Reply to J. D. Muhly, "Early Bronze Age Tin and the Taurus"
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Reply to J.D. Muhly, "Early Bronze Age Tin and the Taurus" K. ASLIHAN YENER AND PAMELA B. VANDIVER Abstract ical data that we have published in the past and in This response to J.D. Muhly's essay (supra pp. 239-53) this issue,2 but he has also not had access to our new focuses on a series of key issues that have arisen concern- findings from the 1992 season at G61tepe. In this reply ing the chronology, technology, and archaeological con- we present some new data and discuss the larger text in which prehistoric metallurgy developed. Additional radiocarbon dates and information on EBA question of tin metallurgy and metal exchange in ceramics from soundings in the Kestel mine are presented, Anatolia. In an appendix, Lynn Willies focuses on which are relevant to the dating of the operations. The local geology and the Kestel mine. tin-bronze industry at Tarsus and the question of "inten- Muhly has often argued for a scheme whereby tionality" in the manufacture of bronze alloys are further metallurgy was a "unique" discovery in only one area discussed. No data exist to support Muhly's contention followed by radial diffusion from the center of origin. that gold and iron were produced at G61ltepe and Kestel. It is stressed that although particles of cassiterite and tin Although he applauds the passing of traditional ideas metal are small, they are dense and characteristically col- such as stimulus-diffusion and "ex orient lux," he ored, and hence easily identified. Replication experiments nevertheless insists that the inspiration for metallur- in 1992 have suggested a method of producing tin metal gical development came from a single restricted area, compatible with the analyses of the crucibles and coatings. In an appendix, Lynn Willies discusses the geological such as Troy or Mesopotamia, and then spread out- nature of tin deposits in general and at Kestel in particular, ward through "indirect relations" between metal-pro- and considers Muhly's interpretation of the deposits in ducing regions.3 We expect that as intensive research the Eastern Desert.* in metal-rich highland regions of the world increases and their sophisticated indigenous metal technologies Professor Muhly is to be thanked for devoting se- are documented, Muhly's unilinear, monodimen- rious attention to the question of Early Bronze Age sional reconstruction will be replaced by a more com- tin, a topic that has so many significant implications. plex model. We believe that his commentary and the widespread interest shown by scholars, and by the lay scientific "INTENTIONALITY" AND DEFINITION OF BRONZE press, all reflect the importance of our findings to the field.' We welcome the opportunity to respond to his One of the most contentious issues in archaeomet- points, each of which touches on issues that we have allurgy has been the definition of "intentionality" in considered in depth and have discussed in print. the manufacture of bronze. Muhly dismisses the pres- Muhly seems to have overlooked some of the empir- ence of a local bronze industry in south-central Ana- * Publication of this response was also made Proceedings possible inof the 24th International Archaeometry Symposium part by the AJA Matson Fund. (Washington, D.C. 1986) 309-20; K.A. Yener, H. Ozbal, E. See J.D. Muhly, "Early Bronze Age Tin and Kaptan, the Tau- A.N. Pehlivan, and M. Goodway, "Kestel: An Early rus," in this issue, supra pp. 239-53. Bronze Age Source of Tin Ore in the Taurus Mountains, Publications both lay and scholarly have presented Turkey," our Science 244 (1989) 200-203; P.B. Vandiver, K.A. findings: see esp. P. Craddock, "A Short History Yener, of Fireset- and L. May, "Third Millennium B.C. Tin Processing ting," Endeavor n.s. 16 (1992) 145-50; C. Michel, Debris from"Dur- G61ltepe (Anatolia)," in P.B. Vandiver, J. Druzik, humid, son commerce et ses marchands," in D. and Charpin G.S. Wheeler and eds., Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology F. Joannes eds., Marchands, diplomats et empereurs. 3 (Pittsburgh, Etudes in press) 545-69; and E.V. Sayre, K.A. Yener, sur la civilisation misopotamienne offertes & Paul and Garelli E.C. (ParisJoel, reply to "Evaluating Lead Isotope Data: Fur- 1991) 253-73; T. Bass, "Land of Bronze," Discover ther Observations," 12:10 Archaeometry (in press). (1991) 62-66; L.L. Jobe, "Finding the Evidence," 3 J.D. Aramco Muhly, Copper and Tin: The Distribution of Mineral World 43:1 (1992) 18-19; C. Holden, "Clues to Resources a Tin Age," and the Nature of the Metals Trade in the Bronze Science 256 (1992) 1136; and E. Pennisi, "Turkish Age Tin(Hamden, Mine Conn. 1973) 322-23; Muhly, "The Bronze Revises Bronze Age History," Science News 141 Age (1992) Setting," 309. in T.A. Wertime and J.D. Muhly eds., The 2 See bibliography supra p. 208 n. 6, p. 209 Coming n.12, ofand the Age of Iron (New Haven 1980) 28; and R. p. 215 n. 38. See also K.A. Yener and H. Ozbal, Maddin "The ed., The Beginning of the Use of Metals and Alloys Bolkardag Mining District Survey of Silver and (Cambridge, Lead Metals Mass. 1988) 2. in Ancient Anatolia," in J.S. Olin and M.J. Blackman eds., American Journal of Archaeology 97 (1993) 255 This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Mon, 24 Sep 2018 14:59:17 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 256 K. ASLIHAN YENER AND PAMELA B. VANDIVER [AJA 97 tolia by questioning the tin-copper ratios lead isotopeanalyzed ratios. inCharacterization of ceramics and the Early Bronze assemblage from Tarsus. analysis Contraryof their clay sources, as well as obsidian sourc- to our view and those of his collaborators4 ing, have that illuminated 1% or complex networks and ex- more tin content in a bronze is significant, change patterns he has operating concurrently with metal concluded that there was no bronze industry trade. The exact at Tar-nature of the interactions, both of sus. With such a view of the as yet little-known local and interregional Cilicia, exploitation, should become he also discounts the contemporary and more nearby evident inAmuq the near future. bronzes. Even if one were conservatively to consider SOURCES OF TIN 2% tin content in a bronze as the "intentionality" limit, as Muhly suggests, then 12% of the objectsOver the fromyears Muhly has suggested a number of Tarsus should be considered intentional areas bronzes, as the "primaland source" of tin. In earlier papers one would have to explain the origin he of regarded the added the source of Near Eastern tin to be in tin. Furthermore, the remaining 12% central(of our and stated southeast Asia and Cornwall.5 Later he 24%) of objects that "unintentionally" favoredcontain Afghanistan 1-2% over the more remote southeast tin clearly indicate that the ores used Asia.6in Tarsus Also, areand despite evidence to the contrary, he rich in tin and, when smelted, yielded has discounted a so-called the Eastern Desert of Egypt, Erzge- "natural" tin-bronze. birge, Yugoslavia, as well as the other small pockets This evidence of a bronze industry at Tarsus is in the Black Sea sands, Cyprus, and the Troad, which corroborated by the presence of local tin-rich ores, have all yielded tin.7 which we have documented just to the north of Tarsus There have also been inconsistencies in his assess- in the Taurus Mountains. The 24% figure for tin- ment of the Taurus sources. At one time he regarded bronzes at Tarsus is not insignificant either for the them as important candidates for a tin source,8 reluc- amount of tin utilized as an alloying additive or as tantly accepting Taurus tin;9 later he totally rejected evidence for the use of local tin-rich ores. Notwith- their existence,10 then moved back to acceptance," standing Muhly's arguments in the preceding article, and finally, in this issue of AJA, he turns negative once tin-bronzes do occur in a variety of locations in Ana- again. Muhly has also interpreted the metallic nature tolia from the late Chalcolithic through the third mil- of the Taurus Kestel mine in several ways. Initially he lennium B.C. Their sources as well as the nature of congratulated us for having discovered the legendary their technology are being investigated. Our analytical "Silver Mountains" of the Akkadians;'2 later he ap- program in collaboration with the Turkish Geological plauded us for having discovered the oldest gold mine Survey carried out over a span of 10 years clearly of antiquity.'3 Now he suggests that we may have demonstrates that a number of tin sources in Turkey discovered an ancient iron mine.14 existed during the formative periods of bronze met- These are not matters for conjecture, but empirical allurgy. We are now researching the mosaic pattern data. The ore mined at Kestel was tin, as confirmed of interactions from the highlands to the urban cen- and published by a number of local and foreign spe- ters utilizing analytical methods such as elemental cialists.'5 Muhly's former coauthor and local expert, characterization of metals and the sourcing of ores by O. Oztunah, has now abandoned his former reserva- 4 E. Pernicka, F. Begemann, S. Schmitt-Strecker, 12 and Muhly A.P. et al. (supra n. 10) 212. Grimanis, "On the Composition and Provenance 13of J.D. Metal Muhly and E. Pernicka, "Early Trojan Metallurgy Artefacts from Poliochni on Lemnos," OJA 9 (1990) and Metals 272. Trade," in J. Herrmann ed., Heinrich Schlie- 5 Muhly 1973 (supra n. 3) 262-88; Muhly, "Tinmann. GrundlagenTrade und Ergebnisse moderner Archdologie 100 Routes of the Bronze Age," American Scientist Jahre 61 nach (1973) Schliemann's Tod (Berlin 1992) 315.