Search

Researchers use a variety of target materials, and sometimes combinations of materials, in their archaeological experiments to examine thrust‐spear or projectile penetration, impact angle, durability, and other issues involving prehistoric hunting weaponry. This variety of target materials is beneficial to archaeological science in several ways, but it may also hinder the comparison of results because many of these target materials do not necessarily share similar physical properties. Here, we assess the penetration properties of four different target materials—store‐bought meat, clay, and two types of gelatin—via static penetration tests of a modern broadhead‐tipped arrow and a stone‐tipped projectile attached to an Instron Universal Materials Tester. Our analyses of load‐deflection curves, peak load, and work energy demonstrate how the four target materials are similar in some ways but different in others, which suggests that researchers may strategically employ one or several depending on the question asked or hypothesis tested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many factors governed the penetration efficacy of prehistoric projectile weaponry. Archaeologists broadly focus their efforts on understanding the effect of stone weapon tips because these specimens are often the only part of the weapon system that survives in the archaeological record. The tip cross‐sectional area (TCSA) and perimeter (TCSP) of stone weapon tips have been shown to correlate with target penetration depth. Here, using results from both static and dynamic penetration testing, we compare TCSA and TCSP against other tip geometry metrics: lateral surface area (LSA) and volume (V). Our analyses broadly show that using a single‐point geometry metric evaluated at multiple locations along the length of the point, or using multiple geometry metrics evaluated at a single location, better predicts required energy than using a single‐point geometry metric evaluated at a single location. Our results also show that in the case where a single geometry metric evaluated at multiple locations is used LSA provided the most robust prediction models. Finally, our results show that for the case where all geometry metrics evaluated at a single location are used the location that provides the most robust prediction model is dependent on how far the point penetrated the target. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]