{"title":"The Bow-and-Arrow along the Southern Arc and Through to Oceania: Earliest Appearances, Archaeological Challenges, and Future Opportunities","authors":"Michelle C. Langley","doi":"10.1007/s10816-026-09794-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It has been theorised that the invention of the bow-and-arrow may have been key to the successful dispersal of <italic>Homo sapiens</italic>, and indeed, archaeological evidence for the use of this technology at early <italic>H. sapiens</italic> sites along the southern dispersal route towards Australia have been reported. On the Australian continent and throughout most of Polynesia, however, the bow appears to have been largely abandoned or only used for ritual or entertainment. Such a situation appears incongruous with the prominence of the bow as a subsistence technology in the remainder of the Old World, and as such, has proven to be a matter of confusion for both early European explorers and researchers alike. This paper reviews the earliest archaeological evidence for the use of the bow-and-arrow across the southern arc from India through Island Southeast Asia, Australasia, and finally, out across Oceania. Where durable components of arrows are missing from the archaeological record, the rich ethnohistoric record is examined for information concerning its presence or absence. By bringing these data together across such a broad spatial region for the first time, this paper not only provides a ‘big picture’ view of its use across the southern arc, but identifies challenges for furthering our knowledge of when, where, and how it was made and used by various peoples—and perhaps more interestingly, why it was ignored by others.","PeriodicalId":47725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-026-09794-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
It has been theorised that the invention of the bow-and-arrow may have been key to the successful dispersal of Homo sapiens, and indeed, archaeological evidence for the use of this technology at early H. sapiens sites along the southern dispersal route towards Australia have been reported. On the Australian continent and throughout most of Polynesia, however, the bow appears to have been largely abandoned or only used for ritual or entertainment. Such a situation appears incongruous with the prominence of the bow as a subsistence technology in the remainder of the Old World, and as such, has proven to be a matter of confusion for both early European explorers and researchers alike. This paper reviews the earliest archaeological evidence for the use of the bow-and-arrow across the southern arc from India through Island Southeast Asia, Australasia, and finally, out across Oceania. Where durable components of arrows are missing from the archaeological record, the rich ethnohistoric record is examined for information concerning its presence or absence. By bringing these data together across such a broad spatial region for the first time, this paper not only provides a ‘big picture’ view of its use across the southern arc, but identifies challenges for furthering our knowledge of when, where, and how it was made and used by various peoples—and perhaps more interestingly, why it was ignored by others.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, the leading journal in its field, presents original articles that address method- or theory-focused issues of current archaeological interest and represent significant explorations on the cutting edge of the discipline. The journal also welcomes topical syntheses that critically assess and integrate research on a specific subject in archaeological method or theory, as well as examinations of the history of archaeology. Written by experts, the articles benefit an international audience of archaeologists, students of archaeology, and practitioners of closely related disciplines. Specific topics covered in recent issues include: the use of nitche construction theory in archaeology, new developments in the use of soil chemistry in archaeological interpretation, and a model for the prehistoric development of clothing. The Journal''s distinguished Editorial Board includes archaeologists with worldwide archaeological knowledge (the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Africa), and expertise in a wide range of methodological and theoretical issues. Rated ''A'' in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is rated ''A'' in the ERIH, a new reference index that aims to help evenly access the scientific quality of Humanities research output. For more information visit: http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/activities/research-infrastructures.html Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List. For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm