See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/236850054

Determining the Geological Provenance of Obsidian Artifacts

from the Maya Region: A Test of the Efficacy of Visual Sourcing

Article  in  Latin American Antiquity · September 2000

DOI: 10.2307/972178

CITATIONS READS
86 352

5 authors, including:

Geoffrey Braswell John Clark

University of California, San Diego Brigham Young University - Provo Main Campus
36 PUBLICATIONS   635 CITATIONS    65 PUBLICATIONS   1,990 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Kazuo Aoyama Heather Mckillop

Ibaraki University Louisiana State University
53 PUBLICATIONS   1,125 CITATIONS    58 PUBLICATIONS   978 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Create new project "Obsidian Artifact Sourcing " View project

Pusilha Archaeological Project (PUSAP) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kazuo Aoyama on 04 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Å式苧IA"QEficIA"TY
VOLUME ll NUMBER3 SEPTEMBER2000

SAA
∩ l〕 r芦1 ㌔:-

Soc臆rY FOR AMERiCAN ARCHAEOLOGY

 DETERMINING TIIE GEOLOGICAL PROVENANCE
oF OBSIDIAN ARTIFACTS FROM TIIE MAYA REGION:
A TEST OF THE EFFICACY OF VISUAL SOURCING

Geoffrey E･ Braswell, John E･ Clark･ Kazuo Aoyama, Heather II McKillop, and Michael D･ Glascock

Dun･ng the las'four decades, mesoamerL･can archDeOLogL･sts regularly have employed van'ous chemical assay techniques to deter-
m,.ne Eke geoLogl･cal sources ofobsL.dL･an arl'facts･ In necenl years･ the neLiab,'lityofthese anLZlyticaL procedures has L'ncreased and
thei, costs have declined, encouragL･ng the assay of ever larger samples･ Nonetheless･ several constraints make L-1 unlikely that cotn-
positL･Onal data wL.ll be used routinely 'o attrLlbuEe enlL･ne collections to their geologL'caL sources･ This report describes a test of visual
sou,ring. a technique that for many sites in the Maya region L･s only slightly less accurate than composi'ional assay･ We also pno-
pose sampIL.ng StrategLeS that combine visual and compositionaL sounclng Zn Ways that allow large collections to be accurately
sourced at low costs. Ft'naLly, We suggest ways to develop the EeChniquefor use throughout Lbtin America.

Dwante las dltimas de,cadas, arqueo,Logos mesoamericanos pop lo general ham empleado diversas te'cnL-cos quEmicas de ana'LL-sis
para determinar Lasbentes geoldgicas de artefactos de obsidiana･ En a招os recL'entes･ Se ha L-ncnementado la conPabiLidad de esta

close de I"OCedE･mt･entos anaLl,ticos en tanto que su costo ha disminuido･ de manera que se ha L'mpulsado el ana'lL'sEs de muestras
ma,s g,andes. No obstante, hay limilanles que Vuelven poco pn,bable que los datos composicL'onales se empLeen en forma ruti-
na,ia para la atrL･buct.dn de colecct･ones completas a lasbentes geoldgicas de origen･ En esle reporte se describe uno prueba del
me,todo vL･suaL de atribucio,n, que es una te,cnLIca lL･geramente memos precL･sa que los ana'Lsis composL'cionales en eL caso de muchos
sL･tios en la reg10n maya･ Ademds, prvponemos estrategias de muesEreo que COmbLnan el tnCtodo visual con los andlisis compost--
C.･onales, de manera que sea pos''bLe dePnL-r La Pente geoLo'gica de coLeccL-ones grandes a un bajo costoI Por dEtimo･ pnoponemos
medidas para desarroLlar eL uso de la te'ctu'ca en toda Lptinoame'rica･

ore than a decade ago, Tbrrence exchange (e.g., Aoyama 1994; Amauld 1990; Clark

M (1986: 10-37) ably summarizedthe most

important studies of long-distance and

inte汀eglOnal obsidian exchange in Mesoamerica

et al. 1989; Clarkand Salcedo 1989; Nelson 1980,
1985, 1989). But most research still emphasizes血e

gathering of source-attribution data ratherthanthe

(e.g" Hammond 1972, 1976; Fires-Ferreira 1975,
1976; Sidrys 1976a, 1976b, 1977)･ The goalofmany
researchers at that time was to reconstruct ancient
trade routes uslng geOloglCal provenance data
gleanedfromthe chemiCalassay of obsidian artifacts･
More recently, numerous au血ors have criticized or
analysis of exchange mechanisms (but see Braswell
1996; Clarkand Salcedo 1989; Healan 1993; Zeitlin
1982),and provenance data rarely have been used to
formulateand test hypothesesthat focus on issues
otherthan trade patternS･
Al山Ough there were several early attempts to

refinedthese trade-route models (e.g., Dreiss 1988; make source attributions for Maya obsidianartifacts
Dreiss and Brown 1989, 1991 ; McKillop et al. 1988)･ using compositionaldata (e･g･, Washington 1921),
Others have proposed new, detailed hypotheses to chemical analysis became a viablearchaeometric
replace older, more generalconJeCtureS about ancient technique only 35 years ago (Heizeret al･ 1965; Jack

Geoffrey E. Brasweu I Department ofAnthropology･ State University Of New York at Buffalo･ Amherst･ NY 14261
John E. Ctark. Department of Anthropology, 950 SWKT･ Brigham Young University･ Provo･ UT 84602
Kazuo Aoyama l- Faculty of Humanities･ Ibaraki University, Bunkyo 2-1- 1, Mito, Ibaraki 3 10-8512･ Japan
Heather I. McKillop. Department of Geography and Anthropology, Louisiana State University･ Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Michael D. Glascock lL Research Reactor Center, University Of Missouri, Columbia･ MO 6521 1

Latin AmeriCanAntiquity, 1 I(3), 2000, pp･ 269-282

copyright ㊨ 2(状) bythe Society for American Archaeology

269
 270 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
and Heizer 1968; Stross et al. 1968; Weaver and
Stross 1965). Since血en, numerous compositional
methods have been employed to make source attri-
butions, but X-ray fluorescence (XRF)and neutron
activation analysis (NAA) have emerged as the most
common laboratory t∝hniques used to determine
the elementalcomposition,and hence, geologlC Ori-
gln, Of obsidianartifacts.
NAAand XRF have become highly acctmte tech-
nlqueS, though some source attributions for
MesoameriCanartifacts detemined beforethe I 980s
almost certainly are e汀OneOuS (Glascock et al.
1998:28-22). Recent improvements are due to仇e
ngorous use of standards, a clearer understanding of
bothintersource and intrasource chemiCalvariation,
the determination of concentrations for more ele-
ments, andthe use of improved statisticaltechniques
to interpret compositionaldata (Asaro etal. 1978;
Glascock et al. 1998; Hughes 1984; Stross et al.
1983)･ In addition,the federalfunding of research
reactorsand other facilities has allowed laboratory
scientists to offertheiranalyticalservices at reduced
costs. Together, these factors have madethe chemi-
Calsourclng Of Maya obsidianartifacts common.
Nevertheless, it is unlikelythat NAA, XRF, Or
other methods of compositional assay ever will be
used routinely to source large samples or entire col-
lections of MesoameriCanobsidianartifacts. Most
govemments allow only a small fraction of any
archaeologicalcollection to leavethe country for
analysIS, and these techniques requlre expensive
equlpment血at is not commonly available in Latin
America. In addition, because of山e enomous over-
head required torun a research reactor or other faci1-
lty, even a modest charge for each artifact prohibits
the sourclng Of morethana few hundred pieces.
Finally, NAAand high-precision XRF requirethat
a portion of anartifact be cut, ground,and prepared
according to cermin standards. In some cases, Sam-
plesare irradiated and must be disposed of accord-
lng tO Strict procedures.
For several reasons, the data provided by the
chemical analysis of a small portion of a collection
are inadequate for use inthe study of ancient econ-
omy. First, because chemicalsourclng is destructive,
it is never random. Unique artifacts, pleCeS found in
specialcontexts, aJld other important specimensare
excluded routinelyfrom samples chosen for chem-
icalassay (Braswell et al. 1994: 178). Suchartifacts
o氏en are of great interest to archaeologlStS, because
【Vol. ll, No. 3, 2000】
their value as items of prestlge Or Status makes them
likely candidates for interreg10nal or long-distance
exchange. Byanalyzing onlythose artifacts judged
to be expendable, We create a systematic bias agalnSt
whole classes of commoditiesthat were important
tothe politicaleconomy. Second, certain obsidian
sources may have been used preferentially for pro-
ducing specific tooltypes. We cannot extrapolate
source data derived from ubiquitous pnsmatic blade
fragments to less-Common projectile polntS Or
eccentrics･ Thus, if weare to understand lithic pro-
duction and exchange systems, we cannot routinely
exclude certain classes ofarlifactsfrom sourceanaly-
ses. This sampling bias has led tothe suggestionthat
血e Maya may not have made b血ces of EI Chayal
obsidian (Moholy-Nagy 1999:304), when血e sim-
ple truthisthat we have not assayed many "gray"
bifaces. Third, important goals of economiCanaly-
sis should be血e estimation of血e quantities of par-
ticulargoodsthat were imported or produced locally
during different periods, andthe measurement of
changes in procurement, production,and consump-
tion pattems. Source data derived from small sam-
ples preclude such analyses.
h sum,the importance of obsidian provenance
data is notthat we canbuild hypotheses about trade
routes from a handful or a breadbox-full of artifacts
(e.g., Hamond 1972; Nelson 1985), but血at we can
study-from a diachronic perspective-broader
issues of prehistoric economy. If weare limited to
provenance data derived from a small number of arti-
facts, it is di抗cult to reconstruct pattems of produc-
tion, exchange, and consumption. Detailed economic
analysis is not possible when source provenance data
are derived from a small sample, because only rarely
is there a clearway to extrapolatethese data tothe
en血e obsidian assemblage. We should aim to soume
large samples drawnfromall artifacttypes or, if pos-
sible, to sourceall obsidianartifacts in a collection.
Ⅵ5ual Sourclng
What is desired,then, isanaccurate, rapid,and non-
destruCtive source a血bution techniquethat can be
used inthefield laboratory. One approachthat clearly
meets most of these criteria is visual sourclng. Inthis
method, obsidian artifactsare sorted into categories
de丘ned by opticalCriteria, including: ( 1 )the refracted
color; (2)the renected color; (3)the degree of translu-
cence and opacity; (4)the degree to which refracted
light is diffused; (5) the presence, size, color,
 REPORTS
frequency, and nature of inclusions; (6)the texture
and luster offlaked surfaces; and (7)the color, tex-
ture, andthickness of cortex (Aoyama 1994, 1996,
1999;Aoyamaetal･ 1999; Braswell etal･ 1994; Clark
1988; Clark and Salcedo 1989: Hellerand Stark
1998; McKillop 1989, 1995). The opticalCriteria we
use for identifying artifactsfromthethree principal
obsidian soumes in血e Maya reglOn are presented
in Table 1.
Ampleand complete reference collectionsare
criticalto visualsourcing･ We advocatethe use of
bothpreviously assayed artifactsand geologiCalsam-
ples when making source a肘ibutions･ It is impor-
tantthatthe artifact reference collection contain
pleCeS Ofvarylng SIZeandthickness･ as well as exam-
ples ofallthe artifact types likely to be found at
archaeologicalsites･ If a particular source is visually
heterogeneous, artifacts presentingthefull range of
optiCalVariation should be present inthe reference
collection. Geologicalreference samples should be
drawn from various outcrops ln a source area in order
to represent as wide a range of variation as possible･
When close correspondencesare not found witharti-
facts inthe reference collection,theanalyst may
make visualsource identi丘cations by using flakes
knapped hl0m geOlogiCalSamples･
Adequate lighting also is important to visual
sourcing. Braswell favorsthe use of a variety of light
sources, ranging from naturalsunlight tofluoresI
cent. In contrast, Clark prefers to usethe same light
source for consistency･ Bright light is most helpful
when studying dark or completely opaqueartifacts･
but sunlightand very bright incandescent bulbs may
`加ash out" differencesinthe re丘acted colors of more
translucent pieces ･ Flourescent tubes highlight some
differences of huethatare obscured by wan incan-
descent sources. A white background, either a cloth
or a piece Ofpaper, oflenaids in comparison of both
refhctedand renected color.
The丘rst four authors of this report each have
found visualsourclng tO yield generally consistent
and reliable results for obsidiancollectionsfrom
血oughout血e Maya reglOn･ 1 we each have checked
our resultsthroughchemiCalassay,and for most
archaeologicalassemblages we have demonstrable
accuracy rates upwards of 95percent (e･g･, Aoyama
1991; Braswell etal･ 1994; Braswell etal･ 1999;
McKillop 1995). Together withGlascock, we advo-
cate血e judicious use of a combined strategy of血e
visualsourclng Of complete collections･ accompa-
271
nied withthe limited testing of these resultsthrough
compositional assay･
Desplte Our Success and that of several
Guatemalanscholars whoalso usethe method (e.g.,
carpio Rezzio 1993; Sanchez Polo 1991), visual
Soumlng remains a controversial tech山que･ Some
Maya li仙c analysts have expressed血eir doubts in
print, and many more remain unconvinced of the
etncacy of the method･ Common criticismsarethat
certain sources are highly variable,and hence diffi-
cult to identify(Moholy-Nagyand Nelson 1990),that
samples chosen for bothvisualsourclngand chem-
icalassayare not random (see Braswell etal･ 1994),
and, most importantly,that independent scholars
have not demonstratedthe llePrOducibilityoftheir
results. This report demonstratesthat･ at least for
certain collections of Maya obsidian, visualsourc-
lng is bothreproducibleand accurate･
A Test ofⅥSualSourclng
In 1991and 1993, Braswell conductedtypologiCal
and attributeanalyses of l,501 obsidianartifacts
aom chitak Tzak, a highland Maya site located near
sumpango, department of S acatepiquez, Guatemala
(Figure 1 ). Surface survey and excavations of the site
were directed by Eugemia J. Robinson (1994, 1997)
as part of the continuing Proyecto Arqueo16gico del
Area Kaqchikel･ Althoughthe visiblearchitecture at
the site dates tothe Late Postclassic period, when
chitak Tzak was a secondary settlement inthe Ixim-
che･ polity, substantialquantities of bothLate Post-
classicand Early Classic ceramicsand obsidianwere
collectedfromthe site.
Each obsidianartifactfrom Chitak Tzak was atbib-
uted to a geologiCalsource according to visualCrite-
ria. Braswell determined that obsidian from Sam
March Jilotepeque (n = 786, 5214percent) isthe most
corrmon materialrepresentedinthe conection, a result
that is not surprising becausethe site is l∝ated only
20 km southofthat source aDea. Obsidianfrom EI
chayal(n = 677, 45･lpercent)also is common･and
a small number of ardfactsfromthe lxtepeque (n =
29, 1.9percent)and San Bartolome MilpasAltas (n
= 9, 0.6percent) sources were identified･2 A random
sample of 36 artifacts was drawn from Suboperation
21and fourofits extensionsforchemiCalassay accord-
ing to abbreviated NAA (Glascock etal･ 1994; Glas-
cock etal. 1998). TYle Sample consisted of seven
percussion makes, two chunks (a debitage taxon), and
27 wholeandfragmentary prismadc blades･
 Table 1. Visual attributes of thethree common Guatemalan obsidianS. h}
ヽl
‥E

Refracted Renected Translucency/ Sharp/ Luster and

Source Color Color Opacity Di軌sed Inclusions Texture of Surface Cortex
EI ChayaJ Frequently Medium gray Medium Di軌sed light, Frequent but smal), Medium Generally
medi Lml to black. translucency appearance dark gray or black luster, soapI 血iれ and

graywith but banded similartofrosted handing and dusty stone texture,后ne relatively
mi1ky or waLXy tX)rtlOnS glass. iLnClusions are corrm unmaJTed surface. smooth.
appearance,thickest are Opaque･ h clearer examples. When
portion o氏en has pre紀nt, handing iswide and
roseate hue. Less and somewhat imgular.
commonly, clear,
dark gay, or black.

軸ue Usually brown, Black but opaque Most commonly Sharp re舟acted Usually none,though High luster Generally
similar h color pleCeS are medium medium trams-   ligh(, like handing (typicalIymilky unkss opaque quite血in
LATIN AMEFtlCAN ANTIQUITY
to dark sherry or gray･ Mal10gany lucency, but ban°ed arti茄cialglass. gray to black) is common. and
gray, which has
cola. Rare pieces spots are frequent portions are OPaque. Bands are nadrOW, Straight, mdium luster. regular,
are completely on opaque m∝lules, Completely opaque and parallel. In加q此ntly, Su血ce typically o氏enwith
Opaque･ but はre on pleCeS are found. cola-colored materialhas iLS Very Smooth perlitic
artifacts. s弧d一g血n-sized andglassy, surface.

inclusions, but dusty thoughpieces

inclusions are absent. withsandy
inclusions may be
mewhat piked.
SaJI Mark Usually dark Black. Low to medium,  Highly variable, UbiquitotB and of all Low luster,though Medium to
Jjlotepeque gray withsome irregular depending  though generally sizes触m dusty to sand- the surface can have thick, o氏en rough.

brown hue. Highly on densityof falling between grain-sized pardcles. an oiけshecn. Sur-

variable and imclusions･    EI Chayal and Ihlusions ate distributed face is pitted due to
dependent on Ixtepeque inthe throughout in clouds, very inclusions,and has
density of par(- degree of diffusion. uneven black bands, and an "orange skin"
iculate inclusions. o仙er血egular fomations. ap阿mCe. bast
Inclusions are much glassy of the three major
more dense血an in SOurCeS.

o山er two souⅣes. Some [Vor.≡,No.3.2000]

pleCeS have irzeguIar

mahoEanV Or black stx)ts.
 FtEPORTS 273

Table 2. Element concentrations for obsidian artifacts for

Chitak Tzak, Guatemala.

Figure l･ Location of Chitak Tzak9 department of

sacatep丘quez, Guatemala, and the four obsidian sources

represented h ttle archaeological assemblage of the site (a

= San Mart]'n Jilotepeque; b = EI Chayal; C = Ixtepeque;
A = Sam Bartolomd Milpas A]tas)･

Befbre sending血e collection to Glascock at the

Missouri University Research Reactor, Braswell

contacted Clark, Aoyama,and McKillop,and asked
them each to source the sample according to their
own visual procedures･ None of the four partici-
pants had worked together in the laboratory, dis-
cussed their procedures, or compared results･ It
should be stated血at in 1993, although Clark and

McKillop knew each other, neither Aoyama nor

Braswell had met Clark, Aoyama and McKillop
did not know each other, and Braswell knew
Aoyama and McKillop only slightly･ Each partici-
pant was told what Braswellalreadyknew:the loca-
tion of the site and血at it was occupied in both the

Early Classic and Late Postclassic periods･ Clark,

Aoyama, and McKillop were not informed of
Braswell's results until they had丘nished their own

studies, nor did血ey discuss血e test with each o山er･ removed from Table 3 in order to focus attention on
Thus, the four rounds of visual sourclng Were COn- 血e overall homogeneity of our results･

ducted as a blind test. After all fわur analysts had

made source attributions, the sample was sent to
Glascock who, in tum, was unaware of the results
of visual sourclng.
Table 2 summarizes six-element abbreviated
NAA results forthe 36 pieces from Chitak Tzak･ Fig-
ure 2 is a plot of their manganeseand sodium con-
centrations: two elements that are particularly
diagnostic for distinguishingamongthe Guatemalan
obsidian sources. Table 3 comparesthe results of the
four independent visualsourclng experiments with
Statistical Analysis
Two aspects of the data in Table 3are particularly
worthy of note･ First,the results of the fourinde-
pendent attempts at visual sourclng are remarkably
consistent. Onanartifact-by-artifact basis, source
identifications made bythree individuals (A, B,and
C)all agree. Identifications made by investigator D
match those of the otherthree researchers for 34
cases, but disagree for two artifacts (samples
GEB005 and GEBO23). Tb put it ano血er way, 97･2

Glascock's NAA results. Our names have been percent of all pairs of observations (i･e･, two
 274 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY lVol. ll, No. 3, 2000]

400      440      480     520     560      600     640     680     720

MN(ppm)

Figure 2･ MaJIganeSe (Parts PermilIion) and sodium (percent) concentrations of 36 obsidianartifacts from Chitak TZak
(ellipses iJIdicate pS･percent con広dence limit for assignment to each source).

observers assigning a source tothe sameartifact)
agree･ Furthermore,the slight discrepancy inthe four
attempts at visualsourclng lS Important Only if the
source of each particular pleCe needs to be known.
That is, the surr-ary results for each attempt at visual
sourclng are identical:all four researchers concluded
that 19 artifacts comefromthe SanMartl'n Jilote-
peque source, 16from EI Chayal, and one from Ixte-
peque･
TYle data in Table 3also demonstratethat visual
viated NAA result, we decided to reanalyzethe arti-
fact using 28-element NAA･ ThisfulllCOmPlement
analysis supportedthe result of abbreviated NAAand
demonstratedthat not one of us was able to identify
correctlythe source ofthisartifact. Still,the indi-
vidualsuccess rates for visualSourclng Ofthe ran-
dom sample from Chitak Tzak ranged from 92 to 97
percent,and averaged 96 percent.
What isthe probability of such a remarkable con-
sensus in血e results of visual soumlng generated by

sourclng is highly accurate. Six-element abbreviated
NAA confimsthat investigators A, B,and C iden-
tifiedthe correct geologicalsource for 35 of the 36
artifactsI Researcher D's visualasslgnmentS Were
correct for 33 artifacts. Oddly,all four attempts at
visual sourcing agreed that one artifact (sample
four independent researchers? In addition, how con-
fident can we bethatthe great concordance between
the visualsourclngand NAA results is not merely a
coincidence? To phrase it differently, at a glVen con-
fidence level, what isthe reproducibilityand accu-
racy of visual souming fbr血is collection?

GEB007) Camefromthe EI Chayalsource. Abbre- One conseⅣative approach to the problem of

viated NAA suggestedthatthe piece came from Ixte- reproducibilityis to pretendthatthe summary results
peque. Given the unanimity of血e visual source were known tothe researchers. That is, to ask: if the
asslgnmentSandtheir disagreement withthe abbre- summary visualresults ( I 9 artifacts from SanMarh'n
 REPORTS 275

¶lble 3. Results or visual sourclng and abbreviated neutron fer in only two? In essence,this reducesthe problem
activation analysis for obsidian artifacts from Chitak Tzak,
to modeling a probability as sampling without
Guatemala (COY = EI Chayal, IXT = Ixtepeque, SMJ = Sam
replacement･
Martl,n Jilotepeque; incorrectvisual identifications are shown
in bold italics). If we consider D's experiment and assume sam-
pling without replacement,there are 339 ([36 !/34!2 !]
Visual Sourcing Results - [19!/17!2!] - [16!/14!2!]) possible ways todifferin
B C D
only two attributions･ Notall of these havethe same
慧認諾誤 cHY認諾 sMJ 認cHYsMJ 認諾cHY S
諾sMJ誤認cHY諾認器諾sMJcHY sMJ諾cHY認諾S 諾sMJ認cHYMJs認諾 cHYsMJ慧cHY認諾 cHYS probability ofoccurrence･ Calculatingthe totalprob-
諾sMJ誤認cHYMJs認諾 cHYsMJ認諾s cHY認諾S 諾sMJ慧温cHYsMJ 諾認cHYsMJ 認諾sMJmScHY認諾
abilityof achievingthis degree of agreement with
the otherthreeanalysts is possible, but tedious･ A
丘nalconservative simpli丘cation,therefore, is to con-

sider only the concordance ofB and C's results w仙

〟S,血at is, to Ignore investlgatOr D's asslgnmentS

eventhoughthey greatly supportthe reproducibility

of visual sourclng.
Giventhe above very conservative stlPulations･
the probability of B agreelng WithA on each iden-
tincation is 1 in 146,157,442,200, or6･84 x 10-]2･ If
we also consider C,血e probability drops to 1 in

21,361,997,910,446,300,000,000, or 4･68 A lO123･

These are extremely long odds: approximately loo
times worsethan hittingthe PowerBall Lotto (al1five
balls plus the bonus) twice in a row･ If we factor in
D's results, the total probability decreases to some-
thing on the order of 10-35･ clearly, with these
obseⅣers and血is data set, visual sourclng lS not

random and is highly reproducible･ Again,仙is is a

conservative estimate becausethe problem is mod-

eled as sampling w仙out replacement･ In reality,

the researchers did not know which sources would

be inthe sampleand what their relative frequencies
would be.
Ano血er way to consider reproducibility is to cal-

culate Cohen's k (Cohen 1960), used as a measure

of agreement between the ratlngS Of palrS Of
observers. TYLe Simplest measure of agreement･ of
course, 1S just血e number of identical obseⅣations

divided bythe total: inthis case 100 percent for any

Jilotepeque, 16 from EI Chayal,and one from Ixte- pair drawnfromanalysts A･ B, and C, or 94 percent
peque) were known ahead of time, what would be (34/36) for any pair of observers containing investi-
血e chances that山e reseamhers would assign血e gator D･ Butthis does not correct for chance agree-
same result to each piece? To simplifythe problem ment. For example, all four observers attributed 53
further in order to aid in calculations, let us assume percent ( I 9/36) of the collection to Sam Martl'n Jilote-
that one set ofresults (say A'S) forms a reference sam- peque･ Givenany independent pair of observers･ we
would expect血at approximately 28 percent of山e
ple･ TYlat is, glVen A's results on a pleCe-by-piece
basis,and giventhat the other researchersknew how pleCeS would be identified by bothas obsidian from
manytimes A assigned a particular source (and which 血at source. A simple co汀eCtion, then, is 53 percent

- 28 percent = 25 percent･ Cohen's k is a normaliza-

sourcesthey were), what isthe probabilitythat inves-
tlgatOrS Band C would make preciselythe same tion of this probability, Calculated by dividing it by
asslgnmentS aS A,and that researcher D would dif- the largest possible difference in the marginaltotalS
276 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
of the cross tabulation. Tests of the null hypothesis
that k = 0 can be calculatedfromthe ratio ofk to its
standard error.
Any pair of the four ratersthat does not include
researcher D yields k = I. The asymptotic standard
error is 0, T is approximately 6.48 I,andthe result-
lngP IS approximately 0. If D is paired withA, B, or
C, k =.894,the asymptotic staJldard error is.069, T
is approximately 5.792,andthe resultingp << ･0005･
TYluS,the null hypothesisthatthe degree of agree-
ment between any two obseⅣers is a chance result
canbe rejected withnearcertainty.
The simplest measure of accuracy of the visual
Sourclng Ofthis sample isthe totalnumber of cor-
rect identi丘cations out ofall attempts, or 96 percent
( 138/144). But what, atthe 95-percent con点dence
level, is血e probability of any pleCe in血e collection
being identi丘ed correctly by visualsourcing? If we
assumethatthe four researchers inthis studyarethe
only l仙ic analysts who practice visual sourcing,血e
standard deviation in our individualaccuracy rates
is 2 percent. Thus, atthe 95-percent confidence level,
our true accuracy rates forthis collectionare greater
than91 percent. If, onthe other hand,the four of us
are considered to be drawn from a larger population
of amhaeologists who practice the me山od,血e 95-
percent conndence level forthe accuracy of visual
Sourclng Ofthis collection is 90-I 00percent. Hence,
witha highdegree of certainty, visualSource iden-
tifications forthe Chitak Tzak assemblageare at
least 90 percent accurate.
Interpretationand Previous
Tests of Visual Sourclng
StatistiCalanalyses indicatethat for the Chitak Tzak
sample, visualsourclng is highly reproducibleamong
differentanalysts withexperience inthe method.
Moreover,the successful attribution rate (as mea-
sured against NAA results) is quite high. Although
other investigators might decidethatanoverall accu-
racy rate of approximately 96 percent (witha 2-G
range of 91-loo percent) is insufBcient fortheir
work, we hd this success rate morethanadequate
for our own research. Moreover, the large samples
that can be studiedusingvisualsourcingallow us to
form more statistically sound interpretations of
ancient Maya exchange.
The tested sample from Chitak Tzak contained
artifacts from only three sources and cannot be taken
as representative of all collections fromall sites in
the Maya reglOn.What additional infomation can
【Vol. ll, No. 3, 2000】
be gleanedfromthis data setthat may be applicable
to other samples from other sites?
Inall cases, visualsourclng Successfully distin-
guished SanMartl'n Jilotepeque obsidian from mate-
rialfromthe other two sources. We expect,then,that
this would tend to be true for samples from other sites.
Only twoartifactsfromthe Ixtepeque source were
present inthe collection. One wasmisidentined as EI
Chayal by all fわur visual analysts. Moreover, one
researchermisidentiRedanIxtepeque artifact as com-
ing from EI Chayal, andmiS-assigned an EI Chayal
pleCe tO Ixtepeque. TYLis suggeststhat differentiatlng
between Ixtepequeand EI Chayalobsidianis more
difncultthandistinguishing Sam Martl'n Jilotepeque
from either EI Chayalor Ixtepeque.
Unfortunately,the sample size for Ixtepeque (n =
2) is too small to detemine whetherthe confusion
of Ixtepeque and EI Chayal is significant. Still, 98
percent (59/60) of the visualsource identiGcations
for artifactsfromthe EI Chayalsource were correct.
TYLis is actually higherthan our overall success rate
forthe entire sample. Thus,although some Ixtepeque
obsidianmay overlap withour visualCriteria for EI
Chayal, it is less likelythat we wouldmisidentify EI
Chayal obsidian as coming丘.om lxtepeque.
The apparent lack of symmetry in distinguishing
between lxtepeque and EI Chayal obsidian may be
related to experience with material from those
sources. Aoyamaand Braswell each have worked
extensively in westem Honduras, and betweenthem
have analyzed morethan1 1 0,(刀O Ixtepequearlifacts
from Copan, La Entrada, and other reglOnS inthe
southeast periphery. Studyingthese collectionsand
geologiCalSamples from Volcan de lxtepeque,they
have seenthefull range of visual variation present
in materialn.omthat source. In contrast, Ixtepeque
obsidian is less common in山e Belizean cayes and
in Chiapas, where McKillop and Clark have con-
ducted much of山eir research. In addition, collec-
tionsfromthe Belizean cayes often contain obsidian
from multiple sources (six have been identiBed at
Wild Cane Caye lMcKillop etal. 1988]), soananal
lyst wi血expenence in血at reglOn might expect more
diversity ln COllections kom otherareas. Moreover,
Clark has studied many moreartifacts from Taju-
mulcoandthe highland Mexicansources thanthe
otherthree analysts, Aoyama isthe only one with
sign泊cant experience recognlZlng two Honduran
sources (Sam Luisand Esperanza),and Braswell has
conducted extensive research in Sam Marll'n Jilote-
peque. It is reasonable to expectthat each of us would
 REPORTS
be more accurate in identifying materialfromthe
sourcesthat weknow well. Thus, visualsourclng
results may reflect disparate areas of study and
degrees of familiarity withmaterialfrom different
sources, as well as pnor expectations regarding
source diverslty.
How difncult is it to distinguish between EI Chayal
and Ixtepeque obsidian? Since only twoartifacts in
the Chitak Tzak collection comefromthe Ixtepeque
source, it is necessary to look at other tests of visual
sourclng tO Obtain an estimated accuracy rate･
Aoyama (1991), Braswell etal･ (1994),and McKi1-
lop ( I 995)all have published results of previous tests
of the emcacy of visual sourclng･ McKillop
( 1 995 :Table 28) made source assignments for 44 arti-
facts from SanJuanAmbergris Caye, 36 0fwhich had
been attributed to geologiCalsources by XRF (see
Gudedanetal. 1 989).3 Thirty-five of these came from
either EI Chayal(n = 31) or Ixtepeque (n = 4)I Only
one error was made; an Ixtepeque pleCe WaSmistak-
enly attributed tothe EI Chayalsource･ This was not
a completely blind test･ The summary results for 36
of the 44artifacts were known to McKillop before
she began her visual analysis of山e collection･
In a blind experiment, Aoyama (1991)and Glas-
cock analyzed a random sample of 1 00 obsidianarti-
facts from the La Entrada region. The sample
included 61 piecesfromthe Ixtepeque sourceand
four from EI Chayal･ Aoyama correctly identinedal1
61 Ixtepequeartifacts, but two particularly small EI
Chayalartifacts were given incorrect attributions;
One was assigned to Ixtepeque and one to SanMartl'n
Jilotepeque (Aoyama 1991 :Cuadro VI-57)･ In one
sense,仙is error is血e opposite of仙ose committed
by researchers A, B, and C inthe current study･ In
the Chitak Tzak sample, these threeanalysts suc-
cessfully identifiedallthe EI Chayalobsidian but
misidentined a single piece Of lxtepeque･ Inanother
sense,the elTOr is similar; oneartifactfrom aminor
source in each collection was mistakenly attributed
to a more common source. This impliesthat when
conducting visualsourclng, analysts should not auto-
matically asslgnanartifact withambiguous visual
characteristics to血e dominant source.
Braswell encounteredthe opposite problem in his
study of 48 Ixtepeque and EI Chayalartifactsfrom
Quelepa, EI Salvador (Braswell et al･ 1994)･ In血at
case,all nine artifactsfromtheminor source of EI
Chayal were correctly attributed, but three pleCeS
from the predominant source of Ixtepeque were
misidenti丘ed as coming from EI Chayal･ The lesson
277
to be drawn fromthisthird example isthatanana-
lyst should not be over-eager to identifyuncommon
sources in essentially homogeneous coll∝tions･ Tb
be fair, boththe La Entrada and Quelepa tests were
conducted attimes when Aoyamaand Braswell were
relatively inexperienced at visualanalysis･ A further
note of caution isthat identincations become easier
and more accurate with increased experience･
Finally, Aoyama'S ( 1 99 1 ) experiment demonstrates
that it is often difncult to identifycorrectlythe ge0-
logicalsource of very small artifacts･
A totalof 165artifacts chemically provenanced
to the Ixtepeque (n = 106)and EI Chayal (n = 59)
Sources were glVen Visual source asslgnmentS in the
current s山dy and in these血ee previous tests･ In
all, 216 visual amibutions were made forthese arti-
facts (the 17 pieces from EI Chayaland Ixtepeque
thatare in the Chitak Tzak sample each were ana-
lyzed fわur times). Only 12 inco汀eCt assignments
were made out of 216 attempts, that is,血e success
rate f♭r distinguishing between EI Chayal and lxte-
peque was 94.4 percent･ Thus,althoughobsidian
from Ixtepeque and EI Chayalare not as visually
distinctive as material from SanMartl'n Jilotepeque,
they canbe distinguished from each other with a
high degree of success･
A Combined Approach to Obsidian Sourclng
and a Suggested Sampling Strategy
The visualidentification of obsidianfromthethree
important Guatemalansources is highly accurate･
but not quite as reliable as NAA or XRF･ Nonethe-
less,thereare benefits to sourclng entire collections
that faroutweighthe slight increase in error associ-
ated wi血visual sourcing･ Amhaeologists wi血lim-
ited funds or those who cannot transport their
collections to a laboratory for compositionalanaly-
sis should investthetime and effort needed to learn
visualsourclng.
For血ose who can conduct XRF or NAA on small
samples drawnfromtheir collections, we advocate
a combined strategythat entails bothvisualand com-
positional analyses･ We have fわund that the best
approach to obsidian sourclng一一叫ne血at血nimizes
cost andartifact destruction yet maximizes accuracy
andthe sample size of sourced artifacts-isthe use
of visualsourcing foranentire collection coupled
with limited, nonrandom sampling for NAA or XRF･
At many sites in the Maya reglOn, almost all
obsidiancomesfrom one or two of the Guatemalan
sources (see note 1). One approach to source idem-
 278 LATIN AMERICAN ANTlQUITY
t泊cation is to draw a small (10 to 30artifacts) ran-
dom sample from each of the visual categories
thought to representthese sources. In addition,all
pleCeSthat appearunuSualand may come from other
sources should be subject to compositionalanalysis.
Braswell has used血is nonrandom sampling strat-
egy to study collections from Calakmul (Braswell et
al. 1999), Topoxti (Braswell 1999), Ek Balamand
Yaxun丘(Braswell 1998), and a samplefromthe non-
Maya site ofQuelepa (Braswell et al. 1994). McKiL
lop etal･ (1988) selected a sample offive visually
unusualobsidianartifacts from Wild Cane Caye for
chemiCalanalysis,and all were identified as coming
from sourcesthatare uncommon inthe assemblage･
This strategy maximizes the chance of identifying
allthe rare sources, o氏en Mexican,that easilyare
missed when drawing a small, random sample from
a large collection (Braswell et al. 1994; McKillop
1987, 1989; McKillop and Jackson 1988). Such
sources may not constitute a significant portion of
the total assemblage, but they are important fわr
understanding long-di stance exchange systems ･4 The
sample drawn fromthe predominant source cate-
gories allows a quick check of山e accuracy of仇eir
visualidenti丘cation.
In cases where many sourcesare present in sub-
stantialquantities, such as at Chichen Itz丘(Braswell
1997b, 1998), it may be necessary to draw a random
sample for compositional analysis from each visual
category･ In血is strategy, visual sourclng lS COnSid-
ered successful if each visualcategory is shown to
consist of one and only one source･ Occasionally, a
visual category may contain morethanone source.
If山e sample has been drawn randomly, it should
reflectthe population as a whole, so compositional
results canbe extrapolated tothe entire suspect visual
category･ Thus,althoughthe source of each piece in
the source-heterogeneous visualcategory will not be
known,the proportion of those sources within the
entire collection can be estimated. If piece-speci丘C
or context-specinc resultsare needed, a second round
of chemical analysis may be conducted on山e entire
source-heterogeneous category.
The Development of VisualSourclng
Throughout Latin America
Obsidian specialists working in other reglOnS Ofthe
Americas may ask if visual sourcing has general
applicability,山at is, can it be employed elsewhere
withequivalent success? Braswell ( 1 997a; Braswell
【Vol. ll, No. 3, 20001
etal･ 1995) has used visualsourcing to study large
collectionsfrom lower CentralAmerica, particularly
from PaciGc Nicaragua･ Inthat reglOn, most Obsid-
ian comes fromthe Giiinope, Honduras, source, but
minor sources (including lxtepeque, EI Chayal, and
Sam Martl'n Jilotepeque)alsoare found in some sam-
ples, especial1ythose dating tothe SapoえーOmetepe
periods･ He has foundthat Gdinope obsidianis dis-
tinctive and easily identifiable, and accuracy rates for
visualsourclngare equivalent tothose achieved with
Maya collections.
Obsidian sources are less abundant in Central
Americathan in highland Mexico, which compli-
catesthe use ofvisualSourclng inthat region. Dozens
of poorly known sourcesare represented in collec-
tions from sites in the northwest periphery of
Mesoamerica (Trombold et a1. 1993). Moreover,
materials from certain central Mexican sources
appearSomewhat similar. In particular,the Mexican
"black" obsidians present some difficulties, espe-
cially when distinguishing between material from
Ucareo, Michoacan,and Zaragoza, Puebla (Braswell
1 997b). But widespread distribution ofUcareo obsid-
ian was limited largely tothe Epiclassicperiod, and
materialfromthat source is not common at most
Mexican sites where Zaragoza obsidianis found in
quantity (B raswel1 200). Fortunately, other common
highland sources, particularly Pared6n and Pico de
Orizaba,are as easy to identify as green obsidian
from Pachuca, Hidalgo･ Moreover, the technique
already has been shown to have great potentialin cer-
tain regions (e.g., Heller and Stark 1998). Conse-
quently,although we cautionthat it may be dilncult
to make visual source attributions for some collec-
tions from northwest Mesoamerica, we antlCIPate
thatthe technique will be highly successful in much
of highland Mexico.
Current understanding of Andean obsidian
sources is limited, but important advances have been
made (e.g.,Asaro etal. 1994; Burger etal. 1994,
1998a, 1998b, 1998C; Seelenfreund et al. 1996).
Recent research in Penl provides an example of how
visual source analysis could be developed in areas
outside of Mesoamerica.
Thefirst step in developlng Visualsourcing for
new reg10nS is the identification of sourcesthat may
appearinarchaeologicalcollections. This is accom-
plishedthrough geologicalprospectlngand compo-
sitional assay. Unfortunately, noneconomic
geological investlgations have received little pnor-
 REPORTS
ity in Peru until quite recently (Burger et al･
1998b: 1 86). Nevertheless, three principalsources
exploited by ancient i血ab血nts of血e central Andes
(Quispisisa, Department of Ayacucho),the Cuzco
Basin (AIca, Department of Arequipa), andthe Tit-
icaca Basin (Chivay, Department ofArequipa) have
been identified (Burger etal. 1998a, 1998b; Burger
and Glascock 2000). These sources in southem Peru
account for 8 1percent of 8 I 2artifacts collectedfrom
14l archaeologiCalsites inthe region (Burger etal･
1998b:185). Still, the locations of sources corre-
sponding to severaladditionalchemiCalgroups are
not yet known.
The second step isthe chemiCalassay of artifacts,
withthe goalofcreating useful reference collections･
In Peru, at least I,314 artifacts have been assayed
(Burger 1980, 1981; BurgerandAsar0 1978, 1993;
Burger etal. 1984, 1994, 1998b)･ nethird step,the
establishment of comparative visualcollections and
the de丘nition of optiCalCriteria to be used to distin-
guish obsidian from distinct sources, has not yet been
attemptedintheAndean region･ Our expenence sug-
geststhat a sulRcient number of artifacts from Peru
and northem Bolivia have been assayed forthis to be
accomplished･ Moreover, since only 10 chemical
groups are represented inthese collections･ it should
not be too onerous a task. Giventhe factthatthe vast
majority of assayed artifacts come from onlythree
sources, it may be su氏cient to pr∝eed withCriteria
forthese alone.When studying collections from
southem Peruand Bolivia, we suggestthefirst sam-
pling strategy described above･ A small number of
pleCeS could be drawn for chemiCalanalysisfrom
visualcategoriesthought to representthe common
sources,andall pieces that do not appear to come from
these sources could be assayed by NAA or XRF･
ConclusionLS
Despite published doubts aboutthe etRcacy of visual
sourcing (e.g., Moholy-Nagy and Nelson 1990),
experienced visualanalysts can distinguish consis-
tentlyamongthethree major Obsidiansources rep-
resented in collections from the Maya reglOn.
Obsidianfrom SanMarh'n Jilotepeque isthe most
distinctive, but wealso have identified Ixtepeque and
EI Chayal obsidian correctly in 94･4 percent
(204/2 1 6) of our attempts. Visualidenti丘cations of
thesethree Maya sources,andalso of the most-com-
mon Mexicansource (Pachuca, Hidalgo) represented
at Maya sites, ∬e highly accurate, and we have
279
demonstratedthat accuracy in four tests using NAA
and XRF results.
Visual sourclng results for obsidian fromthe
Maya regionalso are highly reproducibleamong
independent observers･ In 1 993, when we conducted
our test of the Chitak Tzak material,the four partiC-
lPantSknew each other only poorly, if atal1. Yet our
results arealmost identical, witha palr-Wise agree-
ment rate of 97･2 percent over all obseⅣadons･ A
highly conseⅣadve probabilistic model (one血at
assumesthatthe summary results wereknown tothe
four visualanalysts) demonstratesthatthe chance of
such a degree of concordance being a random event
is astronomically small. Moreover, CalculatiOns of
Cohen's k, used to measurethe level of agreement
between palrS Of raters,also indicatethat our degree
of consensus should not be considered a random
event, withprobabilitylevels so lowthatthey are
nearly incalculable.
Lithic specialists who work inthe Mayaarea
should learn to differentiateamongthethree pnnci-
palGuatemalansources, because visualsourclng
allowsthe geologicalprovenance of large collec-
tions-ratherthansmall, usually nonrandom sam-
ples-to be detemined･ Although compositional
assay of small samples pemitsthe formation ofgen-
eralhypotheses conceming trade routes (e･g･, Ham-
mond 1972, 1976; Nelson 1985), it precludes more
detailedanalyses of ancient economy･ We suggest
that other LatinAmeriCanists interested in produc-
tion, exchange, and consumption pattems would do
well to employ our method if relatively few sources
are represented intheir archaeologicalcollections･
and if those sourcesare sufficiently distinctinappear-
ance to allow visual sourclng. Since only three
sources make upthe vast majorityofcollectionsfrom
peruand northem Bolivia,and because even fewer
sources were used in ancient Ecuador (Asaro etal.
1994; Burger etal. 1994), we suggestthatAndean
Sou仙Amedca may be a suitable place to employ
the pmCedure･ Moreover,the efficacy ofvisualsourc-
ingalready has been demonstrated in lower Central
America (Braswell 1997a; Braswell etal. 1995),and
in certain regions of Mexico (e･g･, Heller and Stark
1 998). None血eless, we caution血at it may be some-
what more difncult to developthe techmique in cen-
tralMexico, where two important sources ape Similar
in appearance, and inthe northwestemfrontier of
Mesoamerica, where many sources were used in
ancient times.
280 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
We cautionthatthe success of visualsourclng lS
related to experience; scholars should not expect to
achieve very low error-rates after only one day exper-
imentlng Wi血血e technique. Moreover, 1i血ic ana-
lysts, particularIythose new tothe method, should
use a comparative reference collection･ This should
contain bothartifactsand geological specimensthat
exhibitthefull range of visualattributes associated
w仙each source likely to be fわund in an archae0-
10giCalassemblage. We suggestthatthe best strate-
gies fわr detenmnlng geological provenance involve
a combined approach of complete visual sourclng
coupled withlimited compositionalanalysis･ The
latter should be used to source pleCeS Of uncertain
geological provenance, as well as to demonstrate山e
source-homogeneityof visualcategories established
bythe analyst. Althoughthese are not purely ran-
dom sampling strategleS, We have foundthatthey
allowthe largest quantity of artifacts to be accurately
sourced at a low cost, and fbr血e error rates associ-
ated wi血visual sourclng tO be calculated･
Acknowledgments. NeutrorL aCtivation analysis of the Chitak Tzak
sample was supported by grantsfromthe NationalScience Foun-
dation (DBS-9 10201 6, awarded to Michael D. Glascock) and也e
Wenner-Gren Foundation (awaJpded to Eugenia J. Robinson). The
authorsthank Brydon J･ B･ Grant and Jacek Dmochowski of
SUNY-Buf払lo fortheir adviceand help withstatisticalanalysis･
Our colleagues Jennifer B･ Braswelland Rafael Cobos were kind
enough to edit血e Spanish abstract･
References Cited
Andrews, A.P., F. Asar0, H. V. Michel, F. H. Stross, and P. Cervera
Rivero
1989 The Obsidian Trade at Isla Cerritos, YucatAn, Mexico.
Joumal ofFjeLd AJでhaeology 16:355-363･
Aoyama, K.
1 991 Ll'tica. In lnvestlgaCiones arqueoLdgicas en la regio'n de
Lb Entnada, vol. 2, edited by S. Nakamura, K. Aoyama, and
E. UratsuJl, PP. 391203. Servicio de Voluntarios Japoneses
para la Cooperaci6n con el ExtranJerO y el Instituto Hon-
dure氏o de AntropologI'a e Historia, Sam Pedro Sula･
1 994 Socioeconomic Implications of Chipped Stone血.om the
La Entrada Region, Westem Honduras. Journal of FL'eLd
Arrhaeology 2 1 : 1 331145.
1 996 Erchange, Cr7aji SpecialL'zatL'on, andAnc,'entMaya State
FomationI A Study of Chipped Stone Artifacts Ibm the
Southeast Maya Lowlands. Ph.D. dissertation, Department
ofAnthropology, University of Pittsburgh･ University Micro-
films, Ann Arbor.
1999 Ancient Maya State, Urbanism, Exchange, and Craji
Specl'aEization.l ChEFPed Stone Evidence of the Copan Val-
Ley and the Liz Entrada RegL'on, Honduras･ Memoirs in Latin
American Archaeology, No. 1 2. University of Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh.
Aoyama, K., T. Tashiro,and M. D. Glascock
1999 A Pre-Columbian Obsidian Source in Sam Luis, Hon-
duras: Implications forthe Relationship between Late Clas-
【VoI. ll, No. 3, 2000】
sic Maya PoliticalBoundaries and the Boundaries ofObsid-
ian Exchange Networks. AncL-ent Mesoamerica 1 0: 2371249･
Amauld, M. C.
I 990 EI comercio clasico de obsidiana:rutas entretierrasaltas
y tierras bajas en el area maya･ LLZEz'n American AnEz'qul-ty
1 :347-367.
Asar0, F., H. V. Michel, R. Sidrys, aJld F. H. Stross
1978 High-Precision ChemicalCharacterization of Maya
Obsidian Sources in Guatemala. Amerl'can Antiquity
43:436JH3.
Asaro, F., E. Salazar, H. V. Michel, R. L. Burger, and FI H･ Stross
1994 EcuadorianObsidian Sources Used for A爪ifact Pro-
duction and Methods for ProvenienceAssignments. LLZh'n
American AnEL-quL-ty5 : 2571277･
Braswell, G. E.
1996 A Maya Obsidl'an SouneI 71he Geoanhaeology, SeEtle-
ment History, and AncL'enE Economy of Sam Martz'n JiLote-
peque, GuatemaLa･ Ph･D･ dissertation, Department of
Anthropology, nllane University･ University Micro別ms,
Ann Arbor.
I 997a El intercambio comercialentre los pueblos prehispan-
icos de Mesoamirica y la Gran Nicoya･ Revl'sla de la UTu'-
versiu deE ValLe de Guatemala 6: 1 7129.
I 997b El intercambio prehisp血ico en YucatれM血ico･ In X
slmPOSio de invesElgaCiones ariqueOldgicas en Guatemala,
1996. vo1 2., edited by J.P. Laporte and H･ Escobedo, pp･
545-556. Museo Nacionalde ALqueOlogI'a y Etnologl'a,
Guatemala.
1998 Trade, Procurement,and Population: Obsidianandthe
Maya of the Northem Lowlands. Paper presented atthe 97th
AnnualMeetings oftheAmericanAnthropologiCalAssoci-
ation. Philadelphia.
1999 Losartefactos de obsidiana de Topoxti, EI Peten,
Guatemala. Beitnb'ge てur Allgemeinen and VeTgleichenden
AnhdloLogie. Mainz, in pressl
20(氾 Postclassic MesoameriCanObsidian Exchange Spheres･
In The Postclassic Mesoamerican Worhi, edited by M. E.
Smith and F. Berdan. Universityof Utalt Press, Salt Lake
City, ln preSS･
Braswell, G. E., E.W. Andrews V, and M. D. Glascock
1994 The Obsidian Ardfacts ofQuelepa, EI Saivador･ Ancient
Mesoamerica 5: 1 73-192.
Braswell, G. E., J. D. Gunn, M. del R. Dominguez Carrasco, W
J. Folan, L Fletcher,and M. D. Glascock
1999 Dehingthe TeminalClassic at Calakmul. h 71he Ter-
miMI Classic len Eke Maya LowkzndsI Collapse, 7ねnsition,
and 7ねnsformLZtL'on, edited by D. S. Rice, P･ M･ Rice, and
A. A. Demarest. Westview Press, Boulder. In press.
Braswell, G. E., S. Salgado GonzAlez,and M･ D･ Glasc∝k
1995 La obsidiana guatemalteca en Centroamirica･ In VIII
sLmPOSio de investlgaCiones arqueolo'gT'cas en Guatemala･
1994, vol. 1, edited by J. P. Laporteand H･ Escobedo, pp.
121-131. Museo Nacionalde Arqueologl'a y Etnologl'a,
Guatemala.
Burger, 氏.し.
1980 Trace-Element AnalysIS Of Obsidian Artifacts from
Pachamachay, Junin. In Prehistoric Hunters of the High
Andes, by J･ Rick, pp1 257-261 ･ Academic Press, New York･
1981 La procedencia de artefactos de obsidiana en los sitios
formativos en Ayacucho: Chupas y Wichqana. BoleEl'n deL
Museo Naciotwl de AntropoLogl'a y Anqueologl'a 7:9-lot
Lima.
Burger, R. Land F.Asaro
1978 0bsidian Distdbutionand Provenience in the Central
High1ands and Coast of Peruduringthe Preceramic Period･
Contributions of the UniveT:Sityof CalTfonu'a A TrhaeoLogi-
caL Research Facility36:61-83.
 REPOFtTS
1993 La distribuci6n y procedencia de artefactos de obsidi-
ana durante el Pen'odo Inicialy Horizonte Temprano･ In
EmergencL'a de la civiLizacio'n en Los Andes: Ensayos de
interpretacidn, by R･ L･ Burger, pp･ 1801231･ Universidad
NacionalMayor de Sam Maqcos, Lima･
Burger, a L F.Asaro, and H. VI MicheI
1 984 The Source of Obsidian Artifacts at Chavl'n de HuAntar.
In Tlhe Prehistoric Occupation ofChavtn de Hua'ntaq PenL,
by R･ L･ Burger, pp･ 263-270･ Universlty OfCalifomia Press･
Berkeley.
Burger, R･ L･, F･Asaro, H･ VI Michel･ FI H･ Stross･ and E･ Salazar
1994 An Initial Consideration or Obsidian Procurement and
Exchange in Prehispanic Ecuador. LLZtl'n American AntiquL'ty
5:228-255.
Burger, R. L F.Asaro, G. Salas, and F･ Stross
1998a The Chivay Obsidian Source and the Geological0ri-
gin of Titicaca Basin TypeObsidian Artifacts･ Andean Pw
5 : 203-223.
Burger, R. L F.AsaJ･0, P･ Trawick, and F･ H･ Stross
1998bnLe AIca Obsidian Source: The Origin of Raw Material
for Cuzco lYpeObsidian Artifacts･ Andean Pzzst 5: 1 85-202･
Burger, R. L K. J. Schreiber, M･ D･ Glascock, and J･ Ccencho
1998C 刀le Jampatilla Obsidian Source: 1dentifyingthe Ge0-
logicalSource of Pampas Type Obsidian Artifacts from
Southern Peru. Andean Pust 5: 225-239.
Burger, R. L and M. D. Glascock
2(X氾Locating the Quispisisa Obsidian Source in the Depart一
ment of Ayacucho, Peru. Latin AmerLIcan AntL'quLty
1 1 :258-268 (cu汀ent issue).
Carpio Rezzio, E･ H1
1993 0bsidiaJl at Balberta. In Tlhe BaLberta PrujeclI The Ter-
minal FTonnative - Early CLassic 7TransitJ'on on the PacIPc
coast of Guatemala. edited by F･ J･ Bove, SI Medrano B･,
B. Lou P., and B.Amoyo L pp. 831106･ Memoirs in LatiTI
American Archaeology, No. 6. Universlty Of Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh.
Clark, ∫. E.
1988 The LL'Ehic ArtLfacts ofLLZ LL'berlad, Chiapas, Mexico･
Papers of山e New Wbrld Amhaeological Foundation, No･
52. Brigham Young University, Provo･
Clark, J. E., T. A.Lee, Jr., and T. Salcedo
1 989 The Distribution ofObsidian. In ArzcL'ent 7Trade and Th-b-
ute.･ Economies of the Soconusco RegLlon ofMesoamerica,
edited by B. Voorhies, pp. 268-284･ Universlty OfUtah Press,
Salt Lake City･
Clark, J. E., and T. Salcedo
1 989 0C6s Obsidian Distribution in Chiapas, Mexico･ In New
Fronliers in the AだhaeoLogy of the PaclSc Coast ofSouth-
ern Mesoamerica, edited by F･ J･ Bove and L Heller, pp･
1 5-24. AnthropologiCalResearch Papers, No･ 39･ Arizona
State University, Tempe･
Cohen, ∫.
1960 A Coefncient of Agreement for Nomina) Scales･ Edu-
calL-onal and Psychological Measurement 20: 37-16･
Dreiss, M. L
l988 0bsidian at CoLha, Belt'zeI A TechnoLoglCal Analysts
and Dl'stn'buttlonaL Study Based on Trace Element Data.
papers of the Colha Project, vol･ 4, Texas ArchaeologlCal
Research Laboratory･ Universlty Of Texas･ SanAntonio･
Dreiss, M.し., and D. 0. Brown
1989 0bsidian Exchange Pattems in Belize･ In PrlehL'storic
Maya Economies I-n Belz'ze･ edited by P･ A･ McAnany and B･
L Isaac, pp･ 57-901 Research in Economic Anthropology･
Supplement No･ 4･ JAI Press, Greenwich･ Connecticut･
1991 Socioeconomic Implications of the Distribution of
obsidian in the Late and TerminalClassic Periods at the
Maya Site or Colha, Belize･ Paper presented at the 47山
281
IntemationalCongress ofAmericanists, New Orleans･
Glascock, M. D., G. E. Braswell, and R. H. Cobean
1998 A Systematic Approach to Obsidian Source Character-
ization. In ArchaeologlCa1 Obsidian StudiesI Method and
Theory, edited by M･S･ Shackley, pp･ 1 5-･65･ Plenum Press,
New York.
Glasc∝k, M. D., H. Neff, K. S. Sけyker, and TI N･ Johnson
1994 Sourcing ArchaeologicalObsidian by an Abbreviated
NAA Procedure. Journal of RadioanalyticaL and Nuclear
Chemistry, Articles 1 80:29-35･
Gudedan, T. H., J. F. Garber, H･ A･ Smith, FI H･ Stross, H･ V･
Michel, and E Asaro
1989 Maya Maritime Trade and Sources of Obsidian at San
Juan, Ambergris Cay, Belize･ JoumaL ofFieLdAJrhaeoLogy
1 6:363-369.
Hammond, N.
1972 0bsidian Trade Routes in the Maya Area･ Science
178: 1092-1093.
1976 Maya Obsidian Trade in Southern Belize･ In Maya LiEhllc
StudiesI Papers Jbm the J976 Belize Ft'eld SymposL'um,
edited by T･ R･ Hester and N･ Hammond･ pp･ 71-81･ Spe-
cialReport No. 4, Center forArchaeologiCalResearch･ Uni-
verslty Of Texas, SanAntonio･
Healan, D. M.
1 993 Localversus Non-LocalObsidian Exchange at Tula and
lts Implications for Post-Formative Mesoamerica･ World
A J℃haeoLogy 24:449-164･
Heizer, R. F., H. Williams, and J. A. Graham
1965 Notes on Mesoamerican Obsidians and Their Signifl-
cance in A∫chaeologiCalStudies･ ContributL'ons of the UnL--
versL'tyOf CaLLfornia Archaeological Research FacL'lity
1 :94-103.
Ileller, Land a. L. Stark
1998 Classic and Postclassic Obsidian Tool Production and
Consumption: A RegionalPerspectivefromthe Mixtequ1-
1la, VeracruZ. MexL'con 20: 1 1 9-I 28.
Hughes, R･ E･
1 984 0bsidian Sourcing Studies inthe Great Basin: Problems
aJld Prospects. Contrl'buTLons ofthe UnL'versityofCallfor7u-a
