Metallurgical remains from regional surveys of ''non-industrial'' landscapes: The case of the...

Metallurgical remains from regional surveys of‘‘non-industrial’’ landscapes: The case of theKythera Island Project

Myrto Georgakopoulou

University College London Qatar

This paper explores the potential of studying metallurgical remains recovered during regional surveys in thereconstruction of past metallurgical practices across a given landscape, using as a case study the relevantfinds from the Kythera Island Project. The methodology developed includes macroscopic examination of allfinds, evaluation of spatial distribution patterns, an assessment of local and regional ore resources, andmicroscopic and chemical analyses of selected samples. The study suggests that during the Classicalperiod both small scale iron smelting and smithing were taking place in the surveyed Kythera landscape.The picture is less clear for other historical periods. Prehistoric metallurgical finds on the other hand aremeager to nonexistent; a picture partly attributable to the scarcity of finds left behind by secondary non-ferrous metalworking.

Keywords: Kythera, regional survey, iron smelting, iron smithing, iron slag, ancient metallurgy

IntroductionSystematic regional surveys form an important

component of Aegean, and more broadly Mediter-

ranean, archaeological field research (e.g., Alcock

and Cherry 2004; Iacovou 2004). Although limited in

their resolution compared to excavations, they offer

unsurpassed advantages in covering wide areas and a

number of sites, often diachronically and with a

strong landscape perspective. Sites are sampled with

uniform collection strategies of different cultural

materials. Pottery and lithics are the main materials

recovered, but metal and metallurgical remains

frequently form part of the finds repertoire. While

pottery, and to a lesser extent lithics, are the main

tools for dating the sites identified and are therefore

systematically studied following recovery, less atten-

tion is usually paid to metal and metallurgical

remains either because of less rigorous collection

strategies and/or lack of post recovery treatment. At

first this is not surprising as metal artifacts are found

less frequently and their occurrence as surface finds is

largely impeded by poor preservation. Furthermore,

fragments of metal cannot usually be dated in the

absence of a stratified context and cannot be easily

distinguished from frequent modern examples as

these are also usually weathered and fragmented.

These restrictions do not hold to the same extent in

the case of metallurgical remains. Slags and ores

typically preserve well in Mediterranean surface

conditions. Archaeometallurgical studies have formed

an integral part of specialized or intensive survey

design in the case of landscapes rich in mineral wealth,

where metallurgical activities were already known or

could be anticipated (Neustupny and Venclova 2000;

Given et al. 2002; Given and Knapp 2003; Graham

et al. 2006). In addition, extensive surveys of ‘‘metal-

rich’’ landscapes are often used in archaeometallurgi-

cal field research, usually targeting specialized sites

such as slag heaps, mines, etc. (Bassiakos and

Philaniotou 2007; Bielenin et al. 1995; Wagner and

Oztunali 2000). In both cases, whether in systematic

surveys of ‘‘metal-rich’’ landscapes or specialized

archaeometallurgical surveys, the recording and study

of metallurgical remains in the field and subsequent

macroscopic study and laboratory analyses are key

components to understanding the nature, technology,

as well as spatial organization of metallurgical activi-

ties in a given region.

This paper shifts attention to metallurgical materi-

als recovered during surveys of ‘‘non-industrial’’

landscapes, that is, regions where significant mineral

deposits or extensive remains and installations of

metallurgical activities (mines, slag heaps, washeries,

etc.) are not known and thus the study of metal

production is not normally prioritized in the origi-

nal survey design. Small numbers of metallurgical

Correspondence to: Myrto Georgakopoulou, University College LondonQatar, PO Box 25256, Georgetown Building, Education City, Doha, Qatar.Email: [email protected]

� Trustees of Boston University 2014DOI 10.1179/0093469013Z.00000000071 Journal of Field Archaeology 2014 VOL. 39 NO. 1 67

remains, principally iron slags, were not uncommon

finds in regional or urban surveys undertaken in the

last decades in the southern Aegean (Cherry et al.

1991: 80, 85; Mee and Forbes 1997: 174). In most–if

not all–cases, their presence was merely reported as

an indicator of the practice of metallurgy, but no

further study or consideration of their significance

was undertaken. Given the absence of a methodology

for post fieldwork study for such finds, collection

strategies were not usually as rigorous as with other

materials. The Istron (Mirabello) survey is an

exception; however, this was primarily a geophysi-

cal-geoarchaeological survey and not a regional field

survey as discussed here (Kalpaxis et al. 2006).

How much can these finds promote an under-

standing of ancient metallurgical practices regionally

and diachronically? What is the potential of their study

and what kind of problems are to be anticipated?

These questions are addressed here through a study of

the metallurgical assemblage recovered during a

systematic regional survey in the context of the

Kythera Island Project (hereafter KIP) (Broodbank

1999; Kiriatzi and Broodbank 2008; http://www.

ucl.ac.uk/kip/). The project’s overall aim was to

investigate the environmental and cultural dynamics

of island insularity through time in the Aegean, using

Kythera, an island off the coast of southern

Peloponnese, Greece, as a case study. Reconstru-

ction of technological landscapes was a central aim of

the project (Kiriatzi et al. 2012), and significant work

has been presented already for pottery production in

certain prehistoric periods (Kiriatzi 2003; Broodbank

et al. 2005; Broodbank and Kiriatzi 2007). Studies of

other materials are ongoing. The field component of

the project, the regional survey, was carried out

between 1998 and 2001 and extended across the

eastern central part of Kythera (FIGS. 1, 2). An area

of 43 sq km was systematically tract-walked by teams

of fieldwalkers, and approximately 200 archaeological

sites were identified spanning the Final Neolithic to

Late Venetian periods. The overwhelming majority of

sites were designated as such based on their ceramic

densities. A sample of cultural material was collected

from all identified sites, usually systematically,

through the establishment of grids. Where present,

all slags and other metallurgical materials were

collected, so the sample available for study represented

the total number of such finds recognized on the

surface. It should be noted that emphasis was placed

from the start of the project on the collection of

metallurgical materials; metal, including all related

finds, formed one of three basic categories (along with

pottery and lithics) on the fieldwalkers’ recording form

(http://www.ucl.ac.uk/kip/WRF.pdf). As with other

finds, variable visibility and the ability of fieldwalkers

to recognize these materials will have played a

constraining role in recovery. The archaeometallurgy

specialist during fieldwork for KIP was Sven van

Lockeren, who rigorously trained walkers in the

identification of such materials. The author also

participated in fieldwalking and on site-collection

teams in the last two years of fieldwork.

Figure 1 Map of Kythera showing the KIP survey area

(enclosed in a dashed line) and places in the text. The smaller

map shows the location of Kythera in the Aegean. Map by

Denitsa Nenova.

Figure 2 Photograph of part of the surveyed landscape

showing Paliokastro Hill and the Bay of Palaiopoli and sea in

the background. The photograph is taken from the northwest

and the inland Mitata Valley shown in the foreground

includes many of the sites (e.g., 015–019) mentioned in the

text. Photograph courtesy of KIP project.

Georgakopoulou Metallurgical remains from regional surveys of ‘‘non-industrial’’ landscapes

68 Journal of Field Archaeology 2014 VOL. 39 NO. 1

http://www.maneyonline.com/action/showImage?doi=10.1179/0093469013Z.00000000071&iName=master.img-000.jpg&w=227&h=306


Three major archaeological sites had been investi-

gated within this region prior to the start of the

survey. The first is the coastal, multiperiod site of

Kastri, partly excavated in the 1960s by Coldstream

and Huxley (1972) and particularly famous for its

‘‘Minoanizing’’ elements from the end of the third

millennium B.C. and to the first half of the second

millennium B.C. Second, the peak sanctuary of Ayios

Georgios, excavated in the 1990s by Sakellarakis

(1996, 2008, 2011), remains the only definite excavated

peak sanctuary known outside Crete. The excavated

area was excluded from the survey’s tract-walking and

intensive site collection. In the Early Iron Age to

Roman periods the principal settlement of the island

was located inland at Paliokastro (Petrocheilos 1984:

65–76, 1993, 2003). The site is being investigated by I.

Petrocheilos and for this reason the Paliokastro area

was also excluded from the survey.

A Landscape Approach to Iron MetallurgyThe metallurgical collection included nearly 3500

finds both from original tract-walking and subse-

quent systematic sampling of sites. It was immedi-

ately clear that the majority of these were iron slags,

although a few other possibly prehistoric finds were

present. The presence of these iron slags raised a

series of specific questions. First, their date and

distribution across the landscape needed to be

resolved. Were there any particular patterns regard-

ing the nature of the sites where these were present,

their size, or their position on the landscape? What

was the nature of the processes that produced these

byproducts in each case?

Iron productionIn order to understand the latter, it is worth

summarizing the stages involved in iron production

and the kind of remains they leave behind. Iron in

antiquity was in most cases produced by the bloomery

process (Serneels 1993; Pleiner 2000, 2006; Buchwald

2005). This involved smelting of the ore to roughly

1200uC at which point the metal produced is iron

mixed with slag (the bloom). Smelting was followed by

cycles of cleaning the bloom using a process known as

‘‘primary smithing,’’ where the bloom is repeatedly

heated and hammered, squeezing out the trapped slag

and forging the metal, often into a bar. Under the

broad heading ‘‘secondary smithing’’ fall those activ-

ities involved in the final shaping of this metal into an

artifact or the repair and reshaping of used artifacts.

The different stages of production need not necessarily

be spatially isolated, although they often were, and so

they should be viewed as part of a continuum. What is

important for the present study is that all of these

stages leave behind considerable amounts of slag, their

quantity generally becoming progressively less, as the

stages move away from the primary ore and smelting.

The identification of iron slag in the field therefore is

not an indication of a specific stage in the production

process. Unfortunately, the distinction between iron

smelting and smithing slags in the absence of a clear

context remains one of the most persistent pro-

blems in archaeometallurgy (McDonnell 1983, 1986,

1988; Serneels 1993), as their macroscopic, chemical,

and microstructural features are often very similar.

Furthermore, in the absence of excavation, recogni-

tion of other characteristic remains that may be more

indicative, such as hammerscales, which are typical

byproducts of smithing, is impossible. In the case of

regional surveys, where clear contexts are lacking,

these difficulties undoubtedly pose a challenge.

The goal of the present work was to develop a

methodology to address these specific issues as well as

to demonstrate the potential of studying these

materials, placing emphasis on low-tech and low-cost

techniques and approaches that could have wide-

spread applicability in the processing of survey finds.

A range of data were collected and these are

presented in detail in the following sections.

A geological assessment of Kythera in thecontext of iron metallurgyThe first aim was to understand the geological setting

of the survey area and broader environs with reference

to availability of iron ores. The goal here was not to

fully assess the distribution of raw material resources

(this would have required additional consideration of

clays, fuel, and fluxes, materials that unlike ore, are

necessary for both smelting and smithing), but rather

to evaluate the extent to which the area would form a

candidate for widespread primary metal production–

in other words, to appraise the use of the term ‘‘non-

industrial.’’ The assessment relied primarily on geolo-

gical literature and field reconnaissance. The latter

provided personal experience of these materials, which

greatly assisted in the macroscopic classification of the

KIP survey finds.

The geology of the KIP survey area consists

primarily of limestone in the Tripolitza and Olondos-

Pindos zones with limited associated flysch outcrops,

as well as a series of thick Neogene sediments from

clays to conglomerates (Petrocheilos 1966; Danamos

1992; Kiriatzi 2003). This geological setting does not

support the presence of ore deposits suitable for the

production of ancient metals, and none are known. A

very different geology is found in the northern part of

the island where the base metamorphic unit is exposed.

It consists of schists (mainly quartz-mica schists) and

gneiss. Quartzite veinlets, in some cases accompanied

by secondary iron minerals, traverse the schists, while

numerous iron-rich mineral springs are known in this

area (Petrocheilos 1984: 37; Kiskyras 1988: 128). It is

not clear to what extent iron ores exist in significant

quantities in northern Kythera, but limited iron


Journal of Field Archaeology 2014 VOL. 39 NO. 1 69

mineralizations were identified during field explora-

tions around the area of Gerakari village (FIG. 1) in the

context of the present project and samples were

collected. The iron minerals were identified as a variety

of hematite, known in Greek as oligistos, a particularly

good type of ore, with a characteristic metallic grey-

silver color, friable, that leaves behind a silver powder

upon handling (Kiskyras 1988; Bassiakos et al. 1989).

The existence of this type of iron ore in the quarry used

for the construction of the port of Ayia Pelagia was

reported in a brief article in a local newspaper

(Kytheraiki Drasi 15 June 1938).

Rich iron ore deposits, primarily oligistos, are also

known from the neighboring Laconian peninsula on

the mainland, in the areas where the metamorphic

unit is exposed (Exindavelonis and Taktikos 1984;

Bassiakos 1988; Bassiakos et al. 1989: fig. 1; Dimadis

and Taktikos 1989; Gerolymatos 1999, 2002).

Unused modern iron mines are found in the broader

Neapoli region there (Kiskyras 1988; Bassiakos et al.

1989), while there is also significant evidence for

ancient exploitation (Davies 1935: 255–256; Bassiakos

1988; Bassiakos et al. 1989; Varoufakis 1989: 283).

Samples were taken at the famous Ayios Elissaios

mines (Gerolymatos 2002), the Ayios Nikolaos

exposures south of Neapoli (Gerolymatos 1999), and

at Stephania close to the village of Krokees (Dimadis

and Taktikos 1989). It should be pointed out that iron

ores are also known in the somewhat more distant

metamorphic units of northwestern Crete (Varoufakis

1982; 1989), but these were not investigated in the

context of the present research.

This brief assessment suggests that although the

surveyed area itself did not host iron ores, limited

exposures are known in the metamorphic units in the

northern part of the island, while some of the richest

and best quality iron ore deposits in the Aegean are

found in nearby southern Laconia on the mainland.

The Macroscopic Study of the MetallurgicalAssemblageTypes of finds and recovery issuesThe entire collection of KIP metallurgical finds was

studied macroscopically. The finds were put into

different categories depending on their nature and

several features were recorded and entered into a

database. The original macroscopic examination could

not always attribute finds to specific categories, as

materials such as slags, iron minerals, or stones often

show similarities, making it difficult to distinguish

between them. Laboratory examination of selected

samples allowed further clarification and final categor-

ization of finds (below) followed a second more

informed macroscopic study of the entire collection

at the end of the analytical work. The geological

reconnaissance also played a crucial role in this

categorization, particularly for the materials recognized

as iron ores. The seven categories defined were: iron

slags (SL), iron ore (O), iron-rich stones (O?), metall-

urgical ceramics (MC), metal artifacts (M), non-

metallurgical vitrified ceramics (VC), and stones (X).

Online supplement 1 (Supplementary Material 1

http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/0093469013Z.00000000071.S1)

summarizes the distribution of these finds at the different

sites, with the exception of the last two categories, which

are clearly unrelated to metallurgy and were thus not

examined further. ‘‘Non-metallurgical vitrified ceramics’’

are highly vitrified ceramics with no clear association

with metallurgy. The majority appear to be ceramic kiln

wasters, which are byproducts of ceramic, not metal,

production. Their presence in the metallurgical collection

highlights the macroscopic similarities of such finds to

slags and other metallurgical materials and the possibility

of confusion in the absence of informed examination

(Bachmann 1982: 2). In the ‘‘stones’’ category are

grouped all geological specimens clearly unrelated to

metallurgy or any other anthropogenic activity; they are

most likely part of the local geology.

All slags are waste products of metallurgical

activities, whether from primary production, (i.e.,

smelting) or smithing. In the KIP assemblage, it was

clear from the original macroscopic examination that

all slags resulted from iron metallurgy. The category

‘‘iron ore’’ includes only those fragments clearly

identified as the characteristic oligistos; they are

certainly not part of the local geology and must have

been transported to the surveyed region. The ‘‘iron-

rich stones’’ group incorporates numerous types of

stones, some of which may be iron-rich, based on

their color primarily, but which cannot clearly be

identified as iron minerals, and some, at least, may be

part of the local geology.

‘‘Metallurgical ceramics’’ are ceramic fragments

clearly associated with metallurgical practices. The

association is usually made based on the adherence of

slag to these fragments or because they are highly

vitrified and were found in proximity to slags. All of

these specimens from KIP were very small and

fragmentary without any diagnostic features indicative

of their original shape. The analysis of such materials

is important in the study of ancient metallurgy to help

define the composition of iron slags (Crew 2000;

Veldhuijzen 2005). Such an in-depth technological

reconstruction was, however, beyond the scope of this

project, hence metallurgical ceramics were not exam-

ined further. All ‘‘metal artifacts’’ are here grouped

together, although specific characteristics (e.g, type of

metal, shape, etc.) are noted in the database. The

majority of metal artifacts are most probably modern

(for the exceptions see below). As pointed out above,

the recovery of metal in a survey is largely impeded by

poor preservation, and in most cases there are no

means of dating metal artifacts directly. Although



recovered metal artifacts and fragments were all

cataloged and described, the majority are excluded

from further discussion here.

Table 1 summarizes the relative abundance of the

five categories of purported metallurgical finds recov-

ered during KIP tract-walking and site collection. The

‘‘iron-rich stones’’ are substantially more abundant in

tracts than on sites. Although in some cases several

fragments were recovered from the same or nearby

tracts, no archaeological sites were recorded nearby.

This suggests that some of these materials are

associated with local geological micro-occurrences

and that their presence is not related to metallurgical

activities. In the case of ‘‘iron ore’’ fragments, the

distribution is entirely different. The total number of

oligistos fragments recovered from tracts and sites is

quite small, and therefore their percentage of the whole

is small. There were more finds at sites than in tracts (7

from tracts, 49 from sites), however. Furthermore,

most of the tract finds were actually recovered from

areas where sites were subsequently defined on the

basis of pottery scatters. The ‘‘iron-ore’’ group there-

fore has a distribution consistent with materials

brought into the landscape, an observation in line with

the recognized absence of iron ores in the geological

setting. Second, there are also substantially more slags

at sites than in tracts. Slags are not randomly dispersed

across the surveyed area, but are instead concentrated

on recognized sites. In fact, slags from tracts were

usually found in areas subsequently identified as sites.

This distribution confirms that the slags are present on

the KIP landscape as a result of primary deposition,

associated with metallurgical practices and not from

other secondary usage such as building or road

constructions, for which ancient slags are known to

have been used (Bassiakos et al. 1989: 254). In light of

the above and given the comparatively small number of

finds from tracts, the rest of the study (below) focuses

only on site recovered finds.

Slag types as indicators of smelting or smithingApproximately 45 kg of slag were cataloged from a

total of 48 KIP sites. Compared to metallurgical sites

(e.g., Neapoli in Laconia), the amount is very small,

but it is probably the largest collection recovered

from a survey of a non-industrial area in the Aegean.

Specific characteristics were recorded for the finds

including size, shape, color, magnetic properties, and

crystallinity, as well as weight. In rare cases, parti-

cular processes may result in slags of distinct shapes

or features (Kassianidou 2003: 215–216), but no such

established criteria are known for the southern

Aegean. More broadly, at least two particular types

of iron slag are commonly recognized (McDonnell

1983; Serneels 1993): plano-convex bottoms (PCBs)

and tap slags. The former are also referred to in the

literature with various other names, such as ‘‘smi-

thing hearth or furnace bottoms’’ and ‘‘slag basins.’’

They are more commonly identified as the bases of

smithing hearths, and therefore their presence is

associated with iron-working sites, but in some cases

they have been shown to be the bases of small

smelting furnaces (McDonnell 1983; Allen 2006,

2008). The tap slags are recognized as such from

the ropey texture on their upper surfaces indicating

they cooled from molten, flowing slag. Larger

distinctive fragments of these must certainly be

identified as smelting residues, but care should be

taken as smaller drops with a flow texture might also

result from slag squeezed out of the bloom during

smithing.

In the case of the KIP finds, the majority of slags

are usually small to medium (less than 6 cm in length)

shapeless fragments of black/brown color, usually

responding to a handheld magnet and bearing

significant iron hydroxides on their surface. They are

macroscopically undiagnostic in terms of smelting or

smithing. Examples of both PCBs and tap slags were

recognized, representing, however, less than 5 % of the

total slag assemblage. A few whole or nearly whole

PCBs were found as well as a few possible fragments

(FIG. 3). Based on the limited whole examples their

diameter is around 10 cm, while their characteristics

vary. Their shapes range from plano-convex to

concavo-convex and their upper surfaces are in some

cases smooth, while in others uneven, but they are

always magnetic. Some of the specimens showed

depressions on their upper surfaces, usually attributed

to the air blast from the tuyere (McDonnell 1983;

Dunikowski et al. 1996; Serneels and Perret 2003).

The majority of slags with a flow texture are small

and as such they are not clear evidence for smelting,

but a few more characteristic specimens were also

recovered (FIG. 4). The small size of many of these

finds might be related to site formation processes and

overall preservation conditions. As an example, at

sites 017 and 019, the proportion of fragments from

cooled flows is striking compared to other sites. These

slags are black and usually retain their original

Table 1 Relative abundance in percentages of the fivecategories of purported metallurgical KIP finds from tract-walking (Tracts) and site collection (Sites). N denotes thetotal number of finds studied.

Tracts (N5227) Sites (N53156)

SL 34.4 % 89.3 %O 3.1 % 1.5 %O? 42.7 % 1.2 %MC 0.0 % 0.5 %M 19.8 % 7.5 %

SL5iron slag; O5iron ore; O?5iron-rich stones; MC5meta-llurgical ceramics; M5metal artifacts.



lustrous surface, differentiating them from the bulk

of KIP slags that are externally brown/orange from

intense presence of iron hydroxides. The majority of

fragments from 017 and 019 are consistently small,

usually less than 4 cm in length, with weight to count

ratios around 10 (online supplement 1). Both 017 and

019 are located within the Mitata valley (FIG. 2), a

geomorphologically unstable landscape with signifi-

cant agricultural activity to the present day. The

noted fragmentation is most likely the result of such

practices. On the other hand, a few larger, more

characteristic slags with flow textures were recovered

from sites 026 and 033, a difference also reflected in

much higher weight to count ratios approximating

1:20 and 1:73 respectively (online supplement 1). This

variation in size is partly due to landscape use, as site

033 in particular is located in a much less intensively

exploited part of the surveyed area. Different site

collection strategies have also contributed to this

picture as both 017 and 019 were gridded, while 026

and 033 were less intensively collected using grab

samples. These examples highlight the value of

assessing the macroscopic features of the finds in

relation to their recovery contexts and collection

methodologies.

Distribution and Dating of MetallurgicalRemains

Spatial distribution of iron metallurgyThe systematic collection strategies employed during

the KIP survey allowed an assessment of the

distribution patterns of metallurgical finds and thus

of metallurgical activities. Geographical Information

Systems (GIS) helped in providing a visual assess-

ment. The effects of parameters such as variable

Figure 4 Examples of fragmented slags with flow textures from site 017 (left) and a larger specimen from site 026 (right).

Figure 3 Example of a PCB from site 001C, showing a

depression on top formed by the air blown through the

tuyere. A) top view; B) side view; C) drawing of side view.





visibility, the experience of fieldwalkers, or site

formation processes in the recovery of metallurgical

finds were not investigated for the present research,

although such data were recorded during KIP field-

work. It should be assumed, however, that distribu-

tional patterns will have been affected significantly by

visibility and sampling strategies and thus compar-

isons of scale between sites should be done with

caution. Sites with less than 100 g of slag in total were

generally excluded from consideration. Figure 5

depicts the distribution of iron slags and iron ores

across the different sites. The majority of sites with

slags are concentrated inland in the surveyed area

and around the Bay of Palaiopolis, where the

multi-period site of Kastri (site 064) lies. In total, 23

sites had more than 100 g of slag (FIG. 5). The only

areas where they are virtually absent, aside from

a few random isolated fragments, is in the north-

eastern part of the survey area, around and south

of the port of Diakofti, as well as in the southeast.

In one particular case, site 001, even intrasite

patterns can be observed (FIG. 6). The site is large and

was systematically sampled by 565 m and 10610 m

squares. It ranks third among all KIP sites in terms of

the weight of slag recovered with a total of nearly

5.5 kg. With only one exception, all slag fragments

were recovered from the southeastern part of the site.

The study of the pottery (Broodbank 1999: 202),

along with slag distribution, suggested that 001

should be divided into three individual sites (001A,

001B, and 001C), hence the vast majority of slags

come from 001C. Only one fragment was recovered

from 001B. Although it weighs more than 100 g,

001B is not here considered as an additional, separate

site, given its proximity to 001C. Large quantities of

fine Classical pottery were recovered from 001C,

suggesting a different, ‘‘specialized’’ function versus

that on the largely contemporaneous 001B (Broodbank

1999: 200). Further insight into this striking pattern

will be offered upon publication of the study of the

associated pottery.

Association of slags with oresMost of the KIP sites that had oligistos fragments

also had slag (FIG. 5). This pattern suggests that the

iron ore fragments, clearly brought into the surveyed

area, might be taken as evidence for smelting when

they are found with slag. Ores are smelted to metal

and in principle are not used in any of the subsequent

stages of iron metallurgy. Furthermore, an interesting

pattern emerges as iron ores were not recovered

from the southern part of the survey area (FIG. 5).

Figure 5 Distribution (by weight) of iron slags (SL) and iron ores (O) across the KIP survey area. Map by Denitsa Nenova.




Obviously inherent problems of survey recovery and

the overall small number of iron ore samples found

preclude any definite conclusions, but the pattern is

noteworthy, particularly as this southern region is the

farthest from local ore sources and main coastal

access points.

Dating the iron metallurgySlags in general cannot be dated directly on the basis

of morphological features. The few exceptions where

particular features are suggestive of a specific

chronological period (e.g., Phorades-type slag) (Kassi-

anidou 2003: 216) presume that a distinctive techno-

logy has been established through previous work on

sites of known dates, a requirement not met in this

case. Scientific methods to date slags can be used,

with radiocarbon dating of embedded charcoal being

the most established (Buchwald 2005: 112). Radio-

carbon dating was not utilized in the present study. In

the absence of relative stratigraphy and given the

numerous sites involved, the number of samples

required for representative results would have been

excessive and contrary to the low cost methodology

sought here.

Dating of the sites in this case relied on the dating

of the associated pottery. All of the slags from KIP

were found at sites with large quantities of pottery; in

fact sites were identified on the basis of pottery

concentrations. The relatively small amounts of slag

on each site suggest that metallurgical activities are

related to and not separate from those represented by

at least some of the pottery (see Acknowledgments

for pottery specialists). It should be noted that iron

slags were recovered during the 1960s excavations at

Kastri from both Classical and Late Roman contexts.

Hence metallurgical activities during these two

periods had already been documented on Kythera

(Broodbank et al. 2007) before the present study.

Many of the KIP sites with metallurgical finds

are multi-period (online supplement 3) and, as at

Kastri, have both Classical and Late Roman pottery.

All but one of the 23 sites with more than 100 g of

slag had substantial Classical pottery (see below).

Three can be dated with some confidence to this

period, as no pottery from any other historical period

was recovered. These are sites 001C, 017, and 171.

Furthermore, pottery from sites 026 and 033 is

primarily Classical, with a few Venetian and Late

Roman specimens, respectively. The comparatively

large amounts of slag from these two sites are

probably associated with the predominant Classical

pottery. Finally, pottery recovered from site 044

testifies to Classical and Venetian activities with no

evidence for the intervening periods. Site 015 is the

only site without Classical pottery. The site was

collected less intensively with grab samples, but the

majority of pottery dates to the Late Roman period,

with a few Venetian sherds also identified. Slags

are not presently reported from later (Byzantine-

Venetian) excavated contexts on Kythera. Although

pottery of these periods was found on several among

the 23 sites, they were in all cases mixed with other

periods. Site 174 is large and primarily Venetian,

however, the few Classical, Middle Roman, and

Byzantine sherds preclude a conclusive date for the

associated slags.

The picture that emerges suggests that during the

Classical period metallurgical activities were under-

taken at several sites dispersed across the surveyed

area. On the other hand, as slags were not recovered

from all KIP Classical sites, metallurgical activities

were not ubiquitous, attesting to some degree of site

specialization in this period. The picture is far less

clear for the Late Roman period. Although the Kastri

excavations suggest metallurgical practices, there are

no clear Late Roman sites with slag in the KIP survey

Figure 6 Distribution (by count) of slags at sites 001A, 001B,

and 001C. Map by Denitsa Nenova.




area with the possible exception of site 015. This is

despite the identification of numerous and often quite

large Late Roman sites in the surveyed area.

Similarly, it is impossible to assess, based on the

present data, whether metallurgy was practiced in any

of the later historical periods.

AnalysesThe macroscopic study provided some indications of

the nature of activities undertaken on some sites with

suggestions of both smelting and smithing. A

comparatively small number of samples was further

selected for laboratory examination with the aim of

providing additional evidence.

MethodsAn important challenge when dealing with metallur-

gical remains collected during regional surveys is

sampling for analysis. Slags were collected from a

total of 48 KIP sites in different, although always

relatively small, quantities. Sampling all of these sites

in numbers sufficiently representative would have

been prohibitive in the context of the present project.

The aim here was not to discriminate with certainty

between smelting and smithing in all cases, but rather

to attempt to define preliminary patterns. A sampling

strategy was therefore devised to include several sites

from which representative samples were selected.

Criteria for selecting sites included: the date of the site

with priority given to those of a largely single period;

position in the landscape; presence/absence of the

macroscopically distinct types of PCBs and tap slags;

presence/absence of oligistos fragments; and the total

quantity of slags recovered, with larger assemblages

preferred in order to have more available samples.

Bulk chemical composition was measured using

an energy dispersive x-ray fluorescence spectrometer

(ED-XRF: Spectro X-Lab Pro2000). A calibration

method developed specifically for iron-rich materials

(Veldhuijzen 2003) was used for measurement.

Between 5 and 20 g of sample were pulverized,

depending on the original sample size, and approxi-

mately 5.5 g of this powder, exactly weighed, were

mixed with 0.6 g of wax and pressed into pellets for

analysis. Two standard materials were included with

each batch of samples analyzed in order to monitor

the instrument’s performance. It is known that XRF

analyses of major and minor elements in pressed

pellets are characterized by results of medium to poor

accuracy due to significant matrix effects, and this

was indeed reflected in the analyses of the standard

samples. Precision and accuracy estimates were

comparable to those reported by Humphris and

colleagues (2009: 362). The choice of technique was

largely influenced by ease of accessibility to the

instrument and low overall cost, while, despite the

limitations, the approach was considered to be

adequate for the establishment of broad preliminary

patterns. A more powerful technique would poten-

tially permit more in-depth resolution of chemical

patterns, but for this a much larger number of

samples would also be required, substantially raising

costs and time expended.

For the study of the microstructures of the slags,

polished blocks were prepared by cutting sections

from the samples, mounting them in resin and

progressively polishing their surfaces down to 1/4

micron. The polished sections were studied under a

reflected light polarized optical microscope (Zeiss

Axioskop 40), while a few samples were further

analyzed using an energy-dispersive x-ray spectro-

meter attached to an electron microprobe (ED-XRF)

(EPMA: JEOL SUPERPROBE JXA-8600). Analyses

were carried out at 15keV using the ZAF correction

procedure and INCA software.

ResultsForty slag samples from 10 sites were analyzed for

their chemical compositions with each site represented

by a minimum of one and a maximum of seven samples

(online supplement 2 (Supplementary Material 1 http://

dx.doi.org/10.1179/0093469013Z.00000000071.S2)). In

addition, nine oligistos samples were analyzed with the

same method; three of those were finds from KIP sites,

while the other six were comparative geological samples

collected from northern Kythera and the Laconian

peninsula (at Ayios Nikolaos, Ayios Elissaios, and

Stephania).

Among the ores, the two samples from the Ayios

Elissaios mines stand out for their high calcium

content, probably associated with a calcareous host

environment. Ore deposits tend to be chemically

variable, and the chemical composition will largely

depend on the ratio of metal-bearing minerals to

surrounding rocks. Only one or two samples from

each deposit were analyzed. The results do not

therefore fully characterize internal variability but

only serve to sketch a broad chemical profile for these

ores. Furthermore, elements such as chromium,

vanadium, and manganese, important for chemical

characterization of iron minerals, were in general low

in these samples, approaching or falling below the

detection limits of ED-XRF.

The slags from KIP show significant chemical

variability, when the entire assemblage is considered

together. Overall they have a ferrosilicate composi-

tion, with silica contents highly variable and often

significantly low, while a few samples also had

significant calcium contents. Measured totals exceed-

ing 100 % are primarily due to overestimation of iron

as oxide, as the microscopic examination revealed

that some of the iron is present in metallic form. This

variability is not surprising given the inherent



heterogeneity in iron slags. When viewed in more

detail, however, some interesting patterns emerge

(below).

First, however, a brief diversion is necessary for

some general remarks on the chemistry of iron slags.

Strict chemical criteria for distinguishing between

smelting and smithing slags, particularly those from

primary smithing, do not exist. Much of the work

carried out during primary smithing involves remov-

ing entrapped smelting slag from the bloom, hence

the composition of primary smithing slag will, to a

large extent, be affected by the original smelting slag,

particularly in the early stages of the operation.

During smithing, both primary and secondary, other

materials contributing to the composition of the slag

are the oxidizing iron metal, possible added siliceous

fluxes, surrounding ceramics, and the fuel (Serneels

1993: 48–51). As smithing progresses, the contribu-

tion of the smelting slag, and thus the ore, is

significantly reduced, and the aforementioned mate-

rials (oxidizing metal, siliceous fluxes, etc.) predomi-

nate by far. Hence, slags from later smithing cycles

will be chemically poorer in those elements that

characterize the ore. The chemical profile of smelting

and smithing slags, however, forms a continuum,

particularly as most of the major elements are present

in different proportions in all other raw materials

used following smelting, such as ceramics, fluxes, and

fuels (Serneels 1993: 49–51; Serneels and Crew 1997).

The situation is more complicated in the more

common ferrosilicate slags (such as the KIP slags),

because iron is continuously added to the slag from

the oxidizing metal. Potential patterns of chemical

change from smelting to smithing slags can only be

appreciated once a substantial number of slags of

known character have been analyzed, a prerequisite

that does not hold in the case of the KIP slags. As a

general rule, however, elements (e.g., nickel, copper,

cobalt) that have an affinity for iron (siderophilic), and

therefore adhere to the metal during smelting, will tend

to increase in smithing slags. On the other hand,

elements present in the ore that tend to separate into

the slag during smelting such as manganese, vana-

dium, and chromium, will be depleted in smithing

slags. The trends are less clear with elements such as

iron, silicon, calcium, and aluminum present in

different proportions in ores, ceramics, fuel, and fluxes

(Serneels 1993: 49–51). Smithing slags will also be

more heterogeneous as there is usually less control

over the operating conditions in a hearth, while a

range of other non-ferrous metallurgical activities,

such as copper working, may also have taken place in

the same installation. Even single smelting operation

may result in slags of different morphologies (e.g., tap,

furnace slags) and significant chemical variability,

particularly when small samples are analyzed

(Chirikure and Rehren 2006; Humphris et al. 2009).

Returning again to the KIP slags with these points

in mind, some preliminary trends can be discerned,

and these are better illustrated if the data are treated

with multivariate statistics. Principal component

analysis of the log-transformed data for all elements

shown in online supplement 2, except sodium,

phosphorus, and vanadium, was carried out, and

the resulting scatterplot of the first two principal

components accounting for 68.4% of the total

variability is illustrated in Figure 7 along with a plot

of the corresponding loadings. The small number of

samples and the significant inherent analytical limita-

tions outlined above preclude the definition of distinct

chemical groups. Some patterns do, however, emerge.

The slags from two sites, 001C and 171, stand out

because the slags show increased variability compared

to most other sites (hence the points appear more

scattered on the diagram) and because of their

increased copper, cobalt, and iron contents (respon-

sible for the corresponding points appearing on the left

side of the diagram). In contrast, sites such as 017, 026,

033 show much less chemical variability among the

samples analyzed; elements such as silicon, aluminum,

and potassium increase, while iron correspondingly

decreases, and copper contents are negligible.

In terms of microstructure, a summary of the main

characteristics is given in online supplement 3

(Supplementary Material 1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/

0093469013Z.00000000071.S3). Practically all of the

slags are very rich in iron oxides in the form of

wustite within a glass matrix. There are, however,

differences in the homogeneity of the sections and the

presence or absence of iron silicates. Where present,

iron silicates are of a composition ranging between

fayalite (2FeO.SiO2) and kirschteinite (FeO.CaO.

SiO2) depending on the total calcium content of the

slag, with minor magnesium and less frequently

manganese. Iron metal was frequently noted in these

sections, often enclosed within wustite. A few

fragments very rich in low carbon (ferritic) iron

metal were identified mixed with slag and these may

constitute bloom fragments (online supplement 3

(Supplementary Material 1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/

0093469013Z.00000000071.S3)).

A particularly important discovery in the context

of the present project was made in one sample from

site 044 (sample MKIP271). The fragment was small,

approximately 4 cm in length and shapeless. Upon

cutting, a large, macroscopically visible unreacted

fragment of oligistos ore was found enclosed in the

center of the slag fragment. Examination under the

microscope showed three phases: unreacted ore in

the center, enveloped in a zone of partially reacting

ore, and that in turn enveloped by the slag proper



consisting of fayalite and wustite in a glass matrix

(FIG. 8). This particular sample provides direct proof

that oligistos ore was indeed used in iron metallurgi-

cal practices and furthermore that this slag must be

the byproduct of smelting (or at the very least early

primary smithing of an unconsolidated bloom),

confirming primary production of iron on the island.

Five of the plano-convex slags were sectioned and

examined under low magnification. These were

MKIP46 from Site 171, MKIP148 and MKIP149

from Site 001C, and MKIP251 and MKIP256 from

Site 033. They are all heterogeneous with medium

porosity throughout and significant weathering. In

section their color is primarily grey with brown areas.

MKIP148 and MKIP149 show macroscopically

distinct zones (FIG. 9), while secondary green copper

minerals were identified within a pore of section

MKIP256. The sections were covered with resin and

polished to one micron for examination under the

metallographic microscope. The grey areas are rich in

iron oxides, mostly wustite, within a significantly

corroded glass matrix, while the brown areas are

mainly iron hydroxides. Iron silicates were not noted,

although this may be due to the extensive weathering

of the sections, but small inclusions of iron metal

were recognized in some cases. On the whole, the

characteristics of these basins appear to be more

consistent with being hearth bottoms associated with

smithing instead of furnace bottoms associated with

smelting. Previous studies have identified similar areas

in smithing hearth bottoms and it has been proposed

that the relevant abundance of these areas may be

indicative of different types of smithing activities

undertaken in a particular workshop (Dunikowski

et al. 1996; Serneels and Perret 2003). The absence of

comparative data from in-depth studies of material

from smithing workshops in southern Greece, how-

ever, precludes any further interpretation here.

Discussion: Iron Metallurgy across the KIPLandscape

Online supplement 3 (Supplementary Material 1

http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/0093469013Z.00000000071.

S3) summarizes the data for the 23 KIP sites having

more than 100 g of slag (FIG. 5). For some sites

distinctive patterns surface that highlight consistent

differences, probably associated with the practice of

different stages of the iron production process. Sites

001C and 171, for example, both dated with con-

fidence to the Classical period, show certain common

elements. Plano-convex bottom slags were found on

both, and the examination of those suggest they are

smithing hearth bottoms. Ore was not found on these

sites, and neither were tap slags more frequently

associated with smelting. Chemical analysis showed

increased variability among the analyzed samples with

high iron to silicon ratios and high copper contents.

This is consistent with a smithing instead of a smelting

origin for the slags, and therefore ironworking

activities are more probable.

In contrast, sites 017 and 026, also dating to the

Classical period (with a little Venetian pottery in the

latter, but probably not associated with the slags),

show strikingly different characteristics in all respects.

Tap slags were common, even if fragmentary, and ore

fragments were found, while plano-convex bottoms

were absent. The chemical characteristics of the small

number of slags analyzed suggest much less chemical

variability, with lower iron to silicon ratios, and

negligible amounts of copper. Examination under the

microscope showed that the slags are relatively

homogeneous, with iron-silicate phases and wustite

in a glass matrix. A smelting origin is more likely for

these materials.

Figure 7 Scatterplot of first two principal components and

plot of corresponding loadings resulting from principal

component analysis of the log-transformed chemical data

of KIP slags (online supplement 2) excluding sodium,

phosphorus, and vanadium.




Iron smelting can also be detected at site 044,

where sample MKIP271 was found incorporating an

unreacted ore fragment, as well as at site 019, which

shows many similarities with 017. The probable Late

Roman site, 015, also has several features that

suggest smelting practices. These patterns are not

necessarily exclusive; smelting and smithing practices

may have taken place at the same sites, although at

least in the first four cases discussed above, the

differences seem to hold. In other cases the evidence

is less clear, as for site 064, which corresponds to

Kastri, and sites 033 and 154, where all stages of iron

production might be attested.

On the whole, even without attributing specific

practices to every individual site, the study of the

KIP metallurgical assemblage brings forward strong

evidence for both small scale production and the

working of iron in the Classical period at least, with

ore being imported from outside the immediate

survey area, either from the north of the island or

beyond. Not every Classical period KIP site pro-

duced metallurgical remains, but the identification of

such evidence on several sites shows that these

activities were not restricted to one major central

site on the island. This pattern is not surprising for

secondary smithing activities, but the identification

of primary iron production, smelting, on a small scale

in the iron-deficient landscape of KIP is certainly

noteworthy.

Presently, very little is known about the organiza-

tion of iron production in the Classical period in

Figure 9 Section cut through plano-convex bottom slag

sample MKIP149.

Figure 8 A) Sample MKIP271 from site 044 as a mounted section; B) reflected light microphotographs of MKIP271 showing

entrapped ore in the center; C) border of ore and partially reacting ore; D) border of partially reacting ore and slag.





Greece. A markedly different mode of iron produc-

tion to that deduced from the KIP finds is, however,

attested in broadly the same period on the neighbor-

ing Laconian coast, where large slag heaps have been

recorded, with at least 2.5 tons of slag remaining at

Psafaki hill, despite its significant reuse for road

construction (Bassiakos 1988; Bassiakos et al. 1989).

Although much remains to be understood about the

Laconian iron industry, the slag heaps testify to large

scale production, probably centrally organized, and

in close proximity to extensive ore sources, reflecting

the importance of this region as a major iron

production center in the Classical period (Pleiner

1969: 23; Treister 1996: 189). Why did the inhabitants

of Kythera choose to produce their own iron on a

small scale by transporting iron ore, instead of, or as

well as, acquiring the smelted metal from neighboring

Laconia? One possible explanation for the parallel

existence of these different iron production modes lie

in the island’s changing political links with Sparta

during this period, known primarily from textual

evidence (Petrocheilos 1984: 115–124). Alternately,

small scale iron production activities within urban

settlements have been recognized in roughly con-

temporaneous sites in the northern part of Greece

(Kostoglou 2008, 2010), illustrating that different

scales of production may have coexisted during the

same period, depending on particular contexts. It is

presently unclear how widespread smelting was on

Kythera, as conclusive evidence of smelting versus

smithing was not possible in most cases. Further-

more, it is not possible at this stage to comment on

the nature of the sites where smelting was attested,

and to understand the contexts within which produc-

tion was undertaken (e.g., small farmsteads, larger

central settlements, ritual sites, etc.). Consideration of

the conclusions of this study in the light of those from

the upcoming KIP pottery studies may shed more

light in this direction. The above brief discussion

illustrates the potential of archaeometallurgical data

gathered from surface surveys for filling in the

regional picture concerning the spatial organization

of metallurgical practices.

Prehistoric metallurgical evidenceThe possible prehistoric evidence for metallurgy

from the KIP survey is represented primarily by three

tiny (ca. 1 cm in length), shapeless copper-based metal

fragments. A polished section was prepared from each

and analyzed under a scanning electron microscope.

MKIP279 is arsenical copper having approximately

5% arsenic, and MKIP86 is tin bronze with appro-

ximately 7% tin and minute lead inclusions that

make up less than 0.2% of the total. MKIP112 is

pure copper on one side with no other element

detected, while on the other side iron minerals were

noted, which made the specimen magnetic. The

fragment was too small to confirm whether the layer

was highly ferrous magnetite-rich slag or attached

corroded iron metal.

The arsenical copper fragment MKIP279 was

recovered from site 085C, whose main period of

activity on the basis of the pottery seems to be Early

Bronze II (mid-3rd millennium B.C.), with some

Second Palace or Neopalatial (mid-2nd millennium

B.C.) period pottery, and few later historical (primar-

ily Late Roman) sherds. The chemical composition of

the copper fragment, however, is of additional help

here in assigning a date to it. Arsenical copper is the

dominant alloy of the Early Bronze Age in the

Aegean, and its use largely declines in the later

Bronze Age and historical periods being replaced by

tin bronze (cf., Mangou and Ioannou 1999). Given

the predominance of Early Bronze II pottery, it is

safe to assume that the fragment can be dated to that

period. The situation is far less clear for the other two

specimens. MKIP86 comes from the large coastal site

of Kastri, occupied with different intensities through-

out the prehistoric and much of the later historical

time span, while MKIP112 was found at site 070

associated with pottery dated to the Second Palace

period and the Classical and Roman periods. Since its

introduction in the Aegean, late in the Early Bronze

Age, tin bronze continues to be used today, and this

applies to pure copper too. Although it is possible

that both fragments are prehistoric there is no

conclusive way of proving this. Beyond the metal

fragments, a few whetstones, probably used for the

sharpening of metal cutting tools, were recovered

from some Second Palace period KIP survey sites,

indirectly proving metal usage and reworking on

Kythera in this period (Broodbank et al. 2007: 235).

For the prehistoric periods particularly the Early

Bronze Age and the Second Palace period, it is the

absence rather than the presence of metal related

finds in the survey assemblage that is noteworthy. In

the middle of the Early Bronze Age, the presence of

‘‘Minoanizing’’ pottery made with local Kytheran

clays, marks a notable Cretan presence on Kythera

(Coldstream and Huxley 1972: 275–77, 309). Brood-

bank and Kiriatzi (2007) argue that this probably

reflects an immigrant Cretan population living along-

side indigenous communities, who for some time

continued to maintain their own traditions. The

authors view Kastri’s nodal position within contem-

porary maritime networks, linking western Crete

with mineral resources in the Cycladic islands and

potentially elsewhere, as a primary driving force for

this movement, with an emphasis on metal as well as

obsidian resources. By the Second Palace period,

Kastri, and more broadly Kythera, were fully

integrated within Cretan practices (Coldstream and



Huxley 1972: 280–303, 309; Sakellarakis 1996, 2011;

Bevan 2002; Bevan et al. 2002; Broodbank 2004: 77–

81; Preston 2007; Kiriatzi 2010). Important metal

finds of this date were recovered from the excavations

at Kastri and at the peak sanctuary. Several copper-

based, silver, and even gold artifacts were found in

the 1960s excavations at Kastri. Some of the

shapeless copper fragments recovered then were later

positively identified through analysis as copper ingot

fragments (Broodbank et al. 2007), which suggests

copper working on the site. At the Ayios Georgios

sanctuary a remarkable assemblage of copper-based

anthropomorphic figurines, deposited as votive offer-

ings, demonstrates the important role of metal in

ritual depositions on Kythera (Sakellarakis 1996,

2011). Furthermore, a study of six amorphous

fragments from the sanctuary suggests that they were

probably spills from copper casting, strengthening

the case for the practice of metalworking activities on

Kythera during this period (Varoufakis 2006).

Despite the varied direct evidence for use, working,

and deposition of metal in the Second Palace, and to

a lesser extent Early Bronze Age, periods on Kythera,

the evidence from the KIP survey is meager. This

picture is not surprising. Poor preservation of

finished metal artifacts on the surface is certainly a

crucial, obvious reason for the rarity of such

materials. Furthermore, contrary to the case for iron,

secondary metalworking activities for copper and the

other non-ferrous metals used in antiquity leave

behind much less evidence, mainly in the form of

crucibles, molds, or metal spills. The absence of

evidence therefore cannot be taken as evidence for

absence, particularly as both use and working are

substantiated from the aforementioned excavations.

One thing is certain: the absence of copper (or lead/

silver) smelting activities within the surveyed land-

scape. Smelting, even on a small scale, would have

left behind considerable amounts of slag, which

should have been recognized by the fieldwalking

teams (cf., Georgakopoulou 2007). This absence of

smelting evidence is superficially explained by the

lack of relevant ores on the island itself. On the other

hand, recent research has demonstrated that during

the Early Bronze Age in the Aegean, the transporta-

tion of ore for smelting over long maritime distances

was an established practice, as demonstrated at the

site of Chrysokamino in eastern Crete (Betancourt

2006), as well as possibly elsewhere (Georgakopoulou

2007; Papadatos 2007). The absence of smelting

activities and ore imports in the Early Bronze Age on

Kythera demonstrates something different, possibly

reflective of the differences in the nature of maritime

networks in the 3rd millennium B.C., particularly in

regards to western and eastern Crete (Broodbank and

Kiriatzi 2007: 267).

ConclusionsArchaeometallurgical research tends to concentrate

on regions rich in relevant mineral resources or

otherwise on finds recovered from excavated sites.

The work presented in this paper highlights the

potential of another source of information for the

study of ancient metallurgy, i.e., materials recovered

from regional surveys. Iron slags, which are the main

type of slag likely to be encountered in such surveys,

are particularly difficult materials to identify in

terms of the nature of the activities from which

they resulted. The assessment of local and regional

resources, macroscopic examination of all related

finds, study of distribution patterns, and use of

analytical facilities can offer significant insight, not

least filling in the gaps between large scale production

and localized settlement-type activities glimpsed

through excavations.

Possible metallurgical materials from the early

prehistoric periods in the KIP survey area are

extremely rare, although metal usage and working

in at least some prehistoric periods has been

confirmed from previous excavations on the island.

This contrast undoubtedly highlights the limitations

of survey recovery in this case, but on a positive note

also confirms the absence of primary production

activities on Bronze Age Kythera with interesting

implications for considering broader Aegean material

production and circulation networks. Among the

later historical periods, iron metallurgy is attested

in the Classical, Late Roman, and possibly also

Venetian periods. The former is by far the best

documented presently in the KIP survey area. There

is evidence for small scale primary production on the

island using ores brought in either from the northern

part of the island or further abroad, as well as

secondary iron-working. The small scale of these

activities is in contrast to the contemporaneous

extensive smelting operations on the neighboring

coast of Laconia. This study would certainly have

benefited from a better understanding of southern

Aegean iron production practices which, in the

future, should be sought through systematic exam-

ination of excavated materials and the known large

production sites. Still, using a methodology that can

easily be applied to large and varied assemblages, the

study of the KIP metallurgical finds has opened up a

window into the island’s unexpectedly varied metal-

lurgical past.

AcknowledgmentsI am grateful to the directors of KIP, Cyprian

Broodbank and Evangelia Kiriatzi, for their invita-

tion to study this material and for their valuable

assistance and advice throughout this project, as well

as their insightful comments and corrections on an



earlier draft of this paper. Study of the KIP pottery is

presently underway by the project’s specialists: C.

Broodbank and E. Kiriatzi (prehistoric periods), A.

Johnston (Geometric to Hellenistic), K. Slane

(Roman), and J. Vroom (Byzantine to modern).

Constructive reviews of the first draft of this paper

were offered by four reviewers. Geological recon-

naissance on Kythera and southern Laconia was

undertaken with Evangelia Kiriatzi and Ruth Sidall

under an IGME permit. It was Yiannis Bassiakos who

on an earlier trip to the Kythera northern metamorphic

units had pointed out to me for the first time the

presence of oligistos on the island. Permission for

sampling the KIP metallurgical collection was grant-

ed by the Greek Ministry of Culture, and Aris

Tsaravopoulos significantly facilitated the transporta-

tion of the samples. Analytical examination was

undertaken primarily at the Wolfson Laboratories of

the Institute of Archaeology (University College

London). Thanks are due to Thilo Rehren for

arranging access and for helpful discussions on the

microstructure of the slags and to Kevin Reeves and

Simon Groom for technical assistance. Varina Delrieu

undertook the GIS analysis during my study seasons

on Kythera. Denitsa Nenova skillfully produced

illustrations for Figures 1, 3, 5, and 6, while the

photographs in Figures 3 and 4 were taken by Chronis

Papanikolopoulos. Funding for this project was

awarded by the Institute for Aegean Prehistory.

Myrto Georgakopoulou (Ph.D. 2005, University

College London) is recently appointed Lecturer in

Archaeological Materials Science at University

College London Qatar. She undertook this work while

working at the Fitch Laboratory of the British School

at Athens as Archaeological Chemistry Fellow. Her

research interests include the technology and organiza-

tion of early metal production, currently focusing on

the 3rd millennium B.C. Aegean. She has studied

relevant material from various sites on the Cyclades

and southeastern Attica.

ReferencesAlcock, S. E., and J. F. Cherry, eds. 2004. Side-by-Side Survey.

Comparative Regional Studies in the Mediterranean World.Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Allen, J. R. L. 2006. ‘‘The Slag Basins,’’ in M. Fulford, A. Clarke,H. Eckardt, eds., Life and Labour in Late Roman Silchester.Britannia Monograph Series 22. London: Society for thePromotion of Roman Studies, 161–163.

Allen, J. R. L. 2008. ‘‘Romano-British Iron-making on the SevernEstuary Levels: Toward a Metallurgical Landscape,’’Archaeology in the Severn Estuary 19: 73–119.

Bachmann, H.-G. 1982. The Identification of Slags fromArchaeological Sites. London: Institute of Archaeology.

Bassiakos, Y. 1988. ‘‘Ancient Iron Metallurgy in Laconia,’’ in R. E.Jones and H. W. Catling, eds., New Aspects of ArchaeologicalScience in Greece. Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper 3.Athens: British School at Athens, 55–58.

Bassiakos, Y., C. T. Michael, and D. Chaikalis. 1989. ‘‘AncientMetallurgical and Mining Studies on S.E. Peloponnese

(Greece),’’ in Y. Maniatis, ed., Archaeometry. Proceedings ofthe 25th International Symposium. Amsterdam: Elsevier SciencePublishers B.V., 253–259.

Bassiakos, Y., and O. Philaniotou. 2007. ‘‘Early CopperProduction on Kythnos: Archaeological Evidence andAnalytical Approaches to the Reconstruction of theMetallurgical Process,’’ in P. M. Day and R. C. P. Doonan,eds., Metallurgy in the Early Bronze Age Aegean. SheffieldStudies in Aegean Archaeology 7. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 19–56.

Betancourt, P. P. 2006. The Chrysokamino Metallurgy Workshopand its Territory. Hesperia Supplement 36. Athens: AmericanSchool of Classical Studies at Athens.

Bevan, A. 2002. ‘‘The Rural Landscape of Neopalatial Kythera: AGIS Debate,’’ Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 15: 217–256.

Bevan, A., E. Kiriatzi, C. Knappett, E. Kappa, and S.Papachristou. 2002. ‘‘Excavation of Neopalatial Deposits atTholos (Kastri), Kythera,’’ The Annual of the British School atAthens 97: 55–96.

Bielenin, K., M. Mangin, and S. Orzechowski. 1995. ‘‘La siderurgieancienne et l’exploitation miniere dans les Montagens Sainte-Croix (Petite Pologne). I. Bilan des recherches 1955–1990,’’Dialogues d’Histoire Ancienne 21: 203–224.

Broodbank, C. 1999. ‘‘Kythera Survey: Preliminary Report on the1998 Season,’’ The Annual of the British School at Athens 94:191–214.

Broodbank, C. 2004. ‘‘Minoanisation,’’ Proceedings of theCambridge Philological Society 50: 46–91.

Broodbank, C., and E. Kiriatzi. 2007. ‘‘The First ‘Minoans’ ofKythera Revisited: Technology, Demography, and Landscapein the Prepalatial Aegean,’’ American Journal of Archaeology111: 241–274.

Broodbank, C., E. Kiriatzi, and J. Rutter. 2005. ‘‘From Pharaoh’sFeet to the Slave-women of Pylos? The History and CulturalDynamics of Kythera in the Third Palace Period,’’ in A.Dakouri-Hild and S. Sherratt, eds., Autochthon: PapersPresented to O. T. P. K. Dickinson on the Occasion of hisRetirement. B.A.R. International Series 1432. Oxford:Archaeopress, 70–96.

Broodbank, C., T. Rehren, and A.-M. Zianni. 2007. ‘‘ScientificAnalysis of Metal Objects and Metallurgical Remains fromKastri, Kythera,’’ The Annual of the British School at Athens102: 219–238.

Buchwald, V. F. 2005. Iron and Steel in Ancient Times. Historisk-filosofiske Skrifter 29. Copenhagen: The Royal DanishAcademy of Sciences and Letters.

Cherry, J. F., J. L. Davis, and E. Mantzourani. 1991. LandscapeArchaeology as Long-Term History. Northern Keos in theCycladic Islands from Earliest Settlement until Modern Times.Los Angeles: Institute of Archaeology, UCLA.

Chirikure, S., and T. Rehren. 2006. ‘‘Iron Smelting in Pre-colonialZimbabwe: Evidence for Diachronic Change from SwartVillage and Baranda, Northern Zimbabwe,’’ Journal ofAfrican Archaeology 4: 37–54.

Coldstream, J. N., and G. L. Huxley. 1972. Kythera: Excavationsand Studies. London: Faber and Faber Limited.

Crew, P. 2000. ‘‘The Influence of Clay and Charcoal Ash onBloomery Slags,’’ in C. Cucini Tizzoni and M. Tizzoni, eds., IlFerro Nelle Alpi. Atti Del Convegno. Bienno: Commune diBienno, 38–48.

Danamos, G. D. 1992. ‘‘Symvoli sti Geologia kai Ydrogeologia tisNisou ton Kytheron,’’ unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,University of Athens, Greece.

Davies, O. 1935. Roman Mines in Europe. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Dimadis, E., and S. Taktikos. 1989. Geological Map of Greece

1:50.000: Gytheion Sheet. Athens: IGME.Dunikowski, C., M. Leroy, P. Merluzzo, and A. Ploquin. 1996.

‘‘L’atelier de forge gallo-romain de Nailly (Yone),’’ RevueArcheologique de l’Est 47: 97–121.

Exindavelonis, P., and S. Taktikos. 1984. Geological Map of Greece1:50.000: Molaoi Sheet. Athens: IGME.

Georgakopoulou, M. 2007. ‘‘The Metallurgical Remains,’’ in A. C.Renfrew, C. Doumas, L. Marangou, and G. Gavalas, eds.,Keros, Dhaskalio Kavos: The Investigations of 1987–88,McDonald Institute Monographs. Cambridge: McDonaldInstitute for Archaeological Research, 380–401.

Gerolymatos, I. 1999. Geological Map of Greece 1:50.000:Neapolis-Ay. Nikolaos Sheet. Athens: IGME.

Gerolymatos, I. 2002. Geological Map of Greece 1:50.000:Papadhianika-Potamos Sheet. Athens: IGME.



Given, M., V. Kassianidou, A. B. Knapp, and J. Noller. 2002.‘‘Troodos Archaeological and Environmental SurveyProject, Cyprus: Report on the 2001 Season,’’ Levant 34: 25–38.

Given, M., and A. B. Knapp. 2003. The Sydney Cyprus SurveyProject: Social Approaches to Regional Archaeological Survey.Monumenta Archaeologica 21. Los Angeles: The CotsenInstitute of Archaeology, UCLA.

Graham, A., K. W. Jacobsen, and V. Kassianidou. 2006. ‘‘AgiaMarina-Mavrovouni: Preliminary Report on the RomanSettlement and Smelting Workshop in the Central NorthernFoothills of the Troodos Mountains, Cyprus,’’ Report of theDepartment of Antiquities, Cyprus 2006: 345–367.

Humphris, J., M. Martinon-Torres, T. Rehren, and A. Reid. 2009.‘‘Variability in Single Smelting Episodes–A Pilot Study UsingIron Slag from Uganda,’’ Journal of Archaeological Science 36:359–369.

Iacovou, M. ed. 2004. Archaeological Field Survey in Cyprus. PastHistory, Future Potentials. Proceedings of a Conference Held bythe Archaeological Research Unit of the University of Cyprus, 1–2 December 2000. British School at Athens Studies 11. London:The British School at Athens.

Kalpaxis, T., K. Athanassas, I. Bassiakos, T. Brennan, B. Hayden,E. Nodarou, K. Pavlopoulos, and A. Sarris. 2006.‘‘Preliminary Results of the Istron, Mirabello Geophysicaland Geoarchaeological Project, 2002–2004,’’ The Annual of theBritish School at Athens 101: 135–181.

Kassianidou, V. 2003. ‘‘Archaeometallurgy: Data, Analyses, andDiscussion,’’ in M. Given and A. B. Knapp, eds., The SydneyCyprus Survey Project. Social Approaches to RegionalArchaeological Survey. Monumenta Archaeologica 21. LosAngeles: The Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UCLA, 214–227.

Kiriatzi, E. 2003. ‘‘Sherds, Fabrics and Clay Sources:Reconstructing the Ceramic Landscapes of PrehistoricKythera,’’ in K. P. Foster and R. Laffineur, eds., METRON:Measuring the Aegean Bronze Age–Proceedings of the 9thInternational Aegean Conference, Yale University, 18-21 April2002. Aegaeum 24. Liege and Austin: Universite de Liege andUniversity of Texas at Austin, 123–130.

Kiriatzi, E. 2010. ‘‘‘ Minoanising’ Pottery Traditions in SouthwestAegean during the Middle Bronze Age: Understanding theSocial Context of Technological and Consumption Practice,’’in A. Philippa-Touchais, G. Touchais, S. Voutsaki, andJ. Wright, eds., Mesogelladika. Bulletin de CorrespondenceHellenique Supplement 52. Athens: Ecole Francaise d’ Athenes,683–699.

Kiriatzi, E., and C. Broodbank. 2008. ‘‘To ereynitiko programmaKytheron tis Vretanikis Sxolis Athinon: stoxoi, methodologiakai prokatarktika apotelesmata,’’ in G. N. Leontsinis, ed.,Epistimoniki Ereuna sta Kythera. Kythera: Open University ofKythera Municipality, 241–262.

Kiriatzi, E., M. Georgakopoulou, C. Broodbank, and A. Johnston.2012. ‘‘I historia enos topiou mesa apo ti meleti kai analysikeramikon kai metallourgikon evrimaton: to paradeigma tisepifaneiakis erevnas Kythiron,’’ in N. Zacharias, M. Georga-kopoulou, K. Polikreti, Y. Facorellis, and Th. Vakoulis, eds.,Proceedings of the 5th Symposium of the Hellenic Societyfor Archaeometry. Athens: Papazisis Publishers, 289–304.

Kiskyras, D. A. 1988. ‘‘O oryktos ploutos tis Manis kai genikoteratis Laconias,’’ Laconikai Spoudai 9: 117–132.

Kostoglou, M. 2008. Iron and Steel in Ancient Greece. Artefacts,Technology and Social Change in Aegean Thrace from Classicalto Roman Times. BAR International Series 1883. Oxford:B.A.R.

Kostoglou, M. 2010. ‘‘Iron, Connectivity and Local Identities inthe Iron Age to Classical Mediterranean,’’ in P. van Dommelenand A. B. Knapp, eds., Material Connections in the AncientMediterranean. London: Routledge, 170–189.

McDonnell, J. G. 1983. ‘‘Tap Slags and Hearth Bottoms, or Howto Identify Slags.’’ Current Archaeology 86: 81–83.

McDonnell, J. G. 1986. ‘‘The Study of Early Iron SmithingResidues,’’ in B. G. Scott and H. Cleere, eds., The Crafts of theBlacksmith. Proceedings of the 1984 Symposium of the UISPPComite pour la siderurgie ancienne. Belfast: UISPP Comitepour la siderurgie ancienne, 47–52.

McDonnell, J. G. 1988. ‘‘Ore to Artefact– A Study of EarlyIronworking Technology,’’ in E. A. Slater and J. O. Tate, eds.,Science and Archaeology. BAR British Series 196. Oxford:B.A.R., 283–293.

Mangou, H., and P. V. Ioannou. 1999. ‘‘On the ChemicalComposition of Prehistoric Greek Copper-based Artifactsfrom Mainland Greece,’’ The Annual of the British School atAthens 94: 81–100.

Mee, C., and H. Forbes. 1997. A Rough and Rocky Place: TheLandscape and Settlement History of the Methana Peninsula,Greece. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

Neustupny, E., and N. Venclova. 2000. ‘‘Surveying PrehistoricIndustrial Activities: The Case of Iron Production,’’ in J.Bintliff, M. Kuna, and N. Venclova, eds., The Future ofSurface Artefact Scatter in Europe. Sheffield ArchaeologicalMonographs 13. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 93–104.

Papadatos, Y. 2007. ‘‘The Beginning of Metallurgy in Crete: NewEvidence from the FN–EM I Settlement at Kephala Petras,Siteia,’’ in P. M. Day and R. C. P. Doonan, eds., Metallurgy inthe Early Bronze Aegean. Sheffield Studies in AegeanArchaeology 7. Oxford: Oxbow, 154–167.

Petrocheilos, I. E. 1984. Ta Kythera apo tin Proistoriki Epochi os tiRomaiokratia. Ioannina: University of Ioannina.

Petrocheilos, I. E. 1993. ‘‘Epifaneiaki ereyna sto PaliokastroKythiron,’’ Praktika tis en Athinais Arxaiologikis Etaireias148: 154–161.

Petrocheilos, I. E. 2003. ‘‘Arxaio iero sto Paliokastro,’’ in I. E.Petrocheilos and G. Leontsinis, eds., A’ Diethnes SynedrioKytheriakon Meleton, Kythera: Mythos kai Pragmatikotita,Vol. 1: Apeikonisi kai Ermineia tou Chorou– Apo tin Proistoriasthn Arxaiotita kai to Vyzantio. Kythera: Open University ofKythera Municipality, 77–89.

Petrocheilos, J. 1966. Geological Map of Greece 1:50.000: KythiraSheet. Athens: IGME.

Pleiner, R. 1969. Iron Working in Ancient Greece. Prague: NationalTechnical Museum.

Pleiner, R. 2000. Iron in Archaeology: The European BloomerySmelters. Prague: Archeologicky Ustav Av Cr.

Pleiner, R. 2006. Iron in Archaeology: Early European Blacksmiths.Prague: Archeologicky Ustav Av Cr.

Preston, L. 2007. ‘‘Bringing in the Dead: Burials and the LocalPerspective on Kythera in the Second Palace Period,’’ OxfordJournal of Archaeology 26: 239–260.

Sakellarakis, J. A. 1996. ‘‘Minoan Religious Influence in theAegean: The Case of Kythera,’’ The Annual of the BritishSchool at Athens 91: 81–99.

Sakellarakis, J. A. 2008. ‘‘H dimosieusi tis anaskafis ston AyioGeorgio sto Vouno,’’ in G. N. Leontsinis, ed., EpistimonikiEreuna sta Kythera. Kythera: Open University of KytheraMunicipality, 495–501.

Sakellarakis, J. A. 2011. Kythera. To Minoiko Iero Koryfis stonAyio Georgio sto Vouno. 1. Ta proanskafika kai i Anaskafi.Athens: I En Athinais Arxaiologiki Etaireia.

Serneels, V. 1993. Archeometrie des Scories de Fer. Recherches surla Siderurgie Ancienne en Suisse Occidentale. Lausanne:Cahiers d’ Archeologie Romande.

Serneels, V., and P. Crew. 1997. ‘‘Ore-Slag Relationships fromExperimentally Smelted Bog-iron Ore,’’ in P. Crew and S.Crew, ed., Early Ironworking in Europe: Archaeology andExperiment, Books of Abstracts. Snowdonia: Plas Tan y Bwlch,78–82.

Serneels, V., and S. Perret. 2003. ‘‘Quantification of SmithingActivities Based on the Investigation of Slag and OtherMaterials,’’ in Archaeometallurgy in Europe Vol. 1,Proceedings of the Meeting in Milan 2003. Milan:Associazione Italiana di Metallurgia, 469–478.

Treister, M. Y. 1996. The Role of Metals in Ancient Greek History.Leiden: E. J. Brill.

Varoufakis, G. J. 1982. ‘‘The Origin of the Mycenean andGeometric Iron on the Greek Mainland and in the AegeanIslands,’’ in J. D. Muhly, R. Maddin, and V. Karageorghis,eds., Early Metallurgy in Cyprus, 4000–500 B.C. Nicosia:Pierides Foundation, 315–324.

Varoufakis, G. J. 1989. ‘‘Greece: An Important MetallurgicalCentre of Iron in Antiquity,’’ in R. Pleiner, ed.,Archaeometallurgy of Iron 1967–1987. InternationalSymposium of the Comite pour la siderurgie ancienne del’UISPP. Liblice 5–9 October 1987. Prague: Comite pour lasiderurgie ancienne de l’UISPP, 279–286.

Varoufakis, G. J. 2006. ‘‘Metallourgiki meleti xalkinon dokimiontis Minoikis Epochis apo ta Kythera,’’ in Proceedings of the 2ndInternational Conference on Ancient Greek Technology. Athens:TEE, 84–88.



Veldhuijzen, H. A. 2003. ‘‘‘Slag_Fun’–A New Tool forArchaeometallurgy: Development of an Analytical (P)ED-XRF Method for Iron-rich Materials,’’ Papers from theInstitute of Archaeology 14: 102–118.

Veldhuijzen, H. A. 2005. ‘‘Early Iron Production in the Levant:Smelting and Smithing at Early 1st Millennium B.C. Tell

Hammeh, Jordan, and Tel Beth-Shemesh, Israel,’’ unpublishedPh.D. dissertation. London: Institute of Archaeology,University College London.

Wagner, G. A., and O. Oztunalı. 2000. ‘‘Prehistoric Copper Sourcesin Turkey,’’ in U. Yalcin, ed., Anatolia Metal I. Der AnschnittBeiheft 13. Bochum: Deutsches Bergbau-Museum, 31–67.



Online supplement 1 Summary of finds in the original KIP metal and metallurgical remains collection (top row for eachsite shows counts and the bottom row shows weights). (SL) iron slag; (O) iron ore; (O?) iron-rich stones; (MC)metallurgical ceramics; (M) metal artifacts; (VC) non-metallurgical vitrified ceramics; (X) stones.

Site SL O O? MC M

001B 1170

001C 512 4 45135 45 15

003 15

004 25

006 135

008 355

009 6 235 50

010 23 1505 10

015 508 5 7 32290 255 15 5

016 18 1310 5

017 270 1 12715 ,5 5

019 115 4 11475 40 30

024 110

026 224 44326 5

031 115

033 100 4 37255 85 95

044 50 4440 25

049 155

051 390

054 10 1415 55

057 2 185 15

060 5 1105 45

064 32 12 6 141555 205 85 220

068 20 1 2370 ,5 25

069 10 250 5

070 12115

072 110

074 1 2250 185

080 15

081 3105

082 210

083 140

085A 15

085B 15

085C 2 25 5

Site SL O O? MC M

088 110

090 110

092 265

093 17 5 5345 75 25

094 115

097 110

102 1140

103 40380

106 3110

108 120

109 110

112 350

113 230

114 23 1225 ,5

118A 120

118B 1,5

119 1 10910 1945

120A 1,5

121 210

123 4 270 70

124 1 110 85

126 5240

127 145

128 35

129 1170

132 110

133 1035

134 25

136 115

137A 25

140 275

141 1160

142 160

150 15

152 115

Online supplement 1 Continued

Site SL O O? MC M

153 81 11850 25

154 511 4 18320 75 ,5

156 18 1 2600 15 35

158 5135

159 1 220 10

161 335

162 450

164 1 15 ,5

168 1 2,5 30

169 115

170 110

171 13 111045 40

172 25

174 183 64290 20

Online supplement 1 Continued

On

lin

esu

pp

lem

en

t2

Resu

lts

fro

mE

D-X

RF

an

aly

sis

of

iro

nsla

gs

an

dir

on

ore

sfr

om

the

KIP

su

rvey

an

dco

mp

ara

tive

geo

log

ical

iro

no

res

(olig

isto

s)

fro

mn

ort

hern

Kyth

era

an

dL

aco

nia

.B

.d.l.5

be

low

de

tec

tio

nlim

it.

Na

2O

(%)

Mg

O(%

)A

l 2O

3(%

)S

iO2

(%)

P2O

5(%

)K

2O

(%)

CaO

(%)

TiO

2(%

)V

2O

5(%

)C

r 2O

3(%

)M

nO

(%)

FeO

(%)

Co

(pp

m)

Cu

(pp

m)

Su

m

SLA

GS

SIT

E1

MK

IP143

0.3

11.5

52.6

615.3

0.2

81.0

212.7

0.1

0b

.d.l.

0.0

20.1

181.5

566

660

116

MK

IP144

b.d

.l.

0.9

70.9

311.2

0.2

70.2

63.5

0.0

3b

.d.l.

0.0

12.1

287.5

513

1086

107

MK

IP145

b.d

.l.

0.7

40.0

95.5

0.5

50.0

54.1

0.0

1b

.d.l.

0.0

10.0

586.5

626

240

98

MK

IP147

b.d

.l.

0.5

40.7

57.9

0.0

40.2

74.4

0.0

3b

.d.l.

0.0

20.1

382.6

644

419

97

MK

IP149

b.d

.l.

1.6

70.1

54.3

0.4

30.0

47.0

0.0

0b

.d.l.

0.0

10.0

988.0

681

407

102

MK

IP151

b.d

.l.

1.8

11.1

19.9

0.2

50.1

34.5

0.0

4b

.d.l.

0.0

10.3

486.4

661

1638

105

SIT

E15

MK

IP179

0.3

00.6

21.3

614.1

0.1

71.0

75.1

0.0

6b

.d.l.

0.0

20.0

782.6

621

169

105

MK

IP181

0.2

20.8

71.4

813.8

0.1

80.5

47.8

0.0

7b

.d.l.

0.0

20.0

576.8

485

56

102

MK

IP182

0.4

30.6

81.8

817.2

0.3

60.8

76.9

0.0

6b

.d.l.

0.0

20.1

574.7

829

103

103

MK

IP183

0.5

61.7

72.9

821.3

0.2

11.2

617.0

0.1

1b

.d.l.

0.0

20.0

960.1

469

18

105

SIT

E17

MK

IP196

0.3

30.5

82.4

417.7

0.0

30.8

65.7

0.1

90.0

40.0

20.0

476.4

465

29

104

MK

IP198

0.3

90.7

64.3

320.4

0.1

00.7

64.5

0.2

80.0

60.0

10.0

669.4

412

11

101

MK

IP200

0.3

90.4

62.7

417.0

0.1

50.7

44.2

0.0

9b

.d.l.

0.0

10.0

978.5

567

48

104

MK

IP201

0.3

40.3

42.1

315.9

0.0

30.6

82.8

0.1

90.0

10.0

10.0

482.5

522

25

105

SIT

E26

MK

IP233

0.2

00.3

72.5

512.0

0.1

00.5

02.2

0.2

40.1

20.0

10.0

490.5

588

25

109

MK

IP234

0.3

40.6

32.8

717.3

0.0

50.8

65.2

0.2

3b

.d.l.

0.0

20.0

575.4

533

17

103

MK

IP235

0.1

40.7

42.7

017.2

0.1

30.6

46.0

0.1

2b

.d.l.

0.0

20.0

577.6

522

35

105

MK

IP236

0.3

40.5

43.2

318.8

0.0

90.6

73.1

0.2

30.0

10.0

10.0

676.3

522

19

103

SIT

E33

MK

IP247

0.7

00.8

75.8

322.6

0.1

21.1

07.4

0.3

00.0

10.0

20.1

562.9

517

18

102

MK

IP248

0.1

70.5

54.0

816.2

0.2

20.4

83.1

0.1

80.0

20.0

20.2

178.6

559

31

104

MK

IP250

0.6

20.7

34.8

619.5

0.0

81.0

33.1

0.1

90.0

00.0

20.0

773.5

475

25

104

MK

IP252

0.4

40.6

63.8

314.5

0.2

10.9

93.0

0.1

1b

.d.l.

0.0

10.1

482.9

551

4107

SIT

E44

MK

IP269

0.3

00.3

12.8

915.5

b.d

.l.

0.4

91.6

0.1

90.0

30.0

10.0

484.1

601

4105

SIT

E64

MK

IP82

0.3

70.5

72.3

812.0

0.4

30.7

67.0

0.0

9b

.d.l.

0.0

10.3

777.6

538

64

102

MK

IP83

0.4

80.6

23.3

719.1

0.3

20.9

54.5

0.0

8b

.d.l.

0.0

12.0

070.2

431

4102

MK

IP85

0.5

40.6

32.1

818.7

0.1

30.7

92.5

0.0

8b

.d.l.

0.0

12.1

274.3

420

4102

MK

IP90

0.1

80.5

00.9

910.2

0.1

70.2

03.4

0.0

3b

.d.l.

0.0

10.0

387.0

688

72

103

SIT

E154

MK

IP8

0.7

51.2

74.5

923.4

0.1

81.6

711.3

0.2

4b

.d.l.

0.0

20.4

455.2

329

54

99

MK

IP10

0.5

51.1

24.3

222.4

0.1

91.5

98.8

0.2

60.0

10.0

20.2

362.8

401

49

102

MK

IP14

0.1

70.4

61.5

310.0

0.3

40.3

411.5

0.0

6b

.d.l.

0.0

10.0

580.5

586

64

105

MK

IP15

0.5

71.1

73.9

621.5

0.1

61.3

79.7

0.2

20.0

00.0

20.3

562.5

400

77

101

MK

IP16

0.6

31.0

54.3

921.7

0.1

71.4

98.1

0.2

50.0

10.0

20.2

262.4

458

42

100

MK

IP17

0.4

01.2

33.9

618.7

0.1

10.8

19.3

0.1

5b

.d.l.

0.0

20.1

069.7

431

136

104

MK

IP18

0.2

00.7

22.4

013.5

0.3

80.9

56.6

0.0

6b

.d.l.

0.0

10.0

780.7

653

193

106

SIT

E156

MK

IP28

0.1

30.8

10.6

28.8

0.2

10.2

16.7

0.0

3b

.d.l.

0.0

10.0

588.7

664

56

106

MK

IP29

b.d

.l.

0.7

61.6

48.0

0.2

30.2

75.5

0.0

5b

.d.l.

0.0

20.0

489.9

758

324

106

SIT

E171

MK

IP44

b.d

.l.

0.4

70.5

86.2

0.3

60.0

51.0

0.0

2b

.d.l.

0.0

10.0

686.6

653

1514

95

MK

IP45

b.d

.l.

0.1

90.4

73.8

0.0

40.0

80.4

0.0

1b

.d.l.

0.0

11.7

196.4

582

325

103

MK

IP47

0.2

00.9

22.6

416.4

0.3

20.4

77.6

0.1

0b

.d.l.

0.0

10.1

567.9

519

296

97

MK

IP48

b.d

.l.

0.3

10.4

84.9

0.0

60.1

11.4

0.0

1b

.d.l.

0.0

31.5

689.1

543

462

98

OR

ES

SIT

E64

MK

IP88

b.d

.l.

0.2

81.6

45.4

b.d

.l.

0.0

80.1

60.0

1b

.d.l.

0.0

20.0

389.4

639

47

97

SIT

E15

MK

IP187

b.d

.l.

b.d

.l.

0.7

62.3

b.d

.l.

b.d

.l.

0.1

50.0

3b

.d.l.

0.0

20.0

288.7

1040

43

92

Na

2O

(%)

Mg

O(%

)A

l 2O

3(%

)S

iO2

(%)

P2O

5(%

)K

2O

(%)

CaO

(%)

TiO

2(%

)V

2O

5(%

)C

r 2O

3(%

)M

nO

(%)

FeO

(%)

Co

(pp

m)

Cu

(pp

m)

Su

m

SIT

E33

MK

IP266

b.d

.l.

b.d

.l.

0.2

22.3

0.0

70.0

10.2

10.0

00.0

10.0

20.1

291.9

890

134

95

N.

Kyth

era

MK

IP300

b.d

.l.

b.d

.l.

0.9

03.0

0.0

20.0

40.1

30.0

2b

.d.l.

0.0

20.0

392.9

638

60

97

KG

S55

6.2

0b

.d.l.

15.2

848.6

b.d

.l.

0.0

53.7

50.4

7b

.d.l.

0.0

00.0

411.3

129

386

Ay.

Nik

ola

os

KG

S84

b.d

.l.

0.4

46.8

59.1

b.d

.l.

0.2

40.0

40.2

00.0

20.0

10.4

680.2

564

b.d

.l.

98

Ay.

Elis

saio

sK

GS

89a

b.d

.l.

0.2

8b

.d.l.

0.8

0.0

3b

.d.l.

20.0

1b

.d.l.

b.d

.l.

0.0

00.3

055.4

435

b.d

.l.

77

KG

S89e

b.d

.l.

0.4

7b

.d.l.

1.2

0.0

4b

.d.l.

29.6

4b

.d.l.

b.d

.l.

b.d

.l.

0.5

739.7

433

b.d

.l.

72

Ste

phania

KG

S97a

2.2

20.1

05.1

713.7

b.d

.l.

0.0

10.0

10.0

60.1

20.0

20.0

278.0

500

33

99

On

line

su

pp

lem

en

t3

Su

mm

ary

of

main

ch

ara

cte

risti

cs

for

the

23

KIP

sit

es

havin

g.

100

go

fsla

gan

dp

rob

ab

leacti

vit

y.

AR

C5

Arc

haic

(700–500

B.C

.);C

LA

5C

lassic

al

(500–300

B.C

.);H

EL

L5

Helle

nis

tic

(300–100

B.C

.);E

RO

M,

MR

OM

,L

RO

M5

Earl

y(1

00

B.C

.–A

.D.

200),

Mid

dle

(A.D

.200–400),

Late

Ro

man

(A.D

.400–650);

MB

YZ

5M

idd

leB

yza

nti

ne

(A.D

.1100–1350);

VE

N5

Ven

eti

an

(A.D

.1

35

0–

18

00

).

Sit

eD

ate

SL

(g)

Ore

(g)

PC

Bs

TA

PA

naly

ses

Pro

bab

leacti

vit

y

001C

CLA

5300

–4

–H

ete

rog

eneous

chem

istr

yw

ith

hig

hFe:S

ira

tios

and

hig

hcop

per

conte

nts

.Four

sections

stu

die

dand

these

are

all

hete

rog

eneous

and

poro

us,

rich

inw

ustite

;som

ehave

iron-c

alc

ium

sili

cate

sw

ith

com

positio

nb

etw

een

that

of

fayalit

eand

kirschte

inite.

Note

hig

her

Mn

conte

nts

of

sam

ple

MK

IP144,

whic

hare

note

dals

oin

the

analy

ses

of

the

sili

cate

phases.

Sm

ithin

g

010

Majo

r:C

LA

,E

RO

M–LR

OM

,V

EN

Min

or:

HE

LL,

MB

YZ

510

10

–very

few

sm

all

Not

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.?

015

Majo

r:LR

OM

Min

or:

VE

N2290

260

–fe

wsm

all

Med

ium

variab

ility

inchem

icalcom

positio

ns,

low

-med

ium

Fe:S

ira

tios,

low

base

meta

ls.

Six

sections

stu

die

d,

rela

tively

hom

og

eneous,

rich

iniron

wustite

,m

ost

als

ohave

kirschte

inite,

ing

lass.

Iron

meta

lfr

eq

uently

associa

ted

with

wustite

.

?

016

Majo

r:C

LA

,LR

OM

,V

EN

300

––

few

sm

all

Not

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.?

017

CLA

2700

,5

–m

any

sm

all

Low

-med

ium

variab

ility

inchem

icalcom

positio

n,

low

-med

ium

Fe:S

ira

tios,

low

base

meta

ls.

Fiv

esections

stu

die

d,

four

are

rela

tively

hom

og

eneous,

rich

inw

ustite

,usually

with

iron

sili

cate

sof

fayalit

iccom

positio

n,

freq

uent

iron

prills

oft

en

associa

ted

with

wustite

.O

ne

frag

ment

of

sla

gm

ixed

with

larg

eare

aof

corr

od

ed

ferr

itic

iron

and

pla

tycry

sta

lsof

cem

entite

–p

ossib

lya

part

of

ab

loom

.

Sm

eltin

g

On

lin

es

up

ple

me

nt

2C

on

tin

ue

d

Sit

eD

ate

SL

(g)

Ore

(g)

PC

Bs

TA

PA

naly

ses

Pro

bab

leacti

vit

y

019

Majo

r:C

LA

,M

RO

M,

LR

OM

,V

EN

Min

or:

HE

LL–E

RO

M,

MB

YZ

1500

40

–m

any

sm

all

Not

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.S

meltin

g

026

Majo

r:C

LA

Min

or:

VE

N4300

5–

many,

few

larg

eLow

-med

ium

variab

ility

inchem

icalcom

positio

n,

low

-med

ium

Fe:S

ira

tios,

low

base

meta

ls.

Four

sections

stu

die

d,

rela

tively

hom

og

eneous,

rich

inw

ustite

,w

ith

iron

sili

cate

sof

fayalit

iccom

positio

n,

freq

uent

iron

prills

oft

en

associa

ted

with

wustite

.

Sm

eltin

g

033

Majo

r:C

LA

Min

or:

LR

OM

7300

85

5fe

w,

som

ela

rge

Med

ium

variab

ility

inchem

icalcom

positio

ns

and

low

-med

ium

Fe:S

ira

tios,

low

base

meta

lconte

nt.

There

ap

pear

tob

ed

iffe

rent

typ

es

of

sla

gsug

gestive

of

both

sm

eltin

gand

sm

ithin

g.

One

of

the

PC

Bs

was

sectioned

and

gre

en

cop

per

min

era

lsw

ere

note

din

sid

eth

ep

ore

s,

sug

gesting

the

sam

eheart

hm

ay

have

been

used

for

cop

per

work

ing

.Four

sla

gs

were

sectioned

and

the

sections

are

rela

tively

hom

og

eneous,

very

rich

inw

ustite

,often

with

elo

ng

ate

doliv

ines

ina

gla

ssy

matr

ix.

Iron

meta

lis

note

d.

Poro

sity

ishig

h.

Sm

eltin

gz

sm

ithin

g?

044

CLAz

MB

YZ

440

25

––

Only

one

sam

ple

was

analy

zed

chem

ically

,show

ing

low

-med

ium

Fe:S

ira

tios

and

low

base

meta

ls.

One

section

of

anoth

er

sam

ple

was

cut

and

afr

ag

ment

of

unre

acte

d/p

art

ially

reacte

dolig

isto

sw

as

found

within

it.

Sm

eltin

g

054

Majo

r:C

LA

,LR

OM

,V

EN

Min

or:

ER

OM

,M

RO

M415

––

–N

ot

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.?

060

Majo

r:C

LA

Min

or:

AR

C,

HE

LL,

ER

OM

105

––

–N

ot

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.?

064

Majo

r:C

LA

,ER

OM

–LR

OM

Min

or:

AR

C,

HE

LL,

MB

YZ

,V

EN

1500

200

1fr

ag

.fe

wsm

all

Med

ium

-hig

hvariab

ility

inchem

icalcom

positio

n,

med

ium

Fe:S

ira

tios,

note

hig

her

Mn

conte

nts

intw

osam

ple

s,

low

base

meta

ls.

Sections

were

not

stu

die

d.

Sm

eltin

gz

sm

ithin

g?

068

Majo

r:C

LA

,LR

OM

Min

or:

HE

LL,

ER

OM

,M

BY

Z,

VE

N370

,5

–very

few

sm

all

Not

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.?

070

Majo

r:C

LA

,E

RO

MM

inor:

MR

OM

120

––

–N

ot

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.?

081

Majo

r:C

LA

,LR

OM

Min

or:

ER

OM

,M

RO

M105

––

one

sm

all

Not

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.?

093

Majo

r:A

RC

,C

LA

,LR

OM

Min

or:

ER

OM

–LR

OM

,V

EN

350

75

–fe

w,

one

med

ium

Not

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.?

114

Majo

r:C

LA

Min

or:

LR

OM

,M

BY

Z230

––

few

sm

all

Not

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.?

153

Majo

r:C

LA

,V

EN

Min

or:

MB

YZ

1850

––

one

sm

all

Not

sam

ple

dfo

ranaly

sis

.?

On

lin

es

up

ple

me

nt

3C

on

tin

ue

d

Metallurgical remains from regional surveys of ''non-industrial'' landscapes: The case of the...

Documents

Transcript of Metallurgical remains from regional surveys of ''non-industrial'' landscapes: The case of the...