South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
51
Research Article
A TYPOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE FINAL MIDDLE STONE AGE
STONE TOOLS FROM SIBUDU CAVE, KWAZULU-NATAL
LYN WADLEY
School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand,
P.O. WITS, 2050 South Africa. E-mail: [email protected]
(Received April 2005. Accepted September 2005)
ABSTRACT
The final Middle Stone Age (MSA) stone tool assemblage from Sibudu
Cave is characterized by sidescrapers, bifacial and unifacial points,
hollow-based points, bifacial cutting tools and backed tools, including
large, wide segments. The assemblage has been dated to between c. 33
and 35 kyr by optically stimulated luminescence (OSL), but a
radiocarbon date of c. 42 000 BP is also available. This Sibudu lithic
collection shows that large backed tools can be an integral part of the
final MSA because no Later Stone Age (LSA) occupation occurs at the
site. Sibudu data contribute to discussion of local traditions in the final
MSA, of dating the final MSA, and of the presence of segments in
non-Howiesons Poort and non-LSA assemblages.
Keywords: Sibudu Cave, stone tools, final Middle Stone Age.
INTRODUCTION
Sibudu Cave is approximately 40 km north of Durban in
northern KwaZulu-Natal and it lies at an altitude of approximately 100 m amsl (above mean sea level) on the Tongati River,
about 15 km inland of the Indian Ocean. The 55 m long cave
floor slopes abruptly from north to south. The cave is about
18 m in breadth. A small trial trench of roughly one metre deep
was excavated in 1983 by Aron Mazel of the Natal Museum. His
excavation revealed that the uppermost layers of the cave
contain Iron Age (IA) occupations and layers immediately
below this contain Middle Stone Age (MSA) occupations (Natal
Museum notes). He obtained two reversed radiocarbon dates
for charcoal samples from MSA layers; the uppermost one was
26 000 ± 420 BP (Pta-3765) from layer MOD 2 at a depth of
200–300 mm from the surface; the second date of 24 200 ±
290 BP (Pta-3767) came from layer GAA2 at 790 to 880 mm
below surface. This second, younger date is out of context and
it must be rejected. The uppermost date of 26 000 BP was
initially thought to be useful, although radiocarbon dates from
MSA contexts are often minimum estimates; however, an
equivalent MOD layer elsewhere in the excavation grid is now
dated by OSL to about 50 kyr and this seems to be a more
reliable date (Z. Jacobs, pers. comm., 2004).
The new excavations (Wadley 2001; Wadley & Jacobs 2004)
are in a grid of twenty-four square metres (Fig. 1). Within the
grid a two-metre trial trench is more than three metres deep,
but it is estimated that several metres of deposit wait to be excavated. Eighteen of the remaining squares are on average
700 mm deep and the other squares are shallower than this.
The deposit is excavated in 500 mm quadrants. Until 2003 deposit was screened through 2 mm mesh and, since then, it has
been screened through 1 mm mesh. A permanent datum line is
painted on the cave wall and the depth of each layer is
measured from this datum. All stratigraphic depths are thus
relative to the datum unless it is stated differently.
DATING AND STRATIGRAPHY
The Sibudu stratigraphy is clear, but complex, and there are
many hearths and ash lenses. A sedimentological analysis
(Pickering 2002) of six samples shows that the sediments are
poorly sorted and immature, largely comprising anthropogenically derived material, for example, ash, bone and worked
stone. The sediments also contain weathered roof-rock, windborne sand, debris from microfauna and owls, and calcium
carbonate and gypsum nodules, which form during decalcification of the deposits. The poor sorting of the sediments
implies that little or no waterborne transportation occurred
within the cave, and mineralogy and sediment microscopy
confirm this conclusion (Schiegl et al. 2004). Ash is a major
component of, not only the hearths, but also the surrounding
sediments in all MSA layers studied (Schiegl et al. 2004).
I now briefly describe the dating and stratigraphy of layers
from an industry that I call the final MSA. By the final MSA I
mean the layers and associated industries that are more recent
than about 42 kyr. These must be distinguished from other
post-Howiesons Poort layers and assemblages, with ages
between about 60 and 50 kyr, which are called late MSA (Villa
et al. 2005).
Two dating methods have been used: radiocarbon dating
on charcoal samples and optically stimulated luminescence
(OSL) dating of soil samples. Radiocarbon dating is not suitable
for dating most of the MSA sequence because of the limits set by
the half-life of carbon 14. OSL is more suited to the task. The
OSL dates were obtained from a combination of single-aliquot
and single-grain analysis (Wadley & Jacobs 2004).
Below the surface of the entire excavation grid there is
brown silt with vegetal material (BSV) (Fig. 2). This contains
Iron Age (IA) material culture items. The underlying brown
sand with stones (BSS) also contains IA remains and charcoal
from a pit in square E3 has been dated to 960 ± 25 BP (Pta-8015)
(calibrated to 1044 [1069, 1157] 1171 AD). No Later Stone Age
(LSA) remains are present in Sibudu. A hiatus, which is not
detectable in the stratigraphy, occurred between the final
MSA occupations and the first IA occupations. The surface of
the cave floor is presently scoured by wind in late winter/early
summer and in the past wind may also have prevented the accumulation of sterile deposits.
The final MSA occurs in Squares C2, D2, D3, E2 and E3 in
the eastern part of the excavation (Fig. 1). Here, the stratigraphy is different from that in the northern part of the excavation
grid (Fig. 2). The uppermost of the final MSA layers is Co, which
is a coffee-coloured, sandy deposit. It is preliminarily dated by
OSL to c. 33 kyr (Z. Jacobs, pers. comm., 2004). In the various
inventories (Tables 1–6), the reader will see not only layer Co,
but also H/Co; this is a hearth in layer Co that has been excavated as a feature within the surrounding deposit. Co overlies
Bu, which is a light grey, sandy-silt with many tiny roof spalls.
A charcoal sample from square E2 in this layer was dated by
radiocarbon to 42 300 ± 1 300 BP (Pta-8017). However, OSL provided a younger age of 35.2 ± 1.8 kyr for the same layer (Wadley
& Jacobs 2004). H/Bu and P/Bu are hearth and pit features
within layer Bu. A thin, light-brown lens with white flecks of
52
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
gypsum, LB MOD (and its associated hearth H/LB), is under Bu
and over MC, which is a small, white ash lens that does not
reach the eastern section wall and therefore does not feature in
Fig. 2. H/MC is a hearth feature within MC. Under this are the
small lenses Mou, D Mou and L Mou. In the northern part of
the excavation grid the sequence is different and is older
(Wadley & Jacobs 2004). The relationship between the stratigraphy in the north and that in the east of the excavation grid is
not yet fully understood and it is hoped that more dates from
the younger layers will provide the necessary resolution. At
this preliminary stage of dating, it seems that the eastern part of
the excavation grid, which is close to the cave wall, contains a
saucer-like series of lenses in which relatively young occupation horizons occur. This series is missing from the northern
part of the excavation grid where MOD, at the top of the
sequence, has a preliminary OSL date of about 50 kyr (Z.
Jacobs, pers. comm., 2004). The saucer-like lenses cover such a
small area of the excavation grid that one could be persuaded to
believe that, after c. 42 or 35 kyr (depending on which date is accepted), only small groups camped against the wall of the cave.
ENVIRONMENTAL EVIDENCE: 45–25 KYR
Drier as well as cooler conditions than at present may have
prevailed from about 45 kyr in KwaZulu-Natal and there are
proxy data to support this suggestion. Colluvial deposits accumulated in parts of KwaZulu-Natal during the Last Glacial and
this colluviation developed during periods of increased aridity
and reduced vegetation (Botha & Partridge 2000). Further support for a dry phase comes from the western shores of Lake
Sibayi, KwaZulu-Natal, where freshwater diatomite beds and
calcareous clays developed between about 45 and 25 kyr,
suggesting drying out of the lake (Maud & Botha 2000).
During the Last Glacial Sibudu would, of course, have been
further from the coast than it is today because of the lowering of
sea-levels. This is evidenced from the KwaZulu-Natal river
mouths that in the past were cut deeper into bedrock than
they are today (Cooper & Flores 1991). The Tongati River
bedrock channel is cut back to –30 m (Orme 1976). At the height
of the last glaciation the shoreline in the Durban region was 30
to 40 km offshore of its present position and similar distances
could be expected for the coastline off the Tongati River.
GEOLOGY AND ROCK TYPES USED IN SIBUDU
The geology of the area has, of course, influenced the raw
material components of the lithic assemblages at the site. The
shelter, itself, has been carved by fluvial action from a Natal
Group sandstone cliff. Sandstone was occasionally used for
tool manufacture, but the rock used for knapping seems
finer-grained than that from the shelter wall. A few hundred
metres from the site there is a dolerite intrusion into the
sandstone cliff and this is likely to be the source of part of the
dolerite that was used for knapping throughout the MSA.
Dolerite cobbles and rare quartzite and quartz nodules also
occur on the banks of the Tongati River, below the cave.
Hornfels of the quality generally used at Sibudu is not
locally available today, but there is a chance that outcrops
exposed near to the cave in the past may now be covered with
dune sand. Today the closest good-quality hornfels outcrop
that has been located is in the Verulum area, approximately
20 km south of Sibudu. A piece of hornfels that eroded from the
talus slope of the shelter was subjected to an elemental analysis
by XRF (R. Uken, pers. comm., 2004). Its high silica content
(63.8%) and low magnesium (1.4%) and calcium (0.7%) content
(relative to that of dolerite) confirms that it is metamorphosed
shale (hornfels) from a contact zone with a dolerite intrusion.
FIG. 1. Plan of Sibudu Cave, showing the distribution of final MSA deposits.
Uken suggests that the origin is most likely to have been from a
contact zone where a dolerite sill intruded the Ecca Shales.
Varying temperatures occur in the zone of thermal metamorphism where a dolerite intrusion occurs. Consequently, there
are different grades of metamorphic hornfels and igneous
dolerite and, on occasion, they are difficult to discriminate.
Both dolerite and ‘chilled dolerite’ (which looks like hornfels)
occur locally in the Sibudu valley (R. Uken, pers. comm., 2004).
Since XRF cannot be performed on all the lithics, there will be a
margin of error in my hornfels and dolerite identifications.
THE CULTURAL REMAINS
Directly below the Iron Age occupation layers (described
briefly in Wadley & Jacobs 2004) are traditional MSA material
culture items, mostly made from stone. In the eastern part of
the excavation, under discussion here, there are retouched
tools that include bifacial and unifacial points, straight and
convex scrapers, backed tools, scaled pieces (pièces esquillées)
and notches. There are rare examples of small bifaces and
hollow-based points (Fig. 3). Neither bifaces nor hollow-based
points are found elsewhere in the excavation grid; they are
absent from all layers older than those discussed in this paper.
The bifaces are not points, but rather elliptical tools with sharp
cutting edges and they have been worked invasively across
both faces by removing small flakes from their perimeters.
Hollow-based points are bifacial, triangular points that have
their bases thinned and shaped to a concave form, presumably
to facilitate hafting. The name hollow-based point is, perhaps,
not well chosen, but I use it in recognition of identical points, by
the same name, from the final MSA of Umhlatuzana (Kaplan
1990), which is about 90 km, as the crow flies, from Sibudu.
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
53
FIG. 2. Stratigraphy of the eastern section of Sibudu Cave.
Points from Sibudu seem to have been hafted (Lombard
2004, 2005; Wadley et al. 2004; Williamson 2004). Lombard’s
macro-fracture, use-wear analysis and replication work have
convincingly shown that 24 Sibudu points (taken as a random
sample) were hafted and that mastic and twine were probably
used together for the attachment of the stone to its haft. The
concentration of faunal remains on the distal portions of points
shows that the tips were used on animals, although some of
them may have also been used for the processing of plants
(Lombard 2005).
RESULTS OF THE TYPOLOGICAL STUDY
RETOUCHED TOOLS (Table 1)
The highest frequency of retouch occurs in LB where there
are 0.47 tools per litre of deposit (Table 1). Layer Bu has the
greatest volume of deposit (485 litres), yet one of the lowest tool
densities (0.11) (Table 1). There are 219 whole retouched tools
and 157 broken retouched tools.
Although they are relatively rare, the most distinctive retouched tools in these upper layers are hollow-based points
(n = 6) and small bifaces (n = 6) (Table 1; Fig. 3). Microscopic
analysis and the morphology of the bifacial cutting tools
suggests that they were cutting implements.
Scrapers are the most common retouched type (whole
scrapers are 30.0% of the total of whole tools), with sidescrapers
(Fig. 4) being the most prevalent scraper type (71%). Most of
these are straight sidescrapers (called knives in previous publications on Rose Cottage Cave, for example, Wadley 1997;
Wadley & Harper 1989).
Points are the next most common retouched types in the
collection and the 51 whole points represent 26.4% of all whole
FIG. 3. Retouched tools from Sibudu Cave final MSA. (1) Hollow-based point, hornfels: square C2a, Co; (2) hollow-based point, hornfels: C2a, Mou; (3) bifacial
cutting tool, hornfels: C2c, Es; (4) hollow-based point, hornfels: C2a, Bu.
54
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
TABLE 1. Sibudu Cave: frequencies of retouched tools.
MSA layers
Co
Unifacial point
3
Bifacial point
4
Hollow-based point
1
Broken point
3
Scraper
End
0
Side, convex
3
Side, straight
2
Side, concave
0
Side, convergent
0
Side, double
0
End/side
1
Convergent
2
Bifacial cutting tool
0
Broken bifacial cutting tool 0
Denticulate
1
Notch
3
Graver/burin
2
Bec
1
Borer
0
Adze
1
Scaled piece
5
Miscellaneous retouch
2
Broken retouch
23
Backed tool
Segment
0
Backed blade
0
Obliquely backed
0
Other
0
Broken backed tool
0
Total
Litres deposit
Tools per litre
57
260
0.22
H/Co
Bu
H/Bu
P/Bu
LB
H/LB
MC
H/MC
Es
Mou
L Mou
D Mou
0
0
0
0
3
3
1
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
8
1
13
0
0
0
0
3
6
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
2
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
21
24
6
26
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
2
3
28
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
9
10
1
5
0
0
0
2
2
1
7
0
1
3
2
4
4
49
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
4
0
2
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
0
0
0
1
2
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
7
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
1
4
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
11
14
19
1
7
3
1
2
4
2
4
19
3
2
3
3
14
14
151
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
2
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
1
3
5
6
55
485
0.11
8
50
0.16
1
10
0.10
10
30
0.33
11
30
0.37
14
30
0.47
8
10
0.80
4
5
0.80
1
5
0.20
140
295
0.47
retouched tools. Bifacial points are slightly more common than
unifacial points and are 59.0% of the whole points, including
hollow-based forms. All of the broken points (n = 26) are the
distal tips of broken points. Several of these final MSA points
have been subjected to a residue analysis by Marlize Lombard.
One of these, a hollow-based point from Co, contained plant
and ochre residues on the proximal end and animal residues on
the distal end (M. Lombard pers. comm., 2004, and Lombard
2005). In this instance it appears that the tool was hafted with
plant twine and mastic loaded with ochre. The most obvious
explanation for animal residues on the distal tip is that the
hafted point was used as a spear, but it may also have been used
as a knife for cutting meat.
Concave notches are more numerous than adzes, suggesting that notches are not merely worn out adzes. There is no pattern to the residues in notches (B.S. Williamson, pers. comm.,
2004) and they may have been multi-purpose tools; however, a
larger sample is probably required in order to make useful
comments about their function. In contrast, plant residues are
common on the shattered edges of scaled pieces (pièces
esquillées) that are tools not cores (B.S. Williamson, pers. comm.,
2004) and this implies that they were used as wood-working
tools. They may have been used for preparing wooden handles
for the hafting of stone inserts, but this is presently surmised.
Boomplaas specimens seem also to have been used for working
wood (Binneman 1982).
Backed tools are uncommon (whole backed tools represent
7.3% of the total of whole retouch), but are present in small
frequencies in almost all of the final MSA layers. The seven
segments occur only in LB and MC and, of these, several are
unusually wide (Fig. 4) compared to segments from the
Howiesons Poort layers.
2
7
0.29
65
165
0.39
Total
376
The percentages of retouch are low (1.1%) when they are
calculated from the total of stone pieces in all layers. When
chips are excluded from the calculation, retouch percentages
increase to 3.0%. If the tools from hearths and pits are removed
from the calculation, because of their low absolute frequencies
of retouch, then percentages of retouch in the various layers
range between 2.8 and 4.0%.
GRINDSTONES (Table 2)
Only four grindstone fragments are present in the entire
final MSA.
CORES (Table 2)
Cores are not common in the Sibudu collection, an observation that applies to all layers, not merely to the final MSA ones.
Of the 108 whole cores recorded here, minimal and bipolar
cores are the most common (29.0% each of the total cores). A
minimal core is a chunk with two or three randomly placed
removals. The core-reduced pieces may be worked-out bipolar
cores and, when combined with bipolar cores, they represent
46% of all cores.
Levallois and other prepared core techniques are noticeably rare, as are non-levallois cores that could have been used
for the production of blades. The low frequencies of core rejuvenation/preparation flakes mirror the prepared core low
frequencies.
CHIPS, CHUNKS, FLAKES AND BLADES/BLADELETS
(Table 3)
In this study, chips are pieces 10 mm and smaller. They
represent the largest percentage (64.6%) of the recovered stone
(Table 3). Chunks are manuports, or pieces larger than 10 mm
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
55
TABLE 2. Sibudu Cave: frequencies of grindstones and cores.
MSA layers
Grindstone
Grindstone fragment
Core
Minimal
Core-reduced
Bipolar
Levallois
Other prepared
Radial
Adjacent platform
Change of orientation
Single platform
Opposed platform, same side
Opposed platform, opposite side
Opposed platform, same and
opposite side
Double platform
Cylinder
Blade
Bifacial
Core fragments
Broken core
Co
H/Co
Bu
H/Bu
P/Bu
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
1
4
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
7
1
8
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
5
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
H/LB
MC
H/MC
Es
Mou
L Mou
D Mou
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
9
11
3
0
1
1
5
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
1
3
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
that have one removal, and they represent 11.5% of all stone.
Flakes are divided by size into <20 mm, and 20 mm and larger.
They are also separated into cortical (flakes with at least 50% of
the ventral surface covered with rock cortex) and non-cortical
categories, and into side- and end-struck classes. Given that
there are few cores at the site, it is unsurprising that the
frequencies of cortical flakes are low; indeed, cortical flakes
LB
comprise only 3.0% of the whole flakes. Side-struck flakes
(flakes with breadth greater than length) are marginally more
common than end-struck flakes. The final MSA at Sibudu is
typified by flake rather than blade production. Here, a blade
is defined as a long flake with its length at least twice that of
its breadth. A bladelet is a blade with a length smaller than
26 mm. Bladelets comprise 57.0% of the combined blade and
FIG. 4. Retouched tools from Sibudu Cave final MSA. (1) segment, dolerite: square D3a, LB MOD; (2) segment, dolerite: D3c, LB MOD; (3) convergent scraper,
hornfels: E3c, LB MOD; (4) incised flake, dolerite: D2a L Mou; (5) bifacial point, dolerite: E2c, LB MOD; (6) convergent scraper, hornfels: D3d, LB MOD; (7) sidescraper, hornfels: C2d, Bu.
56
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
TABLE 3. Sibudu: frequencies of chips, chunks, flakes, blades and broken pieces.
MSA layers
Co
H/Co
Bu
H/Bu
P/Bu
LB
H/LB
MC
H/MC
Es
Mou
L Mou
Chip <1 cm
Chunk
Flake
End non-cort <2 cm
End non-cort >2 cm
Side non-cort <2 cm
Side non-cort >2 cm
End cort <2 cm
End cort >2 cm
Side cort <2 cm
Side cort >2 cm
Core rejuvenation/prep.
Total flake
Broken flake
Proximal
Fragments
Split
Blade
Bladelet
Crested blade
Broken blade
Proximal
Fragments
2 617
470
609
83
4 009
675
606
55
34
6
7 553
1 373
26
9
3 649
722
209
29
413
102
417
124
596
96
359
11
21 097
3 755
77
54
96
44
1
2
7
11
3
295
26
13
27
12
0
0
0
1
0
79
161
69
176
92
10
8
7
2
3
528
12
2
20
6
2
0
0
0
0
42
4
0
5
2
0
0
0
0
0
11
506
236
685
257
7
9
7
8
11
1 726
6
8
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
177
108
286
122
4
4
7
6
2
716
2
2
12
4
0
0
0
0
0
20
26
11
38
20
1
0
0
0
0
96
25
19
27
28
1
0
2
2
0
104
43
33
44
10
0
0
0
2
0
132
11
11
15
7
0
1
0
0
0
45
1 076
566
1 434
604
26
24
30
32
19
3 811
214
126
13
9
6
2
35
18
3
1
5
0
320
175
22
14
15
0
25
9
2
2
0
0
7
5
0
1
1
0
738
641
11
28
42
0
2
3
0
0
1
0
550
252
20
7
11
0
14
7
1
0
0
0
46
28
2
1
3
0
59
39
2
2
0
0
66
49
2
2
6
0
45
68
1
0
1
0
2 121
1 420
79
67
91
2
14
20
2
4
21
15
0
0
0
2
27
40
0
0
16
13
0
0
1
1
3
8
0
2
0
1
84
106
Total
3 788
839
5 794
739
67
12 179
58
5 956
280
693
758
951
531
32 633
bladelet category. When blades and bladelets (160) are combined with flakes (3811), then flakes comprise 96.0% of the 3971
pieces.
INCISED FLAKE
A snapped, dolerite flake from layer L Mou is incised
(Fig. 4). There are two types of incisions: first, short cut marks
on the perimeter of the flake that make it look like a decorated
piecrust and, secondly, several straight and curved lines cut
into the dorsal surface of the flake.
ROCK TYPES USED FOR LITHIC MANUFACTURE
(Tables 4–6)
Hornfels and dolerite are the main rock types used for tool
manufacture. Quartzite, quartz and fine-grained sandstone are
also used, but to a lesser extent. Although quartz tools are not
that common, there are more quartz cores than any other type
(65.7% of all whole cores). Minimal cores are 58.6% quartz and
only 13.8% hornfels; 91.3% of core-reduced/bipolar cores are
made of quartz and 36.4% of the ‘other ’ core classes are made of
quartz. Notwithstanding this high percentage of quartz cores,
only 14.0% of whole flakes are quartz and only 16.2% of
blades/bladelets are quartz. Hornfels is most often used for
flakes (60.4%) and for blades/bladelets (57.0%). Hornfels is also
the preferred rock type for most retouch in the final MSA:
66.2% points, 55.2% scrapers and 60.3% ‘other ’ retouch are
hornfels. Few points, scrapers, backed tools or ‘other ’ retouch
are made of quartz. Amongst backed tools 45.5% are made on
hornfels and 31.8% on dolerite. Dolerite is also favoured for
Howiesons Poort backed tools, notwithstanding the irregular
surface of this rock type.
THE SIBUDU FINAL MSA IN THE BROADER AFRICAN
CONTEXT
The Sibudu final MSA is dated by single-grained luminescence to c. 33 and 35 kyr in the upper two layers and by radio-
D Mou
Total
carbon dating on charcoal to 42 300 ± 1300 BP. The industry is
characterized by flake rather than blade production, and scrapers and points (particularly bifacial examples) are the most
common retouched classes. The 30 whole bifacial points are
particularly noteworthy when they are compared with the single bifacial point and single partly bifacial point from RSp,
dated c. 53 kyr. In total, RSp has 113 pointed forms (Villa et al.
2005). Notches are also present and large, wide segments and
other backed tools occur in low, but significant frequencies
(whole backed tools represent 7.3% of the whole retouched
tools). Only one segment occurs in RSp at c. 53 kyr (Villa et al.
2005); thus it appears that backed tools are a small, but genuine,
part of the final MSA at Sibudu.
The most distinctive formal tools, notwithstanding their
rarity, are the hollow-based points and the bifacial cutting tools.
No hollow-based points occur in deeper MSA layers. The high
proportion of quartz cores, yet the low proportion of quartz
flakes and blades/bladelets, suggests that small quartz nodules
were brought back to the site for knapping more regularly than
pieces of hornfels or dolerite. Hornfels and dolerite tools may
have been made or partially prepared elsewhere, for example,
at the quarries where large blocks were obtained. Thus, partly
prepared hornfels and dolerite flake and blade blanks may
have been brought to the cave where they were modified,
used, re-sharpened and curated. Dolerite could have been
obtained just a few hundred metres from the site, but hornfels
of the quality used by the Sibudu knappers was only available
about 20 km away.
Sibudu data can contribute to a broader discussion of, first,
local traditions in the final MSA, secondly, dating the final
MSA and, thirdly, the occurrence of segments in non-Howiesons Poort and non-LSA assemblages.
Sibudu’s final MSA is most like the contemporary assemblage from Umhlatuzana, a rockshelter about 90 km from
Sibudu, between Durban and Pietermaritzburg. The
Umhlatuzana final MSA, or MSA/LSA transition as Kaplan
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
57
TABLE 4. Sibudu Cave: frequencies of rock types of retouched tools.
MSA layers
Point/broken point
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Bifacial tool/ broken bifacial tool
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Scraper
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Other retouch
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Backed tool/broken backed
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Broken retouch
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Co
H/Co
Bu
H/Bu
P/Bu
LB
H/LB
MC
H/MC
Es
Mou
L Mou
D Mou
9
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
2
5
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
1
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
4
1
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
5
3
1
0
6
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
1
0
6
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
7
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
1
0
1
6
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
21
3
0
0
4
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
33
2
7
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
25
4
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
1
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
(1990) calls it, dates (by the radiocarbon method on charcoal) to
between 35 300 ± 930 BP (Pta-4663) and 27 800 ± 780 BP
(Pta-4389). The Umhlatuzana dates may be minimum estimates, although the date of c. 35 000 BP fits well with the luminescence dates of 33 and 35 kyr from Sibudu. Unfortunately,
rotational slippage occurred at Umhlatuzana and this has
caused some doubt about the site’s stratigraphic integrity. LSA
industries occur above the MSA and it is therefore possible that
mixing occurred between MSA and LSA assemblages; a comparison between the contemporary Sibudu and Umhlatuzana
assemblages suggests that the latter may, indeed be mixed.
Kaplan’s MSA/LSA transition contains unifacial, bifacial and
hollow-based MSA points together with bladelets and bladelet
cores that are considered to be LSA. In contrast, Sibudu does
not contain many bladelets in the final MSA assemblage and it
has no bladelet cores. The unifacial, bifacial and hollow-based
points from Umhlatuzana are almost identical to those from
Sibudu, in part because they are also made of hornfels, and a
local knapping tradition may be represented. At both sites, the
hollow-based points, although not common, are useful time
markers in the region because at neither site do they occur in
layers older than 35 kyr, or c. 42 000 years ago if the Sibudu
radiocarbon date is correct. In an African context, the hollowbased points appear to be unique to the KwaZulu-Natal region.
They are only known from Umhlatuzana and Sibudu final
MSA layers; however, a single hollow-based point was found
at Border Cave (on the border of KwaZulu-Natal and Swaziland) in a Howiesons Poort layer (Beaumont et al. 1978). Since
only one of these tools is reported from Border Cave it is
difficult to assess its significance in the Howiesons Poort Industry. Although I do not know of other hollow-based points in
Africa, they also occur in the Upper Palaeolithic of the USSR,
where they are known as Pointe de Streletskaya in the sites of
Streletskaya, Kostienki and Soungir (Demars & Laurent 1992:
126–127). The Pointe de Streletskaya are dated to between 35 and
42 kyr and are therefore comparable in age to the Sibudu
hollow-based points (Villa et al. 2005).
Holley Shelter, in the Wartburg district of KwaZulu-Natal,
is closer to Sibudu than Umhlatuzana, but its MSA assemblages
are unlike Sibudu’s late MSA and more like Sibudu assemblages that date between 50 and 60 kyr. Hollow-based points
are not represented at Holley Shelter; instead, the assemblages
are characterized by long hornfels blades, unifacial points
made on blades and large, hornfels outils écaillés (sometimes
known as pièces esquillées) (Cramb 1952, 1961, and personal
observation). The British Museum Laboratory date of 18 200 ±
500 BP from charcoal collected in the 24–30-inch spit (Cramb
1961) is at best a minimum age, but is more likely to be
completely inappropriate for the industry represented in
Holley Shelter. Another late date for a MSA tradition was
58
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
TABLE 5. Sibudu: rock types of grindstones and cores.
MSA layers
Grindstone/Grindstone fragment
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Core
Minimal core
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Core-reduced/bipolar
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Other core
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Broken core/ core fragments
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Co
H/Co
Bu
H/Bu
P/Bu
LB
H/LB
MC
H/MC
Es
Mou
L Mou
D Mou
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
1
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
2
0
4
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
obtained from the important KwaZulu-Natal site of Shongweni (Davies 1975). The uppermost MSA layer here, with a
radiocarbon date (on charcoal) of 22 990 ± 310 BP (Pta-966),
contains scrapers, points and segments and the dominant raw
material is hornfels with quartz, dolerite and quartzite less well
represented. No hollow-based points are present here, perhaps because the period represented is not the same as that in
the final MSA of Sibudu, or perhaps because I am wrong in
thinking that hollow-based points represent time-related regional traditions in the final MSA. Perhaps the hollow-based
points are simply part of a tool-kit that was not appropriate for
the activities carried out at Shongweni. Holley and Shongweni
need to be re-dated before their lithic assemblages can be
meaningfully compared with those from Sibudu and
Umhlatuzana.
Malan (1945, 1949) described several open MSA sites in
KwaZulu-Natal. Two of these, at Izotsha, about a kilometre
from the ocean, contain a large segment, broken backed blades,
bifacial and unifacial points, and scrapers (Malan 1945). Few
tools were reported, and surface collections from open sites are
potentially mixed, so it is difficult to draw any conclusions
about the two assemblages, other than to point out that the
combination of many bifacial points with segments points to
the final MSA in Sibudu; no other Sibudu assemblage has this
combination of tool classes. Malan’s (1949, 1952) descriptions of
‘Magosian’ sites in KwaZulu-Natal and elsewhere in South
Africa, have added to the general confusion surrounding this
term, because he does not distinguish between collections with
or without backed tools, nor between collections that are pre-
or post-Howiesons Poort. His description of the open scatter of
MSA tools (with scrapers and small unifacial points, but no
backed tools) at Tayside, Dundee (Malan 1949), suggested that
the site does not have a ‘Magosian’ or final MSA industry, but
that a late MSA of the kind found at c. 53 kyr at Sibudu (Villa
et al. 2005) is represented.
The dates of c. 33–42 kyr for the MSA layers discussed here
place the Sibudu final MSA industry within the later part of
MSA 3 as it was described by Volman more than twenty years
ago (1981, 1984). So much variability occurs within the
typologies and technologies of MSA 3 that this catch-all
category is probably not useful without further subdivision.
One problem is that the MSA 3 is used to embrace all
MSA assemblages dating from about 60 to 25 kyr. A second
problem is that some of the radiocarbon dates in this period
may be minimum ages for the strata from which they were
taken. Without a reliable chronology it is impossible to make
informative comparisons between sites and their industries.
With the advent of dependable OSL dating techniques the
situation is now far better than it was a decade ago; several of
South Africa’s long-sequence sites have been well dated, but a
major dating programme is still required to re-date sites where
radiocarbon dating was initially used. My experience at Sibudu
suggests that radiocarbon dates may often be minimum ages in
MSA contexts. Thirdly, and importantly, there is lack of agreement among archaeologists about what constitutes MSA, LSA
and transitional industries.
As I have already intimated, literature dealing with lithic
industries from the period 40–25 kyr is as navigable as a
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
59
TABLE 6. Sibudu: frequencies of rock types of chips, chunks, flakes, blades and broken tools.
MSA layer
Chunk
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Flake
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Broken flake
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Blade/bladelet
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Broken blade/bladelet
Hornfels
Dolerite
Quartzite
Sandstone
Quartz
Other
Co
H/Co
Bu
H/Bu
P/Bu
LB
H/ LB
MC
H/MC
95
136
4
18
186
31
22
26
0
0
32
3
176
131
0
15
344
9
15
15
0
2
23
0
3
0
0
0
2
1
443
92
209
21
431
177
2
2
0
0
5
0
242
280
10
13
172
5
9
16
1
1
2
0
142
90
6
12
44
1
43
19
0
1
16
0
288
76
9
28
127
0
18
4
1
4
15
0
8
1
1
0
1
0
1121
158
187
8
251
1
9
7
1
0
0
0
425
192
12
27
57
3
174
112
7
4
55
1
32
19
0
0
5
0
349
80
3
3
82
0
24
3
1
0
8
0
7
4
0
0
1
0
877
145
151
1
216
0
3
2
0
0
0
0
8
4
1
3
1
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
17
5
0
2
5
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
42
7
8
1
12
0
21
10
1
0
2
0
5
1
0
0
0
0
27
3
1
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
53
5
4
0
5
0
labyrinth. For example, McBrearty & Brooks (2000) placed the
MSA/LSA transition at 50 kyr, Beaumont (1978) and Grün &
Beaumont (2001) placed the beginning of the LSA at 40 kyr, but
others suggest that the LSA begins much later, between 30 and
23 kyr (Wadley 1993, 1997; Mitchell 1994, 2002; Deacon 1995;
Clark 1997a,b). Beaumont (1978) situates the Border Cave 1WA
assemblage in the early LSA because it has high frequencies of
outils écaillés, low frequencies of formal tools, low frequencies of
faceted platforms (10%) and a lack of prepared core technology. A recent re-assessment of the 1WA chronology provides
an age estimate of between 42 and 35 kyr (Grün & Beaumont
2001). Border Cave’s 1 WA assemblage seems enigmatic in the
light of other contemporary South African assemblages, but
Mitchell (1988) and Barham (1989) both pointed out that there
may be an admixture of MSA core technology in 1 WA. It is not
presently possible to explain why, within this same time-frame,
bifacial and unifacial points were still being manufactured in
quantities at Sibudu, which is only 250 km south of Border
Cave. At Sibudu there is no question about the typologically
MSA nature of the assemblage even as late as 42 or 33 kyr
because bifacial and unifacial points comprise 30.2% of the
retouched tools. Both Border Cave and Sibudu are now
securely dated by means other than radiocarbon and there
seems a strong likelihood that the dates for both sites are
correct within the range of their respective standard deviations. This chronological security does not apply to some of the
other sites that I now discuss.
MSA tool classes appear to continue late in the South African sites of Rose Cottage Cave (Wadley & Vogel 1991; Wadley
1993, 1997; Clark 1997a,b; Valladas et al. 2005), Florisbad
Es
Mou
L Mou
D Mou
27
44
0
3
25
3
50
12
18
0
35
9
34
12
20
0
13
17
9
2
0
0
0
0
13
4
1
2
0
0
59
32
1
1
3
0
66
23
4
1
10
0
80
13
31
2
4
2
22
13
8
0
2
0
496
228
12
17
68
1
16
5
0
1
0
0
39
28
0
1
8
0
69
14
10
0
7
0
65
21
26
0
4
1
33
20
22
2
10
27
0
0
0
0
1
0
10
5
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
4
1
2
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
9
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
(Kuman et al. 1999), Strathalan Cave B (Opperman &
Heydenrych 1990), Driekoppen Shelter (Wallsmith 1990),
Highlands Rock Shelter (Deacon 1976), Boomplaas (Deacon
1995), Umhlatuzana (Kaplan 1990) and Grassridge (Opperman
1987). MSA tools also continue late at Sehonghong in Lesotho
(Carter et al. 1988; Mitchell 1994), at Sibebe, Swaziland
(Price-Williams 1981), and Apollo 11, Namibia (Wendt 1976). At
Sehonghong and at Rose Cottage the final MSA contains a
variety of scrapers (especially straight scrapers, known as
‘knives’ in some of the South African literature) and several
unifacial points, but there are low frequencies of formal tools.
At Strathalan Cave B (Opperman & Heydenrych 1990) the
small lithic assemblage has a predominance of blades with few
(21) formal tools and it is difficult to compare this assemblage
with those from other sites. The youngest MSA layer at
Boomplaas is dated by radiocarbon on charcoal to 32 000 years
ago (Deacon 1979, 1995). This lithic assemblage is rich in long
blades as is the one at Highlands (Volman 1981, 1984). The
MSA 4 of Klasies River, Cave 1, (Singer & Wymer 1982: 67), notwithstanding its name, predates the period under discussion
here and belongs to an early MSA 3 phase in the Volman
scheme. The final MSA from Florisbad, Free State, is one of the
most informal of the late MSA collections; it contains only
flakes with a few triangular flakes and ten flakes with faceted
platforms (Kuman et al. 1999). The date of 19 530 ± 650 BP for
this final MSA at Florisbad may be a minimum age. The final
MSA assemblage from the Western Cape site of Ysterfontein,
dated 33 470 ± 510 BP (Beta-169978) and >46 400 BP
(Beta-171202), contains many denticulates, but few other
retouched pieces (Halkett et al. 2003). Southwestern Namibian
60
final MSA sites also have few formal tools and an apparent lack
of standardization among other lithics (Vogelsang 1996).
Further afield, the situation is equally complex. In Egypt, at
Sodmein Cave in the Red Sea Mountains, the oldest Upper
Palaeolithic (defined partly by a lack of Levallois technique) is
dated 25 200 ± 500 BP (UtC-3313), while the Middle Palaeolithic
level 2 is dated 29 950 ± 900 (GrN-16782) and >30 000 BP
(Lv-2084) (Van Peer et al. 1996). In the Horn and East Africa
there is also a confusion of MSA artefact types and technologies, some with and others without Levallois technology and it
is not known whether the differences are age-related (Gresham
& Brandt 1996). In central Africa, at Matupi, Congo, microlithic
cores predate 40 kyr, whereas, at Kalemba, Zambia, radial and
disc cores persist as late as 25 kyr (McBrearty & Brooks 2000).
Since the post-Howiesons Poort assemblages labelled
MSA 3 span the period c. 60–30 kyr, it is not surprising that
a great deal of variability is evident. As Deacon (1995) pointed
out, the mid-late Pleistocene is generally a period of low
archaeological visibility and important sites such as
Nelson Bay Cave and Klasies River do not have occupation for
much of this period. Thus it seems inappropriate to compare
the earlier part of MSA 3, dating older than 45 kyr, with the late
MSA 3 at Sibudu and other like-aged sites.
The presence of some backed tools (7.3% of all whole retouched classes – broken tools are excluded from the calculation) in the final MSA of Sibudu is noteworthy, but it does not
imply that a Howiesons Poort Industry is represented here.
Nor does their presence imply contamination from above because there is no LSA occupation in Sibudu; the backed tools in
the final MSA cannot therefore be the result of downward
movement of LSA material through the deposits. Small frequencies of backed tools appear to be an integral part of the late
MSA at Sibudu, as they are at Shongweni and Umhlatuzana.
Backed tools were also found in the Alfred County Cave,
KwaZulu-Natal, but their context is unknown (Mitchell 1998).
Although backed tools, particularly segments, are the acknowledged fossiles directeurs of Howiesons Poort industries,
we should not assume that a Howiesons Poort Industry is signified when a few backed tools are present in an assemblage.
Howiesons Poort assemblages removed from sites that have
been carefully excavated in small stratigraphic layers usually
contain very high percentage frequencies of backed tools relative to other tool classes. Rose Cottage Cave is a good case
study. Here, the Howiesons Poort layers, excavated in minute
stratigraphic lenses by Harper (1997), contained high percentages of backed tools and a near absence of other tool classes.
In contrast, the Rose Cottage post-Howiesons Poort layers
contain quantities of points and scrapers together with a few
backed tools (Wadley & Harper 1989; Harper 1997). Villa (in
prep.) estimates that only 3.7% of backed tools occur in the late
MSA Rose Cottage layers BYR, THO, ELA, LYN and KAR,
whereas between 32 and 77.7% backed tools occur in the
Howiesons Poort layers.
Low frequencies of backed tools also occur in several
non-Howiesons Poort MSA assemblages north of South Africa.
In the Songwe Valley, Tanzania, MSA sites with denticulates
contain up to 5.4% of backed elements (Willoughby 1996).
While open sites in the area might have LSA contamination,
Willoughby comments that it is likely that some of the
segments are genuinely associated with the MSA occurrences
because they are large and are made of flint or chert, whereas
segments from unmixed LSA sites are smaller and made of
quartz. Unfortunately, the Songwe Valley sites are undated.
Also in Tanzania, the late MSA Mumba Industry, described
from Mumba Rockshelter, has a number of backed elements in
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
a unit dated by amino-acid racemization on ostrich eggshell to
between 65 and 45 kyr (McBrearty & Brooks 2000).
In Botswana, at White Paintings Shelter, there is an industry dated c. 30 000 years ago (by ostrich eggshell protein
diagenesis) that contains large blades that are occasionally
retouched to form large segments and scrapers; Robbins &
Murphy (1998: 59) call the industry an early LSA or the
“Botswana counterpart to the South African Howiesons Poort
industry”. If this late industry in Botswana can be shown to
have MSA elements, it may have similarities to the Tshangula
Industry of Zimbabwe. Here, Cooke recognized the Tshangula
as an industry that combined MSA Levallois elements with
backed tools, including segments (Cooke 1971, 1978; Volman
1981, 1984; Larsson 1996). As such, the Tshangula was seen as a
transitional industry, not unlike the Magosian Industry, that is,
the ‘Second Intermediate’ recognized in the first half of the
twentieth century (Cooke 1971, 1978; Volman 1981). At
Pomongwe the final MSA seems to postdate 35 000 years ago
and it contains backed tools with points (Walker 1995). Several
different industries may be represented by the term Tshangula
(Walker & Wadley 1984) and it is possible that, amongst these
sites, only Duncombe Farm (Hitzeroth 1973; Walker & Wadley
1984) contains a true transitional industry. A date of 18 970 ±
275 BP (SR-243), which is possibly a minimum age, was
obtained from the middle of the Tshangula at this site and all of
the site’s large segments were obtained within the Tshangula.
Included within the Tshangula assemblages are ostrich
eggshell beads, worked bone artefacts and occasionally bored
stones. It is tempting to suggest that the Tshangula bears a
resemblance to the ‘early LSA’, dated 39 900 ± 1600 BP, that
Ambrose (1998) has recognized at Enkapune ya Muto, Kenya.
This assemblage contains ostrich eggshell beads, outils écaillés
and thumbnail endscrapers, low frequencies of backed blades
and large segments that are within the size range of MSA
segments, and low frequencies of discoidal forms and
discoidal cores and faceted platform flakes (Ambrose 1998:
382). Other East African sites dating more recently than 40 000
years ago also have a variety of organic artefacts and seem
transitional in their combination of MSA and LSA tool classes.
In Tanzania there is Kisese 11, dated 31 480 BP and Mumba has
an MSA/LSA industry dating 27 000 and 33 200 BP (Ambrose
1998). It now seems fashionable to refer to these industries as
LSA, perhaps partly as a reaction against the term ‘Magosian’.
The Magosian began to lose favour after Cole (1967) questioned
its integrity and suggested that many Magosian sites were
contaminated mixtures of MSA and LSA. Subsequently Clark
et al. (1979, 1984) were able to demonstrate that the so-called
Magosian at Porc Epic in Ethiopia was merely a mixture of
slumped LSA artefacts into MSA layers. The segment-rich
Howiesons Poort was, furthermore, shown to be sandwiched
within MSA traditions. The Magosian and Second Intermediate disappeared into a Black Hole. In more recent years the
concept of a transitional MSA/LSA industry was reintroduced
by some archaeologists (see, for example, Wadley 1993;
Mitchell 1994; Clark 1997a,b). The transition implies that there
are both technological and typological continuities between
the final expression of the MSA and the introduction of the
earliest LSA tools. Detailed and standardized technological
studies need to be carried out on many African sites dating
between 40 000 and 20 000 years ago in order to resolve the
issue of the MSA and LSA interface.
Notwithstanding the demise of the Magosian, it is patent
that segments are not the sole prerogative of either Howiesons
Poort or LSA industries. Indeed, segments are not a Howiesons
Poort innovation for, at some sites, they pre-date the
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
Howiesons Poort Industry by several hundreds of thousands
of years. The earliest backed tools in Africa, dating to about
300 kyr, have been found in the Lupemban Industry of Twin
Rivers in Zambia (Clark & Brown 2001; Barham 2002). At Twin
Rivers, backing accounts for up to 15% of the Lupemban
retouched tools (Barham 2002). Backed tools, probably also
part of the Lupemban industry, were associated with fossil
remains of Homo heidelbergensis (elsewhere called Homo
rhodesiensis) at Kabwe, Zambia (Barham 2002). If these anatomically pre-modern humans were the makers of the backed tools
at Kabwe, we have a fascinating association between them and
tools that some archaeologists (for example, Deacon 1995;
Wurz 1999) consider to be hallmarks of modern behaviour that
embody symbolic expression. The choice of name H. heidelbergensis or H. rhodesiensis for the African fossils has other
far-reaching implications for Out-of-Africa interpretations
because H. heidelbergensis is either ancestral to or part of the
Neanderthal lineage (Stringer 1996; McBrearty & Brooks 2000).
No Neanderthals have yet been found in Africa.
The strong typological variability among lithic assemblages
within the 15 000–20 000 years directly before the Last Glacial
Maximum was noted by Volman (1984) more than twenty years
ago when the chronology of the MSA was less well known than
it is today. Notwithstanding the rather confusing data in the
available literature, it may be possible to recognize a few trends
between about 40 and 25 kyr. First, it seems that sites with very
late dates (c. 25 000 years ago) for MSA occurrences (for example, Rose Cottage, Sehonghong, Florisbad, Strathalan Cave B
and Apollo 11) are characterized by few formal tools. This
makes them difficult to assess on typological evidence alone,
a point that I discuss later. Secondly, there may be a local
tradition in part of KwaZulu-Natal for a few thousand years,
centring on about 35 kyr: Sibudu and Umhlatuzana have hollow-based points that may represent a stylistic, time-related
variation of points elsewhere in South Africa. Thirdly, the
presence in Sibudu, Umhlatuzana and Shongweni of segments
in the final MSA, from 40 kyr to more recently, seems significant
in the light of late or final MSA or early LSA occurrences of segments and other backed elements in Botswana, Zimbabwe and
East Africa. I speculate that segments are reliably associated
with final MSA tools at some sites and that, in some instances;
the ‘Magosian’ could claim unfair dismissal. This comment
does not imply that I favour the reintroduction of this term, but
it does imply that not all of the pre-1960s excavations of sites
containing segments in late MSA should be discredited. At
Sibudu there is no LSA and the segments in the final
MSA cannot represent mixing with LSA. The final MSA segments also cannot represent mixing with the earlier Howiesons
Poort Industry, which is two metres deeper than the final
MSA industry.
The issue of whether contemporary sites contain comparable industries may be best resolved through detailed technological, rather than typological, studies of the sort that Wurz
et al. (2003) used to discriminate between MSA 1 and MSA 2 at
Klasies River. Such technological studies are currently being
undertaken by Paola Villa and collaborators (Villa et al. 2005) at
Sibudu and Rose Cottage Cave and similar studies are planned
for Border Cave and other sites (P. Villa, pers. comm., 2004).
Villa will, amongst other assemblages, examine LB MOD
artefacts. Perhaps these new studies will resolve the
conundrum of the final MSA in Africa. It is also necessary to
hold an African workshop where assemblages dating between
40–25 kyr can be directly compared and discussed. This is the
only way to resolve disparities in terminology and to discover
the real similarities and differences between assemblages that
61
are variously described as final MSA, LSA or transitional
MSA/LSA.
KEY FOR TABLES
H/Co = hearth in Co
H/Bu = hearth in Bu
P/Bu = pit in Bu
H/LB = hearth in LB
H/MC = hearth in MC
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The entire ACACIA team is to be thanked for its hard work
and enthusiasm. Amelia Clark assisted with the excavation of
the final MSA reported here. I thank Tammy Hodgskiss for
loading the Sibudu data onto Excel. Zenobia Jacobs is to be
especially thanked for the unpublished OSL dates quoted here.
I thank members of the Geological Survey, Pietermaritzburg,
for showing the ACACIA team the hornfels outcrop at
Verulum. I thank Ron Uken, School of Geological Sciences,
University of KwaZulu-Natal for conducting the XRF analysis
of hornfels. I am also grateful to Bonny Williamson and Marlize
Lombard for unpublished residue data. Paola Villa, Sarah Wurz
and Peter Mitchell made useful comments on the first draft of
this paper. The School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies provide space and support for the ACACIA
project. The Sibudu research is funded by the NRF. Opinions
expressed here cannot necessarily be attributed to the NRF.
REFERENCES
Ambrose, S.H. 1998. Chronology of the Later Stone Age and food production in East Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 377–392.
Barham, L. 1989. The Later Stone Age of Swaziland. Unpublished Ph.D.
thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
Barham, L. 2002. Backed tools in Middle Pleistocene central Africa and
their evolutionary significance. Journal of Human Evolution 43:
585–603.
Beaumont, P.B. 1978. Border Cave. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Cape Town.
Beaumont, P.B., de Villiers, H. & Vogel, J.C. 1978. Modern man in
sub-Saharan Africa prior to 49 000 years B.P.: a review and evaluation
with particular reference to Border Cave. South African Journal of
Science 74: 409–419.
Binneman, J.N.F. 1982. Mikrogebruikstekens op steenwerktuie:
eksperimentele waarnemings en ’n studie van werktuie afkomstig
van Boomplaasgrot. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of
Stellenbosch.
Botha, G.A. & Partridge, T.C. 2000. Colluvial deposits. In: Partridge, T.C.
& Maud, R.R. (eds) The Cenozoic of Southern Africa: 88–99. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Carter, P.L., Mitchell, P.J. & Vinnicombe, P. 1988. Sehonghong: the Middle
and Later Stone Age Industrial Sequence at a Lesotho rock-shelter. Oxford:
BAR International Series 406.
Clark, A.M.B. 1997a. The MSA/LSA transition in southern Africa:
new technological evidence from Rose Cottage Cave. South African
Archaeological Bulletin 52: 113–121.
Clark, A.M.B. 1997b. The final Middle Stone Age at Rose Cottage Cave:
a distinct industry in the Basutolian ecozone. South African Journal of
Science 93: 449–459.
Clark, J.D. & Brown, K.S. 2001. The Twin Rivers Kopje, Zambia: stratigraphy, fauna, and artefact assemblages from the 1954 and 1956 excavations. Journal of Archaeological Science 28: 305–330.
Clark, J.D. & Williamson, K.R. 1979. A Middle Stone Age occupation site
at Porc Epic Cave, Dire Dawa (east-central Ethiopia). Unpublished
paper presented at Southern African Association of Archaeologists’
Workshop, Stellenbosch.
Clark, J.D., Williamson, K.D., Michels, J.W. & Marean, C.A. 1984. A Middle Stone Age occupation site at Porc Epic Cave, Dire Dawa. African
Archaeological Review 2: 37–72.
Cole, G.H. 1967. A re-investigation of Magosi and the Magosian.
Quaternaria 9: 153–167.
Cooke, C.K. 1971. Excavation in Zombepata Cave, Sipolilo District,
62
Mashonaland, Rhodesia. South African Archaeological Bulletin 26:
104–126.
Cooke, C.K. 1978. The Redcliff Stone Age site, Rhodesia. Occasional
Papers of the National Museums and Monuments of Rhodesia 4(2): 45–73.
