Did the shape of Mesolithic-Neolithic arrowheads determine their performance?

three pairs of geometrics prior to testing

Three pairs of geometrics prior to testing

Three pairs of geometrics prior to testing

The arrowheads of the last European hunter-gatherers and early farmers are extremely variable in terms of shape and, because of this, they have been extensively used in archaeology to determine cultural affiliations and relationships.

However, a recurrent question is whether these changes in shape respond to functional pressures (e.g. better performance efficiency) or to cultural aspects (e.g. identity or drift).

In a new study published in Scientific Reports, researchers from the University of Cambridge, the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Archaeology and Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, collaborated to find out more.

To assess this hypothesis the researchers used a tensile tester to experimentally examine the penetration potential of replicated Neolithic arrowheads that varied in their shape. Experimental data were then integrated with geometric morphometrics and a broader Bayesian hierarchical statistical model, to assess how shape influenced the force and energy required for an arrow head to pierce a material. Results point to the fact that shape has no relevant effect of penetration capacity for these specific arrowheads and, in turn, opens a whole new line of research on how we should assess these heads in terms of cultural identity, cultural drifts and social learning processes.

Experimental production process of the geometric microliths. 1—Production of blades through abdominal pressure; 2—Blade fracture through bending; 3—Blade fragments obtained through bending; 4—Blade fragments and deer antler tool used for shaping the geometric; 5, 6—Pressure retouch; 7—Comparison of the experimental versus the archaeological geometric.

Experimental production process of the geometric microliths. 1—Production of blades through abdominal pressure; 2—Blade fracture through bending; 3—Blade fragments obtained through bending; 4—Blade fragments and deer antler tool used for shaping the geometric; 5, 6—Pressure retouch; 7—Comparison of the experimental versus the archaeological geometric.

Experimental production process of the geometric microliths. 1—Production of blades through abdominal pressure; 2—Blade fracture through bending; 3—Blade fragments obtained through bending; 4—Blade fragments and deer antler tool used for shaping the geometric; 5, 6—Pressure retouch; 7—Comparison of the experimental versus the archaeological geometric.

The sample of replica geometric microliths hafted to the wooden dowels (a), three pairs of geometrics prior to testing (b–d), the Instron device and wider experimental set-up, including an exemplar force–deformation curve (e), and a close-up of the experiment post-test (f).

The sample of replica geometric microliths hafted to the wooden dowels (a), three pairs of geometrics prior to testing (bd), the Instron device and wider experimental set-up, including an exemplar force–deformation curve (e), and a close-up of the experiment post-test (f).

The sample of replica geometric microliths hafted to the wooden dowels (a), three pairs of geometrics prior to testing (bd), the Instron device and wider experimental set-up, including an exemplar force–deformation curve (e), and a close-up of the experiment post-test (f).

The team behind this study was combined diverse expertise, including the expert replication of these small, highly shapped stone arrowheads, mechanical testing, and advanced statistical modelling. The team, led by Dr Alfredo Cortell-Nicolau, united world-leading institutions in prehistoric research (Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Cambridge and Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) to answer this long-standing research question.

This research was supported by the UKRI Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) Capability for Collections (CapCo) Fund for the Cambridge Heritage Science Hub (CHERISH) Initiative (AH/V011685/1).

Published 8 May 2025

The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License