Where have all the arrows gone? A cross-cultural comparison of Lowland Maya and Central Ohio arrow use
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2218/jls.7293Keywords:
warfare; hunting; use-life; data analytics; curation rate; comparative studiesAbstract
Arrow points are an abundant lithic resource, but exactly how abundant? Recent systematic surveys of the Mayan Lowlands and central Ohio permit a new cross-cultural comparison of arrow use, and factors that may lead to their differing accumulations in the archaeological record. Somewhat surprisingly, Mayan arrow use, at least in terms of recorded frequencies in the archaeological record, is less than that of Central Ohio Late Prehistoric populations. Central Ohio has a much smaller population density than the Yucatan peninsula, so the dearth of arrow points in the latter context is unexpected. There are many factors that may explain the paucity of arrow points in Mayan contexts, when compared to the relatively dense arrow assemblages in Ohio sites. These many factors warrant further research and analysis in both Ohio and Mayan lithic arrow studies. This research presents the results of a preliminary comparative analysis. Several factors likely explain the difference between Ohio and maya arrow frequencies. Given that most arrows in Ohio are found as isolated finds, the most likely explanation is a difference in survey coverage between Ohio and the Mayan Lowlands. The other contributing factors include the relatively short use-life of Ohio arrow points, and the lack of weapon diversity in Ohio. Both factors result in higher usage of arrows, and a higher rate of deposit when compared to the Mayan Lowlands. With the increase in digital archives and records, large-scale comparative studies such as this have the potential to change our collective understanding of warfare, conflict, and tool use by past peoples.
References
Andrews, A. & Robles Castellanos, F. 2008, Proyectos Costa Maya and Ciudad Caucel: Archaeological survey of northwestern Yucatan: Ceramic and lithic analysis. In Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies (FAMSI), Grantee Reports 2008, FAMSI, Los Angeles: p. 1-31.
Andrieu, C. 2014, Maya lithic production. In Encyclopedia of the history of science, tehcnology, and medicine in Non-Western cultures (Selin, H., Ed.), Spring, Berlín: p. 1-13.
Aoyama, K. 2005, Classic Maya warfare and weapons: Spear, dart, and arrow points of Aguateca and Copan. Ancient Mesoamerica, 16: 291-304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0956536105050248
Aoyama, K. 2016, Warfare, warriors, and weapons. In Encylopedia of the Ancient Maya (Witschey, W., Ed.), Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham: p. 376-379.
Aoyama, K. 2017, Ancient Maya economy: Lithic production and exchange around Ceibal, Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica, 28: 279-303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0956536116000183
Aoyama, K. 2021, Warrior and the transformation of Classic Maya kingship: A diachronic analysis of lithic weapons in Copan, Hounduras, and in Aguateca and Ceibal, Guatemala. In Maya kingship: Rupture and transformation from Classic to Postclassic times (Okoshi, T., Chase, A., P. Nondedeo, & M. Arnauld, Eds.), University of Florida Press, Gainsville: p. 64-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1hp5h64
Aoyama, K. & Graham, E. 2015, Ancient Maya warfare: Exploring the significance of lithic variation in Maya weaponry. Lithics, 36: 5-17.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0956536116000183
Batun Alpuche, A. I. 2009, Agrarian production and intensification at a Postclassic Maya community, Buena Vista, Cozumel, Mexico. Ph.D. thesis at the Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainsville, 360p.
Bebber, M., Lycett, S. & Eren, M. 2017, Developing a stable point: Evaluating the temporal and geographic consistency of Late Prehistoric unnotched triangular point functional design in Midwest North America. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 47: 72-82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2017.04.001
Black, G. 1935, Excavations of a Blackford County site. Indiana History Bulletin, 12: 148-152.
Blitz, J. & Porth, E. 2013, Social complexity and the bow in the eastern Woodlands. Evolutionary Anthropology, 22: 89-95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.21349
Bradbury, A.P., Randall Cooper, D. & Herndon, R.L. 2011, Kentucky’s small triangular subtypes: Old theories and new data. Journal of Kentucky Archaeology, 1: 2-24.
Brady-Rawlins, K. 2007, The O.C. Voss Site: Reassessing what we know about the Fort Ancient occupation of the central Scioto drainage and its tributaries. Ph.D. thesis at the Department of Anthropology, the Ohio State University, Columbus, 303 p.
Charlin, J., Cardillo, M. & Borrazzo, K.. 2014, Spatial patterns in Late Holocene lithic projectile point technology of Tierra del Fuego (southern South America): assessing size and shape changes. World Archaeology, 46(1): 78-100.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2014.890914
Ciofalo, A. 2012, Maya use and prevalence of the atlatl: Projectile point classification function analysis from Chichen Itza, Tikal, and Caracol. M.A. thesis at the Department of Anthropology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, 91 p.
Clarkson, C. 2002, An index of invasiveness for the measurement of unifacial and bifacial retouch: A theoretical, experimental and archaeological verification. Journal of Archaeological Science, 29(1): 65-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.2001.0702
Cook, R. 2007, Single component sites with long sequences of radiocarbon dates: The SunWatch site and middle fort ancient village growth. American Antiquity, 72(3): 439-460. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/40035855
Drooker, P. 1996, Madisonville metal and glass artifacts: Implications for Western Fort Ancient chronology and interaction networks. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, 21(2): 146-189.
Engelbrecht, W. 2014, Unnotched triangular points on Village sites. American Antiquity, 79(2): 353-367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7183/0002-7316.79.2.353
Engelbrecht, W. 2015, Interpreting broken arrow points. American Antiquity, 80(4): 760-766. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7183/0002-7316.80.4.760
Gomez, O. 1998, New excavations in Temple V, Tikal, Tikal (Spanish). In XI Symposium of Archaeological Investigations in Guatemala, 1997 (Laporte, J.P. & H. Escobedo, Eds.), National Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Guatemala: Guatemala City: p. 57-70. URL: https://www.asociaciontikal.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/06.97_-_Oswaldo.pdf
Hamblin, N. 1984, Animal utilization by the Cozumel Maya: Interpretation through faunal analysis. Ph.D. thesis at the Department of Anthropology, the University of Arizona, Tuscon, 349 p.
Henderson, A. G. & Pollack, D. 2012, A native history of Kentucky. In Native America: A State-by-State Historical Encyclopedia. (Murphee, D., Ed.), Greenwood Press, Santa Barbara: p. 393-440. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/rr-06-2013-0148
Hernandez, A. 2005, The Rendencion del Campesino Valley archaeological survey. Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies (FAMSI), Grantee Reports 2005, FAMSI, Los Angeles: p. 1-52.
Holmes, W. 1895, Archaeological studies among the ancient cities of Mexico. Anthropological Series, Publication 8. Field Columbian Museum, Chicago, 336 p.
Horowitz, R. 2017, Understanding Ancient Maya economic variability: Lithic technological organization in the Mopan Valley, Belize. Ph.D. thesis at the Department of Anthropology, Tulane University, New Orleans, 597 p.
Justice, N.D. 1989, Stone Age spear and arrow points of the Midcontinental and Eastern United States: A modern survey and reference. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 288 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.3340110507
Kelly, R. 2013, Lifeways of hunter-gatherers: The foraging Spectrum. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 375 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3213/2191-5784-10251
Kennedy, W. 2000, Interpreting Fort Ancient settlement variability. M.A. thesis at the Department of Anthropology, Kent State University, Kent, 178 p.
Lepper, Bradley. 2005, Ohio archaeology. Orange Frazer Press, Wilmington, 300 p.
Lincoln, H. 2018, Lithic resources, workshops, and consumption in Northwestern Belize. M.A. thesis at the department of Anthropology, St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, 120 p.
Lothrop, S. K. 1924, Tulum: An archaeological study of the east coast of Yucatan. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication No. 335. Carnegie Institution, Washington, 179 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.166048
Marino, M. 2014, Chert tool production and exchange at two Late Postclassic Maya households. M.A. thesis at the Department of Anthropology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, 88 p.
Meissner, N. 2014, Technological systems of small point weaponry of the Postclassic Lowland Maya (A.D. 1400-1697). Ph.D. thesis at Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Carbondale, 694 p.
Meissner, N. & Rice, P. 2015, Postclassic Peten Maya bow-and-arrow use as revealed by immunological analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science, 64: 67-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2015.10.001
Mika, A., Flood, K., Norris, J., Wilson, M. Key, A., Buchannan, B., Redmond, B., Pargeter, J., Bebber, M.R. & Eren, M.I. 2020, Miniaturization optimized weapon killing power during the social stress of late pre-contact North America (AD 600-1600). PLOS One 15: e0230348. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1371/journal.pone.0230348.
Mills, W.C. 1906. Explorations of the Baum Prehistoric Village site. Press of Fred J. Heer, Columbus, 96 p.
Mills, W.C. 1907. Certain mounds and Village sites in Ohio. Press of Fred J. Heer, Columbus, 85 p.
Miller, D.S. & Smallwood, A. 2012, Beyond stages: Modeling Clovis biface production at the Topper site (38AL23), South Carolina. In Contemporary lithic analysis in the Southeast: Problems, solutions, and interpretations (Carr, P., Bradbury, A. & Price, S., Eds.), University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa: p. 28-41.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2010.05.002
Nolan, K.C. 2010, Multi-Staged analysis of the Reinhardt Village community: A fourteenth century Central Ohio community in context. Ph.D. thesis at the Department of Anthropology, the Ohio State University, Columbus, 431 p.
Nolan, K.C. 2014, An exploratory analysis of diachronic settlement patterns in central Ohio. Journal of Ohio Archaeology, 3: 12-37.
Oehler, C. 1973, Turpin Indians. Cincinnati Museum of Natural History, Cincinnati, 36 p.
Oland, M. 2013, The fifteenth-seventeenth century lithic economy at Progresso Lagoon, Belize. Lithic Technology, 38(2): 81-96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1179/0197726113z.00000000011
Olson, E. 2017, No shovel required: An archaeological survey of the Greater Akron Area, Summit County, Ohio. Current Research in Ohio Archaeology of the Ohio Archaeological Council, 17 p. Retrieved July 23, 2023. URL: https://ohioarchaeology.org/what-we-do/research/research-articles-and-abstracts/articles-and-abstracts-2017.html
Olson, E. 2019, The Shirey Meadow site: A comparative study of shovel testing and pedestrian survey. Pennsylvania Archaeologist, 89: 61-74.
Olson, E., Nolan, K.C. & Shott, M.J. 2021, Central Ohio Archaeological Digitization Survey: Preliminary report. Current Research in Ohio Archaeology of the Ohio Archaeological Council, 11 p. Retrieved July 23, 2023. URL: https://ohioarchaeology.org/what-we-do/research/research-articles-and-abstracts/articles-and-abstracts-2021.html
Ortman, S., & Z. Cooper. 2021, Artifact density and population density in settlement pattern research. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 39, 103189. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.103189.
Phillips, D.A. 1979, Material culture and trade of the Postclassic Maya. Ph.D. thesis at the department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tuscon, 314 p.
Proskouriakoff, T. 1962, Artifacts of Mayapan. In Mayapan, Yucatan, Mexico, Publication 619 (Pollock, H., Ed.). Carnegie Institute of Washington, Washington: p. 321-442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/979515
Redmond, B. 2000, Reviewing the Late Prehistory of Ohio. In: Cultures Before Contact: The Late Prehistory of Ohio and surrounding regions (R. Genheimer, Ed.) Ohio Archaeological Council, Columbus, p. 426-437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1593835
Sabloff, J. & Rathje, W. 1975, A study of changing Pre-Columbian commercial systems: The 1972-1973 seasons at Cozumel, Mexico. Monographs of the Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Vol. 5. Peabody Museum, Cambridge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1976.78.4.02a00690
Salisbury, S. 1877, The Mayas, the sources of their history. Press of Charles Hamilton, Worcester, 103 p.
Shott, M.J. 1997, Stones and shafts redux: The metric discrimination of chipped-stone dart and arrow points. American Antiquity 62(1): 86-101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/282380
Shott, M.J. 2020, Toward a theory of the point. In Culture History and Convergent Evolution: Can We Detect Populations in Prehistory? (Groucutt, H.S., Ed.). Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology, Springer, New York, p. 245-259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46126-3_12
Shott, M.J., Seeman, M.F. & Nolan, K.C. 2018, Collaborative engagement: Working with private collections and responsive collectors. Occasional Papers of the Midwest Archaeological Conference, No. 3.
Smith, M. 2005, City Size in Late Postclassic Mesoamerica. Journal of Urban History 31: 403-434. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0096144204274396
Stanton, T. 2002, Proyecto Santa Barbara, Yucatan, Mexico. Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies (FAMSI), Grantee Reports, 2002. FAMSI, Los Angeles: p. 1-40.
VanValkenburgh, P. & Dufton, J.A. 2020, Big Archaeology: Horizons and blindspots. Journal of Field Archaeology, 45: 1-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2020.1714307
Vickery, K. 1996, Flint raw material use in Ohio Hopewell. In A view from the core: A synthesis of Ohio Hopewell Archaeology (Pacheco, P.J., Ed.). The Ohio Archaeological Council, Columbus: p. 108-127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2694157
Webster, D. 2018, The population of Tikal: Implications for Maya demography. Archaeopress, Oxford, 156 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/jsa.17582
Weltfish, G. 1977, The Lost Universe: Pawnee life and culture. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, 506 p.
White, C. & Schwarcz, H. 1998, Ancient Maya diet: As inferred from isotopic and elemental analysis of human bone. Journal of Archaeological Science 16: 451-474.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-4403(89)90068-x
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
This is an Open Access journal. All material is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence, unless otherwise stated.
Please read our Open Access, Copyright and Permissions policies for more information.