Cited by 1

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Stuccoed Tripod Vesselsfrom Teotihuacan: An Examination of Materials and Manufacture

Fletcher, Jessica M.·2002·Journal of the American Institute for Conservation

Abstract

This study was conducted with the goal of characterizing a specific group of polychrome stuccoed ceramic sherds from the Maquixco Bajo archaeological site at Teotihuacán, Mexico. Teotihuacan is located northeast of Mexico City and dates to the Classic Period, ca. 150–750 A.D. Analysis included pigment identification, stucco identification, characterization of the ceramic surface preparation, as well as further investigation into binders and the technology of application. The layered structure of the stucco decoration is described. Analytical techniques used included scanning electron microscopy (SEM), x-ray powder diffraction (XRD), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), microchemical testing, and polarized light microscopy. Results indicate that red and yellow pigments are primarily iron oxides, blue and green pigments are mixtures of azurite and malachite with chrysocolla, and most black pigments contain charcoal black. Ground layers are made up of calcite or clay, as well as mixtures of the two materials. Calcite is proposed as a binder.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1179/019713602806112940

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. Berrin K., 1993, Teotihuacán: Art from the city of the gods
  2. Castillo Tejero N., 1968, Algunas técnicas decorativas de la cerámica arqueolôgica de México
  3. Chandler T., 1974, 3000 years of urban growth
  4. 10.1525/mua.1997.21.2.39 · DOI
  5. Evans S. T., 1992, Art, ideology, and the city of Teotihuacin, 8
  6. Kolb C. C, 1988, Ceramic ecology revisited, 1987: The technology and socioeconomics of pottery, 436, 345
  7. Kolb C. C, 1997, Materials issues in art and archaeology, 5, 247
  8. Magaloni D., 1995, Materials issues in art and archaeology, 4, 381
  9. Sanders W. T., 1994, The Teotihuacân Valley Project final report, Vol. 3 : The Teotihuadn period occupation of the valley, Part 1:The excavations. Occasional papers in anthropology
  10. Shepard A. O, 1946, Excavations at Kaminaljuyu, Guatemala, 561, 261
  11. Taylor D, 2000, Bulletin, 74, 4
  12. Torraca G, 1982, Porous building materials: Materials science for architectural conservation
  13. 10.1179/019713690806046055 · DOI
  14. Barba L., 1995, Materials issues in art and archaeology, 4, 491
  15. 10.1179/019713693806176517 · DOI
  16. Berrin K., 1988, Feathered serpents and flowering trees: Reconstructing the murals of Teotihuacân
  17. Gettens R. J, 1955, Bonampak, Chiapas, Mexico
  18. Hansen E. E, 1997, Materials issues in art and archaeology, 5, 207
  19. Kolb C. C, 1988, A pot for all reasons: Ceramic ecology revisited, 147
  20. 10.2307/276436 · DOI
  21. 10.2307/277478 · DOI
  22. 10.2307/276688 · DOI
  23. 10.2307/277448 · DOI
  24. 10.2307/277528 · DOI
  25. 10.2307/276642 · DOI
  26. 10.2307/278089 · DOI
  27. 10.2307/2694465 · DOI
  28. Magaloni D., 1991, Materials issues in art and archaeology, 2, 145
  29. Magaloni D., 1992, Materials issues in art and archaeology, 3, 997
  30. Miller A. G, 1973, The mural paintings of Teotihuacin
  31. Shepard A. O, 1968, Science and Archaeology

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Fletcher, J. M.
Venue
Journal of the American Institute for Conservation
Published
2002-01
Volume
41
Issue
2
Pages
139-154
ISSN
  • 0197-1360
  • 1945-2330
Cited by
1
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review