Abstract
Metallogenic ore deposits can be construed and understood in different ways: it is easy for archaeologists and historians to oversimplify the mineralogical complexity of an ore deposit when conceptualising deposits as deliverers of raw materials such as copper or gold. Deposits are most of the time not monometallic; rather they are a mixture of various minerals that can significantly influence the metallic end products. Provenance data are often critically discussed on the basis of the explanatory value of ore mineralogy; however, archaeometallurgists may describe the complex mineralogical and chemical composition on a highly detailed level, disregarding the question of relevancy to the understanding of early societies, who tended to understand their environment on more empirical and practical levels. Archaeological theories are too often developed without regarding the specific quality of archaeometrical record, which needs detailed discussion about its quality and information value. Intense communication and close cooperation of specialists from diverse academic and scientific backgrounds are key in taking the study of metal resources forward.
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.
