Next Article in Journal
Microfossil (Diatoms, Tintinnids, and Testate Amoebae) Assemblages in the Holocene Sediments of the Laptev Sea Shelf off the Yana River as a Proxy for Paleoenvironments
Previous Article in Journal
Upper Pleistocene Marine Levels of the Es Copinar–Es Estufadors (Formentera, Balearic Islands, West Mediterranean)
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Obsidian Technology and Transport Along the Archipelago of Southernmost South America (42–56° S)

1
Estudios Aplicados, Escuela de Antropología, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Av. Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Santiago 7820436, Chile
2
Centro de Estudios de Historia y Arqueología, Instituto de la Patagonia, Universidad de Magallanes, Bulnes 01890, Punta Arenas 6200000, Chile
3
Cape Horn International Center (CHIC), Teniente Muñoz 396, Puerto Williams 6350000, Chile
4
Centro de Investigación en Ecosistemas de la Patagonia, José de Moraleda 16, Coyhaique 5951601, Chile
5
Department of Geological Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0399, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Quaternary 2025, 8(3), 39; https://doi.org/10.3390/quat8030039
Submission received: 11 May 2025 / Revised: 26 June 2025 / Accepted: 25 July 2025 / Published: 29 July 2025

Abstract

Obsidian was a key toolstone for the development of maritime lifeways in the western archipelago of southernmost South America. This area is a fragmented landscape where the major north–south movement of people along the Pacific was only possible by navigation because it is constrained by major biogeographic barriers. Two obsidian sources have been recorded, each one located on the extremes of the archipelago, and each has played a key role in the canoe-adapted societies that used them. As indicated by repeated inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry analyses, obsidian from Chaitén Volcano to the north was distributed between 38°26′ S and 45°20′ S, and obsidian from Seno Otway to the south was distributed between 50° and 55° S, although it mainly occurred in sites close to the Strait of Magellan and within constrained time periods. This study explores the distribution of these two types of obsidians, their chronology, their frequencies in the archaeological record, the main artifact classes that are represented, and the technological processes in which they were involved. This examination indicates common aspects in the selection of high-quality toolstones for highly mobile maritime groups and discusses the different historical trajectories of two obsidians that appear decoupled across the Holocene.

1. Introduction

Obsidian is a highly valuable toolstone given its glassy-like properties, which make it among the most desirable raw materials for knapped tool manufacturing. It was widely used across the globe over a vast time range, even predating the appearance of modern humans, and in both nonhierarchical and complex societies [1,2,3,4]. The widespread use of precise technologies (e.g., ICP-MS, XRF, pXRF, NAA, and PGAA) for provenance analyses has become prominent in the study of obsidians given their geochemical distinctiveness [5,6,7,8]. Other igneous lithologies have been sourced employing these approaches and techniques [9,10,11]. Exotic obsidians have been found at great distances from their original sources; they were transported across the sea and transformed along the way [12,13]. One key example of marine transport is that of Western Patagonia, where an intricate network of islands and channels forms one of the world’s largest archipelagos. Obsidians have been recognized almost since the earliest occupations of the different areas comprising this zone and are often highly relevant in the assemblages in which they are recorded, either in terms of frequency, their role in the techno-economic system, or both. Given that they provide notable information on decisions related to high-quality toolstone procurement, use, mobility, and spatial hierarchy, obsidians are among the most cited raw materials for inferences of past behaviors in Western Patagonia, as well as other maritime settled areas [14].
Patagonia, south of 42° S, has a total of six major geochemically recognizable obsidian sources (Figure 1) that have been systematically exploited since the Pleistocene–Holocene transition: four from the steppes extending east of the Andes to the Atlantic coast and two from the archipelagos along the western fringe of the continent [15,16]. Only a small proportion of artifacts manufactured in obsidian from archaeological assemblages in Patagonia come from minor or unknown sources; hence, they are considered less significant when discussing the main comparative trends. The four major continental sources to the east of the Andes Mountain chain are better known in terms of location, chemical variability, artifact distribution, and chronological trends, since more archaeological research has been conducted in this area by a greater number of teams benefiting from more favorable logistics [17,18]. Conversely, mobility across archipelagos is currently only accomplished by navigation, as was performed in the past, which is a limiting factor for effectively surveyed land [19]. The fact that this region extends for almost 1600 km from Reloncaví Sound in the north to Cape Horn in the south, comprising over 19,000 km of shorelines, makes it an extremely challenging environment for achieving comparable study samples derived from the two western obsidian sources. The vast number of islands in the archipelago has resulted from Holocene sea-level rise, glacial retreat and rebound, volcanism, and tectonics, thereby adding chronological complexity to site location in an already fragmented landscape [20,21].
The Patagonian archipelago was the home of canoe hunter–fisher–gatherers with distinctive maritime adaptations [22]. Yamana, Kawésqar, and Chono, with minor subsisting communities today, are well-recognized, highly mobile societies that occupied this environment during the historic period, thus providing an approximation of how human beings developed the austral maritime traditional lifeway [23,24,25,26]. Highly specialized maritime-adapted groups are recognized in the southernmost archipelago within a distinctive chronological range between 7500 and 5500 cal BP [19,27,28,29]. The archaeological record shows the development of a maritime lifeway as a more or less widespread phenomenon, first south of 52° S and later, at 6100 cal BP, in the northern part of the archipelago [22,30]. People throughout the archipelago systematically exploited marine produce, as attested by dense shell middens bearing rich marine archaeofaunal assemblages and as suggested by the isotopic composition of human bone remains [19,31,32]. As many islands have been effectively separated from the mainland since the glacial retreat, their occupation directly implies navigation, and the presence of obsidian in such locales implies transport across the intervening waterway [33]. Occupation of the northern channels reached a marked peak during the last 2000 years, at a period characterized as a widespread occupational radiocarbon maximum [34]. A heightened Late Holocene occupation is also observed for the southern channels based on the vast number of late-age sites, though there is no equivalent quantitative assessment [19,35].
Obsidian was important throughout the archipelago, with evidence of such use as early as the Middle Holocene [36,37,38]. However, not all obsidians were the same in terms of quality, abundance, and availability; consequently, they are characterized by differences in terms of spatial distribution, chronology, frequency, and the technological transformations to which they were subjected. This paper compiles the available data of obsidian provenance analyses from locations along the archipelago of Western Patagonia. These data are used to discuss the spatial and temporal distributions of obsidians and their implications for disentangling procurement behaviors, technological decision making, and discarding. The obsidian distribution along the archipelago is dominated by two distinctive sources: the Chaitén Volcano (42°50′ S) source of gray porphyritic obsidian to the north and the Seno Otway (ca. 53° S) source of green obsidian to the south.

2. West Patagonia

A remarkably complex network of islands, channels, and fjords extends along the western margin of the southern cone of South America at latitudes higher than 42°S. From Reloncaví Sound in the north (41°28′ S) to the southernmost tip of the continent (56° S), more than 240,000 km2 of fragmented land makes up more than 1200 islands that are >1 km2, comprising one of the largest archipelagic systems of the world. The Andes, the backbone of South America, gradually submerges into the sea, forming a land/seascape of abrupt topography modeled by tectonics, volcanism, glacial processes, and postglacial sea-level rise. Three plates converge in this zone on the Taitao Peninsula (46–47° S), an area of active ocean ridge subduction [39]. An important number of volcanoes extend along the Andes [40]. This area, once covered by the Patagonian Ice Sheet, experienced a loss of ice since the last Termination 25,000 years ago, a process that affected the topography of the Pacific coast [41]. Postglacial rebound and sea-level rise filled the fjords and reached a Middle Holocene highstand that contributed to the shaping of geomorphological features of the islands [42,43]. With local variations in the Holocene coastlines, the marine environment of the archipelago was established south of the Chacao Channel (42° S) between 18,000–12,000 cal BP and at the southern end of the Strait of Magellan (50° S) and Beagle Channel (56° S) at 9100–9400 cal BP [21,44,45].
The core of the southern westerly winds between 45° and 55° S produces year-round precipitation primarily west of and over the Andes [46]. Consequently, evergreen forests and peatbogs occur on islands and along the western continental coast [47]. Island paleoenvironmental records of the Chonos archipelago (44° S) indicate the development of forest cover by 16,800 cal BP with subsequent relative stability in terms of forest distribution, coverage, and species variability during the Holocene, showing minor variations in pollen composition and rates of change during the last 8 millennia, the period encompassing the human occupation [34]. Similarly, the palaeoecological records of southernmost Patagonia show the establishment of an open-canopy forest by 12,500 cal BP, with different moisture-sensitive phases and vegetation shifts during the Holocene until historic times [44,48].

3. Materials and Methods

The archaeological assemblages discussed herein integrate samples obtained using a broad diversity of methods that range from opportunistic collections to systematic surface surveys, auger sampling, test pits, and stratigraphic excavations at selected sites. An attempt to provide a chronology for these contexts that is as detailed as possible has been carried out through a series of research projects since the mid-1970s [36]. Currently, better shoreline coverage, detailed excavations, and the systematic use of radiocarbon dating coupled with geochemical analyses enable a much more thorough investigation of obsidian technology, addressed recently through specifically designed research projects [49,50,51]. This study uses previously published ICP-MS analyses of obsidians from sites throughout the Patagonian archipelago comprising a total of 45 samples, which are representative of the assemblages in which they occur [16,52,53]. The trace element composition of a subsample of obsidian artifacts, their geographical reference, and the field and laboratory information associated with each sample are included as a Supplementary File (Table S1).
The ICP-MS analyses were performed in the Laboratory for Environmental Geochemistry of the University of Colorado (Boulder, CO, USA). We used an ELAN DCR-e, an inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer manufactured by Perkin-Elmer. Obsidians from the Patagonian sources are highly homogeneous, and the results are precise to ±10% at the parts per million (ppm) level based on repeated analyses of selected obsidian samples (both archaeological and unworked source specimens) and available U.S. Geological Survey standards [16,54]. Additional XRF and INAA on samples of both obsidians confirm their chemical compositions and distinctiveness [53,55]. Sr–isotopic ratios were determined using solid-source mass spectrometry at the University of Colorado. Given the distinctiveness of the Chaitén Volcano gray and Seno Otway green obsidians and the consistency in geochemical results published over the years, these two types can be confidently identified based on macroscopic attributes. Hence, for this discussion, we not only use directly analyzed samples to address frequencies and technology but also include the whole lithic assemblages of the studied sites [53].

4. Results

4.1. Obsidian Petrology and Sources

The two main obsidian types represented in the archaeological record of the Patagonian archipelago are both distinctive based on their macroscopic attributes and geochemical compositions (Table 1). A bivariate plot of Ba versus Sr best reflects their distinctiveness (Figure 2). However, the use of multiple trace element diagrams is required to ascertain such distinctions in provenance analyses [11,56,57]. Such bivariate plots with different combinations of trace elements (Zr versus Ba; La/Yb versus La) fully document the geochemical distinction between these sources, as well as other continental sources in Patagonia, as shown in the studies referenced here [16,52]. The trace element composition of individual obsidian archaeological artifacts matches the two sources discussed in this study (Table S1 and Figure 3).
The Chaitén Volcano source (42°50′ S, 74°39′ W) is a continental coastal area located east of the Chiloé region. The volcano is located approximately 20 km inland, but blocks of obsidian derived from it reach the coast at several sites (Figure 1). The Chaitén Volcano has a recorded history of four eruptions starting at least 9900–9600 cal BP [58]. The obsidian from this source is a gray calc-alkaline rhyolite with 1–3 vol% plagioclase feldspar crystals [55]. It is characterized by low concentrations of Ti, Y, Zr, Hf, and Nb and high 87Sr/86Sr (0.7059; Table 1 and Figure 2) compared to other rhyolitic obsidians from Andean volcanoes [16]. A recent study in the volcano area shows that obsidian nodules, in the range between 50 and 10 cm, occur in high concentrations along the Rayas, Blanco, and Chaitén Rivers at distances over 1 km from their coast [59]. Our observations prior to the 2008 eruption showed they were once available even in the coastal margin. Flaking properties are variable, with nodules within the range of medium to good quality, because crystal inclusions make it less homogeneous and occasionally preclude clean extractions. No exceptionally high-quality crystal-free specimens have been observed.
Table 1. Averaged trace element composition in ppm for the Chaitén Volcano and Seno Otway obsidian types based on >50 samples each [16,60].
Table 1. Averaged trace element composition in ppm for the Chaitén Volcano and Seno Otway obsidian types based on >50 samples each [16,60].
ElementSeno OtwayChaitén Volcano
Ti763 ± 73985 ± 89
Mn252 ± 21548 ± 58
Cs6.4 ± 0.78.6 ± 0.8
Rb170 ± 18127 ± 12
Sr22 ± 3148 ± 16
Ba102 ± 12650 ± 62
Y37 ± 413 ± 2
Zr132 ± 1288 ± 10
Nb37 ± 49 ± 1
Hf6.1 ± 0.72.9 ± 0.3
Th22.9 ± 2.915.8 ± 1.8
U5.9 ± 0.74.3 ± 0.5
La29.6 ± 3.028.3 ± 3.0
Ce66.1 ± 6.949.5 ± 5.1
Pr7.98 ± 0.924.49 ± 0.63
Nd29.2 ± 3.118.3 ± 2.0
Sm6.74 ± 0.712.96 ± 0.31
Eu0.21 ± 0.020.59 ± 0.06
Gd8.8 ± 0.912.89 ± 0.31
Tb1.15 ± 0.200.36 ± 0.04
Dy6.75 ± 0.712.02 ± 0.22
Ho1.34 ± 0.150.35 ± 0.04
Er4.16 ± 0.441.21 ± 0.14
Tm0.54 ± 0.060.11 ± 0.02
Yb4.04 ± 0.411.41 ± 0.15
Lu0.54 ± 0.060.22 ± 0.03
La/Yb7.320.1
(87Sr/86Sr)0.70510.7059
Figure 2. Plot of Ba versus Sr average values in ppm for the Chaitén Volcano and Seno Otway obsidian types based on >50 samples each [16,60].
Figure 2. Plot of Ba versus Sr average values in ppm for the Chaitén Volcano and Seno Otway obsidian types based on >50 samples each [16,60].
Quaternary 08 00039 g002
Figure 3. Scatter plot of Ba versus Sr in ppm of obsidian archaeological samples of the Chaitén Volcano and Seno Otway obsidian types included in Table S1.
Figure 3. Scatter plot of Ba versus Sr in ppm of obsidian archaeological samples of the Chaitén Volcano and Seno Otway obsidian types included in Table S1.
Quaternary 08 00039 g003
The Seno Otway obsidian is olive to dark green in color and generally crystal-free. It is a hydrated calc-alkaline rhyolite with low concentrations of Ti, Zr, and Hf, as expected for rocks of the Andean convergent plate boundary volcanic arc [16]. However, it is characterized by lower concentrations of Sr and Ba than other obsidian types from active volcanoes, including the Chaitén type (Figure 2 and Figure 3). It was originally defined on the basis of geochemical analyses of archaeological samples that were all of similar chemistry. A K-Ar age of 17.1 Ma for one sample indicates that they were likely derived from the Miocene magmatic belt of the southernmost Patagonian Andes around the Strait of Magellan and the Otway Sound [49]. Despite numerous systematic efforts to locate the primary outcrop source, it remains undiscovered. The frequency and abundance of green obsidian artifacts, combined with geological information, have narrowed the source area to the vicinity of the Otway Sound and Riesco Island area [49]. Analyzed artifacts indicate that 87% are homogeneous dark olive green and 70% are crystal-free, while in darker colors, the presence of devitrification bands and crystals of feldspar (<1 vol %) are attributes present only in a small number of samples [16]. Based on the few available nodules or artifacts with cortex remnants, 88% of the cases showed that they were tabular (baguette) or plaques, and only 12% were cobbles. This obsidian type contains a significant amount of water, between 4.7 and 6.2 wt%, but it is not devitrified [61]. The flaking quality for this obsidian is considered very good because it is brittle, homogeneous, and isotropic.

4.2. Spatial Distribution and Chronology

Only three excavated sites have been reported in the immediate vicinity of the Chaitén Volcano obsidian source (Table 2), and only two obsidian flakes have been recovered from a 2150–2000 cal BP level at one of the sites, namely, the Cueva Alta in the Santa Bárbara area, which is 100 m from the shoreline [62]. Research close to the source is still in its initial stages, and data are expected to change as more sampling is performed [59]. However, the gray porphyritic obsidian derived from Chaitén Volcano has been recorded as far north as the Chan Chan site (39°31′ S) in Valdivia (north of Patagonia), with an age as early as 6420–6250 cal BP [55,63]. This obsidian occurs in sites of the same age in the Reloncaví Sound [59]. Additionally, it has been observed at sites on Chiloé Island, such as Quilo 1, Chepu 005, and San Juan 1 (Figure 4A), with a maximum antiquity of 6260–5930 cal BP [55,64,65,66]. It is common at sites throughout the Chonos archipelago (43°50′–46°50′ S), with a chronology as early as 6210–5990 cal BP, as indicated by the occupational level at the GUA-010 Terraza site (Figure 4B) [67]. The gray porphyritic obsidian has been geochemically identified at several sites on Traiguén Island (45°35′ S), such as Nahuelquín 1 and Posa las Conchillas [52]. Its southernmost occurrence in the archipelago is in the Isla Goñi 1 site (45°55′ S) within a deposit dated at 4580–4420 cal BP [50]. The obsidian has also been recorded in continental channels, such as the Seno Gala 1 site (Figure 4C) [68]. Overall, this obsidian is a common feature at coastal sites between 39°31′ S and 45°55′ S, a maritime area comprising approximately 70,000 km2 and occurring from at least ca. 6000 cal BP to Western colonial encounters. It does not occur on Isla Mocha (38°22′ S), where other obsidians from the mainland were introduced by maritime transport [69]. Interestingly, there are no occurrences of Chaitén Volcano obsidian to the east of its main area of distribution, which is a densely forested mountainous area interpreted as a barrier to human movement [50,52]. However, exceptional surface findings of this type of obsidian have been recorded at the Cabeza de León and Zona Norte sites in Monte León National Park (50°21′ S and 50°16′ S, respectively) of the Atlantic coast and in the Frailes 2 (51°51′ S) rock shelter 25 km inland in the region of Pali Aike [70]. These findings occur among black, gray-banded, and green obsidian types in assemblages where obsidians represent a minor proportion in the case of the former and a relatively larger assemblage in the case of the latter [71,72]. Only one stratigraphic context, the Yegua Quemada 3 site (50°24′ S), places these four types of obsidian together at 6790–6000 cal BP [73]. Given the lack of findings along the way, current information suggests that these specimens represent a unique case of transport of this raw material over 2000–2600 km, “skipping” around the southern tip of the continent.
Over 160 sites have yielded green obsidian artifacts across southernmost Patagonia (Table 2), although it is most common in coastal and insular locations in the Otway Sea, the Strait of Magellan, and to the northeast of Tierra del Fuego Island [16,53]. Sites such as Bahía Buena, Bahía Colorada, Englefield, and Pizzulic 2 (Figure 4D) are notorious for the abundance of green obsidian they contain, with a chronology as early as 7010–7410 cal BP [19,36,37,74]. Seno Otway green obsidian has been recovered from sites around the western coast of Tierra del Fuego Island, such as Marazzi 1 and 13, and to a lesser extent from the interior at sites such as Amalia 4 [75,76]. It has also been recorded along the Beagle Channel (54°55′ S) with an age as early as 7570–7160 cal BP at the Túnel 1 site [77]. Different occupational levels of this site show a distinctively maritime-adapted assemblage in which green obsidian is represented by frequencies between 3.5% and 0.3% for tool classes and <0.03% for waste flakes, thus suggesting that it was introduced as advanced-stage tools [78]. Its southernmost area of occurrence is at the southern coast of Navarino Island (55°14′ S) [79]. Green obsidian has also been recorded in continental locations to the north, such as at the Charles Fuhr site east of Lago Argentino [16], and represents ~30% of all obsidian artifacts at sites in Monte León National Park on the Atlantic coast [70,71]. These sparse frequencies are consistent with the Cabeza de León 7 assemblage, which contains 2% of green obsidian. This type of obsidian is also present in well-known long archaeological sequences, such as those of Fell’s Cave and Pali Aike sites in the Pali Aike volcanic field [80]. Although originally considered a five-period sequence (I through V), it can confidently be partitioned into three-time blocks for disaggregating the assemblage. In Fell’s Cave, green obsidian comprises 1% of the Pleistocene/Holocene transition block, 0.4% of the Middle Holocene, 0.5% of the Late Holocene, and 0.5% of indetermined findings [81]. However, stronger associations are found in the layers attributed to the Middle Holocene, which is consistent with the chronology of the early appearance of this obsidian in maritime sites [53].
Most remarkably, this obsidian ceased to be used between 4850 and 2350 cal BP, as indicated by sites close and far from the Otway Sea in a period in which access or knowledge of the source may have been lost [19,51]. This interruption has also been noted for the layers attributed to this chronology in Fell’s Cave and Pali Aike [82]. For the last two millennia, several sites have yielded green obsidian, although its distribution is more circumscribed to the strait of Magellan, and it is most abundant close to the presumed source, for instance, at sites Pizzulic 4, locus 2 of Offing 2 (Figure 4E), and Punta Santa Ana 3 (Figure 4F) [19,53]. Equally relevant are a series of evidence in museum collections and ethnohistorical accounts that point to the use of this obsidian during historical times [49]. Overall, this obsidian is a very common element at coastal sites between 51°30′ S and 51°14′ S, with an important number of inland occurrences, comprising a total distribution area of 170,000 km2, and occurring since ca. 7000 cal BP onwards, although markedly interrupted for ca. 2500 years.

4.3. Techno-Economic Characteristics

Artifacts manufactured with Chaitén porphyritic gray obsidian have been recorded in several surface and intertidal findings at many locations of the continental coast (e.g., Reloncaví Sound) and the western archipelago, with bifacial points being the most conspicuous [50,59]. However, sites closest to the source have yielded either no obsidian or, in the case of the Cueva Alta site, only a few flakes (6%) were recovered [62]. Conversely, in longer occupational sequences excavated in the Isla Grande de Chiloé (at the same latitude but crossing the Corcovado gulf), such as in San Juan 1 (5840 to 480 cal BP), this type comprises 81% of the studied assemblage [65]. At this site, 95 linear km from the source, the local production of lanceolate bifacial points and other bifacial artifacts is supported by the presence of abundant soft-hammer percussion flakes. Marginally retouched artifacts are few and include only a side scraper and a knife. Other sites, as early as the basal occupations of the earliest sites in Chiloé, such as GUA-010 Terraza in the Guaitecas archipelago, at a distance of 140 linear km south of the source, show only 7% porphyritic gray obsidian [52]. This toolstone is represented by bifacial artifacts (Figure 5), whose manufacture mainly occurred in other locations, as suggested by the presence of finished and broken lanceolate points and the absence of the expected debris [50]. This small frequency of obsidian is consistent with the evidence at other sites in the same archipelago, such as the Gran Guaiteca 2 Terraza assemblage (4430–4240 cal BP), which only produced four obsidian artifacts, and Alero Low, a rock shelter with occupations spanning the last two millennia, which yielded no obsidian at all [50]. The observed pattern is also valid for continental sites such as Seno Gala 1 (1360 to 1180 cal BP) at an equivalent distance of 140 km from the source, where this obsidian has been identified only as artifacts in an intertidal lithic scatter but not in the adjacent excavated archaeological deposit [68]. In contrast to the limited proportion of gray obsidian at several sites of the Guaitecas archipelago, the Isla Goñi 1 site in the southern Chonos archipelago, at a linear distance of 360 km from the source, showed porphyritic gray obsidian both as intertidal dispersed material and as artifacts recovered from an eroded stratigraphical section [50]. This last deposit is dated at 4580–4420 cal BP, and excavations produced an assemblage composed of 99% of gray obsidian artifacts, which included bifacial tools, large flakes, bifacial thinning flakes, retouching debris, and fragments from all these artifact classes, suggesting that several stages of the chaîne operatoire were represented. The dominant techno-economic feature of the Chaitén Volcano obsidian is the bifacial shaping scheme (façonnage) in most assemblages. Another less-represented knapping process is marginal retouch, as indicated by simple débitage methods that do not include predetermination and may even be regarded as opportunistic behavior [83]. Considering the above, porphyritic gray obsidian from Chaitén Volcano depicts a discontinuous distribution pattern across the western archipelago. Sites at different distances show either large or small frequencies of flakes and retouched artifacts, yet these are mainly bifacial.
In a different fashion, green obsidian appears to show a decreasing radiating pattern from its centre of main occurrence in the Otway Sea, even though a proper primary outcrop source has not been located. Sites such as those on Riesco and Englefield Islands yielded a great abundance. This quantitative decline is associated with a decline in artifact classes, such as nodules, cores, and flakes bearing cortex remains, which become more infrequent as the distance from the Otway Sea increases [53]. Conversely, formal, highly transportable artifacts, such as projectile points and bifaces, are proportionally more important with increasing distance. For the Middle Holocene sites, the assemblages excavated on Englefield Island are outstanding for their frequencies of green obsidian artifacts. Bahía Colorada (6620–6410 cal BP), for instance, shows more than 90% green obsidian [84,85]. Green obsidian in Pizzulic 2 (6870 to 6760 cal BP) reaches 80% [33] and, at the Englefield site (7170–6670 cal BP), comprises 78% of all knapped evidence. The earliest period represented by these sites, known as the “Englefield Culture”, is characterized by short occupations whose green obsidian assemblages include flake-retouched knives, side scrapers, triangular bifacial points, and large bifacial knives [19]. The sites in the Strait of Magellan have also produced notable green obsidian-rich assemblages. For instance, Bahía Buena (6650 to 5930 cal BP) produced a large lithic assemblage (N = 1561 artifacts), with more than 90% green obsidian artifacts, without considering nodules that were also transported to the site [36]. In Punta Santa Ana 1 (7320–7020 cal BP), obsidian is less abundant (32%), although with a very high representation of retouched flake artifacts, including knives, bifacial points, and bifaces, amongst others [36].
Nodule morphology (e.g., baguettes or elongated tabular nodules) and their size were key natural features in technological decision making for green obsidian assemblages (Figure 6a), either in the case of façonnage or débitage methods. Façonnage was not only restricted to the manufacture of unstemmed projectile points (Figure 6d) but also utilized in a wide range of chaînes operatoires for instruments, such as scrapers, daggers, and knives. Metric analyses show a preference for selecting elongated cutting edges located either in the transversal or perpendicular axes of the tools [86]. The débitage methods were quite simple and relied on natural features without involving a systematic phase of core preparation. The main method used to produce tool blanks was blade “tendency” débitage. Such blade or long-flake tools were further manufactured via marginal retouching to obtain knives, small end scrapers, and side scrapers. Although minorly represented, complex débitage technology has been described for the Bahía Colorada site, where Levallois methods were recorded within two techno-economic strategies before core discarding. The first strategy, a “simplified” Levallois core flake production without proper core shaping, took advantage of natural convexities used as predetermination traits (Figure 6e,f). The second strategy involved the reuse of blade “tendency” cores at their final stages of reduction (Figure 6c), where they were utilized to obtain a series of preferential Levallois flakes [74,81].
Equally significant in the case of green obsidian are the sites and assemblages in which this raw material is absent, constrained to the period between 4850 and 2350 cal BP [19,53]. Single-component sites where this toolstone should be expected due to its proximity to the source but have yielded no green obsidian evidence include Pizzulic 3 (4410–4150 cal BP) and Camden 2 [19]. This is also the case for sites in the Strait of Magellan, such as Punta Santa Ana 2 (2880–2700 cal BP) or Kilómetro 44 Sur (3240–2880 cal BP), and for sites in the Skyring Sea, such as Bahía Rebolledo 29 (5840 to 4930 cal BP), which also lack this raw material [28,87,88]. Additionally, long sequences, such as Ponsonby, include less than 1% of green obsidian artifacts for the layers attributed to this period, and even so, for such cases, there is no absolute certainty of their stratigraphic provenance [27].
After 2350 cal BP, the use of green obsidian across the Otway Sea and Strait of Magellan was resumed, with marked techno-economic differences. For example, Levallois complex débitage methods that involve predetermined extractions are present in the studied assemblages, though not using obsidian as raw material. At Pizzulic 4 (860 to 840 cal BP), 99% of the evidence indicates green obsidian, although the evidence is mainly composed of flakes and small debris. Tool matrices are smaller, and the intended production is that of triangular stemmed projectile points, which only occasionally show bifacial thinning [33]. At Punta Santa Ana 3 (860 to 620 cal BP), although this is a very rich lithic assemblage (Figure 6b), green obsidian comprises only 5.5% of all artifacts (Figure 6g), including a triangular stemmed projectile point [81,87]. Technology before and after the discontinuity has some varying outstanding characteristics. In addition to the differences in the morphology of the intended final products (i.e., stemmed and unstemmed projectile points), the use of bifacial façonnage varied considerably. While the early methods included stages of soft percussion reduction, the later bifacial shaping did not include such stages, and flake blanks were mainly shaped using pressure. Morphological and metric characteristics of triangular late-stemmed projectile points have been associated with the technology involved in historic and ethnographic bow and arrow weapons [89].

