Grade Levels: 9-12

Time Allotment: Three 45-minute class periods

Overview: In this lesson, selected segments from the PBS series The Human Spark are used to help students understand both the construction and context of some of the prehistoric tools which allowed early humans to survive and thrive. Particular attention is paid to the design and use of these early tools, the specific techniques used in their construction, and the reciprocal relationship between human technology and human evolution.

In the Introductory Activity, students will review the six simple machines and their role as the building blocks of most technologies. The Learning Activities will examine the progressively more sophisticated stone-age technologies of the hand-ax, the spear, and the atlatl assisted spear. The Culminating Activity asks students to brainstorm other tools and technologies which have affected the course of human development, and to conduct further research into them.

This lesson is best used as an introduction to a unit on the history of technology, or as a supplement to an anthropology or archaeology unit about Neanderthals and/or early humans. 

SUBJECT MATTER: Archaeology, Anthropology, Technology

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

Students will be able to:

• Describe  the six simple machines and give examples of each
• Describe detailed construction techniques for several different prehistoric tools
• Distinguish between natural and man-made wear patterns on rocks.
• Discuss how certain tools and technology have advanced human development and may have affected human biological evolution

LEARNING STANDARDS:

(From the National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies, available at www.socialstudies.org/standards/strands)

Chapter 2—The Themes of Social Studies

8. Science, Technology, and Society

Science, and its practical application, technology, have had a major influence on social and cultural change, and on the ways people interact with the world. Scientific advances and technology have influenced life over the centuries, and modern life, as we know it, would be impossible without technology and the science that supports it.

There are many questions about the role that science and technology play in our lives and in our cultures. What can we learn from the past about how new technologies result in broader social change, some of which is unanticipated? Is new technology always better than that which it replaces? How can we cope with the ever-increasing pace of change, perhaps even the concern that technology might get out of control? How can we manage technology so that the greatest numbers of people benefit? How can we preserve fundamental values and beliefs in a world that is rapidly becoming one technology-linked village? How do science and technology affect our sense of self and morality? How are disparate cultures, geographically separated but impacted by global events, brought together by the technology that informs us about events, and offered hope by the science that may alleviate global problems (e.g., the spread of AIDS)? How can gaps in access to benefits of science and technology be bridged?

(From the National Science Education Standards, available at www.nap.edu)

Content Standards: 9-12

Science as Inquiry

Content Standard A: As a result of activities in grades 9–12, all students should develop

• Understandings about scientific inquiry

1. Scientists usually inquire about how physical, living, or designed systems function. Conceptual principles and knowledge guide scientific inquiries. Historical and current scientific knowledge influence the design and interpretation of investigations and the evaluation of proposed explanations made by other scientists.
2. Scientists conduct investigations for a wide variety of reasons. For example, they may wish to discover new aspects of the natural world, explain recently observed phenomena, or test the conclusions of prior investigations or the predictions of current theories.

Science and Technology

Content Standard E: As a result of activities in grades 9-12, all students should develop

• Understandings about science and technology

1. Scientists in different disciplines ask different questions, use different methods of investigation, and accept different types of evidence to support their explanations. Many scientific investigations require the contributions of individuals from different disciplines, including engineering. New disciplines of science, such as geophysics and biochemistry often emerge at the interface of two older disciplines.
2. Science often advances with the introduction of new technologies. Solving technological problems often results in new scientific knowledge. New technologies often extend the current levels of scientific understanding and introduce new areas of research.

MEDIA COMPONENTS:

Video:

Selected segments of The Human Spark: Becoming Us

These video segments may be accessed by clicking the links below or on the Video Segments Page.

If It Ain’t Broke…

Archaeologist John Shea explains the context and construction of one of early humans’ first tools–the stone hand ax.

Pyroengineering

Archaeologist Curtis Marean explains a recent discovery about how early humans used fire in the creation of certain stone tools.

Making Stone Tools is Sooo Millions of Years Ago

Archaeologist Curtis Marean explains a recent discovery about how early humans used fire in the creation of certain stone tools.

To Make A Spear

Archaeologist John Shea demonstrates the construction of a primitive spear and explains its  impact on the social development the early humans who used them.

Websites:

“Simple Machines”

A website from the Center of Science and Industry featuring animated interactives about the nature and applications of simple machines.

MATERIALS:

For the teacher:

• A computer with internet access connected to a projector and speakers for classroom use.

PREP FOR TEACHERS:

Prior to teaching this lesson, you will need to:

Preview all of the video segments and websites used in the lesson.

Download the video segments used in the lesson to your classroom computer, or prepare to watch them using your classroom’s internet connection.

Bookmark the website used in the lesson on each computer in your classroom. Using a social bookmarking tool such as delicious.com or diigo (or an online bookmarking utility such as portaportal) will allow you to organize all the links in a central location.

Proceed to Lesson Activities.

1. Ask students how they would define “technology” in the most simple and general terms possible. (Accept all answers, but explain that anthropologists define technology as the use and knowledge of tools, techniques, and systems to solve problems or otherwise serve some purpose.) Ask students how they would define a tool in the most simple and general terms possible. (Accept all answers, but explain that a simple working definition of a tool is that it is some sort of instrument used to perform or facilitate work.) According to this definition, ask students if they think something as complex as a computer could be considered a tool. (Yes.) What about the software that runs on that computer? (Yes.) But what were the tools that made these tools, and what in turn were the tools used to make them? Where does it end? Ask students to come up with a list of  10 of the simplest tools they can think of. In other words, 10 of the most physically useful objects which they think cannot be broken down into even simpler useful objects. (Probable answers include a knife, a hammer, a screwdriver, etc.) Write all answers on a blackboard or whiteboard.

2. Log on to the “Simple Machines” website. Click on “The Essence Of Simple Machines” tab on the bottom left of the screen. The screen will show images of the six classic simple machines. Ask the class to identify and explain the basic function of each one, clicking on the machine’s link to get more information if necessary. (Pulley, inclined plane, lever, screw, wedge, and wheel.)

3. For each tool on their list of 10 simple tools, ask students if it is, or contains, one or more of the six simple machines. (E.g. a knife would be an example of a wedge; a hammer would be example of a lever.)

4. Explain that these simple machines do indeed constitute some of humanity’s earliest tools—developed and used long before they were named or recognized as the basic building blocks of future technologies. Tell students that in this lesson they will be taking a closer look at some specific instances of “stone age technology,” exploring how some of humanity’s earliest tools were created, what they were used for, and what further evolutions and advancements in humanity itself they may have sparked.

Learning Activities

1. Tell students that in this lesson they will be watching some segments from the PBS series THE HUMAN SPARK, which explores different theories about what it is that makes humans unique among animals. Ask students what ideas they may have about what makes us unique? (Accept all answers.) Ask students if they think that making and using tools are traits unique to humans? (Accept all answers.) Explain that while tool making and use was once considered uniquely human, more recent research has revealed that other species also make and use tools. Chimpanzees, for example, have been observed stripping sticks with their fingers and teeth so that they may more easily be inserted into ant and termite nests as probes to collect the edible inhabitants. Nevertheless, for no other species has tool making and use—on other words, technology—been such a central part of an evolutionary strategy as it has been for humans.

2. Tell students that they will know be looking at a video segment which examines the context and construction of one of humanities’ earliest tools—the hand ax. As they watch, ask students to be watching for the reason why archaeologist John Shea believes the design of the hand ax changed so little for so long.  PLAY Clip 1: “If It Ain’t Broke…”

3. Review the focus question: why does archaeologist John Shea believe the design of the hand ax changed so little for so long? (The design of the hand ax was not under a   “powerful pressure of natural selection” to evolve and improve; in other words, it wasn’t broke, so it wasn’t fixed!) Ask what natural selection is? (Charles Darwin’s principle of “survival of the fittest.”) Explain that Shea is using an evolutionary term usually applied to organisms and applying it instead to an organism’s inanimate creation; the more “fit” a tool seems to serve its purpose, the less it is refined or “evolves”, and the more it “survives” in its existing form.

4. Ask students how stone-age hand axes were made, based on Professor Shea’s demonstration. (A piece of rock is hit with another piece of rock, which chips pieces off, creating a sharp edge.) What kind of rock would work best for constructing hand axes in this manner? (Accept all answers, but point out that flint and certain other sedimentary rocks are ideal.) What are sedimentary rocks? (Sedimentary rocks are created by the geological compression over time of layer upon layer of sediments, generally left behind where there were once rivers or other bodies of water.) Why are they ideal materials for creating tools? (Their sedimentary layers can easily be chipped or “flaked” away to produce a sharp edge.)

5. Tell students that besides being a good stone for making into blades, flint possesses another extremely useful quality—what is it? (Flint, when struck with a rock containing iron, can generate sparks which can be kindled into flame.) Explain that this technique, known as “percussion firestarting,” is generally though to have developed around 7,000 B.C.—much later than the stone hand axes seen in the previous clip. Recent archaeological discoveries, however, suggest that fire did indeed play a role in the creation of certain stone blades dating back at least 72,000 years ago. As they watch the next clip, have students pay attention to what “silcrete” is and what role fire played in its use as a raw material for stone blades.  Play Clip 2: “Pyroengineering.”

6. Review the previous question: what is silcrete? (A material long thought to be ideal for making stone blades, many high-quality examples of which have been found by archaeologists). How was archaeologists’ actual experimental experience with silcrete problematizing this theory? (They themselves couldn’t make silcrete into good blades.) What was the archaeologists’ breakthrough in understanding how the high-quality silcrete blades were made? (They discovered silcrete encased in ash, suggesting that it had been heat-treated.) What happened when they heat-treated silcrete themselves during a barbeque? (It took on the same red color as the original silcrete blades they’d found, and when struck, flaked off sharp edges beautifully.)

7. Tell students that hardening by fire is also known as “tempering,” and that it is widely used in almost every type of manufacturing today, but that silcrete was perhaps its original use. Ask student how this type of “pyroengineering” might first have been discovered by early man? (Accept all answers, but point out that it may very well have been discovered accidentally when raw silcrete was heated in a cooking fire not unlike that made by Curtis Marean and his fellow archaeologists at their barbeque.) Remind students that silcrete blades have been found that date back over 72,000 years. Ask students how they think tempering would have been possible so many years before humans developed the ability to create fire? If necessary, offer this hint: how does fire occur naturally? (Flames started naturally by lighting strikes could, with care, be maintained more or less indefinitely.)

8. Point out how the case of silcrete is a good illustration of how much archaeological knowledge must be extrapolated from relatively mundane artifacts (e.g. an ash-encrusted rock) and confirmed through modern experimentation (e.g. the archaeologists’ barbeque.) When most of the prehistoric archeological record consists of various types of rock, even the subtlest differences can be significant to the trained eye. Ask students how archaeologists can distinguish between pieces of flint which were simply broken naturally from pieces that were deliberately fashioned into axes by early humans? (Accept all answers, and tell students to be thinking about this question as they watch the next clip.) PLAY Clip 3: “Making Stone Tools Is Sooo Millions of Years Ago.”

9. PAUSE at 1:54 right after John Shea says to Alan Alda “Of course they didn’t have guns yet.” Review the previous question: how can archaeologists distinguish between pieces of rock which were naturally broken from pieces that were deliberately fashioned into axes by early humans? (Rocks that are naturally fractured tend to be worn equally over their entire surface, and chipped in all directions, whereas artificially created ax heads show careful chipping only along the cutting edges, and always in one direction. Also, the environmental context in which rocks were found gives strong indication of whether they were made by humans.) Ask students what specific uses they think hand-axes had. PLAY Clip 3 through to the end.

10. Review the previous question: for what specific uses were hand-axes used? (They were multi-use tools, but depending on the nature of the edge they could be used for cutting or scraping.) Ask students to review the six classic simple machines. (Screw, inclined plane, pulley, wheel, lever, and wedge.) What kind of simple machine is a hand axe? (A wedge.) How does a wedge work? (It splits objects.)

11. Ask what would happen if you somehow attached a hand axe to a long stick or shaft?  (You would have created a spear.) What are the advantages of a spear over a hand axe? (Greater range.) Ask if a spear is fundamentally a different type of simple machine than a hand axe. (No—a spearhead is a wedge exactly like a hand-axe; only the nature of the force behind it is different—i.e. the force of a thrust, or the force of momentum if thrown.) Ask students how they think early humans went about making spears. (Accept all answers.) Tell students to be watching in the next clip for the answer to this question. PLAY Clip 4: “To Make A Spear.”

