Stone Tools pp 279-309 | Cite as

Innovation and Selection in Prehistory

A Case Study from the American Bottom
  • Michael J. Shott
Part of the Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology book series (IDCA)

Abstract

In the American midcontinent, first millenium A.D. point types show a single continuum of metric variation, not a time-series of distinct forms. This view changes our understanding of the technological transition from dart to arrow, which may have begun earlier and unfolded over a longer time than commonly believed, and involved for some time simultaneous use of both weapon types. Reduction in point size may have persisted even after the arrow was adopted, possibly in response to broader subsistence changes. The Diet Breadth model suggests one explanation for the continuous decline in arrow-point size. Whatever its cause, this time-dependent trend can improve our ability to measure time as the continuum it is.

Keywords

Base Width Arrow Point Neck Width Fish Lake American Antiquity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amick, D. S. 1994. Technological Organization and the Structure of Inference in Lithic Analysis: An Examination of Folsom Hunting Behavior in the American Southwst. In The Organization of North American Prehistoric Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, edited by P. Carr, pp. 9-34. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
  2. Bareis, C. J., and J. W. Porter (editors). 1984. American Bottom Archaeology: A Summary of the FAI-270 Project Contribution to the Culture History of the Mississippi River Valley. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  3. Binford, L. R. 1962. A New Method of Calculating Dates from Kaolin Pipe Stem Samples. Southeastern Archaeological Conference Newsletter 9: 19–21.Google Scholar
  4. Blitz, J. H. 1988. Adoption of the Bow in Prehistoric North America. North American Archaeologist 9: 123–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braun, D. P. 1985. Absolute Seriation: A Time-Series Approach. In For Concordance in Archaeological Analysis: Bridging Data Structure, Quantitative Technique, and Theory, edited by C. Carr, pp. 509–539. Westview, Kansas City.Google Scholar
  6. Braun, D. P. 1987. Coevolution of Sedentism, Pottery Technology, and Horticulture in the Central Midwest, 200 B.C.-A.D. 600. In Emergent Horticultural Economies of the Eastern Woodlands, edited by W. Keegan, pp. 153-181. Occasional Paper No. 7. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.Google Scholar
  7. Christenson, A. L. 1986a. Projectile Point Size and Projectile Aerodynamics: An Exploratory Study. Plains Anthropologist 31: 109–128.Google Scholar
  8. Christenson, A. L. 1986b. Reconstructing Prehistoric Projectiles from Their Stone Points. Journal of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries 29: 21–27.Google Scholar
  9. Churchill, S. E. 1993. Weapon Technology, Prey Size Selection, and Hunting Methods in Modern Hunter-Gatherers: Implications for Hunting in the Paleolithic and Mesolithic. In Hunting and Animal Exploitation in the Later Paleolithic and Mesolithic of Eurasia, edited by G. Peterkin, H. Bricker and P. Mellars, pp. 11-24. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, No. 4.Google Scholar
  10. Cole, F.-C., and T. Deuel. 1937. Rediscovering Illinois: Archaeological Explorations in and around Fulton County. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  11. Cotterell, B., and J. Kamminga. 1990. Mechanics of Pre-Industrial Technology: An Introduction to the Mechanics of Ancient and Traditional Material Culture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  12. Cundy, B. J. 1989. Formal Variation in Australian Spear and Spearthrower Technology. BAR International Series 546, Oxford.Google Scholar
  13. Delier, D. B., and C. J. Ellis. 1988. Early Paleo-Indian Complexes in Southwestern Ontario. In Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene Paleoecology and Archaeology of the Eastern Great Lakes Region, edited by R. Laub, N. Miller and D. Steadman. Bulletin of the Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences 33: 251-263.Google Scholar
  14. Doolittle, W. E. 1984. Agricultural Changes As an Incremental Process. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 74: 124–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunnell, R. C. 1992. Archaeology and Evolutionary Science. In Quandaries and Quests: Visions of Archaeology’s Future, edited by L. Wandsnider, pp. 209–224. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.Google Scholar
