ANDEAN PAST 8 (200!): !-!.

LATE PARACAS OBSIDIAN TOOLS FROM ANIMAS ALTAS, PERU

RICHARD L. BURGER

Yale University

INTRODUCTION

In 1959 Lawrence Dawson collected 238obsidian bifaces and flakes at the Ocucaje Phase9 site of Animas Altas in the Callango Basin ofthe Ica Valley (Figure 1). This assemblageaffords an excellent sample for the study of thelithic material pertaining to one phase of theParacas culture in the Callango Basin. Withsome notable exceptions (Bencic 2000; Burgeret al. 2000; Gero 1983; Stone 1983), the stonetool industries of prehispanic Andean culturespossessing ceramics have been ignored becausethey seemed less useful than pottery as chrono-logical markers. However, analysis of stone toolsoffers unique insights into subsistence, culturalcontinuity, trade patterns, site function, ethnic-ity, and other topics of archaeological interest.In light of the demonstrated potential of lithicstudies elsewhere in the world (cf. Hester andHeizer 1973), the current dearth of research onthe later stone industries in the central Andes isunjustified. This study is a contribution whichwill help to fill this lacuna for the Paracas cul-ture of the Early Horizon (approximately 800-50B.C.).

Although the Paracas ceramic and textilestyle has been described in considerable detail(e.g., DeLeonardis 1991; Kroeber 1953; Kroeberand Strong 1924; Menzel et al. 1964; Paul 1990,1991; Tello and Mejía 1979; Wallace 1960,1962, 1975, 1979), the rich tradition of Paracasstone working has yet to be described for any ofthe ten Early Horizon epochs. The AnimasAltas collection is particularly well suited for

defining the Ocucaje 9 lithic assemblage be-cause it is a large sample of complete artifactswith precise relative dating. As one of thelargest collections of obsidian artifacts from asingle Paracas site it provides the basis for abetter understanding of the use of bifaces in lateParacas culture.

In this article, I offer an analysis based onthe projectile point morphology and breakagepatterns of the Animas Altas collection.1 Iobserve that these are all bifaces that conse-quently do not represent a multifunctional toolkit. Moreover, the scarcity of debitage indicatesthat these tools were manufactured outside ofAnimas Altas. The ubiquity and large size of theobsidian bifaces suggest relatively easy access tothe obsidian source 225 km away in the high-lands of central Ayacucho. My analysis revealsevidence for the recycling and rejuvenation ofthe bases of the obsidian bifaces when they werebroken. Finally, I suggest that some of theselithics were hafted in projectiles used in raiding,warfare, and perhaps hunting. Others couldhave hafted in short handles to form knives.Additional experimental work focusing onbreakage patterns is necessary to distinguishbetween these alternatives.

1 Unfortunately, surface weathering prevents a wearpattern analysis, because all traces of microwear have beenobliterated.

ANDEAN PAST 8 (200!) - 2

THE ANIMAS ALTAS ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE

Animas Altas is roughly 40 km inland on alow hill 1.5 km to the east of the Ica River and2 km southeast of the hacienda buildings inCallango. Animas Altas (PV62-148) was discov-ered by Dwight Wallace in 1958, but LawrenceDawson encountered the site the following yearwithout knowledge of Wallace’s earlier visit(Menzel 1971:82). Adobe walls and twelverectangular mounds dominate the site. Themounds are oriented in a north-south direction.Animas Altas covers some 100 hectares and alsoincludes open plazas, storage structures, andtemple walls. Sarah Massey studied the site,performing survey, including mapping, andsurface collection, but she excavated only thetemple structure (Massey 1986). During herinvestigations, she uncovered an unbaked clayfrieze on the interior walls of the main AnimasAltas temple structure. This decoration featuredlate Paracas iconography. Although Dawsonoriginally referred to the site as Media Luna, itis better known to archaeologists as AnimasAltas, the term applied to it by Massey.

After a survey of archaeological sites in theCallango Basin, Lisa DeLeonardis concludedthat Animas Altas was the center of a smallregional system in Callango and that mostsettlement was concentrated at that site(DeLeonardis 1991:194). John Rowe has arguedthat Animas Altas was an urban settlement inwhich producers of food and raw materials livedwithin the nucleated core rather than in thesurrounding countryside(Rowe1963:9). Morerecent survey indicates that Animas Altas wasone of the two largest settlements in the IcaValley during the late Early Horizon (Ocucaje 9;Cook 1999). Intensive collections of abundantsurface materials and a small test excavation byDawson revealed Ocucaje 9 pottery, and it islikely that the site was occupied for a very short

time, probably less than a century.2 Radiocarbonmeasurements obtained by DeLeonardis (1997:160) in Ica for the Ocucaje sequence suggest adate of roughly 375 B.C. for the abandonmentof Ocucaje 8 sites in the Valley. Given theproblems with radiocarbon dating for the periodin question, one can conservatively suggest thatthe Ocucaje 9 occupation of Animas Altasprobably occurred sometime between 375 B.C.and 100 B.C. Based on a consideration of Cen-tral Andean radiocarbon dates for this periodbeyond the Peruvian south coast, it can besuggested that the Ocucaje 9 occupation proba-bly fell within the later portion of this time span(i.e.250 B.C. to 100 B.C.).

During his explorations at Animas Altas,Dawson collected all of the obsidian artifactsand debitage that were visible. Complete bifaces(N=51) or fragments of broken bifaces(N=170) constitute 92.9% of the assemblage.Dawson believed that the paucity of obsidiandebitage (N=17)at the site is not the result ofbias from the sampling procedures.

In Massey’s later work at Animas Altas, sherecovered 38 obsidian points or biface tips, fourutilized obsidian flakes, and three non-utilizedobsidian flakes in randomly placed collectionunits across the 100 hectare site. As in Dawson’ssample, biface and biface fragments constitutethe majority of the obsidian artifacts, in this case85.4%. The morphology and breakage patternsof the numerous obsidian bifaces recovered byMassey strongly resemble those described in thisarticle (Massey 1986: 299). The scarcity of

2 DeLeonardis (personal communication August 1, 2001)noted that Dawson excavated some graves at AnimasAltas that pre-date Ocucaje 9 (Menzel et al. 1964:177)and that there is some Late Intermediate Period materialin scattered areas although the site was never wholly re-occupied. These other components would not havecompromised the integrity of the Dawson collection whichwas made in those portions of the site featuring only anOcucaje 9 occupation.

3 - Burger: Late Paracas Obsidian Tools

obsidian debitage in Massey’s sample is consis-tent with Dawson’s observations and the com-position of the Animas Altas collection studiedat the Phoebe Hearst Museum (ibid: 299).

Obsidian tools were particularly abundant atthe Animas Altas site, but bifaces similar in sizeand form have been recovered at other coevalsites of the Paracas culture. Tello found obsidianpoints similar to those from Animas Altasduring his investigations at Cerro Colorado onthe Paracas Peninsula (Tello and Mejía 1979:figure 20, 6-9). These points date to CavernasII, which is contemporaneous with Ocucaje 9sites such as Animas Altas(DeLeonardis 1991:178). In their research in the Ica Valley, Menzelreports finding very similar obsidian points atTajahuana (Menzel et al, 1971:82). Massey(1986:299) refers to a scatter of obsidian pointsdiscovered around 1971 to the north of CasaVieja in the entrance to the Callango Basin. Sheexamined some of these points, which are nowin private collections, and observed that theyresembled those from Animas Altas in their size,shape and breakage patterns. DeLeonardis,during her systematic survey of the CallangoBasin in Ica, encountered obsidian points atthree smaller Ocucaje 9 sites: D-12, D-16, andD-18. The style of these points resembles thatdescribed here for Animas Altas. At one ofthese sites (D-12), the points were whole, whileat the others, only fragments were recovered(DeLeonardis 1991: 178, plates 4.1 a-b, 4.2 b-c).DeLeonardis (ibid: 194) raises the possibilitythat such points may be indicative of warfare, apossibility consistent with the earthen walls,interpreted as defensive, which surround Ani-mas Altas on its southern and western bound-aries (Massey 1986).

Despite the exclusive presence of obsidiantools in the collection made by Dawson atAnimas Altas, the lithic assemblage there prob-ably included implements that were made ofother raw materials. Massey (ibid: 293) mentions

basalt core tools, and quartzite manos andbatanes (grinding stones) on the surface at Ani-mas Altas. Elsewhere in the Callango Basin, acareful study of the lithic assemblage obtained atanother Paracas site (PV62D12) through sys-tematic collection and excavation revealed thatonly 1-2% of the stone artifacts were made ofobsidian. The vast majority were made of locallyavailable raw materials all found within 5 km ofthe site (DeLeonardis 1997:136, 139). Thesemore readily accessible materials include ande-site and basalt. They made up more than 83% ofthe artifacts found on the surface and 86% ofthe lithics recovered in excavations at PV63D13(ibid: Table 4.7, 4.8, 8.8). PV63D 13 was aban-doned just prior to the occupation of AnimasAltas and, although it is located some 25 km tothe west on the other bank of the Río Ica, itseems likely that basalt, andesite and other localmaterials might also have been heavily utilizedby the occupants of Animas Altas. If this wasthe case, the obsidian sample discussed herewould reflect only one distinctive component ofthe total lithic assemblage.

MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

For the purpose of this study, the AnimasAltas obsidian assemblage is divided into sixgroups: (1) complete or nearly complete bifaces,(2) fragments from upper portions of bifaces, (3)fragments from lower portions of bifaces, (4)fragments of mid-sections, (5) fragments fromone lateral edge with portions of the tip or base,and (6) miscellaneous obsidian debitage. Thesecategories were then subdivided. The categoriesdo not constitute a classification, but rather aheuristic device that was employed to elicit abetter understanding of this collection (Table1).

Group 1. Group 1 consists of bifaces inexcellent condition (Figures 4a, b, d, 5a, b, d,6a, b, d, and 7a, b, d), bifaces missing a singletang (Figure 2a), missing a small part of the

ANDEAN PAST 8 (200!) - 4

distal end (Figure 2b), and bifaces missing botha tang and a small part of the distal end (Figures4f and 5f). It was required that their originalform be easily reconstructible. It is worth notingthat the complete or nearly complete bifacesmake up 33.2% of the sample (35.7% if debitageis excluded). Of these bifaces, 51 were in excel-lent condition. Fourteen showed some damageto the tip, 28 were missing a tang, and 6 had lostthe tip and a tang.

Ninety-six percent of the bifaces from Ani-mas Altas are triangular. Measurements basedon the complete or nearly complete (and there-fore reconstructible) triangular bifaces (N=76)were computed. The bifaces vary in length from2.2 cm to 5.7 cm. The modal length is 3.6 cm,and the mean length is 3.75 cm. They rangefrom 1.7 cm to 4.0 cm in width, but almost all ofthem fall between 2.0 cm and 2.8 cm. Themodal maximum width is 2.4 cm, and the meanmaximum width is 2.5 cm. The thickness of thebifaces is quite standardized and is almost neverless than 0.5 cm or more than 0.8 cm. The meanthickness is 0.6 cm.

The length/width ratio may be calculated togive a better idea of the proportions of thesetriangular bifaces. Ratios of 9:1 to 2.5:1 wererecorded, but most bifaces fall unto the into therange of 1.3:1 to 1.7:1. Nine of the bifaces weresubstantially shorter than the mean or modallength, and had ratios below 1.3:1. Similarly, 10of the other bifaces were substantially longerthan the mean or modal length and had ratiosgreater than 1.7:1.

The triangular bifaces were also weighed.However, because of breakage on the tips andtangs, not compensated for in the weight calcu-lations, these figures are less representative thanthe other measurements. Weights vary from 1.9g to 15.4 g. The lightest complete biface weighs2.1 g. The modal weight is 4.8 g, and the meanweight is 5.4 g.

Two bifaces (Figures 4a, b, 5a, b) weredistinguished from the triangular bifaces becauseof their lanceolate form. They have greaterlength and narrower proportions. Their mea-surements provide an interesting contrast to theproportionally wider triangular bifaces. Theirlength/ width ratio is 3.1:1. The mean length ofthe lanceolate bifaces is 6.9 cm, and the modallength us 6.5 cm; both are substantially largerthan comparable figures from the triangularbifaces. On the other hand, all three are 0.7 cmthick with a mean average width of 2.1 cm atthe base, figures quite similar to those from thetriangular bifaces. Not surprisingly, the lanceo-late bifaces are heavier than most of the triangu-lar bifaces, with a mean weight of 11.8 g and amodal weight of 12.5 g.

The lateral edges of the Animas Altas bi-faces are usually straight or slightly convex. Onsome of the smaller pieces, the convexity ismore marked, perhaps due to reworking. Thebasal edge is usually straight, although a fewfragments show an intentional concavity (e.g.Figures 4e, 5e, 6b, 7b).

The flaking of the obsidian bifaces fromAnimas Altas consisted of removing relativelylarge primary flakes by percussion to produce apre-form, and then bifacially removing a simplerow of small trimming flakes along all threemargins. The flakes taken from the lateral edgesof the tool are short and both faces of the toolsare usually dominated by the irregular flakingwhich preceded the edgework. A single bifaceedge may show short, wide percussion flaking(4.0 mm x 4.0 mm), and longer thin pressureflaking (3.0 mm x 7.0 mm). The direction of theforce of the flaking is roughly parallel on anedge, but is not parallel to the flaking on theother edges. Occasionally, the lateral flakingcreates a serrated edge (Figures 4g, 5g). Basalthinning usually consists of a single row of fourto six small flakes taken from each face. Bothtypes of thinning can occur on a simple biface.

5 - Burger: Late Paracas Obsidian Tools

One large biface with a concave base has un-usual basal thinning. Twelve small and regularflakes have been removed to shape and thin thebasal edge (Figure 4e).

Transverse sections of the biface are usuallybiconvex with varying degrees of facial flatten-ing. The edge angle as estimated with a gonio-meter is usually less than 25º. A few piecesexhibit alternate beveling, i.e. alternative faceson different edges, with edge angles up to 60º.Another biface was beveled on both workingedges unifacially and also had a steep edgeangle. This produced a plano-convex crosssection. Finally, two pieces were beveled on asingle working edge. The pieces displayingbeveling are a minority of the collection.

Group 2. Group 2 consists of small distal tipsand larger upper portions (including the tips) ofprojectiles. Although these two sub-categorieswere distinguished largely on the basis of size,an overlap was permitted in the 2.5 cm to 2.9cm range in order to include tips from large andsmall points.

a) Thirteen distal tips were recovered,varying in length from 1.5 cm to 2.9 cm. Thelargest of these tips is from a long lanceolatebiface similar to two described earlier in thispaper. The most common length is 2.2 cm. Thewidth of these tips ranged from 1.6 cm to 2.7cm. The three tips whose width was 2.5 cm orgreater were from tools with rounded, ratherthan pointed, tips. This may have been fromsecondary retouching since none of the toolsfrom Groups 1 or 2b have tips resembling these.The most common type of breakage is a trans-verse break which would have run parallel tothe base of the tool (Figures 3b, 6g, 7g). Muchless common is a complex break which results intwo straight lines forming an oblique angle atthe bottom of the fragment (an oblique break).

b) Upper sections of bifaces are much morecommon than tips. Forty-seven of these werefound at Animas Altas. They range in lengthfrom 2.9 cm to 5.7 cm, and from 1.9 cm to 3.7cm in width (2.2 cm to 2.5 cm being the mostcommon range). Some of these upper sectionsare quite large and are comparable in size to thelargest of the complete bifaces. The largest ofthese fragments (16-14343) weighs 13.8 g.These fragments suggest that the large bifacesmay have been more frequently produced thanthe statistics on whole or nearly whole bifaceswould suggest and that longer ones were morelikely to get broken.

Two types of breaks are found on most ofthe upper fragments from the bifaces. The mostcommon break is concave curved, usually occur-ring roughly perpendicular to the axis of thebiface (Figures 2d, e, f, 4g, 5g). This concavebreakage usually spans the width of the frag-ment. A minor variation of this is a break similarto the oblique break described for bifaces, ex-cept that one or both lines are curved. The nextmost common break is transverse across thewidth of the fragment, usually perpendicular toits axis. A few oblique breaks also occur.

Group 3. Group 3 includes small basal frag-ments and larger lower fragments of the bifaces(including the base). As in Group 2, the sub-division is numerically based on height, but alsoincludes some subjective judgement.

a) Eight basal fragments were collected.They range from 1.2 cm to 2.5 cm in length, and2.3 cm to 3.0 cm in width. Curiously, two ofthese are from lanceolate bifaces (Figures 3c, 6h,7h). Because only three complete lanceolatebifaces were collected by Dawson, the three basefragments probably reflect a pattern of breakageand, by extension, use which differs from that ofthe triangular bifaces. A straight break roughlyparallel to the base is found on six of the frag-

ANDEAN PAST 8 (200!) - 6

ments. The remaining two have rounded con-vex breaks.

b) Thirty fragments of the lower portion ofbifaces were found (Figures 4e, 5e). As men-tioned earlier, this subgroup was defined ashaving the base and part of the adjoining mid-section. These range from 2.3 cm to 5.5 cm inheight (with most being below 4.1 cm), and inmaximum width from 2.0 cm to 3.7 cm (mostfalling in the range of 2.4 cm to 3.1 cm). Ofthese fragments, eleven had one of the tangsmissing from the base. Once again, the over-whelming majority of breaks are transverse,usually running parallel with the base. Fourfragments show the removal of part of thelateral edge. The flute-like flake that was re-moved was widest at the distal end and tapers asit approaches the base. This type of breakage issometimes attributed to the impact of a projec-tile point. Several fragments have more complexbreakage patterns.

Group 4. Group 4 consists of fragmentswhich are missing both tip and base, but displayportions of both lateral edges (Figure 3d).Twenty-six body fragments were found withboth lateral edges intact. These fragments arefairly small, with most being 2.8 cm to 3.7 cm inheight, and 2.1 cm to 3.2 cm in width. By defini-tion, two of the edges of these fragments werecreated by breaks. Most fragments have trans-verse breaks on both edges, although often onlyone of the breaks is perpendicular to the biface’saxis. Less common are fragments with straightbreaks and only one fragment shows a curved oroblique break. The curved and oblique breaksusually occur on the lower edge of the fragment(as defined by greater width). Finally, there area few fragments with more complex breakage.

Group 5. Twelve fragments with only onelateral edge were recovered from Animas Altas.Three of these seemed to be pieces of the tipwhich had been roughly halved along the axis

(Figure 3e). In addition, there were six otherfragments which had portions of one lateraledge and part of the basal edge.

Group 6. Very little debitage (17 pieces in all- 7.1%) was recovered in the surface collection,despite conscious effort to locate it. Only onesmall fragment showed remnants of primarycortex. The remainder are interior flakes. Thelargest of these is 4.9 cm by 4.5 cm with a thick-ness of 1.6 cm (Figure 3f). One smaller interiorthinning flake was collected.

The absence of large numbers of primaryflakes and the presence of interior flakes suggestthat the obsidian was brought to Animas Altasas finished bifaces or as preforms to be com-pleted at the site. Given the paucity of debitage,it seems more likely that the tools arrived ascompleted bifaces which were sometimes re-paired and reworked there.

