New Strategies in Archaeometric Provenance Analyses of Volcanic Rock Grinding Stones: Examples from Iulia Libica (Spain) and Sidi Zahruni (Tunisia)

dc.contributor.authorCasas i Duocastella, Lluís
dc.contributor.authorDi Febo, Roberta
dc.contributor.authorAnglisano, Anna
dc.contributor.authorPitarch Martí, África
dc.contributor.authorQueralt, Ignasi
dc.contributor.authorCarreras, Cesar
dc.contributor.authorFouzai, Boutheina
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-30T13:15:09Z
dc.date.available2026-01-30T13:15:09Z
dc.date.issued2024-07-01
dc.date.updated2026-01-30T13:15:09Z
dc.description.abstractArchaeometry can help archaeologists in many ways, and one of the most common archaeometric objectives is provenance analysis. Volcanic rocks are often found in archaeological sites as materials used to make grinding tools such as millstones and mortars or as building materials. Petrographic characterization is commonly applied to identify their main mineralogical components. However, the provenance study of volcanic stones is usually undertaken by comparing geochemical data from reference outcrops using common descriptive statistical tools such as biplots of chemical elements, and occasionally, unsupervised multivariate data analysis like principal component analysis (PCA) is also used. Recently, the use of supervised classification methods has shown a superior performance in assigning provenance to archaeological samples. However, these methods require the use of reference databases for all the possible provenance classes in order to train the classification models. The existence of comprehensive collections of published geochemical analyses of igneous rocks enables the use of the supervised approach for the provenance determination of volcanic stones. In this paper, the provenance of volcanic grinding tools from two archaeological sites (Iulia Libica, Spain, and Sidi Zahruni, Tunisia) is attempted using data from the GEOROC database through unsupervised and supervised approaches. The materials from Sidi Zahruni have been identified as basalts from Pantelleria (Italy), and the agreement between the different supervised classification models tested is particularly conclusive. In contrast, the provenance of the materials from Iulia Libica remained undetermined. The results illustrate the advantages and limitations of all the examined methods.
dc.format.extent1 p.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.idgrec755572
dc.identifier.issn2075-163X
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/226496
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherMDPI
dc.relation.isformatofReproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.3390/min14070639
dc.relation.ispartofMinerals, 2024, vol. 14, num.7
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.3390/min14070639
dc.rightscc-by (c) Casas Lluis et al., 2024
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject.classificationArqueometria
dc.subject.classificationRoques volcàniques
dc.subject.otherArchaeometry
dc.subject.otherVolcanic rocks
dc.titleNew Strategies in Archaeometric Provenance Analyses of Volcanic Rock Grinding Stones: Examples from Iulia Libica (Spain) and Sidi Zahruni (Tunisia)
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Fitxers

Paquet original

Mostrant 1 - 1 de 1
Carregant...
Miniatura
Nom:
882671.pdf
Mida:
23.07 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format