Skip to main content
Heritage Science
Download PDF
Download ePub

A glimpse into the monetary supply network of the Tang empire in the seventh century CE: archaeometallurgical study of Kaiyuan Tongbao coins from Lafu Queke cemetery, Xinjiang, Northwest China

Heritage Science volume 10, Article number: 178 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

The supply of coins and their metal materials is important for state governance. Many details about the monetary supply network in ancient China still need to be verified. In this paper, 15 early Tang dynasty Kaiyuan Tongbao 開元通寶 coins excavated from the Lafu Queke 拉甫却克 cemetery, Hami 哈密 city, were studied by combining scientific analyses (PXRF and MC-ICP-MS etc.) with the archaeological context and historical texts. The results show that all of these coins are made of Cu-Sn–Pb ternary alloy. The lead isotopes match with the isotopic signatures of some southwest China lead mines consistent with historical records, 14 coins are located in the range of Southern China geochemical province, and the lead of 5 coins could be considered as highly radiogenic lead (HRL). Combining these results with the archaeological context and historical texts, it can be inferred that the coins minted in southwest China were made from locally exploited raw metal, and supplied to the northwest borderland of the Tang dynasty in the seventh century CE.

Introduction

The supply of coins and their metal materials is important for state governance, since the minting of coins is related to central authority in almost all societies, and the usage of coins generally involves all social strata and permeates throughout every corner of the territory [1]. For example, in Ancient Rome, in order to establish a monetary supply network that would sustain imperial power for many centuries, the Imperator and Senate needed sophisticated social organization to manage the supply of metal materials, minting, as well as the deployment of coins to different regions, owing to the uneven distribution of mineral resources and production capacity throughout the vast territory [2,3,4,5,6,7].

China has a long history of minting coins, going back more than 2600 years [8], and the monetary supply network changed over time. The issue of Banliang 半两 coins in the Qin dynasty (221 ~ 207 BCE) symbolized the establishment of a centralized monetary system [9], and a prototype of an imperial monetary supply network seemed to form at this time, as inferred from the relatively united provenance of mintage raw material [10]. Nevertheless, from the end of the Han dynasty (202 BCE ~ 220 CE), the empire split, initially into three kingdoms, and subsequently divided further, and the accompanying monetary chaos continued for more than four centuries. Political reunification occurred in the Sui (581–618), and became more secure in the Tang dynasty (618–907). The issue of Kaiyuan Tongbao 开元通宝 coins heralded a new system of coinage [11, 12].

According to the Monograph on Food and Money (Shi Huo Zhi 食货志) in the New Tang History (Xin Tang Shu 新唐书) and the Institutional History of Tang (Tang Hui Yao 唐会要), during the 4th and 5th years of the Wude 武德 reign (621, 622), mint offices (qianjian 钱监) were established in Luozhou 洛州, Bingzhou 并州, Youzhou 幽州, Yizhou 益州 and Guizhou 桂州 prefectures (Fig. 1b). From these historical texts, although it is clear that the intention for the early Tang monetary supply network was have coins minted in different places under the management of mint offices appointed by the central government, there are still many details to be verified, especially the distribution of coins produced by the mint offices, and which mines supplied the raw metals for making the coins.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Maps showing geographical names in modern times (a) and the Tang dynasty (b)

Full size image

In regard of the problems above, this study selects 15 Kaiyuan Tongbao 開元通寶 coins excavated from the Lafu Queke cemetery in Hami city, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, northwest China as the research object. A series of scientific analyses are presented, with discussions in the context of archaeological and historical understanding, which allow a glimpse into the monetary supply network of the Tang empire in the seventh century CE, and provide a new insight on the issues of metal and monetary supply, as well as borderland governance in ancient China.

Given the limited sample size and archaeological site, the findings of this study are still preliminary, and further studies are needed to add richer and more accurate understanding to these issues.

Archaeological context and material

The Lafu Queke cemetery is located 60 km northwest of the Lafu Queke ancient city site, which is considered to be the remains of Nazhi 纳职 county, Yizhou 伊州 prefecture in the Tang dynasty, recorded in the Yuanhe Atlas of Prefectures and Counties (Yuanhe Junxian Tuzhi 元和郡县图志) (Fig. 1). In 2019 and 2020, this cemetery was excavated by the Xinjiang Institute of Archaeology and Cultural Relics, and a total of 102 tombs were uncovered, including 21 tombs with a sloping path (TSP), 20 catacombs with a vertical shaft (CVS), 58 burials on the ground (BG) and 3 tombs of children [13]. More than 200 objects were found, such as pottery, metal artifacts and woodware etc. A total of 44 coins were excavated from 20 tombs, including 36 Kaiyuan Tongbao, 1 Wuzhu 五铢 and 7 Sasanian silver coins.

Judged by archaeologists, the TSP were consistent with the burial custom of Han Chinese, dating roughly in the early and middle Tang dynasty. The CVS were most likely Sogdian 粟特人 burials, dating from the Northern and Southern Dynasties (420 ~ 589) to the middle Tang dynasty. The BG were probably associated with Uyghur 回鹘人 burials dating from the late Tang to the Northern Song dynasty (960 ~ 1127). The occupants of most of the tombs were commoners, however, two of TSP—that is, M3 and M9—were brick-chambered tombs and considered to belong to high-ranking individuals [13]. Unfortunately, very few objects were found in these tombs owing to serious destruction.

The three oases of Hami, Turfan and Jimsa, in the eastern part of Xinjiang, where Chinese influence was most evident, were incorporated into the Chinese prefecture/county administration, and named as Yizhou 伊州, Xizhou 西州 and Tingzhou 庭州 prefectures, respectively (Fig. 1), acting as an example of the internalized governance of the borderlands in the early Tang dynasty [14, 15]. In the 14th year of the Zhenguan 贞观 reign (640), the Anxi 安西 commandery (Duhu Fu 都护府) was established in Xizhou prefecture, and a complete military and political system was established in these three prefectures according to the laws and decrees of the Tang empire [16]. Thus, the classic term “Western Regions” (Xiyu 西域) changed semantically and the border of the Tang empire moved westward [17]. The discovery of many administrative documents in the Turfan district has provided concrete evidence of Tang dynasty rule in these three prefectures.

Except for the extremely rare Gaochang Jili 高昌吉利 coins [18], scarcely any of the metallic coins used in these three prefectures were locally minted. Meanwhile, local minting of coins took place further west in the kingdom of Qiuci (present-day Kucha) [19]. Thus, discussing the issue of monetary supply could reflect the vicissitude of regional political and economic situation [20]. Based on contemporary documents excavated from sites in Turfan, silk and Sasanian silver coins were also used as currency in this region during the sixth and the early seventh centuries CE. Bronze Chinese coins began to appear in the reign of Emperor Gaozong 高宗 (649 ~ 683), but didn’t completely replace the silver coins until the beginning of the eighth century CE [20,21,22,23,24,25]. In fact, since Aurel Stein's expeditions in the early twentieth century, a large number of bronze coins issued by Tang government have been found in Xinjiang, many of which were Kaiyuan Tongbao [26].

The 15 Kaiyuan Tongbao coins in this study come from 11 tombs in the Lafu Queke cemetery (Fig. 2), with most of those tombs dating around the early Tang dynasty, detailed information is given in Table 1. According to the Old Tang History (Jiu Tang Shu 旧唐书), New Tang History and Encyclopaedic History of Institutions (Tong Dian 通典), Kaiyuan Tongbao coins were first issued by Emperor Gaozu in the 4th year of the Wude reign (621), and continued to be minted throughout almost the whole Tang dynasty. The Kaiyuan tongbao had a profound impact on Chinese monetary history, and marked a new beginning as the inscription suggests (Kaiyuan means “start anew”). It continued the tradition of using a round coin with a raised rim and a square hole in the center, but stopped using a weight reference as the inscription, and initiated a four-character inscription, ending in Tongbao 通寶 (‘circulating treasure’) or Yuanbao 元寶 (‘first/original treasure’), which remained the standard design of Chinese coinage throughout the subsequent thirteen centuries [27]. In time, it became usual practice to use the current era name for the first two characters in the inscription.

Fig. 2
figure 2

15 Kaiyuan Tongbao coins recovered from Lafu Queke

Full size image
Table 1 Information concerning the Kaiyuan Tongbao coins from Lafu Queke (blank space represents not measured), TSP: tombs with a sloping path; BG: burials on the ground; CVS: catacombs with a vertical shaft
Full size table

Great attention was paid to the calligraphy on the Kaiyuan Tongbao coins, which was initially provided by the great calligrapher Ouyang Xun 欧阳询 (ca. 557 ~ ca. 641). Kaiyuan “new start” also referred to the calligraphy, and marked the beginning of a more standard and legible script than on previous inscriptions in seal script [8, 28]. In the western world, the texts, images and material of coins embodied connotations of value, trust and identity [1]. The emergence of Kaiyuan Tongbao coins was just an embodiment of this rule in ancient China.

Although the inscription Kaiyuan Tongbao did not indicate a specific era, some systematic typological studies show that it is possible to distinguish among coins produced in the early, middle and late Tang dynasty [29,30,31]. Based on coins found in tombs with dated epitaphs [29,30,31], it has been noted that the Kaiyuan Tongbao coins of the early Tang dynasty were generally of a higher quality than later Kaiyuan Tongbao coins, with sharper inscriptions, full size (2.4 cm) and weight (4 g), and without markings (e.g. a crescent) on the reverse. The arrangement of the inscription also has certain features: the jing 井 component of kai 開 does not touch the hole (Fig. 3, top). The top stroke of yuan元 was short (Fig. 3, bottom). The radical 辶to the left of tong 通 is not continuous (Fig. 3, left). The two strokes in the middle of bei 貝 in bao 寶 do not touch the verticals (Fig. 3, the right). According to these characters, the date of the 15 Kaiyuan Tongbao coins in this study were attributed to the early Tang dynasty, or to be more exact, no later than the reign of Emperor Gaozong 高宗 (649 ~ 683), and confirmed by Prof. Dr. Yang Jun, a senior numismatist from the China Numismatic Museum.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Typological characteristics of the early Tang Kaiyuan Tongbao coin

Full size image

Analytical methods

Preprocessing and sampling

Given the small size of the coins, destructive sampling analysis would inevitably cause obvious changes to the appearance. Thus, a non-destructive technique was preferred. Provided that a sufficiently large metallic surface (about 1 ~ 3 mm) can be exposed to the light spot of the instrument, it is possible to obtain sound data on the nature and approximate concentrations of the main constituents in copper-based alloys such as tin and lead [32]. Therefore, areas with as little rust as possible on the surface of the coins were selected to be analyzed.

For lead isotope analysis, a few superficial corrosion powders are enough to represent the lead isotopic signature of bronze artifacts, to which lead has been intentionally added [33, 34]. Moreover, some simulation experiments showed that the lead isotopic composition of corrosion rinds (within experimental error) is similar to that of the metallic matrix of bronze. Thus, in order to protect the integrity of the artifacts to the greatest extent, corrosion rinds can be used to investigate the provenance of ancient bronzes [35, 36]. In this study, the corrosion rinds were carefully removed from the surface of the coins using a scalpel, and the dust was exfoliated by an ultrasonic shock.

Component analyses

Component analyses were performed by a handheld XRF instrument (Niton XL3t 950He from Thermo Fisher Scientific, Billerica, USA). The main filter was operated at 50 kV with a current of 10μA. The alloy mode was selected and elemental data were obtained with an acquisition time of 60 s. The detection limits were 70 ppm for Sn and 35 ppm for Pb. While testing, the 32LB10E of the Copper CHARM Set standard sample was used for quality control [37]. The errors in the main compositions were essentially no more than 5%. The results are suitable for semi-quantitative comparisons due to the inevitable chemical heterogeneity in the ancient metallurgical products [38].

Lead isotope analyses

The details of sample preparation are described elsewhere [39]. The lead contents of the sample solutions were measured by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (ICP–AES, Leeman Labs Prodigy, USA), with the working conditions as follows: RF power 1.1 kW, argon plasma gas flow rate 20 L/min, and nebulizer gas at 20 MPa. After that, the solutions were diluted to the tolerance limit of the instrument (about 1 mg/L), and thallium (Tl) standard solution-SRM997 was added. Lead isotope analyses were performed by Multicollector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (MC-ICP-MS, VG Elemental Axiom, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., USA), at School of Earth and Space Sciences, Peking University. The results of repeated runs for the SRM981 determination and the published values from Cattin et al. [40] are listed in Table 2.

Table 2 The results of three runs for the SRM981 determination and published values from Cattin et al. [40]
Full size table

Results

Chemical compositions

Chemical compositions in this study are shown in Table 3. The content ranges from 44.8% to 71.1%, 14.1% to 29.6%, and 5.5% to 26.2% for copper, tin and lead respectively. Previous scholars have carried out systematic works on the alloy composition of ancient Chinese coins [41,42,43], which showed that the content of Kaiyuan Tongbao coins in the Tang dynasty generally ranged from 52 to 94%, 0.2% to 29.0%, and 1.4% to 33.2% for copper, tin and lead respectively (Additional file 1: Table S1). The chemical compositions of our samples are similar to the previous studies, and the lower copper contents and higher tin contents could be attributed to the effect of corrosion enrichment on the surface [32].

Table 3 The chemical compositions and lead isotope ratios of the Kaiyuan Tongbao coins from Lafu Queke
Full size table

Lead isotope

Lead isotope ratios of the 15 coins range from 18.190 to 19.313 for 206Pb/204Pb, 15.661 to 15.817 for 207Pb/204Pb and 38.631 to 40.442 for 208Pb/204Pb (Table 3). Different perspectives about the introduction of lead have been mentioned by western scholars [44,45,46], while, the conventional threshold is considered to be 2% in most published studies of ancient Chinese metallic artifacts [47]. In this regard, the overall lead contents of the coins in this study are not lower than 10%, except for HM5 (5.5%), suggesting that the lead was added on purpose and the lead isotopes may be able to indicate the source of lead ores.

Discussion

Provenance of raw material

To date, there are in total 16 published lead isotope ratios of Tang dynasty bronze coins, including 13 Kaiyuan Tongbao coins collected from Japan [48, 49], and 3 coins unearthed from the Chengdu Plain [50], however, it is unfortunate that none of them had more specific information of date (i.e., early, middle or late Tang dynasty). In this context, the value of these 15 early Tang Kaiyuan Tongbao coins from the Lafu Queke cemetery should not be overlooked. The data of this study and the previous studies (Additional file 1: Table S2) are plotted in Fig. 4. Based on the theory of geochemical provinces in China [51, 52], it can be seen that the whole data set is distributed in three different ranges, belonging to Northern China, Yangtze and Southern China geochemical provinces respectively. More impressive is that 14 data of this study are located in the range of Southern China province, and five of them, namely HM 6, 8, 11, 14 and 15, conform to the characteristics of highly radiogenic lead (HRL) in bronze vessels from Central China, for the values of 206Pb/204Pb and 208Pb/204Pb in these coins are above 19 and 40 respectively [53, 54].

Fig. 4
figure 4

Lead isotope ratios of the Lafu Queke samples and other Tang coins

Full size image

In the light of the previous lead isotopic studies of ancient Chinese copper alloyed artifacts, the provenance of the HRL was initially estimated to be the mines distributed in southwest China [55, 56]. The source of common lead in this study is also open to this region, based on the recent published isotope database for the provenance study of archaeological materials [57]. These inferences are also consistent with the historical documents. Records of the Huayang State (Huayangguo Zhi 华阳国志) was written in the Eastern Jin dynasty (317 ~ 420), and is recognized as one of the earliest local chronicles specializing in ancient southwest China. This ancient work records that lead mines were found in Shu 蜀 (approximately modern Sichuan province) and Nanzhong 南中 (approximately modern Yunnan province) regions. These two regions together correspond approximately to the area under the administration of the Jiannan 剑南 circuit in the Tang dynasty (Fig. 1) [58]. In addition, Dugu Tao独孤滔, born in the late Tang dynasty, was quoted in Compendium of Materia Medica (Bencao Gangmu 本草纲目) vol. 8, as saying that the lead mines were located in Jiazhou 嘉州, Yazhou 雅州 and Jianzhou 剑州 prefectures, within the jurisdiction of the Jiannan circuit [58].

To be more specific, we chose the published lead isotopic data of galena ores from southwest China as comparators based on the above-mentioned historical records (Additional file 1: Table S3) [59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71]. These include the mine sites Tangjia 唐家, Tuanbaoshan 团宝山 and Ganluo 甘洛, which are located in the area of Jiazhou and Yazhou prefectures, as well as the mines of Huize 会泽 county, an area described as teeming with lead, silver and copper in Records of the Huayang State, and known as Tangxing 唐兴 in the Tang dynasty (Fig. 1) [58]. It can be seen in Fig. 5 that both Huize and Tuanbaoshan yield not only common lead but also HRL. The data of samples HM2, 4, 7, 9, 10 lie within the range of common lead from these two places. The data of HRL in HM 6, 8, 11, 14 and 15 overlap with one result from Huize, and locate within the range of the Huize lead mines, suggesting that the lead of these samples might be derived from this region. In brief, the data from Lafu queke matches the lead isotopic signatures of some lead mines in southwest China, which is also consistent with the historical records.

Fig. 5
figure 5

Lead isotope ratios of the Lafu Queke samples and southwest China lead mines

Full size image

Monetary supply of the northwest borderland

Chen Zi’ang 陈子昂 (ca.659 ~ ca.700) was not only a famous poet in Chinese literary history, but also placed in a key position during the reign of Empress Wu Zetian 武则天 (684 ~ 705), as recorded in his biography in the New Tang History. In his memorial to the throne Proposal for the military affairs of the Shu region (Shang Shuchuan Junshi 上蜀川军事), he mentioned that the expenses for military affairs of the northwest borderland relied entirely on the southwest region [72]:

“The Ba-Shu 巴蜀 region is the land of abundance in our country. The military expenses 资, the supply of postal system, as well as the merchandise for the prefectures of the Longyou 陇右 - Hexi 河西 region, are all obtained from the Shu 蜀 region.”

“……伏以国家富有巴蜀, 是天府之藏, 自陇右及河西诸州, 军国所资, 邮驿所给, 商旅莫不皆取於蜀, ……”

Longyou 陇右 was another circuit at the same administrative level of Jiannan in the early Tang dynasty, and it had jurisdiction over a vast area, including modern Gansu province and Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region (Fig. 1) [58]. Unfortunately, in such a context, it could not be confirmed whether the word “expenses 资” mean money or military goods, meanwhile, the money could be silk or coins, or both, at this time [73, 74]. For example, the unearthed documents in Turfan recorded a special type of silk for military expenses, named junzi lian 军资练 [75]. In A memorial from the Department of Public Revenue dated of the third year of the Yifeng reign of the Tang (678) and the resulting directive (zhifu旨符) issued to the Department of the Treasury (Jinbu 金部) of the fourth year (679) (Tang Yifeng Sannian Duzhi Zouchao Sinian Jinbu Zhifu 唐仪凤三年度支奏抄. 四年金部旨符), it was stipulated that the tax silk paid by the Jiannan circuit was transferred annually to Yizhou 伊州 and Guazhou 瓜州 (in modern Gansu province) prefectures to support the military in the borderland [21].

Nevertheless, in Chen Zi’ang’ s work Proposal for national affairs (Shang Yiguoshi 上益国事) [72], the word “expenses” 资 could mean bronze coins, as in the following passage:

“Exploiting copper from the mines in the mountains of Jiannan 剑南 circuit to mint coins could make our country rich. However, nowadays all the mountains are closed and no official mining is implemented. And all the military expenses 资 are levied from the common people. Thus, on the one hand, the government are exhausted and the people are impoverished. On the other hand, the natural resources are abandoned. As I see it, please reinstate the previous system 旧式 that exploited copper from the mines distributed in the prefectures of Jiannan circuit, and minted money in Yizhou 益州 prefecture, from which all the military expenses 资 for the Songpan 松潘 area (in the west of modern Sichuan province) could be obtained.”

“……伏见剑南诸山多有铜矿, 采之铸钱, 可以富国。今诸山皆闭, 官无采铸。军国资用, 惟敛下人。乃使公府虚竭, 私室贫弊。而天地珍藏, 委废不论。以臣所见, 请依旧式, 尽令剑南诸州准前采铜, 于益府铸钱。其松潘诸军所须用度, 皆取以资给, ……”

This passage confirms that in the era before Wu Zetian’ s reign, Yizhou 益州 prefecture of the Jiannan circuit was an important base of coin production, as also corresponding to the aforementioned records in the New Tang History and Institutional History of Tang. Also, the mints in the Yizhou 益州 prefecture used the raw metal exploited locally in the Jiannan circuit. And, as there is no evidence to suggest that Chen Ziang was a specialist of minting coins, it is quite normal that he neglected the alloying components of coins. Thus, it could be estimated that, besides copper, the locally exploited raw metals could also include lead and tin.

In accordance with these conditions, it can be understood that the bronze coins minted in southwest China were largely made from indigenous metals, and supplied in large amounts to the northwest borderland of the Tang dynasty in the seventh century CE. Furthermore, the indications from the lead isotope ratios of the Kaiyuan Tongbao coins from the Lafu Queke cemetery strengthen the chain of evidence extracted from the historical materials.

The Tang dynasty played a critical role in the formation of the pluralistic and integrated pattern of the Chinese nation, not only because of its powerful strength and vast territory, but also because of its innovation of ruling ideology that began to regard the heartland and the borderlands as a whole [15, 76]. Deploying Kaiyuan Tongbao coins to the northwestern prefectures not only served as an important segment of the monetary supply network of the Tang empire, but also embodied China’s internalized governance of the borderlands, and certainly exerted far-reaching influence on the region’s political and economic situation.

Conclusion

In this paper, 15 Kaiyuan Tongbao coins of the early Tang dynasty excavated from the Lafu Queke cemetery in Hami city, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, Northwest China, were studied by multiple scientific methods. The XRF results show that all of these coins were Cu–Sn–Pb ternary alloy. The lead isotopic data indicate that the provenances for the lead material of the 14 coins are located in the Southern China geochemical province, and 5 coins contain HRL. Combining the scientific results with the archaeological context and the historical records, it can be inferred that the coins were first minted in southwest China by the locally exploited raw metal, and then supplied to Tang’s northwest borderland in the seventh century CE.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

Abbreviations

HRL:

Highly radiogenic lead

PXRF:

Portable X-Ray Fluorescence

MC-ICP-MS:

Multicollector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry

TSP:

Tombs with a sloping path

CVS:

Catacombs with a vertical shaft

BG:

Burials on the ground

Reference

  1. Kemmers F, Myrberg N. Rethinking numismatics The archaeology of coins. Archaeol Dialog. 2011;18(1):87–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Howgego C. The supply and use money in the Roman World 200B.C. to A.D. 300. J Roman Stud. 1992;82:1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kemmers F. Not at Random: Evidence for a Regionalised Coin Supply? in Bruhn J, Croxford B, Grigoropoulos D, editors. TRAC 2004: Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Durham 2004. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2005; 39–49.

  4. Guest P. The production, supply and use of late roman and early Byzantine copper coinage in the Eastern Empire. Numism Chron. 2012;172:105–31.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Albarède F, Blichert-Toft J, Rivoal M, Telouk P. A glimpse into the Roman finances of the Second Punic War through silver isotopes. Geochem Persp Let. 2016;2:127–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Westner KJ, Birch T, Kemmers F, Klein S, Höfer HE, Seitz HM. ROME’S rise to power geochemical analysis of silver coinage from the western mediterranean (fourth to second centuries BCE). Archaeometry. 2020;62(3):577–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Westner KJ, Kemmers F, Klein S. A novel combined approach for compositional and Pb isotope data of (leaded) copper-based alloys: bronze coinage in Magna Graecia and Rome (5th to 2nd centuries BCE). J Archaeol Sci. 2020;121:105204.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Peng X, Kaplan EH. A Monetary History of China Center for East Asian Studies. Bellingham: Western Washington University; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jiang R. Study on the ancient Chinese Coins of the Qin and Han Dynasty. Beijing: China Publishing House; 1997. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chen D, Yang Y, Jiang T, Yang B, Tang B, Luo W. On coinage technology features and lead material management of the Qin state from the Chengdu Ban Liang coins. J Archaeol Sci Rep. 2021;35:102779.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tan M. Monetary policy as key to State authority and income in Tang China. J Chinese Stud. 2017;64(1):35–109.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Chen Y. The rise and fall of currency system——the inflation and deflation in Wei, Jin and Northern and Southern dynasties Shanghai Shiji Publishing Co., Ltd.,. Shanghai: Gezhi Publishing House; 2019. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wang Y. The archaeological record Lafu Queke cemetery in Hami. Cultural Relics World. 2021;7:112–7 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mu S, Wang Y. The western regions (hsi-yü) under the T’ang empire and the kingdom of Tibet. in Litvinsky BA, Zhang GD, Samghabadi RS, editors. History of Civilizations of Central Asia, The crossroads of civilizations: A.D. 250 to 750 Volume III. Paris: the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization; 1996; 343–357.

  15. Li D. History of the border in tang dynasty. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press; 2013. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Liu Z. Study of military and political system established in Yizhou, Xizhou and Tingzhou prefectures in the Tang dynasty. Shanghai: Zhongxi book company; 2016. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rong X, Wen X. The Semantic Shift of “Western Regions” and the Westward Extension of the “Border” in Yu TS, Li JX, editors the Tang Dynasty. in Eurasian Studies III Sydney: Asia Publishing Nexus 2015; 321-334.

  18. Wang Y. Textual research of the Gaochang Jili coins. in Shanghai Museum, editors. Proceedings of the symposium on ancient coins and the culture of the Silk Road. Shanghai: Shanghai Painting and Calligraphy Publishing House; 2011; 443–460. (in Chinese).

  19. Zhang P. Re-discussion on the local mintage of Qiuci. Western Regions Stud. 1999;1:47–51 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Skaff JK. Sasanian and Arab-Sasanian Silver Coins from Turfan: their relationship to international trade and the local economy. Asia Major. 1998;2:67–115 (3rd series XI).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Arakawa M, Hansen V. The transportation of tax textiles to the north-west as part of the Tang-Dynasty military shipment system. J R Asiat Soc. 2013;23(2):245–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hansen V. The impact of the silk road trade on a local community: the turfan oasis, 500–800. in É. Trombert, E. De La Vaissière, editors. Les Sogdiens en Chine. Paris: École française d’Extrême-Orient; 2005, pp. 283–310.

  23. Hansen V. The place of coins and their alternatives in the silk road trade. in Shanghai Museum, editors. Proceedings of the symposium on ancient coins and the culture of the Silk Road. Shanghai: Shanghai Painting and Calligraphy Publishing House; 2011; 83–113.

  24. Hansen V, Rong X. How the residents of turfan used textiles as money, 273–796 CE. J Royal Asiat Soc. 2013;23(2):281–305.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wang H. Textiles as Money on the silk road? J R Asiat Soc. 2013;23(2):165–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wang H. Money on the Silk Road: the evidence from Eastern Central Asia to c.AD 800. London: British Museum Press; 2004.

  27. Qian J, Guo Y. The evolution of Chinese currency. Shanghai: Shanghai People’s Publishing House; 2005. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Yang X. Study on some issues of currency history in the Tang dynasty Unpublished PhD dissertation thesis. Nanjing: Nanjing Normal University; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Xu D. Chronological study of Kaiyuan Tongbao coins. Archaeology. 1991;6:555–61 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Xu D. Chronology and typology of Kaiyuan Tongbao coins. China Numismatics. 1992;03:259–71 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hartill D. Cast Chinese Coins. Bloomington: Trafford Publishing; 2005. p. 105.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Orfanou V, Rehren TA. (not so) dangerous method: pXRF vs EPMA-WDS analyses of copper-based artefacts. Archaeol Anthropol Sci. 2015;7(3):387–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ponting M, Evans JA, Pashley V. Fingerprinting of Roman mints using laserablation MC-ICP-MS lead isotope analysis. Archaeometry. 2003;45(4):591–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Weeks L, Keall E, Pashley V, Evans J, Stock S. Lead isotope analyses of bronze age copper-base artefacts from Al-Midamman, Yemen: towards the identification of an indigenous metal production and exchange system in the Southern red sea region. Archaeometry. 2009;51(4):576–97.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Snoek W, Plimer IR, Reeves S. Application of Pb isotope geochemistry to the study of the corrosion products of archaeological artefacts to constrain provenance. J Geochem Explor. 1999;66(1–2):421–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Wei G, Qin Y, Wang C, Li Q, Zhang A, Gong X. Comparative studies on Pb isotope ratios of corrosion rinds and metal cores of bronze vessels. J Univ Sci Technol China. 2006;07:771–4 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Heginbotham A, Bassett J, Bourgarit D, Eveleigh C, Glinsman L, Hook D, Smith D, Speakman RJ, Van SA, Langh R. The copper charm set: a new set of certified reference materials for the standardization of quantitative x-ray fluorescence analysis of heritage copper alloys. Archaeometry. 2015;57(5):856–68.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Rademakers FW, Rehren T. Seeing the forest for the trees: assessing technological variability in ancient metallurgical crucible assemblages. J Archaeolog Sci Rep. 2016;7:588–96.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Ma D, Gan C, Luo W. Lead isotope and trace element analysis of the Wuzhu coins from Doujiaqiao hoard Tianjin City, North China. Eur Phy J Plus. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01142-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Cattin F, Guénette-Beck B, Curdy P, Meisser N, Ansermet S, Hofmann B, Kündig R, Hubert V, Wörle M, Hametner K, Günther D, Wichser A, Ulrich A, Villa IM, Besse M. Provenance of early bronze age metal artefacts in Western Switzerland using elemental and lead isotopic compositions and their possible relation with copper minerals of the nearby Valais. J Archeol Sci. 2011;38(6):1221–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhou W. Study on the alloy composition of ancient Chinese coins. Beijing: China Publishing House; 2004. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wang H, Cowell M, Cribb J, Bowman S. Metallurgical analysis of Chinese coins at the British Museum. London: British Museum; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Pollard A, Liu R. Chemical studies of Chinese coinage II: from Qin to Yuan (221 BCE–1368 CE). Herit Sci. 2021;9:56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Gale NH, Stos-Gale ZA. Lead isotope analyses applied to provenance studies, in Modern Analytical Methods. In: Ciliberto E, Spoto G, editors. Art and Archaeology. Chicago: Wiley; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Bray PJ, Cuénod A, Gosden C, Hommel P, Liu R, Pollard AM. Form and flow: the ‘karmic cycle’ of copper. J Archaeol Sci. 2015;56:202–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Pollard A, Bray P, Gosden C, Wilson A, Hamerow H. Characterising copper-based metals in Britain in the first millennium AD: a preliminary quantification of metal flow and recycling. Antiquity. 2015;89:697–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Wang L, Chen F, Wang Y, Qian W, Mei J, Martinón-Torres M, Chen KL. Copper metallurgy in prehistoric upper Ili Valley, Xinjiang China. Archaeol Anthropol Sci. 2019;11:2407–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Yamazaki K, Murozumi M. Attempts to analyze the provenance by lead isotope ratio. Archaeology and Natural Science. 1976; 9 (in Japanese)

  49. Mabuchi H, Hirao Y. Isotopes of ancient east Asian copper coins Archaeology and Natural Science. 1982; 15 (in Japanese)

  50. Li H, Zuo Z, Cui J, Tian J, Yang Y, Yi L, Zhou Z, Fan J. Bronze production in the ancient Chengdu plains: a diachronic metallurgical perspective on a separate cultural region. J Cult Herit. 2019;43:26–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Zhu B. The mapping of geochemical provinces in China based on Pb isotopes. J Geochem Explor. 1995;55:171–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Zhu B. The Theory and application of isotopic systems in earth science. Beijing: Science Press; 1998. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Liu R, Hsu YK, Pollard AM, et al. A new perspective towards the debate on highly radiogenic lead in Chinese archaeometallurgy. Archaeol Anthropol Sci. 2021;13:33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Pollard AM, Bray P, Cuénod A, Hommel P, Hsu YK, Liu R, Perucchetti L, Pouncett J, Saunders M. Beyond Provenance new approaches to interpreting the chemistry of archaeological copper alloys. Leuven: Leuven University Press; 2018. p. 157.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  55. Jin Z. Lead Isotopic Archaeology in China. Hefei: University of science and technology of China press; 2008. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Jin Z, Liu R, Rawson J, Pollard AM. Revisiting lead isotope data in shang and western zhou bronzes. Antiquity. 2017;91:1574–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Hsu YK, Sabatini BJ. A geochemical characterization of lead ores in China: anisotope database for provenancing archaeological materials. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(4): e0215973.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Tan Q. The Historical Atlas of China. Beijing: China Cartographic Publishing House; 1996. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Gao Z. Lead isotope characteristics of main lead-zinc deposits in Yunnan province. Yunnan Geology. 1997;16(4):359–67 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Chen Y. Lead isotopic composition and genesis of phanerozoic metal deposits in China. Geochimica. 1980;3:215–29 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Zhang M. Study on Metallogenic mechanism of fluid in Huize Lead-Zinc deposit, Yunnan province, China. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Wuhan: China University of Geosciences; 2016 (in Chinese with English abstract).

  62. Zhou C, Wei C, Guo J, Li C. The Source of Metals in the Qilinchang Zn-Pb deposit, Northeastern Yunnan, China: Pb-Sr isotope constraints. Econ Geol. 2001;96(3):583–98.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Li W, Huang Z, Zhang G. Sources of the ore metals of the Huize ore field in Yunnan province: constraints from Pb, S, C, H, O Sr isotope geochemistry. Acta Petrologica Sinica. 2006;22(10):2567–80 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Fu S. Metallogenesis of Pb-Zn deposits and enrichment regularity of dispersed elements Cd, Ga, and Ge in SW Yangtze block. Unpublished PhD dissertation Thesis. Chengdu: Chengdu University of Technology; 2004 (in Chinese with English abstract).

  65. Bao Z, Li Q, Wang CY. Metal source of giant Huize Zn-Pb deposit in SW China: New constraints from in situ Pb isotopic compositions of galena. Ore Geol Rev. 2017;91:824–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Zhou J, Bai J, Huang Z, Zhu D, Yan Z, Lv Z. Geology, isotope geochemistry and geochronology of the Jinshachang carbonate-hosted Pb–Zn deposit, southwest China. J Asian Earth Sci. 2015;98:272–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Liu W. Geological characteristics and genesis of the Jinshachang lead–zinc deposit in Yunnan Province. China J Chengdu College Geol. 1989;16:11–9 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Liu H, Lin W. Study on the regularity of Pb-Zn-Ag deposits in northeast Yunnan. Kunming: Yunnan University Press; 1999. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Chen D. Study on stable isotopes of main stratum-controlled Antimony mercury deposits in eastern Yunnan and Western Guizhou. Guizhou Geology. 1991;8(3):227–40 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Zeng L. Discussion on the genesis and prospecting direction of the Zebangou lead-zinc deposit in Ganluo, Sichuan Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Chengdu: Chengdu University of Technology; 2006. (in Chinese with English abstract).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Liu Y. Geological Characteristics and Genesis Analysis of Tangjia Lead-Zine OreDeposit in the Hanyuan. Unpublished PhD dissertation thesis. Chengdu: Chengdu University of Technology; 2014. (in Chinese with English abstract).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Chen Z. Xu P editors. Collected works of Chen Ziang. Shanghai: Shanghai Classics Publishing House; 2013. (in Chinese)

  73. Zhang R. The pattern of fiscal and taxation system in the early Tang dynasty. The history materials of Wei, Jin, Northern and Southern Dynasties, Sui and Tang. 2000;17:78–84 (in Chinese).

  74. Jia Z. A rustic opinion on the military expenditure of Jiannan circuit in the Tang dynasty. The history materials of Wei, Jin, Northern and Southern Dynasties, Sui and Tang. 2002;19:177–87 (in Chinese).

  75. Zhao Z. Currency circulation of Xizhou prefecture in Tang Dynasty as seen in Turpan documents. In: He X, editor. Religionary Faith and Ethnic Culture 12. Beijing: Social Science Academic Press (China); 2019, pp. 27–46 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  76. Fei X. The pluralistic and integrated pattern of the Chinese Nation (revised). Beijing: China Minzu University Press; 2018. (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Many thanks are due to Dr. Helen Wang of The British Museum for her comments and great help in correcting the English writing. The authors are also grateful to anonymous reviewers whose comments greatly improved the quality of the manuscript.

Funding

This research is supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China (No. 20VJXG018 & No. 22BKG043), the Beijing Social Science Found Project (No. 21DTR046) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China

    Ding Ma, Yanqi Bi & Wugan Luo

  2. Xinjiang Institute of Archaeology and Cultural Relics, Urumqi, 830011, China

    Yongqiang Wang

  3. China Numismatic Museum, Beijing, 100031, China

    Jun Yang

  4. Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Beijing, 100044, China

    Yanqi Bi & Wugan Luo

Authors
  1. Ding Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yongqiang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jun Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yanqi Bi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wugan Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

DM, YB and and WL wrote the main manuscript text and prepared tables and figures. YW selected the samples and offered archaeological context. JY authenticated the exact date of the samples. All authors reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wugan Luo.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

We declare that we have no conflicts of interest to this work, we have no financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that can inappropriately influence our work, there is no professional or other personal interest of any nature or kind in any product, service and /or company that could be construed as influencing the position presented in or the review of the manuscript entitled.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: Table S1.

Published chemical compositions data of bronze coins of the Tang dynasty. Table S2. Published lead isotopic ratios of bronze coins of the Tang dynasty. Table S3. Published lead isotopic ratios of galena from mines in southwest China.

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/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ma, D., Wang, Y., Yang, J. et al. A glimpse into the monetary supply network of the Tang empire in the seventh century CE: archaeometallurgical study of Kaiyuan Tongbao coins from Lafu Queke cemetery, Xinjiang, Northwest China. Herit Sci 10, 178 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-022-00809-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-022-00809-z

Keywords