Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-8gtf8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-22T23:03:31.255Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Renaissance Enameled Jewelry and 19th century Renaissance Revival: Characterization of Enamel Compositions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2011

Mark T. Wypyski
Mark T. Wypyski*
Affiliation:
Sherman Fairchild Center for Objects Conservation The Metropolitan Museum of Art 1000 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10028, U.S.A.
Get access

Abstract

Enamels from European Renaissance enameled gold jewelry and other objects dating from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and Renaissance style and other objects from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were quantitatively analyzed using energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry. Differences were observed in the overall compositions, as well as the colorants and opacifiers used, of the Renaissance period and most of the later enamels. Some enamels from as late as the early nineteenth century, however, appeared to be essentially the same as those used during the Renaissance. The differences found in the enamel compositions can provide a set of objective compositional criteria to help distinguish between authentic Renaissance period enameled objects and some later enamels done in the style of the Renaissance.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 712: Symposium II – Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology VI , 2002 , II6.6
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Wardropper, I., Renaissance Jewelry in the Alsdorf Collection. The Art Institute of Chicago Museum Studies 25 (2), 82–91 (2000).Google Scholar
2. Wypyski, M. T. and Richter, R. W., Techne 6, 48–57 (1997).Google Scholar
3. Truman, C., Renaissance Jewelry in the Alsdorf Collection. The Art Institute of Chicago Museum Studies 25 (2), 82–91 (2000).Google Scholar
4. Biron, I., Dandridge, P. and Wypyski, M. T., The Enamels of Limoges: 1100-1350, ed. Boehm, B. and Taburet-Delahaye, E. (Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1996), pp. 48–62.Google Scholar
5. Pilosi, L. and Wypyski, M. T., Glass, Ceramics and Related Materials, ed. Paterakis, A. (ICOM, 1998) pp. 17–29.Google Scholar
6. Page, J., Pilosi, L. and Wypyski, M. T., Journal of Glass Studies 43, 115–139 (2001).Google Scholar
7. Wypyski, M. T., Renaissance Jewelry in the Alsdorf Collection. The Art Institute of Chicago Museum Studies 25 (2), 102–103 (2000).Google Scholar
8. Wypyski, M. T., Metropolitan Museum Journal 35, 150–152 (2000).Google Scholar
9. Richter, R., The Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art 81 (7), 223–251 (1994).Google Scholar
10. Newman, R., Artist's Pigments: A Handbook of Their History and Characteristics, Vol.3, ed. Fitzhugh, E.W. (Oxford University Press, 1997) pp. 273–293.Google Scholar
11. McCray, W. P., Osborne, Z. A., and Kingery, W. D., Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology IV, (Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 352, Pittsburgh, PA, 1995) pp. 201–211.Google Scholar
12. Strahan, D., “Uranium in Glass, Glazes and Enameling: History Identification and Handling,” Studies in Conservation 46, 181–195 (2001).Google Scholar
13. Volf, M. B., Chemical Approach to Glass, (Elsevier, 1984) pp. 470–476.Google Scholar
14. Brill, R. H., Chemical Analyses of Early Glasses, Vol. 2 (Corning Museum of Glass, 1999).Google Scholar
15. Veritá, M., Basso, R., Wypyski, M. T., and Koestler, R. J., Archaeometry 36 (2), 241–51 (1994).Google Scholar
16. Jorba, M. Perez y, Rommelure, M. and Bahezre, C., Studies In Conservation 36, 76–84 (1991).Google Scholar