A comparison of prismatic core scar and target blade widths demonstrates some morphological overlap although small blades struck from prismatic cores are generally narrower and thinner than target blades struck by the Levallois methods.
Artefact Type Number Unifacial Cobble Core 5 Bifacial Cobble Core 16 Flake Blank Core 15 Small Bifacial Tablet Core 2 Multiplatform Early Reduction Core 9 Other Early Reduction Core 438 Standard Blade Core 528 Multiple Scar Blade Core 11 Shark's Tooth Blade Core 11 Prismatic Core 14 Tula Core 76 Large Biface 8 Early Reduction Flake 7789 Contact Removal Flake 5 Uniface Retouching Flake 19 Biface Thinning Flake 14 Tula Flake 752 Blade 6765 Eraillure 4 Reflex Flake 2 Janus Flake 1 Axe Reworking Flake (Biface Thinning) 1 Retouched Target Blade 34 Other Retouched Blade 22 Retouched Early Reduction Flake 13 Tula Adze 89 Dacite Edge-Ground Axe 1 Quartzite Hammerstone 1 Total 16,645 Table 2.
The "Levallois" trajectory (after Dortch 1972, 1977; Dortch and Bordes 1977) involved producing "target blades" with subparallel edges that contracted to a pointed tip (Figure 3d-h) (Moore 2003a).
Bifacial flaking was used to prepare the basal end of some target blades for hafting, and the edges of target blades sometimes show sporadic bifacial flaking presumably to repair or resharpen worn edges.
The majority of this material derived from the various Levallois methods of producing target blades. As with the tula manufacturing trajectory, finished target blades are regularly encountered at off source sites although blade cores resulting from the Camooweal Standard, Multiple Scar, and Shark's Tooth methods are rare in off-source settings.