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]

Understanding prehistoric projectile weaponry performance is fundamental to unraveling past humans' survival and the evolution of technology. One important debate involves how deeply stone-tipped projectiles penetrate a target. Theoretically, all things being equal, projectiles with smaller tip cross-sectional geometries should penetrate deeper into a target than projectiles with larger tip cross-sectional geometries. Yet, previous experiments have both supported and questioned this theoretical premise. Here, under controlled conditions, we experimentally examine fourteen types of stone-tipped projectile each possessing a different cross-sectional geometry. Our results show that both tip cross-sectional area (TCSA) and tip cross-sectional perimeter (TCSP) exhibit a strong, significant inverse relationship with target penetration depth, although TCSP's relationship is stronger. We discuss why our experimental results support what is mathematically predicted while previous experiments have not. Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that when stone tip cross-sectional geometries become smaller over time in particular contexts, this evolution may be due to the selection of these attributes for increased penetration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The iconic Paleoindian projectile points of the northern portion of the North American Great Plains—Clovis, Folsom, Agate Basin, Plainview (Goshen), Hell Gap, Alberta, Scottsbluff, and Eden—span nearly 4,000 radiocarbon years. Here, we apply recent findings from experimental archaeology to a database of 343 Paleoindian points to better understand how well these point types potentially functioned relative to each other in terms of penetration. Given that tip cross-sectional area (TCSA) and tip cross-sectional perimeter (TCSP) inversely correlate with penetration depth, we measured and analyzed these two attributes on each specimen in our database. Our results indicate significant differences in the Paleoindian point types' tip cross-sectional geometries, suggesting that these points were not equally effective at penetration and that there is not a progressive trend in penetration effectiveness from Early to Late Paleoindian times. We conclude with a discussion of hypothetical Paleoindian point evolution and the reasons for the possible selection for or against penetration. The results speak to the assessment of archaeological and ethnographic technologies with full knowledge of their performance potential as gleaned from experimental archaeology. Such knowledge will help anthropologists propose more robust hypotheses involving the evolution of technology and culture, both past and present. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]