A Critique of ‘The Geniculate Bannerstone as an Atlatl Handle’ by Orville H. Peets

Author(s): Dan F Morse; Phyllis A Morse

Year: 1962

Summary

J. Whittaker: Experiments are NOT dead in archaeology. [Then gives trivial examples and acts as if experimentation is just to help classify artifacts]. How long did Peets spend on atlatls [Implying waste of time]. What did Peets prove? “Demonstrating an object can function does not mean a priori that it did so function.” [The last is true but otherwise an obtuse discussion which misses the point of experimentation entirely]. Artifact names may be useful even if not reflecting function. European bow-guards differ from Am. gorgets, which are often found in chest area of burials. [Interesting example of early theoretical arguments about typology, function, and experiment.]

Cite this Record

A Critique of ‘The Geniculate Bannerstone as an Atlatl Handle’ by Orville H. Peets. Dan F Morse, Phyllis A Morse. Tennessee Archaeologist. 19 (1): 20-24. 1962 ( tDAR id: 423388)

This Resource is Part of the Following Collections

Keywords

General
Atlatl Hunting Projectile Weapon

Geographic Keywords
USA

Spatial Coverage

min long: -129.199; min lat: 24.495 ; max long: -66.973; max lat: 49.359 ;

Individual & Institutional Roles

Contact(s): EXARC Experimental Archaeology Collection Manager

Record Identifiers

ExArc Id(s): 10200

Notes

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