Abstract
A rapidly increasing number of bronze mirrors dated to the Chinese Han dynasty (202 BC – AD 220), known for their unique decorative patterns and highly developed alloying techniques, have been widely discovered in both China and beyond, providing fresh materials and scientific data to revisit their geological provenance, production and circulation network along the ancient Silk Road. In this paper, 47 bronze mirrors unearthed in the southeastern provinces of China, including Zhejiang, Anhui and Fujian provinces, have been characterized by typo-chronology, lead isotopic analysis, compositional analysis and metallography. A much wider comparative study is also carried out through a combination of data from China, Japan, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia, leading to a more updated lead isotopic database of the Han mirrors spreading out of China in various directions. Compared with the traditional ‘optimal’ model based on the Han mirrors recovered in Japan, the current study contributes several key changes in the bronze mirror production of the Han dynasty. The systematic analysis of the alloy composition, trace elements and typological studies shows that the bronze mirror industry shifted towards a more standardized production in the middle to late Western Han Dynasty. In contrast to the substantial change of non-mirror bronze productions, the similar distribution of lead isotope data in early and middle to late Western Han mirrors suggests that the ‘official monopoly of salt and iron’ policy was less effective for the management of lead involved in mirror production. Bronze mirrors dated to middle to late Western Han discovered outside Han-China, such as Japan, Thailand, Afghanistan, **ongnu and the ancient Dian Kingdom, appear to be subjected to a more specific type of lead as a result of the state-centralized policy of the Western Han court.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
As one crucial type of bronze artefacts for both ritual and daily use, the history of bronze mirrors in China can be traced back to beyond 4,000 years BP. Although mirrors provide critical links between the Central Plains of China and the northwest regions (Li 1988; Song 1997; Mei 2005), it was only with the rise of the Han dynasty (202 BC – AD 220) that bronze mirrors became widespread in Japan, Southeast Asia, Mongolia, Eastern Europe and further (Loubo-Lesnitchenko 1973; Bai 2010; Cahill 2011; Treister and Ravich 2021).
A range of pioneering studies focused on mirrors of the Chinese Han dynasty were in fact promoted by Japanese scholars, partially due to the fact that thousands of Han mirrors have been unearthed from different archaeological contexts dated to the Yayoi (300 BC - AD 250) or Kofun periods (AD 250–592) in Japan (Mabuchi et al. 1985). For example, the origin of the Kofun-period ‘triangular-rimmed mirrors with divinity and animal figures (TRDA mirrors)’ has been the subject of a heated debate in East Asian archaeology due to its potential association with the rise of state in Japan (Kobayashi 1971; Higuchi 1985; Wang 1981, 1994, 2000; Xu 2022). In addition to typology, studies of associated production techniques and mirror inscriptions began to be published since 1970s. The subsequent decades witnessed the application of lead isotope (LI) analysis by Japanese scholars to Han mirrors, as well as what here referred to as the ‘optimal’ model, with the Western Han (WH) mirrors discovered in Japan (JW) being made from ‘Northern Chinese lead’ on one hand and the Eastern Han (EH) mirrors in Japan (JE) being made from ‘Southern Chinese lead’ on the other hand (Mabuchi and Hirao 1982, 1983; Mabuchi et al. 1985; Mabuchi 2011). The boundary between the two, as shown in subsequent figures, is taken to be 208Pb/206Pb below c. 2.15 and 207Pb/206Pb below c. 0.865 for Eastern Han, with Western Han above these values.
Recent decades have seen an increasing trend in the use LI in order to pinpoint the geological source of the bronze mirrors within China (Fig. 1; Cui et al. 2009; Zhangsun et al. 2017; Chen et al. 2019, 2020a, b; Luo et al. 2023; Yang et al. 2023). Although it is rather reasonable to assume that LI represent the source of lead, since the percentage of lead in these bronze mirrors are in most cases beyond impurity levels, pinpointing their geological sources is yet possible. The lead deposits are clearly more ubiquitous than copper and tin, with the latter being predominately located along the Yangtze region and further south (Fig. 1). Moreover, many of the lead deposits are much less distinguishable purely by lead isotopic data.
Nevertheless, an emerging consensus in the literature is that LI are extremely useful for characterizing metal objects in antiquity and detecting the diachronic changes in their sources (e.g., Bray et al. 2015; ** et al. 2017). Whilst the current databank of Han mirror LI values has seen a substantial expansion in the last two decades, interpretation is still dominated by the traditional optimal model of ‘WH-EH contrast’, which springs from relatively limited analyses of Han mirrors excavated only in Japan. It is increasingly imperative to ask the degree to which this model can explain the new data from mirrors excavated in China.
One more related question is whether bronze mirrors, like other types of metal artefacts, were also regulated by the state policy of ‘official monopoly of salt and iron’. This policy was introduced by the Emperor Wu in the middle to late WH at around 110BC, as documented in the Records of the Grand Historian 史记 and the Book of the Han 汉书. Its prime objective was to centralize and regulate the collection and management of salt and iron resources, with the purpose of accumulating capital for military campaigns against **ongnu. The exploitation and circulation of iron and copper ore were officially regulated by the establishment of ‘copper officials 铜官’ and ‘iron officials 铁官’, who were also responsible for prohibiting private mining or casting. However, the policy became gradually less effective in the late WH period due to increasing complaints from the ordinary class that it extracted exorbitant profit (** 2010). The most recent publication (Yang et al. 2023) showed a more convergent pattern in the distribution of LI of the bronze objects in the noble burials of WH, based on which they argued for a profound impact of the ‘official monopoly of salt and iron’ on bronze production under the reign of the Emperor Wu (141 to 87 BC). This regulation also appears to have been extended to the control of leaded bronze production, providing an intriguing question that to what extent this policy affected the production of mirrors. Unlike other bronze objects, mirrors require more specific and advanced alloying and casting technology to be pragmatically functional.
A third question derives from the widespread distribution of the Han mirrors. Despite its great archaeological interests, the current discussion on the sources of the Han mirrors unearthed outside Han China, including Afghanistan (Mabuchi et al. 1985), **ongnu territory (Chen et al. 2020a) and Thailand (Pryce et al. 2014), is also deeply rooted in the interpretational model derived from the Japanese Han mirrors. However, it is reasonable to ask whether the updated database could paint a different picture than the traditional one.
Samples and typo-chronology
Samples
The samples in the current research provide a complete chronological sequence from WH to EH. They derive primarily from four regions in Southeastern China, namely, Anji in Zhejiang province (22 pieces), Shouxian (16 pieces) and Fuyang (six pieces) in Anhui province, and Wuyishan (three pieces) in Fujian province (Fig. 1).
The 22 bronze mirrors from Anji in northwestern Zhejiang province were all excavated from the tombs of the Han dynasty in this area, though many of them could also be dated to the Warring States period (475 − 221 BC; Cheng 2010). Anji was once the major city of the Zhang state 鄣郡 set up in the early WH and later merged into the Danyang state 丹阳郡 during the reign of Emperor Wu. The Danyang state is also known from ‘Danyang produced high-quality copper during Han 汉有善铜出丹阳’ in the inscription of the bronze mirrors. It is thought to be located at the conjunction of the southern part of Anhui province, southwestern of Jiangsu province and northwestern of Zhejiang province according to historical geographers (Tan 1982).
The 16 bronze Shouxian mirrors are part of the Shouxian Museum collection, most probably from the vicinity of Shouxian in Anhui province. Shouxian was the last capital of the Chu State during the Warring States period and was the capital of the Huainan State 淮南国 (196–122 BC) during WH. Panchi mirrors (Fig. 2) are found in large quantities in Shouxian and the surrounding Huai River region, which have been called ‘Huai-type mirror’ by previous researchers (Karlbeck 1926).
The 6 bronze mirrors from the Fuyang Museum most probably came from the vicinity of Fuyang in Anhui province, which is where the Ruyin Marquis State 汝阴侯国 (201–115 BC) of the Han dynasty was located. More than 300 bronze mirrors were found around Fuyang, and a monograph on Han mirrors in Fuyang has been published (Yang 2017).
