Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T11:29:33.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Darts, Arrows, and Archaeologists: Distinguishing Dart and Arrow Points in the Archaeological Record

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jon M. Erlandson ,
Jack L. Watts  and
Nicholas P. Jew
Jon M. Erlandson
Affiliation:
Museum of Natural and Cultural History, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-1224 ([email protected])
Jack L. Watts
Affiliation:
Kellogg College, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6PN, United Kingdom ([email protected])
Nicholas P. Jew
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-12183 ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using several methods to distinguish dart and arrow points, archaeologists have suggested that the bow and arrow appeared in various parts of the world between ˜65,000 and 1,000 years ago. Hildebrandt and King (2012) proposed a dart-arrow index (DAI) to help differentiate dart and arrow points, rejecting claims that the bow and arrow was introduced to western North America prior to the Late Holocene. We used the DAI and other methods to evaluate ˜11,700-year-old projectile points from Santa Rosa Island, obtaining mean values below the threshold for darts, comparable to several North American arrow point types. We have no direct evidence that these small points were used on darts, arrows, or hand-thrown spears, but faunal associations suggest that they may have served as harpoon tips used on atlatl darts to capture birds, fish, and marine mammals. The DAI and other methods for discriminating between dart and arrow points are based almost exclusively on ethnographic and archaeological specimens from interior regions. Our analysis suggests that such methods should not be applied universally, especially in coastal or other aquatic settings, and that archaeologists should continue to critically assess the antiquity of the bow and arrow and the function of projectile points worldwide.

