Experimental assessment of obsidian versus chert lanceolate projectile point durability and robusticity: Semi‐static fracture strength and dynamic impact
Stone‐tipped weaponry was important for the survival of past peoples, and many functional and non‐functional factors likely influenced their design. Two functional factors that past peoples likely considered in the design of their stone tips are durability (whether or not a stone tip breaks) and rob...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Archaeometry 2022-12, Vol.64 (6), p.1307-1324 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1324 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1307 |
container_title | Archaeometry |
container_volume | 64 |
creator | Gala, Nicholas Mika, Anna Wilson, Michael Williams, Jeremy Buchanan, Briggs Walker, Robert S. Bebber, Michelle R. Eren, Metin I. |
description | Stone‐tipped weaponry was important for the survival of past peoples, and many functional and non‐functional factors likely influenced their design. Two functional factors that past peoples likely considered in the design of their stone tips are durability (whether or not a stone tip breaks) and robusticity (how much damage is incurred upon breakage). Many factors have been shown experimentally to influence stone tip influence durability and robusticity, including stone raw material. Here, we further explore the relationship between stone raw material and stone tip durability and robusticity via controlled experiments comparing chert and obsidian. We first demonstrate with semi‐static fracture strength analyses that obsidian stone tips require less force to break than do chert stone tips. We then show with dynamic ballistics impact testing that obsidian stone tips are less durable and robust than chert stone tips. Our results are entirely consistent with previous experimental comparisons of chert versus obsidian stone tips, and support the hypothesis that past peoples, when presented with multiple raw materials, likely weighed their costs and benefits in the process of selection. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/arcm.12787 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2731304514</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2731304514</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2677-3a5fcac16f6600cfa36f94a2e7e598d9025d3d1ba5bbe88dc6ffed9766f349d83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtKxDAUhoMoOF42PkHAnVBNmjZt3cngDRTBC7grp8mJZuhlTFJ1dj6Ce9_OJzHjuDZwSP6c788hPyF7nB3yuI7Aqe6Qp0VZrJEJz4o8iZWtkwljTCQlF4-bZMv7WZQyy9iEfJ2-z9HZDvsALQXv0fuloIOhQ-OtttDTV3R-9FQ9owu0hV7h0EJAOnfDDFWwbTwONpr06KCxrQ0LCr2mbmhGH6yK-pjeYWe_Pz59gHhDjQMVRofUB4f9U3j-NehFD13s2m4e2ztkw0Drcfdv3yYPZ6f304vk6ub8cnpylahUFkUiIDcKFJdGSsaUASFNlUGKBeZVqSuW5lpo3kDeNFiWWkljUFeFlEZklS7FNtlfvRv_8zKiD_VsGF0fR9ZpIbhgWc6zSB2sKOUG7x2aeh5zA7eoOauX4dfL8Ovf8CPMV_BbDGfxD1mf3E6vV54f3-CNuw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2731304514</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Experimental assessment of obsidian versus chert lanceolate projectile point durability and robusticity: Semi‐static fracture strength and dynamic impact</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Gala, Nicholas ; Mika, Anna ; Wilson, Michael ; Williams, Jeremy ; Buchanan, Briggs ; Walker, Robert S. ; Bebber, Michelle R. ; Eren, Metin I.</creator><creatorcontrib>Gala, Nicholas ; Mika, Anna ; Wilson, Michael ; Williams, Jeremy ; Buchanan, Briggs ; Walker, Robert S. ; Bebber, Michelle R. ; Eren, Metin I.</creatorcontrib><description>Stone‐tipped weaponry was important for the survival of past peoples, and many functional and non‐functional factors likely influenced their design. Two functional factors that past peoples likely considered in the design of their stone tips are durability (whether or not a stone tip breaks) and robusticity (how much damage is incurred upon breakage). Many factors have been shown experimentally to influence stone tip influence durability and robusticity, including stone raw material. Here, we further explore the relationship between stone raw material and stone tip durability and robusticity via controlled experiments comparing chert and obsidian. We first demonstrate with semi‐static fracture strength analyses that obsidian stone tips require less force to break than do chert stone tips. We then show with dynamic ballistics impact testing that obsidian stone tips are less durable and robust than chert stone tips. Our results are entirely consistent with previous experimental comparisons of chert versus obsidian stone tips, and support the hypothesis that past peoples, when presented with multiple raw materials, likely weighed their costs and benefits in the process of selection.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-813X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1475-4754</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/arcm.12787</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Chert ; Cost benefit analysis ; Durability ; experimental archaeology ; Impact analysis ; lithic technology ; obsidian ; Raw materials</subject><ispartof>Archaeometry, 2022-12, Vol.64 (6), p.1307-1324</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of University of Oxford.</rights><rights>2022. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2677-3a5fcac16f6600cfa36f94a2e7e598d9025d3d1ba5bbe88dc6ffed9766f349d83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2677-3a5fcac16f6600cfa36f94a2e7e598d9025d3d1ba5bbe88dc6ffed9766f349d83</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3576-6076</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Farcm.12787$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Farcm.12787$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gala, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mika, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Jeremy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buchanan, Briggs</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walker, Robert S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bebber, Michelle R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eren, Metin I.</creatorcontrib><title>Experimental assessment of obsidian versus chert lanceolate projectile point durability and robusticity: Semi‐static fracture strength and dynamic impact</title><title>Archaeometry</title><description>Stone‐tipped weaponry was important for the survival of past peoples, and many functional and non‐functional factors likely influenced their design. Two functional factors that past peoples likely considered in the design of their stone tips are durability (whether or not a stone tip breaks) and robusticity (how much damage is incurred upon breakage). Many factors have been shown experimentally to influence stone tip influence durability and robusticity, including stone raw material. Here, we further explore the relationship between stone raw material and stone tip durability and robusticity via controlled experiments comparing chert and obsidian. We first demonstrate with semi‐static fracture strength analyses that obsidian stone tips require less force to break than do chert stone tips. We then show with dynamic ballistics impact testing that obsidian stone tips are less durable and robust than chert stone tips. Our results are entirely consistent with previous experimental comparisons of chert versus obsidian stone tips, and support the hypothesis that past peoples, when presented with multiple raw materials, likely weighed their costs and benefits in the process of selection.</description><subject>Chert</subject><subject>Cost benefit analysis</subject><subject>Durability</subject><subject>experimental archaeology</subject><subject>Impact analysis</subject><subject>lithic technology</subject><subject>obsidian</subject><subject>Raw materials</subject><issn>0003-813X</issn><issn>1475-4754</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMtKxDAUhoMoOF42PkHAnVBNmjZt3cngDRTBC7grp8mJZuhlTFJ1dj6Ce9_OJzHjuDZwSP6c788hPyF7nB3yuI7Aqe6Qp0VZrJEJz4o8iZWtkwljTCQlF4-bZMv7WZQyy9iEfJ2-z9HZDvsALQXv0fuloIOhQ-OtttDTV3R-9FQ9owu0hV7h0EJAOnfDDFWwbTwONpr06KCxrQ0LCr2mbmhGH6yK-pjeYWe_Pz59gHhDjQMVRofUB4f9U3j-NehFD13s2m4e2ztkw0Drcfdv3yYPZ6f304vk6ub8cnpylahUFkUiIDcKFJdGSsaUASFNlUGKBeZVqSuW5lpo3kDeNFiWWkljUFeFlEZklS7FNtlfvRv_8zKiD_VsGF0fR9ZpIbhgWc6zSB2sKOUG7x2aeh5zA7eoOauX4dfL8Ovf8CPMV_BbDGfxD1mf3E6vV54f3-CNuw</recordid><startdate>202212</startdate><enddate>202212</enddate><creator>Gala, Nicholas</creator><creator>Mika, Anna</creator><creator>Wilson, Michael</creator><creator>Williams, Jeremy</creator><creator>Buchanan, Briggs</creator><creator>Walker, Robert S.</creator><creator>Bebber, Michelle R.</creator><creator>Eren, Metin I.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3576-6076</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202212</creationdate><title>Experimental assessment of obsidian versus chert lanceolate projectile point durability and robusticity: Semi‐static fracture strength and dynamic impact</title><author>Gala, Nicholas ; Mika, Anna ; Wilson, Michael ; Williams, Jeremy ; Buchanan, Briggs ; Walker, Robert S. ; Bebber, Michelle R. ; Eren, Metin I.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2677-3a5fcac16f6600cfa36f94a2e7e598d9025d3d1ba5bbe88dc6ffed9766f349d83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Chert</topic><topic>Cost benefit analysis</topic><topic>Durability</topic><topic>experimental archaeology</topic><topic>Impact analysis</topic><topic>lithic technology</topic><topic>obsidian</topic><topic>Raw materials</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gala, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mika, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Jeremy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buchanan, Briggs</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walker, Robert S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bebber, Michelle R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eren, Metin I.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Archaeometry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gala, Nicholas</au><au>Mika, Anna</au><au>Wilson, Michael</au><au>Williams, Jeremy</au><au>Buchanan, Briggs</au><au>Walker, Robert S.</au><au>Bebber, Michelle R.</au><au>Eren, Metin I.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Experimental assessment of obsidian versus chert lanceolate projectile point durability and robusticity: Semi‐static fracture strength and dynamic impact</atitle><jtitle>Archaeometry</jtitle><date>2022-12</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>64</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1307</spage><epage>1324</epage><pages>1307-1324</pages><issn>0003-813X</issn><eissn>1475-4754</eissn><abstract>Stone‐tipped weaponry was important for the survival of past peoples, and many functional and non‐functional factors likely influenced their design. Two functional factors that past peoples likely considered in the design of their stone tips are durability (whether or not a stone tip breaks) and robusticity (how much damage is incurred upon breakage). Many factors have been shown experimentally to influence stone tip influence durability and robusticity, including stone raw material. Here, we further explore the relationship between stone raw material and stone tip durability and robusticity via controlled experiments comparing chert and obsidian. We first demonstrate with semi‐static fracture strength analyses that obsidian stone tips require less force to break than do chert stone tips. We then show with dynamic ballistics impact testing that obsidian stone tips are less durable and robust than chert stone tips. Our results are entirely consistent with previous experimental comparisons of chert versus obsidian stone tips, and support the hypothesis that past peoples, when presented with multiple raw materials, likely weighed their costs and benefits in the process of selection.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/arcm.12787</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3576-6076</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-813X |
ispartof | Archaeometry, 2022-12, Vol.64 (6), p.1307-1324 |
issn | 0003-813X 1475-4754 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2731304514 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Chert Cost benefit analysis Durability experimental archaeology Impact analysis lithic technology obsidian Raw materials |
title | Experimental assessment of obsidian versus chert lanceolate projectile point durability and robusticity: Semi‐static fracture strength and dynamic impact |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T17%3A14%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Experimental%20assessment%20of%20obsidian%20versus%20chert%20lanceolate%20projectile%20point%20durability%20and%20robusticity:%20Semi%E2%80%90static%20fracture%20strength%20and%20dynamic%20impact&rft.jtitle=Archaeometry&rft.au=Gala,%20Nicholas&rft.date=2022-12&rft.volume=64&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1307&rft.epage=1324&rft.pages=1307-1324&rft.issn=0003-813X&rft.eissn=1475-4754&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/arcm.12787&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2731304514%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2731304514&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |