The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 59 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Design and performance of microlith implemented projectiles during the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: experimental and archaeological evidence
Open accessAbstract
The study comprises an experimentally based investigation of interaction between temporal change in the morphology of microlithic tools and transformations in projectile technology during the Late Pleistocene in the Levant. Archery experiments with differently designed arrows fitted with various types of microliths representing subsequent Epipaleolithic cultures of the Levant allowed analyzing performance abilities of the arrows, identifying projectile damage types characteristic of particular hafting modes, detecting factors influencing the frequency of projectile damage and estimating the frequency of projectile damage expected to be found in archaeological samples. The data obtained through the experiments applied in the analysis of the archaeological microliths from Geometric Kebaran and Natufian sites in Israel indicate different approaches to the design of projectiles fitted with microliths characteristic for these cultures. The shift in design, associated with such important economic and social transformations as transition to sedentary settlements and a broad-spectrum economy, may reflect a demand for light, flexible and efficient projectile weapons requiring low time and labor investment for preparation and retooling. The use of such efficient weapons in conditions of growing population density and restricted areas available for Natufian hunter–gatherers can be considered as one of the factors that could have affected the subsequent transition to food production that took place in the early Holocene.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Archery experiments with 102 arrows and 265 microlith replicas show that Epipaleolithic projectile design affects penetration, durability, ricochet frequency, and diagnostic impact fractures. Comparing experimental damage with Geometric Kebaran trapeze/rectangles from Neve David and Natufian lunates from el-Wad Terrace suggests a shift from microliths used mainly as lateral elements to lunates hafted mainly as transversal/oblique tips.
Key findings
- Arrow performance varied by design: oblique points averaged 23.0 cm penetration, transversal points 22.6 cm, and self-pointed arrows with lateral blades 22.5 cm; straight points averaged 15.0 cm, double oblique points 11.0 cm, the microgravette-plus-four-barb arrow 11.5 cm, and self-pointed arrows with twisted barbs 5.6 cm. Ricochets were most common among double oblique points (50%), followed by transversal points (22%), straight points (11.8%), and oblique points (8%).
- Diagnostic projectile damage frequencies were highest for single straight points (53.8%) and transversal points (40%), while lateral blades showed only 12.5% diagnostic damage. Among barbs, Helwan lunates remained undamaged in 87% of cases, compared with 46% for lunates with abrupt retouch, 39% for trapeze/rectangles, 33% for Kebara points, and 25% for arch-backed bladelets.
- Taphonomic analysis estimated that more than 40% of shot microliths would be lost in hunting; projectile damage expected in archaeological assemblages was estimated at 7.9–26.5%. Archaeological samples showed diagnostic projectile damage on 5.3% of Neve David trapeze/rectangles and medial parts and 8.4% of el-Wad Terrace lunates.
- At Neve David, parallel fractures and fractures along a sharp edge dominated, suggesting trapeze/rectangles were hafted predominantly as side elements/lateral blades. At el-Wad Terrace, 23 of 25 damaged lunates had oblique/perpendicular fractures initiating on a sharp edge, suggesting transversal hafting at the tip, with two exceptions showing parallel fractures.
Methods
- Experimental archery used 102 arrows incorporating 265 microlith replicas, shot by Dmitry Nuzhnyy with a recurved wooden sport bow of 17.5 kg power. The first session targeted a freshly killed unskinned female goat on Mount Carmel in December 2006 at 13 m, then 10 m, then 8 m; the second session targeted a skinned sheep thorax encased in cardboard at 5 m.
- Macrofractures diagnostic of projectile impact were classified by initiation location and orientation relative to the microlith’s longitudinal axis; selected experimental and archaeological microliths were inspected with SEM for micro-fractures.
- Archaeological analysis used all trapeze/rectangles from two 1 m² units at Geometric Kebaran Neve David (N=311, plus 85 medial parts) and all 299 lunates from two 1 m² units at Natufian el-Wad Terrace (182 Helwan, 117 abrupt retouch); three Neve David trapeze/rectangles and seven el-Wad lunates were examined by SEM.
Limitations
- The paper states that samples of arrows with a particular design fitted with a particular microlith type were relatively small, precluding detailed statistical analyses; it also states that further experiments are needed on lunate durability, Final Natufian small lunates, desert Geometric Kebaran wide trapeze/rectangles, and lateral-blade fracture types, and that the suggested projectile-design shift requires confirmation from additional Geometric Kebaran and Early Natufian samples.
- Evident from the text: the experiments used animal carcasses/thorax rather than live hunting, and the taphonomic estimate was based on the first session and all microliths without accounting for hafting mode, which the paper notes affects damage frequency.
- Evident from the text: the archaeological comparison is limited to two sites and two 1 m² excavation units per site, so broader assemblage variability is not captured.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
3 of 59 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Lunates with abrupt retouch and trapezes/rectangles hafted in the same mode showed considerably higher values of diagnostic and not diagnostic damage when undamaged remained 46% and 39%, respectively.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.6. Frequencies of projectile macro-damage according to microlith type and mode of hafting
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some of the microliths exhibited multiple fractures diagnostic of projectile impact.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.2. Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the sample from el-Wad Terrace 23 of 25 lunates possessing damage diagnostic of projectile impact exhibit oblique/perpendicular fractures initiating on a sharp edge (type b) oriented either perpendicularly or in sharp angle relative to the longitudinal axis of the microlith”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.2. Archaeological data 3.2.1 Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fractures along a sharp edge in conjunction with other types of oblique/perpendicular fractures (type d2m) occurred on a transversal point (Fig. 5b:5) and on a lateral blade (Fig. 10a:c).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.4. Multiple macro-fractures
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 2Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Linear micro-fractures were observed only on five of them, two microgravettes hafted as straight points (Fig. 7b), one transversally hafted trapeze/rectangle (Fig. 9b), one Helwan lunate hafted as a double oblique point (Fig. 8b) and one trapeze/rectangle set as a lateral blade (Fig. 10b,c).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.5. Micro-fractures on the experimental microliths
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Barbs fitted with non-geometric microliths, arch-backed bladelets and Kebara points, received the highest frequencies of damage when undamaged remained only 25% and 33% of the barbs fitted with these types, respectively.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.6. Frequencies of projectile macro-damage according to microlith type and mode of hafting
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Straight points, as well as lateral blades exhibited fractures oriented parallel to the longitudinal axis of the microlith, i.e. consistent with the hafting mode of the microlith and his direction during the impact.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.5. Micro-fractures on the experimental microliths
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among these, burin-like fractures removing the distal tip (type a2) appeared on lunates, trapeze/rectangles (Fig. 5b:9d) and on one Kebara point.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.3. Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact and microlith morphology
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Various types of single oblique/perpendicular fractures initiating on a sharp edge (types b1, b2, b3) occurred on transversal points (Fig. 5b:6), double oblique points, barbs (Fig. 5b:10b, c), oblique points (Fig. 5b:3), and lateral blades.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.2. Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In one case an oblique fracture removing tip (type b2) occurred on straight point fitted with trapeze/rectangle.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.2. Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedSingle caseTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes
- Probably not a substantial claim. 22
- It may state two separate claims as one. 67
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Fractures initiating on a sharp edge were observed on lunates from Natufian sites (Valla, 1987;Marder et al., 2007;Valla et al., 2007).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.1. Background
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Valla, 1987 source
- Not matchedcites Marder et al., 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Could not verifycites Valla et al., 2007 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The available Abstract passage says the paper analyzes how Final Natufian lunates were shaped, but does not describe fractures initiating on a sharp edge. Searches for that fracture description and French equivalents returned no relevant passage from our copy, so the specific observation cannot be verified. (LLM, conf=0.70)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Thus, the function as tips and lateral elements of projectiles was suggested for the trapeze/rectangles from the Geometric Kebaran sites Ein Miri (Shimelmitz, et al., 2004), Hefziba and Neve David (Yaroshevich, 2006).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.1. Background
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Shimelmitz, et al., 2004 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the discussion of the microliths (around pp. 128–130), the paper identifies abundant trapezes and rectangles at Ain Miri and says projectile fractures in some microliths suggest projectiles were part of the assemblage. The passages in our copy do not specify that trapezes or rectangles served as projectile tips or lateral elements. Hefziba and Neve David are attached to a different citation in the citing sentence and are not judged here. (LLM, conf=0.78)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Yaroshevich, 2006 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“At the same time, while their penetrating ability is relatively less than other designs it is still sufficient to cause a fatal wound, particularly if poison was applied (Clark, 1977).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Clark, 1977 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The discussion of traditional San arrow types (around p. 130) says that some bone-pointed arrows were poisoned, but does not identify double oblique points or assess their penetration or ability to cause fatal wounds. Searches for “double oblique,” penetration, and fatal wounds found no passage addressing that comparison. (LLM, conf=0.74)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Trapeze/rectangles and medial parts of backed microliths from Neve David exhibit a variety of fracture types, the most common being single parallel fractures initiating on a retouched edge removing only a tip (type a2, Fig. 11:3, 4) and fractures along a sharp edge (type b1), among them deep, prominent fractures with a clear oblique orientation, similar to fractures observed on experimental”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.2. Archaeological data 3.2.1 Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When comparing between trapeze/rectangles and lunates hafted as transversal points, differences in terms of severity of damage were noted, although both types of microliths exhibited similar diagnostic fractures.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.3. Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact and microlith morphology
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In terms of penetrating abilities, oblique points (23.0 cm penetration depth), transversal points (22.6 cm) and self-pointed arrows with lateral blades (22.5 cm) yielded the highest values.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.1. Arrow Performance
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of the trapeze/rectangle (Fig. 12a) the striations were oriented parallel to the longitudinal axis of the microlith (Fig. 12a,b) whereas on the lunate the striations were oriented perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the microlith (Fig. 13a,b).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.2.2. Micro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Considerable differences appear in the frequencies of projectile damage between microliths hafted in different modes, between microliths hafted in the same mode but in differently designed arrows and between different types of microliths hafted in the same mode.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.6. Frequencies of projectile macro-damage according to microlith type and mode of hafting
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interestingly, four microliths were recovered from the target without any macro-damage at all.Two of them were hafted as transversal points, one as an oblique point and one as a double oblique point.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.7. Taphonomy of projectile microlithic elements
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Projectile damage among these two categories was observed on 7.9% and 18.6% of the microliths recovered from the target and the arrows, respectively”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.7. Taphonomy of projectile microlithic elements
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, transversal points exhibited obliquely oriented striations whereas the lunate hafted as a double oblique point exhibited striations oriented roughly parallel to its longitudinal axis.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.5. Micro-fractures on the experimental microliths
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Damage diagnostic of projectile impact occurred on 5.3% of the microliths from the Geometric Kebaran site of Neve David and on 8.4% of the lunates from el-Wad Terrace.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.2. Archaeological data 3.2.1 Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The high frequency of undamaged straight points shot in the second session (41.9%) as opposed to 7.7% of undamaged straight points shot in the first session supports this explanation.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.6. Frequencies of projectile macro-damage according to microlith type and mode of hafting
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The highest durability indices among arrows with microlithic tips occurred on double points and transversal points.The mean numbers of shootings per arrow (Index 1) were 3.6 and 3.0 and the mean numbers of target penetrations (Index 2) were 1.4 and 1.8 for double oblique points and transversal points, respectively.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.1. Arrow Performance
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One of the lateral blades (Fig. 11a: g) received a distinctively deep, obliquely oriented fracture which removed a considerable part of its sharp edge (type b1).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.2. Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedSingle caseTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Transversal points are the most efficient in terms of penetrating depth and durability, but have a relatively high frequency of ricochets; oblique points show good penetration values and low frequency of ricochets, but appear to be less durable.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Much lower values averaging 15.0 cm, 11.0 cm and 11.5 cm showed straight points, double oblique points and the arrow with a microgravette point and four oblique barbs, respectively.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.1. Arrow Performance
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, cases of more severe damage for transversal points occurred among trapeze/rectangles, whereas minimal damage occurred on lunates.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.3. Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact and microlith morphology
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Linear striations were observed on one of the three trapeze/rectangles and on one of the seven lunates observed through SEM.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.2.2. Micro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Double oblique points are durable, but have a high frequency of ricochets and relatively low penetrating abilities.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the angle of the fractures relative to the longitudinal axis of the microlith differs in the two cases.On the transversal point the fractures are oriented perpendicularly or in sharp angle whereas on the double oblique point the fractures are oriented in a blunt angle.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.4. Multiple macro-fractures
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The two exceptions with parallel fractures showed single fracture initiating on a surface (type a1), which is most characteristic for straight point, but occur on oblique points as well.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.2. Archaeological data 3.2.1 Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In terms of the angle of the oblique/perpendicular fractures, it appears that fractures oriented obliquely to the longitudinal axis of the microlith are most common and occur on obliquely hafted points and barbs, on lateral blades, as well as on transversal points (Fig. 5b:3, 5, 6, 8; 10; Fig. 11a: g).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.2. Macro-fractures diagnostic of projectile impact
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ricochets were most common among double oblique points (50%) whereas among straight and oblique points ricochets comprised 11.8% and 8% respectively.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.1. Arrow Performance
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Selfpointed arrows also showed high values of durability.Thus, the arrow with lateral blades was shot three times, with two of them resulting in target penetration; the arrows with twisted barbs were shot in average of 4.3 times with a mean value of target penetration of 2.0.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.1. Arrow Performance
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Single straight points and oblique points showed considerably lower values with mean number of shootings of 2.6 and 2.2 and mean number of penetrations of 1.4 and 1.1 for straight and oblique points, respectively.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.1. Arrow Performance
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The self-pointed arrows with lateral blades appeared to be efficient in all the tested characteristics whereas the arrows with tips composed of one or two microliths demonstrated contrasting attributes.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mode of hafting and the design of the arrow: single straight and transversal points resulted in the highest frequency of projectile damage whereas the lowest frequency was observed among lateral blades.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.3. Frequency of projectile fractures
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The samples analyzed in the study revealed differences in terms of the frequency of projectile damage in general, as well as in terms of the distribution of projectile fracture types.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The lower value represents the frequency of diagnostic damage among microliths recovered from the goat carcass while the larger value is the frequency of microliths with projectile damage recovered from the carcass and from the arrows combined.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.4. Taphonomy of projectile microlithic elements
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The high frequency of ricochets among double oblique points compared with the low frequency of ricochets among straight and oblique points supports this hypothesis.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The frequency of projectile damage in the sample of lunates is considerably higher than among the trapezes/rectangles, but still is relatively low, close to the minimal value indicated by the taphonomic analysis.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A sharper frontal angle and greater arrowhead width increase arrow efficiency in terms of penetration depth.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The mean length of complete trapeze/rectangles from Neve David is 16.7mm (SD=2.6),mean width is 4.8mm (SD=0.6)and mean thickness is 1.8mm (SD=0.4)(Yaroshevich, 2006).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.4. Archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Yaroshevich, 2006 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 311Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Oblique hafting increases the width of a projectile head while still keeping the angle of the frontal tip sharp, a combination which explains the high values of penetration depth for arrows with obliquely inserted microliths.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This difference can be explained by different arrow designs as the straight points shot in the first session consisted of a single microlith and the arrows were shot until the point was damaged or dislodged.In the second group the straight points were inset into arrows which also held four barbs.In many of these cases the arrow was retired as a result of damaged or dislodged barb/s even though the”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.6. Frequencies of projectile macro-damage according to microlith type and mode of hafting
