Abstract
Metallurgical crucible remains have been found in many archaeological contexts and in varying degrees of preservation. The reconstruction of metallurgical activity through the study of these remains, by means of microscopy and chemical analysis, is undertaken with the aims of understanding technological choices of ancient craftspeople, their use of different raw materials and, by extension, the organisation of production and trade. When large assemblages are available for study, an intra-site comparison of technology and material use within different contexts and throughout time offers interesting perspectives.Complete crucible examples are rarely found and it is often difficult to reconstruct full crucible profiles based on the fragmented remains. This in turn means that process variability within a single crucible can be hard to assess. Crucible slag is often highly heterogeneous, even within single fragments, enticing analysts to lose themselves in details. Furthermore, the abundance of remains is highly variable, depending on the scale of activity as well as archaeological recovery and preservation, while technological variation within an assemblage can only be detected through study of multiple samples.Drawing on the analysis of two crucible assemblages, some difficulties and opportunities for technological reconstructions are discussed. Issues related to crucible heterogeneity and inherent process variability are illustrated and a number of interpretative problems arising therefrom are examined. Following a deconstruction of these interpretative issues, some suggestions are made for how, despite methodological difficulties, archaeologically relevant results are obtained where one tries to see the forest for the trees.
Highlights
This paper highlights some issues regarding the study of crucibles used for high-temperature metallurgical operations (Rehren, 2003), illustrated by results from two assemblages studied as part of the first author's PhD research
Crucibles, a glaze may form on the exterior and dross is sometimes preserved on the interior, but interior crucible slag is rarely developed
The first type of variability that can be identified within crucible assemblages is the variation that occurs within crucibles themselves
Summary
This paper highlights some issues regarding the study of crucibles used for high-temperature metallurgical operations (Rehren, 2003), illustrated by results from two assemblages studied as part of the first author's PhD research (published in full elsewhere). Crucible slag is defined here as the combination of vitrified ceramic and various contributions from the crucible charge, such as fuel ash and metal oxides, developed at the interface of the crucible and its charge This contrasts with – typically later – externally heated examples, often made of more refractory ceramic (Bayley and Rehren, 2007), such as Roman brass-making (Bayley, 1984), medieval European fire assay (Martinón-Torres et al, 2006, 2008) and early Islamic Central Asian steel-making crucibles (Rehren and Papachristou, 2003). Though this paper focuses in particular on internally heated crucibles, much of the following discussion has bearing on all crucible types
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