Resumen

Resumen

Mediante el uso de varios métodos para distinguir entre dart y puntas de flechas, los arqueólogos han sugerido que el arco y flecha apareció en diversas partes del mundo entre ˜65,000 y 1,000 años atrás. Hildebrandt y Rey (2012) propone un dardo de flecha índice (DAI) para ayudar a diferenciar dart y puntas de flechas, rechazando las afirmaciones de que el arco y fieche se introdujo al oeste de América del Norte antes de fines del Holoceno. Hemos utilizado la DAI y otros métodos para evaluar ˜11,700 años de puntas de proyectil en Isla Santa Rosa, obteniendo valores promedio por debajo del umbral de dardos, comparable a la de diversos flecha América del Norte tipos de punto. Nosotros no tenemos una evidencia directa de que estos pequeños puntos se utilizaron a los dardos, flechas, o la mano produce de lanzas, pero asociaciones faunisticas sugieren que podrían haber servido como puntas de arpón atlatl dardos para capturar aves, peces y mamíferos marinos. Los DAI y otros métodos para discriminar entre dart y las puntas de flecha se basan casi exclusivamente en muestras etnográficas y arqueológicas de las regiones del interior. Nuestro análisis sugiere que el empleo de estos métodos no debe aplicarse en todo el mundo, especialmente en las zonas costeras o en otros entornos acuáticos, y que los arqueólogos deben seguir para evaluar críticamente la antigóedad del arco y fleche y la función de puntas de proyectil.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 79 , Issue 1 , January 2014 , pp. 162 - 169
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Ackerman, Robert E. 1996 Cave 1, Lime Hills. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory and Palaeoecology of Beringia, edited by Frederic Hadleigh West. pp. 470–477. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Aikens, C. Melvin, and Higuchi, Takayasu 1982 Prehistory of Japan. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Ames, Kenneth M., Fuld, Kristen A., and Davis, Sara 2010 Dart and Arrow Points on the Columbia Plateau of Western North America. American Antiquity 75:287–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bettinger, Robert L. 2013 Effects of the Bow on Social Complexity in Western North America. Evolutionary Anthropology 22:118–123.Google Scholar
Bettinger, Robert L., and Eerkens, Jelmer 1999 Point Typologies, Cultural Transmission, and the Spread of Bow-and-Arrow Technology in the Prehistoric Great Basin. American Antiquity 64:231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bingham, Paul M., Souza, Joanne, and Blitz, John H. 2013 Social Complexity and the Bow in the Prehistoric North American Record. Evolutionary Anthropology 22:81–88.Google Scholar
Blitz, John H. 1988 Adoption of the Bow in Prehistoric North America. North American Archaeologist 9:123–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braje, Todd J., Erlandson, Jon M., and Rick, Torben C. 2013 Points in Space and Time: The Distribution of Paleocoastal Points and Crescents on California’s Northern Channel Islands. In California’s Channel Islands: The Archaeology of Human-Environmental Interactions, edited by Christopher S. Jazwa and Jennifer E. Perry, pp. 26–39. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Erlandson, Jon M. 2013 Channel Island Amol Points: A Stemmed Paleocoastal Type from Santarosae Island, Alta California. California Archaeology 5:105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erlandson, Jon M., and Jew, Nicholas P. 2009 An Early Maritime Biface Technology at Daisy Cave. San Miguel Island, California: Reflections on Sample Size, Site Function and Other Issues. North American Archaeologist 30:145–165.Google Scholar
Erlandson, Jon M., Rick, Torben C., Braje, Todd J., Casperson, Molly, Culleton, Brendan, Fulfrost, Brian, Garcia, Tracy, Guthrie, Daniel A., Jew, Nicholas, Kennett, Douglas J., Moss, Madonna L., Reeder, Leslie, Skinner, Craig, Watts, Jack, and Willis, Lauren 2011 Paleoindian Seafaring, Maritime Technologies, and Coastal Foraging on California’s Channel Islands. Science 331:1181–1185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenenga, Franklin 1953 The Weights of Chipped Stone Points: A Clue to Their Functions. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 9:309–323.Google Scholar
Glassow, Michael A., Erlandson, Jon M., and Braje, Todd J. 2013 Channel Island Barbed Points: Shape and Size Variation within a Paleocoastal Projectile Type. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 33:185–195.Google Scholar
Glassow, Michael A., Perry, Jennifer E., and Paige, Peter F. 2008 The Punta Arena Site: Early and Middle Holocene Cultural Development on Santa Cruz Island. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History Contributions in Anthropology 3. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California.Google Scholar
Gusick, Amy E. 2013 Behavioral Adaptations and Mobility of Early Holocene Hunter-Gatherers, Santa Cruz Island, California. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
Heizer, Robert F., and Baumhoff, Martin A. 1961 The Archaeology of Two Sites at Eastgate, Churchill County, Nevada. University of California Anthropological Records Vol. 20, No. 4 University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Heye, George C. 1921 Certain Artifacts from San Miguel Island, California. Indian Notes and Monographs Vol. 7, No. 4, F. W. Hodge, general editor, Museum of the American Indian, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hildebrandt, William R., and King, Jerome H. 2012 Distinguishing between Darts and Arrows in the Archaeological Record: Implications for Technological Change in the American West. American Antiquity 77:789–799.Google Scholar
Hughes, Susan S. 1998 Getting to the Point: Evolutionary Change in Prehistoric Weaponry. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 5:345–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jew, Nicholas P., and Erlandson, Jon M. 2013 Paleocoastal Lithic Heat Treatment Practices on Alta California’s Northern Channel Islands. California Archaeology 5:77–102.Google Scholar
Jones, Philip M. 1956 Archaeological Investigations on Santa Rosa Island in 1901. University of California Anthropological Records Vol. 1, No. 2, Robert F. Heizer and Albert B. Elasser, general editors, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Justice, Noel D. 2002 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of California and the Great Basin. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Kennett, Douglas J., Lambert, Patricia M., Johnson, John R., and Culleton, Brendan J. 2013 Sociopolitical Effects of Bow and Arrow Technology in Prehistoric Coastal California. Evolutionary Anthropology 22:124–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennett, D. J., Kennett, J. P., West, G. J., Erlandson, J. M., Johnson, J. R., Hendy, I. L., West, A., Culleton, B. J., Jones, T. L., and Stafford, Thomas W. Jr. 2008 Wildfire and Abrupt Ecosystem Disruption on California’s Northern Channel Islands at the Ållerød-Younger Dryas Boundary (13.0–12.9 ka). Quaternary Science Reviews 27:2530–2545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiryak, Margarita A. 1996 Bolshoi Elgakhchan 1 and 2, Omolon River Basin, Magadan District. In American Beginnings: The Prehistory and Palaeoecology of Beringia, edited by Frederic Hadleigh West, pp. 228–236. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Lombard, Marlize, and Phillipson, Laurel 2010 Indications of Bow and Stone-tipped Arrow Use 64,000 years ago in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Antiquity 84:635–648.Google Scholar
Moratto, Michael J. 1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, Orlando.Google Scholar
Nakazawa, Yuichi, Iwase, Akira, Akai, Fumito, and Izuho, Masami 2011 Human Responses to the Younger Dryas in Japan. Quaternary International 242:416–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rick, Torben C., Erlandson, Jon M., Jew, Nicholas P., and Reeder, Leslie 2013 Archaeological Survey and the Search for Paleocoastal Peoples of Santa Rosa Island, California, USA. Journal of Field Archaeology 38:324–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riede, Felix 2008 The Laacher See-eruption (12,920 BP) and Material Culture Change at the End of the Allerød in Northern Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 35:591–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robbins, Lawrence H., Campbell, Alec C., Brook, George A., Murphy, Michael L., and Hitchcock, Robert K. 2012 The Antiquity of the Bow and Arrow in the Kalahari Desert: Bone Points from White Paintings Rock Shelter, Botswana. Journal of African Archaeology 10:7–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shea, John J. 2006 The Origins of Lithic Projectile Point Technology: Evidence from Africa, the Levant and Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 33:823–846.Google Scholar
Shott, Michael J. 1997 Stones and Shafts Redux: The Metric Discrimination of Chipped-Stone Dart and Arrow Points. American Antiquity 62:86–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Nathan E., and Codding, Brian F. 2009 Inferring the Function of Projectile Points from the Central Coast of Alta California. California Archaeology 1:7–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, David Hurst 1978 Arrowheads and Atlatl Darts: How the Stones Got the Shaft. American Antiquity 43:461–472.Google Scholar
Watts, Jack 2013 The Culture of Santarosae: Subsistence Strategies and Landscape Use on the Northern Channel Islands from the Initial Occupation. Ph.D. dissertation, Kellogg College, School of Archaeology, University of Oxford.Google Scholar