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Transversal hafting of a microlith at the tip produces a projectile head width equal to the microlith's length, which is the maximal width possible with use of a single microlith.This accounts for the greater values for penetration depth even though the design does not involve a pointed tip.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Fractures initiating on a sharp edge were observed on experimental transversally hafted points (Fisher et al., 1984;Nuzhnyy, 1990Nuzhnyy, , 1993;;Lombard and Pargetter, 2008); on obliquely hafted points (Nuzhnyy, 1990(Nuzhnyy, , 1993;;Lombard and Pargetter, 2008), as well as on side elements, i.e. lateral blades and barbs of the projectiles (Nuzhnyy, 1990(Nuzhnyy, , 1999;;Crombe et al., 2001).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.1. Background
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fisher et al., 1984
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Nuzhnyy, 1990
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lombard and Pargetter, 2008 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“For the lunates with abrupt retouch the average lengths, widths and thickness are 16.9mm (SD= 4.4), 6.5mm (SD=1.9)and 2.4mm (SD=0.5),respectively (Liber, 2006).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.4. Archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Liber, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both these categories would be lost in a hunting situation.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.7. Taphonomy of projectile microlithic elements
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“while the frequencies of macro-damage on projectile tips vary from 32% (Crombe et al., 2001) to 41% (Fischer et al., 1984).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.1. Background
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The average lengths, widths and thicknesses of Helwan lunates are 21.9mm (SD=4.6),8.1mm (SD=1.4) and 2.9mm (SD=0.7).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.4. Archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Liber, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Fisher et al., (1984) determined that two types of fractures can be recognized as diagnostic of projectile impact, i.e., fracture types that could not have been produced as a result of other activities or as a result of production accident or trampling.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.1. Background
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Fischer et al., 1984 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Micro-fractures indicating projectile impact on lunates from the Late Natufian of Mureybet and Abu Hureyra allowed interpretation of their use as transversally and obliquely hafted points and barbs (Anderson-Gerfaud, 1983).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.1. Background
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Anderson-Gerfaud, 1983
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Fractures diagnostic of projectile impact have been observed on microliths from a number of Levantine Epipaleolithic sites and various hafting modes were suggested for different microlith types.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.1. Background
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Fractures initiating on the retouched edge of the microlith were defined as diagnostic of hafting the microlith as a straight point (Nuzhnyy, 1990).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.1. Background
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Nuzhnyy, 1990
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Self pointed arrows with numerous lateral blades combine all the characteristics of efficient cutting projectiles as attachment of lateral blades along both sides of the shaft increases the width of the projectile head and the long sharp edges formed by the lateral blades reduce friction thus enhancing penetrating abilities (Friis-Hunsen, 1990).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Friis-Hunsen, 1990 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“for Natufian huntergatherers can be considered as one of the factors that could have affected the subsequent transition to food production that took place in the early Holocene.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The design of a projectile weapon may affect its performance characteristics.
In the paper
“In order to produce a deep wound the arrowhead must penetrate the hide as well as cut an opening which would be wide enough to allow the shaft to enter with negligible friction (Friis-Hunsen, 1990).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Friis-Hunsen, 1990 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This barb was fitted with arch-backed bladelet and we believe that the double breakage occurred due to the considerable length of the protruding part of the microlith.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.4. Multiple macro-fractures
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hafting a microlith as a straight point fixes the width of the projectile head equal to the width of the microlith.As a result the opening produced by the arrowhead is relatively small which increases friction and does not allow deep penetration, notwithstanding the relatively sharp angle of the leading tip.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Recent use-wear analysis of Natufian lithic assemblages indicated transversal hafting for several lunates from Hayonim Cave and as barbs from Salibiya I (Richhter, 2007).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.1. Background
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Richhter, 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Based on obliquely oriented macro-fractures initiating on the sharp edges of lunates from the Final Natufian site of Eynan (Ein Mallaha), it was suggested that they were hafted as oblique, rather than transversal points (Marder et al., 2007;Valla et al., 2007).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 2.1. Background
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Marder et al., 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked yetcites Valla et al., 2007 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In these cases the orientation of the micro-fractures is not consistent with the mode of microlith hafting which probably indicates the movement of the microlith from its original position during impact.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 3.1.5. Micro-fractures on the experimental microliths
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, obliquely oriented fractures on transversally hafted microliths and striations directed roughly parallel to the longitudinal axis on obliquely hafted microliths indicate movement of the microlith during impact.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.2. Projectile damage patterns in the context of microlith hafting mode
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Single straight points show higher values than arrows composed of straight points with additional barbs.This difference is connected to the frequent retirement of these arrows due to damage of the barbs.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.3. Frequency of projectile fractures
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It should be remembered, however, that this range was calculated based on all the microliths used, without taking into account the mode of microlith hafting which was shown to affect the frequency of projectile damage.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.4. Taphonomy of projectile microlithic elements
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Extensive experimentally based research of the Late Pleistocene -Early Holocene microlithic assemblages in the Ukraine revealed a shift from the hafting of elongated backed microliths predominantly as side inserts to a variety of hafting modes for smaller geometric microliths, mostly on the tip of the projectile, including hafting as transversal points (Nuzhnyy, 1990(Nuzhnyy, , 1993)).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Nuzhnyy, 1990
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Nuzhnyy, 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The use of the bow and arrow also fits the evidence for the broadening of the diet range during the Natufian as this type of weapon allows for extended trips required in a restricted area and can be used in the hunting of a wide variety of game (Yu, 2006).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Yu, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Straight points are particularly associated with multiple fractures at opposite ends, oriented one towards the other as well as with multiple fractures on the same end that appear on the dorsal and ventral surfaces.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.2. Projectile damage patterns in the context of microlith hafting mode
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Another consequence of reduced mobility which might directly affect projectile weapon technology is a change in the attitude to the ownership of territory in conditions of growing population density.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Another example of projectile transformation associated with temporal change in microlithic variability was indicated based on an analysis of flint assemblages from the Boreal and the Atlantic sites in the Kamenice River Canyon of the Czech Republic.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Svoboda et al., 2007
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This shift in projectile design, generally similar to the dynamics revealed in the present study, was explained in terms of technological developments towards more efficient production of projectile heads.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result, the samples of arrows with a particular design fitted with a particular type of microlith were relatively small which precludes detailed statistical analyses.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 5. Conclusions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Through use of a variety of designs, each of which has its own advantages in terms of performance, the Natufians could exploit the available resources in a more efficient way and thus sustain their large communities, as well as to protect their territory.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 5. Conclusions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This is in accordance with the”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Belfer-Cohen and Goring-Morris, 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Delage, 2005 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, arrows with one or two microliths set as tips are easier to prepare as the microlithic points can be hafted with minimal or no preparation of the distal part of the shaft, they are light and convenient to use and retooling is relatively simple.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In sum, our experiments have shown that arrow design affects its efficiency, as well as damage patterns in accordance with microlith morphology.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.4. Taphonomy of projectile microlithic elements
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Accordingly, the Geometric Kebaran knapping technique is highly homogeneous and oriented toward uniform bladelet production, which fills the need for a large series of standardized blanks (Yaroshevich, 2006).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Yaroshevich, 2006 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The retooling of such projectiles would involve resharpening the point, as well as replacement of missing blades.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the Levant the transformation in projectile design is associated with the transition to sedentary settlements-a change which implies intensified use of resources within an area of several hours walking distance from the base site.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It has been indicated, however, that the use of flint points as tips of spears resulted in more prominent fractures in terms of their size and frequency than their use as arrowheads (Fischer et al., 1984).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Fischer et al., 1984 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Oblique hafting can be identified by multiple fractures that initiate on the sharp edge of the microlith and remove its tip in a blunt angle or by the combination of parallel and oblique/perpendicular fractures on opposite ends of the microlith.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.2. Projectile damage patterns in the context of microlith hafting mode
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The introduction of transversal arrowheads may indicate a hunting strategy based on tracking down animals as this kind of point forms a wound large enough to create a blood trail (Clark, 1959).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Clark, 1959
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Archery experiments and analysis of a sample of microliths from an Early Mesolithic site in Belgium have shown that the Pre-Boreal to Boreal increase in the number of non-geometric microliths and reduced frequency and morphological diversity of geometric microliths reflect a shift to hafting microliths mostly as tips of the projectiles together with a reduction in the use of barbs (Crombe et al.,”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Crombe et al., 2001 source
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The experiments have demonstrated that most types of single fractures diagnostic of projectile impact can occur on differently hafted microliths and cannot provide a reliable base for reconstructing mode of hafting.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.2. Projectile damage patterns in the context of microlith hafting mode
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hafting as straight points leaves a considerable part of the microlith exposed upon impact whereas hafting as double oblique and transversal points allows embedding most of the microlith's surface into the adhesive leaving only the sharp edge exposed.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The high frequency of ricochets among double oblique points compared with the low frequency of ricochets among straight and oblique points supports this hypothesis.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The rest can be returned to the habitation site either inside the game or in the arrows.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.4. Taphonomy of projectile microlithic elements
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Temporal changes in microlithic variability linked to transformations in projectile design have been indicated for the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic in Europe.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, these arrows are heavier and more cumbersome to use.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Here production of microlithic backed bladelets and triangles, hafted as straight points and probably as barbs, was replaced by blade-based production of trapezes hafted as transversal points (Svoboda et al., 2007).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Svoboda et al., 2007
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The differences in the durability indices can be explained by differences in the location of the microlith on the shaft and by the extent of protrusion of the microlith from the adhesive.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1. Experimental data 4.1.1. Performance characteristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“A single parallel fracture initiating on a retouched edge and crossing the microlith body is also characteristic mostly of straight points (see also Nuzhnyy, 1990Nuzhnyy, , 1993)), although this type of damage may occasionally occur on long non-geometric microliths hafted as barbs as a result of removing the arrow from the target.”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.1.2. Projectile damage patterns in the context of microlith hafting mode
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Nuzhnyy, 1990
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Nuzhnyy, 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Projectile weapons were in use in the Levant starting at least from the early Upper Paleolithic (Bergman, and Newcomer, 1983;Shea, 2006).”
§ Design and Performance of Microlith Implemented Projectiles During the Middle and the Late Epipaleolithic of the Levant: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence > 4.2. Interpretation of archaeological material
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bergman, and Newcomer, 1983
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shea, 2006 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
The Late Pleistocene flint assemblages in the Levant do not yield any type of symmetrical points, leaving microlithic tools as the only candidates to function as projectiles.
“The Late Pleistocene flint assemblages in the Levant do not yield any type of symmetrical points leaving microlithic tools as the only candidates to function as projectiles.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The design of a projectile weapon may affect its performance characteristics.
“The design of a projectile weapon may affect its performance characteristics.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Projectiles are usually used outside the settlement area, and only a portion of microliths used in hunting activity is expected to be brought back to the site.
“Projectiles are usually used outside the settlement area.Only a portion of microliths used in hunting activity is expected to be brought back to the site either inside the game or still embedded in the projectile shaft.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Experimental studies with Levantine microliths have not been performed before.
“Experimental studies with Levantine microliths have not been performed before.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The experimental fracture patterns produced by shooting microliths into a goat carcass are analogous to those produced in prehistoric hunting.
“Based on the frequency of damage diagnostic of projectile impact among the microliths recovered from the target and from the arrows, and taking into consideration that in a real hunting situation damaged microliths embedded in the arrows could have been replaced, we suggest that projectile damage expected to be found in archaeological assemblages range between 7.9-26.5%.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The experimental sample of microliths and shooting sessions is representative of past projectile use and hafting variability.
“The experiments have demonstrated that most types of single fractures diagnostic of projectile impact can occur on differently hafted microliths and cannot provide a reliable base for reconstructing mode of hafting.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The archaeological microliths with diagnostic fractures were used as projectiles and their fractures were caused by projectile impact.
“Damage diagnostic of projectile impact occurred on 5.3% of the microliths from the Geometric Kebaran site of Neve David and on 8.4% of the lunates from el-Wad Terrace.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The taphonomic processes affecting microliths in the experiments are similar to those in prehistoric hunting and discard.
“Our taphonomic analysis of microlithic implements has shown that more then 40% of shot microliths are expected to be lost in hunting activity.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The performance characteristics measured in the experiments (penetration depth, durability, ricochets) are relevant to prehistoric hunting effectiveness.
“The analysis of efficiency of differently designed arrows showed a correlation between arrow design and performance characteristics.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The samples from el-Wad Terrace and Neve David are representative of Natufian and Geometric Kebaran microlith assemblages, respectively.
“Table 7 : Frequencies of diagnostic and non-diagnostic fractures and undamaged microliths in the samples from Geometric Kebaran Neve David and Natufian el-Wad Terrace.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The experimental arrows with microliths accurately represent the actual projectiles used in the Epipaleolithic.
“Our study was based on experiments intended to represent a wide range of projectile designs and types of microliths.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
el-Wad diagnostic lunates are assigned to different types in Tables 7 and 8
MinorTable 7 reports diagnostic damage on 15 Helwan and 10 abrupt-retouch lunates; Table 8 instead labels 14 Helwan and 11 abrupt lunates. Both give 25 overall, but the type-specific counts disagree.
“| el-Wad Terrace | Helwan lunate Lunate abr. etouch Lunate varia | 135 93 18 | 84.4 79.5 81.8 | 15 10 - | 9.4 8.5 - | 10 14 4 | 6.3 12.0 18.2 | 160 117 22 | 100.0 100.0 100.0 |”
“| el-Wad Terrace | Helwan lunate N=14 Abrupt lunate N=11 Total el-Wad Terrace |”
Second-session total is labelled with the whole-study count
MinorA row labelled "Total second session" gives 265 microliths, while the paper states that 265 is the total number prepared for the study and separately lists 102 for the first session.
“Total second session 65 24.5 69 26 102 38.5 29 10.9 265 100”
“For the present study 102 arrows were made incorporating a total of 265 microlith replicas prepared by Dodi Ben Ami.”
Straight-point penetration index does not match the table counts
MinorIndex 2 is defined as target penetrations divided by arrows. Table 1 gives 15 penetrations for 12 straight-point arrows, yielding 1.25, not the reported 1.4.
Reported 1.4 · recomputed 1.25
“| Straight points N=12 | 15 | 2 | 14 | 31 | 15.0 | 2.6 | 1.4 | 11.8 |”
Neve David diagnostic-fracture counts differ between tables
MinorTable 7 reports five diagnostic medial parts and 21 diagnostic microliths in total, whereas Table 8 labels six medial parts and 22 in total.
“| Neve David | Trapeze/rectangle Medial parts Total | 254 80 334 | 81.7 94.1 84.3 | 16 5 21 | 5.1 5.9 5.3 | 41 -41 | 13.2 -10.4 | 311 85 396 | 100.0 100.0 100.0 |”
“| Neve David | Trapeze/rectangle N=16 Medial parts N=6 Total Neve David N=22 |”
Citations
Cites
Evolution, consequences and future of plant and animal domestication
Diamond, J. M. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01019 · Cited by 1,772
Stiner, M. C., Munro, N. D., & Surovell, T. A. (2000) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/300102 · Cited by 686
The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land
Routledge, B. E., & Levy, T. E. (1998) · The Classical World · doi:10.2307/4352203 · Cited by 641
Life in neolithic farming communities: social organization, identity, and differentiation
(2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.38-2231 · Cited by 384
The origins of lithic projectile point technology: evidence from Africa, the Levant, and Europe
Shea, J. J. (2006) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2005.10.015 · Cited by 363
FISCHER, A., HANSEN, P. V., & RASMUSSEN, P. (1984) · Journal of Danish Archaeology · doi:10.1080/0108464x.1984.10589910 · Cited by 356
Zooarchaeological Measures of Hunting Pressure and Occupation Intensity in the Natufian
Munro, N. D. (2004) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/422084 · Cited by 330
Experiments with spears and arrows on animal targets
Odell, G. H., & Cowan, F. (1986) · Journal of Field Archaeology · doi:10.1179/009346986791535780 · Cited by 266
Spear Points from the Middle Paleolithic of the Levant
Shea, J. J. (1988) · Journal of Field Archaeology · doi:10.1179/jfa.1988.15.4.441 · Cited by 199
Hester, T. R. (1982) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/279922 · Cited by 194
From Foraging to Agriculture. The Levant at the End of the Ice Age. By Donald O. Henry.
Zariņš, J. (1990) · American Journal of Archaeology · doi:10.2307/505806 · Cited by 185
The articulation of cultural processes and Late Quaternary environmental changes in Cisjordan.
Goring‐Morris, A. N., & Belfer‐Cohen, A. (1997) · Paléorient · doi:10.3406/paleo.1997.4653 · Cited by 166
The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land. Thomas E. Levy and Kent Flannery.
Harrison, T. P. (2000) · Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research · doi:10.2307/1357644 · Cited by 145
Clark, J., Phillips, J. L., & Staley, P. S. (1974) · Paléorient · doi:10.3406/paleo.1974.1057 · Cited by 140
Lombard, M., & Pargeter, J. (2008) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2008.04.004 · Cited by 128
Hunters at Hengistbury: some evidence from experimental archaeology
Barton, R. N. E., & Bergman, C. A. (1982) · World Archaeology · doi:10.1080/00438243.1982.9979864 · Cited by 122
Archaeology and ethnoarchaeology of mobility
Sellet, F., Greaves, R. D., & Yu, P.-L. (2006) · Cited by 113
Hunting during the Upper Paleolithic: Bow, Spearthrower, or Both?
Cattelain, P. (1997) · Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-1851-2_9 · Cited by 103
Mesolithic cutting arrows: functional analysis of arrows used in the hunting of large game
Friis-Hansen, J. (1990) · Antiquity · doi:10.1017/s0003598x0007839x · Cited by 86
Preparing for the Hunt in the Late Paleolithic Camp at Rekem, Belgium
Caspar, J.-P., & Bie, M. D. (1996) · Journal of Field Archaeology · doi:10.1179/009346996791973747 · Cited by 79
Life in Neolithic Farming Communities
Kuijt, I. (2006) · Kluwer Academic Publishers eBooks · doi:10.1007/0-306-47166-3_1 · Cited by 71
Wear analysis on Early Mesolithic microliths from the Verrebroek Site, East Flanders Belgium
Crombé, P., Perdaen, Y., Sergant, J., & Caspar, J.-P. (2001) · Journal of Field Archaeology · doi:10.1179/jfa.2001.28.3-4.253 · Cited by 66
From foraging to agriculture: the Levant at the end of the Ice Age
(1989) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-2169 · Cited by 65
Préliminaires d'une analyse fonctionnelle des pointes microlithiques de Bergumermeer (Pays-Bas)
Odell, G. H. (1978) · Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française · doi:10.3406/bspf.1978.4398 · Cited by 62
Early Natufian remains: evidence for physical conflict from Mt. Carmel, Israel
Bocquentin, F. (2004) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.05.003 · Cited by 58
Newcomer, M. H., & Moss, E. H. (1982) · Cited by 58
Epipaleolithic Subsistence Strategies in the Levant: a Zooarchaeological Perspective
Bar-Oz, G. (2004) · doi:10.1163/9789004494336 · Cited by 57
Une tête de sagaie à armature de lamelles de silex à Pincevent (Seine-et-Marne)
Leroi‐Gourhan, A. (1983) · Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française · doi:10.3406/bspf.1983.5435 · Cited by 50
L'utilisation des microlithes géométriques et non géométriques comme armatures de projectiles
Nuzhnyj, D. (1989) · Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française · doi:10.3406/bspf.1989.9368 · Cited by 47
Odell, G. H. (1998) · American Anthropologist · doi:10.1525/aa.1998.100.3.793 · Cited by 46
Formal Variation in Australian Spear and Spearthrower Technology
Cundy, B. J. (1989) · doi:10.30861/9780860546931 · Cited by 39
A 14000 year-old hunter-gatherer's toolkit
Edwards, P. C. (2007) · Antiquity · doi:10.1017/s0003598x0009596x · Cited by 39
L'Evolution du Natoufien. Nouvelles suggestions
Bar‐Yosef, O., & Valla, F. (1979) · Paléorient · doi:10.3406/paleo.1979.4243 · Cited by 37
Self-citationLes fouilles de Ain Mallaha (Eynan) de 2003 ὰ 2005: Quatrième rapport préliminaire
Valla, F. R., Khalaily, H. [., Valladas, H., Tisnerat-Laborde, N., Samuelian, N., Bocquentin, F., Rabinovich, R., Bridault, A., Simmons, T., Le Dosseur, G., et al. (2007) · Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society · doi:10.61247/s955444 · Cited by 34
Brooks, R. R., & Wakankar, V. S. (1976) · Cited by 29
Richter, T. (2007) · Levant · doi:10.1179/lev.2007.39.1.97 · Cited by 17
Themes in the prehistoric art of Zimbabwe
Garlake, P. S. (1987) · World Archaeology · doi:10.1080/00438243.1987.9980033 · Cited by 16
After 70 Years: New Excavations at The el-Wad Terrace, Mount Carmel, Israel
Weinstein‐Evron, M., Kaufman, D., Bachrach, N., Bar‐Oz, G., Mayer, D. E. B., Chaim, S., Druck, D., Groman-Yaroslavski, I., Hershkovitz, I., Liber, N., et al. (2007) · Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society · doi:10.61247/s373104 · Cited by 15
Self-citationThe Geometric Kebaran microlithic assemblage of Ain Miri, Northern Israel
Shimelmitz, R., Barkai, R., & Gopher, A. (2004) · Paléorient · doi:10.3406/paleo.2004.1016 · Cited by 12
Marder, O., Pélegrin, J., Valentín, B., & Valla, F. (2006) · HAL · Cited by 12
Ophelie, B. (2009) · Docs.school Publications · Cited by 7
Yaroshevich, A. (2006) · Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia · doi:10.1134/s1563011006040025 · Cited by 4
Self-citationThe Natufian lithic industry: interpretive challenges and new insights
Delage, C. (2005) · Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society · doi:10.61247/s563703 · Cited by 2
Les Natoufiens connaissaient-ils l'arc ?
Valla, F. R. (1987) · Travaux de la Maison de l'Orient · doi:10.3406/mom.1987.1705
(1959) · Medical Entomology and Zoology
(1983) · Journal of Field Archaeology
(2007)
Self-citationEarly Sedentism in the Near East
Belfer-Cohen, A., & Bar-Yosef, O. (n.d.) · Fundamental Issues in Archaeology · doi:10.1007/0-306-47166-3_2
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Bar-Yosef, O., 1970. The Epi-Palaeolithic Cultures of Palestine. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
- Gvosdover, 1952, A composite point from the Paleolithic site of Talitskij, Scientific Notes of Moscow State University, 158, 207
- Kaufman, 1987, Excavations at the Geometric Kebaran site of Neve David, Israel: a preliminary report, Quartar, 37–38, 1989
- Liber, N., 2006. The Natufian stratigraphy of El-Wad terrace as seen through a techno-typological analysis of the lunates. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Haifa (in Hebrew).
- Marder, 2007, Reconstructing microlith shaping: archaeological and experimental observations on Early and Final Natufian lunates at Einan (Ein Mallaha), Israel, Eurasian Prehistory, 4, 99
- Nuzhnyy, D., 1990. Projectile damage on Upper Paleolithic microliths and the use of bow and arrow among Pleistocene hunters in the Ukraine. The interpretative possibilities of microwear studies. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of Lithic Use-Wear Analysis, 15–17th February 1989 in Uppsala, Sweden. AUN 14, Uppsala, pp. 113–124.
- Nuzhnyy, 1993, Projectile weapons and technical progress in the Stone Age, Traces et Function: les Gestes Retrouves Colloque International de Liege Editions ERAUL, 50, 11
- Nuzhnyy, 1998, The preliminary results of experiments with Aurignacian split based points production, hafting and usage, Préhistoire Européenne, 13, 117
- Nuzhnyy, 1999, Microlithic projectile weapons of the Late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic hunters of the Crimea, Archeologija, 1, 5
- Peterson, 1951, Mikrolithen als Pfeilspitzen. Ein Fund aus dem Lille Loshult Moor Ksp. Loshult, Skane, Meddelanden frn Lunds Universitets Historiska Museum, 4, 123
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evidence for Early Hafted Hunting Technology
Wilkins, J., Schoville, B. J., Brown, K. S., & Chazan, M. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1227608 · Cited by 420
Indications of bow and stone-tipped arrow use 64 000 years ago in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
Lombard, M., & Phillipson, L. (2010) · Antiquity · doi:10.1017/s0003598x00100134 · Cited by 290
Projectiles and the abuse of the use-wear method in a search for impact
Rots, V., & Plisson, H. (2013) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2013.10.027 · Cited by 245
Eren, M. I., Lycett, S. J., Patten, R. J., Buchanan, B., Pargeter, J., & O’Brien, M. J. (2016) · Ethnoarchaeology · doi:10.1080/19442890.2016.1213972 · Cited by 212
Lombard, M. (2011) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2011.04.001 · Cited by 208
Metadata
- Authors
- Yaroshevich, A., Kaufman, D., Nuzhnyy, D., Bar-Yosef, O., & Weinstein-Evron, M.
- Affiliations
- Israel Antiquities Authority (IL)
- University of Haifa (IL)
- National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (UA)
- Corresponding author
- Yaroshevich, Alla
- Venue
- Journal of Archaeological Science
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-02
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 368-388
- ISSN
- 0305-4403 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2103814391
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 17.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- nrs.harvard.edu
- Locations
- Journal of Archaeological Science (publishedVersion)
- Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Archaeological and Geological Studies
- Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
- Keywords
- microliths, projectile technology, Epipaleolithic, Levant, Natufian, hafting, experimental archaeology, transition to agriculture, hunter-gatherers, Late Pleistocene
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
