Experimental evidence for lithic projectile injuries: improving identification of an under-recognised phenomenon
Introduction
Between the Upper Palaeolithic and the inception of metallurgy, stone-tipped projectiles played an important part in both subsistence strategies and interpersonal conflict. Whilst the lithic components of such artefacts are relatively ubiquitous in the archaeological record, evidence for their use is less common and more difficult to identify. Where such identifications have been suggested, these are generally in the form of projectile points embedded in human and animal bone, with a smaller number based upon apparent penetrating injuries to bone where projectiles are absent. The latter class in particular, are somewhat speculative, as they have not been based on direct observation.
A great deal of effort has been invested in discerning the uses to which lithic hunting implements have been put. However, the majority of such work has concentrated on the effects of impacts on the artefacts, with relatively little attention paid to identifying evidence for hunting on the osseous remains of animals being hunted (see ‘Earlier Work’). The establishment of experimentally observed signatures will be instrumental to further advance in this area. A variety of investigations have been conducted relating to interactions between stone tools and bone, with regard to recognising and interpreting butchery practices. Projectile trauma represents an important further class of evidence that should be added to the range of recognised categories of bone modification. Unless investigators are able to differentiate between the effects of projectiles and those of other implements on bone, such evidence runs the risk either of not being noticed or of being misidentified as other kinds of tool-mark.
Improved recognition of such trauma may also have significant implications for our understanding of conflict in prehistory. Recent years have seen a renewal of interest in the archaeology of warfare with a corresponding rejection of previous ‘pacified’ views of the past [23]. However, inferences concerning the presence or absence of both intergroup and interpersonal conflict are only possible in the light of clearly defined signatures that are acknowledged as evidence for particular kinds of physical aggression. Unless a specific class of event has been observed and its effects documented, attempts to recognise the material residue of such an occurrence will remain little more than speculation. Whilst significant advances have been made in recent years with regard to the recognition of some types of skeletal injury, this article argues that trauma caused by archaic projectiles has been a somewhat neglected area and deserves greater attention.
This article discusses experimental work undertaken to facilitate the identification of stone-tipped projectile trauma in archaeological material. In so doing the investigations described below had several aims; firstly, it was intended to investigate the signatures left on bone by stone projectile points at both gross and microscopic levels. In particular, it was hoped to provide data that might assist in the identification of more equivocal defects on bone, which might otherwise be regarded as too ambiguous to be confidently identified as projectile wounds. Secondly, it was intended to investigate the frequency with which fragments of flint projectiles may become embedded in bone and to maximise their recognition in archaeological material. Finally, past assertions about the likely nature of archaic projectile wounds have often been based upon observations of trauma caused by modern projectiles, including both bullets and modern hunting and field-tipped arrows. A further aim of the present study was therefore to assess the extent to which such comparisons with modern projectiles are appropriate.
Section snippets
Background
As with other types of trauma, the potential to recognise lithic projectile injuries in archaeological material with any certainty, only exists in instances involving bone. In the case of hunting, rather than simply being a function of anatomy, the size of the resultant sample may be additionally reduced in that often prehistoric archers may have deliberately attempted to avoid hitting bone [16]. Where such bony injuries do exist, trauma caused by stone-tipped projectiles may be further
Earlier work
Experiments involving archaic projectiles have been conducted by a variety of investigators from diverse backgrounds, including archaeologists, medical and forensic practitioners. The objectives of these investigations can be grouped together into three broad areas. The first comprises experiments designed to evaluate the ‘performance’ of different projectiles and systems of launching them, including bows, crossbows, thrown spears and spear-throwing devices such as atlatls. Such work
Methods
Two methods were used to investigate the impact of flint-tipped arrows on bone. The first involved using a bow to actually shoot replica arrows at bone targets. The arrows were constructed similarly to known archaeological examples [4], [49], [59] and were tipped with flint arrowheads as illustrated in Fig. 2. For the purpose of these experiments flint was employed firstly because of its widespread occurrence in archaeological contexts, but secondly because it occupies a fairly ‘central’
Results
Various types of damage were produced during the experiments, some of which are suggested to be specific to projectile trauma from stone-tipped weapons. Examples of each type of damage discussed below were produced using both the bow and the impact tester. Any differences between these two methods in terms of results were apparently minimal, although a larger scale study involving a greater number of tests would be required to explore this statement further. The inclusion of archaeological
Discussion
Embedded fragments of projectile points are a common finding in cases of flint projectile trauma. The results from the current experiments demonstrated that any bony defect that is suspected to be a possible projectile wound should be examined using an optical microscope to check for lithic fragments. This type of quick and inexpensive check has the potential to contribute significant amounts of additional information on stone-tipped projectile trauma in archaeological bone.
The most significant
Conclusions
The present study has provided new information regarding several ways in which stone-tipped projectiles interact with bone. The key conclusions of this study are summarised as follows. Firstly, point breakage leaving stone fragments embedded is frequent when archaic projectiles strike bone. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, this study has established that it is possible to identify bony trauma caused by stone-tipped projectiles even in the absence of embedded projectile fragments. The
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the Leverhulme Trust (Grant No: F/00 094/AJ). The authors would like to thank Will Lord for manufacturing the bow, arrowheads and finished arrows used in this study. We are also particularly grateful to Mick Cunningham and Avril Rogers of the Department of Metallurgy and Materials, School of Engineering, University of Birmingham, for their advice and assistance with the impact tests. We thank Peter Saunders, Wiltshire Heritage Museum, Salisbury; Steve Blake, Ann
References (62)
- et al.
Intracranial stab injuries: case report and case study
Forensic Science International
(2002) - et al.
The biomechanics of knife stab attacks
Forensic Science International
(1999) The origins of metallurgy: distinguishing stone from metal cut-marks on bones from archaeological sites
Journal of Archaeological Science
(1999)- et al.
Experimental blowgun injuries, ballistic aspects of modern blowguns
Forensic Science International
(2000) - et al.
Differential diagnosis of holes in the calvarium: application of modern clinical data to palaeopathology
Journal of Archaeological Science
(1997) The dynamics of stab wounds
Forensic Science
(1975)Mesolithic hunting in Denmark illustrated by bone injuries caused by human weapons
Journal of Archaeological Science
(1974)On distinguishing natural from cultural damage on archaeological antler
Journal of Archaeological Science
(1989)- et al.
Transorbital penetrating head injury with a hunting arrow: case report
Surgical Neurology
(1994) - et al.
Suicidal crossbow bolt cardiac injury
Surgery
(2003)
Analysis of bevelling in gunshot entry wounds
Forensic Science International
Gunshot wounds to the skull: comparison of entries and exits
Forensic Science International
Experimental tests of Middle Palaeolithic spear points using a calibrated crossbow
Journal of Archaeological Science
Early hominid hunting, butchering and carcass processing behaviours: approaches to the fossil record
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology
Projectile point form and function at Rogers Shelter, Missouri, Missouri Archaeological Society Research Series 8 Columbia
Missouri
A passion for pork: meat consumption at the British late Neolithic site of Durrington Walls
Minimal debridement or simple wound closure as the only surgical treatment in war victims with low-velocity penetrating head injuries
Surgical Neurology
Hunters at Hengistbury: some evidence from experimental archaeology
World Archaeology
Recognising gunshot and blunt cranial trauma through fracture interpretations
Experimental archery: projectile velocities and comparison of bow performances
Antiquity
Archaeology of excavated areas
Examination and interpretation of rifled firearm injuries
Notes on arrow wounds
American Journal of the Medical Sciences
Evidence for weapons related trauma in British archaeological samples
Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains
Neolithic bows from Somerset, England, and the prehistory of archery in north-western Europe
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society
Work-place homicide by bow and arrow
Journal of Forensic Sciences
Hunting with flint-tipped arrows: results and experiences from practical experiments
Mammoth hunting and butchering from a perspective of African elephant culling
Fatal arrow wounds
Journal of Forensic Sciences
Experimental arrow wounds: ballistics and traumatology
Journal of Trauma
Cited by (72)
Actualistic butchery studies in zooarchaeology: Where we've been, where we are now, and where we want to go
2024, Journal of Anthropological ArchaeologyUnraveling Neolithic sharp-blunt cranial trauma: Experimental approach through synthetic analogues
2023, Journal of Archaeological SciencePreliminary archaeological findings from recent excavations of a Sarmatian (Iron Age) kurgan site at Karaoba, Kostanay Region, Kazakhstan
2022, Archaeological Research in AsiaHolding your shape: Controlled tip fracture experiments on cast porcelain points
2022, Journal of Archaeological Science: ReportsMaking impact: Towards discovering early projectile technology in Island South East Asian archaeology
2022, Archaeological Research in AsiaValidating chronograph photo sensor measurement accuracy of stone-tipped projectile velocity
2021, Measurement: Sensors