PROVENIENCE OF THE SOURCE MATERIAL

All of the stone artifacts collected by Daw-son at Animas Altas were made of obsidian.Visually, most of the obsidian was opaque andgray, but some of it was translucent, with occa-sional dark streaks. Thirteen percent (N=31) ofthe Animas Altas artifacts were analyzed todetermine the source of the obsidian used intheir manufacture. These measurements wereconducted at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratoryin collaboration with Frank Asaro and with theassistance of Helen Michel. Thirty of thesefragments were tested using X-ray Fluorescence,and provenience was identified using measure-ments for five trace elements. A single fragmentwas tested by neutron activation as a controlover the X-ray Fluorescence. Neutron activationprovides high precision measurements for morethan two dozen trace elements. The proceduresused have been described in detail in anotherpublication (Burger and Asaro 1979:190-202).Both methods indicated that all thirty-one

7 - Burger: Late Paracas Obsidian Tools

artifacts were chemically identical and weretherefore made of obsidian from a single source(ibid:211, figure 11).The measurements from theAnimas Altas artifacts collected by Dawsonmatched those of actual geological material fromthe Quispisisa Source near Sacsamarca, Prov-ince of Huanca Sancos, Department of Aya-cucho (ibid; Burger and Glascock 2000). Onthese grounds, it can be stated with confidencethat the obsidian came from a distance of about225 kilometers.

It remains uncertain where the bifaces weremade. They could have been manufactured nearthe quarry or in a community located betweenthe Quispisisa area and Animas Altas. As noted,the scarcity of debitage and the near absence offlakes with cortex strongly argues against pro-duction at the site itself.

Judging from a recent review of obsidiantools from the southern highlands (Burger et al.2000), the vast majority of obsidian toolsthroughout prehistory were significantly smallerthan those from Animas Altas. Moreover, thesize of the Animas Altas bifaces when originallyproduced was larger than that suggested by theaverage biface in the assemblage because manyof these are the result of reworking brokenpoints to a squatter, but still functional, form.Thus, it is likely that most triangular points atAnimas Altas were originally closer to the 5.7cm length of some unreworked artifacts thanthe mean length of 3.75 cm calculated for theentire group of triangular points. The lanceolatebifaces from Animas Altas were still longer at6.9 cm. These impressive dimensions suggestrelatively easy access to the exotic raw materialfrom the distant obsidian source at Quispisisa inAyacucho.

DISCUSSION

The relative proportion of fragment typesand the kinds of breakage which are present at

Animas Altas have the potential for indicatingthe use of the tools. However, before thesearchaeological remains can be confidentlyinterpreted in this light, additional experimenta-tion must be carried out concerning the types ofbreakage which occur while using obsidianknives and arrows.

An examination of the cross sections of thebroken edges of the bifaces at Animas Altasreveals that most breaks are roughly perpendicu-lar to the ventral and dorsal surfaces. Thispattern, referred to as lateral snap, results whenimpact occurs on one end of the artifact and thebreak occurs in an entirely different section ofthe artifact (Purdy 1975:134-135). Such a breakcould result from dropping an obsidian knife ona hard surface or from shooting it as a projectileagainst a hard object. However, it would notresult from twisting a knife against a hard sur-face. Some of the biface points seem to havebeen broken by pressure applied to the tip. Theresultant break is conchoidal and flake-likerather than flat.

It can be suggested that a wide basal areawas preferred for hafting. Apparently, when atriangular biface broke, the basal portion was,when possible, retained for reworking. Somebroken biface tips show evidence of use wearalong their edges produced after the breaks hadoccurred, suggesting their opportunistic reuse.The reworked basal sections could be trans-formed into squatter versions of the originallarger triangular points. Indeed, many of thebifaces (perhaps some 80%) show some evi-dence of such reworking. This scenario wouldhelp to explain the considerable range in theheight/ width proportion of these points whichcontrasts with the homogeneity in thickness andthe predominance of the triangular form.

A few bifaces have working edges that arebevelled in cross section. This bevelling may bethe outcome of resharpening.

ANDEAN PAST 8 (200!) - 8

Based on late Paracas and early Nascaiconography, it can be suggested that at AnimasAltas, some obsidian tools may have been haftedfor use as darts or spears, and utilized in raidsand hunting (Burger and Asaro 1979). Judgingfrom the iconography of Ocucaje 8-10 pottery,some bifaces may also have been hafted onknives associated with the taking of trophyheads. However, the absence of distinctive knifebreaks suggests that the Animas Altas obsidianbifaces were not used as knives in household orritual contexts. This conclusion may be un-warranted if, as Dwight Wallace suggests(personal communication, February 17, 2002),a jabbing and rocking motion rather than asawing or slicing motion was performed with lateParacas knives. This possibility can generally beevaluated by use-wear experiments, but not inthe case of the wind-blasted animas Altas col-lection.

The conspicuous dearth of obsidian unifacesand utilized flakes likewise suggests that thelithic assemblage studied from Animas Altasdoes not represent a multi-functional tool kit.Rather, it appears that the lithics recovered byDawson make up a narrow range of tools, pro-jectile points and perhaps knives. Obsidianprojectile points have been encountered in theiroriginal hafting in late Early Horizon contexts.Frédéric Engel (1966), for example, published awell-preserved obsidian-tipped dart from theParacas Necropolis. Points of comparable sizehave been recovered from Ocucaje 10 graves atthe Hacienda Ocucaje in Ica. These were heldin wooden foreshafts by a combination of resinand cotton thread. These, in turn, were con-nected to long cane shafts.

If some of the obsidian bifaces from AnimasAltas were utilized as the tips of darts or spears,what was their target? While wild game couldhave been the goal, the most common animalremains encountered at late Paracas sites are the

domesticated llama and guinea pig. Wild gameconsists primarily of small animals such as birds,which would have been hunted using slings(e.g., DeLeonardis 1997:276). In contrast, thereis empirical evidence suggesting that, at least insome cases, the intended victims of theobsidian-tipped projectile points were human.

At the site of Karwa, on the shores of Bahíade la Independencia (Figure 1), an obsidianpoint was found lodged in a human forearm. Ithad pierced the arm of its victim with so muchforce that the point had penetrated the otherside of the arm bone (Engel 1966: figure 59).This vivid evidence of the function of obsidianbifaces probably dates to the late Early Horizon.Similarly, Ravines (1967) reports an obsidianpoint from Huancavelica that caused the imme-diate death of its victim. Thus, the bifaces ofAnimas Altas may have been produced for usein warfare as well as for the bagging of occa-sional wild camelid or deer.

The possibility that the obsidian bifaces wereprimarily weapons of war has been raised byearlier investigators who were cognizant of theprominent fortifications at Animas Altas andthe coeval Ocucaje 9 center of Tajahuana. Thelatter center has three to six parallel fortificationwalls protecting the northern and eastern side ofthe site. These walls are 2 m in height (Massey1986: 295). Massey (ibid:301) argued that:

The construction of defense walls, the pres-ence of shallow burials within architecture, thelarge numbers and random distribution of ob-sidian points at Animas Altas, the isolatedscatter of obsidian points at the entrance ofCallango and the subsequent abandonment ofthe region lend support to a conquest theory.

While the lithic analysis offered here cannottest Massey’s bold hypothesis, the results areconsistent with the interpretation of the Ocuca-je 9 obsidian points as weapons and therefore,they do not preclude using the bifaces in an

9 - Burger: Late Paracas Obsidian Tools

argument positing inter-group violence as acause of the abandonment of the Callango Basinfollowing Ocucaje 9.

The likelihood that some of the obsidianbifaces may have been set in a short straightwooden haft for use in battle or as knives inceremonies is supported by the late Early Hori-zon and early Early Intermediate Period iconog-raphy of the south coast. For example, a famousNasca 1 painted textile (Sawyer 1979: 113,figure 2) features a decapitator with a haftedtriangular point. There are numerous depictionsof the Oculate Being in flying position holdinga trophy head in one hand and a knife with ashort, straight haft and triangular point in theother. Wallace (personal communication,February 17, 2002) reports finding one suchrepresentation in a Chongos style midden in theupper Cañete Valley. Although depictions ofdarts with possible obsidian tips do appear insome textiles, they are less frequent than thoseof knives. This is true of images on ceramics, aswell:

From Ocucaje 8 to Nasca 6, the pottery stylesof Nasca and Ica show representations of blacktipped darts and knives. The more naturalisticof these depictions can be linked to archaeo-logical finds of obsidian weapons at local con-temporary sites. This has led Lawrence Daw-son to hypothesize that many of these arerepresentations of obsidian objects (personalcommunication). Beginning in Ocucaje 8 thehypothsized obsidian knives are associatedwith the taking of trophy heads in the iconog-raphy.

Burger and Asaro (1977:15) One of the few published examples of an

actual ceremonial knife appears in Disselhoff(1972:277). This early Nasca knife was a tri-angular obsidian blade hafted in a delicatelypainted palate of a dolphin.

A second focus of this article is the source ofthe raw material for the obsidian bifaces de-scribed here. As noted, all of the obsidian wasbrought from a single geological source 225 kmaway. This source the Quispisisa Source, is at3,780 meters above sea level. It would havetaken a llama caravan some two weeks to carrythe volcanic glass to the Callango Basin fromthe quarry in central Ayacucho. The large sizeof the bifaces suggests a relatively easy access tothe source area or its products, but the clearevidence that the bifaces were recycled andrejuvenated rather than discarded suggests that,once acquired, the obsidian bifaces were highlyvalued. One of the more striking findings of thisstudy is that the bifaces were apparently notmade at Animas Altas because obsidian debi-tage is extremely rare at the site judging fromsystematic surface collections and excavations.

On Peru’s south coast, the pattern of acquir-ing bifaces made of Quispisisa obsidian appar-ently did not originate with the occupation ofAnimas Altas. DeLeonardis has documented asimilar pattern for the nearby site of PV62D12,which predates Animas Altas. At PV62D12, asat Animas Altas, the only projectile points weremade of obsidian. A sample of them was ana-lyzed by neutron activation at the University ofMissouri Research Reactor in collaboration withMichael Glascock, and all of these materialslikewise proved to be made of obsidian from theQuispisisa Source (personal communication LisaDeLeonardis August 1, 2001). Obsidian debi-tage was so rare at PV62D12 as to suggest toDeLeonardis (1997:279) that the artifacts wereacquired as blanks or preforms. She also notedthat in contrast to the “reckless use of locallithic materials and tools”, obsidian was re-worked for further use rather than being dis-carded. DeLeonardis (ibid:136-139) believesthat this general pattern of obsidian may havebegun by early Paracas times and consequentlyis not a good temporal indicator of late Paracas

ANDEAN PAST 8 (200!) - 10

occupations. Additional work on Paracas lithicswill be necessary to evaluate this hypothesis.

Nevertheless, it is clear that the patternfound at the Paracas site such as Animas Altasand PV62D12 differed significantly from thatfound in much earlier and later sites along thesouth coast. For example, at the Late Pre-ceramic site of San Nicolás on the shores of theNasca drainage, obsidian from the QuispisisaSource was used for a wide range of tools ratherthan just bifaces. Moreover, there is consider-able chipping debris including primary flakeswith cortex which indicates that obsidian wasbeing imported as nodules and then transformedinto tools on site (Burger and Asaro 1997,Vescelius 1963). Similarly, recent work by KevinVaughn at Marcaya, an Early Nasca village,indicates that obsidian was brought to the site asnodules from the Quispisisa Source (Vaughnand Glascock 2002).

To understand why variability in obsidianacquisition and production occurred, we willneed to know far more about the economic andpolitical organization of Peru’s south coast priorto the Middle Horizon. While at present we maynot be able to explain the pattern of lithicprocurement and production observed at Ani-mas Altas and why it differs from these earlierand later sites, we cannot ignore its implications.At the very least, the ubiquity in the CallangoBasin of numerous large obsidian bifaces madeof exotic highland material manufactured in anunknown location undermines the image of self-sufficient village life that has so often character-ized discussions of the Paracas culture.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This paper is dedicated to the memory of LawrenceDawson. Larry recovered these materials, encouraged meto analyze them while I was a graduate student at Berke-ley, and provided helpful suggestions on these and othermatters. I will always cherish my memory of him as a wiseand gentle teacher. Special thanks to Tom Hester whosupervised my research on the lithic material from Animas

Altas and made many editorial suggestions, and to SergioJ. Chávez for his critical comments on breakage andchipping patterns. Sergio’s photographs provide aninvaluable addition to the text. I am also grateful to LisaDeLeonardis, Jack Rossen, and Dwight Wallace forencouragement and critical commentary on the draft ofthis paper. Finally, my thanks to Rosemary Volpe for herhelp with the map.

REFERENCES CITED

Bencic, Catherine M.2000 Industrias líticas de Huari y Tiwanaku. Boletín de

Arqueología PUCP 4:89-118.Burger, Richard L., and Frank Asaro1977 Trace Element Analysis of Obsidian Artifacts

from the Andes: New Perspectives on Pre-His-panic Economic Interaction in Peru and Bolivia.Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Preprints LBL-6343 (Berkeley, California).

1979 Análisis de rasgos significativos en la obsidianade los Andes centrales. Revista del Museo Nacion-al 43:281-325.

Burger, Richard L., Sergio J. Chávez, and Karen MohrChávez2000 Through the Glass Darkly: Trace Element Anal-

ysis of Obsidian and Patterns of Interaction inSouthern Peru and Northern Bolivia. Journal ofWorld Prehistory 14(3):267-362.

Burger, Richard L., and Michael D. Glascock2000 Locating the Quispisisa Obsidian Source in the

Department of Ayacucho, Peru. Latin AmericanAntiquity 11(3):258-268.

Cook, Anita1999 Asentamientos Paracas en el Valle Bajo de Ica,

Perú. Gaceta Arqueológca Andina 25:61-90.DeLeonardis, Lisa1991 Settlement History in the Lower Ica Valley, Peru V-

Ist Centuries, B.C. M.A. thesis, Catholic Univer-sity of America, Washington, D.C.

1997 Paracas Settlement in Callango, Lower Ica, IstMillennium B.C., Peru. Ph.D. dissertation,Department of Anthropology, Catholic Univer-sity of America, Washington, D.C.

Disselhoff, Hans Dietrich1972 Das Imperium der Inka und die Indianischen Fruh-

kulturen der Andenlander. Berlin: Safari-Verlag. Engel, Frédéric1966 Paracas: Cien siglos de cultura peruana. Lima:

Editorial Mejía Vaca.Gero, Joan M.1983 Material Culture and the Reproduction of Social

Complexity: A Lithic Example from the Peru-

11 - Burger: Late Paracas Obsidian Tools

vian Formative. Ph.D. dissertation, University ofMassachusetts, Amherst.

Hester, Thomas R., and Robert Fleming Heizer1973 Bibliography of Archaeology I: Experiments,

Lithic Technology, and Petrography. Addison-Wesley Modular Publications 28: An Addison-Wesley Module in Anthropology. Reading,Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley PublishingCompany.

Kroeber, Alfred Louis1953 Paracas Cavernas and Chavín. University of

California Publications in American Archaeologyand Ethnology 40(8):313-348. Berkeley: Univer-sity of California Press.

Kroeber, Alfred Louis, and William Duncan Strong1924 The Uhle Pottery Collections from Ica, with

three appendixes by Max Uhle. University ofCalifornia Publications in American Archaeologyand Ethnology 21(3):96-133.

Massey, Sarah1986 Sociopolitical Change in the Upper Ica Valley,

B.C. 400 to A.D. 400: Regional States on theSouth Coast of Peru. Ph.D. dissertation, Univer-sity of California, Los Angeles.

Menzel, Dorothy1971 Estudios arqueológicos en los valles de Ica, Pisco,

Chincha y Canete. Arqueología y Sociedad 6.Menzel, Dorothy, John Rowe, and Lawrence Dawson1964 The Paracas Pottery of Ica: A Study in Style and

Time. Berkeley: University of California Press.Paul, Anne1990 Paracas Ritual Attire: Symbols of Authority in

Ancient Peru. Norman, Oklahoma: University ofOklahoma Press.

1991 Paracas Art and Architecture. Iowa City, Iowa:University of Iowa Press.

Purdy, Barbara1975 Fractures for the Archaeologist. Lithic Technol-

ogy: Making and Using Stone Tools, edited by EarlSwanson, pp. 133-141. Chicago: Aldine.

Ravines, Rogger1967 A Pre-Columbian Wound. American Antiquity

32(2):230-231.

Rowe, John H.

1963 Urban Settlements in Ancient Peru. ÑawpaPacha 1:1-27.

Sawyer, Alan1979 Painted Nasca Texiles. In The Junius B. Bird Pre-

Columbian Textile Conference, edited by AnnPollard Rowe, Elizabeth P. Benson, and Anne-Louise Schaffer, pp. 129-150. Washington, D.C.:The Textile Museum and Dumbarton Oaks.

Stone, Jane1983 The Socio-Economic Implications of Lithic

Evidence from Huari, Peru. Ph.D. Dissertation,SUNY, Binghampton.

Tello, Julio C. And Toribio Mejía Xesspe1979 Paracas Parte II Cavernas y Necropolis. Lima:

Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos.Vaughn, Kevin J., and Michael D. Glascock2002 Exchange of Quispisisa Obsidian in Nasca: New

Evidence from Marcaya. Andean Past 7:93-110.Vescelius, Gary1963 New Finds at San Nicolas. Ñawpa Pacha 1:43-46.Wallace, Dwight1960 Early Paracas Textile Techniques. American

Antiquity 26:279-281.1962 Cerrillos, an Early Paracas Site in Ica, Peru.

American Antiquity 27:303-314.1975 The Analysis of Weaving patterns: Examples

from the Early Period in Peru. In ArchaeologicalTextiles: 1974 Proceedings, Irene Emery Roundtableon Museum Textiles, edited by Patricia L. Fiske,pp. 101-116. Washington, D.C.: The TextileMuseum.

1979 The Process of Weaving Development on thePeruvian South Coast. In The Junius B. Bird Pre-Columbian Textile Conference, edited by AnnPollard Rowe, Elizabeth P. Benson, and Anne-Louise Schaffer, pp. 16-82. Washington, D.C.:The Textile Museum and Dumbarton Oaks.

ANDEAN PAST 8 (200!) - 12

Condition Detail Number Percentage

Complete bifaces 51 21.40%

Nearly complete bifaces

Tang missing 28 11.80%

Fragmentary bifaces Upper section (including tip) 47 19.70%

Tip 13 5.50%

Bottom section (including base) 30 12.60%

Base 8 3.40%

Body fragments (both lateral edges) 26 10.90%

Body fragments (one lateral edge) 9 3.80%

Fragments with two contiguous sides 6 2.50%

Fragments of tip with one lateral edge 3 1.30%

Debitage 17 7.10%

Total 238

Table 1. Tools and tool fragments analyzed from, Animas Altas, Ica Valley, Peru.

13 - Burger: Late Paracas Obsidian Tools

Fig- ure1. The Ica Valley and vicinity with the locations of Paracas sites mentioned in the text

(after DeLeonardis 1991).

ANDEAN PAST 8 (200!) - 14

Figure 2. Obsidian bifaces from Animas Altas, Ica Valley(photograph by Richard L. Burger).

Figure 3. Obsidian bifaces,biface fragments and debitage from Animas Altas, Ica Valley(photograph by Richard L. Burger).

15 - Burger: Late Paracas Obsidian Tools

Figure 4. Animas Altas obsidian bifaces and biface fragments coated to highlight chipping technique(photograph by Sergio J. Chávez).

Figure 5.The reverse sides of artifacts in Figure 4(photograph by Sergio J. Chávez).

ANDEAN PAST 8 (200!) - 16

Figure 6. Animas Altas obsidian biface fragments coated to highlight chipping technique(photograph by Sergio J. Chávez).

Figure 7. The reverse sides of artifacts illustrated in Figure 6(photograph by Sergio J. Chávez).

17 - Burger: Late Paracas Obsidian Tools