Download Differences between written and archaeological record: The case of

Proceedings of the IV th International Congress of Ethnobotany (ICEB 2005), 2006, 397-406
Differences between written and archaeological record:
The case of plant micro remains recovered at a Northwestern
Argentinean Pipe
CAPPARELLI, Aylen1, M. Lelia POCHETTINO2, Andreoni DIEGO1,
and Rubén D. ITURRIZA3
1 Scientific Department of Archaeology, Natural Sciences Museum of La Plata, Paseo del Bosque s/n, (1900),
La Plata, Argentina
[email protected]
2 Laboratorio de Etnobotánica y Botánica Aplicada, 64 y 120, (1900) La Plata; Argentina
[email protected]
3 Municipalidad de Londres de Quimivil, (4753) Londres, Argentina
There are two main objectives of this paper. The first one is to identify fragmented and carbonised material
stuck to the inner part of the tube of a pipe from the site La Puntilla in Catamarca Province. This pipe is characteristic of the Lower Formative Period (650 BC – 500 AD) of Northwestern Argentina. Two requirements
are essential in the identification of this kind of material: 1-knowledge of those plants traditionally recorded
(in documentary evidence) to have been used in such artifacts, and 2- an appropriate methodology for the
identification of those residues that lack external morphology sufficient to allow them to be macroscopically
referred to a specific plant. By means of a wide range of chemical treatments, several plant structures were
distinguished from this pipe such as: papillae with thick walls, interlaced vegetal and animal fibers, crystals,
trichomes of different morphology and function, different kind of epidermis and starch grains. These structures were thought to belong to fragmented and carbonised leaves and ground seeds of E. coca, leaves of
Nicotiana sp., leaves of possibly Aloysia citriodora and Ilex sp., as yet unidentified glandular trichomes.
Almost no evidence of smoking plants are mentioned in written evidence from the Argentinean NW, contrasting with the archaeological record. Just a few species are mentioned from the neighboring Chaco region,
mainly belonging to the genus Nicotiana. Therefore, our second objective is to discuss the differences that
appear between archaeological and written record.
Key words: archaeological pipes, biodynamic plants, archaeobotany, written record, Northwestern Argentina
Approximately 200 pre-Hispanic pipes were recovered from NW Argentina, specifically from the altiplano of Jujuy, Salta and Catamarca, the ravines
of El Toro and Humahuaca, and the sub-Andean
border of the basin of the San Francisco river;
as well as from valleys, such as the Calchaquí,
Yocavil, Hualfín, Ambato, Abaucán, Famatina,
Andalgalá, Sanagasta and Vinchina (Fig. 1). Most
of them belong to the Lower Formative (650 BC500 AD) according to Nuñez Regueiro (1975). All
pipes recovered from NW Argentina are spread
among official and private collections (Fernández,
Ravina–, and Balesta 1999). The oldest pipes belong to the Pre-Ceramic -or Paleo- Indian- caves
from the East of the Humahuaca ravine –Inca
Cueva IC c7 and Huachichocana CHIII sites–.
From the first one, two tubular bone-carved pipes
were recovered, and dating from 2130 years BC
(Fig. 2A). From the second site, four tubular stone
carved pipes were estimated to belong to 2000
years BC (Fernández Distel 1980). It is thought
that the pipe smoking costume of the aborigines
of NW Argentina during the Pre-ceramic/PaleoIndian period may have come from the Chaco
region (Pérez Gollán and Gordillo 1993) or
from the Bolivian lowlands- western Paraguay
(Dougherty 1972) and survived for several centuries. By the Lower Formative (650 BC-500 AD)
the several pipes recovered are represented in
different cultural bodies such as Tebenquiche, La
Ciénaga, Saujil, Tafí, Condorhuasi, Las Cuevas,
and Laguna Blanca, among others (Fernández,
Ravina–, and Balesta 1999). Apparently, the large
extension of the basins of the Pilcomayo, Bermejo,
and Pasaje-Juramento rivers assisted in this diffusion (Pérez Gollán and Gordillo 1993). The
398
Proceedings of ICEB 2005
oldest pipe of this period was found in the San
Francisco culture, and was dated at 620 years BC
(Dougherty 1972). Finally, just a few pipes are represented in the archaeological record of the Upper
Formative (500-900 AD), specifically in La Aguada
culture (Fig. 2E). Interestingly, pipes were no
longer to be found in NW Argentina after the Formative Period, being replaced in the archaeological
record apparently by the “rape” complex costume
that might have come from the Tiwanaku cultures
(Pérez Gollán and Gordillo 1993). Outside the NW,
some pipes were recovered in Argentina from the
Cuyo valleys of Jachal (Punta de Barro) and Uspallata, as well as from the Mesopotamia littoral
(Fernández, Ravina–, and Balesta 1999:11) (Fig. 1).
Pipes from Argentina were made from different raw materials: bone, stone and ceramic. The
oldest ones from Inca Cueva were made from large
-apparently human- bones (two pipes) and from
stone (four pipes). Meanwhile, from 620 years BC
onwards ceramic pipes were the most abundant,
although stone pipes were also present.
Their shapes vary, ranging from tubular ones,
which present a shape of simple tubes (Fig. 2A), ethnographically common in the Mesopotamia and
Chaco-; to those called “monitor”, bearing a boatshape base in whose center raises the bowl –ethnographically common between Mapuches, Huiliches and Tehuelches, and sites of the SE Bolivia,
although it was also recovered from NW Argentina- (Fig. 2C); to the angular forms (Fig. 2B,D,E),
with a horizontal and vertical branches that ends
in a burner or bowl –more common in the East of
Brazil, N Argentina, Patagonia and Chile-. Some
ceramic pieces feature an articulate vertical branch
(Fig. 2D).
The decoration applied to these objects may
include different techniques, such as incisions,
painted, shaped or a combination of several of
them. Decoration is usually applied to the vertical
branch, to the bowl and seldom to the horizontal
branch. In the pipes bearing sculpture decoration,
anthropomorphic and zoomorphic motives prevail. The faces have very prominent noses with
well-defined nostrils and they may also present
prominent jaws. Eyes differ between almond-shape
eyes to rounded holes. They all show open mouths
with very prominent teeth (Fernández, Ravina–,
and Balesta 1999:23).
Fig. 1 Map of Argentina showing the location of La
Puntilla site, in the Catamarca Province. Major divisions
correspond to the different archaeological areas of the
country (sensu González 1977). White words show the
main valleys and ravines where pipes were recovered.
Since the beginning of the last century, the
function of these pipes has been subject to intense
debate. Some considered them as receptacles where
certain substances were burnt for ritual purposes,
therefore labeling them as “incensarios” (censers)
(Debenedetti in Bregante 1926). Others argue that
they were used to smoke such vegetal substances,
thus calling them “pipas” (pipes) (Debenedetti
1931; Márquez Miranda 1946). This second hypothesis seems to be confirmed today, because
different kinds of archaeological information indicate thus. Such is the case of the Rupestrian art’s
representation of human figures smoking a pipe
(petroglyphs) of Laguna Blanca (Catamarca), as
well as smoking animal motives –probably monkeys- found in pottery from La Ciénaga cemeteries
Capparelli et al.: Differences between written and archaeological record
399
(Catamarca). The latter displays three figures
with zoomorphic bodies and anthropomorphic
heads smoking pipes with the bowl at an angle
(Fernández, Ravina–, and Balesta 1999:33) (Fig. 3).
The hypothesis mentioned before, about the
Chaco/jungle provenience of the pipe-smoking
custom would endorse the presence in La Ciénaga
cemeteries of other traits proceeding from those
places, such as children burials in urns (Fernández,
Ravina–, and Balesta 1999:33).
With respect to the chronicles and ethnographic information, there are several sets of data from
the Mesopotamia, Chaco, and Patagonian Argentinean regions, that registered how pipes were
and are use by aborigines, and which plants are
involved in this process. However, only scarce
information is registered from NW Argentina.
This fact may be related to the absence of pipes in
the archaeological record since 900 AD onwards,
what might imply both, the possible absence of
their use during this period and the omission of
their mention by chroniclers.
The taxa mentioned by ethnographers as used
for smoking in pipes in Argentina include: Anadenanthera, Nicotiana, Dortenia brasiliensis, Berberis and Ilex (Table 1). Nevertheless there is no
Fig. 2 Different kind of pipes recovered in Argentina.
A. Pre-ceramic tubular bone pipes from the Humahuaca
ravine (Inca Cueva site). B. Lower Formative (La
Ciénaga culture) stone angular pipe from the Pipanaco
basin (La Puntilla site). C. Lower Formative monitor
stone pipe from the Pipanaco basin (Tuscamayo).
D. Angular (ang.) and angular articulated pipes (art.).
E. Upper Formative (La Aguada culture) ceramic angular
pipe from the Ambato valley (Rodeo Grande site). Fig. A
was taken from Fernández Distel (1980), while C,D, E
were taken from Fernández, Ravina–, and Balesta (1999).
Fig. 3
Incised smoking
animals –possibly
monkeys- on La
Ciénaga cemetery
pottery. Taken from
Fernández, Ravina–,
and Balesta (1999).
Wichís
Wichís
Tehuelches
Argentina Patagonia
Paraguay
Chaco Boreal Maká
Argentina Patagonia
Argentina Patagonia
Nicotiana tabacum
Nicotiana sp.
Ilex sp.
Nicotiana sp.
Berberis sp.
Nicotiana sp.
Mapuches
y Huiliches
Mapuches
y Huiliches
Tehuelches
Ranqueles
Argentina Patagonia
finak
Tabaco
yerba mate
Tabaco
calafate
Tabaco
Nicotiana sylvestris
Tabaco, yu’kwas
chaguar
Tabaco, ‘qoyik
coro, koro
Tabaco
Tabaco
Tabaco
yerba paraguaya
coro, koro
Argentina NW
Argentina Patagonia
Family
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Aquifoliaceae
Solanaceae
Berberidaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Moraceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Bromeliaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Aquifoliaceae
jataj (vilca, cebil) Fabaceae
Common name
Dortenia brasiliensis Higuerilla
Nicotiana langsdorffi
Nicotiana tabacum
Several species
Nicotiana sp.
Nicotiana sp.
Nicotiana sp.
Ilex paraguariensis
Nicotiana?
Trichocline?
Nicotiana?
Trichocline?
Nicotiana tabacum
Scientific name
Anadenanthera sp.
Argentina Mesopotamia
Argentina Mesopotamia
Argentina Chaco
Argentina Chaco
Argentina Chaco
Chorotes
Matacos
Argentina Chaco
Chaco
Chaco
Chaco
Chaco
Chaco
Tobas,
Matacos
Tobas,
Matacos
Tobas
Argentina
Argentina
Argentina
Argentina
Argentina
Archaeological Ethnicity
area
Argentina Chaco
Matacos
Country
leaves
leaves
stem
leaves
bark
leaves
leaves
leaves
fibrovascular
bundle
root
leaves
leaves
root
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
root
seeds
Part used
A substitute of tobacco is
mixed with sawdust and Ilex
paraguariensis stems
mixed with Polygonum, Tessaria,
Celtis or Sapium when the
tobacco is strong or scarce
mixed with tobacco
mixed with tobacco
mixed with Calafate bark
used as a filter for
cleaning the smoke
grinded
sometimes mixed with
other species
mixed with tobacco
dried, grinded and mixed
with tobacco
mixed with flavouring bark
mixed with jataj (cebil)
mixed with “coro”
Processing
Arenas (1982:223-4)
Gancedo (1973)
Mansilla in: Pérez Gollán and
Gordillo (1993)
Musters in Gancedo (1973)
Cooper (1949)
Serrano (1934)
Suggested by the Botanist
Parodi in: Serrano (1934)
Suggested by the Botanist
Parodi in: Serrano (1934)
Cooper (1949)
Arenas (2003:343-4)
Arenas (2003:344)
Arenas (2003:343)
Califano (1976:47)
Pérez Gollán and Gordillo (1993)
Dobrizhoffer (1967)
Alanis in: Pérez Gollán and
Gordillo (1993)
Serrano (1934)
Califano (1976:47)
Sources
Table 1. Plants used in pipes in Argentina and neighboring countries according to ethnographic record (except Parodi in Serrano 1934)
400
Proceedings of ICEB 2005
Chaco Boreal
Chaco Boreal
Chaco Boreal
Chaco Boreal
Chaco
Chaco
Chaco
Chaco
Chaco
Chaco
Paraguay
Paraguay
Paraguay
Paraguay
Paraguay
Paraguay
Paraguay
Paraguay
Paraguay
Paraguay
Nicotiana rustica?
Nicotiana tabacum ?
Nicotiana undulata ?
South America
South America
Aristotelia maqui
South America
Araucanos
Chile
Eugenia pitra
Nicotiana paniculata?
Araucanos
Chile
South America
Araucanos
Chile
Anadenanthera
Araucanos
Chile
Nicotiana sp.
Deinacanthon
urbanianum
Sapium
haematospermum
Celtis pallida
Polygonum
hispidum, P. punctatum
Ruprechtia triflora
Nicotiana tabacum
Sapium
haematospermum
Celtis pallida,
C. spinosa
Tessaria
dodoneaefolia
Polygonum
paraguayense
Species
Scientific name
Chile
Araucanos
Chile
Lengua-Maskoy
Lengua-Maskoy
Lengua-Maskoy
Lengua-Maskoy
Lengua-Maskoy
Lengua-Maskoy
Maká
Maká
Maká
Maká
Archaeological Ethnia
Area
Country
cevil
maqui
Pitra
molle
Papa silvestre
tabaco
Tàmom’a
tooting
amhe
Winak yaamìt
waata
heena
setuk
qanaxataqakuk
cofok
Cahaq tituwey
Common name
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Fabaceeae
Eleocarpaceae
Mirtaceae
Anacardiaceae
Solanaceae
Bromeliaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Celtidaceae
Polygonaceae
Polygonaceae
Solanaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Celtidaceae
Asteraceae
Poligonaceae
Family
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
seeds
leaves
leaves
lleaves
fibrovascular
bundle
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
Part used
Arenas (1981:82-3)
Arenas (1981:82-3)
Arenas (1981:82-3)
Arenas (1981:82-3)
Arenas (1981:82-3)
Arenas (1981:82-3)
Arenas (1982:223-4)
Arenas (1982:223-4)
Arenas (1982:223-4)
Arenas (1982:223-4)
Sources
mixed with tobacco
mixed with tobacco
mixed with tobacco
mixed with tobacco
Cooper (1949)
Cooper (1949)
Cooper (1949)
Cooper (1949)
Dobrizhoffer (1967)
Serrano (1934)
Serrano (1934)
Serrano (1934)
Serrano (1934)
mixed with papa silvestre, Serrano (1934)
maqui, pitra or molle
used as a filter for
cleaning the smoke
mixed with tobacco
mixed with tobacco
mixed with tobacco
mixed with tobacco
mixed with Polygonum,
Celtis, Sapium when
tobacco is scarce
mixed with tobacco
mixed with tobacco
mixed with tobacco
mixed with tobacco
Processing
Table 1. (cont.) Plants used in pipes in Argentina and neighbouring countries according to ethnographic record (except Parodi in Serrano 1934)
Capparelli et al.: Differences between written and archaeological record
401
Proceedings of ICEB 2005
402
Table 2. Chemical evidence provided by NW Argentinean archaeological pipes
Artifact
Akcaloids
Species
Family
Sources
Bone pipes IC c7
N,N dimethiltryptamine (=Bufotenine)
Anadenanthera sp.
Fabaceae
Fernández Distel 1980:65
None evidence of N,N
dimethiltryptamine was found
Stone pipes CH III
The alkaloids that might have been
represented by the main peak of the
gass chromatography were:
N-Methylpavine
Norcoralydine
Tetra hydropalmanine
Xylopine
O-Methyl-caseadina Argemonine
Fumaritine
Glaucine
Hunnemannine
micro, nor macro, remains analysis of any Argentinean NW pipe as there have been performed with
other artifacts (Pochettino and Capparelli 2004),
and only the deposits of the tube of just two pipes
(the oldest ones) were selected to look at alkaloids
by gas chromatography. One of them demonstrated the presence of N,N dimethiltryptamine, which
is also known as Bufotenine, characteristical of
Anadenanthera (Table 2).
In order to contribute to the interpretation of
these elements, there are two main objectives of
this paper. The first one is to identify fragmented
and carbonized material stuck to the inner part of
the tube of a pipe from the site La Puntilla. Two
requirements are essential for the identification of
this kind of material: 1-knowledge of those plants
traditionally recorded (in documentary evidence)
to have been used in such artifacts, and 2- an
appropriate methodology for the identification of
those residues that lack external morphology
sufficient to allow them to be macroscopically
referred to a specific plant organ or taxon. The
second objective of this paper is to discuss the differences between the archaeological versus ethnographical record.
La Puntilla site belongs to the Lower Formative Period (650 BC-500 AD) of Northwestern
Argentina. A rescue excavation was carried out by
one of the authors of this paper during the year
1996, previously to the construction of a large pool
to retain water for irrigation. A mortuary context
of a man in genuflexion was registered together
indeterminated
Mendonça 1980:79
with domestic features. Findings also included La
Ciénaga II (or Güisyschi) and ordinary pottery,
a bronze plaque, “suri” egg and Dassypodidae
fragments, and a pipe bowl with anthropomorphic
shape, among others. The last remain mentioned
was thought at the beginning to be articulated to
the pipe analyzed here (Pochettino and Capparelli
2004), but this assumption was after discarded because the association of ceramic with stone material in the same pipe is not usual.
Materials and methods
The inner part of the horizontal branch of the pipe
was scratched by means of a metallic instrument
that was previously sterilized with sodium hypochlorite.
Methodology used for identification of plant
remains depends on the sample state and recovery
conditions. Problems arise when the material is
highly fragmented or powdered (for instance,
material recovered from pipes and inner parts of
receptacles, and often further obscured by desiccation or charring, with fragment size less than
500 μm. Preservation of diagnostic tissue organization under these conditions is unlikely.
Investigations have shown that diagnostic results can however be obtained, if such samples are
first treated with a range of reagents or solvents.
Strong oxidizing agents, such as 100v hydrogen
peroxide, sodium hypochlorite, lactic acid, potassium permanganate-hydrochloric acid mixtures
Capparelli et al.: Differences between written and archaeological record
403
Fig. 4 Coca (Erythroxylum
coca). A,B. Starch from seeds.
A. Archaeological, B. Reference
material. C,D. Papillae in leaves.
C. Archaeological. D. Reference.
E,F. Crystals in middle rib.
E. Archaeological. F. Reference.
and reducing agents such as phenol and chloral
hydrate, were tested. In most cases samples were
washed with sodium hydroxide after treatment.
Partial discoloration was thus attained, enabling
observation of some histological features, and consequently the identification of the sample by light
microscopy. For scanning electron microscope observations the material was firstly washed with
alcohol and then with hydrochloric acid to eliminate carbonates, which are common in samples
that were embedded in substratum or ashes.
Results
By means of carrying out this wide range of chemical treatments, several plant structures were distinguished from this pipe such as:
– Single or 2-3 compound starch grains, isolated
or in amilaceous parenchyma (Fig. 4 A, B),
rounded papillae with thick walls (Fig. 4 C, D),
presence of cubic crystals by the veins (Fig 4
E, F). They were thought to belong to fragmented and carbonised leaves and ground
seeds of E. coca.
– Stomata and hairs (Fig. 5 A-B), pluricellular
branched trichomes (Fig. 5 C-F) similar to
those depicted, for Nicotiana epidermis and
named type B1 and B2, by Goodspeed (1954)
(Fig. 5 G).
– Adpressed hairs similar, but not exclusive, of
Aloysia citriodora (Fig. 6 A), trichomes of leguminous morphology and multicelular hairs
yet not identified (Fig. 6 D).
– Two different kind of epidermis: with festooned cells similar, but not exclusive, of
Aloysia citriodora (Fig. 6 B) and with striate
cuticle that is similar (but not exclusive) to the
one of Ilex paraguariensis (Fig. 6 C).
– interlaced vegetal and animal fibres (commonly
dyed) (Fig. 6 E).
