Category Archives: Articles

History

Bannerstones and how they relate to the Atlatl

35 Comments

An Argument Against the Notion That Bannerstones are Atlatl Weights

The following is a recently updated article on bannerstones written and researched by Robert S. Berg of Thunderbird Atlatl. Thoughts, questions and comments are welcomed. Thunderbird Atlatl will be publishing a booklet on this theory in the next few months.

Archaeologists have been agonizing for a long time over the use of banner stones. Some have offered that they are atlatl weights or ceremonial pieces. Others have suggested that they are for drilling, cordage making, or fire making. My theory proposes that they are part of a kit of tools used to make and repair atlatls and darts.

My theory has met with a lot of resistance because of the works of William S. Webb (1882-1964), who proposed that bannerstones were part of an atlatl. He cites “in situ” evidence which consists mainly of bannerstones found in line with atlatl handles and hooks in graves that archaeologists dug up during the construction of the Tennessee Valley Authority’s massive water control system in the southeast during the early part of the 20th Century. He proposed these theories without a complete knowledge of how atlatls work. I do not believe that he ever hunted with one or tried to make or repair an atlatl or dart in the field with Stone Age style equipment. It is possible that he never even fully grasped the techniques as to how they were actually used as the techniques for using atlatls were lost or (possibly understood by only a few experimenters) then eventually revived in the 1980s by people like Bill Tate, Ray Madden, and William R. Perkins.

The bannerstone is an artifact that has been considered an atlatl weight since William S. Webb said it was in the first half of the 20th century. Several booklets and reports were published on the subject based on several excavated graves from Indian Knoll Kentucky. He described what he termed in situe finds which had an atlatl handle a bannerstone and an atlatl hook in order proving that the bannerstone was part of the atlatl. Some of his publications: Indian Knoll, Atlatls and Bannerstones, Excavations at Indian Knoll.

I believe his work is flawed. First and foremost bannerstones make no sense by their configuration to be atlatl weights. To discover the truth, I examined many examples of durable remains that are found in almost any Indian artifact collection. I made replicas and filled in the missing pieces with wood, cordage, glue, feathers, leather and bark, by way of a series of experiments. The experiments were designed to produce working, practical weapons, tools and techniques similar to what may have been used by the Woodland era American Indian. Then I field tested them during actual hunting and fishing expeditions. I started out this endeavor not only to develop this theory but also to pursue a personal quest to learn the primitive skills necessary to hunt and fish using the atlatl.

I experimented with bannerstones, gorgets, atlatls and darts, celts, projectile points, fire by friction, cordage making, and primitive hunting techniques using mainly the atlatl for more than fifteen years. Much of what I did required learning and mastering difficult and complex skills such as flint knapping, marksmanship and hunting with an atlatl, atlatl fishing, wood working with stone age style tools, cordage making, tracking, and making fires with friction. I now consider myself to be fairly proficient in all of these skills. I have hunted big game with atlatls successfully with more than twenty kills. I am also accepted among primitive technology students and practitioners as a teacher.

My conclusion is that bannerstones were unlikely to have been used as atlatl weights, except on modern atlatls, which is contrary to the myth that has developed from William S. Webb’s theories. The idea was proposed as absolute truth by Webb who is no longer alive to argue with. Now we have lots of people who have run with the idea. They have invested time in making so called replica atlatls using bannerstone weights or writing various articles about bannerstone weights with mystic properties like increasing velocity or silencing the dart. They all followed the leader like lemmings over the cliff.

The atlatls allegedly found with bannerstones on them didn’t have shafts upon which the bannerstone, atlatl hook and handle were attached. Only a very small percentage of bannerstones found thus far, have been found in situ in the way which caused Webb to theorize that they were parts that went together. Since Webb’s theories I have heard of no new finds that are similar to those that he reported on. I would add here that thousands of bannerstones have been found all over the place in North America, but they have only been found with hooks and handles in digs done by Webb or I might say digs done by Webb’s crews. It is unclear whether Webb actually participated in the digs. If his work were submitted to a group of peers today it would be highly suspect. It’s possible that the bannerstones were simply in the same container with atlatls when the owners of them were buried. Webb doesn’t even discuss that possibility.

Many people have suggested to me that there are petroglyphs that prove that bannerstones were atlatl weights. A picture at www.thudscave.com/petroglyphs/atlatls.htm
Shows what some people believe is positive proof, but I disagree. However, if those pictures depict bannerstones, it seems that they would weigh about 10 pounds or more. Also the pictures are way too much like cartoon figures to get any real information from them. It is difficult to determine anything from the drawings because of the drawing style.
There are other reasons I think bannerstones were not atlatl weights. I have examined hundreds of them in various conditions from completely whole to broken bits and pieces. I looked carefully at the holes and how they were drilled. I looked at wear patterns and I measured the holes. Some of the holes were as small as 1/4 inch, many were 3/8″, and the average was about half an inch, the largest I have seen was over an inch. Most of the holes seemed too small for an atlatl shaft that would work well. I compared many bannerstones that were broken from the Fogelman collection (150 or so pieces) many had holes that were 1/4″, 3/8″, 1/2″ up to One and 1/8 inches.

What they all had in common, where the bannerstone was complete enough to detect this, was that they were all balanced as if they were designed to spin. I maintain that it is evident and incontrovertible that bannerstones were balanced around the central hole because they were meant to spin. Atlatls don’t need to spin. I asked myself- what would a hunter gatherer needed that spins? Something to make string, fire or drill holes is the answer. I think it is the string making tool that is the best answer. It’s the best answer because string is necessary to haft points and tie on fletching among other handy applications for cordage in the hunter gatherer’s lifestyle.

Bannerstones are also all over the place as far as weight is concerned. Most of them seem to me to be too heavy to be atlatl weights. They are very apt to break in use as an atlatl weight and actual atlatl weights can be made in various ways and attached to the atlatl much easier than drilling a hole through a rock with grit and a reed.

I believe the bannerstone was used as a spindle weight to make string to tie on fletching and projectile points, and possibly a spindle weight to turn and taper dart shafts. It was not part of the atlatl at all but was carried in a kit, made from bark or leather, with the atlatl. It was probably fastened by pressure fit onto a round stick about the same length as an atlatl. The kit would most likely also contain a wad of fiber, several flint points, scrapers, pine pitch or other adhesive material, and some feathers for fletching.

A typical dart uses about three yards length of thread to haft the point, whip the shaft behind the point, tie on the fletching and whip the dart shaft in front of the knock dimple. The time saved is enormous considering that on a typical hog hunt I have expended as many as seven darts that I either had to replace because of damage or repair. This use is an effective time and labor saving feature, which alone could explain why bannerstones were carried by early American Indians.

But there is more. In the process of making darts I also used the bannerstone as a fly weight to help to make my darts round and also to taper them. This experiment was partly conducted at Mercyhurst College with several students at in Northern Pennsylvania. We cut down an ash tree and split it into dart sized staves using only stone and bone tools. I used flint scrapers to shape the trapezoidal shaped stave into roughly a round shaft. I formed the front end of the shaft so it would fit tightly into the bannerstone and spun the dart powering the device with a simple bow like one would use to start a fire by friction. I used ground flint chips as an abrasive by adding them dry into a cone shaped piece of leather that I held in my left hand around the spinning dart shaft. The result was impressive as this method created a perfectly round shaft that was smooth and consistent.

Another problem with the bannerstone is its weight. Many of them simply are too heavy to be atlatl weights. I have seen bannerstones that weigh more than a pound. Most weigh more than 100 grams. Compared with objects known to be atlatl weights the difference is very significant. Typical atlatl weights that have been found that tie to the side of an atlatl weigh an average of 3 ounces.

There is an ethnological model for the use of a bannerstone like spindle weight in the form of the Navajo spindle. The Southwest Indians have been using this design for longer than they remember. The Navajo spindle has a wooden wheel that works just like the bannerstone did in my experiments. I helped with an experiment for a woman from Ohio, who was gathering information for her doctoral thesis; she compared (among other things) the speed of hand cordage making to spindle made cordage. In the time it took me to produce one foot of hand made cordage I made about three yards of thread on the bannerstone spindle whorl.

A typical dart uses about three yards length of twisted thread to haft the point, whip the shaft behind the point, tie on the fletching and whip the dart shaft in front of the knock dimple. The time saved is enormous considering that on a typical big game hunt many darts would be used and damaged. This use of a tool to speed up making and repairing darts would be effective for saving time and labor. This alone could explain why bannerstones were carried by early American Indians.

