Masaryk University Faculty of Arts

Institute of Archaeology and Museology

Master’s Diploma Thesis

2015 Bc. Barbora Kubíková

Institute of Archaeology and Museology

Centre of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East

Bc. Barbora Kubíková

Morphological Study of Sling Projectiles with Analysis of Clay Balls from the Late Neolithic Site Tell Arbid Abyad (Syria)

Master’s Diploma Thesis

Supervisor: Dr. Phil. Maximilian Wilding

Brno 2015

Bc. Barbora Kubíková

Morphological Study of Sling Projectiles with Analysis of Clay Balls from the Late Neolithic Site Tell Arbid Abyad (Syria)

Master’s Diploma Thesis

DECLARATION

I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography. I agree with storing this work in the library of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East at the Masaryk University in Brno and making it accessible for the study purposes. I further agree that permission for copying of this thesis in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by the scientific researchers who supervised my thesis work or, in their absence, by the Head of the Institute of Archaeology and Museology or the Dean of the Faculty of Arts in which my thesis was done. It is understood that any copying, publication, or use of this thesis or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the Masaryk University in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my thesis. Requests for permission to copy or to make other use of material in this thesis in whole or in part should be addressed to:

Centre of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East Veveří 470/28 602 00 Brno Czech Republic

Brno 30th of November 2015

......

Signature

ABSTRACT

Title: Morphological Study of Sling Projectiles with Analysis of Clay Balls from the Late Neolithic Site Tell Arbid Abyad (Syria) Author: Bc. Barbora Kubíková Institute/Department: Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts, Institute of Archaeology and Museology, Centre of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East (PANE) Supervisor of the master thesis: Dr. phil. Maximilian Wilding

Abstract: The thesis aims to put the draft into the practice for further substantial research into the sling missiles in the Near East which has been made in the prior bachelor thesis. The presented work will try to establish a first morphological means for the identification of sling projectiles in the archaeological record in the Near East. The main goal is to concentrate on the metric data and the functional design of projectiles in order to establish parameters which are characteristic only for sling projectiles. The necessary size, weight and form parameters, however, cannot at present be deduced from archaeological artefacts proper, because the identification of "rounded handy-sized objects of clay or stone RHO" (Kubíková 2013, 17) as sling projectiles is disputed and very different functions for the plain and ball-like items are proposed (cooking stones, tokens etc.). The central idea is to get to valid parameters after studying sling projectiles in a secure context, where their identification is unambiguous, namely in their use by recent-ethnographic societies. Studying the attributes of slingstones from the ethnographic contexts from Oceania and Americas, it is hoped that realistic size and shape ranges can be defined which could serve as a supporting tool when designating and interpreting small finds of stone or clay in the Neolithic Near East. The range margins, it is thought, in the first step, will permit to subtract from the archaeological record all RHO items that fall out of the size, weight and form range of ethnographically attested sling missiles. As a testing case, the ethnographically derived parameters will be applied to various kinds of plain clay balls that were found at the Late Neolithic site Tell Arbid Abyad (MU-ARBA Project, NE-Syria, 2007–2010). Beyond that much of the available archaeological information and photographs of slingstones, sling balls and sling projectiles are brought together to

spur an archaeological comparison and which could help archaeologists with a correct identification of small artefacts.

Keywords: sling projectiles, slingstones, clay balls, morphology of sling ammunition, ethnographic use of sling, identification of artefacts, metric data, slingstones of the Pacific Islands, sling-use in America, Late Neolithic period, Tell Arbid Abyad site

ANOTACE

Název práce: Autor: Bc. Barbora Kubíková Katedra/Ústav: Masarykova univerzita, Filozofická fakulta, Ústav archeologie a muzeologie, Pravěká archeologie Předního Východu Vedoucí bakalářské práce: Dr. phil. Maximilian Wilding

Abstrakt: Cílem této práce je uvést v praxi návrh na další výzkum v oblasti prakových kuliček na Předním východě, který byl vytvořen v předchozí bakalářské práci. Současná práce se pokusí představit morfologickou metodologii k rozpoznání prakových kuliček v archeologickém materiálu na Předním východě. Hlavním cílem je soustředit se na metrická data a funkční design projektilů, aby bylo možné určit parametry, které jsou charakteristické pouze pro prakové projektily. Důležité parametry jako je velikost, váha a forma nemohou být v současnosti určeny ze samotných archeologických nálezů, protože identifikace kulatých předmětů malé velikosti z hlíny nebo kamene "RHO" (Kubíková 2013, 17) jako prakových projektilů je sporná a těmto prostým a kulovitým předmětům jsou přidělovány různé funkce (varné kameny, tokeny, atd.). Klíčovou myšlenkou je získání platných parametrů na základě studia prakových projektilů v pevném kontextu, kde je jejich rozpoznání jednoznačné, zvláště v jejich používání současnými etnickými skupinami. Autorka doufá, že díky studiu atributů prakových kamenů z etnografického kontextu z Oceánie a Amerik se podaří definovat realistický rozsah velikostí a tvarů, což by mohlo sloužit jako podpůrný prostředek při určování a interpretování malých kamenných nebo hliněných nálezů v neolitu na Předním východě. Hranice rozmezí, dle předpokladu, v prvé řadě dovolí vypustit z archeologického materiálu všechny RHO předměty, které nespadají do rozměrového, váhového a formového rozsahu etnograficky doložených prakových projektilů. Pro otestování této teorie poslouží lokalita Tell Arbid Abyad (MU-ARBA Project, SV Sýrie, 2007–2010), kde budou aplikovány etnograficky odvozené parametry na různé druhy prostých hliněných kuliček. Kromě toho, bude mnoho z dostupných archeologických informací a fotografií prakových kamenů, prakových kuliček a prakových projektilů sloučeno proto,

aby započalo archeologické porovnávání, které by mohlo archeologům pomoci se správnou identifikací malých artefaktů.

Klíčová slova: prakové projektily, prakové kameny, hliněné kuličky, morfologie prakové munice, etnografické využití praku, identifikace a označení archeologických artefaktů, metrická data, prakové kameny na Tichomořských ostrovech, využití praku v Americe, pozdní neolit, lokalita Tell Arbid Abyad

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis consumed a huge amount of own work, research and dedication. Still, it would not have been possible if I did not have a support of many individuals to whom I owe my sincere gratitude. First of all I am deeply thankful to my supervisor Dr. Phil. Maximilian Wilding for his guidance throughout the work and my studies, for many consultations and the feedback given, his time and thoroughness. My sincere appreciation goes accordingly to the head of Centre of PANE Mgr. Inna Mateiciucová, Ph.D for her mentoring during the whole course of my studies. I am also very grateful to namely Dr. Hans-Georg K. Gebel (FU, ex oriente e. V., Berlin) and Dr. Arnulf Hausleiter (PD of FU, DAI Orient – Abteilung, Berlin) for being short-time consultants during the Erasmus period at FU, to Dr. Dörte Rokitta-Krumnow (DAI, Berlin) and Dr. phil. Laura Dietrich (DAI, Berlin) for the information provided to me about sling balls from the Shir excavation, to Dr. Bernd Müller-Neuhof (DAI, Berlin) for the discussion concerning his PhD work on the conflict and weaponry topic in the Neolithic of the Near East and Dr. Olivier Nieuwenhuijse for granting me an access to the databases of Tell Sabi Abyad for a closer look at the clay specimen referred to as sling missiles. I am much obliged to Darlene R. Moore, archaeologist of the Micronesian Archaeological Research Services, Inc. in Guam, who provided me the information on the sling stones from the Mariana Islands, to Merel Brüning (Leiden University) who helped with the databases of Tell Sabi Abyad, to Dr. Gregory G. White (California State University, Chico) for the report and the data on sling specimen from Californian sites, to Dr. John L. Craib (Queensland, Australia) for sending slingstones metric data from two sites on Rota Island in the Pacific Ocean and to Dr. Matthew Schmader (Parks and Recreation Department of Albuquerque, New Mexico) for yet unpublished photos and metric data of slingstones from Piedras Marcadas pueblo, located in Albuquerque, New Mexico. I wish to thank Erik Skov, M.A. (University of Nebraska-Lincoln) for the insights in the experimentation with the sling and projectile types and for the feedback to my bachelor thesis, to Dr. Deyan Rabovyanov (the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences) who provided me his article and translated a table of metric data of sling clay projectiles from

Slavonia, to Dr. Rosalind L. Hunter-Anderson for sending me information about the slingstones from Guam in the Manenggon report, (University of New Mexico), to Prof. John W. M. Bush (of Applied Mathematics in the Department of Mathematics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology) and Prof. Christophe Clanet (of École Polytechnique, Palaiseau) for our discussion about the aerodynamics of different shapes of sling projectiles, finally thanks goes to the Auckland War Memorial Museum and Penn museum for lending images of Pacific slingstones. I especially want to recognise all who gave me various tips on the suited literature or send me useful articles and were kind to answer my questions on academia.edu or via emails namely Prof. emeritus Frank Hole (New Haven), Dr. Danny Rosenberg (University of Haifa), Associate Prof. Dr. Çiler Çilingiroğlu Ünlüsoy (Ege Üniversitesi), Assistant Prof. Margaret Brown Vega, Ph.D. (Indiana University-Purdue University at Fort Wayne) and Dr. Nick Wernick (The Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities). I also must mention my unique field experience with the slingers from all over the world, I made acquaintance with on Mallorca during the International Slinging Tournament in February 2015 organised by Pep Ribas Ribas (Federacio Balear de Tir de Fona). The practitioners helped me to better understand the art of slinging and showed me that slinging is great fun as well. I truly appreciate the help received from the slingers of the website slinging.org with filling my questionnaires about slinging. Last but not least, I want to express my gratitude towards my parents Lýdia and Pavol, close friends, especially Lucia Miškolciová, my roommate and diploma writing fellow Alexandra Gottierová, and my love Pavol Gábryš for their endless support, care and encouragement at every moment.

"This man of wonderful physique was a Klamath Indian, a lone and mighty warrior for all who opposed him…

This warrior did not use bow and arrows, spear or shields to defend myself in his conquests, but used instead the sling and pebbles."

Lucy Thompson, To the American Indian (1991)

"And David put his hand in his bag,

and took thence a stone, and slang it,

and smote the Philistine in his forehead,

that the stone sunk into his forehead;

and he fell upon his face to the earth."

I SAMUEL, 17:49.

King James Version (KJV)

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 14

1.1 Organisation of the Master Thesis ...... 15

2. AIMS AND METHODS ...... 17

3. CURRENT STATE OF RESEARCH ...... 19

4. STUDY OF SLING PROJECTILES IN WORLDWIDE CONTEXT...... 23

4.1 The Islands of the Pacific Ocean (Oceania) ...... 24

4.1.1 Mariana Islands (Micronesia) ...... 30

4.1.2 New Caledonia (Melanesia) ...... 56

4.1.3 Hawaiian Islands (Polynesia) ...... 62

4.1.4 Cook Islands (Polynesia) ...... 70

4.1.5 Discussion ...... 76

4.2 The Americas ...... 77

4.2.1 North America ...... 79

4.2.2 Mesoamerica ...... 90

4.2.3 South America ...... 94

4.3 Discussion...... 103

5. MORPHOLOGICAL STUDY OF SLING PROJECTILES ...... 107

5.1 Shape ...... 110

5.2 Material ...... 124

5.2.1 Stone ...... 124

5.2.2 Clay ...... 127

5.3 Surface ...... 130

5.4 Size ...... 131

5.4.1 Dimensional Margins for Stone Sling Projectiles ...... 132

5.4.2 Dimensional Margins for Clay Sling Projectiles...... 145

5.5 Weight ...... 148

5.5.1 Weight Limits for Clay Sling Projectiles ...... 151

5.5.2 Weight Limits for Stone Sling Projectiles ...... 156

5.5.3 Weight Preference of Sling Projectiles by Modern Slingers ...... 160

5.6 Results ...... 162

6. ANALYSIS OF RHOs FROM TELL ARBID ABYAD...... 165

6.1 Description of the Site Tell Arbid Abyad and the Excavation Process ...... 167

6.2 Separating of Clay RHOs from the Other Small Finds of Tell Arbid Abyad (selection process) ...... 173

6.3 Clay RHOs...... 175

6.4 Result of the Application of the Morphological Analysis to the Clay RHOs from Tell Arbid Abyad ...... 183

7. CONCLUSION ...... 188

REFERENCES...... 192

ONLINE SOURCES ...... 208

LIST OF FIGURES ...... 209

LIST OF TABLES ...... 217

APPENDIX ...... 219

1. INTRODUCTION

This master thesis aims to be a continuation and an extension of my bachelor thesis which focused on the re-assessment of objects referred to as sling missiles in the prehistoric archaeology of the Near East (Kubíková 2013). It focused on a wide topic of the category of small clay or stone balls part of which are the artefacts referred to as 'sling missiles'. In my previous work, I attempted to analyse the past and current discourse on sling missiles in Near Eastern archaeology. The presumptive sling projectiles appear in great number, in a variety of contexts and without any specific stylistic treatment throughout the Neolithic period in the Middle East. The current interpretations of the function of RHOs (Kubíková 2013, 17) vary and range from counters or tokens, gaming pieces, cooking stones, weights, and polishers, to them being sling projectiles. The main goal of my previous thesis was to assist the proper identification of these controversial artefacts which are often only poorly described in the archaeological reports. The descriptions of objects referred to as sling missiles in the archaeological literature and their archaeological contexts were discussed in detail in order to create a framework of shapes and unified labelling for further substantial research into this topic. To this purpose, many examples and pieces of evidence were brought together for comparison and proof that this subject is not addressed sufficiently in scientific literature. Concerning the outcome of my prior work on sling missiles (Kubiková 2013) the proposition was to create a kind of a 'gauge' for a better identification of artefacts suitable for slinging among the large array of small clay or stone ball-like objects found at Near Eastern excavations. This is where my master thesis will continue with creating a descriptive framework based on the morphological studies of slingstones from the more secure contexts where such objects were unequivocally used as projectiles for a sling. Archaeological ambiguity is cast on these rounded small, plain and simple artefacts made from clay or stone when trying to interpret them only out of the archaeological context. In the Near East, they are referred to as sling missiles1 most frequently, but this functionality is doubted and other possible functions are proposed such as counters or tokens, cooking

1 Legacy of James Mellaart 1967 and Manfred Korfmann (1972, 1973).

stones, gaming pieces. Additional suggestions are stone boilers, standardized weights, digestive devices, grinders and mace heads. The same situation is to be found in North America, where many clay or stone RHOs have been archaeologically interpreted as gaming stones or gambling stones, atlatl weights, net weights, stone sinkers, luck stones, hunting charms, charmstones2, and bolas or recently as sling stones (York & York 97–104). In order to avoid this interpretative loop, focusing more strongly on attested ethnographic slinging is suggested. Reviewing available local ethnographies was also proposed by R. Sagarbarria (2010) as one of the methods for interpretation of the function of more than 100 ovoid stones3 excavated in the Pitt Polder research area (British Columbia). When Sagarbarria (2010) tried to compare the collection to existing Northwest Coast artefact collections, he found out that sling projectiles are absent from current American Northwest Coast artefact taxonomy. As he tries to examine depositional factors by ruling out the natural deposition of the collection of ovoid stones excavated, he has also found out that there are numerous narratives of local Katzie ethnographies about the involvement of slings in the mythological landform creation. The Katzie4 stories suggest that the sling existed and was known within the study area.

1.1 Organisation of the Master Thesis

The thesis is organised into seven chapters. Chapter 1 reflects on the problems of the topic of sling projectiles in the archaeological debate discussed in the previous bachelor thesis. Starting points of inefficient identification of sling projectiles among all the small finds are evoked. A proposal of enhancing the identification through exactly defined bodily characteristics of sling projectiles is sketched.

2 Charmstones are defined as "made of stone, entirely shaped by manufacturing processes, cylindrical or elongate in form, generally between 7-20 cm in length and either perforated or non-perforated (Sharp 2000, 233). They occur as isolated artefacts or in groups.

3 Their average values are as follows: weight: 69 g, length: 4.9 cm, width: 3.5 cm and thickness: 2.7 cm. They are homogenous in dimension, shape and weight, and consist of local metamorphic and sedimentary rocks (Sagarbarria 2010).

4 The Katzie are Halq’emeylem-speakers and part of the Central Coast Salish cultural group. The studied area lies within the northern aspect of the Katzie's traditional territory (Sagarbarria 2010).

Chapter 2 explores the aims set to establish a range of shapes, size and weight for the category of sling projectiles. Expected outcomes of the morphological study of sling projectiles and analysis of clay small finds from the site Tell Arbid Abyad in Syria are presented. The methods applied and used to create complex parameters exercisable only on the sling projectile artefact are reviewed as well. Chapter 3 provides ideas, concepts and the state of previous academic research of the sling projectiles, the scarcity of experimental studies of these projectiles and the lack of in- depth studies of their technical and functional properties. Chapter 4 introduces the academic approach when studying the sling projectiles and the importance of this approach. The chapter is divided into two geographical regions The Pacific and the Americas. These regions represent a secured contexts where the sling has been known and used. Metric information on the Pacific and American sling projectiles is gathered and presented visually. Chapter 5 is based on the conclusions of the previous chapter. The thought-provoking chapters 5.1–5.5 try to offer in-depth discussion on the sling projectiles. All the specific information is elaborated on to provide a coherent set of morphological characteristics of stone or clay projectiles used with a sling in Chapter 5.6. Chapter 6 opens the practical part of the thesis. The Late Neolithic site Tell Arbid Abyad is introduced. The focus lies on the metric information, shape and surface of rounded handy-sized clay objects excavated on this site. Proposed size and weight ranges for sling projectiles are applied on clay RHOs. Chapter 7 summarizes all the information and findings of the previous chapters. This chapter is followed by the relevant references, and lists of figures and tables used in the text. At the end, there is Appendix which provides plates of photos of small finds from the site Tell Arbid Abyad and photos of slingstones from New Caledonia (courtesy of the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology of the University of Pennsylvania, Penn Museum).

2. AIMS AND METHODS

My bachelor thesis (Kubíková 2013) focused on describing the problem of artefacts referred to as sling missiles in the archaeological record and considering some of its ramifications. Various types of the description of objects were discussed and direct comparisons have been made of objects´ identical designation (as ballistic items) coming from different sites. The inconsistencies in the descriptions and designations used in excavation reports and other publications were revealed. The thesis further noticed the existing doubts concerning the actual function of plain ball-like objects of small size which led to a dismissal of the use of the term sling missiles altogether, because of their disputed function and their problematic interpretation nowadays. A term rounded handy-sized object of clay or stone was established which is fit to subsume all the small decoration-free finds in the reports and articles. Consequently, seven primary shapes of potential sling projectiles could have been discerned and the best suited labels coined, on the basis of available literature and other considerations. The selection of these representative shapes in (Kubíková 2013, 20) was executed using actual archaeological finds as the starting point. The interpretation of these artefacts as sling missiles, however, has become doubted and is not as firmly established nowadays (Tsuneki 1998, 111–112) as it used to be beforehand (cf. Korfmann 1973; 1972). Unfortunately, "technical and functional qualities" [of small finds] "have never been part of in-depth studies" in the Near East context (Gaulon 2013, 345). D. Rosenberg (2009, 108) came to the same conclusion that "almost no technological, typological metrical or other observations of slingstone assemblages have been published". Therefore, if it is not certain that it is prehistoric sling projectiles that are studied, all the conclusions about the slinging practice in the past drawn from the observation of these artefacts are a deadlock. Found interpretations thus cannot be validated and must stay in limbo. Where the archaeology has its own shortcomings, ethnoarchaeology and ethno- historic accounts "provide ways to deal with this lack of evidence, and form an ever improving understanding of the archaeological record" (Harris-Jones 2015, para 11). The only logical step in this dispute is to look for the contexts where the identification of sling projectiles is undisputed, and that is within the indigenous cultures and societies. The secured

ethnographic context of the sling projectiles can be found among indigenous peoples of the Pacific region and the Americas. R. York & G. York (2011) have arrived to the same conclusion, when they tried to explore the implications of almost worldwide distribution of sling use (Korfmann 1973, 42) which "was relegated to archaeology limbo" (York & York 2011, xv). They provided "a long-overdue survey of existing knowledge regarding use of slings and particularly slingstones in the Americas and Oceania" (York & York 2011, xvi). In both of these areas the sling usage is known. The only obstacle is how much information focused on the physical properties of sling projectiles can be traced. Technology of stone or clay projectiles could be identifiable more easily if unique depositional environment, ethnographic evidence and comparative attributes were pursued. In particular, comparative attributes should be a starting point. As York & York (2011, 91– 92) noted a number of times, accurate metric information is essential in defining slingstones and determining or eliminating other proposed functions. In my thesis, I will follow the York & York's steps but the focus will remain solely on the morphological features and the metric data of the slingstones from the Oceania and the Americas. These were reported in the ethnographic sources and used in order to propose closed size, weight and shape ranges (threshold values) into which they supposedly fall because of their high-performance functional decoration-free design. This thesis is constricted to study the slingstones as an artefact class only from the morphological perspective. Its goal is to answer the question what defines a find object as a slingstone. The study is performed using a qualitative aspects of the researched material and data rather than quantitative ones. Analysing shapes and metric data of sling projectiles in order to conceptualise the size and weight ranges is based on the same logic Alan Cannel used in his research about "the efficiency of impact energy delivered by a thrown rock and the relationship between the mechanics of throwing and how rocks are chosen" (2012, 335). Using mass distribution as an analytical technique is explained by the idea that "the mass distribution of chosen and hoarded stones leaves a recognisable pattern, something like a footprint" (Cannel 2002, 339). In this thesis, the same footprint is proposed to be seen in the shapes, sizes and weight of sling projectiles. The attributes of sling projectiles are in a constant mutual relation with the functional design of a sling, and with the aerodynamics of projectiles. The functional

analogy approach is the main method of this thesis. Ethnographically generated ranges are based on the supposition of functional analogy and morphological convergence. Regarding the technology of sling projectiles, the attributes monitored are number, dimensions (length, width, diameter, and thickness) and weight, along with the description of visual features such as shape, material and surface. These features are monitored with the intention to create tables, databases and graphs to visualise the data. This is a pilot study which does not have sufficient data for in-depth analysis; however the data collected is sufficient for the exploratory statistic. In addition to the exploratory statistic, this thesis´ understanding of particularities of sling projectiles has been enhanced by the field trip to Mallorca, where I had a chance to observe the slinging skill, the slingers´ treatment of and decisions regarding the ammunition and their unique experiences regarding the sling and slinging during the international competition. Travelling to Mallorca to see the slinging international competition provided a unique opportunity to get as close as possible to authentic identification and calibration of objects that serve as sling missiles. All of this thesis´ findings and conclusions are meant to serve archaeology. The limit values will be used to sort out the broad array of archaeological RHOs, of which some are supposed sling projectiles. The specimen from the Late Neolithic site Tell Arbid Abyad have been chosen to prove the validity of this thesis´ findings. The lack of actual archaeological material to study in other cases would cause serious difficulties in the scientific endeavour, however, for the application of the function analogy and morphological approach, only metric data, descriptions and photos are required.

3. CURRENT STATE OF RESEARCH

The more recent contributions on slings and slingstones neither focus on a specific discussion nor deal with them in a comprehensive fashion, except formerly Korfmann’s unique publication of 1972, Rosenberg's (2009) article on slingstones from the Levant and recently York & York's (2011) book about slingstones from the Pacific and the Americas. Therefore, it is very difficult to survey possible sling projectiles (because the long-standing disinterest in the subject by archaeologists). Only few archaeological contributions do report those small plain finds of clay which could be sling missiles on regular basis, and if they fail 19

to record basic information about such finds that are a must for comparative studies (York & York 2011, 5). To cite just some examples, 1912, A. J. B. Wace and M. S. Thompson wrote an extensive work about the excavations of Neolithic mounds in Thessaly in Greece during which] they had found hundreds of finds referred to as sling bullets. However, they did not report any measurement and weight of these clay and stone objects (1912, 43, 53, 54, 73, 85, 125, 149, 66). As well at the fortress Buhen in Egypt, the excavators identified bi-conical small finds of clay as sling-shots but they were not recorded5 in the publication in 1979. It has been only noted that a large quantity of them had been found (Emery 1979, 130–131). In a storeroom of the MB Western Palace in Area Q at Ebla, large clay ball artefacts were found, referred to as "catapult projectiles" (Matthiae 1982, 125). However, there is no evidence for the existence of a catapult in that period, so Burke proposed that these artefacts should have been interpreted as slingstones (Burke 2004, 60). Unfortunately, Matthiae (1977, 152) did not provided the sizes of the artefacts. They were compared only to a ballista stone which had a diameter of 13.7 cm. In sharp contrast to these incomplete pieces of information stands J. Craib (1988) had reported the manufacturing stage, cross section, tip shape, metric variables and indices of width/length, thickness/width, and thickness/length on the slingstones found at two sites on Rota Island (Mariana Islands/Oceania). Yet another excavator, I. Ghezzi (2006, 74–75), reported the weight, volume, length, width, density, and even an index of sphericity of cobbles which were found in Chankillo, a fortified site in Peru. Besides, for a comparison of the natural stone artefacts interpreted as slingstones, he used a control group of cobbles from a nearby river. In the Middle East, D. Rosenberg (2009, 102) applied a comprehensive approach to slingstones from the Levant collected and excavated during field surveys of the Wadi Rabah sites. His study of slingstones encompassed the state of preservation, the raw materials and the technology used in the production of these artefacts in an effort to identify possible production marks. His observations extended as well to factors like symmetry, metrical and weight measurements. Even potential impact scars were mentioned.

5 Many sling-shots were discarded and Wernick (2014, 99) is convinced that a "statistical analysis of size and shapes would be inherently flawed as it would omit many samples from the dataset".

F. Forouzan (et al. 2012) applied XRF analysis to sling bullets made of clay from the Iranian site Chogha Gavaneh dating to the Early Chalcolithic (ca. 5000–4000 B.C.E). The analysis provided information on a chemical composition of the clays used for the small finds with the goal to submit certain assumptions concerning the production and the use of such objects to a test. For more definite conclusions about the function of the sling bullets from Chogha Gavaneh, Forouzan (et al. 2012, 84) also called for more comparisons with other sling bullets from similar Chalcolithic periods and "information on ethnographic observation or experimental replication enacted in the local region". A. Gaulon (2013) explored in his article about Halafian modelled clay balls their shapes, dimensions, the archaeological context and reasoned about the plausibility of different proposed functions. He concluded that these clay balls are "polyvalent and almost certainly had various functions and socio-economic positions within Halafian daily life" (Gaulon 2013, 351). Despite all the doubts about the function, clay or stone sling missile artefacts considered to be are part of the Neolithic package (Çilingiroğlu 2005, 5). Recently extensive research about the sling projectiles in worldwide context has been done by Robert and Gigi York. In 2011 they published a monography titled 'Slings & Slingstones: The Forgotten Weapons of Oceania and the Americas'. The publication is the outcome of their long-standing research on slings and slingstones in the Museum of History and Culture in Saipan, (Northern Mariana Islands/ Oceania) where they came across many Pacific sling missiles that are shaped in a way that is fit for killing. The thorough and readable account of slingstones is a unique source of information on sling missiles. Simultaneously, the sling as a tool and its capabilities was researched also by E. Skov (2011). The sling and slingstones have not been subjected to the same extent of experimentation as other weapons and projectiles (DeWitt 2013, 18). Rare experimental studies include for example R. E. Dohrenwend (2002) who started with the ballistics, terminal effect or impact issues of the sling projectiles. Finney's (2005) experiments with slingstone hurling in order to establish the range of slings in the context of Britain hillforts. Finney (2005, 168) used a Bolivian sling which is "temporally, spatially, and culturally" separated from the Middle Iron Age hillforts

context, however he still assumed that it allowed "the demarcation of certain bounds of inference relating to its [sling] capability to be drawn" Finney (2005, 168)6. Experimental data on the shooting range of sling projectiles was acquired in Peru by M. Brown Vega and N. Craig (2009). The reason behind these slinging trials was that the designation as sling missiles by the excavators alone is a weak indicator that slings were used at these sites (Brown Vega 2009, 1265) and it must be demonstrated that a sling was an effective weapon at these Andean hillforts by experiments. E. Skov (2013) in his master thesis also experimented with shooting sling projectiles on the assumption that "previous scholarship and experimental efforts have significantly underestimated potential velocity, range and potential damage to target organisms" (Skov 2013, 1). In another master thesis by K. DeWitt (2013) who chose to compare the effectiveness of two prehistoric multiplier weapons, atlatl and sling, tested three hypotheses with the help of five adult novice volunteers. DeWitt (2013, 19, 26, 42) tried to find out (1) whether the atlatl would be mastered more quickly than the sling, (2) whether the atlatl would be more accurate than the sling and (3) whether the sling would have a longer effective range than the atlatl. As has been shown above except Korfmann’s comprehensive discussion on slings and sling projectiles in Western Asian context and Yorks’ work covering America and Oceania, the coverage of the sling missiles in scientific literature is suboptimal.

6 In the case of the sling missiles themselves, aerodynamics and human performance are stringent factors which set the morphological variation very narrow limits. Therefore, due to certain ballistic constraints of sling projectiles, it is possible to use the functional analogies from different and distant geographical areas.

4. STUDY OF SLING PROJECTILES IN WORLDWIDE CONTEXT

Fig. 1 Worldwide distribution of the sling (after Korfmann 1973, 42).

As highlighted in Chapter 3, the evidence on slings is uneven but we can still be fascinated by the map produced by Manfred Korfmann (Fig. 1). Uneven survey of the sling use evidence in the worldwide context York & York (2011, 17). Concerning the use, it is assumed that the sling made its first appearance in the Epipaleolithic and at the beginning of Neolithic period along with the bow, the dagger and the mace (Ferril 1985, 18-19). The use of the sling has survived during classical ancient Greek and Roman times as well (Korfmann 1973, 37). Later notions of the use of sling came from travellers spotting the sling in the hands of native people of Oceania (York & York 2011, 18) and from the conquistadors reporting the Indians fighting the Spanish with slings (York & York 2011, 75, 85). Even Pacific Islands, Andean and Mediterranean local cultures7 still maintain slinging traditions (Harrison 2006, para 14). The sling appears to be the case of a multifunctional "force multiplier" (DeWitt 2013) tool. Besides its use in warfare and hunting, the artefact has been "helpful to nomadic herdsmen in the Near East, Central Asia, and the Andean highlands of South America"

7 Also some places in the Himalayas, reported by a female participant of Mallorca slinging competition of Tibetian origin that slinging is a family practice for guarding and shepherding the herds (Puchi Rial 2015, pers. comm.)

(Cahlander 1980, 5) and "the sling as a weapon, hunting tool, or herding tool can be used widely by adults and children, males and females" (Brown Vega 2008, 66). However, David's weapon is only one part of the sling technology. The second and inseparable part of it is the ammunition, the sling projectiles. Sling missiles are ubiquitous. Stone projectiles are the easiest obtainable kind of sling projectile. Other materials used were clay and lead8. The only well-accepted evidence for the sling comes from the context of the Pacific Islands. It has been described as the "human-modified football type" slingstone (Fig. 2) (York & York 2011, 20).

Fig. 2 Slingstones in the Guam Museum collection varying in size from 3.81–12.7 cm (after Guam Museum 2015, pers. comm.).

4.1 The Islands of the Pacific Ocean (Oceania)

This chapter will be focusing on the islands of the Pacific Ocean where usage of the sling is well known from the pre-European period due to the unique ethnographic observations, the historical accounts written by voyagers, explorers and other scholars and the records of archaeological excavations. The earliest evidence for the sling use in Oceania

8 In this study, the focus will be on clay and stone material because enhancing identification of prehistoric objects is the thesis' goal and lead sling projectiles are artefacts of a later age.

are bi-conical slingstones with pointed ends found in9 Lapita context in the Reef-Santa Cruz Group of the Solomon Islands, dated to ca. 3 100 years ago (York & York 2011, 17). This geographical area comprises 20,000 to 30,000 islands in the Pacific Ocean. Oceania is divided into three cultural areas: Micronesia, Melanesia and Polynesia (Fig. 3). The presented selection of islands arose naturally from the variability and abundance of information about the sling projectiles there. It needs to be emphasized that the discussed evidence for the Pacific Islands is unavoidably uneven, due to my search for the detailed metric data of sling projectiles. However, the same conclusion was drawn by York & York in their extensive research on slings and slingstones from Oceania (2011, 17). In this thesis, the evidence from Micronesia is only represented by the slingstones from the Mariana Islands, for at present this is the most diverse and well-documented collection in whole Oceania. From Melanesia, the metric data on the sling projectiles come from New Caledonia. In Polynesia, information on the slingstones was acquired from Hawaii and the Cook Islands. The absence of data concerning the sling projectiles from other islands in this thesis does not imply that the use of the sling was not attested there. The aim was to seek data on the slingstones mainly from archaeological contexts, but in case of some islands, it seems that the slingstones have not been recovered yet from the excavations or there seems to be no current debate regarding the sling and slingstones in the relevant literature (York & York 2011, 52). Therefore, I had to rely on the ethno-historic sources or museum collections for the information on the dimensions, shapes and materials as the main hypothesis is based on the parallel of form/size/weight caused by the 'natural’ performance needs of ballistic bodies.

9 An exception is Australia where the use of the sling is not documented (York & York 2011, 17).

Fig. 3 A map of the main cultural areas. (http://www.britannica.com/place/Pacific-Islands, accessed 05.07.2015).

Particular information was found on the slingstones from the Marquesas Islands. They were described as oval stones specially selected for their size and polished by rubbing (Handy 1923, 131). Samoan people were known to use slings, clubs and spears as weapons (Buck 1930, 583). Interestingly, bows and arrows were used in sport to shoot pigeons and fish (Buck 1964, 50). Peter Henry Buck (1930, 609) wrote that the sling was a very effective weapon because it inflicted severe wounds and caused the fractures of bones. The projectiles for Samoan slings were waterworn pebbles of appropriate size without additional shaping or working (Buck 1930, 608). On Tahiti, that weighed up to 1 kg, worked into the shape of a chicken egg were slung (Bunzendahl 1935, 98). Trying to define a reference range deduced from the ethno-historical record of Oceania can be a useful method when the identification of sling stone projectiles depends only on sorting by weight and shapes within an assemblage of beach pebbles and sometimes on the distribution, concentration or provenance as well. But there is still a chance that it was natural sorting. Flint beach pebbles found on the several sites in the southern Britain (UK)

were a priori interpreted as slingstones–this interpretation is traditional and widely accepted. It is clear that the identification on the basis of archaeology in the case of sling projectiles which are not as clearly cultural as many other found items is always ambiguous. The identification becomes clearer only if it is caches or other accumulations (distribution) or when it is (kneaded) clay specimen. Seager Thomas (2013, 6) also tried to compile metric information on the slingstones from various islands of the Pacific Ocean, where the practice of slinging is known. The purpose was to create a range of size proved to be effective for slinging. Thomas´ results are shown in Table 1 which in fact summarises the information gathered by researchers York & York (2011) as well. This overview was structured mainly according to the sources available to me; due to the limited access some other sources had to be left out. It is important to stress that the comparability of diverse sources is hard to maintain if different descriptive frameworks are used. The main size dimension – length is expressed either in terms of metrical average values or as a comparison to another object or there is no information available at all. Regarding the weight, the slingstones were either weighed, estimated or weighing of the specimen has not occurred so far. In my bachelor thesis, the same incompleteness and inconsistency was observed in the information body about the objects referred to as sling missiles in the Near East (Kubíková 2013, 17-23). This master thesis focuses more on the compilation of metric information for each object separately allowing for more accurate comparisons and reference ranges.

Fig. 4 A topographic map of Oceania. (http://www.ezilon.com/maps/images/Oceania_phy1.gif, accessed 09.09.2015).

Region Shape Size - Length Weight g Reference Marquesas oval (water no information up to 225 Linton 1923, rolled) and 398; Porter 1985 pointed [1815] 323 New pointed "on average 5 no information Parkinson 2010 Ireland cm long" [1907], 127 New no information no information 450–680 Monckton 1921, Guinea 38–39 rounded and "the size of a no information pointed billiard ball" no information no information 112–225 Newton 1914, 76 pointed 60–85 mm not weighed (45– York & York 90 g estimate) 2011, 31–32 rounded "the size of golf not weighed balls (c. 40 mm)" Tahiti water rolled or "about the size no information Ellis 1833, vol. 1, "sharp, angular" of a hens egg" 226 no information no information 2 lbs (just under a Hawkesworth kilogram) 1773, 445 no information "mostly the size no information Morrison 1935, of a hens egg" 98 Mariana pointed 60–85 mm 40–80 York & York Islands (rare examples (not usually 2011, 8, 21 the size of "an exceeding 160 but American rare examples up football") to 1000) New pointed 44 mm 42 (average) Brigham 1902, Caledonia (average) 345 pointed 45–65 mm not weighed British Museum rounded 38 mm not weighed (?) pointed not measured 26–72 Gifford and Shutler 1956, 69 pointed 50–57 mm 42–50 Vigors 1888, 363, fig. 2 Hawai’i pointed 38–89 mm c. 70–280 Brigham 1892, 68; 1902, 345 water rolled "about the size no information Ellis 1833, vol. 4, of a hens egg" 119

Table 1 An overview of assembled information on the Pacific slingstones from the ethno-historical sources (after Seager Thomas 2013, 33). 29

4.1.1 Mariana Islands (Micronesia)

The Mariana Islands consist of 15 islands. The chain of islands can be divided into the northern and southern group. The islands of the northern group are small, volcanic peaks rising directly out of the sea. The southern group is represented by larger islands such as Guam, Rota, Aguijan, Tinian and Saipan. They are composed of coral limestone terraces lying on volcanic bases. Due to larger size of the islands and the slightly sloping land, the southern group is more suitable for a human occupation (Spoehr 1957, 22). The inhabitants of the Mariana Islands are known as the Chamorro people. At the time of the first European explorers, the inhabitants spoke one language and lived in a homogenous culture. They were farmers and fishermen, skilled outrigger-canoe builders and sailors (Spoehr 1957, 25). Some sources mention their weaponry: "From documentary accounts, it is clear that the sling was a principal weapon of the Chamorros" (Spoehr 1957, 137), and "The ancient Chamorros did not use the bow and arrow or swords in combat. They used the lance or spear and the sling and slingstones" (Cunningham 1992, 71). Acho’ is the word indigenous people use for stone, pebble or rock, atupat is translated as a sling, hence a slingstone is in the Chamorro language is called acho’ atupat (Topping et al. 1975, 5). The significance of a slingstone is even recognized on the flag of Guam, the largest island of the Mariana Islands of Micronesia (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5 The flag of Guam Island. (http://www.operationworld.org/guam, accessed 03.04.2015).

Cunningham (1992, 71) described Chamorro slingstones as football-shaped and made of various types of volcanic rock, coral and sometimes clay. The size varied from a pigeon egg to an ostrich egg. Most of them were pointed, but rounded tips appeared as well. The sling was used in the classical "David-and-Goliath style", that means that a projectile 30

was placed in a pouch, which is located in the middle of the cords attached to it. The sling and the projectile were swung around and over the head. One cord was released and the slingstone rotated around its axis toward its intended target. Cunningham (1992, 71) further discusses the shape and symmetry of slingstones as aerodynamic factors and ones helping to maintain accuracy. He advocates the pointed ends to have great penetrating force in the moment of impact. The same physical principle applies to a martial arts fighter who rather strikes with a side of the hand with extended fingers. Using a fist as a large area would reduce the effectiveness of the punch.

Fig. 6 A timeline of the prehistoric periods in Guam and the CNMI10, showing Spoehr’s (1957) broad phases of Marianas prehistory as subdivided by Moore and Hunter-Anderson (1999) (after Amesbury 2013).

In the 1920s Hans G. Hornbostel explored latte11 sites (Fig. 6) and collected ethnological material on Guam, Rota, Tinian and Saipan (Thompson 1932, 3). He excavated and collected a vast amounts of slingstones, pottery, fish-hooks, tools made of stone and shell, specimens of monuments and skeletal remains (Thompson 1932, 3, Cunningham and

10 The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

11 The word latte refers to megalithic pillars that supported wood dwellings. The distinctive form of stone posts is unique to the Marianas (Hunter-Anderson 2010, 152). The latte period is dated 900 –1700 A.D. (Carson 2012, 3).

Beaty 2001, 13). Later, the sociocultural anthropologist Laura Thompson did a fieldwork in Guam and used information collected by Hornbostel. "The collection contains more than 4,700 worked slingstones (atupats), most of which have been found on the surface or just below the surface on the island of Guam, in greatest abundance near the shore" Thompson (1932, 49) says. She further states that slingstones were found in concentration either in open areas, "mentioned in the folklore as old battlegrounds" (Thompson 1932, 49) or in caches buried in depth of almost one meter containing "12 up to 40 stones of comparative uniformity in size, shape, colour, material, and workmanship" (Thompson 1932, 49). A few slingstones appeared in monumental sites, then directly over or under burials and those of good craftsmanship were located in burial caves (Thompson 1932, 49). Concerning the material, Thompson has observed white limestone, crystalline limestone, fine grain basalt, and soft sedimentary green rock ('lauka'), and fossilized coral, marble and baked clay of a reddish hue. She mentions that clay specimen showed traces of burning (Thompson 1932, 50). Size is the one attribute which is not described in her publication and the actual photos of slingstones are not included either. What is available, however, is her classification of shapes with additional information on the type of cross-section and sketches. She defines 4 types, thereby giving a typological means for further subdividing the bi-conical projectiles. Slingstones are not only worked into these shapes but polished as well. "61% of the collection of slingstones is from Guam, 31% from Saipan, only 6% from Tinian and only 2% from Rota" (Thompson 1932, 51).

Type 1 – elongate, cross-section: circular (Fig. 7 a)

Type 2 – elongate, cross-section: flattened (Fig. 7 b)

Type 3 – double conical, cross-section: circular (Fig. 7 c)

Type 4 – subspherical, tendency toward pointed extremities, cross-section: circular (Fig. 7 d)12

12 This shape type clearly resembles the outline of sling projectile on the Guam flag.

Fig. 7 An illustration of four classified types of slingstones from the Hornbostel collection (after Thompson 1932, 50).

Besides interpreting these artefacts as ammunition for a sling used as a weapon, she suggests a ceremonial usage14 for huge sizes of excellently worked slingstones with distinct colouring (Fig. 8).

13 Author’s note: 2 inch = 5.08 cm

14 The ensign of Guam flag and the proposed architectural roof in the shape of one pointed end of slingstone of the Guam Museum point to modern ceremonial usage as well.

Fig. 8 An example of the distinct colouring and extraordinary craftsmanship on a slingstone found on Saipan in 2004, by someone called the Beachcomber on his blog site (http://beachcomberonsaipan.blogspot.cz/search?q=sling+stone, accessed 14. 02. 2015).

In the collection, there are also modified slingstones. These are either grooved vertically or lengthwise with a perforation near the tip. It is proposed that they were used as sinkers (Fig. 10) to attract fish or as amulets and ornaments (Thompson 1932, 51). The Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago sent Alexander Spoehr to the Mariana Islands in 1949–1950. Spoehr’s archaeological survey and excavation of the Islands Saipan (24 artefacts), Tinian (7) and Rota (4) yielded in total 35 slingstones, all made from coral limestone. Sixteen of them were found on the surface, the rest during excavations from subsurface deposits. They were classified according to the projectile tips. Three pieces with rounded ends (Fig. 9 b) were found, on Saipan (Spoehr 1957, 138). The researcher measured the dimensions of each type separately. The ones with pointed ends vary in length from 4.4–10.9 cm and have a diameter of 1.5–5.1 cm. Three specimens with rounded ends show a range from 5.5–6.4 cm and their diameter falls between 2.9–3.9 cm. One piece from Saipan has a length of almost 11 cm, "nearly twice the usual size" (Spoehr 1957, 138). Spoehr mentions the Hornbostel collection where there were many oversized stones, the largest being 26 cm long. Spoehr also repeats Thompson’s interpretation of their ceremonial use.

Fig. 9 Slingstones from Saipan, Tinian and Rota a) pointed ends b) rounded ends (after Spoehr 1957, 139).

Location Number of Shape Length Avg Diameter Avg Weight complete (cm) L. (cm) D. (g)

Saipan, 32 pointed 4.4 – 10.9 5.86 1.5 – 5.1 2.9 unknown Tinian, ends Rota

Saipan, 3 rounded 5.5 – 6.4 5.87 2.9 – 3.9 3.4 unknown Tinian, ends Rota

Saipan, 5 grooved 4.1 – 5.5 unkn unknown unkno unknown Tinian, own wn Rota

Table 2 Dimensions of two classified types of slingstones and grooved type found by Spoehr (1957) on Saipan, Tinian and Rota.

In the collections, Thompson found objects interpreted as sinkers, the same artefacts were excavated on Saipan by Spoehr. The latter presents 5 pieces found on the surface, 4 out of which are objects with grooving are apparently considered former slingstones (Spoehr 1957, 146). Their dimensions vary from 4.1–5.5 cm in length (this falls into the range of slingstones), their material being coral limestone and igneous rock.

Fig. 10 Examples of sinkers from Saipan excavated by Spoehr (after Spoehr 1957, 147).

Importantly, the researcher from the Natural History Museum in Chicago obtained two radiocarbon dates from the excavations on Tinian and Saipan. A sample from Tinian was dated to 845 ± 145 A.D. and an oyster shell from Saipan dated to 1527 + 200± B.C. (Spoehr 1957, 168). Another researcher who explored Oceania was Fred R. Reinman. During the period of 1965–1966, he performed several test excavations at five sites and carried out an archaeological survey on the Island of Guam. He chose the mountainous, southern part of Guam because the previous excavations of Hornbostel tended to concentrate on the northwestern coast of the island (Reinamn 1977, 21). Reinman collected 31 slingstones; 18 from the survey and 13 from the excavations. Except for one with rounded ends (Fig. 11 d), all of the objects had pointed ends. A flattened cross-section at one side was observed in 9 specimens, with this feature either occurring naturally or being done by pecking. Other objects had circular cross-sections. The materials used were from "fine-grained basalts, other volcanics, coral and limestone" (Reinman 1977, 95). No clay specimen was recorded. The surface quality depended on the material used. Those of fine-grained basalt had a smooth surface and those of coral and limestone had a rough surface. "Sizes ranged from 3.4–8.9 cm" (Reinman 1977, 95) with the average value of being 6.2 cm. 19 objects displayed complete forms and 12 were fragmentary.

Number Shape Length Avg. Diameter/Width Weight Reference of (cm) L. (cm) (g) complete (cm) 31 pointed 3.4 – 6.2 unknown unknown Reinman ends 8.9 1977

Fig. 11 Reinman’s collection of slingstones from southern Guam (after Reinman 1977, 225).

In 1984, the northern coast of Rota Island was investigated during a salvage project because of the construction of a new road (Butler 1988, 12). The road project included four coastal sites, but the actual excavations were conducted only on three of them (Butler 1988, 39). Brian M. Butler found 12 slingstones. The slingstones are described as "oval, bipointed objects" (Butler 1988, 268). He identified limestone, coral, calcite and igneous rock as the material used. 6 complete objects of non-igneous rock were 4.1–5.5 cm in length (avg. 5 cm) with weight of 18–57 g (avg. 40 g). Thickness was recorded in case of 9 specimens ranging from 2.7–4 cm (avg. 2.8 cm) (Butler 1988, 268).

Number Shape Length Avg. Thickness Avg. Weight Avg. Reference of (cm) L. (cm) T. (g) W. complete (cm) (cm) (g) 6 pointed 4.1–5.5 5 2.7–4 2.8 18–57 40 Butler ends 1988

Fig. 12 Slingstones from northern Rota (after Butler 1988, 277).

The island of Guam was in an archaeological focus again in 1994. A researcher from the Micronesian Archaeological Research Services, Rosalind Hunter-Anderson excavated in the area of Manenggon Hills, Yona. "Eighty-six slingstones were found, 51 on the surface and 35 in excavations or after site scraping" (Hunter-Anderson 1994, 5.67). Regarding the topic of slingstones, she remarked that they are popular among modern collectors so they might be often extracted from the surface of archaeological sites (Hunter-Anderson 1994, 5.74). The most common material of the 32 complete slingstones was volcanic stone, basalt and the second most used material was limestone. One specimen was made out of clay. The 38

length of clay slingstone was recorded as 4.4 cm, diameter being 2.8 cm and the weight reported was 27 g. One type of the volcanic soft and sedimentary stone used for the sling missiles could be scratched with a fingernail. Dimensions are tabularly shown here:

Number Shape Length Avg. Diameter Avg. Weight Avg. Reference of (cm) L. (cm) D. (g) W. complete (cm) (cm) (g) 32 pointed 2.6–7.5 4.8 1.8–3.8 2.8 12–112 20.2 Hunter- and Anderson rounded 1994 ends

Fig. 13 Selected slingstones from the Manenggon Hills (Guam) showing their variation in size and shape (after Hunter-Anderson 1994, 5.68).

Fig. 14 A scatter graph of the dimensions of the complete slingstones of Manenggon Hills, Guam (after Hunter-Anderson 1994, 5.70).

Hunter-Anderson (1994, 5.67) selected 29 complete slingstones from the project area and planted metric data into a scatter graph (Fig. 14). It was observed that clustering appeared in the 4–6 cm length range, the 2.5–3.5 cm diameter range, and the 20–60 grams weight range. "Most of the slingstones cluster within a narrow size range, which is probably related to their function as high-speed missiles (Hunter-Anderson 2015, pers. comm.)". She also determined the average weight of slingstones according to the material type. Her observations in this connection could be summarised as follows: sandstone is less dense than basalt and limestone, and so the sandstone slingstones had to be relatively bigger in order to achieve adequate weight (Hunter-Anderson 1994, 5.67). In Fig. 14 it can be noticed that three specimen have considerably smaller dimensions than others. Hunter-Anderson expressed doubts that these slingstones were suitable as projectiles for a sling because of irregular surface and low weight (Hunter-Anderson 1994, 5.67). More recent excavation was done by Darlene R. Moore and Judith R. Amesbury (2011), the archaeologists of the Micronesian Archaeological Research Services in Guam. In the course of an archaeological survey of the Buena Vista Subdivision at Santa Rita, Guam, 7 slingstones were collected from the surface. The relatively high number of pieces 40

is explained by the location: it is the place where they were probably made. Three pieces are whole (Fig. 15), four are only fragments (Moore and Amesbury 2011). For two of the fragments, the maximum diameter could be inferred. As is shown in Table 3 dimensions vary from 6.1–6.6 cm in length and in diameter it is from 2.3–3.4 cm. The weight of the complete slingstones fall into the range of 50–60 g15. Except one piece, all of the slingstones are made from volcanic regolith (Fig. 15) the specimen on the right). According to Richard K. Olmo, geologist of the project, volcanic regolith is a weathered volcanic rock. The weathering process will eventually turn volcanic rock almost entirely to clay. He suggests that the choice of material was caused by the fact that while regolith is moist, it is easy to work it into the shape of the slingstones (Fig. 15). Then slingstones could be dried up in the air or fired like pottery (Moore and Amesbury 2011).

15 The plus sign (+) in Table 3 indicates the weight or measurement would be greater if the whole slingstone were present. This sign will be applied henceforth in all the tables containing fragmentary pieces in this thesis.

