Silver and Lead in Prepalatial Crete

Branigan, Keith

doi:10.2307/503550

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Alternatively, it could suggest that Siphnian lead (or lead from a deposit with a LIA signature similar to Siphnos) was used to extract silver from disseminated silver-bearing ores from other locations, perhaps on Amorgos and Syros. Since some of the most notable finds of silver and lead artefacts have been made on Amorgos, Syros and Naxos (Branigan 1968), this explanation cannot be ruled out. More recently, excavations at EBA sites on the islands of Dhaskalio and Kavos, have recovered silver, lead and litharge (with litharge LIA signatures mapping to Laurion and Siphnos), which indicate lead and silver metallurgy was practised (Georgakopoulou 2018, 501-32).…”

Section: Bronze Age Silver Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is not a new proposition. In fact, Branigan (1968) recognised the possibility that the Minoans utilised their own sources of silver and lead, and Strong (1966) states that local sources of silver may have been used in the Cyclades because of high concentrations of gold and copper in the silver. Moreover, Davis (1977) identified some of the Mycenaean shaft-grave silver objects as Minoan.…”

Section: Lead Objects and Lithargementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sending Laurion Back to the Future: Bronze Age Silver and the Source of Confusion

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Silver-bearing lead ores at Laurion in Attica were considered to have been first exploited with the introduction of coinage sometime around the birth of Classical Greece. However, in the late 20th century this chronology was radically revised earlier, to the Bronze Age, largely supported by lead isotope analyses (LIA). Here, we acknowledge that lead and silver metallurgy emerged from the earliest times but we propose that any correlation between these metals in the archaeological record is not a consequence of a geological association between lead and silver in ores such as galena until the middle of the first millennium BCE. We suggest that ancient metallurgists recognised that silver minerals (such as horn silver) dispersed in host rocks could be concentrated in molten lead and that LIA signatures of Bronze Age silver artefacts reflect the use of exogenous lead to extract silver, perhaps applying processes similar to those used to acquire silver in Bronze Age Siphnos. We further propose that lead from Laurion used for silver extraction resulted in the inadvertent transfer of its LIA signature (probably aided by roving silver prospectors) to silver objects and metallurgical debris recovered around the Aegean. New compositional analyses for the Mycenaean shaft-grave silver (c. 1600 BCE) support these conclusions. We believe that reverting to the mid-first millennium BCE for the first exploitation of silver from argentiferous lead ores is consistent with the absence of archaeological evidence for centralised control over Laurion until the Archaic period, the paucity of lead slag associated with silver-processing debris at Bronze Age sites, the scarcity of silver artefacts recovered in post-shaft grave contexts at Mycenae and throughout the Early Iron Age Aegean, the few Attic silver coins with LIA signatures consistent with Laurion until after 500 BCE and a single unambiguous mention of silver in the Linear B texts.

show abstract

Section: Bronze Age Silver Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Lead Objects and Lithargementioning

confidence: 99%

Sending Laurion Back to the Future: Bronze Age Silver and the Source of Confusion

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That the burial record of the region around the north coast had many Cycladic links during the EM I–II periods has been well documented (Branigan 1968b, 225; Karantzali 1996; Broodbank 2000, 300–9; Papadatos 2003a); however, little attention has been paid to the variety of ways in which these links were materialized: from cemeteries with off‐island influences so strong as to be a direct transfer of Cycladic mortuary behaviour (Agia Photia Siteia) to the inclusion of a few objects made from off‐island raw materials (Krasi), to cases where no off‐island influence was found at all (Partira, Mortzos 1972). This reveals variation in the attitudes the different communities had regarding Aegean connections, and the varying degrees of importance these links had in the social organization of different communities.…”

Section: Early Minoan Imentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This general use of off‐island material, however, was quite variable and the different regional mortuary behaviours show that it was adapted to the particular characteristics of each region. Preferences existed in the type of materials that were chosen, such as bronze daggers in the Asterousia area and silver ornaments on the north coast (Branigan 1968b; Nakou 1995; Legarra Herrero 2004). The adaptation of this material to the tastes of the different communities was not only made in terms of consumption choices and demand, but also as producers/transformers of most of the objects (Branigan 1968a, 56, 102–3; Papadatos 2003b; 2007; Tselios 2006).…”

Section: Early Minoan IImentioning

confidence: 99%

The Minoan Fallacy: Cultural Diversity and Mortuary Behaviour on Crete at the Beginning of the Bronze Age

Herrero

2009

Oxford J Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We are becoming increasingly aware of regional data patterning in the archaeological record of Prepalatial Crete, yet a theoretically informed and methodologically systematic study assessing the significance of such differences is still lacking. This article investigates variation through the rich mortuary record of the period and explores the significance of such diversity for our understanding of Prepalatial Crete. A detailed analysis using mortuary data reveals a complex spatial and temporal variation in the record which raises questions about social, political and ideological differences between communities on the island during the early periods of the Early Bronze Age. Prepalatial Crete emerges from this analysis as a complex context resulting from an intricate combination of local and regional histories and trajectories and far from the unified culture that the term 'Minoan' implies.

show abstract

“…Different theoretical explanations for these changes have placed significance on the production, exchange and consumption of metal objects as key elements for the negotiation of social changes within Cretan communities (Branigan 1968a(Branigan : 57, 1974Manning 1994: 243-246;Nakou 1995;Renfrew 1972: 308, 483-496). However, Prepalatial metalwork has been the subject of much less study than any other material on the island, and in many ways conceptions about metalwork are still based on analyses of the data established in the late 1960s and early 1970s (Branigan 1967(Branigan , 1968a(Branigan , 1968b(Branigan , 1969(Branigan , 1974Davaras 1975;Junghans et al 1968).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

About the Distribution of Metal Objects in Prepalatial Crete

Herrero¹

2004

PIA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although metal objects have been used as evidence in different interpretations of the socioeconomic changes identified in Prepalatial Crete (c.3100-1900 BC), they constitute an understudied category of material. This paper argues that metal objects on Crete were subject to complex processes regarding the creation of meaning; a more comprehensive appraisal of metal objects on the island may cast new light on these issues. Copper-based, gold, lead and silver objects are investigated from their ore extraction locations outside Crete to their final deposition, linking the different steps of the process of creating an artefact with different layers of meanings for the metal and, subsequently, for the finished objects. This study evaluates differences in the use of metals, with a particular focus on their intra-island depositional patterns. It seeks to identify differences in the roles of metals within Cretan communities as well as regional fashions in the use of metal objects. It is suggested that metals had different characters since their depositional patterns vary, and that people consciously chose certain metals to make specific objects and also used metal objects in different ways, reflecting the socio-economic context for each region. KeywordsCrete, Early Bronze Age, metallurgy, Prepalatial, regionalism Introduction Studies of Bronze Age metal (copper-based, gold, lead and silver) objects in the Aegean are somewhat paradoxical. On the one hand, metalwork has played an important role in the interpretations of Bronze Age Aegean societies. It has been argued that control over the production, exchange and consumption of metal was an important source of socio-economic control for the emerging elites during this period (Branigan

show abstract

Silver and Lead in Prepalatial Crete

Cited by 11 publications

References 4 publications

Sending Laurion Back to the Future: Bronze Age Silver and the Source of Confusion

Sending Laurion Back to the Future: Bronze Age Silver and the Source of Confusion

The Minoan Fallacy: Cultural Diversity and Mortuary Behaviour on Crete at the Beginning of the Bronze Age

About the Distribution of Metal Objects in Prepalatial Crete

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About