Spear thrower
The spear thrower is a device that is used to throw spears . It extends the limb, which means that the spears accelerated with it reach a speed of over 150 km / h, which is much higher than that of spears thrown by hand.
For the leadership of the spear serving hook on the spinner end of reindeer - antler have passed since the late Paleolithic ( Magdalenian ) in Europe than elsewhere in the world and archaeological evidence remains. The spear thrower used by the Australian Aborigines was called Woomera . In Central America the spear thrower was still used as a weapon of war and hunting under the Aztec name Atlatl at the time of America's discovery .
functionality
Spears used with spear throwers have a trough-shaped cavity at the rear end. The hook of the sling engages in this recess with a form fit . The thrower initially holds the spear and slingshot parallel and in an approximately horizontal position in his hand (see figure opposite). At the end of the throwing movement there is roughly a right angle between the sling and the spear. The slingshot points in the same direction as the extended limb, which it roughly doubles. The sling hook has come out of the spear cavity so that the spear can fly away unhindered. The sequence of movements of throwing is basically similar to that of a normal javelin throw, but the arm movement is flatter and less sweeping than when throwing a javelin.
The range of the spear is more than doubled. Typical hunting distances are usually less than 30 meters. The advantage results mainly from the higher speed, because the effective when hit kinetic energy of the spear is square grown with his speed.
Typology
The spear thrower was first documented in Europe about 18,000 years ago in the Upper Solutréen . Spear throwers from the Upper Palaeolithic have been proven almost exclusively as hook throwers, but this may be due to the durability of this type of construction made of reindeer antlers. Accordingly, hook ends made of reindeer antler are by far the most common with 121 specimens, only 1 specimen is known to be made from bone and one from mammoth ivory . The hook was attached to a wooden stick with the help of bevels, natural adhesives (probably birch pitch ), binding materials ( tendons , bast ) and sometimes with holes. To increase the flight stability of the spear, it was probably feathered. The relatively small number of 123 finds suggests that the majority of the spear throwers were made entirely of wood . The currently known finds are 114 fragments and nine complete specimens. Worldwide comparisons of ethnological complete specimens showed an average total length of the spear throwers of 65 cm. The length of the spears, the tips of which were made of flint or reindeer antlers, is reconstructed on the basis of experiments with 2.10 to 2.30 m.
Ulrich Stodiek divides the ethnographic spear throwers based on their design features into hook throwers ( composite devices), hollow throwers that are made from one piece and have a hollow at one end, and hook and hollow throwers, a hybrid of both types with a small hook. There is no archaeological evidence for trough throws. In New Guinea ethnographically there are spear throwers that are hollowed out at the end, while the spear has a barb.
Stodiek used the method of basic design (one-sided or two-sided bevel; perforations) and the decorations (not decorated; engravings / ornaments; figurative decorations) as further distinguishing criteria for the archaeological spear thrower hook ends. The figurative decorations are animal representations and a possibly anthropomorphic representation. Some specimens show clear similarities in their design, which is why Stodiek particularly emphasizes two groups of types. On the one hand, the “faon” type, in which the functional end is worked out in the form of an ibex looking back, standing or lying, with one or two birds on the tip of its tail and the tail of a bird as a hook. And on the other hand, the type of “rudimentary horse head”, in which the functional end is designed as a horse head looking in the direction of the throw and the forehead mane serves as a hook - some of the shafts have engraved horse bodies. Since the fragments of this type are mostly broken off in the mouth area of the horse's head, nothing can be said about a possible regularity.
Chronology and Distribution
There have been various considerations that slender ivory tips from Pavlovian (approx. 25,000 BC) could only have been made for use as tips for slinging spears. The assumption is plausible, but not proven. The same applies to the filigree back knives and tips of the Gravettian , which may have been built into sling spears as shaft reinforcement.
The oldest hook end as direct evidence of the spear thrower comes from the Grotte de Combe Saunière (layer IVb) and is assigned to the late Solutréen (before 18,000 - 16,000 BC). The majority of hook ends from stratigraphically secured contexts, however, come from the “Middle Magdalenian ” (stage “Magdalenian IV”, approx. 14,700 - 13,400 BC). The combination of spear and spear thrower is the oldest complex hunting weapon known to mankind - due to the current location, it is probably several thousand years older than the hunting bow .
The main focus of the spread of found spear throwers is southwest France , some finds come from northern Spain ( El Castillo cave ), Switzerland ( Kesslerloch ) and Germany (Teufelsbrücke / Thuringia). The finds from Switzerland and Germany are also particularly noteworthy, because they can be assigned to the type "rudimentary horse head", whose main area of distribution is in southwestern France about 1000 km away. And it is precisely this finding gap from the core area to Switzerland and Thuringia in Germany that is often used as an argument for spear throwers made entirely of wood.
In later times the spear thrower is archeologically and ethnographically documented in Micronesia , Australia (called Woomera ), New Guinea and among the Eskimos . In America , the Aztecs used the spear thrower, the atlatl , the design of which differs somewhat from the spear throwers on other continents, as a weapon of war.
Research history
Ulrich Stodiek has compiled important stages in the history of research in his monograph. The first specimen was therefore excavated by Edouard Lartet and Henry Christy during excavations in the "Abri classique" of Laugerie-Basse (Les Eyzies de Tayac) in 1863. In the corresponding publication of the site from 1864, two fragments of a piece are shown separately, the fragment with the hook being interpreted as part of a harpoon.
In October 1866, during his excavations in Abri Montastruc (Bruniquel) , Peccadeau de l'Isle found a hook end of a spear thrower made in the shape of a mammoth. A new hook has been inserted into this piece, the original one in the form of a raised tail of the animal probably broke off during use. This piece was viewed by the excavator as the handle of a dagger.
At around the same time, in 1866, the Viscount de Lastic Saint-Jal examined the nearby Grotte du Roc du Courbet (Penne), which, like Montastruc, is in the Aveyron Valley. It contained numerous finds, including three spear-throwing hook ends, which were also not recognized as such.
Edouard Piette examined various sites in the foothills of the Pyrenees in the 1870s and 1880s: 1871 Grotte de Gourdan , 1873 Grotte d'Espalangue (Arudy), 1887 Cave of Mas d'Azil . All three sites contained hook ends that were not recognized as such at the time of the excavation.
A. de Maret excavated Le Placard in 1879, where hook ends that were found also went undetected.
In an essay from 1891 Adrien de Mortillet - after comparing it with spear throwers from Australia, Central and South America and those of the Eskimos - expressed the assumption that the unearthed hook-shaped objects could have been used in the same function. He mainly refers to the piece from Laugerie-Basse excavated by Lartet and Christy. Mortillet was therefore the first to publish the correct interpretation, but, as later showed, not the first to recognize it correctly.
Because in 1903 Émile Cartailhac published several hook ends from the stations of Bruniquel . He, too, correctly interpreted the function of the pieces and, like Mortillet in 1891, made ethnographic comparisons. What was special about this publication was the reference to a letter he found in the university library of Toulouse , which a member of the " Geological Survey of Ireland " who can no longer be identified had addressed to Edouard Lartet on September 27, 1864. The stranger, who also used ethnographic comparisons with Australian spear throwers as an argument, had already correctly interpreted its function in the year when the first hook end was found by Lartet and Christy.
In 1907, Henri Breuil, in an article written together with Emile Cartaillhac on the Upper Palaeolithic small art objects in the Vibraye collection, listed all 34 spear throwing hook ends in a footnote.
In the first half of the 20th century, more specimens were discovered during excavations at other sites or when work was continued in already known sites. So in the grotto Saint-Michel d'Arudy (F. Mascaraux 1910), in La Madeleine (Abri) (l. Capitan and D. Peyrony 1928) and in the caves of Isturitz and Oxocelhaya (R. de Saint-Périer 1936 ; E. Passemard 1944). These publications are comprehensive descriptions of the sites where the spear thrower hook ends are not given any special consideration, but are only viewed as one of many types of finds.
Other newly discovered spear thrower hook ends were described in a separate article: Grotte d'Enlène (H. Bégouën 1912; R. Bégouën 1986), Grotte du Mas d'Azil (M. u. S.-J. Péquart 1942), Kesslerloch (WU Guyan 1944), Grotte de Bedeilhac (R. Robert 1951, 1953a, 1953b), Canecaude I (D. Sacchi 1975) and Combe Sauniére 1 (P. Cattelain 1989). However, fewer comparisons with other finds were made in these articles; instead, the authors predominantly described the respective specimen, mostly focusing on aspects of artistic design.
Dorothy Garrod described in 1955 in "Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society" in a lengthy article the 66 Upper Paleolithic spear-throwing hook ends known up to that point. In addition to a brief discussion of the history of research, chronological and chorological aspects, the main aim of her work is to structure the finds. Their most important distinguishing feature was the design of the hook end. She distinguishes between rod-shaped, only slightly decorated forms ("unweighted throwers") and more massive, sculptural animal bodies ("weighted throwers"). On functional-technological questions, e.g. B. the shaft, it only goes into the margins, but explicitly points out the need for a study, which should be combined with practical attempts at reconstructed pieces.
From 1977 there is an unpublished Cologne seminar paper on the Upper Palaeolithic spear thrower hook ends by Jörg Sedlmeier , in which Dorothy Garrod's compilation is updated to 79 copies. Here, too, hardly any functional-technological aspects are discussed.
The exploration of the Upper Palaeolithic spear thrower hook ends has been significantly intensified by Pierre Cattelain . In 1978 he presented his unpublished master’s thesis, which contains a detailed compilation of all known French spear-throwing hook ends as well as some of the newly discovered spear-throwing hook ends in museum magazines. He also took into account fragments without hooks or a clear basis. He carried out the assignment to this type of find exclusively according to the decoration.
In 1986 an article by Cattelain appeared on macroscopic signs of wear and tear on the hooks of the Young Paleolithic spear thrower hook ends. He uses ethnographic material from Australia as well as experimental pieces. The reconstructed spear throwers and spears were based on Australian models. The throwing experiments carried out apparently only had the purpose of producing signs of wear on the hook; he apparently did not investigate other functional-technological questions.
In 1988, Cattelain published another article in the series “Fiches typologiques de l'industrie osseuse préhistorique”, in which he gives a summary of this type of device. He counts 118 copies.
Ulrich Stodiek counted a total of 123 pieces, 114 of them fragmented, mostly distal fragments with the hook or recognizable remains of them. He regards only nine pieces as complete. We owe him a broad comparison with ethnographic spear throwers as well as the treatment of functional-technological issues such as the method of operation. He also included series of measurements on throwing distances, speeds and hit rates in his considerations.
The size of the spear throwing hook ends (2-42 cm) was also discussed. Some researchers had the opinion that effective hunting with such short spear throwers was impossible and that it must therefore be ritually used spear throwers that were only used in magical hunting ceremonies. The realization that these are parts of composite devices that were connected with an elongating wooden shaft only prevailed in the 1950s.
literature
- Ulrich Stodiek: On the technology of the Upper Palaeolithic spear thrower. A study based on archaeological, ethnological and experimental findings . Tübingen Monogr. Urgesch. 9, Tübingen 1993, ISBN 3-921618-36-3
- Ulrich Stodiek, Harm Paulsen : "With the arrow, the bow ..." Technique of Stone Age hunting . Oldenburg 1996, ISBN 3-89598-388-8
- Joachim Hahn : Recognizing and determining stone and bone artifacts - introduction to artifact morphology . Pp. 390-393, Verlag Archaeologica Venatoria, Tübingen 1991, ISBN 3-921618-31-2
Web links
- Speerschleuder.de
- Aboriginal technology
- Drawing of a Woomera , from the book Boy Scouts Beyond the Seas: "My World Tour" by Sir Robert Baden-Powell , 1913
Individual evidence
- ↑ a b speerschleuder.de - see Fig. 5: Throwing pictures [1]
- ↑ a b U. Stodiek 1993
- ↑ z. B. Weule: Völkerkunde , Leipzig 1912
- ↑ Enrico Brühl, Jiri Svoboda: On the ivory tips from the Middle Paleolithic mammoth hunter settlement Pavlov I in South Moravia. In: Knowledge hunters. Culture and environment of early humans. Festschrift for Dietrich Mania. Hall 2003.
- ^ Gerhard Bosinski : The great time of the ice age hunters. Europe between 40,000 and 10,000 BC Chr. Yearbook of the Roman-Germanic Central Museum in Mainz. 34, 1987, pp. 13-139.
- ↑ U. Stodiek 1993, pp. 104-108