A 1990s Perspective on Method and Theory in Archaeological Volcanic Glass Studies

Distinguishing Nemrut Dağ and Bingöl A obsidians: geochemical and landscape differences and the archaeological implications

“…Distinguishing Nemrut Da g and Bingöl A obsidians is about more than, as expressed by Green (1998), "characterizing the size of the dot which pinpoints [an artifact's] supposed origin" (227). This study has archaeological implications based on the above results and sourced obsidian artifacts from Tell Mozan.…”

The Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Araucanian Resilience

“…Obsidian is a volcanic glass that can be used in a variety of functions, primarily as tools such as projectile points, knives, lancets, and others requiring a sharp edge (Green 1998). Importantly, obsidian can also be sourced to specific volcanos as each volcano has a specific chemical signature based on its location, mineral content, and other typological factors (Glascock et al 1998;Seelenfreund and Contreras 2001;.…”

Archaeological Petrology and the Archaeometry of Lithic Materials*

“…For museum specimens, it is often unacceptable to thin section the material for petrographic analysis or subject it to destructive NAA, while non‐destructive methods such as XRF may be acceptable. Keep in mind that each method has its advantages and limitations, and the results of a given technique may not be specifically valid (see Goffer 1980; Neff and Glascock 1995; Green 1998; Shackley 1998a; Roll et al 2005; Speakman and Neff 2005). Finally, match artefacts to sources.…”

“…Obsidian studies in archaeology are a relatively recent aspect of archaeological research (Boyer and Robinson 1956; Green 1962, 1998; Cann and Renfrew 1964; Jack and Heizer 1968; Jack and Carmichael 1969; Williams‐Thorpe 1995; Shackley 2005). Early on, megascopic (macroscopic) observation, density measures and mass spectrometry were all used in an attempt to define source groups and correlate artefacts to sources, with mixed results.…”