, Volume 38, Issue 1, pp 42–49 | Cite as

Dating mortar by optically stimulated luminescence: A feasibility study



Quartz is the datable component in mortar. Although its luminescence properties are very well studied, the problem of mortar dating arises from a low level of optical bleaching. In order to reduce the time consuming efforts for dating lime mortar in monuments by optically stimulated luminescence, we investigated the most suitable methods of dose and dose rate determination, and we explored tests which are suitable to predict the datability of a given material. Reverting to the large number of publications on sedimentary partially bleached quartz we found linear modulation techniques especially useful, equally we also recommend the determination of the level of optical depletion before starting analyses. Single grain analysis is regarded as an ultimate but infallible tool to date very poorly bleached quartz from mortar. Dose rate measurements need to take into account the radioactive equilibrium of the uranium decay and the short range inhomogeneity of the environmental gamma radiation field: gamma spectrometry and on-site TLD measurements are best suited.


optical dating monuments preservation mortar 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adamiec G and Aitken M, 1998. Dose-rate conversion factors: update. Ancient TL 16(2): 37–50.Google Scholar
  2. Aitken MJ, 1998. An Introduction to Optical Dating. Oxford, Oxford University Press: 276 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Agersnap Larsen N, Bulur E, Bøtter-Jensen L and McKeever SWS, 2000. Use of the LM-OSL technique for the detection of partial bleaching in quartz. Radiation Measurements 32(5–6): 419–425, DOI 10.1016/S1350-4487(00)00071-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ankjærgaard C and Murray AS, 2007. Total beta and gamma dose rates in trapped charge dating based on beta counting. Radiation Measurements 42: 352–359, DOI 10.1016/j.radmeas.2006.12.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bailey RM, Stokes S and Bray H, 2003. Inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP/MS) for dose rate determination: some guidelines for sample preparation and analysis. Ancient TL 21: 11–15.Google Scholar
  6. Bailiff IK, 2007. Methodological developments in the luminescence dating of brick from English late-medieval and post-medieval buildings. Archaeometry 49: 827–851, DOI 10.1111/j.1475-4754.2007.00338.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Banerjee D, Murray AS, Bøtter-Jensen L and Lang A. 2001. Equivalent dose estimation using a single aliquot of polymineral fine grains. Radiation Measurements 33(1): 73–93, DOI 10.1016/S1350-4487(00)00101-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bøtter-Jensen L, Solongo S, Murray AS, Banerjee D and Jungner H. 2000a. Using OSL single-aliquot regenerative-dose protocol with quartz extracted from building materials in retrospective dosimetry. Radiation Measurements 32(5–6): 841–845, DOI 10.1016/S1350-4487(00)00066-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bøtter-Jensen L, Bulur E, Duller GAT and Murray AS, 2000b. Advances in luminescence instrument systems. Radiation Measurements 32(5–6): 523–538, DOI 10.1016/S1350-4487(00)00039-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bulur E, Bøtter-Jensen L and Murray AS, 2000. Optically stimulated luminescence from quartz measured using the linear modulation technique. Radiation Measurements 32(5–6): 407–411, DOI 10.1016/S1350-4487(00)00115-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Degering D and Krbetschek MR, 2007. Dating of interglacial sediments by luminescence methods. In: Developments in Quarternary Science 7:157–172. Series editor: Jaap JM van der Meer. Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duller GAT, Bøtter-Jensen L and Murray AS, 2000. Optical dating of sand-sized quartz: sources of variability. Radiation Measurements 32(5–6): 453–457, DOI 10.1016/S1350-4487(00)00055-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. El-Faramawy NA, Göksu HY and Panzer W, 2004. Thermoluminescence dosimetry properties of a new thin beta detector (LiF:Mg, Cu, P; Gr-200F) in comparison with highly sensitive Al2O3:C beta dosimeters. Journal of Radiological Protection 24: 273–282, DOI 10.1088/0952-4746/24/3/006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fleming SJ, 1979. Thermoluminescence Techniques in Archaeology. Oxford, Clarendon Press: 233 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Galbraith RF, Roberts RG, Laslett GM, Yoshida H, Olley JM, 1999. Optical dating and multiple grains of quartz from Jinmium rock shelter, Northern Australia: part I experimental design and statistical models. Archaeometry 41(2): 339–364, DOI 10.1111/j.1475-4754.1999.tb00987.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gilmore G, 2008. Practical Gamma-Ray Spectrometry. New York, John Wiley: 424 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goedicke C, 2003. Dating historical mortars by blue OSL: results from known age samples. Radiation Measurements 37: 409–415, DOI 10.1016/S1350-4487(03)00010-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goedicke C, 2006. Assessment of environmental dose rates in luminescence readers using α-Al2O3:C. Radiation Measurements 41: 36–39, DOI 10.1016/j.radmeas.2005.02.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goedicke C and Dolata J, 2007. Unpublished.Google Scholar
  20. Göksu HY, Bulur E and Wahl W, 1999. Beta dosimetry using thin-layer α-Al2O3:C TL detectors. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 84(1–4): 451–455.Google Scholar
  21. Hale J, Heinemeier J, Lancaster L, Lindross A and Ringbom Å, 2003. Dating ancient mortar. American Scientist: 91, 130 ff, DOI 10.1511/2003.2.130.Google Scholar
  22. Jain M, Thomsen KJ, Bøtter-Jensen L, Murray AS, 2004. Thermal transfer and apparent-dose distributions in poorly bleached mortar samples: results from single grains and small aliquots of quartz. Radiation Measurements 38: 101–109, DOI 10.1016/j.radmeas.2003.07.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jain M, Murray AS, Bøtter-Jensen L and Wintle AG, 2005. A single-aliquot regenerative-dose method based on IR (1.49 eV) bleaching of the fast component in quartz. Radiation Measurements 39: 309–318, DOI 10.1016/j.radmeas.2004.05.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lindroos A, Heinemeier J, Ringbom Å, Braskén M and Sveinbjörnsdóttir Á, 2007. Mortar Dating Using AMS 14C and Sequential Dissolution: Examples from Medieval, Non-Hydraulic Lime Mortars from the Åland Islands, SW Finland. Radiocarbon 49: 47–67.Google Scholar
  25. Martini M and Sibilia E, 2006. Absolute dating of historical buildings: the contribution of thermoluminescence (TL). Journal of Neutron Research 14: 69–74, DOI 0.1080/10238160600673326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Murray AS and Wintle AG, 2000. Luminescence dating of quartz using an improved single-aliquot regenerative-dose protocol. Radiation Measurements 32(1): 57–73, DOI 10.1016/S1350-4487(99)00253-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nawrocka D, Michiniewicz J, Pawlyta J and Pazdur A, 2005. Application of radiocarbon method for dating of lime mortars. Geochronometria 24: 109–115.Google Scholar
  28. Preusser F and Kasper HU, 2001. Comparison of dose rate determination using high-resolution gamma spectroscopy and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. Ancient TL 19: 19–23.Google Scholar
  29. Scharf A, 2007. Datenanalyse und Qualitätssicherung der 14C-AMSMessungen am Erlanger Tandembeschleuniger und Erweiterung des Sortiments 14C-datierbarer Probenmaterialien. Unpublished PhD thesis, Friedrich-Alexander University, Erlangen-Nürnberg.Google Scholar
  30. Wintle AG and Murray AS, 2006. A review of quartz optically stimulated luminescence characteristics and their relevance in single-aliquot regeneration dating protocols. Radiation Measurements 41: 369–391, DOI 10.1016/j.radmeas.2005.11.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zacharias N, Mauz B and Michael CT, 2002. Luminescence quartz dating of lime mortars. A first research approach. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 101: 379–382.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© © Versita Warsaw and Springer-Verlag Wien 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Humboldt-Universität zu BerlinGeographisches InstitutBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations