Microwear Analysis of Retouched Glass Fragments from Fortlet Miñana, Azul, Argentina, 1860–1863

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a microscopic analysis conducted on supposedly retouched glass fragments that were likely used as tools. The pieces were recovered in a series of excavations performed at the historical site of Fortlet Miñana (1860-1869), a military settlement used during the war against the Indians on the southern border of Buenos Aires province, Argentina. The use of glass as raw material in archaeological sites of the historic period has frequently been reported in the Pampas and Patagonian regions. In this paper we present a review of ethnohistoric and ethnographic sources concerning the use of glass side scrapers, end scrapers, and arrowheads by aboriginal groups throughout the world. In order to perform the analysis, the glass fragments from Fortlet Miñana were compared to a series of experimental pieces on which traces of deliberate use on two kinds of raw material, wood and hide, were identified. The experimental approach and the microscopic analysis demonstrate that the retouched glass fragments recovered at Fortlet Miñana were not used as tools. Therefore, we conclude that microscopic analysis is of significant use to all researchers working with materials of this kind.

Archaeological spatial analysis and GIS in a small fortification: Ephemeral occupations along the border during the ‘Conquest of Desert’ process in Argentinean Pampas (19th Century)

“…This formation process makes it very difficult to locate any trace of structures that were extensively documented in written sources and annexed drawings (Thill and Puigdomenech, 2003). This is the main problem not only in Otamendi site but also for other small forts excavated by one of us in the 1990's (see Clemente Conte and Gómez Romero, 2008;Gómez Romero, 2005;Pedrotta and Gómez Romero, 1998); then, on archaeological site we can detect spatial distributions of different material remains, but we cannot find any evidence of structure (Gómez Romero, 2007b: 186;Gómez Romero y Maximiano 2011:123)).…”

Artefatos em vidro na amazônia colonial

“…A presença de artefatos em vidro lascado é registrada em diversos sítios históricos do continente sul-americano (Belardi, Marina e Delaunay De Angelis, 2013;Casamiquela,1978;Conte & Romero, 2008;Delaunay, Belardi, Marina, Saletta e De Angelis, 2017;Jackson, 1991aJackson, , 1991bLothrop, 1928;Macedo, 1997;Pablo & Borrazzo, 2017;Santos Júnior, 2017;Souza, 2011;Symanski & Osório, 1996), da região do Caribe (Ahlman, Bobby e Gerald, 2014), dos Estados unidos (Porter, 2015;Wilkie, 1996), do Havaí (Flexner & Morgan, 2013), da índia (Cooper & Bowdler, 1998), da Itália (Kehrberg, 1992), da áfrica (Chazan, Porat, Alexandra e Kolska, 2013) e em variados países da Oceania (Allen, 2008;Allen & Jones, 1980;Balfour, 1903;Goward, 2011;ulm, Vernon, Robertson e nugent, 2009).…”

The Archaeology of Contact in Southern Patagonia: Some Issues to be Resolved in the Southwestern Forest

“…The use of glass as lithic raw material for traditional technological forms is recorded in several aboriginal archaeological contexts from South America, [1][2][3][4][5] United States, [6][7][8] India, 9 Africa 10 and Oceania, [11][12][13][14] among others. These flaked artifacts are commonly associated with contact encounters during European colonial expansion 7,11,[14][15][16][17][18] and they are described as remanufactured glass.…”

“…These flaked artifacts are commonly associated with contact encounters during European colonial expansion 7,11,[14][15][16][17][18] and they are described as remanufactured glass. 19 According to Martindale & Jukavik, 2,19 two of the issues addressable in the analysis of indigenous remanufactured glass artifacts are:…”