I have thought long and hard about addressing beliefs that winged type
bannerstones were used for hunting. Especially a specific species.
Since there is no hard evidence in the archaeological records of a winged
bannerstone being found on a known atatl shaft. Webb's grave finds of antlers
and bannerstones in a burial mound are still just his speculation.
To me it is just such rumor that can start a train of misguided thinking.
The original use of banners was documented as ceremonial. This should
still be a big consideration. Although the fact that bannerstones are as likely
to be found in refuse pits and graves of women and children.
The forests of the Archaic time period were boreal, totally un -cut mature forests
with a light blocking canopy. These forest were not the domain of white tailed
deer. More of an elk habitat. Elk inhabited nearly the entire US and it would be
hard to think hunters wouldn't at least attempt to kill them with atatls with similar
tactics employed for deer hunting. Not to mention Moose, seals, Manatee,
javelina, wolf, beaver and what not.
I think there are a multitude of arguments about using drilled stone on atatl shafts.
One very simple one would be to use a dense hard wood weight that would require way less time to craft and also be more durable to boot.
Although I have no archaeological proof that bannerstones were used as drilling aides.I think there are more reasonable possibilities.to contemplate.
I am still amazed about the lack of archaeological record for stone drills and drilling. I would think that in the year 2014 science could easily reveal
the use of a bannerstone. I guess the modern discipline's are way more to concerned with finding something solid that pre dates Clovis. lol
Zuma
