Margaret Brown Vega, Nathan Craig.  “New Experimental Data On The Distance Of Sling Projectiles,”  JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 36 (2009), pp. 1264–1268.

Abstract:
The range of stones cast by slings used in the past is debated. In the Central Andes, slings are asserted to be important weapons of prehispanic war, and have been recovered archaeologically. Rolled river cobbles and stones presumed to be slingstones found at fortified hilltop archaeological sites are presented as evidence that slings were used at these fortifications. Yet sling use has not been adequately tested at hillforts. Experiments conducted in Europe by a novice slinger have attempted to illuminate the range of sling cast stones at ancient hillforts. Data acquired from native slingers is necessary to more accurately assess distances achieved by projectiles launched by slings. We present data from sling experiments carried out in Puno, Peru´ among Quechua-speaking herders who are experienced slingers. The results demonstrate that a prior model of the maximum theoretical distance of sling cast stones underestimates their range. Results also show significant differences in the use of slings by men and women, and by different age groups. These new data permit a better approximation of warfare that has bearing on our interpretation of fortified sites.

Text Here:
http://pennstate.academia.edu/documents/0010/4106/brown_vega_craig2009_slings.pd...

Any thoughts on the relevancy of the data presented in the article?

Thanks for sharing the articles, Neander97.

You're not from Düsseldorf, I guess? 

This was spotted in the following thread: http://slinging.org/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1237975848/11#11
and there were some responses on that thread.

Mrboss, not everyone is interested only in throwing long distances. In the context of their experiments they would have been more interested in the distance people could comfortably throw.

It would not have been that dangerous standing downrange provided they kept their eyes open. Peruvians throw pretty big rocks and they were probably easily spotted, and could easily be dodged.

I think the results they obtained were interesting, and they did quote their 'raw data' which is rare, but I think their data reduction led to rather pessimistic conclusions about the ranges which might have been common in earlier times.

>>This was spotted in the following thread:

Ah . . . sorry for double posting the article.
= = = = = = = =

As far as the distance thing goes.  I thought they were interested in slingers defending hillforts.  Maybe I mis-read, I need to look at the paper again.

(When I assumed it was slinging in defense of an elevated, defensive position) I didn't think distance would be a major factor - I assumed the slinger's job was to hit the attacker as he approached the base of the wall.

= = = = = = = =

Flawed or not, I like to see academics doing experimental work like this.  Odds are that at some point, someone else will build upon the work in this paper and then someone will do a follow up to that, and so on and so on.  And sooner or later useful data sets emerge.

A good example is the work done by George Frison and his students at the University of Wyoming.  The were curious about the knapped stone tools and points used by “Mammoth hunters.”  They conducted a lot of “laboratory” type experiments and gathered some good data, but knew that they still were missing a lot.

At some point an elephant died in a zoo and they were able to test various spear & lance points on the carcass, as well test their stone skinning and butchering tools.  Later they even traveled to Africa and conducted experiments on carcasses there.  While it’s not the same as poking a live mammoth with a sharp stick, they did learn a lot (and share the results with anyone who was interested).
= = = = = = = =


>>You're not from Düsseldorf, I guess?

Neandershöhle?

: -)  : -)

Naw . . . I’ve family (three or four generations back) that came from someplace in Saxony, does that count? ; -)

Actually, the Neander thing is a play on my last name, Neumann.

Neander97 wrote on Jun 17^th, 2009 at 2:52pm:


Sorry, that is a common joke in the Rhine valley. I hope you did not feel offended.

BTW: The valley near Düsseldorf where the bones of the first "Neandertal man" were found in 1856 was called Neandertal (i.e. "Neander valley") because a religious poet called Neumann in the 17th century who had graecised his name into Neander liked to have walks and write poems there. Some of his poems have become popular songs in churches until today. Maybe you are a distant relative.

And if ya read Dohrenwend's article, You will find a diffrence between plunging and crazing fire. The height of the hillforts adds force and distance to the sling rocks.

Marc Adkins

timann wrote on Jun 17^th, 2009 at 2:18pm:

Yep And for the new slingers here I was the one who made official contact.
For the record this subforum is about the history of the sling and unless you are making arguements about historical or scholarly recorded ranges the rest of this arguement can be taken up on the main forum.

I agree that if the downrange crew is looking for a slow moving large rock well out of range there should be no problems.

Marc Adkins

timann wrote on Jun 17^th, 2009 at 1:55pm: