.0

k~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A7

Number 5 July 1968

'I

PAPERS ON MESOAMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 * ' .:*¢ - . ,,.s, .'.rs ,, I~*A **

__~~~~~~~~~~| S~~~~~~~~~iS . S : i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~AM

CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH FACILITY

Number 5 July 1968

PAPERS ON MESOANERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH FACILITYDepartment of Anthropology

Berkeley

CONTENTS

I. INVESTIGATIONS AT LA VENTA, 1967,by R. F. Heizer, P. Drucker and J. A. Graham . . .

II. THREE SANDSTONE MONUMENTS FROM LA VENTA ISLAND,by M. W. Stirling . . . 35

III. THE EL NESON MONUMENT AT ANGEL R. CABADA,VERACRUZ, by Philip Drucker . . . . . . 41

IV. ANALYSIS OF AMERICAN OBSIDIANS BY X-RAY FLUORESCENCEAND NEUTRON ACTIVATION ANALYSIS., by F. H. Stross,J. R. Weaver, G. E. A. Wyld, R. F. Heizer andJ. A. Graham . . . . . . . . 59

V. "FINGER-PRINTING" OF SOME MESOAMERICAN OBSIDIANARTIFACTS, by R. N. Jack and R. F. Heizer . . . 81

VI. NOTES ON THE PAPALHUAPA SITE, GUATEMALA,by J. A. Graham and R. F. Heizer . . . . . 101

VII. THE 1968 INVESTIGATIONS AT LA VENTA,by R. F. Heizer, J. A. Graham and L. K. Napton . . 127

APPENDIX I: LA VENTA CERAMICS, by P. S. Hallinan,R. D. Ambro and J. F. O'Connell . . . . . 155

APPENDIX II: NEW STONE MONUMENTS FROM LA VENTA, 1968,by C. W. Clewlow, Jr. and C. R. Corson . . . . 171

59

IV. ANALYSIS OF AMERICAN OBSIDIANS BY X-RAY FLUORESCENCEAND NEUTRON ACTIVATION ANALYSIS

F. H. Stross,* J. R. Weaver,* G. E. A. Wyld,* R. F. Heizer,' J. A. Graham'

In recent years several studies have been published that were aimed atcharacterizing obsidian by analyzing for elements present in small or tracequantities. If obsidian rock can thus be characterized according to source,correlation of an obsidian artifact with its source becomes possible. Medi-terranean and Afro-Asian obsidians have been studied by Castiglioni et al.(1963), Cann and Renfrew (1964), Renfrew, Cann and Dixon (1965), Renfrew,Dixon and Cann (1966), and Dixon, Cann and Renfrew (1968). Green, Brooksand Reeves (1967) have studied New Zealand obsidian types by emission spec-troscopy. A similar though smaller study of American obsidians has beenpublished by Weaver and Stross (1965) and Heizer, Williams and Graham (1965).The present paper is a continuation of the two latter studies.

Experimental

The samples reported here were analyzed by x-ray fluorescence using thesame instrument and technique described in the earlier study (Weaver andStross 1965). Values for the nine samples (with a few minor corrections)together with an additional fifty-seven samples analyzed in 1965 are shownin Table 1. The sample descriptions are given in Table 2. In addition tothe analyses made by x-ray fluorescence, manganese was determined by neutronactivation analysis. The x-ray values are in terms of counts-per-second-ever-background and have no absolute quantitative significance; the manga-nese values are given in terms of parts per million by weight.

Aluminum, chromium, and manganese have been disregarded in the x-rayfluorescence determination. These can normally be measured, but they werejudged to be of no value in this study for the following reasons: (1) thegrinding device used to powder the samples was made of alumina and thesamples were unquestionably contaminated with aluminum by the grindingoperation; (2) the x-ray tube used had a chromium target which resulted ina very large background signal for chromium; (3) the small manganese peak,

' Shell Development Company, Emeryville, California.Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley.

We wish to thank Shell Development Company for the time and facilitiesmade available to us for this study (P-1639). We also thank Mr. J. Holst,who carried out most of the x-ray fluorescence analyses.

60

while detectable, was on the side of the large chromium peak, and hencemeasurement was unreliable. However, manganese is considered a gooddiagnostic element in this connection, and therefore we employed anothertechnique for obtaining this analysis.

The x-ray fluorescence work was performed over an extended period oftime, and it was necessary to adjust the conditions each time a lot ofsamples was analyzed to make all the data comparable with each other.Subsequent to the first lot, each time the instrument was used it wasadjusted to give, as closely as possible, the same counts-per-second foreach element in an arbitrarily chosen sample, namely sample 1-9. We in-clude the data obtained on that sample at several points in Table 1 toillustrate the precision that was obtained in this process.

For the neutron activation determination of manganese, 20-mg sampleswere irradiated for 30 minutes in a thermal neutron flux of 1011 neutrons/cm2/sec. in the Aerojet-General Nucleonics Industrial Reactor in San Ramon,California. Ten micrograms of gold was added to each sample and standardas an internal standard to compensate for flux variations. Gamma-rayspectra were recorded by means of a solid, 3-inch sodium iodide detectorand a Nuclear Data, 512-channel analyzer. The only interference underthese irradiation conditions was sodium. A computer program was used toremove the sodium interference by means of differences in the gamma-rayspectra and half-lives.

