Beveled Projectile Points and Ballistics Technology

Abstract Explanations for beveled blade edges on projectile points have been debated in North America archaeology since the first systematic description oflithic assemblages in the nineteenth century. Debate has centered around two opposing perspectives. One views beveled edges as features of projectile points that cause them to spin during flight. The other views beveling as a product of edge resharpening that is done unifacially to conserve scarce resources. Here we use a fluid-dynamics model to simulate the effect beveling has on projectiles. Expectations derived from this modeling are evaluated using windtunnel experiments. Our findings indicate that beveling produces in-flight rotation that serves as a means of increasing accuracy in relatively low-velocity flight paths.

[1]  S. Churchill.  Weapon Technology, Prey Size Selection, and Hunting Methods in Modern Hunter‐Gatherers: Implications for Hunting in the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic , 1993 .

[2]  J. B. Sollberger,et al.  Technological Study of Beveled Knives , 1971 .

[3]  D. Thomas.  Arrowheads and Atlatl Darts: How the Stones Got the Shaft , 1978, American Antiquity.

[4]  J. Blitz.  Adoption of the Bow in Prehistoric North America , 1988 .

[5]  THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION. , 1905, Science.

[6]  Michael Shott,et al.  Stones and Shafts Redux: The Metric Discrimination of Chipped-Stone Dart and Arrow Points , 1997, American Antiquity.

[7]  L. Morgan.  League of the Iroquois , 1984 .

[8]  David Corliss.  Neck width of projectile points : an index of culture continuity and change , 1972 .

[9]  Todd L. VanPool,et al.  The diversity of North American projectile-point types, before and after the bow and arrow , 2009 .

[10]  C. C. Jones.  Antiquities of the Southern Indians, Particularly of the Georgia Tribes , 1972 .

[11]  Robert L. Bettinger,et al.  Point Typologies, Cultural Transmission, and the Spread of Bow-and-Arrow Technology in the Prehistoric Great Basin , 1999, American Antiquity.

[12]  G. Fowke.  Archaeological History of Ohio: The Mound Builders and Later Indians , 2010 .

[13]  M. J. O’Brien,et al.  The prehistory of Missouri , 1998 .

[14]  S. Hughes.  Getting to the point: Evolutionary change in prehistoric weaponry , 1998 .

[15]  E. Davis,et al.  Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley , 1848 .

[16]  D. Acheson.  Elementary Fluid Dynamics , 1990 .

[17]  Todd L. VanPool,et al.  Variation in North American Dart Points and Arrow Points when One or Both are Present , 2008 .

[18]  J. M. Campbell,et al.  The Atrisco Sites: Cochise Manifestations in the Middle Rio Grande Valley , 1952, American Antiquity.

[19]  Michael J. Shott.  Spears, Darts, and Arrows: Late Woodland Hunting Techniques in the Upper Ohio Valley , 1993, American Antiquity.

[20]  W. K. Hutchings.  Measuring use-related fracture velocity in lithic armatures to identify spears, javelins, darts, and arrows , 2011 .

[21]  Michael Shott,et al.  Biface Reduction and the Measurement of Dalton Curation: A Southeastern United States Case Study , 2007, American Antiquity.

[22]  G E Sellers.  Observations on stone chipping , 1886 .

[23]  D. Morse.  Hawkins Cache: a Significant Dalton Find in Northeast Arkansas , 1971 .

[24]  A. Christenson.  Projectile Point Size and Projectile Aerodynamics: An Exploratory Study , 1986 .

[25]  Michael J. O'Brien,et al.  A Mechanical and Functional Study of Bone Rods from the Richey–Roberts Clovis Cache, Washington, U.S.A. , 1998 .