Frame Godin Metal

METAL FINDS FROM GODIN TEPE, IRAN:
PRODUCTION, CONSUMPTION, AND TRADE
by
Lesley Diana Frame
___________________________
Copyright Lesley Diana Frame 2007
A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the
DEPARTMENT OF MATERIALS SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of
Master of Science
In the Graduate College
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
2007
2
STATEMENT BY AUTHOR
This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an

advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library
to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.
Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission,
provide that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for
extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be
granted by the copyright holder.
SIGNED:________________________________
APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR
This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:
_________________________________ ___________________
Pamela B. Vandiver Date
3
Acknowledgements
This thesis represents a portion of a larger project headed by Hilary Gopnik,

Mitchell Rothman, and Robert Henrickson to publish the excavation of Godin Tepe.
Without their help and support, as well as the support provided by the Royal Ontario
Museum and Susan Stock, Bill Pratt, Angelica Magsisi, and Louis Levine this project
would not have been possible. In addition, valuable support and advice was provided by
my thesis committee, Pamela Vandiver, David Killick, and David Poirier regarding the
analyses, interpretation and overall scope of the project. Aaron Shugar, Vincent Pigott,
Christopher Thornton, and Ernst Pernicka provided advice regarding Iranian
archaeometallurgy, and I would like to thank Lloyd Weeks for inviting me to the
Workshop on Early Iranian Metallurgy where I received important feedback on some
aspects of this research. Robert Mehrabian, Carlos Levi, and Jyrki Miettinen provided
helpful advice regarding the solidification and cooling rate aspect of this study.
The analyses were largely carried out at the University of Arizona and I greatly
appreciate the training and troubleshooting on the SEM-Microprobe provided by Ken
Domanik in the Department of Planetary Science, Lunar and Planetary Laboratory. In a
similar vein, Phil Anderson of the Arizona Materials Laboratory was kind enough to help
me with the X-ray Diffraction analyses.
I would also like to thank my family and friends and colleagues who have
provided contextual and grammatical advice, as well as the ever-appreciated emotional
support that is necessary when completing a project of this magnitude.
4
DEDICATION
To Steven
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES. 7
LIST OF TABLES 10
ABSTRACT 11
Chapter 1: BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION FOR RESEARCH..12
1.1: The Earliest Metallurgy of the Ancient World..... 12
1.1.a: Native Copper to Sulfide Ores 12
1.1.b: Production of Copper in Iran.. 15
1.1.c: The Appearance of Tin 17
1.2: Chronology and Geography of Western Asia 19
1.3: The Sequence at Godin Tepe.... 23
1.4: Purpose of the Present Investigation......25
Chapter 2: EQUIPMENT AND METHODS USED IN THIS INVESTIGATION. 27
2.1: Artifact Inventory.. 27
2.2: Sampling Strategy.. 27
2.2: Methods of Analysis. 32
2.3.a: Preparation of Samples 32
2.3.b: Electron Microprobe Analysis 34
Chapter 3: ANALYTICAL RESULTS.39
3.1: Period VI:1 (3300-3050 BCE).. 39
3.2: Period IV (2950-2700 BCE). 44
3.3: Period III (2600-1400 BCE). 45
3.3.a: Period III:6 (2600-2400 BCE). 50
3.3.b: Period III:5 (2400-2200 BCE).58
3.3.c: Period III:4 (2100-1900 BCE). 58
3.3.d: Period III:2 (1900-1600 BCE).65
3.3.e: Period Post III:2 (1600-1400 BCE). 67
3.4: Period II (800-600 BCE)68
3.5: Summary of Results. 71
Chapter 4: DISCUSSION OF THE METALLURGY AT GODIN TEPE.. 112
4.1: The Argument for Small-Scale Local Metal Production.. 112
4.1.a: Raw Materials 114
4.1.b: The Use of Crucibles for Smelting. 117
4.1.b.i: Processing Setup. 117
4.1.b.ii: Crucible Charge.. 118
4.1.b.iii: Maximum Processing Temperatures. 125
4.1.c: The Right-Angle Tuyere from Period III:2. 128
4.1.d: The Molds from Godin Tepe. 131
4.2: A Regional Perspective..132
4.2.a: The Intentionality of Composition.. 133
4.2.a.i: Benefits of Arsenic and Tin Solute in Copper.. 134
4.2.a.ii: Evidence for Alloy Choice.. 135
4.2.a.iii: Transition from Cu-As to Cu-Sn Alloys.146
6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.2.b: Methods of Manufacture. 148
4.2.b.i: Cooling Rates for Cast Objects.153
4.3: Conclusions157
APPENDIX A: All Godin Tepe Metal Finds.. 161
APPENDIX B: Photographs of Artifacts with Sample Orientations Indicated 170
APPENDIX C: Phase Diagrams Used in Chapter 4. 210
REFERENCES. 216
7
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Archaeological sites in Western Asia (Pigott 1999:75). 20

Figure 1.2: Chronology for early Godin Tepe levels (courtesy Hilary Gopnik)...... 21
Figure 1.3: Chronology for Godin III (courtesy Hilary Gopnik).. 22
Figure 1.4: Major trade routes of Iran (adapted from Henrickson 1986). 23
Figure 2.1: Grinding and polishing orientations of mounted samples.. 33
Figure 2.2: Schematic cross-section for the Cameca Sx50 Electron Microprobe
(Domanik 2001). 35
Figure 3.1 Metallographic section of Gd73-312, Period IV:1, unidentified object...... 73
Figure 3.2 Optical light micrograph of B1-510ss28 Period IV:1, melting crucible..... 73
Figure 3.3 XRD spectrum for A01-34 ss29, Period IV, Ore fragment..... 74
Figure 3.4 Metallographic section of Gd71-261, Period IV, blade.. 75
Figure 3.5 Metallographic sections of B2-351ssX25, Period IV, Nugget........ 76
Figure 3.6 Optical light micrograph of A1-1123ss521, Period IV, smelting
crucible...... 76
Figure 3.7 Optical light micrograph of A1-1109ss511, Period IV, smelting
crucible...... 77
Figure 3.8 Optical light micrograph of A2-1184ss63, Period IV, melting crucible.... 78
Figure 3.9 Metallographic section of A1-1109ss511, Period IV, prill from smelting
crucible...... 79
Figure 3.10 XRD spectrum for A1-1123ss521, Period IV, Ore fragment.... 80
Figure 3.11 Metallographic section of Gd65-33, Period III, chisel. 81
Figure 3.12 Metallographic section of B2ss1, Period III, chisel...... 82
Figure 3.13 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd71-153, Needle, (b) A2-5 and (c)
B2ssX18, Wires, Period III 83
Figure 3.14 Metallographic section of Gd73-73, Period III, arrowhead.. 84
Figure 3.15 Metallographic section of (a) Gd71-246, (b) Gd71-318, (c) Gd71-19,
Period III:6, Chisels.................................................................................................. 85
Figure 3.16 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd67-113, Period III:6 (b) Gd67-207,
Period III:2, Pins 86
Figure 3.17 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd73-103, (b) Gd67-126, (c) Gd73-68,
and (d) Gd71-159, Period III:6. 87
Figure 3.18 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd73-109, (b) Gd71-188, (c) Gd7149,
(d) Gd71-50, Period III:6.. 88
Figure 3.19 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd71-207, (b) and (c) Gd71-73, Period
III:6 89
Figure 3.20 Metallographic section of (a) Gd67-102, (b) Gd67-103, (c) Gd67-117,
Period III:6 90
Figure 3.21 Metallographic section of Gd67-104, Period III, bracelet 91
Figure 3.22 Metallographic sections of A1-347ss25 at (a) low and (b) high
magnification, Period III:6, Nugget.. 92
Figure 3.23 Metallographic sections of A1-188ss9 at (a) low and (b) high
magnification, Pin, Period III:5. 93
8
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)
Figure 3.24 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd71-141, (b) Gd69-693 Period III:4.. 94
Figure 3.25 Metallographic sections of (a,b) A1-69ss2, (c) B1-38, Period III:4,
Nuggets. 95
Figure 3.26 Optical light micrograph of AA2-193ss9 Period III:4, melting crucible.. 96
Figure 3.27 XRD spectrum of AA2-193ss9, Crucible, Period III:4. 97
Figure 3.28 Metallographic sections of (a) C2-112ss10, (b) Gd69-694, Period III:2.. 98
Figure 3.29 Metallographic sections of Gd67-237, Blade, Period III:2... 99
Figure 3.30 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd67-196, Armourplate, (b) Gd67-201,
Arrowhead, Period III:2 100
Figure 3.31 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd67-215, (b) Gd67-219, Period III:2. 101
Figure 3.32 Metallographic sections of (a)AA2-154ss1, and (b) MB1 #5, Period
III:2 102
Figure 3.33 Metallographic sections of Gd67-231, Period III:2, Bracelet... 103
Figure 3.34 XRD spectrum of A1-40, Period III:2, Tuyere. 104
Figure 3.35 XRD spectrum of A01-50ss40, Period VI:1, Crucible fragment. 105
Figure 3.36 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd67-450, (b) Gd67-452, and (c) Gd67-
455, Period Post III:, Arrow/spearheads 106
Figure 3.37 Metallographic sections of Gd67-453, Period Post III:2, Bracelet.. 107
Figure 3.38 Metallographic sections of (a) EE01-1 and (b) Gd67-729, Period II 108
Figure 3.39 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd71-343 and (b) Gd71-344, Period II,
Pins 109
Figure 3.40 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd69-216, (b) Gd69-461, (c,d) Gd73-
419, Period II, Pins 110
Figure 3.41 Metallographic sections of Gd69-215, Bracelet, Period II 111
Figure 4.1: Plan map for Godin Tepe central mound with grid and metallurgical
finds indicated (adapted from Young and Levine 1974).. 113
Figure 4.2: Map showing ore deposits (numbered), High Road (dotted line) and
Godin Tepe (adapted from Bazin and Hubner 1969 and Henrickson 1986)..... 115
Figure 4.3: Schematic drawing of pit smelting operation 118
Figure 4.4: Metallographic sections of (a) A1-1123ss521, Period IV, and (b) B1-
510ss28, Period VI:1, Crucibles 121
Figure 4.5: Copper rich end of the Cu-O phase diagram (Neumann et al. 1990) 122
Figure 4.6: Cu-O stability diagram (Neumann et al. 1990). 122
Figure 4.7: Metallographic section of A1-1109ss511.. 123
Figure 4.8: Cu-As equilibrium phase diagram (Subramanian and Laughlin 1990). 124
Figure 4.9: Retained arsenic during smelting operations at various temperatures
(Pollard et al. 1991)125
Figure 4.10: (a) Liquid regions of FeO-Fe2O3-SiO2-CaO-Al2O3 slag at 1250oC and
PO2 of 10-8 atm, for various Al2O3 contents; and (b)Liquidus surface of FeO-
Fe2O3-SiO2-Al2O3-MgO slag at 7% MgO, 2% Al2O3 and PO2 of 10-8 atm
(Kongoli 2003:205)127
9
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)
Figure 4.11: Straight tuyeres from (a) Yanik Tepe and (b) Kyul Tepe; scale in cm
(Kushnareva 1997:198). 129
Figure 4.12: Tuyere from Godin Tepe (A1-40) showing (a) interior and (b)
exterior.. 130
Figure 4.13: Molds from Godin Tepe (a) Gd69-218, Period III:1, and (b) Gd71-
120, Period III:6 shown at the same scale. 131
Figure 4.14: Molds from (a) Kyul Tepe, and (b) Geoy Tepe; scale in cm
(Kushnareva 1997:198). 132
Figure 4.15: Cu-Ag equilibrium phase diagram (Murray 1984)...... 138
Figure 4.16: The presence of optimum composition arsenic in Godin Tepe metal
artifacts. 143
Figure 4.17: Tin content according to period and artifact type 147
Figure 4.18: Relationship between secondary dendrite arm spacing (SDAS) and

cooling rate ( T ) for different alloys (after Askeland 1984:160, Grugel 1993) 154
10
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Sixty-nine metal samples with accession numbers and context. 29
Table 2.2: Nine samples of metallurgical processing debris.... 31
Table 2.3: Grinding and polishing routine for opaque sections 32
Table 2.4: Elements and detection conditions for microprobe analysis.. 36
Table 3.1: Microprobe results for Period VI:1 Metals.. 41
Table 3.2: Microprobe results for Period VI:1 Oxides. 42
Table 3.3: Microprobe results for Period IV Metals. 46
Table 3.4: Microprobe results for Period IV Oxides. 48
Table 3.5: Microprobe results for Period III:6 & Period III:5 Metals.. 52
Table 3.6: Microprobe results for Period III:4, III:2 & Post III:2 Metals. 60
Table 3.7: Microprobe results for Period III Oxides. 64
Table 3.8: Microprobe results for Period II Metals... 69
Table 4.1: Melting temperatures for entrapped prills... 126
Table 4.2: Eutectic phase compositions for crucible slag 128
Table 4.3: Electromotive Force Series (Vansek 1984).. 139
Table 4.4: Composition of Ni- and Ag-bearing artifacts (bdl=below detection
limit).. 140
Table 4.5: Metal artifacts with dendritic microstructures (bdl=below detection
limit).. 154
Table 4.6: Calculated cooling rates for Godin Tepe cast artifacts 156
Table 4.7: Typical cooling rates157
11
ABSTRACT
The excavation of Godin Tepe during the 1960s and 1970s uncovered a thriving
trade center along the High Road occupied during the Chalcholithic though Iron Ages.
The site contained over two hundred metal finds ranging from the decorative and
aesthetic to utilitarian and functional. The decorative items, such as pins and jewelry
show a high degree of variability in composition and manufacturing method even for
typologically similar items. This variability in manufacture reflects the variability in
methods of production employed by the craftsmen of the region as a whole. These
craftsmen copied style and form, but not technological manufacturing methods, from
their contemporaries. In contrast, the utilitarian items, such as chisels, show uniform
methods of manufacture, which reflect the craftsmens desire to achieve specific material
properties for these objects. In addition to metal artifacts that were produced elsewhere
and brought to Godin through trade, this site hosted a small scale metallurgical industry
as early as Period VI:1, evidenced by the crucible, furnace and ore fragments found in
these levels.
12
CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION FOR RESEARCH
The present study is concerned with the nature of metal manufacture and use on
the Iranian Plateau during the Bronze and Iron Ages as represented by the artifacts from
Godin Tepe. To appreciate the significance of the local metallurgical technology, a brief
overview of the development of metallurgy in west Asia and the Near East is warranted.
1.1. The Earliest Metallurgy of the Ancient world
1.1.a. Native Copper to Sulfide Ores
Copper is one of only a few metals that occur in metallic form in nature either by
deposition from ground water flowing through rock fissures or through various leaching
processes that selectively remove sulfide ores (Craig and Vaughan 1981). As ancient
craftsmen of the time searched for raw materials to create lithic implements, outcrops of
the ductile, lustrous material would be easily spotted as an exotic and unique material. It
is therefore hardly surprising that this metal first appears in the archaeological record as
roughly worked implements of native copper (Tylecote 1992, Pigott 1999:2). The metal
was valued for its ability to be reshaped repeatedly unlike stone, a material with which
contemporary craftsmen were more familiar. More significant for our purposes,
however, is the transition from the early appearances copper in its native form to its
manufacture from oxide, carbonate, and eventually sulfide ores.

13
The earliest native copper appears at ayn Tepesi during the Neolithic and Ali
Kosh as early as the 9th millennium BCE (Pigott 1999:2, Tylecote 1992; Hole 1962).
(See Figure 1.1) Although these metal finds were not annealed, later examples of native
copper do show evidence of heat treatment (Tylecote 1992). Copper can be annealed at
temperatures as low as 300oC, achievable by means of charcoal fire (Thompson 1958);
the transition from annealing to melting native copper is not hard to image. However,
the transition from using native copper to the production of copper metal by smelting
ores would require more experimentation and creativity on the part of the craftsmen.
Our understanding of this technological transition to smelting technology is
hindered by the lack of direct evidence, but many scholars believe that smelting
technology developed from a familiarity with colorful copper oxide ores (such as green
malachite and brilliant blue azurite) and a well-established ceramic pyrotechnology
(Tylecote 1992). Although most early ceramic kilns did not produce atmospheres that
were sufficiently reducing to convert copper oxides to copper (Craddock 2001),
craftsmen were aware of how to control firing atmospheres and, with slight
modifications, the correct environment could be achieved.
Early smelting took advantage of oxide and carbonate ores that were easily
identified in outcrops and also easily smelted at temperatures well-below the melting
temperature of copper (Thompson 1958). The reaction could follow one of the
following:
Cuprite: Cu2O + CO CO2 + 2Cu (Eq.1.1)

14
Malachite: Cu2CO3(OH)2 + 2CO 3CO2 + H2O + 2Cu (Eq. 1.2)
Smelting first occurred in small crucibles that were charged with crushed ore and a
carbon-rich fuel source. With a reducing atmosphere, the CO combines with the oxygen
of the ore to leave behind copper metal. If the atmosphere is not sufficiently reducing,
or if the ore of interest is associated with other minerals, there can be un-reduced
inclusions left behind in the resulting metal. Also it should be noted that while smelting
can occur as low as 600oC (Thompson 1958), the resulting metal at these temperatures is
dispersed in the crucible slag in the form of small prills of copper (Charles 1979). The
crucible must be crushed to separate the metal, which is remelted to form a useable
product (Tylecote 1992:5).
Later smelting practices involved more complex polymetallic ores, such as
copper sulfide and copper iron sulfide minerals. Smelting sulfide ores requires an
additional step, whereby the sulfur is driven off by the presence of oxygen, usually
referred to as roasting. This can be done in two stages where the ore is heated in an
oxidizing atmosphere and then reheated in a reducing atmosphere. Alternatively, it can
be done in a single step, in which sulfide ores are combined with oxide ores so that the
oxygen from the oxide ores combines directly with the sulfur. The latter method is a
more fuel-efficient process (Doonan 1994:88).
CuFeS2 + 3O2 FeO + CuO + 2SO2 (Eq. 1.3)
CuO + CO CO2 + Cu (Eq. 1.4)

15
5CuO + CuFeS2 FeO + 2SO2 + 6Cu (Eq. 1.5)
In addition to using more complex ores, later copper production saw the use of
furnaces, which further increased fuel efficiency. The processing debris left behind by
this early copper production includes ore, crucibles, slag, furnaces, molds, and tuyeres.
The earliest evidence for slag has been found at atal Hyk in Anatolia (c. 7th
millennium BCE); however, it is unclear whether this represents early smelting of
copper ores. By the 4th millennium BCE, there is strong evidence for a smelting
industry in west Asia demonstrated by the presence of arsenical copper awls and chisels
at Tepe Yahya (c. 3800 BCE) as well as axes excavated in Egypt (Tylecote 1992).
1.1.b. Production of Copper in Iran
By the 5th millennium BCE, there is evidence for large scale production of
copper, and scholars agree that the development of an early extractive metallurgical
technology was closely related to the local geology. Early metallurgical activity is
evident on the Iranian Plateau, an ore-rich metallogenic zone (Pigott 1999:73,
Berthoud 1979; Taghizadeh 1974).
Some of the earliest evidence for copper production has been found at Tal-i Iblis,
located in southern Iran, representing some of the earliest copper production of the
ancient world. The earliest materials at Tal-i Iblis date to the 5th millennium BCE, and
show clear evidence for large-scale production of copper using crucibles (Frame 2004,
Caldwell 1968). The 4th millennium BCE saw a large increase in the number of
16
production centers across Iran including industries at Arisman, Tepe Ghabristan, Tepe
Hissar, and Shar-i Sokhta. Arisman maintained a crucible smelting industry from 3700
to 3000 BCE, switching to the use of furnaces after 3000 BCE (Helwing pers. comm.
2007). Tepe Ghabristan revealed similar evidence of crucibles and molds (Majidzadeh
1979). Though this site has been cited as a 5th millennium BCE (Pigott 1999:77) or even
6th millennium BCE (Thornton et al. 2002) workshop, recent reconsideration places it
closer to early 4th millennium BCE (Helwing 2005:46).
Production at Tepe Hissar during the mid-4th millennium BCE resulted in
hundreds of kilograms of slag scattered across the site (Pigott 1989; 1982; Tosi 1989).
The production at Shar-i Sokhta was longer-lived, lasting into the 3 rd millennium (Pigott
1999:86). The 3rd millennium also saw a rise in production centers at Shahdad and Tepe
Sialk (Pigott 1999:89), though details of the large scale production at Shahdad during
the second half of the third millennium BCE are not well-published (Hakemi 1992). At
Tepe Sialk, production occurred on the South Hill during the 3rd millennium. (These
materials are currently being studied by Marcus Schreiner of the Universitt Tbingen.)
It appears that production at Arisman continued into the 2nd millennium BCE; the
ongoing excavations at this site will hopefully shed further light on the nature of
production there.
The major ore sources for these production centers are believed to be at Anarak,
Veshnoveh, and Taknar (Figure 1.1), each of which shows evidence of ancient mining.
The largest of these mining districts is the Anarak district with primary sources at
17
Talmessi and Meskani in north central Dasht-i Lut (Pigott 1999:78). However, smaller
deposits of copper occur all throughout the plateau region.
1.1.c. The Appearance of Tin
As production technology progressed, arsenical copper became a common alloy
in the ancient world. This production of Cu-As alloys is well documented for Shar-i
Sokhta, among others (Pigott 1999:86). Cu-As alloys were valued for their increased
hardness and improved mechanical properties. This alloy appears as early as the mid-4th
millennium BCE in Palestine and on the Iranian Plateau at Susa, Tepe Yahya and Tal-i
Malyan (Pigott 1999:3). It is unclear whether these artifacts reflect co-smelted copper
and arsenic ores, or if arsenic ores, such as algodonite (Cu5As) and domeykite (Cu3As),
were merely dissolved in molten native copper, forcing much of the As into solution
with the copper (Pigott 1999:78). Certainly by the 3rd millennium BCE arsenical copper
was deliberately chosen for its mechanical properties (Pigott 1999:3).
The more hotly debated question amongst scholars is not when arsenical copper
alloys appeared, but when tin copper alloys appeared. Tin-bronze artifacts are present in
the 4th millennium BCE levels at Mundigak in eastern Iran and at Tal-i Malyan in
southwest Iran by the early 2nd millennium BCE (Pigott 1999:4). In addition, bronze
appears in the artifact assemblage from the Kish cemetery, dating to the Early Dynastic I
(ED I, early 3rd millennium BCE) and is common at Mesopotamian sites (Gawra Tepe,
Ur, and Kish) by ED III, mid-3rd millennium BCE (Stech 1999:64, Nezafati et al. 2006;
Moorey 1982; Mller-Karpe 1991). Despite the regular occurrence of tin in

18
Mesopotamia, it did not appear regularly at Iranian highland sites until the late-3rd
millennium BCE. Given the large scale copper production on the Iranian Plateau and
the heavy flow of metal goods to Mesopotamian lowland sites, it is surprising that the
common appearance of tin occurs so late on the plateau. The reason for this has been
generally attributed to the assumption that tin is coming from Anatolian or Afghani
sources (Pigott 1999:5). As such, tin may have been circumventing the Iranian
highlands altogether and traveling along various sea-based trade routes (Pigott 1999,
Muhly 1999).
The question regarding the transition to tin-bronze becomes more complicated as
new studies identify small tin sources that lie in the metal-rich regions of Iran. One such
site is Deh Hosein, east of Luristan (Nezafati et al. 2006). This relatively small deposit
includes arsenopyrite, native copper, copper sulfide minerals, and cassiterite spread over
27 km2 (Nezafati 2006). The evidence for ancient mining includes hammer stones,
pottery, grinding stones, and the occupation of adjacent settlements. The pottery dates
to the early 1st millennium BCE, but excavated charcoal shows that the mine was also in
use as early as 1775-1522 BCE (Nezafati 2006).
The evidence therefore suggests that production of Cu-Sn alloys could have
occurred on the Iranian Plateau using local sources during the 2nd millennium. Further,
it is likely that other sources of tin have been overlooked in this region, given that the
majority of the geological surveys were focused on the identification of more
economically viable ore deposits, ignoring these smaller deposits. The presence of small
local Cu-Sn deposits supports the hypothesis that tin was first added to copper
19
accidentally. The present work suggests that the co-occurrence of copper and tin in
small, nearby deposits led to low-Sn-Cu alloys and the eventual recognition of the
benefits of bronze; it was not until the full benefits of tin were recognized that higher
tin-bronzes were produced and better tin sources were exploited, despite being located at
greater distances from production centers. The analyses of the Godin Tepe artifacts
support the hypothesis that the transition from Cu-As to Cu-Sn was much more gradual
than previously thought.
1.2. Chronology and Geography of Western Asia
The chronology for this region is quite extensive, so the focus here is on the 4th
through 1st millennia BCE as it pertains to the site of Godin Tepe. As metallurgical
technology was developing in small settlements of highland Iran during the 4th
millennium BCE (the Uruk period), Mesopotamia saw the rise of multiple city-states
(Lamberg-Karlovsky and Sabloff 1995). In the mid-4th millennium BCE Iranian
highlands, there was a period of divergence between valley systems in the Kermanshah
region (near Godin Tepe), with differences in ceramic styles appearing in the Mahidasht
and Kangavar valleys (Levine and Young 1987:21). However this difference dissolved
(ibid. 33) as the Uruk expansion of the late 4th millennium BCE created outposts along
major trade networks in Iran, including Godin Tepe (Lamberg-Karlovsky and Sabloff
1995:142). Interestingly, this development corresponds to the increase of copper
production centers on the Iranian Plateau as discussed above.

20
Figure 1.1: Archaeological sites in Western Asia (adapted from Pigott 1999:75)
This expansion was likely motivated by a desire for raw materials absent in lowland
Mesopotamia (Lamberg-Karlovsky and Sabloff 1995; Oates 2003; Weiss and Young
1975). It should be noted that ores and metals were imported into the lowlands as early
as the Ubaid period (5th millennium BCE), for example at Tepe Gawra (Lamberg-
Karlovsky and Sabloff 1995:111), but this was not a common occurrence until after the
Uruk Expansion (Beale 1973; Kohl 1982). The new Uruk outposts were usually
established at pre-existing towns, where the lack of destruction evidence suggests that
the presence of Mesopotamian merchants was peaceful and mutually beneficial in nature
(Lamberg-Karlovsky and Sabloff 1995:142). Such outposts were created at Godin Tepe
and Susa, among other sites. The widespread ceramic typologies created by the
21
increased trade have allowed archaeologists to develop relative chronologies like those
shown in Figures 1.2 and 1.3.
Figure 1.2: Chronology for early Godin Tepe levels (courtesy Hilary Gopnik)
22
Figure 1.3: Chronology for Godin III (Courtesy Hilary Gopnik)

23
1.3. The Sequence at Godin Tepe
Godin Tepe was excavated in the late 1960s and early 1970s by T. Cuyler
Young, Jr. from the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. It lies in the Iranian highlands
along the major East-West trade route, which is referred to by many names: the High
Road, the Great Khorasan Road, and later, the Silk Road. It is the main route from
Baghdad to the highlands and through northern Iran (Figure 1.4). It passes through the
Zagros Gates and climbs through a series of valleys to the Iranian plateau (Levine and
Young 1987:15, Boardman 1923:8). In addition, two North-South trade routes connect
the High Road to Susa and the southern East-West routes (dotted lines in Figure 1.4).
Figure 1.4: Major trade routes in Iran (adapted from Henrickson 1986).
24
Although Godin Tepe and nearby Seh Gabi reveal an occupation sequence going
back to the 6th millennium BCE, this investigation is interested in Godin Period VI:1 and
later. Godin VI:1 (formerly termed Godin V) marks the appearance of the Uruk
merchants, the construction of a large oval outpost structure at the top of the mound, and
a period of cultural contact with the Mesopotamian lowlands (Weiss and Young
1975:1). Further, this period marks the earliest appearance of metal at Godin. (Earlier
material was excavated at nearby Seh Gabi (Levine 1975), though it is not included in
this study.) During Period VI:1, Godin also had close contact with Susa, another
merchant site to the South. Weiss and Young (1975:14) argue for the local production
of pottery at Godin by Susians during Godin VI:1; however it is impossible to tell if this
is mimicked in the metals due to the hasty abandonment of the mound after Godin VI:1,
for which few items of high value survive in the archaeological record.
During Godin IV, there is evidence for cultural interaction with eastern Luristan,
but not as far as the Mahidasht at the western end of the High Road (Levine and Young
1987:48), and Godin IV pottery was not found in the lowlands (Schacht 1987:177).
By Godin III, the trade and interaction network of the highlands and surrounding
regions was well established, bringing goods from as far as the Indus valley to the East
(Khan 1968), and southern Mesopotamia in the West. This period lasted over one
thousand years with minor gaps between subperiods (Figure 1.3), but the pottery from
this period has been linked typologically to sites across the Iranian Plateau, to the South
and in the lowlands of Mesopotamia (Henrickson 1984, 1986, 1987).

