Provenance of the lead used in Shang Dynasty bronzes: the number, locations, and geological identities of the lead sources exploited within the Shang chronological range, and the unresolved relationship between highly radiogenic and common lead where silver cannot discriminate them

The lead deliberately added to Shang Dynasty (c. 1600–1046 BC) ritual bronzes contains a famously enigmatic 'highly radiogenic' component whose geological source has so far eluded definitive identification. Liu, Pollard, Liu and Rawson (2020) showed that silver concentration, which travels with the added lead, distinguishes at least two Ag/Pb geochemical provinces in the late Shang period (a more argentiferous one supplying the Central Plains and a silver-poor one supplying southern and southwestern assemblages), but fails to separate highly radiogenic from common lead at Anyang, where both isotopic classes co-occur. The question those authors left open is how many lead sources were used within the chronological range of the Shang dynasty, where, and with what geological identity, and whether the co-occurring isotopic classes record distinct sources, different mineralization stages, or metallurgical processing histories. Subsequent literature shows that all competing source hypotheses — Qinling, the North China Craton margins, southwest China, multiple coeval sources, deeper ores in the same deposits — remain contested, and that recent analyses deepen the problem without resolving it. The problem is open at the full generality of the source question.

Background

Bronze Age China produced ritual bronzes on a scale unmatched in the contemporary world, in copper-based alloys to which lead was deliberately added to improve casting. The provenance of that lead is studied chiefly through lead isotope analysis: measured isotope ratios such as $^{206}\mathrm{Pb}/^{204}\mathrm{Pb}$, $^{207}\mathrm{Pb}/^{204}\mathrm{Pb}$ and $^{208}\mathrm{Pb}/^{204}\mathrm{Pb}$ vary between ore deposits according to their uranium-to-lead and thorium-to-lead ratios and the decay of U and Th to radiogenic lead. A striking pattern defines the central enigma: from the Erligang phase at Zhengzhou (c. 15th–14th century BC) through most of the Anyang (Yinxu) phase — the late Shang capital period, c. 1250–1046 BC — a large share of bronzes, both in the Central Plains of the Yellow River valley and at contemporaneous regional centres such as Panlongcheng (Hubei), Hanzhong (Shaanxi), Xin'gan (Jiangxi) and Sanxingdui (Sichuan, famous for its sacrificial pits of bronze masks and figures), contain 'highly radiogenic' lead (HRL), identified here following the published convention of the source group (Liu, Rawson and Pollard 2018; Wood and Liu 2023) by $^{206}\mathrm{Pb}/^{204}\mathrm{Pb} > 19.5$, i.e. lead extraordinarily enriched in uranium-derived isotopes, whereas other objects contain 'common' lead with crustal-like isotope ratios close to $^{206}\mathrm{Pb}/^{204}\mathrm{Pb}$ 18.5, $^{207}\mathrm{Pb}/^{204}\mathrm{Pb}$ 13.3 and $^{208}\mathrm{Pb}/^{204}\mathrm{Pb}$ 38.3. Where the HRL came from has been debated for decades: proposed sources include southwest China (Yunnan), the middle Yangtze valley, the Qinling and Zhongtiao mountains, the margins of the North China Craton, and even Africa (Sun et al. 2016), and Liu, Rawson and Pollard (2018) showed from non-metal objects that multiple HRL sources must have been used across Chinese history more broadly, making a multi-source model for the Shang feasible. The question matters because the shared HRL signal links Sanxingdui to the Central Plains and underpins all models of Shang metal circulation and political economy.

Because isotopic signatures of distinct deposits can overlap, Liu, Pollard, Liu and Rawson (2020) tested whether silver concentration could serve as an independent tracer: argentiferous galena (PbS) yields lead metal carrying more silver than do weathered, silver-poor ores such as cerussite ($\mathrm{PbCO_3}$), so the weight-percent of silver (%Ag) in bronze should fingerprint the ore type of the added lead. Using the Arthur M. Sackler Collection bronzes and compiled published assemblage data they found: (i) %Ag correlates positively with %Pb, negatively with %Cu, and not with %Sn, so silver was introduced mainly with the intentionally added lead; (ii) southern and southwestern assemblages (Sanxingdui, Hanzhong, Panlongcheng, Xin'gan, and Jinsha, the successor site of Sanxingdui in the Chengdu Plain) have systematically lower median %Ag than Central Plains ones (e.g. Qianzhangda, Anyang), implying at least two distinct Ag/Pb geochemical provinces; (iii) the rise of HRL from Zhengzhou to Anyang coincides with a change in silver proportions, indicating a reorganization of lead supply relative to the earlier, silver-richer, effectively HRL-free Erlitou period (the first bronze-using state culture of the Central Plains, c. 1900–1500 BC; one highly radiogenic Erlitou bronze fragment is recorded); but (iv) within Anyang, objects classified as common versus highly radiogenic lead overlap in %Ag–%Pb space and cannot be separated by the level of silver — so silver separates provinces but not the two isotopic classes at the site where their co-occurrence is recorded; a parallel overlap has been reported at Panlongcheng. Cupellation — the ancient refining process that extracts silver from lead by oxidizing the lead to litharge (lead monoxide) — together with recycling, could in principle alter Ag/Pb ratios and thus blur the tracer. The question that remains is the provenance of this lead at the level of identified sources.

Problem Statement

Determine the provenance of the lead added to Shang Dynasty bronzes: establish how many distinct lead sources were exploited within the chronological range of the Shang dynasty, where they were located, and what their geological identities were, including the source(s) of the highly radiogenic lead whose exact origin, in the source authors' words, has so far eluded definitive identification. (The 2020 silver compilation covers Shang and Western Zhou assemblages; the open question it leaves is scoped to the Shang chronological range.) Following the source group's convention, 'source' is a scale-flexible term — 'from vast metallurgical province, or a large metalliferous belt, to a specific ore body, or even to a small specific mine shaft' — so an identification of a source's location and geological identity at any defensibly argued scale within that range addresses that part of the question, going beyond the established result that at least two Ag/Pb geochemical provinces supplied the Central Plains and the south/southwest respectively in the late Shang. This single objective comprises two linked requests. (1) Establish how many geochemically distinct lead-source regions (each a metallurgical province or a metalliferous belt) were exploited, where they were located, and what their geological identities were. (2) Resolve, for the assemblages where highly radiogenic and common lead co-occur — Anyang (Yinxu) above all, where the two classes come from geochemical environments that cannot be distinguished by the level of silver, together with the mixed signals reported at Panlongcheng and at Jinsha in contrast to the uniformly radiogenic Sanxingdui assemblage — whether the two isotopic classes derive from distinct sources with coincident Ag/Pb chemistry, from different mineralization stages within the same source region, or from metallurgical or processing histories (cupellation, recycling) that altered the silver content; the same account should be consistent with the documented temporal pattern (silver-richer, effectively HRL-free Erlitou — one HRL bronze fragment is recorded — the rise of HRL around the Erligang phase at Zhengzhou, its dominance at Anyang through Yinxu Phases II–III, its virtual disappearance in Phase IV, and its persistence at Sanxingdui and, longest, at Jinsha into the early Western Zhou). Competing accounts remain admissible and are to be weighed against the isotopic and silver evidence rather than excluded by definition — including the proposal that the metal came from mining progressively deeper ores of the same deposits rather than from geographically new sources, and the proposal that mixing and recycling of scrap metal fundamentally limit object-to-mine attribution.

References

1. Ruiliang Liu, A. Mark Pollard, Cheng Liu, Jessica Rawson (2020). Every Cloud has a Silver Lining: Using Silver Concentration to Identify the Number of Sources of Lead used in Shang Dynasty Bronzes. Acta Geologica Sinica (English Edition) 94(3): 585–593. DOI: 10.1111/1755-6724.14530, https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-6724.14530
2. Ruiliang Liu, Jessica Rawson, A. Mark Pollard (2018). Beyond ritual bronzes: identifying multiple sources of highly radiogenic lead across Chinese history. Scientific Reports 8: 11770. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-30275-2, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-30275-2
3. K. Chen, J. Mei, T. Rehren, S. Liu, W. Yang, M. Martinón-Torres, C. Zhao, Y. Hirao, J. Chen, Y. Liu (2019). Hanzhong bronzes and highly radiogenic lead in Shang period China. Journal of Archaeological Science 101: 131–139. DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2018.11.010, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2018.11.010
4. Y. Z. Zhangsun, Z. Y. Jin, F. Z. Feng, J. H. Tian, H. G. Wang, C. C. Zhao, F. Huang, X. T. Wu (2021). Revisiting the lead isotopic compositions of the Shang bronzes at Hanzhong and the new hypothesis of Qinling as the source of highly radiogenic lead. Archaeometry 63(1): 122–141. DOI: 10.1111/arcm.12630, https://doi.org/10.1111/arcm.12630
5. Qin Ying, Guofeng Wei, Qiao Huang (2020). The provenance of Yin-Shang bronzes with highly radiogenic lead isotopes. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 12(5): 99. DOI: 10.1007/s12520-020-01056-8, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01056-8
6. R. Liu, Y.-K. Hsu, A. M. Pollard, G. Chen (2021). A new perspective towards the debate on highly radiogenic lead in Chinese archaeometallurgy. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 13: 33. DOI: 10.1007/s12520-021-01280-w, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-021-01280-w
7. Ruiliang Liu, A. Mark Pollard, Feiya Lv, Limin Huan, Shanjia Zhang, Minmin Ma (2021). Two Sides of the Same Coin: A Combination of Archaeometallurgy and Environmental Archaeology to Re-Examine the Hypothesis of Yunnan as the Source of Highly Radiogenic Lead in Early Dynastic China. Frontiers in Earth Science 9: 662172. DOI: 10.3389/feart.2021.662172, https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2021.662172
8. Jonathan R. Wood, Yaxiong Liu (2023). A Multivariate Approach to Investigate Metallurgical Technology: The Case of the Chinese Ritual Bronzes. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 30(3): 707–756. DOI: 10.1007/s10816-022-09572-8, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-022-09572-8
9. Ruiliang Liu, A. Mark Pollard (2022). Asking different questions: highly radiogenic lead, mixing and recycling of metal and social status in the Chinese Bronze Age. Mineralogical Magazine 86(4): 677–687. DOI: 10.1180/mgm.2022.32, https://doi.org/10.1180/mgm.2022.32
10. Qiang Li, Guofeng Wei, Haiyan Huang, Jigen Tang, Bingjian Zhang (2024). Lead isotope ratio analysis of lead ingots and bronze wares unearthed from Yinxu. Archaeometry 66(2): 368–379. DOI: 10.1111/arcm.12915, https://doi.org/10.1111/arcm.12915
11. Qingzhu Wang, Siran Liu, Jianli Chen, Yan-xiang Li, Jianfeng Lang, Xiao-Yan Guo, Xuexiang Chen, Hui Fang (2023). The first discovery of Shang period smelting slags with highly radiogenic lead in Yingcheng and implications for the Shang political economy. Journal of Archaeological Science 149: 105704. DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2022.105704, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2022.105704
12. Xiaotong Wu, Jinzhuo Tan, Xiansheng Yan, Zhen Fang, Xiuling Liu, Lei Zhu, Wenbin Dong, Tao Qu, Zhengyao Jin (2024). Highly radiogenic lead in Shandong bronzes (5th–3rd century BC) and lead mines provides evidence of a metal road from China to Korea and Japan. Journal of Archaeological Science 170: 106047. DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2024.106047, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2024.106047
13. Siran Liu, Zhenfei Sun, Ji Zhang, Junling Lin, Kunlong Chen, Jianli Chen, Jianfeng Cui, Jianjun Mei (2025). 50 years of bronze provenance studies: A perspective from China. Journal of Archaeological Science 180: 106272. DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2025.106272, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2025.106272
14. Xiaotian Zeng, Huiru Lian, Honglin Ran, Kunlong Chen (2026). Metallurgical strategies at Sanxingdui: bronze production and resource reuse in Late Shang, China. Research Square preprint (under review). DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-10022824/v1, https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-10022824/v1
15. Yingdong Yang, Wugan Luo, Zhankui Wang, Jianbo Tian, Zhiqing Zhou, Xiaoting Wang, Yuexuan Li, Dian Chen (2026). Arsenical bronze at Jinsha: Evidence for technological transmission and adaptive alloying in Bronze Age Southwest China. Research Square preprint (under review). DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-10527620/v1, https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-10527620/v1
16. Wei-dong Sun, Li-peng Zhang, Jia Guo, Cong-ying Li, Yu-hang Jiang, Robert E. Zartman, Zhao-feng Zhang (2016). Origin of the mysterious Yin-Shang bronzes in China indicated by lead isotopes. Scientific Reports 6: 23304. DOI: 10.1038/srep23304, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep23304
17. Jonathan R. Wood, Yaxiong Liu (2025). Speculating on the Sources of Tin for the Chinese Bronze Age. Journal of World Prehistory 38(2): 10. DOI: 10.1007/s10963-025-09199-z, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10963-025-09199-z
18. Xiaoting Wang, Yingdong Yang, Tianyou Wang, Wugan Luo (2025). Typology and lead source diversity of late Shu bronze jin from Shuangyuan village cemetery. npj Heritage Science 13: 641. DOI: 10.1038/s40494-025-02202-y, https://doi.org/10.1038/s40494-025-02202-y