the aegean in the neolithic, chalcolithic and the early...

ANKARA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CENTER FOR MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY (ANKÜSAM)

Publication No: 1

Proceedings of the International Symposium

The Aegean in the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age

October 13th – 19th 1997, Urla - İzmir (Turkey)

Edited by

Hayat Erkanal, Harald Hauptmann, Vasıf Şahoğlu, Rıza Tuncel

Ankara • 2008

ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ / ANKARA UNIVERSITY SUALTI ARKEOLOJİK ARAŞTIRMA ve UYGULAMA MERKEZİ (ANKÜSAM)

RESEARCH CENTER FOR MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY (ANKÜSAM)

Yayın No / Publication No: 1

Ön kapak: İzmir - Höyücek’de ele geçmiş insan yüzü tasvirli bir stel. M.Ö. 3. Bin. Front cover: A stelae depicting a human face from İzmir - Höyücek . 3rd Millennium

BC. Arka kapak: Liman Tepe Erken Tunç Çağı II, Atnalı Biçimli Bastiyon. Back cover: Early Bronze Age II horse-shoe shaped bastion at Liman Tepe.

Kapak Tasarımı / Cover Design : Vasıf Şahoğlu

ISBN: 978-975-482-767-5

Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi / Ankara University Press İncitaşı Sokak No:10 06510 Beşevler / ANKARA

Tel: 0 (312) 213 66 55 Basım Tarihi: 31 / 03 / 2008

CONTENTS

Abbreviations …………………………………………………………………………………............ xi Preface by the Editors ………………………………………………………………………………… xiii Opening speech by the Mayor, Bülent BARATALI …...……………………………………………......... xxiii Opening speech by Prof. Dr. Ekrem AKURGAL ……………………………………............................... xxv Opening speech by Prof. Dr. Christos DOUMAS……………………………………………………….. xxvii LILIAN ACHEILARA

Myrina in Prehistoric Times …..……………………………………………………………. 1 VASSILIKI ADRIMI – SISMANI

Données Récentes Concernant Le Site Prehistorique De Dimini: La Continuité de l’Habitation Littorale depuis le Début du Néolithique Récent jusqu’à la Fin du Bronze Ancien ……………………………………………………………………………… 9

IOANNIS ASLANIS

Frühe Fortifikationssysteme in Griechenland ………………………………………………. 35 PANAGIOTA AYGERINOU

A Flaked-Stone Industry from Mytilene: A Preliminary Report …………………………… 45 ANTHI BATZIOU – EFSTATHIOU

Kastraki: A New Bronze Age Settlement in Achaea Phthiotis …………………………….. 73 MARIO BENZI

A Forgotten Island: Kalymnos in the Late Neolithic Period ……………………………….. 85 ÖNDER BİLGİ

Relations between İkiztepe by the Black Sea Coast and the Aegean World before Iron Age ……………………………………………………………………………... 109

TRISTAN CARTER

Cinnabar and the Cyclades: Body modification and Political Structure in the Late EB I Southern Cyclades ………………………………………………………............. 119

CHRISTOS DOUMAS

The Aegean Islands and their Role in the Developement of Civilisation ………….............. 131 ANTHI DOVA

Prehistoric Topography of Lemnos: The Early Bronze Age ………………………………. 141 NIKOS EFSTRATIOU

The Neolithic of the Aegean Islands: A New Picture Emerging ………………….............. 159 HAYAT ERKANAL

Die Neue Forschungen in Bakla Tepe bei İzmir ..…………………………………………. 165 HAYAT ERKANAL

Liman Tepe: A New Light on the Prehistoric Aegean Cultures …………………………… 179 JEANNETTE FORSÉN

The Asea Valley from the Neolithic Period to the Early Bronze Age …………….............. 191 DAVID H. FRENCH

Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Pottery of Southwest Anatolia ………………............. 197

Contents

viii

NOEL GALE Metal Sources for Early Bronze Age Troy and the Aegean ………………………............. 203

BARTHEL HROUDA

Zur Chronologie Südwestkleinasiens in der 2. Hälfte des 3. Jahrtausends v. Chr ............... 223 HALİME HÜRYILMAZ

1996 Rettungsgrabungen auf dem Yenibademli Höyük, Gökçeada / Imbros …………….. 229

ERGUN KAPTAN Metallurgical Residues from Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Liman Tepe ………………………………………………………………………….......... 243

ANNA KARABATSOLI and LIA KARIMALI

Etude Comparative Des Industries Lithiques Taillées Du Néolithique Final Et Du Bronze Ancien Egéen : Le Cas De Pefkakia ………………………………………….. 251

NECMİ KARUL

Flechtwerkgabäude aus Osttrakien ……………………………………………………….. 263 SİNAN KILIÇ

The Early Bronze Age Pottery from Northwest Turkey in Light of Results of a Survey around the Marmara Sea ………………………………………………………….. 275

OURANIA KOUKA

Zur Struktur der frühbronzezeitlichen insularen Gesellschaften der Nord- und Ostägäis: Ein neues Bild der sogenannten “Trojanischen Kultur”…………….. 285

NINA KYPARISSI – APOSTOLIKA

Some Finds of Balkan (or Anatolian) Type in the Neolithic Deposit of Theopetra Cave, Thessaly …………………………………………………………………. 301

LAURA LABRIOLA

First Impressions: A Preliminary Account of Matt Impressed Pottery in the Prehistoric Aegean ………………………………………………………………………… 309

ROBERT LAFFINEUR

Aspects of Early Bronze Age Jewellery in the Aegean …………………………………… 323 KYRIAKOS LAMBRIANIDES and NIGEL SPENCER

The Early Bronze Age Sites of Lesbos and the Madra Çay Delta: New Light on a Discrete Regional Centre of Prehistoric Settlement and Society in the Northeast Aegean ……………………………………………………........................ 333

YUNUS LENGERANLI

Metallic Mineral Deposits and Occurences of the Izmir District, Turkey ………………… 355 EFTALIA MAKRI – SKOTINIOTI and VASSILIKI ADRIMI – SISMANI

Les Sites Du Neolithique Recent Dans Le Golfe Pagasetique : La Transformation Des Sites De L’age De Bronze En Sites Urbains (Le Cas De Dimini) ……………………. 369

ELSA NIKOLAOU, VASSO RONDIRI and LIA KARIMALI

Magoula Orgozinos: A Neolithic Site in Western Thessaly, Greece ………………………. 387 EMEL OYBAK and CAHİT DOĞAN

Plant Remains from Liman Tepe and Bakla Tepe in the İzmir Region ……………………. 399

Contents

ix

DEMETRA PAPACONSTANTINOU Looking for ‘Texts’ in the Neolithic Aegean: Space, Place and the Study of Domestic Architecture (Poster summary) ………………………………….......... 407

ATHANASSIOS J. PAPADOPOULOS and SPYRIDOULA KONTORLI – PAPADOPOULOU Some thoughts on the Problem of Relations between the Aegean and Western Greece in the Early Bronze Age …………………………………………………. 411

STRATIS PAPADOPOULOS and DIMITRA MALAMIDOU

Limenaria: A Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Settlement at Thasos ……………………… 427 DANIEL J. PULLEN

Connecting the Early Bronze I and II Periods in the Aegean ……………………………….. 447

JEREMY B. RUTTER Anatolian Roots of Early Helladic III Drinking Behaviour …………………………………. 461