25
After a 500-year hiatus following the end of Godin III, the site was reoccupied
during the Iron Age. Godin II spans 800 to 600 BCE and corresponds to Iron III in
north west Iran and Luristan. This phase at Godin Tepe consists of a large manor
house on top of the occupation mound (Gopnik 2005). The manor included a large
kitchen and multiple storerooms, but no craft areas. It was peacefully abandoned,
leaving no items of value or even the roof beams and wooden columns (Gopnik
2005:253). There are no production remains from this period, though there were a
number of vitrified ceramic sherds from the kitchen (Room 7) and surrounding rooms.
1.4. Purpose of the Present Investigation
Because Godin Tepe is well situated on the High Road, goods from
Mesopotamia to the West, Azerbaijan to the North, Susa to the South, and Tepe Hissar
to the East entered the sites as evidenced in the ceramic assemblages (Henrickson 1986;
Henrickson 1985; Levine and Young 1987). The vast collection of material culture at
Godin Tepe reveals technological and stylistic transitions that occur throughout the
region as a whole. For example, a shift in pottery technology is apparent with the
absence of grog-tempered pottery during Godin III when compared to sherds of Godin
IV, which are characterized by the appearance of grog-tempered pottery similar to that
of Transcaucasian sites farther north (Mason and Cooper 1999).
The metal finds from Godin Tepe are abundant, including over 200 artifacts.
Given the prominent position of Godin along the High Road, the investigation of the
metal artifacts should provide useful insight into the manufacturing methods employed
26
by the craftsmen of the highland region. In addition, the presence of processing debris
at Godin Tepe shows that at least small-scale production occurred at the site. Analysis
of these technical ceramics sheds light on the nature of small-scale production during
this time, providing a useful corollary to our knowledge of the large-scale processing
centers at Tepe Hissar and Arisman.
The present investigation explores the variability in metal artifact technology
from Godin Periods VI:1 (3250-3050 BCE) through II (800-600 BCE) in terms of their
compositions and microstructures, and it also investigates the nature of the metallurgical
debris excavated from Periods VI:1 (3250-3050 BCE), IV (2950-2700 BCE), and III
(2600-1400). The results of this study advance the field of Iranian archaeometallurgy by
providing detailed information regarding the presence and processing of metal in
highland Iran during the Bronze Age and Iron Age. Analysis of seventy out of over two
hundred well-dated, metal artifacts makes this view chronologically-detailed as well as
regionally-broad, allowing interpretation of the variability and temporal trends in
production for north-central Iran.

27
CHAPTER 2: EQUIPMENT AND METHODS USED IN THIS INVESTIGATION
2.1. Artifact Inventory
The Godin Tepe excavation yielded over two hundred metal artifacts including
jewelry, pins, needles, tools, weapons, and some vessels and other less common artifact
types. The majority were kept in Iran at the Iran National Museum in Tehran, but ninety-
three metal artifacts were sent to the Southwest Asian Department of the Royal Ontario
Museum (ROM) in Toronto, Canada for conservation and storage. These artifacts
included seventeen metal items that were collected specifically for scientific analysis and
are therefore designated with a scientific sample number, ss. The scientific samples
do not have ROM or Godin (Gd) accession numbers; instead they are referred to in this
thesis by their operation and lot (OpLot), and when present, scientific sample (ss)
numbers. The metal artifacts from Godin Tepe included in this study are indicated in the
full list of Godin metal artifacts (Appendix A), which also includes the artifact accession
numbers and current storage locations. In addition to the metal artifacts, the scientific
samples included metallurgical processing debris; these are listed in Table 2.2 and are
discussed below.
2.2. Sampling Strategy
Mainly copper-alloy objects were taken for analysis on the basis that the iron
objects from Period II were too heavily corroded and there were too few lead and silver
28
items to be of interest. Of the copper-alloy artifacts, the study focused primarily on tools,
pins, needles, and bracelets. The rings were considerably mineralized, and it was decided
to preserve the vessels on aesthetic grounds. The sixty-nine metal objects indicated in
Appendix A were examined and sampled during two separate visits to the Royal Ontario
Museum (ROM) in June 2006 and December 2006. The objects with ROM accession
numbers were sampled in Toronto using a jewelers saw, and the samples were
subsequently brought to Tucson, AZ for compositional and microstructural analysis.
However, the samples designated as scientific samples were shipped as whole objects
to be sampled in Tucson using a jewelers saw or Buehler Isomet saw with an abrasive
diamond blade. All available contextual information for these artifacts is given in Table
2.1.
The nine metallurgical debris samples listed in Table 2.2, include crucible,
furnace, tuyere, and ore fragments, and they were shipped as whole samples from
Toronto to Tucson, AZ. All samples listed in Table 2.2 were sectioned using a ceramic
tile circular saw with an abrasive diamond blade. Appendix B contains images of all
sampled metal artifacts as well as the ceramic and ore samples with sample location and
mounted orientation indicated.

29
Table 2.1: Sixty-nine metal samples with accession numbers and context
Godin No. Period ROM No. Object Material Op. Tomb Burial Square Lot Stratum Area
Gd 73-312 VI:1 973.456.115 Object Copper-alloy B1 521
Gd 73-379 VI:1 973.456.140 Chisel Copper-alloy A1 1161
Gd 73-86 IV 973.456.43 Pin Copper-alloy B1 530
Gd 73-103 IV 973.456.51 Pin Copper-alloy A1 1084 512
Gd 71-261 IV 971.486.14 Blade Copper-alloy A01 nil
ssX25 IV Nugget Copper-alloy B2 351
Gd 67-113 III:6 967.326.45 Pin Copper-alloy M 1
Gd 67-126 III:6 967.326.47 Pin Copper-alloy M 2
Gd 71-73 III:6 971.486.44 Pin Copper-alloy A2 286
Gd 71-159 III:6 971.486.78 Pin Copper-alloy C2 87
Gd 73-68 III:6 973.456.36 Pin Copper-alloy A2 1037 60
Gd 71-50 III:6 971.486.39 Needle Copper-alloy B2 177
Gd 71-188 III:6 971.486.89 Needle Copper-alloy B2 237
Gd 71-276 III:6 971.486.116 Needle Copper-alloy B1 269 24
Gd 73-82 III:6 973.456.42 Needle Copper-alloy A2 1066 60
Gd 73-109 III:6 973.456.54 Needle Copper-alloy A2 1066 60
Gd 71-49 III:6 971.486.38 Wire Copper-alloy B1 161 15
Gd 67-102 III:6 967.326.18 Bracelet Copper-alloy M loose fill 1
Gd 67-103 III:6 967.326.41 Bracelet Copper-alloy M 1
Gd 67-104 III:6 967.326.42 Bracelet Copper-alloy M loose fill 1
Gd 67-117 III:6 967.326.46 Bracelet Copper-alloy M 1
Gd 71-19 III:6 971.486.28 Chisel Copper-alloy B2 157
Gd 71-246 III:6 971.486.108 Chisel Copper-alloy A1 347
Gd 71-318 III:6 971.486.131 Awl or chisel Copper-alloy A2 314
Nugget, fibula
ss25 III:6 Copper-alloy A1 347
pin coil?
ss26 III:6 Nugget Copper-alloy A1 351
ss9 III:5 Pin Copper-alloy A1 188
Gd 71-207 III:5 971.486.94 Needle Copper-alloy A1 240
29
30
Table 2.1: Sixty-nine metal samples with accession numbers and context (continued)
Gd 69-558 III:4 969.370.104 Pin Copper-alloy B2 113
Gd 69-693 III:4 969.370.124 Pin Copper-alloy A2 179
Gd 71-141 III:4 971.486.68 Pin Copper-alloy C2 84 8
ss2 III:4 Nugget Copper-alloy A1 69
III:4 Nugget Copper-alloy B1 38 8
Gd 67-207 III:2 967.326.68 Pin Copper-alloy O 10
Gd 67-215 III:2 967.326.71 Pin Copper-alloy O 1 B
Gd 67-219 III:2 967.326.16 Pin Copper-alloy O 1 B
III:2 Pin Copper-alloy M'B#5 4
ss1 III:2 Wire Copper-alloy AA2 154 u 13
Gd 67-224 III:2 967.326.14 Anklet Copper-alloy O 1 B
Gd 67-231 III:2 967.326.77 Bracelet Copper-alloy O 1 B
Gd 69-694 III:2 969.370.125 Chisel Copper-alloy A2 165 u
ss10 III:2 Chisel Copper-alloy C2 112
Gd 67-196 III:2 967.326.64 Armourplate Copper-alloy O 3
Gd 67-201 III:2 967.326.65 Arrowhead Copper-alloy O 8
Gd 67-202 III:2 967.326.66 Dagger Copper-alloy O 8
Gd 67-237 III:2 967.326.82 Blade Copper-alloy O 1 A
ss5 III:2 Blade Copper-alloy AA2 176 12 16
Gd 67-453 Post III:2 967.326.9 Bracelet Copper-alloy 2 AA2 6
Arrow/spear
Gd 67-450 Post III:2 967.326.11 Copper-alloy 2 AA2 6
head
Arrow/spear
Gd 67-452 Post III:2 967.326.10 Copper-alloy 2 AA2 6
head
Gd 67-455 Post III:2 967.326.15 Spearhead Copper-alloy 2 AA2 6
Gd 65-33 III ? 965.275.11 Chisel Copper-alloy A Surface
Gd 71-153 III ? 971.486.73 Needle Copper-alloy C1 111
Gd 73-73 III ? 973.456.37 Arrowhead Copper-alloy Surface
III Wire Silver A2 5
30
31
Table 2.1: Sixty-nine metal samples with accession numbers and context (continued)
ss1 III Chisel Copper-alloy B2
ssX18 III Wire Lead B2
Gd 69-216 II 969.370.52 Pin Copper-alloy BB2 2 3
Gd 69-461 II 969.370.93 Pin Copper-alloy B3 15 4 3
Gd 71-344 II 971.486.142 Pin Copper-alloy NW 2 2
Gd 73-419 II 973.456.151 Pin Copper-alloy 1 1
Gd 71-343 II 971.486.141 Pin Copper-alloy NW 2 2
? Wire Lead B1 10 or 11
Gd 69-215 II 969.370.51 Bracelet Copper-alloy CC1 4 3
Gd 67-65 II 967.326.35 Chisel Iron
Gd 69-729 II Arrowhead Copper-alloy BB3 26 3b 4
II "tang of point" Copper-alloy EE01 1 1
ss521 II Nugget Iron A3 313 52 54
Nugget and
II Copper-alloy CC2 3
pin
31
32
Table 2.2: Nine samples of metallurgical processing debris

Per. Square Lot SS Area Strat. Material Description XRD
VI A01 34 ss29 Ore X
VI B1 510 ss28 Ceramic Crucible fragment
VI:1 A01 50 ss40 Ceramic Furnace fragment X
IV A1 1109 ss511 Ceramic Crucible fragments
IV A1 1123 ss521 Ceramic Crucible fragments
IV A1 1123 ss521 Ore X
IV A2 1184 ss63 70 Ceramic Crucible fragment
III:4 AA2 193 ss9 Ceramic Crucible fragment X
III:2 A1 40 8 6 Ceramic Tuyere fragment X
2.3. Methods of Analysis
2.3.a. Preparation of Samples
Compositional and microstructural analyses were performed on all samples listed
in Tables 2.1 and 2.2. All samples taken for analysis were mounted in Buehler Epo
Thin epoxy under low-vacuum conditions to achieve good epoxy-to-sample bonding in
corroded and porous samples. These were ground and polished on a Buehler 2-speed
polishing wheel to 1m according to the preparation method outlined in Table 2.3 and
Figure 2.1. In orientation A, the sample is held in a single position on the polishing
wheel with the abrasive motion indicated by arrows. For orientation B, the sample is
held in a single position turned 90o from orientation A so that new scratches occur
perpendicular to the scratches created in orientation A. In orientation C, the sample is
rotated around the polishing wheel in the opposite direction of wheel movement.
33
Table 2.3: Grinding and polishing routine for opaque sections

Grinding or polishing medium Technique Goal
400grit carbide paper By hand, orientation A Removal of epoxy from
sample surface
600grit carbide paper By hand, orientation B Remove 400grit scratches
800grit carbide paper By hand, orientation A Remove 600grit scratches
9m diamond suspension on By hand, orientation C Remove 800 grit scratches
Texpan cloth (Pace
Technologies)
3m diamond suspension on By hand, orientation C Remove 9m scratches
Texpan cloth (Pace
Technologies)
1m diamond suspension on By hand, orientation C Remove 3m scratches
Microcloth (Buehler)
Sample
A B Wheel rotation
C direction
Figure 2.1: Grinding and polishing orientations of mounted samples.
The samples were coated with 200-250 of carbon for SEM and electron
microprobe analysis (see below for details of these analytical techniques). After these
analyses, the samples were re-polished at 1m followed by sub-micron final polishing
using colloidal silica on a Buehler Vibramet I and etched to reveal microsegregation,
grain boundaries, and other features of the microstructures of the samples. The copper-
base alloy samples were etched using a ferric chloride solution (10gFeCl3, 30mL HCl,
195mL H2O). The etch times varied depending on alloy composition and degree of
34
corrosion in the sample but ranged from 10-45 seconds. The microstructures were
examined using a Nikon Eclipse microscope equipped with a MicroFireTM CCD camera
and Picture Frame image capture software.
In addition, five samples (indicated on Table 2.2) were also taken for powder X-
ray diffraction (XRD) analysis. These samples include three ceramic samples and two
ore fragments. The tuyere (A1-40, Period III:2) and the furnace fragment (A01-50ss40,
Period VI:1) were sampled from unvitrified regions using a jewelers saw. They were
then powdered in a Diamonite high density powdered synthetic sapphire mortar and
pestle. The crucible (AA2-193ss9, Period III:4) was sampled from the vitrified, slag
region by the same method. The two ore samples (A1-1123ss521-ore, Period IV and
A01-34ss29, Period VI:1) were crushed and powdered with the Diamonite mortar and
pestle. These samples were analyzed using the Scintag XDS 2000 PTS
Diffractometerhoused at the Arizona Materials Laboratory (AML). The diffraction
peaks were recorded for incident angles of < 70o.
2.3.b. Electron Microprobe Analysis
The microprobe analyses were carried out on the Cameca Sx50 SEM-equipped
Electron Microprobe maintained by Kenneth Domanik in the Lunar and Planetary
Laboratory of the Department of Planetary Sciences at The University of Arizona (Figure
2.2). Energy dispersive (ED) and quantitative wavelength dispersive (WD)
spectrographic measurements were taken to determine composition of the metal and slag
samples. WDS measurements included the elements identified in Table 2.4. All
35
measurements were automatically corrected for background x-rays, and the instrument
was calibrated on the morning of each measurement session using the standards indicated
in Table 2.4. Table 2.4 also identifies the corresponding diffraction crystals used to
detect each of these elements and typical detection limits for the elements of interest.
Figure 2.2: Schematic cross-section for the Cameca Sx50 Electron Microprobe (Domanik
2001)
36
Table 2.4: Elements and detection conditions for microprobe analysis

Elements for metal analysis Diffraction Detection
Peak Standard
(25keV) Crystal Limit (wt%)
P K TAP-2 InP 0.018
S K PET Chalcopyrite 0.024
Pb M PET Galena 0.077
Sb L PET Stibnite 0.043
Sn L PET Sn 0.034
Ag L PET Ag 0.044
Cu K LIF Chalcopyrite 0.048
Fe K LIF Fe 0.023
As K LIF As 0.559
Zn K LIF Zn 0.048
Ni K LIF Ni 0.029
Elements for silicate
analysis (15keV)
Na K TAP-1 Albite 0.037
Si K TAP-1 Diopside 0.029
Mg K TAP-2 Diopside 0.019
Al K TAP-2 Anorthite 0.018
Ca K PET Diopside 0.020
Mn K PET Rhodonite 0.043
K K PET K-Feldspar 0.019
Fe K LIF Fayalite 0.080
Cu K LIF Chalcopyrite 0.107
The analyses were conducted at 20.0nA and 25keV and 15keV for the metals and
silicates, respectively. A 1m beam spot size was used to maintain resolution and
precision in areas of high heterogeneity. For all bulk analysis of metals and silicate
phases, multiple measurements were averaged and both n and the standard deviation
for these measurements are indicated in the results section (Chapter 3).
Electron microprobe analysis employs the use of an incident electron beam and
the detection of secondary characteristic x-rays. These characteristic x-rays are produced
when incident electrons cause inner-shell electrons to be ejected from the atom. As the
outer-shell electrons relax to fill the electron vacancies, x-ray photons are emitted with
37
energy that is characteristic to the particular atom. These x-rays can be reabsorbed to
emit Auger electrons, or emitted from the atom entirely. Because higher atomic number
atoms have a higher proportion of emitted x-rays compared to the reabsorbed x-rays,
these are the more easily detected elements with this method of analysis (Domanik
2001:11). The characteristic x-rays are detected using strategically positioned diffraction
crystals taking advantage of Braggs Law:
n 2d sin (Eq. 2.1)
where n is an integer, is the wavelength of the x-rays, d is the crystallographic spacing
between planes of atoms, and is the incident angle of the x-rays. This allows only the
x-rays of interest to be detected. can be changed by changing the position of the
diffraction crystals. Therefore, x-rays with different energies, which are characteristic of
different elements, can be detected. The diffraction crystals used for these analyses are
listed in Table 2.4. There were two thallium acid phthalate (TAP) crystals, a
pentaerythritol (PET) crystal, and a lithium fluoride (LIF) crystal.
In general, the intensity of the characteristic x-ray beam is proportional to the
concentration of the element in the sample (Domanik 2001:26). Therefore the x-ray
intensity can be compared to a standard to quantify the concentration of an element in the
sample:
38
Cunk I unk
(Eq. 2.2)
Cstd I std
where C is the concentration of an element in atomic percent, I is the background
corrected intensity of x-rays, and unk and std stand for unknown and standard,
respectively. However, this simple relationship does not take into account the scattering
and attenuation of the electron beam, or the x-ray absorption and secondary fluorescence
that take place as the emitted x-rays interact with the sample volume. Therefore, these
values must also be corrected. For the analyses reported here, the PAP matrix correction
method is employed to correct for ZAF (atomic number, absorption and secondary
fluorescence) effects. This method is based on experimental data and allows for more
accurate corrections for geologic materials and light elements when compared to the
traditional ZAF correction scheme (Domanik 2001:28).
For the analysis of silicate phases, oxygen could not be detected (due to its low
atomic number), so it was calculated by the Cameca software to achieve stoichiometric
balance for each element. However, this calculation holds the assumption that elements
with multiple oxidation states are only present in their lowest oxidation state. For
example, all iron was calculated as FeO rather than Fe2O3. It is impossible to determine
the oxidation state of the elements using this method of analysis, but this is only a minor
concern for the interpretation of the results as reported in this thesis.

39
CHAPTER 3: ANALYTICAL RESULTS
The results of the analyses described in Chapter 2 are reported below by period
beginning with the earliest materials. These data are reported in wt%, and generally
reflect an average of multiple measurements (n is indicated for each analysis).
Although Chapter 2 reported typical detection limits for each element, the actual
detection limit varied with each measurement. Therefore bdl (below detection limit)
reported in the tables here, corresponds to the measurement-specific detection limit, and
not the averages reported previously. Further, the standard deviation for the averaged
measurements of the bulk metal for each artifact is reported as X for each element
where appropriate. All compositions other than the bulk metal phase are reported in
shaded rows in the tables. In addition to the data presented here, Appendix B contains
photographs of all samples as well as sample orientations. Discussion of these results
occurs in Chapter 4.
3.1. Period VI:1 (3300-3050 BCE)
The two metal artifacts analyzed from this period include a possible figurine
fragment (Gd73-312) and a chisel (Gd73-379). The samples of manufacturing debris
include a fragment of a technical ceramic (B1-510 ss28, p.171), a furnace fragment (A01-
50ss40, p.171), and ore fragments (A01-34 ss29). The composition of the metals and the
40
prills within the crucible and furnace fragments are shown in Table 3.1. The oxide
composition of the technical ceramic, furnace, and the ore are shown in Table 3.2.
The chisel is completely mineralized with only an outline of the original structure
and silver-rich regions in the corrosion products remaining. Many of the artifacts in this
study contain these silver-rich phases. As will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4
(on p.137), this is due to the galvanic corrosion of silver and copper. These high-silver
regions are not representative of the original alloy composition, and should be seen here
as secondary (post burial) features of the microstructure. They are indicated in the
analyses as metal in corrosion product.
The object (Gd73-312) proved to be a copper-arsenic alloy with As-S-Sb
inclusions. This artifact has an as-cast structure showing microsegregation within the
dendrites (Figure 3.1). The compositions with low totals in Tables 3.1 and 3.2 are the
poorly preserved artifacts that exhibit a higher degree of corrosion. Therefore, with such
low totals, there is less confidence for the accuracy of these measurements.
The crucible and furnace fragments contain many prills of high-purity copper.
However, the sulfur-rich inclusions within the prills indicate that these crucibles were
employed for smelting ore rather than melting native copper. Such high concentrations
of sulfur (ranging from 5.09 to 20.19wt%S) would be impossible to achieve from melting
native copper (Coghlan 1962, 1951; Patterson 1971; Tylecote 1980, 1992), which can be
Due to the large number of figures for this chapter, they have all been placed after the text on page 73.
41
Table 3.1: Microprobe results for Period VI:1 Metals

Godin No. Object Notes n P S Pb Sb Sn Ag Cu Fe As Zn Ni Total
Metal in the
bdl 0.04 bdl bdl bdl 88.99 10.38 bdl bdl bdl 0.11 99.51
Gd73-379 Chisel corrosion product 3
0.04 0.10 97.40 0.09 1.92 0.83
bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.38
Gd73-312 Object Metal 9 0.02 0.05 1.53 0.05 1.15 0.13
bright inclusions
0.03 5.68 bdl 1.35 bdl 0.28 80.48 0.03 12.66 bdl 1.56 102.08
(high z) 4
dark inclusion
bdl 5.03 0.15 0.62 bdl 0.11 81.62 0.09 8.89 bdl 0.68 97.18
(low z) 3
Furnace
bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 85.48 bdl bdl bdl bdl 85.48*
A01-50ss40 fragment Prill 1 1
bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 87.30 0.24 bdl bdl bdl 87.54*
Prill 2 1
bdl 20.19 bdl bdl bdl bdl 80.06 bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.25
Near Prill 1 1
Technical
bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.92 0.09 bdl bdl bdl 100.01
B1-510ss28 Ceramic Prill 1 3
Prill 2 2
bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 0.13 98.85 0.05 0.88 bdl bdl 99.90
bright inclusions 2
bdl 9.12 bdl bdl bdl bdl 93.21 0.42 bdl bdl 0.03 102.78
dark inclusion 1
15.51 bdl 0.19 bdl bdl bdl 1.46 7.39 bdl bdl bdl 24.54**
A01-34ss29 ore Phase 1 1
7.03 0.03 bdl bdl bdl bdl 6.25 23.16 bdl 0.09 0.07 36.62**
Phase 2 2
bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 51.88 0.11 bdl 0.09 bdl 52.08**
Phase 3 1
n=number of data points for each reported value
bdl=below detection limit
*These low totals are most likely due to the presence of undetected oxygen and salts.
**In addition to missing O, this sample also contains a high amount of Si, resulting in the low totals.
41
42
Table 3.2: Microprobe results for Period VI:1 Oxides

Godin No. Object Notes n Na2O K2O SiO2 MgO Al2O3 CaO MnO FeO CuO Total
Furnace
0.55 1.35 35.84 6.56 9.55 35.97 0.21 5.01 0.67 95.72
A01-50ss40 fragment Glassy Matrix 2
bdl 0.12 14.69 1.52 4.85 37.51 0.15 1.53 7.89 68.26
Dark ovoid 1
Technical
1.05 2.14 54.43 6.31 12.47 15.25 0.13 6.66 0.18 98.62
B1-510ss28 Ceramic Glassy Matrix 4
Dark phase in
0.17 0.12 50.25 13.98 4.87 21.38 0.16 8.22 0.17 99.32
matrix 1
Light phase in
1.09 1.18 50.55 6.47 18.38 17.34 0.09 4.18 0.19 99.47
matrix 1
bdl bdl 99.63 bdl bdl bdl bdl 0.31 0.50 100.44
A01-34ss29 ore Phase 1 1
0.07 0.17 3.97 0.08 0.05 1.16 bdl 62.02 7.64 75.15*
Phase 2 1
bdl bdl 0.14 bdl bdl bdl bdl 38.76 43.30 82.20
Phase 3 1
bdl 0.04 3.13 0.06 1.03 0.33 bdl 68.65 3.96 77.21
Phase 4 1
*The low total for this analysis is probably from S, which appeared as a major peak in the EDS spectrum.
42
43
as high as 99.9% pure (Patterson 1971:301). In contrast, small amounts of polymetallic
minerals mixed with the pure carbonate and oxide ores of tenorite-CuO, cuprite-Cu2O,
malachite-Cu2(CO3)(OH)2, and azurite-Cu3(CO3)2(OH)2 also would yield high-purity
copper with sulfide inclusions (Patterson 1971:306).
The technical ceramic (B1-510ss28) and furnace fragment (A01-50ss40) of
Period VI:1 contain thin layers of slag on their interior surfaces. These slag regions were
analyzed using microprobe analysis and revealed calcium-alumino-silicates phases with
varying amounts of MgO and FeO (5-7wt%) and 0.6 to 2.1wt% of Na2O and K2O. They
show a SiO2:Al2O3 ratio of about 4.2; thus the ceramic composition is neither highly
refractory nor highly fluxed. The microstructure of the technical ceramic (Figure 3.2)
shows small angular crystals in a glassy phase. The low iron content is typical of a
melting slag rather than a smelting slag, but the distinction here is difficult based on
these analyses.
The ore, A01-34ss29, was found in the same square as the furnace fragment, but
this specimen did not show signs of being heated. It was probably a less desirable,
discarded fragment due to the high amount of gangue associated with the copper
minerals; regardless, it reflects the type of ore obtained by craftsmen for the copper
production taking place in this locus. It was powdered for XRD. The XRD spectrum
(Figure 3.3) reveals that this ore consists of cuprite, wstite, goethite, and delafossite, as
well as gangue material such as quartz, wollastonite, and potassium carbonate, which is
consistent with the probe composition of copper-iron oxides and silicate phases. The
provenance of the ore will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.