Fig. 15 Three whole slingstones, from left to right ISO 4, 17, and 17 (after Moore and Amesbury 2011, Moore 2015, pers. comm.).

ISO Provenience Condition Material Length Diameter Weight No. (cm) (cm) (g)

4 Lot 6 complete tuffaceous 6.39 3.45 54.5 sandstone 7 Lot 34 fragment volcanic 3.74+ 2.35 12.4+ regolith

10 Lot 41 fragment volcanic 4.48+ 3.1+ 29.0+ regolith

17 South of Lot complete volcanic 6.63 3.38 59.2 83 regolith

17 South of Lot complete volcanic 6.13 3.25 52.8 83 regolith

17 South of Lot fragment volcanic 4.4+ 2.91+ 30.2+ 83 regolith

19 Northwest fragment volcanic 3.89+ 2.7+ 23.1+ corner regolith

Table 3 Metric data and information of all found slingstones in Guam (after Moore and Amesbury 2011). 42

Slingstones from Guam 4

2 complete

Width (cm) Width fragment 1

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Length (cm)

Fig. 16 A comparison of sizes of complete and fragmentary slingstones from Guam found by Moore and Amesbury (2011).

John L. Craib (1988) excavated the area of Alaguan, Sagan Gagani and Agusanin as a part of the SNM project on Rota island. In Alaguan, three complete slingstones and one broken piece made from limestone were discovered. Half of them from the surface, the other half from subsurface deposits. A small number of pieces is explained by the fact that these artefacts are rare in the settlements (Craib 1988, 1). In Sagan Gagani and Agusanin, 10 slingstones were recovered of which 7 were complete. Four came from the surface, two were from excavations and four were recovered during monitoring of the initial grading. The material used for making these slingstones is mostly limestone, but one piece is from fired clay, the second one from basalt and the third from coral. The fired clay piece (10S 74W Sp1) was only a tip fragment, with about 75 % of the original sling missile was missing. Craib (1988) tried to estimate the size of the whole specimen. "Based on the size and configuration of the tip fragment, this slingstone was smaller than average, roughly 40 mm long with an estimated width of roughly 25 mm (Craib 1988, 3)". He also assessed the manufacturing stage of the whole specimen. The specimen marked as Latte D – had a graded surface that is a preform because the surface is irregular as no further grinding appeared and it was roughly pecked into the shape. Craib (1988, 1) assumes that "although this specimen would be functional, it lacks the smooth, ground

surface of most slingstones". Another specimen he claims to be a preform was found in Burial 2 in Latte A. The cross-section and plan is oval even with pointed ends and the surface is uneven. He thinks that the sling missile is "too lopsided to be aerodynamic" (Craib 1988, 1). As is shown in Table 4 dimensions vary from 5.2–6.9 cm in length and from 2.8–4.1 cm in width/diameter. In Table 4 an asterisk sign * indicates that there is an actual photo in Fig. 18. The weight of complete slingstones fall into the wider range of 50–90 g. In Fig. 17 the size range of Rota slingstones mostly from limestone is visually represented. Thompson (1932, 50) defined the attributes, 'Shape' and 'Cross-section' (circular and flattened) in her classification. Craib (1988, 2) then continued and added the characteristics 'Manufacturing Stage' (blank/roughout and finished), 'Tip Shape' (rounded and pointed), 'Condition' (broken tip, body fragment, tip/body) and 'Cross-section' (circular, elliptical and plano-convex). Definition of elliptical in this context is: wider than thick (which could correspond to Thompson’s aforementioned, flattened cross-section).

Number Shape Length Avg. Width Avg. Weight Avg. Reference of (cm) L. (cm) W. (g) W. complete (cm) (cm) (g) 10 bi- 5.2–6.9 5.9 2.8– 3.4 51–89 70 Craib conical 4.1 1988

Range of sizes of sling stones from Rota 5

2 Width (cm) Width

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Length (cm)

Dimensions of complete sling stones Average

Fig. 17 Craib’s metric data of complete slingstones from Rota island.

Fig. 18 Slingstones A) 10S 76W sp4, B) 16S 16W surf., C) Area 3 graded surf., D) Area 1/4 graded surf., E) Latte D graded surf., F) 10 76W Surf., G) Latte A Burial 2, H) 10S 6W Surf., I) Beach Road near Swimming Hole (after Craib 1988, 4).

Provenance/ Preservation Material Tip Cross Manufacturing Length Width Thickness Weight Location Shape Section Stage (cm) (cm) (cm) (g)

3N/19W Sp l complete limestone ------5.9 2.8 2.8 51

ALG12 Surf. complete limestone ------6.2 3.2 3.2 89

ALG13 Surf. complete limestone ------6.1 4 2.6 89

ALG25/34 TP10 Sp 2 fragment limestone ------3.1 3.1 22+

10S 6W* fragment, basalt -- round finished 2.7+ 2.6 -- 96+ tip/body

10S 74W fragment, fired clay pointed blunt finished ------tip/body

10S 76W* complete limestone pointed plano-convex finished? 6.9 3.4 0.2 67

10S 76W* complete limestone pointed round finished 6.9 3.6 3.2 85

16S 16W* complete limestone blunt round finished 5.4 3.1 2.9 60

Latte A* complete limestone pointed elliptical -- 5.7 4.1 0.7 74

Latte D* complete limestone blunt round -- 5.5 3.5 3 70

Area ¼* complete coral round finished? 5.2 3.9 3.5 64

Area 3* complete limestone pointed round -- 5.5 3.3 3.1 57

Beach Road* fragment, limestone pointed round finished 3.2+ 3 -- 94+ tip/body

Table 4 Data on the slingstones found on Rota (after Craib 1988, 3). 47

In his dissertation (Craib 1986), Craib had studied 13 slingstones from the area of Pågat, a large Latte village in northeast Guam. This is a sketch of their shapes and surfaces (Fig. 19).

Fig. 19 The slingstones from Pågat in northeast Guam. (after Craib 1986).

Apart from a huge collection of objects collected by Hans Hornbostel, recent excavations and surveys only yield a few pieces compared to nearly 5,000 slingstones collected in 1920s. This might be due to the fact that this collection is assembled from all three islands and that islanders were paid for each slingstone artefact brought to Hornbostel (Hunter-Anderson 1994, 5.66). Nowadays the situation is more complicated because modern collectors value the slingstones for their precious material and high effort put in manufacturing and keep them for themselves. In particular, clay specimen are very rare and always fragmentary (Fig. 20). Clay slingstones are less common than their stone counterparts. The clay specimens from the sites on Guam have not been analysed in detail yet, except for measuring and weighing. Darlene

R. Moore sent me a photo of one incomplete clay sling projectile found in Guam (Moore 2015, pers. comm.). She examined it under the microscope and concluded that it seems that some temper was added, possibly beach sand with bits of quartz. The surface can be scratched with a fingernail and even though it is partially eroded, it seems to have the remnants of a clay wash. Without subsequent analyses, it is uncertain whether it is fired or not. Moore expects that most of the clay sling projectiles were fired. She produced experimental slingstones from local clay. She acknowledges that they are quite hard when they are only sun dried (Moore 2015, pers. comm.).

Fig. 20 Clay fragment of a sling missile (after Moore 2015, pers. comm.).

Other slinging objects are on display in the Guam Museum (Fig. 21) but the comprehensive information about the number of slingstones and their metric data or single photos is not available.

Fig. 21 A collection of slingstones in Guam museum (Retrieved from: http://www.guampedia.com/slingstones/).

The research of slingstones from the Mariana Islands lacks unified metric data. As Darlene R. Moore said: "as far as I know, there is not a compilation of all of the slingstones that have been found" (Moore 2015, pers. comm.). On the basis of gathered metric data I will now perform a comparison of the available morphological information of the Marianas Islands sling missiles in order to get the threshold values via ethnographic record. The first graph (Fig. 22) is to show the relative preservation and fragmentariness of the sling projectiles found in the Mariana Islands consisting of 15 islands. Reinman (1977, 95), Butler (1988, 268), Hunter-Anderson (1994, 5.67), Moore and Amesbury (2011) did not elaborate on how fragmented the projectiles were. Finally, Craib (1988) described the level of preservation in detail, stating what parts of the objects were preserved. Three specimen were found as a body/tip, one broken and others as whole. 50

Proportion of complete and fragmentary slingstones

Spoehr (1957) Tinian, Rota, Saipan

Craib (1988) Rota

Moore & Amesbury (2011) Guam

Hunter-Anderson (1994) Guam

Butler (1988) Rota

Reinman (1977) Guam

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Hunter- Moore & Spoehr (1957) Reinman Butler (1988) Craib (1988) Anderson Amesbury Tinian, Rota, (1977) Guam Rota Rota (1994) Guam (2011) Guam Saipan complete 19 6 32 3 10 35 fragmentary 12 6 54 4 4 0

Fig. 22 The preservation of the sling projectiles found in the Mariana Islands.

The second graph expresses the relation between the length and width of presented sling projectiles. The data recorded by Craib (1988) and Moore & Amesbury (2011) were put together at first because these three researchers published the metric figures for each specimen in their analyses of the sling projectiles. Even the complete assemblage by Moore & Amesbury is a quite small specimen, the sizes falling inside the size range from Craib's data (Fig. 23).

Range of dimensions of complete slingstones 6

Width/Diameter (cm) Width/Diameter 1

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Length (cm)

Moore & Amesbury (2011) Craib (1988)

Fig. 23 Combined metric data of Moore & Amesbury’s slingstones from Guam and Craib’s slingstones from Rota.

The next step is to combine all the metric information in one graph to see the overall relation.

Fig. 24 A visual summary of size ranges of complete slingstones from the presented cases from the Mariana Islands.

The graph presented in Fig. 24 is a visualisation of the gathered metric data of complete slingstones, collected and excavated by several researchers in the Mariana Islands, in order to determine possible length and width/diameter range. Those metric data which were possible to acquire for each specimen are rendered as dots. In cases where the only minimum and maximum value was stated in the literature, coloured rectangles are chosen. Reinman’s (1977) data is shown only by a yellow line because the width range was not stated in the literature for the specimen he investigated. Butler's and Spoehr's squares overlap because the final value of Butler's length range of the sling projectiles is the starting value for the Spoehr's length range of the sling projectiles with rounded ends. Disputable data, where seemingly slingstones have an unusual range of length come from Spoehr (1957). One specimen of nearly 11 cm was included in the statement on how the dimensions of Spoehr´s specimen varied but he did not note what the maximum length of projectiles would have been without this one large slingstone. Therefore, if the slingstone is omitted from consideration as a clear extreme, it can be argued that the length range of Mariana slingstones is 3.5–7.5 cm and the width range is 2–4.5 cm. If the cluster was strictly followed, the length range would be 4–6.5 cm and the width range would be 2.5–4 cm. If the red square is omitted from the consideration because of the extreme value, the strong positive relation between length and width/diameter can be observed. Hunter- Anderson (1994, 5.67) noticed the same when evaluating her metric data in the scatter graph and concluded that "these attributes seem to reflect the functional constraints on sling projectile design" and I am also inclined to this opinion about the gathered data in Fig. 24. The last attribute to discuss is the weight. Considering the weight in the graph (Fig. 25), these ranges were encountered: 18–57 g, 12–112 g with the clustering between 20–60 g, then 50–60g and 51–89g. The graph illustrates dispersion of values, the dot represents the average value. Generally it can be assumed that weight range for the modified/shaped stone sling projectiles goes from 20 g to 100 g.

Comparison of weight 120 110 100 90 80 70 70,6 60 55,5 50

Weight g Weight 40 40 30 20 20,2 10 0 Butler 1988 (6) Hunter-Anderson Craib 1988 (10) Moore & 1994 (32) Amesbury 2011 (3)

Fig. 25 Ranges of sling projectiles weight where given in the literature: Butler (1988), Hunter- Anderson (1994) and Craib (1988)–ticks represent threshold values, dots represent average value. The figure in the brackets is the number of specimen.

To conclude this section, the visualised metric information in the graphs allowed to get to the sought narrower threshold size values for the sling projectiles (Fig. 26) that can be used to cut potential sling missiles out of a site’s total RHO’s.

Proposed square of threshold values 6

1 Width/Diameter (cm) Width/Diameter 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Length (cm)

Fig. 26 An implicated square of threshold values for the size of sling projectiles.

Concerning the function, a sling is considered first to be a weapon in warfare or in intergroup conflicts (Hunter-Anderson 1994, 5.66) but hunting birds or fruit bats with the sling is not excluded either. Many Spanish accounts document the use of the sling as a weapon during the conflict between Chamorro people and the Spanish (Driver 1983, 211, Hunter-Anderson 1994, 5.66, 5.76). For bigger sizes of slingstones Carson sees their purpose in breaking canoes at sea.

Fig. 27 Chamorro type of sling. (http://www.guampedia.com/slingstones/, accessed 15.06.2015).

Slingstones in Chamorro culture had probably symbolic meaning as well. As esteemed items made from valuable materials with a lot of time investment in working, they were suitable as ceremonial paraphernalia or as grave-goods. The high quality of Chamorro slingstones caused them to be often taken "from Latte sites during or shortly after the Spanish-era abandonment" (Carson 2012, 49). In an overview of Latte period archaeology, Carson (2012, 47) concludes that slingstones seem to be restricted to the Latte period because no slingstones have been found in earlier contexts as of yet. Most of the slingstones are made of limestone with the second most frequently used material being volcanic stone. Carson compares the slingstone shape to the rugby ball with pointed ends. When it comes to ammunition, a sling is very easy to load. It is possible to sling any item which fits a pouch. When accuracy is the main concern, however, and thus high

velocity, greater distance and predictability of the flight are demanded, both the skills of a slinger and the type of ammunition need to be adequate. The shape, size, weight and the surface of the projectile plays a more important role in this situation than special personal skills. Therefore, natural rock would also serve for the immediate purpose of a slingstone. Chamorro people, however shaped the slingstones precisely into the elongated bi-conical form with pointed ends and polished them. The reason of all this endeavour was perfect aerodynamic properties of thus worked projectile (Carson 2012, 49). To conclude, Marianas sling projectiles were laboriously produced from all local materials such as coral, limestone, basalts, clay and even out of shell. Clay was hand moulded and either sun-dried or fired. Other raw materials were chipped, abraded and some even polished. All these materials were shaped into a variety of aerodynamic forms, the most preferred of which a bi-conical shape with pointed ends was, resembling the miniature versions of rugby or American footballs. York & York (2011, 21) remarked on the size and weight ranges as "hand size", ranging in length from 2.5–10 cm, (widest) diameter of 2–6 cm, and weighing from 40–80 grams. York & York compare ancient Chamorros from the Mariana Islands to the Balearic slingers in their slinging skill if the testimonies of European ethnographers and travellers are reliable. Recently the credibility of the statements has increased due to the archaeological find of a shattered skull on Guam where a bi-conical slingstone was embedded at the centre in the broken bone (York & York 2011, 21–23).

4.1.2 New Caledonia (Melanesia)

New Caledonia is the southernmost archipelago in Melanesia, composed of a long and narrow island of continental origin and surrounded by limestone formations. In The Journal of the Royal Historical and Archaeological Association of Ireland in 1888, an article about sling and slingstones can be found. Besides a general discussion about this weapon and its projectiles in the various cultures, Colonel Philip Vigors wrote about New Caledonian sling and slingstones specifically because he had visited New Caledonia and witnessed the usage of the sling there (Vigors 1888, 361). His observations imply that the inhabitants were better skilled experts in handling a sling than using other weapons, such as bow and arrow, spear or club. He witnessed that they needed only one turn over the head and the projectile had enough energy to fly (Vigors 1888, 362). He mentions the marks of 56

injuries from slingstones which resembled those caused by a bullet. According to Vigors (1888, 362), it must have been severe wounds. He also describes how natives carried the ammunition around their waist in a bag (Vigors 1888, 359). He claims that he measured several slingstones and they varied little in dimensions. In Fig. 28 a sketch of a typical shape can be seen together with length and diameter values. The length of the ethnographical sling projectiles varied from 4.8–5.7 cm, the diameter was exactly 2.5 cm and weight was in between 42–49.6 g (Vigors 1888, 363). Unfortunately, the number of measured pieces was not stated by P. Vigors. Vigors (1888, 363) judges the material used for making the sling projectiles to be sort of steatite/soapstone. The type of stone used for the production of slingstones seemed to be soft and easily worked with.

Fig. 28 A slingstone used by indigenous population of New Caledonia, Melanesia (after Vigors 1888, 360).

According to William Tufts Brigham, slingstones from New Caledonia were the lightest and most acute (Brigham 1902, 345). In the 20th century, the collection of slingstones from New Caledonia (Fig. 29) in the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum contained slingstones with the average length of 4.4 cm and with the average weight of 44.2 g (Brigham 1902, 345) corresponds to Vigors (1888) observations of the dimensions of slingstones.

Fig. 29 Slingstones from New Caledonia and Guam (after Brigham 1902, 343).

While searching for metric data for the sling projectiles, I decided to include also specimens from the collections of reputable museums which provide open online collection databases of artefacts with their descriptions and photos. Slingstones from New Caledonia were also found in the collections of the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology of the University of Pennsylvania (Penn Museum) and the Auckland War Memorial Museum in New Zealand. From 62 New Caledonian artefacts, only seven were not accompanied by a photo and two slingstones were broken in such a way that the tip was missing. Only the slingstones from the Auckland Museum have information about the material (which turned out to be soapstone). Based on the photographies (Fig. 30, Appendix – Plate I) downloaded from the museums’ websites (with official approval), the shape was recognisable. Using Thompson’s (1932, 50) classification, their shape would be categorised as elongate. Applying Spoehr’s (1957, 137) classification, the majority of them have pointed ends but some specimens appear to have blunt ends. The rest have an oval shape with rounded ends and only three artefacts have a drop-shaped form with one pointed and one rounded end. The weight was not written in any of the descriptions by the museums.

Number of Shape Length Avg. Width Avg. Weight complete (cm) L. (cm) W. (g) (cm) (cm) 60 bi-conical with 4.7 – 8.6 6.3 2.2 - 4 2.8 unknown pointed or blunt ends and oval with rounded ends

Fig. 30 New Caledonian slingstones, courtesy of the Auckland Museum, used with permission.

Range of dimensions of slingstones 5

New Caledonia 2 Width cm Width Average

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Length cm

Fig. 31 Dimensions of complete slingstones of New Caledonia housed by the Penn Museum, Museum of New Zealand and Auckland Museum.

In Fig. 31 except for two slingstones markedly differing from the average value, it can be agreed that New Caledonian slingstones seem to have a very narrow range of dimensions. The diameter only varies between 2 and 3 cm. The length is between 4 and 8 cm. The indigenous population of New Caledonia must have been very precise in manufacturing these artefacts, and soft steatite must have enabled them to work the material easily into the desired shape and dimensions. A visible characteristic of New Caledonian slingstones is that their length is greater than their maximum diameter (Campbell 2006, 155).

Fig. 32 A Visual summary of size ranges of complete slingstones from the presented cases from the Mariana Islands (other colours) and New Caledonia (Purple Square).

Combined threshold values 6

Width/Diameter (cm) Width/Diameter 2

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Length (cm)

Fig. 33 Combination and comparison of implicated squares of threshold values from the Mariana Islands data (red square) with the square observed from New Caledonia data (Purple Square).

Fig. 34 New Caledonian type of sling from Cook-Forster Collection in National Museum Australia. (http://www.nma.gov.au/online_features/cook_forster/objects/sling_and_sling_stones_oz694-698, accessed 16.09.2015).

New Caledonians also made fibre slings and plaited the pouch, but the other parts of the throwing device are twisted (Vigors 1888, 362).

4.1.3 Hawaiian Islands (Polynesia)

The Hawaiian Islands is an archipelago of eight major islands, several atolls, and numerous smaller islets of volcanic origin. The Hawaiian weapons of battle include long and short spears, daggers, clubs and slings (Hammatt 2013, 41). The bow and arrow were used to shoot rats as sport (Buck 1964, 50). In the Hawaiian language "stone propelling slings were known as ma’a" (Mitchell 1992, 276, Campbell 2006, 151). "Slingstones were highly lethal projectiles used for long-range combat, for maiming and killing opposing warriors, prior to closing ranks for hand-to-hand combat in Hawaiian warfare" (Hammatt 2013, 41). Hawaiian slingstones occurred as two types as either water- rounded pebbles carefully selected or as intentionally shaped conical stones (Kirch 1997, 198) which correspond with naturally given stream-rolled cobbles and coarse lava blocks of Hawaii (Kirch 1997, 34).

A cache of slingstone pebbles was found at the fortified ridge Kawela on Molokai Island (Kirch 1997, 198). Similar water-worn slingstones were found at the Ka‘apahu peak that has been used as a defensive place due to its flat top and steep slopes (McElroy et al. 2005, 6). Generally the shape can be described as bi-conical and according to Thompson’s classification (1932, 50) it would be the subspherical type because of the large diameter. In other words: the stones are rather shaped like lemons, and most of the slingstones were made of basalt.

Fig. 35 Hawaiian slingstones displayed in Lyman Museum and Mission House in Hawaii (http://lymanmuseum.org/?s=sling, accessed 13.09.2015).

According to William Tufts Brigham, the slingstones from Hawaii were the largest and heaviest of all (Brigham 1902, 345). He was an American geologist, botanist, ethnologist and the first director of the Bernice P. Bishop Museum in Honolulu. Brigham vastly contributed to the research of Hawaiian botany, geology, and material culture. In his book Stone implements of Ancient Hawaiians (1902), 36 slingstones are described. They were found during the construction of the Bishop Museum beneath a large block of lava. The author speculated about a warrior who placed the ammunition to use it against an enemy and never retrieved it. 63

The shape is referred to as double cones. Unlike other authors, Brigham describes the process of making slingstones, as follows: they are "rolled patiently between flat stones with a motion from right to left as well as back and forth" (Brigham 1902, 345). His interpretation of this particular shape is to "insure directness of aim as the missile could be made to revolve on its axis, like a rifle ball, by the skill of slinger" (Brigham 1902, 345). Average dimensions are 6.7 x 4.1 x 3.9 cm with an average weight of 134 g (Brigham 1902, 345, Judd 1970, 16). The material of these slingstones is difficult to assess because Brigham only mentiones that they are made of various kinds of lava with different colours. Judging from the place where they were found and the basalt composition of Hawaiian volcanoes, basalt would be the first suggestion.

Number Shape Length Avg. Width Avg. Weight Avg. Reference (cm) L. (cm) W. (g) W. (cm) (cm) (g) 36 double 3.8–8.6 6.7 3.6–5.3 4.1 76–283 134 Brigham cones 1902

Fig. 36 Hawaiian slingstones (after Brigham 1902, Plate XXXI).

Fig. 37 Hawaiian slingstones (l: after Brigham 1902, 344, r: photo taken by David Franzen, Bishop Museum Archives, Honolulu, Hawaii (after Palignawan et al. 2006, 51).

Brigham Material/Description Length Width Thickness Weight Photo number (cm) (cm) (cm) (g)

4831 rolled lava 6 4.8 4.6 184 Fig. 36

4832 rolled lava 5.3 4.1 127 Fig. 36

4833 rolled lava 5.3 4.2 127 Fig. 36

4834 cellular 5.3 3.8 3.6 99 Fig. 36

4835 - 5.1 4.2 3.8 113 Fig. 36

4836 well-rolled 5.6 3.9 3.7 113 Fig. 36

4837 cellular 4.3 3.8 85 Fig. 36

4838 defective 6.1 4.2 3.8 119 Fig. 36

4839 nearly round 4.8 4.3 113 Fig. 36

4840 cellular 5.6 4.3 4.1 133 Fig. 36

4841 cellular 5.3 3.8 3.6 91 Fig. 36

Plate 4822 compact lava 6.7 4.1 3.8 142 XXXI

Plate 4812 brown, smooth 6.1 4.6 170 XXXI

Plate 4814 brown lava 7.6 4.8 4.3 198 XXXI

Plate 4816 rough rolled 6.1 3.8 105 XXXI

Plate 4817 grey lava 6.6 4.1 3.6 127 XXXI

Plate 4818 smooth finish 7.2 4.3 170 XXXI

Plate 4819 lava 4.8 4.2 105 XXXI

Plate 4813 compact lava 7.9 5.3 283 XXXI

Plate 4820 lava 8.6 4.8 283 XXXI

Plate 4824 grey, clay-like 6.9 4.6 4.3 184 XXXI

Plate 4826 red, porous lava 6.1 4.3 147 XXXI

Plate 4823 clay (palolo)16 6.6 3.8 113 XXXI

Plate 4821 clay (palolo) 7.6 4.1 3.6 127 XXXI

Plate 4815 rolled lava 6.6 4.8 4.3 184 XXXI

Plate 4828 cellular lava 6.1 4.1 142 XXXI

Plate 4825 claylike 6.4 4.1 3.8 127 XXXI

Plate 4827 lava 5.1 3.8 3.3 85 XXXI

Plate 4829 smooth 6.1 3.6 3 91 XXXI

Plate 4830 cellular lava 5.8 3.8 3.6 113 XXXI

16 Pālolo is the name of a valley and a stream in Honolulu.

Plate 4842 round, rough (noa?) 3.8 85 XXXI

Plate 8049 very irregular 7.1 3.8 3.6 142 XXXI

Plate 8051 ground 6.6 4.1 3.8 133 XXXI

Plate 7648 rough, tufa-like 5.8 4.3 4.1 147 XXXI

Plate 7749 flattened 5.3 3.8 2.8 76 XXXI

Plate 8048 cellular lava 4.8 3.7 3 85 XXXI

Table 5 An overview of the recorded dimensions of complete slingstones in the Bishop Museum (after Brigham 1902, 345).

Range of dimensions of Hawaiian slingstones 7

Width (cm) Width 2

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Length (cm)

Brigham 1902 Average

Fig. 38 Range of dimensions of Hawaiian slingstones recorded by Brigham 1902.

In Fig. 38 the values of length and width of slingstones recorded by Brigham (1902) were plotted into the scatter graph to observe possible clustering. Length range of 5–7 cm and 3.5–5 cm width range can be observed.

Range of dimensions of Hawaiian slingstones 7

Width (cm) Width 2

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Length (cm)

Brigham 1902 Average

Fig. 39 A comparison of threshold size values for the Mariana, New Caledonian and Hawaiian slingstones.

In Fig. 39 it can be seen that the length of Hawaiian sling projectiles does fit within the postulated ranges from Micronesia (the Mariana Islands) and Melanesia (New Caledonia). Although in general, they have larger diameters, they seem somewhat larger than the Pacific specimen presented so far (Mariana Islands and New Caledonia).

Fig. 40 Hawaiian type of sling after Brigham (1902, 344), r: after Stokes (1916, 237). Hawaiian fibre sling was plaited and/or braided (Mitchell 1992, 279, Campbell 2006, 151).

4.1.4 Cook Islands (Polynesia)

The islands are named after Captain James Cook, who landed there in 1773. The Cook Islands cluster in two groups. The Northern Cook Islands consist of 7 coral atolls. The Southern Cook Islands consist of 8 coral islands. Rarotonga is the largest and a very mountainous island of volcanic origin (Gilson 1980, 2). Peter Buck visited and wrote also about the material culture of the Cook Islands. In his book Arts and Crafts of the Cook Islands (1944), in the chapter dedicated to weapons, he mentions besides clubs and spears, slings and slingstones (Buck 1944, 275). There are only 12 slingstones from the Cook Islands deposited in the Bishop Museum. Only six of them are drafted, among these we can observe the noticeable spherical shape (Fig. 41). These slingstones come from the islands of Rarotonga, Atiu, Mauke, and Mangaia. The most frequently used material is basalt (9 slingstones), two of the slingstones are made of hard coral, and one of stalagmite. "Stalactites and stalagmites are present in caves in Atiu, Mauke, Mitiaro, and Mangaia" Buck stated (1944, 303). Buck argues that this material is excellent

for a sling projectile because it burst into fragments after striking. The prevailing shape is spherical, except for the coral specimen (f). He writes that this slingstone (Fig. 41, e) "was picked up from an old battlefield" (Buck 1944, 302). Basalt was a natural choice of the material on islands of volcanic origin. Even though they might have used pebbles, the inhabitants of the Cook Islands still shaped the material into a spherical form. The spherical form is in contrast to the bi-conical shape of Hawaiian slingstones (Buck 1944, 303).

Locality Material Length (cm) Width (cm) Weight (g) Sketch

Rarotonga basalt 6.3 6.3 439 a

Rarotonga basalt 8.4 8.4 792 b

Atiu basalt 4.8 4.8 177 c

Mauke stalagmite 8.2 8.8 750 d

Mangaia coral 5 5 163 e

Mangaia coral 5.2 6.4 226 f

Table 6 An overview of information on the Cook Islands slingstones in the Bishop Museum.

Fig. 41 Cook Islands sling stones in the Bishop Museum (after Buck 1944, 302).

Dimensions of spherical slingstones from Cook Islands 10

Width (cm) Width 4

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Length (cm)

Fig. 42 Size range recorded for the spherical slingstones from the Cook Islands.

This small assemblage of more or less spherical slingstones shows that their diameter range from nearly 5 cm up to almost 9 cm. York & York (2011) looked at other slingstones from the Cook Islands at the Auckland Museum. They are described as spherical slingstones of unidentified volcanic rock, ranging from "golf-ball size (3–4+ cm in diameter) to softball or grapefruit-size (9+ cm in diameter)" (York & York 2011, 52). At the Otago Museum in New Zealand they discovered also bi-pointed ovoid slingstones from Rarotonga, the largest island in the Southern Cooks. They were made of limestone and basalt and the size ranged from 5–10 cm in length to 3–5+ cm in diameter. York & York estimated the weight from 45–300 grams (2011, 53).

Fig. 43 Slings from Rarotonga, the Cook Islands in Auckland Museum (after Buck 1944, Plate 12).

Inhabitants of Cook Islands made slings from plant material. In Fig. 43 the example is made of coir (Buck 1944, 300). Polynesian sling is different from European type of leather string by "the woven cord-fibre matting (after Campbell 2006, 151)". Important to realise is that the demonstrated use of the sling in Oceania with the mostly tropical and subtropical types of forests brings new thoughts into the concept of sling being used only in open terrains as it is often mentioned. The following artefacts were found in the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa which states that the slingstones are from the Cook Islands. Unfortunately, they

were photographed without a scale. Only specimen having measured the dimensions is Fig. 46.

Fig. 44 Po`atu maka, (sling stone), Cook Islands, maker unknown. Gift of Charles Tuarau, 1952. CC BY-NC-ND licence. Te Papa (FE002636/2).

Fig. 45 Sling Stone (po`atu maka), 1800s, Cook Islands, maker unknown. Gift of Charles Tuarau, 1952. CC BY-NC-ND licence. Te Papa (FE002636/3).

Fig. 46 Sling Stone (po`atu maka), overall: x 8 cm (Length) x 7 cm (Width/Depth), 1800s, Cook Islands, maker unknown. Gift of Charles Tuarau, 1952. CC BY-NC-ND licence. Te Papa (FE002636/1). 75

4.1.5 Discussion

To sum up, presented data seem to be sufficient to postulate handy Length/Width/Weight range from the examples of Oceanic bi-conical sling projectiles. Overall proposed size range for the sling projectiles made of stone having a bi-conical shape is 4–8 cm ranging in length and 2–5 cm ranging in width/diameter (Fig. 47). It is clear that data show that these three cultural areas little bit differ in the projectile design. New Caledonian sling projectiles were performed in a slimmer type, in contrast with Hawaiian slingstones having bigger diameters and Micronesian sling projectiles are in the middle of this scatter. However, the slinging practice on these islands strongly points to the fact that these sizes of projectiles were functional and used. Regarding the spherical shape of sling projectiles, my data set is small and only from the Cook Islands. The proposed dimensional range is relatively more sharply defined than the range proposed by York and York which is 2.5–10 cm ranging in length and 2–6 cm in width/diameter. They had broader access to the metric data on the sling missiles from Oceania. This broader range is caused by including all the large specimen which functionality needs to be carefully considered in my opinion.

Fig. 47 Combination of postulated size ranges for the bi-conical stone sling projectiles, red square = Mariana Islands sling projectiles, purple square = New Caledonia sling projectiles, blue square = Hawaiian sling projectiles. 76

Proposed weight range on the basis of presented data is 20–300g (Fig. 48).

Size range of bi-conical slingstones 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100

Diameter Diameter cm 80 60 40 20 0 Rota Guam Rota Guam Hawaii New Caledonia

Fig. 48 Comparison of weight ranges and the average values of sling bi-conical projectiles from Micronesia, Melanesia and Polynesia.

In order to avoid the pitfall of using culture-bound data for what is claimed to be a 'timeless’ functional constant, other morphological data from the different geographical region are needed. To cross-check and to safeguard the veracity of my conclusions, metric data on the sling projectiles will be sought on the American continent. The ethnohistorical information on the sling projectiles from the Americas will serve to refine my proposed threshold values for the size and weight of sling projectiles.

4.2 The Americas

"The sling was widely known in the pre-European Americas" as stated by York & York (2011, 73). In York & York's introduction to the use of sling in Americas in the book Slings and Slingstones, the Forgotten Weapons of Oceania and the Americas they mention the sling topic in American archaeology as being unaddressed properly since about the

1960's. They tried to suggest several explanations for the sling research status quo. One of the reasons can be attributed to the fact that few actual slings have been preserved. Another reason might be that the sling projectiles are very difficult to identify and they are not time and culturally sensitive artefacts as e.g. pottery or arrowheads. The studies of these latter artefacts are found to be more productive by the archaeologists than the one of plain sling missiles. Skov (2011, 112) also remarks that the sling is connoted in America only as David's weapon in the Bible, a low status weapon: the shepherds’ weapon, the boy's weapon or even a toy. Importantly, York & York's (2011, 73) survey on the sling and slingstones in America reflects a priori archaeological assumptions. Therefore, they end up in the defensive position for the interpretation of sling projectiles against other numerous interpretations such as gaming pieces, charmstones, net sinkers etc. Generally in North America the sling was known and used by many native groups (York & York 2011, 89). Diverse use of slings can be observed: On one hand, Southwestern slings show uniformity. On the other hand the slings from the West Coast and the Great Basin differ from tribe to tribe, in materials used and in the style (York & York 2011, 95). The differences occur also in the material for of sling projectiles. Ranging from natural stones and worked, hand-sized spheroids in the Southwest, to worked bi-conical stones that can be encountered on the Pacific coast. In South America the sling was a standard projectile weapon in warfare for thousands of years. However, the projectiles used for the sling do not resemble those hurled in the Pacific region. They appear as unmodified pebbles rounded by streams and were usually deposited in large piles. These piles of stones have become one of the indicators for defensive structures. An exception in the shape can be observed in Caribbean Venezuela, Argentina and Uruguay (York & York 2011, 75). Another a wide-spread, long-standing and variably used tool in South America is the bola17 (Fig. 49). Many of the slingstones were and are blanketed by the designation bola stone (York & York 2011, 77).

17 "The bola is a rope with a weight attached at the ends" (The State Museum of Pennsylvania 2011). The bola stone is usually made of a river pebble which has been modified. The modification can be a shallow indentation on one end or pecked/incised grooves around the middle for attaching strings (Purdy 1996, 6).

Fig. 49 Three bola stones made from sandstone, quartzite, or limestone with incised grooves from the Morhiss Mound site in Texas dated to the Early Archaic around 7,000 B.C. (http://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/morhiss/images/VT1-bolo-stones.html, accessed 10.11.2015).

4.2.1 North America

"Sling use in North America is supported mostly through ethnographic, rather than archaeological evidence" (Skov 2013, 12; Heizer 1925, 356, 531, 845). The only direct evidence for the sling use in North America are the findings of preserved sling pockets one (Fig. 50) in a grave in the Lovelock Cave in Nevada dated to 2482 ± 260 years BP ((Heizer and Johnson 1952, 139) and several in nearby Humboldt Cave dated to ca. 2000 BP (York & York 2011, 96). The find from Lovelock cave was later redated to 3 200 BP (York & York 2011, 96) and it means that slings predate European contact (Heizer and Johnson 1925, 139). Due to perishable materials used to make a sling, this kind of evidence is a rare case in the archaeological record.

Fig. 50 Lovelock sling pocket (after Heizer and Johnson 1952, 140, Fig. 67).

The second type of artefact, namely sling ammunition made from clay or stone is far less unambiguously to interpret. Many stone "balls found" are basically water-worn pebbles, so they were not shaped, as for example the Pacific types of slingstones used to be (see Chapter 4.1). However, even unmodified cobbles picked up because of their suitable size, round shape and smooth surface, occurring archaeologically in concentrations may suggest sling usage (Skov 2013, 13). "All the Native American tribes of the Southwest knew the sling" as York & York (2011, 89) state. The sling was used for killing small animals and birds, for crop protection, as a toy and as a combat weapon. Regarding the ammunition, in the Southwest of North America18 naturally occurring stones of suitable size and shape were used as sling ammunition and also hand-sized (3–9 cm in diameter) ground and polished stone and clay spheroids. Whereas in the Southwest these are not usually recognised as sling projectiles, in neighbouring Mesoamerica such connection is made much more often. In North America they often appear under the designation 'game balls' or 'function unknown' (York & York 2011, 90–91). At the West Coast19 bipointed (pointed at both sides) stones are encountered in many sites. All the natives of Pacific Coast and Great Basin in North America probably used the sling for hunting small game and birds, especially waterfowl, and as a combat weapon and

18 Arizona, New Mexico, western Texas, most of Utah, western Colorado, southeast Nevada, the Mexican states of Sonora and Chihuahua (York and York 2011, 89).

19 California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, western Montana, Nevada, western Utah, southeast Alaska, the Canadian province of British Columbia (York and York 2011, 94).

a toy (York & York 2011, 94). Heizer and Johnson (1925, 139, 141) argued that many tribes from the Great Basin knew the sling however, in many groups the sling had fallen into disuse or was known only as a toy. Kroeber (1925, 845) also stated that slings were known to all the California tribes as toys. Definite reports for warfare usage come from the hill tribes of the Wintum of Trinity River and the western Mono (Kroeber 1925, 531, 356). Regarding the sling projectiles, there might be a direct dependence between the type of projectile and the sort of sling used, its shape, the size of the pouch and the length of cords. For example the Pomo tribes used different types of slings for war and hunting. The Eastern Pomo of the Clear Lake in north-western California preferred shooting water birds with baked clay ball sling projectiles. The balls had ca. 4–5 cm in diameter and were manufactured on purpose as little flattened from two sides because they would skate along the water and from clay because they were lighter than stone counterparts (York & York 2011, 95). "For geese, hunters hurled round stone 1.5–2 inches (3.81 cm–5.08 cm) in diameter. But for ducks or mud hens, balls of clay 1.5–1.75 inches (3.81 cm–4.44 cm) in diameter were used" (Campbell 1999, 362). Loud (1918, 379) introduced information about the weight of these clay balls as being from around 55 to 75 grams. However, for hunting geese and for warfare the Eastern Pomo used the balls made from stone (York & York 2011, 95). Llewellyn Loud (1918, 377) found 137 elliptical clay balls during his excavations in the Humboldt Bay region of the North Coast of California. Most of them were uncovered near human remains, the rest was scattered in the trenches. He identified four different forms of clay balls and was fascinated by the uniformity of size and shape. The first type (Fig. 51, 1) is smaller than the other types, with a size ranging from 2.9–3.8 cm in length, has pointed and rounded ends. The most numerous type was as illustrated in (Fig. 51, 2). Their average length was 4.5 cm with a variation of only 2–3 mm and the average weight being 34.4 grams and another collection having a lesser weight of 29.5 g. One specimen of this type measured 4.9 cm in length and weighed 42.2 grams. Type 3 was with pointed ends and the illustrated specimen had a length of 5.4 cm (Fig. 51, 3). Only three or four specimens with pointed ends were found altogether. Fig. 51, 5 represents the smallest specimen of only 2.3 cm long and of more oval shape than the other artefacts. Loud (1918, 379) mentioned the slingstones from Guam which resemble those elliptical clay balls found in the Humboldt Bay (California). In his opinion the similarity did not go beyond the appearance. However, P. A. Means (1919, 317) American historian and 81

anthropologist mentions that, "[it has] been assumed that the clay pellets found in some of the California sites were sling missiles". Loud (1918, 379) also noted 30 objects of sandstone with a measuring from 3.5 to 7.5 cm in length that were resembling the specimen from Humboldt Bay. Not only clay was used for elliptical ball artefacts, however. In 1912, when Lovelock cave in neighbouring Nevada was excavated by L. Loud, he did not report the existence of a sling pocket because he did not recognise it as a sling fragment. Not until in 1952, F. Heizer and I. W. Johnson recognised the sling also with the help of the Northern Paiute or Paviotso tribes who occupied the area around the cave in historic times knew the sling (Heizer and Hohnson 1952, 139).

Fig. 51 Clay balls found with the human remains (1 and 2) and from the trenches (3, 5) of the excavations in Humboldt Bay region in the North Coast of California (after Loud 1918, 435, Plate 20).

In Californian sites certain pellets of baked clay found in numbers were assumed as sling missiles at the beginning of 19th century (Hodge 1907, 602). However in the current situation, clay "balls" with no special surface treatment might be found in the designations as cooking stones, net sinkers and rarely sling projectiles. They are found in spherical or bi- conical shapes (White 2011, 50–51). A large collection of 133 clay bi-conical objects was found in Colusa Reach in California (White 2003, 149). The specimens are similar in size and shape. They are about 4.4–5 cm long, 2.3–3.2 cm thick and weigh 20.3–35.4 g. The size of twelve complete and 82

121 almost complete pieces does not vary more than 1 cm in the main dimensions (Fig. 52 and Fig. 53). Their cross-section is round to slightly oval and the side-view aspect is stated to be ovoid. The raw material appears to be finer clay than the one used for other ceramic artefacts (White 2003, 150). All the specimen were carefully shaped by hands and fired under the same firing conditions as the uniform brown to greyish brown colour indicates. A crosshatch impression occurs on one side of a number of the objects. White (2003, 150) suggests that "they were mounted on a wicker frame for firing". They were associated with the strata 1 and 2, which are dated to 2755–3295 cal BP. No cache was recognised, but two artefacts were found in a burial context. Although White attempted to discuss the objects' function, he was not able to arrive at final conclusion. The archaeological context here also does not provide clue of the function and no comparable ethnographic source is known. The absence of tool use or reworking, hafting or another treatment leads the author to incline towards an interpretation as sling projectiles because of the given weight, size and aerodynamic shape (White 2003, 150). White chooses to approach the sling projectile interpretation via a study of the morphological characteristics of the objects. Therefore, to pursue this kind of characteristics is justified and important for the identification of sling projectiles in among the silent archaeological record.

Fig. 52 Egg-shaped clay artefacts from Colusa Reach in California (after White 2003, 159, Fig. 75).

Fig. 53 Fragments of egg-shaped clay artefacts from Colusa Reach in California (after White 2003, 158, Fig. 74).

Charles C. Jones (1873) described the southern Indians in the state Georgia in the time of European contact that they used for throwing or for a sling commonly "round or ovoidal, and appear to have been gathered from the beds of streams–or rudely fashioned from soapstone" (Jones 1893, 372).

Skov (2013, 18–19) explored the sling distribution among North American native groups from the source: eHRAF, or the Electronic Human Resource Area Files. Of 42 North American cultures, the eHRAF search revealed 22 of these cultures' ethnographies containing mentions of sling weapons. Information of my interest was which material the tribes used for projectiles. Table 7 shows the overview.

Sling Material Culture Variation in North America Projectile Material

Mescalero Apache stone

Navajo stone

Nuu-chahnulth stone

Nuxalk stone

Pomo clay, stone

Quinault stone

Ute stone

Western Apache stone

Yokuts clay

Yuki clay or stone

Zuni stone

Table 7 An overview of projectile material choice for the sling by various American Indian cultures (eHRAF-derived) (after Skov 2013, 117–119).

Fig. 54 Sling and sling projectile from North America ethnographic collection. Culture: Gros Ventre, Fort Belknap Indian reservation. Collector: Kroeber, A. L. Catalogue # 50/1858 AB Courtesy, AMNH Anthropology.

Fig. 55 A basket and 24 clay balls for hunting ducks and mud hens by Eastern Pomo Indians in Lake County, Lower Lake. Collected by Samuel A. Barrett, 1906. Collection number: 1-10604/05. (http://hearstmuseum.berkeley.edu/exhibitions/cent/gallery1_3_5.html, accessed 01.11.2015).

Loud (1918, 379) saw this sling made of tule and 24 partially baked globular clay balls (Fig. 55) in The anthropology museum at the University of California (Mus. no. 1- 10604). He measured the balls and stated that the average diameter is 4.1 cm and a dozen of these balls were "quite uniform in size, with a variation of only 4 mm" (Loud 1918, 379).

Fig. 56 A basket for Clay Balls for killing Mud Hens. Brooklyn Museum, Museum Expedition 1908, Museum Collection Fund, 08.491.8612. Creative Commons-BY. (https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/19306/Basket_for_Clay_Balls_for_killi ng_Mud_Hens_8581_bi-chul_ka-tu-li, accessed 02.11.2015).

The basket and the balls are made from the materials found and growing around Clear Lake in California (Fig. 56). The clay balls were used by the Pomo hunters in the boats for killing waterfowls. Other birds would have been killed by a sling as well or snared. The balls are not fired in a kiln. There is some plant temper mixed with the clay and they are sun baked. This reconstruction was made by Native American Susana Graves from the Pomo, tribe in ca. 1906 (The Brooklyn Museum).

Region Shape Size - Length Weight g Reference British rounded up to 102 mm no Duff 1952, 60; Columbia information Webber 1899 "an ordinary orange" (average)

California rounded 38–50 mm no Loeb 1926, 184 information

New no "fist-sized... cobbles" no Liebmann 2010, Mexico information information 40

Table 8 An overview of assembled information on the slingstones from the ethno-historical sources (after Seager Thomas 2013, 33).

From North American ethnographic specimen, there is a clearer picture of sizes and weight for globular sling projectiles made from clay or stone. Diameter for the clay spherical sling projectiles range from 3.5–5 cm and weigh from around 50–80 g. Diameter for the stone sling projectiles range similarly from 3.5–6 cm.

4.2.2 Mesoamerica

Fig. 57 Mesoamerica and South America sling distribution. Shaded areas indicate known sling use. (after York & York 2011, 86, Map. 6).

Means (1919, 317) in his evaluation of sling use and its distribution in pre-Columbian America stated that the natives of Mexico used slings as one of the offensive weapons, taking stones as ammunition. The Olmecs introduced the sling used as weapon in the La Venta phase. "The first evidence of sling is from around 900 B.C" (Hassig 1992, 28). Slings were made of leather or vegetable fibres and that is why there are no surviving pieces nor were they depicted in Olmec art. The only remains are sling projectiles of solid fired clay in the shape of a sphere measuring from 2 to 4.2 cm in diameter found at San Lorenzo Tenochtitlan (Hassig 1992, 28). To the standard Aztec weapons belonged the spear thrower, dart, sling, bow, thrusting spear, club, knife, axe and the broadsword (Hassig 1992, 248). Aztec tactics meant a precise sequence of weapons. Firstly, a hail of arrows and slingstones was launched at long range (Evans and Webster 2013, 465). 90

Slingstones made of stone were found throughout Mesoamerica. Stone balls mostly measured between 2 and 6 cm in diameter, with the weight clustering around at 25-50 grams with smooth surface. Hassig (1992, 189) measured the slingstones (Table 9) found by G. Vaillant at Ticoman, Zacatenco and El Arbolilo in Mexico, now displayed in the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. Some of the stones in Table 9 fall outside of the optimum range for slingstones but he listed them for a comparison.

Diameter cm Weight g

4.6 136.1

3.2 31.7

4.2 85.8

3.7 52.2

6.1 323.9

6.7 325.5

5.1 184.3

4.9 204.8

2.6 19.8

3.0 23.8

3.2 24.9

2.9 21.7

Table 9 Measurements of slingstones found at Ticoman, Zacatenco and El Arbolilo in Mexico (after Hassig 1992, 189).

Weight range of slingstones

360 330 300 270 240 210 180 150 Weight g Weight 120 90 60 30 0 Mexico

Fig. 58 Recorded weight range of stone sling projectiles found at Ticoman, Zacatenco and El Arbolilo in Mexico.

Size range of slingstones 8

Diameter Diameter cm 2

0 Mexico

Fig. 59 Measured range of diameter of stone sling projectiles found at Ticoman, Zacatenco and El Arbolilo in Mexico.

P. Tolstoy (2015, chapter 10) did research on 5,400 artefacts from central Mexico, exactly from the Valley of Mexico. More than half of the artefacts were excavated by G.

Vaillant (1930) from 7 sites (Ticoman, Zacatenco, El Arbolilo, and Teotihuacan, including San Francisco Mazapan, San Miguel Amantla / El Corral, Chiconautla and Nonoalco). Tolstoy (2015) mentions stone balls ranging 3–10 cm in diameter, occurring in quantities and made of lava, limestone, trachyte, marble, porphyry and clay, as well. Vaillant (1930, 168) interpreted that artefacts as slingstones (Fig. 60).

Fig. 60 Knives, points, stone balls and miscellaneous tools of various stones (after Vaillant 1930, 169, Plate XLV).

Region Shape Size – Length Weight g Reference Mexico rounded 26–67 mm 20–325 Hassig 1992, 29, stones 189; 1995, 80

Table 10 Information on the slingstones from the ethno-historical sources (after Seager Thomas 2013, 33).

To summarise the metric information from Mesoamerica, diameter for spherical clay sling projectiles range between 2–4.5 cm and stone spherical sling projectiles have diameter from 2 to 6 cm weighing between 20–350 g.

4.2.3 South America

P. A. Means (1919, 318–329) noted the occurrence of the sling in Peru, north-western Argentina, north-western Colombia, and in Chile. He concluded that the sling was especially important in certain coastal regions of Peru in pre-Inca times and was also a chief weapon for the people in the mountains (Means 1919, 323). Even though slings are highly underrepresented in the archaeological record because of the perishable materials used, there are parts of the world where the conditions are favourable for such preservation. Such places are located in the high altitudes of Andes for example. In Argentina on one of the high mountains, the Llullaillaco (6739 m), an archaeological site was noticed where Inca offerings and ceremonial sacrificial victims were found in 1999 (Ceruti 2014, 108). There the burials of three frozen mummies, one of a boy who had wrapped a sling wrapped around his head, were excavated (Ceruti 2015, 6). He was well-clothed and had extra items as a textile bag, a skin bag, two figurines close to him and carried two more slings (Ceruti 2014, 110). According to radiocarbon dating their deaths can be set in between AD 1430 and AD 1520 (Wilson et al. 2007, 16457). Earlier in 1964 a similar discovery of a sling has been accomplished on the El Toro (6160m) by archaeologist Juan Schobinger. A male frozen mummy was found there with a sling as well (Ceruti 2015, 4). This evidence tells us that the sling was known, used and well embedded in Andean civilisations (Fig. 61). Besides the utilitarian application as a weapon in warfare and as a tool used by agriculturalists for praying on birds and small animals and by herders guiding and protecting their herds, the same sling was worn as a headband too. Longer, more colourful and ornamental slings, but still in the shape of slings traditionally used as weapons, occur as well in pre-Columbian Peru. A ceremonial application has been suggested in cases where they are worn around the waist or the head (Bjerregaard 2010, 2), or on the shoulders and used during Inca-style dances. To this day, the technique how to braid a sling and sling-use endures in the hands of llama herders or serves as ceremonial accessories in dances and in mock battles in parts of the Andes (in the highlands of modern Peru and Bolivia) (Cahlander 1980, 5, 7; Bjerregaard 2010, 4; Brown Vega 2013, 776).

Fig. 61 Ancient Peru slings from Coyungo and Acarí (after Means 1919, Pl. 27).

The native Guamán Poma had written an extensive chronicle about Incan history, events and daily life for the King Phillip III of Spain. It contained also 400 illustrations, one of which presents a scene where the sling is mastered from childhood days on (Fig. 62) and the second is the depiction of Inca ruler Pachacutec with a sling. The book was written between 1567 and 1615.

Fig. 62 Inca boy learning how to hunt birds with a sling and Incan ruler Pachacutec with a sling. Illustration by Felipe Guamán Poma de Ayala. (http://www.mgmoa.org/sites/mg/uploads/documents/Education/StartwithArt/Inca_Textiles/SWA- Poma_Illustrations.pdf; http://historiadordelperu.blogspot.cz/2010/12/la-honda-y-los-mitos- andinos-siglos-xvi.html, accessed 04.11.2015).

Slings in the Andean region have used stones as projectiles. The slingstones are documented archaeologically and ethnographically in the Andes (Topic 1989). They are usually river-rolled cobbles or stones in the size and shape of a golf ball (Staller and Stross 2013, 205). In Peru, caches of stones were found at hillforts and they were interpreted as ammunition stockpiles (Skov 2011, 113). At the site of La Tiza in the southern Nasca drainage, piles of slingstones were found on defensive terraces (Dulanto 2008, 774). York & York (2011, 75–76) note that even though the sling was a main military weapon in the Inca civilisation, the modified elaborate sling projectiles were not manufactured. The slingstones were identified by their defensive context, deposition in the caches and statistical similarity (relatively uniform in size) rather than by specific morphological features of projectiles (Skov 2013, 96). Smaller grooved pebbles that would have been attached to a string are called bola stones in the Titicaca Basin and are interpreted as potential weapons. The use of bolas and slings is interlocked in South America (York & York 2011, 147). For example in the Nazca 96

culture, bolas and slings (Fig. 63) are used as weapons (Proulx 2007, 7). York & York (2011, 147) suggest that stones interpreted as bola stones should be re-examined because they might be slingstones.

Fig. 63 Seven slings painted on the Nazca pottery found in a grave. Sling cord, rhomboid pouch and finger loop (after Kroeber and Collier 1998, 104, Figure 118).

Margaret Brown Vega, an archaeologist from Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne, conducted research for her dissertation at Acaray in the Huaura Valley, Peru, a hilltop fortress in the Central Andes. Surface finds of two complete slings and two fragments from under the fortress and river cobbles spotted throughout the whole site were made. Thereupon slingstones were found inside and outside the walls, dispersed or arranged in piles (Brown Vega 2008, 327–328). The total number was 123 stones which were selected for their size (Fig. 64). Their average length was 8.7 cm and their average width was 6.5 cm. Brown Vega (2008, 329) also pointed out that average size of Acaray slingstones is higher than the recorded measurements from other sites as as Ostra, Chankillo and Galindo. The Acaray average size is in contrast also to the slingstones used experimentally by Quechua- speaking herders in Puno for testing a sling range. Slingers used stones in the immediate area but they selected certain sizes. Slingstones were "within the range of 4–9 cm long and 2.5– 4.5 cm wide" (Vega and Craig 2009, 1266). Even though the size of Acaray slingstones is slightly bigger, the idea of slingstones is not rejected. It is reminded that slingers have been known to launch larger projectiles too as well as that these stones could be hand-thrown also (Finney 2005, 13, 14).

Fig. 64 A scatter plot of length and width measurements of river cobbles from Acaray (after Brown Vega 2008, 330).

The slingstones were defined as one of the attributes for the identification of pre- Columbian Andean fortifications (Topic and Topic 1987 cited in Ghezzi 2006, 72). Those slingstones were selected, transported and arranged in piles (Topic and Topic 2009, 55). On the shoreline in Peru, the preceramic site Ostra (4200 to 4000 cal BC) is located. It was a fortification isolated from a settlement. There were found 54 piles of slingstones which were "carefully selected, slightly smaller than a human fist and relatively spherical" (Topic and Topic 2009, 30). The piles were distributed three meters apart. Each pile contained around one hundred stones. These stones are not found on the beach. They were transported from alluvial deposits some distance away, or cobbles eroded from river zones, were collected. They are interpreted as an evidence for a potential conflict. There is no direct evidence for fighting but the concentrations of stone projectiles indicate preparedness to a threat (Topic and Topic 2009, 30). Chankillo in Casma Valley is a large fortification with a temple inside, situated in the desert. The temple was an oval shaped hilltop building. The average weight of Chankillo stones is 223 g. They are found on the hillside and desert plain, near the hilltop building (Ghezzi 2006, 74).

Later in the Moche V/Later Moche period (ca. 650–750 B.C.) there are noted the shifts in coastal warfare. At the Moche V site Galindo in Moche Valley a large fortified settlement was discovered. "Massive parapetted walls of adobe and stone were stocked with piles of slingstones spaced about every three meters" (Topic and Topic 2009, 43). The amount of slingstones on the walls indicate that defenders were ready to restrain attackers with this long range weapon. Slingstones are also associated with the low status houses located, on the hill slopes (Butters and Castillo 2008, 723). Slingstones are common at both early and late fortified settlements (Topic and Topic 2009, 51). In the Table 11 there are listed all the average dimensions measured for the slingstones found at the fortifications Chankillo, Ostra, Galindo and as a control group area Arroyo, a stream near Ostra site.

Site Number Average Length (cm) Average Width (cm)

Chankillo 55 7,3 3,8

Ostra Pile 1 94 6,9 4,0

Ostra Pile 2 135 5,6 2,7

Galindo Wall A 98 6,0 3,1

Galindo Wall C 104 7,4 3,5

Arroyo (stream near Ostra) 57 6,9 3,0

Control group near Chankillo 936 5,0 2,4

Table 11 Average dimensions of slingstones from Peru (after Ghezzi 2006, 75).

Slingstones (size of circle means number of pieces) 5

4 Chankillo

3 Control group near Chankillo Ostra Pile 1 2 Ostra Pile 2 Arroyo (stream near Ostra)

Average Width cm Width Average 1 Galindo Wall A Galindo Wall C 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Average Length cm

Fig. 65 The range of average figures of the size of slingstones from Peru.

Region Shape Size – Length Weight g Reference Peru rectangular– 40–90 mm no Brown Vega and rounded information Craig 2009, 1266

smooth "the size of a hens egg" no Xerez 1534 information (quoted in Hemming 1993, 187)

Table 12 An overview of assembled information on the slingstones from the ethno-historical sources (after Seager Thomas 2013, 33).

Turning now to Chile, the excavations in northern Chile took place in several sites as Playa Miller, Playa de los Gringos, Quiani and Punta Pichalo. Except Quiani, at all the places slings were found. Especially in Playa de los gringos, the slings were uncovered in the graves (Bird 1943, 209, 225, 228, 230, 231). Junius B. Bird (1943, 209) stated that in Playa Miller, in a cove, five slings as a part of hunting features were found. They were made from wool, with a woven pouch and with braided cords (Fig. 66, e), having a loop for a finger. No evidence for bows and arrows was found. Another hunting equipment was bolas. Stone bolas were small, egg-shaped and elliptical water-worn pebbles and–importantly–

100

grooved on the long axis. In Quiani where only bolas were found, Bird mentioned that they are still used for bird hunting along the Desaguadero River. Bolas were made either from natural smooth oval pebbles of 4 to 5 cm or different stones of the same size but of a more elliptical shape, formed by pecking. All of them had grooves lengthwise, the latter had deeper grooves. At part of the assemblage of the same size, the material had grooves in the middle of short axis (Fig. 66, g). In addition stones (Fig. 66, m) without grooved encircling were found but several of them bore traces of plant fibre cords around the shorter diameter (Bird 1943, 241). The people in Quiani according to Bird’s observation and excavations were hunters and fishermen who set up a camp there and the occupation continued until after an agriculture was introduced and only later the site was abandoned. Bird defined the pre- agricultural period for the northern Chilean coast (Bird 1943, 248). In Playa Miller, there is an evidence for the pre-pottery period and the pottery-using period as well. With the arrival of painted pottery, hunting tools as bolas continued to exist and slings were introduced (Bird 1943, 249).

Fig. 66 Throwing slings, central parts, Bolas weight grooved on short axis (g), Bolas weight (m). (after Bird 1943, 206, Fig.7, 242, Fig. 19).

In eastern Venezuelan sites, bipointed stone pebbles were reported (Fig. 67, O). Estimated size ranges 4–5 cm in length and 2.5–3.5 cm in diameter according to York & York (2011, 84). Rouse (1964, 505) suggested a use as slingstones in the Meso-Indian Epoch by the Manicuaroid Indians, whose complex appeared by at least 2 500 B.C.

101

Fig. 67 Artefacts of Manicuaroid series, eastern Venezuela, O is assigned to the Manicuaroid slingstone (after Rouse 1964, 504, Fig. 7).

To conclude, the slings used with the sling stones, are believed to be the principal 'Andean' weapon of war. The sling-use in South America has been documented ethnographically and by ethnohistorical accounts, as well as by archaeological specimens whose function–due their specific appearance in clusters–is considered as being secure, demonstrate the sling was a pre-Columbian weapon (Means 1919, 323–324). However, still the situation is not ideal as Brown Vega (2013, 775) notes that for example in coastal Peru, where both ancient slings and slingstones preserve well, the former often have been studied more as textiles than tools and the latter are often overlooked as ecofacts. To conclude the metric information for the sling projectiles from South America, the length of naturally occurring but selected stones range from 5 cm to 12 cm and width goes from 2.5 to 9 cm. Average values are 4–8 cm in length and 2.5–4.5 cm in width. Finally to sum up the metric information on the sling stone projectiles from the Americas, the diameter for spherical clay sling projectiles range from 2–5 cm weighing from 102

50 to 80 grams. The diameter for spherical stone sling projectiles range between 2–6 cm weighing from 20 to 350 g. Rounded stones range from 4 cm to 9 cm in length and from 2.5 to 9 cm in width.

4.3 Discussion

The detailed characterisation of sling projectiles was presented from two broad world areas (Oceania and America) founded primary on the ethnographic and the ethnohistorical sources. In the case of the Pacific region and South America, the archaeological sources were used as well because the sling-use is clearly proved there. Discussed attributes of sling projectiles were shape, material, surface, size and weight. Across the Pacific "an elongated form with conical terminals was in use" (Brigham 1902, 344). The Pacific sling projectiles are modified, carefully shaped to desired dimensions which are subject to functional constraints pertinent to sling projectiles. The idea of functional design asserted on the sling missiles allows to seek size and weight threshold values. Sling projectiles as artefacts can speak only through a functional language to us because they do not bear any specific stylistic or decorative attributes. Gathered and visualised data on the dimensions of Pacific sling projectiles showed a possibility to create delimited size and weight ranges. It was even observed certain preferences in the functional design in the regions of Oceania. Although they all share a bi-conical shape, New Caledonian and Hawaiian sling projectiles differ significantly in the diameter. Slingstones from New Caledonia are slim and the range of diameter is approximately from 2–3 cm. Contrary to that Hawaiian projectiles are thick and range of diameter is from 3.5–5 cm. When the slingstone which David used against Goliath is compared with the slingstones of Pacific islanders (Brigham 1902, 344), this smooth pebble from a nearby river seems really simple, even 'amateur like’ against those elaborate and improved forms and shapes which maximize the aerodynamic properties of a projectile used for slinging.

103

Range of dimensions of bi-conical slingstones 8

5 New Caledonia 4 Micronesia

3 Cook Islands

Width (cm) Width Chuuk/Truk Islands 2 Average of New Caledonia 1

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Length (cm)

Fig. 68 Combined data on the dimensions of bi-conical slingstones from the collections of Penn Museum, Auckland Museum and Museum of New Zealand.

Comparison of dimensions of modified slingstones from the Oceania 8 7 6 Guam 5 Rota 4 New Caledonia 3 Cook Islands Width (cm) Width 2 Chuuk/Truk Islands 1 Hawaii 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Length (cm)

Fig. 69 Comparison of dimensions of modified slingstones from the Oceania according to gathered information in Chapter 4.1.

104

As can be seen in the graphs where all the data gathered in this study from the Oceania was plotted (Fig. 68 and Fig. 69), the size range of modified stone sling projectiles of a bi-pointed shape could be concluded as between 4–8 cm in length and from 2–5 cm in diameter. The metric information gathered from the Americas shows other insights into sling ammunition. The slingstones from Andean South America represent the unmodified branch of sling projectiles, since only naturally occurring stones appear to have ever been used (York & York 2011, 91). Even though those slingstones are not modelled in any way, their morphological appearance is also subject to functional demands which are reflected in the selection of certain sizes and weight. Selection of rounded stones ranges from 4 cm to 9 cm in length and from 2.5 to 9 cm in width. The metric information from Mesoamerica and North America offer insights into dimensions of spherical sling projectiles. Diameter of spherical specimen range from 2 cm to 6 cm, inside with narrower North American specimen which range from 3–5 cm in diameter. It seems that proposed square of threshold values (Fig. 70) seems to be valid by recorded range of dimensions of bi-conical sling stone projectiles from Venezuela being 4–5 cm in length and 2.5–3.5 cm in width and also by the excavated clay bi-conical specimen from California which have dimensions 4.4–5 cm in length and 2.3–3.2 cm in width (White 2003).

105

Proposed threshold values for sling projectiles 6

Width/Diameter (cm) Width/Diameter 2

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Length (cm)

Fig. 70 Proposed threshold values for sling projectiles.

Application of this square of threshold values on RHO specimen in general is not definite. This proposition of size range is advisory to help to navigate through interpretations when only morphological features are left. The objects falling into this proposed square should be considered as probable sling projectiles because they fulfil their main feature – functional design reflected in metric values. The weight range drafted from the collected metric data on the Pacific slingstones can be summarised as following (Fig. 71). Modified bipointed stones range from 20 g to 300 g, with the optimum lying between 30 g and 150 g. Spherical stones range from 150 g up to 800 g. However, the stones more than 400 g should be carefully re-examined if they can be still considered as slingstones. Regarding the collected metric data from the Americas, the weight range of unmodified water worn pebbles is from 30–300 g. American modified bipointed stones range from 30–60 g, bipointed clay projectiles range from 30–45 g. The clay spheres weight from 55–75 g. Stone spherical projectiles weight from 20 to 350 g.

106

The weight ranges are more problematic because amount of input data is not sufficient. Although still the values could be of guiding assistance when considering the functionality of artefact.

Weight range of bi-conical slingstones 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100

Diameter Diameter cm 80 60 40 20 0 Rota Guam Rota Guam Hawaii New Caledonia

Fig. 71 A comparison of weight ranges and average weight of bipointed sling stone projectiles.

5. MORPHOLOGICAL STUDY OF SLING PROJECTILES

The concept of Near Eastern clay RHOs firstly appeared in connection with sling projectiles from the Aegean excavations of the 19th century (Gaulon 2008, 80 cited in Oppenheim, Schmidt 1943, 117). At the subsequent excavations in the Middle East, they were often referred to as sling balls, and the function was never disputed because of G. Childe's work and influence in the '50s and M. Korfmann's work in the '70s. Currently, the archaeological debate has again opened and researchers began to question the purpose of these artefacts (Kubíková 2013, 42-52). In connection with the sling balls hypotheses to explain the function of round handy-sized objects of clay and stone (labelled RHO– Kubíková 2013, 17), archaeologically two arguments are used. A use of the sling for hunting

107

or as a weapon claimed on the basis of (1) by the absence of arrowheads during Halaf period and (2) by the presence of large concentrations of modelled clay balls at the sites (Gaulon 2008, 81). However, these arguments are not determinative because currently sling ball interpretation is questioned. The next potential argument is to actually look at the artefacts themselves closely, at their dimensions, weight, shape and surface. In the case of ballistic bodies it is mainly functional exigencies that are reflected in the design of sling missiles (shape, size, weight and surface) irrespective of their past or present cultural context. The morphological constraints on sling projectiles allows to make thorough use of the ethno-archaeological analogy (David and Kramer 2001). In order to bypass the current 'crisis' of interpretation, the focus more strongly on the morphological parameters which can be precisely identified and described, is suggested. The foundation of the current work the thesis is the supposition that there is not an endless weight/shape diversity in the objects designed to be thrown by means of a sling, even if considered worldwide. On the contrary–a broad comparison of sling projectiles as done in the Chapter 4 of above, helps to establish the limits of practicality. Realistic lower and upper margins of size and weight can be derived from the more secure interpretative context (ethnography) better than from disputed archaeology - now at least. A clear success towards sling missile identification would be if one were able to pick the sling missiles with some degree of certainty out of the inventory of RHOs of an excavation. There are no doubt criteria that only pertain to the sling projectiles and cannot be applied to other objects such as firing implements or counting devices. Otherwise, an artefact referred to as a sling ball in an excavation could be always interpreted by different researchers as tokens or cooking balls, and this ad infinitum. On one hand, there should be defined what RHOs are unfit as ballistic/sling missiles because of their size, weight, shape and surface. On the other hand, there should be defined what RHOs are fit as ballistic/sling projectiles especially because of their metrical and weight measurements and shape and surface. The presumptive sling shots are plain objects without any decoration, that bear only physical properties such as length, weight, volume, density, colour, hardness, velocity and

108

spin20. There are mostly functionality requirements influencing the physical design of a sling projectile. Sling is a force multiplier tool that "multiplies input force into output force beyond what a human arm could exert unaided" (DeWitt 2013, 1). The force is transported to a projectile which starts to spin and fly (Fig. 72). Perfect object for spinning is a ball, an object with a spherical shape.

Fig. 72 Physics behind the slinging (after Kaye 2008, 112).

The sling projectile should be first of all considered as a ballistic body, an object with a momentum which is free to move, is subject to various known forces when flies and has usually an aerodynamic shape and surface. Ballistic properties thus define the shape, size, weight and surface of sling projectiles. Skov's experiments with lead and clay projectiles showed "the importance of projectile shape and material as aspects of design that have a functional importance in sling performance" (2013, 96). It is easier to find these ranges when a projectile is modified and a certain enhanced functional design is displayed in the case of the bi-conical sling projectiles. Because, as Korfmann (1973, 38) sceptically expressed vast numbers of naturally formed missiles may never be recognized. For the unmodified branch of sling projectiles, factors such as distribution, concentration and homogeneity in size and weight play a more important role.

20 Spin as "rotation of the projectile is used by skilled slingers to either stabilize a projectile in flight (like a rifle bullet) or to generate lift (like a golf ball)" (Skov 2013, 110).

109

According to York & York, the slingstones can be classified according to the purpose, temporal and cultural indicators (York & York 2011, 146). However, in this chapter only details of the morphology, design parameters and some of the physical properties will be studied and discussed.

5.1 Shape

The focus will be only on the primary designs used for the sling projectiles that range from spherical to bi-conical shapes because they represent classic aerodynamic forms that all the projectiles try to follow21, –however, there is a possibility that the shape of projectile underlies the demands of particular actions with a sling. It means that different sizes, shapes and weight of the projectiles can be used for different ballistic purposes. This has been illustrated on the example of the Pomo Indians who used flattened clay balls for waterfowl, but for warfare they chose stone ball projectiles (York & York 2011, 146). Skov (2013, 43) indicated that the Pomo example is "a technological and behavioural marker". It can be agreed upon that the identification of ammunition for a sling in the archaeological records is difficult and tricky. The nature of sling projectiles can be described in two manners. On the one hand, they are of "expedient nature" (Wernick 2014, 98): –Any skilled slinger is able to cast a nearby stone (Korfmann 1973, 37; Burke 2004, 59; Vega and Craig 2009, 1266) of all kinds of shapes. However, when the intention is to tap on the full potential and efficiency of a sling, a projectile should meet certain ballistic criteria. In the case of stone material, slingers often choose as round as possible a water-worn pebble (Fig. 73). The greater need for accuracy and distance, the bigger demand is on the consistent or regular shape and form. Simply said, angular stone fly off in the unpredictable directions and turn at surprising angles during a flight. A rounder stone has more straightforward trajectory, therefore more shot accuracy is achieved with rounded stones. As Harrison (2006, 4) puts it: "Stones from riverbeds were popular as their polished, smooth exterior caused less air resistance than angular rocks, which improved accuracy and range". Skilled slinger Nikolas Lloyd confirms that "a good sling stone makes a big difference to the range and accuracy of a sling shot" (1996, para 18).

21 A random stone can also opportunistically to serve as a slinging artefact–with scarcely any archaeological means to determine which variant is the correct one.

110

Fig. 73 A photography of ammunition (beach cobbles) for slinging training made during the 2. International Slinging Tournament in Mallorca (Arta, Felanitx, Sa Pobla, Castillo San Carlos y Castell de Bellver, 27.02.–01.03. 2015). (Photo: Kubíková 28.02.2015).

Each slinger would tend to rather use uniform missiles in order to be able to judge the trajectory of his missile from experience and practise (Kaye 2008, 117). Therefore to obtain the consistency and regularity of a shape, one has to work with the material. The next step away from the rounded is a regular spherical shape. Even though balls fly quite steadily, they also suffer from some limitations in flight– from an aerodynamic point of view they experience more air resistance than other shapes of sling projectiles (Fig. 74 and Fig. 75). This is expressed in a distance of which a projectile is capable to fly. Streamlined22 shapes (a bi-conical, an ovoid, a drop-shaped form) increase sling's range because there is less air friction (Harrison 2006, 4). "Streamlined designs help the air close more smoothly around these bodies and reduce pressure drag" (Aerodynamics 2015). All the shapes (from spherical to bi-conical) allow a spin, but streamlined bodies are "presumably ballistically more effective than a sphere as a directional spin can be imposed" (Isaac 1987, 11). Oval shapes seem to "allow for a spin when being thrown" (Isaac and Isaac

22 Streamlining is "reducing a shape's resistance to the flow of air" (Scott 2002).

111

2011, 396). Due to a flight on traverse rotation, these shape "orient [the] point first and spin through the air like a bullet or American football" (Harrison 2006, 4). Slinger very renowned in the slinging community as Uwe Pelzer (Schleudermacher–nickname) when we discussed projectiles and their shapes also expressed that "rifle spin stabilises the trajectory and is necessary for long distances" (Pelzer 2015, pers. comm.)23. Besides, "the point first orientation also increased penetration ability" (Harrison 2006, 4) Mixter (2001, 12) also suggests that bi-conical (egg-shaped) and ovoid (almond- shaped) sling projectiles were designed to improve the penetration ability over velocity and range in comparison to spherical sling projectiles.

Fig. 74 Effect of streamlining on the air resistance of a body (shrinking field of turbulence). (http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0094b.shtml, accessed 16.11.2015).

23 Uwe also noted that <70g, ca. 3-5cm long is an optimal size and weight for a projectile to allow a rifle spin (Pelzer 2015, pers. comm.).

112

Fig. 75 Flow separation and drag on blunt streamlined shapes. (http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0215.shtml, accessed 16.11.2015).

1. Round 2. Oval/Ovoid (rounded ends)

3. Drop-shaped/almond (one pointed end) 4. Bi-conical (pointed ends)

Fig. 76 These are the schematic primary shapes for potential sling missiles.

These above four shapes represent the potential forms/outlines for a design of sling projectiles from which a sling can profit. The first row represents classic shapes suitable for 113

flying. The second row represents more elaborate shapes which allow more desired performance in terms of higher velocity, higher accuracy and greater distance. York & York (2011, 109) also discussed advantages of bi-conical shapes as they reduce the aerodynamic drag24 and flight distance is increased. The flight path of a bi-conical shaped object is to be flatter, straighter (especially with a spin), longer and faster (impact) due to the reduced aerodynamic drag. Regarding the ends of shapes, there are two possibilities such as rounded/blunt or pointed. York and York (2011, 146) assume that it depends on penetration or knock-down ability. To justify bi-conical shapes of the sling projectiles usually the American football reference is used (Fig. 77). The shape has mostly to do with the aerodynamics. This bi- conical shape of the ball (technically known as a prolate spheroid) "can fly through [the] air in a perfect spiral" (Stamp 2012, para 3). The American football needs to be thrown over long distances, and the ball's shape helps it maintain its trajectory and is, therefore, easier to throw.

Fig. 77 Evolution of shapes of rugby balls, 1894–2012. (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts- culture/how-did-the-pigskin-get-its-shape-63180450/?no-ist, accessed 12.03.2015).

The same reference can be found in Golf sport. Everybody is familiar with a spherical golf ball. I have found out that an oval form of golf ball has been used as well (Fig. 78). The

24 "The force that acts against the motion of an object as it moves through the air. Also known as wind resistance or air resistance" (University of Waikato 2011, http://sciencelearn.org.nz/About-this- site/Glossary/aerodynamic-drag, accessed 28.11.2015).

114

game is called GolfCross and oval shaped golf balls and nets instead of holes are used. It was created in 1989 in New Zealand. They also argue that an oval golf ball is actually more aerodynamically stable than the round one and easier to control. It is able to fly straight and further. Flight directions depend on the initial positions of the ball. There are five basic positions in order to achieve specific types of shot. The flight of the ball is controlled by the way the ball is angled in a tee. Information was retrieved from the official website of GolfCross (www.golfcross.com/golfcross/game.html, accessed 13.10.2015).

Fig. 78 Classic golf ball and the oval golf ball used in a sport called GolfCross in New Zealand. (http://www.kitgroup.com/uploads/product/golf-itemno-12.jpg, accessed 19.11.2015; http://site.rockbottomgolf.com/scratch-the-cavemans-blog/tag/ball/, accessed 13.10.2015).

115

Compared to the round ball, the drag of the drop-shaped object is reduced (Fig. 79). There is a lot more speed loss by the huge field of turbulent air behind a ball. However, because the ball is less pointed than the symmetric oval one, it ‘nose’ creates some resistance. Neither in front nor at the back, the oval shaped object has that air resistance.

Fig. 79 A comparison of pressure drag on three shapes (University of Waikato 2011, http://sciencelearn.org.nz/Science-Stories/Cycling-Aerodynamics/Sci-Media/Images/Pressure- drag, accessed 13.11.2015).

There are two archaeologists who experimented with the shapes of archaeological finds that are thought to be possible sling missiles in order to observe how they behave in the air and to confirm them as ballistic bodies. According to the first one, M. Stout (1977,

116

64–65) the experiment of a skilled slinger from the village near Tell Sweyhat who hurled 10 specimens for each shape (4 different shapes) with a sling, showed that a bi-conical shape goes to the left, an elongated bi-conical shape goes very straight, a point-ended ellipsoid goes reasonably straight and a flat-ended ellipsoid goes to the left. Stout reasonably concludes that "there was a reason for different shapes (Stout 1977, 65)" and does not note different curvatures as a disadvantage of projectiles. In contrast, according to Alizadeh (2003, 88) the bi-conical shape (Fig. 80) is not suitable for being a sling projectile because his own replicas of a bi-conical shape of clay artefact also did not follow a straightforward trajectory.

Fig. 80 Rejected interpretation of sling projectiles in the case of these shapes. The artefacts were found at the prehistoric mound Chogha Bonut in Iran (after Alizadeh 2003, 87, Figure 36.).

Regarding the relation between a shape and a trajectory, Alizadeh's assumptions can be proved wrong. J. M. W. Bush (2003, 184) executed an experiment where the dominant influence of aerodynamics on the trajectories of balls was reviewed. The critical role of surface roughness of the ballistic object was documented and highlighted by him (Bush 2003, 171). It was proved that we can observe different curvatures of flying paths even with the same shape, in this case, a sphere (beach ball). In order to explain this, the Magnus effect25 has been made responsible for the anomalous curvature of spinning balls because it depends critically on the surface roughness of the ball. As can be seen in Fig. 81 a smooth

25 "The Magnus Effect is the tendency of a spinning, translating ball to be deflected laterally" (Bush 2013, 180).

117

plastic ball curve towards shooter's right because it is smooth and a reverse Magnus effect applies. The second ball with a rubber band responds as a normal football and the regular Magnus effect appears, therefore the curvature is to the shooter's left side (Bush 2003, 188). Simply put, the shape is not responsible for the trajectory if going right or left, it is the surface. These shapes (Fig. 76, 79) represent aerodynamic shapes. The bi-conical and drop-shaped form are more streamlined ballistic bodies than a sphere's and their drag is lower than sphere's but they are much less stable. The only way to stabilise such shapes is to make them spin (Bush and Clanet 2015, pers. comm.). In this case, at least the shape of some RHOs should directly point to possible, perhaps even probable sling projectiles.

Fig. 81 The trajectories of two balls that have been struck, one smooth (blue circles), the other rough (red circles) (after Bush 2013, 186, Figure. 7).

M. Korfmann (1973, 38–39) concluded that the first sling missiles have been spherical, the bi-conical shape of sling projectiles appeared later and ovoid forms followed, last This development standardisation of shapes, he explained by three considerations linked to the improvement of accuracy. The first was related, he assumes, to uniformity in weight in order not every time to have to compensate for different weight of a projectiles. The

118

second objective was to "provide a uniform and somewhat streamlined shape" (Korfmann 1973, 39). The last one was that a projectile does not slip from the cradle/pouch. The images below suffice to give a general understanding of the form variation of (presumed) archaeological sling projectiles excavated in the Levant (Fig. 82). It is also important to note that the bi-conical specimen might be more clearly only sling projectiles (as it is perhaps aprioristically assumed), compared to round balls which are less indicative because they obviously could have had several functions. Even though bi-conical shapes are more aerodynamic than spherical forms, an intention is not to dismiss the latter shapes from the slinging reasoning. All the presented shapes have their particular advantages to slinging practice.

Fig. 82 Schematic shapes of archaeological sling missiles (after Korfmann 1972, TAFEL XII).

119

Fig. 83 Bi-conical and ovoid clay sling bullets from Neolithic Sesklo in Thessaly, Greece (after Theocharis 1973, fig. 274, cited in Runnels et al. 2009, 180, fig. 8).

Fig. 84 'Torpedo shaped' (bi-conical) slingstones from the fortress of Buhen, Ancient Egypt, dimensions: c. 3 x 11 cm, BM 65751, 65752, 65754 (after Wernick 2014, 100, Fig. 4).

120

Fig. 85 Drawings of modelled clay balls from Late Halaf site Kashkashok I., Syria (after Gaulon 2013, 346, Figure 31.2).

Fig. 86 Photo of modelled clay balls from Late Halaf site Kashkashok I., Syria (after Gaulon 2013, 346, Figure 31.3).

121

Apparently, the different shapes of sling missiles were correlated to different flight path characteristics (range, height, straightness or curvature). There is some indication that a somewhat pointed projectiles (bi-conical, oval) may fly faster and head towards the target with more precision than their round counterparts, especially if they have been given a spin during release that stabilises them ballistically. An additional effect of the more pointed forms though perhaps not the main cause for shaping sling shots that way is that they cannot as easily roll out of the sling pouch. Finally also that, pointed forms cause a deeper impact on whatever receives the bullet at the end of the flight if the point meets it first. Moving to introduce examples of what RHOs that are unfit as sling missiles because of their shape are some of clay balls of Poverty Point people from Louisiana, USA. Poverty Point, an eponymous archaeological site in lower Mississippi delta, is dated to between 1730 and 1350 B.C. One of the distinguishing characteristics of this culture is the existence of variety of clay balls (Webb 1977, 1982 cited in Ortmann 2007, 37). They are referred to as cooking balls, cooking stones, or baked clay objects. The specimen, are made of silt or very fine clay and appear in various shapes as cylindrical, bi-conical, spheroidal and they are fired under oxidizing conditions (Lehmann 1982, 44). Archaeologists call them Poverty Point objects (PPO). A remarkable feature of these objects is their grooved surface (Fig. 87). In addition, grooving is not the only one feature on the surface. At another Poverty Point site, Jaketown in lower Mississippi Valley, types of PPOs were described with extruded ends, punched, twisted, or a decorated surface (Lehmann 1982, 45). When discussed these artefacts (Fig. 87) with Prof. Ch. Clanet (2015, pers. comm.) he concludes that: "Melon grooved and 'bi-conical' are the more aerodynamic provided they fly in the direction of their axis of symmetry. One way to be quantitative on the subject, is to measure the drag of these objects in a wind tunnel. The lower the drag the better the aerodynamic". In my opinion, for a slinger it would be a difficulty in addition to focus to throw this kind of a projectile by a sling in the direction of their axis of symmetry if there is a possibility to use spherical or bi-conical shapes of projectiles. I would assume that this kinds of shapes are less potential to be used as a sling missile because the shape is not as aerodynamic as spherical or bi-conical shapes.

122

Melon Grooved

Cylindrical Grooved

Cross Grooved

Bi-conical

Fig. 87 Artefact types of Poverty Point objects in North America. (http://www.uri.edu/artsci/soc/bovy/povpt/typology/ppo.html, accessed 10.08.2015).

123

5.2 Material

The choice of the material used for sling projectiles can be also influenced by the preferred qualities of the particular material, not only a result of natural environment just as it is (York & York 2011, 146). As in the case of the Pomo Indians who used clay projectiles for hunting water birds but stone projectiles for warfare. The usage of both materials is also reported from the Mariana Islands (Craib 1988; Moore 2015, pers. comm.) and Hawaii (Brigham 1902).

5.2.1 Stone

The simplest projectile was a stone, preferably a well-rounded one. Suitable stone ammunition can be found in a river because of its water-worn smoothness. River-rolled cobbles were sling projectiles of choice, mainly in the South America (Fig. 88). However, a few cases about using pebbles are reported form North America as well.

Fig. 88 A cache of slingstones from Block 3B, the fortress Acaray, Huaura Valley in Peru (after Brown Vega 2008, 317, Figure 10.10).

124

Important issue to regard is question of archaeologically recovered stones and their concentration in one place. As Seager Thomas (2013, 7) exactly remarked "it should not be forgotten that there are geological as well as archaeological catchments". He continued to list all the key aspects to consider such as "sorting, natural and intra-site context, clast- support, lithology, weathering, size range, the fall off in this, and feature and artefactual association" (Seager Thomas 2013, 7). Rather angular stones in Fig. 88 are identified because they are clustered. Would they be spread out across the living horizon that it would not be the case. One can see that a more situational than the primary, form-related (‘morphological’) factor triggers the identification of untreated stones as sling missiles in this case (cache). If the same stones are not clustered, interpretation falls short and they will disappear from the archaeological record as purely geological items. In this particular case, in site Acaray in Peru, the piles of sling stones are associated with the parapets and walls, serving defenders to launch projectiles (Brown Vega 2008, 126). It is also noted that sling stones were dispersed over the site area. Brown Vega (2008, 328) concludes that "these concentrations of river cobble might be considered as unused ammunition, while the dispersed patterns of stones indicate these projectiles were thrown". Regarding the rock types used for the sling projectiles in Oceania, the most frequent materials were limestone, basalt and soapstone. Reported rock materials were also sandstone, stalagmite, coral and volcanic regolith which is weathered volcanic rock, as shapeable as clay. The use of soapstone is noted among the native tribes of the American Southeast, particularly Georgia (Jones 1893, 372). In order to understand the specific design parameters of sling projectiles, the personal observations of slingers could be used more often. Some of their performative experience should be considered systematically and to build on their heightened awareness in comparison to the excavators, regardless of the fact that they hurl sling missiles 'just for fun or competition'. These are people who have a long and genuine experience with slings and the throwing characteristics of RHOs. They might be only slinging hobbyists for outer world, but during my research field trip to Mallorca for the 2. Slinging International Competition, I observed that most of them take slinging very seriously and they are interested in the physics of slinging and know about the archaeological specimen labelled as sling missiles. In the Balearic Islands26 slinging is more than just a sport or competition, it is their history

26 Majorca, Minorca, Ibiza and Formentera

125

and legacy. They train and compete to renew the fame of past Balearic slingers. Despite many differences, the recent performers have about the same aim as the natives of past cultures - ultimately they want influence the landing point of the object they have hurled away using a sling. To show the advantages of the new approach, I will in the following quote the personal observations on sling ammunition by Nikolas Lloyd (1996) who wrote about slinging and his experiences on his own website. He has made a few slings by himself and experimented a lot with different slings and different kinds of ammunition. The slinger Lloyd says something indicative for research related to the missile surface texture "if you use rough- surfaced stones, these will tend to grip the cup and leave it too late, and smash into the ground in front of you. If you use stones from a river, with slime on them, they will tend to leave the sling early and go high in the air, and land two paces in front of you." In Fig. 88 Lloyd depicts stones suitable for slinging and described them as not too rough and grippy, but not too slick either.

Fig. 89 Stones selected by a slinger Nikolas Lloyd/Britain because of their good size and weight for hand slinging. (http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/weapons/sling.html, accessed 13.11.2015).

126

5.2.2 Clay

More than the selection of certain types of natural stone pebbles and rock pieces, the use of clay material can emphasize the idea of a standardisation of sling projectiles. It is easier to achieve exactly the desired weight and size and shape of slingshots via the plastic clay raw material than by shaping stone. This very high consistency of size and shape aids range and slinging skills and the accuracy of each shot. Otherwise, a slinger would need to re-calibrate their shooting performance with each try. As Finney (2005, 12) also concludes "standardised projectiles would have had the potential to significantly increase a slinger's accuracy". Finney (2005, 12) considered clay as one of the methods to improve accuracy as well. Using clay material for the projectiles allows to combine maximum weight within minimum dimensions and to create low-effort standard projectile. Very little information is reported on clay specimen of sling projectiles from the ethnographic sources. From eHRAF database Skov (2013, 117–119) reports 3 (from 11) Indian tribes from North America who used clay for sling projectiles. More information was found about the Pomo Indians who added plant temper to clay and sun-dried the balls. Generally for the ethnographic clay projectiles is stated that they were either fired or sun- baked. From the Pacific region (precisely: from the Mariana Islands and Hawaii Islands) the use of clay is noted (see above Ch. 4.1.1. and 4.1.3). Thompson (1932, 50) reports baked clay specimen of reddish hue with traces of burning from Guam. Craib (1988) found a fired clay tip fragment of a sling projectile as well on Guam. Moore (2015, pers. comm.) describes one sun-dried clay specimen to which some mineral temper had been added. Brigham (1902) states about two projectiles that were from clay from Hawaii. Korfmann (1973, 39) concludes that clay missiles from the Near East were not tempered with the chaff as it is done routinely with pots or bricks. He brought also an interesting notion that very occasionally, pebbles can be sheathed in clay (Korfmann 1973, 39) for purpose of increasing of weight27. The same is concluded by Gaulon (2013, 347) when clay balls from Kashkashok I and II, Nuzi, Chagar Bazar, Tülin Tepe and Arpachiyah were examined. All were made from fine clay without visible temper or inclusions, only sometimes with a very fine mineral temper (mica or limestone). Some clay balls that are known contain "certain amount of coarse mineral grit" (Gaulon 2013, 347). Vegetal temper is completely excluded. Another information comes from the third millennium B.C where

27 This should be tested by sports slingers.

127

archaeological specimen labelled as clay sling bullets are often described as straw-tempered and baked, or only baked or unbaked. Most of them are of pure clay and sun-dried hence unbaked (Stout 1988, 226). The firing condition of clay projectiles is difficult to determine from the archaeological reports. Information is confusing because different terms as baked, unbaked, fired, unfired, sun-dried are used. There is a significant difference among these conditions in the temperature involved in the process of transforming of clay (Gaulon 2013, 347). In most of the cases, thermal exposure was estimated with the naked eye and it was always only a binary (either baked or sun-dried, fired or sun-dried). Only the use of methods such as XRD and micro-petrography will allow better understanding of the firing condition of clay specimen of sling projectiles. Temperature scaling is a further step to understand the chaîne opératoire of clay RHOs28. The main objection to clay material being suitable for sling projectiles is weakness and fragility. However, only experiments can challenge excavators' doubts about the clay balls being brittle to be sling projectiles expressed by for example Merpert (et al. 1984, 40) for Yarim Tepe and Tsuneki (1998, 111) for Umm Qseir. For example, Erik Skov prepared clay and lead projectiles of spherical and bi-conical shape for his experiments with the slinging range (2013, 73) for his master thesis. These two materials were chosen because their densities are on the opposite ends of the density spectrum. Any stone densities would then be between the performances of clay and lead (Skov 2015, pers. comm.). Clay projectiles were hand moulded from modelling clay and only sun-dried because of two reasons. Skov explains that allowing clay only to dry, keeps enough moisture inside and, therefore, the density of the material is higher than if fired as pottery. The use of temper for firing would decrease the density. Skov argues that "sun-dried clay is less brittle than fired clay" (2013, 56). The second reason was that sun-dried projectiles were found in Hamoukar in Syria and the Pomo Indians in California used them as well. Another important issue is shattering on impact. The dried clay projectiles, Skov used, would shatter on hitting any hard target, but only a few shattered during the experiment

28 It is possible that it might be dealt with trinity – sun-dried specimen as half-products, really fired specimen as a result of accident and hardening by any source of heat as a right stage in-between which can be stopped whenever a projectile is ready to use. Experiments with different degrees of drying out of clay specimen are highly needed.

128

when he was using a rubberized cloth backstop. When he threw for a distance (these trials did not appear in his thesis) none broke on hitting the grass (Skov 2015, pers. comm.). A similar experiment has been carried out much earlier by M. Stout (1977). After excavating a cache of 35 complete and over 60 fragments of clay sling bullets at Tell Sweyhat in Syria (Holland 1975, 37), it was decided to replicate the artefacts and tried to sling them. The projectiles were manufactured of pure clay and sun-dried. This experiment showed that clay sling balls "do not always shatter when they hit" (Stout 1977, 65). From 50 m a plastered mud-brick wall was dented. Clay sling missiles that hit stones cracked completely, however "ninety per cent of those thrown on the range were recovered intact or slightly damaged" (Stout 1977, 65). Another perspective towards clay projectiles and their shattering on impact (Fig. 90) is given by Finney (2005, 13). He explains that this disintegration of an unbaked projectile (sun or hearth dried) would be effective because it explodes upon impact. Therefore it increases "the overall effect by scattering debris into vegetation or even by striking a wayward animal without doing any particular harm" (Finney 2005, 13).

129

Fig. 90 Experimentation with clay dried in an oven sling projectiles at open-air museum Asparn an der Zaya in Austria (Kubíková 27.–28.06.2015).

5.3 Surface

From the aerodynamic point of view the factor texture/surface influences the object's behaviour through the air. Roughness of the surface affects a flight curvature. Pacific sling projectiles, for example, made from various types of rocks were chipped, abraded and then polished (see above Chapter 4). Reinman (1977, 95) distinguishes precisely between very smooth surfaces of fine-grained basalt slingstones and limestone slingstones with rougher surfaces from Guam. Smooth surface is one of the necessary attributes of a designation for sling projectiles. One specimen in Craib's (1988) assemblage from Rota lacked a smooth surface of most slingstones. It would be still functional however it was unusual not to be smooth. Specimens with rougher surface were unfinished products. Stone balls from Mesoamerica are reported as smooth. York and York (2011, 118, Figure 37) noticed two pre-Columbian stone balls from the American Southwest measuring 3–4 cm like a golf ball and it seems that the balls have dimples on a surface also like a golf ball. York & York (2011, 109) assume that this particular pecking and intentional roughening was for reducing an aerodynamic drag as it is done with a golf ball surface. Other surface treatments such as grooving and perforations indicate other uses, often interpreted as sinkers (Fig. 90) or bola stones, because there was a cord attachment (York & York 2011, 78).

130

Fig. 91 Hawaiian squid-hook sinkers (after Brigham 1902, Plate XXXVI).

Regarding a surface of clay sling projectiles, fingerprints, grass impressions, textile/fibres impressions, basket impressions can be found simply because they are hand- moulded and the surface impressions depend on the place where they are dried.

5.4 Size

Sling projectiles are primarily portable objects. Generally they are hand-sized and carried along by the slinger. Exception are those larger stone projectiles deposited in piles for defensive situations in South America. Selection of sizes of projectiles could also reflect a slinger's intention. Burke (2014, 60) suggests that the choice of a larger stone would 131

decrease the velocity and accuracy of the shot, but the weight of a larger stone would cause a greater collision impact.

5.4.1 Dimensional Margins for Stone Sling Projectiles

In the following example, the theoretical upper limit for stone sling projectiles will be assessed. On Niue or Savage Island in the South Pacific Ocean, the practice of throwing stones with a great accuracy during fighting was reported in the accounts of travellers, missionaries and ethnologists. The throwing stones of the Polynesian island Niue are also called 'war hand-stones', 'war stones', 'fighting or battle stones'. They are "carefully smoothed and evenly polished, fitting into the human hand with a satisfying shape and heft" (Isaac and Isaac 2011, 369). This practice has long vanished, most of the stones are in the possession of several world museums and few studies only investigated the throwing stones as a unique material and cultural phenomenon. However, Barbara and Gwyneira Isaac were able to gather 94 stones from Britain (British Museum, Pitt Rivers Museum, Cambridge Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, World Museum Liverpool and the Maidstone Museum); from Australia (State Museum Victoria); from New Zealand (Te Papa and Auckland Museum); and from the United States (Bishop Museum and the Peabody Museum Harvard) (2011, 389). The authors did not record the shape nor was it stated in the description in the museum collections. It is only provided that throwing stones fit comfortably within an adult's hand, most of them were, it seems lemon shaped (Fig. 92) and few were spherical or almost spherical. For those which were recorded the length, varied from 6–21.8 cm and the width ranged from 4.1–17.2 cm. As can be seen in Fig. 94 the size proportion clusters around a ratio 8:6. However, it is not clear whether this expresses the choice of a collector or the "targeted ideal on the part of the makers" (Isaac and Isaac 2011, 389) because lemon-shaped stones might have been more attractive for collecting.

132

Fig. 92 Maka (a throwing stone), maker unknown. A scale was not accompanied with a photography. Gift of Reverend Inglis, 1869. CC BY-NC-ND licence. Used with the permission of Te Papa (FE002241) Museum of New Zealand.

Fig. 93 Drawn throwing stones from Niue in the Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford (after Isaac 1987, 11).

133

Fig. 94 Length against width (in mm) of "throwing stones" in diverse museum collections (after Isaac and Isaac 2011, 394).

The Auckland museum displays throwing stones also from Kiribati Island in the Central Pacific Ocean. They are large and bi-conical with one end pointed and the second one rounded, ranging 15–17 cm in length, with a maximum diameter of 8 cm. They are made of coral limestone. York & York (2011, 27) estimated the weight of throwing stones from Kiribati Island as over 300 grams. It was decided to use data of throwing stones in this size discussion because their lemon-shaped forms resemble Hawaiian slingstones, which, according to Thompson’s classification (1932, 50), would be categorised as 'subspherical'. Another shared element is the common geographical region. Most of the natives of the Pacific Basin had a practice of working stones into specific shapes. In order to establish a theoretical upper limit for the dimensions of stone sling projectiles, the values of slingstones used in Chapter 4 were plotted together with the values of throwing stones (Isaac and Isaac 2011, 390–302) in a scatter graph to see a possible

134

overlapping and also different clustering in the stone projectiles used by the different Polynesian throwing techniques. As can be observed in Fig. 95, it is possible that some specimen may have been misinterpreted or misidentified, either mistaken for a slingstone or vice versa a throwing stone. However, the recorded values of stones used for throwing are visibly higher than those reported for the slingstones from the Islands of Pacific. To conclude, the excursion to the practice of the hand-thrown stones was to set an upper limit of slingstones dimensions, where the different hurling technique (hand-throwing) definitely takes over, that it changes to the other projectile category as it is the case of the practice and as it is also expressed in the diagram. The upper limit of slingstones dimensions is: length: 9 cm and width: 5.5 cm. Studying artefacts such as throwing stones and their physical properties can fairly contribute to our understanding of particular modifications in regard to stone throwing or of the shape of flying projectiles (Isaac and Isaac 2011, 369).

135

Fig. 95 Graph of all the dimensions of slingstones and throwing stones of Oceania mentioned in the thesis.

Comparison of dimensions of slingstones and throwing stones from Oceania 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 Throwing stones 11 Guam 10 Rota 9

Width (cm) Width New Caledonia 8 Cook Islands 7 Chuuk/Truk Islands 6 Hawaii 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Length (cm)

136

During my field trip experience in Mallorca on the occasion of the Second International Slinging Tournament in 27.02.–01.03.2015, I observed three weight classes of beach pebbles (Fig. 96) used as sling projectiles at the tournament (field note of 27.02.2015, p. 61, Notebook Diplomka 2013). On an occasion before the official competition, I was given a choice of bag of ten stone projectiles as a gift. I chose the lightest group and had a chance to bring a few stones of middle weight class to Brno29 (Fig. 98). The length of the Mallorcan slingstones of the lightest weight group range from 4.6–5.9 cm and the width range from 3.5–4.5 cm. The length of the larger slingstones (middle-sized) ranges between 6.2–6.9 and the width 4.4–5 cm. As it happens these dimensions precisely fit into my proposed threshold square of values for sling projectiles30 (see Chapter 4.1.5 and Chapter 4.3).

Fig. 96 Three weight classes of sling pebbles given as a gift to the foreign participants at the 2. International Slinging Tournament in Mallorca. (Author: Kubíková 2015).

29 The 1. stones of the Collection Kubíková. The selection criteria were discussed with a Mallorcan teacher of the slinging practice, Luis Livermore who says that "these three weight classes are the most typical sizes and weight of projectiles used in Mallorca slinging competitions" (Livermore 2015, pers. comm.).

30 In terms of statistics this is a small random sample. Further attempt in the realm of sports slinging will be undertaken by the author to confirm this observation (field research).

137

Mallorca slingstones 6

3 ligtest group

Width cm Width 2 medium group

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Length cm

Fig. 97 Measured sling stone pebbles from Mallorca.

138

Fig. 98 Mallorca sling pebbles, two size groups, the lightest group two rows on the top, the medium group at the bottom. (Photo: Kubíková 2015).

Korfmann (1972, 224) for his study about a sling and a bow in Southwest Asia recorded the dimensions of stone bi-conical and ovoid missiles from 7 sites dating from 5,000 B.C to 2,900 B.C. The dimensions recorded by Korfmann were plotted into a scatter graph (Fig.?) The measurements of stone sling missiles are fewer than those of clay sling missiles. A bit of clustering around length of 4 cm and width between 2.5–3 cm and the same around length of 6 cm and width between 3–3.5 cm can be observed.

139

Korfmann's stone bi-conical sling missiles 5

biconical 2 ovoid

Width/Diamter (cm) Width/Diamter 1

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Length (cm)

Fig. 99 Dimensions of stone bi-conical sling missiles recorded by Manfred Korfmann from Near eastern sites, mainly from the Northern Levant (after Korfmann 1972, 224).

During the excavations in site Abu Zureiq located in the vicinity of Kibbutz Hazorea on the western boundary of the Jezreel Valley, dated to the 7th mill. B.P. (Garfinkel and Matskevich 2002, 129) ten slingstones were uncovered. The slingstones were worked into an elongated shape with pointed ends on both or one side. Four of the slingstones were found in a cluster (Garfinkel and Matskevich 2002, 161).

