centuries by electron probe microanalysis”, Chemical Physics and Mesoscopy, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 353–365. (In Russ.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.15350/17270529.2021 .3.32
• Saprykina, I.A., Pelgunova, L.A., 2013, “Prospects for the study of archaeological objects using X-ray spectrometry (using the example of the M4 TORNADO, BRUKER, Germany)”, Photography. Image. Document, iss. 4 (4), pp. 80–87. (In Russ.)
• Semenov, V.A., 1980, “Varninsky burial ground”, A new monument of Polom culture, ed. V.F. Gening, SRI at the CM UASSR, Izhevsk, pp. 5–135. (In Russ.)
• Semenov, V.A., 1985, “Omutnitsky burial ground”, Materials of medieval monuments of Udmurtia, ed. M.G. Ivanov, SRI at the CM UASSR, Ustinov, pp. 92–118. (In Russ.)
• Tishkin, A.A., Khavrin, S.V., 2006, “The use of X-ray fluorescence analysis in archaeological research”, Theory and Practice of Archaeological Research, vol. 2, pp. 74–85. (In Russ.)
• Tsybulskaya, O.N., Buravlev, I.Yu., Yudakov, A.A., Nikitin, Yu.G., 2010, “The use of physico-chemical methods of analysis in the study of archaeological sites”, Vestnik of the Far East Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, no. 5, pp. 85–90. (In Russ.)
• Faraldi, F., Çilingirˇ oglu, A., Angelini, E., Riccucci, C., De Caro, T., Batmaz, A., Mezzi, A., Caschera, D., Cortese, B., 2013, “Micro-chemical and micro-structural investigation of archaeological bronze weapons from the Ayanis fortress (lake Van, Eastern Anatolia, Turkey)”, Applied Physics A, vol. 113 (4), pp. 911–921. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00339-013-7772-6
• Ferretti, M., 2014, “The investigation of ancient metal artefacts by portable X-ray fluorescence devices”, Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry, vol. 29, p. 1753. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/c4ja00107a
• Nørgaard, H., 2017, “Portable XRF on Prehistoric Bronze Artefacts: Limitations and Use for the Detection of Bronze Age Metal Workshops”, Open Archaeology, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 101–122.
• Šatović, D., Desnica, V., Fazinić, S., 2013, “Use of portable X-ray fluorescence instrument for bulk alloy analysis on low corroded indoor bronzes”, Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, vol. 89, pp. 7–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sab.2013.08.007