44
3.2. Period IV (2950-2700 BCE)
The microprobe results for three metal finds and four metal processing samples
from this period are shown in Tables 3.3 and 3.4. A blade (Gd71-261) and a pin (Gd73-
86) were found to be of similar composition (copper-arsenic alloys) with sulfide
inclusions. However, in contrast to the other two artifacts, the lump from processing
(B2-351ssX25) contained a high amount of Fe and Ni. This is an indication that this
nugget was produced during a separate casting event than the other two objects and
perhaps even in a different workshop (see below, Chapter 4) The microstructures of the
metal objects revealed that the blade (Gd71-261, Figure 3.4) and pin (Gd73-86) have
remnant cast structures and show signs of cold-working. The lump of processing metal is
almost entirely mineralized, but small areas of metal were analyzed (Table 3.3), and the
original structure contains a well-preserved coarse dendrite structure (Figure 3.5).
The processing material from this period included multiple crucible fragments
(A1-1123ss521) containing a thin layer of slag at the rim and interior surface and
accompanying ore fragments (A1-1123ss521-ore). These fragments are depicted in
Appendix B (p.175). In addition, there were two other samples of technical ceramics
(A1-1109ss511, p.178 and A2-1184ss63, p.177). The microstructures of A1-1123ss521
(Figure 3.6) and A1-1109ss511 (Figure 3.7) are typical of smelting slag, as shown by the
presence of skeletal magnetite (white snow-flake crystals indicated by arrows) and
partially decomposed ore (Figure 3.7). However, A2-1184ss63 is a melting slag (Figure
3.8). This is determined by the presence of delafossite (CuFeO2) needles and cuprite
(Cu2O) in the slag. The cuprite can be seen in cross-polarized light in Figure 3.8b as the
45
orange region. These features are typical of high oxygen partial pressure (PO2) during
the production event, and while such high O2 would not be conducive to smelting copper,
it would be acceptable for melting copper. The compositions of the glassy phase in these
slags indicate a switch in the raw material from calcareous clay to a higher alumina and
iron oxide composition (Table 3.4). The prills entrapped in the slag are not especially
pure, containing as much as 25wt%Fe, 26wt%As, and 3.5wt%Sb along with variable
amounts of S. Crucible fragment A1-1109ss511 is particularly interesting due to its high
Ni, As, and Sb concentrations. The largest prill entrapped in this slag has a cast structure
with a copper-rich primary phase and an arsenic-antimony-rich secondary phase (Figure
3.9). Such a high As content does not appear in any artifacts, but it is possible (and
reasonably likely) that this prill represents a primary smelt from a polymetallic ore, like
the fragments found with many of the crucible fragments in locus A1-1123. The ore
sample (A1-1123ss521-ore) was powdered and examined by XRD. It is composed of
chalcopyrite, a copper carbonate, and quartz gangue, as shown in the XRD spectra
(Figure 3.10).
3.3. Period III (2600-1400 BCE)
Period III is the longest period for Godin Tepe covering over one thousand years.
Fortunately it has been divided into subperiods based on the architecture and pottery
sequences (see Chapter 1 for discussion of Godin Tepe and regional chronology). The
46
Table 3.3: Microprobe results for Period IV Metals

0.06 0.17 0.06 0.05 96.43 0.53 2.51 0.15
bdl bdl bdl 99.96
Gd71-261 Blade Metal 16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.06 0.45 0.02
0.02 3.88 15.85 bdl bdl bdl 78.68 2.17 2.55 bdl 0.15 103.29
Bright inclusion 5
bdl 10.86 2.31 0.05 bdl bdl 71.22 9.01 1.90 bdl 0.08 95.41
Dark inclusion 8
0.04 0.10 0.09 97.67 1.81 0.18
bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.89
Gd73-86 Pin Metal 8 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.59 0.48 0.02
bdl 0.46 bdl 0.09 bdl 0.08 97.53 bdl 1.67 bdl 0.19 100.02
Bright inclusion 4
bdl 9.61 42.46 0.14 bdl bdl 1.55 bdl bdl bdl Bdl 53.76*
Dark inclusion 1
bdl bdl 0.12 bdl bdl bdl 3.49 61.62 bdl bdl 8.86 74.09*
B2-351ssX25 Nugget Metal 1
bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 0.06 82.67 1.63 bdl bdl 0.19 84.54*
Metal (phase2) 2
bdl 0.29 0.25 0.08 bdl 63.72 18.24 1.78 1.03 bdl 0.22 85.61*
Metal in corrosion 1
Smelting 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.02 93.82 3.88 0.19 0.04
bdl bdl bdl 98.70
A1-1123ss521 crucible 1 Prill 1 4 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.02 1.65 0.36 0.19 0.01
Prill 1
0.08 0.10 bdl bdl bdl bdl 63.06 7.66 bdl bdl bdl 70.90*
grain boundary 1
bdl 20.13 bdl bdl bdl bdl 76.25 3.33 0.76 bdl bdl 100.47
Prill 2 2
Smelting
A1-1123ss521 crucible 2 Prill 1 3
Prill 2 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 87.61 0.09 bdl bdl bdl 87.70*
Bright inclusion
in Prill 1 1 0.09 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 37.45 12.22 bdl bdl bdl 49.76*
Metal in corrosion
product 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 90.24 2.40 bdl bdl bdl bdl 92.64
Standard deviations are not reported for most measurements here due to the low number of analyses for each phase.
46
47
Table 3.3: Microprobe results for Period IV Metals (continued)

Smelting
A1-1123ss521 crucible 3 Prill 3 bdl 1.37 bdl bdl bdl 0.09 89.77 7.43 1.65 bdl bdl 100.30
Smelting
A1-1109ss511 crucible Prill 1 1 bdl bdl bdl 0.69 bdl bdl 89.33 1.18 6.85 bdl 1.44 99.49
Prill 1
Bright Inclusion 1 bdl 1.18 20.55 3.56 bdl 0.90 50.36 1.44 15.50 bdl 6.37 99.86
Prill 2 1 bdl bdl bdl 0.31 bdl 0.07 91.14 0.09 6.00 bdl 1.57 99.18
Prill 3
Primary phase 1 bdl bdl bdl 0.13 bdl 0.07 93.62 bdl 4.82 bdl 0.66 99.30
Prill 3 -
Secondary phase 1 bdl 0.14 bdl 2.06 bdl bdl 70.17 bdl 26.65 bdl 0.11 99.13
Prill 3
Bright Inclusion 1 bdl bdl 38.40 1.44 bdl 17.47 34.55 bdl 9.01 bdl 5.70 106.57
Melting
A2-1184ss63 crucible Prill 1 1 0.05 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 25.26 bdl 0.11 0.13 25.54**
Prill 2 1 0.47 0.07 0.18 bdl bdl bdl 43.12 0.52 3.19 bdl bdl 47.56***
**In addition to missing O, EDS showed that this prill also contains Si, resulting in this low total.
**EDS showed Cl in this prill
47
48
Table 3.4: Microprobe results for Period IV Oxides

Godin No. Object Notes n Na2O K2O SiO2 MgO Al2O3 CaO MnO FeO CuO Total
Smelting
6 0.38 2.10 46.33 0.88 11.47 12.21 0.15 20.98 0.23 94.73
A1-1123ss521 crucible 1 Glassy Matrix
Low Z (dark)
5 0.42 2.26 47.10 0.44 12.66 11.08 0.09 18.52 0.28 92.86
crystals
7 0.09 0.35 2.67 0.80 5.17 0.53 0.07 79.42 0.22 89.32
Magnetite crystals
Smelting
2 0.13 0.55 43.09 3.63 8.31 10.71 0.20 31.27 0.22 98.09
crucible 2 Glassy Matrix
2 0.24 1.03 44.84 2.12 9.54 11.20 0.16 25.86 0.73 95.71
Second glass phase
Smelting
3 0.26 1.04 53.04 2.93 10.17 9.96 0.23 18.67 0.40 96.69
crucible 3 Glassy Matrix
2 0.28 0.88 54.34 4.50 9.96 10.85 0.25 18.38 0.21 99.63
Second glass phase
3 0.23 0.96 48.88 2.99 8.49 7.99 0.20 28.59 0.27 98.61
Dendrites (Bright)
High Z (bright)
2 0.12 0.26 7.65 0.83 3.69 0.56 0.10 81.00 bdl 94.19
crystals
Smelting
2 0.76 2.01 39.08 2.55 12.37 14.77 0.11 14.93 0.36 86.96
A1-1109ss511 crucible Glassy Matrix
2 0.87 9.40 46.37 3.71 12.89 7.24 0.06 6.62 0.26 87.41
Second glass phase
1 0.06 0.29 27.45 bdl 0.01 1.46 0.30 54.82 bdl 84.38
High Z crystals
Melting
4 0.77 2.11 49.74 6.15 14.83 13.53 0.11 8.81 bdl 96.06
A2-1184ss63 crucible Glassy Matrix
2 1.57 2.67 48.70 1.04 24.25 12.17 0.07 2.43 1.34 94.24
Second glass phase
3 1.10 1.77 27.20 0.22 11.11 5.50 0.05 1.26 54.14 102.35
High Z crystals
1 1.34 2.14 30.91 2.53 11.04 5.59 0.24 33.07 bdl 86.87
High Z crystals
48
49
results from microprobe analyses reveal that tin makes its first appearance at Godin Tepe
in a pin from Period III:6 (2600-2400 BCE); however, its presence is restricted to burial
contexts until Period III:4 (2100-1900 BCE). All items from burial contexts are indicated
with asterisks before the Gd accession number in Table 3.5, and it can be seen that the
artifacts found in earlier Period III non-burial contexts contain only trace amounts of tin
(<0.07wt%Sn), if any. During Period III:4 and later, tin is present in 16 out of 23
artifacts, and the social and mechanical implications for this tin content is discussed
below in Chapter 4. The majority of the metal objects are presented here by subperiod.
However, there are six Period III objects with unspecified or imprecise contexts. These
are described first.
Two of these objects are Cu-As-Sn alloy chisels (Gd65-33, B2ss1) with very
similar microstructures. Figures 3.11 and 3.12 show the large aspect ratios for the copper
sulfide inclusions, as well as the heavy cold-working for each of these chisels. In
addition, as with the Period VI:1 and Period IV metals, many of the Period III metal
artifacts also include silver-rich regions. As discussed previously, these regions result
from post burial galvanic corrosion of the copper metal and are not indicative of the
original alloy composition.
An unstratified needle (Gd71-153) contains 2wt%As and has a fine-grained
structure (Figure 3.13a), similar to some of the needles and pins reported below. Two
non-copper base wires are unstratified from Period III (A2-5, Ag and B2ssX18, Pb), and
both show large grains and annealing twins (Figures 3.13b and 3.13c). The final
unstratified artifact (Gd73-73) is a surface find and is a small arrowhead consisting of

50
dirty copper with copper-iron sulfide and copper-lead inclusions. The microstructure
(Figure 3.14) indicates heavy working from the high aspect ratio (5:1) of the sulfide
inclusions, but the annealing twins indicate that this artifact was annealed after or during
this processing. The variability in grain size is characteristic of incomplete or lower
temperature annealing. Typically, annealing at higher temperatures and for longer
periods of time will result in a higher number of coarse, equiaxed grains. Low
temperature annealing allows recovery from the high energy defects induced during cold-
working, while at higher temperatures recrystallization and grain-growth can occur
(Sinha 2003:5.3).
In this study, needles, undecorated pins, and wires have been grouped together.
The main reason for this is that some of the pins and needles are incomplete, and a needle
with a missing eye could easily be categorized as a pin. Similarly, many artifacts labeled
as pins are curved and quite thin, and they are indistinguishable from some artifacts
labeled as wires. Second, not all pins are decorated and therefore even within the pin
category alone, there is considerable variation in morphology. Finally, the variability in
composition and microstructure does not differentiate any of the pin, needle, wire
designations assigned in the field. Regardless, these designations are included here for
the benefit of future researchers wishing to explore object classification.
3.3.a. Period III:6 (2600-2400 BCE)
The subperiod III:6 contained the majority of the Period III artifacts (22 out of
54), and includes three chisels, thirteen wire/pin/needle samples, four bracelets, and two
51
unidentifiable lumps of copper-base metal. The compositions for these are reported in
Table 3.5. Three bracelets (Gd67-117, Gd67-102, Gd67-104) and one of the pins (Gd67-
126) are the only samples to contain Sn (1.3 4.3wt%) and all are from burial contexts.
The chisels (Gd71-19, Gd71-246, Gd71-318) are Cu-As alloys (1 2wt%As) and all
exhibit signs of heavy working (Figure 3.15), although only Gd71-19 and Gd71-246
show the same banded structure as the previous chisels. Gd71-318 has many slip lines,
but it was mounted in a different orientation and was actually identified by the excavators
as an Awl or Chisel, which may account for these differences in microstructure from
the other chisels. The chisel, Gd71-247, also shows signs of annealing evidenced by a
few annealing twins and the more rounded grains. Although, less than 2wt%As is not
enough to significantly harden copper through solid-solution strengthening (Eaton and
McKerrel 1976:169), the processing to which these chisels were subjected (i.e., cold-
working) significantly improved the hardness of the metal.
Eleven of the needles, pins, and wire are also Cu-As alloys (1.3 3wt%As) with
Pb and sulfide inclusions. The pin with 4.3wt%Sn (Gd67-126) was mentioned previously
(Figure 3.17), and the twelfth pin (Gd67-113) is pure copper and is similar in style and
microstructure to a 8wt%Sn pin from Period III:2 (Gd67-207) as shown in Figure 3.16.
Of the remaining samples, most show annealed, coarse-grained microstructures, varying
slightly in grain size and degree of working, indicated by annealing twins and slip lines
(Figures 3.17 and 3.18), but one (Gd71-73) shows a very different structure with
extensive cold working (slip lines) and remnant segregation of solute (Figure 3.19).
52
Table 3.5: Microprobe results for Period III:6 & Period III:5 Metals
Godin No. Per. Object Notes n P S Pb Sb Sn Ag Cu Fe As Zn Ni Total
0.27 0.67 0.22 96.56 0.17 2.09 0.14
Gd65-33 III Chisel Metal 8 bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.11
0.01 1.52 0.02 0.39 0.01 0.24 0.01
Dark Inclusions 5 bdl 3.03 0.33 0.22 0.09 0.18 92.17 0.95 1.70 bdl 0.12 98.81
Metal in
5 bdl 0.04 bdl 0.13 0.14 77.08 11.14 bdl bdl bdl bdl 88.52
corroded region
Metal in
3 bdl bdl bdl 39.33 0.25 27.57 21.55 0.04 7.85 bdl bdl 96.59
corroded region
1.11 0.05 0.06 3.01 0.12 95.12 1.21 0.11
B2 ss1 III Chisel Metal 5 bdl bdl bdl 101.01
0.09 0.05 0.01 0.31 0.05 0.83 0.25 0.02
Dark Inclusions
3 bdl 3.32 1.28 bdl 2.78 0.11 91.00 0.24 1.30 bdl 0.08 100.11
(elongated)
Bright Inclusion 3 bdl bdl bdl 0.06 3.00 0.10 95.03 0.02 1.34 bdl 0.08 99.63
0.06 0.06 0.06 98.47 0.33 0.19
Gd73-73 III Arrowhead Metal 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.92
0.06 0.01 0.00 0.52 0.02 0.19
Dark Inclusion 1 bdl 7.60 bdl bdl 0.05 bdl 88.81 1.84 bdl bdl bdl 98.30
Bright Inclusion 2 bdl 0.08 3.88 bdl 0.06 bdl 95.94 0.33 bdl bdl bdl 100.28
0.46 96.53 2.38
A2-5 (ss) III Ag wire Metal 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.37
0.18 0.69 0.52
Bright Inclusion 2 bdl bdl 0.55 bdl bdl 95.33 3.47 bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.35
0.08 95.47 0.20
B2 ssX18 III Pb wire Metal (phase 1) 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 95.74
0.02 6.27 0.16
0.02 80.33 0.10 18.91 0.09
Metal (phase 2) 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.45
0.00 0.99 0.00 0.55 0.01
Metal (phase 3) 2 0.02 bdl 66.35 bdl bdl 0.11 31.45 bdl bdl bdl 0.21 98.13
52
53
Table 3.5: Microprobe results for Period III:6 & Period III:5 Metals (continued)
0.06 0.07 97.18 2.27 0.10
Gd71-253 III Needle Metal 17 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.67
0.02 0.01 0.43 0.38 0.02
Bright Inclusion 3 bdl 0.04 49.16 0.30 0.23 bdl 37.65 1.30 7.42 bdl 0.23 96.32
Bright Inclusion 1 bdl 0.02 9.25 0.69 49.45 bdl 27.52 0.38 bdl bdl 0.04 87.35
Dark Inclusion 3 bdl 7.01 0.50 0.05 0.05 bdl 90.22 bdl 1.41 bdl 0.07 99.30
Dark Inclusion 2 bdl bdl 2.39 0.18 0.57 bdl 51.54 24.74 1.65 0.17 2.85 84.08
Metal in
1 bdl 0.03 5.06 0.70 62.90 bdl 14.78 0.34 0.74 bdl 0.11 84.65
corroded region
0.06 0.07 0.10 97.76 0.22 2.10 0.05
Gd71-19 III:6 Chisel Metal 12 bdl bdl bdl bdl 101.04
0.06 0.02 0.02 0.87 0.02 0.83 0.01
Dark Inclusion 1 bdl 0.05 bdl bdl bdl 0.06 59.24 25.05 1.26 bdl 0.04 85.70
Dark Inclusion 1 bdl 12.49 1.91 bdl bdl bdl 76.19 4.64 0.87 bdl bdl 96.10
Bright Inclusion 5 bdl 2.13 10.32 0.10 bdl 0.14 84.37 0.65 2.56 bdl 0.04 100.32
Metal in
3 bdl 0.33 bdl 0.06 0.05 26.71 66.84 0.13 1.38 bdl 0.05 95.53
corroded region
Metal in
2 0.05 7.30 65.09 bdl bdl bdl 3.27 bdl bdl bdl bdl 75.71
corroded region
Gd71-246 III:6 Chisel Metal 2 bdl bdl bdl 0.09 bdl 0.07 97.81 0.23 1.81 bdl 0.07 100.07
Dark Inclusion 2 bdl bdl bdl 0.09 bdl 0.12 96.59 0.28 3.07 bdl 0.05 100.19
Bright Inclusion 1 bdl 0.05 0.33 bdl bdl 0.06 93.55 3.02 1.61 bdl bdl 98.62
97.25 1.33 1.07 0.03
Gd71-318 III:6 Awl/Chisel Metal 12 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.77
0.86 0.65 0.20 0.01
Dark Inclusion 6 bdl 19.14 bdl bdl bdl bdl 71.74 8.37 1.13 bdl bdl 100.38
53
54
0.18 98.45 1.36
10 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.02
Gd71-49 III:6 Wire Metal 0.03 0.49 0.22
2 0.03 0.59 0.40 0.05 bdl 0.22 84.00 0.04 1.14 bdl bdl 86.47
Dark Inclusion
2 0.03 0.33 2.30 1.30 0.04 0.11 61.00 0.74 5.95 bdl 0.06 71.84
Dark Inclusion
Metal in
3 bdl 0.03 bdl bdl bdl 28.07 45.67 0.03 0.69 bdl bdl 74.49
corroded region
0.04 0.13 0.08 96.30 0.78 2.96
10 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.33
Gd73-103 III:6 Pin Metal 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.18 0.07 0.27
4 bdl 4.84 bdl 0.06 0.07 0.07 88.18 1.87 2.32 bdl bdl 97.41
Dark inclusion
Metal in
3 0.04 0.16 bdl 0.06 0.30 50.97 42.04 0.27 0.78 bdl bdl 94.63
corroded region
0.03 0.05 0.12 95.88 0.25 3.02 0.04
13 bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.37
Gd71-73 III:6 Pin Metal 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.95 0.03 0.32 0.01
4 bdl 0.08 bdl 0.05 bdl 0.11 93.01 2.13 3.04 bdl 0.04 98.45
Dark Inclusion
Metal in
1 0.02 2.42 8.49 bdl bdl 0.18 32.34 0.07 0.70 bdl Bdl 44.22
corroded region
Metal in
1 bdl 0.06 bdl bdl bdl 31.82 49.04 bdl bdl bdl Bdl 80.92
corroded region
0.43 0.17 0.09 0.05 0.08 96.46 0.13 2.93 0.12
17 bdl bdl 100.46
Gd71-159 III:6 Pin Metal 0.70 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.03 0.36 0.01
2 bdl 0.61 2.71 0.08 bdl 0.07 92.06 0.19 3.15 bdl 0.12 98.98
Bright Inclusion
0.09 0.16 97.44 0.03 2.25
11 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.97
Gd73-68 III:6 Wire/Pin Metal 0.03 0.03 0.64 0.01 0.42
1 bdl 15.13 bdl bdl bdl 0.10 85.65 0.27 bdl bdl bdl 101.15
Dark Inclusion
Metal in
2 bdl 0.09 bdl bdl bdl 5.40 55.71 0.04 bdl bdl bdl 61.23
corroded region
54
55
0.03 0.11 4.25 0.02 65.02 0.11 0.19
3 bdl bdl bdl bdl 69.83
* Gd67-126 III:6 Pin Metal 0.03 0.03 0.69 0.02 1.00 0.04 0.01
1 bdl bdl 2.85 0.11 3.91 0.09 61.54 0.10 bdl bdl 0.17 68.77
Bright Inclusion
2 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 0.14 100.26 bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.40
* Gd67-113 III:6 Pin Metal
2 bdl 0.18 bdl bdl bdl 35.59 40.74 bdl bdl bdl bdl 76.50
Bright Inclusion
0.03 0.36 0.06 0.10 96.84 0.07 2.72 0.13
24 bdl bdl bdl 100.30
Gd71-188 III:6 Needle Metal 0.01 0.25 0.01 0.02 0.53 0.01 0.29 0.01
2 bdl 1.18 0.91 bdl bdl 0.08 63.68 21.87 1.49 bdl 0.08 89.28
Dark Inclusion
3 0.04 3.54 1.57 bdl bdl 0.10 89.11 1.54 2.16 bdl 0.09 98.15
Dark Inclusion
4 0.03 0.05 12.79 0.06 bdl 0.15 83.65 0.07 2.94 bdl 0.12 99.86
Bright Inclusion
Metal in
3 bdl 0.80 0.24 0.16 bdl 78.74 22.14 0.73 1.31 bdl 0.03 104.15
corroded region
Metal (partially
2 0.40 0.12 6.69 0.16 bdl bdl 75.89 1.00 2.42 bdl bdl 86.68
Gd71-276 III:6 Needle mineralized)
Metal in
4 0.44 0.06 22.84 0.47 bdl bdl 25.31 7.84 10.76 bdl 0.04 67.76
corroded region
0.09 0.05 0.13 96.57 0.17 2.74
11 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.60
Gd73-109 III:6 Needle Metal 0.09 0.00 0.03 0.28 0.02 0.37
3 bdl bdl 0.18 bdl bdl 0.15 96.56 0.21 2.81 bdl bdl 99.91
Dark Inclusion
4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 0.15 96.31 0.17 3.00 bdl bdl 99.62
Bright Inclusion
Metal in
1 bdl bdl 0.31 bdl bdl 7.11 56.24 bdl bdl bdl bdl 63.66
corroded region
Metal in
1 0.13 0.25 32.89 0.24 bdl bdl 25.67 0.22 7.30 bdl bdl 66.70
corroded region
55
56
Metal
Gd73-82 III:6 Needle 4 0.08 0.08 0.24 0.11 bdl bdl 66.38 0.26 8.20 bdl bdl 75.34
(mineralized)
Metal in
2 bdl 0.12 bdl 0.07 bdl 46.73 57.33 0.03 bdl bdl bdl 104.27
corroded region
0.09 0.15 96.62 0.16 2.35 0.06
Gd71-50 III:6 Needle Metal 10 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.43
0.02 0.03 0.57 0.02 0.25 0.01
Metal in
4 0.02 0.11 bdl 0.05 bdl 19.89 49.11 0.07 2.05 bdl bdl 71.30
corroded region
0.15 0.05 0.01 96.91 0.77 2.14
Gd71-207 III:6 Needle Metal 11 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.18
0.02 0.00 0.01 0.24 0.06 0.36
Dark Inclusion 4 bdl 0.42 bdl 0.07 bdl bdl 96.42 0.88 2.11 bdl 0.03 99.93
Metal in
1 0.03 7.74 64.76 bdl bdl bdl 9.04 bdl bdl bdl bdl 81.57
corroded region
2.93 0.13 97.10 0.16
* Gd67-117 III:6 Bracelet Metal 9 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.38
0.55 0.03 0.60 0.03
Dark Inclusion 2 bdl 11.55 0.25 bdl 1.17 0.07 76.37 2.04 bdl bdl bdl 91.44
Bright Inclusion 1 bdl bdl 0.96 bdl 3.04 0.20 95.04 0.13 bdl bdl bdl 99.37
Metal in
3 0.04 0.06 0.21 bdl 4.43 0.41 85.31 0.26 bdl bdl bdl 90.72
corroded region
0.21 0.07 2.40 0.08 94.36 2.17
* Gd67-102 III:6 Bracelet Metal 13 bdl bdl bdl bdl 0.12 99.41
0.02 0.01 0.34 0.01 1.73 0.26
Bright Inclusion 3 0.12 1.73 37.74 0.07 2.33 0.53 49.89 0.05 1.39 bdl 0.07 93.91
* Gd67-103 III:6 Bracelet Metal 2 bdl 0.04 bdl bdl 0.06 0.06 95.52 0.29 3.39 bdl 0.46 99.81
Dark Inclusion 4 bdl 21.48 0.26 bdl bdl bdl 72.74 4.69 1.05 bdl 0.07 100.28
Bright Inclusion 2 bdl 0.07 14.12 bdl bdl bdl 82.99 0.22 3.12 bdl 0.40 100.92
56
57
0.01 0.07 1.33 0.27 93.70 1.08 3.02 0.76
* Gd67-104 III:6 Bracelet Metal 21 bdl bdl bdl 100.37
0.01 0.01 0.20 0.70 0.67 0.23 0.38 0.05
Dark Inclusion 2 bdl 14.64 0.45 0.06 0.58 bdl 76.02 6.66 1.65 bdl 0.33 100.39
Dark Inclusion 4 bdl 0.05 0.25 0.09 1.42 0.09 91.51 1.54 3.80 bdl 0.87 99.62
Bright Inclusion 4 0.03 0.08 4.11 0.09 1.57 0.09 90.05 0.91 3.19 bdl 0.85 100.97
Metal in
1 bdl bdl bdl 0.06 1.45 15.92 70.27 0.25 bdl bdl 0.06 88.01
corroded region
0.06 0.55 97.41 0.22 1.55
A1-347ss25 III:6 Nugget Metal 5 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.79
0.01 0.11 0.26 0.03 0.29
Bright Inclusion 1 bdl bdl 0.41 0.06 bdl 0.58 96.81 0.18 1.64 bdl Bdl 99.68
0.01 0.09 0.13 95.01 1.03 2.21
A1-351ss26 III:6 Nugget Metal 3 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 98.49
0.01 0.05 0.01 1.78 0.09 0.59
Fe-rich area 2 bdl 0.03 bdl 0.12 0.08 0.12 85.68 6.51 1.68 bdl bdl 94.21
Dark Inclusion 3 0.03 bdl bdl 0.16 0.05 0.18 93.58 1.72 2.52 bdl 0.04 98.27
0.11 96.83 3.21 0.01
A1-188ss9 III:5 Pin? Metal 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.18
0.02 0.43 0.15 0.01
Dark Inclusion 3 bdl bdl bdl bdl 0.05 0.11 96.97 0.05 2.83 bdl 0.04 100.05
Bright Vein in
1 bdl bdl bdl 0.05 bdl 26.40 69.58 bdl 4.66 bdl 0.11 100.80
Metal
Metal in
1 bdl 0.14 bdl bdl bdl 15.99 54.14 bdl 1.01 bdl bdl 71.28
corroded region
The low totals in this table are most likely due to the presence of oxides and salts.
57
58
Three of the bracelets from Period III:6 (Gd67-102, Gd67-104, Gd67-117) have
similar compositions (1.3 2.9wt%Sn); the fourth (Gd67-103) is Cu-3.4wt%As. In
addition, three of them exhibit equiaxed grains with annealing twins (Figure 3.20), and
the fourth (Gd67-104) has a well-preserved dendritic structure (Figure 3.21).
There were two unidentifiable lumps of copper from this period (A1-347ss25, A1-
351ss26). The microstructure of A1-347ss25 is shown in Figure 3.22, and this Cu-
1.6wt%As-0.6wt%Ag alloy has been carefully worked into a curved shape. Its
morphology suggests that it may be part of a coil to a fibula pin, but due to its corroded
and fragmentary nature, this is very difficult to determine with any certainty.
3.3.b. Period III:5 (2400-2200 BCE)
This period only included one analyzed artifact (A1-188ss9), a Cu-3.2wt%As pin
containing no sulfide or lead inclusions (Table 3.5). It has similar microstructure to the
Period III:6 pins, but with a slightly more lamellar structure (Figure 3.23).
3.3.c. Period III:4 (2100-1900 BCE)
The six Period III:4 objects include three pins, two unidentifiable lumps, and a
thick crucible fragment, and their compositions are reported with those of Periods III:2
and Post III:2 in Table 3.6. Two of the pins (Gd71-141, Gd69-693) are Cu-As alloys
containing 2.6 3.5wt%As. The third pin (Gd69-558), though heavily corroded, contains
a high amount of Sn in the mineralized fabric (10wt%Sn). This high concentration is not
precise, due to the effects of corrosion products; nonetheless, the analysis does indicate
59
the presence of tin in the alloy. Gd71-141 and Gd69-693 show different microstructures
(Figure 3.24), with the former containing large worked and annealed grains, and the latter
being much finer-grained with no evidence of cold or hot working.
The unidentifiable lumps (A1-69ss2, B1-38) both contain cast structures (Figure
3.25). A1-69ss2 is a dirty copper alloy with low amounts of As, Pb, Fe and Ni, and it
has a square cross-section. From the bent dendrites in the microstructure, one can deduce
that it was cast and subsequently worked into this shape. B1-38 shows a high degree of
microsegregation within the grains with highest solute concentration of 10wt%Sn near
the grain boundaries. This corresponds to the expected solute distribution according to
the Cu-Sn phase diagram around 800oC (Appendix C, p.209).
The crucible fragment from this period (AA2-193ss9, Appendix B, p.193) has
been determined to be a melting crucible based on its rounded open shape, low Fe
content, and microstructure (Figure 3.26). The microstructure is similar to that of B1-
510ss28 from Period VI:1. The oxide composition for this slag is reported in Table 3.7,
and it has a dolomitic composition, high in alkali content, and a 3.4 SiO2:Al2O3 ratio. In
addition, it contains an entrapped prill that is high in both Sn (10.9wt%) and As
(3.9wt%), but unfortunately, this composition does not match those for any of the
artifacts. Also it should be noted that the presence of Sn in this melting slag provides
strong evidence for the recycling of metal or ingots at Godin Tepe (see below, Chapter
4). A sample from this slag was also powdered for XRD, the results of which (shown in
Figure 3.27) reflect the contents of the vessel as well as the ceramic composition.
60
Table 3.6: Microprobe results for Period III:4, III:2 & Post III:2 Metals
Godin No. Per Object Notes n P S Pb Sb Sn Ag Cu Fe As Zn Ni Total
0.15 96.86 0.10 2.66
Gd71-141 III:4 Pin Metal 16 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.82
0.14 0.51 0.03 0.25
Dark Inclusion 4 0.02 8.98 bdl bdl bdl bdl 88.32 1.45 1.54 bdl bdl 100.30
Completely
Gd69-558 III:4 Pin 1 bdl 0.04 bdl 0.09 10.43 bdl 69.66 0.24 bdl bdl bdl 80.46
mineralized
0.01 0.02 0.06 95.90 1.31 3.51
Gd69-693 III:4 Pin Metal 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.87
0.01 0.02 0.01 1.81 0.88 0.84
Dark Inclusion 1 bdl 14.45 1.05 bdl bdl bdl 82.25 4.20 1.31 bdl bdl 103.26
Bright Inclusion 1 bdl 0.03 bdl bdl 0.78 2.59 80.73 1.18 2.23 bdl bdl 87.54
Scan of grain:
B1-38 III:4 Nugget 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl 4.37 bdl 94.27 0.13 bdl bdl 0.15 98.92
center
Scan of grain 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl 5.01 bdl 93.81 0.15 0.80 bdl 0.18 99.95
Scan of grain 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl 5.97 bdl 92.46 0.14 bdl bdl 0.17 98.74
Scan of grain 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl 7.65 bdl 91.31 0.12 bdl bdl 0.14 99.22
Scan of grain 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl 8.11 0.09 89.92 0.11 bdl bdl 0.15 98.38
Scan of grain:
1 bdl bdl bdl bdl 10.20 0.09 88.51 0.09 1.05 bdl 0.15 100.09
grain boundary
60
61
Table 3.6: Microprobe results for Period III:4, III:2 & Post III:2 Metals (continued)
7.63 0.09 90.97 0.12 0.93 0.15
B1-38 III:4 Nugget grain average 10 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.89
2.05 0.00 2.06 0.02 0.10 0.01
Dark Inclusion 2 0.02 13.97 0.17 bdl 2.78 bdl 79.46 5.57 bdl bdl 0.06 102.02
Bright Inclusion 3 bdl 0.18 33.14 bdl 6.32 0.19 64.84 0.16 bdl bdl 0.11 104.95
0.02 0.03 0.06 0.09 97.06 0.16 2.20 0.17
A1-69ss2 III:4 Nugget Metal 5 bdl bdl bdl 100.01
0.02 0.03 0.02 0.01 1.02 0.02 0.43 0.02
0.05 0.13 10.88 83.80 0.04 3.91 0.22
AA2-193ss9 III:4 Crucible Prill 1 5 bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.23
0.05 0.03 0.71 1.70 0.03 1.06 0.02
0.03 0.16 1.46 0.07 96.05 0.56 1.80 0.36
Gd69-694 III:2 Chisel Metal 26 bdl bdl bdl 100.50
0.00 0.01 0.17 0.01 0.42 0.02 0.32 0.02
Dark Inclusion 4 bdl 9.63 0.43 bdl 0.80 bdl 83.65 3.55 1.58 bdl 0.23 99.86
Bright Inclusion 1 bdl 0.04 30.30 bdl 1.19 bdl 69.34 0.53 1.61 bdl 0.24 103.25
0.05 0.22 0.01 0.01 93.19 0.34 6.07
C2-112ss10 III:2 Chisel Metal 5 bdl bdl bdl bdl 101.06
0.05 0.22 0.01 0.01 1.27 0.51 0.44
Gd67-202 III:2 Dagger Bright Inclusion 4 0.03 0.06 bdl bdl 33.30 bdl 31.20 0.49 bdl bdl bdl 65.07*
Metal (near
AA2-176ss5 III:2 Blade 2 0.08 0.07 bdl 0.12 45.16 bdl 15.80 0.43 0.74 bdl 0.05 62.44*
corrosion)
0.20 0.05 0.02 13.50 66.17 0.17
Metal 3 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 80.13*
0.05 0.03 0.02 3.49 4.51 0.02
Metal in
1 0.02 bdl bdl bdl 6.67 74.35 5.03 0.08 bdl bdl bdl 86.15*
corroded region
Gd67-237 III:2 Blade Metal tip 2 0.02 bdl bdl bdl 9.16 bdl 86.91 0.08 1.50 bdl 0.45 98.11
Metal center 3 Bdl bdl bdl bdl 7.47 0.07 90.49 0.08 1.00 bdl 0.43 99.54
Bright Inclusion 2 Bdl 0.05 1.13 0.05 15.96 bdl 68.55 0.13 1.61 bdl 0.61 88.08
*These low totals are due to the heavy corrosion of these samples. In addition, the high Sn does not reflect the original alloy composition and has been inflated
through corrosion processes during burial.
61
62
Intergranular
Gd67-237 III:2 Blade 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl 7.82 5.52 84.90 0.09 bdl bdl 0.44 98.77
Inclusion
0.01 99.95 0.09 0.04
Gd67-201 III:2 Arrowhead Metal 5 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.13
0.01 0.54 0.02 0.01
Dark Inclusion 2 bdl 0.35 bdl bdl 0.06 bdl 98.17 0.83 bdl bdl bdl 99.41
2.20 0.05 1.99 93.31 0.09 1.20 0.47
Gd67-196 III:2 Armor-plate Metal 3 bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.41
2.99 0.05 0.92 4.03 0.01 0.24 0.07
Dark Inclusion 3 bdl bdl bdl bdl 1.71 bdl 94.14 0.09 0.92 bdl 0.42 97.26
5.24 92.61 0.40 1.17
AA2-154ss1 III:2 Wire Metal 5 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.41
0.67 1.57 0.06 0.13
Dark Inclusion 3 0.07 bdl bdl bdl 4.02 bdl 94.41 0.43 bdl bdl bdl 98.92
0.68 0.21 8.43 89.21 0.06 0.95
0.21 0.03 0.51 0.54 0.01 0.03
Bright Inclusion 1 bdl bdl 1.96 0.24 8.24 bdl 87.81 0.05 0.94 bdl 1.01 100.25
0.02 0.02 9.39 89.58 0.15 0.22
0.02 0.02 1.39 1.31 0.02 0.01
Bright Inclusion 2 0.03 0.03 3.19 bdl 8.45 bdl 86.32 0.15 0.80 bdl 0.18 99.14
Gd67-219 III:2 Pin Metal 2 bdl bdl bdl bdl 4.66 0.09 93.58 0.16 1.23 bdl 0.25 99.96
Bright Inclusion 3 bdl bdl 1.93 bdl 4.87 0.15 92.23 0.13 0.97 bdl 0.25 100.53
0.25 8.68 0.11 90.64 0.06 0.03
M'B #5 III:2 Pin Metal 12 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.84
0.15 0.39 0.01 0.77 0.02 0.01
Sn-rich
5 bdl 0.03 bdl bdl 11.13 0.10 83.12 0.20 bdl bdl 0.04 94.61
inclusions
62
63
0.09 0.47 0.09 97.67 1.01 0.04
Gd67-224 III:2 Anklet Metal 3 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.37
0.04 0.13 0.03 0.16 0.13 0.01
Dark Inclusion 1 bdl 11.45 bdl 0.08 0.64 0.06 87.74 bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.97
Bright Inclusion 1 0.06 16.19 0.17 0.33 4.95 bdl 71.33 0.04 0.96 bdl 0.03 94.06
0.19 0.01 5.04 0.06 93.32 0.07 1.27 0.30
Gd67-231 III:2 Bracelet Metal 5 bdl bdl bdl 101.08
0.19 0.01 0.84 0.01 0.85 0.01 0.32 0.02
Bright Inclusion 9 bdl 0.13 2.32 bdl 5.76 0.06 91.43 0.06 0.99 bdl 0.34 101.09
A1-40 (ss) III:2 Tuyere Prill 1 1 0.04 0.03 bdl bdl 30.04 bdl 40.06 0.08 bdl bdl 0.04 70.29
Prill 2 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl Bdl bdl 98.53 2.87 bdl bdl 0.10 101.50
Prill 3 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl Bdl bdl 98.36 4.34 bdl bdl bdl 102.70
Post Arrow/ 0.01 98.99 0.37 0.04
Gd67-450 Metal 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.43
III:2 Spearhead 0.01 0.28 0.03 0.01
Dark Inclusion 1 bdl 3.10 bdl bdl bdl bdl 89.99 0.55 bdl bdl bdl 93.64
Post Arrow/ 0.24 98.52 0.51 0.93
Gd67-452 Metal 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.20
III:2 Spearhead 0.03 0.33 0.07 0.20
Dark Inclusion 2 bdl 10.08 0.57 0.13 bdl bdl 80.71 6.25 bdl bdl 0.04 97.77
Bright Inclusion 1 bdl 10.96 6.67 0.14 bdl bdl 77.37 3.68 bdl bdl bdl 98.82
Bright Inclusion 3 0.02 0.06 1.02 0.25 bdl bdl 97.64 0.54 1.09 bdl bdl 100.62
63
64
Post 0.03 0.04 0.06 98.65 0.32 0.04
Gd67-455 Spearhead Metal 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.32
III:2 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.17 0.01 0.01
Dark Inclusion 2 bdl 14.33 bdl bdl bdl bdl 82.03 2.56 bdl bdl bdl 98.92
Post 0.01 8.97 89.61 0.17 0.79 0.39
Gd67-453 Bracelet Metal 5 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.96
III:2 0.01 0.09 0.59 0.02 0.03 0.01
Dark Inclusion 4 0.03 8.23 bdl bdl 5.14 0.37 81.74 0.11 1.07 bdl 0.22 96.90
Bright Inclusion 4 0.05 0.75 67.06 bdl 3.49 0.80 29.46 0.18 0.76 bdl 0.13 102.68
Table 3.7: Microprobe results for Period III Oxides

Godin No. Per. Object Notes n Na2O K2O SiO2 MgO Al2O3 CaO MnO FeO CuO Total
AA2-193ss9 III:4 Crucible Matrix 1 2.30 6.17 56.98 2.57 16.96 5.94 0.17 7.64 0.22 98.96
Dark Needles 1 3.35 2.80 54.72 0.75 25.71 10.74 0.06 2.22 0.21 100.56
Bright Needles 1 1.14 4.05 55.95 6.51 15.32 9.78 0.19 6.91 0.16 100.00
Tuyere
A1-40 (ss) III:2 Matrix 2 0.53 0.55 43.02 8.63 4.12 21.67 0.09 16.51 0.75 95.87
fragment
Darker Matrix 2 0.39 17.10 59.43 0.08 25.14 0.07 bdl 1.84 0.49 104.54
Lighter Matrix
1 0.27 0.09 12.00 4.00 5.33 5.18 0.21 63.17 4.47 94.71
(region 1)
Lighter Matrix
1 0.00 0.34 1.44 1.82 8.18 0.48 0.12 75.48 2.83 90.69
(region 2)
64
65
This is in contrast to the other technical ceramic XRD spectra since the previous two
XRD samples were taken from exterior (non-slag) surfaces. The presence of geerite
(Cu8S5) in the XRD spectrum is not surprising since we have already seen the presence of
sulfur and copper in the entrapped prills. Geerite is likely a product of the weathering of
this sample though could be a remnant of an unreacted ore fragment if this is actually a
smelting, rather than melting crucible. Further investigation is necessary to clarify this
point.
3.3.d. Period III:2 (1900-1600 BCE)
The objects analyzed from this period include seven utilitarian items (chisels,
blades, arrowhead, etc), five pins/wires, two pieces of jewelry, and a single tuyere (Table
3.6). The chisels (Gd69-694 and C2-112ss10) are shown in Figure 3.28. Gd69-694 is
similar in microstructure to those presented previously with elongated inclusions and
evidence of heavy working. However, C2-112ss10 has a much different structure. One
of two possibilities may account for this. Either this artifact was misclassified as a chisel,
considering that it does not actually contain a chisel edge or, because it was sampled
from the center of the chisel rather than the tip, this different microstructure may just
indicate that the chisel is heavily annealed at the center and only cold-worked at the tip to
increase hardness, which would not be surprising.
The weapons are all from burial contexts, and the two blades (Gd67-237, AA2-
176ss5) and the dagger (Gd67-202) are all Cu-Sn alloys ranging from 9 15wt%Sn.
Gd67-202 is heavily corroded and therefore the high Sn content does not reflect the true
66
composition of this artifact. Only Gd67-237 contained enough metal for microstructural
analysis (Figure 3.29). This blade has been worked and annealed. The aspect ratio of the
elongated sulfide inclusions is approximately 12:1, indicating that this artifact was
heavily worked to achieve the flat edge. The armor-plate (Gd67-196) with a Cu-Sn-S-As
alloy and the arrowhead (Gd67-201) of 99wt%Cu, are similar in their microstructures
(Figure 3.30a,b). Both have large annealed grains with elongated nonmetallic inclusions
that indicate heavy working to achieve the final shape of the object. These structures are
highly desirable for the high-toughness applications for which these implements could
have been used.
The pins are all Cu-Sn alloys containing 4.7 9.4wt%Sn. Two pins are much
more ornate in style (Gd67-215, Gd67-219), and they come from the same burial. They
are similar in style and microstructure (Figure 3.31), with 25m grains and some
annealing twins, but Gd67-215 has double the tin content (9.3 vs. 4.7wt%Sn). Because
higher tin content yields a more golden color, this difference in composition may reflect a
desire to have a pair of pins of slightly different color (see Chapter 4). Gd67-207 was
mentioned above (Figure 3.16), and the other two samples of pins/wire (AA2-154ss1,
MB #5Area4) are shown in Figure 3.32.
The jewelry from this period includes a low-Sn-As copper alloy (Gd67-224,
anklet) and a 5wt%Sn bronze alloy (Gd67-231, bracelet). Gd67-231 contains a remnant
cast structure that can be seen at low magnification; however, at higher magnification, the
annealed grains are visible (Figure 3.33). This reflects the inability of Sn to re-distribute
rapidly in the structure during annealing events. In addition, the edge of the cross-section
67
for this bracelet shows slip lines from use-wear. Both of these points are discussed below
in Chapter 4.
The tuyere from Period III:2 (A1-40, Appendix B, p.201) is highly refractory and
contains very little vitrified material at its interior surface. In fact, most of the surface is
merely reduced and shows no signs of high heat aside from the few copper prills. These
prills had drastically different compositions ranging from very high Sn (30wt%) to Cu-
4wt%Fe. It is possible that this tuyere was reused and the different prills represent
different alloy compositions of individual melting events (see Chapter 4). In addition to
the microprobe analysis of the oxide composition (Table 3.7), a sample from the external
surface of the tuyere was powdered for XRD analysis. Figures 3.34 and 3.35 show that it
is almost identical to the spectrum for A01-50ss40 (the furnace fragment from Period
VI:1). This may be an indication of similar clay source material for crucible
construction, and will be discussed in greater detail below in Chapter 4.
3.3.e. Period Post III:2 (1600-1400 BCE)
Four artifacts from Period Post III:2 were sampled. These were all from burial
contexts and include three spearheads (Gd67-450, Gd67-452, Gd67-455) and a bracelet
(Gd67-453). The arrowheads were found in the same burial and are all at least
98.5wt%Cu (Table 3.6). Their microstructures suggest, however, that they were
manufactured with different purposes in mind (Figure 3.36). Gd67-450 and Gd67-452
contain elongated inclusions, slip lines and flattened grains, whereas Gd67-455 has been
worked (indicated by the presence of elongated inclusion) but was subsequently annealed
68
to achieve a more ductile material. This coarse structure is well-suited to the demands of
a projectile point, but the other spearheads are better suited for cutting or slicing
applications. The bracelet (Gd67-453) is similar to the microstructures of previously
reported samples such as Gd67-102 and Gd67-103 from Period III:6 (Figure 3.37), but
unlike the earlier bracelets, it contains almost 9wt%Sn.
3.4. Period II (800-600 BCE)
This period marks the first appearance of iron at Godin Tepe. The chisels and
blades only appear in iron, but the arrowheads as well as the decorative items are all
made of copper alloys. Most of the iron implements were too heavily corroded for
sampling, but compositions for one corroded chisel (Gd67-65) and a small nugget (A3-
313ss5) are reported in Table 3.8 along with the rest of the Period II metal. The copper
alloy artifacts from this period included an arrowhead, a tang, a bracelet (Gd69-215), an
unidentifiable lump of copper (CC2ss3-nugget) and six pins.
The arrowhead (Gd69-729) and tang (EE01-1) are both Cu-As alloys. The tang
has an annealed, coarse structure, and the arrowhead is heavily workedsimilar to Gd67-
452 and Gd67-450 from Period Post III:2 (Figure 3.38). The pins range in composition,
but Gd71-344 and Gd71-343 are of particular interest because they are so similar. They
have almost identical compositions and microstructures (Figure 3.39), and both are
broken and from the same locus. Therefore, it is highly likely that these two samples are
actually two broken pieces of the same pin. Of the other four pins, one is mostly
69
Table 3.8: Microprobe results for Period II Metals

Inclusion in
Gd67-65 Chisel-Fe 1 0.38 2.82 18.93 bdl bdl bdl 1.18 40.98 bdl bdl bdl 64.29
corrosion
Gd69-729 Arrowhead Metal 2 bdl 0.06 bdl 0.05 bdl 0.18 98.21 0.43 1.21 bdl bdl 100.13
Dark Inclusion 2 bdl 0.37 bdl bdl bdl 0.20 98.17 0.58 bdl bdl bdl 99.31
97.59 2.31 0.03
EE01-1 Tang Metal 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.92
0.41 0.11 0.00
0.01 0.08 7.92 0.10 90.81 0.06 0.33
Gd69-215 Bracelet Metal 14 bdl bdl bdl bdl 99.48
0.01 0.02 0.71 0.02 0.64 0.01 0.02
Dark Inclusion 2 bdl 13.66 0.62 0.06 3.27 0.06 79.52 1.81 bdl 1.21 0.15 100.36
Dark Inclusion 1 bdl 1.40 1.59 0.05 6.14 bdl 70.65 12.83 bdl 0.12 0.24 93.02
Bright Inclusion 5 0.03 0.15 81.00 bdl 1.76 0.17 16.91 0.04 bdl bdl 0.07 100.13
Metal in corrosion
9 bdl bdl 0.83 0.12 12.53 44.99 35.12 0.17 bdl bdl 0.28 94.02
product
0.02 1.15 0.13 97.63 0.49 1.08 0.25
Gd71-343 Pin Metal 3 bdl bdl bdl bdl 100.78
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.74 0.03 0.17 0.02
Dark Inclusion 3 bdl 20.49 0.41 bdl 0.21 0.09 71.07 6.64 bdl bdl 0.05 98.96
Bright Inclusion 3 bdl 5.13 35.65 0.06 0.93 0.88 57.62 0.87 1.06 bdl 0.20 102.40
Metal in corrosion
5 bdl 0.05 0.14 0.08 1.46 40.81 57.74 0.32 1.25 bdl 0.14 101.98
product
Gd71-344 Pin Metal 2 bdl 0.03 0.16 0.08 1.14 0.15 96.44 0.44 0.89 bdl 0.21 99.54
Dark Inclusion 2 bdl 19.01 0.27 bdl 0.35 bdl 71.78 6.67 bdl bdl 0.10 98.17
69
70
Table 3.8: Microprobe results for Period II Metals (continued)

Gd71-344 Pin Bright Inclusion 2 bdl 0.03 24.78 0.05 1.03 0.13 63.15 0.34 bdl bdl 0.16 89.66
Metal in corrosion
1 bdl bdl bdl bdl 0.62 6.26 92.52 0.15 bdl bdl 0.07 99.62
product
Gd69-216 Pin Metal 2 bdl bdl bdl 0.49 7.48 0.09 90.05 bdl 1.60 bdl 0.04 99.73
Gd73-419 Pin Metal 4 bdl 0.06 0.17 bdl Bdl bdl 97.11 0.44 1.59 bdl 0.27 99.63
Dark Inclusion 4 bdl 18.37 1.02 bdl Bdl bdl 68.82 7.23 bdl bdl 0.05 95.49
Bright Inclusion 2 0.02 0.20 54.10 bdl Bdl bdl 44.20 2.36 1.83 bdl 0.13 102.83
Gd69-461 Pin Metal 3 bdl 3.14 0.26 bdl Bdl bdl 69.66 0.28 14.92 0.06 bdl 88.32
CC2 ss3 Nugget Metal 7 bdl bdl 0.17 bdl Bdl 0.08 99.25 bdl bdl bdl 0.24 99.73
Grain Boundary 3 bdl bdl 0.17 0.08 Bdl 0.14 98.50 bdl 0.81 bdl 0.17 99.87
Metal (mostly
CC2 ss3 Pin 1 bdl bdl bdl bdl 1.73 bdl 51.60 0.02 bdl bdl bdl 53.35
mineralized)
A3-
Fe piece Metal 4 bdl bdl bdl bdl Bdl 0.05 0.08 99.68 bdl bdl 0.07 99.87
313ss521
70
71
mineralized (CC2ss3-pin), but contains 1.7wt%Sn. One pin (Gd69-216) is quite high in
Sn (7.5wt%), Gd69-461 is high in As (15wt%), and Gd73-419 is low arsenic. In addition
to the compositional variability, the microstructures (Figure 3.40) range from fine-
grained (Gd73-419) to coarse with annealing twins (Gd69-461 and Gd67-216). The
bracelet (Gd69-215) is high tin-bronze, but very similar in microstructure to many of the
bracelets previously discussed (Figure 3.41).
3.5. Summary of Results
The metal artifacts from Godin Tepe reflect a wide variety of compositions and
microstructures, ranging from Cu-As to Cu-Sn and Cu-Fe, and from as-cast, dendritic
structures to heavily cold-worked to heavily annealed structures. Even within the same
period, typologically similar items often have quite different microstructures (e.g., Gd67-
104 and Gd67-102, Figures 3.21 and 3.20a, respectively). In addition, the appearance of
tin at Godin Tepe is well-marked by burial items during Period III:6 and in non-burial
contexts during Period III:4. Iron first appears in Period II and it completely replaces
copper as the metal of choice for blades and chisels. Copper alloys are still present in
Period II in the form of bracelets, pins, and projectile points.
Processing debris from Godin Tepe, though small in quantity, provides strong
evidence for smelting, melting or recycling, and casting of copper alloys during Periods
VI:1, IV, III:4 and III:2. The majority of the production debris comes from the earlier
periods and is absent during Period II; however, even at the height of production, one
would be hard-pressed to call this on-site manufacture anything more than a cottage-
level industry. In general, the results and scarcity of finds presented here provide a
72
detailed view of the metallurgical activity at Godin Tepe. In order to appreciate fully the
significance of these results, however, one must place Godin Tepes metallurgy in the
context of a larger geological, cultural, and technological context.

