Whenever I see a projectile point, I am always impressed with the level of detail and time that went in to turning a plain rock into a useable tool. While working in the Big Bar locality on the Fraser River, a considerable number of multi notched, or serrated, projectile points were recovered, leaving me even more amazed by the meticulous work put into these tools. Why did the makers begin taking the extra time and effort to put serrations on the projectile point, after thousands of years without? (Warning – this contains some unpleasant details).
Projectile points in the Canadian Plateau of British Columbia are assigned to archaeological time units using specific size and shape characteristics. The age ranges are determined through carbon 14 analysis of datable materials found in association with the same point styles in other archaeological sites.
The most recent archaeological unit is the Kamloops Horizon, which dates from 1200 to 200 years before present. The characteristic projectile points from this Horizon are typically small (1.5 to 3 cm long), thin, and triangular in shape. Larger points became more frequent towards the recent end of the time period. The points have 2 small opposing U shaped notches above the base, and are predominantly produced from fine grained volcanic rock such as basalt and dacite. Photograph 1 shows a typical Kamloops Horizon point. The multi notched variation of the Kamloops Horizon point has 2 or more deep, narrow, U shaped notches along one blade edge. This style has been found in the Mid-Fraser and Thompson drainages in sites dating from 600 to 200 years before present. Photograph 2 shows an assortment of complete and fragmented multi notched Kamloops Horizon points collected from a notable site in the Big Bar area.
Although more in depth research is still needed, it has been theorized that multi notched projectile points may have been designed for use in serious interpersonal conflicts. The extra notches would result in greater damage during arrow penetration, and would also cause more damage when removed. The notches on a thin projectile point make it more prone to breaking, either on impact or extraction, which would leave the tip of the point in the wound. This may promote infection or require invasive removal, resulting in further physical damage.
Secwepemc oral histories, along with ethnographic record, reference inter-regional conflict and tensions between nations, and that the Fraser River and Plateau was an area with significant conflict and overlapping territories. Hunting and fishing grounds could have been the subject of social conflict, and sections along the Fraser River still have assigned fishing rights today. Multi notched projectile points were utilized just prior to the arrival of settlers, and the introduction of colonial weapons may have resulted in a shift from stone tools for conflict. As addressed in a previous Dig It article, a metal projectile point was also recovered in this area, which may be correlated with the timeline of the arrival of settlers and the introduction of new arrow material with the potential to cause greater injuries.
To have made the shift from tools manufactured for means of subsistence through hunting and gathering to a weapon of warfare is part of a shift of lifestyle and inter-regional group dynamics. What kinds of shifts in society took place for this to occur, and what caused certain groups to aim to make war on others? Oral histories and ethnographic accounts are our best way to gain understanding of the societal interactions, and the archaeological record will hopefully help instigate and continue those conversations and research.