The sherds of conquistadors: a petrological study of ceramics from Graciosa Bay and Pamua, Solomon Islands

Abstract

We present evidence linking vessel forms with ceramic wares resulting from the petrological analysis of 33 sherds from two sixteenth century Spanish colonial sites in the Solomon Islands. Our results expand the range of fabric types previously published, and comparative literature analyses support earlier studies suggesting probable ceramic origins in the Americas and Spain.

Sherds on the Edge: Characterization of 16th Century Colonial Spanish Pottery Recovered from the Solomon Islands

“…Through the comparison of typological and petrological data with the published literature (Dickinson and Green ; Green ; Kelloway et al ; Kelloway ), U–Pb dating of detrital zircons (Kelloway et al ) and the chemical data presented in this paper, we suggest that many of the ceramics within the Solomon Islands artefact assemblages were made variously within Peru, Spain, Panama, China and Thailand. Many of the various types are Peruvian made, and the other non‐Peruvian‐made ceramics would have been readily obtained within Peru.…”

“…Based on the geochemical results presented in this paper and typological and petrological studies carried out in the 1970s and more recently (Dickinson and Green ; Green ; Bedford et al ; Kelloway et al ; Kelloway ), a number of suggestions can be made as to the provenance(s) of various wares in the Solomon Island assemblages. The Asian Stoneware originated from Thailand based both on typological and geochemical comparisons, and the porcelain is most likely Ming porcelain from China, based on typology.…”

“…The fragmentary nature of the ceramic assemblage means that whole vessels were not able to be reconstructed and some wares were unable to be associated with vessel forms at all; however, fabric and surface treatment distinctions resulted in a range of wares that could be probed for provenance. Petrological and geochemical (INAA, this paper) studies were conducted to further characterize and provenance sherds, the latter also including U–Pb dating of detrital zircons (Kelloway et al , ).…”

Sourcing Olive Jars Using U‐Pb Ages of Detrital Zircons: A Study of 16th Century Olive Jars Recovered from the Solomon Islands

“…With respect to Panama, although the younger rocks of Panama could yield granitic sands and abundant zircons, the majority of zircons in this study are pre-Eocene. Further, no sedimentary-metasedimentary lithics were identified in thin sections of the main INAA group sherds (Dickinson & Green, 1973;Kelloway, Gibbs, & Craven, 2013). Rather, the rock fragments in the olive jars under study are igneous suggesting derivation from a granitic source and the Panamanian granitic rocks are not as voluminous as Peruvian batholiths.…”

“…In this study, we apply the methodology of U-Pb zircon dating to further determine the provenance of Red Earthenware olive jars (botijas) retrieved from two 16th Century colonial Spanish sites in the Solomon Islands (Allen, 1976;Allen & Green, 1972;Green, 1973). Previous research involving petrology and geochemistry (INAA) indicated possible Panamanian or Peruvian origins for these sherds (Bedford et al, 2009;Dickinson & Green, 1973;Kelloway, Gibbs, & Craven, 2013). This paper presents U-Pb ages of zircons extracted from five Red Earthenware sherds that indicate an Andean origin, and some implications for our understanding of production and distribution of 16th Century Peruvian-made pottery.…”