AYchaeologz'cal Reseanlh FacL'LL'ty45: I 119l
Jack, R.N., and R. F. Heizer
1 968日Finger-Printingn of Some MesoamericaJI ObsidianA血
facts. Contributions oflhe UniversityofCallfomia Arrhae-
ological Research Facility5:8 1-100･
Lewenstein, S. M., and M. D. Glascock
1997 Presencia delaltiplano en la regidn de ComalCalco･ Lps
lnvestigadoTleS de La Cultwa Maya 5:205-2 1 1 ･ Universidad
Aut6noma de Campeche, Campeche･
McKillop, H･ Ⅰ･
1987 mLd Cane CayI An Insular ClassL'c Pm-od to Postclas-
sic Pm-od Maya Trading StatL'on･ Ph ･ D･ dissertation･ Depart-
ment of Anthropology, Universlty Of California-Santa
BaTbara･ University Micronlms, Ann Arbor･
1989 CoastalMaya Trade: ObsidianDensities at Wild Cane
Cay, Bel ize. ln PnehLIstoric Maya EconomL'es ofBelE'ze, edited
by P･ A･ McAnany and B･ Isaac, pp･ 1 7156･ ReseadTCh in Eco-
nomic Anthropology, Supplement 4･ JAI Press, Greenwich･
Connecticut.
1995 The Role ofNorthem Ambergris Caye in Maya Obsid-
ian Trade: Evidence from Visual Sourclng and Blade Tech-
nology. In Maya MaritL-me Trade･ SeETLement･ and
populations onAmbergn's Caye･ Belize･ edited by T･ H･ Gud-
edan and J. F. Garber, pp･ 163-174･ Maya Research Pr0-
gram and Labyrinthos, Lancaster･ Pennsylvania･
McKillop, H. I" and L･ J･ Jackson
1988 Ancient Maya Obsidian Sources and Trade Routes･ In
obsidian Dates WI A Compendium of the Obsidian Hydra-
 282 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUJTY
(ion Delem7E-nations Mde al the UCLA Obsidian Hydrla-
tt'on LLZboratory, edited by C･W･ Meighan and J.し. Scalise,
pp･ 130-141 ･ Monograph No. 29,血e Institute ofAmhaeo1-
ogy. University of Califomia, Los Angeles.
McKillop, H. 1., L. J. Jackson, H. V. Michel, F. H. Stross,and F.
Asaro
I 988 ChemicalSource Analysis of Maya Obsidian: New Per-
SpectIVeS from Wild Cane Cay, Belize. InArrhaeometTy `88I
PnceedingsPvm the 1 988 Intematt'onalA Jrhaeometry Con-
ference, edited by R. M. Farquar, R. J. V. Hancock, and L.
A･ Pavlish, pp･ 2551260. University Of Toronto, Toronto.
Moholy-Nagy, H.
I 999 Mexican Obsidian at Tikal, Guatemala. LDtin Amen'can
AntE'quity1 0:3∝ト3 1 3.
Moholy-Nagy, H.,and F. W Nelson
1990 New Data on Sources ofObsidian Artifacts from Tikal,
Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica I :7 1180.
Nelson, F 帆
1980 Rutas de intercambio en lapenlnSula de Yucat血en las
diferentes epcN:aS aJqueOldgicas segdn la evidencia de la
obsidiana. In XVI Mesa Redonda, VOI. I., pp. 349-355.
Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologl'a, Saltillo, Mexico.
1985 Summary of the Results of Analysis of Obsidian Arti-
facts from the Maya Lowlands. Scannzng Electron
Micn)scopy II: 63 1 ｣強9.
I 989 Rutas de intercambio de obsidiana en el norte de lapenln-
sula deYucat血･ In LD ObsL-diana en Mesoame'rica, edited by
M. Gaxiola G. and J. E. Clark, pp. 363-368. Instituto de
Antropologl'a e Historia, Mexico.
Pi一es-Fe汀eira, J. W
1 975 FTomzatE'veMesoamen'can Exchange Networks with Spe-
cL'al RefeTmCe t0 the Vallq of Oaraca. Memoirs of the
Museum of Anthropology, No1 71 Universlty Of Michigan,
Ann Arbor.
1976 0bsidian Exchange in Formative Mesoamerica. In The
Early Mesoamen-can Ⅵllage, edited by K･ V･ Flannery, pp.
292-306. Academic Press, New Ⅵ)rk.
Robinson, E. ∫.
1 994 Chitak Tzak, un centro reglOnalpostcldsico taJldl'o de los
mayas KaqchikeL In VII sE'mposio de I-nvestLgaCiones arque-
olo'gicas en Guatemala, 1993, edited by JI P･ Laporte and H･
Escobedo, pp. 1 75-I 84. Museo Nacionalde Arqueologl'a y
Etnologl'a, Guatemala.
1997 Protohistoric to ColonialSettlement Transition inthe
Antigua VdIey, Guatemala. In Approaches to the Histon'cal
Atでhaeology of Mexico, Central & South America, edited
by JI Gasco, GI CI Smith, and P. Foumier-Garcl'a, PP. 591
70･ Monograph No. 38,山e Institute of Archaeology. Uni-
verslty Of Califomia, Los Angeles.
Sまnchez Polo, R.
1991 Lps naVajas de obsidiaTZa de Kamt'nLajuyd/Son Jotge/
un estudLlo tecnoldgt'coルnc''PnLZl･ Unpublished licenciatuTa
thesis, Escuela de Historia, Area de Arqueologl'a, Universl-
dad de SaJI Carlos Borrorneo de Guatemala, Guatemala.
Seelen打eund, A., C. Rees., R. Bird, G. Bailey, R. B丘rcena, and
V. DurAn.
I 996 Trace-ElementAnalysis ofObsidianSources andArdfacts
ofCenbd Chile (Maule River Basin) and Westem Argentina
(Colorado River). LDlin American Antiquio, 7 :7-20.
Sidrys, R. V.
1976a Classic Maya Obsidian Trade. American AntiquL-ty
4 1 :449-164.
I 976b Mesoamen'caI An AJ℃haeoLogL'cal Atuzlysis ofa LDW-
Energy Civilization･ Ph･D･ dissertation, Department of
Anthropology, University of Califomia, Log Angeles. Uni-
versity Microfilms, Ann Arbor.
I 977 Mass-Distance Measures forthe Maya Obsidian Trade.
View publication stats
【Vol. ll, No. 3, 2000】
In Erchange Systems L'n PrehL'story, edited by T. K. EaLrle and
J･ E･ Ericson, pp･ 91-108. Academic Press, New Yわrk.
Stross, F. H., P. D. Sheets, F. Asaro, and H. V. Michel
1983 Precise Characterization of Guatemalan Obsidian
Sources, and Source Determination of Artifacts from
Quirigua. American AntL'quity48:3231346.
Stross, F. H., J. R. Weaver, G. E. A. Wyld, R. F. Heizer, and J. A.
Graham
1968 Analysis ofAmerican Obsidians by X-Ray Fluorescence
and Neutron Activation Analysis. Contn'butL-ons of the UnL'-
versityof CalLfornL'a Archaeological Research Facility
5 : 59-79.
Tbn℃nce, 良.
1986 PTVductElon and加hange of Stone ToolsI Prehl'Storic
ObsL-dl'an in the Aegean. Cambridge Umiversity Press, Cam-
bridge.
Trombold, C. D., J. F. Luhr, T. Hasenaka, and M. D. Glascock
1993 Chemical Characteristics of Obsidian from Archae0-
logicalSites in Westem Mexico andthe Tequila SourceAr組:
Implication for Regional and Pan-RegionalInteraction
within the Northern Mesoamerican Periphery. Ancient
Mesoamen'ca 4 : 255-270.
Washington, H. S.
1921 0bsidian舟om Cop血and Chich血Itz丘. Joumal of the
WashLlngton Academy ofSciences 1 1 :48 1-187.
Weaver, J. R., and F. H. Stross
1965 Analysis by X-Ray Fluorescence of Some American
Obsidians. ContributL'ons of the Universityof Callfomia
Ant･haeological Reseanh FacilL'ty1 :89-93.
Zeitlin, R. N.
1 982 Tbward a More Comprehensive Model of lnten℃gional
Commodity Disdbution : PoliticalⅥ山ables and Prehistoric
Obsidian Procurement in Mesoamerica. 47:268-275.
Notes
l･ To a great degree,this is becausethe vast maJOnty OfMaya
obsidian comes fromJuSt four sources: EI Chayal, lxtepeque, Sam
Martl'n Jilotepeque, and Pachuca. ¶le last long has been recog-
nized for its golden-green hue,thoughthe others o氏en are
lumped together as "gray" obsidian. Together, these four sources
account for 98percent or more of most Maya assemblages,with
the important except10mS Of some collectionsfromthe northem
lowlands (Andrews etal. 1989; Braswell 1997b, 1998, 2000),the
northwestperiphery (Lewenstein and Glascock 1997), and
S∝onusco andthe westem Maya highlands (Clark etal. 1988).
Elsewhere in山e Maya area, visual sourclng COnSists of distin-
guishing amongthethree pnncipal Guatemalan sources, and
identifyingthe ∝casional to rareartifact舟om other Mexican,
Honduran, or minor Guatemalan souⅣes.
2. The quarry zone of Sam Barlolome Milpas Altas is located
Just 9 km east ofChitak Tzak, but raw material from this source
area is largely unsuitable for use in pnsmatic blade and biface
production･ Prehispanic residents of山e reglOn used Sam
Bartolomi obsidian only rarely for making ad hoe make tools.
3･ An additional artifact was analyzed by XRF but could not
be asslgned to a source because of measurement errors caused
bythe thinness of the sample (Gudedan etal. 1989:Table 2).
4. See McKillop and Jackson (1988) for a discussion of the
effects of small sample-size on models of Maya obsidian
exchange.
Received November 29, 1999; accepted March 4, 2000,･
revised April I0, 2000.