5. Discussion

With respect to the spatial distribution, these two obsidians—Chaitén Volcano and Seno Otway—exhibit decoupled behaviors. None of the assemblages in which they occur shares both types, excluding those exceptional records in the Monte León National Park and in the Pali Aike region. In such cases, these toolstones are infrequent, given that they represent very distant occurrences. They should be regarded as exceptional, particularly in the case of Chaitén Volcano obsidian, and hence not representative of recurrent procurement and use behaviors. On the one hand, the distribution of obsidian from the Chaitén Volcano along the northern part of the archipelago is discontinuous. Although knowledge thus far is preliminary, current information indicates that this toolstone partially “skipped” certain areas, such as the Guaitecas archipelago, where, despite its presence, it composed a minor proportion of the assemblages. Conversely, this exotic material reached >80% of the assemblages at sites on Chiloé Island and even higher values 360 km away from the source south of the Chonos archipelago. On the other hand, green obsidian dominates the southernmost archipelago. A larger wealth of accumulated studies indicates that its distribution is spatially continuous and shows an expected decline with incremental distance from the presumed source. This decline covaries with changes in the representation of expected artifacts close to the source (i.e., nodules, cores, and tool variability) to curated and smaller artifacts over larger distances. The observed discontinuity in the first case suggests that watercraft transport may produce not only exotic materials at great distances but also nodules and bifaces carrying large quantities of a specific toolstone at distant locations [50]. This contrasts with the pattern of constant decline, which is more suitable in continuous landscapes than in more fragmented seascapes.
From 42° to 52° S, the archipelago is bounded to the east by dense forests, abrupt and high mountains, and two ice fields that acted together as a biogeographical barrier, exerting a major influence on maritime movement along the western archipelago. No gray obsidian from Chaitén Volcano has crossed these barriers. On the other hand, south of 52° S, there is a relatively high degree of continuity with the continental part of Patagonia and with larger islands, such as Tierra del Fuego (c. 48,000 km2). This geographical difference promoted elevated degrees of distribution and transport of green obsidian from the archipelago inland, which were possibly incentivized by the higher population in this area with respect to the Chonos archipelago.
Conversely, regarding chronology, both obsidian types appeared during the Middle Holocene and were in use at all “early” studied localities at some point between 7000 and 6000 cal BP. This remarkable synchronicity is attributable to the penecontemporary development of maritime lifeways. A series of nuclei is proposed for the point of origin of this process, and if these nuclei arose independently [22], the fact remains that the process was very widespread over a relatively short period of time. One major feature is the disappearance of green obsidian in most records of southernmost Patagonia in the period between 4850 and 2350 cal BP. Was the knowledge of the location of the source lost in time? Or was this a deliberate procurement decision related to synchronic techno-economic changes? Probably not, given the high quality of this toolstone and its pervasive use over previous millennia. Therefore, was this marked decline promoted by the temporary vanishing of the source? This seems to be a more likely alternative, particularly considering that this is also the case for this source nowadays. The interplay between Holocene sea-level rise, isostatic rebound, and tectonic movements operating at smaller spatial scales produces combined effects that model the islands of the Patagonian Archipelago and are particularly strong in the transformation of near-shore records. As for the northern part of the archipelago, given that Chaitén Volcano obsidian sites have been less studied, it is not possible to assess potential in the procurement of this source over time.
In terms of quality and utilization, both obsidians were highly ranked toolstones for the societies that used them. Their knapping quality differs, but they were both subjected to curated behaviors (e.g., bifacial shaping), transported over long distances, and knapped in patterned ways. In the case of the Chaitén Volcano obsidian, façonnage was the unique method used for tool manufacturing. However, the recorded specimens showed a major variation in size, which suggests that while the main intended product was bifacial points, some nodules were shaped into lanceolate bifacial cores that were suitable for carrying clean and already tested raw material (Figure 5B). On the other hand, green obsidian from the Otway Sea was knapped with both façonnage and débitage methods. Formal tool morphology (i.e., projectile points) varied across time, as did the chaînes operatoires. Relatively more sophisticated technology was in place during the “early” period, while more simplification is characteristic of later assemblages. However, the dominant bifacial tool morphology—lanceolate points—over the period with no obsidian in the southern archipelago was precisely the one with the highest resemblance to the bifacial points manufactured in the Chaitén Volcano obsidian from the northern archipelago. Is this formal similarity to some point also part of the different spatial trajectories in the use of these two lithic raw materials?

6. Conclusions

This study addressed the set of behaviors involved in the use of two sourced high-quality obsidians that were key raw materials for the canoer societies in the western archipelago of Patagonia. The obsidian sourced to the Chaitén Volcano appears discontinuously across the northern archipelago, while the Seno Otway obsidian follows a continuous spatial decline in the southernmost regions. These differences suggest watercraft transport played a major role in the movement of goods and people. While geographic barriers constrained Chaitén obsidian’s expansion eastward, green obsidian artifacts from the Otway Sea reached inland regions, likely driven by higher population densities. Chronologically, the use of both obsidians emerged during the Middle Holocene, coeval with the widespread adoption of maritime lifeways. However, the disappearance of green obsidian from Southern Patagonian archaeological records for 2.5 millennia during the Late Holocene, likely due to natural changes affecting the source, remains a major research issue to address. Though both obsidians were highly valued, they were processed differently; Chaitén obsidian was exclusively shaped into bifacial tools, while Seno Otway green obsidian was worked using both façonnage and débitage techniques, further suggesting that regional cultural trends shaped the way in which technological treatment was conceived. The results and implications of this study have relevance to the understanding of the management of high-quality resources by highly mobile societies, which have remained as such throughout their whole history.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/quat8030039/s1, Table S1: Trace element composition (in ppm) of obsidian samples discussed in the paper, geographical reference, field, and laboratory information.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.M.; methodology, C.M., F.M. and C.R.S.; validation, C.M., F.M. and C.R.S.; formal analysis, C.M., F.M. and C.R.S.; investigation, C.M., F.M., O.R., M.S.R., A.N.-D. and C.R.S.; resources, C.M., F.M. and C.R.S.; data curation, C.M., F.M. and C.R.S.; writing—original draft preparation, C.M. and F.M.; writing—review and editing, C.M., F.M., O.R., M.S.R., A.N.-D. and C.R.S.; visualization, C.M. and F.M.; funding acquisition, F.M., O.R. and A.N.-D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

ANID Regional R20F0002, ANID FONDECYT 1210045, ANID FONDECYT 1211976, ANID FONDECYT 1190984, CHIC ANID/BASAL FB210018, and BIP 40047179-0 (Gobierno Regional de Aisén) grants.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article. All archaeological specimens in this study are curated in the Museo Regional de Aysén (Km 3 camino a Coyhaique Alto, Coyhaique, Chile) or in the Instituto de la Patagonia-Universidad de Magallanes (Av. Pdte. Manuel Bulnes 01890, Punta Arenas, Chile). They are accessible upon reasonable requests to the institutional curators.

Acknowledgments

Javier Carranza helped with the photographs shown in Figure 5.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Gallotti, R.; Mussi, M. The unknown Oldowan: ~1.7-million-year-old standardized obsidian small tools from garba IV, Melka Kunture, Ethiopia. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0145101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Takakura, J. Rethinking the disappearance of microblade technology in the terminal pleistocene of Hokkaido, Northern Japan: Looking at archaeological and palaeoenvironmental evidence. Quaternary 2020, 3, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Tykot, R.H. Obsidian in prehistory. In Encyclopedia of Glass Science, Technology, History, and Culture; Richet, P., Ed.; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2021; pp. 1237–1248. [Google Scholar]
  4. Muşkara, Ü.; Konak, A. Characterization of the obsidian used in the chipped stone industry in Kendale Hecala. Quaternary 2022, 5, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kuzmin, Y.V.; Oppenheimer, C.; Renfrew, C. Global perspectives on obsidian studies in archaeology. Quat. Int. 2020, 542, 41–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kasztovszky, Z.; Maróti, B.; Harsányi, I.; Párkányi, D.; Szilágyi, V. A comparative study of PGAA and portable XRF used for non-destructive provenancing archaeological obsidian. Quat. Int. 2018, 468, 179–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Suda, Y.; Tsuchiya, M.; Hashizume, J.; Oyokawa, M. Chemical discrimination of obsidian sources in the Kirigamine area and provenance analysis of obsidian artifacts from the Hiroppara prehistoric sites I and II, central Japan. Quat. Int. 2018, 468, 72–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Glascock, M.D. Obsidian Provenance Research in the Americas. Accounts Chem. Res. 2002, 35, 611–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Belardi, J.B.; Cassiodoro, G.; Goñi, R.; Glascock, M.D.; Súnico, A. Siltstone from Southern Patagonia: Its Source and Archaeological Artifact Distribution in Santa Cruz Province, Argentina. Geoarchaeology 2015, 30, 223–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ditchfield, K.; Huntley, J.; Ward, I.; Webb, J.; Doelman, T.; Kurpiel, R. Sourcing stone and ochre artifacts: A review of why it matters in Australia (and beyond). In Sourcing Archeological Lithic Assemblages: New Perspectives and Integrated Approaches; Speer, C., Parish, R.M., Barrientos, G., Eds.; University of Utah Press: Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 2023; pp. 52–67. [Google Scholar]
  11. Jesse, F.; Hollerbach, R.; Schröder, A.; Wennrich, V. The signature of the stones: pXRF studies on prehistoric axes from the Eastern Sahara. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 2023, 49, 104028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Pitulko, V.V.; Kuzmin, Y.V.; Glascock, M.D.; Pavlova, E.Y.; Grebennikov, A.V. ‘They came from the ends of the earth’: Long-distance exchange of obsidian in the High Arctic during the Early Holocene. Antiquity 2019, 93, 28–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Weisler, M.; Clague, D. Characterization of archaeological volcanic glass from oceania: The utility of three techniques. In Archaeological Obsidian Studies: Method and Theory; Shackley, M.S., Ed.; Plenum Press: New York, NY, USA, 1998; pp. 103–128. [Google Scholar]
  14. Bednarik, R.G. Seafaring in the Pleistocene. Camb. Archaeol. J. 2003, 13, 41–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Paunero, R. The Cerro Tres Tetas (C3T) locality in the Central Plateau of Santa Cruz Province, Patagonia, Argentina. In Where the South Winds Blow. Ancient Evidence of Paleo South Americans; Miotti, L., Salemme, M., Flegenheimer, N., Eds.; Center for the Study of the First Americans: College Station, TX, USA, 2003; pp. 133–140. [Google Scholar]
  16. Stern, C.R. Obsidian sources and distribution in Patagonia, southernmost South America. Quat. Int. 2018, 468, 190–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Espinosa, S.; Goñi, R. Viven: Una fuente de obsidiana en la provincia de Santa Cruz. In Soplando en el Viento, Actas de Las III Jornadas de Arqueología de la Patagonia; Belardi, J.B., Fernández, P.M., Goñi, R., Guráieb, A.G., Nigris, M.D., Eds.; Instituto Nacional de Antropología y Pensamiento Latinoamericano: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 1999; pp. 177–188. [Google Scholar]
  18. Pallo, M.C.; Borrero, L.A. Intercambio o movilidad? Una evaluación sobre el uso de escalas de análisis espaciales y curvas de declinación en Patagonia Centro-Meridional (Argentina). Lat. Am. Antiq. 2015, 26, 287–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. San Román, M.; Reyes, O.; Morello, F.; Torres, J. Archaeology of maritime hunter-gatherers from Southernmost Patagonia, South America: Discussing timing, changes and cultural traditions during the holocene. In Marine Ventures: Archaeological Perspectives on Human–Sea Relations; Bjerck, H.B., Breivik, H.M., Fretheim, S.E., Piana, E.L., Skar, B., Tivoli, A.M., Zangrando, A.F., Eds.; Equinox eBooks Publishing: London, UK, 2016; pp. 157–174. [Google Scholar]
  20. Lomnitz, C. Major earthquakes and tsunamis in Chile during the period 1535 to 1955. Geol. Rundsch. 1970, 59, 938–960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. McCulloch, R.D.; Bentley, M.J.; Tipping, R.M.; Clapperton, C.M. Evidence for late-glacial ice dammed lakes in the central strait of Magellan and Bahía Inútil, southernmost South America. Geogr. Ann. Phys. Geogr. 2005, 87, 335–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Orquera, L.A.; Legoupil, D.; Piana, E.L. Littoral adaptation at the southern end of South America. Quat. Int. 2011, 239, 61–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Cooper, J. The Chono. In Handbook of South American Indians: The Marginal Tribes; Steward, J., Ed.; Smithsonian Institution: Washington, DC, USA, 1946; Volume 1, pp. 47–54. [Google Scholar]
  24. Darwin, C. The Voyage of the Beagle; Barnes and Noble: New York, NY, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  25. Emperaire, J. Los Nómades del Mar; Ediciones de la Universidad de Chile: Santiago, Chile, 1963. [Google Scholar]
  26. Gusinde, M. Die Feuerland-Indianer: Die Yamana; Fines Mundi GmbH Saarbrücken: Mödling, Austria, 1937. [Google Scholar]
  27. Legoupil, D. Cazadores-Recolectores de Ponsonby (Patagonia Austral) y Su Paleoambiente Desde VI al III Milenio A.C.; Magallania: Punta Arenas, Chile, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  28. Legoupil, D.; Fontugne, M. El poblamiento marítimo en los archipiélagos de Patagonia: Núcleos antiguos y dispersión reciente. An. Inst. Patagon. Ser. Cienc. Humanas 1997, 25, 75–87. [Google Scholar]
  29. Piana, E.L.; Zangrando, A.F.; Orquera, L.A. Early occupations in Tierra del Fuego and the evidence from layer S at the Imiwaia I site (Beagle channel, Argentina). In Southbound Late Pleistocene Peopling of Latin America; Miotti, L., Salemme, M., Flegenheimer, N., Goebel, T., Eds.; Center for the Study of the First Americans: College Station, TX, USA, 2012; pp. 171–175. [Google Scholar]
  30. Reyes, O.; Méndez, C.; San Román, M. Cronología de la ocupación humana en los canales septentrionales de Patagonia Occidental, Chile. Intersecc. Antropol. 2019, 20, 87–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Piana, E.L.; Orquera, L.A. Shellmidden formation at the Beagle channel (Tierra del Fuego, Argentine). In Monumental Questions: Prehistoric Megaliths, Mounds and Enclosures; Calado, D., Baldía, M., Boulanger, M., Eds.; Archaeopress: Oxford, UK, 2010; pp. 263–271. [Google Scholar]
  32. Reyes, O.; Tessone, A.; Belmar, C.; San Román, M.; Morello, F.; Moraga, M.; Urbina, X. Cambios y continuidades en la subsistencia e interacción entre sociedades cazadoras-recolectoras marinas y agro-alfareras durante el Holoceno tardío en el Archipiélago Septentrional), Patagonia, Chile. Lat. Am. Antiq. 2023, 34, 497–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. San Román, M. Sitios arqueológicos de isla Englefield, mar de Otway: Nuevas evidencias de discontinuidad cultural en el proceso de poblamiento marítimo de Patagonia meridional. In Tendencias Teórico-Metodológicas y Casos de Estudio en la Arqueología de la Patagonia; Zangrando, A.F., Barberena, R., Gil, A., Neme, G., Giardina, M., Luna, L., Otaola, C., Paulides, S., Salgán, L., Tivoli, A., Eds.; Museo de Historia Natural de San Rafael-Sociedad Argentina de Antropología-Instituto Nacional de Antropología y Pensamiento Latinoamericano: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2013; pp. 523–534. [Google Scholar]
  34. Moreno, P.I.; Méndez, C.; Henríquez, C.A.; Fercovic, E.I.; Videla, J.; Reyes, O.; Villacís, L.A.; Villa-Martínez, R.; Alloway, B.V. Fires and rates of change in the temperate rainforests of northwestern Patagonia since ∼18 ka. Quat. Sci. Rev. 2023, 300, 107899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zangrando, A.F.J.; Tivoli, A.M.; Ponce, J.F.; Alunni, D.V.; Ropero, M.D.C.F.; Martinoli, M.P. Colonización humana de Tierra del Fuego: Contextos arqueológicos pretransgresivos en la costa norte del canal Beagle. Chungara Rev. Antropol. Chil. 2022, 54, 557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ortiz-Troncoso, O. Los yacimientos de Punta Santa Ana y Bahía Buena (Patagonia austral). Excavaciones y fechados radiocarbónicos. An. Inst. Patagon. Ser. Cienc. Humanas 1975, 7, 93–122. [Google Scholar]
  37. Ortiz-Troncoso, O. Ancestros de los pescadores australes (9000 a. C. a ca. 1500 d. C.). In Culturas de Chile Prehistoria. Desde sus Orígenes Hasta los Albores de la Conquista; Hidalgo, J., Schiappacasse, V., Niemeyer, H., Aldunate, C., Solimano, I., Eds.; Andrés Bello: Santiago, Chile, 1989; pp. 367–379. [Google Scholar]
  38. Porter, C. GUA-010, un sitio costero erosionado en una zona sísmica activa. In Actas del XII Congreso Nacional de Arqueología Chilena; Sociedad Chilena de Arqueología, Ed.; Boletín del Museo Regional de la Araucanía: Temuco, Chile, 1993; Volume 1, pp. 81–88. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ramos, V.A. Seismic ridge subduction and topography: Foreland deformation in the Patagonian Andes. Tectonophysics 2005, 399, 73–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Naranjo, J.A.; Stern, C.R. Holocene tephrochronology of the southernmost part (42°30′-45°S) of the Andean Southern Volcanic Zone. Rev. Geol. Chile 2004, 31, 224–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Davies, B.J.; Darvill, C.M.; Lovell, H.; Bendle, J.M.; Dowdeswell, J.A.; Fabel, D.; García, J.L.; Geiger, A.; Glasser, N.F.; Gheorghiu, D.M.; et al. The evolution of the Patagonian Ice Sheet from 35 ka to the present day (PATICE). Earth Sci. Rev. 2020, 204, 103152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Isla, F.I. Holocene sea-level fluctuation in the southern hemisphere. Quat. Sci. Rev. 1989, 8, 359–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Lambeck, K.; Esat, T.M.; Potter, E.K. Links between climate and sea levels for the past three million years. Nature 2002, 419, 199–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. McCulloch, R.D.; Blaikie, J.; Jacob, B.; Mansilla, C.A.; Morello, F.; De Pol-Holz, R.; San Román, M.; Tisdall, E.; Torres, J. Late glacial and Holocene climate variability, southernmost Patagonia. Quat. Sci. Rev. 2020, 229, 106131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Moreno, P.I.; Denton, G.H.; Moreno, H.; Lowell, T.V.; Putnam, A.E.; Kaplan, M.R. Radiocarbon chronology of the last glacial maximum and its termination in northwestern Patagonia. Quat. Sci. Rev. 2015, 122, 233–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Garreaud, R.D. The Andes climate and weather. Adv. Geosci. 2009, 22, 3–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Luebert, F.; Pliscoff, P. Sinopsis Bioclimática y Vegetacional de Chile; Editorial Universitaria: Santiago, Chile, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  48. Mansilla, C.A.; McCulloch, R.D.; Morello, F. The vulnerability of the Nothofagus forest-steppe ecotone to climate change: Palaeoecological evidence from Tierra del Fuego (~53° S). Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 2018, 508, 59–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Morello Repetto, F.; San Román Bontes, M.; Iglesias, A.P.; Stern, C. Nuevos antecedentes para una discusión arqueológica en torno a la obsidiana verde en Patagonia Meridional. An. Inst. Patagon. Ser. Cienc. Humanas 2001, 29, 129–148. [Google Scholar]
  50. Reyes, O. The Settlement of the Chonos Archipelago, Western Patagonia, Chile; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  51. San Román, M.; Prieto, A. (Dis)continuidad del uso de obsidiana verde entre poblaciones de adaptación marítima del mar de Otway y estrecho de Magallanes. In Contra Viento y Marea. Arqueología de Patagonia; Civalero, M.T., Fernández, P.M., Guráieb, A.G., Eds.; Instituto Nacional de Antropología y Pensamiento Latinoamericano-Sociedad Argentina de Antropología: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2004; pp. 571–580. [Google Scholar]
  52. Méndez, C.; Stern, C.R.; Delaunay, A.N.; Reyes, O.; Gutiérrez, F.; Mena, F. Spatial and temporal distributions of exotic and local obsidians in Central Western Patagonia, southernmost South America. Quat. Int. 2018, 468, 155–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Morello, F.; Stern, C.; San Román, M. Obsidiana verde en Tierra del Fuego y Patagonia: Caracterización, distribución y problemáticas culturales a lo largo del Holoceno. Intersecc. Antropol. 2015, 16, 139–153. [Google Scholar]
  54. Saadat, S.; Stern, C.R. Petrochemistry and genesis of olivine basalts from small monogenetic parasitic cones of Bazman stratovolcano, Makran arc, southeastern Iran. Lithos 2011, 125, 607–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Stern, C.R.; Navarro, X.; Muñoz, J. Obsidiana gris translúcida del volcán Chaitén en los sitios arqueológicos de Quilo (Isla Grande de Chiloé) y Chanchán (X Región), Chile, y obsidiana del Mioceno en Chiloé. An. Inst. Patagon. Ser. Cienc. Humanas 2002, 30, 167–174. [Google Scholar]
  56. Dilaria, S.; Ricci, G.; Secco, M.; Beltrame, C.; Costa, E.; Giovanardi, T.; Bonetto, J.; Artioli, G. Vitruvian binders in Venice: First evidence of Phlegraean pozzolans in an underwater Roman construction in the Venice Lagoon. PLoS ONE 2024, 19, e0313917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Santi, P.; Renzulli, A.; Bell, M. The volcanic millstones from the archaeological site of Morgantina (Sicily): Provenance and evolution of the milling techniques in the Mediterranean area. Archaeometry 2015, 57, 803–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Amigo, Á.; Lara, L.E.; Smith, V.C. Holocene record of large explosive eruptions from Chaitén and Michinmahuida Volcanoes, Chile. Andean Geol. 2013, 40, 227–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Sierralta Navarro, S.G.; Cortés Rodríguez, C.; Rojas Castillo, C.; Urbina Araya, S. Obsidiana riolítica del Chaitén: La fuente y su circulación en los Archipiélagos Patagónicos Septentrionales (41–47° S). Intersecc. Antropol. 2025, 26, 207–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Stern, C.R. Obsidian in southern Patagonia: Review of the current information. In Contra Viento y Marea Arqueología de Patagonia; Civalero, M.T., Fernandez, M.P., Guraieb, G., Eds.; Instituto Nacional de Antropología y Pensamiento Latinoamericano: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2004; pp. 167–176. [Google Scholar]
  61. Fernández, M.V.; Leal, P.R. Determining the provenance of obsidian in Southern Patagonia using optical properties. Archaeometry 2014, 56, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Labarca, R.; Calás, E.; Letelier, J.; Alloway, B.; Holmberg, K. Arqueología en el Morro Vilcún (Comuna de Chaitén, Región de Los Lagos, Chile): Síntesis y Perspectivas. Bol. Soc. Chil. Arqueol. 2021, 499–520. [Google Scholar]
  63. Pino, M.; Navarro, R.X. Geoarqueología del sitio arcaico Chan-Chan 18, costa de Valdivia: Discriminación de ambientes de ocupación humana y su relación con la transgresión marina del Holoceno Medio. Rev. Geol. Chile 2005, 32, 59–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Rebolledo, S.; Delgado, A.; Kelly, P.; Sierralta, S.; Bravo, G.; Hernández, D.; Cortés, C. Chepu 005: Aproximaciones desde el análisis de colecciones a las comunidades cazadoras recolectoras de Chiloé. Bol. Soc. Chil. Arqueol. 2021, 465–497. [Google Scholar]
  65. Reyes, O.; Belmar, C.; San Román, M.; Morello, F.; Urbina, X. Avances en la secuencia cronológica del mar interior de Chiloé, Patagonia occidental: Sitios arqueológicos San Juan 1, Tauco 1 y 2. Magallania 2020, 48, 173–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Sierralta Navarro, S.; Delgado Orellana, A.; Rebolledo Canales, S.; Cortés Rodríguez, C.; Carrión Méndez, H.; Hernández Castillo, D.; González Rojas, R.; Dávila Contreras, C.; Inostrosa Rojas, H.; Roa Solís, C. Poblamiento litoral de los archipiélagos patagónicos septentrionales: Cronología y estratigrafía de Puente Quilo-1, Isla Grande de Chiloé, Chile. Lat. Am. Antiq. 2024, 35, 72–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Reyes, O.; Román, M.S.; Morello, F. Searching for maritime hunter-gatherer archaeological record in the shifting shorelines of the south Pacific coast (Chonos and Guaitecas archipelago, Chile). In Marine Ventures: Archaeological Perspectives on Human–Sea Relations; Bjerck, H.B., Breivik, H.M., Fretheim, S.E., Piana, E.L., Skar, B., Tivoli, A.M., Zangrando, A.F., Eds.; Equinox eBooks Publishing: London, UK, 2016; pp. 137–151. [Google Scholar]
  68. Reyes, O.; Méndez, C.; San Roman, M.; Cardenas, P.; Velasquez, H.; Trejo, V.; Morello, F.; Stern, C. Seno Gala 1: Nuevos resultados en la arqueología de los canales septentrionales (~44° S, región de Aisén, Chile). Magallania 2007, 35, 105–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Campbell, R.; Stern, C.R.; Peñaloza, Á. Obsidian in archaeological sites on Mocha Island, southern Chile: Implications of its provenience. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 2017, 13, 617–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Stern, C.R.; Caracotche, S.; Cruz, I.; Charlin, J. Obsidiana gris porfírica calco-alcalina del volcán Chaitén en sitios arqueológicos al sur del río Santa Cruz, Patagonoa meridional. Magallania 2012, 40, 137–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Caracotche, M.S.; Cruz, I.; Espinosa, S.; Marina, F.C.; Belardi, J.B. Rescate arqueológico en el Parque Nacional Monte León (Santa Cruz, Argentina). Magallania 2005, 33, 143–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Charlin, J. Aprovisionamiento, circulación y explotación de obsidianas durante el Holoceno Tardío en Pali Aike (provincia de Santa Cruz). Relac. Soc. Argent. Antropol. 2009, 34, 53–74. [Google Scholar]
  73. Caracotche, M.S.; Muñoz, A.S.; Mastrángelo, D.S.C.; Lobbia, P.A. Yegua quemada 3: Un depósito arqueológico del holoceno medio en el Parque Nacional Monte León (Patagonia, Argentina). Magallania 2017, 45, 165–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Schidlowsky, V. Les Premiers Chasseurs Maritimes et les Chasseurs Terrestres de Patagonie Australe; BAR International Series: Oxford, NY, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  75. Huidobro, C. Métodos de Reducción Bifacial del Norte de Tierra del Fuego Durante el Holoceno Medio y Tardío; Universidad de Chile: Santiago, Chile, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  76. Oría, J.; Salemme, M.C.; Fernando, C.S. Obsidiana verde en la Estepa Fueguina: Un hallazgo en Amalia 4. Magallania 2010, 38, 231–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Orquera, L.A.; Piana, E.L. Sea nomads of the Beagle channel in southernmost South America: Over six thousand years of coastal adaptation and stability. J. Isl. Coast. Archaeol. 2009, 4, 61–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Álvarez, M. La explotación de recursos líticos en las ocupaciones tempranas del canal Beagle: El caso de Túnel I. In Desde el País de los Gigantes Perspectivas Arqueologicas en Patagonia; Belardi, J.B., Marina, F.C., Espinosa, S., Eds.; Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral: Río Gallegos, Argentina, 2000; pp. 73–85. [Google Scholar]
  79. Legoupil, D. El archipiélago del Cabo de Hornos y la costa sur de la isla Navarino: Poblamiento y modelos económicos. An. Inst. Patagon. Ser. Cienc. Humanas 1993, 22, 101–121. [Google Scholar]
  80. Bird, J. Viajes y Arqueología en Chile Austral; Ediciones de la Universidad de Magallanes: Punta Arenas, Chile, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  81. Morello, F. L’industrie Lithique de Part et d’autre du Détroit de Magellan en Patagonie et Terre de Feu: Dynamiques Techno-Culturelles du Peuplement Durant l’Holocene; Université Paris 1 Pantheón Sorbonne: Paris, France, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  82. Prieto, A.; Stern, C.R.; Estévez, J.E. The peopling of the Fuego-Patagonian fjords by littoral hunter–gatherers after the mid-Holocene H1 eruption of Hudson Volcano. Quat. Int. 2013, 317, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Inizan, M.L.; Reduron, M.; Roche, H.; Tixier, J. Technology and Terminology of Knapped Stone (J. Féblot-Augustins, Trans.); Cercle de Recherches et d’Études Préhistoriques: Nantere, France, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  84. Huidobro, C. Points or knives? The multiple sides of bifaces in the Bahía Colorada Site, Englefield Island, Southernmost Patagonia. In Beyond Use-Wear Traces. Going from Tools to People by Means of Archaeological Wear and Residue Analyses; Beyries, S., Hamon, C., Maigrot, Y., Eds.; Sidestone Press: Leiden, Netherlands, 2021; pp. 281–292. [Google Scholar]
  85. Legoupil, D. Los Cazadores de Mamíferos Marinos Tempranos de la Isla Englefield (Patagonia Austral); Universidad de Magallanes: Punta Arenas, Chile, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  86. Schidlowsky, V. Comportements Techno-Économiques et Identité Culturelle des Premiers Chasseurs Maritimes et des Chasseurs Terrestres de Patagonie Australe; Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne: Paris, France, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  87. Morello, F.; Torres, J.; Martínez, I.; Rodríguez, K.; Arroyo-Kalin, M.; French, C.; Sierpe, V.; San Román, M. Arqueología de la Punta Santa Ana: Recontrucción de secuencias de ocupación de cazadores-recolectores marinos del Estrecho de Magallanes, Patagonia Austral, Chile. Magallania 2012, 40, 129–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Ortiz-Troncoso, O. Aspectos arqueológicos de la península de Brunswick. An. Inst. Patagon. Ser. Cienc. Humanas 1973, 4, 109–130. [Google Scholar]
  89. Pigeot, N. Les techniques de taille. In Punta Baja Ethno-Archéologie dans les Archipels de Patagonie: Les Nomads Marins de Punta Baja; Legoupil, D., Ed.; Mémoire de l’ADPF, Recherches sur les Civilisations: Paris, France, 1989; pp. 130–151. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Map of Patagonia showing the western archipelago obsidian sources (solid stars: coastal; empty stars: continental: S. Sacanana; T/SN. Telsen-Sierra Negra; PDA. Pampa del Asador; CB. Cordillera Baguales), main areas and archaeological localities (numbers: groups and specific sites mentioned in the paper): 1. Quilo and Chepu; 2. San Juan; 3. Guaitecas; 4. Seno Gala; 5. Traiguén Island; 6. Goñi Island; 7. Bahía Rebolledo; 8. Ponsonby; 9. Englefield, Bahía Colorada, and Pizzulic; 10. Kilómetro 44, Bahía Buena, and Punta Santa Ana; 11. Offing; 12. Marazzi; 13. Amalia; 14. Túnel; 15. Charles Fuhr; 16. Yegua Quemada 3, Cabeza de León, and Zona Norte; 17. Los Frailes 2; 18. Fell’s Cave; 19. Pali Aike. The Chan Chan site is located along the Pacific coast, ~170 km to the northern limit of the figure area.
