Fishtail Points, Technology and Microwear Analysis from the Negro River Basin, Uruguay


Ongoing research performed in the central part of Uruguay added new Paleo-Southamerican finds from the Negro River basin. A number of lithic exemplars were analyzed to determine their technology and function. The examined artifacts provided a new perspective on Fisthail points. Microwear analysis showed that there is a difference in the location of microscopic polishing between the blade and stem in the examined points. Polishing in the stem’s border might be attributed to leather or a similar substance, probably the leather cord or sinew used to bind the points in the foreshaft. The surface of the stem shows a coarse micro-topography and has patches of black residues. The coarse micro-topography suggests the use of an adhesive substance covering the whole stem, while the black patches are probably the residue used to glue the points in the foreshafts. Most remarkable is the discovery of the use of edge-to-edge and overshot flaking for bifacial reduction, technical features shared with Paleoindian fishtailed points from North and Central America.

Share and Cite:

Nami, H. and Castro, A. (2014) Fishtail Points, Technology and Microwear Analysis from the Negro River Basin, Uruguay. Archaeological Discovery, 2, 65-70. doi: 10.4236/ad.2014.23008.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Bosch, A., Femenías, J., & Olivera, A. (1980). Dispersión de las puntas líticas pisciformes en el Uruguay. III Congreso Nacional de Arqueología. Anales. Montevideo: CEA.
[2] Callahan, E. (1979). The Basics of Biface Knapping in the Eastern Fluted Point Tradition. A Manual for Flintknappers and Lithic Analysts. Archaeology of Eastern North America, 7, 1-180.
[3] Cardich, A., Paunero, R., & Castro, A. (1993-1994). Análisis de los Conjuntos Líticos de la Cueva 2 de Los Toldos (Santa Cruz, Argentina), Anales del Instituto de la Patagonia, Serie Ciencias Humanas, 22, 149-173.
[4] Castro, A., (1993). El análisis funcional por medio del estudio microscópico de huellas de uso: Aportes para un modelo de clasificación tipológica. Doctoral Dissertation, La Plata: National University of La Plata.
[5] Cooke, R., & Sánchez., L. (2003). Panamá prehispánico: tiempo, ecología y geografía política.
[6] Cordero, S. (1960). Los Charrúas. Editorial Mentor, Montevideo.
[7] Keeley, L. H. (1976). Microwear on Flint: Some Experimental Results. 2d International Symposium on Flint, Staringia, 3, 49-51.
[8] Keeley, L. H. (1980). Experimental Determination of Stone Tool Uses: A Microwear Analysis. London: The University of Chicago Press.
[9] López, F., Femenías, J., & Nami, H. G. (2001). Fell Evidence and New Data on Late-Pleistocene Landscape from Canelones, Uruguay. Current Research in the Pleistocene, 18, 41-44.
[10] Nami, H. G. (1985/1986). Excavación Arqueológica y Hallazgo de una Punta de Proyectil “Fell I” en la Cueva del Medio, Seno de Ultima Esperanza, Chile. Informe Preliminar. Anales del Instituto de la Patagonia, 16, 103-109.
[11] Nami, H. G (2001). Consideraciones tecnológicas preliminares sobre los artefactos líticos de Cerro de los Burros (Maldonado, Uruguay). Comunicaciones Antropológicas de los Museos Nacionales de Historia Natural y Antropología de Montevideo 3 (1).
[12] Nami, H. G. (2003). Experimentos para explorar la secuencia de reducción Fell de la Patagonia Austral. Magallania, 30, 107-138.
[13] Nami, H. G. (2007). Research in the Middle Negro River Basin (Uruguay) and the Paleoindian Occupation of the Southern Cone. Current Anthropology, 48, 164-176.
[14] Nami, H. G. (2009). Crystal Quartz and Fishtail Projectile Points: Considerations on Raw Materials Selection by Paleo-South Americans. Current Research in the Pleistocene, 26, 9-12.
[15] Nami, H. G. (2010). Tecnología Paleoindia de Sudamérica: Nuevos experimentos y observaciones para conocer la secuencia de reducción Fell. Origenes, 9, 1-40.
[16] Nami, H. G. (2013). Archaelogy, Paleoindian Research and Lithic Technology in the Middle Negro River, Central Uruguay. Archaeological Discovery, 1, 1-22.
[17] Nami, H. G. (2014). Observaciones para conocer secuencias de reducción bifaciales Paleoindias y puntas Fell en el Valle del Ilaló, Ecuador/Observations pour identifier les séquences de réduction bifaciales paléoindiennes et les pointes de Fell dans la vallée de l’Ilal?, Equateur. In M., Farias, & A. Lourdeau (Eds.), Peuplement de l’Amérique du sud: l’apport de la technologie lithique/Povoamento na América do Sul: a contribui??o da tecnologia lítica/Población de América del sur: la contribución de la tecnología lítica. Sociedade de Arqueologia Brasileira XVI Congresso Union Internationale des Sciences Préhistoriques et Protohistoriques Actes du XVI Congrès mundial Florianópolis 4-10/09/2011 @rchéo-é, In press.
[18] Nami, H. G. & Castro. A. (2010). New Paleoindian Finds and Micro-Wear Analysis at Arroyo Cacique Site, Tacuarembó Department, Uruguay. Current Research in the Pleistocene, 27, 25-28.
[19] Pearson, G., & Ream. J. (2005). Clovis on the Caribbean Coast of Venezuela. Current Research in the Pleistocene, 22, 28-30.
[20] Rots, V. (2008). Hafting and Raw Materials from Animals. Guide to the Identification of Hafting Traces on Stone Tools. Anthropozoologica, 43, 43-66.
[21] Sheets, P. D. (1973). Edge abrasIon during Biface Manufacture. American Antiquity, 38, 215-218.
[22] Stanford, D. J., & Bradley, B. (2012). Across the Atlantic Ice. The Origins of American’s Clovis Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Copyright © 2023 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.