12. PAUSE at 35:55, after Shea says “In a real one we’d have a lot of glue in there.” Review the previous question: how did early humans make multi-part spears? (A stone spearhead would be made in a manner similar to a hand ax, inserted into a groove cut in a wooden stick or shaft, held in place with pitch or some other type of glue, and secured by multiple windings of animal sinew or plant fiber.) Explain that the spear, when thrown, was one of the earliest examples of “projectile technology.” Ask what the very earliest example probably was? (A thrown rock.)  Ask students what advantage projectile weapons had against the handheld variety? (Greater range.) What are the benefits of a weapon with greater range? (Accept all answers.) Have students pay particular attention to this question as they watch the remainder of the clip. PLAY Clip 4 through to the end.

13. Review the previous question: what are the benefits of a weapon with greater range? (Larger, more dangerous prey like woolly mammoths could be hunted at a safer distance.) Ask students if in the last clip they observed Shea and Alda using another example of stone-age technology to give their spears even greater range? If necessary, go back and play the clip from the previous pause point at 35:55. (They were using wooden “spear-throwers,” one end of which fit over the spear’s end with the other being held in the hand of the thrower.) Ask students how they think a spear-thrower works. (Accept all answers.) Tell students that the spear thrower used by Shea and Alda—also known as an “atlatl”—has been developed by many primitive cultures around the world. Ask students if they think the atlatl is an example of another simple machine? (Yes—a lever.) Explain that an atlatl is specifically a “third class lever,” which works by applying force between the fulcrum (the thrower’s shoulder) and the load (the spear or dart). By allowing a smaller movement on the fulcrum end of the lever to be magnified into a larger movement on the load end, an atlatl adds speed—and accordingly, distance—to the spear’s trajectory by effectively lengthening the thrower’s arm.

14. Ask students whether early humans hunted larger game animals individually or in groups? (In groups.) Why? (Because even the more advanced projectile technology of the atlatl-thrown spear wasn’t powerful enough for one person to kill a larger animal single-handedly.) Ask students why John Shea suggests in the clip that the nature of cooperative hunting was in itself also a major factor in humans’ evolutionary advancement. (The coordination and cooperation necessary for a group of early humans together required communication and planning, which in turn required language.)

15. Ask students which they think came first—primitive hunting implements or the language necessary to coordinate their use? (Accept all answers.) Point out that the likely answer to this “chicken and egg” dilemma is that the development of hunting tools and language was intertwined, with an advance in one leading to an advance in the other. Ask how else improvements in hunting might have affected human evolution? (Accept all answers.) Explain that, generally speaking, improvements in hunting allowed more and bigger game to be hunted, providing more meat in early humans’ diet; more meat, in turn, is believed to have contributed to a larger brain size; a larger brain size, among other things, helped contribute to even more sophisticated tool technology and language use, and so on. Essentially, our tools are extensions of ourselves—technologies that are both the artifacts of our evolutionary development to date, and catalysts for future development.

Culminating Activity

1. Divide students into groups of 4-5. Allow 20-30 minutes for groups to brainstorm five other basic tools or technologies which they think may have contributed to human advancement. Instruct groups to keep their ideas as simple and elemental as possible (e.g. “the plow,” rather than “farming machinery”).

2. Have each group present their ideas to the rest of the class as you write down all ideas on the blackboard or whiteboard. Encourage questions and comments from the class. Can any tool or technology be reduced to a simpler, more basic element? Is the tool an example of a simple machine? Does it include multiple simple machines? What human advancement might it have helped facilitate?

3. After all groups have presented, have each student choose one of the tools or technologies listed on the black or whiteboard as the subject for a short research essay addressing the following questions:

• When was the tool or technology developed/invented?
• What need did it address?
• Who developed/invented it?
• What advance did it make possible?
• How has the tool or technology been developed, improved, or expanded beyond its original incarnation?

Proceed to Video Segments.

Grade Level: 9-12

Time Allotment: two to three 45-minute class periods

OVERVIEW: In this lesson, students will use selected segments from the PBS series The Human Spark, to learn how archeologists discover and examine physical evidence and use it to formulate theories explaining how and why humans were able to advance beyond our now-extinct cousins the Neanderthals.

The Introductory Activity establishes the scope and focus of archeological research by challenging students to properly sequence a series of early human milestones, while an online quiz tests for prior knowledge. In the Learning Activities, students learn about archeological methodology as they watch The Human Spark segments featuring archeologists at work in both the field and the laboratory, and conduct a hands-on classroom activity simulating an archaeological excavation. In the Culminating Activity, students apply their new archaeological knowledge to a group project researching the early human milestones featured in the Introductory Activity.

This lesson is best used as an introduction to a science unit on archaeology or anthropology.

SUBJECT MATTER: Archaeology, Anthropology

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

Students will be able to:

• Describe the nature and limitations of Neanderthal culture.
• Discuss various theories about what enabled early humans to supersede the Neanderthals.
• Outline traditional archaeological methods and how they are being augmented by modern technology.
• Distinguish between “hard” and “social” sciences.
• Give specific examples of what the “debris of everyday life” can tell us about our early human ancestors.
• Offer theories of what might constitute a unique “human spark.”

STANDARDS:

From the National Science Education Standards at www.nap.edu

CONTENT STANDARD G: History and Nature of Science

As a result of activities in grades 9-12, all students should develop understanding of

SCIENCE AS A HUMAN ENDEAVOR

• Individuals and teams have contributed and will continue to contribute to the scientific enterprise. Doing science or engineering can be as simple as an individual conducting field studies or as complex as hundreds of people working on a major scientific question or technological problem. Pursuing science as a career or as a hobby can be both fascinating and intellectually rewarding.
• Scientists are influenced by societal, cultural, and personal beliefs and ways of viewing the world. Science is not separate from society but rather science is a part of society.

THE NATURE OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE

• Science distinguishes itself from other ways of knowing and from other bodies of knowledge through the use of empirical standards, logical arguments, and skepticism, as scientists strive for the best possible explanations about the natural world.
• Scientific explanations must meet certain criteria. First and foremost, they must be consistent with experimental and observational evidence about nature, and must make accurate predictions, when appropriate, about systems being studied. They should also be logical, respect the rules of evidence, be open to criticism, report methods and procedures, and make knowledge public. Explanations on how the natural world changes based on myths, personal beliefs, religious values, mystical inspiration, superstition, or authority may be personally useful and socially relevant, but they are not scientific.
• Because all scientific ideas depend on experimental and observational confirmation, all scientific knowledge is, in principle, subject to change as new evidence becomes available. The core ideas of science such as the conservation of energy or the laws of motion have been subjected to a wide variety of confirmations and are therefore unlikely to change in the areas in which they have been tested. In areas where data or understanding are incomplete, such as the details of human evolution or questions surrounding global warming, new data may well lead to changes in current ideas or resolve current conflicts. In situations where information is still fragmentary, it is normal for scientific ideas to be incomplete, but this is also where the opportunity for making advances may be greatest.
• Science distinguishes itself from other ways of knowing and from other bodies of knowledge through the use of empirical standards, logical arguments, and skepticism.

HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES

• Usually, changes in science occur as small modifications in extant knowledge. The daily work of science and engineering results in incremental advances in our understanding of the world and our ability to meet human needs and aspirations. Much can be learned about the internal workings of science and the nature of science from study of individual scientists, their daily work, and their efforts to advance scientific knowledge in their area of study.

MEDIA COMPONENTS:

Video:

The Human Spark: Becoming Us, selected segments

The Art Spark

An exploration of early cave art and what it tells us about our ancestors.

The Neanderthal Way

A glimpse into the excavation of a cave once inhabited by our close relatives the Neanderthals, and what it tells us about their archeological methodology.

What Teeth Can Tell

An example of how modern technology is informing archeological methodology.

The Garbage of Everyday Life

A tour of an archeological dig of an early human settlement, and some clues it offers about our ancestors.

The Community of Symbolism

Archeologists explain the significance of early ornamental beads.

Social Advantages

An explanation of the evolutionary advantage of human social organization.

Websites:

“What Do You Know?”

A quiz testing students’ knowledge about archaeology from the American Museum of Natural History.

MATERIALS:

For the teacher:

• A computer with internet access connected to a projector and speakers for classroom use.
• “Early Human Milestones” Student Organizer Answer Key

For each group of several students:

• A computer with internet access.

For each student:

• “Early Human Milestones” Student Organizer

PREP FOR TEACHERS:

Prior to teaching this lesson, you will need to:

Preview all of the video segments and websites used in the lesson.

Download the video segments used in the lesson to your classroom computer, or prepare to watch them using your classroom’s internet connection.

Bookmark the website used in the lesson on each computer in your classroom. Using a social bookmarking tool such as delicious.com or diigo (or an online bookmarking utility such as portaportal) will allow you to organize all the links in a central location.

Print and make copies of “Early Human Milestones” Student Organizer and Answer Key.

Proceed to Lesson Activities.

Selected segments of The Human Spark: Becoming Us

If It Ain’t Broke…

Archaeologist John Shea explains the context and construction of one of early humans’ first tools–the stone hand ax.

Pyroengineering

Archaeologist Curtis Marean explains a recent discovery about how early humans used fire in the creation of certain stone tools.

Making Stone Tools is Sooo Millions of Years Ago

Archaeologist Curtis Marean explains a recent discovery about how early humans used fire in the creation of certain stone tools.

To Make A Spear

Archaeologist John Shea demonstrates the construction of a primitive spear and explains its  impact on the social development the early humans who used them.

The Human Spark: Becoming Us, selected segments

The Art Spark
An exploration of early cave art and what it tells us about our ancestors.

The Neanderthal Way
A glimpse into the excavation of a cave once inhabited by our close relatives the Neanderthals, and what it tells us about their archeological methodology.

What Teeth Can Tell
An example of how modern technology is informing archeological methodology.

The Garbage of Everyday Life
A tour of an archeological dig of an early human settlement, and some clues it offers about our ancestors.

The Community of Symbolism
Archeologists explain the significance of early ornamental beads.

Social Advantages
An explanation of the evolutionary advantage of human social organization.

Downloadable QuickTime versions of the video segments:
(Note: To download a video, right click on the video title and click “Save Link As…’ or “Save Target As…”. On a Mac, press the CTRL key and simultaneously click the mouse, then save the link.)

The Art Spark

The Neanderthal Way

What Teeth Can Tell

The Garbage of Everyday Life

The Community of Symbolism

Social Advantages

What do you think of Dominique’s answer to our favorite question: what is the human spark?

The first Neanderthal skull discovered in modern times hid in a cave in Engis, Belgium until a local doctor pulled it out in 1829. In this video, archaeologist Michel Toussaint describes how the discovery was ahead of its time — three decades before publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species.

Can you think of other scientific ideas or breakthroughs that took time for society to accept?

Veronica Waweru shares some of her recreated arrows with Alan as Larry Engel and Peter Miller capture the video and audio and Producer Graham Chedd looks on. Credit: Maggie Villiger

By Veronica Waweru

Ancient human inventions always engender debate among paleoanthropologists. Models are developed to explain the appearance and timing of new “novel” technologies or behavior. I am no different from these researchers and harbor a fascination with the origin of the bow and arrow. This technology is central to discussions on the hunting abilities of ancients. Were they not-too-smart creatures that scavenged leftovers from big cats, did they only hunt docile animals or were they proficient hunters who brought down dangerous animals? These debates often also include comparisons of Homo sapiens of the last 200,000 years to their Neanderthal contemporaries. Often, the discussion pivots on whether early Homo sapiens were better hunters than Neanderthals. The evidence cited by most researchers suggests that our cold-adapted relatives in Eurasia were not such adept hunters – what with their rodeo-rider-type injuries and their large spears that would force them to engage prey face to face. The most damning evidence for Neanderthals’ technological ineptitude is their extinction – at least for those who do not believe that they interbred with Homo sapiens. But that is a different debate altogether!

Veronica holds a stone point that dates to 100,000 years ago.

Stone armatures or points are amongst the most durable artifacts found in the archaeological record. These were used to arm the business end of knives, javelins, stabbing spears, atlatls and the bow and arrow. All of the organic elements of these implements dating back to 200,000 years ago have decomposed, of course. We are left with the stone tips to determine what weaponry system they were part of. Here we apply laws of physics and ballistics, take copious measurements of the stone tips and attempt to extract ancient blood serum and fats from their edges to make our cases. Then we cite evidence of indigenous people who still use spears and arrows to hunt.

My work focuses on finding evidence of the bow and arrow using stone points from Cartwright’s site, located on the Kinangop plateau in Kenya. I have used most methods employed by researchers in the field but also went ahead and had replicas of the prehistoric tips made and hafted onto arrow shafts. We then shot them at sides of pork and a complete goat carcass (very humanely dispatched and used for food afterward). The results indicated that in terms of distance traveled and penetration, some of the points worked well as “arrowheads.”

Veronica examines the arrows of a modern hunter in Kenya while the Human Spark camera captures their exchange. Credit: Maggie Villiger

To any hunter, putting distance between yourself and prey that might potentially fight back is important. Here, arrows have an advantage over spears. Weapons also need to deliver lethal blows, induce massive bleeding or cause damage to internal organs. Penetration depth is therefore important. In a nutshell, we have a lightweight projectile weapon dating to approximately 100,000 years ago in east Africa! One that can be transported for long distances, the head easily replaced, and the arrow shot from a variety of positions and potentially by a group of hunters, without alerting prey. Modern hunters often add a cocktail of poisons to the shafts of their arrows. These are derived from plants (such as the arrow poison tree) that have wide distribution in Africa. Did prehistoric hunters use arrows to deliver poisons to quarry? We may never know because poisons are unlikely to survive that long.

If arrows could be used effectively against large dangerous prey, why not against our enemies? Here the gore starts – coalitionary violence against members of our own species. What might prehistoric people fight over? Perhaps not oil or ideology but scarce food resources during dry climatic conditions brought on by glacial cycles. Would such a weapon, when used in tandem with poisons, not threaten the very survival of a group if people took to shooting each other over resources?

After showing that prehistoric stone tools were likely used with the bow and arrow, I am now investigating the implications of this invention. Many researchers have argued that human aggression has a genetic substrate. I suspect that cultural mechanisms would have evolved to protect members of a social group from each other. I am presently studying poison-tipped arrow use in interethnic violence in Kenya. This will give insights into lethal violence between members of an ethnic group and non-members. 100,000 years ago, long before Hammurabi’s law or the Ten Commandants were in place, ancients may have had an unwritten — albeit tempered — Second Amendment. Thou shall posses and use poison tipped projectiles, but only on outsiders.

Veronica became the center of attention at the Kariokor Market in Nairobi when she showed up with our film crew. Here a vendor exhibits the modern arrows he sells there. Caption: Maggie Villiger

My fascination with the gore and science of ancient projectiles and poisons, led me to join the Human Spark film crew in Kenya last summer. I did some background work to find people to interview about bows and arrows and poisons. Metal-tipped arrows for sale were easy to find. The poison sources and makers were more elusive. Do you want to kill a stray dog? A person? Why not try bewitching them? The best answer I got was that only very old men made poisons, but they lived “very far away” and may not to want talk to women or strangers. So when the Human Spark crew arrived, I had but one contact who made bows and arrows for sale and who failed to persuade his great uncle to speak about poisons. Our first shooting site was a local market in downtown Nairobi. The crew appeared very much at ease among the throngs of curious crowds and open sewers. My favorite part of the whole event was getting pulled over by local policemen on our way out of Nairobi. They are notorious for taking bribes, but one look at the huge camera and they let us go. I almost dared them to ask for a bribe.

Next summer, I will get a big dummy camera to scare away corrupt traffic police, and endure more rides through potholed dirt roads to coax recipes of poison cocktails from unwilling old men of the Kamba ethnic group. The curiosity is intense and unrelenting. I blame it on a primordial curse – The Human Spark!

At Roc de Marsal, a Neanderthal site in France, Alan Alda learns that what had been believed to be a purposeful burial of a Neanderthal child now isn’t looking like such solid proof of ritualistic behavior.

In this video, archaeologists Shannon McPherron, Harold Dibble and Dennis Sandgathe explain to Alan why they no longer believe this site is an example of an intentional burial.