Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-12T12:18:14.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

AMS and Radiometric Dating of an Etruscan Linen Book and Associated Mummy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Rupert A Housley
Affiliation:
Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, 6 Keble Road Oxford OX1 3QJ
Dušan Srdoč
Affiliation:
Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, 6 Keble Road Oxford OX1 3QJ
Nada Horvatinčić
Affiliation:
Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, 6 Keble Road Oxford OX1 3QJ
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

An important Etruscan linen “book,” the Liber linteus Zagrabiensis, was preserved in wrappings of an Egyptian mummy. Stylistic estimates for the date of composition of the text vary. Three possible centuries were suggested, the 3rd and the 1st centuries BC and the 1st century ad. Radiometric and AMS dating of the linen book and the mummy has demonstrated multiple uses for differing aged materials. There seem to be at least two sets of linen wrappings of markedly contrasting ages, while separate fractions of the embalming unguent seemed to contain carbon of differing dates. 14C results suggest the most probable age range for the linen book is ca 360–210 cal BC, making the 3rd century BC stylistic date the most likely time of inscription.

Type
IV. Applications
Copyright
Copyright © The American Journal of Science 

References

Gillespie, R, Hedges, R E M and Humm, M J, 1986, Routine AMS dating of bone and shell proteins, in Stuiver, M and Kra, RS, eds, Internatl 14C conf, 12th, Proc: Radiocarbon, v 28 no. 2A, p 451456.Google Scholar
Hedges, R E M, Law, I A, Bronk, C R and Housley, R A, 1989, The Oxford accelerator mass spectrometry facility: technical developments in routine dating: Archaeometry, v 31, no. 2, in press.Google Scholar
Mirnik, I and Rendić-Miočević, A, 1986, Liber linteus Zagrabiensis : Vjesnik Arheol Muz Zagreb, v XIX, p 4172.Google Scholar
Mook, W G and Streurman, H J, 1983, Physical and chemical aspects of radiocarbon dating, in Internatl symposium of 14C and archaeology 1st, Proc: PACT, v 8, p 3156.Google Scholar
Olsson, I U, 1968, Modern aspects of radiocarbon dating: Earth Sci Rev, v 4, no. 3, p 203218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, G W, Pilcher, J R, Baillie, M G L, Corbett, D M and Qua, F, 1986, High-precision 14C measurement of Irish oaks to show the natural 14C variations from AD 1840 to 5210 bc, in Stuiver, M and Kra, R S, eds, Internatl 14C conf, 12th, Proc: Radiocarbon v 28 no. 2B, p 911934.Google Scholar
Pearson, G W and Stuiver, M, 1986, High-precision calibration of the radiocarbon time scale, 500–2500 bc, in Stuiver, M and Kra, R S, eds, Internatl 14C conf, 12th, Proc: Radiocarbon, v 28, no. 2B, p 839862.Google Scholar
van der Plicht, J and Mook, W G, 1989, Calibration of radiocarbon ages by computer: Radiocarbon, this issue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roncalli, F, 1980a, “Carbasinis volumibus implicati libri.” Osservazioni sul liber linteus di Zagabria: Jahrb Deutschen Archaeol Inst, v 95, p 227264.Google Scholar
Roncalli, F, 1980b, Osservazioni sui “libri lintei” etruschi: Atti Pont Accad Rom Archaeol, v LI-LII, p 321.Google Scholar
Srdoč, D and Horvatinčić, N, 1986, Radiocarbon dating of the Liber linteus Zagrabiensis : Vjesnik Arheol Muz Zagreb, v XIX, p 8398.Google Scholar
Stuiver, M and Pearson, G W, 1986, High-precision calibration of the radiocarbon time scale, AD 1950–500 bc, in Stuiver, M and Kra, R S, eds, Internatl 14C conf. 12th, Proc: Radiocarbon, v 28, no. 2B, p 805838.Google Scholar
Ward, G R and Wilson, S R, 1978, Procedures for comparing and combining radiocarbon age determinations: a critique: Archaeometry, v 20, no. 1, p 1931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar