Tracing the flows of copper and copper alloys in the Early Iron Age societies of the eastern Eurasian steppe.
Hsu, Yiu-Kang ; Bray, Peter J. ; Hommel, Peter 等
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Introduction
The Early Iron Age of the Eurasian steppe zone (c. 1000-300 BC) is
characterised, above all, by connectivity. Rapid transmissions of ideas
within the pastoral world are marked by the appearance of strikingly
similar modes in material culture and stylistic representation from the
Danube to Manchuria (Figure 1), matched by ever more specific material
evidence of contact between these steppe societies and their
agricultural neighbours to the south (Rawson 2013; Wu 2013).
Many researchers have sought to explain this increasingly
interactive world as an outcome of migration or mobility, associated
with rising equestrianism in both economic and martial contexts (e.g.
Moskova & Rybakov 1992; Davis-Kimball et al. 1995; Chernykh 2014).
Others have looked within to find new kinds of social and structural
complexity in the societies of the steppe (e.g. Linduff 2004; Bokovenko
2006; Hanks & Linduff 2009; Houle 2010). Whatever the case, a
clearer understanding of the patterns and character of interaction is
one of the essential goals of archaeological research in this period.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
Drawing together existing 'legacy' data on the
composition of copper and bronze artefacts from the Early Iron Age of
eastern Eurasia, new theoretical and methodological approaches to the
study of artefact chemistry (see Bray & Pollard 2012) can begin to
contribute to this discussion. Although such data are imperfect in many
ways, they reveal structured patterns at a regional scale, providing a
framework for the reconstruction of flow (Bray et al. 2015) in the
circulation of copper and tin through contemporary society. By rejecting
simple ideas about object and origin, we can begin to trace complex
patterns of production and reproduction, mixing, movement and exchange
across space and time, and to explore variations in the perception of
both metals and metal objects in the societies that made and used them.
Archaeometallurgy in the eastern steppe
Although nominally attributed to the Iron Age, copper, bronze and
occasionally gold remain dominant in archaeological metal assemblages
for much of this period. These items--including personal weapons and
tools, horse bits, mirrors, plaques, pendants and a range of ornaments
(Figure 2)--have been extensively studied in terms of typology and style
(e.g. Bunker et al. 1997; Wu 2008). Such traditional discussions
frequently use stylistic and typological similarities as markers of
'interaction and exchange. The character of contact is rarely
explored in detail, however, and the orientation of exchange often
remains a matter of opinion.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
Research into the metalwork of the Eurasian Bronze Age,
particularly in the western steppe, has attempted to integrate these
traditional modes of archaeological research within a single
interpretive system, combining absolute chronology and technological and
chemical analyses (e.g. Chernykh & Kuz'minykh 1989; Chernykh
1992, 2007, 2014). For some reason, this kind of approach has not been
extended into the Iron Age. Despite more than 50 years of research,
discussions of metal chemistry in the first millennium have remained
solidly independent, locally focused and largely disconnected from the
primary archaeological narratives.
The earliest significant archaeometallurgical study in the region,
led by I.V. Bogdanov-Berezovaya (1963), analysed more than 400 artefacts
from the Minusinsk Basin and applied a 1% cut-off to tin and arsenic to
classify their metallic chemistry into four broad alloy types: clean
copper, arsenical copper, arsenical tin-bronze and tin-bronze. The
observed range of trace elements within each of these alloy types was
also discussed. The author concluded that arsenical copper production
played a primary role in Tagar metallurgy, with tin-bronze as the second
largest copper alloy, and also noted that some objects attributed to the
Tagar culture contained high quantities of nickel, sometimes up to 2-3%.
Sunchugashev (1969, 1975) adopted a rather different approach by
focusing on the survey and study of potential ancient mining and
smelting sites, exemplified by Temir in the Minusinsk and Khovu-Aksy in
I uva. The results showed the extensive exploitation of copper deposits
between the seventh and fourth centuries BC. Survey and excavation at
the sites identified a wide range of evidence for metallurgical
production including slags, casting moulds, crucibles, nozzles, and
stone mining and processing tools.
Working on metal assemblages farther to the east, in the Baikal
region, Sergeeva (1981) employed cluster analysis to divide metal
chemistry statistically into different groups. Sergeeva further noted
that between 1300 and 700 BC, communities living in the Transbaikal used
both tin-bronze and leaded tin-bronze, while communities of the
Cisbaikal produced predominantly clean copper artefacts, with limited
tin-bronze and arsenical copper items in the record around 700-500 BC
(Sergeeva 1981: 19-27).
These works provide a good overview of the characteristics of Early
Iron Age metalwork on the eastern Eurasian steppe, and in many cases
their general conclusions remain valid. They follow the conventional
provenance perspective, however, in assuming that it is possible to
correlate metal artefact chemistry directly with geological sources of
metal ores. This assumption overlooks technological factors and various
human interactions with metal, which can significantly alter metal
composition through re-melting and/or mixing of materials (Bray &
Pollard 2012: 856). In our own study, we apply a developing
methodological approach, which seeks to identify patterns of metal use,
re-use and deposition at a regional scale (Bray et al. 2015). To do
this, we have widened the field of analysis and shifted the focus of our
interpretations.
An alternative chemical approach
The question of provenance,' which has been the dominant theme
in archaeometallurgical research over the last 150 years, is based on
the assumption that a static chemical connection exists between the
composition of the metal and the ores from which it was smelted
(Friedman et al. 1966; Pernicka 2014). Although this conclusion is
potentially valid in certain circumstances, its extension as a universal
assumption in archaeological research seriously underestimates the
complexity of human relationships with metal in prehistory. As Budd et
al. (1996) pointed out, metallic ores are limited resources, especially
for tin, and the recycling or mixing of metal must have been commonplace
in ancient societies. Such practices would potentially break any
chemical connection between ore source and metal artefact. Indeed, Ixer
(1999) argues that ore deposits usually vary so significantly in
geochemistry and mineralogy that any attempt to reconstruct precisely
this connection is fraught with difficulty.
The method applied here (after Bray & Pollard 2012; Bray et al.
2015) is based on theoretical thermodynamics, industrial observations
and the results of experimental archaeology (McKerrell & Tylecote
1972; Sabatini 2015; Doonan pers. comm). It relies on the fact that some
common trace elements in copper alloys (e.g. zinc [Zn], arsenic [As],
antimony [Sb] and iron [Fe]) under high temperature are preferentially
'lost' through oxidation and volatilisation when compared with
other more noble elements (e.g. gold [Au], silver [Ag] and nickel [Ni]).
Where sufficient densities of data exist, these relative changes in
chemical composition can be analysed at various scales, allowing us to
explore patterns in the chemical data. These patterns can provide proxy
evidence of metal flow within and between regions in the past, and can
also expose different attitudes towards metal and metal objects at the
level of the assemblage.
Although described more fully elsewhere (Bray et al. 2015), it is
worth outlining the main steps in the analytical process, the first of
which characterises the copper itself. For unalloyed artefacts, this is
straightforward, but even where the copper has been intentionally
alloyed with tin, lead or zinc, we can give some estimate of the
underlying copper composition by stripping out these elements and
renormalising the result. This calculation relies on the assumption that
the remaining trace elements are associated with the copper itself
rather than any of the added alloying components. Although this
assumption is not always valid--the deliberate addition of lead, for
example, may result in elevated silver content-the methodology is
sufficiently sensitive to identify the resulting anomalous patterns and
sufficiently flexible to allow us to treat these alloying practices
accordingly.
The modified data are classified into 16 copper types based on the
presence or absence of certain trace elements (Table 1). As we are
drawing on chemical data from a variety of sources, the cut-off value
for presence/absence (0.1 wt% in this instance) is a pragmatic
compromise, which allows us to include as much of the available data as
possible in the analysis. To test the robustness of the conclusions,
this value is routinely changed during the interpretive process to
assess the significance of any changes to the patterns described.
Alloy types are next classified using an arbitrary 1% cut-off value
to distinguish the presence/absence of deliberately added elements (tin,
lead and zinc). This theoretically leads to an eight-fold
classification: copper, leaded copper, tin-bronze, leaded tin-bronze,
brass, leaded brass, gunmetal and leaded gunmetal. For this period and
region, however, only the first four of these categories are relevant.
These preliminary organisational steps enable us to examine
regional patterns in the composition of metal assemblages and to explore
not only the movement or flow of metal differences, but also the ways in
which metals are used and re-used in society (Bray et al. 2015). Each
copper group does not necessarily relate to a single source, and over
the course of its 'lifetime' a unit of metal may pass between
different groups. The stepwise process of assigning a group then
examining the distribution and median levels of key elements allows us
to untangle aspects of this life-history.
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
The bronze data
A database of 1900 chemical entries (1371 of which have trace
elements) has been collected for this study (see online supplementary
material 1 & 2). The data collated covers areas of the Altai, Tuva,
Minusinsk Basin, Cisbaikal, Transbaikal and Xinjiang, which were
occupied by predominantly pastoralist societies throughout the Early
Iron Age. By way of comparison, we also include analyses of metal from
contemporary semi-sedentary societies of northern and north-western
China, and the agricultural world of the Central Plains. Copper-based
artefacts under examination are roughly dated to between c. 900 and 650
BC (Figure 3; see online supplementary material 1 for discussion of the
chronology).
These chemical data were obtained from a variety of sources and
derived using a wide range of analytical techniques. As a result, it is
important to consider questions of comparability and reproducibility in
our analysis. A large-scale, inter-laboratory investigation of this
issue was carried out by Northover and Rychner (1998). They concluded
that most of the data obtained showed general agreement irrespective of
the analytical technique employed and could, therefore, be used
interchangeably with appropriate caution. Moreover, to minimise any
resulting errors, we do not deal with absolute compositional values of
isolated objects, but rather focus on the chemical trends within the
dataset.
Classification of copper groups
Table 2 summarises the distribution of the 16 copper groups in each
of the geographic regions defined in this study. Where more than 10% of
the analysed objects from a region belong to any single group, the
corresponding cells are shaded to highlight major regional patterns.
'Clean' copper (G1) and arsenic-only' copper (G2)
are both present in almost all regions; 'arsenic-antimony (G6) and
nickel-bearing copper (G11 and G14) are restricted to the steppe, while
argentiferous copper (G9 and G12) is primarily Chinese (the silver in
these cases is probably brought in with the lead during alloying; Figure
4).
The distribution of 'clean' copper (G1) is most abundant
in the Altai, Minusinsk Basin and Cisbaikal, along the northern edge of
the Altai-Sayan Mountains. Arsenic-only copper (G2) is common in most
areas, but dominant in the metalwork from the Altai, accounting for
almost 60% of the analysed objects, and suggesting significant primary
production. The proportion of G2 copper within the local assemblages
diminishes with distance from the Altai. Although central Chinese
objects similarly show a high proportion of G2, their arsenic content
tends to be low, and most samples derive from ritual vessels, radically
different in technology and style, from the metalwork of the steppe. The
emergence of G2 copper in central China probably belongs to another
metallurgical network as yet incompletely defined.
The distribution of G6 'arsenic-antimony' copper,
although interesting, does not reveal any clear patterns. Even though
the Lake Baikal regions contain a higher percentage (55%) than in the
west, we cannot rule out the possibility that other sources in other
regions were also contributing to this pattern. Instead of linear
directional exchange, the distribution of this copper type may help to
highlight the complexity of the system and would be a potentially
interesting focus for future research.
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
Nickel-bearing copper (G11 and G14) appears to be restricted to the
steppe, and Tuva and the Minusinsk Basin are both excellent candidates
as the source regions for these types of copper. The presence of metal
of this type in the Transbaikal is potentially significant, but as it is
relatively rare within the assemblage, its contribution to the wider
flow of metal is not yet clear.
Some copper types suggest possible long-distance relationships
between the steppe and China. For example, G12, silver-bearing copper
typical of metalwork in China, correspondingly occurs in the
Transbaikal, but is absent in other areas. Additionally, highly mixed
G16 metal is found in both northern China and the Transbaikal.
Reconstructing flows of metal
Our chemical model predicts that elements vulnerable to oxidative
loss (e.g. arsenic and antimony) will diminish during recycling events.
Therefore, a decrease in the average levels of these elements at an
assemblage level can be regarded as indicators for the dominant
direction of metal flow between regions. By observing the profiles of
these elements, we can begin to identify patterns of primary and
secondary production.
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
Figure 5a shows the profile of arsenic in G2 arsenic-only
metal' for each region. In the Altai we see two pronounced peaks
between 0.5-1% and 1.5-2%. Over 50% of the Altai G2 copper objects fall
within one of these two bands. In this respect, the Altai region is
quite different from the other areas. Such high arsenic levels imply
easy access to high-arsenic copper ores.
G2 metal in other regions tends to fall into the low-arsenic range
(<0.5%). This pattern could be explained as the result of routine
re-casting of the Altai G2 metal into new objects or locally appropriate
forms. Figure 5b compares the median arsenic level across the regional
assemblages. In the Altai, it is around 1.5%, which is far higher than
in other regions.
Of course, many other primary production centres would have existed
beyond the Altai region during the Early Iron Age. These certainly
contribute to the patterns we observe in the data; even with the
relatively limited data, some potential candidates show up clearly. One
such example is the nickel-bearing copper (G11 and G14) that appears
concentrated in the Tuva and Minusinsk Basin. The profile of arsenic in
G11 illustrates the general similarity of metal in both regions, with a
common peak at 1-2% arsenic (Figure 6a). Arsenic levels in G14 metal
further show a maximum at the same level (Figure 6b). This may suggest a
shared 'repertoire' of nickeliferous metalwork in both Tuva
and Minusinsk.
[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]
This conclusion fits well with the available archaeological
evidence of mining and metalworking activities in these regions, which
have emphasised the importance of primary production in the Tuva and
Minusinsk Basin; several Early Iron Age mining, smelting and casting
sites have been discovered near the copper-nickel-cobalt deposits at
Khovu-Aksy in eastern Tuva (Sunchugashev 1969: 44). Likewise, the
chemical analysis of copper ingots from Temir, a Tagar casting site in
Minusinsk, show arsenic greater than 1% and nickel around 0.1-0.6%
(Sunchugashev 1975: 124-25). This evidence demonstrates that, when
sufficient data are available, our chemical approach can serve as an
independent tool to predict probable areas of primary production for
particular copper groups. This is especially important when no direct
archaeological evidence of primary production is available.
Distribution of alloy types
Examining the alloy types used by different pastoralist groups can
also provide valuable information regarding the circulation of alloying
materials (tin or lead), whether as ore, metal or within finished
objects. Regions with access to such resources will probably produce
high proportions of tin-bronze or leaded tin-bronze in their
assemblages. In order to determine the alloy type, we set the cut-off
value at 1% for the significant presence/absence of tin and lead. This
classification criterion is intended to highlight the characteristic
history of these copper-based alloys rather than provide any window into
the actual mechanical properties of the metal itself.
Table 3 shows the percentage of each alloy type in each region,
revealing two separate traditions of metallurgical practice in the Early
Iron Age of eastern Eurasia. The first is the steppe-style use of
unalloyed copper and tin-bronze. This stands in sharp contrast to the
strong tradition of leaded tin-bronze seen in central China and among
some of its neighbours, the bronze-producing communities in northern
China and the Hexi Corridor, although it is not yet clear how much of
this latter material is recycled or acquired from Chinese sources (see
Cao 2014).
[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]
Plotting distributions for each alloy type on a map can further
highlight the spatial relationships between different areas (Figure 7).
In the Altai, tin-bronze production dominates; nearly 60% of the Altai
objects from this period were alloyed with tin. This proportion drops
steadily eastwards away from the Altai. Assemblages from the Minusinsk
Basin and Xinjiang still contain quite high proportions of tin-bronze,
while in the Cisbaikal, the proportion falls sharply. Interestingly, the
use of tin-bronze in Tuva is similarly quite low, although this is
potentially a function of the particular character of the analytical
sample from this region. Equally of note is the significant proportion
of tin-bronze in the assemblages of the Transbaikal, which may reflect
the exploitation of local cassiterite (tin oxide) deposits near the
Upper Onon River (Wolf 1982: 262).
[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]
The Baikal region is also noteworthy for the presence of leaded
copper and bronze objects (Cu-Pb and Cu-Sn-Pb). As noted above, the
addition of lead appears to be closely connected with China, and may
suggest the use of leaded metal, acquired there or from its neighbours.
Again, this would fit well with other lines of archaeological evidence
(e.g. Hommel et al. 2013).
In order to develop a better picture of the use of tin and lead, it
is important to look at the profiles of these elements in the regional
assemblages. In the primary production regions, where ancient
metalworkers had ready access to tin resources, they were able to
produce tin-bronze/leaded tin-bronze within controlled compositional
ranges (Figure 8). Central Chinese metalwork, for example, shows a
unimodal distribution of tin between 7% and 19%. Such a broad tin
distribution might be due to diverse types of bronze artefacts, which
required different levels of tin. Objects from the Altai and Xinjiang do
not show such prominent peaks, yet we can still regard both areas as
tin-bronze production centres due to the frequent occurrence of high-tin
objects. The Altai region has a faint peak between 10% and 13% tin,
followed by Xinjiang with a peak between 7% and 10% tin. The similarity
of the tin distribution in both regions may indicate that tin-bronze
production in Altai and in Xinjiang were closely associated and tin
resources or high-tin bronzes were either readily available or freely
circulated in both regions.
[FIGURE 9 OMITTED]
In other areas with limited access to local tin resources, we would
expect a different pattern. Such 'non-primary tin-bronze use'
would be characterised by a predominance of low-tin artefacts, perhaps
primarily produced by recycling and recombining tin-bronzes acquired
through exchange or other forms of contact. Given that the majority of
objects from the Transbaikal, Cisbaikal, Minusinsk Basin and Tuva
contain considerably less than 7% tin, we would argue that all of these
areas fall into this latter category. Of course, on its own, this
pattern could be interpreted as a local tradition of low-tin bronze
production, but if we combine this with data on arsenic levels, this
seems increasingly improbable. Arsenic, as discussed earlier in this
paper, can be used as a marker of recycling, and if tin-bronzes from one
region were routinely re-melted in another, we would expect an overall
decrease in arsenic between their assemblages. Figure 9, which shows
median arsenic levels in regional bronze (tin [greater than or equal to]
1%) assemblages across the eastern steppe, illustrates precisely this
pattern. Away from the Altai, which we consider to be a major source of
tin and tin-bronze, the falloff seen in other regional assemblages in
the steppe can be most plausibly explained as the result of re-melting
imported tin-bronzes in combination with local unalloyed copper,
resulting in objects with relatively low tin and arsenic values.
Typology and chemistry
Thus far, the discussion has considered all types of copper-alloy
objects together at a regional scale. Where sample numbers permit,
however, it is possible to begin to target individual artefact types and
consider how they fit within or differ from the general trends. To
demonstrate this, we have extracted data for the most iconic and widely
distributed steppe artefacts of this period: single-bladed knives and
cauldrons.