I have no proof that I am right either but I can see through a tall tale and bannerstones as atlatl weights is a tall tale. I have made several atlatls with bannerstone weights and they work alright but there is nothing that the bannerstone does to the atlatl that improves how it works to make it worthwhile drilling a hole through a rock with a reed and grit, grinding and polishing the object for as long as a week. A simple rock from a stream bed will do the same thing.

Although my experiments and the evidence are certainly not conclusive, it is compelling. What I can say for sure is that there are lots of problems with bannerstones as atlatl weights. Whereas I perceive from my perusal of the evidence that I have been able to check, coupled with a great deal of experience in using atlatls that practical uses for the bannerstone exist that can be easily replicated that prove to be significant advantages as a tool rather than as an as an atlatl weight to a hunter in stone age America.

Copyright 2007

How To, Ramblings

Some Thoughts on Hafting Stone and Bone Points

Leave a comment

The most effective method of hafting stone and bone points is with cellulose based fiber and glue. The glue can be modern or traditional. I use hide glue, pine or copal resin, or modern glues like Elmer’s, Carpenters Glue or epoxy. Animal fibers tend to fail faster when they get in contact with water. Cellulose fibers like yucca, basswood, hickory, flax, hemp, dog bane, and cotton have proven to be better than sinew each and every time I have used them in real hunting situations. I prefer flax, hemp and dog bane fibers. Rain, dew, blood and wet earth get in contact with sinew and it turns to slime and releases the haft. It also turns a hafted point into a dog bone. Something will eat it sooner or later. Hide glue is also affected by water.
Tree resins are very water resistant and work well if they are not too brittle. Pine resin can be tempered with charcoal, dung, bees wax and fats which make the resin less likely to be brittle. Many different recipies have been used for this purpose.

The combination of hide glue and cellulose fibers shrinks and tightens up the hafting. If you saturate linen cloth with hide glue and stretch it on a frame it is drum tight after it dries. I learned this from making canvases for oil painting. I also read, but have not confirmed this with my own experiment, that linen cloth saturated with hide glue applied to glass will actually break the glass when it dries.

I also have been experimenting with pine and copal resin as a sealant for hafting. After the glue dries I apply several coats of thinned pine resin or copal resin to the hafted area. This makes a very hard, smooth, and water resistant haft. The reason I like this method is that the surface of the fiber, after it is coated this way, offers little resistance to penetration. Copal resin is fossilized pine resin that gets very hard after it is dry. Pine resin remains sticky for a long time. I don’t know whether this method is “traditional”.
I use turpentine or alcohol to thin the resin. You can melt both resins over heat to apply them also but this is more difficult. It is also possible to use runnier fresh pine sap, then heat the finished piece to encourage drying. I also use the copal resin thinned into a “shellac” on the thread whipping that holds the front and back of my fletching down. A thin coating of the thinned resin on the dart shaft itself makes it virtually water proof and will adhere the fletching to the shaft.

To make the thinned resin put a few pieces of pine resin or copal on a square of cloth, tie it closed with string, place it in a glass jar of turpentine or denatured alcohol with the lid tightened. Every now and then shake the jar. After a while the resin will be dissolved. The bark and dirt will remain in the cloth. Copal resin works a lot better than pine because it dries in a half an hour or less.

-Some thoughts about the atlatl Bob Berg-

Posted by Robert Berg

Beginners, How To

Comparison of Various Atlatl Materials

6 Comments

Wooden darts are easy for both experienced and first timers to make. They are reasonably priced always available and very durable. Some wooden dart materials that are lighter than ash show promise for target use. Hemlock is very light yet strong. I also like spruce darts. from time to time I make darts from hemlock and spruce but I don’t always have them in stock. The softer woods are easily worked with hand tools so customizing them is easy. A very good dart can be made by splicing an ash shaft to a hemlock shaft using a scarf joint. The splice should be about 1/3 of the length of the shaft with the ash in the front and the hemlock in the back.

One should avoid splicing shafts in the middle or at the quarter points of darts because harmonic motion lead to strange flexing patterns when the dart is shot.

Heavy ash darts are good for accuracy from 1 to 20 yards, (excellent for accuracy at 2 to 15 yards), poor for distance, and excellent for penetration and very durable, require periodic straitening but once seasoned retain straightness well, killing power 10, consistency is 9, authenticity is 8 in the South and 10 in the North, hafting is easy and can be done in a large variety of ways, finishing is easy. Ash darts are very good for hunting. Setting up ash darts for hunting has the advantage of the possibility to make a full set of practice darts that match your full set of hunting darts. One advantage of heavier wooden dart shaft is that they have a greater dampening of the helical undulating harmonic oscillation that is caused by the pattern that the atlatl spur pushes against the dart as it accelerates it forward. In simpler terms it is the corkscrew wobble that is decreased because of the properties of the wood that is caused by the weird way that an atlatl launches a dart.

A good way to keep and maintain a set of hunting darts is to get two identical sets. Put broadheads on one set and field points on the other. As you use up your hunting darts your practice darts can easily be converted into hunting darts.

Cane darts are good for accuracy at longer distances, fair for distance throwing and medium for penetration and not very durable, retain straightness but are difficult to straighten initially; killing power 5 consistency is 1, authenticity is 8 (1 in the north), hafting is more challenging, finish is not necessary but if wanted it is challenging to apply. Cane darts can be made for hunting by using a heavy fore shaft improving killing power and penetration. Cane darts are expensive and difficult to get. We sell raw cane shafts when good quality shafts are available. (call for availability: 800 836 4520) A typical cane dart takes experienced dart makers up to several hours to make because of the time necessary to straighten them. Cane darts vary so much from shaft to shaft that matched sets are sometimes difficult to come up with.

Auminum darts are good for distance, not so good for accuracy and poor for penetration. Dampening of the helical wobble is non existent. Aluminum darts wiggle all the way to the target. They are durable and always straight, killing power on a scale of 1 to 10 rates a 2, consistency on a scale of 1 to 10 is 10, authenticity on a scale of 1 to 10 is 1, hafting is accomplished mechanically, finish is always the same. Aluminum darts can be weighted and improved by filling the front half with wood or another aluminum arrow shaft. Aluminum darts are expensive.

Composite materials like fiberglass and carbon fiber can be made into darts that score a 10 in consistency, straightness, and durability. Accuracy is good. Dampening characteristics of composite materials are poor. Most composite darts I have seen have been very light so they would not be good for hunting or fishing. It would be possible to make composite darts that would be good for hunting and fishing but the obstacle is that they are the most expensive of darts to make and hunting darts tend to get destroyed.

You can have fun with any dart but as for me, I prefer wood darts. If I practice with them I get real good at controlling them. I have shot in the high 80s and once in the 90s in the ISAC with heavy darts for many years so they can be accurate up to the 20 meter distance. The real test of wooden darts is that I have killed 20 or more big game animals with them. Many of my customers have reported success with my wooden darts.

Just some thoughts about the atlatl.

-Bob Berg

Hunting & Fishing

Atlatl Hunting & Fishing

5 Comments

Atlatlists from the Northeast have been slowly but surely working their way toward getting the atlatl accepted as a big game hunting weapon.

Russ Guthrie of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania has been leading the way. Russ has the unique ability to bring the right people together at the negotiating table. It is an up hill climb as this small special interest group attempts to negotiate governmental hurdles to get the atlatl accepted. Atlatlists want to join with their fellow hunters in the fields and forests of Pennsylvania as accepted members of the hunting community.

Missouri has recently joined the short list of states where atlatl hunting is allowed. Atlatlists are now allowed to hunt small game in Missouri. We atlatl hunters and fishermen and women hope this effort continues and spreads to other states.

Posted by thunder

History

Atlatl Myths

4 Comments

The atlatl and dart are mythically endowed with powers that are highly overrated by several atlatlists. The first myth is that the dart flexes and compresses, storing energy in order to push itself away from the atlatl. Another myth is that there is a specific magic formula for the optimum length of the dart to the length of the atlatl. The third myth is that atlatl weights increase the power or speed of the dart as it rebounds from the atlatl. Although these are fascinating concepts they are not true.

The reason an atlatl dart needs to have a certain flex is that there are lateral components to the vectors that are necessary to cast a dart caused by its non linear acceleration. This is caused by the way the atlatl must work due to the human anatomy. The atlatl must go through an arch to cast the dart. As it does so, the back of the dart is pushed first up then down as it accelerates forward. The dart must be designed to bend enough to allow this to happen. Upon close inspection of fast action pictures of the moment when the dart disengages from the atlatl, flexible atlatls remain flexed after disengaging from the dart. This phenomenon leads me to believe that the energy stored in the flexing atlatl is lost rather than transferred to the dart.

The dart to atlatl length ratio has more to do with the strength of the atlatlist and his or her goal in throwing the dart. Smaller, shorter darts will work just as well in the same atlatl as longer heavier darts to achieve the specific results desired by the atlatlist. Distance darts tend to be lighter and shorter whereas hunting darts are longer and heavier. Darts meant to be used for target shooting work better if they are lighter and long, yet with a fairly sturdy spine especially if the target is set at 15 to 20 meters. The long light darts work best for the target shooter because of their lower and straighter trajectory. The dart needs to be “tuned” to the capabilities and the goals of the atlatlist rather than the dart being sized to the atlatl. The flexibility of the dart needs to be matched to the degree that is necessary for it to be cast effectively by a particular atlatlist. That depends on the casting technique of the atlatlist more than anything else.

Atlatl weights add to the stability of the cast rather than to its power, speed or penetration. It takes energy to accelerate the extra weight of the stone. Some say that the energy is returned to the system to give it more power. This theory may erroneously lead you to believe that the stone weight somehow acts as an amplifier of the power exerted in the throw. Simply said, you get out of a cast what you put into it. It again depends on the atlatlist, his technique, and how hard he or she throws the dart.

Bannerstones are unlikely to have been used as atlatl weights, except on modern atlatls. The idea was proposed as absolute truth by William S. Webb who is no longer alive to argue with. Now we have lots of people who have run with the idea. They have invested time in making so called replica atlatls using bannerstone weights or writing various articles about bannerstone weights with mystic properties like increasing velocity or silencing the dart. They all followed the leader like lemmings over the cliff.

The atlatls allegedly found with bannerstones on them didn’t even have shafts upon which the bannerstone, atlatl hook and handle were attached. They were found “in situ” which means that they were found in place in a way which Webb suggested that they were parts that went together. I would add here that thousands of bannerstones have been found all over the place in North America, but they have only been found with hooks and handles in digs done by Webb. I should say digs done by Webb’s crews. It isn’t clear that he actually did the digs. If his work were submitted to a group of peers today it would be highly suspect. It’s possible that the bannerstones were simply in the same container with atlatls. Webb doesn’t even discuss that possibility.

Many people have suggested to me that there are petroglyphs that prove that bannerstones were atlatl weights. A picture at www.thudscave.com/petroglyphs/atlatls.htm
shows what some people believe is proof positive but if those are bannerstones it seems that they would weigh about 10 pounds or more. Also the pictures are way too much like cartoon figures to get any real information from them.

There are other reasons I think bannerstones were not atlatl weights. I have examined hundreds of them in various conditions from whole to bits and pieces. I looked carefully at the holes and how they were drilled. I looked at wear patterns and I measured the holes. Some of the holes were as small as ¼ inch, many were 3/8”, and the average was about ½ inch, the largest I have seen was over an inch. Most of the holes seemed too small for an atlatl shaft that would work well.

What they all had in common, where the bannerstone was whole enough to detect this, was that they were all balanced. That is to say that they looked like they were designed to spin. Atlatls don’t need to spin. What would a hunter gatherer need that spins? Something to make string, fire or drill holes is the answer. I think it is the string making tool that is the best answer. It’s the best answer because string is necessary to haft points and tie on fletching among other handy applications for cordage in the hunter gatherer’s lifestyle.

Bannerstones are also all over the place as far as weight is concerned. Most of them seem to me to be too heavy to be atlatl weights. They are very apt to break in use as an atlatl weight and atlatl weights can be attached to the atlatl in any number of ways much easier than drilling a hole through a rock with grit and a reed.

For each kind of dart material there are a few constants which are inherent to it. They are the material’s density, modulus of elasticity, and vibration dampening characteristics. There are other characteristics but these three affect how the dart works the most. Dart materials may include wood, aluminum, bamboo, fiberglass and perhaps many others. If there is a formula to be devised as a guide to making good darts it would be one that shows a ratio of dart diameter, density, elasticity through different dart sizes, with the ultimate spine being determined by how hard the atlatlist tends to throw.

© Bob Berg

Posted by thunder