Abstract
Understanding prehistoric projectile weaponry performance is fundamental to unraveling past humans’ survival and the evolution of technology. One important debate involves how deeply stone-tipped projectiles penetrate a target. Theoretically, all things being equal, projectiles with smaller tip cross-sectional geometries should penetrate deeper into a target than projectiles with larger tip cross-sectional geometries. Yet, previous experiments have both supported and questioned this theoretical premise. Here, under controlled conditions, we experimentally examine fourteen types of stone-tipped projectile each possessing a different cross-sectional geometry. Our results show that both tip cross-sectional area (TCSA) and tip cross-sectional perimeter (TCSP) exhibit a strong, significant inverse relationship with target penetration depth, although TCSP’s relationship is stronger. We discuss why our experimental results support what is mathematically predicted while previous experiments have not. Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that when stone tip cross-sectional geometries become smaller over time in particular contexts, this evolution may be due to the selection of these attributes for increased penetration.
Highlights
Understanding prehistoric projectile weaponry performance is fundamental to unraveling past humans’ survival and the evolution of technology
Killing prey was vital for the survival of prehistoric humans, and projectile penetration depth contributes to the killing of prey[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
Given that Sperrazza and K okinakis27, Ashby28, Hughes[5], and K neubuehl[29] mathematically demonstrate target penetration is inversely proportional to tip cross-sectional area, all things being equal, stone-tipped projectile penetration depth should increase as TCSA and tip cross-sectional perimeter (TCSP) decrease
Summary
Understanding prehistoric projectile weaponry performance is fundamental to unraveling past humans’ survival and the evolution of technology. Given that Sperrazza and K okinakis27, Ashby28, Hughes[5], and K neubuehl[29] mathematically demonstrate target penetration is inversely proportional to tip cross-sectional area, all things being equal, stone-tipped projectile penetration depth should increase as TCSA and TCSP decrease (see [6,19]). Despite this theoretical foundation, experiments involving prehistoric replica stone tipped projectiles have not consistently supported the inverse relationship between penetration depth and TCSA or TCSP. His ballistics experiments involving stone projectile tips possessing a large range of TCSA and TCSP values led him to suggest that “a very poor correlation exists between these two statistics and penetration depth” (3: 193) such that “TCSA/TCSP do not provide a valuable measure of the mechanical limits on projectile design” (3: 197)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