Figure 1. Map of Patagonia showing the western archipelago obsidian sources (solid stars: coastal; empty stars: continental: S. Sacanana; T/SN. Telsen-Sierra Negra; PDA. Pampa del Asador; CB. Cordillera Baguales), main areas and archaeological localities (numbers: groups and specific sites mentioned in the paper): 1. Quilo and Chepu; 2. San Juan; 3. Guaitecas; 4. Seno Gala; 5. Traiguén Island; 6. Goñi Island; 7. Bahía Rebolledo; 8. Ponsonby; 9. Englefield, Bahía Colorada, and Pizzulic; 10. Kilómetro 44, Bahía Buena, and Punta Santa Ana; 11. Offing; 12. Marazzi; 13. Amalia; 14. Túnel; 15. Charles Fuhr; 16. Yegua Quemada 3, Cabeza de León, and Zona Norte; 17. Los Frailes 2; 18. Fell’s Cave; 19. Pali Aike. The Chan Chan site is located along the Pacific coast, ~170 km to the northern limit of the figure area.
Quaternary 08 00039 g001
Figure 4. Images of selected sites of the Patagonian archipelago with obsidian evidence: (A) San Juan 1; (B) GUA-010 Terraza; (C) Seno Gala 1 intertidal concentration of lithic material; (D) Pizzulic 2; (E) Offing 2 locus 2b; (F) Punta Santa Ana 3.
Figure 4. Images of selected sites of the Patagonian archipelago with obsidian evidence: (A) San Juan 1; (B) GUA-010 Terraza; (C) Seno Gala 1 intertidal concentration of lithic material; (D) Pizzulic 2; (E) Offing 2 locus 2b; (F) Punta Santa Ana 3.
Quaternary 08 00039 g004
Figure 5. Bifacial artifacts of Chaitén obsidian: (A) bifacial point (GUA-010 Terraza) and (B) large biface (site origin is unknown).
Figure 5. Bifacial artifacts of Chaitén obsidian: (A) bifacial point (GUA-010 Terraza) and (B) large biface (site origin is unknown).
Quaternary 08 00039 g005
Figure 6. Seno Otway green obsidian artifacts and diacritic schemes (modified from Morello [81]): (a) baguettes from Otway Sea sites; (b) refitted blade tendency core from Punta Santa Ana 3; (c) Levallois core reusing blade volume from Bahía Colorada; (d) unstemmed projectile points from Pizzulic 2; (e,f) “simplified” Levallois cores from Bahía Colorada; (g) end scraper and side scraper on retouched flakes from Punta Santa Ana 3. Artifact codes are shown whenever appropriate.
Figure 6. Seno Otway green obsidian artifacts and diacritic schemes (modified from Morello [81]): (a) baguettes from Otway Sea sites; (b) refitted blade tendency core from Punta Santa Ana 3; (c) Levallois core reusing blade volume from Bahía Colorada; (d) unstemmed projectile points from Pizzulic 2; (e,f) “simplified” Levallois cores from Bahía Colorada; (g) end scraper and side scraper on retouched flakes from Punta Santa Ana 3. Artifact codes are shown whenever appropriate.
Quaternary 08 00039 g006
Table 2. Studied sites with records (or absence) of obsidian from Chaitén Volcano and Seno Otway sources in Patagonia, indicating the coast where they belong (or mainland), broad chronological range, number of obsidian artifacts, and their proportion in the recorded assemblages. Sites are ordered by latitude.
Table 2. Studied sites with records (or absence) of obsidian from Chaitén Volcano and Seno Otway sources in Patagonia, indicating the coast where they belong (or mainland), broad chronological range, number of obsidian artifacts, and their proportion in the recorded assemblages. Sites are ordered by latitude.
OceanLocalitySiteLatitudeAge (cal BP)Obsidian TypeN. Obsidian Artifacts% Obsidian
PacificValdiviaChan Chan39°31′ S6420–6250Chaitén V.N/DN/D
PacificChiloé IslandPuente Quilo 1 SU 1–241°52′ S5400–4200Chaitén V.Present4.0%
PacificChiloé IslandPuente Quilo 1 SU 3–641°52′ S4200–2900Chaitén V.Present4.3%
PacificChiloé IslandChepu 00542°03′ S6260–1355Chaitén V.N/D2.7–5.0%
PacificChiloé IslandSan Juan 142°20′ S5840–480Chaitén V.N/D81.0%
PacificSanta Bárbara, ChaiténCueva Alta Morro Vilcún42°50′ S2150–2000Chaitén V.26.0%
PacificSanta Bárbara, ChaiténCueva Grande Morro Vilcún42°50′ S730–320None00.0%
PacificSanta Bárbara, ChaiténCueva Mediana Morro Vilcún42°50′ S280–160None00.0%
PacificGuaitecas ArchipelagoAlero Low43°50′ S2000–350None00.0%
PacificGuaitecas ArchipelagoGUA-010 Terraza 43°51′ S6210–5990Chaitén V.N/D7.0%
PacificGuaitecas ArchipelagoGran Guaiteca 143°51′ S720–530Chaitén V.2N/D
PacificGuaitecas ArchipelagoGran Guaiteca 2 Terraza43°51′ S4430–4240Chaitén V.2N/D
PacificGuaitecas ArchipelagoIsla Solitaria43°52′ S630–530Chaitén V.N/DN/D
PacificGala SoundSeno Gala 1 (intertidal scatter)44°08′ SN/DChaitén V.N/DN/D
PacificTraiguén IslandNahuelquín 1 (intertidal scatter)45°28′ SN/DChaitén V.1N/D
PacificTraiguén IslandIsla Acuao 145°39′ SN/DChaitén V.225.0%
PacificTraiguén IslandPosa las Conchillas (intertidal scatter)45°40′ SN/DChaitén V.N/DN/D
PacificGoñi IslandIsla Goñi 145°55′ S4580–4420Chaitén V.32899.0%
PacificGoñi IslandIsla Goñi 2 (intertidal scatter)45°55′ SN/DChaitén V.480.0%
MainlandCharles FuhrLago Argentino50°15′ SLate HoloceneS. OtwayN/DN/D
AtlanticMonte León National ParkCabeza de León50°16′ SN/DS. Otway72.0%
AtlanticMonte León National ParkÁrea de acampe (CONC10)50°21′ SN/DS. Otway30.5%
AtlanticMonte León National ParkYegua Quemada 350°24′ S6800–6000Chaitén V. & S. Otway1 & 181.0% & 18.6%
MainlandPali AikeFell’s Cave52°05′ S13,000-recentS. Otway110.4–1.0%
MainlandPali AikePali Aike52°07′ SN/DS. Otway.110.3%
MainlandLaguna BlancaCañadon Leona52°24′ SLate HoloceneS. Otway140.3%
PacificSkyring SeaBahía Rebolledo 2952°37′ S5840–4930None00.0%
PacificRiesco IslandPonsonby52°39′ SN/DS. Otway140.5%
PacificEnglefield Island, Otway SeaBahía Colorada53°05′ S6620-6410S. Otway>400088.0%
PacificEnglefield Island, Otway SeaEnglefield53°05′ S7170–6670S. Otway>200096.0%
PacificEnglefield Island, Otway SeaPizzulic 253°05′ S6870–6760S. Otway117180.0%
PacificEnglefield Island, Otway SeaPizzulic 353°05′ S4410–4150None00.0%
PacificEnglefield Island, Otway SeaPizzulic 453°05′ S860–840S. Otway253399.0%
PacificOtway SeaCamden 253°07′ S3390–2970None00.0%
PacificOtway SeaPunta Baja53°13′ SHistoricS. Otway253795.2%
PacificTierra del Fuego IslandMarazzi 153°29′ S6600–6000S. Otway10.0%
PacificTierra del Fuego IslandMarazzi 1353°29′ S4420–4150S. Otway18.3%
PacificMagellan StraitKilómetro 44 Sur53°31′ S3240–2880None00.0%
MainlandTierra del Fuego IslandAmalia 453°36′ SN/DS. Otway10.8%
PacificMagellan StraitPunta Santa Ana 153°38′ S7320–7020S. Otway5243.0%
PacificMagellan StraitPunta Santa Ana 253°38′ S2880–2700None00.0%
PacificMagellan StraitPunta Santa Ana 353°38′ S860–620S. OtwayN/D5.4%
PacificMagellan StraitBahía Buena53°40′ S6650–5930S. OtwayN/D97.0%
PacificDawson IslandOffing 2 Locus 253°54′ S930–670S. Otway30.3%
AtlanticBeagle ChannelTúnel I (2nd component)54°55′ S7570–4870S. OtwayN/D<0.03%
PacificNavarino IslandGrandi 155°14′ S7170–6740S. Otway1N/D
Note: SU: stratigraphic unit.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Méndez, C.; Morello, F.; Reyes, O.; San Román, M.; Nuevo-Delaunay, A.; Stern, C.R. Obsidian Technology and Transport Along the Archipelago of Southernmost South America (42–56° S). Quaternary 2025, 8, 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/quat8030039

AMA Style

Méndez C, Morello F, Reyes O, San Román M, Nuevo-Delaunay A, Stern CR. Obsidian Technology and Transport Along the Archipelago of Southernmost South America (42–56° S). Quaternary. 2025; 8(3):39. https://doi.org/10.3390/quat8030039

Chicago/Turabian Style

Méndez, César, Flavia Morello, Omar Reyes, Manuel San Román, Amalia Nuevo-Delaunay, and Charles R. Stern. 2025. "Obsidian Technology and Transport Along the Archipelago of Southernmost South America (42–56° S)" Quaternary 8, no. 3: 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/quat8030039

APA Style

Méndez, C., Morello, F., Reyes, O., San Román, M., Nuevo-Delaunay, A., & Stern, C. R. (2025). Obsidian Technology and Transport Along the Archipelago of Southernmost South America (42–56° S). Quaternary, 8(3), 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/quat8030039

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop