Block 2 contained an abundance of projectile points diagnostic to the Archaic Foragers period. The wide variety of point types probably reflects the mobile strategies of Archaic foragers and the variable geology of the larger region.

Table 6-25. Diagnostic Projectile points Series 1-4 from Block 2 identifed by ArchID number.

Obsidian projectile points are extremely well represented in this area, but fine-grained volcanic material, primarily andesite, is also relatively abundant among the projectile point types except the Series 5 points. Chert and chalcedony points were present in Block 2, as well as chert knapping debris in low densities throughout the area, suggesting that chert nodules are available in relative proximity as well.

(a) (b)

Figure 6-16. Projectile Point weights and lengths (when complete) by material type for Block 2. Series 5 points are excluded, chalcedony is included with chert, and quartzite is described separately.

Obsidian is well represented by count, but obsidian is typically smaller regardless of material type, even if the small, triangular Series 5 point types are excluded. An analysis of variance of material type showed that these differences between mean weights was extremely significant (F = 11.511, p> 05). Remarkably, even in this region, which is a day's travel from the Chivay source, obsidian appears to be used in the smaller size range of projectile points of the larger types.

Comparing the counts for weights and lengths in Figure 6-16 reveals that approximately one-half of the projectile points made from both obsidian and fine-grained volcanic materials are longitudinally snapped (and therefore no length measurement was taken). Thus, this difference in weights between obsidian and volcanics does not reflect differential breakage by obsidian points as it appears that the mean lengths of non-broken obsidian points are also roughly 8cm shorter than the mean lengths of fine-grained volcanic points. Other possible explanations for the smaller obsidian projectile points include the in-haft resharpening and other forms of recycling that would result in smaller sized obsidian points in the styles of larger types. The was evidence of resharpening noted on some projectile points, but a restudy would be required to examine resharpening evidence consistently in the collection.