Modern thermoplastic (hot glue) versus organic-based adhesives and haft bond failure rate in experimental prehistoric ballistics
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract The prehistoric production of composite technologies throughout human evolution was facilitated greatly by the use of adhesives. One such technology was projectile weaponry, which used adhesive to attach a stone point to a wooden shaft. Prehistoric projectile weaponry is often studied via experimental archaeology, which recreates ancient technologies to understand their manufacture and function. Here, we explore whether a modern thermoplastic adhesive can serve as a suitable replacement for two organic adhesives that would have been used by past peoples – pine rosin and hide glue – in modern experimental tests of prehistoric weaponry. We conducted a ballistics experiment and shot groups of stone-tipped arrows, each group hafted with one of the three adhesives, and assessed the haft bond failure rate. The modern thermoplastic adhesive was similar to that of the pine rosin and significantly failed less often than the hide glue. We conclude that in some cases modern thermoplastic adhesive can be substituted for organic-based adhesives in experimental archaeology. Our results also show that hafting bond failure rate was significantly different between the pine rosin and the hide glue, suggesting that prehistoric hunter-gatherers faced costs or benefits in selecting adhesives for hafting.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology · Archaeology and ancient environmental studies · Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (62)
Show source-provided references
1. Barham · 2013
2. Examining the origins of hafting in south asia10.1007/s41982-019-00034-4 ↗
3. Interchangeable parts re-examined: the private sector of the American arms industry on the eve of the Civil War10.2307/3103762 ↗
4. Thinking a bow-and-arrow set: cognitive implications of Middle Stone Age bow and stone-tipped arrow technology10.1017/S095977431200025X ↗
5. Developing a stable point: evaluating the temporal and geographic consistency of Late Prehistoric unnotched triangular point functional design in Midwestern North America10.1016/j.jaa.2017.04.001 ↗
6. Interpreting broken arrow points10.7183/0002-7316.80.4.760 ↗
7. Making a point: wood-versus stone-tipped projectiles10.1017/S0003598X00098999 ↗
8. Identification of birch bark tar at the Mesolithic site of Star Carr
9. Bitumen as a hafting material on Middle Palaeolithic artefacts10.1038/380336a0 ↗
10. Bitumen as hafting material on middle paleolithic artifacts from the el kowm basin, Syria
11. New evidence for significant use of bitumen in Middle Palaeolithic technical systems at Umm el Tlel (Syria) around 70,000 BP10.3406/paleo.2008.5257 ↗
12. Cârciumaru M, Ion RM, Niţu EC, Ştefănescu R. New evidence of adhesive as hafting material on middle and upper palaeolithic artefacts from gura cheii-râşnov cave (Romania). J Archaeol Sci;39(7):1942-1950.10.1016/j.jas.2012.02.016 ↗
13. First molecular identification of a hafting adhesive in the late howiesons poort at diepkloof rock shelter (western cape, South Africa)10.1016/j.jas.2012.12.026 ↗
14. The role of fire in the life of an adhesive10.1007/s10816-017-9361-z ↗
15. Use and trade of bitumen in antiquity and prehistory: molecular archaeology reveals secrets of past civilizations10.1098/rstb.1999.0358 ↗
16. Microscopic residues as evidence of hafting on backed tools from the 60 000 to 68 000 year-old Howiesons Poort layers of Rose Cottage Cave, South Africa
17. The identification of hafting adhesive on a slotted antler point from a southwest Yukon ice patch10.1017/S000273160004227X ↗
18. Ancient projectile weapons from ice patches in northwestern Canada: identification of resin and compound resin-ochre hafting adhesives10.1016/j.jas.2013.09.010 ↗
19. Laboratory strength testing of pine wood and birch bark adhesives: a first study of the material properties of pitch
20. The gripping nature of ochre: the association of ochre with Howiesons Poort adhesives and Later Stone Age mastics from South Africa10.1016/j.jhevol.2007.05.004 ↗
21. A new Palaeolithic discovery: tar-hafted stone tools in a European Mid-Pleistocene bone-bearing bed10.1016/j.jas.2006.01.006 ↗
22. Lithic microwear analysis as a means to infer production of perishable technology: a case from the Great Lakes10.1016/j.jas.2014.05.019 ↗
23. A multi-analytical methodology of lithic residue analysis applied to Paleolithic tools from Hummal, Syria10.1016/j.jas.2013.03.018 ↗
24. Dusseldorp G/middle paleolithic complex technology and a neandertal tar-backed tool from the Dutch north sea10.1073/pnas.1907828116 ↗
25. Investigating the history of prehistoric glues by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry10.1002/jssc.200301608 ↗
26. Aspects of tool production, use, and hafting in Palaeolithic assemblages from Northeast Africa10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.01.001 ↗
27. Birch tar production does not prove Neanderthal behavioral complexity10.1073/pnas.1911137116 ↗
28. Palaeolithic barbed point from gransmoor, east yorkshire, england
29. The chemistry, archaeology, and ethnography of a native American insect resin
30. Implications for complex cognition from the hafting of tools with compound adhesives in the Middle Stone Age, South Africa10.1073/pnas.0900957106 ↗
31. Compound-adhesive manufacture as a behavioral proxy for complex cognition in the Middle Stone Age10.1086/649836 ↗
32. Composite projectiles and hafting technologies at Ohalo II (23 ka, Israel): analyses of impact fractures, morphometric characteristics and adhesive remains on microlithic tools10.1016/j.jas.2013.05.017 ↗
33. Middle Palaeolithic birch-bark pitch10.1017/S0003598X00089638 ↗
34. High-tech in the middle palaeolithic: neandertal-manufactured pitch identified10.1179/eja.2001.4.3.385 ↗
35. Neandertals revised10.1073/pnas.1521269113 ↗
36. Wragg Sykes R. To see a world in a hafted tool: birch pitch composite technology, cognition and memory in Neanderthals. In Coward F, Hosfield R, Pope M, Wenban-Smith F (editors), Settlement, society and cognition in human evolution: landscapes in the mind 2015 (pp. 117-137). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139208697.008 ↗
37. A new experimental methodology for assessing adhesive properties shows that Neandertals used the most suitable material available10.1016/j.jhevol.2019.102664 ↗
38. Controlled ballistics tests of ground, percussion-flaked, and pressure-flaked projectile point impact durability: implications for archaeological method and theory
39. Lap shear and impact testing of ochre and beeswax in experimental Middle Stone Age compound adhesives10.1371/journal.pone.0150436 ↗
40. Clarkson C, Haslam M, Harris C. When to retouch, haft, or discard? Modeling optimal use/maintenance schedules in lithic tool use. In Goodale N, Andrefsky W (editors), Lithic technological systems and evolutionary theory 2015 (pp. 117-138). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139207775.011 ↗
41. Test, model, and method validation: the role of experimental stone artifact replication in hypothesis-driven archaeology10.1080/19442890.2016.1213972 ↗
42. Mesoudi · 2011
43. How atlatl darts behave: beveled points and the relevance of controlled experiments10.7183/0002-7316.80.3.590 ↗
44. Internal and external validity in economics research: tradeoffs between experiments, field experiments, natural experiments, and field data10.1111/j.1467-8276.2009.01295.x ↗
45. Molecular evidence of use of hide glue in 4th millennium BC Europe10.1016/j.jas.2015.08.012 ↗
46. An ethnoarchaeological inquiry into the functional relationship between projectile point and armor technologies of the Northwest Coast10.2190/YG4T-2YG1-0NWP-HTCA ↗
47. Hard core and cutting edge: Experimental manufacture and use of Magdalenian composite projectile tips10.1016/j.jas.2011.01.002 ↗
48. Fletcher L, Milner N, Taylor M, Bamforth M, Croft S, Little A, Pomstra D, Robson HK, Knight B. The use of birch bark. In Milner N, Conneller C, Taylor B (editors), Star carr 2018 (pp. 419-435). White Rose University Press.
49. Misleading residues on lithics from Star Carr: Identification with Raman microspectroscopy
50. Wood: surface properties and adhesion10.1016/B0-08-043152-6/01769-1 ↗
51. Early evidence of San material culture represented by organic artifacts from Border Cave, South Africa10.1073/pnas.1204213109 ↗
52. Ochre in hafting in middle stone age southern africa: a practical role10.1017/S0003598X00113298 ↗
53. Toward a functional understanding of the North American Old Copper Culture “technomic devolution”10.1016/j.jas.2018.08.001 ↗
54. Levallois lessons: the challenge of integrating mathematical models, quantitative experiments and the archaeological record10.1080/00438243.2013.821670 ↗
55. The non-invention of the ceramic arrowhead in world archaeology
56. Miniaturization optimized weapon killing power during the social stress of late pre-contact North America (AD 600-1600)10.1371/journal.pone.0230348 ↗
57. Experimental assessment of proximal-lateral edge grinding on haft damage using replicated Late Pleistocene (Clovis) stone projectile points10.1007/s12520-017-0594-2 ↗
58. Field · 2014
59. Wine and olive oil permeation in pitched and non-pitched ceramics: relation with results from archaeological amphorae from Sagalassos, Turkey10.1016/j.jas.2008.11.024 ↗
60. Thermal degradation chemistry of archaeological pine pitch containing beeswax as an additive10.1016/j.jaap.2014.10.020 ↗
61. Ellis CJ. Factors influencing the use of stone projectile tips. In Knecht H (editor), Projectile technology 1997 (pp. 37-74). Springer, Boston, MA.10.1007/978-1-4899-1851-2_2 ↗
62. Comparing the use of meat and clay during cutting and projectile research10.1016/j.engfracmech.2018.02.010 ↗