COINS, ARTEFACTS AND ISOTOPES—ARCHAEOMETALLURGY ANDARCHAEOMETRY*

Abstract

Archaeometallurgy is one of the earliest manifestations of archaeometric research, using science-based approaches to address cultural-historical questions. This review first outlines the extent of the field, defining in some detail the main branches of archaeometallurgy, and their specific methodological approaches. It then looks at some of the early publications pioneering archaeometallurgical research, to set the scene for the publication pattern of archaeometallurgy in general, and the role that Archaeometry played in publishing archaeometallurgical research. The analysis of archaeometallurgy-themed publications in Archaeometry , their change over time and their relationship to the total range of work done in the field indicates that there is a rather narrowly defined and specific type of archaeometallurgy that gets published in Archaeometry , initially with a strong focus on coin and object analysis, often combined with method developments. The more recent developments in isotope-based studies in archaeometallurgy find only a limited representation in the journal, despite the leading role that the Isotrace Laboratory played in this discipline, for some considerable length of time. More recently, this Archaeometry -specific 'flavour' of archaeometallurgy seems to weaken, with an increase of papers on iron and on primary production in general, subjects still much under-represented.(tin-lead) and iron (iron-carbon and iron-phosphorus), although there are good reasons to extend archaeometallurgy to much more recent periods (e.g., Goodway and Odell 1988;Gilmour and Northover 2003;Rehren 2006;Bourgarit and Plateau 2007). Thus, it is not primarily the age of the material studied that defines archaeometallurgy, but the application of scientific methods to address cultural-historical questions. Reliance on scientific methods is often dictated by the 'ahistorical' nature of the crafts well into the recent past, resulting in at best patchy contemporary textual documentation being available.The first use of metals some 10 000 years ago was from natural occurrences as native metals, which did not require elaborate mining and smelting. This early metallurgy is limited to specific geological areas and is typical of the earliest use of gold, silver, copper, iron and mercury. The use of these native metals initially followed earlier, rather mechanical, approaches to lithic materials. However, supply of metals increased dramatically with the inception and spread of mining and extractive metallurgy, the origin of which is not yet clear, but seems to have risen in the late sixth millennium bc ; at the same time, genuinely metallurgical production and manufacturing techniques were developed, considerably expanding the use and versatility of metals. The emergence of alloys, both natural and intentional, further widened the range and appeal of metals available. In spite of these innovations and the subsequent, almost global, spread of metallurgy, the geological limitation of metal production to areas rich in specific ores remained....

Copper and tin isotopic analysis of ancient bronzes for archaeological investigation: development and validation of a suitable analytical methodology

“…This matrix-matched Cu solution was prepared taking into account the minimum Cu content and the maximum concentration levels for other elements present in bronzes according to literature [4,9,16,27] and showed a final composition of 500 mgL −1 Cu, 120 mgL −1 Sn, 82 mgL −1 Pb, 37 mgL −1 Zn, and 15 mgL −1 Fe. Additionally, 500 mg L −1 Ni was added as internal standard for mass bias correction.…”

“…Owing to the introduction of multi-collector inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (MC-ICP-MS) instruments, the interest for isotopic analysis has grown considerably, not only for elements with radiogenic nuclides (such as Pb, Sr, or Nd) [3], for which larger isotopic variations are observed in nature, but also for "non-traditional" stable isotopic systems (such as those of Cu or Sn), showing smaller variation, mainly due to mass-dependent isotope fractionation [4][5][6][7][8]. At this point, systematic studies are still needed to fully assess the possibilities of these nontraditional isotopic systems in the field of archaeometry, starting from optimization of the analytical methodology, at a later stage deployed for trying to relate the isotopic information to, e.g., geographical origin of raw materials, mining activities, manufacturing technology, and/or trade routes [9,10].…”

The Archaeology and Technology of Metal Production in the Late Iron Age of the Southern Waterberg, Limpopo Province, South Africa

“…Since, production remains for these metals can only be positively separated in a full scale metallurgical analysis and not in hand specimen (Miller and Killick, 2004;Rehren and Pernicka, 2008), it was important to consider all metals that were worked in the area under study.…”

Wands in the hand! Or Potter’s powers

“…Actual research into ancient goldwork is one of the specialisations within the ield of archaeometallurgy and its orientation is primarily archaeometric (Rehren and Pernicka, 2008), that is, based on scientiic methods of observation and analysis. his has not been achieved in a straightforward way, or without problems and tensions (Pollard and Bray, 2007).…”