140

Sling stones from Abu Zureiq 4

Average value 2 limestone

Width (cm) Width clay (?) 1 flint

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Length (cm)

Fig. 100 A range of dimensions of sling projectiles from Abu Zureiq, Wadi Rabah culture (after Garfinkel and Matskevich 2002, 162).

141

Fig. 101 Drawings of slingstones from Abu Zureiq, Wadi Rabah culture (after Garfinkel and Matskevich 2002, 160).

In Rosenberg's comprehensive study (2009, 99) of more than 365 slingstones collected from the Southern Levant, found in the Wadi Rabah sites throughout Israel. Rosenberg (2009, 106) describe artefacts as worked, pecked and polished stones of bi- conical shape. Rosenberg (2009, 102, 107) also defines two subtypes: oval/elliptical shapes being 64% of the studied slingstones (Fig. 102 on the left) and oblate or flattened forms being 29% of the studied assemblage (Fig. 102 on the right). Most of them (93% of studied assemblage) are manufactured from widely available limestone, the second material used 142

was fine-grained compact basalt (Rosenberg 2009, 106). The dimensions of these worked stones fit into the proposed threshold values; the width classes fit exactly ranging from 2-5 cm (Fig. 104), and the length classes fit precisely as well except of few specimen measuring only 3-3.9 cm (Fig. 103).

Fig. 102 Shapes of slingstones from Hazorea sites, two subtypes defined (after Rosenberg 2009, 103, Fig. 3. and Fig. 4).

Fig. 103 A distribution of length groups among the slingstone assemblage from the Southern Levant (the northern regions of Israel) (after Rosenberg 2009, 107, Fig. 8). 143

Fig. 104 A distribution of length and width groups among the slingstone assemblage from the Southern Levant (the northern regions of Israel) (after Rosenberg 2009, 107, Fig. 9).

Fig. 105 Some of the slingstones from site Kabri in Southern Levant (the northern regions of Israel) (after Rosenberg 2009, 101, Fig. 2).

144

5.4.2 Dimensional Margins for Clay Sling Projectiles

Brigham (1902, 345) noted two specimen made of clay from Palolo, valley or stream in Honolulu, Hawaii. Their dimensions are similar to the counterparts made from volcanic rocks.

Material/Description Length Width Thickness Weight (cm) (cm) (cm) (g)

clay (palolo) 6.6 3.8 - 113

clay (palolo) 7.6 4.1 3.6 127

Archaeologically deduced, that the size of clay sling missiles should be "larger than geometric objects" ) meaning 'tokens', as Forouzan et al. (2012, 3535) concludes and proposes a kind of definition for Near-eastern sling projectiles. Denise Schmandt-Besserat (1977, 33) has identified many small geometric clay objects occurring from the 9th to the 2nd mill. B.C. in most Middle Eastern sites and referred to them as tokens. Sling projectiles appear in the forms of a sphere to bi-conical shape, so in this thesis it was focused on these shapes among her tokens. Schmandt-Besserat (1977, 35–46) defined pellets, spheres, large spheres and bi-conoids. Sizes for these shapes of tokens were determined as follows: 1. Pellets = 5 mm in diameter and less 2. Spheres = 0.6–2.5 cm in diameter 3. Large spheres = larger than 2.5 cm 4. Biconoids = 2–2.7 cm in length and 1–1.5 cm in width/diameter

So except for large spheres, it can be concluded that tokens should not be bigger than 3 cm in any dimension. If the dimensions are larger, the identification of designation and interpretation of function is open for discussion. Korfmann (1972, 224) for his study about sling and bow in Southwest Asia recorded the dimensions of clay bi-conical and ovoid missiles from 19 sites dating from 5,800 B.C to 2,800 B.C. The dimensions recorded by Korfmann were plotted into a scatter graph (Fig.?) and it can be seen that the length starts from 3 cm and clusters around 5 cm and ends at 6.3 cm. The width begins with 1.8 cm and clusters around 3 cm and ends at 4.3 cm. Except of a

145

few specimen at the lowest part of range, other sizes of sling missiles fit precisely to my proposed threshold square of values for sling projectiles (see Chapter 4.1.5 and Chapter 4.3).

Korfmann's clay sling missiles 5,0 4,5 4,0 3,5 3,0 2,5 biconical 2,0 1,5 ovoid

1,0 Width/Diameter (cm) Width/Diameter 0,5 0,0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Length (cm)

Fig. 106 The dimensions of the clay sling missiles recorded by Manfred Korfmann from Near Eastern sites, mainly from the Northern Levant (after Korfmann 1972, 224).

Recently Gaulon (2013, 347) collected metric data on 'modelled clay balls' or according to my labelling, clay RHOs from 7 Halafian sites, dated to the end of 6th mill. cal. BCE in the Middle East. Except of modelled clay balls which have minimum length around 3 cm and width under 2 cm, other modelled clay balls fit precisely to my proposed threshold square of values for potential sling projectiles (see Chapter 4.1.5 and Chapter 4.3).

Sites Length (cm) Diameter (cm) min. – max. min. – max. Sabi Abyad 6 type 1 3–5.6 2–3.9 Sabi Abyad 6 type 2 4–4.9 2.5–3.2 Sabi Abyad 3b type 1 4.8–7.2 2.8–4.9

146

Sabi Abyad 3b type 2 4.5–7.9 3.1–5.5 Sabi Abyad 3b type 3 7.4–17.4 2.2–3.2 Arpachiyah 3.1–5.5 1.7–3.4 Umm Qseir 2.9–5.3 2.2–4.9 Kashkashok I 3.4–5.8 2.3–3.5 Girikihaciyan 4.1–6 2.4–3.9 Chagar Bazar 2.8–5.3 2.2–3.4 Tülin Tepe 4.1–5.8 2.9–3.8

Table 13 Measurements of sizes of modelled clay balls from various Halaf sites (after Gaulon 2013, 347).

Comparison of diamensions of 'Schleudergeschosse' (TT) and Clay balls (TUQ) 6

3 Tell Umm Qseir (Tsuneki 1998) Tell Tawīla (Becker 2015) 2

1 Width/Diameter (cm) Width/Diameter

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Length (cm)

Fig. 107 Comparison of sizes of complete and almost complete clay ovoid and egg-shaped specimens from two Near Eastern Halafian sites.

147

Fig. 108 Clay sling bullets from Tell Tawila, Halaf period (after Becker 2015, 209, Abb. 2.92).

5.5 Weight

The same need for accuracy and efficiency is reflected in the weight of a projectile as well. It means if a slinger does not have to adjust to different weight every time he or she whirls a sling, slinging skills increase. Finney (2005, 166) calls this the "muscle memory". Therefore it can be assumed that the narrower the range of weight in the assemblage, the better the exploitation of the sling potential. Dohrenwend (2002, 39) tried to calculate the effectiveness of the shot and to assess the impact energy of sling projectiles on the human body (the material of the projectile is not specified, weight stated in general), and he concludes that even a 50 g projectile "would be very extremely effective on impact" (2002, 39) However, Skov (2011, 118) remarks that

148

"his analysis is entirely incorrect" because Dohrenwend (2002, 36–39) took improper values of energy stated to break bones and pierce a human body. Dohrenwend (2002, 43) uses the terminal ballistics of military rifles based on a comparison with the Index of Relative Theoretical Lethality (IRTL) devised by military theorist Colonel R.E. Dupuy. Skov (2011, 118) also argued that energy "is not an adequate measure for evaluating terminal effects" and that the factor "surface area matters" as well in these calculations. On the website slinging.org in the section 'Sling Ranges', it is stated that this topic is certainly discussed by many scholars (Korfmann 1973, 37; Connolly 1981, 49; Ferril 1985, 25; Finney 2005, 173; Vega and Craig 2009, 1265)31 and equally experimented by many hobbyists. The adopted table (Table 14) consists of data documented and posted by several members on slinging.org's forum. The information about the projectiles made either from stone or clay was selected to see what weight modern slingers used for test ranges. Even though these data are unverifiable, they represent another insight into the slinging realm theme. The reported values also show discrepancies between ethnographic accounts, historical evidence, informal experimentation, personal experience and controlled experimentations, as for example can be seen in the statement by Finney (2005, 174) that it is not possible "for a slinger to cast a lightweight object a great distance". Finney argues that due to the low air resistance of a sling projectile, an initial velocity is also the same speed when reaching maximum range. He compares the sling with the bow which can store energy in the elastic medium, therefore he concludes that even a lighter object can be shot further. Very light projectiles for the sling cannot "generate the required momentum to travel any significant distance" (Finney 2005, 174). As Skov (2011, 115) relevantly notes Finney (2005, 325–335) measured his own slinging ability. However, this Table 14 can be read also that even projectiles (of clay) of 6 and 11 grams were thrown by a sling and that their ranges are similar to those reached by heavier projectiles.

31 The experiments by Korfmann (1937), Finney (2005) and Vega and Craig (2009) are questioned and carefully re-examined by Skov (2011, 115-121).

149

Name/Nickname of the Date Projectile Projectile Range Slinger Type Weight (g) (m) Larry Bray32 1982 stone 62 437.1 LoboHunter 06.02.2005 egg-shaped 85 177.3 stone LoboHunter 06.02.2005 clay gland 85 148.6 Douglas 11.02.2005 heavy stone ~500 ~90 MammotHunter 15.02.2005 bipointed, 34 101.5 clay NonkinMonk 01.03.2005 stones ~70 182.9 Jerzy Gasperowicz 15.02.2005 light stones ~25 ~250 Mike Greenfield 05.04.2005 stone 82 ~100 Colonel Walker 15.10.2005 stone ~112 ~107 Crater_Caster - stone ~113 ~107 Curious_Aardvark33 2007 stone ~57 ~220 FunSlinger 05.06.- stone ~85 ~219 SEB - stone 300 ~220 SEB 05.10.- stone ~100 ~173 Zorro 05.09.- spherical ~40 ~119 stone Peter van der Sluys - bipointed, 11 119 clay Peter van der Sluys 16.10.2007 bipointed, 6 180 clay Stephen Fitzgerald 13.03.2006 smooth stone ~70 ~180 Saulius Pusinskas 08.08.- stone 70 220 Sobieski 11.02.- stone 90 180

Table 14 Slinger information about the type and weight of the projectile preferred for testing shooting range. (http://www.slinging.org/index.php?page=sling-ranges, accessed 22.11.2015).

32 Previous Guinness World Record holder.

33 In Mallorca I had an opportunity to meet him in person.

150

Korfmann (1973, 39) notes that the weight range for stone sling projectiles collected from Near Eastern sites is very wide from 13 g (diameter of 2 cm) to 185 g (diameter of 5 cm). When the weight of projectiles in general (made from clay, stone and lead) was considered, Korfmann (1973, 39) states that the range is narrower and that "few of the lighter missiles weigh less than 20 grams and few of the heavier ones more than 50". However, there are still places to which this statement does not apply because for example Balearic slingers were known to use heavier projectiles (Dohrenwend 2002, 36) than "the Near Eastern maximum of 185 g" (Korfmann 1973, 39). Another scholar, Vutiropulos (1991, 279) notes that the average weight of clay or stone projectiles either of bi-conical, oval or spherical shape, was 30 g which was very effective when hurled by a sling in skilled hands. However, he did not mention on what data or source his conclusion was based. I assume it was based on the reported weight of clay sling projectiles from Neolithic Greece and on the lead projectiles from the mainland Greece and the Aegean islands (cf. Vutiropulos 1991, 279–281). Deduced from the ethnographic sources presented in the thesis (see Chapter 4), the weight range for the bi-conical shape of sling projectiles is from 20–300g, for spherical projectiles from 20–350 g and unmodified pebbles range between 30–300 g, but this is strongly linked to the material and its density which affects the choice of the weight for slinging. To sum up, I would to like express that all the mentioned sources aiming to define effective sling range by considering the optimal weight of a sling projectile significantly contribute to our understanding of the mechanics of a sling and the ballistics of sling projectiles. However, informal experimentations and documentations of personal experience should endorse scientific rigor and methods. On the other hand pure ethnographic accounts and historical evidence should be confronted with controlled experimentation (but those controlled experimentations should be carefully questioned by other scholars as well).

5.5.1 Weight Limits for Clay Sling Projectiles

Ethnographic sources are scarce on reporting the clay sling projectiles. As mentioned earlier Brigham (1902, 345) found clay bi-conical sling projectiles weighing 113 and 127 g

151

in Hawaii. Ethnographic records from North America mentioned clay balls weighing between 55–75 g. Experimental clay sling projectiles made by E. Skov (2013) for the testing of sling ranges weighed for a spherical shape 36.82 g and for the bi-conical shape in two versions as 36.82 g and 55 g, respectively. The overall range of the weight of experimental projectiles of clay and lead has been 20.4 – 55.2 g. The lower margin was similar to the lead bullets from Olynthos which ranged from 18 to 35 g (Korfmann 1973, 41) and the upper margin was set according to Skov's comfort level. Skov (2013, 56) reported tension experienced in the shoulder when using larger weight. Due to personal experiments of slinging hobbyists who share their experiences and outcomes on slinging.org, it can be significantly observed how clay projectiles left to dry, decrease in the weight. Shawn Noah described his process of making clay spherical sling shots. The balls were close to golf ball size (4.3 cm) and weighed when wet 80 grams (Fig. 109). After one or two days of drying outside, their weight decreased to 65 grams (Noah, http://slinging.org/index.php?page=making-clay-shot---shawn, accessed 23.11.2015). Therefore we should take this clay behaviour into consideration when approaching and interpreting any assemblage of clay RHOs, especially the ones encountered in archaeology.

152

Fig. 109 Homemade sun-dried clay ball projectiles approximately of the size of a golf ball made by Shawn Noah. (http://slinging.org/index.php?page=making-clay-shot---shawn, accessed 09.10.2015).

It is worth to mention the approach to retrieve the values which were not stated by early research works. Runnels et al. (2009, 180) tried to calculate the weight for the sling bullets made from clay excavated at Greek Neolithic sites. Caches of oval terra-cotta sling bullets were found on Neolithic mounds; at Rakhmani 158 artefacts, at Sesklo 110 specimen and at Tsangli 130 (Wace and Thompson 1912, 43, 70–73, 125). Runnels et al. (2009, 180) focused in their investigation on the dimensions length (L), width (W), thickness (Th) and the relative density of clay materials34 (accessed from http://www.simetric.co.uk/). Runnels et al. (2009, 180) estimated the weight range of Greek Neolithic clay bi-conical sling projectiles to be ca. between 20–45 g. Gaulon (2013, 347) collected also the weight of modelled clay balls from Halafian sites in the Middle East.

34 Estimation weight = density x volume /1000

Volume formula: V=π (( L x W x Th))/6 (Runnels et al. 2009, 180).

153

Sites Weight (g) min. – max.

Sabi Abyad 6 type 1 unavailable Sabi Abyad 6 type 2 unavailable Sabi Abyad 3b type 1 49–131 Sabi Abyad 3b type 2 53–136 Sabi Abyad 3b type 3 60–101 Arpachiyah 10–57 Umm Qseir 25–41 Kashkashok I 18–56 Girikihaciyan 29–71 Chagar Bazar 30 Tülin Tepe 32–75

Table 15 Weight of modelled clay balls from Halafian sites (after Gaulon 2013, 347).

In order to define theoretical upper weight margins for clay projectiles, the example of hurling projectiles by hand-throwing will be used again. E. C. Lanning (1955, 72–74) documented the usage of such projectiles as a weapon for Africa (Buganda Province) in his article Stone and Clay Missiles in Buganda. Lanning (1955, 72) found numerous stone balls of granite embedded in the topsoil during his excavations at the ancient site of Munsa (Fig. 110). Similar stones were found in the neighbouring Kasaka Hill, Bukumi, five miles from Munsa. He also explored rock shelters (Butozo II), almost three miles south of Munsa, where an unspecified number of amphibolite stone balls of varying sizes and in a close orderly formation were placed. They were not interpreted as grinding stones. Explanations for the function of the stones were obtained after local inhabitants only the elders remembered the use of stones as throwing missiles. It seems that stones have been used before the spears as a weapon in inter-tribal fights and were kept to that purpose in stockpiles. The preferred and valuable stones, the ones that have been as round as possible. Lanning (1955, 73) claimed that these stones were not used for any other purposes.

154

Fig. 110 Stone throwing balls of granite and amphibolite from Buganda (after Lanning 1955, 73).

Fifty miles south of Munsa, Lanning (1955, 73) found another example of the use of stones as throwing projectiles in conflicts. However, in this case, stone was not the only matter which was used for the ball projectiles. The people there have made artificial ball throwing missiles from clay which were applied in defence in the case arrows had been expended (Fig. 111). This type of missiles was known also to the Baganda, another native group of Buganda. There, balls were made of red moist mud rolled in fine dust and hardened by putting them close to an open fire (Lanning 1955, 73). The finished artefacts were strong, solid and not breaking easily. The important information now is that these objects were weighed and had from 8 to 14 ounces (226.7 to 396.8 grams). The author mentioned that some people still used these home-made balls for scaring animals away from their enclosures for livestock or from their farmlands (Lanning 1955, 74).

35 5 inches = 12.7 cm

155

Fig. 111 Clay ball shaped throwing missiles traditionally used by the Baganda (after Lanning 1955, 73).

This range for throwing clay projectiles of a weight of ca. 230–400 g should be cross- checked with other ethnographically reported ranges concerning such use, but this is beyond the scope of the current thesis. But these values should not only serve as an additional contribution to the understanding of the closely related practices of slinging and hand- throwing with an interesting focus on their effects upon the weight of their projectiles. This example also helps to assess where the upper margins of the use of slings to hurl objects of clay to some distance may lie. It is proposed to further study such ranges in order to define more refined weight ranges for clay sling projectiles.

5.5.2 Weight Limits for Stone Sling Projectiles

According to the ethnographic sources, a size of a projectile can vary dramatically. Modified bipointed stones range from 20 g to 300 g. Spherical stones range from 20 g up to 800 g. The weight range of unmodified water worn pebbles varies from 30–300 g. However, the stones more than 400 g should be carefully re-examined if they can be still considered as slingstones, later explained on the presented case of throwing stones. It should be realised

156

that these broad ranges reflect various rock types36 of sling projectiles and two broad world regions, Oceania and America. For the Near East, mainly the Northern Levant, Korfmann (1973, 39) stated the weight range of stone missiles from a representative sample as the minimum being 13 g and the maximum 185 g. The stone projectiles made from limestone used by Balearic slingers are reported to weigh one mina calculated either as 330 g or 450 g in different sources. This value, Korfmann (1973, 39) considers as "the outside limits for sling missiles made of stone". Other archaeological reports bring information about "well-shaped balls of flint or limestone, resembling tennis balls, and weighing about 250 grams and more" (Ussishkin 2014, 83) found at the Bronze Age and Iron Age site Tel Lachish in Israel where the reliefs showing slingers and slingstones were found in the excavations. In the same region, in the southern Levant, "783 pebbles, oval or round and sized between 4–9 cm and 30–300 g, were found during the excavations of the gate complex" of Leviah, Early Bronze Age urban centre (Paz 2011, 10). Very valuable insights were written by a sling hobbyist L.W. Forsyth in 1963 in El Paso (Texas) when he met and interviewed "a 75 year old master whose heritage was Mescalero Apache" (Forsyth, para 1). According to his statement "Mescalaro tribe had been using slings for centuries for hunting or combat and could kill a deer or warrior with equal ease" (Forsyth, para 3). Forsyth observed and was impressed by his very high slinging skills and wrote about a construction of a traditional Apache sling and his instructions about an ammunition and slinging technique. The interviewed Indian advised that "all stones of equal size are not necessarily the same density (weight). A smaller stone of greater density is faster for a longer distance than a larger stone of less density. Large and very small stones, by their very nature, are usually less accurate" (Forsyth, para 15). The density of a projectile is another important attribute which should be included in the analyses of archaeological stone RHOs. The old master of sling also reminded to select carefully the projectiles in terms of size and weight to improve a slinger's accuracy. He stressed to learn a proper weight and size of a projectile and its imperfections not only using eyes but mostly by touch. He also advertised placing a

36 such as basalt, limestone, soapstone, sandstone, stalagmite, stalactite, coral, calcite, volcanic regolith and water-worn cobbles

157

projectile identically each time into a pouch as being important for calculating trajectories while precise aiming (Forsyth, para 17). Moving again to the archaeological specimen, the aforementioned assemblage (in Chapter 5.4.1) of stone worked RHOs from Southern Levant, Rosenberg (2009) also weighed (Fig. 112). According to metric characteristics of the assemblage Rosenberg (2009, 107) concludes that slingstones vary little in terms of size (see Chapter 5.4.1) and weight. "The slingstones weigh between 10 and 400 g with an average of 69.3 g" (Rosenberg 2009, 108). Most of the slingstones (more than 80% of the studied specimens) "weigh between 40 and 99 g, a narrow range of 59 g" (Rosenberg 2009, 108). He adds that "there is a slight preference for items weighing between 40 and 69 g" (Rosenberg 2009, 108). These values perfectly fit into the recorded weight ranges of sling projectiles from the Mariana Islands (see Chapter 4.1.1.).

Fig. 112 Distribution of weight groups among the slingstone assemblage from the Southern Levant sites (the northern regions of Israel) (after Rosenberg 2009, 107, Fig. 10).

Niue throwing stones will be used again in the discussion about the upper weight limit for stone bi-conical or similarly shaped sling projectiles. By studying metric data of artefacts referred to as throwing stones used only in the practice to be thrown by a hand for hunting or in a conflict, it can be learnt more about the weight optimum for this technique. It seems that the weight optimum for throwing and slinging projectiles is different. Allan Cannel (2002, 336) examined the relevance between the chosen weight of a projectile and the efficiency of impact energy delivered by throwing and concluded that an 158

ideal weight of chosen roughly spherical stones by men would be around 500 g. His investigation suggested that "up to about 400 g of mass, there is a positive gain of impact energy for every additional gram thrown. After 600 g, the gain is almost negligible and the extra impact energy obtained is simply not worth the effort" (Cannel 2002, 336 and Fig.1.). It seems that preferred range is 400–600 g and this is supported also by the weight of hand samples selected by geologists, by the throwing stones made by Niue Islanders, by the weight of contemporary military hand grenades and the values are reflected in the handball sports as well (Cannel 2002, 335). Isaac and Isaac (2011) studied closely Niue throwing stones and inferred from the metric data collected on the stones identified as throwing stones in the collections of world museums that "the majority of the stones fall between 250–600 g; the mean weight of 74 stones is 559 g and the median 430 g" (Isaac and Isaac 2011, 389). However, it must be considered that these numbers, include eight extremely large stones of over 1,000 g which are a matter for discussion whether they should belong in the category of throwing stones. From the plotting dimensions in the scatter graph (Fig. 94, see Chapter 5.4.1.) a cluster around 8:6 was revealed and it corresponded with a weight of 400 up to 500 g. Isaac and Isaac (2011, 389) suggest that this range of weight "fits very comfortably within the adult hand". I would suggest that particular principles of physics are reflected also in the manufacture of sling projectiles as well as in the manufacture of throwing projectiles as proposed by the researchers Isaac and Isaac (2011, 395). My line of thoughts is not new at all. Already the experiments by Thom Richardson showed that "there is an optimum weight range of slingshot for a given sling" (1998, para 12). According to Richardson (1998, para 12) "the minimum weight seems to be just under the weight of the sling itself; too light a projectile and it will drop out of the cradle before it is up to speed, or tend to hang in the cradle on release, before shooting out at random (and usually to the slinger’s left). Too heavy a slingshot will be very painful on the release finger, and tends to be released at rather a low velocity". As Richardson (1998, para 26) argues a projectile must weigh enough to extend a sling. Therefore, the weight range of sling projectiles would reflect the balance between the strength of a slinger and potentialities of a sling itself. To sum up, I would propose the overall weight limits for stone sling projectiles as following, the lowest being around 20 g and the highest margin around 400 g with the reminder to further study the relation between a weight of an object and its functionality. 159

Comparison of average weight of slingstones and throwing stones

600 559 550

500 Rota (Craib 1988) 450 424 Guam (Moore & Amesbury 2011) 400 Rota (Butler 1988) 350 300 Guam (Hunter-Anderson 1994) 250 New Caledonia (Brigham 1902) 200 Hawaii (Brigham 1902) Average weight g Average 134 150 Cook Islands (Buck 1944) 70,6 100 54 40 44 Niue (Isaac & Isaac 2011) 50 20,2 0 -

Fig. 113 An overview of average weight of sling missiles from Oceania and throwing stones from Niue for comparison.

5.5.3 Weight Preference of Sling Projectiles by Modern Slingers

In order to understand what kind of ammunition is used for a sling, I have prepared two online questionnaires targeted to people who can sling and practise slinging. Those people I have found during my field research trip to Mallorca where the international slinging tournament took place in February of 2015. Slingers from the Balearic Islands37 and from different European countries participated and competed against each other. I have also become a member of slinging community on the website slinging.org where I posted my questionnaires. First one concerned general questions about slinging such as how long they have been actively slinging, how often they practice, which shape and material of projectile they prefer for slinging, which technique of slinging they use and why they sling. The second questionnaire was focused on the weight and the material of projectiles they use for slinging. Questions were set up as when they use sun-dried clay, baked clay, stone pebble, worked

37 Islands in the Mediterranean Sea including Majorca, Ibiza and Minorca.

160

stone, lead projectiles, tennis balls or balloon sand balls what weight they prefer for slinging. It is assumed that there is a certain weight range differing by the material based on the functional, physical and aerodynamic patterns of sling projectiles. Therefore even though respondents have different levels of slinging skills, their answers have still an informative value towards the weight optimum and weight range of sling projectiles.

Material or type of Whole weight ranges marked in The most frequent weight sling projectile the questionnaire (g) range selected (g) Sun-dried clay 36–150 56–65 Baked clay 36–150 51–60 Stone pebble 31–260 61–80 Worked stone 51–206 137–142 and 155–200 Lead 31–150 66–75 and 81–85 Tennis ball 41–160 56–60 Sand ball in balloon 96–201 101–105

Table 16 Data obtained via online questionnaires (03. 05. 2015-31. 07. 2015).

The acquired sling pebbles from Mallorca during my field research trip were weighed as well. In Fig. 114 can be seen that these ranges fit to the weight range of stone pebbles obtained via the questionnaires. The preferred weight range of respondents is reflected in the lower part of the Mallorca lightest group range. However, to draw more conclusions it would be necessary a more complex study of various factors affecting their choice.

161

Comparison of weight 230 210 190 170 150

130 Weight g Weight 110 90 70 50 Mallorca lightest group (10) Mallorca medium group (4)

Fig. 114 Measured weight of sling stone pebbles from Mallorca.

5.6 Results

In this chapter, the spread-out morphological information on ethnographically and archaeologically well attested sling projectiles will be recapitulated and arranged in synoptical columns. It is proposed to use the term RHO for the entirety of the small finds made from clay or stone found in the archaeological records of a prehistoric site in Mesopotamia. On the basis of the collected metric information and other morphological unique characteristics pertaining to sling projectiles, I do discern two categories applicable to the archaeological specimen: – 'potential sling projectiles' and 'probable sling projectiles'. The first term ‘potential’ denotes ballistic objects which have their functional requirements directly imprinted onto their morphology. In the next category – 'potential sling projectiles', the characteristics are more elaborated and put in more specific terms use-related and contextual. According to these traits, a relevant small find can be initially labelled as potential sling projectile. After that a closer look at the supposed function and properties of the particular item should be undertaken, it should be examined experimentally and its function highlighted with the contribution of local ethnographies who can show which practises of slinging have been known. The last category includes a precise list of materials and shapes 162

certainly used for sling projectiles and the threshold values of size and weight concluded in Chapter 4.1.5 and 4.3. An additional feature is context. The context is only sketched and needs to be studied further and examined thoroughly, however this aspect is currently out of the scope of the current thesis.

163

Potential Probable RHO Sling missiles Sling missiles

Material: clay, Material: clay, Material: fine stone volcanic, clay, limestone, Surface: metamorphic, soapstone, decoration-free sedimentary sandstone, Shape: rocks, flint stalagmite, rounded, oblate, water-worn basalt, water- spheroidal, pebble/cobble worn spherical, Composition: pebble/cobble subspherical, temper (Y/N) Composition:

globular, bi- Treatment: mineral temper conical, conical, baked, fired, (Y/N) oval, ovoid, sun-dried, dried, Treatment: elliptical, worked, fired, dried, cylindrical smoothened, smoothened, Size: fitting into polished polished a hand Surface: rough, Surface: smooth, unadorned, unadorned, bare, smooth, bare, prints, dimpled impressions Shape: Shape: round, spherical, spherical, oval/ovoid, oval/ovoid, egg- bi-conical, shaped, rounded and

drop/almond- pointed ends shaped, bi- Size: 4-8 cm conical, bi- Weight: 20-250 pointed g Size: 2-10 cm Context: Weight: 10-400 concentrated g distribution, accumulation, stockpiled character, high quantity in scattered distribution

164

This is the grid that can be used later in the creation of a manual for the proper field- archaeological treatment of plain small finds of clay and stone which are thought to be sling projectiles. These parameters, can impossibly be discerned from archaeology itself because exactly there the interpretation of certain clay objects as sling projectiles is subject to doubt and suspicion. Therefore it was tried to study sling projectiles in a context that was far less unsecured: the attested use of the slinging missiles gleaned from ethnographic sources and collections. My plan was to study these artefacts and reimport their metrical values to archaeology to see which of the indistinct rounded objects of clay matched their ethnographic counterparts and which did not. This was the calculus. It turned out that this preoccupation with the metrics was ideal, because it appeared that the unequivocal sling missiles of ethnography had not only relatively clear cut upper and lower size and weight ranges, but also that these threshold parameters were the same at different places. Thus it is possible to present a 'square' of plausible metric threshold values for sling missiles (Fig. 70) that tells us conclusively what characteristics prehistoric sling missiles might have had and that it is likely to find further corroboration.

6. ANALYSIS OF RHOs38 FROM TELL ARBID ABYAD

For the practical part of my thesis, I chose to work with the material from the prehistoric site Tell Arbid Abyad (TAA)39 in Syria, Upper Khabur region where I excavated at the eve of the country’s deep crisis. Together with a fellow student I acted as the supervisor of trench J11 for one season in 2010. The physical specimen had to stay in Syria in our dig house but the whole documentation, all the files and photographs were brought back from Syria to Brno where the field data are available to study.

38 RHOs are rounded handy-sized objects of clay or stone having rounded, oblate, spheroidal, spherical, subspherical, globular, bi-conical, conical, oval, ovoid, elliptical or cylindrical shape, decoration-free and hand- made (Kubíková 2013, 17-27).

39 Excavated 2006-2010 in the framework of the MU-ARBA research project of Masaryk University by participants from the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Syria, Germany and the United States.

165

Numerous clay specimens had been found at the prehistoric Upper Mesopotamian site. They have been sorted on the site, according to the designations predetermined in the hand-out that has been in use at the Dutch site Tell Sabi Abyad. The forms of documentation files were also borrowed from the well-established documentation of Tell Sabi Abyad in Syria where the head of the Tell Arbid Abyad excavation Mgr. Inna Mateiciucová, PhD. had been excavating for some time. Each form was adjusted to the needs of the Czech excavation. The main source of information for the following analysis are filled-out find forms (field note papers), various kinds of photographs, maps, drawings and sketches of small finds. My analysis here is focused on the rounded, handy-sized objects of clay excavated during the seasons 2007–10 at the Late Neolithic site Tell Arbid Abyad. The monitored find attributes are: dimensions, weight, shape and surface. This category of finds is not easy to excavate because they are easily disregarded and it happens that if they are not clustered in one place they might be ignored. Their plain and bare appearance in combination with a weak material causing that many are found fragmentary or broken can often lead them to be unidentified (Kubíková 2013, 61–62). Due to highly weathered and ploughed state of the tell TAA, the excavation pace was slow and attention was paid to clay RHOs to be properly identified in the prehistoric layers. The goal of the analysis to apply my proposed 'square' of threshold dimensional values (see. Fig. 70) in combination with other characteristics such as object shape and surface to the 'cohort' of small finds of clay from the site to see which of the TAA clay RHOs fit the criteria that have been found for prehistoric sling missiles in the foregoing chapters. Following a morphological principal allows me, to sort out potential sling missiles out of the larger set of small-sized plain objects of clay which are rounded without having to enter the murky field of rival interpretations that are currently more based on assumptions concerning their functionality. Using analogous information from the ethnographic, ethno-historical and archaeological records from other continents to enhance the understanding of archaeological specimen from the Late Neolithic period in Upper Mesopotamia was carried out under the assumption that sling projectiles are highly functional and ballistic, and obviously a less determined by cultural standards and styles as is evidenced by their all-too-obvious 'monotony', free of lavish decorations or cultural symbols, and displaying limited form and size variations, they form a truly humble find category. 166

One type of analogy called the 'laboratory technique' according to Yellen (1977, 11)– which means using a collection of ethnographic data in order to provide enhanced analytical methods that can be applied to an archaeological assemblage–was used. This thesis, however did not provide relational ethnographic analogies for the artefacts (sling projectiles) because the author of the thesis is convinced that sling projectiles are less liable to cultural 'bindings' than to the physical requirements of a very tool–the sling–and the harmonious relation between projectile and slinger. To be sure, the selection of ethnographic and ethno-historical sources used in the thesis did not so much describe behaviours or actions but focus on the metric facts of objects observed to be actually used in the practice of slinging, that means to study (functional) rounded handy sized objects in a context where not the slightest doubt is cast on their identity. The known sling projectiles, the source of analogy, were concentrated in the thesis and physical characteristics of sling projectiles were established, and they are proposed to serve as a frame of reference for one of the few distinctive attributes of sling projectiles– the ones that is based on their morphology. Slinging was looked at as a worldwide phenomenon in a variety of ethnographic testimonies from two different world areas, the Pacific and the Americas.

6.1 Description of the Site Tell Arbid Abyad and the Excavation Process

Tell Arbid Abyad is situated upstream the river Khabur in the north-eastern corner of Syria (Fig. 115) (Mateiciucová 2010, 411). Its geographical position is approximately 30 km from the Syro-Turkish border and approx. 80 km away from the border with Iraq. The site is located 700 m east from the known site Tell Arbid (Fig. 116) where remains of the 3rd and 2nd millennium BC were excavated by archaeologists led by Piotr Bieliński from Warsaw (Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology). Tell Arbid Abyad lies only about 12 km east of the famous Halafian site of Chagar Bazar (Mallowan 1936, 92). Tell Arbid Abyad currently is only small elevation around 2 m with an area not exceeding 0.5–1 hectare (Mateiciucová 2010, 411, 413). This site was for the first time discovered by J. Ur in 1999 and in 2000 independently by a photographer of the Polish Mission to Tell Arbid (Mateiciucová and Wilding in preparation). In 2005, a team of excavators from Masaryk University led by Inna Mateiciucová (ÚAM, FF) has been invited to collaborate, and the presence of site TAA was verified during

167

a field prospection in the micro-region defined as a 5 km radius around Tell Arbid (Mateiciucová et al. 2012, 18). The systematic surface survey revealed a vast amount of surface-finds, mainly potsherds. Acquired material was processed and part of the assemblage was preliminary dated to the Late Neolithic Period on the basis of the presence of the Halafian sherds (Mateiciucová et al. 2012, 21). The following geophysical prospection indicated that this was an extremely flat tell and archaeological evidence would be limited in comparison to the Bronze Age Tell Arbid main tell (Mateiciucová et al. 2012, 22). In 2005 the excavation project was initiated by two testing trenches (Mateiciucová 2010, 413). Due to the advanced state of decay of the site and the yearly ploughing, excavation approach was defined from the beginning to salvage the prehistoric layers in order not to let the prehistoric site 'perish' from local history before it has been documented (Mateiciucová and Wilding 2010, 2–3). In 2007 three trenches (H8, I9 and J9) were opened in the northern half of the site TAA and measured 10x5 m. These trenches yielded 39 clay RHOs altogether40 including 12 items which were referred to as sling missiles according to on-site labelling. Preliminary results of the excavation suggest that "architectural remains (walls and circular structures) in the northern part are rather rare and badly preserved, while features indicating open area activities – ovens, fireplaces, fire pits, and working platforms – dominate" (Gregerová et al. 2013, 306–307). These features were dated to the Transitional (Proto-Halaf) Period (Mateiciucová and Wilding 2010, 3). The investigations in trenches H8 and I9 continued also in the subsequent season of 2008, and in trench J9 continued in years of 2008 and 2009. In 2008, an additional exploratory trench K13 was initiated and opened in the southern part of the tell. There features of a younger period were revealed. In the context of a tholos and rectangular structures (Mateiciucová and Wilding 2010, 4; Gregerová et al. 2013, 307), 65 clay RHOs were uncovered in trench K13 including 32 artefacts which were referred to as sling missiles according to on-site labelling. In 2009, work continued in the trench K13, and small soundings in the east (J10, L11) and for the first time at the peripheral northern side of the excavation area M6 (Fig. 117) were opened in order to obtain as complete a stratigraphic sequence as possible (Mateiciucová and Wilding 2010, 4). Trench J10 which contained the remains of a multi

40 For the criteria of their selection among the other finds refer to p. 172 below.

168

chambered building, yielded 7 clay RHOs of which 3 are labelled as sling missiles. L11 a small trench excavated by Frank Hole (Yale University) and M6 where two burials were uncovered, yielded 3 clay RHOs, including 2 artefacts which were referred to as sling missiles according to on-site labelling. The season 2010, the ultimate one, started with an aim to connect trenches J9 and K13, and to establish a cross-section across much of the middle –southern extent of the current tell to [clarify] "the relation between the Transitional layers (central part of the site, mainly J9 and neighbouring) and the Early Halaf deposits dug out in K13 (southern, lower part of the site)" (Mateiciucová and Wilding 2010, 6). New trenches J11, J12 and half of J14 were opened in less spacious manner, and, it was switched to narrow and long N–S trenches (8x1.5 m) to gather speedily evidence of the trenches in side-ward direction and to allow further contributions to a N–S profile of the prehistoric tell site. In the trenches J10, J11, J12 and J14 virgin-soil was reached. In trench J12 considered as a waste area where no architectural features or installations were recorded, 78 clay RHOs, including 12 items which were referred to as sling missiles according to on-site labelling. Trench J11 also lacking architectural remains, produced 12 clay RHOs, consisting of 3 artefacts labelled as sling missiles. The report from trench J14 has not been yet processed. The investigations of TAA seasons 2005-2010 yielded architectural remains, burials, pottery, stone tools, sealing fragments, tokens, labrets, spindle whorls, fragments of husking trays, beads, figurine fragments, sling missiles and other objects. "Despite comparable abundance of artefacts, the prehistoric features themselves were in deplorable state of preservation" (Mateiciucová and Wilding 2010, 4). The excavation team had to face extreme bioturbation, the impact of agricultural machines and full exposure to all atmospheric influences. Therefore, identification and documentation of features was difficult and challenging, which necessitated an adaptive (fine-grained) excavation technique based on the use of fine tools and precise sampling (Mateiciucová and Wilding 2010, 2). Based upon the radiocarbon dates, pottery, architectural remains of a rectangular building, including so-called 'tholoi' and the small finds, the site was dated to the Pre-Halaf and Proto-Halaf and Early Halaf periods and the occupation continued at least to the Middle and Middle/Late Halaf periods (Mateiciucová and Wilding, in preparation). At the contemporary site Tell Sabi Abyad, the Late Transitional phase is represented in level 4 in Operation I and Early Halaf period is defined in level 3 in Operation I 169

(Mateicucová 2010, 416). This dating to the beginning of the 6th millennium BCE is supported by two radiocarbon dates from the top part and on the bottom of the circular feature in the northern part of the site, in trench H8 (Mateicucová 2010, 417; Gregerová et al. 2013, 305).

Fig. 115 A map showing the position of the micro-region Tell Arbid in the Khabur Basin and in relation to the state borders of Turkey and Iraq (after Mateiciucová and Wilding 2010).

170

Fig. 116 A map showing the relative position of Tell Arbid and Tell Arbid Abyad (after Mateiciucová and Wilding 2010).

171

Fig. 117 A digital layout of the trenches of the seasons 2007–2010. Trench L11 is missing in the map (after Mateiciucová and Wilding 2010).

172

6.2 Separating of Clay RHOs from the Other Small Finds of Tell Arbid Abyad (selection process)

For the on-site labelling and sorting of finds, it is useful to have certain criteria which assist the quick classification. For the objects made of clay, the definitions were the following:

Jar stopper – lump of clay, flat or conical, impressions of the rim of the vessel, seal impressions

Lid – large flat disc, made of clay, impressions of rims

Loom weight – relatively large ball or conical shape of unbaked clay with a perforation

Spindle whorl – spherical, bi-conical or conical object of clay, pierced in or near the centre

Token – small object of clay in geometrical shape: sphere, disc, cone, cylinder etc., marks: incisions, notches, fingernail impressions

Stamp (seal) – small object of baked clay with at least one flat surface, incised motif on the surface

Sling missile – oval, bi-conical or cylindrical object of clay

As my analysis is focused on the rounded small finds, the objects of designations such as jar stopper, a lid, a loom weight, a spindle whorl, and a stamp (seal) were omitted because shapes of discs, cylinders, and cones, and descriptions such as flat, pierced, incised, bearing notches, motifs, and impressions of rims are eliminative elements for the category of potential sling projectiles. On the other hand, find objects with fingerprint and fingernail impressions were included, because clay sling projectiles are hand-made and therefore there is a possibility that fingerprints or fingernails occur. Impressions of different materials on the surface were also considered as a possibility that potential sling projectiles were laid down and dried or burnt in various contexts. According to the morphological approach my main concern are on the metric data, the surface and the shape of finds, so the second selection was done according to the criterion whether this information was stated or not in the find forms from all the excavation seasons. Tracked information: Material: clay

173

Dimensions and weight given: yes/no

Photography or drawing/sketch made: yes/no

Shape: from round, spherical, oval, ovoid, egg-shaped to bi-conical

Preservation: from complete to fragmentary

Surface: smooth, rough, fingerprint impressions, fingernail impressions, no notches, no incisions, no piercing

So according to the photos, drawings and sketches, only objects of clay with more or less rounded shape, an undisturbed–surface without any marks of tools and dimensions ranging from less than 1 cm up to 10 cm were selected and included in my database. According to the abovementioned designations, these criteria were best fulfilled by the objects designated as tokens and sling missiles and by the find object category 'unspecified objects of clay'. From the class of tokens, the specimen which carried notches (Fig. 118) or incisions were omitted because for obvious reasons rough or smooth and unadorned or bare surfaces was given a preference in the analysis. Well documented seasons were the years 2007, 2008, 2009, and the trenches H8, I9, J9, J10, K13, M6, and L11 yielded in total 1,285 small finds. Unfortunately, for the squares J11, J12 and J14 opened in 2010 the measurements and photos have not been entered to the find forms due to time reasons, therefore the small finds of the last excavation year could not be included in the database.

174

Fig. 118 Excluded RHO (‘token’), bearing a notch from Tell Arbid Abyad, Trench I9.

6.3 Clay RHOs

The database thus resulting consists of 114 clay artefacts selected according to the previous criteria. Subsequently, the main focus of the following analysis will be the morphology of clay RHOs, whereas the context is outside the scope of present investigation. The complete specimen are counting 48 objects, the number of almost complete specimen is 7, partly broken are 53 and broken to several pieces is the label for 6 clay artefacts in the records. The relevant objects of clay were found in all contexts in the trenches, primary, secondary and tertiary. The majority of almost complete specimen have a recognisable shape of mostly oval form with rounded ends and the tips mostly missing (see Plate V). The length of oval objects ranges from 3.4+ to 5.1 cm. Two partly broken specimen, however, have a cylindrical shape (Fig. 119). One is bigger, having a length of 3.4+ cm with a diameter 2.3 cm, is weighing 17.4 + g, and seems to have a tip missing41. The second one displaying also an unfinished cylindrical shape measures only 1.9+ cm in length and 1.1 cm in diameter, and weighing 1.5+ g. As can be seen in Plate VI those fragmentary RHOs, even though they are so fragile, still have informative capacity.

41 The Tell Sabi Abyad Level 6 (Burnt Village) yielded 6 specimen of a cylindrical flattened shape with a length ranging from 4-4.9 cm and with a diameter from 2.5-3.2 cm (Spoor and Collet 1996, 449).

175

Fig. 119 RHO (fragments) of a more cylindrical shape, both found in trench K13 in Tell Arbid Abyad.

In the following, it will be focused more on the complete specimen which have more easily recognisable and obvious contours. The 33 RHOs from Tell Arbid Abyad have been measured in length and either width or diameter. Their length ranges from 1 cm to 5 cm and their width or diameter ranges between 0.8 and 3.2 cm. The weight was measured from 0.1 g up to 38.1 g. Under F1225 two artefacts were found, one complete, a quite symmetrical, – an oval specimen with rounded ends of a length of 5 cm and a diameter of 3.2 cm, with one side smoothened (Fig. 120). It was found together with a fragment one end of which was clearly rounded and which measured 4.1+ cm in length, 3.4+ cm in width and 2.2+ cm in thickness. They were weighed together (68.9 g).

176

Fig. 120 Complete oval RHO and a further RHO fragment of an oval shape, found together in trench K13 in Tell Arbid Abyad.

In the descriptions of the surface can be found that some objects are marked by fingerprints, grass impressions or show traces of sintering and few seem to be polished because their surface is quite smooth in comparison to a specimen like F284 whose an oval shape can be recognised but whose surface seems unfinished (Fig. 121 ). The said RHO has dimensions of 3.9x2.5x1.9 cm and weighs 18.1 g.

177

Fig. 121 RHO of oval shape with a rough (unfinished?) surface found in trench J9 in Tell Arbid Abyad.

16 of the objects have been described as round, globular or as a sphere, so only their diameter (in fewer cases: their 'thickness' has been noted). Their diameter ranges from 0.9– 2.8 cm and they are weighing from 0.1 g to 16 g. Only 6 specimen are of a diameter of more than 2 cm and only one specimen weighs over 10 g. The majority of spherical RHOs are described as having no notches and showing a plain surface.

Fig. 122 Example of the ball-shaped RHOs at the Late Neolithic site Tell Arbid Abyad. F366 measuring 2.2 cm in diameter (trench I9) and F451 measuring 2.8 cm in diameter (trench K13).

178

Fig. 123 RHO clay spheres found in trench I9 at Tell Arbid Abyad, ((diameters: 2.1 cm (l.) and 2 cm (r.)).

68 of the relevant RHO of Tell Arbid Abyad are reported as being burned, whereas 32 specimen are classified as unburnt. However, this was assessed usually only by the naked eye while the items were still being unclean, and it seems that is refers in most of the cases rather to the state of compactness of the clay material than to an actual burning of those RHOs. According to Gregerová et al. (2013, 313) a "relatively precise estimation of firing temperatures is only possible based on mineralogical examination" and this examination has not been yet executed on the site's clay RHOs. Now the RHOs with stated recorded complete length, width/diameter and of a relatively oval/ovoid shape will be plotted in a graph (Fig. 124). A total of 40 RHOs is visualised in the graph. It can be observed that 2 size groups come forward. The first group concentrates between 1–2 cm and the second one clusters between 4–5 cm. Of the RHOs in- between, one has a length of 2.9 cm. It is a completely oval specimen with rounded ends, however only a sketch is available. The second RHO which is having 3.1 cm in length, is of a circular shape and appears flattened if looked at it from the side, resembling a disc.

179

Clay RHOs from TAA 5

Width/Diameter (cm) Width/Diameter 1

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Length (cm)

Fig. 124 Comparison of sizes of complete clay specimen of relative oval/ovoid shape from Tell Arbid Abyad.

180

Fig. 125 Length min/Width min corner of the square for sling projectiles.

The 'square'42 of threshold values for sling projectiles was applied in the graph (Fig. 125). The side move and strategy to step away from interpretation and archaeology to morphology and ethnic groups worked. As can be seen, no dubious or arbitrary metric values arose from the morphological study, but plausible threshold values working in an upper and in a lower segment in this case. Functional analogies are not tested alone by one single evidence, but the thresholds can be observed in very different contexts. To get an impression of the equivalent in terms of the shape the reader is advised to refer to the following images of RHOs from the yellow square in the Appendix: F422, F444, F483 in the Plate II complete RHOs; F845, F1020, F1225, F635 in the Plate III complete RHOs; F1271, F1201 in the Plate IV complete RHOs; F1197, F696 in the Plate V almost complete RHO. F1222 – fragmentary RHOs Plate VI. Photos of F861 and F107 were not retrieved from the ARBA memory discs, F121 is represented only via a drawing (Fig. 126)

42 The so-called ‘square’ is constituted each time the following 4 threshold values are entered into the spatter graphs of the thesis: Length upper - Length lower - Width upper/- Width lower.

181

and F1255 has the proper length/width ratio but the specimen is still set apart from the others in that it appears to be 'squeezed', deformed (Fig. 127).

Fig. 126 Drawing of oval clay RHO F121 found in trench H8 in Tell Arbid Abyad (scale not furnished).

Fig. 127 Squeezed oval RHO F1255 measuring 4.5x2.9x1.6+ cm weighing 20.5+ g and found in trench K13 Tell Arbid Abyad.

182

6.4 Result of the Application of the Morphological Analysis to the Clay RHOs from Tell Arbid Abyad

The majority of rounded/spherical RHO has a size under 2 cm, therefore according to the proposed characteristics (see Chapter 5.6, p. 163) they are still not removed from the category RHO. The bottom line is that, I am able to present 8 obviously undamaged artefacts from TAA which meet the criteria of priorly defined for the category 'potential sling projectiles' (see Chapter 5.6) without turning to the find contexts yet, for a corroboration (or dismissal)43. As a fruit of the investigation they can now be classified non-arbitrarily and with some degree of precision owed to the study of their metric characteristics. It was proven that the function-driven labelling has not been helping in the case of plain clay RHOs. Therefore, instead of continuing being deadlocked in the polyvalent archaeological interpretations, a frame of limit size and weight values was searched for the category of sling projectiles. On the basis of many ethnographic sources of attested usage of slings, the marginal values were theorised. However, it was not the end, their primary purpose was to be applied onto various archaeological assemblages in numerous contexts, especially onto the assemblage from Tell Arbid Abyad where I excavated for the first time in the Middle East. So, the length of the presumptive pellets ranges from 4 cm to 5 cm and their width/diameter ranges from 2.2 to 3.2 cm. The weight ranges from 22.9 g to 38.1 g44 with the majority weighing between 26–30 grams. All the artefacts have rounded ends with the exception of F635 which has one pointed end. Their shape can be characterised as oval except for few specimen which tend to have a more bi-conical outline (F1020, F635). A smooth surface can be observed on five artefacts (F1020, F845, F422, F1271, and F1225). As a result of the aforegoing, the thesis strongly suggests to consider 'rounded, handy-sized objects' (RHOs, Kubíková 2013) of this mould that are made from clay, as potential sling missiles.

43 In a subsequent thesis, this morphological analysis will be superseded by an exclusively a context-function oriented approach, using ballistic tests, more systematic queries designed for slinging practionners, experimental archaeology with different kinds of projectiles and laboratory methods for temperature scaling of the clay material.

44 Under the designation F1225 two RHOs can be found which weighed together as 68.9 g.

183

Tell Arbid Abyad Small Finds