↓ Skip to main content

Contributions to the Dart versus Arrow Debate: New Data from Holocene Projectile Points from Southeastern and Southern Brazil

Overview of attention for article published in Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Contributions to the Dart versus Arrow Debate: New Data from Holocene Projectile Points from Southeastern and Southern Brazil
Published in
Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, December 2015
DOI 10.1590/0001-3765201520140625
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mercedes Okumura, Astolfo G.M. Araujo

Abstract

Lithic bifacial points are very common in the southern and southeastern regions of the Brazilian territory. Dated from Early to Late Holocene, these artifacts have not been studied in terms of their propulsion system. Given the characteristics of the bow and arrow compared to the atlatl and dart, there are important differences in the size and weight of arrowheads and dart points. Applying the techniques proposed by Shott (1997), Bradbury (1997), Fenenga (1953), Hughes (1998), and Hildebrandt and King (2012) to specimens recovered from eight sites dating from the early to the late Holocene, this work aims to present preliminary results to better understand the potential presence of darts and arrows in southeastern and southern Brazil. There was a variation in the results according to the application of different techniques. At least one set of points, dated from the Early Holocene, presented quite a high proportion of specimens classified as arrows, indicating the presence of points that could be used as arrowheads.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 25%
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Arts and Humanities 7 29%
Social Sciences 7 29%
Environmental Science 3 13%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 8%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 17%