X-ray fluorescence (XRF), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and Raman spectroscopy were employed to analyse the chemical compositions and phase structures of nine pieces of jade artefacts unearthed from Sujiacun, a Longshan Culture (2400-2000 bce) site in coastal Shandong, eastern China. The results of the analyses indicated these samples were primarily made from multiple raw mineral materials, including antigorite, actinolite, clinochlore, turquoise and muscovite. No nephrite was recovered from the Sujiacun site. This is strikingly different from other top-ranking settlements of Longshan Culture, such as Dantu, Liangchengzhen and Xizhufeng, in which nephrite was the main material of jade artefacts. This may reflect the distinctions in the supply system of jade raw materials among different rankings of Longshan period sites. In addition, laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) was used to analyse the composition of the rare earth elements of serpentine jade. These preliminary results were compared with published data on the composition of serpentine jade and it was found that the Sujiacun serpentine jade artefacts were likely sourced from the Taishan jade deposit.
Complex raw materials and the supply system: Mineralogical and geochemical study of the jade artefacts of the Longshan Culture (2400-2000 bce) from Sujiacun site in coastal Shandong, China
Review badges
Web of Science (Free Access)
Abstract
- Contribute
- pre-publication peer review (FINAL ROUND)
Decision Letter
2020/11/0101-Nov-2020
Dear Mr. Zhang:
I am writing to inform you that we are happy to accept your manuscript entitled "Complex Raw Materials and Supply System: Mineralogical and Geochemical Study for the Jade Artefacts of Longshan Culture (2400~2000BC) from Sujiacun Site in Coastal Shandong, China" in its current form for publication in Archaeometry.
Thank you for your contribution. On behalf of the Editors of Archaeometry, we look forward to your continued contributions to the Journal.
Yours sincerely,
Prof. Mark Pollard
Managing Editor, Archaeometry
mark.pollard@rlaha.ox.ac.ukManaging Editor Comments to Author:
Please note the comment below and make sure you correct it at proof stage if necessary
Referee(s)' Comments to Author:
Referee: 1
Comments to the Author
I have one final question: is there a misprint in the sentences: "The images suggest that the mineral particles of these two samples are large without the fine texture of jade. The interfelted microstructure has also been observed." If mineral felting can be observed, then isn't the criterion met for the material to be nephrite? It seems you are making a determination on the size of the crystals rather than the felting, which was one of Wen & Jing's criterion for identifying nephrite. Please clarify.Decision letter by
Cite this decision letter
Reviewer report
2020/10/30I have one final question: is there a misprint in the sentences: "The images suggest that the mineral particles of these two samples are large without the fine texture of jade. The interfelted microstructure has also been observed." If mineral felting can be observed, then isn't the criterion met for the material to be nephrite? It seems you are making a determination on the size of the crystals rather than the felting, which was one of Wen & Jing's criterion for identifying nephrite. Please clarify.
Reviewed by
Cite this review
Author Response
2020/10/05Dear editor:
Many thanks for the insightful comments and suggestions of the referees. I have made corresponding revision according to their advice. All the changes are highlighted in yellow.Author response by
Cite this author response
- pre-publication peer review (ROUND 1)
Decision Letter
2020/08/2020-Aug-2020
Dear Dr. Wu:
Manuscript ID ARCH-05-0264 entitled "Complex raw materials and Supply System: Mineralogical and Geochemical study for the Jade Articles of Longshan Culture (2400~2000BC) from Sujiacun Site in Coastal Shandong, China" which you submitted to Archaeometry, has been reviewed. The comments of the referee(s) are included at the bottom of this letter.
The referee(s) have recommended major revisions to your manuscript. Therefore, I invite you to respond to the referee(s)' comments and revise your manuscript.
If you would like help with English language editing, or other article preparation support, Wiley Editing Services offers expert help with English Language Editing, as well as translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting at www.wileyauthors.com/eeo/preparation. You can also check out our resources for Preparing Your Article for general guidance about writing and preparing your manuscript at www.wileyauthors.com/eeo/prepresources.
To revise your manuscript, log into https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/arch and enter your Author Centre, where you will find your manuscript title listed under "Manuscripts with Decisions." Under "Actions," click on "Create a Revision." Your manuscript number has been appended to denote a revision.
You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of the manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing programmeme and save it on your computer. Please also highlight the changes to your manuscript within the document by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or coloured text.
Once the revised manuscript is prepared, you can upload it and submit it through your Author Centre.
When submitting your revised manuscript, you will be able to respond to the comments made by the referee(s) in the space provided. You can use this space to document any changes you make to the original manuscript. In order to expedite the processing of the revised manuscript, please be as specific as possible in your response to the referee(s).
IMPORTANT: Your original files are available to you when you upload your revised manuscript. Please delete any redundant files before completing the submission.
Because we are trying to facilitate timely publication of manuscripts submitted to Archaeometry, your revised manuscript should be uploaded as soon as possible. If it is not possible for you to submit your revision in a reasonable amount of time, we may have to consider your paper as a new submission.
Once again, thank you for submitting your manuscript to Archaeometry and I look forward to receiving your revision.
Yours sincerely,
Prof. Mark Pollard
Managing Editor, Archaeometry
mark.pollard@rlaha.ox.ac.ukManaging Editor's Comments to Author:
Please pay particular attention to the comments of reviewer 1
Managing Editor: Pollard, Mark
Comments to the Author:
(There are no comments.)Referee(s)' Comments to Author:
Referee: 1
Comments to the Author
None other than the attachedReferee: 2
Comments to the Author
The manuscript describes a mineralogical and geochemical study of jade from the Longshan culture recovered from the site of Sujiacun, Shandong province, China. The authors used several analytical methods to characterize their samples of jade. They were limited to methods that were non-destructive, but were able to identify a number of different minerals which suggested to origins of several of their samples. The primary discovery is that the samples of jade recovered from Sujiacon were of lower quality and supports the idea that the site was secondary to the primary sites within the Shandong province
The article should be of interest to those interested in the study of jades from China or elsewhere and regarding an evaluation of the types of measurements possible. The paper is publishable provided the English is improved.
Some corrections I recommend to the manuscript are as follows:
ABSTRACT
Line 22: use “were” not “was”
Line 29: should be “settlements”
INTRODUCTION
Page 2, Line 50: no comma after China
Page 2, Line 51: change comma after Valley to a semicolon – ( ; )
Page 2, Line 53: no comma after Valley.
Page 2, Line 57: change “manufacture” to “manufacturing”
Page 3, Line 10: change “from” to “by”
Page 3, Line 36: delete “away”
Page 3, Line 41: change “in” to “on”
Page 4, Line 3: change “from” to “recovered from”
Page 4, Line 7: change “topics that spark” to “a topic that sparks”
Page 4, Line 16: change “three methods were primarily employed to source the jade materials:” to three different methods were employed to source the jade materials.”
Page 4, Line 16: start a new paragraph here by replacing “1. structure analysis” with
“The first method was structural analysis.”
Page 4, Line 28: delete “finally”
Page 4, Line 28: delete “and successful cases”
Page 4, Line 29: change “microstructures;” to “microstructures.”
Page 4, Line 28: start a new paragraph with “The second method was isotopic tracing (e.g., O, Pb, Sr, etc.)”
Page 4, Line 41: change “measured Sr, Pb contents and Sr, Pb isotopic values in” to “measures the elemental and isotopic values for Sr and Pb in”
Page 4, Line 52: change “hard to be employed in this field;” to “difficult to employ.”
Page 4, Line 53: start a new paragraph with “The third method was microelemental analysis of the rare earth elements.”
Page 5, Line 7: change “incompetent in testing” to “unable to test”The Materials and Methods sections has a lot of unnecessary repetition. All of the experiments were conducted at the University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei. One could have said this in a single sentence at the beginning instead of repeating it multiple times. Alternatively, it could have been made into an acronym (USTC-Hefei).
Page 5, Line 37: delete “For”
Page 6, Line 20: change “composition” to “compositions”
Page 6, Line 35: change “was” to “were”
Page 7, Line 8: change “are” to “is”
Page 9, Line 40: change “content metal elements” to content of metal elements”
Page 10, Line 8: change “discussed in the next:” to “discussed below.”
Page 10, Line 29: change “was” to “were”Decision letter by
Cite this decision letter
Reviewer report
2020/07/21The manuscript describes a mineralogical and geochemical study of jade from the Longshan culture recovered from the site of Sujiacun, Shandong province, China. The authors used several analytical methods to characterize their samples of jade. They were limited to methods that were non-destructive, but were able to identify a number of different minerals which suggested to origins of several of their samples. The primary discovery is that the samples of jade recovered from Sujiacon were of lower quality and supports the idea that the site was secondary to the primary sites within the Shandong province
The article should be of interest to those interested in the study of jades from China or elsewhere and regarding an evaluation of the types of measurements possible. The paper is publishable provided the English is improved.
Some corrections I recommend to the manuscript are as follows:
ABSTRACT
Line 22: use “were” not “was”
Line 29: should be “settlements”
INTRODUCTION
Page 2, Line 50: no comma after China
Page 2, Line 51: change comma after Valley to a semicolon – ( ; )
Page 2, Line 53: no comma after Valley.
Page 2, Line 57: change “manufacture” to “manufacturing”
Page 3, Line 10: change “from” to “by”
Page 3, Line 36: delete “away”
Page 3, Line 41: change “in” to “on”
Page 4, Line 3: change “from” to “recovered from”
Page 4, Line 7: change “topics that spark” to “a topic that sparks”
Page 4, Line 16: change “three methods were primarily employed to source the jade materials:” to three different methods were employed to source the jade materials.”
Page 4, Line 16: start a new paragraph here by replacing “1. structure analysis” with
“The first method was structural analysis.”
Page 4, Line 28: delete “finally”
Page 4, Line 28: delete “and successful cases”
Page 4, Line 29: change “microstructures;” to “microstructures.”
Page 4, Line 28: start a new paragraph with “The second method was isotopic tracing (e.g., O, Pb, Sr, etc.)”
Page 4, Line 41: change “measured Sr, Pb contents and Sr, Pb isotopic values in” to “measures the elemental and isotopic values for Sr and Pb in”
Page 4, Line 52: change “hard to be employed in this field;” to “difficult to employ.”
Page 4, Line 53: start a new paragraph with “The third method was microelemental analysis of the rare earth elements.”
Page 5, Line 7: change “incompetent in testing” to “unable to test”The Materials and Methods sections has a lot of unnecessary repetition. All of the experiments were conducted at the University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei. One could have said this in a single sentence at the beginning instead of repeating it multiple times. Alternatively, it could have been made into an acronym (USTC-Hefei).
Page 5, Line 37: delete “For”
Page 6, Line 20: change “composition” to “compositions”
Page 6, Line 35: change “was” to “were”
Page 7, Line 8: change “are” to “is”
Page 9, Line 40: change “content metal elements” to content of metal elements”
Page 10, Line 8: change “discussed in the next:” to “discussed below.”
Page 10, Line 29: change “was” to “were”Reviewed by
Cite this review
Reviewer report
2020/05/22None other than the attached
Reviewed by
Cite this review