The 3 bronze mirrors excavated from the Minyue Wangcheng site, also known as the Chengcun Hancheng site, are located in Chengcun village, Wuyishan city, Fujian province. Minyue Wangcheng site was the core city of Minyue State 闽越国 (202–110 BC) in the early WH (Yang 1990). Since the first excavation in 1958, massive building foundations and a significant number of Han tiles, pottery, iron and bronze ware have been recovered (Fujian Museum et al. 2004).
Typo-chronology of Han mirrors
Whilst the chronology of these bronze mirrors can be inferred according to their excavation context and associated materials, these factors approximate the date of their last use or ‘death’. However, the ‘birth’ of the mirrors is of more interest since it is closely related to their production and circulation. Through a comprehensive analysis of the images and inscriptions of Han mirrors, Okamura has established a refined chronology for the Han mirrors, which classified them into seven phases (Okamura 1984, 1993, 2014). This was followed by Mabuchi who illustrated the variation of LI of Han mirrors throughout these seven phases (Mabuchi 2011). This paper follows Okamura’s chronological framework, permitting a direct comparison to be carried out between the new and legacy data.
Through comparison with previous typo-chronology results concerning the images and inscriptions of samples, this paper divides the newly sampled mirrors into phases I-VII defined by Okamura.
The early WH comprises Phase I and II when the Panchi mirrors were predominant, followed by the Caoye mirrors. The Phase III and IV belong to the middle and late WH, respectively, in which the more sophisticated images and inscription started to appear on the reverse of the mirror. In this case, **ngyun mirrors were the dominant type, followed by Huilong, Riguang and Zhaoming mirrors. The early to late EH is in line with Phase V, VI and VII, respectively. The TLV mirror and the Shoudai mirrors were still prevalent in Phase V and Phase VI, and there were Bafeng mirrors in Phase VII. The sample information and the typological chronology are showing in Table 1.
Methods
Composition analysis
Major alloy compositional analyses of the samples showing a metallic composition were carried out at the Archaeometry Laboratory of the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC), and the samples were measured for their chemical composition using energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (ED-XRF) after polishing. The experimental instrument was manufactured by Shimadzu Corporation, Japan, model EDX-8100, which was used for the quantitative analysis of the fundamental parameter method tests under the following operating conditions: atmospheric vacuum, collimator of 1–10 mm, and rhodium (Rh) X-ray tube target, each sample tested three times to obtain the average as the final result. The tube voltage was 50 kV, the tube current was 1000 µA, and the analysis time was 7 min each test.
Trace elemental analysis was carried out using a JSM-5910 scanning electron microscope (SEM) (JEOL Ltd, Japan) combined with EDS (Oxford Instruments, UK) with INCA software at the University of Oxford Archaeology and Art History Research Laboratory. For each sample, 8–10 different squares of equal areas were selected as test zones and their average values were calculated as final results. The parameters are set as voltage for 20KV, spot size for 32 μm, test time for 120s, and dead time for 30 ~ 40%. The minimum detect limit is 0.1% for most of the trace elements except arsenic, zinc and bismuth of 0.15–0.2% (for detailed data see Liu 2016).
Metallographic structure observation
The samples were prepared in line with a standard procedure of metallographic samples. The metallographic microstructure observation was carried out in the Archaeometry Laboratory of USTC, using the Axio Observer inverted metallographic microscope (Carl Zeiss, Germany) to observe the metallographic microstructure of the sample before and after etching in 3% FeCl3 in alcohol solution.
LI analysis
The pre-treatment of the samples for LI was carried out in the Archaeometry Laboratory of USTC. All samples were washed with ultrasound to remove dust or glue stains, then 30 mg of each sample is dissolved in concentrated nitric acid solution. Under the condition of weak acid solution, lead was extracted by electrochemical method and dissolved in 2% nitric acid. In the Key Laboratory of Crust and Mantle Materials and Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, USTC, concentrations were tested by ICP-MS then diluted the lead solution to 200 ppb. The LI ratio was determined by Neptune Plus MC-ICP-MS, School of Earth and Space Sciences, USTC. During the experiment, 200 ppb of NBS 981 standard lead solution was inserted into every 5 samples to correct the LI ratio. Repeated measurements of the standard samples and samples showed that the instrument’s 2σ standard error was lower than ± 0.001 for the three lead isotopic ratios.
Results
The new analytical results of typological chronology, elemental composition and LI are summarized in Table 2. The elemental compositions of the 17 bronze mirror samples with sound metal body show that the Cu content ranges between 62.9 and 71.4%, Sn between 21.9 and 30.9%, and Pb content between 0.3 and 6.7%. Except AJ-01 and AJ-04, which contain lead lower than 1%, other samples all contain lead at a level of 3–7% therefore are characterized as copper-tin-lead ternary alloys (threshold = 2%). Apart from these two mirrors with low lead, the compositional analysis revealed a stable copper-tin-lead ratio of 14:5:1 for mirrors (Zhangsun et al. 2017), suggesting the standardized mirror recipe of alloys.
The metallographic analyses of all the 17 samples illustrate a typical structure of high-tin bronze with α-phase and (α + δ) phase. Because of the high content of tin, the (α + δ) phase increases and interconnects into matrix, leading to the strip-like and needle-like distribution of the α-phase (Cu-Sn alloy; Fig. 3a). While mirrors with higher lead content present a different microstructure, in which lead is formed as spherical or irregular particles on intredendritic boundaries (Fig. 3b, Cu-Sn-Pb alloy).
LI results show that the data range of the 47 samples is 17.625–18.579 for 206Pb/204Pb, 15.521–15.733 for 207Pb/204Pb, and 38.220–38.980 for 208Pb/204Pb respectively, all of which fall into the category of common lead (** 2008; Liu et al. 2018). Because almost all the mirrors contain more than 2% lead, the LI data presented here represent that of the lead source, as opposed to trace values of lead in the copper (** et al. 2017).
Discussion
Comparison of LI between Chinese and Japanese Han Mirrors
The interpretation of lead isotopes in Han mirrors is overwhelmingly dominated by the traditional model that Western Han mirrors are defined by the distribution in the Japanese Western Han (JW) region and Eastern Han mirrors by the Japanese Eastern Han (JE) region: a model purely based on the Han mirrors excavated in Japan (Fig. 4; Mabuchi 2011). This could become a circular argument, in that bronze mirrors isotopically falling into the JW ‘field’ are automatically assumed to be dated to the Western Han (Chen et al. 2020a).
Following the chronological phases, Fig. 4 illustrates a comparison of the distribution of LI data between Japanese and Chinese Han mirrors. From Phase I to Phase V (Fig. 4a-e), corresponding to various periods of WH and early EH, the distribution of lead isotopes for Chinese Han mirrors obviously stretches over both the JW and JE regions, which is rather different from the traditional optimal model. This is especially true of Phases II-III, when virtually no Han mirror excavated from Japan falls into the range of JE (inserts of Fig. 4b & c; Table S1). A crucial shift occurred in Phase VI (middle EH, Fig. 4f), when Han mirrors belonging to JW completely disappear, as attested by both the new and legacy data (Fig. 4f; Mabuchi 2011). This pattern remains the same in Phase VII (late EH, Fig. 4g). The data of the Han mirrors excavated from Japan, though comprehensive and extremely thought-provoking, still appears unable to represent the overall production of bronze mirrors during the Han dynasty. Meanwhile, the distinctive data distribution of Japanese Han mirrors also raises more archaeologically interesting questions regarding the apparently selective exportation of bronze mirrors from Han China to Japan.
The ‘Official monopoly of salt and Iron’ policy on bronze mirrors
A number of bronze vessels or weapons produced since the Qin state show clear inscription of the manufacturer in the form of ‘XX 造 (made by someone)’, offering important materials for the study of the underlying production and management model. However, the bronze mirrors produced in WH, though cast with various types of inscriptions, primarily auspicious expression, contain little information on manufacture. Occasionally, some WH mirrors show the exact date of production. More technologically related inscriptions can be seen from the bronze vessels of WH, as systematically summarized by Wu (2005). He identified a three-tier production model for the bronze vessels of the early WH, encompassing the central government departments (shaofu 少府, zhongguan 钟官) at the top, the vassal states (e.g., Zhongshan State 中山国, Ruyin Marquis State 汝阴侯国, Changsha State 长沙国) in the middle and local merchants (e.g., Luoyang 洛阳, Handan 邯郸) at the bottom, which largely followed the political structure at that time. During the middle to late WH when the political power of the vassal states declined radically, the production of the bronze vessels changed to a two-tier model, meaning that they were predominantly produced under the supervision of the Gongguan 工官 (managers of craftspeople) of the central government (Shangfang 尚方, Kaogong 考工 and Shanglin 上林), and the local governments (Hedong 河东 and Luoyang 洛阳). EH saw an increasing proportion of bronzes vessels marked with the exact surname of the craftsmen but giving less information of the related governmental departments, implying the rise of the private bronze production.
The extent to which these models and changes are applicable to bronze mirror production remains uncertain. Even though one can extract slightly more information from EH mirrors, such as the production centres (e.g., Kuaiji, Jiangxia and Guanghan, Fig. 1; Kong and Liu 1984), the vast majority were still made without these inscription details. Consequently, in addition to the excavations of the bronze mirror workshops (Bai et al. 2004), the only method to resolve the issue of production and circulation appears to be the chemical and lead isotopic analyses of the bronze mirrors themselves.
Control of alloying composition is of critical importance of mirrors. Proper addition of tin (and lead) not only creates ideal colour for mirrors, but also reduces the melting point that permits longer time for alloying liquid to fulfil the moulds and form fine decorations. The comparison of the major elements of mirrors from northern and southern China dated to the Warring States period, the early WH, the middle to late WH and the EH is presented in Fig. 5. The distribution of alloy compositions is plotted against copper to avoid the unit sum issue (Liu et al. 2020; Pollard and Liu 2023). Clearly, leaded bronze was the prevailing alloying pattern for the mirrors. The reason to include the Warring States period is to highlight the continuity and contrast with the early WH, considering the scarcity of data on the northern mirrors in the early WH. Showing these four periods together underlines the similarity of alloys for the mirrors between northern and southern China dated to middle and late WH, whereas the bronze mirror production in northern and southern China of the Warring States period illustrates a bimodal distribution. In spite of the limited number of data, and these northern mirrors show a more restricted range of compositions in the EH (Fig. 5a), though more data are required.
Data availability
No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
References
Bai Y (2010) Discovery and identification of Han-style bronze mirrors in central Asia. Cult Relics 1:78–86
Bai Y, Wei C, Wang H (2004) Investigation on the site of a Han mirror casting workshop in the Imperial City of Qi, Linzi, Shandong. Archaeology 4:29–36+102
Bray P, Cuénod A, Gosden C et al (2015) Form and flow: the ‘karmic cycle’ of copper. J Archaeol Sci 56:202–209
Cahill S (2011) The Lloyd Cotsen study collection of Chinese bronze mirrors volume II: Studies. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology
Chen D, Luo W, Zeng Q et al (2018) The lead ores circulation in central China during the early western Han dynasty: a case study with bronze vessels from the Gejiagou site. PLoS ONE 11:e205866
Chen D, Luo W, Bai Y (2019) The social interaction between China and Japanese archipelago during western Han dynasty: comparative study of bronze mirrors from Linzi and Yayoi sites. Archaeol Anthropol Sci 7:3449–3457
Chen D, Luo W, Zhang J et al (2020a) Archaeometallurgical perspectives on breaking mirror tomb of **ongnu culture in **njiang during the WESTERN HAN Dynasty. Eur Phys J Plus 135(4):363
Chen D, Zeng Q, Cui B et al (2020b) Source change of lead material for mirror-making industry in western Han, China: evidence from Nanyang bronze mirrors. Curr Sci 118(9):1442–1447
Cheng Y (2010) Research on bronze mirrors unearthed in Anji of Han Dynasty. Oriental Museum 1:85–90
Cui J, Wu X, Bai Y et al (2009) An analysis of the lead isotope ratios of the western Han bronze mirrors from the Linzi city-site of the Qi state in Shandong. Archaeology 4:85–89
Duan Y (2020) Han mirrors discovered in Southern Korean Peninsula. China’s Frontier Archaeol 02:235–255
Fu X (2021) Han mirrors discovered in Southeast Asia. Archaeol Cult Relics 06:92–98
Fujian Museum MW, Museum F (2004) Excavation report on the Han City Site of Chengcun, Wuyishan. Fujian People’s Publishing House. Fuzhou 1–6
Higuchi T (1985) The nature of TRDA mirrors in east Asia and Japan in the 3rd century. Consider Anc Times 39:1–17
Higuchi T (1992) Analytical analysis of TRDA mirrors. Shinchosha Publishing Co Ltd, Tokyo
Huang M, Wu X, Chen X et al (2021) Wuchuan bronzes and cinnabar mining immigrants during the Qin and Han dynasties—new perspectives from typological and lead isotope analysis. Archaeol Anthropol Sci 13:198
** Z (2008) Lead isotope archaeology in China. University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei
** W (2010) Sang Hongyang and the salt and iron official camp of the western Han Dynasty. J Jiangsu University: Social Sci Ed 12(4):38–42
** Z, Liu R, Rawson J et al (2017) Revisiting lead isotope data in Shang and Western Zhou bronzes. Antiquity 360:1574–1587
Karlbeck O (1926) Notes on some early Chinese bronze mirrors. China J Sci Arts 4(1):3
Kobayashi Y (1971) Research on TRDA Mirror: type classification compilation. Res Notes Department Literature Kyoto Univ 13:96–170
Kong X, Liu Y (1984) Ancient Chinese bronze mirrors. Cultural Relics Press, Bei**g
Li H (1988) The origin and early spread of Chinese bronze mirrors. J Shandong Univ Philos Social Sci Ed 2:51–54+45
Li X (1992) A Han mirror unearthed in Silbargan. Afghanistan Wenbo 05:15–16
Li K (2001) Yunnan arts history. Yunnan Education, Kunming
Liu R (2016) Capturing changes: applying the Oxford system to further understand the movement of metal in Shang China. Doctoral dissertation. University of Oxford
Liu Y, Chen K, Mei J et al (2015) Scientific analysis of bronze mirrors unearthed from the **nfeng Qin Tomb in Lintong, Shaanxi Province, 4 edn. Central Plains Cultural relics
Liu R, Rawson J, Pollard A et al (2018) Beyond ritual bronzes: identifying multiple sources of highly radiogenic lead across Chinese history. Sci Rep 8(1):11770
Liu R, Pollard AM, Rawson J et al (2019) Panlongcheng, Zhengzhou and the movement of metal in early bronze age China. J World Prehistory 32:393–428
Liu R, Pollard A, Cao Q et al (2020) Social hierarchy and the choice of metal recycling at Anyang, the last capital of Bronze Age Shang China. Sci Rep 10(1):18794
Loubo-Lesnitchenko E (1973) Imported mirrors in the Minusinsk Basin. Artibus Asiae 35:25–61
Luo Z, Fan A, ** Z et al (2022) Scientific analysis and research on the Warring States bronze mirrors unearthed from Changsha Chu Cemetery, Hunan province, China. Archaeometry 64(5):1187–1201
Luo Z, ** Z, Zhao Z et al (2023) Lead isotope reveals the mineral source change of late bronze age bronze mirrors excavated in Hunan province, southern China. J Archaeol Sci: Rep 49:103994
Ma L (2015) A comparative study of the Mirror Destruction practices of the huns and the Tuoba **anbei. J Zhengzhou Univ (Philos Soc Sci Ed) 06:140–145
Ma D, Wang N, Li P et al (2024) How the metal supply for mintage shifts in the transforming monetary system of the Han Empire: Archaeometallurgical study of the Wuzhu Coins from the Guanghuacun cemetery, Chengdu, Southwest China. J Archaeol Sci: Rep 53:104341
Mabuchi (2007) Thirty Year’s studies in ancient bronze objects by lead isotope method: reconsideration of the bronze materials in the late Yayoi Period. Archaeol Nat Sci 55:1–29
Mabuchi H (2011) Studies on some chemical aspects of Chinese Han-style mirrors: transition of lead isotope patterns from ‘Western-Han mirror type’ to ‘Eastern-Han mirror type’. Archaeol Nat Sci 62:43–63
Mabuchi H, Hirao Y (1982) Study of Han style mirrors by lead isotope method. Museum 370:4–12
Mabuchi H, Hirao Y (1983) Study of Han-style mirrors by lead isotope method (2). Museum 382:16–30
Mabuchi H, Hirao Y, Nishida M (1985) Lead isotope approach to the understanding of early Japanese bronze culture. Archaeometry 27:131–159
Mei J (2005) Some problems on the study of early bronze mirrors unearthed in **njiang. The second International Symposium on Turpan Studies
Okamura H (1984) The chronology and style of earlier Han’s mirrors. J History 67(5):661–702
Okamura H (1993) The chronology of later Han mirrors. Res Rep Natl Museum History Folklore 55:39–83
Okamura H (2014) Staging study of Han mirror. Han Mirror Culture Study. Peking University, Bei**g, pp 46–110
Pollard A, Liu R (2023) Predicting bronze casting recipes in ancient China: ternary copper-lead–tin alloys and the unit sum problem. Archaeol Anthropol Sci 15(5):55
Pryce T, Baron S, Bellina B et al (2014) More questions than answers: the southeast Asian lead isotope project 2009–2012. J Archaeol Sci 42:273–294
Song X (1997) Early Chinese bronze mirror and its related problems. J Archaeol 2:147–169
Tan Q (1982) Historical atlas of China. Sinomap Press, Bei**g
Treister M, Ravich I (2021) Chinese mirrors from the burials of the nomads of Eastern Europe of the second half of the 1st millennium BC–first centuries AD: typology, chronology, distribution and technology of manufacture. Adv Archaeomaterials 02:24–48
Wang Z (1981) Questions about the Japanese TRDA mirrors. Archaeology 4:346-358+395–396
Wang Z (1994) On the four gods mirror unearthed in Japan - and on the TRDA mirror made in Japan by Wu craftsmen of China. Archaeology 8:727–735
Wang Z (2000) On the Nature of the Japanese ‘Imitation TRDA mirror’ and Its Relationship with the So-Called ‘Imported TRDA mirror’. Archaeology 1:78–88+104
Wang K (2018) Overseas trade in kuaiji county during the six dynasties-centering on a sea route between China and Japan in ancient times. Chin Lit Hist Ser 2:28
Wu X (2005) Archaeological study of Han Dynasty bronze vessels. Yuelu Book Society, Changsha
Xu J (2022) Review of the TRDA Mirror: from the history of gemology, material evidence to historical archaeology. Acad Mon 54(03):193–200
Yang C (1990) On the age and nature of Han city in Chong’an Cheng Village Han. Archaeology 10:915–924
Yang Y (2017) Research on bronze mirrors of Han Dynasty in Fuyang. University of Technology, Hefei
Yang D, Wu X, Liu R et al (2023) From diversity to monopoly: major economic policy change in the western Han dynasty revealed by lead isotopic analysis. Archaeol Anthropol Sci 3:37
Zhangsun Y, Liu R, ** Z et al (2017) Lead isotope analyses revealed the key role of Chang’an in the mirror production and distribution network during the Han Dynasty. Archaeometry 59(4):685–713
Funding
The research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (12035017&41473010). Ruiliang Liu acknowledges the financial support provided by ERC synergy project Horsepower (101071707) co-funded by ERC and UKRI (EP/X042332/1).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
X. Wang: conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, investigation, data curation, writing—original draft, visualization, project administration
R. L. Liu: conceptualization, methodology review and editing, formal analysis, grant application, writing—original draft
J. Gao: writing—original draft, review and editing
A. M. Pollard: review and editing
A. C. Fan: review and editing
F. Huang: data quality monitor.
R. L. Li: sample providing
S. X. Zhang: sample providing
F. L. Hua: sample providing
Z. Y. **: conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, writing—original draft, project administration, funding acquisition.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Consent for publication
Written informed consent was obtained from all the participants prior to the publication of this study.
Ethics approval
Not applicable.
Consent to participate
Written informed consent was obtained from all the participants prior to the enrolment of this study.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, X., Liu, R., Gao, J. et al. Reconstructing the trade history: provenance study of Han bronze mirrors in and out of Han China. Archaeol Anthropol Sci 16, 110 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-024-02016-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-024-02016-2