  16. Dunnell, R. C., and J. K. Feathers. 1992. Late Woodland Manifestations of the Maiden Plain, Southeast Missouri. In Stability, Transformation, and Variation: The Late Woodland Southeast, edited by M. Nassaney and C. Cobb, pp. 21–45. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Dwyer, P. D. 1974. The Price of Protein: Five Hundred Hours of Hunting in the New Guinea Highlands. Oceania 44: 278–293.Google Scholar
  18. Dwyer, P. D. 1985. A Hunt in New Guinea: Some Difficulties for Optimal Foraging Theory. Man (n.s.) 20: 243–253.Google Scholar
  19. Fawcett, W. B., and M. Kornfeld. 1980. Projectile Point Neck-Width Variability and Chronology on the Plains. Wyoming Contributions to Anthropology 2: 66–79.Google Scholar
  20. Fischer, A. 1989. Hunting with Flint-Tipped Arrows: Results and Experiences from Practical Experiments. In The Mesolithic in Europe, edited by C. Bonsall, pp. 29–39. John Donald, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  21. Forbis, R. 1960. The Old Woman’s Buffalo Jump, Alberta. National Museum of Canada Bulletin 180: 56–123.Google Scholar
  22. Fortier, A. C., F. A. Finney, and R. B. Lacampagne. 1983. The Mund Site (11-S-435). American Bottom Archaeology, FAI-270 Site Reports, Volume 5. University of Illinois, Urbana.Google Scholar
  23. Fortier, A. C., T. O. Maher, and J. A. Williams. 1991. The Sponemann Site: The Formative Emergent Mississippian Sponemann Phase Occupations (11-Ms-517). American Bottom Archaeology, FAI-270 Site Reports, Volume 23. University of Illinois, Urbana.Google Scholar
  24. Frankel, D. 1988. Characterising Change in Prehistoric Sequences: A View from Australia. Archaeology in Oceania 23: 41–48.Google Scholar
  25. Freeman, D. B. 1985. The Importance of Being First: Preemption by Early Adopters of Farming Innovations in Kenya. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 75: 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. George, R., and R. Scaglion. 1992. Seriation Changes in Monongahela Triangular Lithic Projectiles. Man in the Northeast 44: 73–81.Google Scholar
  27. Gould, R. A. 1966. Archaeology of the Point St. George Site and Tolowa Prehistory. University of California, Publications in Anthropology, Vol. 4.Google Scholar
  28. Guthrie, R. D. 1983. Osseous Projectile Points: Biological Considerations Affecting Raw Material Selection and Design among Paleolithic and Paleoindian Peoples. In Animals and Archaeology 1: Hunters and Their Prey, edited by J. Clutton-Brock and C. Grigson, pp. 273–294. BAR International Series 163, Oxford.Google Scholar
  29. Hall, R. L. 1980. An Interpretation of the Two-Climax Model of Illinois Prehistory. In Early Native Americans: Prehistoric Demography, Economy, and Technology, edited by D. Browman, pp. 401–467. Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
  30. Hames, R. B., and W. T. Vickers. 1982. Optimal Diet Breadth Theory as a Model to Explain Variability in Amazonian Hunting. American Ethnologist 9: 358–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hamilton, T. M. 1982. Native American Bows, second edition. Special Publication No. 5, Missouri Archaeological Society.Google Scholar
  32. Hawkes, K., K. Hill, and J. O’Connell. 1982. Why Hunters Gather: Optimal Foraging and the Aché of Eastern Paraguay. American Ethnologist 9: 379–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hill, K., and K. Hawkes. 1983. Neotropical Hunting among the Aché of Eastern Paraguay. In Adaptive Responses of Native Amazonians, edited by R. Hames and W. Vickers, pp. 139–188. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Johannessen, S. 1984. Paleoethnobotany. In American Bottom Archaeology: A Summary of the FAI-270 Project Contribution to the Culture History of the Mississippi River Valley, edited by C. Bareis and J. Porter, pp. 197–214. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  35. Kelley, D. B. 1992. Coles Creek Period Faunal Exploitation in the Ouachita River Valley of Southern Arkansas. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 17: 227–264.Google Scholar
  36. Kelly, J. E. 1984. Late Bluff Chert Utilization on the Merrell Tract, Cahokia. In Prehistoric Chert Exploitation: Studies from the Midcontinent, edited by B. M. Butler and E. May, pp. 23-44. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 2. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.Google Scholar
  37. Kelly, J. E., F. A. Finney, D. L. McElrath, and S. J. Ozuk. 1984. The Late Woodland Period. In American Bottom Archaeology: A Summary of the FAI-270 Project Contribution to the Culture History of the Mississippi River Valley, edited by C. Bareis and J. Porter, pp. 104–127. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  38. Kelly, J. E., A. C. Fortier, S. J. Ozuk, and J. A. Williams. 1987. The Range Site: Archaic through Late Woodland Occupations. American Bottom Archaeology, FAI-270 Site Reports, Volume 16. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  39. Kelly, J. E., S. J. Ozuk, and J. A. Williams. 1990. The Range Site 2: The Emergent Mississippian Dohach and Range Phase Occupations. American Bottom Archaeology, FAI-270 Site Reports, Volume 20. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  40. Kelly, L. S., and P. G. Cross. 1984. Zooarchaeology. In American Bottom Archaeology: A Summary of the FAI-270 Project Contribution to the Culture History of the Mississippi River Valley, edited by C. Bareis and J. Porter, pp. 215–232. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  41. Klein, R., and K. Cruz-Uribe. 1984. The Analysis of Animal Bones from Archeological Sites. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  42. Knecht, H. 1991. The Role of Innovation in Changing Early Upper Paleolithic Organic Projectile Points. Techniques et Culture 17-18: 115–144.Google Scholar
  43. Lee, R. B. 1979. The!Kung San: Men, Women and Work in a Foraging Society. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  44. Lorentzen, L. H. 1989. Form and Function of the Chodistaas and Grasshopper Springs Projectile Points. Unpublished ms. on file, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
  45. Lynott, M. J. 1991. Identification of Attribute Variability in Emergent Mississippian and Mississippian Arrow Points from Southeastern Missouri. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 16: 189–211.Google Scholar
  46. MacArthur, R. H., and E. R. Pianka. 1966. On Optimal Use of a Patchy Environment. American Naturalist 100: 603–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Martin, J. F. 1983. Optimal Foraging Theory: A Review of Some Models and Their Applications. American Anthropologist 85: 612–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McCabe, R. E., and T. R. McCabe. 1984. Of Slings and Arrows: An Historical Retrospective. In White-Tailed Deer: Ecology and Management, edited by L. Hall, pp. 19–72. Stackpole, Harrisburg.Google Scholar
  49. Milner, G. R. 1984. The Julien Site (11-S-63). American Bottom Archaeology, FAI-270 Site Reports, Volume 7. University of Illinois, Urbana.Google Scholar
  50. Milton, K. 1984. Protein and Carbohydrate Resources of the Maku Indians of Northwestern Amazonia. American Anthropologist 86: 7–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Moshage, M. 1987. Appendix 1. Description of Material Types. In The George Reeves Site, edited by D. McElrath and F. Finney, pp. 393–399. American Bottom Archaeology, FAI-270 Site Reports, Vol. 15. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  52. Odell, G. H. 1988. Addressing Prehistoric Hunting Practices through Stone Tool Analysis. American Anthropologist 90: 335–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Parker, K. E. 1991. Sponemann Phase Archaeobotany. In The Sponemann Site: The Formative Emergent Mississippian Sponemann Phase Occupations, edited by A. Fortier, T. Maher and J. Williams, pp. 377–419. American Bottom Archaeology, FAI-270 Site Reports, Vol. 23. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  54. Patterson, L. W. 1985. Distinguishing between Arrow and Spear Points on the Upper Texas Coast. Lithic Technology 14: 81–89.Google Scholar
  55. Patterson, L. W. 1993. Current Data on Early Use of the Bow and Arrow in Southern North America. Ohio Archaeologist 43: 21–24.Google Scholar
  56. Plog, S., and J. L. Hantman. 1990. Chronology Construction and the Study of Prehistoric Culture Change. Journal of Field Archaeology 14: 439–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Redford, K. H., and J. G. Robinson. 1987. The Game of Choice: Patterns of Indian and Colonist Hunting in the Neotropics. American Anthropologist 89: 650–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Reidhead, V. 1981. Optimization and Food Procurement at the Prehistoric Leonard Haag Site, Southeastern Indiana: A Linear Programming Approach. Indiana Historical Society, Prehistory Research Series No. 6(1).Google Scholar
  59. Riley, T., G. Walz, C. Bareis, A. Fortier, and K. Parker. 1994. Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) Dates Confirm Early Zea Mays in the Mississippi River Valley. American Antiquity 59: 490–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Saffirio, G., and R. Scaglion. 1982. Hunting Efficiency in Acculturated and Unacculturated Yanomama Villages. Journal of Anthropological Research 38: 315–327.Google Scholar
  61. Sahal, D. 1981. Patterns of Technological Innovation. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
  62. Schambach, F. F. 1982. An Outline of Fourche Maline Culture in Southwestern Arkansas. In Arkansas Archaeology in Review, edited by N. Trubowitz and M. Jeter, pp. 132-197. Arkansas Archeological Survey, Research Series, No. 15, Fayetteville.Google Scholar
  63. Schiffer, M. B. 1979. A Preliminary Consideration of Behavioral Change. In Transformations: Mathematical Approaches to Culture Change, edited by C. Renfrew and K. Cooke, pp. 353–368. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  64. Schiffer, M. B., and J. Skibo. 1987. Theory and Experiment in the Study of Technological Change. Current Anthropology 28: 595–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Seeman, M. F. 1992. The Bow and Arrow, the Intrusive Mound Complex, and a Late Woodland Jack’s Reef Horizon in the Mid-Ohio Valley In Cultural Variability in Context: Woodland Settlements of the Mid-Ohio Valley, edited by M. Seeman, pp. 41–51. MCJA Special Paper No. 7. Kent State University Press, Kent, Ohio.Google Scholar
  66. Seeman, M. F., and C. A. Munson. 1980. Determining the Cultural Affiliation of Terminal Late Woodland-Mississippian Hunting Stations: A Lower Ohio Valley Example. North American Archaeologist 2: 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Shott, M. J. 1990. Stone Tools and Economics: Great Lakes Paleoindian Examples. In Early Paleoindian Economies of Eastern North America, edited by K. Tankersley and B. Isaac, pp. 3–43. Research in Economic Anthropology, Supplement 5. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.Google Scholar
  68. Shott, M. J. 1992. Radiocarbon Dating as a Probabilistic Technique: The Childers Site and Late Woodland Occupation in the Ohio Valley. American Antiquity 57: 202–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Shott, M. J. 1993. Spears, Darts, and Arrows: Late Woodland Hunting Techniques in the Upper Ohio Valley. American Antiquity 58: 425–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Smith, J. 1966. The Generall Historie of Virginia, New-England, and the Summer Isles. UMI Press, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  71. Spencer, L. 1974. Replicative Experiments in the Manufacture and Use of a Great Basin Atlatl. In Great Basin Atlatl Studies, edited by T. Hester, M. Mildner and L. Spencer, pp. 37–60. Ballena Press, Ramona, CA.Google Scholar
  72. Speth, J. D., and S. Scott. 1989. Horticulture and Large Mammal Hunting: The Role of Resource Depletion and the Constraints of Time and Labor. In Farmers as Hunters: The Implications of Sedentism, edited by S. Kent, pp. 71–79. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  73. Swanton J. R. 1946. The Indians of the Southeastern United States. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin No. 137. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  74. Thomas, D. H. 1978. Arrowheads and Atlatl Darts: How the Stones Got the Shaft. American Antiquity 43: 461–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Waselkov, G. A. 1978. Evolution of Deer Hunting in the Eastern Woodlands. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 3: 15–34.Google Scholar
  76. Watanabe, H. 1975. Bow and Arrow Census in a West Papuan Lowland Community: A New Field for Functional-Ecological Study. Occasional Papers in Anthropology, No. 5. University of Otago, New Zealand.Google Scholar
  77. Wenhold, L. L. 1936. A 17th Century Letter of Gabriel Diaz Vara Calderon, Bishop of Cuba, Describing the Indians and Indian Missions of Florida. Smithsonian Institution, Miscellaneous Collections 95(16). Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  78. Williams, S. C. 1930. Adair’s History of the American Indians. Promontory, New York.Google Scholar
  79. Winterhaider, B. 1981. Optimal Foraging Strategies and Hunter-Gatherer Research in Anthropology: Theory and Models. In Hunter-Gatherer Foraging Strategies: Ethnographic and Archaeological Analyses, edited by B. Winterhaider and E. Smith, pp. 13–35. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  80. Yellen, J. 1986. Optimization and Risk in Human Foraging Strategies. Journal of Human Evolution 15: 733–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Yerkes, R. 1992. Review of “Early Paleoindian Economies of Eastern North America,” edited by K. Tankersley and B. Isaac. North American Archaeologist 13: 67–71.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael J. Shott
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Sociology and AnthropologyUniversity of Northern IowaCedar FallsUSA

Personalised recommendations