VASIF ŞAHOĞLU

New Evidence for the Relations Between the Izmir Region, the Cyclades and the Greek Mainland during the Third Millennium BC …………………………………. 483

ADAMANTIOS SAMPSON

From the Mesolithic to the Neolithic: New Data on Aegean Prehistory ……………………. 503 EVANGELIA SKAFIDA

Symbols from the Aegean World: The Case of Late Neolithic Figurines and House Models from Thessaly …………………………………………………………... 517

PANAGIOTA SOTIRAKOPOULOU

The Cyclades, The East Aegean Islands and the Western Asia Minor: Their Relations in the Aegean Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age …………………….. 533

GEORGIA STRATOULI

Soziale une ökonomische Aspekte des Chalkolithikums (spätneolithikum II) in der Ägäis aufgrund alter und neuer Angaben …………………………………………….. 559

GEORGE TOUFEXIS

Recent Neolithic Research in the Eastern Thessalian Plain, Greece: A Preliminary Report ……………………………………………………………………….. 569

RIZA TUNCEL

IRERP Survey Program: New Prehistoric Settlements in the Izmir Region ……………….. 581 HANNELORE VANHAVERBEKE, PIERRE M. VERMEERSCH, INGRID BEULS, BEA de CUPERE and MARC WAELKENS

People of the Höyüks versus People of the Mountains ? …………………………………… 593 KOSTAS VOUZAXAKIS

An Alternative Suggestion in Archaeological Data Presentations: Neolithic Culture Through the Finds from Volos Archaeological Museum ……………….. 607

Closing Remarks by Prof. Dr Machteld J. MELLINK ………………………………………………. 611 Symposium Programme ……………………………………………………………………………… 615 Memories from the Symposium……………………………………………………………………… 623

Metal Sources for Early Bronze Age Troy and the Aegean

Noel GALE

ABSTRACT: The setting of this conference at Urla on the Aegean coast of Turkey, felicitously bringing together as it does Greek, Turkish and other colleagues, marks a new era in Aegean Bronze Age archaeology, with the important new excavations at Liman Tepe, Panaztepe and Bakla Tepe. Amongst many other aspects these excavations are destined to throw new light on our knowledge of early metallurgy in the eastern Aegean, in the study of which it is planned my Laboratory will take part in collaboration with Professor Erkanal and his colleagues. This paper reviews briefly what is already known from studies based on metal artefacts from Troy, Poliochni, Lemnos and Kastri on Syros.

The study of early metallurgy in the Aegean has a long history. Schliemann himself not only brought his Aegean preoccupations to his excavation and study of Troy, but was also intensely interested in the development of bronze technology in the Northeast Aegean. Schliemann had some of the first chemical analyses of prehistoric metals ever made carried out on material excavated by him at Troy, especially from what we now know as Treasure A from Troy IIg. Prominent amongst the experts to whom Schliemann turned was Chandler Roberts of the Royal Mint and Royal School of Mines in London1. As a graduate of the sister college, the Royal College of Science in London, it has been a pleasure for me to take such studies a little further and in new directions made possible by the advance of science over the past 115 years.

Preamble

Exchange is a central concept in archaeology. Exchange of material goods is of course much the same as trade, though one must not neglect the possibilities of gift exchange and reciprocity (exchange between equals), or the varieties of trade such as redistribution or market exchange. Exchange in a broader sociological sense includes all interpersonal contacts, including the exchange of information. In recent archaeological programmes an attempt has been made to tackle the whole question of the production and distribution of traded goods. Followed, where possible, by attempts to reconstruct the operation of a trading system as a whole.

1 Schliemann 1881

Where metals are concerned, in the Aegean, Branigan2 exemplifies the traditional, typological, approach, studying metal as a chronological indicator and an index of inter-regional contact. Archaeologists and archaeometallurgist alike have attempted at one level to establish where such new technologies as the use of tin bronze first developed, and whether such a technology diffused out from where it was initially discovered or whether it was independently discovered in different societies. At another level scholars such as Renfrew3, dealing with Aegean prehistory, discussed metallurgy not only in terms of the diffusionist/autonomist divide but also in an attempt to investigate the impact of the development of metallurgy on the evolution of societies, in the context of indigenous state formation, and as a technological advance enabling the imposition of power through gift exchange and through warfare, and as a store of wealth reflecting the status of emerging leaders and allowing the development of hierarchical societies. It should be mentioned here that Renfrew4, in discussing the rise of state societies in the Aegean, did not rely only on discussions of the impact of metallurgy; he emphasised that the essential drive towards growth and change came from the interaction of a number of subsystems through the multiplier effect of systems theory. While it was possible to stress the importance of certain processes, such as the increasing skill in metallurgy and the development of the vine and the olive, Renfrew’s emphasis was placed on the aggregate of the interactions.

2 Branigan 1974. 3 Renfrew, 1967, 1972. 4 Renfrew 1972.

Noel GALE 204

Contra recent rather facile suggestions of the Bradford school5, the whole question of prehistoric trade, inter-regional contacts and the movement of ideas remains at the forefront of current archaeological interest6 and, where movement of or trade in material goods is concerned, this relies on the ability to identify the sources of traded goods. Conventional typology is not always a safe guide here7; artefact forms can be imitated, or may resemble each other by chance. Much more reliable evidence for trade can be provided if the raw material of which an object is made can reliably be shown to have originated elsewhere than the region of the site in which the artefact is found. Of course this sort of evidence is about where the raw materials came from; it cannot necessarily tell us where was located the workshop in which the object was made. It can however tell us a great deal about trade or the exchange of goods since, as the evidence from the Bronze Age shipwrecks of Cape Gelidonya8 and Uluburun show abundantly9, there was great traffic in raw materials, including metal ingots of copper, tin and lead, in the Bronze Age Mediterranean

For metals we thus need to identify some characteristic property of the metal which is present also in the metal ore source from which the metal was smelted, a property moreover which is not significantly altered in the processes of smelting, refining, casting, hammering, etc. In addition this property must be sufficiently different from one metal ore source to the next so that each relevant metal ore source can be distinguished from the others. The property which comes closest to satisfying these requirements is the isotopic composition of the metal lead present, in major or minor amount, in the ore sources, and which is known to be carried over isotopically unchanged, within the errors of measurement, from the ore source to the final metal object, be this of lead, silver or copper based metal10. Thousands of measurements, by isotope geochemists and

5 Pollard & Heron 1996. 6 Renfrew 1983; Renfrew & Bahn 1993. 7 Caskey 1986, 22. 8 Bass 1967. 9 Pulak 1988. 10 Gale 1989; Gale & Stos-Gale 1996.

archaeological scientists, of the lead isotope compositions of hundreds of metal ore deposits have shown that, in the vast majority of cases, the lead isotope composition of a particular ore deposit varies only over a small range, usually about 0.4% in total. Note that this does not, as erroneously claimed by Pollard and Heron11, depend on the assumption that these deposits are stratiform or of any particular style of metallogenesis; it is an empirical finding based solely on actual lead isotope data measured for a large number of ore deposits.. Relatively rare deposits which contain significant U/Pb ratios do range much more widely in lead isotope composition, but even then conclusions about provenance may often be drawn from comparative lead isotope data for ore deposits and artefacts, as for example has been shown by Pernicka et al. 199312. In contrast, major, minor or trace element chemical compositions vary through an ore body and are changed by smelting in the final metal relative to the composition in the ore deposit; nevertheless certain chemical elements and element ratios are useful in providing provenancing evidence additional to that coming from lead isotope analysis13.

Introduction

The topic of this paper is a brief discussion of what natural science has discovered about the metal sources which supplied Early Bronze Age Troy and some relevant parts of the Aegean, together with a limited discussion of its archaeological implications. Prior to carrying out such work, it was clear that success would be archaeologically important. At the least it would allow examination of the conflict between the earlier diffusionist hypothesis, which would have the primary development of metallurgy in the East followed by transmission to the Aegean etc., and the later theories of Branigan or Renfrew. Branigan, basing himself largely on typological studies, essentially saw the early development of metallurgy in the Aegean as due to “regional schools” of

11 Pollard & Heron 1996. 12 Pernicka et al. 1993. 13 Gale & Stos-Gale 1995.


205

metallurgy. Renfrew was at pains to discard the notion of Ex Oriente Lux in favour of determinedly autonomous and independent developments of metallurgy in different parts of the Mediterranean, owing little to what had happened in the East. Underlying both approaches was the idea, for which little detailed evidence was produced, that independent developments of metallurgy in the Mediterranean were made possible by the presence in that region of easily accessible, abundant, sources of copper and some sources of tin. It will be seen that the studies discussed here gave us some surprises which were not envisaged when the work began, and which go beyond merely providing evidence for or against the theories just mentioned.

I should begin by recording that almost all the work bearing on my topic has been done either in Oxford or by the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Mainz and the Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics in Heidelberg; sometimes by all. My talk will attempt briefly to review just a little of what has come out from the work done in all three laboratories. It will however be concentrated on Troy and the Northeast Aegean. I do not have time to cover the rest of the Aegean, except briefly where there seems to be a strong link with the eastern region.

However, since the discussion of the Northeast Aegean can be complex, I am going to start with something simpler. This is intended just to illustrate the application of lead isotope provenancing to an archaeologically important problem, where the application seems to be simple and demonstrably to succeed.

Principles of lead isotope analysis

Figure 1 illustrates the quite simple bases of lead isotope analyses as used for provenancing the metal of which an ancient artefact was made. First we must build up a number of lead isotope analyses of ores, so as to define the fields characteristic of the ore deposits which could in principle have supplied the particular metal under consideration. As an illustration figure 1 shows the lead isotope fields characteristic of four Aegean ore deposits; those of Lavrion in Attica and of the

Cycladic islands of Keos, Seriphos and Thera. Clearly, an ore deposit which basically contains only copper minerals cannot, in the Bronze Age, have provided silver for a silver artefact, etc. Second, all three possible lead isotope ratios must be used. Only if all the lead isotope ratios of an artefact fall within the fields for an ore source in both diagrams, can that ore source have provided the metal for the artefact in question. Thus the lead isotope ratios for lead metal artefact B, which fall in the upper diagram both into the Lavrion and the Keos fields, but in the lower diagram falls only into the Keos field, is consistent only with derivation of its lead from the Keos galena deposits. On the other hand artefact A has a lead isotope composition which falls into none of these fields, so that its metal cannot have derived form any of these ore deposits.

Cypriot Copper Oxhide Ingots

My illustration of the application of this principle is the question of the source of copper for the Late Bronze Age copper oxhide ingots, or talenta, which have been excavated or found in Cyprus, Sardinia and Sicily, Mainland Greece, Cycladic islands such as Keos, in Crete, in Chios, in Ugarit, Hattuša, the Black Sea coast of Bulgaria, with recent fragments being excavated at the Turkish site of Tekirdağ on the northern coast of the Sea of Marmara and at the Egyptian 1300 BC site of Piramesse Quantir in the Eastern Nile Delta. This is a question which has received much attention for more than 15 years by the team of Muhly, Maddin and Stech14, who have approached the problem, with no real success, through a combination of chemical and metallographic analyses with archaeological discussion. More recently the application of lead isotope provenancing has proved much more successful15.

The whole basis of the investigation of this problem has been altered significantly, and much strengthened, by recent work at Oxford, in which we have added about 200 good quality lead isotope data for over 25 different Cypriot ore deposits. This lead isotope data has proved to be in good accord with the latest geological 14 Muhly et al. 1988. 15 Cf. Gale 1989.

Noel GALE 206

and geophysical work in Cyprus16, which relates the formation of the ore bodies in Cyprus to sub-oceanic processes occurring near a number of palaeo crustal spreading centres. It should however be emphasised that lead isotope based conclusions about the origin of copper for the oxhide ingots do not at all depend on the mode of metallogenesis of any ore bodies.

It turns out that, for comparison with the oxhide ingots, only the ore deposits related to one ancient crustal spreading axis in Cyprus, called by geologists the Solea axis17, are of interest. The relevant mines are those of Mavrovouni, Apliki, Skouriotissa, Alestos and Memi, near the Morphou Bay in the region of the north west of the Troodos mountains. Figure 2 shows the lead isotope compositions in relation to our old “overall Cypriot field” (which was based on only about 30 ore samples), and shows that these mines tend to have somewhat different isotopic compositions from each other, in an approximate progression through Memi, Alestos, Skouriotissa, Mavrovouni, Apliki. In confirmation of earlier indications based on much less data18, the new lead isotope data for the Apliki deposit tend to fall below the extent of the ‘old Cypriot lead isotope field’ in the 208Pb/206Pb versus 207Pb/206Pb diagram.

Comparison, in figure 3, with the lead isotope compositions of copper oxhide ingots found in Cyprus itself shows a very good match with some of these Cypriot ores on the Solea axis, principally with the ores from the mine (not the archaeological site) of Apliki. The oxhide ingots whose isotopic analyses are shown here vary widely in find spot on Cyprus, from Enkomi on the East coast to Maroni on the central Southern coast; they are all consistent with their copper having come from the Apliki region copper ore deposits on Cyprus.

Finally, figure 4 shows data for some of the copper oxhide ingots found on Sardinia, which again fit closely with the Apliki ores, with two fragments straying up into the region of overlap with the Skouriotissa ores.

16 Maliotis 1995. 17 See Stos-Gale et al. 1997. 18 Stos-Gale & Gale 1994.

It seems clear that this brief glance at lead isotope analyses applied to copper oxhide ingots demonstrates a clear success story. Together with further evidence presented elsewhere19 it seems that the lead isotope data shows that, from all over the Mediterranean, those post 1250 BC oxhide ingots which have been analysed derive from copper smelted from one mining region in Cyprus, that of Apliki.

The Northeast Aegean

The first lead isotope analyses of copper based metals from Troy were presented in a paper which I gave at the First Conference on Southern European Archaeometry, held in Delphi in November 198420. A fuller publication of this data appeared in November 198421; this paper contained full archaeological information about the Troy IIg material which had been analysed at Oxford, including references to drawings of the objects22. This material came from Schliemann’s excavations of Troy, included axes, chisels, daggers, knives, loop rings and vessel parts, and had been sampled by the Stuttgart programme of metal analyses23 of the 1960’s-1970’s. Information about the chemical composition of these artefacts had previously been published, within a comprehensive study of Anatolian copper alloy objects, by Esin24.

