No announcement yet.

The Bow & Arrow

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Bow & Arrow

    Adoption Dates for the Bow in North America

    John H. Blitz’s paper “Adoption of the Bow in Prehistoric North America” (published in North American Archaeologist in 1988) is probably the most complete and informed assessment of when Native Americans first acquired the bow as a replacement for the atlatl. Blitz provides this map as an approximation of the adoption dates:
    Click image for larger version

Name:	BowAdoptioninPrehistoricNorthAmericaBlitz1988.jpg
Views:	332
Size:	47.7 KB
ID:	195712

    The bow seems to have come into America from the North, and is a relatively late technology. Blitz concludes: “In this case, a continent-wide perspective reveals a north to south chronological distribution for the initial adoption of the bow. Multiple episodes of independent invention or extensive movements of people are rejected as explanations in favor of a secondary diffusion process. The large-scale pattern suggests that this technological change is not to be explained by highly localized ecological conditions, but rather by a historical process of intergroup contact and competition. For those who adopted it, the bow as a weapon conferred a competitive advantage over groups who retained the atlatl and a rapid process of dissemination and technological replacement occurred.”

    Here's a link to his paper:
    I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.

  • #2
    When Did the Bow and Arrow Come To The Midwest?... Possibly Much Sooner Than You Thought.
    Dr. E. J. Neiburger, Curator Emeritus Lake County Museum, Waukegan, Illinois
    Originally published in the Central States Archaeological Journal, Vol.47, No.4, pg.180

    American Indians are often identified with the bow and arrow. Until the advent of accessible repeating rifles in the late 1800's, the bow and arrow was the chief weapon of choice. This was not always the case as the bow and arrow was a recently "invented" weapon, and was in all probability, inherited from the Old World.

    Archaeological remains of bows and arrows (mostly small "arrowhead" points) indicate that the bow and arrow came from Siberian immigrants around 3000 BC. Artifacts found at a variety of sites in Alaska and northern Canada show dates around 1500 BC. This weapon moved south into the Mid-West (600-700AD), Southeast (700AD) and the Western United States by (500-200AD). Most archaeological texts have quoted these approximate dates consistently for the last 50 years.

    While studying the Riverside Site collection, at the Milwaukee Public Museum, I noted what appears to be copper arrow points which were C 14 dated approximately 600-1000 years earlier than what was previously reported. If this interpretation is accurate, then the introduction and spread of the bow into North America was considerably more rapid than previously thought.


    The Riverside Site was an Old Copper-Red Ocher Late Archaic site in southeastern Michigan located on Lake Michigan at the Wisconsin Michigan state line. It was a large cemetery which included numerous stone, bone, primitive pottery and copper artifacts. Most of the lithic (stone) materials were large blades and spear points. The numerous copper artifacts included: celts, knives, crescents, large "Ace of Spades" spears points, pikes, rings, awls, needles, fish hooks and about two dozen small conical points.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	w2.jpg
Views:	258
Size:	24.9 KB
ID:	195714

    The site was periodically inhabited over a 1500 year period with most of the radiocarbon dates ranging between 1040-1 BC. This site was unique in that it demonstrated the beginnings of pottery manufacture and contained a lump of copper that demonstrated evidence of melting. The Riverside people were just moving out of the Archaic and into the Early Woodland period.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	w1.jpg
Views:	202
Size:	40.2 KB
ID:	195715


    The 25 small conical copper points found were unusual. Some were unfinished but most were completed points made by rolling a pounded copper sheet in such a way as to form a point at one end and an open "skirt" at the other. The points ranged in length from 40mm to 15mm with most points being 35mm long. Their widths constantly ranged from 7mm to 10mm at the open skirt.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	w3.jpg
Views:	179
Size:	26.4 KB
ID:	195716

    There was no shaft material present upon excavation, but most of the points shared the same size and shape. The size of these points lead me to the conclusion that they were arrow points for the following reasons: They were uniform, a requirement for consistently accurate shooting. They were small and were constructed to easily fit on an arrow sized shaft. They were too small for a typical spear shaft. In experiments, such a thin shaft (7-10mm width) could not be thrown very far because it was too light and would not have made an effective atlatl dart or spear. The points were thin at the tip and useless for heavy repetitive work such as with an awl, pike or scraper. There were other larger artifacts (both copper and stone) that were clearly used as spears heads, awls, needles and pikes. These points did not show much wear. If they were used, they were not reused very often. Most of the aerodynamically shaped and balanced.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	w4.jpg
Views:	183
Size:	20.7 KB
ID:	195717

    Click image for larger version

Name:	w5.jpg
Views:	194
Size:	27.3 KB
ID:	195718

    The size of the open skirt is diagnostic for an arrow. Hamilton studied arrow shaft diameters from numerous cultures. He found arrow shafts to range from 7mm to 12mm. Corliss did an exhaustive study of hundreds of arrows from a wide range of native cultures. He found most arrows had a shaft diameter of 7 7mm (range 4- 8mm) as compared to spears which had an average shaft width of 12mm (range 9-13mm). Kehoe sized early American arrow points to fit the 7.5mm average shaft diameter range. My own study of 70 arrows from the collection of historic North and south American tribes (Milwaukee Public Museum) showed arrow shaft widths average 7-8mm as compared to spear shafts which were 12- 20mm.

    These points appear to be an ideal shape and size for a well functioning arrow. If the arrow diameter is too small, it breaks and flies poorly. If it is too large, the arrow has a very short range and is useless. The Riverside conical points fit the profile of the ideal arrow point perfectly.


    The Riverside Site copper points appear to have utilitarian use other than arrow points. It is possible that these, may have had other uses (e.g. decoration, as awls), but this is unlikely. These points generally look like modern field arrow points, fit modern arrow shafts and exhibit good aerodynamic shape and balance.

    There is one question remaining. Considering the increased efficiency of the bow and arrow as a weapon used by the Riverside people, why didn't it become more popular with the population? Such a scenario would encourage fabrication of considerable numbers of arrow points made from a variety of materials (stone and bone) which would be seen at numerous excavated sites.

    Such a situation was noted around 600 AD in the Midwest but, with the exception of Riverside, not earlier. Once the bow and arrow was introduced spear points almost disappeared from period sites while arrow points multiplied. This did not happen in this case. No other sites of similar age show this type and quantity of points. Is it possible that the manufacture and use of arrows was somehow contained or limited for some reason? Perhaps it was limited to royalty or religious functions. We will probably never know. But looking at the Riverside Site, and the artifactual evidence, it is very probable that bows and thus arrows were used by the Riverside people. If indeed, the Riverside conical copper points were used as arrow points, as the above analysis implies, then the bow and arrow was in use sometime between 1000 BC and 1 BC in the Midwest, approximately 1000 years earlier than previously thought.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	w6.jpg
Views:	201
Size:	25.9 KB
ID:	195719
    Click image for larger version

Name:	w7.jpg
Views:	201
Size:	29.1 KB
ID:	195720


    Blitz, J. 1988, North American Archaeology, "Adoption of the Bow in Prehistoric North America. 9, 2:123-145
    Thomas, D. 1994, Exploring Ancient Native America, "When did the Bow and Arrow Arrive in North America." Mac-Milian & Co. NY. P.58-60.
    Kehoe, T. 1966, American Antiquity, "The Small Side-Notched Point System of the Northern Plains" 31, 6:827-840.
    Hruska, R. 1967, The WisconsinArchaeologist, `The Riverside Site:ALate Archaic Manifestation in Michigan." Vol. 48, #3: 145-260. Neiburger, E.J.
    1986, North American Archaeology "Melted Copper from the Archaic Midwest." Vol.12, # 3, 35-360.
    Hamilton, T. 1982, Missouri, Archaeological Society, Special Publication # 5. P. 16-24.
    Corliss, D. 1972, Neck Width of Projectile Points: an Index to Culture, Continuity and Change. Idaho State University Museum. #29.

    Used by permission of the publisher
    To learn more about or to join the Central States Archaeological Society, click here:
    I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.


    • #3
      Yahi Archery (California)

      Saxton T. Pope’s 1918 book “Hunting with the Bow and Arrow” begins with the story of a man called Ishi who was the last survivor of the Californian Yana tribe. There are some really interesting insights into the construction and use of the bow and arrow. It can be viewed here… scroll down to section II headed: HOW ISHI MADE HIS BOW AND ARROW AND HIS METHODS OF SHOOTING":

      The publication has also recently become available as downloadable pdf file here:
      I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.