The origins and early elaboration of projectile technology

Abstract

The ability of Homo sapiens to kill prey at a distance is arguably one of the catalysts for our current ecological dominance. Many researchers have suggested its origins lie in the African Middle Stone Age or the European Middle Palaeolithic (∼300-30 thousand years ago), but the perishable components of armatures rarely preserve. Most research on this subject therefore emphasises analysis of armature tip size, shape, and diagnostic impacts or residues. Other lines of evidence have included human skeletal anatomy or analyses of the species composition of faunal assemblages. Projectile Impact Marks (PIMs) on archaeofaunal remains offer an ideal complement to this work, but their potential has been restricted mainly to the later Eurasian zooarchaeological record. A review of current evidence and approaches shows that systematic PIM research could add much to our understanding of early projectile technology, especially in Africa.

A Review of Ethnographic Use of Wooden Spears and Implications for Pleistocene Hominin Hunting

“…During the 19 th and 20 th centuries, Aboriginal Tasmanians were often interpreted as intellectually inferior on the basis of a false equivalence: that simple technologies reflect inferior intellects. Fritz Noetling, a German geologist and palaeontologist, (Noetling 1911: 64, emphasis added) wrote:…”

“…Southern USA (Swanton 1946) Chickasaw Southeastern USA (Swanton 1946) Shoshone Western USA (Steward 1941) Sinkyone of S Fork of Eel River Northwestern USA (Driver 1939) Eastern Apache, Chiricahua Southwestern USA (Opler 1941) Western Apache Southwestern USA (Buskirk 1986;Goodwin & Basso 1971) Yuma Southwestern USA (Drucker 1937;Forde 1931) Mohave Southwestern USA (Stewart 1947) Yaqui Southwestern USA, Northwest Mexico (Drucker 1941) Maricopa Southwestern USA, Northwest Mexico (Spier 1933) Pima Southwestern USA, Northwest Mexico (Drucker 1941) Yavapai (Northwestern) Southwestern USA, Northwest Mexico (Drucker 1941) Multiple Mainland Australia (Davidson 1934a;Davidson 1934b;Hayden 1979) Aboriginal Tasmanians Tasmania, Australia (Noetling 1911…”

When Lithics Hit Bones: Evaluating the Potential of a Multifaceted Experimental Protocol to Illuminate Middle Palaeolithic Weapon Technology

“…Bones have the potential to preserve direct evidence of projectile hunting through bone lesions, traumata or embedded weapon tips. Their appearance in the archaeological record is well-documented from the Late Upper Palaeolithic onwards (Table 1) and here could be linked to the increased use of bow and arrow technologies (Moirenc et al 1921;Noe-Nygaard 1974;Bratlund 1990Bratlund , 1991Milo 1998;Morel 1998;Boeda et al 1999;Münzel and Conard 2004;Zenin et al 2006;Letourneux and Pétillon 2008;Nikolskiy and Pitulko 2013;Gaudzinski-Windheuser 2016;O'Driscoll and Thompson 2018;Wojtal et al 2019;Синицын et al 2019Синицын et al , Sano et al 2019. However, potential projectile impact wounds from Lower, Middle and early Upper Palaeolithic contexts are sparse and several well-known examples remain disputed, mainly from a taphonomic perspective (see Gaudzinski-Windheuser 2016 for a discussion of Boxgrove and Umm el Tlel).…”

Split-based points from the Swabian Jura highlight Aurignacian regional signatures

“…Antler points, specifically split-based points (SBP), count among the most numerous and wide-spread examples of osseous tools from the eUP [20][21][22][23]. This innovation represents one of the complex weaponry systems that are in the repertoire of modern humans' behavioral complexity [24][25][26][27]. In Europe, this technological shift also signals the use of a new raw material, antler, which was subsequently used throughout the Upper Paleolithic, underscoring its lasting utility for the Late Pleistocene hunter-gatherers [22,23,28].…”