Knives from the Minusinsk Basin and the Baikal region allow for
this kind of comparative study. As shown in Table 4, these knives mainly
consist of G2 'arsenic only' copper and tinbronze. While we
see a pattern of diminishing arsenic in the overall assemblages from
these regions, the arsenic distribution in knives appears relatively
stable. This implies that many of these knives were moving directly
between regions, whether through exchange or population movements,
without entering the recycling chain (Figure 10a). The similar profile
of tin (1-7%) may suggest that some were even transported directly
between Minusinsk and the Transbaikal (Figure 10b). Consequently, the
circulation of metal in eastern Eurasia involved both general exchange
and the recycling of metal (e.g. Altai G2 tin-bronze) and direct
movement or exchange (e.g. single-bladed knives) to form a complex
metallurgical network. Such patterns are clearly worthy of further
study.
Compositional data on cauldrons, although relatively limited, may
also show evidence of technological transmission. In the Minusinsk
Basin, the chemistry of cauldrons generally follows the same copper
groups as single-bladed knives (G2, G6, G11 and G14). The alloy types
used are, however, distinct: mostly unalloyed copper with a few leaded
tin-bronze and leaded copper examples. The preference for pure copper in
the production of cauldrons is again attested in Xinjiang (see Mei
2002), suggesting a possible relationship in technological choice.
Furthermore, these copper cauldrons often bear traces of casting seams,
serving as evidence of the piece-mould' production. This method was
characteristic of bronze vessel production in China, and its appearance
in the eastern steppe further consolidates proposed links between these
two areas (So & Bunker 1995: 108).
[FIGURE 10 OMITTED]
Discussion and conclusion
The provisional directional flows of metal described in this paper
are summarised in Figure 11. G2 arsenic-only copper' was primarily
produced in the Altai and filtered into the Minusinsk Basin and on into
the Baikal region. A similar flow of tin from the Altai, and possibly
from Xinjiang, is also apparent--probably in the form of finished
tin-bronze products, reworked and recombined with other copper sources
in the Minusinsk Basin and beyond. Only in the Transbaikal do we see the
potential exploitation of other primary sources of tin. Simultaneously,
nickel-bearing copper (Gil and G14), deeply rooted in Tuvinian and
Minusinsk metalwork, reached as far as Transbaikal, where the presence
of G12 (silver-containing copper) suggests other connections with the
south. Although G2 metal produced in the Altai flowed into the
Minusinsk, no corresponding flow of Gil and G14 metals in the opposite
direction was identified. This apparent eastward drift in the flow of
copper and tin resources during the first few centuries of the first
millennium BC is intriguing and warrants further investigation, both in
the context of subsequent developments and in relation to the extensive
metallurgical network that emerged during the Final Bronze Age. The
coincident distribution of Karasuk-related, bronze single-bladed knives,
in particular, suggests that the patterns of flow in the Early Iron Age
built directly upon the modalities of exchange' established in the
preceding period (Legrand 2004: 153-54; Molodin 2009; Gorelik et al.
2013). Likewise, another metal-trading network, through the Mongolian
steppe to central China, was established during the Final Bronze Age
(Cao 2014).
What seems clear from our initial analysis is that the structure of
metallurgy and metal exchange among pastoral communities of the steppe
is both complex and dynamic. It is tempting to attribute some of the
'mobility' seen in metal as markers of the routine seasonal
movements and intercommunal contact, which is broadly characteristic of
steppe societies. Certainly many of the patterns we see were shaped by
short-distance, multi-stage exchange relationships of this kind,
combined with significant local re-production. Indications of more
extensive transfers, however, and even the direct movement of finished
objects over considerable distances, seem clear.
[FIGURE 11 OMITTED]
Perhaps certain objects had sufficient social significance to
escape the basic currents of metal circulation, in which re-working and
re-melting was commonplace, changing hands multiple times in their
original form. Perhaps they were deeply personal and closely bound to
the people for whom, or by whom, they were made. New data, combined with
detailed typological work and other lines of evidence, should allow us
to target and unpick these patterns of movement and exchange; again,
such questions provide potentially fruitful avenues for research.
Of course, as this paper has been reliant on 'legacy
data' in its reconstruction of flow within the metallurgical
network of the Early Iron Age, it inevitably faces the challenges of
insufficient information, sampling bias and chronological uncertainty.
In the absence of significant bodies of data on metal composition from
key regions of northern China, Mongolia, Xinjiang and Kazakhstan, all
the patterns we describe are to some extent incomplete, and the
existence of alternate pathways of circulation and additional foci of
primary production seems certain. Data collection in all these regions
is an active focus of our on-going research.
Chronology is also a significant problem. Reliable series of
radiocarbon dates for this period are only available for a limited
number of sites in the Tuva, Minusinsk Basin and central China, and the
majority of the Early Iron Age cultures have only broad and ambiguous
chronological boundaries. This alone makes the comparison of synchronous
events very challenging. As we know that some metal objects remained in
circulation for significant periods, absolute chronology must be very
carefully paired with typology. For many sites, this pairing is
currently difficult to achieve.
Perhaps the most significant problem we face is the general lack of
data, which limits our ability to work in detail on relationships
between typology and composition. This work is crucial, as it is only
through this combination of archaeological and chemical studies of metal
that we can hope to find explanations for the structure in the data.
Ultimately, both the patterns we have described and the questions we
have left unanswered can only be tested and clarified through further
research. For us, in spite of all the challenges, this seems an exciting
prospect.
doi: 10.15184/aqy.2016.22
Acknowledgements
The research for this project has been mainly supported by
Leverhulme Grant 'China and Inner Asia 1000200 BC (F/08 735/G) and
by the Oxford University Press John Fell Fund. We are also grateful to
Sascha Priewe and Quanyu Wang at the British Museum for providing
additional northern Chinese data, and for the valuable feedback provided
by our departmental colleagues, particularly R. Liu, B. Sabatini, L.
Perucchetti and V. Sainsbury. We are especially grateful to the two
reviewers whose helpful and constructive comments provided the
foundation for considerable improvements to the final text. Any
remaining errors or omissions are entirely our own.
Supplementary material
To view supplementary material for this article, please visit
http://dx.doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2016.22.
References
ALEKSEEV, A. YU., N.A. BOKOVENKO, YU. BOLTRIK, K.A. CHUGUNOV, G.
COOK, V.A. DERGACHEV, N. KOVALYUKH, G. POSSNERT, J. VAN DER PLICHT, E.M.
SCOTT, A. SEMENTSOV, V. SKRIPKIN, S. VASILIEV & G. ZAITSEVA. 2001. A
chronology of the Scythian antiquities of Eurasia based on new
archaeological and 14C data. Radiocarbon 43: 1085-1107.
BoGDANOV-BeREZOVAYA, V.l. 1963. Khimicheskiy sostav metallicheskikh
predmetov iz Minusinskoy kotloviny, in S.I. Rudenko (ed.) Novyye metody
v arkheologicheskikh issledovaniyakh: 115-58. Leningrad: AN SSSR (in
Russian).
BOKOVENKO, N. 2006. The emergence of the Tagar culture. Antiquity
80: 860-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00094473
BRAY, P.J. & A.M. POLLARD. 2012. A new interpretative approach
to the chemistry of copper-alloy objects: source, recycling and
technology. Antiquity 86: 853-67.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00047967
BRAY, R, A. CUENOD, C. GOSDEN, P. HOMMEL, R. LIU & A.M.
POLLARD. 2015. Form and flow: the 'Karmic Cycle' of copper.
Journal of Archaeological Science 56: 202-209.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2014.12.013
BUDD, E, R. HAGGERTY, A.M. POLLARD, B. SCAIFE & R.G. THOMAS.
1996. Rethinking the quest for provenance. Antiquity 70: 168-74.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017.S0003598X00083034
BUNKER, E.C., T.S. KAWAMI, K.M. LINDUFF & E. WU. 1997. Ancient
bronzes of the eastern Eurasian steppes from the Arthur M. Sackler
collections. New York: A.M. Sackler Foundation.
CAO, D. 2014. The loess highland in a trading network (1300-1050
BC). Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Princeton.
CHERNYKH, E.N. 1992. Ancient metallurgy in the USSR: the early
metal age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
--2007. Kargaly. fenomen iparadoksy razvitiya; Kargaly v sisteme
metallurgicheskikh provintsiy. Moskva: YSK (in Russian).
--2014. Kultury nomadov v megastrukture evraziiskogo mira (volume
1). Moskva: YSK (in Russian).
CHERNYKH, E.N. & S.V. KUZ'MINYKH. 1989. Drevnyaya
metallurgiya Severnoy Yevrazii. Moskva: Nauka (in Russian).
DAVIS-KIMBALL, J., V.A. BASHILOV & L.T. YABLONSKY (ed.). 1995.
Nomads of the Eurasian steppes in the Early Iron Age. Berkeley (CA):
Zinat.
FRIEDMAN, A.M., M. CONWAY, M. KASTNER, J. MILSTED, D. METTA, P.R.
FIELDS & E. OLSEN. 1966. Copper artifacts: correlation with some
types of copper ores. Science 152: 1504-1506.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science. 152.3728.1504
GORELIK, A., G. KORLIN, Z.S. SAMASHEV & T. STOLLNER. 2013.
Unbekanntes Kasachstan: Archaologie im Herzen Asiens. Bochum: Deutsches
Bergbau-Museum.
HANKS, B. & K. LINDUFF. 2009. Social complexity in prehistoric
Eurasia: monuments, metals and mobility. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605376
HOMMEL, P., J. RAWSON & M. SAX. 2013. V Kitaj Hz Kitaya;
proizkhozhdenie I rasprostranenie bus v period Zapadnogo Chzhou.
Sovermennye resheniya aktual'nykh problem Evrazijskoj arkheologii.
Barnaul: Altai State University Press.
HOULE, J.L. 2010. Emergent complexity on the Mongolian steppe:
mobility, territoriality, and the development of early nomadic polities.
Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
IXER, R.A. 1999. The role of ore geology and ores in the
archaeological provenancing of metals, in S.M. Young, A.M. Pollard, P.
Budd & R.A. Ixer (ed.) Metals in antiquity. 43-52. Oxford:
Archaeopress.
LEGRAND, S. 2004. Karasuk metallurgy: technological development and
regional influence, in K. Linduff (ed.) Metallurgy in ancient eastern
Eurasia from the Urals to the Yellow River. 139-61. Lampeter: Edwin
Mellen.
LINDUFF, K. (ed.). 2004. Metallurgy in ancient eastern Eurasia from
the Urals to the Yellow River. Lampeter: Edwin Mellen.
MCKERRELL, H. & R.F. TYLECOTE. 1972. Working of copper-arsenic
alloys in the Early Bronze Age and the effect on the determination of
provenance. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 38: 209-18.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0079497X00012111
MEI, J. 2002. The metal cauldrons recovered in Xinjiang, north-west
China. Newsletter on Steppe Archaeology 13.
MOLODIN, V.I. (ed.). 2009. Chicha--gorodishche perekhodnogo ot
bronzy k zhelezu vremeni v. Barabinskoy lesostepi (volume 3).
Novosibirsk: Verlag Institute (in Russian).
MOSKOVA, M.G. & B.A. RYBAKOV. 1992. Stepnaya polosa Aziatskoy
chasti SSSR v skifo-sarmatskoye vremya. Moskva: Nauka (in Russian).
NORTHOVER, P. & V. RYCHNER. 1998. Bronze analysis: experience
of a comparative programme, in C. Mordant, P. Michel & V. Rychner
(ed.) L'atelier du bronzier en Europe du XXe au VIlie siecle avant
notre ere: actes du colloque international 'Bronze '96',
Neuchdtel et Dijon, 1996: 19-40. Paris: Editions du CTHS.
PERNICKA, E. 2014. Provenance determination of archaeological metal
objects, in B.W. Roberts & C.P. Thornton (ed.) Archaeometallurgy in
global perspective: 239-68. New York: Springer.
RAWSON, J. 2013. Ordering the exotic: ritual practices in the late
western and early eastern Zhou. Artibus Asiae 73: 5-76
SABATINI, B. 2015. Chemical composition, thermodynamics, and
recycling: the beginnings of predictive behavioral modeling for ancient
copper-based systems. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of
Oxford.
SERGEEVA, N.F. 1981. Drevneyshaya metallurgiya medi yuga Vostochnoy
Sibiri. Novosibirsk: Nauka (in Russian).
SO, J.F. & E.C. BUNKER. 1995. Traders and raiders on
China's northern frontier. Seattle (WA) & London: Smithsonian
Institution, in association with the University of Washington Press.
SUNCHUGASHEV, Ya.I. 1969. Gornoye delo i vyplavka metallov v
drevney Tuve. Moskva: Nauka (in Russian).
--1975. Drevneyshiye rudniki ipamyatniki ranney metallurgii v
Khakassko-Minusinskoy kotlovine. Moskva: Nauka (in Russian).
SVYATKO, S.V., J.P. MALLORY, E.M. MURPHY, A.V. POLYAKOV, P.J.
REIMER & R.J. SCHULTING. 2009. New radiocarbon dates and a review of
the chronology of prehistoric populations from the Minusinsk Basin,
southern Siberia, Russia. Radiocarbon 51: 243-73.
WOLF, K.H. (ed.). 1982. Handbook of strata-bound and stratiform ore
deposits: bibliography and ore occurrence data, volume 10. Amsterdam:
Elsevier.
WU, E. 2008. Beifang caoyuan kaogu jcue wenhua bijiao yanjiu:
qingtong sbidai zhi zaoqi xiongnu sbiqi, beifang caoyuan kaogu xue
wenhua yanjiu. Beijing: Kexue chubanshe (in Chinese).
WU, X. 2013. Cultural hybridity and social status: elite tombs on
Chinas northern frontier during the third century BC. Antiquity 87:
121-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00048663
ZAITSEVA, G.I., K.V. CHUGUNOV, A. YU. ALEKSEEV, V.A. DERGACHEV,
S.S. VASILIEV, A.A. SEMENTSOV, G. COOK, E.M. SCOTT, J. VAN DER PLICHT,
H. PARZINGER, A. NAGLER, H. JUNGNER, E. SONNINEN & N.D. BOUROVA.
2007. Chronology of key barrows belonging to different stages of the
Scythian period in Tuva (Arzhan-1 and Arzhan-2 barrows). Radiocarbon 49:
645-58.
Received: 26 January 2015; Accepted: 5 May 2015; Revised: 17 August
2015
Yiu-Kang Hsu (1), *, Peter J. Bray (1), Peter Hommel (1), A. Mark
Pollard (1) & Jessica Rawson (2)
(1) Research Laboratory for Archaeology & the History of Art,
University of Oxford, School of Archaeology, Dyson Perrins Building,
South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QJ, UK
(Email:yiu-kang.hsu@linacre.ox.ac.uk)
(2) Institute of Archaeology, University of Oxford, 36 Beaumont
Street, Oxford OX1 2PG, UK
* Author for correspondence
Table 1. Classification of copper groups.
16 copper groups based on the presence or absence of elements
G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7 G8
NNNN YNNN NYNN NNYN NNNY YYNN NYYN NNYY
G9 G10 G11 G12 G13 G14 G15 G16
YNYN NYNY YNNY YYYN NYYY YYNY YNYY YYYY
Sequence: As/Sb/Ag/Ni.
N when the element is <0.1 wt%; Y when the element
is [greater than or equal to] 0.1 wt%.
Table 2. Copper groups in analysed objects;
see online supplementary material 2 for references.
Steppe
900-650 BC Cisbaikal Transbaikal Minusinsk Tuva
G1 25% * 7.3% 11.2% * 4.9%
G2 As 23.8% * 23.6% * 24.9% * 11.1% *
G6 AsSb 27.4% * 24.2% * 20% * 13.2% *
G9 AsAg 8.3% 5.5% 1.4% 0%
G11 AsNi 0% 3% 15.3% * 30.6% **
G12 AsSbAg 8.3% 11.9% * 2.1% 0%
G14 AsSbNi 1.2% 10.9% * 19.8% * 31.3% **
G15 AsAgNi 0% 1.8% 2.1% 1.4%
G16 AsSbAgNi 1.2% 10.3% * 1.8% 0.7%
Total n 84 165 570 144
Steppe Chinese
900-650 BC Altai N. China C. China
G1 20.1% * 2% 12.8% *
G2 As 59.7% ** 11.8% * 30% **
G6 AsSb 10.8% * 2% 7.3%
G9 AsAg 0% 19.6% * 17.9% *
G11 AsNi 4.3% 2% 1.10%
G12 AsSbAg 1.4% 19.6% * 28% *
G14 AsSbNi 0.7% 0% 0%
G15 AsAgNi 0% 21.6% * 0%
G16 AsSbAgNi 0.7% 17.6% * 0%
Total n 139 51 218
* 10-30% ** >30% G1 & G2: steppe/China; G6, G11 & G14:
steppe; G9 & G12: China, n = 1371.
Table 3. Alloy types in analysed objects.
900-650 BC Cu Cu-Sn Cu-Sn-Pb
Cisbatkal 54.8% ** 26.2% * 15.5% *
Lransbatkal 19.4% * 53.9% ** 19.4% *
Minusinsk 48.5% ** 40% ** 8.8%
Tuva 94.4% ** 4.2% 0%
Altai 16.5% * 59.7% ** 21.6% *
Xinjiang 46.8% ** 48.4% ** 4.8%
Hexi Corridor 7.1% 7.1% 64.3% **
N. China 20% * 32.7% * 45.5% **
C. China 4.1% 24.4% * 69.8% **
*: 10-40% **: >40% Sn [greater than Sn & Pb [greater
or equal to] 1% than or equal
to] 1%
900-650 BC Cu-Pb Total N
Cisbatkal 3.6% 84
Lransbatkal 7.3% 165
Minusinsk 2.6% 532
Tuva 1.4% 144
Altai 2.2% 139
Xinjiang 0% 62
Hexi Corridor 21.4% * 14
N. China 1.8% 55
C. China 2.3% 705
*: 10-40% Pb [greater than or equal to] 1% 1900
Table 4. Summary of copper and alloy types in object typology.
Single-bladed knife Cauldron
900-650 BC Cis-Baikal Trans-Baikal Minusinsk Minusinsk
Copper group
G1 28.6% 4% 8.7% 28%
G2 As 42.9% 32% 36.5% 32%
G6 AsSb 7.1% 20% 22.2% 16%
G9 AsAg 7.1% 5.3% 1.6% 0%
G11 AsNi 0% 4% 16.7% 0%
G12 AsSbAg 7.1% 8% 0.8% 0%
G14 AsSbNi 0% 13.3% 19.8% 24%
G15 AsAgNi 0% 1.3% 0% 0%
G16 AsSbAgNi 0% 10.7% 0.8% 0%
Copper alloy
Cu 50% 11.8% 25.5% 68%
Cu-Sn 50% 71.1% 60.8% 4%
Cu-Sn-Pb 0% 15.8% 12.4% 12%
Cu-Pb 0% 1.3% 1.3% 16%
Total n 16 76 153 25
