Paper short abstract:

Southeast Asian lead isotope archaeological research is now over two decades old. How useful are these data at this stage? The major methodological approaches are compared and contrasted and the Iron Age Phum Snay dataset re-interpreted.

Paper long abstract:

Southeast Asian lead isotope archaeology, or the geochemical reconstruction of regional non-ferrous metal production, exchange and consumption networks, is now over two decades old. The archaeometallurgical research teams' combined database now exceeds over 500 determinations and covers most Southeast Asian countries' Bronze and Iron Age periods; albeit with a very uneven coverage. How useful are these data at this stage, and what direction should we take now? To offer an answer I will review the two methodological approaches applied to date and re-interpret the very dense dataset available from Iron Age Phum Snay in northwest Cambodia. Instead of a general attribution of most bronzes to a 'Chinese' origin, I suspect that sourcing to a primary production site or even region may not be possible. However, I can detect patterning suggestive of the batch production of certain artefacts for use in burial practices.