Study pinpoints when bow and arrow came to North America

Radiocarbon results suggest a single origin and rapid diffusion through cultural transition networks.

See full article...

 

[Chuckstar]

Regarding the hill thing:

They weren't throwing the javelin and atlatl while standing on the angled part of a hill. They were throwing from the top of a scissor lift, which more closely replicates throwing over the edge of a drop-off, which could be a good place from which to ambush prey.

What they found was that you can throw a javelin about as hard at a downward angle as you can straight, such that you get much great terminal velocity compared to throwing at a target at the same level as the thrower.

With an atlatl, however, they found that they didn't get any greater terminal velocity compared to throwing at a target at the same level as the thrower. Because they do not think this represents a previously unknown modification of gravity , this must mean that the release speed of the atlatl was lower when throwing downward compared to throwing level. They account for this as being the result of relatively poor biomechanics of throwing downward using an atlatl.

I would note that it's possible that the biomechanical inefficiency experienced when throwing downward using an atlatl might be a result of the disconnect between the angle on which one is standing and the angle one is trying to throw. Basically, they tested the case where you stand on a horizontal surface trying to throw over an edge at X° downward. They did not test the case of standing on a surface angled X° downward and throwing at that same X° downward, as if standing on a hillside throwing at a target further down the hill.

Here's the write-up from phys.org (I think there's a link to the paper in there somewhere, but I didn't have time to go about reading the whole paper):

https://phys.org/news/2024-10-paleolithic-hunters-benefited-high.html

EDIT: IIUC, they didn't expect quite how inefficient throwing an atlatl downwards would be. Even if the atlatl could be thrown as efficiently downward as level, there would be an advantage to the heavier javelin in that situation. They were using a 4x heavier javelin compared to the atlatl dart. While the speed gain from gravity will be the same in both cases, the energy gained from gravity is proportional to mass, so when hunting from a height like that you can get a lot of penetration power from using a heavier weapon. So even if the biomechanical disadvantage of the atlatl disappears when throwing from the angled hillside, the javelin still gains more energy from the gravity assist.

 

[Chuckstar]

A least 15,000 years of dart points never became arrow points? Why would there be so many dart points, it seems less than an ideal weapon. I mean ok they could exist, but so many? And none associated with bone injuries likely arrow not dart?

In this context, darts are what you throw with an atlatl, not what you throw while drinking in a pub.

 

[Chuckstar]

…

Reading this, I initially assumed “they” were ancient hunters, and got very confused when I hit “scissor lift”.

LOL… that’s one of those situations where I knew what I meant so didn’t notice I was being unclear.

 

[Chuckstar]

I would’ve assumed, as a first approximation, that the main determinant of kinetic energy would be how much could be transferred from the muscles, rather than the properties of the projectile? Does a bow being powered by both arms do better or worse than a spear using one arm but also at least some of the torso? And does a spear gain advantage from being a single motion rather than draw-hold-loose (these obviously not being compound bows)?

It’s not that simple. You draw a bow slowly, storing energy in it that then gets quickly transferred upon release. For throwing a spear you have to impart all the energy directly, at speed.

Also, there’s a question of range. Even if you could impart the same energy with either weapon, the lighter arrow is imparted greater speed, so will have greater range.

Having said all of that, there’s really no question that you get much greater penetration power with an atlatl, compared to either an arrow or thrown spear. The question becomes how much you need penetration. An arrow is plenty deadly for hunting most animals, with stalking and aim being more important than how much better an atlatl dart would penetrate.

 

[Chuckstar]

I read that as axolotl not atlatl, and for a moment I had a mental image of cute little pink amphibians playing darts in a pub, quaffing tiny pints of beer, and man my brain is a weird place to live sometimes

I like your version better!

 

[Chuckstar]

The crossbows on the French side didn't get much use at Agincourt. You're probably thinking of Crecy, which was an unfair matchup because the (Genoese mercenary) crossbowmen were ordered to advance without their pavises, and to fight in the rain (which ruins bowstrings). When they finally turned back, the French cavalry mowed them down.
But yeah, infantry battle is a scenario where there's defintiely no point to holding onto a taut bow. Just loose and reload.

I’ve never been convinced the rain was more of a factor for the French-side’s crossbows. It’s not clear exactly what bows the Genoese were using, but those types of high-tensile crossbows often used rope bowstring, which is much less susceptible to stretching when wet, compared to gut/rawhide. Regardless, (1) crossbow strings were heavily waxed to avoid getting wet and (2) they could have easily used covers to keep rain off the bow before fighting started, leaving them in a similar position to archers keeping the bowstrings under their hats until the fighting started. Not waiting for the pavices was probably the key issue, given how vulnerable crossbow men were while re-drawing those heavy bows.