Dear Dr. Eshel,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 09 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Joe Uziel

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1.  Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf   and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. In your manuscript, please provide additional information regarding the specimens used in your study. Ensure that you have reported human remain specimen numbers and complete repository information, including museum name and geographic location.

If permits were required, please ensure that you have provided details for all permits that were obtained, including the full name of the issuing authority, and add the following statement:

'All necessary permits were obtained for the described study, which complied with all relevant regulations.'

If no permits were required, please include the following statement:

'No permits were required for the described study, which complied with all relevant regulations.'

For more information on PLOS ONE's requirements for paleontology and archeology research, see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-paleontology-and-archaeology-research.

3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

“This research was supported by THE ISRAEL SCIENCE FOUNDATION (grant No. 1032/23, awarded to T.E.)”

Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed.

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. We note that Figures 1 and 2 in your submission contain [map/satellite] images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figures 1 and 2 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. 

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an ""Other"" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: General Assessment

This is a well-structured and thoroughly researched paper that makes a significant and original contribution to the archaeology of early Iron Age metallurgy in the Southern Levant. The article presents new archaeometallurgical evidence from the site of el-Ahwat, arguing convincingly for local bronze production during Iron Age I, based on metallography, chemical analysis (ICP-MS), and lead isotope analysis (LIA).

The link to Arabah copper ores (Faynan and Timna) is important and timely, and the combination of scientific data and broader historical interpretation is particularly valuable. Yet, the attempt to trace copper provenance to both Timna and Faynan using lead isotopes and microstructural features is ambitious and intriguing. However, given the known isotopic overlap between ores from these two regions, and the emerging but still debated metallographic criteria, this identification should be presented with a degree of caution. While the authors address this overlap, the conclusion of a mixed or dual origin could benefit from more critical engagement with the methodological limitations.

Strengths

1. Original Contribution:

The paper presents the first unequivocal evidence of local bronze production (not recycling) in the Iron Age I Southern Levant, filling a significant gap in the scholarly literature.

2. Multidisciplinary Approach:

The authors combine multiple lines of evidence—optical microscopy, SEM-EDS, ICP-MS, and LIA—to build a strong case. Their discussion is data-rich and methodologically rigorous.

3. Clear and Comprehensive Presentation:

The article is well written and organized, with clear tables, detailed methodology, and well-argued conclusions. The inclusion of Figures, Tables, and Appendices is appropriate and supports the findings.

4. Regional and Historical Significance:

The findings have broader implications for understanding the economic and political networks in the Iron Age Southern Levant and offer new perspectives on the role of inland highland communities in early metallurgical production.

Points for Improvement / Clarification

1. Copper Provenance – Timna vs. Faynan:

While the integration of LIA and metallography is commendable, there remains inherent ambiguity in distinguishing between Timna and Faynan copper due to their overlapping isotopic signatures. The use of micro-inclusions (Mn, Co, P) as distinguishing markers for Faynan's DLS ores is promising, but still under development in the field. The authors may consider tempering the strength of their attribution and explicitly acknowledging the tentative nature of such identifications, even when the evidence is suggestive.

2. Discussion of Tin Sources:

The paper notes that the source of tin remains unidentified. While this is understandable, it would be beneficial to briefly discuss possible routes or regions of origin for tin in this period (e.g., Anatolia, Central Asia, or re-export via Mediterranean trade), even if speculative.

3. Elaboration on Administrative Structures:

The suggestion that local bronze production required centralized coordination is persuasive. However, the authors could expand on what form this administration may have taken—tribal elites, proto-polities, or external influence.

4. Chronological Range:

Although the general dating of el-Ahwat to Iron Age I is provided, more precise dating of the bronzeworking context (e.g., specific strata, C14 ranges if available) would strengthen the chronological argument, especially in light of the discussions of Timna and Faynan.

Recommendation: Accept with Minor Revisions

I strongly support the publication of this article in PLOS ONE pending minor revisions, especially a more cautious framing of copper source attribution to Timna and Faynan. The manuscript is otherwise of excellent quality and makes a meaningful contribution to the study of early Iron Age metallurgy in the Levant.

Reviewer #2: I would like the authors to include and address all the points below:

Line 36 - Benefiters – make it “beneficiaries” Suggested sentence: One of the beneficiaries of this dramatic change were the Iron Age societies inhabiting the copper ore districts in the Arabah valley that separates modern Israel and Jordan.

Line 38 – add reference –(Levy and Najjar 2007)

Line 39 – insert ‘Israel’ to make “…at Timna on the western side of the Wadi Arabah in Israel (Fig. 1),

Line 54 – “…copper used at destination sites cannot yet be determined” should be - copper used at destination sites is difficult to determine…

Line 63 – “… add ‘ancient’ to make ‘ancient Edom’

Line 65 - Excavators have proposed that semi-nomadic Edomite groups engaged in herding and limited copper production occupied Faynan and Timna. DELETE – ‘limited’

Line 86 – add two references - (Galili et al. 2020; Yasur-Landau et al. 2021)

Line 131 – delete ‘never’ replace with ‘not’

Line 137 – define what a metal spill is.

Line 339 – delete ‘or’ replace with ‘and’ to make ‘Timna and Faynan’

Line 340 - While the two ore sources overlap in Pb-isotope values, metallographic criteria have been recently suggested as a precise method of distinguishing these sources.’

Note: Long ago, Shalev showed that Faynan ore could be distinguished from Timna ores based on metallographic analyses, as did Hauptmann. See and add the following references: (Hauptmann 2007; Shalev and Northover 1987)

Line 358 – add reference - (Levy, Najjar, Higham, et al. 2014)

Line 364 – The increase in copper production in the 10th c. BCE was not gradual. It was a fast, punctuated change. This point needs to be highlighted. See - (Ben-Yosef et al. 2019)

Lines 374 – 375 - Chronologically, el-Ahwat is dated to the Iron Age I, ~1200–950 BCE, predating Shoshenk I (Eshel et al. 2023), in accordance with the low quality of the copper found onsite.

Not clear what the authors mean by low quality of the copper . What is this based on? Do the authors mean ‘limited quantity’ of copper in the 10th c. BCE at Khirbat en-Nahas? In discussing the pre-10th c BCE at Kh. En-Nahas, one has to factor in the very small excavation exposures (due to the fact that the pre-10th c. BCE material is found near the base of the slag mounds, over 6 meters in depth making it difficult to expose).

Conclusion -

Line 412 – “results demonstrate that copper was alloyed with tin on-site, a process previously undocumented in this region for this period.

Elaborate what on-site alloying implies for trade and exchange, as well as craft specialization during the Iron I considering the post Late Bronze Age collapse.

Line 426 – “emergence of the Kingdom of Israel and Judah shortly after.”

These conclusions also apply to the Edomite Kingdom. It should be included here.

References to add or correct -

Ben-Yosef, E., B. Liss, O.A. Yagel, O. Tirosh, M. Najjar, and Levy T.E.

2019 Ancient technology and punctuated change: Detecting the emergence of the Edomite Kingdom in the Southern Levant. PLoS ONE 14(9: e0221967):https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221967.

Galili, Ehud, Baruch Rosen, Mina Weinstein Evron, Israel Hershkovitz, Vered Eshed, and Liora Kolska Horwitz

2020 Israel: Submerged Prehistoric Sites and Settlements on the Mediterranean Coastline—the Current State of the Art. In The Archaeology of Europe’s Drowned Landscapes, edited by Geoff Bailey, Nena Galanidou, Hans Peeters, Hauke Jöns, and Moritz Mennenga, pp. 443-481. Springer International Publishing, Cham.

Hauptmann, A

2007 The Archaeo-metallurgy of Copper - Evidence from Faynan, Jordan. Springer, New York.

Levy, T.E., and M. Najjar

2007 Ancient Metal Production and Social Change in Southern Jordan: The Edom Lowlands Regional Archaeology Project and Hope for a UNESCO World Heritage Site in Faynan. In Crossing Jordan - North American Contributions to the Archaeology of Jordan, edited by T.E. Levy, M. Daviau, R.W. Younker, and M. Shaer, pp. 97-105. Equinox, London.

Levy, T.E., M. Najjar, and E. Ben-Yosef

2014 New Insights into the Iron Age Archaeology of Edom, Southern Jordan - Surveys, Excavations and Research from the Edom Lowlands Regional Archaeology Project (ELRAP). Two Volumes. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press UCLA, Los Angeles.

Levy, T.E., M. Najjar, T. Higham, Y. Arbel, A. Muniz, E. Ben-Yosef, N.G. Smith, M. Beherec, A.D. Gidding, I.W.N. Jones, D. Freses, and M. Robinson

2014 Excavations at Khirbat en-Nahas 2002-2009: An Iron Age Copper Production Center in the Lowlands of Edom. In New Insights into the Iron Age Archaeology of Edom, Southern Jordan - Surveys, Excavations and Research from the Edom Lowlands Regional Archaeology Project (ELRAP), edited by T.E. Levy, M. Najjar, and E. Ben-Yosef, pp. 89 - 245. UCLA Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles.

Shalev, S., and J. P. Northover

1987 Chalcolithic metal and metalworking from Shiqmim. In Shiqmim I - Studies Concerning Chalcolithic Socieites in the Northern Negev Desert, Israel (1982 - 1984), edited by T.E. Levy, pp. 357-371; 683-689. BAR International Series 356, Oxford.

Yasur-Landau, Assaf, Gilad Shtienberg, Gil Gambash, Giorgio Spada, Daniele Melini, Ehud Arkin-Shalev, Anthony Tamberino, Jack Reese, Thomas E. Levy, and Dorit Sivan

2021 New relative sea-level (RSL) indications from the Eastern Mediterranean: Middle Bronze Age to the Roman period (~3800–1800 y BP) archaeological constructions at Dor, the Carmel coast, Israel. PLOS ONE 16(6):e0251870.

**********

what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes:  Thomas E. Levy

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org

First Evidence of Bronze Production in the Iron Age I Southern Levant - A Direct Link to the Arabah Copper Polity

PONE-D-25-24485R1

Dear Dr. Eshel,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Joe Uziel

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments: