The Paleoindian Fluted Point: Dart Or Spear Armature?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE PALEOINDIAN FLUTED POINT: DART OR SPEAR ARMATURE? THE IDENTIFICATION OF PALEOINDIAN DELIVERY TECHNOLOGY THROUGH THE ANALYSIS OF LITHIC FRACTURE VELOCITY BY Wallace Karl Hutchings B.A., Simon Fraser Universis, 1987 M.A., University of Toronto, 199 1 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PMLOSOPHY in the Department of Archaeology O Wallace Karl Hutchings 1997 SIMON FUSER UNIVERSITY November, 2997 Al1 nghts resewed. This work may not be reproduced in whoIe or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. National Library Bibliothèque nationale lJF1 ,,,da du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographic Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington OrtawaON KIAON4 ûüawaON K1AON4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence dowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distnibute or seil reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microfoxm, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/fih, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts ~omit Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ABSTRACT One of the highest-profile, yet lest known peoples in New World archaeology, are the Paleoindians. Despite the absence of supportive empirical data, archaeologists have long assurned that Paleoindians employed the spearthrower dong with heavy, fluted- point-tipped darts, to hunt now extinct species of late Pleistocene mamrnoth and bison. This assumption is criticai to our understanding of Paleoindian life-ways since the identification of exploitative technolog, such as weapons systems, is often the first crucial step towards the interpretation of higher order information that contributes to ou knowledge of prehistoric peoples. Without an accurate assessment of the basic tools with which people interacted with their environment, we cannot fully explore more cornplex issues such as technoIogicaI and social organization, or settlement and subsistence strategies. Traditional analyses of weapon technologies generally rely on classification schemes to identie projectile points as spear, dart, javelin, or arrow armatures. The logical fallacy of such schemes is the assumption that the investigator knows, a priori. that the artifact in question served as a projectile armature. By adopting and applying a methodology based on the fracture mechanics of brittle solids, this research avoids such interpretive leaps of faith. Employing data derived fiom velocity-dependant micro-fracture features, a series of iii controlled experiments were conducted to explore the range of lithic fi-acture velocities associated with various manufacturing (reduction) techniques, projectile impacts, and accidentai breakage. Manufacturing and weapon delivery technologies are differentiated based on the fracture velocity exhibited by damaged artifacts; high-speed projectile impacts are reliably disthguished fkom other sources of lithic fiachue, thus providing a quantitative means for identifjkg projectile armatures. Data derived fiom Paleohdian artifacts reveal fracture rates associated with hi&-velocity impacts, indicating the use of the spearthrower. This research was supported in part by a Simon Fraser University Doctoral Fellowship (199 1, 1992, 1994, 1W6), a President's Ph-D. Research Stipend (SFU) (1 999, and a graduate research travel grant fiom the Department of Archaeology (SFU) (1 995). Many individuals contributed their the, energy, and assistance in various forms throughout this research. I especially thank Earl Hall and Brian McConaghy of the R.C.M.P. Forensic Laboratory (Vancouver) - Firearms Section; Tom Troczynski and Florin Esanu of the Department of Metals and Materiais Engineering, University of British Columbia, and Larry Courchaine of Checkmate Archery (Abbottsford). Thanks also to Lorenz Briichert for endless ethnographie data concerning the spearthrower. I am indebted to Berkley B. Bailey for providing geological samples fiom numerous Great Plains Paleoindian tool-stone sources. The collection of data from institutions in Canada and the United States would not have been possible without the generous help of numerous people. I thank Mike Jacobs of the Arizona State Museum; Vance Haynes of the Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona; Bruce Huckell, Marianne Rodee, and Bobbi Hohman of the Maxwell Museum, University of New Mexico; Patncia Nietfeld of the Museum of New Mexico; James Dixon of the Denver Museum of Naturai History; Jack Brink, and Bob Dawe of the Provincial Museum of Alberta; Don Tuohy, and Sue Ann Monteleone of the Nevada State Museum; Ken Hedges of the San Diego Museum of Man; John Fagan of Archaeologicai investigations Northwest (Portland); Melvin Aikens and Pam Endsweig of the Oregon State Museum of Anthropology; and Elise V. LeCompte and David Webb of the Florida Museum of Natural History, for al1 the heIp they have provided me in this effort. I owe special thanks to Tony and Simone Baker, who not oniy provided access to their private coIlection, but extended the hospitality of their home during rny visit to Denver. 1 express my sincere gratitude to the members of my supervisory committee, my senior supervisor Dr. Roy Carlson, and Dr. Jack Nance, for their support and guidance. Among the faculty of the Simon Fraser University Department of Archaeology, 1 also wish to thank Dr. David Burley for his constructive criticism as a mernber of rny thesis examination cornmittee, and Dr. Brian Hayden for the use of various microscopy equipment. 1 am delighted to have a newfound &end in Dr. John D. Speth (Professor of Anthropology, and Director of the Museum of Archaeology, University of Michigan [Am itrbor]), who served as my externai thesis examiner. His extensive cornrnents and suggestions have contributed irnrnensely to the clarity of this thesis, though ultimately, any shortcomings are my sole responsibility. Finally, but most of dl, the tremendous support provided by my wife, Lisa, and my parents, Wallace and Lillian, has been instrumentai to my completion of this dissertation. 1thank them from the bottom of my heart. TABLE OF CONTENTS ... ABSTRACT .......................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................. v CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................... 1 Lithic Fracture Velocity Research in Archaeology ....................... -5 CHAPTER II AN OVERVLEW OF PALEOINDLAN TECHNOLOGY ..................... 10 CWTERIII PROBLEMS CONCERMNG PROJECTILE CLASSIFICATION AND IDENTIFICATION .................................................... 21 Projectile Classification ............................................21 Projectile Identification ........................................... -26 CHAPTER IV THE QUANTIFICATION OF LITHIC FRACTURE VELOCITY ............ -32 Fracture Suface Features and the Determination of Fracture Velocity ........33 Fracture Velocity Data ColIection ................................... -37 Fracture Feature Configurations .................................... -40 Correlation Between Lithic Fracture Velocity and Precursory Loading Rate . -46 Quasi-static and Rapid Loading Rates .......................... -49 Dynarnic Loading Rates ...................................... 57 Temiinai Fracture Velocity ......................................... 58 Summary ....................................................... 61 CHAPTER V REPLICATION AND EXPERIMENTATION ............................. 63 Reconstruction of the Fiuted-Point-Tipped Projectile .....................65 Reconstruction data based on Paleoindian-related research ......... -65 Reconstruction Data Based on Non-Paleoindian Archaeological and Ethnographie Examples of Spearthrower Darts ............. -71 Surnmary of H& Diameter Data .............................. -74 vii Effective Hunting Ranges .............................-77 Spearthrower Experiments .......................................... 79 Dart and Javelin Velocity Measurements .................-80 Velocity Experiments ................................. -80 Fracture Velocity Experiments ......................................86 Results of the Dart Armature Lithic Fracture Velocity Tests ......... 90 Results of the Javelin Armature Lithic Fracture Velocity Tests ....... 97 Results of the Spear Armature Lithic Fracture Velocity Tests ....... 100 Results of the Arrow Armature Lithic Fracture Velocity Tests ....... 103 Results of the Dropped Armature Lithic Fracture Velocity Tests ..... 106 Discussion ..................................................... 108 Summary ...................................................... 112 CHAPTER VI THE PALEOLNDIAN DATA ........................................... 114 ImpactData .................................................... 115 ClovisPoints ............................................. 115 Folsom Points ............................................ 120 Other Paleoindian (or pre-Archaic) Points ....................... 120 FlutingData ...................................................