Eight objects25 from the EB II-EB IIIA Yortan cemetery26 were also included in this early work, as were a number of objects from the “Troas” hoard published, and analysed typologically, by Bittel27 who, arguing from the typological standpoint, classified them as of the Troy IIg period, and pointed in some cases to links with the Pontids region. (Subsequently and parallel to our work Pernicka and his colleagues28 and Seeliger et al.29 also published

19 Stos-Gale et al. 1997. 20 Gale & Stos-Gale 1986. 21 Stos-Gale et al. 1984. 22 Schmidt 1902. 23 Junghans et al. 1974. 24 Esin 1969. 25 Gale et al. 1985. 26 Kamil 1982. 27 Bittel 1959. 28 Pernicka et al. 1984. 29 Seeliger et al. 1985.


207

work on the artefacts from Troy, Yortan and the Troas).

The lead isotope analyses for Troy IIg copper based objects appear in Figure 5. There was an immediate surprise, in that the lead isotope data for Trojan artefacts spreads far beyond, towards the upper right hand side of the diagram, the normal confines of data for most Aegean copper based artefacts, which are usually positioned in the lower half of this diagram, with 208Pb/206Pb ratios below 2.09. Figure 6 shows this is not so for the objects from Yortan, which cluster into one group in the usual part of the Pb isotope diagram, but figure 7 shows that the objects from the so-called “Troas Hoard” again have objects falling into the upper part of the lead isotope diagram. Moreover the lead isotope data is not scattered randomly across the diagram, as it would be if we had a situation where the artefacts were made of random mixtures of copper coming from different copper ore deposits, but occupies a number of discrete isotopic groups30.

Isotope geochronology shows us that the lead isotope compositions of metal ore deposits are related to first order to the geological age of the ore deposit31. The isotopic composition of lead in the ore deposit passes sensibly unchanged into the metal objects made from metal smelted from it. Consequently we can relate the isotopic compositions of the various isotopic groups, into which the Troy IIg objects fall, to the geological age of the copper deposits from which they were made. Figure 5 shows these inferred ages in millions of years. For instance, the uppermost group in figure 5 contains copper based objects which must have been made of copper coming from copper deposits of Precambrian age, whilst those falling in the lowermost group came from much younger copper deposits of about Miocene age.

At the time when we were first trying to understand these results, the work of de Jesus32

30 The lead isotope diagrams given in this paper for Troy, the Troas ‘hoard’ and Yortan show only one of the two possible isotope diagrams which were illustrated in Figure 1; both diagrams are necessary for valid interpretation. The other diagrams for these artefacts are given in Stos-Gale et al. (1984), Gale et al. (1985).

31 See Faure 1986, 309-340. 32 Jesus 1980.

suggested the regions indicated on the map of figure 8 as those where there were relatively nearby copper deposits, which might have supplied the copper used in Troy, Yortan, and for the “Troas Hoard”. Apart from the copper ore deposits in Anatolia itself, there were not far away the very large Strandža deposits in Bulgaria near the coast around Burgas; these were not identified as a possible source by de Jesus, but clearly should be considered since Chernykh33 discovered evidence for ancient working of these deposits, period largely unknown. In our publications of 1984 and 1985 we made cautious attempts to relate the lead isotope data for Troy, Yortan and the “Troas Hoard” to some of these possible source regions, based on the very scanty geological evidence for the probable age of these often complex deposits.

These preliminary assessments were of course made redundant by the excellent programme of fieldwork in Turkey led by Wagner from Heidelberg, in the years from about 1983 to 198634. For the Taurus Mountains more evidence was provided by Aslıhan Yener and her colleagues35. For the first time we were provided with hard evidence from the point of view of ancient mining and, via slag heaps, about ancient metal production, though there was in most cases no sound evidence to assign a date to the slag heaps. Fig. 9 summarises some of the Heidelberg conclusions about the existence of ancient copper mines in NW Anatolia relatively near to Troy and Yortan. Incidentally, their work essentially discounted previous suggestions that tin occurs in usable amount in this region, though there is evidence for an EB tin mine at Kestel in the Taurus Mountains36. The copper mine, TG192 at Serçeörenköy, had definite evidence for prehistoric working. Wagner’s work confirmed that there are no Cambrian or Precambrian copper deposits in Turkey, as is true also for the whole Mediterranean region. Consequently, the not inconsiderable number of copper based objects from Troy IIg and the “Troas Hoard”, which have exotically high lead

33 Chernykh 1978. 34 Wagner et al. 1989. 35 Yener et al. 1989; 1991. 36 Yener et al. 1989, 1993; Willies 1990.

Noel GALE 208

isotope ratios, are made of metal which, it seems, cannot have been mined in Anatolia or the Mediterranean regions, something which was not known before lead isotope analyses were made of these objects.

Our work on the copper-based objects from Troy IIg and the “Troas Hoard” was confirmed by independent lead isotope analyses of the same objects by Begemann37. This is brought out by fig. 31 in their paper38, where it is shown that a large number of analysed objects are far outside the region where fall the lead isotope compositions of ores in the Aegean or Anatolia. Note also from this diagram that most of the copper based objects with exotic lead isotope ratios in this diagram are of tin bronze, identified as filled black symbols.

Tin bronze is an alloy which, in the NE Aegean, becomes dominant in Troy IIg times, though some is now known from true Troy I horizons at Beşik-Tepe on the western shore of the Trojan plain. This is well brought out in figure 9, based on the data of Muhly and colleagues39 for copper alloy artefacts from the site of Poliochni on the Northeast Aegean island of Lemnos. It shows the absence of tin bronzes or high lead isotope ratios in the Blue or Green periods, little in the Red period, and a sudden explosion of tin bronze and high lead isotope ratios in the Yellow period.

Thus a combination of chemical analysis and lead isotope analyses has shown us something of importance for archaeology. In the Troy IIg period, the Anatolian EB III of about 2300-2200 BC, artefacts from Troy itself, Poliochni and the “Troas Hoard”, show a sudden increase of true tin bronzes, and the sudden appearance of high lead isotope ratios, indicating the use of metal from geologically old metal ore deposits which do not exist in the Aegean or in Anatolia, though they do exist in Central Asia. At the same time gold appears in the Treasures which Schliemann found at Troy, in the gold jewellery in Poliochni Yellow, and in the princely burials at Alaca Hüyük. At Thermi on Lesbos40, a few tin bronzes appear in

37 Reported in Pernicka et al. 1984. 38 Pernicka et al. 1984. 39 Muhly et al. 1991. 40 Stos-Gale 1992.

towns II, III and V, and the very high lead isotope ratios appear in a few arsenical copper and tin bronze objects in towns III-V. It has been suggested that Thermi V was over by the time of Poliochni Yellow. It may be wrong, as has sometimes been done, to equate these sudden developments in Poliochni and Troy IIg with the sudden appearance in the Royal Cemetery at Ur, and at Ebla, of gold, tin bronze and lapis lazuli. The Royal Cemetery seems to date to ED IIIA, or about 2600 BC, at any rate some hundreds of years earlier than Troy IIg. We may well be forced back to Ex Oriente Lux in this case. On the other hand the view was expressed at a recent conference41 that the relative dating of the Royal Cemetery at Ur and Troy IIg is sufficiently imprecise that there might be overlap between these two periods.

It is usual to look to Afghanistan for the ancient source of lapis lazuli42, and both tin and gold also occur there, leading Muhly to suggest that all three came to Mesopotamia (and to Northern Syria) via an overland route across Iran, though Berthoud has suggested a route via the Persian Gulf43.

A feature of the high lead isotope ratios, linking a high proportion of Troy IIg artefacts with very old ore deposits, is that they are not confined to tin bronzes. Some of the objects which plot in the ‘exotic’ range of the lead isotope ratio diagram are of copper. This suggests that the high lead isotope ratios are not for the tin metal in a tin bronze, but rather are diagnostic of the copper used to make these tin bronzes. This is further supported by the fact that the concentrations in the bronzes of Sn and Pb are not positively correlated, so the Sn/Pb ratio in the bronzes is not constant. Also, objects with the same Sn/Pb ratios have very diverse Pb isotope ratios. On present evidence this would be expected, since what analyses there are for the lead content of cassiterite tin ores44 show low lead contents in comparison with most copper ores.

All evidence suggests that the high lead isotope ratios are characteristic of the copper

41 Moscow 1996. 42 von Rosen 1988. 43 von Rosen 1990 discusses possible trade routes. 44 e.g. Dulski 1980.


209

metal used to make the tin bronzes. Since no Anatolian or Aegean copper deposits exhibit these ‘exotic’ isotope ratios, it follows that these bronzes were not made by alloying local copper with imported tin metal. It is possible that bronze was made at, or near, the geologically old copper ore deposits, coming to Troy and Poliochni as the tin/bronze alloy. Since there are at Poliochni and Troy a few copper objects with high lead isotope compositions, it cannot quite be excluded that tin and copper came separately and were made into the alloy at Troy etc. Coupling this with the fieldwork, which seems to show that there are no tin ore deposits in NW Anatolia, we can no longer accept as probable the hypotheses of Branigan, Renfrew and others that there was an independent discovery and development of tin bronze technology in Western Anatolia, based on local tin and copper sources. The existence of an EB tin ore source at Kestel45 in the Taurus Mountains does of course seem to leave it open that, at Troy, tin from further away in Anatolia might conceivably have been utilised.

To repeat, the high lead isotope ratios for Troy IIg bronzes point to the exploitation of geologically old, Palaeozoic, copper deposits which do not occur in Anatolia or the Aegean, but do occur in Central Asia. In Afghanistan there are not only tin deposits, but also sources of lapis lazuli and gold which could have supplied the other precious commodities appearing at Troy and related sites towards the end of the 3rd. Millennium BC, perhaps via a trade route across the Black Sea. There is the apparent difficulty that the copper, and tin, deposits in Afghanistan so far described in the archaeometallurgical literature46 are geologically young; but geological reports on the mineral deposits of Afghanistan47 reveal that the complex geology of Afghanistan embraces also Precambrian/Cambrian deposits of copper, though most deposits of tin are connected with the geologically much younger Eocene/Oligocene magmatism.

I turn now to my other major topic - the hill fort site of Kastri on Syros48 in the Cycladic

45 Yener et al. 1989. 46 Berthoud et al. 1977. 47 e.g. Afghanistan 1973. 48 Bossert 1967.

Islands. Note that this settlement site is to be distinguished from the nearby cemetery site of Chalandriani on Syros, which was excavated by Tsountas49.

The material analysed in Oxford comprises the copper based artefacts coming from the excavation of EC IIIA Kastri by Bossert50. These comprise an Early Bronze Age toolkit of nine chisels, a saw and two awls with, in other parts of the site, two small daggers, two flat axes and a spearhead, illustrated by Bossert51 and Renfrew52. Branigan53 showed that some of these copper based metal objects have good parallels in Anatolian objects excavated at Troy and at Thermi on Lesbos.

It was found already by Junghans and his colleagues54, with further analyses in Oxford55 that Kastri stood apart from other Cycladic sites, in having a large number of tin bronzes, similar to Troy IIg, whereas other Cycladic islands had arsenical copper as their typical metal56. This contrast was emphasised in diagrams published in 1984 and 198557, which also revealed striking similarities between the alloy compositions of metal artefacts from Kastri and Troy IIg.

These striking similarities extend also to the lead isotope data, shown in figure 10. This diagram compares the Kastri copper based objects to those from Troy IIg, the “Troas Hoard”, Yortan and Thermi I & II58. Similarities between alloy compositions alone might have been due to chance. Similarities in lead isotope composition also seems to indicate that the people of Kastri had their metals, or at least the tin bronzes with high lead isotope ratios, ultimately from the same ore deposits which supplied the NE Aegean sites of Poliochni, Lemnos, the Troas Hoard and Troy. When in 1984 we first noticed these isotopic similarities, we had only the Troy IIg and

49 Tsountas 1899. 50 Bossert 1967. 51 Bossert 1967. 52 Renfrew 1972, 343. 53 Branigan 1974. 54 Junghans et al. 1974. 55 Stos-Gale et al. 1984. 56 Gale & Stos-Gale 1989. 57 Stos-Gale et al. 1984, 32, Fig. 4; Gale et al. 1985, 156,

Fig. 4. 58 Stos-Gale 1992.

Noel GALE 210

“Troas Hoard” objects as comparanda. The addition of Thermi increases confidence in the groupings, whilst addition also of the objects from Poliochni Yellow59 does so yet further. In 1984 we felt that the metallurgical evidence, plus the evidence that Kastri was a short period, hill top fortress with Anatolian pottery, and in uneasy relations with its neighbours, was sufficient to put forward the hypothesis that the people at Kastri were invaders or refugees from the Norteast Aegean.

Since then Christos Doumas60 has made a much wider review of the evidence for the Northeast Aegean islands, which controlled the entrance to the Dardanelles, and the Cycladic islanders, who may have controlled traffic between Crete and the Greek mainland. Doumas demonstrates that contacts between the two maritime communities were established at least in the Early Cycladic II period. His review seems to be in accord with the interpretation we made more narrowly for Kastri on Syros. Doumas shows that the EC IIIA hill fort sites in the Cyclades, on Syros, Naxos, Delos, and Christiana on Thera, have produced exclusively Kastri group material. These sites share common features unknown in other EC settlements: location on a hill top near the sea, small size, and short life. In at least two of the hill-forts, life ended violently. Between main and outer walls at Kastri, Tsountas61 found a quantity of pebbles, interpreted as sling-stones, and a spearhead. At Panormos on Naxos masses of similar pebbles were recovered from the two bastions protecting the entrance to the citadel. A spearhead was found, just outside the gate; inside it, in a layer of heavy burnt remains, were recovered the few vessels yielded by the excavation. It seems that both settlements suffered attacks from outside, and that Panormos was abandoned on fire62. The people residing in the hill forts seem to have been intruders, not local Cycladic people. There is a suggestion of this idea also by MacGillivray63: ‘newcomers settle in the islands...’, whilst Caskey64 writes: “How great is the difference 59 Pernicka et al. 1990. 60 Doumas 1988. 61 Tsountas 1899. 62 Doumas 1963. 63 MacGillivray 1984. 64 Caskey 1986.

between EH II and EH III.... I still believe, as formerly, that many of the pots do indicate a distinct change in perception, having been made by people of different traditions and with different techniques”, and also: “Within the present limits of our knowledge I look for certain events: the advent of new people (not necessarily hostile invaders) coming quite possibly from Asia Minor, with new knowledge and new energies, to the central and Southeastern Greek mainland at the beginning of EH II; the arrival of other vigorous people, again quite probably from the East, some centuries later bringing elements of Anatolian material culture to the Aegean islands, while a related but independent group, more warlike or meeting stronger resistance, came westward and took many of the EH II settlements by force, ......”.

It is in that light that we must interpret the Kastri group people’s use of tin bronze, as something foreign to the contemporary Cycladic people65, but pointing to the origin of the Kastri group people from the Northern Aegean around Troy, Poliochni and Thermi, not, as has been interpreted by some via the Kastri group pottery, from Southwestern Anatolia66. It seems a powerful argument against linking the Kastri group with Southwestern Anatolia rather than the Northeastern Aegean and Troy that there are so far no sites contemporary with Troy IIg or EC IIIA in Southwestern Anatolia which have produced tin bronzes or which have exhibited the exotic lead isotope ratios. Apart from Troy IIg, Poliochni and Thermi, tin bronzes in Anatolian EB II levels occur only at the central Anatolian sites of Alaca Hüyük, Alişar and Ahlatlibel, which may be a further indication that tin was coming to Troy from further east. Even should we admit connections between Troy IIg ceramics and contemporary ceramics in Cilicia, contemporary strata in sites in Cilicia such as Mersin67 do not contain high tin bronzes and do not have copper based metal

65 Gale & Stos-Gale 1989; Stos-Gale et al. 1984; Bossert

1967. 66 E.g. Davis 1992, but on the dangers of relying too

much on comparisons of ceramic typology alone see Caskey 1986.

67 Gale et al 1985; Esin 1969; Berthoud et al. 1977.


211

artefacts with the exotic lead isotope ratios which link Troy IIg, Poliochni, Thermi and Kastri on Syros. Davis’ argument68 against linking the Kastri group with the presence of Anatolian people at these sites seems weak, being based almost solely on his estimate that at Ayia Irini the Anatolian features in the Kastri Group ceramics constitute only about 10% of the pottery in use, whilst at Kastri on Syros and Panormos on Naxos the ceramics are not fully published so that a similar estimate cannot be made. Apart from being somewhat of an argument from silence, this does not take into account possible differences between sites and seems to place altogether too much emphasis on ceramic evidence alone. Davis seems not to give sufficient weight to the cumulative evidence adduced69 not only for ceramics, where Doumas has emphasised that the contemporary ‘Dark-faced’ and Kastri group pottery do not co-exist on the same site, whilst the hill-fort sites in the Cyclades ‘..have produced exclusively Kastri group material70. Beyond ceramics, Doumas also emphasised that “These sites all share some common features, unknown in other Early Cycladic settlements: situation on a hill top near the sea, small size, short life. Moreover, at at least two out of the three excavated hill-forts, life ended violently”, as was explained above. “Their inhabitants were buried in isolated graves near other cemeteries”71. To all this is to be added the evidence of the metals, where the use of tin bronze and the exotic lead isotope compositions link Kastri on Syros with Troy IIg, Poliochni and Thermi. Doumas surveys a range of evidence which suggests that, prior to EC III, the North Aegean mariners maintained contacts with Euboia and Aigina, perhaps with the tacit agreement of the Cycladic people, using the Northern Sporades as stepping stones and passing through the straits of Euboia, rather than risking the perilous crossing across the central Aegean, whose winds and waters are often extremely rough. This status quo seems to have been kept until the appearance of the hill-forts in the Cyclades in EC III.

68 Davis 1992.

69 Stos-Gale et al. 1984; Doumas 1988. 70 Doumas 1988, 25. 71 Doumas 1988, 26.

As Doumas72 has suggested, from the occurrence of Kastri group material at Pefkakia near Volos, at Manika, at Raphina in Attica, at Aegina, the Kastri group intruders probably came south through the route via Euboea, following a route known to them since EC II, when they had been used to coming south on peaceful missions. The Kastri group people probably fled from the destructions, such as are recorded at the end of Poliochni Yellow, Troy IIg, and Thermi V. Although Troy was rebuilt after the destructions, Poliochni and Thermi were not; Lesbos and Lemnos were abandoned. As Doumas writes “Their inhabitants, experienced mariners, must have left by sea. And their safest course was to follow their known seaway via the straits of Euboia and go to places with which they had relations and where continuation of their maritime activities could be guaranteed. Such places, as we have seen, included Manika and Aigina73. Having established at least two strongholds in the south, and in need for further territory for their activities, I suggest that these refugee-pirates tried to expand their authority into the Cyclades where they hastily settled on some remote coastal hill-tops which they fortified in their own way. ... Finally the intruders were expelled from the Cyclades as is suggested by the short life of the hill forts and by their violent abandonment”74.

Conclusions

In summary, the leading discoveries which scientific investigations of metal provenance have made in relation to the Northeast Aegean seem to be:

1) In the Troy IIg-Poliochni Yellow periods there began the penetration into the NE Aegean of copper from geologically old, Precambrian, copper sources which are not to be found in Anatolia or the Aegean, coupled with the common use of tin bronze. Much of the isotopically ‘exotic’ copper is in the form of tin-bronze. Both tin and the ‘exotic’ copper may have come from Afghanistan; cf. lapis lazuli. Although most of both the tin and the copper

72 Doumas 1988. 73 Cf. Walter & Felten 1981, 28. 74 Doumas 1988, 28, Walter & Felten 1981.

Noel GALE

212

deposits visited in Afghanistan by the French expedition75 are geologically too young, Oligocene to Jurassic, they attributed two copper deposits near Ainak to the Proterozoic, and later Soviet geological work has identified other Precambrian/Cambrian Afghan copper deposits. We should not lose sight of the fact that there are also tin deposits (Uzbekistan, Tadjikistan, Kazakstan, Kirgizstan) and Precambrian copper deposits in central Asia, some of which Chernykh’s work76 shows were exploited in the Bronze Age.

2) Close similarities between the isotopic and alloy compositions of artefacts from Troy IIg, Poliochni Yellow, the “Troas Hoard”, Yortan and Kastri/Syros suggest time synchronism between Troy IIg, EC IIIA Kastri, Poliochni Yellow and the “Troas Hoard”.

3) A combination of other archaeological evidence with the scientific evidence for metals from Kastri suggests that the Kastri Group people were not native Cycladic islanders but Anatolian refugees from the Northeast Aegean, fleeing from the end Troy IIg and Poliochni Yellow troubles in the north east Aegean.

4) It becomes difficult to argue for independent introduction of tin bronze technology in the Cyclades or Northeast Aegean, if the alloy components came from so far away, and bearing in mind the prior adoption of tin bronzes in Mesopotamia, who may also have had tin from Afghanistan or one of the former Soviet Central Asian republics.

5) A large number of Troy IIg, Poliochni-Yellow, etc. objects do not have the ‘exotic’, high, lead isotope ratios, but have ratios consistent with the copper having come, for different artefacts, from Aegean/Anatolian ores, including ores from the Troad and from the NE Pontids, and from the Cyclades.

6) Lead isotope analyses show that no artefacts from Kastri, Troy, Poliochni, etc. have copper coming from the Strandzha copper ore deposits on the Black Sea coast of Bulgaria.

75 Berthoud et al. 1977. 76 Chernykh 1989.

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr H. Schickler who kindly provided our samples of artefacts from Troy, the Troas and Yortan from samples remaining from the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Metallurgie des Altertums, Stuttgart. Thanks are also due to the organisations which have provided financial support to the Isotrace laboratory over the past 20 years: the Volkswagen-Stifftung, the Science Research Council, the Leverhulme Trust, the British Academy, the Leventis Foundation, the Institute of Aegean Prehistory and the University of Oxford. Finally, acknowledgement is made to Professor W. Gentner and Professor Lord Renfrew of Kaimsthorn for instigating this avenue of research in Oxford, and to my colleague Dr Z. A. Stos-Gale, who has participated fully in all this research.

NOEL GALE Isotrace Laboratory, Nuclear Physics Building, Keble Road, Oxford, OX1 3RH. UK


213

Bibliography: Afghanistan, 1973, Geology and Mineral Resources of Afghanistan, Department of Geological Survey, G. Besulov & E.N.

Kondrashkini. Kabul. Bass, G.F. 1967, Cape Gelidonya, a Bronze Age Shipwreck, Transactions American Philosophical Society, new series 57 (8).

Philadelphia. Berthoud, Th., R. Besenval, J.P. Carbonnel, F. Cesbron & J. Liszak-Hours 1977, “Les Anciennes Mines d’Afghanistan”,

Rapport Preliminaire, Commisariat a l’Energie Atomique. Fontenay-aux-Roses, 30pp. Bittel, K. 1959, “Beitrage zur Kenntnis anatolischer Metalgefässe der zweiten Hälfte des dritten Jahrtausends v. Chr.”, JdI

LXXIV, 1-34. Bossert, E.-M. 1967, “Kastri auf Syros”, ADelt 22, 53-76. Branigan, K. 1974, Aegean Metalwork of the Early and Middle Bronze Age. Oxford. Caskey, J.L. 1986, “Did the Early Bronze Age end?”, in: Cadogan, G. (ed.) 1986, The End of the Early Bronze Age in the

Aegean, Cincinnati Classical Studies, New Series, Vol. VI. Leiden, 1-30. Chernykh, E. N. 1978, Gornoe delo i metallurgia v drevneishei Boulgarii. Sofia. Chernykh, E. N. 1989, Drevnia Metallurgia Severnon Evrasii, Akademia NAUK CCCP. Moscow. Davis, J.L. 1992, “Review of Aegean Prehistory I: The Islands of the Aegean”, AJA 96, 699-756., esp. 754-755. de Jesus, P.S. 1980, The Development of Prehistoric Mining and Metallurgy in Anatolia, BAR Int. Series 174. Oxford. Doumas, C. 1963, “Archaiotitetes kai Mnemeia Kykladon”, ADelt 19B, 411-412. Doumas, C. 1988, “EBA in the Cyclades: Continuity or Discontinuity?”, in: French, E.B. & K.A. Wardle (eds.) 1988,

Problems in Greek Prehistory. Bristol, 21-30. Dulski, P. 1980, “Spurenanalyse als Hilfsmittel bei der geochemischen Untersuchung der Genese bolivianischer Sn-

Lagerstätten”, Berliner Geowissenschaftliche Abhandlungen, Reihe A/Band 28, 79. Esin, U. 1969, Kuantitatif Spektral Analiz Yardımıyla Anadolu’da Baslangıcından Asur Kolonileri Çağına Kadar Bakır ve

Tunç Madenciliği. İstanbul. Faure, G. 1986, Principles of Isotope Geology. New York, 309-340. Gale, N.H., Z.A., Stos-Gale & G.R. Gilmore 1985, “Alloy Types and Copper Sources of Anatolian Copper Alloy

Artifacts”, AnatSt 35, 143-173. Gale, N. H. & Z. A. Stos-Gale 1986, “Anatolian and Cycladic Metal Sources”, in: Proceedings of the First Conference on

Southern European Archaeometry, Delphi, 1984, PACT Journal 15, 13-32. Gale, N.H. 1989, “Lead Isotope Studies Applied to Provenance Studies - a Brief Review”, in: Maniatis, Y. (ed.) 1989,

Archaeometry. Amsterdam, 469-502. Gale, N.H. & Z.A. Stos-Gale 1989, “Some Aspects of Early Cycladic Copper Metallurgy”, in: Domergue, C. (ed.) 1989,

Mineria y Metalurgia en las Antiguas Civilizaciones Mediterraneas y Europeas, Tomo I. Madrid, 21-37. Gale, N.H. 1991, “Copper Oxhide Ingots: Their Origin and Their Place in the Bronze Age Metals Trade in the

Mediterranean”, in: Gale, N.H. (ed.) 1991, Bronze Age Trade in the Mediterranean, SIMA XC. Jonsered, 197-239. Gale, N.H. & Z.A. Stos-Gale 1995, “Comments on ‘Oxhide Ingots, Recycling, and the Mediterranean Metals Trade”, JMA

8.1, 33-41. Gale N.H., & Z.A. Stos-Gale 1996, “Lead Isotope Methodology: The Possible Fractionation of Lead Isotope Compositions

during Metallurgical Processes”, in: Demirci, S., A.M. Özer & G.D. Summers (eds.) 1996, Archaeometry ‘94, Proceedings of the 29th International Symposium on Archaeometry, TÜBITAK, Ankara, 287-299.

Junghans, S., E. Sangmeister & M. Schröder 1974, Kupfer und Bronze in der frühen Metallzeit Europas. Katalog der Analysen Nr. 10,041-22,000 (mit Nachuntersuchungen der Analysen). Berlin.

Kâmil, T. 1982, Yortan Cemetery in the Early Bronze Age of Western Anatolia, BAR Int. Series I45. Oxford. MacGillivray, J.A. 1984, “The Relative Chronology of Early Cycladic III”, in: MacGillivray, J.A. & R.L.N. Barber (eds.)

1984, The Prehistoric Cyclades. Edinburgh, 70-77. Maliotis, G. 1995, “The Structural Control of the Mineralisation of North-north-east Troodos, Cyprus”, in: Fifteenth

Congress of the Carpatho-Balcan Geological Association, Geol. Soc. Greece Spec. Publ. 4/2, 767-770. Moscow 1996, Troy and its Treasures, State Pushkin Museum. Moscow. Muhly, J.D., F. Begemann, Ö. Öztunali, E. Pernicka, S. Schmitt-Strecker & G.A. Wagner 1991, “The Bronze Age

Metallurgy of Anatolia and the Question of Local Tin Sources”, in: Pernicka, E. & G.A. Wagner (eds.) 1991, Archaeometry ‘90, Birkhauer. Basel, 209-220.

Muhly, J.D., R. Maddin & T. Stech 1988, “Cyprus, Crete and Sardinia: Copper Oxhide Ingots and the Bronze Age Metals Trade”, RDAC, 281-298.

Noel GALE 214

Pernicka, E. , T.C. Seeliger, G.A. Wagner, F. Begemann, S. Schmitt-Strecker, C. Eibner, Ö. Öztunali & I. Baranyi 1984, “Archäometallurgische Untersuchungen in Nordwestanatolien”, JbZMusMainz 31, 533-599.

Pernicka, E., T.C. Seeliger, G.A. Wagner, F. Begemann 1984, “Archäometallurgische Untersuchungen in Nordwestanatolien”, JbZMusMainz 31, 533-599.

Pernicka, E., F. Begemann, S. Schmitt-Strecker & A.P. Grimanis 1990, “On the Composition and Provenance of Metal Artefacts from Poliochni on Lemnos”, OJA 9, 263-297.

Pernicka, E., F. Begemann, S. Schmitt-Strecker & G.A. Wagner 1993, “Eneolithic and Early Bronze Age Copper Artefacts from the Balkans and their Relation to Serbian Copper Ores”, PZ 68, 1-54.

Pollard, A.M. & C. Heron 1996, Archaeological Chemistry, The Royal Society of Chemistry. Cambridge. Pulak, C. 1988, “The Bronze Age Shipwreck at Uluburun, Turkey: 1985 Campaign”, AJA 92, 1-37. Renfrew, A.C. 1967, “Cycladic Metallurgy and the Aegean Early Bronze Age”, AJA 71, 1-20. Renfrew, A.C. 1972, The Emergence of Civilization: the Cyclades and the Aegean in the Third Millennium B.C. London. Renfrew, C. 1983, “Divided we Stand: Aspects of Archaeology and Information”, American Antiquity 43, 3-16. Renfrew, C. & P. Bahn 1993, Archaeology. London, 307-370. Schliemann, H. 1881, Ilios, the City and Country of the Trojans. New York (reprinted 1976). Schmidt, H. 1902, Heinrich Schliemann’s Sammlung Trojanischer Altertümer. Berlin. Seeliger, T.C., E. Pernicka, G.A. Wagner, F. Begemann, S. Schmitt-Strecker, C. Eibner, O. Oztunali & I. Baranyi

1985, “Archäometallurgische Untersuchungen in Nord- und Ostanatolien”, JbZMusMainz 32, 597-659. Stos-Gale, Z.A., N.H. Gale & G.R. Gilmore 1984, “Early Bronze Age Trojan Metal Sources and Anatolians in the

Cyclades”, OJA 3.3, 23-43. Stos-Gale, Z. A. 1992, “The Origin of Metal Objects from the Early Bronze age site of Thermi on the island of Lesbos”, OJA

11.2, 155-177. Stos-Gale, Z.A. & N.H. Gale 1994, “Metals”, in: Knapp, A.B. & J.F. Cherry, Provenience Studies and Bronze Age Cyprus.

Madison, 92-121. Stos-Gale, Z.A., G. Maliotis, N.H. Gale & N. Annetts 1997, “Lead isotope Characteristics of the Cyprus Copper Ore

Deposits Applied to Provenance Studies of Copper Oxhide Ingots”, Archaeometry 39.1, 83-123. Tsountas, C. 1899, “Kykladika II”, AEphem, 73-134. von Rosen, L. 1988, Lapis Lazuli in Geological Contexts and in Ancient Written Sources, SIMA Pocket Book 65. Partille. von Rosen, L. 1990, Lapis Lazuli in Archaeological Contexts, SIMA Pocket Book 93. Jonsered. Wagner, G.A., Ö. Öztunali & C. Eibner 1989, “Early Copper in Anatolia: Archaeometallurgical Field Evidence”, in:

Hauptmann, A., E. Pernicka & G.A. Wagner (eds.) 1989, Archäometallurgie der Alten Welt. Bochum, 299-306. Walter, H. & F. Felten 1981, Alt-Ägina III.1: Die vorgeschichtliche Stadt: Befestigungen, Häuser, Funde. Mainz. Willies, L. 1990, “An Early Bronze Age Tin Mine in Anatolia, Turkey”, Bull. Peak District Mines Historical Society 11.2,

91-96. Yener, K.A., H. Özbal, A. Minzoni-Deroche & B. Aksoy 1989, “Bolkardag: Archaeometallurgy Surveys in the Taurus

Mountains, Turkey”, National Geographic Research 5.4, 477-494. Yener, K.A., H. Özbal, E. Kaptan, A.N. Pehlivan & M. Goodway 1989, “Kestel: an Early Bronze Age Source of Tin Ore

in the Taurus Mountains, Turkey”, Science 244, 200-203. Yener, K.A., E.V. Sayre, E.C. Joel, H. Özbal & I.L. Barnes 1991, “Stable Isotope Studies of Central Taurus Ore Sources

and Related Artefacts from Eastern Mediterranean Chalcolithic and Bronze Age Sites”, Journal of Archaeological Science 18, 541-77.

Yener, K.A. & P. Vandiver 1993, “Reply to J.D. Muhly, “Early Bronze Age Tin and the Taurus”, AJA 97, 255-264.


215

List of Illustrations: Fig. 1: Illustration of the principles of provenancing metals using lead isotope analyses. Points A and B represent the lead

isotopic compositions of two metal artefacts. Lead artefact A cannot have been made of ores from any of the ore deposits Lavrion, Keos, Seriphos and Thera whose lead isotope fields are shown here. Lead artefact B is fully consistent with having been made of lead ores from Keos, but not from any of the other ore deposits.

Fig. 2: Lead isotope analyses of Cypriot ores from mines associated with the Solea palaeo spreading axis, compared with the old ‘Cypriot field’, which was based on an inadequate number of ore samples.

Fig. 3: Lead isotope analyses of Late Bronze Age copper oxhide ingots found in Cyprus, compared with the lead isotope compositions of ores from mines associated with the Solea axis.

Fig. 4: Lead isotope analyses of some Late Bronze Age copper oxhide ingots found in Sardinia, compared with the lead isotope compositions of ores from mines associated with the Solea axis.

Fig. 5: Lead isotope analyses of copper alloy artefacts from Troy IIg, showing how they fall into discrete groups of isotopic composition. Model lead isotope geological ages are shown for the average lead isotopic composition of each group, showing that two groups of artefacts have been made of copper ores coming most probably from Precambrian ore deposits.

Fig. 6: Lead isotope analyses of copper alloy artefacts from Yortan, showing that they fall into but one isotopic group, and do not have the exotic isotopic compositions exhibited by some Troy IIg objects.

Fig. 7: Lead isotopic compositions of copper alloy artefacts from the Troas hoard, which again fall into discrete groups and exhibit the exotic compositions characteristic of some Troy IIg objects.

Fig. 8: Map of Anatolia, after de Jesus 1980, showing metal ore deposits. Also shown is the position of the important copper ore deposits of Strandzha in Bulgaria.

Fig. 9: Map of Anatolia, after Wagner and colleagues, showing probable prehistoric copper ore deposits and metal processing sites as identified by the Heidelberg fieldwork. The previously suggested tin ore deposit at Soğukpınar has now been discounted by Wagner.

Fig. 10: Lead isotope compositions of copper alloy artefacts from the various phases of Poliochni on Lemnos, showing the sudden appearance of the exotic lead isotope compositions in Poliochni Yellow (After Muhly et al. 1991). The dashed field encloses the region wherein Aegean ores plot, whilst the solid ellipse encloses Troad ores. The hatched area is for objects from Poliochni with less than 1% tin, whilst black dots indicate objects with greater than 1% tin.

Fig. 11: Lead isotope compositions of copper alloy artefacts from EC IIIA Kastri on the Cycladic island of Syros, compared with the lead isotope compositions of copper alloy artefacts from Troy IIg, the ‘Troas hoard’, Yortan and Thermi I & II, Lesbos.

Noel GALE 216


217

Noel GALE 218


219

Noel GALE 220


221

Noel GALE

222

the aegean in the neolithic, chalcolithic and the early...

Documents