CERAMIC DIVERSITY IN CHAVIN DE HUANTAR, PERU

Isabelle C. Druc

Ceramic diversity in the ceremonial center of Chavin de Huantar in the Peruvian highlands is assessed by neutronactivation analysis, petrography,and stylistic analysis. Theseanalyses lead to a new interpretationof ceramicproductionin Chavin
between ca. 850 and 200 B.C. Several compositional groups with very differentmineralogical paste types are identified.
More than 30 percent of the ceramics are nonlocal. Most of these are bottles and fine wares, probably brought to the site
as gifts or offerings. At the local level, ceramic production changed over time. A dramatic shift in resource procurement
occurred at the end of the first occupation phase, and production became more diversified and intense as the site and its
population grew larger
Estudiosde activacidn neutr6nicay petrograffa,y andlisis estilistica muestranla diversidadcerdmicaque existe en el centro
ceremonialde Chavinde
en los Andes de Perd. Se proponennuevas interpretacionessobre la produccidncerdmica
en Chavinentre 850 y 200Huantar,
a. C. Variosgrupos de composicidnson identificados,con pastas mineraldgicasmuydistintas.La
mayoria de las vasijas exogenas son botellas y cuencosfinos, probablementellevados al centro ceremonialcomo ofrendaso
productosde intercambio.La activacidnneutrdnicarevela que, al nivel local, la produccidncerdmicacambia en el curso de
existenciadel sitio. Se nota el uso de pasta volcdnicadurantelas dos primerasfases de ocupacidn (Urabarriuy Chakinani)y
la produccidnde vasijas principalmenteutilitariascon poca variacidndeforma. En cambio, durantela tercerafase de ocupaci6n (Janabarriu)se usa un material intrusivocomo la granodioritaprocedentede la CordilleraBlanca. La produccidnes
mds diversificadae intensa cuando el sitio conoce su desarrollo mdximo.El estudio de activacion neutrdnicamuestra tambien que las cerdmicascon un alto contenidodel elementocesium no son locales. La mayoriade estas cerdmicasson de estilo
at'pico. Las cerdmicasno locales tienen composicionesquimicasdiversas lo que sugiere multiplesorigines.

The

ceremonial
center
ofChavindeHuantarone of the many galleries of the old temple. The

is knownfor its fine architecture,extensive

stone art, and beautiful ceramics. The
Chavinoccupationspansnearly700 years,between
850 and 200 B.C. The site is located at the crossroads of selva (tropicalforest)-coastand northsouth highland routes (Figure 1), at 3,200 m
elevationin theupperMosnaValley.TheU-shaped
center has two main temples (the old temple,
believedto be the firstone built,andthe new temple, an extensionor additionto the old structure),
a small sunkencircularplaza, and a largerectanThesite
gularplazaflankedby lateralconstructions.
relates to the pan-Andean stylistic horizon of
Chavinandis associatedwiththe spreadof Chavin
ideology. Fringed creatures,supernaturalbeings
withfeline, raptorialbird,andsnake-likeattributes
arecarvedon stoneslabs,columns,andmonoliths.
The Lanzon,a 5-m-highsculpture,is foundwithin

ceremonialcenteris surrounded
by a settlementthat
reaches proto-urbansize by 250 B.C. Due to its
location, religious importance,and the ceramic
offeringsfoundin Chavin,this site has been interpretedas a pilgrimagecenter(Keatinge1981;Lumbreras1974). Its economicimportanceis reflected
by the presence of nonlocal commodities like
obsidian,ceramicsof foreign style, and products
from the tropicalforestandPacificcoast. Spondylus shells fromthe warmwatersof coastalEcuador
are anotherexampleof long-distancetrade.
Chavininfluencehas been felt in manyregions
of Peru,in boththe highlandsandalong the coast.
Many sites bear stylistic traits that link them to
Chavinideology.Ceramics,textiles,bones,carved
stones,andclay friezestestifyto this culturalaffiliation. The spreadof Chavinideology and style,
however, is not clearly understood. Chavin de

Isabelle C. Druc 0 Departmentof Anthropology,5240 Social Science Building, 1180 ObservatoryDrive, Universityof
Wisconsin-Madison,Madison,WI 53706-1393
LatinAmericanAntiquity, 15(3), 2004, pp. 344-363
Copyright@2004 by the Society for AmericanArchaeology
344

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

Huantaris seen as representinga synthesisof earlier traditionsanda centerfromwhich ideas,if not

objects, radiated.Indeed, Chavin-styleceramics
are common at manyPeruviansites. It was, however,not certainif theirpresencewas the resultof
imitation(diffusionof ideasor styles)or trade(diffusionof objects).This questionpromptedthe present INAA (instrumental neutron activation
analysis) study, which completes earlier provenancestudieswithpetrographyandXRF(x-rayfluorescence) analyses of Chavin ceramics (Druc
1998a).A few compositionalstudieshadbeenpreviously undertakenbut not at a regionallevel and
withprovenancein mind.Theseearlieranalysesare
first reviewed to place the present study in perspective.Methodologyandresultsfollow.
A Review of Chavin Ceramic Analyses
Although stylistic analysis offers insight into the
provenanceof ceramics,compositionalanalysisof
the pastehelps to differentiatelocal productsfrom
imports,thusprovidinga meansto investigateinterregional interactions.The initial compositional
studiesof ceramicsfrom Chavinde Huantarwere
undertakenin theearly1980s.Thefirststudy,a petrographicanalysisof nineceramicthinsectionsby
RobertTracy,was publishedin RichardBurger's
(1984) excavationreport.The samplescame from
ceramicsfound outside the ceremonialcenter,in
the surroundingChavin settlement.Tracyidentified several mineralogical compositions (with
quartz,plagioclase,biotite,homblende,metamorphic, fine-grainedvolcanic, and plutonicigneous
rockfragments).His observationscorrespondto my
analyses.
The second study, using Maissbauer spectroscopy (MS), instrumentalneutron activation
analysis (INAA), and X-ray diffraction(XRD),
was conductedby a Germanteam (Salazaret al.
1986) on 61 Chavinsherdsfrom an interiorcorridor of the old temple of Chavin,50 surfacefinds
(Chavin),two ancientsoil samples,andone modem clay sample.The aim of the studywas to classify the samplesandlearnaboutfiringprocedure.
The hierarchicalclusteringof the INAA results
produced five groups with chemically distinct
pastes.The largestgroupincluded57 Chavinand
post-Chavinceramics,andthe recentclay sample.
It was thereforeassumedthatthe wareshad been

345

locally produced.The MS analysisindicatedthat

the ceramicswere firedin a reducingatmosphere
followed by an oxidationphase.X-raydiffraction
(XRD) identifiedsome of the mineralswithinthe
ceramics: black talc and feldspar for the main
group, and amphibole crystals for some of the
other samples.
These two studies showed that ceramics at
Chavin de Huantarhad variedcompositionsand
some were of nonlocal origin. Stylistic analysis
had produceda similarconclusion(Burger1984;
Lumbreras1977, 1993). Based on style, northern
andcoastaloriginswereproposedfor thenonlocal
wares.
Anothercompositionalstudy(MS, INAA, thin
section microscopy)was conductedby the same
Germanteam(Lumbreraset al. 2003) on 70 sherds
from the OfrendasGalleryof Chavinde Huantar.
Thisgalleryis famousformorethan500 finebowls
and bottles, believed to be offerings left in the
gallery on multiple occasions (Lumbreras1977,
1993).The Ofrendasmaterialis, however,stylistically differentfromtheotherceramicsfromtheceremonialcenteror the surroundingsettlement.The
hierarchicalclusteringof the INAA results conformed to stylistic groups within the Ofrendas
material.Gebhardet al. (1996) suggesta nonlocal
provenance,butno comparativematerialfromother
siteswas analyzedto allowidentificationof origins.
Stylistic affinitiespoint to the central and north
coast, andto the northernhighlands(Burger1984;
Lumbreras1993).
Until 1994, no comprehensive study of a
regional scale had been attemptedto understand
how potterywas producedin the Chavinarea.Was
it madeatdifferentworkshops?WereChavin-style
ceramicscentrallyproducedandthendistributed?
No ceramicworkshopsorkilnshavebeen foundin
Chavinde Huantaror in the nearbyregion.
A studyof ceramicproductionanddistribution
in the Chavinsphereof influence(Figure 1) was
conducted in 1993-1997 (Druc 1998a, 1998b),
usingpetrographyandenergydispersiveX-rayfluorescenceanalysis(EDXRF).The studyincluded
soil andmodemclay
284 ceramicsand69 modemrn
samplesfromsix siteslocatedin five differenthighlandandcoastalregions(Chavinde Huantar,Huaricoto,Pallka,Anc6n,andtwo smallsitesin Nepefia).
The analysis results showed that most of the
Chavin-styleceramicsin the Chavinspherewere

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

346

LATINAMERICAN
ANTIQUITY

Pacific

[Vol.15, No. 3, 2004]

Huaura

OceanUma

Garaga
'

100 km

Uma

Figure 1. Study region and sites (after Druc 1998a, Figure 4).

locally made imitations.Furthermore,it proveda

small-scaleexchangeof bottlesandfinebowls into
the ceremonialcenterof Chavinde Huantar,(and
not outwardfrom Chavin).This conformsto the
idea of Chavinde Huantaras a pilgrimagecenter.
The study also yielded new insights into ceramic
production.Petrographicanalysisshowedthatthe
wareswereproducedin severalworkshopsor production areas at each site, and that bottles were
very often producedwith a fine paste.
Thepatternof productionattheceremonialcenter of Chavinde Huantar,however,provedmore
complexthanat anyothersite studied.The ceramics analyzedin the 1993-1997 study come from
the ceremonialcenter(n = 86) and the associated
settlement(n = 23). As seen in priorstudies, the
ceramicsshow high compositionalheterogeneity.
Six differentcompositionalgroupsandsubgroups
were petrographicallyidentified,along with unattributedspecimens of atypicalcomposition.Two

maingroupsareidentifiedas local. One is characterized by a volcanic-derivedpaste (pyroclastic

sandwith quartz,plagioclase,biotite,hornblende,
welded rhyolitictuff fragments),and the otherby
an intrusive-derivedpaste (quartz, plagioclase,
biotite, augite, granodioritefragments).A third
groupof mixedintrusive-sedimentary
composition
was also foundto be local, on the basis of geological and abundancecriteria.Subgroupsaregranulometricor modal variants.Ceramicswith exotic
pastesdisplaymetamorphiccomposition(quartzmuscovite-schist) or rare compositions (felsic,
granitic)not correspondingto local geology (for
detailssee Druc 1997, 1998a).The EDXRFanalysis suggestedthatat least 30 percentof the ceramics found in Chavinde Huantarwere of nonlocal
production.This figureconformsto the findingof
the INAA studyby Salazarandcolleagues(1986),
where25 percentof thewareswerefoundto be nonlocal (20 out of 76 wares).

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

347

REPORTS
Table 1. Analyzed Sample of ChavinCeramicsby Types and Vessel Forms.
Urabarriu
Bowls
Ollas
Jars
Bottles
Total

4
8
1
1
14

Chakinani
6
3
4
8
21

Althoughx-rayfluorescenceworkedwell atthe
intersitelevel, it failed to distinguish individual
groupsat the intrasitelevel andwouldnotpartition
the corpus as accuratelyas petrographicclassification.Forthis reason,andto get a clearerpicture
of ceramicproductionat Chavinde Huantar,it was
decided to submit the Chavin corpus to another
roundof analysis,this time using neutronactivation. In addition,the chemicalresultscould be triangulatedwith differentsets of data:petrographic,
geological, stylistic, archaeological, and ethnographic.The resultsof this last studyarepresented
here.
The methodologywill be describedfirst.The
resultsarethendiscussedin light of the chemical,
mineral,and stylistic data.Finally,the discussion
is enlargedto reacha higherinterpretative
levelwith
regardto ceramicproductionthroughtime in relation to the developmentof Chavinde Huantarand
interregionalinteractions.
Methodology
Several questions defined the objectives of the
INAA study. Its goal was identifying and interpretingintrasitechemicalgroupsandinvestigating
compositionaldifferencesin relationto time and
space. How many differentchemical groups are
therein Chavinde Huantarceramics?Whatdo they
reflect?Is therea change in ceramiccomposition
throughtime? Is therea centralizationof production? The sample is comprisedof 81 specimens
fromChavinde Huantar(56 sherds,and25 thathad
alreadybeen used for EDXRF), and 20 pressed
powderpellets from sherdsfrom the sites of Pallka, Huaricoto,Anc6n and Garagay(Figure1) for
comparativepurposes.No bindingagentwas used
for preparingthe pellets,whichwerekeptin a desiccatorafteruse. The sampleshaveknownmineral
compositionfromthe previousanalyses.
The Chavinsamplecomes fromthe threeoccupational phases and related styles identified by

Janabarriu
15
5
3
5
28

Chavin-Style
1
1
0
3
5

Atypical
4
2
3
3
12

RichardBurger(1984, 1988) at Chavinde Huantar:Urabarriu(850 to 460 B.C), Chakinani(460 to

390 B.C.), and Janabarriu(390 to 200 B.C.). The
differentwareformsin the samplearerepresentative of those found on the site: bowls, neckless
ollas,jars,andbottles(Table1).Theceramicsfrom
the ceremonialarea (n = 70) come from excavations by WendellBennett(1938, 1944), and bear
identificationnumbers3700 and above (Table2).
Theceramicsfromtheancientsettlementof Chavin
de Huantaroutsidethe ceremonialcenter(n = 11,
ID# B 1 and above) come from excavations by
RichardBurger(1984). Table1 shows the number
of samplesanalyzedby type andvessel form.The
Chakinani,andJanabarriu
Urabarriu,
typesarespecific to the respectivetimeperiodsof the site occupation. The Chavin category groups ceramics of
Chavin style, which could not be identified as
Urabarriu,Chakinani,or Janabarriutype ware.
Most of the analyzed ceramics from Chavin de
Huantarare represented in Figure 2. They are
grouped according to the chemical and mineralogicalgroupsin Table3. Vessel formsper group
are listed in Table2.
The neutronactivationanalysiswas conducted
at the SmithsonianCenterfor MaterialResearch
and Education(SCMRE)and at the nuclearreactorfacilityof theNationalInstituteof Standardsand
Technology(NIST).Neutronactivationanalysisin
general,andthe procedurefollowed at NIST,have
been amply described elsewhere (Bishop and
Crown 1994; Bishop et al. 1982; Glascock 1992;
Perlmanand Asaro 1969). James Blackmanand
RonaldBishop conductedthe elementalanalysis.
The sampleswerepreparedfrom200 to 400 mg of
pastedrilledfromthesherdcross-sectionsandfrom
the pressedpowderpellets. Standardswere run at
the same time with the powdersamplesenclosed
in plasticvials.Of the 31 elementscommonlymeasuredwith INAA, the following 18 elementswere
used for the statisticalanalysis:Na, K, Sc, Cr,Fe,
Rb, Cs, Ba, La, Ce, Sm, Eu,Tb,Yb, Lu, Hf, Ta,Th.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

348

[Vol.15, No. 3, 2004]

LATINAMERICAN
ANTIQUITY

Table 2. Vessel Formsper CompositionalGroup(See Table 3 for GroupCharacteristics).

Group 1
3742a
3742b
3764e
3786e
3786h
3686i
3745c
3748c
3748d
3780b
3781c
B 19
3781D
B17
3757B
3787A
3787b

Urabarriubowl
Urabarriuolla
Urabarriuolla
Urabarriuolla
Urabarriubowl
Urabarriujar
Chakinanijar
Chakinanijar
Chakinaniolla
Janabarriuolla
Janabarriubowl
Chakinanibowl
Atypical olla
Chakinanibowl
Chakinanibowl
Urabarriuolla
Janabarriubowl

Group 2
B4
3781h
3781i
3781d
3780H
3783b
B 13
3786b
3784c
3780c
3781j
3781k
3787c
3781e
3783H
3700

Janabarriubowl
Janabarriuolla
Janabarriuolla
Janabarriubowl
Janabarriubowl
Janabarriuolla
Chakinaniolla
Urabarriuolla
Janabarriubowl
Janabarriubowl
Janabarriujar
Janabarriujar
Janabarriubowl
Janabarriubottle
Janabarriubottle
Atypical bowl

Group 3
3780a
3783a
3786c
P23

Urabarriuolla
Janabarriujar
Urabarriubowl
Pallka bottle

Group4
3748b
3764f
3774
3783d
B21
3743a
3748e
B14
3755a

Urabarriujar
Urabarriubottle
Group7
Chavinbowl
3764b
Janabarriubowl
Janabarriubowl
Chavin bottle
Group8
Chavinbottle (spout fragment)
3775a
Chakinanibottle (spout fragment) 3786f
3785
Atypical bowl

Group 5
3762
3764a
3786g
3755b
3745a
B20
3765a
37841
B8
3783c
3780e
B21
P3
P4
P14
P24

Atypical bottle
Atypicaljar
Atypicaljar
Chakinanibottle
Chakinanijar
Chakinanibowl
Chakinanibottle
Janabarriubottle
Janabarriubottle
Janabarriubowl
Janabarriubowl
Janabarriubowl
Pallka olla
Pallka olla
Pallkabottle
Pallka bottle

The elements were chosen accordingto smallest

analyticalerror,expectedvalues in ceramics,and
inspectionof the raw data.The alkali Cs and Ba
were importantdiscriminatorsfor this specific set
of samplesand were thus includedin the statistical analysis.Raw data were log transformedand
datawere exploredvia multivariateanalyses.
Differentclusteringmethodsas well as principal componentanalysis(PCA),using bothcovariance-variance and correlation matrices, were
explored. Cluster analysis was conducted using
log-transformeddata, mean Euclideandistances,
andhierarchicalagglomerativecompleteandaverage link methods. Both linkage methods proved
conclusivein groupingthesamples,yieldingstrong
groupoverlap,which suggestsgenuinepatterning.

Group 6
3784f
B 15
3790B
3787d
3787B
3787a
3754B

Atypical bottle
Chakinanibottle
Atypical bowl
Urabarriubowl
Atypical bowl
Atypical bottle
Chakinanibottle

Janabarriujar

Janabarriubowl
Urabarriujar
Urabarriumolcajete

The resultsof the two clusteringmethodswill be

discussed as they provide complementaryinformationon ceramicproductionin Chavinde Huantar. The average linkage allowed for more
homogeneousclustersin termsof themineralcompositionof the samples.Clusteranalysis,however,
imposes different patterning depending on the
methodused and thereforerequiresexternalvalidation of the results (Aldenderfer1982; Baxter
1994;Shennan1988).Consequently,workingwith
the raw listings was importantin evaluatingthe
clusters,along with informationon style andmineralogy.In principalcomponentanalysis,the variance-covariancematrixwas preferredoverthe use
of a correlationmatrix.The lattercentersthe distribution,an approachnot recommendedfor very

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Table 3. Classificationof the Ceramic Samples Based on HierarchicalClusteringby the Average-LinkM

Groups
Group 1

N 101a(81)
18; 17.8%;(22.2%)

Group l a
Group2

3; 3%; (3.7%)
19; 18.8%;(23.4%)

Group 3
Group4
Group5

4; 3.9%; (3.7%)
12; 11.9%(14.8%)
16; 15.8% (11.9%)

Group6
Group7

7; 6.9%; (8.6%)
12; 11.9%;(3.7%)

Group 8

3; 3%; (3.7%)

Group9 + Outliers

Descriptionb
red slip ollas/bowls, combed ollas/bowl; 1 circle-dot bowl,
2 jars, 1 atypical olla; U, C, 3J
1 circle-dot bowl, 2 jars; J, C, atypical
5 ollas, 2 undec, 3 dec & 2 circle-dot bowls, 4 bottles,
2 jars, 1 atyp bowl; J, 3C, 2U
dec. olla & jar, bowl, +Pallka bottle; 2U, 2J
6 bottles, 3 bowls, 2 circle-dot bowls, 1 atyp. Jar;U, C, J
4 Pallka +12 Chavin sherds, ollas, bottles, jars, circle-dot
olla + bowl, atypical bottle + jar; C, J
bottles, atyp. & dec. bowls and bottles; U, C, atypicals
3 Chavin, 3 Garagay,3 Huaricoto,3 Anc6n; ollas, bowls,
bottles, jars; U, C, J
olla, jar, circle-dot bowl; 2 U, J

7; 6.9%; (1.2%)

Mineralogyc
volcanic tuff,
pyroclasticmaterial
volcanics, pyroclastic material
basic-interm.intrusive
+2 sed/intr
2 volcanic, 2 granitic
fine paste + sedimentary
intrusive,sedimentary,
1 volcanic
sedimentaryfine paste
mixed
qz-muscovite schist

low Cs
high Cs

very hi
Ce, Nd
Yb, Lu
Chak bowl 3708A, 2 Huaricoto, pellitic,
+ coast
2 Anc6n, 2 Garagay

apercentagesare based on 101 samples (all sites included), and 81 samples for Chavin de Huantaronly (in parentheses)
bU = Urabarriu,C = Chakinani,J = Janabarriu,dec = decorated,atyp = atypical.
csed = sedimentery,intr = intrusive,metam = metamorphic,interm = intermediate,qz = quartz.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Chemis
low Cr
Ce, Hf
high Cs

350

LATINAMERICAN
ANTIQUITY

heterogeneous samples, as is the case with the

ceramiccompositionsfrom Chavinde Huantar.
Results and Discussion
Eightcompositionalgroupsof archaeologicalsignificancewere identifiedin the hierarchicalclassification of the 56 samples from Chavin de
Huantarand 20 comparativesamples from four
other sites. These chemical groups are presented
in Table3, along with informationon mineralogy,
form, style, chemistry,and possible source areas;
the sherdsamplesfor each groupareillustratedin
Figure2.
The PCA scatterplot for ceramicsfromChavin
de Huantarshowsfive groups(Figure3). The main
chemical variablesresponsiblefor this classification are (by orderof importance):Cs, Th, La, Ce,
Rb, andK, for PC1, andCR, LU,YB, SC for PC2.
Thefirstprincipalcomponent(PC1)explains42.34
percentof the varianceandthe second(PC2)23.25
percent.
The chemical groups show internal heterogeneity.Compositionalvariabilitywithinclusters
is above 17 to 20 percentfor most of the elements,
suggestingmultipleoriginsfor the samplesin the
sameclusteror the existenceof severalworkshops
using clay from differentlocalized sourcesin the
same productionarea. Consequently,representation in multivariatespace, such as a PCA scatter
plot, is not easily interpretedvisually.The groups
are spreadout and give the impressionof being
intermixedbecauseof the reductionin the number
of dimensionsto two orthree,particularlyso when
the samples from the comparative sites are
included.Nevertheless,the chemicalgroupspoint
to productionareas with internallysimilar geochemicalenvironment.Due to the degreeof compositionaldiversityin Chavinde Huantarceramics,
the sampleclassificationby clusteranalysison logtransformeddatais moreinformativethanthePCA
andprovidesthe basis for the discussion.
Sample Classification
Thehierarchicalclassificationreflectsthemainpetrographicgroups observed in mineral analysis:
acidic volcanic, intermediateto basic intrusive,
fine/sedimentary,and mica tempers.The clustering constructedwiththecompletelinkmethodfollows an acidic to basic trend, with the acidic

[Vol.15, No. 3, 2004]

volcanicsampleson one endof thedendrogramand

the basic intrusivesampleson the other.Elemental variationsoccuraccordingly,allowingthe characterization of the mineral trends in terms of
chemicaltendencies.Table4 gives the concentration rangesfor each compositionalgroupderived
by this method. Values outside the range are in
parentheses,while valuesforoutliersarenotgiven.
The group numbers in parenthesesrefer to the
groupsformedby averagelinkage listed in Table
3. Differencesbetween the acidic and basic poles
are mostly seen amongtraceelements.The acidic
pole is characterizedby low Sc, and high Rb, Cs,
La, Ce, and Th (the reverseis true for the basic
pole). Ironcontentshows differencesaccordingto
the mineralogyor provenancewithinthe clusters,
witha low rangein thevolcanicgroupanda higher
one in the basic-intermediate intrusive group.
Exceptions in chemical trends are observed for
ceramics from the coast (Anc6n and Garagay),
Huaricoto,a few Chavin samples, and the three
mica-temperedceramics.Samplesfrom the comparativesites arefoundin compositionalgroups3,
5, 7 and 9 and as outliers.
In the complete-linkdendrogram,some groups
encompasssampleswith differenttempercomposition, althoughsimilaritiesin mineralcontentare
observed.Chemicalvariationsthatexist in theclay
may not be observedin petrographydueto the resolutionof the microscope.The clay matrix,which
often representsmorethan50 percentof the paste
of the Chavin ceramics (Druc 1997), is largely
uncharacterized.Consequently,finer distinctions
arereachedwithINAAthanwithpetrography
when
dealingwithfineorlow-temperedfragments.Samples with similartempermay thus displaychemical variationsrelatedto the use of a differentclay
paste. This is the case for the two Garagayollas,
G4 andG6, whichwerebothtemperedwithcrushed
granodioritebuthaddifferencesin Cs, Ba, Tb, Ta,
Th, andRb content.Theirmineralogicalcomposition is verydifferentfromtherestof theAnc6nand
Garagayceramics (see Druc et al. 2001), hence
theirseparateclustering.
The dendrogrambuilt using the average-link
method does not follow the same acidic to basic
trendin the orderingof the clusters.Nevertheless,
the constitutionof the groupsis similar.The average-linkmethodyields a morehomogeneousclusteringof the samplesrelativeto theirmineralogy.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

351

Group 1
Volcanicpaste
42a

42b

64e

86e

48d
886i5c48c
81c

81D

B19

87b

57B

80a
83a
86c
P
Pallka
Group 3 Volcanic+ Intrusive
Group 2
Intrusive
S81h

817

81d

(*Sedimentary)

80

B4

080c*

81j

84c3

87c

81k

83
81e

U0J
3700
3700

4 cm

Figure 2. The ceramic sample from Chavin de Huantar grouped according to chemistry and mineralogy. Identifying
numbers for samples collected by Bennett (1938, 1944) in this figure correspond to sample numbers listed in Tables 2 and
5, but lack the initial "37"; e.g., 42a corresponds to 3742a in Tables 2 and 5.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

352

LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol. 15, No. 3, 2004]

Group4
Finepaste+ Sedimentary
48b

64f

74

'83d
B21

43a

48e

B14

55a
Group

Chavin

S64(*Volcanic

55b

ceramics

65a

45aB20

+P3,P4,
P14,P24

GO
841

Pallka

InstrusiveandSedimentary
paste)

B8

83c

B1

80e

*Group6 Sedimentary(*Finepaste)

87B

64b

87a* 54B

Group7
Chavin
Huaricoto
Ancon
Garagay
75a

Group 8
Micapaste
Micapaste

86f

85

4cm
0

Outlier
Figure 2. continued.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

4 cm

353

REPORTS

44

20

-1-

0)

++

O.

