Obsidian Hydration Dating
Obsidian Hydration Dating (OHD) · Also known as: OHD, obsidian hydration method
Obsidian hydration dating (OHD) is a chronometric method that determines the age of obsidian artifacts by measuring the thickness of a hydration layer formed on their exposed surfaces. Developed by Irving Friedman and Robert Smith in 1960, it is based on the principle that fresh obsidian surfaces absorb water from the surrounding environment at a measurable rate. The method is particularly valuable in archaeology for dating volcanic glass tools and other obsidian objects, especially in regions where obsidian was commonly used for cutting and scraping implements.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
When to use it
Apply OHD to obsidian artifacts including blades, scrapers, points, and other worked pieces from archaeological sites where obsidian was used as a cutting tool. Most reliable for obsidian of known chemical composition and source. Best applied to artifacts with clear, fresh working surfaces that have been buried continuously in stable thermal environments. Less suitable for obsidian exposed to extreme temperature fluctuations or for materials that have been exposed to surface weathering. Can date artifacts from a few centuries to several hundred thousand years old depending on hydration rate and layer thickness.
Strengths & limitations
- Applicable to obsidian artifacts regardless of context, without reliance on organic material or radioisotopes
- Relatively rapid and non-destructive when combined with non-invasive measurement techniques
- Can produce high chronological resolution for closely-dated obsidian samples from the same source
- Particularly useful in archaeological regions where obsidian was extensively used, such as Mesoamerica and parts of Eurasia
- Results can independently verify or supplement radiocarbon chronologies
- Requires knowledge of obsidian source and chemical composition, which may not be available for all artifacts
- Hydration rates vary significantly with temperature history, moisture, and chemical composition, introducing uncertainty
- The method assumes continuous burial in stable thermal and chemical conditions; artifacts with complex taphonomic histories are problematic
- Obsidian sources show regional variation in hydration rates, requiring source-specific calibrations
- Thick hydration layers (representing very old artifacts) are difficult to measure accurately due to optical limitations
Frequently asked
Why is obsidian source identification critical for hydration dating?
Different obsidian sources have different mineral compositions and thermal histories, which affect their hydration rates. An artifact of unknown source cannot be reliably dated because the appropriate hydration rate is unknown. Source identification is done through trace-element analysis (X-ray fluorescence, inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry) or X-ray diffraction. Once sourced, the artifact can be dated using the calibrated hydration rate for that specific source.
How does temperature affect obsidian hydration rates?
Hydration is a thermally-activated chemical process; higher temperatures accelerate the hydration rate exponentially. An artifact buried in a warm climate will develop a thicker hydration layer than an identical artifact buried in a cold climate, even if both are the same age. This is why paleoclimate and site-specific temperature corrections are essential. Regional temperature variations during the time of burial can introduce errors of centuries to millennia if not properly accounted for.
Can obsidian hydration dating provide precise ages?
The precision depends on source calibration and knowledge of post-burial temperature history. Well-calibrated sources can yield ages with errors of 10-20 percent for young artifacts (< 2 kyr), but older artifacts and poorly-calibrated sources show larger uncertainties. OHD is best used as a supplementary method alongside radiocarbon or other independent dating techniques to verify and refine chronologies.
What artifacts are most suitable for obsidian hydration dating?
Artifacts with fresh, undisturbed working surfaces and sharp edges are ideal—such as blades, scrapers, and cutting implements. Artifacts that have been heavily weathered, thermally altered, curated (hand-held through successive generations), or re-used often show hydration patterns that don't reflect their true burial age. Blunt, heavily used pieces are less suitable than fresh, minimally-used artifacts.
How is the hydration layer thickness measured and what is typical accuracy?
Measurements are made under high-magnification optical microscopy (400-1000x) using calibrated eyepieces or digital image analysis. The hydration rind appears as a distinct optical band. Measurement accuracy is typically ±0.5 to ±2 micrometers, depending on rind thickness and optical clarity. Multiple measurements from different spots on the same artifact are averaged to improve precision and detect variation.
Sources
- Friedman, I., & Smith, R. L. (1960). A new dating method using obsidian: Part 1, the surface rind method. Journal of Geophysical Research, 65(4), 1287-1291. link ↗
- Ericson, J. E., & Berger, R. (1975). Kinetic energy of ionizing radiation as a determinant of the obsidian hydration rate. Nature, 254(5496), 55-56. link ↗
- Mazer, J. J., Bates, J. K., Stevenson, C. M., & Clelland, J. G. (1991). Obsidian-water reactions: Measuring extremely low water contents in obsidian. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 55(2), 395-405. link ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Obsidian Hydration Dating (OHD). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/archaeology/obsidian-hydration-dating
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- Archaeomagnetic DatingArchaeology↔ compare
- Optically Stimulated Luminescence DatingArchaeology↔ compare
- Radiocarbon DatingGeophysics↔ compare
- Thermoluminescence DatingArchaeology↔ compare