The Loss and Re-introduction of Bow-and-arrow Technology: A Study from the Northern European Late Palaeolithic

Summary

J. Whittaker: Large tanged Bromme pts + Bromme techno-complex sandwiched between earlier Federmesser and later Ahrensburgian, both with small points. Experiments by Fischer show Bromme pts usable as large arrowheads.Rozoy says bow allowed recolonization of N Europe. But B pts more likely reversion to atlatl with loss of cultural knowledge at population bottleneck after eruption of Laacher See volcano 12, 920 BP. Fischer experiments not quantified enough, show typical projectile fractures on B pts, but not whether arrow or dart. Studied 632 complete pts from L Paleo N Europe. Shott discriminant function analysis classes almost all B pts as dart, Federmesser + Ahrensburg pts as arrows [But it really does NOT apply here - Shott/Thomas samples too small and not European.] Ahrensburgian evidence - wooden arrowshafts and possible bow frags, faunal data suggest rapid fire techniques [?huh?]. Pt size ranges suggest bow + atlatl coexist in Federmesser. Atlatl may have been used against large game - elk (=moose) and giant deer Megaloceros because of greater impact power (Baugh) and effective distance (Churchill). But why lose the bow? Social disruption and loss of transmission of technology, only dramatic enough event is eruption of Laacher See at junction between Feder + Bromme periods - Bromme lithic tech simplified. [Interesting, possible - BUT it all relies on point size arguments - not good enough. For instance, we don’t know anything about the bows - could they not have changed? And no finds of atlatl parts either.]

This Resource is Part of the Following Collections

• EXARC Experimental Archaeology Collection

Keywords

Individual & Institutional Roles

Contact(s): EXARC Experimental Archaeology Collection Manager

Record Identifiers

ExArc Id(s): 10161

Notes

Rights & Attribution: The information in this record was originally compiled by Dr. Roeland Paardekooper, EXARC Director.