Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Grant Wood
Annotated Bibliography 1
2/5/12
Journal Article:
Bamforth, Douglas  B.
2009 Projectile Points, people, and Plains Paleoindian perambulations. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28: 142-157.
    In the article Projectile points, and Plains Paleoindian perambulations there are two main findings . In this article: Projectile points, people, and Plains Paleoindian perambulations by Bamforth is an analysis of Paleoindian archaeology. One main point of this article is to “focus  specifically on the role that a single class of artifacts – projectile points—has played in Paleoindian research, considering both the excellent reasons for studying points and the severe limits an over-emphasis in these artifacts puts  on our understanding of Paleoindian ways of life.” (Bamforth 142).  Another main point that he made in this article is that it can show how different peoples interacted with each other in the same region.   He also has two main roles of projectile points in the Great Plains. One role of the projectile point in the Great Plains region is that of hunting large game like bison . Another role of projectile points is how they were used. I think this article: Projectile points,  people , and Plains Paleoindian perambulations is important for two reasons. One reason that I think this article is important because it discusses how projectiles were used. An example of this is Native Americans using projectile points to hunt large mammals and other game. Another reason that I think reading this article importance is because it shows many aspects one doesn’t think  is involved.
Boszhardt, Robert F.
2003 A projectile point guide for the Upper Mississippi River Valley. Iowa City, IA
In the book: A projectile point guide for the Upper Mississippi River Valley by Robert F. Boszhardt, he states discusses all of the many different types of projectile points. Also he gives short descriptions of how it was made, the material that was used, how it was distributed in the region, and etc. He also examines not just how these projectile points were made. But, Robert Boszhardt also suggests that the stones that Native American tribes used in constructing their projectile points didn’t just come from within the Great Plains region but from other regions as well. There are three examples from this book that I believe demonstrates this point. The first example is the Kramer projectile point which is constructed in different shapes and is heat treated. Another example of the Great Plains regions diversity in projectile points is that the majority of projectile points in the Great Plains were from local stones, but on some occasions they traded stones from other regions within the United States. Another thing that Boszhardt says is that Native Americans had different processes for affecting the stone they were working to form into a projectile point either before, during, or after finishing forming the projectile point. An example of this is heat treating the projectile point once your done forming the projectile point. I think there are two important things in this article that can be related to the North American Archaeology class. One important thing is that Boszhardt gives an in depth description to what different kinds of projectile points are textured, the length and width of a projectile point to name a few. Another point that he made is that projectile points were distributed within the region that it was made in. An example of this projectile point is called the Steuben projectile point.

References Cited:
Bamforth, Douglas  B.
2009 Projectile Points, people, and Plains Paleoindian perambulations. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28: 142-157.
Boszhardt, Robert F.
2003 A projectile point guide for the Upper Mississippi River Valley. Iowa City, IA

No comments:

Post a Comment