No abstract

The overkill hypothesis has been criticized using a simple observation–with the exception of New Zealand, there is little evidence for human hunting of extinct Quaternary faunas. We explore the legitimacy of this argument, or what we call the “Associational Critique,” the idea that the paucity of evidence for the subsistence exploitation of extinct taxa weakens or falsifies overkill. Using quantitative and probabilistic models, based on the temporal depth of extinction events, human demography, and taphonomic bias, we ask how many associations with extinct fauna should have been found by this point in time in Australia, North America, and New Zealand. We conclude that such evidence should be rare in Australia, of intermediate abundance in North America, and common in New Zealand, a conclusion very much in accord with the current state of the archaeological record. We reach a similar conclusion using an analysis of the relative frequency of radiocarbon dates from each region dating to the time of coexistence of humans and extinct fauna. We argue that a scarcity of evidence for the exploitation of extinct fauna is not only consistent with overkill but also nearly every other extinction hypothesis that has been proposed, thus rendering the Associational Critique irrelevant.

Self-bows replaced spear throwers as primary terrestrial hunting weapons on nearly all continents at different time periods throughout human prehistory. Many scholars have debated whether this transition occurred because of a shift in resource exploitation toward smaller fauna or because of the bow's supposedly superior performance in warfare. Before causal hypotheses explaining this technological shift can be tested, performance characteristics of atlatls versus bows must be well understood. Studies of performance characteristics often address topics such as the range, accuracy, or maintainability of weapons systems, but this study quantitatively compares the learnability of each weapon. Learning curves for spear throwers and bows are established using contemporary data generated by archers from the Society for Creative Anachronism and atlatlists from the World Atlatl Association.The hypothesis that spear throwers are easier to learn and can be wielded effectively by a wider segment of human populations than bows is supported. Implications for the organization of labor are contextualized in light of socioecological changes generally characterizing the conditions under which shifts from atlatl to self-bow technology occurred in prehistory. [learning curve, division of labor, atlatl, performance characteristics, skill] RESUMEN Los arcos simples reemplazaron los lanzadardos como armas de caza terrestre primarias en casi todos los continentes en diferentes períodos de tiempo a lo largo de la prehistoria humana. Muchos investigadores han debatido si su transición ocurrió debido a un cambio en la explotación de recursos hacia la fauna más pequeña o debido a un desempeño supuestamente superior del arco en la guerra. Antes de que las hipótesis causales que explican este cambio tecnológico puedan ser probadas, las características de desempeño de losátlats versus los arcos deben ser bien entendidas. Los estudios de las características de desempeño a menudo abordan temas tales como alcance, precisión, o capacidad de mantenimiento de los sistemas de armas, pero este estudio cuantitativamente compara la facilidad de aprendizaje de cada arma. Las curvas de aprendizaje para los lanzadardos y los arcos son establecidas usando datos contemporáneos generados por los arqueros de la Sociedad para Anacronismo Creativo y los lanzadores deátlats de la Asociación Mundial deÁtlatl. La hipótesis que los lanzadardos son más fáciles de aprender y pueden ser manejados efectivamente por un segmento más amplio de las poblaciones humanas que los arcos es sustentada. Las implicaciones para la organización del trabajo son contextualizadas a la luz de los cambios sociológicos generalmente caracterizando las condiciones bajo las cuales los cambios delátlatl a la tecnología

No abstract

No abstract