Differences between written and archaeological record: the case of plant microremains recovered at a NW Argentinian pipe

CAPPARELLI, A.; POCHETTINO, MARIA LELIA; ANDREONI, D.; ITURRIZA, D.

Estambul, Turquía

Congreso; IVth International Congress of Ethnobotany (ICEB 2005); 2005

Yeditepe University

Two are the main goals of this paper. The first one is to identify fragmented and carbonised material adhered to the inner part of the tube of a pipe from the site La Puntilla, Catamarca Province. This pipe is characteristic of the Inferior Formative Period (2600 BP ? 1450 BP) of the Northwestern Argentina. Two requirements are essential for identification of this kind of material: 1-knowledge of those plants traditionally recorded (in documentary evidences) 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. By means of a wide range of chemical treatments several plant structures were distinguished from this pipe such as: papillae with thick walls, starch grains, isolated or in amilaceous parenchyma, crystals in fibres, interlaced vegetal and animal fibres (commonly dyed), trichomes of different morphology and function, and different kind of epidermis (with festooned cells, with striate cuticle, among others). Commonly this structures were well preserved. They were thought to belong to the following taxa organs: fragmented and carbonised leaves and ground seeds of E. coca, Gramineae epidermis, Nicotiana epidermis??, and trichomes of both leguminous morphology and other, as yet unidentified glandular trichomes. It appears that the plant dried mix used in this pipe was previously within a woven container, as indicated by the presence of interlaced plant and animal fibres. As it was mention before, for this identification it was important first to know those plants traditionally recorded (in documentary evidences) to have been used in such artifacts. However, just a few species are mentioned in written evidence from the NW Argentina to have been used in pipes: tabaco (Nicotiana), cebil (Anadenanthera) and koro (Trichocline?). As it is evident most of them are not coincident with archaeological evidence. Therefore, the second objective of this paper is to discuss about why these differences appear, and how it is possible to interpret these contrasting evidences.