Discussion and conclusion
The variety of species recovered from the tube of
the pipe may involved two possibilities. On the
one hand, the different species might have been
smoked/burnt simultaneously under the form of a
mixture. On the other hand, the identified plant
diversity might have been the result of successive
uses of a single plant, which was a different plant
in any case. The first possibility implies the use of
a mixture made from some substances close to
coca and tobacco or a close related species of
Nicotiana, together with other different plant parts
404
Proceedings of ICEB 2005
Fig. 5 Nicotiana sp.
A,B. Stomata and hairs from
leaves. A. Archaeological,
B. Reference material.
C,D,E. Hairs type B1, B2 and
B3 from leaves and petioles.
C,D. Archaeological,
E. Reference material sensu
Goodspeed (1954).
for smoking. In this way, just a few species are
mentioned in written evidence from Argentina
to have been used in pipes, from which tobacco
(Nicotiana sp.), cebil (Anadenanthera) and koro
(Trichocline? Nicotiana?) are the most frequently
reported for the North (Pérez Gollán and Gordillo
1993). As is evident from this work, coca is not
mentioned for smoking uses in Argentina.
Just two references, both reported by Jussieu
(2001, website), were found about the mixing of
coca and tobacco. One comes from the Amazon
Nonoyu aborigines who mixed tobacco and coca
leaves for chewing. The other comes from the
Witotos Boras aborigines and several other tribes
of northwest Amazonas where ambil –a thick
syrup made from tobacco- is “…applied to the
gums with a finger or a stick and is swallowed
very slowly with saliva and coca powder…”. However, an unconscious mixed of these two species
may have been due, if the person who is going to
smoke tobacco is/was chewing coca, and carried
out a pre-treatment of chewing to the Nicotiana
leaves before putting them into the pipe. This pretreatment was reported, for example, by Arenas
(1982: 223-224) between the Maká aborigines of
Paraguay.
Capparelli et al.: Differences between written and archaeological record
405
Fig. 6 Other archaeological remains founded in the pipe. A. Adpressed hair (cedrón/Aloysia citriodora?).
B. Festooned epidermis (Aloysia citriodora?). C. Multicelular hairs indet. D. Epidermis with stomata and striate
cuticle (yerba mate/ Ilex sp.?). E. Vegetal fibers and wool.
The presence of Nicotiana does not imply the
use of N. tabacum. Other species were reported to
have been used in South America (see for example
Cooper 1949). In the Catamarca province grow
nowadays several wild species of this genus, as
for example: N. cavanilliesi, N. longibracteata,
N. corymbosa, N. pauciflora, N. acuminata, N.
miersii, N. glauca, N. sylvestris, N. longiflora, N.
noctiflora and N. petunioides (Goodspeed 1954).
The presence of interlaced plant and animal
fibres may be the consequence of two situations.
On the one hand the plant dried mix used for
smoking in this pipe could have been previously
placed within a woven container. For example, the
Whichís commonly used bags for putting on the
tobacco leaves while smoking (Arenas 2003:344).
On the other hand, a filter could have been made
from fibers for retaining the solid fraction when
smoking. This situation was usual also between
the Whichís in Argentina (Arenas 2003:344) or
the Lengua-Maskoy in Paraguay (Arenas 1981:
141-42), which preferred the Bromeliaceas fibers.
A third possibility explaining the presence of these
fibers could have been done by the use of an instrument for cleaning the inner tube of the pipe
after their use.
Some of the other species identified are seldom mentioned by written record. For example
Gancedo (1973) reported the used of Ilex paraguariensis (yerba mate, yerba paraguaya), mixed
with tobacco, between the Tehuelches of the Patagonia (Table 1). Dobrizhoffer (1967:206-9) also
mentioned that a Spaniard captain that share many
journeys with him, smoke “yerba paraguaya” when
he lacked tobacco. He said that no pipe was need
for that, instead, the man make a cigarette rolling
a leave within other rectangular one, by the same
manner they used to do with tobacco. In Mississippi cultures of U.S.A. the use of other species of
Ilex, I. cassine, was registered by Swanton (1911).
The cedrón, also known as hierba luisa (Aloysia
citriodora) is not mentioned in the ethnographic
data. However, flavoring plants seldom were used
for tobacco, as for example the Berberis and other
barks (Table 1).
Besides unidentified structures are not coincident with any of the ethnographically mentioned
taxa. Therefore it seems that only written record is
not enough, and that further archaeobotanical studies are still necessary, to reach the correct interpretation of this kind of remains.
406
Proceedings of ICEB 2005
Literature Cited
Arenas, P. 1981. Etnobotánica Lengua-Maskoy. Fundación para la Educación, La Ciencia y La Cultura,
Buenos Aires.
———. 1982. Recolección y agricultura entre los indígenas Maká del Chaco Boreal. Parodiana 1(2):171243, Buenos Aires.
———. 2003. Etnografía y Alimentación entre los TobaÑachilamole#ek y Wichí-Lhuku’tas del Chaco Central (Argentina). P. Arenas, ed., Latín Gráfica S.R.L.,
Buenos Aires.
Bregante, O. 1926. Ensayo de clasificación de la cerámica
del Noroeste argentino. Facultad de Filosofía y letras,
PhD Thesis, Universidad de Buenos Aires.
Califano, M. 1976. El chamanismo mataco. Scripta Ethnologica 3(2):30-47, Buenos Aires.
Cooper, J.M. 1949. Stimulants and beverages. Vol. 5. Pages
524-558 in Julian H. Steward, ed., Handbook of South
American Indians, Smithsonian Institution Bureau of
American Archaeology Bulletin 143.
Debenedetti, S. 1931. L’Ancienne civilization des Barreales. Ars Americana, Vol. 2. Paris.
Dobrizhoffer, M. 1967. Historia de los Abipones. Vol. 1.
Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Humanidades, Departamento de Historia, Resistencia,
Argentina.
Dougherty, B. 1972. Las pipas de fumar arqueológicas de
la provincia de Jujuy (Consideraciones preliminares). Revista Relaciones de la Sociedad Argentina de
Antropología, Nueva Serie 6:83-89.
Fernández, A.M., M.G. Raviña, and B. Balesta. 1999.
Las pipas precolombinas del norte argentino. Union
Academique Internationale, Corpus Antiquitatum
Amaricanensium, Argentina, Vol. 3, Academia Nacional de la Historia, Buenos Aires.
Fernández Distel, A. 1980. Hallazgos de pipas en complejos precerámicos del borde de la Puna jujeña
(República Argentina) y el empleo de alucinógenos
por parte de las mismas culturas, Estudios Arqueológicos 5:55-75.
Gancedo, O. 1973. Descripción de pipas de fumar tehuelches de la colección Francisco P. Moreno y Estanislao
S. Cevallos. Revista del Museo de La Plata, Nueva
Serrie, Sección Antropología 8:47-71.
González, A. R. 1977. Arte Precolombino de la Argentina. Filmediciones Valero, Buenos Aires.
Goodspeed, T.H. 1954. The genus Nicotiana. Waltham,
Mass, U.S.A. Published by the Chronica Botanica
Company.
Jussieu, A.L. 2001. Mapacho by A.L. Jussieu (Nicotonia
[sic] tobaccum [sic]). http://lycaeum Leda Mapacho
by A_L_Jussieu (Nicotonia tobaccum).htlm, consulted 9/11/01.
Márquez Miranda, F. 1946. Los Diaguitas. Revista del
Museo de La Plata, Nueva Serie 3:5-300.
Mendonça, O.J. 1980. Apéndice a la investigación del
componente alucinógeno de las pipas de CH III.
Estudios Arqueológicos 5:79.
Núñez Regueiro, V.A. 1975. Conceptos instrumentales y
marco teórico en relación al desarrollo cultural del
Noroeste argentino. Revista del Instituto de Antropología 5:169-190.
Pérez Gollán, J., and I. Gordillo. 1993. Religión y alucinógenos en el Antiguo Noroeste Argentino,
Ciencia Hoy 4:50-63.
Pochettino, M.L., and A. Capparelli. 2004. Arqueobotánica y plantas medicinales. Proceedings 3rd. International Symposium on Ethnobotanical Disciplines,
Canoas (Porto Alegre, Brasil) (in CD).
Serrano, A. 1934. El uso del tabaco y vegetales narcotizantes entre los indígenas de América. Revista de
Geografía Americana 2(5):415-429.