Skip to main content
Log in

Comparative Analysis of the Modern and Ancient Coloring Pigment in the Paintings from the Two-Eyed Stone (Dvuglazyi Kamen’) Pictograph (the Neyva River, the Middle Urals)

  • NATURAL SCIENTIFIC METHODS IN STUDYING CULTURAL HERITAGE OBJECTS
  • Published:
Nanobiotechnology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The results of a comparative analysis of the ancient paint layer of the Two-Eyed Stone (Dvuglazyi Kamen’) pictograph (Alapaevsk, the Neyva River) and the experimental painting made at the same place in 1992 using paint prepared in accordance with the supposed ancient technology (grinding a piece of local iron ore with lard) are presented. The studies of mineral and chemical composition are carried out by SEM-EDS and Raman spectroscopy. The results do not preclude the use of local raw materials (hematite from iron ore occurrences of the “Alapaevsk” type) as a coloring pigment by ancient people. The technology of manual grinding of hematite-containing material, both in ancient times and today, has made it possible to obtain a finely dispersed pigment with almost submicron particle sizes. The ancient paint layer is covered with secondary formations, represented by crusts consisting of gypsum and weddellite crystals, in some cases with thin dolomite–magnesite interlayers on gypsum. Possible mechanisms for the gypsum crust formation are proposed. The formation of oxalate crusts (weddellite) may result from biological activity of lichens, whose probable traces are detected in the experimental painting. The traces of fat from domesticated ruminants, most likely ram, which could be added as a binder, in contrast to the experimental paint based on pig fat, were found in the organic component of the ancient paint. Both paint samples contain an admixture of organic substance of plant origin derived from the environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. V. N. Chernetsov, Rock Carvings of the Urals: Part 2, Code of Archaeological Sources, No. 4–12 (Nauka, Moscow, 1971) [in Russian].

  2. Yu. P. Chemyakin, in Proceedings of the Conference on Ural in the Past and Present, Yekaterinburg, February 24–25, 1998, Part 1, p. 123.

  3. V. N. Shirokov, S. E. Chairkin, and Yu. P. Chemyakin, Ural Pisanitsy: Neiva River (BKI, Yekaterinburg, 2000) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  4. V. N. Shirokov and S. E. Chairkin, Rock Carvings of the Northern and Middle Urals (Azhur, Yekaterinburg, 2011) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  5. D. V. Kiseleva, E. S. Shagalov, E. A. Pankrushina, et al., Geoarkheol. Arkheol. Mineralog., No. 6, 53 (2019).

  6. J. Russ, W. D. Kaluarachchi, L. Drummond, et al., Stud. Conserv. 44, 91 (1999).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. R. Reese, M. Hyman, M. Rowe, et al., J. Archeol. Sci. 23, 269 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. A. N. Khorkova, D. A. Danilov, D. V. Kiseleva, et al., AIP Conf. Proc. 2313, 050055 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. V. M. Pozhidaev, Ya. E. Sergeeva, I. S. Slushnaya, et al., Butlerov. Soobshch. 52 (12), 73 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  10. R. P. Evershed, S. N. Dudd, M. S. Copley, et al., Acc. Chem. Res. 35, 660 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. M. L. He, S. Ishikawa, and H. Hidari, Asian-Australas. J. Animal Sci. 18, 165 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. L. Cordain, B. A. Watkins, G. L. Florant, et al., Eur. J. Clin. Nutrit. 56, 181 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. M. H. Abd-El-Aal and M. S. Mohamed, Food Chem. 31, 93 (1989).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. E. S. Azarov, V. M. Pozhidaev, N. I. Shishlina, et al., Kratk. Soobshch. Inst. Arkheol., No. 244, 391 (2016).

  15. R. P. Hansen, F. B. Shorland, and N. J. Cooke, Biochem. J. 58, 516 (1954).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. T. Rezanka and K. Sigler, Prog Lipid Res. 48, 206 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. M. Z. M. Salem, R. A. Nasser, A. Zeidler, et al., BioRes. 10, 7715 (2015).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project no. 20-09-00194). Scanning electron microscopy with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy and Raman spectroscopy were performed at the Geoanalytic Center for Collective Use, Ural Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences under the state task of Zavaritsky Institute of Geology and Geochemistry, Ural Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences on subject no. АААА-А18-118053090045-8.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. V. Kiseleva.

Additional information

Translated by L. Mukhortova

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kiseleva, D.V., Shirokov, V.N., Shagalov, E.S. et al. Comparative Analysis of the Modern and Ancient Coloring Pigment in the Paintings from the Two-Eyed Stone (Dvuglazyi Kamen’) Pictograph (the Neyva River, the Middle Urals). Nanotechnol Russia 16, 676–683 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1134/S2635167621050086

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S2635167621050086

Navigation