Mázas kerámiák készítéstechnikájának ásványtani, kőzettani és geokémiai vonatkozásai – Késő római és késő középkori kerámiák példáján

Comparison of rapid preparation methods for Pb isotope analysis of high‐Pb ceramic glazes: A case study of late medieval Besztercebánya/Banská Bystrica‐type stove tiles

“…A total of 15 stove tiles (22 glaze samples) were investigated with all three preparation methods (see Tables S4–S6 in the additional supporting information). The Pb oxide content of the glazes of the investigated tiles varied between 45 and 71 wt% based on scanning electron microscopy with energy‐dispersive X‐ray spectrometry (SEM‐EDX) measurements (Györkös, 2022; Györkös et al, 2020) (see Table S1 in the additional supporting information).…”

“…A total of 24 tiles were selected that represent all the previously investigated archaeological sites: Beszterceb anya/Bansk a Bystrica, Cs abr ag/ Čabra ď, Ipolys ag/ Šahy and Fülek/Fi ˇlakovo from Slovakia and Salg o, Eger and Szécsény from Hungary. The ceramic body and glazes of the tiles were formerly characterized in detail by Györkös et al (2018Györkös et al ( , 2019Györkös et al ( , 2020 and Györkös (2022). The analysed samples belong to the Museum of Applied Arts (Budapest, Hungary), the Hungarian National Museum (Budapest, Hungary), the Istv an Dob o Castle Museum (Eger, Hungary), the Ferenc Kubinyi Castle Museum (Szécsény, Hungary), the Slovak National Museum (Bratislava, Slovakia), the Institute of Archaeology of the Slovak Academy of Sciences (Nitra, Slovakia), and the Honty Museum and Gallery of Ľudovít Simonyi ( Šahy, Slovakia).…”

“…In the last few decades, several archaeological and art historical studies have investigated the connections between these tiles, characterized by similar circumstantial motifs and illustrated topics, along with the number and location of the possible production workshops (Anderko, 2023; Bodnár, 1988; Cserey, 1974; Gruia, 2007; Hoššo, 2005; Jančiová, 2020; Kvietok & Mácelová, 2013; László, 2012; Mácelová, 2005, 2006, 2009; Mezei, 2013, 2016; Mordovin, 2015; Parádi, 1984; Rakonczay, 2018, 2020). These studies were recently complemented by systematic archaeometric research to determine the raw materials and production technology of the ceramic body, as well as of the glaze of the stove tiles found at various archaeological sites, using a multi‐analytical methodology (Györkös, 2022; Györkös et al, 2018, 2019, 2020). Based on the similarities and differences in the applied materials and production technology, the investigated tiles from seven sites were classified into three groups: (1) tiles from Besztercebánya/Banská Bystrica (Slovakia); (2) tiles from Eger, Salgó, Szécsény (northern Hungary) and Fülek/Fiľakovo (Slovakia); and (3) tiles from the castle of Csábrág/Čabraď and the monastery of Ipolyság/Šahy (Slovakia).…”

“…Based on the similarities and differences in the applied materials and production technology, the investigated tiles from seven sites were classified into three groups: (1) tiles from Besztercebánya/Banská Bystrica (Slovakia); (2) tiles from Eger, Salgó, Szécsény (northern Hungary) and Fülek/Fiľakovo (Slovakia); and (3) tiles from the castle of Csábrág/Čabraď and the monastery of Ipolyság/Šahy (Slovakia). Thus, the stove tiles were produced in at least three different workshops in the region, from where they were distributed to customers (Györkös, 2022, Györkös et al, 2018, 2019, 2020). (Note that names of the localities are shown in Hungarian and Slovakian, and in some cases in German in this article, as these three languages were the prevailing languages in the region for centuries.…”