When Is a Point a Projectile? Morphology, Impact Fractures, Scientific Rigor, and the Limits of Inference
When Is a Point a Projectile? Morphology, Impact Fractures, Scientific Rigor, and the Limits of Inference
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/978-94-017-7602-8_1
复制
发表时间：
2016-01-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Hutchings, Wallace Karl
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hutchings, Wallace Karl
考古学家长期以来一直在寻找一种可靠的方法来确定某些尖形石器是否代表武器装甲，更具体地说，特定类型的尖形石器是否与特定的武器技术有关。这些尝试通常依赖于人种学数据;形态学，以及最近的形态测量学标准;实验;使用磨损分析;残留物分析;以及它们的组合。本文涉及的可靠性的建立方法的鉴定的石头武装尖端的古代武器，特别是建立手段区分武器运载技术。作者提出了一个关键的审查主要试图隔离标准，旨在确定这样的文物和技术;确定的方法和标准的不足之处，迄今为止;并得出结论，由于基本的主观方法和缺乏全面的实验，目前的方法来确定武器电枢和运载技术缺乏足够的科学严谨性。
Archaeologists have long sought a reliable means to identify whether certain pointed stone artifacts represent weapon armatures, and more specifically, whether specific types of pointed artifacts are associated with specific weapon technologies. These attempts have generally relied on ethnographic data; morphological, and more recently, morphometric, criteria; experimentation; use wear analyses; residue analyses; and combinations thereof. This paper is concerned with the reliability of established methods of identification of the stone arming tips of ancient weaponry, and in particular established means of differentiating weapon delivery technologies. The author presents a critical review of major attempts to isolate criteria intended to identify such artifacts and technologies; identifies deficiencies in the methodologies and criteria employed to date; and concludes that due to underlying subjective methods and a lack of comprehensive experimentation, current methods for identifying weapon armatures and delivery technologies lack sufficient scientific rigor.