Slings and Slingstones: The Forgotten Weapons of Oceania and the Americas. ROBERT YORK and GIGI YORK. 2011. Kent State University Press, Kent, Ohio. 196 pp.  $55.00 (hardcover)   ISBN 978-1-60635-107-9

Reviewed by John C. Whittaker

American Antiquity 78(1):199-200



In Slings and Slingstones, the Yorks have done good service by surveying the information on a “forgotten” weapon system. The writing is pleasant and unpretentious, with occasional humor, and plentiful illustrations.



The Yorks remind us repeatedly that slings have been sorely neglected by archaeologists, while demonstrating that they are widespread ethnographically and prehistorically, highly effective in warfare and some hunting, and thus culturally important in both symbolic and practical spheres. Slings influenced the conduct of warfare and the success or failure of some polities, the construction of fortifications and the use of armor, and the prevalence of medical techniques such as trepanation. They interacted in interesting ways with competing weapon systems, and slings and related traits can be used to address areas of cultural change and the movement of peoples, including in areas where long-range contact or diffusion has been argued.

The Yorks suggest several reasons for the neglect of such an important artifact. First, slings are made of perishable materials that do not survive well, and despite their importance, are rarely recognizable in iconography. Second, in many places, natural stones served as ammunition, and may not be readily identified as artifacts. Shaped biconical forms are apparently the only clear diagnostic of ancient sling use, yet even those have often been unrecognized and assigned other functions. I would add to this that few scholars have ever had any theoretical or practical experience with slings, a circular situation that inhibits interest and recognition and makes it hard to attract new study.

The structure of the book is an area by area survey of ethnographic and archaeological information in part of the sling’s geographical range, Oceania and the Americas, especially North America. The sections are somewhat uneven, largely because that is the nature of the record. The occasional historic accounts are especially interesting to read, and make the point that even Europeans armed with firearms found the sling a formidable weapon.  Although the maps are sketchy, the text and tables outline a number of distributional patterns. Most interesting to me is the issue of the overlap or competition between slings, bows and arrows, and atlatls (which get little attention). The usual assumption is that bows are more effective, at least in accuracy, killing power, and ease of use, but the many places where bows were known but slings were favored should lead us to question this, or at least examine specific circumstances.

The Yorks have an archaeological bent that surfaces in their emphasis on the stones as the best evidence for past sling use. They argue that slingstones, even some less-modified ones, can be recognized by form, weight ranges, and often context. Because of their cultural importance, they surely reflect temporal and stylistic changes: “Sling missiles warrant the same depth of study as projectile points.” I am inclined to agree, but it is at this point that I find the major shortcomings of this study. Slingstones need the same kind of technological and experimental examination that is the backbone of projectile point studies, and without which many of the questions posed by this book cannot be answered. Developing skill with a sling is difficult – I have tried, and the Yorks apparently did also. Virtuosity is not necessary to understand a technology, but at least a little experience is very helpful, and a basic  explanation of how it works belongs in any study of a “forgotten” weapon. There are different throwing styles, certainly culturally prescribed. Ethnographic and archaeological information on throwing motions is probably not available, nor should this be a practical manual of sling technique, but there should at least be a simple discussion of how slings work, and some experimental assessment of their capabilities. Web pages and youtube videos show that there are non-academic slingers who could be consulted.

Turning to the artifacts, biconical slingstones are often carefully shaped and finished, a considerable expenditure of effort for a one-shot missile in Oceanic naval warfare. How much effort? How much does it translate into improved range, accuracy, or striking power? Does use produce diagnostic impact damage? These are obvious questions that can be at least partly answered with simple experiments. It would be unfair to expect the Yorks to do everything, but as a fellow fan of ancient weapons, I find it odd that they have not further explored such avenues, when their enthusiasm for all things sling leads them to examine some really dubious stuff, like Oldowan round rocks, volcanic bombs as slingstone prototypes, and roughened slingstone surfaces as analogous to golf-ball dimples. Nevertheless, this is a useful and timely study with a clear call for further research that I hope will be similar to the study of projectile points.