I understand that we progressed from throwing spears to atlatl to archery, but why wasn’t the atlatl maintained? Especially in warfare? Like the Romans used javelins and archery, but think of how much damage they could’ve done if they’d paired archery with thrown spears meant to take down a mammoth? If hucking javelins by hand is deadly then an atlatl would be significantly more so. So why was that technology lost?
While we wait for a more specific response to be written and sourced an answer by /u/wotan_weevil in the following thread is worth a read:
Additionally, while the following thread is rather old and thus not moderated to current quality it does contain some discussion that may help inspire additional follow up questions:
As soon as I saw atlatl, I thought "precontact North America," so here's a discussion of the use of the atlatl and its replacement by the bow and arrow in that context. This is largely a discussion of the uses of these implements for hunting:
In North American precontact cultures, the usual interpretation of the demise of the atlatl/spear is that it was replaced by bow and arrow technology sometime around 5000 BP to 3000 BP (give or take). In the eastern Midwest, where I work, that’s at the close of the Archaic Period and the beginning of the Woodland Period (note that these are archaeological cultural designations based on material culture). Much time has been spent categorizing the projectile points which would have tipped either spears (or darts) or arrows as well as looking at atlatl weights (see Justice 1987 and Thomas 1978, though there is a wealth of literature on the subject). The change in hunting technology is seen in the archaeological record by a decrease/disappearance of atlatl weights and projectile points associated with spears and a proliferation of smaller points used to tip arrows. This movement from atlatl and spear to bow and arrow is assumed to be rooted in precontact economy, subsistence, and environmental change. Namely, a change from hunting larger game which required less stealth and accuracy to hunting smaller game which required not only greater stealth and accuracy but also greater velocity and efficiency (see Tomka 2013). The change in hunting practices seems to have been linked to climatic changes (see Kidder 2006 or Anderson 2001, for example) which seems to have encouraged changes in subsistence patterns. A move to horticulture and agriculture and more sedentary seasonal to year-round occupation can be seen archaeologically in the appearance and rapid increase in pottery styles and vessel types, the appearance of storage pits and the appearance of plants associated with emerging agricultural complexes (see Keener and Nye 2001 for a good discussion on settlement types and associated activities).
While this move from the atlatl/spear to the bow and arrow does seem to have taken place, there is also a large body of work now that challenges the traditional assumption of replacement in favor of side-by-side use and gradual decline of the spear/atlatl in favor of the bow and arrow (Hildebrandt and King 2012, Nassaney and Pyle 1999, Shott 1993 and 1997, Tomka 2013, Vanpool 2006, and Walde 2014, for example). Also keep in mind that while this replacement seems to have happened across North America, it varied greatly in rapidity and scale.
So, to answer the question, in a North American context the replacement may have been gradual with atlatl/spear and bow and arrow technology being used in tandem, depending on the type of game being hunted and the type of subsistence economy being practiced. It seems to have happened because of shifts in that economy which eventually made the use of bow and arrow technology preferable (easier, more effective, more efficient, more appropriate, stealthier) rather than the atlatl and spear. In closing, I think Tomka 2013 is the best, most straightforward discussion of the differences between atlatl and bow and arrow technology.
References:
Anderson, David G.
2001 Climate and Culture Change in Prehistoric and Early Historic Eastern North America, in Archaeology of Eastern North America, Vol. 29: pp. 143-186
Hildrebrandt, William H. and Jerome H. King
2012 Distinguishing between Darts and Arrows in the Archaeological Record: Implications for Technological Change in the American West, in American Antiquity, Vol. 77: pp. 789-799
Justice, Noel D.
1987 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of the Midcontinental and Eastern United States. Indiana University Press: Indianapolis, IN
Keener, Craig S. and Kevin Nye
2007 Early Woodland Upland Encampments of Central Ohio in Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 32: pp. 263-295
Kidder, Tristam R.
2006 Climate Change and the Archaic to Woodland Transition (3000-2500 Cal. B.P. in the Mississippi River Basin, in American Antiquity, Vol. 71: pp. 195-231
Nassaney, Michael S. and Kendra Pyle
1999 The Adoption of the Bow and Arrow in Eastern North America: A View from Central Arkansas, in American Antiquity, Vol. 64: pp. 243-263
Shott, MJ
1993 Spears, Darts, and Arrows: Late Woodland Hunting Techniques in the Upper Ohio Valley, in American Antiquity, Vol. 58: pp. 425-443
Shott, MJ
1997 Stones and Shafts Redux: The Metric Discrimination of Chipped-Stone Dart and Arrow Points in American Antiquity, Vol. 62: pp 86-101
Thomas, David Hurst
1978 Arrowheads and Atlatl Darts: How Stones Got the Shaft, in American Antiquity, Vol. 43: pp. 461-472
Tomka, Steve A.
2013 The Adoption of the Bow and Arrow: A Model Based on Experimental Performance Characteristics, in American Antiquity, Vol. 78: pp. 553-569
Vanpool, Todd L.
2006 The Survival of Archaic Technology in an Agricultural World: How the Atlatl and Dart Endured in the North American Southwest, in Kiva, Vol. 71: pp. 429-452
Walde, Dale
2014 Concerning the Atlatl and the Bow: Further Observations Regarding Arrow and Dart Points in the Archaeological Record, in American Antiquity, Vol. 79, No. 1: pp. 156-161