Sources Of Archaeological Obsidian Research Articles

Natural and Cultural History of the Obsidian Butte Source, Imperial County, California

ABSTRACTLocated in the Salton Basin of Imperial County in southeastern Alta California, Obsidian Butte was the major prehistoric obsidian toolstone source in southern Alta California and northern Baja California and is frequently referenced in the archaeological literature. Reported in detail geoarchaeologically by Richard Hughes in the 1980s, the study herein considerably amplifies his research in that it focuses on the natural (geological) and cultural (archaeological) history of this source and its impact on the prehistory and archaeological interpretations of the region. A thorough in-field examination of the source and analysis of over 500 obsidian artifacts from San Diego County and western Imperial County archaeological contexts enlarges the database of artifacts assigned to that source, as well as providing recent geochronological data in support of the cultural history. This study can be seen as a companion to the recent work on sources of archaeological obsidian in northern Baja California by Panich et al. (2012, 2015, 2017).

Elemental, isotopic, and geochronological variability in Mogollon‐Datil volcanic province archaeological obsidian, southwestern USA: Solving issues of intersource discrimination

AbstractSolving issues of intersource discrimination in archaeological obsidian is a recurring problem in geoarchaeological investigation, particularly since the number of known sources of archaeological obsidian worldwide has grown nearly exponentially in the last few decades, and the complexity of archaeological questions asked has grown equally so. These two parallel aspects of archaeological investigation have required more exacting understanding of the geological relationship between sources and the more accurate analysis of these sources of archaeological obsidian. This is particularly the case in the North American Southwest where the frequency of archaeological investigation is some of the highest in the world, and the theory and method used to interpret that record has become increasingly nuanced. Here, we attempt to unravel the elemental similarity of archaeological obsidian in the Mogollon‐Datil volcanic province of southwestern New Mexico where some of the most important and extensively distributed sources are located and the elemental similarity between the sources is great even though the distance between the sources is large. Uniting elemental, isotopic, and geochronological analyses as an intensive pilot study, we unpack this complexity to provide greater understanding of these important sources of archaeological obsidian.

A Reassessment of Archaeological Obsidian from Southern Alta California and Northern Baja California

This article offers a reassessment of the sources of archaeological obsidian found in southern California and northern Baja California based on new information regarding the geological availability of obsidian in Baja California, Mexico. In particular, we demonstrate that a previously unknown obsidian chemical group, referred to here as Tinajas obsidian, was for decades misidentified as San Felipe obsidian in regional archaeological analyses. In light of new data derived from geological surveys, geochemical analyses, and regional archaeological research, previous obsidian provenance reports from both sides of the border are reviewed. Our findings indicate that the archaeological distribution of the Tinajas obsidian group extends throughout northern Baja California and into southern California. In contrast, San Felipe obsidian appears to have had a more restricted geographical distribution than previously thought.

The identification of archaeological obsidian sources on Kamchatka Peninsula (Russian Far East) using geochemical and geological data: Current progress

The current state-of-the-art of provenance studies for archaeological obsidian on Kamchatka Peninsula is presented. Prehistoric people widely used obsidian as a raw material for making tools, and acquired it from several primary sources. The exact position of seven sources allowed us to understand the general features of obsidian geochemistry and tectonic position of obsidian-bearing volcanic formations. This also made it possible to suggest the localization of seven still unknown sources for archaeological obsidian on Kamchatka. Verification of our preliminary conclusions can be made by fieldwork in selected areas.

Hunter-gatherer Igneous Toolstone Procurement in Northern Arizona: A Geochemical Study of Projectile Points and Raw Material Sources

This paper focuses on patterns of hunter-gatherer igneous (flaked) toolstone procurement on the Coconino Plateau of northern Arizona. The two-part study combined an X-ray fluorescence (XRF) source sampling survey with an XRF analysis of projectile points. Our focus is on the sources of archaeological obsidian and fine-grained volcanic (FGV) material in the San Francisco and Mount Floyd Volcanic Fields and a sample of Paleoindian and Archaic period igneous projectile points (n = 274) recovered from the area. We update the XRF data for the sources with additional analysis of the geologic source material. We also determine the geologic source for the majority of the points. In addition, this paper presents data on three previously undocumented sources of archaeological toolstone.

Shirataki obsidian exploitation and circulation in prehistoric northern Japan

Presently, the total number of archaeological obsidian sources in Japan is more than 80, and among them, 21 are in Hokkaido, northern part of the Japanese archipelago (Izuho and Sato 2007). Obsidian was the dominant of lithic raw material in the Upper Paleolithic Hokkaido (35-10 ka cal BP). Out of 21 archaeological obsidian sources in Hokkaido, 4 sources: Shirataki, Oketo, Tokachi, and Akaigawa are the major obsidian sources and the others are minor sources. Shirataki is one of the largest obsidian sources in Northeast Asia and it is well known that Shirataki obsidian was transported outside Hokkaido to Sakhalin and the Paleo-Honshu Island from the Late Upper Paleolithic period. We compiled data of obsidian source analyses conducted to artefacts from Paleolithic sites in Hokkaido, and it became clear that the ratio of Shirataki obsidian in all analyzed materials is more than half (Sato and Yakushige in press). We examined how far Shirataki obsidian was transported in each period: the Early Upper Paleolithic (35-25 ka cal BP) and the Late Upper Paleolithic (25-10 ka cal BP). The Late Upper Paleolithic is divided into three stage, the early Early Microblade Industry (Stage 1: 25-21 ka cal BP), the late Early Microblade Industry (Stage 2: 19-16 ka cal BP), and the Late Microblade Industry (Stage 3: 16-10 ka cal BP). As a result, it is revealed that the distribution areas of Shirataki obsidian did not expand gradually over time, but are different in different lithic industries. In the background of this situation lay the difference of ecological adaptation strategies adopted by the prehistoric people of the time and their movement behavioral strategies.

TWO NEWLY DISCOVERED SOURCES OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL OBSIDIAN IN THE SOUTHWEST

Two sources of archaeological obsidian that have appeared in analyses of archaeological assemblages in the Southwest but whose location has remained unknown have now been located, mapped, and chemically characterized. These sources, Bull Creek in western Arizona near the well-known Burro Creek source and the Bear Springs Peak source in the southern Jemez Mountains of northern New Mexico, solve two geoarchaeological riddles and in the case of Bear Springs Peak could signal potential cultural ties between the Jemez (Walatowa) and Zuni nations during the seventeenth century.

Sources of Archaeological Obsidian on Sakhalin Island (Russian Far East)

Instrumental neutron activation analysis was performed on 79 obsidian tools and flakes from 35 sites on Sakhalin Island dating from Upper Paleolithic (c.19,000bp ) to Early Iron Age (c.2000–800bp ). Due to the absence of volcanic glass on Sakhalin Island, raw materials from the nearest obsidian sources on Hokkaido Island, such as Oketo, Shirataki, Tokachi-Mitsumata, and Akaigawa, were also analysed. A strong correlation between the chemical compositions of obsidian artefacts from Sakhalin and volcanic glass sources from Hokkaido was discovered. In particular, the Oketo and Shirataki sources were used for tool manufacturing throughout all of Sakhalin Island's prehistory. The distances between sources and archaeological sites range from 200–1000km. The intensive exchange of raw materials continued and even intensified after the appearance of the La Pérouse (Soya) Strait between Hokkaido and Sakhalin about 10,000–8000bp. The Sakhalin Island populations were deeply involved in the obsidian exchange network centered on Hokkaido.

Geochemical Differentiation and Prehistoric Procurement of Obsidian in the Mount Taylor Volcanic Field, Northwest New Mexico

Recently, due to an increasing number of analyses of archaeological obsidian worldwide, the reporting of chemically differentiated and compositionally zoned, obsidian producing rhyolite domes has increased. While these studies have been important, and furthered our knowledge of the potential chemical variability of rhyolite magmas as they relate to archaeological obsidians, they are rarely made relevant to archaeological issues. In northwestern New Mexico the “Grants Ridge” source in the Mount Taylor Volcanic Field exhibits two compositionally differing glasses derived from the same magma source that also exhibit significant megascopic variability correlating with raw material quality. While Grants Ridge was previously seen as a single source, this study suggests that one of the localities was considered a more viable raw material in prehistory, at least in the local area. The Grants Ridge study indicates the value of more intensive investigations of archaeological obsidian sources in the Southwest including systematic geoprospection and chemical analysis. The wavelength and energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence analysis reported here provides the first systematic study of this high-silica archaeological obsidian source in the Mount Taylor Volcanic Field.

Erratum: Sources of Archaeological Obsidian in the Greater American Southwest: An Update and Quantitative Analysis

Erratum: Sources of Archaeological Obsidian in the Greater American Southwest: An Update and Quantitative Analysis

Sources of Archaeological Obsidian in the Greater American Southwest: An Update and Quantitative Analysis

Obsidian studies in the greater American Southwest have come of age. No longer does the region lag behind other adjoining regions both in the understanding of source provenance and the integración of obsidian source studies into regional designs. Most of the archaeological obsidian sources discussed here were originally presented in semi-quantitative form in this journal in 1988 (Shackley 1988a). The purpose here is to present that same data in broadly useable quantitative form calibrated to international standards, update the source descriptions when appropriate, and, finally, present data on a few new sources recently located. This is a necessary step to continue the momentum of obsidian studies in the region and make the information available to all. Finally, some discussion is directed toward the archaeological utility of obsidian studies in the region.

Errata: Sources of Archaeological Obsidian in the Southwest: An Archaeological, Petrological, and Geochemical Study

Errata: Sources of Archaeological Obsidian in the Southwest: An Archaeological, Petrological, and Geochemical Study

Sources of Archaeological Obsidian in the Southwest: An Archaeological, Petrological, and Geochemical Study

Comprehensive geochemical studies of archaeological obsidian sources in the Southwest typically have lagged behind other regions of North American and Mesoamerica. Current archaeological and petrological research indicates four previously unreported sources in Arizona, Sonora, and western New Mexico. This initial semiquantitative X-ray fluorescence (XRF) examination of archaeological silicic-glass sources in this region focuses on current technical problems in southwestern obsidian studies. The chemical variability within some regional obsidian sources appears to be relatively extensive and new data from the San Francisco volcanic field in northern Arizona modifies the results of earlier researchers.

The Chipped Stone Industry of Cihuatan and Santa Maria, El Salvador, and Sources of Obsidian from Cihuatan

The chipped stone industry of Cihuatan and Santa Maria, Postclassic sites of north-central El Salvador, is discussed briefly in terms of behavioral/technological typology. The industry was based almost exclusively on obsidian and emphasized specialized production of prismatic blades. Source determinations by X-rayfluorescence and neutron activation analysis of 20 obsidian specimens from Cihuatan indicate that at least three highland Guatemalan sources supplied obsidian to the site. Twelve specimens are attributed to the Ixtepeque source, seven to El Chayal, and one to San Martin Jilotepeque. The multiple-source procurement pattern is interpreted as a hedge against the fragility of Postclassic sociopolitical alliances and shifting exchange networks. One of the most important advances in Mesoamerican lithic studies of recent years has been the development of behavioral and technological typologies based on linear reduction models of manufacturing trajectories (Clark 1979, 1981 la; Clark and Lee 1979; Moholy-Nagy et al. 1984; Sheets 1972, 1975a, 1978a). These typologies focus on the behavior involved in the manufacture, use, and recycling of lithic artifacts, thus attempting to model the real technological structure of lithic industries. Behavioral/technological typologies are now available for about 20 sites in the Maya area and the southeastern periphery of Mesoamerica (Fowler 1985). Another significant advance has been the development of techniques for accurate, high-precision chemical characterization of obsidian as a means of source determination (Stross et al. 1968; Stross, 1976). The results of precise geochemical analyses to determine the sources of archaeological obsidian in Mesoamerica have led to better understanding of the nature and degree of long-distance exchange in the area. Three factors make obsidian an excellent indicator of long-distance exchange contacts: (1) good-quality, workable obsidian occurs in a relatively limited number of geological deposits; (2) obsidian artifacts deposited in archaeological contexts are virtually imperishable; and (3) it is possible to determine, within limits of statistical certainty, the geological sources of obsidian artifacts through precise geochemical characterization. It is a fair assumption that obsidian exchange is an indicator of the exchange of other items that left no trace in the archaeological record. At the very least, the buyers had to offer something to the sellers in exchange for the obsidian. Whether or not perishable goods moved in appreciable quantities along the same routes of exchange as obsidian (see Drennan 1984), the reconstruction of Precolumbian obsidian exchange in Mesoamerica sheds light on prehistoric interregional contacts and exchange networks in general and provides a foundation for hypotheses concerning ancient sociopolitical ties that operated over long distances. When behavioral/technological typologies and obsidian source determination are used conjunctively, the analyst leams more about the cultural context within which a given lithic industry developed and functioned (Moholy-Nagy et al. 1984). The resulting reconstruction is more detailed and is a more fruitful source of hypotheses than either of the approaches used alone. The chipped stone industry of the ancient settlements of Cihuatan (Bruhns 1980; Fowler 1981; Kelley 1985) and Santa Maria (Fowler 1981), in the Paraiso (or Cerr6n Grande) Basin of north

The distribution and provenance of archaeological obsidian in central and eastern Europe

The sources of archaeological obsidian in central and eastern Europe are briefly described and analyses of 48 samples from 10 of these sources in northeast Hungary and southeast Slovakia are reported. Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis was used to determine 16 trace elements and two major elements. Principal Components Analysis supported by Discriminant Analysis showed seven analytical groups in these data. A total of 270 pieces of archaeological obsidian were assigned by Discriminant Analysis to three of the Carpathian source groups defined, the remaining four source groups not being represented in the archaeological record. The three source groups used are: (1) Szöllöske and Málá Toron̆a in Slovakia (designated group Carpathian 1); (2) Csepegö Forrás, Tolcsva area, Olaszliszka and Erdöbénye in Hungary (Carpathian 2a); and (3) Erdöbénye (Carpathian 2b). Carpathian 2a and 2b type obsidians are both found at the re-deposited source of Erdöbénye. Carpathian obsidian was used most widely in Hungary, Slovakia and Romania, and also reached south to the Danube in Yugoslavia, west to Moravia, Austria and to the Adriatic near Trieste, and north to Poland. Carpathian 2a obsidian was used in the Aurignacian period, Carpathian 1 in the Gravettian and Mesolithic, and Carpathian 1, 2a and 2b in the Neolithic, when Carpathian 1 predominated and obsidian use was at its most intensive. Only Carpathian I type has been identified in the Copper and Bronze Ages. There is no evidence at present for any overlap between the Carpathian obsidian distribution and the distributions of the Near Eastern or Aegean sources, but there is an overlap with Mediterranean obsidian at the Neolithic site of Grotta Tartaruga in northeast Italy where Liparian and Carpathian 1 material were identified. The distribution of obsidian from the Carpathian sources is considered in terms of linear supply routes. Based on limited available evidence the supply zone is significantly smaller and the rate of fall-off with distance slightly lower than that reported for Near Eastern obsidians.

The distribution and sources of archaeological obsidian from southern France

Abstract One-hundred-and-sixty-two pieces of obsidian have been found at 50 archaeological localities in southern France. The distribution is concentrated in the Rhone Valley, but includes sites in Drome and in southwest France. The obsidian is mainly from sites of the Chassey culture (4th and 3rd millennium Neolithic), but there is one Impressed Ware site (Early Neolithic) and four Copper Age sites with obsidian. Only a small proportion of the obsidian (31 pieces) consists of waste pieces, providing little evidence for on-site working. 10 pieces of obsidian were analysed by instrumental neutron activation analysis to determine their geological provenance. Seven pieces proved to be from the Sardinian SA source, one from Lipari, and two from Pantelleria. Chronologically there is some division between sources used: all three pieces of Liparian obsidian so far identified from southern France, in this work and by earlier researchers, belong to Early Chassey contexts, and the two Pantellerian pieces are from a Copper Age dolmen. Sardinian and Liparian obsidian probably reached France by way of northern Italy. where both types were in use in contemporary cultures. The two Pantellerian pieces are evidence of some type of contact between France and the southern Mediterranean in the Copper Age, despite earlier suggestions of a very restricted distribution for the Pantellerian source. Obsidian was probably imported to southern France with other goods since the small amounts used would not warrant a separate trading network for obsidian alone.

The Hungarian and Slovak sources of archaeological obsidian: an interim report on further fieldwork, with a note on tektites

This report describes the results of fieldwork carried out in the Zemplén Mountain area of north-eastern Hungary in 1975. The aim of this work was to locate and sample geological sources of obsidian which may have been used by prehistoric man. These sources are of increased importance since the work of Nandris (1975) showed that the Romanian “sources” do not produce workable obsidian. During the fieldwork three sources in Hungary were visited and sampled; one of these was the previously unlocated source of Csepegö Forräs. A number of other possible localities for geological obsidian are mentioned in 19th and 20th century geological and archaeological literature, and the present state of knowledge with regard to these is summarized. Further sources exist in central and in south-eastern Slovakia. These sources were not visited but material has been obtained from both areas. The central Slovak sources do not produce workable obsidian and are not therefore relevant to archaeological studies. Obsidian from three localities in south-eastern Slovakia is of good glassy quality and further fieldwork is now needed to check the validity of these localities as geological sources. Reference is made to obsidian sources in the western U.S.S.R., and the problem of the use of tektites in archaeological sites is discussed. The obsidian samples obtained during this work are currently being analyzed using neutron activation, in order to characterize the sources on the basis of their trace element analysis and thus to relate them to archaeological obsidian from central and eastern Europe.