Hollow-based arrowheads
Hollow-based arrowheads W1368-W1370
Flint arrowheads are known to have been used in warfare in ancient Egypt up until the Late Period (c.600 BC). In many ways flint arrowheads are better than metal arrowheads in that they are lighter and sharper and break up once they enter the flesh of a moving prey. However, we cannot be certain that the type of arrowhead shown here was used for warfare.
This type of arrowhead is sometimes called a Fayum Point, or a concave based arrowhead, or a hollow-based arrowhead. Most of the examples in the Egypt Centre have one of the wings broken off.
The type is bifacially made and the ‘wings’ or barbs, resulting from the depth of the hollow base, vary in length. Similarly, the size of the projectile varies greatly so that some have been assumed to be spear heads. Most have curved lateral edges though some are straight giving a more triangular appearance to the outline. Several are serrated (Caton-Thompson and Gardner 1934, 28; Holmes 1989, 416).
They are not confined to Egypt. A similar winged type was found at site H in Wadi Ghazzeh in the Gaza strip (MacDonald 1932, pl. 20.15 and 23.31, cited in Rizkana and Seeher 1988, 33). Whether these were made in Egypt or not is unclear.
The earliest of the type appear in the Bashendi A layers at Dakhleh (5700-5000 BC; McDonald 1999, 268). They appear in the Fayum Neolithic (Neolithic A) around 4500 BC and at the same time at Merimde (Rizkana and Seeher 1988, 33). They continue until Badarian and Naqada I times (4000-3500 BC). Although they are often called ‘Fayum Points’ they also occur in Upper Egypt, for example at Mostagedda (Brunton 1937) and Badari (Brunton 1928, 35-36, pl.83). It is unclear if they continue until Naqada II times (3500-3100 BC). Other sites where concave base arrowheads have been found include: Armant (Mond and Myers 1937, pl.68.87), Hemamieh (Brunton and Caton-Thompson 1928, pl 83, 166 and 167) and Naqada (Petrie 1896 pl 72.57and 58).
Neolithic types tend to be more finely made than the Predynastic types (Gilbert 2004, 51). At Merimde Predynastic stouter ones were earlier than narrow long ones (Rizkana and Seeher (1988, 33).
It has been debated as to whether or not one can see regional variations. Caton-Thompson and Gardner distinguished four different types from the Fayum (Caton-Thompson and Gardner 1934, 28). Hikade (2001) distinguishes between a Merimde point and the Fayum point. Rizkana and Seeher (1988, 33) state that at Maadi, Fayuum and Merimde triangular specimens with only slight hollows are found in the same contexts as others with very pronounced wings. Holmes (1989, 416) writes ‘A virtually infinite variety of concave base arrowheads is known from the Fayum, but for the Predynastic of Upper Egypt it has been useful to distinguish only two basic shapes: ‘incurving barb form’ and ‘straight-sided elongated triangular form’’.
While the examples in the Egypt Centre are probably arrowheads some of the larger types may well be spear heads. However, interestingly, large examples were found at Hierakonpolis structure 07 and the excavator suggested that these may have been large because of their votive nature (http://www.archaeology.org/interactive/hierakonpolis/field07/6.html)
The wings do not always seem to have acted as barbs. A hollow-based arrowhead of uncertain date with foreshaft attached was found to have the wings completely covered with adhesive. In this instance at least, the wings were intended to strengthen the join of the head to foreshaft (Payne 1993, 180).
The fact that these are bifacial arrowheads rather than simpler transverse types suggests that they were not simply utilitarian. Even the smaller chunkier ones are made with more care than would be needed simply from a practical view point. Thus, they probably also had symbolic importance, perhaps as a status marker.
More information on flint in ancient Egypt
Other Predynastic items in the Egypt Centre
Other items associated with archery in the Egypt Centre:
First Intermediate Period stela EC62 and W1366
Further Reading
Brunton, G. 1928. Qau and Badari II, London: British School of Archaeology in Egypt.
Brunton, G. Mostagedda and the Tasian Culture. London.
Brunton, G. and Caton-Thompson, G. 1928. The Badarian Civilization and Predynastic Remains near Badari. London.
Caton-Thompson, G. and Gardner, E.W. 1934. The Desert Fayum. London: The Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland.
Gilbert, G.P. (2004), Weapons, Warriors and Warfare in Early Egypt. BAR International Series 1208. Oxford. pp. 50-51.
Hikade, T. 2001. Silex-Pfeilspitzen in Ägypten. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo, 57, 109-125.
Holmes, D. 1989. The Predynastic Lithic Industries of Upper Egypt. A comparative study of the lithic traditions of Badari, Nagada and Hierakonpolis. BAR International Series 469. Oxford: Archaeopress.
MacDonald, E. Starkey, J.L. and Harding, L. 1932. Beth-Pelet II. Prehistoric Fara, London: British School of Archaeology in Egypt.
McDonald, M.M.A. 1999. ‘Daklha Oasis, Ismant el-Kharab’, in Bard, K.A., and Shubert, S.B. (eds.), Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, London and New York: Routledge 261-269.
Mond, R. and Myers, O.H. 1937. The Cemeteries of Armant. 2 vols. London: Egypt Exploration Society.
Payne, J.C. 1993. Catalogue of the Predynastic Egyptian Collection ion the Ashmolean Museum. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1896. Naqada and Ballas 1895. London: Bernard Quaritch.
Rizkana, I and Seeher, J. 1988. Maadi II, The Lithic Industries of the Predynastic Settlement. Maiz: Philipp von Zabern.
