NO. 14 ARCHEOLOGY OF BAY ISLANDS, HONDURAS — STRONG II5 



was not specifically noted elsewhere, this general type of pot with 

 contracted neck and flaring lips was also abundant at site i and at 

 nearly all the island sites we visited. 



This concludes the general description of the cultural material 

 present at site 2. The absence of certain types of objects common at 

 other sites is striking. The lack of metates with legs, celts, mace 

 heads, and other ground or chipped stone artifacts as well as certain 

 types of pottery has already been mentioned. Carved heads and pen- 

 dants of talc or other stone were not seen, and no stone beads were 

 noted. One pottery bead of coarse red ware (pi. 30, d) was the only 

 type found. No shell, bone, or metal work was encountered in our 

 excavations. In regard to all these items it should be remembered 

 that such conclusions are based on a mere sampling of the deposit, 

 the examination of the abundant material left by earlier diggers, and 

 the statements of one of the most assiduous of the latter individuals. 

 On the other hand, many other sites, no more exhaustively worked, 

 yielded not only the majority of site 2 types but many of the others 

 as well. 



Comparison of Sites i and 2 



It has already been mentioned that the Polychrome I pottery and 

 the green stone carvings were found in the upper i foot of the deposit 

 at site I, whereas the usually unslipped monochrome ware occurred 

 both with and below these types. It is impossible to demonstrate 

 this statistically for a number of reasons. We were working desper- 

 ately against time, with two untrained workers and without adequate 

 equipment for carrying on a thorough stratigraphic study. Although 

 care was taken to note the depth of the polychrome sherds and the 

 carvings, there may have been errors, and the present conclusion must 

 be checked by more careful work before it can be unreservedly 

 accepted. Nevertheless, my own observations at site i convinced me 

 that this was the case. It is striking, therefore, that at site 2 no 

 polychrome pottery was found and that the great bulk of the mono- 

 chrome pottery was of the simplest type. The absence of green stone 

 carvings and the rarity of sherds suggesting ornately incised jars are 

 also significant facts in this regard. All of these features were present 

 at the Dixon ofifertory, Helena Island, and at site i, Indian Hill. The 

 limited sample available from site 2 may account for the observed 

 absence there of certain less-abundant types of ground and chipped 

 stone as well as bone artifacts, but it can hardly account for the lack 

 of definite pottery types, for pottery was present in great abundance. 

 On this account I am inclined to believe that site 2 may represent a 

 9 