Results

Artifacts from Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and some from Californiaand Nevada were analyzed. It has been suggested by Parks and Tieh (1966)that the strontium/rubidium ratio is characteristic of origin and age of therock and could give an indication of its provenience. Among the other ele-ments that showed the largest variation, the most useful for diagnosticpurposes were considered to be zirconium, manganese, and iron. Data forthese elements are displayed in a bar-graph (fig. 1) and in two ternaryplots (Zr-Sr-Rb and Sr-Rb-Mn, figs. 2 and 3).

The graph and plots bring out the fact that the samples seem to fallinto three groups:

Group "O", which comprises the greater part of source and site samples,is the group that clusters around the center of both of the ternary plots,and is characterized by approximately equal relative amounts of strontium,rubidium, zirconium, and manganese. This group, we believe, is inadequatelydifferentiated; that is, there are probably several source types which aresufficiently similar to be included in this general group. On logical

61

grounds, the El Chayal and Ixtepeque (=Papalhuapa) sources in Guatemala maybe suggested as providing the obsidian for most of the Maya site artifactsanalyzed here (samples 1-5, 2-4 /2-9, 2-14/ 2-19, 2-23 / 2-30, 2-32 / 2-48),and in addition, the Salvador sample (2-11) and those from Copan, Honduras(1-5, 1-13, 3-4). Stephens (1963:II:232), in the early eighteen-forties',may have been correct when he described a pottery jar from Kantunile,Yucatan, as "filled nearly to the top with arrow-heads, not of flint, butof obsidian; and as there are no volcanoes in Yucatan from which obsidiancan be procured, the discovery of these proves intercourse with the volcanicregions of Mexico." The Otumba, Mexico, source (samples 2-20 3-5A, 3-5B)probably provided the material for artifacts (2-21, 2-33) from Teotihuacan.The La Venta samples (2-1, 2-2) may have been derived from either the Guate-mala highland, the Mexican highlands, or some as yet unknown source. Theintermediate geographical position of La Venta, vis-a-vis Guatemala andHidalgo, makes any guess based upon geographical proximity impossible. Onlyfurther artifact and source collecting and analysis will provide the data todifferentiate Group 0.

Group "2" is distinguished by a very low value for strontium, a highZr/Rb ratio (4 to 6), and a high value for manganese. This group includesall "green" obsidians in the collection of samples analyzed. The onlyMexican source represented in this group is the Pachuca quarry, Hildalgo(samples 1-3, 3-6A, 3-6B), which is well known for its green obsidiandeposit and is thought to have supplied the raw material for most, perhapsall, of the green artifacts found in Mesoamerica. Sample 1-7 is a surfaceartifact from the La Venta site, and its age is therefore not determinable.In January-February 1968, excavations at La Venta in La Venta period refusedeposits yielded a number of obsidian blades of green color, and these maybe presumed to have come from the Pachuca source. Drucker (1952:145) ob-served that he found no green obsidian in the test pits and trenches dug byhim in 1942. It can now be said that the green obsidian from Pachuca was

being traded as far south as La Venta in Middle Pre-Classic times, and as

far as the Peten and highland Guatemala in Early Classic times.

It is remarkable that a blade found in Lovelock Cave, Nevada (sample2-49) gave values that placed it clearly in Group 2; this specimen alsoseemed to have the greenish translucency that is characteristic of thePachuca deposit. It is highly improbable that this artifact should havebeen traded the long distance from Pachuca- to Lovelock, and consequentlythis finding is of special interest. The Department of Anthropology at

Berkeley provided additional specimens (arrow points) of green obsidianwhich had been found at sites near Lovelock Cave. Eleven of these were

analyzed and, without exception, gave analytical results that were consist-ent with the unusual analysis found for the first artifact. These analyseswere compared with those obtained by the University of California (Berkeley)

62

Department of Geology (R. Jack, personal communication) for California andNevada artifacts and sources. These included a few artifacts from Buck-brush Springs, Humboldt County, Nevada, which gave analyses similar to ourLovelock analyses. Since these two sites are not a great distance apart(about 65 airline miles), a common source of the obsidian is suggested.No deposit with the characteristic composition is now known, and it willbe of interest to find the source from which the Lovelock Cave-BuckbrushSprings type green obsidian was obtained.

The remaining samples have been classed separately and are designatedGroup "1". They have in common a low strontium content and a much lowerZr/Rb ratio (approximately 1). The samples indeed appear as a generallyhomogeneous group in the ternary plot (Zr-Sr-Rb, fig. 2). This group in-cludes the two samples from Napa County, California. Many obsidian samplesfrom the same region have been analyzed independently by the Department ofGeology (Jack, Le Joie and Carmichael 1967), and were found to give valueson the Zr-Sr-Rb plot similar to those obtained on our samples. The latter,however, were further analyzed for manganese, and are distinguished by theirvery low manganese content, as is evident in Figures 1 and 3. Only oneMesoamerican sample (2-47, an artifact from Chichen Itza) exhibits a simi-larly low manganese content. We have called this subgroup "lA." Here again,as in the Group 0 series, there must be at least two sources represented -

one Californian and one Mesoamerican.

Four other Mesoamerican samples of Group 1 (samples 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 2-10)have a manganese content intermediate between subgroup 1-A and most ofGroup 0, and are classed as subgroup 1-B. All of the subgroup 1-B samplesdate from the Pre-Classic. The source of the artifact material is not known,but we would guess that it will be found to exist in the Central Mexicanhighland. If there are two sources, one of which supplied Cuicuilco and theother southern Veracruz, both remain to be located.

The iron content generally varies with the groups (Group 0 has the lowest,Group 2 the highest iron content), but this does not seem, at least at thepresent time, to offer additional insight.

This study, in our opinion, serves mainly to point up the desirabilityof carrying out large scale studies of this kind, which, potentially at least,have been made possible by the efficient (but not inexpensive) analyticaltechniques developed in recent years. The crucial question concerning thedivergence from source to source can be answered completely only be analyzinga sufficiently large number of samples from each of the individual sources.A substantial step in this direction has been made in the study already men-

tioned (Jack, Le Joie and Carmichael 1967), in which the similarity of com-

position (using the Zr-Sr-Rb ternary as criterion) within one lava flow was

63

found to be satisfactory. In our case, we can get information on thisquestion from a few samples collected at the same sources at differentinstances. Thus, samples 1-4 and 1-8 are from the same source-the depositat Papalhuapa, Guatemala. One sample is red, the other black. The analy-ses are seen to compare quite closely. Samples 1-3, 3-6A, and 3-6B are allfrom the Pachuca deposit (Group 2), and again give very similar analyses.Samples 1-9 (our reference sample for x-ray fluorescence) and 2-31 are fromEl Chayal, Guatemala, and they compare quite well with each other. Samples2-20, 3-5A, and 3-5B are from the source deposit at Otumba, Mexico, andagain the comparison is satisfactory. It should be noted, however, that ofthe four Mesoamerican sources only one (Pachuca) is different enough fromthe others to be clearly distinguishable. On the other hand, the samples inGroup 1 are distinct from both Group 0 and Group 2; two of these samples arefrom California. No obsidian rock was found that corresponds to the Meso-american samples of Group 1, and it is thus not unlikely that these artifactswere made from obsidian obtained from at least one source as yet unknown to

us,

The published literature on Mesoamerican obsidian working techniques,mining, and quarrying, and implement manufacturing techniques is large andscattered. We have not made any special effort to compile a bibliography onthis subject, but have encountered some published data which we cite here inthe hope that other workers may find them useful.

Stoll (1886:432-434) mentions the El Chayal source. It is also describedby Holmes (1919:227) and by Coe and Flannery (1964). Thompson (1963:207)mentions a "vast deposit of obsidian" at Zacapa, Guatemala. We now know thatthis is in error, and that the obsidian seen along the railroad at this placeis roadbed ballast carried there from El Chayal. Villacorta (1927) firstmentions, although very casually, the obsidian at the site of Papalhuapa,Guatemala. This locality has been described geologically by Williams,McBirney and Dengo (1964).

The obsidian mines in southern Hidalgo, Mexico, were described by Holmes(1900, 1919) and Breton (1902), and more recently by Spence and Parsons (1967)and Spence (1967).; Breton (1902) also provides brief descriptions of obsid-ian workshop-quarry sites at Zinepecuaro, Michoacan, and near Guadalajara,Jalisco. Known or reported obsidian sources in Mexico are listed and mappedin Heizer, Williams -and Graham (1965:98,map 5). The statement by Lunardi(1948:290) that obsidian is common in the vicinity of La Esperanza andIntibucao Honduras, has not been verified, and judging from what is known ofthe geology of this area, the claim is probably incorrect. Hints of otherMesoamerican and Central American obsidian sources are contained in an articleby Washington (1921).

W6 4. 0

a 0L*

/44

/4% 4_

r~~~~~~~~~~f,- _

641**aI /

a* I0 *

O NN

\t I1 / 14fs /

64

a4.au

AIof:zi

//

-jJc£:

AV.

41

P-4

zo I

b,aVD /

:i-urn.)

U

* X

0

-X

IE

a*af

a

61

i I- 4

av

Eo

v -_-4MO -1

x

W

£

wV.

aUa

a

4

65

*FdO0 0 00 00 00 0

-4rL 4 r-I WNN0 HO r-H UN\\.P H n oHHoU O U -

_ H H H

!2 oN co

t0 O N O

C/) r-

9 r4 r-X CD

i N trl t- H

ICe-) 0

°ol cm °r

'O O~

C C,-m I co CtJ

tt C-t _:r- r I

Lr\

cUH

0

H

o

0

0UN%

0

Hasco

0

HUN

0ON

0404

0 ON04

H H

H Oa,\KN N \ co

H

r o co r- r- rqONr4 H000000000000O OCQO UEH X F 1 s~H

H H H 0C

\. os o co o oo\H rH H H H H

0 LCN U-\ Lr\ Lr\ cc) ICo) u4o a:Kco I- cR CU KN rlr Kl

Lr\ L\ 0 UN o\ O Lr\0

OUN UN ? CCMCHH MH H H H

0 L f\U I% UN U00

HHI H-Oo CI CI Cs C,

0 ON ONH f -co ONc o

-4 ueI r- cuO I

oN o- orl lo o Cr\\o£~~~~~~-£ UX4r4ir~~~~~00 LrQ OD

o o oo 0 o O o

H H H H\ HHt C~~S00 LC\~~O0 L0OO

8- 8 8 8 °rl 8 8 °-It Ct\ Ct CU

\ Ctj C 70N0000-. D000t -

r-I r - H-LtI

ONHHOC -O

00 00 0

000 LtN 0.£c)

00CH0 0 0 0 0cc) 1%0404

HI H--H H Hre

0U Cs 90

HM H H H

OD O UN U04NH H H

00 L0UN

O-OD\ O tOUEI C C\j Cw C\J

H H HHH

0 U UNO LO\

H0 O HCM H H

040 04 a o

UNUNOjC \0 UNj

0r UNO 0 UN\WN U, N ON t--

Hl -00L\ Dl -t-

C~ONO--) ON -

04 H 04 H H

O-\ NCOOco 0N

H- H

0 0N04.0 o

\0 0 0 0^D H-4- H

r-4

0 0 00 0 O-1%0 %.D H- 0VrW W H OH U

00 00 O0 0\ O OFH H wH 1~ H Ntcoa)

n ~~~~~~~~~~~~C.)A _

0 0 0Ho.

0 C00MN CM r-H H C4

LrN 0 UUN CU04

0

H

cU

H

0

0-4

ON00

04

ON

ON

0

04H

O4~O04 OCON ~O04 H 04 H OH H 04CH H H N CH H H Hr-4H H o-r- r-4HH

0 UN

o oo

0 0

0

CU

H

CM

0o0H-

0 0CO co

UNU

0o0i040

0o Os-CO

O O

0 0

0 U(\

H CH

O 0CC CC

0 0

0 C)O C\JH CU

O0WNO

004

Lr\H

U 0

H OHM F

UO

H H

0 UN

04 Cr-

HO H

O0 H

C\0

Ct\ CUj

H CH

\O LbC ONC ON H 04 'N-4 UEkC£ -Q ON0 ON H H HI I £

04 H- 04

l)

zC1.

C:

0

C.)

__

E-e

zC-

0

C)IEor

CQ

eHQ)

E-.

U)H

cu Ito r-

t- %.D UIN t- --Jl - '_o=U

00'O400 U'0 L 0 tf%

H rCK fO COCU H Hn H H H H H

0 8 a 0 0 0 0 R 0 04~~C Ul 0 tr CM Kl\u:9 ff \ UNiON l

% r\O F

U'

H H a H H o Ho H oCD4 r- CU4 U4 U4 r4 r- %1. .rI N

o1 °l Cs R 'sO ° '°'°l, ~"

ut H HH H H H H H

U'U R oUC0 -00( U

A: HH H H0HHLr L% UN orl u e % C) Ll

fi N r- Ck KNi

CM CM N

0 0UU' Uo0 UNO

C: C) -H Lr\ t-tH Hz r- rS N r- r- <-

-0 C 0C UN O O UN CC~~~~l ~~-4 r- *4 mv r.-4 H_

Cr\C Z? O O 0 C> 0CM -.V CMl rt O C>

1h n ~~~~CCC- c) CC) t- cmJ 1-H ~~H H

' .OO0 \ 0 UL\ O UNLr\ ON OC, OC CO

01 2N .00L\ U1 O O OC

.C)0r\ \0 0 t4'C>UO .C> OX U'

. o- o- o co o- CD4 o- oCQ N u :H4 o- r- a cu cN CM

'H o o\ Lo, oCo oo\oIC ± 3 CUCU C

HR

H H&

H

H- H- r.4 H- H- H-L NO 0 O L 0Ct CUJ \ H H

U' 0 U LN UN 0

L\ O O OU L HHn H H H HH

UNr LU'\ 0 N LI\ UN"4C\"J\ c1 Ll\CUi H{ H H H H

C)l C\J C-1J a

O O O O~~C O

H CN\ c% CO O\

0E UN ON0CO 0

COI- n - J J

CUJ ON 0 CU H ONCU} H- CUl CU CUJ H

'£ ON ON aN CO oX

0 0 0 O

O0N JI J CU

H H H

Or~ U'00 CM UN

HQ CU H H

O O 0 0

O O O)H H

'O ~O O O\C\J O r J-\. \- \0 a\

H

L00 U\aO ONI-

0 LN U \

0o t- coNH o O

fiO CN CMr- r-CU C

HHs8t t 8 a88Hr-V .~. .- ONir- Ctj -7 (M KN N o ;I :! rc <rIH r4 r- - r- - V- r- r- r- r- rH H

01

WN_z t\ D1 b-C co ON H- CU ~-CN-* tN \O ,u co ROH1\ C'JON\ CCU

C oI\Cv U H CU

U'%H

-

I

C)

0

P-s

X)

0 Er,

0 tIN

H HCU CU

O O\

o 2CUMCH -I

H-0% ON w

II IH H- CU

0 0 0 0 0 0 0o 0H \ - t J l1 \CuUl\Lr\U l\ t-- \0 \0 tlr\U P \

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 00 0 00 U-\ 000 LC\H H H ?4H CH HN H Hr- r- r- CN r- r- T- r- r- r- r-

o~ 00H 04

0 0H H

Lr\ u'\H 04

0Lr\

00H

CMH

0 0 0 0 000 O N~Lr\ Lf\

H H H Hf H0 000 Lr\0 0 0 L t cHH H HfHH

HC Hr Hr 0401Lr

0 0 0r- r4 r-IO\0 01

H H H

HHoHCM J

Cso

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0LC\ -1 0 _:I t~-- _ Is.- L(l% 0W\ (31 - \0 O CN CN C Lr\

H0 H

00 O H 04OO

0 0 ~04C00 08 °.-°-°~°co coo (P H r- U\ H H00 HL(H

H L(o H 04

0 L L 000 000r-I IN-- 04

r-1 r14 C8J r- *d1-1

42Lr\0LC\ Lr\0\.O CC04.t iR 01

0 0H.- H,

0 0KN Ctj

0 O0400

0 L1\0~r4H

1Lt\ 0 LL'\O> H 000 (; JI ,IHH H H H

r-i00oo 0o

O1 H HH H

o C o o o o)

I00C) 0

~)I \O ~J OC - t%lo1 \D %lo t- \-Dcz

0CC0 0\ 0O1 2° ° co

cso o oooIQ0 Lr\0 0

0I 0000k.-AdLfl Lf\ LC\ L(l\ 00 - H H crC0 H 04 N H

0O\0 H O~

rH H Hr H H

o 0 o o 0

r- -HH H-0 0\000

HU-o

o o o o o

LfNO0 Lr~H- H HH H H

00 LIMH-

L\0 L(\0 Rt'L(M0LC

N\O t- 000 ON O C

O tO -0 l UNODD\O

O C) 0XD 0:w)VD

O\N00 - cot--CO

o 8 0~U0 LC

H H H H o a\ O

0h -t C B Fj CXS CS S

K-\ IN H 040404 H~-H H H H H H H H

0 0H- H

CQCMH H

0 0

H OLH H

0 0

H H

8 8 2

8 CM

o~o o

CM H ON

L\\000 r o0 o oH 0 Hi \O t- kDH H H H H H H

n o LrXCM H H

Ht H

OOLC

C) O LJ

H1 H

OOLC)Lr\ U

-o tUH

O\001H C

It O Ct

L'. CM

H

0H

00

04

H

0

0

00

04cu

0

H

H4

H H HH Ht H

HQ H H

L(\0 0

o o\

N\ C\j Nm

a\i Ci 0\

CM r- CM

r f H

a1)H CM rN Lr 4

..

Iuto Nl

*I

r C1Lr \0 \0 U

:E

67

QI0 0

0 0

h-.tWJT -

- 0o aN o r4 cj K% - U% %04

WN~~~ ~ ~NN_,: 4 z :. -J 7 :- .t-, - -

04WIt4\-

0-.J.

t. r-q

0 W\a,\ C\jQ r-I

0 0Ng Cj C\j

0 0 00 LC\ CM_:I CM CMj

0

C O 0~%D t- c'.F. CO

t-

0C0

H

01Ctj

H

0

H

0

H

0

0

00

0

\ON

\0

01H-

0 0Ht rN

0

H

0

H0

CU\

IC'

Ul\

CO

0

H

co

0

0~01

H~

00HO

H\

01CMj

0

0ON

Ct-

0

0C)

H

01

0HrlH-

m < ML \9 \1

P-

a)

co

or

rt,0

0C)

go:J

a)

Ct,to

10

a)

a)

a)

~~~~~r-4CO C

C @ n~~~C

a)-< Sq ceaOH

COH00 CO

JOH a)> * a

68

*I

_I

Ejo

R0

f H

CM

ol -

\D

O

gLr\CO1 CM

o

r LchIH

CHl\

Lr\U

or-~cr N~

Kl-p

Cl0

-

a)

r-4

69

Table 2

Sample Identification*(Obsidians are black or gray unless otherwise noted)

Sample |No. Source Locality

1-1 | Glass Mt., near St. Helena, Napa Co., Calif. Sample from

quarry. Collected by R. F. Heizer, 1959.

1-2 | Site CA-Sol-2, Solano Co., Calif. Artifact in LowieMuseum of Anthropology

1-3 Green obsidian. Pachuca, Hidalgo, Mex. Sample from| quarry. Coll. by W. H. Holmes.

1-4 Papalhuapa, Depto. Jutiapa, Guatemala. Sample from quarry.

| Coll. by H. Williams, J. Graham, R. Heizer, 1964.

1-5 | Copan. Artifact in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University

1-6 Green obsidian. Teotihuacan, Mex. Surface artifact.

1-7 Green obsidian. La Venta, Tab. Surface artifact.

1-8 Red obsidian. Papalhuapa, Depto. Jutiapa, Guatemala.Sample from quarry.

1-9 El chayal, Depto. Guatemala, Guatemala. Sample from quarry.

2-1 La Venta, Tab. Surface artifact.

2-2 La Venta, Tab. Surface artifact.

2-3 Green obsidian. Texcoco, Valley of Mexico, Los Melones Md.Artifact in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

2-4 | Yaxun, Lower Lacantun R., Chiapas, Boco or Jimba Phase.Artifact in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

2-5 Cave of Loltun, Yucatan. Entrance to Chamber 1. Artifact

- (c/1998) in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

2-6 | Cave of Loltun, Yucatan, Sec. 1, Chamber 3. Artifact

(c/2023) in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

2-7 Labna, Yucatan, Md. 6 Late Classic Period. Artifact

(c/2262) in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

2-8 | Green obsidian, Mitla, Oaxaca. Artifact (c/5917) in

| Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

sit

on

.e No. IMap 1 1

21 131I

21

23

I

51

19. 13 1

10,. 121 1

123

10

10 I12 |

I13. 1

I

I'14 1

I7 1

I

Table 2 (cont'd.)

Site No. Sample Ion Map 1 No. Source Locality

11 2-9 San Lorenzo, Lacantun R., Chiapas. Artifact in PeabodyMus. Coll., Harvard University.

6 2-10 | Cuicuilco, D.F., Mexico. TIalpan Phase (field cat. 769).University of California Collection.

20 | 2-11 "El Salvado." Artifact (30.0/2863) in Amer. Mus. Nat.| | Hist. Collection.

2 2-12 | Green obsidian, Tula, Hidalgo. Mexico. Surface artifact.

1 Artifact in Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. Collection.

19 | 2-13 | Copan, Honduras. Artifact in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard| University.

34 | 2-14 Uaxaxtun, Depto. Peten, Guatemala. Stela A-7 cache, LateI Classic Period. Artifact (33-99-20/3393) in Peabody Mus.

| Coll., Harvard University.

17 2-15 | Benque Viejo, British Honduras. Artifact in Peabody Mus.| Coll., Harvard University.

31 2-16 | Seibal, Depto. Peten, Guatemala. Collected by J. Graham,1965.

25 | 2-17 | Iximche, Late Post Classic. Depto. Chimaltenango. Surfaceartifact collected by J. Graham and R. Heizer, 1965.

18 2-18 | Nohoch Ek, Cayo Dist., British Honduras, Periods 4 and 5.Artifact in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

14 | 2-19 Weston site 6, near Belize, British Honduras. Terminal

I Classic. Artifact (3-20232) in Peabody Museum Coll.,| | Harvard University.

4 | 2-20 | Obsidian source locality ("Mine") 2 km. NE of San Marcos,| near Otumba, Estado de Mexico. Collected by M. Spence, 1966.

3 2-21 Teotihuacan, Tlamimilolpa Phase. Site sector 21E:N5Wl.I Collected by J. Bennyhoff.

3 | 2-22 | Teotihuacan, Tzacualli phase, Zona 5-9, Calle de los MuertosI | 0.199. Collected by Florencia Muller.

33 | 2-23 | Tikal, Depto. Peten, Guatemala, Early Classic. Artifact| (12C-408/29) in Univ. of Pennsylvania Mus. Collection.

71

Table 2 (cont'd.)

SampleNo. Source Locality

2-24 | Tikal, Depto. Peten, Guatemala, Early Classic. Artifact| (12K-164-18) in Univ. of Pennsylvania Mus. Collection.

2-25 Tikal, Depto. Peten, Guatemala, Late Preclassic. Artifact| (12P-167/89) in Univ. of Pennsylvania Mus. Collection.

2-26 | Tikal, Depto. Peten, Guatemala, Late Preclassic. Artifact(12P/138) in Univ. of Pennsylvania Mus. Collection.

2-27 Tikal, Depto. Peten, Guatemala, Middle Preclassic.Artifact (12P/152) in Univ. Penn. Mus. Collection.

2-28 Tikal, Depto. Peten, Guatemala, Early Classic. Artifact

(127-226C/33) in Univ. Penn. Mus. Collection.

2-29 | Tikal, Depto. Peten, Guatemala, Late Classic. Artifact

(41F/2) in Univ. of Pennsylvania Mus. Collection.

2-30 Tikal, Depto. Peten, Guatemala, Early Post Classic.Artifact (98L/10) in Univ. Penn. Mus. CollecLion.

2-31 El Chayal, Depto. Guatemala, Guatemala. Sample from quarry.

2-31 Bilbao (Sta. Lucia Colzumahualpa), Depto. Escuintla, Guate-mala. Surface artifact coll. by Graham, Heizer & Williams 1965.

2-33 Uaxactun, Tepeu phase, Depto. Peten, Guatemala. Artifactin Guatemala Museum of Archaeology Collection.

2-34 Uaxactun, Tepeu phase, Depto. Peten, Guatemala. Artifactin Guatemala Museum of Archaeology Collection.

2-35 Zacualpa, Depto. Quicha, Guatemala, Post Classic Period.Artifact in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

2-36 Zacualpa, Depto. Quiche, Guatemala, Post Classic Period.Artifact in Guatemala Museum of Archaeology Collection.

2-37 Poptun, Depto. Peten, Guatemala. Late Classic Period.Artifact in Guatemala Museum of Archaeology Collection.

2-38 Utatlan, Depto. Quiche, Guatemala. Classic Period.| Artifact in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

2-39 Nebaj, Depto. Quiche, Guatemala. Classic Period.Artifact in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

Silon

te No.Map 1 |

33

33

33 -

33

33

33

33

23

24

34

34 I

28

28

30 I

27

29

72

Table 2 (cont'd.)

Site No. I Sample Ion Map 1 No. Source Locality

32 2-40 Altar de Sacrificios, Depto. Pet'n, Guatemala. Artifact

1-in Guatemala Museum of Archaeology Collection.

19 j 2-41 | Piedras Negras, Depto. Peten, Guatemala. Classic Period.|- | Artifact in Guatemala Museum of Archaeology Collection.

26 |2-42 | Agua Escondida, near lake, Depto. Solola, Guatemala.Artifact in Guatemala Museum of Archaeology Collection.

22 2-43 Kaminaljuyu, Depto. Guatemala, Guatemala. Artifact col-1 | lected by R. Heizer and J. Graham, 1966.

2-2 2-45 | Green obsidian, Kaminaljuyu, Depto. Guatemala, Guatemala.Early Classic (Tomb A-V). Artifact in Guatemala Museum

| of Archaeology Collection.

Cenote of Sacrifice, Yucatan, Mexico. Artifact in PeabodyMuseum Collection, Harvard University.

15 | 2-46 Green obsidian, Chichen Itza, Yucatan, Mexico. Artifact| (c/5042) in Peabody Mus. Coll., Harvard University.

15 | 2-47 | Chichen Itza, Yucatan, Mexico. Artifact (c/5038) in| Peabody Museum Collection, Harvard University.

15 | 2-48 | Chichen Itza, Yucatan, Mexico. Artifact (c/4919) in| Peabody Museum Collection, Harvard University.

| 2-49 | Green obsidian, Lovelock Cave, Churchill Co., Nevada.

I Artifact (1-19208) in Univ. Calif. Lowie Mus. Collection.

8 | 3-1 Tres Zapotes, Veracruz, Mexico. Preclassic Period (?)

I (sub-ash cultural level Trench 26). Collected by P.| Drucker and R. Heizer, 1967.

9 | 3-2 Site buried in sand dune near Roca Partida, Tuxtla Mts.,Veracruz, Mexico. Probably Preclassic. Collected by

I J. Graham, R. Heizer, H. Williams, 1967.

9 j 3-3 Eroded site on beach near Punta Roca Partida, Tuxtla Mts.,

Veracruz, Mexico. Probably Preclassic.

19 3-4 Copan, Honduras. Classic Period. Surface artifact col-| lected by R. Heizer, J. Graham, H. Williams, Feb. 1967.

4

I

73

Table 2 (cont'd.)

Site No. Sampleon Map 1 | Source Locality

4 3-5A Otumba, Estado de Mexico, Mexico. Mine No. 1. Collectedby Michael Spence, 1965.

4 3-5B | Otumba, Estado de Mexico, Mexico. Mine No. 1. Collectedby Michael Spence, 1965.

1 | 3-6A | Green obsidian, "Pachuca Mine No. 2," near Huasca, Hidalgo,Mexico. Collected by Michael Spence, 1965.

1 | 3-6B | Green obsidian, "Pachuca Mine No. 2,," near Huasca, Hidalgo,Mexico. Collected by Michael Spence, 1965.

* We wish to thank the following persons for supplying obsidian samples:

Drs. W. R. Coe and H. Moholy-Nagy of the University of Pennsylvania Museum(samples 2-23/ 2-30);

Dr. Harry Pollock, Peabody Museum, Harvard University (samples 1-5, 2-3/ 2-9,2-13/ 2-15, 2-18, 2-19);

Dr. Gordon Ekholm, American Museum of Natural History (samples 2-11, 2-12);

Sr. Gustavo Espinosa, Guatemala Museum of Archaeology (samples 2-33, 2-34,2-36, 2-37, 2-40, 2-41, 2-45);

Drs. J. A. Bennyhoff and Michael Spence, and Dra. Florencia Muller,Proyecto Teotihuacan (samples 2-2C / 2-22, 3-5Al 3-6B);

Dr. Clifford Evans, U.S. National Museum (samples 1-3).

74

89-CV9-Cla -C

z -CC -C

9UP,

6C-Z i

LC-Z9c-z LU

-I-

t C-i

zz-

9i-? <

6LZ-Z 081- izLL-Z C91Z-imzzr61gZ C8 I-zCL-I

U--

8 -z

9 -Z; L

C9-Z

I-Z

6-I8 -LL -I

9 -L

Z -1

I I I I I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- I

8 8 °0 8 8 00 00Ct 0 8 0Dn 04 C14 -~~~2

c4)

LL.

75

Sr

Group 0:1 - 4, 5, 8, 92- 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11,

13-27, 29-44, 483 - 4, 5A and 5 B

Group 1:1 - 1, 22 - 10, 473- 1, 2, 3

Group 2:1 - 3, 6, 72 - 3, 8, 12, 28, 45, 46, 493 - 6A and 6B

Black Points areSource Samples

Group 0

/- O_0

_ Oc_0

0

Group I

'0PO "

0 0 I

NORMALIZED RATIOS OF Zr-Sr-Rb

/

Rb

Group 2

/ 0°E

Zr

%.f

II

l

Figure 2.

76

SrGroup 0:1 - 4, 5, 8, 92- 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11,

13-27, 29-44, 483 - 4, 5A and 5B

Group 1:Subgroup 1A:

1 - 1, 22 - 47

Subgroup 1B:2 - 103 - 1, 2, 3

Group 2:1 - 3, 6, 72 - 3, 8, 12, 28, 45, 46,3 - 6A and 6B

Black Points areSource Samples

/

/

Group I B

., _..Group IA

/

Ilo0/

0 l

Group 0

Q "

'\\ ° 1

001 0 ~00

/

Mnl

Figure 3. NORMALIZED RATIOS OF Mn-Sr-Rb

I

//

Group 2

0

/0

ll..

\I

77.

Bibliography

Azurdia, Carlos Enrique1927 Las Ruinas de Papalhuapa. Anales de la Sociedad de Geograffa

e Historia, 4: 1:65-70.

Breton, A.1902 Some Obsidian Workings in Mexico. 13th Intern. Cong. Amer.,

265-268. New York.

Cann, J. R. and C. Renfrew1964 The Characterization of Obsidian and Its Application to the

Mediterranean Region. Proc. Prehistoric Soc. for 1964,30:111-133.

Castiglioni, 0. C., F. Fussi and G. D'Agnolo1963 Indagini sulla provenienza dell' ossidiana utilizzata nelle

industrie preistoriche del Mediterraneo Occidentale. InAtti della Societa Italiana di Scienze Naturali e del MuseoCivico di Storia Naturale in Milano, Vol. CII, Fasc. 111,310-322.

Coe, M. D and K. V. Flannery1964 The Pre-Columbian Obsidian Industry of El Chayal, Guatemala.

American Antiquity, 30:43-49.

Dixon, J. E., J. R. Cann and C. Renfrew1968 Obsidian and the Origins of Trade. Scientific American,

218: 3:38-46.

Drucker, Philip1952 La Venta, Tabasco. A Study of Olmec Ceramics and Art.

Bureau American Ethnology, Bulletin 153. Washington, D.C.

Green, R. C., R. R. Brooks and R. D. Reeves1967 Characterization of New Zealand Obsidians by Emission Spectro-

scopy. New Zealand Journ. Sci., 10: 3:675-682, Wellington.

Ueizer, R. F., H. Williams and J. A. Graham1965 Notes on Mesoamerican Obsidians and Their Significance in

Archaeological Studies. Contributions of the Univ. Calif.Archaeol. Res. Facility, No. 1:94-103, Berkeley.

78

Holmes, W. H.1900 The Obsidian Mines of Hidalgo, Mexico. American Anthropologist,

2: 3:405-416.

1919 Handbook of Aboriginal American Antiquities. Bureau AmericanEthnology. Bulletin 60. Washington, D.C.

Jack, R. N., K. R. Lajoie and I. S. E. Carmichael1967 "Finger-Printing" of Obsidian and Pumice from the Western

United States. Proc. 80th Ann. Meeting, Geol. Soc. of America,New Orleans, La., Nov. 20-22, 1967 (p. 107).

Lunardi, Federico1948 Honduras Maya: Etnologfa y Arqueologla de Honduras.

Tegucigalpa, Honduras.

Parks, George A. and T. T. Tieh1966 Identifying the Geographical Source of Artefact Obsidian.

Nature, No. 5046:289-290.

Renfrew, Colin, J. R. Cann and J. E. Dixon1965 Obsidian in the Aegean. The Annual of the British School of

Archaeology at Athens, 60:225-247, Oxford.

Renfrew, Colin, J. E. Dixon and J. R. Cann1966 Obsidian and Early Cultural Contact in the Near East. Proc.

Prehistoric Soc. for 1966, 32:30-72.

Spence, Michael W.1967 The Obsidian Industry of Teotihuacan. American Antiquity,

32: 4:507-514.

Spence, Michael and J. Parsons1967 Prehispanic Obsidian Mines in Southern Hidalgo. American

Antiquity, 32: 4:542-543.

Stephens, J. L.1962 Incidents of Travel in Yucatan. 2 vols. Norman, Oklahoma.

Stoll, Otto1886 Guatemala, Reisen und Schilderungen aus den Jahren 1878-1883.

Leipzig.

79

Thompson, J. E. S.1963 Maya Archaeologist. Norman, Oklahoma.

Villacorta Calderon, J. A. and Carlos A. Villacorta1930 Arqueologia Guatemalteca. Guatemala.

Washington, H. S.1921 Obsidian from Copan and Chichen Itza. Journ. Washington

Acad. Sci., 11:481-487,

Weaver, J. R. and F. H. Stross1965 Analysis by X-Ray Fluorescence of Some American Obsidians.

Contributions of the Univ. Calif. Archaeol. Res. Facility,No. 1:89-93, Berkeley.

Williams, H., A. R. McBirney and G. Dengo1964 Geologic Reconnaissance of Southeastern Guatemala. Univ.

Calif. Publs. Geol. Sci., Vol. 50, Berkeley.