73
Gd73-312, object fragment
Figure 3.1 Metallographic section of Gd73-312, Period IV:1, object fragment, etched. Inclusions are
Cu-As-S. The as -cast structure is clearly visible with a secondary dendrite arm spacing of approxi-
mately 29.7m.
B1-510ss28, melting slag
Figure 3.2 Optical light micrograph of B1-510ss28 Period IV:1, melting slag.
74
Figure 3.3 XRD spectrum for A01-34 ss29, Period IV, Ore fragment. In addition to the gangue, this
sample contains cuprite and iron oxides, and possibly delafossite.
75
(a) Gd71-261, blade
(b) Gd71-261, blade
Figure 3.4 Metallographic section of Gd71-261, Period IV, blade at low (a) and high (b) magnifica-
tion, etched. There is a preserved cast structure, though the blade has been worked as revealed by the
deformed dendrites. With a SDAS of approximately 81.7m, this structure is coarser than that for the
object depicted in Figure 3.1.
76
B2-351ssX25, Nugget
Figure 3.5 Metallographic section of B2-351ssX25, Period IV, Nugget. B2-351ssX25 is a lump of
processing material; however, it is almost entirely corroded. Fortunately the microstructure is well-
preseved, and one can see dendrites with a secondary dendrite arm spacing (SDAS) of 55.2m.
A1-1123ss521, smelting slag

Figure 3.6 Optical light micrograph of A1-1123ss521, Period IV, smelting slag. The skeletal magnet-
ite (white snowflakes) and dendritic silicate formations are typical of smelting slags.
77
(a) A1-1109ss511, smelting slag
(b) A1-1109ss511, smelting slag

Figure 3.7 Optical light micrograph of A1-1109ss511, Period IV, smelting slag. (a) The angular sili-
cate phase (arrow) in this sample is similar to that of A1-1123ss521 (Figure 3.6); (b) this slag also
contained regions of partially unreacted ore.
78
(a) A2-1184ss63, melting slag
(b) A2-1184ss63, melting slag

Figure 3.8 Optical light micrograph of A2-1184ss63, Period IV, melting crucible. (a) The white nee-
dles are delafossite, a copper-iron oxide indicative of higher oxygen partial pressure than is necessary
for smelting; (b) also the orange color of the glass phase in cross-polarized light is indicative of cu-
prite.
79
A1-1109ss511, prill
Figure 3.9 Metallographic section of A1-1109ss511, Period IV, prill from smelting slag, etched. The
blue-grey zones are the As-Sb-rich regions.
80
Figure 3.10 XRD spectrum for A1-1123ss521, Period IV, Ore fragment. This sample contains copper
carbonate and chalcopyrite.
81
(a) Gd65-33, Chisel
(b) Gd65-33, Chisel
Figure 3.11 Metallographic section of Gd65-33, Period III, chisel at low (a) and high (b) magnifica-
tion, etched. This chisel has been heavily worked to achieve the laminated structure and high aspect
ratio Cu-Fe-S inclusions (indicated by arrow). The aspect ratio of inclusions range from approxi-
mately 40:1 to 3:1.
82
Darker zone follows

the length of the
chisel point.
Deformed tip
with slip lines
(a) B2ss1, Chisel tip
(b) B2ss1, Chisel 2mm from tip
Figure 3.12 Metallographic section of B2ss1, Period III, chisel at the tip (a) and nearer to the center
(b) of the tool, etched. This chisel has also been heavily worked, though the laminated structure is
much less apparent than the previous examples. A slight variation in the composition can be seen
where the arrow indicates a darker stained region. The high aspect ratio (10-40:1) of the Cu-Pb-S in-
clusions, and the many slip lines farther from the chisel tip (b), reveal the considerable work-
hardening that this chisel must have undergone. In addition, the deformation and multiple slip lines at
the tip show that this object was certainly used as a tool.
83
(a) Gd71-153, Needle
(b) A2-5 Silver Wire
(c) B2ssX18 Lead Wire
Figure 3.13 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd71-153, Needle, (b) A2-5 and (c) B2ssX18, Wires, Pe-
riod III, etched. (a) The needle has a fine-grained microstructures with elongated Cu-Pb and Cu-S
inclusions and annealing twins. (b) A2-5 is a silver wire with large annealed grains. (c) B2ssX18 is of
lead with a similar microstructure, but containing inclusions of copper (indicated by white arrow).
84
Figure 3.14 Metallographic section of Gd73-73, Period III, arrowhead, etched. The high aspect ratio
of the Cu-Fe-S inclusions (indicated by arrow) shows that this arrowhead was worked; however, the
grains are not elongated in the direction of the inclusions. The few annealing twins indicates that an-
nealing did take place, but the variability in size and shape of the grains shows that this annealing
event was not sufficient to allow full recrystallization of the grains.
85
Figure 3.15 Metallographic section of (a)

Gd71-246, (b) Gd71-318, (c) Gd71-19,
(a) Gd71-246, chisel Period III:6, Chisels, etched. (a) This
chisel has the same variation in composi-
tion (shown by the lamination) and elon-
gated Pb-rich inclusions as seen in Figure
3.11. Although this chisel was annealed,
as evidenced by the twins (arrow) and
rounded grains. (b) This chisel was
mounted in a different orientation from
the other chisels, and the Cu-Fe-S inclu-
sions are not elongated. However, the
multiple slip lines indicate heavy working
of the tool. (a) This chisel is heavily
worked with a clear laminated microstruc-
ture and elongated Cu-Fe-S inclusions
(b) Gd71-318, chisel
(c) Gd71-19
86
(a) Gd67-113, Pin
(b) Gd67-207, Pin
Figure 3.16 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd67-113, Period III:6 (b) Gd67-207, Period III:2, Pins,
etched. Both pins exhibit a fine-grained structure with annealing twins and rounded cuprite (a) and
copper sulfide (b) inclusions.
87
(a) Gd73-103, Pin (b) Gd67-126, Pin
(c) Gd73-68, Wire/Pin (d) Gd71-159, Pin
Figure 3.17 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd73-103, (b) Gd67-126, (c) Gd73-68, and (d) Gd71-159,
Period III:6, etched. The top micrographs (a and b) show that these pins have been worked and an-
nealed. There are slip lines as well as annealing twins indicated on the micrograph with arrows. (c)
and (d) are similar, but with larger grains. The inclusions seen here are copper sulfide (a,c) and Cu-Pb
(b,d).
88
(a) Gd73-109, Needle (b) Gd71-188, Needle
(c) Gd71-49, Wire (d) Gd71-50, Needle
Figure 3.18 Metallographic sections of (a) Gd73-109, (b) Gd71-188, (c) Gd7149, (d) Gd71-50, Period
III:6, etched. (a) Gd73-109 has been worked and annealed, and is quite similar to Gd71-188 (b) but
with a slightly larger grainsize. In addition, the copper sulfide inclusions of Gd71-188 (b) are slightly
more elongated and aligned than the cuprite inclusions of Gd73-109 (a). (c) Gd71-49 and (d) Gd71-50
both exhibit larger grains and are shown here in polarized light to emphasize the grain boundaries.
89
(a) Gd71-207, Needle
Figure 3.19 Metallographic sections of (a)

Gd71-207, (b) and (c) Gd71-73, Period III:6,
etched. (a) The needle has been worked and
annealed, and is similar to the samples shown in
Fig. 3.18 with the exception of the lamellar
structure due to segregation of solute. (b) and
(c) Gd71-73 also shows compositional segrega-
tion that is remnant from casting, and (c) has
been heavily worked, though not annealed. The
slip lines either represent the shaping of the pin
or subsequent use of the pin. The Cu-S inclu-
sions are not elongated, but this is most likely
due to sample orientation, not lack of cold-
working.
(b) Gd71-73, Pin
(c) Gd71-73, Pin

90
(a) Gd67-102, Bracelet
Figure 3.20 Metallographic

section of (a) Gd67-102, (b)
Gd67-103, (c) Gd67-117,
Period III:6, etched. (a) and
(b) are similar in microstruc-
ture. Both have relatively
large equiaxed grains with
annealing twins, though
Gd67-102 (a) contains larger
and more numerous Cu-Pb-S
inclusions opposed to the Cu-
Fe-S inclusions of Gd67-103
(b). (c) Gd67-117 has a simi-
lar structure, but with smaller
(b) Gd67-103, Bracelet grains and Cu-Fe-S and cu-
prite inclusions.
(c) Gd67-117
91
(a) Gd67-104, bracelet
(b) Gd67-104, bracelet
Figure 3.21: Metallographic section of Gd67-104, Period III:6, bracelet, etched. This bracelet has a
well-preserved cast structure. The orientation of the dendrites show that the bracelet cooled at the
edges first (consistent with a closed mold). The dendrites are also slightly deformed, indicated minor
re-shaping and working after cooling. The average SDAS for this bracelet is 64.9m, but it is more
irregular toward the center.
92
(a) A1-347ss25, nugget
(b) A1-347ss25, nugget

Figure 3.22: Metallographic sections of A1-347ss25 at (a) low and (b) high magnification, Period
III:6, Nugget, etched. This object, when sampled, had an interesting cross section and two curved
ridges that may be part of the coils to a fibula pin. The microstructure reveals that it has been heavily
worked into a U-shape and has fine, annealed grains.
93
(a) A1-188ss9, Pin
(b) A1-188ss9, Pin
Figure 3.23: Metallographic sections of A1-188ss9 at (a) low and (b) high magnification, Pin, Period
III:5, etched. This pin shows some lamination (a) as well as annealing twins (b), and it is very similar
to Gd71-50 and Gd71-207 from Period III:6 (Figures 3.18 and 3.19)
94
(a) Gd71-141, Pin
(b) Gd69-693, Pin
Figure 3.24: Metallographic sections of (a) Gd71-141, (b) Gd69-693 Period III:4, etched. Gd71-141
(a) shows a sequence of work-hardening, annealing (annealing twins), and additional hardening (slip
lines). However, Gd69-693 (c) is much finer-grained without annealing twins or slip lines. Both pins
contained rounded copper sulfide inclusions.
95
(a) A1-69ss2
Figure 3.25: Metallographic sections

of (a,b) A1-69ss2, (c) B1-38, Period
III:4, Nuggets, etched. (a) A1-69ss2
has a rectangular cross-section and
the deformation of the dendrites in
addition to the slip lines show that it
was cast then reshaped by hammer-
ing. The SDAS is 81.6m, which is
very similar to the blade from Period
IV (Figure 3.4). (c) B1-38 also has a
cast structure but with no signs of
subsequent working or annealing.
The SDAS is similar at 82.7m.
(b) A1-69ss2
(c) B1-38
96
Figure 3.26: Optical light micrograph of AA2-193ss9 Period III:4, melted technical ceramic.
97
Figure 3.27: XRD spectrum of AA2-193ss9, melted technical ceramic, Period III:4. This slag is a potas-
sium magnesium silicate with cuprite and geerite.
98
(a) C2-112ss10, Chisel
(b) Gd69-694, Chisel

Figure 3.28: Metallographic sections of (a) C2-112ss10, (b) Gd69-694, Period III:2, etched. (a) This
chisel contains large equiaxed grains with few annealing twins but no laminated structure that is common
for the other chisels. There was no chisel edge for this sample, and therefore this section was taken from
the center of the object, which may contribute to the presence of this different chisel microstructure. (b)
Gd69-694 is heavily worked with elongated Cu-Fe-S inclusions and multiple slip lines..
99
Figure 3.29: Metallographic sections of Gd67-237, Blade, Period III:2, etched. This blade has been
worked (elongated Cu-Pb-S inclusions) and subsequently annealed (equiaxed-grains and annealing
twins).
100
(a) Gd67-196, Armor-plate
(b) Gd67-201, Arrowhead
Figure 3.30: Metallographic sections of (a) Gd67-196, Armor-plate, (b) Gd67-201, Arrowhead, Period
III:2, etched. These have similar microstructures showing heavy working indicated by the elongated
copper sulfide inclusions followed by an extensive annealing event to promote grain growth..
101
(a) Gd67-215, Pin
(b) Gd67-219, Pin
Figure 3.31: Metallographic sections of (a) Gd67-215, (b) Gd67-219, Period III:2, etched. Gd67-215 (a)
and Gd67-219 (b) have similar microstructures, showing equiaxed grains and annealing twins. These
micrographs also show heavy intergranular corrosion.
102
(a) AA2-154ss1, Wire
(b) MB1 #5, Pin
Figure 3.32: Metallographic sections of (a)AA2-154ss1, and (b) MB1 #5, Period III:2, etched. (a) This
wire is fine-grained with slight working and annealing; whereas MB1 #5 (b) has larger grains and elon-
gated inclusions.
103
(c) Gd67-231, center (b) Gd67-231, edge
(c) Gd67-231, low magnification to show dendrites
Figure 3.33: Metallographic sections of Gd67-231, Period III:2, Bracelet, etched. This bracelet has a
preserved cast structure with a SDAS of 84.8m. It also shows work-hardening or use-wear at the sur-
face, as seen with the slip lines (b).
104
A1-40, Period III:2, Tuyere Fragment
Figure 3.34: XRD spectrum of A1-40, Period III:2, Tuyere.

105
A01-50ss40, Period VI:1, Crucible Fragment
Figure 3.35: XRD spectrum of A01-50ss40, Period VI:1, Crucible fragment. This ceramic has a similar
composition to the Tuyere (A1-40) and both contain anorthite.
106
(a) Gd67-450, Spearhead
(b) Gd67-452, Spearhead
Figure 3.36: Metallographic sec-

tions of (a) Gd67-450, (b) Gd67-
452, and (c) Gd67-455, Period
Post III:2, Arrow/spearheads,
etched. These arrow/spearheads
all show a high degree of work-
ing. This is evident from the
elongated Cu-Fe-S inclusions
(indicated) by arrows) and, for (a)
and (b), the multiple slip lines.
However, Gd67-455 (c) has been
fully annealed to achieve a
coarser microstructure
(c) Gd67-455, Spearhead

107
Figure 3.37: Metallographic sections of Gd67-453, Period Post III:2, Bracelet, etched. This bracelet
has been worked and annealed., and is similar in microstructure to those of previous periods.
108
(a) EE01-1, Tang, taken in polarized light
(b) Gd67-729, arrowhead
Figure 3.38: Metallographic sections of (a) EE01-1 and (b) Gd67-729, Period II, etched. (a) The tang
has been minimally worked and fully annealed, but (b) the arrowhead is similar to the two heavily
worked examples from the Period Post III:2 burial (Fig. 3.36) with elongated Cu-Fe-S inclusions.
109
(a) Gd71-343, Pin
(b) Gd71-344, Pin
Figure 3.39: Metallographic sections of (a) Gd71-343 and (b) Gd71-344, Period II, Pins, etched. These
pins have almost identical microstructures as well as similar compositions, supporting the conclusion
that they are two pieces of the same pin that were separated during excavation (see Chapter 4 for discus-
sion of this).
110
(a) Gd67-216, Pin (b) Gd69-461. Pin
(c) Gd73-419, High magnification
(d) Gd73-419, Low magnification
Figure 3.40: Metallographic sections of (a) Gd69-216, (b) Gd69-461, (c,d) Gd73-419, Period II, Pins,
etched. These pins have different size grains, but have each undergone similar working and annealing
episodes. The only pin with remnant cast structure is Gd73-419 (d).
111
Figure 3.41: Metallographic sections of Gd69-215, Bracelet, Period II, etched. This bracelet shows
evidence of working and annealing (twins and slip lines), but no preserved cast structure as seen in
other bracelets.
112
CHAPTER 4: DISCUSSION OF THE METALLURGY AT GODIN TEPE
The metallurgical debrisore fragments, crucibles, slag, and moldsreveal
details of the local metal production occurring at Godin Tepe, and the metal artifacts
provide information regarding the technological abilities of the region as a whole. To
fully appreciate the extent of this technology, it is necessary to consider all aspects of the
process, including procurement of raw materials, production of metal, processing of
artifacts, and distribution, use, and discarding of objects. This chapter considers these six
stages in relation to the finds from Godin Tepe and discusses the presence of
typologically similar artifacts in the surrounding region. Here, production of metal and
the manufacture of artifacts are considered at both the local and regional scale.
4.1 The Argument for Small-Scale Local Metal Production
Eight crucible/furnace fragments, two ore fragments, two molds (one of which is
wholly intact), and a tuyere fragment provide irrefutable evidence that the inhabitants of
Godin Tepe manufactured and manipulated copper as early as Period VI:1 (3300-3050
BCE). Unfortunately the scale of this production and processing is unclear as a result of
limited archaeological data, the lack of localized workshop debris, and the absence of
hoards or collections of metal at particular loci. The scatter of metallurgical material is
relatively extensive with crucibles appearing throughout a 30x30 meter area in the center
of the mound. As discussed in Chapter 1, the main excavation of this mound covers an
113
area of 120 by 50 meters. The contexts of all processing materials are shown in Figure
4.1. All metallurgical materials occur as individual finds scattered through squares A01,
A1, AA2, B1, and B2 (Figure 4.1).
Figure 4.1: Plan map for Godin Tepe central mound with grid and metallurgical finds indicated
(adapted from Young and Levine 1974).
The preliminary reports on Godin Tepe (Young 1969; Young and Levine 1974)
and summary articles (Young 1968, 1969, 1972, 1974) do not mention any workshop
areas or furnace installations that would suggest that these loci were the focus of metal
production, nor was any such possibility suggested by Cuyler Young concerning
pyrotechnological installations (P.B. Vandiver, personal communication 2007). The
presence of molds, crucibles, and slag indicate onsite processing, suggesting that either
metal production and artifact manufacture at Godin Tepe was a small-scale household
activity, or that metal was produced and fabricated outside the areas excavated. The
small number of crucible, slag, and furnace fragments cannot account for the scale of
114
production required to produce all of the metal artifacts at Godin Tepe, and therefore
imported metal and artifacts must have augmented the production taking place at Godin
Tepe.
A comparison of the results in Chapter 3 and the published data on ancient
metallurgy help to determine the nature of production at Godin Tepe. The details of this
local production are considered in the context of the manufacturing processes, beginning
with raw material acquisition, processing setup, firing temperatures, cooling rates, alloy
compositions, and methods of post-smelting treatment of metals.
4.1.a Raw Materials
North-central Iran is a metalliferous region, particularly rich in copper deposits. It
is traversed by the High Road (east-west) and at least three major north-south roads used
for long-distance trade in antiquity (Henrickson 1986:3 and Chapter 1 of this thesis).
Godin Tepe lies along the High Road half-way between modern-day Kermanshah and
Hamadan. The neighboring copper deposits range from small copper carbonate veins to
complex systems of polymetallic ores* (Bazin and Hubner 1969; Kishvar 1965). A few
of these ore deposits lie within 150 km of Godin Tepe, but many more lie farther east
along the High Road leading to Tehran and Tepe Hissar (Figure 4.2). The Godin Tepe
*
Copper ore deposits can be divided into three zones that consist mainly of (1) copper oxides and
carbonates that are easily smelted, (2) copper-arsenic ores that are dangerous but still easily smelted, and
(3) complex polymetallic ores containing Cu and Fe sulfides that are more difficult to process and often
require intermediate roasting steps.
115
Hamadan
Godin Tepe
Kermanshah
High Road
200 km
Figure 4.2: Map showing ore deposits (numbered), High Road (dotted line) and Godin Tepe
(adapted from Bazin and Hubner 1969 and Henrickson 1986).
inhabitants may have retrieved their ore from these sources; others may have exploited
the more distant deposits and brought raw material to Godin along the trade routes. The
deposit closest to Godin Tepe, Shirvaneh (deposit number 214 in Figure 4.2), contains
chalcopyrite, pyrite, pyrrhotite, malachite and azurite as veinlets in a quartz and calcite
gangue (Bazin and Hubner 1969:Pl.24). Vali Mohamad (deposit 70) contains the same
minerals plus limonitea mixture of iron hydroxides including goethite, which tends to
stain the malachite and azurite brown (Bernard and Hyrsl 2004:354)as a network of
lenses and veins in a quartz gangue (Bazin and Hubner 1969:Pl.15). Recall that XRD
analyses revealed ore sample A01-34ss29 consists of cuprite, goethite, and quartz, and
116
ore sample A1-1123ss521 consists of chalcopyrite, copper carbonate and quartz (Figures
4.3 and 4.10). Of the two deposits, Vali Mohamad (deposit 70) is the more likely source
for these two ores because, in addition to containing all minerals detected by XRD, it is
larger and slightly closer to Godin (75km).
Additional deposits are found approximately 125 km south-southeast of
Hamadan, along one of the north-south roads to Susa. These deposits (71 and 72) are
extensive and the northern deposit (Shamsabad) contains significant amounts of
tetrahedrite, bornite and chalcopyrite. They may have been too far for the local
exploitation by Godin Tepe craftsmen, but the selected and pre-ground arsenic-copper-
sulfide ores could have been transported in small quantities or at least exploited by major
production sites of the region to trade finished products at Godin Tepe.
Another raw material required in these small scale smelting operations is fuel.
Both charcoal and dung can be used as a fuel source (Miller 1984). Though dung is not
the best choice for metallurgical activity because of the high temperatures and carbon-
rich fuel required for the process (Horne 1982:9). If using charcoal (the most efficient
fuel for copper production), 20 g of fuel are required to produce 1 g of copper metal from
a relatively pure oxide ore (Horne 1982:12). The processing and efficiency required to
produce charcoal made it more expensive than many other fuels; nonetheless, it was
probably used for the small-scale smelting operations at Godin Tepe. The nearby oak
forests (Sahab 1963) as well as the large-scale charcoal production to the south (Horne
1982:10) would provide an ample supply of carbon-rich fuel. In addition, with multiple
clay sources available locally in the Kermanshah area (Dewan and Famouri 1964) and
distinguished local ceramic production going back to the Neolithic period at nearby Seh
117
Gabi (Vandiver 1985; Young and Levine 1974), suitable clay for crucibles would not be
hard to find.
4.1.b The Use of Crucibles for Smelting
The crucibles at Godin Tepe provide information regarding the smelting setup
employed, type of ores smelted, composition of metal produced, temperatures reached,
and post-smelting cooling rate. This gives a detailed picture of the process employed and
a rough estimate of the degree of skill practiced by these craftsmen.
4.1.b.i Processing Setup
The shape, size, and quantity of the technical ceramics reinforce the conclusion of
small scale smelting events. Based on the thickness (3cm, Appendix B p.171) and
morphology of one fragment, it has been categorized as a furnace fragment (A01-50ss40,
Period VI:1); however it is the only such fragment and most others clearly are part of
crucibles or tuyeres. The crucibles are shallow, bowl-like vessels with heavy vitrification
at the rim, a reduced body, and copper corrosion products along the interior surfaces
(pictured in Appendix B). This shape and size is typical of pit smelting operations.
Figure 4.3 shows the basic setup for pit smelting, where a crucible would be placed in a
shallow pit and charged with crushed ore and charcoal. This setup is ideal for small-scale
production. Smelting copper requires temperatures of at least 600-700oC for very pure
copper carbonate ore (Charles 1979), but temperatures over 1000oC are necessary for less
pure ores and for casting many copper-base alloys. Such high temperatures require a
high temperature fuel, such as charcoal, and a well-insulated vessel.

118
Crucible Crushed Ore
Fuel
Earth
Figure 4.3: Schematic drawing of pit smelting operation.
The crucibles from Godin Tepe contain a large amount of chaff (vegetal material),
which would burn off during firing to increase the porosity of the ceramic and therefore
increase the insulating property of the crucible (Rice 1987:351). Examples of chaff-
tempered clay for use in smelting operations have been noted elsewhere on the Iranian
Plateau (Tal-i Iblis, Frame 2004, Pigott and Lechtman 2001; and Tepe Hissar, Pigott
1989). However, high porosity crucibles tend to be more friable because the pores act as
stress concentration centers (Rice 1987:361). This is not a concern for the pit smelting
setup. By placing the crucible within a shallow pit, the walls of the pit provide structural
support for the crucible during firing. The crushed charcoal piled in the crucible would
create a reducing environment for the conversion of ore to copper metal, and the
temperature could be increased with the use of a blow pipe or bellows.
4.1.b.ii Crucible Charge
The presence of ore at Godin Tepe (especially in proximity to crucible fragments)
is strong evidence for smelting activity rather than just re-melting metal objects, though
melting and recycling occurred as well. The charge for these crucibles, that is, the ore or
metal with which they were filled, can be inferred from the composition of the slag and
prills affixed to their interior surfaces. The compositional information presented in

119
Chapter 3 shows that the earlier technical ceramics (A01-50ss40 and B1-510ss28 from
Period VI:1; A-1123ss521, A2-1184ss63, and A1-1109ss511 from Period IV) produced
high purity copper, but the presence of sulfide inclusions suggests that the material
smelted included some polymetallic ore mixed with oxide and/or carbonate ore. Copper
sulfide ores must be roasted to oxidize the sulfur before smelting in a reducing
atmosphere (Eq. 4.1). The resulting compound is usually a copper oxide or copper
carbonate, depending on the initial ore composition and the roasting conditions. This
copper oxide can be smelted in a reducing atmosphere (Eq. 4.2). It is also possible to
combine ore types to retrieve copper metal in a single stage smelting operation (Eq.
4.3a,b), but this requires a specific ratio of ores and a specific smelting atmosphere. If
these conditions are not met, one can easily end up with a small amount of sulfur
associated with the copper (Eq. 4.4), resulting in non-metallic inclusions (Zwicker and
Goudarloo 1979:361), similar to those seen in the Godin prills and artifacts.
CuFeS2 + 3O2 FeO + CuO + 2SO2 (Doonan 1994:88) (Eq. 4.1)
CuO + CO Cu + CO2 (Eq. 4.2)
5CuO + CuFeS2 FeO + 2SO2 + 6Cu (Doonan 1994:88) (Eq. 4.3a)
2CuO + Cu2S 4Cu + SO2 (Ryndina 1999:1067) (Eq. 4.3b)
CuFeS2 + 4O2 CuSO4 + FeSO4 (Doonan 1994:88) (Eq. 4.4)
The later Godin crucible (AA2-193ss9) contains Sn-rich prills up to 11wt%. This
melting crucible was used for either recycling Sn bronze implements or mixing copper
with pure tin from ingots. Tin was traded in both forms (bronze and tin ingots) in
120
antiquity (Hauptman et al. 2002, Budd et al. 1995), so it would have been possible to
produce this composition of metal using either method.
The prills in B1-510ss28 (Period VI:1) and A1-1123ss521 (Period IV) contain a
copper-rich phase and a two-phase eutectic of copper plus cuprite (Cu2O) as shown in
Figure 4.4. The phase diagram for Cu-O (Figure 4.5) shows that cuprite forms in the
two-phase region just below the eutectic temperature at the copper-rich end of the
diagram. The formation of cuprite indicates that a fully reducing atmosphere was not
achieved for these crucibles as seen by the Cu-O stability diagram in Figure 4.6. It is
probable that the partial pressure of O2 was sufficient for smelting the ore at higher
temperatures (T = 1300oC and PO2 < 10-6 barr), but during cooling, the partial pressure
remained constant allowing the formation of Cu2O. The presence of ore fragments with
crucible A1-1123ss521 suggests that it was used for smelting ore, and therefore a
sufficiently reducing atmosphere must have been achieved, even if only at higher
temperatures.
121
(a) A1-1123ss521
(b) B1-510ss28
Figure 4.4: Metallographic sections of (a) A1-1123ss521, Period IV, and (b) B1-510ss28, Period
VI:1, Crucibles, unetched. Showing copper cuprite eutectic.
122
Figure 4.5: Copper rich end of the Cu-O phase diagram (Neumann et al. 1990)
Figure 4.6: Cu-O stability diagram with pressure in bar (Neumann et al. 1990).
123
Crucible fragment A1-1109ss511 from Period IV is particularly revealing of the
processing because of the high As and Sb content in the prills of the crucible slag (see
Table 3.5). Only one of the prills within this slag contains both dendrites plus
interdendritic eutectic (Figure 4.7), but this does not warrant concern since heterogeneity
from one prill to the next in the same crucible is common with smelting (Tylecote et al.
1977:311). In addition, the prill with plus eutectic is the largest prill and may have
experienced slightly different cooling kinetics than the others, allowing time for this
eutectic composition to be reached. The primary phase in this prill is Cu-4.8wt%As, but
the eutectic constituents are too fine to be resolved by electron microprobe; the averaged
Figure 4.7: Metallographic section of A1-1109ss511

124
Figure 4.8: Cu-As equilibrium phase diagram (Subramanian and Laughlin 1990).
composition of the eutectic region is Cu-26.6wt%As-2wt%Sb. This composition is
consistent with the Cu-As phase diagram (Figure 4.8) and represents a mixture of the
and phases forming just below the eutectic temperature of 685oC.
This alloy composition can result from smelting copper ores containing over
10wt%As at temperatures over 900oC, as shown in Figure 4.9 (Pollard et al. 1991).
Arsenic-bearing ores, such as tetrahedrite, occur at the Shamsabad deposit about 125 km
south east of Godin Tepe (deposit 71 in Figure 4.2). The chemical formula for the
mineral tetrahedrite is Cu12[S(SbS3)4], but arsenic will often substitute for antimony
(Bernard and Hyrsl 2004:599). If all antimony were replaced with arsenic the formula
would become Cu12[As3IVS12VIS], yielding an ore charge of approximately 15wt%As.

125
However, because of the 2wt%Sb in the prill from crucible A1-1109ss511, the formula is
probably better represented by Cu12[(Sb,As)3 IVS12VIS]. The Shamsabad deposit includes
arsenopyrite as well, which also could have contributed to the high arsenic content of the
prill (Bazin and Hubner 1969:56).
Figure 4.9: Retained arsenic during smelting operations at various temperatures, the initial arsenic
content of the ore is indicated for each line (Pollard et al. 1991).
4.1.b.iii Maximum Processing Temperatures
Temperatures reached during processing can be determined through
compositional as well as microstructural analyses. The compositions for the entrapped
metallic prills have been plotted on their respective equilibrium phase diagrams
(Appendix C, p.210) to determine the minimum temperature necessary to reach the liquid
phase (Table 4.1). The highest melting temperature (Tm) for the entrapped prills is
1115oC for A1-1123ss521, a smelting crucible from Period IV. However, this does not
126
necessarily reflect the maximum temperature reached during processing; rather, it is the
minimum temperature necessary to melt this prill composition.
Table 4.1: Melting temperatures for entrapped prills

Godin # Per. Object Phase constituents Tm (oC) Phase Diagram Ref.
A01-50ss40 VI:1 Furnace Cu 1083 --

Chakrabarti and
Cu - 20.2wt%S 1130 Laughlin 1990
Melting
B1-510ss28 VI:1 Crucible Cu 1083 --
Subramanian and
Cu - 0.9wt%As 1080 Laughlin 1990
Cu - 16.2at%S - Prince and Okamoto
0.4at%Fe 1125 1995: 9408
Smelting
A1-1123ss521 IV Crucible #1 Cu - 3.9wt%Fe 1115 Swartzendruber 1990
Cu - 33.1at%S - Subramanian and
3.1at%Fe 1125 Laughlin 1990
Smelting Cu - 8.5at%Fe - Subramanian and
A1-1123ss521 IV Crucible #2 5.4at%S 1100 Laughlin 1990
A1-40 III Tuyere Cu - 30.0wt%Sn 750 Scott 1991
Cu - 2.9wt%Fe 1090 Swartzendruber 1990
Cu - 4.3wt%Fe 1092 Swartzendruber 1990

Smelting Subramanian and
A1-1109ss511 III Crucible Cu - 6.9wt%As 1000 Laughlin 1990
Subramanian and
Subramanian and
Melting Cu - 6.0at%Sn - Prince and Okamoto
AA2-193ss9 III:4 Crucible 3.4at%As 980 1995: 4577
In addition, the discrete phases within the slag layer on the crucibles have been
analyzed to estimate minimum temperatures necessary to melt the glass phase
composition. It is generally assumed that FeO and CaO will act as fluxes in a silicate
slag, thereby lowering the melting temperature (Kongoli 2003:203; Tylecote 1992).
However, as shown in Figure 4.10, the effect of CaO content on the slag Tm depends on
127
the other constituents of the slag as well as the ratio of iron to silica (Kongoli 2003).
Most of the phases present in the Godin Tepe slags fall in the silica-saturated region or in
the wollastonite region (Table 4.2). The Tm values reported in Table 4.2 are based on the
glass phase composition for each slag. They were estimated from Kongolis (2003)
(a)
(b)
Figure 4.10: (a) Liquid regions of FeO-Fe2O3-SiO2-CaO-Al2O3 slag at 1250oC and PO2 of 10-8 atm, for
various Al2O3 contents; and (b) Liquidus surface of FeO-Fe2O3-SiO2-Al2O3-MgO slag at 7% MgO, 2%
Al2O3 and PO2 of 10-8 atm (Kongoli 2003:205).
phase diagrams (Figure 4.10) as well as those presented in Muan and Osborn (1965) and
Jahanshahi and Sun (2003). These diagrams represent the liquidus behavior of iron-rich
128
calcium-alumino-silicate slags in slightly more reducing atmospheres than were likely for
the Godin Tepe slags. These slag phase diagrams correspond to compositions that are
slightly lower in Al2O3 and higher in Fe than is typical of the Godin Tepe material, and
therefore the melting temperatures derived from these diagrams is taken as a rough
estimate of Tm. At any rate, all estimated values fell between 1200 and 1300oC,
suggesting that the metallurgical industry at Godin Tepe was a high temperature one.
Further study is required to more precisely determine the thermal history of these vessels,
and this could be done using thin section analysis for identification of the phases, DTA
for direct Tm measurement, and hot stage microscopy and remelting experiments to
determine slumping temperatures as performed for the Tal-i Iblis crucible material
(Frame 2004).
Table 4.2: Glass phase compositions for crucible slag

SiO2/ SiO2 / CaO/
Crucible Fe/SiO2 CaO Al2O3 MgO Al2O3 (K2O+Na2O) MgO Temp
A01-50ss40 0.11 35.97 9.55 6.56 3.75 18.86 5.48 >1275
B1-510ss28 0.10 15.25 12.47 6.31 4.36 17.06 2.42 >1250
A1-1123ss521 #1 0.35 12.21 11.47 0.88 4.04 18.68 13.88 ~1250
A1-1123ss521 #2 0.56 10.71 8.31 3.63 5.19 63.37 2.95 1250
A1-1123ss521 #3 0.26 10.85 9.96 4.50 5.46 46.84 2.41 ~1300
A2-1184ss63 0.14 13.53 14.83 6.15 3.35 17.27 2.20 ~1250
A1-1109ss511 0.30 14.77 12.37 2.55 3.16 14.11 5.79 ~1200
A1-40 (Tuyere) 0.30 21.67 4.12 8.63 10.44 39.83 2.51 ~1275
AA2-193ss9 0.10 5.94 16.96 2.57 3.36 6.73 2.31 >1250
4.1.c The Right-Angle Tuyere from Period III:2
Period III finds included a melting crucible, two molds, and a right-angle tuyere.
The tuyere (A1-40) is of particular interest due to its unique nature on the Iranian plateau.
129
The only other tuyeres from the Bronze Age of highland Iran have been found further
north in Azerbaijan at Kyul Tepe and Yanik Tepe (Kushnareva 1997:198). However,
these northern tuyeres are both straight and narrow (Figure 4.11), unlike Godins curved,
bulky tuyere (Figure 4.12).
(a) (b)
Figure 4.11: Straight tuyeres from (a) Yanik Tepe and (b) Kyul Tepe; scale in cm (Kushnareva
1997:198)
The tuyere fabric is similar to that of the crucible and furnace fragments in composition
and porosity. The interior is reduced with a thin layer of slag and multiple prills near one
rim. Because the external surface is free of slag droplets and contains no evidence of
splashed metal or slag during processing (typical of the upper side of tuyeres), it has
been assumed that this fragment is from the underside of the tuyere. The bellows rim is
reinforced and flattened compared to the working-rim (the rim in contact with the
furnace or crucible with which this tuyere was used), and it has an inner diameter of
approximately 3cm. The working-rim has a slightly larger inner diameter of 4cm. The
130
(a)
(b)
Figure 4.12: Tuyere from Godin Tepe (A1-40) showing (a) interior and (b) exterior.
tuyere could have been used with either a furnace or crucible, but to date, there is no
evidence for furnaces during Period III at Godin Tepe. If used with a crucible, it is likely
that the crucible contained a dip in the rim to accommodate the shape of the tuyere. The
prills near the working rim could have accumulated from the reduction of ore fragments
stuck to the tuyere or from the tuyere being positioned near the level of slag or molten
metal, i.e., the tuyere was not positioned above the fuel source pointing down. In
addition, the compositions of the prills (Table 3.5) reveal drastically different alloys.
Two prills are Cu-4wt%Fe alloys, and the other, though heavily corroded, has a very high
131
Sn content (30wt%), which may be inflated due to preferential corrosion of copper. This
is strong evidence that the Godin craftsmen were either mixing Sn-bronze alloys with Cu-
Fe alloys in a single batch, or more likely, this tuyere was used more than once during
multiple heating events for different compositions of metal.
4.1.d The Molds from Godin Tepe
The two molds from Godin Tepe are from Period III and are similar in both fabric
and internal shape (Gd69-218, Period III:1 and Gd71-120, Period III:6, Figure 4.13).
(a)
5cm
1cm
(b)
Figure 4.13: Molds from Godin Tepe (a) Gd69-218, Period III:1, and (b) Gd71-120, Period III:6
shown at the same scale.
132
These were used for casting metal strips (blanks, wedges, or elongated preforms), and are
similar in form to molds from Geoy Tepe and Kyul Tepe shown in Figure 4.14
(Kushnareva 1997:198). These Godin Tepe casting molds were not available for
sampling, but the interior surfaces are heavily vitrified and the fabric is a grit-tempered
ceramic to improve both thermal properties and durability of the mold. In addition, these
two similar-looking open-molds were from Period III:6 (Gd71-120) and Period III:1
(Gd69-218) indicating a continuity in the casting tradition of Godin Tepe throughout
Period III. As seen from the Godin Tepe metal finds (e.g., Gd67-104) closed molds were
also used during this time, though there is no evidence for casting any other forms at
Godin.
(a)
(b)
Figure 4.14: Molds from (a) Kyul Tepe, and (b) Geoy Tepe; scale in cm (Kushnareva 1997:198).
4.2 A Regional Perspective
Due to the small number of crucible and slag samples from each period and the
heterogeneity among prills within even a single crucible fragment, it is impossible to

133
match individual objects to individual crucibles with any certainty. In addition, the scale
of production at Godin Tepe represented by these crucibles is much too small to account
for all, or even many, of the objects found at the site. Rather, if we assume some
uniformity in the preservation rate of finished artifacts and manufacturing debris, then the
majority of the metal finds excavated at Godin Tepe must have been traded from other
sites along the High Road, north-south roads, or from nearby towns. Therefore, the
Godin artifacts may reveal a much broader view of metallurgical activity for the region in
which Godin Tepe interacted. The analysis of seventy out of over two hundred well-
dated metal artifacts allows interpretation of the variability and temporal trends in
production for north-central Iran.
4.2.a The Intentionality of Composition
Although the earliest metal artifacts were manufactured from native copper or
easily smelted carbonate ore (Tylecote 1992:2), as the technology progressed, alloys
became more complex and eventually compositions were specifically selected to suit the
intended function of the implements being formed. Specifically, the occurrence of higher
Cu-As alloy compositions (over 2wt%As) at Godin Tepe suggests deliberate choice
during the manufacturing process to select for specific material properties. More
generally, alloys of As and Sn were chosen to lower the melting temperature and improve
the hardness of the metal. Arsenical copper appears in the archaeological record at Godin
Tepe before tin, and this is due to multiple factors, the most obvious of which is the
limited availability of tin. However, even when tin became more widely available, the
134
shift from Cu-As alloys to Cu-Sn alloys with higher than trace amounts of Sn
(0.1wt%Sn) was gradual and occurred more rapidly for decorative artifact types. In
addition, artifacts from Periods III:2 to Period II show mixtures of As and Sn.
4.2.a.i Benefits of Arsenic and Tin Solute in Copper
Though exact values are not reported, the addition of As or Sn to pure copper
substantially increases the hardness of the metal (Figure 4.14) even at contents as low as
1-5wt%As and 5wt%Sn (Eaton and McKerrel 1976:169, Hosler 1994:276).
Unfortunately for the craftsmen, arsenic is both toxic and highly volatile, especially
during hot-working (Tylecote 1992:10), remelting, and casting (Fleming et al. 2005:40),
which means that the physical properties of the metal will change during processing as
the solute concentration decreases. However, toxicity is an argument for limiting the
processing time during hot working. In addition, although As additions above 1wt%, and
especially above 3wt% improve the hardness of copper, there is very little solid-solution
strengthening that takes place (Budd and Ottaway 1991:138). In the case of As and Sn
solute atoms, subsitutional solid-solutions are formed with copper, and typically greater
solid-solution strengthening can be achieved with larger-size atoms according to the
Hume-Rothery size effect (Bhadeshia and Honeycombe 2006:27). Therefore Sn with an
atomic radius of 140.5 pm should provide better strengthening than As with an atomic
radius of 124.5 pm when in solution with copper (127.8 pm). However, size is not the
only factor that determines a solutes ability to strengthen. The elastic behavior of the
solute and solvent also play a role in the ability of the solute to strengthen the alloy, and
135
ultimately, the mechanical properties of the metal depend largely on the microstructure
(Bhadeshia and Honeycombe 2006:27). The ability of Sn to improve the physical
properties of copper through solid solution strengthening is one of the main benefits of
this alloy element, and it is preferred when physical properties such as hardness (knife
edge-retention) are desired.
4.2.a.ii Evidence for Alloy Choice
The earliest artifacts are Cu-As alloys, with As below 5wt%. Most of these alloys
fall within the range of optimal arsenic composition, but does this reflect availability of
materials and technological practice, or a real technological choice for better alloy
compositions? An intentional alloy should be taken as one where the producer
specifically chose a particular polymetallic ore, combined multiple ore types, or
specifically mixed varying amounts of native or precast metals to achieve a prescribed set
of material properties. This is a difficult issue to address without a large sample of
objects in which process standardization can be studied; however, by dividing the
problem into two parts, ore selection and post-smelting metal selection, this issue of
technical choice can be addressed. It is concluded here that the artifacts do reflect (to an
extent) intentional selection of both ore and metal composition based on properties.
By considering whether these alloy compositions are likely to have come from
smelting a single ore, or mixing ores and/or metals, one can begin to understand the
intentionality of ore selection. Tylecote (1992:10) has shown that arsenic contents less
than 7% can be obtained easily from smelting copper-arsenic ores in a reducing

136
environment. Pollard et al. (1991) have shown that even higher amounts of As can be
retained if smelting occurs at temperatures over 900oC and if the ore charge contains at
least 20% As, at 800oC (Pollard et al. 1991:171). There are many copper-arsenic-
containing ores that include this much arsenic or more. For example, lavendulan
(NaCaCu52+[Cl(AsO4)4]5H2O) and domeykite (Cu3As), both containing up to 28% As,
and koutikite (Cu5As2), containing up to 32% As, are all found at the Talmessi deposit
500 km west-southwest from Godin Tepe (Bernard and Hyrsl 2004). This particular
deposit is known to have been heavily exploited during the Bronze Age and lies in the
Anarak district (Pigott 1999:78). With the co-occurrence of copper and arsenic, this is
also a likely source for the metal artifacts at Godin Tepe. This is not to suggest that the
Godin craftsmen were obtaining ore directly from Telmessi, which lies hundreds of km
away. It is much more likely that, since the majority of these artifacts were brought to
Godin through trade, they were produced at one of the larger production centers closer to
the ore source, such as those mentioned in Chapter 1.
Further, ores from the Telmessi deposit are high in Ni and Co (Pigott 1999:79).
This matches the high amount of Ni (commonly over 0.5wt%) observed for many of the
Period III metal artifacts. Despite the amount of nickel in the ore charge, Ni will only
appear in the metal product when smelted at temperatures over 1000oC (Pollard et al.
1990:131). If smelted at temperatures below this, it is possible to retain non-metallic Ni-
rich inclusions provided that the metal is not remelted to remove sulfides and other
intermetallics. Ni is absent in most of the earlier artifacts, and this may indicated two
possibilities. Either the appearance of Ni in some alloys reflects the use of a higher
temperature smelting practice at the major production sites of Iran, or its appearance
137
reflects a shift in ore source to a Ni-rich deposit such as Telmessi. It has already been
shown that Godin Tepe displays a high-temperature processing industry, and while this
does not prove that all producers during the Bronze Age were attaining such temperatures
during smelting, it is reasonably likely that most were reaching close to at least 1000oC.
Therefore the presence of Ni in some, but not all, metal artifacts at Godin Tepe, indicates
that these artifacts were probably coming from many production sites, some of which
were using Telmessi for ore.
Additional support for the smelting of a single Cu-As ore type stems from the
presence of silver-rich regions within the corrosion products of many artifacts, reported
for over twenty samples in many of the Chapter 3 Tables as Metal in corroded region
ranging from 25 90wt%Ag. The silver-rich end-member of the tenantite
(Cu12[S(AsS3)4]) argentotennantite ((Ag,Cu)10(Zn,Fe)2[S(As,Sb)S3]4) solid solution can
contribute small amounts of Ag to the smelted metal. Similarly, tetrahedrite
(Cu6Cu4(Zn,Fe,Hg,Ag,Cu)2[(Sb,As)3IVS12VIS]), which has been shown to occur at
deposits on the Iranian Plateau (Bazin and Hubner 1969), contributes Ag to the resulting
alloy. Further, because there is such low solubility of Ag in Cu as it cools and especially
at low temperatures (Figure 4.15), the silver remains in solution in the smelted metal, but
over time (e.g., archaeological timescales) Ag migrates to grain boundaries and regions
of lower energy to form discrete secondary phases.

138
Figure 4.15: Cu-Ag equilibrium phase diagram (Massalski and Okamoto 1990;
Murray 1984).
If Ag-rich regions were near or at the surface, a galvanic corrosion process would
occur during burial and preferentially attack the copper leaving behind silver globules in
the corrosion product. The large difference in the standard reduction potentials of copper
and silver make this galvanic corrosion is possible (Table 4.3). The presence of silver in
the corrosion products may therefore indicate the use of one of the many Cu-As-Ag ores
as charge during smelting. Some minerals also contain Ag and As without any copper,
but most of these are rare and do not occur in substantial quantities on the Iranian
Plateau, nor would they have been selected for smelting when the desired metal was a
copper-base alloy.
139
Table 4.3: Electromotive Force Series (Vansek 1984)

Reaction Standard Electrode Potential (V)
Au+ + e Au 1.692
Ag+ + e Ag 0.7996
+
Cu + e Cu 0.521
Cu2+ + 2e Cu 0.3419
As2O3 + 6H+ 6e 2As + 3H2O 0.234
Sn4+ + 2e Sn2+ 0.151
H+ + e H 0
Fe3+ + 3e Fe -0.037
Pb2+ + 2e Pb -0.1262
Ni2+ + 2e Ni -0.257
Fe2+ + 2e Fe -0.447
Sn2+ + 2e Sn -1.375
The presence of both Ag and Ni in the available arsenic-bearing, copper ores of
central Iran correlates with the resulting composition and microstructure of many metal
artifacts from Godin Tepe summarized in Table 4.4. Of particular interest are the
samples that contain low amounts of Ni in the bulk metal phase but do contain Ni-rich
sulfides. From these data, it is concluded that the majority of the artifacts analyzed from
Godin Tepe reflect intentional selection of Cu-As ores, despite the more abundant non-
arsenic bearing Cu ores available on the Iranian plateau.

140
Table 4.4: Composition of Ni- and Ag-bearing artifacts (bdl=below detection limit)
Godin No. Period Object Notes Cu As Sn Ag Ni Total
Gd73-379 VI Chisel Metal in corroded region 10.38 bdl bdl 88.99 0.11 99.51
Gd73-312 VI Object Metal 97.40 1.92 bdl bdl 0.83 100.38
bright inclusions 80.48 12.66 bdl 0.28 1.56 102.08
dark inclusion (in EM view) 81.62 8.89 bdl 0.11 0.68 97.18
B2-351ssX25 IV Nugget Metal 3.49 bdl bdl bdl 8.86 74.09
Metal (phase2) 18.24 1.03 bdl 63.72 0.22 85.61
A1-1123ss521 IV Crucible fragment #2 Prill #1 85.33 bdl bdl bdl bdl 87.11
Metal in corroded region 2.40 bdl bdl 90.24 bdl 92.64
A1-1109ss511 IV Crucible fragments Prill #1 89.33 6.85 bdl bdl 1.44 99.49
Prill #1 - Bright Inclusion 50.36 15.50 bdl 0.90 6.37 99.86
Prill #2 91.14 6.00 bdl 0.07 1.57 99.18
Prill #3 - Primary phase 93.62 4.82 bdl 0.07 0.66 99.30
Prill #3 Secondary phase 70.17 26.65 bdl bdl 0.11 99.13
Prill #3 - Bright Inclusion 34.55 9.01 bdl 17.47 5.70 106.57
Gd65-33 III Chisel Metal 96.56 2.09 0.67 0.22 0.14 100.11
Dark Inclusions 92.17 1.70 0.09 0.18 0.12 98.81
Metal in corroded region 11.14 bdl 0.14 77.08 bdl 88.52
Metal in corroded region 21.55 7.85 0.25 27.57 bdl 96.59
Gd71-153 III (?) Needle Metal 97.18 2.27 bdl 0.07 0.10 99.67
Bright Inclusion 37.65 7.42 0.23 bdl 0.23 96.32
Dark Inclusion 51.54 1.65 0.57 bdl 2.85 84.08
Gd71-19 III:6 Chisel Metal 97.76 2.10 0.05 0.10 0.05 101.04
Metal in corroded region 66.84 1.38 0.05 26.71 0.05 95.53
Gd71-49 III:6 Wire Metal 98.45 1.36 bdl 0.18 0.03 100.02
Metal in corroded region 45.67 0.69 bdl 28.07 bdl 74.49
Gd73-103 III:6 Pin Metal 96.30 2.96 bdl 0.08 bdl 100.33
Metal in corroded region 42.04 0.78 0.30 50.97 bdl 94.63
140
141
Table 4.4: Composition of Ni- and Ag-bearing artifacts (continued)

Gd71-73 III:6 Pin Metal 95.88 3.02 bdl 0.12 0.04 99.37
Gd73-68 III:6 Wire/Pin Metal 97.44 2.25 bdl 0.16 bdl 99.97
Gd67-113 III:6 Pin Metal 100.26 bdl bdl 0.14 bdl 100.40
Bright Inclusion 40.74 bdl bdl 35.59 bdl 76.50
Gd71-188 III:6 Needle Metal 96.84 2.72 bdl 0.10 0.13 100.30
Metal in corroded region 22.14 1.31 bdl 78.74 0.03 104.15
Gd73-109 III:6 Needle Metal 96.57 2.74 bdl 0.13 bdl 100.60
Gd73-82 III:6 Needle Metal (mineralized) 66.38 8.20 bdl bdl bdl 75.34
Gd71-50 III:6 Needle Metal 96.62 2.35 bdl 0.15 0.06 99.43
Gd67-102 III:6 Bracelet Metal 94.36 2.17 2.40 0.08 0.12 99.41
Bright Inclusion 49.89 1.39 2.33 0.53 0.07 93.91
Bright Inclusion 82.99 3.12 bdl bdl 0.40 100.92
Dark Inclusion 91.51 3.80 1.42 0.09 0.87 99.62
Metal in corroded region 70.27 bdl 1.45 15.92 0.06 88.01
A1-347ss25 III:6 coil to fubula pin? Metal 97.41 1.55 bdl 0.55 bdl 99.79
Bright Inclusion 96.81 1.64 bdl 0.58 bdl 99.68
A1-188ss9 III:5 Pin? Metal 96.83 3.21 bdl 0.11 0.03 100.18
Intergranular deposit 69.58 4.66 bdl 26.40 0.11 100.80
141
142
Table 4.4: Composition of Ni- and Ag-bearing artifacts (continued)
Gd69-693 III:4 Pin Metal 95.90 3.51 0.06 bdl bdl 100.87
Bright Inclusion 80.73 2.23 0.78 2.59 bdl 87.54
A1-69ss2 III:4 Nugget Metal 97.06 2.20 0.09 bdl 0.17 100.01
AA2-193ss9 III:4 Crucible Prill #1 83.80 3.91 10.88 bdl 0.22 99.23
AA2-176ss5 III:2 Blade Metal 66.17 bdl 13.50 bdl bdl 80.13
Metal in corroded region 5.03 bdl 6.67 74.35 bdl 86.15
Gd69-694 III:2 Chisel Metal 96.05 1.80 1.46 0.07 0.36 100.50
Gd67-237 III:2 Blade Metal tip 86.91 1.50 9.16 bdl 0.45 98.11
Metal center 90.49 1.00 7.47 0.07 0.43 99.54
Intergranular Deposit 84.90 bdl 7.82 5.52 0.44 98.77
Gd67-196 III:2 Armor-plate Metal 93.31 1.20 1.99 bdl 0.47 99.41
Gd67-207 III:2 Pin Metal 89.21 bdl 8.43 bdl 0.95 99.53
Gd67-215 III:2 Pin Metal 89.58 bdl 9.39 bdl 0.22 99.45
Gd67-219 III:2 Pin Metal 93.58 1.23 4.66 0.09 0.25 99.96
Gd67-453 Post III:2 Bracelet Metal 89.61 0.79 8.97 bdl 0.39 99.96
Dark Inclusion 81.74 1.07 5.14 0.37 0.22 96.90
142
143
The next part of this issue of intentionality is to determine whether specific alloy
compositions were selected after smelting copper and arsenic ores. Budd and Ottaway
(1991) and Lechtman (1996) show that less than 2wt%As does not significantly improve
the hardness of Cu, increasing the hardness from VHNCu=50 to only VHNCu-2wt%As=53
(1996:488), and over 6 to 8wt%As diminishes the ductility to the point of making cold
working quite difficult (1996:481). Therefore, the optimal range of arsenic to achieve
maximum hardness while maintaining good cold-working conditions is 2 to 6wt%As.
This optimal range is achieved for many of the Godin Tepe metals as shown in a
tabulation of the compositions of the objects (Figure 4.16). Also, the small number of
decorative objects, such as bracelets, that fall within the optimal range of 2 6wt%As
suggests that this optimal As content was specifically chosen for artifacts that would
require these improved mechanical properties. Most of the Period III objects in the 2
6wt%As range are chisels, undecorated pins, and needles. The absence of optimal
Presenc
Presence ofofAsAsininGodin
Godin metal
Metalartifacts
Artifacts
100%
80%
>6wt%
60%
2-6wt%As
40%
<2wt%As
20%
0%
VI IV III:6 III:5 III:4 III:3 III:2 Post II
III:2
Period
Figure 4.16: The presence of optimum composition arsenic in Godin Tepe metal artifacts.
144
composition As-bearing artifacts during Period III:2 or later is a result of the introduction
of tin as a common alloying element at this time. The only utilitarian artifacts that
contained no Sn during the later Periods were the projectiles (arrowheads and spearheads)
that require high overall toughness, not hardness (though the edges would require cold-
working to allow the point to slice through its target). These data indicate that aside from
the earliest period, Cu-As alloys were usually produced in the composition range with
optimal hardness for the metal indicating that a patterned activity was practiced by
craftsmen who knew what they were doing. They were willing to work with a more toxic
material in a limited range of composition to obtain a product with a particular set of
properties even though the raw materials were farther away.
The addition of tin to copper was another technical choice made by these ancient
craftsmen. For metal production in Iran, where it was previously assumed that there are
few tin deposits associated with the copper deposits (Bazin and Hubner 1969), and where
the earlier metals contain only trace amounts of tin (<0.09wt%), it is tempting to call any
tin above 1wt% deliberate. However, this is unreasonable given the recent evidence for
ancient mining activity at a Cu-Sn deposit in Luristan (Deh Hosein), and the large
amount of recycling of bronze objects that was possible well before large amounts of tin
were available at great distances from the major sources. Also, though the Deh Hosein
deposit is small, it would have been sufficient to contribute low amounts of tin to copper
alloys (Nezafati et al. 2007). It should be noted that such co-occurrences of copper and
tin ore are also present in southwestern Afghanistan (though not in Anatolia), and these
145
could yield 2wt%Sn bronzes (Stech 1999:62). Artifacts produced in these regions may
have been of noticeably harder metal. However, after recycling these low-Sn containing
artifacts, the result was probably low-Sn metal implements exhibiting no benefit in
material properties. This indicates a transitional stage of experimentation where the
mechanism for recognizing higher quality alloys and the recipes for optimal tin content
were not yet established. Regardless, our identification of intentional Cu-Sn alloys
should be based on the presence of Sn at quantities that cause noticeable changes in the
metal. These differences in the metal could include color change (for high tin content), a
change in the sound of the metal (Hosler 1994), or a change in the mechanical properties
of the metal during processing and subsequent use. It has been argued that such changes
occur at tin contents as low as 2wt% (Stech 1999:62), but the evidence for this is sparse,
so the more widely accepted value of 5wt%Sn will be taken as the threshold for
noticeable changes in the physical properties of the metal (Moorey 1969:134, Lechtman
1996). For this reason, artifacts with tin contents of 5wt% or greater will be considered
deliberate alloys.
Most of the Period III:2 and Period II Sn-bearing artifacts from Godin Tepe
include at least 5wt%Sn, reflecting intentionality of the producers to create Sn-bronze.
The earlier artifacts often contain both As and Sn in lower quantities, and it is argued
here that this also reflects intentional alloy production, but of a more transitional
character. The Godin Tepe metal artifacts reflect a transition from unintentional Cu-Sn
alloys to intentional Sn-bronze production, which is in opposition to previous views that

146
the appearance of tin in copper was deliberate (a view summarized, but not held by
Lechtman 1996:478).
4.2.a.iii Transition from Cu-As to Cu-Sn alloys
Tin was hard to come by in southwest Asia; production centers, such as that at
Goltepe, Turkey (Yener and Vandiver 1993) and others in Afghanistan may have
provided tin ingots for most of western Asia. These were melted and mixed with copper
according to established recipes to produce finished commodities (Muhly 1977; Charles
1977). It has been argued that additions of 5wt%Sn or less would not greatly alter the
physical properties of the metal (Eaton and McKerrel 1976), nor yield a visible color
change. Why, then, are there so many artifacts containing low levels of Sn? One
possibility for this trend is that recycling high Sn-bronze artifacts with other reasonably
well-performing objects that happen to be composed of Cu-As, lowered the Sn
concentration while introducing As to the alloy. Many of the Godin Tepe low-Sn-
bronzes contain 1-3wt%As. Unfortunately no relationships are patterned among the Sn
content and the other elements or with the compositions of the inclusions, thus making it
difficult to identify recycling with any certainty.
These Cu-As-Sn alloy objects may actually perform just as well as others with
higher contents of Sn and As, but because these are not industrially-relevant alloy
compositions, little research has been done to determine their mechanical properties
(Lechtman 1996). The relationship between tin content and artifact type by period is
shown in Figure 4.17. Although many of the artifacts with lower than 5wt%Sn are
147
bracelets and pins, there are also chisels with low Sn. These utilitarian objects are the
artifacts that also contain low amounts of As, but further study is required to prove that
low-Sn-low-As alloys do possess some beneficial mechanical properties.
16.00
14.00
12.00 Chisel
10.00 Blades
wt%Sn
8.00 Pins
6.00 Bracelets
4.00 Nuggets
2.00
0.00
III:6
III:5
III:4
III:3
III:2
Post III:2
II
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00
Period
Figure 4.17: Tin content according to period and artifact type.
The reason for many bracelets and pins with low tin content may also be rooted in
social rather than technological choices. Tin was valued for its rarity and the effort
necessary to obtain it from far away (Stech and Pigott 1986:48). Stech and Pigott argue
that because the mechanical advantages of using tin bronze are not easily distinguishable
from those of arsenical copper, the value would be rooted in the status (not the function)
of the objects, and the presence of tin was conveyed verbally. This may mean that by
adding some tin to an object, even though it is not enough tin to impart changes to the
physical properties of the metal, it now has a greater status and the word of the
craftsman is all that is needed to show that it really contains tin. It is difficult to believe
that these verbal assertions would travel over great distances with the artifacts, but even
148
today we see consumers who trust a label or brand in absence of noticeable property
differences in commodities. It would be interesting to consider how long tin may have
been revered primarily for its status as an exotic and rare commodity rather than an
advantageous alloying element, but this is a topic for a future project.
It is possible that the presence of Sn in such low quantities was either
unintentional or the alloy resulted from inadequate choice of objects for recycling, that is,
choosing Cu-As rather than Cu-Sn metals, and I believe this is true for the earlier
appearances of tin. However, the composition of Godin Tepe metal artifacts conveys a
clear trend towards increased tin and arsenic content and overall complexity in
composition. This transition reflects the development of technological choice of alloys as
well as the exploitation of more complex poly-metallic ore sources, and increased
recycling of artifacts as seen in the dirty alloys found outside of burial contexts.
4.2.b Methods of Manufacture
In order to understand the technological changes in processing for these objects,
they must be examined by functional object type through time. The method of
manufacture can be determined based on the microstructure of the artifacts. In general,
the microstructure revealed a large range of processing methods, especially for the early
objects. However, upon closer examination, it became clear that artifacts within
particular functional groups were produced in remarkably similar ways. The best
evidence for this lies with the chisels.

149
All of the chisels (Figures 3.11, 3.12, 3.15, and 3.28) have been heavily worked to
the point of containing fine grains with annealing twins and slip lines and having a well-
defined lamellar structure, emphasized by the segregation of solute content, which etches
darker with ferric chloride. In addition, the elongation of non-metallic inclusions shows
an aspect ratio of as much as 25:1. On average, the chisels show 25 65% reduction in
thickness, based on the elongated morphology of the sulfide inclusions.
The arrowheads and spearheads were also produced for specific performance
criteria in mind. The high aspect ratio of the inclusions indicates heavy working to
achieve the desired shape (Figures 3.30 and 3.36). The arrow/spearheads were then fully
annealed at high temperatures (>600oC) for multiple hours (>2hrs) to promote grain
growth yielding large equiaxed grains, free of defects (Budd 1991:117). These large
grains would provide maximum toughness for the projectiles. Additionally, the
composition for these artifacts (usually pure copper) suggests a further desire to minimize
hardness since Cu-As and Cu-Sn alloys would increase tensile strength but decrease
overall toughness. This high toughness is desired in arrowheads because it would allow
them to absorb and disperse some of the energy of the impact. If they were fine-grained
with many defects, they would be extremely brittle and may fracture after only a few
uses. The energy absorption of the large-grained microstructure would not prevent them
from slicing through their target, provided the edges and tip were cold-hammered.
Further, the long annealing time required to allow recrystallization and grain growth
reflect an intentional processing to achieve this high-toughness property. The three
artifacts from Burial 2 in square AA2 (Gd67-450, 452, and 455) are all similar in
150
morphology, leading to their classification as arrowheads. However, two (Gd67-450 and
Gd67-452) have heavily worked microstructures necessary for cutting tools, and the third
(Gd67-455) has heavily annealed grains, typical of projectile points. Therefore, despite
the similar typology of these weapons, the true intentions of their use appear to be quite
different.
The blades and daggers include both functional and decorative samples. The
earliest blade (Gd71-261) is cast, and only slightly worked suggesting that it is largely
decorative. Of the three later blades and daggers (Gd67-202, AA2-176ss5, and Gd67-
237) only Gd67-237 contained enough metal to discern the microstructure. This blade
showed signs of working by the slightly elongated grains and annealing twins, but in
general the grains were large and equiaxed. Similarly, the armor-plate (Gd67-196)
contained large grains, beneficial to its function as a means to absorb the shock of
oncoming projectiles. Overall, these artifacts reflect manufacturing methods that were
constrained by the intended function of the object.
This is not the case for decorative artifacts from Godin Tepe. Unlike the
utilitarian weapons and tools, there is a high degree of variability among the decorative
artifacts such as pins, needles, and bracelets. The pins and needles include both
functional and decorative samples. Most of the pins and needles from the earlier periods
are straight and undecorated, but although they were manufactured with the same purpose
in mind, their microstructures reveal that a variety of manufacturing methods were
employed. Their microstructures show that they have been processed to provide hardness
(fine-grained microstructure or large grains with multiple slip lines to minimize defect
151
movement and deformation) without creating an overly brittle tool. The later pins
contain surface decoration such as ridges (Gd67-126, Period III:6 and Gd71-344, Period
II), holes (Gd67-219 and Gd67-215, both Period III:2) and flattened ends (Gd67-113,
Period III:6 and Gd67-207, Period III:2). These are often produced in very different
ways ranging from fine-grained to fully-annealed to heavily worked. The compositions
are also varied for these objects, but Gd67-219 and Gd67-215 are worthy of note in that
they are similar in typology and microstructure and found in the same burial. The main
difference between them is that one is high tin (9wt%) and the other is lower tin (5wt%),
which would cause a color difference between these two highly decorative elite items.
The bracelets represent even greater variability in manufacturing methods. The
voids present at the centers of some bracelets rapid cooling during casting indicating that
they were cast in closed molds where metal solidified at the edges first; this is best seen
with Gd67-104 (Figure 3.21a). Some of these items have been only minimally worked
after casting (as seen from the slightly deformed dendrites in Figure 3.21). Others have
been annealed and worked to the point of showing annealing twins. Often, the edges in
cross-sectional view show signs of additional working (slip lines); this may be from
forming the bracelet or obtaining the desired surface finish (Gd67-231, Figure 3.33). It is
likely that they were cast and then worked enough to achieve the desired shape and
surface finish. That some have a preserved cast structure while others do not, may be
related more closely to the composition as well as the processing. The discrepancy
between the atomic size of Cu and Sn is larger than between Cu and As, which allows for
a higher diffusivity of As in copper than Sn; this enables easier redistribution of the As in
152
solution during annealing episodes, though complete redistribution of the As solute still
requires many hours of annealing at 600oC or higher (Budd 1991:117). The preserved
cast structures appear more frequently in objects with higher tin and arsenic content
(Gd67-231, Gd67-207, and Gd71-207), which is consistent with this property.
This group of objects is not utilitarian, meaning that it is not necessary to
manufacture them in a particular way or with a particular composition for them to fulfill
their intended purpose. An interesting consideration, then, is the composition of some
bracelets. Gd67-231 (5wt%Sn) and Gd67-453 (9wt%Sn) are of particular high Sn
bronze. This higher tin content was not necessary for increased hardness as seen with
chisels and blades. Instead, the high tin content would create a more golden-looking
metal and give it a more resonant sound, thus reinforcing the idea that tin was just as
much a social-status commodity as it was a utilitarian one. The high degree of variability
in both microstructure and composition of these bracelets indicates that different
craftsmen, workshops, and towns may have had their own methods of producing similar
looking bracelets by employing widely different techniques. For example, Gd67-103 and
Gd67-104 are similar in typology with overlapping ends (Appendix B), but the former is
heavily annealed (Figure 3.20a), while the latter is cast (Figure 3.21). The variety of
bracelet microstructures most likely represents separate workshop facilities (or at least
separate craftsmen) who are copying style from regional fashions but are not copying
technology from contemporary craftsmen.
Other items, such as the nuggets and the probable figurine or standard fragment
from Period VI:1 (Gd73-312), are generally as-cast. The nuggets are probably scraps
153
from processing or spare pieces of metal, but it is difficult to determine this without more
contextual evidence. As noted above, the early cast object (Gd73-312) may be part of a
figurine or standard. This is supported by the presence of a standard (Gd73-102) in a
square adjacent to Gd73-312, both at the Godin VI:1 level. However, Gd73-102 remains
in the Iranian collection in the National Museum in Tehran. These two are similar in
their thickness and overall appearance.
4.2.b.i Cooling Rates for Cast Objects
In addition to the manufacturing methods, the microstructures of the nine cast
samples can be studied to estimate the cooling rate during casting events. The method
presented below was also applied to one crucible prill that had a preserved cast structure
(Figure 4.7). The compositions for the ten samples are summarized in Table 4.5. The
cooling rate was estimated based on measurements of secondary dendrite arm spacing
(SDAS).
Table 4.5: Metal artifacts with dendritic microstructures (bdl=below detection limit)
Object # Description n Period Cu As Sn Fe Ni Ag Sb Total
Figurine
Gd73-312 10 VI 97.40 1.92 bdl 0.09 0.83 bdl 0.10 100.34
fragment
Gd71-261 Blade 16 IV 96.43 2.51 0.05 0.53 0.15 bdl 0.06 99.73
Crucible
A1-1109ss511 2 IV 93.62 4.82 bdl bdl 0.66 0.07 0.13 99.30
prill
Gd67-104 Bracelet 20 III:6 93.70 3.02 1.33 1.08 0.76 0.27 0.07 100.23
A1-69ss2 Nugget* 4 III:4 97.06 2.20 0.09 0.16 0.17 bdl 0.06 99.74
B1-38 Nugget* 10 III:4 90.97 0.93 7.63 0.12 0.15 bdl bdl 98.92
Gd67-231 Bracelet 15 III:2 93.32 1.27 5.04 0.07 0.30 0.06 0.05 100.11
Gd73-419 Pin 4 II 97.11 1.59 bdl 0.44 0.27 bdl bdl 99.41
* Probable raw material lump that was cast prior to forming.
154
Cooling rate is taken here as the average rate during solidification, that is, the total
decrease in temperature divided by the total time for solidification. This cooling rate
depends on the cooling environment and geometry of the metal object. Faster cooling
rates allow less time for ripening of dendrites and therefore result in microstructures with
finer texture and closer spacing of secondary dendrite arms (Reed-Hill and Abbaschian
1994). Using this knowledge cooling rates can be calculated based on the SDAS
following the general relationship shown graphically in Figure 4.18 and mathematically
in Equation 4.5 (Askeland 1984:160).

Figure 4.18: Relationship between secondary dendrite arm spacing (SDAS) and cooling rate ( T )
for different alloys (after Askeland 1984:160 and Grugel 1993).
SDAS = kT& n (Eq. 4.5)

155
is the average cooling rate in oC/s, and k and n are constants.

where SDAS is in m, T
Experimental values of n vary between 0.33 and 0.5 (Miettinen 2001) and depend on the
composition of the melt. This relationship has been heavily explored for Al-Cu alloys
(Bardes and Flemings 1966; Flemings et al. 1991; Glicksman et al. 1992; Kattamis et al.
1967; Miyata et al. 1985), but these aluminum alloys typically show a different set of
SDAS cooling rate curves than Cu-base alloys. The cooling rates reported here are based
on the updated equation reported by Miettinen (2006).
SDAS = 180 T& 0.33 exp(C 0.3 ) (Eq. 4.6)
C takes into account the alloy composition, and for the alloys discussed here, C was
calculated based on Equation 4.7. Each solute element is expressed in wt% as Ci, where
i is Fe, Ni, Pb, etc. (J. Miettinen personal communication 2007).
C = 0.17(C Fe + C Ni ) + 0.3(C Pb + C As + C Sb ) + C Ag + 0.37C Sn 0.02C Fe C Ni + 0.008C Pb C Sn
(Eq. 4.7)
The SDAS was calculated from micrographs of the artifacts using Equations 4.6 and 4.7,
and these values are reported in Table 4.6.

156
Table 4.6: Calculated cooling rates for Godin Tepe cast artifacts

Object # Period Description Ave SDAS (m) C (wt%) T (oC/s)
Gd73-312 VI Figurine fragment 29.72 0.76 14.05
A1-69ss2 III:4 Nugget 81.61 0.81 0.64
Gd71-261 IV Blade 81.69 0.95 0.56
Gd67-104 III:6 Bracelet 64.90 2.03 0.52
Gd67-231 III:2 Bracelet 84.76 2.72 0.17
B1-38 III:4 Nugget 82.71 3.17 0.15
Gd73-419 II Pin 145.30 0.64 0.14
A1-1109ss511 IV Crucible prill 112.59 1.67 0.12
The rates indicate that there are three methods of cooling, or casting and
annealing, which yield cooling rates of 14oC/s, ~0.55oC/s, and ~0.15oC/s, regardless of
artifact type. Table 4.7 presents examples of cooling rates for quenching in water or a
water-oil mixture as well as cooling in a furnace. It should be noted that the secondary
dendrite arm spacing is indicative of the entire cooling process given that ripening occurs
while the secondary arms are in contact with the melt (Kurz and Fisher 1984:73).
Therefore, a low cooling rate may suggest furnace cooling as well as possible annealing.
Based on the values reported in Table 4.7, most of the artifacts could be described as
furnace-cooled. This matches well with the low cooling rate estimated for the crucible
prill (A1-1109ss511) since it is likely that the crucible containing this entrapped prill
would have cooled slowly in situ after the smelting event was finished. Furnace-cooled
suggests slow and relatively controlled cooling, but this phrase should not carry the same
precision as it does in modern industrial practice. These artifacts would have been cast
into open, closed, or lost wax molds, and although relative cooling rates may be assumed
for these casting methods (i.e., a closed mold would produce a slower cooling rate than
157
an open mold), exact cooling rates for these presumed ancient practices have not yet been
determined.
Table 4.7: Typical cooling rates

Cooling Rate
Cooling Method Reference
(oC/s)
Quenched in water at 25oC 110 Sinha 2003:13.11
Quenched in 90% water : 10% oil at 50oC 16 Sinha 2003:13.11
Air-cooled in a furnace ~0.5 Anastasiadi et al. 1985
4.3 Conclusions
The major contributions of this thesis include the investigation of 70 metal
artifacts and nine technical ceramics using traditional techniques, such as WDS-
microprobe and metallographic analyses, as well as applying experimental and theoretical
solidification data to estimate processing temperatures and cooling rates that were
achieved in antiquity. Further, the variability in composition and microstructure of the
Godin Tepe metal artifacts illustrates the transitions occurring in copper production
technology across the plateau.
In general, the technology represented by the artifacts at Godin Tepe shows
several temporal trends. First, it moves from aesthetic (early cast object) to utilitarian
and decorative. This is a conclusion biased by the limited evidence from the earliest
levels; the chisel from Period VI:1 contained no metal for microstructural analysis, and
many of the other Period VI:1 finds remain in Iran. However, of the two figurines and
158
one standard excavated at Godin Tepe, both the standard and one of the figurines were
found in Period VI:1 contexts, and the early blade was cast with little subsequent
working. Aesthetic and decorative items made up a larger proportion of the artifact
assemblage outside of burial contexts during the earlier periods.
It is interesting that the decorative items (pins and bracelets) vary widely in their
manufacture. The different microstructures of similar looking pins and bracelets suggest
that there was little communication and regulation of manufacturing practices among
what are assumed to be multiple producers of the region. The only exceptions to this are
the chisels and the arrow/spearheads, which are produced for specific purposes, requiring
and having very specific properties. For example, the chisels all have work-hardened tips
and the projectiles have been heavily annealed.
The styles of bracelets, pins, and even the daggers (Gd67-202) at Godin Tepe are
similar to a variety of artifacts across the Iranian plateau and northern Mesopotamia. For
example, the dagger (Gd67-202) is similar to one at the Bronze Age sanctuary of Tang-i
Hamamlan in Luristan (Thran 1964:158) as well as one from Haft Tepe dating to 1500-
1350 BCE (Negahban 1991:47). The spearheads (Gd67-450, 453, and 455) are similar to
those found in the Warriors Grave at Baba Jan (Period Giyan IIb, 1500-1400 BCE)
(Goff 1976). The bracelets with overlapping ends also appear at Dinkha Tepe during late
Godin III (Rubinson 1991:381), at Agrab Tepe during Godin II (Muscarella 1973:66-67)
and Susa in the 3rd millennium BCE (Carter 1980). The pins with the button-top and hole
at mid-shaft (Gd67-215 and 219) also find parallels at Baba Jan Grave 4 (Godin Period
III) and Dinka Tepe (Rubinson 1991:385). In general, there is greater similarity between
159
metal finds at Godin and other sites on the Plateau and to the West, than farther to the
East in ancient Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan (Lamberg-Karlovsky 1967), despite the
other evidence for contact with these cultures (Khan 1968).
The frequent appearance of similar style objects across the Iranian Plateau,
Luristan, and Mesopotamia does not necessarily reflect the heavy traffic of metal from
one end of the High Road to the other. Rather it indicates the transfer of a style and the
likely reproduction of that style at workshops throughout the region. This would
correlate well with the differences in production methods for similar style artifacts
(especially the pins and bracelets). However, these similar style bracelets are not
necessarily diagnostic of the trade of goods or the spread of a fashionable accessory since
it is a style that also appears frequently in the Northeastern Balkan Eneolithic (Ryndina
1999:1061) and probably elsewhere. If the bracelets of the Iranian Plateau are similar in
microstructure to those of Mesopotamia to the West, and ancient Turkmenistan to the
East, then perhaps it could be argued that they represent a shared technology for bracelet
manufacture. Unfortunately the resolution of data required for such a comparison is
unavailable.
Another conclusion drawn from these results is that the metallurgical technology
of this region progresses from Cu-As alloys to a wider variety of copper alloys ranging
from pure copper to high tin bronze and high arsenical bronze and eventually iron. There
is a clear progression in knowledge of which alloy compositions provide or enhance
particular physical properties whether mechanical, visual, or audible qualities. However,
the presence of co-deposits of copper and tin on the Iranian Plateau in combination with
160
the presence of low-Sn, low-As alloys supports the hypothesis that this transition to tin
bronze was both less intentional and more gradual than previously assumed.
By Period II, iron implements are common at Godin Tepe, though these have not
been analyzed in this study due to their heavy corrosion and friability. There is a distinct
shift in the distribution of copper artifacts from utilitarian as well as decorative, to
primarily decorative. Most of the bronze artifacts are bracelets, pins, needles, and
arrowheads, but there are no chisels, blades, or daggers of bronze during Period IIall of
these implements are now made of iron. The continued presence of bronze arrowheads
may reflect the benefit of using a material of greater ductility and therefore toughness for
projectile points. This shift to the use of iron for utilitarian items is echoed in Luristan
during the Iron III period (Fleming et al. 2005:43).
As the field of Iranian archaeometallurgy progresses, it is becoming equally
necessary to analyze recently excavated artifacts with known context and provenience as
well as artifacts that have been in museum storage for decades. As is the case with Godin
Tepe, the rediscovery of excavated artifacts can shed light on the technological scene
of a site as well as the region in which it is situated. The results presented in this thesis
contribute to the understanding of small scale metal production on the Iranian Plateau, as
well as understanding regional variability in manufacture of common metal implements.
It is hoped that, when compared to the finds in storage at the museum in Tehran as well
as the material from current excavations, these results will elucidate the technological
scene of Bronze Age and Iron Age west Asia.

161
APPENDIX A:
Full List of Metal Artifacts Excavated from Godin Tepe
ROM In this
Accession No. Godin No. Period Object Material Location study
Gd 65-36 VI:1 Pin Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 73-37 VI:1 Pin Copper-alloy ROM
973.456.134 Gd 73-367 VI:1 Pin Copper-alloy ROM

No
Gd 65-37 VI Pin Copper-alloy Record
Gd 73-85 VI:1 Needle Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 73-414 VI:1 Needle Copper-alloy Tehran
973.456.115 Gd 73-312 VI:1 Object Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 73-366 VI:1 Figurine Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 73-102 VI:1 Standard Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 73-249 VI:1 Chisel Copper-alloy Tehran
973.456.140 Gd 73-379 VI:1 Chisel Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 73-49 VI:1 Spearhead Copper-alloy Tehran
973.456.43 Gd 73-86 IV Pin Copper-alloy ROM X
973.456.71 Gd 73-186 IV:1b Spoon Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 73-72 IV:1 Ring Copper-alloy Tehran

No
Gd 65-34 IV Chisel Copper-alloy Record
971.486.14 Gd 71-261 IV Blade Copper-alloy ROM X
B2-351ssX25 IV Nugget Copper-alloy ROM X
973.456.51 Gd 73-103 III:6 Pin Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 67-114 III:6 Pin Copper-alloy NF
Gd 67-115 III:6 Pin Copper-alloy Tehran

162
ROM In this
Gd 67-136 III:6 Pin Copper-alloy Discarded
Gd 67-137 III:6 Pin Copper-alloy ROM

Needle or
Gd 71-329 III:6 pin Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 71-107 III:6 Needle ? Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 73-97 III:6 Needle Copper-alloy NF
Gd 71-328 III:6 Needle Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 73-81 III:6 Needle Copper-alloy ROM
971.486.116 Gd 71-276 III:6 Needle Copper-alloy ROM X

163
ROM In this
971.486.38 Gd 71-49 III:6 Wire Copper-alloy ROM X
971.486.42 Gd 71-71 III:6 Pin/wire Lead/Silver ROM
Gd 67-119 III:6 Ring Copper-alloy Tehran
971.486.43 Gd 71-72 III:6 Ring Lead ROM
Gd 71-220 III:6 Ring Lead/Silver Tehran
967.326.46 Gd 67-117 III:6 Bracelet Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 73-121 III:6 Bracelet Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 71-269 III:6 Bead Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 67-120 III:6 Button Copper-alloy Discarded
Gd 71-134 III:6 Spearhead Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 73-96 III:6 Arrowhead Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 71-26 III:6 Blade Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 71-292 III:6 Point Copper-alloy Tehran
971.486.15 Gd 71-55 III:6 Gouge Copper-alloy ROM

Chisel or
Gd 71-241 III:6 gouge Copper-alloy Tehran
971.486.28 Gd 71-19 III:6 Chisel Copper-alloy ROM X

Awl or
971.486.131 Gd 71-318 III:6 chisel Copper-alloy ROM X
Nugget,
A1-347ss25 III:6 fibula coil? Copper-alloy ROM X
164
ROM In this
A1-351ss26 III:6 Nugget Copper-alloy ROM X
A1-188ss9 III:5 Pin Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 69-603 III:4 Rings Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 69-757 III:4 Ring Gold Tehran

Pin or
Gd 69-554 III:4 chisel Copper-alloy Tehran
Gouge
969.370.11 Gd 69-727 III:4 chisel Copper-alloy ROM
A1-69ss2 III:4 Nugget Copper-alloy ROM X
B1-38 III:4 Nugget Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 69-695 III:3 Chisel Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 67-183 III:2 Pin Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 69-551 III:2 Pin Lead Tehran

165
ROM In this
967.326.16 Gd 67-216 III:2 Pin Copper-alloy ROM
M'B#5 III:2 Pin Copper-alloy ROM X
AA2-154ss1 III:2 Wire Copper-alloy ROM X
967.326.70 Gd 67-209 III:2 Ring Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 69-315 III:2 Ring Copper-alloy NF
967.326.79 Gd 67-233 III:2 Band Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 67-230 III:2 Bowl Copper-alloy Tehran
967.326.14 Gd 67-224 III:2 Anklet Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 67-225 III:2 Anklet Copper-alloy NF
Gd 67-203 III:2 Bowl Copper-alloy Tehran
967.326.13 Gd 67-403 III:2 Bowl Copper-alloy ROM
967.326.7 Gd 67-214 III:2 Istakan Copper-alloy ROM

166
ROM In this
Gd 67-212 III:2 Buttons Copper-alloy NF
967.326.91 Gd 67-254 III:2 Button Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 67-395 III:2 Bead Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 69-321 III:2 Figurine Copper-alloy Tehran

Plaque of
Gd 67-456 III:2 some sort Copper-alloy Tehran
967.326.131 Gd 67-397 III:2 Nail Copper-alloy ROM

Armourpla
967.326.64 Gd 67-196 III:2 te Copper-alloy ROM X
Armourpla
Gd 67-195 III:2 te Copper-alloy Tehran
967.326.65 Gd 67-201 III:2 Arrowhead Copper-alloy ROM X

Arrow/
Gd 67-449 III:2 spear head Copper-alloy Tehran
Arrow/
967.326.11 Gd 67-450 III:2 spear head Copper-alloy ROM X
Arrow/
967.326.10 Gd 67-452 III:2 spear head Copper-alloy ROM X
Arrow/
Gd 67-451 III:2 spear head Copper-alloy Tehran
967.326.15 Gd 67-455 III:2 Spearhead Copper-alloy ROM X
967.326.82 Gd 67-237 III:2 Blade Copper-alloy ROM X
AA2-176ss5 III:2 Blade Copper-alloy ROM X
967.326.66 Gd 67-202 III:2 Dagger Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 67-211 III:2 Knife Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 67-186 III:2 Saw Copper-alloy Tehran
C2-112ss10 III:2 Chisel Copper-alloy ROM X

167
ROM In this
Gd 67-128 Post III Earrings Copper-alloy Discarded
Gd 67-127 Post III Bracelet Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 67-130 Post III Cup Copper-alloy Tehran
967.326.149 Gd 67-131 Post III Bowl Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 69-212 Post III Rod Iron Tehran
969.370.49 Gd 69-211 Post III Point Iron ROM
Gd 69-331 Post III Arrowhead Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 67-355 III Pin Copper-alloy Discarded
967.326.45 Gd 67-113 III Pin Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 69-728 III Pin Copper-alloy Discarded
971.486.73 Gd 71-153 III Needle Copper-alloy ROM X
A2-5 III Wire Silver ROM X
B2 ssX18 III Wire Lead ROM X
969.370.80 Gd 69-441 III Ring Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 69-324 III Ring Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 67-105 III Ring Copper-alloy Discarded
Gd 67-99 III Bracelet Copper-alloy Tehran

168
ROM In this
965.275.11 Gd 65-33 III ? Chisel Copper-alloy ROM X
B2 ss1 III Chisel Copper-alloy ROM X
973.456.37 Gd 73-73 III ? Arrowhead Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 73-163 II Pin Copper-alloy Tehran
971.486.142 Gd 71-344 II Pin Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 69-636 II Pin Copper-alloy Tehran
973.456.151 Gd73-419 II Pin Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 67-328 II Pin Copper-alloy Discarded

Needle or
Gd 69-632 II pin Copper-alloy Discarded
Gd 67-64 II Needle Copper-alloy Discarded
Gd 67-63 II Needle Copper-alloy Discarded
Gd 67-28 II Fibula Copper-alloy Tehran
969.370.111 Gd 69-635 II Fibula Copper-alloy ROM
969.370.51 Gd 69-215 II Bracelet Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 69-231 II Bracelet Copper-alloy Tehran
973.456.150 Gd 73-418 II Bead Lead ROM

Spear/arro
Gd 69-224 II w head Iron Tehran
169
ROM In this
Gd 73-66 II Arrowhead Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 69-729 II Arrowhead Copper-alloy ROM X

"tang of
EE01-2 II point" Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 67-345 II Point Copper-alloy Discarded
969.370.60 Gd 69-258 II Implement Iron ROM
Gd 73-91 II Handle Copper-alloy Tehran
967.326.35 Gd 67-65 II Chisel Iron ROM X
969.370.94 Gd 69-462 II Blade Iron ROM
Gd 69-633 II Blade Iron Discarded
A3-313SS521 II Nugget Iron ROM X

Nugget and
CC2 II pin Copper-alloy ROM X
Gd 73-183 Pin ? Copper-alloy Tehran
Gd 71-281 Pin Copper-alloy ROM
Gd 67-320 Needle Copper-alloy Discarded
Gd 71-119 Needle Copper-alloy Tehran
B1 ? Wire Lead ROM X
Gd 73-166 Drill bit ? Copper-alloy Tehran

No
Gd 65-10 Axehead Copper-alloy Record
170
APPENDIX B:
Photographs of Artifacts with Sample Orientations Indicated
Objects are shown with cm/mm scale. Samples indicated with white lines, and sample
orientation is indicated schematically with drawing and arrows.
Period VI:1
Gd 73-312 VI:1 Object copper/bronze
Gd 73-379 VI:1 Chisel copper/bronze

171
VI:1 B1 510 ss28 Technical ceramic
1 square = 0.5cm
VI:1 A01 50 ss40 Furnace fragment

172
173
Period IV
Gd 73-86 IV Pin copper/bronze
Gd 71-261 IV Blade bronze
IV B2 351 ssX25 Cu Nugget

174
IV A1 1123 ss521 Crucible fragments
(A)
175
(B)
176
IV A2 1184 ss63 70 Crucible/Slag

177
IV A1 1109 ss511 Crucible fragments

178
Period III
Gd 65-33 III ? Chisel bronze
Chisel tip
Sample from
this end
III? B2 ss1 Cu Chisel
Gd 71-153 III Needle Bronze

179
Gd 73-73 III ? Arrowhead bronze
III A2 5 Ag Wire
III B2 ssX18 Pb Wire

180
? B1 10 or 11 Pb Wire
Gd 67-102 III:6 Bracelet Bronze

181

182
Gd 67-126 III:6 Pin bronze
Gd 71-49 III:6 Wire bronze

183
Gd 73-68 III:6 Pin Bronze
Gd 73-82 III:6 Needle Bronze
Sampled this
missing portion

184

185
Gd 71-188 III:6 Needle bronze

186
Gd 71-276 III:6 Needle bronze

187
Gd 73-103 III:6 Pin copper/bronze
Gd 71-159 III:6 Pin (really needle) bronze

188
Gd 71-246 III:6 Chisel bronze
nted
M ou
Gd 71-318 III:6 Awl or chisel Bronze
Gd 71-19 III:6 Chisel Bronze

189
III:6 A1 347 ss25 Cu Nugget, possibly coil to fibula pin
III:6 A1 351 ss26 Cu Nugget, dumbbell shape

190
III:5 A1 188 ss9 Cu Pin
III:4 B1 38 8 Cu Nugget
191
III:4 A1 69 ss2 Cu Nugget, square cross-section

192
III:4 AA2 193 ss9 Ceramic Crucible fragment

193
194
Gd 69-694 III:2 Chisel Bronze
III:2 C2 112 ss10 Cu Chisel
Gd 67-237 III:2 Blade Bronze

195
III:2 AA2 176 ss5 16 12 Cu Blade
Gd 67-202 III:2 Dagger Bronze
Sample
from here
196
Gd 67-196 III:2 Armourplate Bronze
Gd 67-201 III:2 Arrowhead bronze

197

198
III:2 AA2 154 ss1 13 u Cu Wire
Gd 67-224 III:2 Anklet Bronze

199

200
III:2 A1 40 8 6 Ceramic Tuyere fragment
XRD
201
202
Gd 67-450 Post III:2 Arrow/spear head Bronze
Gd 67-452 Post III:2 Arrow/spear head Bronze

203
Gd 67-455 Post III:2 Spearhead bronze
Gd 67-453 Post III:2 Bracelet bronze

204
Period II
Gd 67-65 II Chisel iron
Gd 69-215 II Bracelet bronze

205
Gd 69-216 II Pin bronze

206
Gd 69-729 II Arrowhead bronze

207
II A3 313 ss521 54 52 Fe (bag label: AA2-313ss52)

208
II CC2 3 Cu Nugget and pin
II? EE01 1 1 Cu "tang of point"

209
APPENDIX C:
Phase Diagrams used in Chapter 4
(Chakrabarti and Laughlin 1990)

210
(Subramanian and Laughlin 1990)

211
(Prince and Okamoto 1995: 9408)

212
(Swartzendruber 1990)
213
(Scott 1991)
214
(Prince and Okamoto 1995: 4577)

215
REFERENCES
Anastasiadi, G.P., R.V. Kolchina, and L.N. Smirnova

1985 Effect of Cooling Rate and Heat Treatment on the Chemical Microinhomogeneity of
Steel. Metallovedenie i Termicheskaya Obrabotka Metaliov 9:35-37.
Askeland, D.R.
1984 The Science and Engineering of Materials. PWS Publishers, Boston, pp.151-162
Bardes, B.P., and M.C. Flemings
1966 Dendrite Arm Spacing and Solidification Time in Cast Aluminum-Copper Alloy.
Modern Castings 50(3):100-106.
Bazin, D., and H. Hubner
1969 Copper Deposits in Iran. Report No. 13, Geological Survey of Iran, Tehran.
Beale, T.W.
1973 Early Trade in Highland Iran: A View from a Source Area. World Archaeology
5(2):133-148.
Bernard, J.H., and J. Hyrl
2004 Minerals and Their Localities. Granit, S.R.O., Prague, Czech Republic.
Berthoud, T.
1979 The Early Iranian Metallurgy, Analytical Study of Copper Ores from Iran. Archaeo-
Physika 10:68-74.
Bhadeshia, H., and R.W.K. Honeycombe,
2006 Steels: Microstructure and Properties. Elsevier, Burlington, UK.
Boardman, J.
1923 The Cambridge Ancient History: IV, Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean c.
529-479 B.C. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Budd, P.D.
1991 A Metallographic Investigation of Eneolithic Arsenical Copper. PhD University of
Bradford
Budd, P.D., A.M. Pollard, B. Scaife, and R.G. Thomas
1995 Oxhide Ingots, Recycling and the Mediterranean Metals Trade. Journal of
Mediterranean Archaeology 8(1):1-32.
Budd, P.D., and B.S. Ottaway
1991 The Properties of Arsenical Copper Alloys: Implications for the Development of
Eneolithic Metallurgy. Archaeological Sciences 1989, Bradford, UK
Caldwell, J.R.
1968 Tal-i Iblis and the Beginning of Copper Metallurgy at the Fifth Millennium.
Archaeologia Viva 1:144-150.
Campbell, J.
2003 Castings. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, UK and Boston, MA
Carter, E.
1980 Excavations in Ville Royale I at Susa: The Third Millennium B.C. Occupation. Cahiers
de la delegation archeologique francaise en Iran 1:111-134.
Chakrabarti, D.J., and D.E. Laughlin
1990 Cu-S (Copper-Sulfur). In Binary Alloy Phase Diagrams Volume 2, ed. T.B. Massalski
and H. Okamoto, pp. 1467-1471. ASM International, Materials Park, OH.
216
Charles, J.A.
1979 From Copper to Iron the Origin of Metallic Materials. Journal of Metals. 31:8-13
1977 The Development of the Usage of Tin and Tin-Bronze: Some Problems. In The Search
for Tin, ed. A.D. Franklin, J.S. Olin and T.A. Wertime, pp. 25-32. Smithsonian
Institution, Washington D.C.
Coghlan, H.H.
1962 A Note Upon Native Copper: Its Occurrence and Properties. Proceedings of the
prehistoric society NS 28:58-67.
Craddock, P.T.
2001 From Hearth to Furnace: Evidences from the Earliest Metal Smelting Technologies in
the Eastern Mediterranean. Paleorient. 26(2):151-165
Craig, J.R. and D.J. Vaughan
1981 Ore Microscopy and Ore Petrography. John Wiley & Sons, New York, Chichester,
Brisbane, and Toronto
Dewan, M.L., and J. Famouri
1964 The Soils of Iran. Food and Agriculture Orginization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy
Domanik, Ken
2001 Electron Microprobe Notes 1, University of Arizona Electron Microprobe Laboratory
Doonan, R.
1994 Sweat, Fire and Brimstone: Pre-treatment of Copper Ore and the Effects on Smelting
Techniques. The Journal of the Historical Metallurgy Society 28(2):84-97.
Eaton, E.R., and H. McKerrell
1976 Near Eastern Alloying and Some Textual Evidence for the Early Use of Arsenical
Copper. World Archaeology 8(2):169-191.
Fleming, S.J., V.C. Pigott, C.P. Swann, and S.K. Nash
2005 Bronze in Luristan: Preliminary Analytical Evidence from Copper/Bronze Artifacts
Excavated by the Belgian Mission in Iran. Iranica Antiqua 40:35-64.
Flemings, M.C., T.Z. Kattamis, and B.P. Bardes
1991 Dendrite Arm Spacing in Aluminum Alloys. Transactions of the American
Foundrymen's Society 99:501-506.
Frame, L.D.
2004 Investigations at Tal-i Iblis: Evidence for Copper Smelting during the Chalcolithic
Period. B.S. Thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA
Glicksmann M.E., R.N. Smith, S.P. Marsh, R. Kuklinski
1992 Mushy Zone Modeling with Microstructural Coarsening Kinetics. Metallurgical
Transactions A. 23A(2):659-667
Goff, C.L.
1976 Excavations at Baba Jan: The Bronze Age Occupation. Iran: Journal of the British
Institute of Persian Studies 14:19-40.
Gopnik, H.
2005 The Shape of Sherds: Function and Style at Godin II. Iranica Antiqua 40249-269.
Grugel, R.N.
1993 Secondary and Ternary Dendrite Arm Spacing Relationships in Directionally Solified
Al-Si Alloys. Journal of Materials Science 28:677-683.
Hakemi, A.
1992 Copper smelting furnaces of the Bronze Age in Shahdad. South Asian Archaeology
1989: Tenth International Conference of south Asian Archaeologists in Western Europe,
Paris, France.
217
Hauptmann, A., T. Rehren, and S. Schmitt-Strecker
2003 Early Bronze Age Copper Metallurgy at Shahr-i Sokta (Iran), reconsidered. In Man and
mining = Mensch und Bergbau : studies in honour of Gerd Weisgerber on occasion of
his 65th birthday, ed. G. Weisgerber and T. Stllner, pp. 197-213. Deutsches Bergbau-
Museum, Bochum.
Hauptmann, A., R. Maddin, and M.K. Prange
2002 On the Structure and Composition of Copper and Tin Ingots Excavated from the
Shipwreck of Uluburun. The Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
328:1-30.
Helwing, B.
2005 Early Complexity in Highland Iran: Recent Archaeological Research into the
Chalcolithic of Iran. Turkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi 8:39-60.
Henrickson, E.F.
1985 An Updated Chronology of the Early and Middle Chalcolithic of the Central Zagros
Highlands, Western Iran. Iran: Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies
23(63):108.
Henrickson, R.C.
1987 Godin III and the Chronology of Central Western Iran circa 2600-1400 B.C. In The
Archaeology of Western Iran: Settlement and Society from Prehistory to the Islamic
Conquest, ed. F. Hole, pp. 205-227. Smithsonian Insitution Press, Washington, D.C.
1986 A Regional Perspective on Godin III Cultural Development in Central Western Iran.
Iran: Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies 2:41-55.
1984 Godin Tepe, Godin III, and Central Western Iran, c. 2600-1500 BC. Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Toronto, Toronto.
Hole, F., and K.V. Flannery
1962 Excavations at Ali Kosh Iran, 1961. Leiden Press
Horne, L.
1982 Fuel for the Metal Worker. Expedition 25(1):6-13.
Hosler, D.
1994 The Sounds and Colors of Power: The Sacred Metallurgical Technology of Ancient
West Mexico. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Jahanshahi, S., and S. Sun
2003 Some Aspects of Calcium Ferrite Slags. Yazawa International Symposium:
Metallurgical and Materials Processing: Principles and Technologies, San Diego, CA.
Kattamis, T.Z., and M.C. Flemings
1966 Dendrite Structure and Grain Size of Undercooled Melts. Transactions of the
Metallurgical Society AIME 236(11):1523-1532.
Khan, F.A.
1968 Ancient Routes Between the Indus Valley and Iran. Fifth International Congress of
Iranian Art & Archaeology, Tehran.
Kishvar, S.Z.
1965 Preliminary Metallogenic Map of Iran. 1:2,500,000, Tehran, Geological Survey of Iran
Kohl, P.L.
1982 The First World Economy: External Relations and Trade in West and Central Asia in
the Third Millennium BC. Mesopotamien und seine Nachbarn: Politische und Kulturelle
Wechselbezien im alten Vorderasien 4(1):23-31.
Kongoli, F.
2003 Slags and Fluxes in Pyrometallurgical Processes. Yazawa International Symposium:
Metallurgical and Materials Processing: Principles and Technologies, San Diego, CA.
218
Kurz, W. and D.J. Fisher
1984 Fundamentals of Solidification. Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland, Germany, UK,
USA
Kushnareva, K.K.
1997 The Southern Caucasus in Prehistory: Stages of Cultural and Socioeconomic
Development from the Eighth to the Second Millennium B.C. University of Pennsylvania
Museum, Philadelphia, PA
Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C.
1967 Archeology and Metallurgical Technology in Prehistoric Afghanistan, India, and
Pakistan. American Anthropologist 69(2):145-162.
Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C., and J.A. Sabloff
1995 Ancient Civilizations: The Near East and Mesoamerica. Waveland Press, Inc., Prospect
Heights, Inc.
Lechtman, H.L.
1996 Arsenic Bronze: Dirty Copper or Chosen Alloy? A View from the Americas. Journal of
Field Archaeology. 23(4):477-514
Levine, L.D.
1975 The Excavations at Seh Gabi. 3rd Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran,
Tehran.
Levine, L.D., and Young, Jr., Cuyler T.
1987 Summary of the Ceramic Assemblages of the Central Western Zagros from the Middle
Neolithic to the Late Third Millenium B.C. In Prehistoire de la Msopotamie : la
Msopotamie prhistorique et l'exploration rcente du djebel Hamrin : Paris, 17-18-19
dcembre 1984, pp. 15-53. Editions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique,
Paris.
Majidzadeh, Y.
1979 An Early Prehistoric Coppersmith Workshop at Tepe Ghabristan. In Akten Des VII.
Internationalen Kongresses Fur Iranische Kunst Und Archaologie, pp. 82-92. Dietrich
Reimer Verlag, Berlin.
Mason, R.B., and L. Cooper
1999 Grog, Petrology and Early Transcaucasians at Godin Tepe. Iran: Journal of the British
Institute of Persian Studies 37:25-31.
Massalski, T.B., and H. Okamoto
1990 Ag-Cu (Silver-Copper). In Binary Alloy Phase Diagrams Volume 1, ed. T.B. Massalski
Miettinen, J.
2006 Thermodynamic-Kinetic Model for the Simulation of Solidification in Binary Copper
Alloys and Calculation of Thermophysical Properties. Computational Materials Science
36(4):367-380.
2001 Thermodynamic-Kinetic Simulation of Solidification in Binary FCC Copper Alloys
with Calculation of Thermophysical Properties. Computational Materials Science 22(3-
4):240-260.
Miller, N.F.
1984 Use of Dung as Fuel: An Ethnographic Example and an Archaeological Application.
Paleorient 10(2):71-79.
Miyata, Y., T. Suzuki, and J. Uno
1985 Cellular and Dendritic growth: Part I. Experiment. Metallurgical Transactions A
(Physical Metallurgy and Materials Science) 16A(10):1799-1805.
219
Moorey, P.R.S.
1982 The Archaeological Evidence for Metallurgy and Related Technologies in
Mesopotamia, c. 5500-2100 B.C. Iraq 44(1):13-38.
1969 Prehistoric Copper and Bronze Metallurgy in Western Iran (With Special Reference to
Luristan). Iran: Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies 7:131-153.
Muan, A., and E.F. Osborn
1965 Phase Equilibria Among Oxides in Steelmaking. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,
Inc, Reading, MA.
Muhly, J.D.
1999 Copper and Bronze in Cyprus and the Eastern Mediterranean. In The
Archaeometallurgy of the Asian Old World, ed. V.C. Pigott, pp. 15-25. University of
Pennsylvania Museum Press, Philadelphia.
1977 The Copper Ox-Hide Ingots and the Bronze Age Metals Trade. Iraq 39(1):73-82.
Mller-Karpe, M.
1991 Aspects of Early Metallurgy in Mesopotamia. Archaeometry '90, Heidelberg, Germany.
Murray, J.L.
1984 Calculations of Stable and Metastable Equilibrium Diagrams of the Ag-Cu and Cd-Zn
Systems. Metallurgical Transactions A 15A(2):261-268.
Muscarella, O.W.
1973 Excavations at Agrab Tepe, Iran. Metropolitan Museum Journal 847-76.
Negahban, E.O.
1991 Excavations at Haft Tepe, Iran. The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia.
Neumann, J.P., T. Zhong, and Y.A. Chang
1990 Cu-O (Copper- Oxygen). In Binary Alloy Phase Diagrams Volume 2, ed. T.B.
Massalski and H. Okamoto, pp. 1446-1448. ASM International, Materials Park, OH.
Nezafati, N., E. Pernicka, and M. Momenzadeh
2006 Ancient Tin: Old Question & New Answer, Antiquity 80(308) Project Gallery.
Oates, J.
2003 Babylon. Thames and Hudson, London, UK
Patterson, C.C.
1971 Native copper, silver, and gold accessible to early metallurgists. American Antiquity
36(3):286-321.
Pigott, V.C.
1999 The Archaeometallurgy of the Asian Old World: Introductory Comments. In The
1999 The Development of Metal Production on the Iranian Plateau. In The
1989 Archaeo-Metallurgical Investigations at Bronze Age Tappeh Hesar, 1976. In Tappeh
Hesar: Reports of the Restudy Project, 1976, ed. R.H. Dyson and S.M. Howard, pp. 25-
33. Casa Editrice Le Lettere, Firenze.
Pigott, V.C., and H.L. Lechtman
2001 Chalcolithic Copper-Base Metallurgy on the Iranian Plateau: A New Look at Old
Evidence from Tal-i Iblis. In Culture Through Objects: Ancient Near Easter Studies in
Honour of P.R.S. Moorey, ed. T. Potts, M. Roaf and D. Stein, pp. 291-312. Griffith
Insitute, Oxford.
220
Pigott, V.C., S.M. Howard, and S.M. Epstein
1982 Pyrotechnology and Culture Change at Bronze Age Tepe Hissar (Iran). In Early
Pyrotechnology: The Evolution of the First Fire-Using Industries, ed. T.A. Wertime and
S.F. Wertime, pp. 215-236. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Pollard, A.M., R.G. Thomas, and P.A. Williams
1991 Some Experiments Concerning the Smelting of Arsenical Copper. Archaeological
Sciences 1989, Bradford.
Prince, A., and H. Okamoto (editors)
1995 Ternary Alloy Phase Diagrams. Vol. 7, ASM International, Materials Park, OH.
Reed-Hill, R.E., and R. Abbaschian
1994 Physical Metallurgy Principles. 3rd ed. PWS Publishing Company, Boston, MA.
Rice, P.M.
1987 Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
Rubinson, K.S.
1991 Mid-Second Millennium Tomb at Dinkha Tepe. American Journal of Archaeology
95(3):373-394.
Ryndina, N.
1999 Copper Production from Polymetallic Sulphide Ores in the Northeastern Balkan
Eneolithic Culture. Journal of Archaeological Science 261059-1068.
Sahab, K. and M. Jughrafiyai
1963 Iran Natural Vegetation. Vol. 1:3,000,000, Sahab Geographic & Drafting Institute,
Tehran.
Schacht, R.
1987 Early Historic Cultures. In The Archaeology of Western Iran: Settlement and Society
from Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest, ed. by F. Hole, pp. 171-203. Smithsonian
Institution Press, Washington D.C.
Scott, D.
1991 Metallography and Microstructure of Ancient and Historic Metals. The Getty
Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, CA.
Sinha, A.K.
2003 Physical Metallurgy Handbook. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Stech, T.
1999 Aspects of Early Metallurgy in Mesopotamia and Anatolia. In The Archaeometallurgy
of the Asian Old World, ed. V.C. Pigott, pp. 59-71. The University Museum, University
of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Stech, T., and V.C. Pigott
1986 The Metals Trade in Southwest Asia in the Third Millennium B.C. Iraq 48:39-64.
Subramanian, P.R., and D.E. Laughlin
1990 As-Cu (Arsenic-Copper). In Binary Alloy Phase Diagrams Volume 1, ed T.B. Massalski
Swartzendruber, L.J.
1990 Cu-Fe (Copper-Iron). In Binary Alloy Phase Diagrams Volume 2, ed T.B. Massalski
Taghizadeh, N.
1974 Mineral Distribution Map of Iran. 1:2,500,000,
Thompson, F.C.
1958 The Early Metallurgy of Copper and Bronze. Man. 58:1-7
221
Thornton, C.P., and C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky
2004 A New Look at the Prehistoric Metallurgy of Southeastern Iran. Iran: Journal of the
British Institute of Persian Studies 42:47-59.
Thornton, C.P., C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, M. Liezers, and S.M.M. Young
2002 On Pins and Needles: Tracing the Evolution of Copper-Base Alloying at Tepe Yahya,
Iran, via ICP-MS Analysis of Common-place items. Journal of Archaeological Science
29:1451-1460.
Thrane, H.
1964 Archaeological Investigations in Western Luristan. Preliminary report of the second
Danish archaeological expedition to Iran. Acta Archaeologica 35(2/3):153-169.
Tosi, M.
1989 The Distribution of Industrial Debris on the Surface of Tappeh Hesar as an Indication of
Activity Areas. In Tappeh Hesar: Reports of the Restudy Project, 1976, ed. R.H. Dyson
and S.M. Howard, pp. 13-24. Casa Editrice Le Lettere, Firenze.
Tylecote, R.F.
1992 A History of Metallurgy. 2nd ed. The Institute of Materials, Brookfield, VT.
1980 Furnaces, Crucibles, and Slags. In The Coming of the Age of Iron, ed. T.A. Wertime and
J.D. Muhly, pp. 183-228. Yale University Press, New Haven.
Tylecote, R.F., H.A. Ghaznavi, and P.J. Boydell
1977 Partitioning of Trace Elements Between the Ores, Fluxes, Slags and Metal During the
Smelting of Copper. Journal of Archaeological Science 4:305-333.
Vandiver, P.B.
1985 Sequential Slab Construction: A Near Eastern Pottery Production Technology,
8000-3000 B.C., PhD Thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA
Vansek, P.
1984 Electrochemical Series. In CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, ed. R.C. Weast,
M.J. Astle and W.H. Beyer, pp. D-156. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Florida.
Weiss, H., and Young, Jr., Cuyler T.
1975 The Merchants of Susa: Godin V and Plateau-Lowland Relationships in the Late Fourth
Millennium B.C. Iran: Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies 1:31-17.
Yener, K.A., and P.B. Vandiver
1993 Tin Processing at Goltepe, an Early Bronze Age Site in Anatolia. American Journal of
Archaeology 97(2):207-238.
Young, Jr., Cuyler T.
1974 Excavations at Godin Teppeh - 1973. In Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Symposium on
Archaeological Research in Iran, ed. F. Bagherzadeh, pp. 80-90. Iranian Center for
Archaeological Research, Tehran.
1972 Recent Excavations at Godin Tepe. In The memorial volume of the Vth International
Congress of Iranian Art & Archaeology, Tehran, Isfahan, Shiraz, 11th-18th April 1968,
Vol. 1, pp. 204-210.
1969 Excavations at Godin Tepe: First Progress Report. Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto.
1969 The Chronology of the Late Third and Second Millennia in Central Western Iran as
seen from Godin Tepe. American Journal of Archaeology 73(3):287-291.
1968 The Excavations at Godin Tepe: New Light on the Archaeology of the Zagros.
Archaeologia Viva 1:156.
Young, Jr., Cuyler T., and L.D. Levine
1974 Excavations of the Godin Project: Second Progress Report. Royal Ontario Museum,
Toronto.
222
Zwicker, U., and F. Goudarzloo
1979 Investigation on the Distribution of Metallic Elements in Copper Slag, Copper Matte
and Copper and Comparison with Samples from Prehistoric Smelting Places. Archaeo-
Physika 10:360-375.

Frame Godin Metal

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Frame Godin Metal

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

METAL FINDS FROM GODIN TEPE, IRAN:

PRODUCTION, CONSUMPTION, AND TRADE

Lesley Diana Frame

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF MATERIALS SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an

APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR

This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:

This thesis represents a portion of a larger project headed by Hilary Gopnik,

Figure 1.1: Archaeological sites in Western Asia (Pigott 1999:75). 20

LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

typologically similar items. This variability in manufacture reflects the variability in

methods of production employed by the craftsmen of the region as a whole. These

CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION FOR RESEARCH

1.1. The Earliest Metallurgy of the Ancient world

1.1.a. Native Copper to Sulfide Ores

manufacture from oxide, carbonate, and eventually sulfide ores.

temperatures as low as 300oC, achievable by means of charcoal fire (Thompson 1958);

Our understanding of this technological transition to smelting technology is

malachite and brilliant blue azurite) and a well-established ceramic pyrotechnology

were sufficiently reducing to convert copper oxides to copper (Craddock 2001),

modifications, the correct environment could be achieved.

Cuprite: Cu2O + CO CO2 + 2Cu (Eq.1.1)

Malachite: Cu2CO3(OH)2 + 2CO 3CO2 + H2O + 2Cu (Eq. 1.2)

product (Tylecote 1992:5).

Later smelting practices involved more complex polymetallic ores, such as

oxidizing atmosphere and then reheated in a reducing atmosphere. Alternatively, it can

more fuel-efficient process (Doonan 1994:88).

CuFeS2 + 3O2 FeO + CuO + 2SO2 (Eq. 1.3)

CuO + CO CO2 + Cu (Eq. 1.4)

5CuO + CuFeS2 FeO + 2SO2 + 6Cu (Eq. 1.5)

millennium BCE); however, it is unclear whether this represents early smelting of

1.1.b. Production of Copper in Iran

evident on the Iranian Plateau, an ore-rich metallogenic zone (Pigott 1999:73,

Berthoud 1979; Taghizadeh 1974).

closer to early 4th millennium BCE (Helwing 2005:46).

Production at Tepe Hissar during the mid-4th millennium BCE resulted in

deposits of copper occur all throughout the plateau region.

1.1.c. The Appearance of Tin

As production technology progressed, arsenical copper became a common alloy

was deliberately chosen for its mechanical properties (Pigott 1999:3).

Moorey 1982; Mller-Karpe 1991). Despite the regular occurrence of tin in

The question regarding the transition to tin-bronze becomes more complicated as

use as early as 1775-1522 BCE (Nezafati 2006).

majority of the geological surveys were focused on the identification of more

than previously thought.

1.2. Chronology and Geography of Western Asia

(Lamberg-Karlovsky and Sabloff 1995). In the mid-4th millennium BCE Iranian

1995:142). Interestingly, this development corresponds to the increase of copper

production centers on the Iranian Plateau as discussed above.

shown in Figures 1.2 and 1.3.

Figure 1.3: Chronology for Godin III (Courtesy Hilary Gopnik)

1.3. The Sequence at Godin Tepe

and in the lowlands of Mesopotamia (Henrickson 1984, 1986, 1987).

1.4. Purpose of the Present Investigation

of Transcaucasian sites farther north (Mason and Cooper 1999).

centers at Tepe Hissar and Arisman.

The present investigation explores the variability in metal artifact technology

providing detailed information regarding the presence and processing of metal in

hundred well-dated, metal artifacts makes this view chronologically-detailed as well as

regionally-broad, allowing interpretation of the variability and temporal trends in