Comparison of XRF and PXRF for analysis of archaeological obsidian from Southern Peru

Chemical sourcing is becoming an increasingly important component of archaeological investigation. Instruments used for elemental analysis generally must be operated in a controlled laboratory environment. Further, many methods require destruction of a small portion of the objects under investigation. These facts inhibit the application of chemical sourcing studies in a number of research contexts. Use of portable non-destructive instruments would resolve these issues. Sixty-eight obsidian artifacts from the site of Jiskairumoko, in southern Peru, were examined by X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF) and portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (PXRF). Results were compared for consistency in terms of source determination and individual element concentrations. Both instruments determined that the same sixty-six artifacts derived from the Chivay obsidian source and both identified the same two artifacts that could not be assigned to source. Individual element comparisons showed significant differences, but these can be resolved through instrument cross calibration, and differences had no bearing on source identification. PXRF was found suitable for determining obsidian sources in southern Peru and for identifying specimens that require more sensitive analytical methods such as, instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA). Regular use of Chivay at Jiskairumoko suggests consistent trade relationships developed during the Archaic. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.