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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archaeometry 2022-12, Vol.64 (6), p.1307-1324
Hauptverfasser: Gala, Nicholas, Mika, Anna, Wilson, Michael, Williams, Jeremy, Buchanan, Briggs, Walker, Robert S., Bebber, Michelle R., Eren, Metin I.
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 &amp; 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