?A

- *

_+

AFine

paste

* Sedimentary

+ Intrusive
Atypicalpaste

S,
0a

Volcanic

A*

Mica

-2

-3

-3

-2

-1
0
PrincipalComponent1

Figure 3. PCA scatterplot of ceramics from Chavin de Huantar on the first two principal components. Covariance
matrix, log transformed data.

Cs as Site Discriminant
In orderto allow a closer examinationof the data
andto see whichelementscharacterizeeachgroup,
the chemical raw data were listed following the
orderof the hierarchicalclustering.One element
in particular,cesium (Cs), provedto be important
in theclassificationof thesamples.Cesiumappears
to be a site discriminator,with high Cs content
(above 11 ppm)suggestinga nonlocalprovenance
fortheChavinsherds.However,thiscriterionis not
thesole indicatorof foreignprovenanceandit must
be appliedin conjunctionwith otherinformation
like the style, mineralogy, and archaeological
provenanceof the sherds.
Cesium is likely to be found in late-stage-formationcrystalsin acidicrocks,in leucite,feldspar,
and similarminerals(BruceVelde,personalcommunication2001). Itis also foundas tracesin black
mica(biotite)(FoucaultandRaoult1995),in white

mica (muscovite) in pegmatite,but not in metamorphicrocks (BruceVelde, personalcommunication2001). Thispointis importantto understand
the relativelylow Cs contentin the ceramicstemperedwith quartz-muscoviteschist (mica temper,
Table 3). These wares are nonlocal, as no metamorphicrocksareknownin the regionof Chavin.
High cesium contentmay also point to the use of
a micaceousclay to producethe ceramics,due to
the preferentialabsorptionof Cs associatedwith
micaceousclaysovergeologicaltime(RonBishop,
personalcommunication1998).
As a corollary,ceramicsfound in Chavinwith
Cs contentbelow 11 ppm areprobablylocal. This
is observedfor all theceramicsin thebasicto intermediateintrusivegroupandthesedimentary-intrusive group,and for most ceramicsin the volcanic
group.Theirmineralogyalso correspondsto local
resourcesaroundChavinde Huantar.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

354

LATINAMERICAN
ANTIQUITY

The chemical tendencyshown in Table 3 and

theassociatedmineralogysuggestthatCs is a componentof acidic volcanicrocks, while it is of low
abundancein ceramicswith intermediateto basic
intrusivepaste. Its presenceis linked to the geological environmentof the sourceareafor ceramic
production.The high Cs content of the coastal
ceramicsfromAnc6n andGaragay,andHuaricoto
in the Callej6nde Huaylas,is probablyrelatedto
the volcanicsof thoseregions.On the contrary,the
Mosna-Chavinregionis characterized
by intrusivegranodioritic and sedimentary geology, which
explains the lower Cs content in local Chavin
ceramics.

k00

,.0

~~oo

'

00N
00-r/t

N0

CH

Cli

CM

SIn
Nm

Sz

IIt

[Vol.15, No. 3, 2004]

c~1\A

Non-Local Ceramicsat Chavinde Huantar

Cl
C\

0)

?M
CC/)

000-u

00
I

CO

0:
0I

.0`~

00 0
I

9~

0)

Nt

cO
0)

00

0)

rn

0)).0

k0)

06

C,4C

Sc,0CcO~
O
Oo~

0,0

I I'-I

vi

-]~

CC

00
OO

0)

I0.

~I~~

; \d

-:l

o6

00

Cl

ed

CD

U
~a

>

0~0
Z

.0

~c#C.

O.

~0~eC.)0
--

0 3

0)0)

0+

0.

" CO )

+0
0)
II

C)

0~
>5

COCO

O0

C0.SQ

.00.

U3

Q)20

0)0

Based on cesium content,mineralogy,local geology, and style, severalceramicsfound in Chavin

de Huantarwereidentifiedas nonlocal.Inthecluster analysisof the INAA results,they standout as
outliers or they group separatelyfrom the main
Chavinceramics(Groups1 and2). Mostof thestylistically atypicalceramicsare found in Groups7,
6, and 5.
High Cs contentis found in abouthalf of the
stylistically atypical wares from Chavin (7/12),
theirnonlocalinterpretation.
therebystrengthening
These include four jars (3742c, 3748b, 3764a,
3786g) and three bowls (3708A, Mosna bowl
3755a, oversized bowl 3764b). Chakinanibowl
3708A has very high Cs (56.90 ppm) and low Na
and Fe values. Its paste is not tempered and
extremely fine, unlike any other paste found in
Chavin.An earliermicroprobeanalysisof the clay
matrixof bowl 3708A showedSi/Al ratiosof 4.20
to 4.91, well above local Chavin ceramics with
ratios from 1.98 to 2.00 in the illite-montmorillonite range(Druc 1997; Newman 1987).
ThehighCs contentof severaladditionalsherds
suggests they are not local, althoughthey are of
Chavinstyle. This is the case for two jars (3744,
3745a), four circle-and-dotbowls (B21, 3775a,
3787b, 3784d), three plain bowls (B1, 3783c,
3783d), olla 3741d, andbottle3755c. Sherd3774,
withhighCs content,comes froma concaveundecoratedbowl found in a cell in the ceremonialarea
(Bennett1938)andis probablylateChavinin date.
mineralcomposition
Ithas a granitic/metamorphic
with very coarse,alteredrock fragments,dissimilarto theusualbasicto intermediateintrusivecom-

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

positionof the local Group2. Its contextsuggests

thatit is an offering(Bennett1938).
The other atypical bowls and bottles (3762,
3787B, 3790, 3784f, 3787a) have normalCs content but they cluster separately from the local
ceramics. They have sedimentary or intrusive
pastes.Theirstyle,whichis clearlynotChavin,and
chemistrysuggestnonlocalproduction.
Atypical olla 3781D clusters with outliers
3787A and B 19 within the volcanic local group.
Althoughof uncommonshape,this warecould be
from the Mosnaregion.Similarly,threevolcanictemperedceramicsform a subgroupjoining local
Group1, butthey areprobablyof differentorigin.
These are Janabarriu
circle-stampedbowl 3787b,
Chakinanijar 3744, and atypical red-slippedjar
3742c. Bowl 3787b andjar 3744 lack the typical
welded tuff fragmentsof the local group,but display the same monomineralicgrains.They have a
high Cs content,suggestinga nonlocalorigin.Furthermore,jar 3744 has a slip containing quartz
unlike any other local slip, while the use of volcanic temperin bowl 3787b is uncommonduring
Janabarriu
times.
Threeceramicsfrom Chavinand Pallkabottle
P23 (Group3) clusterseparatelyfromthe intrusive
local Group 2. These are Urabarriubowl 3786c
withintrusivepaste,Urabarriu
decoratedolla 3780a
with volcanic temper,and volcanic-temperedjar
3783a with graphiteslip over a texturedbody.The
latteris probablya Chakinaniware. The Cs contentof these ceramicsis not significantlyhigh, but
the mineralogydiffersfrom the local intrusiveor
volcanic groups. The varied mineralogy of this
group suggests at least two distinct production
areas.The two volcanic-temperedwares lack the
welded tuff fragmentsof the local groupandhave
pyroxenecrystalsin theclay matrix.Theycouldbe
regional productionsfrom the White Cordillera.
BottleP23 foundat Pallkahas a moreacidic-intrusive pastethanthe local Chavingranodioritepaste
and could not have been made in Chavin.
Twoothervolcanic-tempered
waresdo notclusterwiththelocalvolcanicgroup.Theirhighcesium
contentsuggestsa nonlocalorigin.This is the case
for Janabarriu
oversizedbowl 3764b and atypical
jar 3786g. They arefoundin the chemicalclusters
7 and 5, suggesting an origin outside the Mosna
Valley. The origin of bowl 3764b is discussed
below.

355

The final clearly nonlocal group is the mica

group(Group8, Table3). Thewhite mica flakesin
the clay matrixcome from crushedquartz-muscovite schistfragmentsaddedto theclayby thepotter.Thismineralogicalcompositionis foreignto the
Mosna Valley geology. A high Cs content was
expectedforthisgroup,butit is relativelylow (6.38,
7, and 11 ppm) due to the metamorphicorigin of
the temper.In this group,the elementalcompositionfortheJanabarriu
bowl 3775a
circle-impressed
differs from that measuredfor the two Urabarriu
wares,suggestinga differentorigin.
Table 5 summarizes these results. Nonlocal
ceramicsat Chavinde Huantarvaryin form,paste
composition,and date, as will be detailedbelow.
The provenancediversity for volcanic-tempered
wares bears particularsignificancewhen considering the production scenario throughout the
Chavinoccupationof thesite.Compositionaldiversity suggests multiplenonlocal origins. Nonlocal
waresreach30 percent,andupto 40 percent,if one
considersthewaresincludedin thechemicalgroups
3 through8. However,the local productionof several ceramicsin the fine wareGroup4 and mixed
compositionGroup5 cannotbe ruledout.
Local Productionat Chavinde Huantarand
Local Geology
Local geology and the abundancecriteria(Harbottle 1982; Shepard 1968) determinethe local
characterof a group.Groups1 and2 (Table3) consist of ceramicswithmineralcompositionsmatching the local geology. They are termed "local
groups"andrepresent22.2 and23.4 percentof the
Chavinsample.Partof Group4, characterizedby
a sedimentarypaste, is certainlyalso local. The
threemainpetrographic
groupsidentifiedin Chavin
ceramics(volcanic,intrusive,andsedimentary)are
compositiontypes foundwithina 20 km radiusof
the site (Figure4).
The local geology consists of Quaternaryalluvial and glacial deposits at the bottomof the valley, sedimentary rocks of Late Jurassic age
(ChicamaFormation:dark shale and dark limestone, sandstoneand tuff), and LowerCretaceous
sedimentaryrocks (Oy6n Formationand Goyallarisquisgagroup:shale, slate, coal seams, limestone quartzite,and arenite)on the valley slopes
(Cobbinget al. 1996:73-74; Turneret al. 1999).
Sediments with mineralsand rock fragmentsof

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

356

LATINAMERICAN
ANTIQUITY

[Vol.15, No. 3, 2004]

Table 5. Non-local Ceramicsat Chavin de Huantar.

Atypical wares with high Cs content - N 6/81 (7.4%)
3708A
outlier
pellitic untemperedpaste; decoratedlight gray bowl, Chak period
3742c
Gr 1
C1, red slip jar, prob.Urab period
3748b
B 1, mix sed, volc, intr.;Urab red slippedjar
Gr 4
3755a
F mix sed, few intr,no hornblende;Mosna orange slip bowl with red paint
Gr 4
3764b
Gr 7
Cl many micas in the paste; Jan oversized red slipped bowl
Gr 5
3786g
C1 pyroclastics,very coarse grains;incised jar
Chavin style non-local wares with high Cs - N 8/81 (9.9%)
3741d
Gr 7b
B2; black olla
3744
Gr 1
C3 coarse volc sand, no tuff, crushedquartzslip; oxidized Chakjar
3755c
Gr 7
F fine-sandgrains of basic intrusiveorigin in mica paste with mixed lithics (intr,sed, volc);
Chak bottle
3774
Gr 4
D; reducedChavinbowl
3783d
Gr 4
B1; Jan red slip bowl
3784d
Gr 4
B 1; Jan circle-and-dotblack bowl
3787b
Gr 1
C3 Jan circle-and-dotblack bowl
B21
Gr 4
B1 grains perpendicularto walls; Jan circle-and-dotbrownbowl
Atypical wares with normal Cs content (cluster separatelyfrom the "local"wares) N 5/81 (6.1%)
3762
Gr 5
graniticmaterial,not from White Cordillera;bichromebottle chamber,zoned red with
graphite,probablyJan
3784f
Gr 6
Bl; incised bottle chamber,dull beige paste and very fine walls
3787a
Gr 6
F; fragmentfrom squarered bottle
3787B
A2; black bowl with red paint within incision
Gr 6
3790
Bi ; incised bowl
Gr 6
Chavin style wares, normal Cs content (cluster separatelyfrom the "local"wares) N 4/81 (4.9%)
3765a
Gr 5
granitictemper,medium to coarse sand grains;Chavinbottle
3775a
Gr 8
E; Jan circle-and-dotbowl, brown micaceous slip
3785
Gr 8
E; Urab?Body fragmentwith interiornet impressions
3786f
E; Urab red slip jar
Gr 8
Legend:Al, A2 Materialof basic to intermediateintrusiverock in the paste.
B 1, B2, B3 Materialof sedimentaryorigin in the paste.
Cl, C2, C3 Materialof volcanic origin (pyroclastics)with embayed quartz,plagioclase, green hornblende,brownbiotite,
and welded tuff fragments(in C1).
D Acid intrusiverock fragmentsand very alteredminerals,very coarse grains.
E Paste temperedwith quartz-muscoviteschist fragments.
F Fine paste with few inclusions of mixed origin and fine to medium sand grains.
Urab = Urabarriu,Chak = Chakinani,Jan = Janabarriu,sed = sedimentary,intr = intrusive;volc = volcanic.

mixed sedimentarycompositionare found at the

valley bottom.
The White Cordillerais composed of a granodioritic-tonaliticbatholith,intrudedinto volcanic
and sedimentarysequences(Cobbinget al. 1981;
EgelerandDe Booy 1956). Greenhornblendeis a
chief componentof the WhiteCordilleragranodiorite(RobertStrusievicz,personalcommunication
1999) and is found in quantityin the thin sections
fromtheChavinintrusivegroup.Glacierscoverthe
peaks of the White Cordilleraabove 5,000 m elevation(BodenlosandEricksen1955;INGEMMET
1995;Turneret al. 1999).

Sourcesof magmaticmaterialareless extensive

thanintrusiverocksaroundChavin.Volcaniccompositions in the form of ignimbriticmaterialand
tuff fragmentsoutcropto the south in the Mosna
headwater(Cobbinget al. 1996).Daciticextrusives
with welded tuffs outcrop10 km south of Chavin
at PampaJunin(EgelerandDe Booy 1956), a tributaryof the Rio Mosna, 1 km above the junction
with QuebradaTambillo on the road to CatacChavin. Rhyolitic tuff is also reportedas stocks
northeastof Chavin,above San Marcos near the
Antaminamine (Bodenlos and Ericksen 1955).
Greenhornblendeis presentwithinthevolcanictuff

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

357

,IWO

Sa

..0

aro

Z.

?Huat
.14r~

..

+rChavin
.

,t*

.,~)?,

?r?~2

T-11M,
*-

Iti~?)?)trrC,~
~c-Z.1l

11-1

ut

r?(?~~?~r),?trrrrlb
r??r?????~rr
-r-?r~??
?rrtz

lp

VIP=

Sedimentary Rocks and Deposits

LowerCretaceous, GoyllarisquizgaGroup(shale, siltstone,
Ssandstone,
slate, quartzite,limestone)

LowerCretaceous, Oyon Formation(shale, sandstone,

limestone, tuff)

LateJurassic, ChicamaFormation(darkshale and limestone,

sandstone, tuff)
Quaternary,morainicdeposits, sand, gravel, silt, till
Quaternaryfluvioglacial,morainicand aluvialdeposits

Igneous Rocks
Intrusiveneogene granodiorite
A: Leucogranodiorite;
B: Tonalite-granodiorite
Neogene riodacite
Paleogene, CalipuyGroup(volcanics)
Figure 4. Geology of the Chavin de Huantar area (After Turner et al. 1999, Figure 2; Druc 1998, Figure 5; Cobbing et al.
1996, Map 20i). 1. Pampa Junin volcanics (dacitic tuff); 2. Quilloc volcanics (Rhyolite, dacite); 3. Atamina-Contonga volcanics (rhyolite); 4. Cerro Torregaga (riodacite).

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

358

LATINAMERICAN
ANTIQUITY

fragmentsand in the paste of the volcanic-temperedsherds.This is peculiarbecausehornblende

is normallybrownin volcanics. Ignimbritictuffs
from the Black Cordillerahave no hornblende
(RobertStrusievicz,personalcommunication1998
and 1999), which rules out a provenancewest of
the Rio Santafor the tuff-temperedsherdsfound
in Chavin.
Othersourcesof volcanictuff are closer to the
site. The LateJurassicChicamaFormationunderlyingtheMosnaValleyis composedof volcanictuff
along with darkshale, darklimestone, and sandstone (Figure 4; Turner et al. 1999:48-49).
Althoughthis formationcould have been a source
for the Chavinpotters,its mixed sedimentaryand
tuff compositiondoes not match the paste of the
volcanicgroup.However,bouldersof volcanictuff
are reportedaroundthe site and along the river
banks(Turneret al. 1999:55),andtheymaybe part
of a rock fall or landslidefrom the uppervalley
slope to the east. Unfortunately,therehas been no
petrographicanalysisof these boulders.However,
it is likely thatthe local pottersused these soft tuff
rocks as temperingmaterial.
Theuse of volcanictuffwas notrestrictedto potteryproduction.Twodifferentkindsof porousvolcanic tuff were used for carving some of the
columnsandtenonnedheadsof Chavin(Turneret
al. 1999:55).It is likely thatthe potterswere aware
of this stonecarving"industry"andmay havebenefitedfromit by usingtuffdebris.This impliesthat
theywouldnothaveneededto go too farto get their
temperingmaterial,if stone carving was a local
activity,as suggestedby theamountof stonesculpturesin Chavin.
Theremaywell havebeenmultipleceramicproductionlocationsorworkshopswithintheresource
areasdescribedabove,which in turnmay account
for compositionalvariationsrelatedto spatialdistributions.Ignimbriticor pyroclasticdepositsrepresent a good example of such compositional
variability,as their mineralassemblagesvary by
depthof depositflow anddistancefromthe source.
This can account for the chemical heterogeneity
observedwithina single cluster.However,to confirmthe locationof the procurementareas,intensive samplingandpetrographic
analysisof sandand
should
be
conducted
to identifypetroclay samples
facies (Miksa2000).

[Vol.15, No. 3, 2004]

CeramicProductionthroughSpace
and Timein Chavin
Elevenceramicsamplesfromtheancientsettlement
to the northand from aroundthe ceremonialcenter were included in the analysis. They are dispersed through the hierarchical classification,
togetherwiththose fromthe ceremonialarea,suggestingthatthechemicalcompositionof thesherds
is not linked to spatialdistributionwithin the site
areaas a whole.Inotherwords,no particularworkshop was producingexclusivelyfor the residential
or ceremonialareaorusing a differentsourcelocation. Variationsarenoted,however,with regardto
pastecompositionlinkedto a particularoccupation
phase.
Ceramic Production during the Urabarriu
Phase. Volcanicmaterialis prevalentin Urabarriu
and Chakinaniceramics(Group1, Table3). Only
a few ceramicswereproducedwithintrusiveorsedsherdstemimentarymaterial.The few Janabarriu
with
volcanic
material
are
pered
probablynonlocal.
The diversityof pastes within the volcanic group
and the domesticcharacterof the wares(ollas and
jars) suggest a differentproductionscenariothan
for later periods.The chemical diversityand the
domestic characterof the volcanic wares (ollas,
bowls, a fewjars)duringtheUrabarriuphasepoint
to the existenceof multiplesmall-scaleproducers
aroundandaboveChavin,whilefinebowlsandbottles were producedin or broughtinto the valley.
Volcanicmaterialresiststhermalstresswell (Rice
1987; Shepard 1968), which suits the domestic
characterof the Urabarriuwares. These wares
reflect a demand for simpler,less-diverse forms
thanthose of laterperiods.This patternof multiple local productionlocationsalso is observedfor
other sites and is associated with compositional
diversitywithin the coarse ware inventory,while
fine bowls and bottleshave a more homogeneous
compositional profile (Chapdelaineet al. 1995;
Druc 1998a).Burgernotesthe coarseexecutionof
domesticwaresfrom the highlandsites surrounding Chavinde Huantar,whichcontrastswitha finer
qualityof productionforthelocal waresin Chavin,
suggesting the existence of differentworkshops
supplying the hamlets and the center (Burger
1984:185).No pasteanalysisof ceramicsfromthe
highlandsiteswas conducted,butthepresentanalysis and ethnographicevidence suggest the pres-

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

ence of severalpottingcommunitiesthatmayhave
producedfortheChavinpopulationorforintra-village consumption.As statedearlier,ceramicproductionduringtheUrabarriu
phasemighthavebeen
linkedto or benefitedfromvolcanicstone carving
for the temple,indicatingthatat least some of the
workshopswere locatedclose to the center.
CeramicProductionduringthe Chakinaniand
JanabarriuPhases. The use of volcanicresources
declined,and half of the ceramicswere tempered
with sedimentarymaterialor a mixedtemper(sedimentary,volcanic, and intrusivefragmentsin the
paste)duringthe Chakinaniphase.Intrusivematerial from the White Cordillerawas mostly used
during Janabarriutimes to produce all types of
wares.Only a few ceramicshave a sedimentaryor
volcanicpaste.This suggests a switch in resource
areasandworkshoplocations,andtheexploitation
of intrusivematerialsfrom resourceareaswest of
Chavin,along the flanksof the White Cordillera.
Workshopsat the time of the maximumextentof
Chavinde Huantar(390-200 B.C.) were probably
locatedto the west, in agreementwith the distribution of modernpottingvillages along both sides
of the WhiteCordillera(Druc 1996, 2001).
No temporalvariationis observedforthemixedcomposition and fine-pasteceramics (Group4).
This was also seen in an earlierstudy based on a
largersamplethan the one used for INAA (Druc
1998a). These ceramicswere probablyproduced
in smallquantitythroughoutthe occupationof the
ceremonialcenteror were broughtfrom production centersoutsidethe MosnaValley.The present
chemical analysis suggests that some of these
ceramicswere not producedlocally.

359

Paste and CeramicStyle

jars, 1 olla) also display a varietyof pastes.They

are temperedwith sedimentary(2 jars, 1 bottle, 1
bowl), welded tuff (3 jars and 1 olla), or intrusive
materials(1 bottle and 1 bowl), and two are finepastebowls.Theyappearin differentchemicalclusters,suggestingdifferentorigins.Thestyleandhigh
Cs contentin halfof the atypicalwaressuggestthat
they were broughtto the site. Also suggested as
nonlocal are some 18 Chavin-stylesherds,which
clusterwith ceramicsfromsites otherthanChavin
or are outliers.These are bottles, plain and decoratedbowls,two circle-dotbowls, a quartz-slipped
jar, anda blackolla. They varyin mineralcomposition (volcanic, intrusive,sedimentary,and pellitic) and often presenta high Cs content.
It is interestingto note the rarityof ollas and
absence of coarse ware in the nonlocal ceramics.
Instead,the majorityof the nonlocalceramicsare
nondomesticwares,liquidor transportcontainers
(jars/bottles)andbowls, withfine walls,oftendecorated,and with good surfacefinish. Their ceremonial function or offering status is not
demonstrablebutcan be presumed.The compositionaldifferencesand styles suggestthe existence
of differentcontextsof warecirculation.Distributionnetworksforceramicsapparentlydo not apply
here.Neitherthe productionnorthe distributionof
ceramicsappearsto have been controlledor organized.Rather,ceramicdistributionapparentlywas
the resultof occasionalevents.Because Chavinde
Huantarwas an importantreligiousandeconomic
center,local and nonlocalproductsmusthave circulatedatparticularoccasionsas gifts orofferings,
or havebeen acquiredduringfairs.It is also possible that some of the nonlocal wares could have
beenbroughtto Chavinas containersandwerenot
the exchangeproductper se.

Anotherresearchvenueis thecorrelation
of styleand
pastecomposition.No particular
pasteformulawas
reservedforthemanufacture
of a specificwarestyle.
The circle-and-dotdecoratedwarescommonto the
Janabarriuphase occur in differentclusters, displaying differentchemical and mineralcompositions,bothlocal andnonlocal,rulingoutcentralized
production.Thestampedwareswereproducedwith
differentmaterials:
volcanic,intrusive,mixedlithologies, sedimentary,and even metamorphic.Of the
eight stampedceramicstested,five arenonlocal.
The 12 stylisticallyatypicalwares in the sample fromChavinde Huantar(3 bottles,3 bowls, 5

InterregionalRelationships
RelationshipswithPallkain the CasmaValleyand
with the Callej6nde Huaylasare suggestedby the
analysis.SeveralceramicsfromChavinoccuralong
withceramicsfromPallkain compositionalGroup
5. The Pallka sherdshave an intrusivetemperof
graniticcompositiondifferentfromthe granodiorite/tonalitetype found in Chavin.It is difficultto
ascertainthe origin of this mixed Pallka-Chavin
group.Theatypicalstyle of severalceramicsin this
groupandtheirsubclusteringwithinGroup5 suggest a nonlocalorigin for bottle 3762, jars 3764a

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

360

LATINAMERICAN
ANTIQUITY

and3786g, andbowl B20. Bottle3762 is decorated

with graphiteoverred,a style calledWacheqsaby
Lumbreras(1977, 1993) and supposedlyfromthe
Cupisnique region on the north coast or correspondinghighlands.However,the use of graphite
decorationis alsoknownfromtheKotosh-Huanuco
region,southeastof Chavin(Burger1984;Lumbreras 1993).
Bottle 3765a was originally attributedto the
coast by discriminantanalysisusing x-rayfluorescence data (Druc 1998a). It is now groupedwith
Pallkasherds,regardlessof the clusteringmethod,
even whensamplesfromthecoastalsites of Anc6n
andGaragayareincluded.The CasmaValleyis the
probableprovenancesite of this bottle.This placementis morein agreementwithbottlestyle at both
sites and, above all, with petrographicanalysis
(unavailablefor this sampleat the time of the XRF
analysis).PallkabottleP23 withfineintrusivepaste
clustersin Group3 withChavinoutliers,separately
from the otherPallkasherds.Its origin, however,
is not Chavinde Huantar,due to its mineralcomposition thatdoes not matchlocal Chavinmineralogy.
Along withthe sherdsfromtheceremonialcenter of Huaricotoin the Callej6nde Huaylasis the
oversizedbowl 3764b.Itis a largered-slippedbowl
materialand
temperedwithpyroclastic-ignimbritic
weldedtufffragmentsat a time (Janabarriu
phase)
when thistype of temperwas no longerused in the
region of Chavinde Huantar.The presenceof an
andesite fragmentin the paste suggests that the
materialcame froma volcanicrockof the Tertiary
Calipuy Formation.This rock type is not found
nearChavin.Themineralcompositionof thisbowl
is consistentwith sourcesof volcanictuffandignimbritecommonin theCallej6nde Huaylas(Robert
Strusievicz,personalcommunication1999; Cobbing et al. 1996). The Callej6n is easily reached
througha mountainpass just above Chavin.The
provenanceof this bowl, however,is not the small
ceremonialcenterof Huaricoto,judging from the
lack of mineralsimilaritywith the ceramicsfrom
thatsite.
SeveralotherceramicsfromChavinclusterseparately from the Chavin local groups (#3744,
3742c, 3787b, 3755a, and B21) or from samples
fromthe coast. Manyof these come fromatypical
ceramics,whose style ormineralcompositionsuggests a nonlocal provenance,as yet unidentified.

[Vol.15, No. 3, 2004]

These sherds have been discussed in relationto

theirhighCs content.TheMosnaRed-over-Orange
oripaintedsherdin Group4 is also of unattributed
gin. Its style suggestsa northernprovenance,from
the regionof Pacopampa(Lumbreras1993). Last,
the finesand-pasteChakinanibottle3755c andsedimentarypaste olla 3741d are linked to samples
fromthe coastalsites of Anc6nandGaragay.Their
mineralogy,however,is differentfrom the coastal
paste found in Anc6n and Garagay(Druc et al.
2001) and rules out a centralcoast provenance.
Conclusions
Priorchemical analyses hinted at the wide compositionaldiversityof the ceramicsin Chavin de
Huantar.FurtherpetrographicanalysisandINAA
studiesallow this diversityto be linkedto production scenarioschangingover time, and to a considerable amount of nonlocal wares. Several
observationson ceramicproductioncan be made
at the local and interregionallevels. Accordingto
chemical and mineralanalyses,severalcentersof
productionwere supplyingthe ancientsettlement
and ceremonialcenter of Chavin de Huantar.At
least threelargeproductionareascan be proposed:
two in thelocal highlandssouthandwest of Chavin
and one in the valley bottom. Severalworkshops
were probablyactivein each area,as suggestedby
the internal heterogeneity of the compositional
groups.Also, manyproductioncentersmust have
been in use at differenttime periods.The use of
material,oftenwithwelded
ignimbritic-pyroclastic
tuff fragments,is observedduringthe Urabarriu
phase, the first occupation phase at Chavin de
Huantar.The workshopsusing this materialwere
probablylocatedupto 12kmfromtheresourcearea
(estimateddistance based on ethnographicdata,
Druc 1996), south and southeastof Chavin, and
northeastof the site abovethe village of San Marcos (Figure5). Some of the workshopsalso could
havebeen locatednearthe site, using tuffboulders
scatteredalongtheMosnariverbanks,ortuffdebris
fromvolcanicstone-carvingactivity.Laterin time,
duringthe maximumextensionof the site, the tendency was to use intrusiveraw materials,and the
workshopsmusthavebeen locatedwest of the settlement,usingmaterialsfromtheslopeof theWhite
Cordillera.
Thethirdproductionareais characterized
by the

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

361

REPORTS

ai

..

-CI*'Mallas

<
-

,C r ile

.........

.i .
a
..................
........ .............
...:..
havi
R..-:i ....
S
om.
//
:..... .....
...... ..
:
n.W
p
N

"San

arcos

Bla c

.. .
. .r

......

l l i ~i~

lji l j

i :ii:
i :iiii ;
} Iiii iii:ii
...............
ii~iiiiii!;:ii
l?:I!:
lii:
..... .

a;:i
B lanca

..

.....j

.......::A:
.......ii..:i. ..!!
!.
3:40 :
2ooo. . . . . . .l
. de!.!..2..!. !i . . . . .'~~~~l::
.
.. . . . .. . .. . .. . H
ohvn
: : l.....
allejonde

. .... .
....J

.
1 3000I

4000

30004000.......50.0.
.

Pocenters
s ible

of

I6

Hu

.....
.....
......
.

.
-

I!

ceramic

I :- iI: 1Ij 1
4

: 7

production

5000

6768

las~

. ..........
tio
ofeiprodu

ll--:il~l~
5 ~jii~

km:ll

......

:I I

1Ir

1I

iI

m
.

iI1

Ii

I: :i I

I;U

Ii

iI

Figure 5. The Chavin region and possible ceramic production areas suggested by the analysis.

use of sedimentarymaterialandthe productionof

fine paste ceramics. However, productionmust
have been low andthe workshopsfew andlocated
nearthe site of Chavin,in the valley floor or just
aboveit. The workshopsin this areawere engaged
in small-scaleproductionof bottlesanddecorated
bowls throughoutthe existence of the site.
The workshopslocatedhigherup in the valley
on the slope of the Cordillerararelyproducedbottles. DuringUrabarriutimes, when volcanicmaterial was predominantlyused, the most common
wares were ollas and bowls. As the site grew and
became moreimportant,local ceramicproduction
becamemorediversifiedandintrusivematerialwas

used to producea widerrangeof ceramics,including bottlesandjars. The shift in procurementarea

andworkshoplocationscannotbe explainedbased
on pasteanalysisalone.Resourceexhaustion,landslidesthatburiedsources,ortechnologicalchanges
are possibilities.However,among more probable
factors were the economic expansionof the site,
population growth, higher demand for ceramic
products, and the establishmentof new potters,
who perhapswere from the Callej6nde Huaylas
and more familiarwith the intrusivematerials.
This production pattern corresponds to the
observeddevelopmentof Chavinde Huantar.During the Urabarriuphase,the settlementwas small

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

362

[Vol.15, No. 3, 2004]

LATINAMERICAN
ANTIQUITY

and located immediatelynorthof the ceremonial

area.Chavingrew duringthe Chakinaniphase to
an estimated 15 ha and to 42 ha duringthe Janabarriuphase,with the settlementextendingsouth
of the ceremonialcenter(Burger1984, 1992).The
ceremonialcenteralonecoveredsome 1.5ha in the
early periodsto 5 ha at its maximumextent.Severalvillages abovethe valleyfloorandin the highlands surroundedChavin.The highlandvillages
appearto have been occupied mainly duringthe
Urabarriu
phase,ata timewhenvolcanicresources
were used for ceramicproduction.Archaeological
evidence shows a dispersedpopulationduringthe
Urabarriuand Chakinaniphases,and a moreconcentratedand dense occupationduringJanabarriu
times, reflectedin the ceramicproductionpattern.
During the Urabarriuphase, the diversityof volcanicpastessuggestsdispersedceramicproviders,
probably responding to low demand. A more
diverseandintenseproductionis suggestedduring
the Janabarriuphase, when the valley was more
heavily populated.The absenceof atypicalwares
in thevolcanicandintrusivegroupsis in accordance
with the hypothesisof local highlandproduction
for utilitarianware.
The region providingthe Chavin de Huantar
populationwithutilitarianwaremusthaveextended
well beyondthe site. Untilthe early 1970s,potters
fromYacyaandMallas(Figure5), 30 km northin
the highlands above the lower Mosna Valley,
walkedto Chavinto bartertheirpots (Druc 1996;
RichardBurger,personalcommunication1998).
These conclusionssupportBurger'shypothesisof
the Chavin Temple drawing services and goods
from communitiesup to the lower Mosna Valley
and southern Callej6n de Huaylas (Burger
1984:249).In additionto the religiousimportance
of the ceremonialcenter,Chavinmusthavebeen a
centralplace for fairs and exchange of local and
interregionalproducts,including ceramics. Economic and culturalinteractionsexplain the wide
diversity of pastes and variety of origins of the
ceramicsin Chavin.
At the level of interregionalinteractions,the
importanceof Chavinde Huantaris demonstrated
by thenumberof atypicalandnonlocalwaresfrom
the Urabarriuphaseon. None of the sites analyzed
previously (Pallka, Huaricoto,Anc6n, Garagay
[Druc 1998a;Druc et al. 2001]) show this diversity of pasteandnumbersof atypicalandnonlocal

wares,attestingto the interregionalscope of interactionswith the ceremonialcenter.Most nonlocal

wares are bottles and fine bowls that were probably not destinedfor domesticuse in view of their
style, decoration,and rarity.One bottle may be
fromthe ceremonialcenterof Pallkain the coastal
valleyof Casma,whilea largebowlprobablycomes
from the Callej6nde Huaylas,on the otherside of
theWhiteCordillera.Abouta thirdof the nonlocal
waresarenon-Chavinin style andmay come from
cultural areas outside Chavin influence whose
inhabitantswere awareof the religious centerof
Chavinde Huantar.
This INAA study yields a clearer picture of
ceramicproductionand interactionsin Chavinde
Huantar.However,none of the conclusions presentedherecould havebeen reachedsolely on the
basis of neutronactivation.Petrographicandgeological datawereveryimportantin interpretingthe
chemicalresults,along with stylistic information.
By combining these different sets of data more
informationcan be extractedfrompaste analysis.
Acknowledgments.I would like to express my thanksto Ron
Bishop and Jim Blackman, who conducted the chemical
analysis at the Smithsonianlaboratory,which is maintained
at the National Instituteof Standardsand Technology,and to
Ron Bishop for his advice on statisticaltreatmentof the data.
This paperalso benefitedfrom the comments of clay mineralogist Bruce Velde. The interpretationof the data and conclusions are, however, my sole responsibility. I thank the
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of
Canada for a postdoctoral grant (fellowship NB 756-970120), the Smithsonian Center for Material Research and
Education for allowing me to conduct this study, and the
Museum of NaturalHistory in New York for lending many
ceramics from the Bennett collection.

References Cited
Aldenderfer,MarkS.
1982 Methodsof ClusterValidationforArchaeology.World
Archaeology14: 61-72.
Baxter,Mike J.
1994 ExploratoryMultivariateAnalysis in Archaeology.
EdinburghUniversityPress,Edinburgh.
Bennett,WendellC.
1938 1938 Expedition,Callej6nde Huaylas,Peru.Unpublished notes.AmericanMuseumof NaturalHistory,New
York.
1944 TheNorthernHighlandsof Peru:Excavationsin the
Callejdnde Huaylasand at Chavinde Huantar.AnthropologicalPapersof theAmericanMuseumof NaturalHistoryVol. 39, Pt. 1.AmericanMuseumof NaturalHistory,
New York.
Bishop, RonaldL., and PatriciaL Crown
1994 ExperimentalProceduresandParametersUsed in the

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS
NeutronActivationAnalysisof theGilaPolyInstrumental
chromeCeramics.InCeramicsandIdeology.SaladoPolychromePottery,editedby PatriciaL. Crown,pp.227-231.
Universityof New Mexico Press,Albuquerque.
Bishop, Ronald.L., RobertL. Rands,andGeorgeR. Holley
1982 CeramicCompositionalAnalysis in Archaeological
Perspective.AdvancesinArchaeologicalMethodand Theory 5:275-330.
Bodenlos,AlfredJ., and GeorgeE. Ericksen
1955 Lead-ZincDeposits of CordilleraBlanca and Northern CordilleraHuayhuash,Peru. United States Government PrintingOffice,Washington,D.C.
Burger,Richard.L.
1984 The PrehistoricOccupationof Chavinde Huantar,
Peru.Universityof CaliforniaPublicationsin Anthropology 14. Universityof CaliforniaPress,Berkeley.
1988 Unity andHeterogeneityWithintheChavinHorizon.
In PeruvianPrehistory,edited by RichardW. Keatinge,
pp. 99-144. CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge.
1992 Chavin and the Origins of Andean Civilization.
Thamesand Hudson,London.
Chapdelaine,Claude,SantiagoUceda, and Greg Kennedy
1995 Activaci6nneutronicaen el estudiode la producci6n
local de la cerimica ritualen el sitio Moche, Peru.Bulletinde l'InstitutFrangaisd'EtudesAndines24:183-212.
Cobbing,John,W. S. Pitcher,J. J. Wilson,J. W. Baldock,W. P.
Taylor,W. McCourt,andN. J. Snelling
1981 The Geology of the WesternCordilleraof Northern
Peru. Overseas Memoir 5. Instituteof Geological Sciences, London.
Cobbing,John,Agapito SanchezE, WilliamMartinezV., and
HectorZ6arate
O.
1996 Geologiade los cuadrangulosde Huaraz,Recuay,La
Union, Chiquiany Yanahuanca.Boletin no 76. Instituto
Geol6gico Mineroy Metalurgico,Lima.
Druc,IsabelleC.
1996 De la ethnograffahacia la arqueologia:Aportes de
entrevistascon ceramistasde Ancash (Perni)parala caracterizaci6nde la cerimicaprehispinica.Bulletinde l'Institutfrangaisd'e'tudesandines25(1):17-41.
1997 Caractdrisationet analyse de provenancede la productioncdramiquedans laire d'influenceChavin(Andes
centre-nord):Un aspect des relations interrigionalesac
I'Horizonancien. Dissertationthesis. Departementd'anthropologie,Universit6de Montreal,Montr6al.
1998a CeramicProductionand Distributionin the Chavin
Sphereof influence.BritishArchaeologicalReports,InternationalSeries 731. HadrianBooks, Oxford.
1998b Producci6ny distribuci6nde la cerimica en Chavin
de Huaintar,Apendice I. In Cronologiay economia de
Chavin de Hudntar, edited by Richard L. Burger, pp.
303-314. PontificiaUniversidadCat61lica
del Perni,Lima.
2001 Soil SourcesforCeramicProductionin theAndes.In
Archaeologyand Clays, edited by Isabelle C. Druc, pp.
95-105. British ArchaeologicalReportsS942. Hadrian
Books, Oxford.
Druc, Isabelle C., RichardL. Burger,Regina Zamojska,and
PierreMagny.
2001 Anc6n andGaragayCeramicProductionat the Time
of Chavinde Huantar.JournalofArchaeologicalScience
28:29-43.
Egeler,CorneliusG., andThijs De Booy
1956 Geology and Petrology of Part of the Southern
CordilleraBlanca,Peru.GeologySerie 19:1-86.
Foucault,Alain, andJean-FrangoisRaoult
1995 Dictionnairede gdologie. Masson,Paris.
Glascock,MichaelD.

363

1992 Characterizationof Archaeological Ceramics at

MURRby NeutronActivationAnalysis andMultivariate
Statistics.InChemicalCharacterization
of CeramicPastes
in Archaeology,editedby HectorNeff, pp.11-26. Monographs in WorldArchaeology No 7. PrehistoricPress,
Madison,Wisconsin.
Harbottle,Garman
in Archaeology.In Con1982 ChemicalCharacterization
textsforPrehistoricExchange,editedby J. E. Ericsonand
TimothyK, Earle,pp. 13-51. AcademicPress,New York.
INGEMMET(InstitutoGeol6gico Mineroy Metaldrgico)
1995 Mapa geoldgico del cuadrangulo de Huari, 19-i.
INGEMMET,Lima.
Keatinge,RichardW.
1981 The Natureand Role of Religious Diffusion in the
EarlyStagesof StateFormation:An ExamplefromPeruvian Prehistory.In TheTransitionto Statehoodin theNew
World,editedby G.D. JonesandR. R. Kautz,pp 172-187.
CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge,
Lumbreras,Luis G.
1974 ThePeople and Cultureof AncientPeru. Smithsonian InstitutionPress,Washington,D.C.
1977 Excavacionesen el temploantiguode Chavin(sector
R): Informede la sextacampafia.NawpaPacha 15: 1-42.
1993 Chavinde Huantar Excavacionesen la Galeria de
las Ofrendas.DeutschenArchaeologischeInstituts,Band
51. Philippvon Zabern,Mainz.
Lumbreras,Luis G., R. Gehard,W. Hiiusler,FedericoKauffman-Doig,J, Riedner,G. Sieben, and UrsulaWagner
2003 MossbauerStudyof CeramicFindsfromthe Galeria
de las Ofrendas,Chavinde Huantar.HyperlineInteractions 150:51-72.
Miksa,ElizabethJ.
2000 Correspondenceand DiscriminantAnalyses of Sand
and Sand TemperCompositions,Tonto Basin, Arizona.
42:273-299.
Archaeometr,
Newman,A.C. D. (editor)
1987 Chemistryof Clays and ClayMinerals.Mineralogical Society,Monograph6. LongmanScientific& Technical, New York.
Perlman,I., andFrankAsaro
1969 PotteryAnalysisby NeutronActivation.Archaeometry 11:21-52.
Rice, PrudenceM.
A Sourcebook.Universityof Chicago
1987 PotteryAnalysis:
Press,Chicago.
Salazar,R., UrselWagner,FritzE. Wagner,W. Korschinsky,M.
Zahn,Josef Riederer,andFedericoKauffmann-Doig
1986 Missbauer Spectroscopy and Neutron Activation
Analysisof RecentFindsfromChavin.In Proceedingsof
the 1984 International Symposiumon Archaeometry,
edited by J. S. Olin and M. J. Blackmann,pp. 143-151.
SmithsonianInstitutionPress,WashingtonD.C.
Shennan,Stephen
1988 Quantifyingarchaeology.EdinburghUniversityPress,
GreatBritain.
Shepard.AnnaO.
1968 Ceramicsfor theArchaeologist.CarnegieInstitution
of Washington,Washington,D.C.
Turner,RobertJ. W., RosemaryJ., Knight,andJohnRick
1999 GeologicalLandscapeof the Pre-IncaArcheological
Site at Chavinde Huantar,Peru.CurrentResearch1999D, Geological Surveyof Canada:47-56.
ReceivedMarch29, 2002; AcceptedOctober21, 2002;
RevisedAugust13, 2003.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Thu, 13 Mar 2014 22:54:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions