The Micromorphological Analysis of Soils and Site Contexts at Stonehall and Crossiecrown

Author(s):  
Charles French
2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Françoise Watteau ◽  
Nouhou Salifou Jangorzo ◽  
Christophe Schwartz

2018 ◽  
Vol 372 ◽  
pp. 96-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Arriolabengoa ◽  
Eneko Iriarte ◽  
Arantza Aranburu ◽  
Iñaki Yusta ◽  
Lee J. Arnold ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
R. Angus K. Smith ◽  
Mary K. Dabney ◽  
James C. Wright

From 2006 to 2008 The Canadian Institute in Greece sponsored the excavation of a Mycenaean chamber tomb cemetery at Ayia Sotira near Koutsomodi in the Nemea Valley. The five modest tombs excavated by the project were undoubtedly associated with the nearby settlement of Tsoungiza, and offer a picture of the mortuary practices associated with this settlement. The practices at Ayia Sotira describe both local funerary customs and more generally “Mycenaean” ones observable throughout Mainland Greece and the Aegean. Explanations for the local character are found in the economic conditions of the nearby settlement, in the local geology, and presumably local customs. These were documented through careful recovery of the stratigraphy and contents of the tombs, including paleobotanical, phytolith, organic residue, and micromorphological analysis. The remarkable similarity of these tombs and their contents to those excavated at neighboring Zygouries confirm the local character of chamber tomb inhumation. Yet comparison with other chamber tomb cemeteries, notably nearby Aidonia, but also with examples in the Corinthia, Argolid, and elsewhere, demonstrate the general features of a common “Mycenaean” practice. Overall, burial practices in the chamber tombs at Ayia Sotira fits our reconstruction of the inhabitants of Tsoungiza being incorporated into a social and political system dominated by the inhabitants of Mycenae during the LH IIIA2–B periods.


2015 ◽  
Vol 86 ◽  
pp. 395-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramazanov Shikhgasan ◽  
Ţălu Ştefan ◽  
Sobola Dinara ◽  
Stach Sebastian ◽  
Ramazanov Guseyn

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felipe Weidenbach Degrazia ◽  
Bruna Genari ◽  
Vilmar Antonio Ferrazzo ◽  
Ary dos Santos-Pinto ◽  
Renésio Armindo Grehs

The aim of this study was to evaluate enamel roughness, quality of the enamel surfaces and time duration comparing different orthodontic adhesive removal protocols. Premolars were used to test three adhesive removal methods (n = 20): five-blade carbide bur, 30-blade carbide bur, and ultrasonic diamond bur. Bracket was bonded using TransbondTM XT adhesive. Roughness with different parameters was measured before bracket bonding and after adhesive remnants removal. Micromorphological analysis of enamel surface (n = 5) was performed by SEM images and categorized in enamel damage index—“perfect”; “satisfying”; “imperfect”; and “unacceptable”. Time was measured in seconds. All removal methods caused increased roughness in relation to Ra, Rq, and Rz parameters (X axis) comparing to healthy enamel surface. Enamel surface resulted from removal using five-blade burs was scored as satisfactory. Carbide bur groups decreased the roughness values of Ra, Rq, and Rz parameters on the Y axis and enamel surface was considered unacceptable. The 30-blade group increased symmetry (Rsk) and flattening (Rku) parameters of roughness and surface was scored as unsatisfactory. Diamond bur removed adhesive in 54.8 s, faster than five-blade carbide bur. The five-blade bur group resulted in less enamel roughness than the 30-blade and diamond groups.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document