Cooper, J.A.G. & Flores, R.M. 1991. Shoreline deposits and diagenesis
resulting from two Late Pleistocene highstands near +5 and +6
metres, Durban. South Africa Marine Geology 97: 325–343.
Cramb, J.G. 1952. A Middle Stone Age industry from a Natal rock shelter. South African Journal of Science 48: 181–186.
Cramb, J.G. 1961. A second report on work at the Holley Shelter. South
African Journal of Science 57: 45–48.
Davies, O. 1975. Excavations at Shongweni South Cave. Annals of the
Natal Museum 22: 627–662.
Deacon, H.J. 1976. Where Hunters Gathered: a Study of Holocene Stone Age
People in the Eastern Cape. Claremont: South African Archaeological
Society Monograph Series 1.
Deacon, H.J. 1979. Excavations at Boomplaas Cave – a sequence
through the Upper Pleistocene and Holocene in South Africa. World
Archaeology 10: 241–257.
Deacon, H.J. 1995. Two late Pleistocene–Holocene archaeological
depositories from the southern Cape, South Africa. South African
Archaeological Bulletin 50: 121–131.
Demars, P-Y. & Laurent, P. 1992. Types d’outils lithiques du Paleolithique
Superieur en Europe. Paris: Presses du CNRS.
Gresham, T.H. & Brandt, S.A. 1996. Variability in the MSA of the Horn of
Africa In: Pwiti, G. & Soper, R. (eds) Aspects of African Archaeology:
157–164. Harare: University of Zimbabwe Publications.
Grün, R. & Beaumont, P.B. 2001. Border Cave revisited: a revised ESR
chronology. Journal of Human Evolution 40: 467–482.
Halkett, D., Hart, T., Yates, R., Volman, T.P., Parkington, J.E., Orton, J.,
Klein, R.G., Cruz-Uribe, K. & Avery, G. 2003. First excavation of intact
Middle Stone Age layers at Ysterfontein, Western Cape Province,
South Africa: implications for Middle Stone Age ecology. Journal of
Archaeological Science 30: 955–971.
Harper, P.T.N. 1997. The Middle Stone Age sequences at Rose Cottage
Cave: a search for continuity and discontinuity. South African Journal
of Science 93: 470–475.
Henshilwood, C. & Sealy, J. 1997. Bone artefacts from the Middle Stone
Age at Blombos Cave, southern Cape, South Africa. Current Anthropology 38: 890–895.
Henshilwood, C., Sealy, J., Yates, R., Cruz-Uribe, K., Goldberg, P., Grine,
F.E., Klein, R.G., Poggenpoel, C., van Niekerk, K. & Watts, I. 2001.
Blombos Cave, southern Cape, South Africa: preliminary report on
the 1992–1999 excavations of the Middle Stone Age levels. Journal of
Archaeological Science 28: 421–448.
Hitzeroth, L. 1973. Results of a stone age excavation at Duncombe farm,
concession. Rhodesian Prehistory 10: 14–18.
Kaplan, J. 1990. The Umhlatuzana Rock Shelter sequence: 100 000 years
of Stone Age history. Natal Museum Journal of Humanities 2: 1–94.
Kuman, K., Inbar, M. & Clarke, R.J. 1999. Palaeoenvironments and cultural sequence of the Florisbad Middle Stone Age hominid site, South
Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 26: 1409–1425.
Larsson, L. 1996. The Middle Stone Age of Zimbabwe. Some aspects of
former research and future aims. In: Pwiti, G. & Soper, R. (eds) Aspects
of African Archaeology: 201–206. Harare: University of Zimbabwe
Publications.
Lombard, M. 2004. Distribution patterns of organic residues on Middle
Stone Age points from Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
South African Archaeological Bulletin 59: 37–44.
Lombard, M. 2005. Evidence of hunting and hafting during the Middle
Stone Age at Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: a multianalytical approach. Journal of Human Evolution 48: 279–300.
Malan, B.D. 1945. Bifaced Middle Stone Age points from Natal. South
African Journal of Science 41: 400–410.
Malan, B.D. 1949. Two new South African Magosian occurrences in
Natal and South West Africa. South African Journal of Science 45: 1–4.
Malan, B.D. 1952. The final phase of the Middle Stone Age in South
Africa. Proceedings of the First Pan-African Congress on Prehistory,
Nairobi, 1947: 188–194. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Maud, R.R. & Botha, G.A. 2000. Deposits of the south-eastern and
southern coasts. In: Partridge, T.C. & Maud, R.R. (eds) The Cenozoic of
Southern Africa: 19–32. New York: Oxford University Press.
McBrearty, S. & Brooks, A.S. 2000. The revolution that wasn’t: a new
interpretation of the origin of modern human behaviour. Journal of
Human Evolution 39: 453–563.
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
Mitchell, P.J. 1988. The Early Microlithic Assemblages of Southern Africa.
Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series 388.
Mitchell, P.J. 1994. Understanding the MSA/LSA transition: the
pre-20 000 BP assemblages from new excavations at Sehonghong
Rock Shelter, Lesotho. Southern African Field Archaeology 3: 15–15.
Mitchell, P.J. 1998. The archaeology of the Alfred County Cave,
KwaZulu-Natal. Natal Museum Journal of Humanities 10: 1–17.
Mitchell, P.J. 2002. The Archaeology of Southern Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Opperman, H. 1987. The Later Stone Age of the Drakensberg Range and its
Foothills. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series
339.
Opperman, H. & Heydenrych, B. 1990. A 22 000 year-old Middle Stone
Age camp site with plant food remains from the north-eastern Cape.
South African Archaeological Bulletin 45: 93–99.
Orme, A.R. 1976. Late Pleistocene channels and Flandrian sediments
beneath Natal estuaries: a synthesis. Annals of the South African Museum 71: 77–85.
Pickering, R. 2002. A sedimentological analysis of six archaeological soil
samples from Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Unpublished report, University of the Witwatersrand.
Price-Williams, D. 1981. A preliminary report on recent excavations of
Middle and Later Stone Age levels at Sibebe Shelter, north-west
Swaziland. South African Archaeological Bulletin 36: 22–28.
Robbins, L. & Murphy, M. 1998. The Early and Middle Stone Age.
In: Lane, P., Reid, A. & Segobye, A. (eds) Ditswa Mmung: the Archaeology of Botswana: 50–64. Gaberone: Pula Press and the Botswana
Society.
Schiegl, S., Stockhammer, P., Scott, C. & Wadley, L. 2004. A mineralogical and phytolith study of the Middle Stone Age hearths in Sibudu
Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. South African Journal of Science
100: 185–194.
Singer, R. & Wymer, J. 1982. The Middle Stone Age of Klasies River Mouth in
South Africa. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Stringer, C.B. 1996. Current issues in modern human origins. In:
Meikle, W.E., Howell, F.C. & Jablonski, N.G. (eds) Contemporary Issues
in Human Evolution: 115–134. San Francisco: California Academy of
Sciences.
Valladas, H., Wadley, L., Mercier, N., Tribolo, C., Reyss, J.L. & Joron, J.L.
(2005). Thermoluminescence dating on burnt lithics from Middle
Stone Age layers at Rose Cottage Cave. South African Journal of Science
101: 169–174.
Van Peer, P., Vermeersch, P.M., Moeyersons, J. & Van Neer, W. 1996.
Palaeolithic sequence of Sodmein Cave, Red Sea Mountains, Egypt.
In: Pwiti, G. & Soper, R. (eds) Aspects of African Archaeology: 149–156.
Harare: University of Zimbabwe Publications.
Villa, P., Delagnes, A. & Wadley, L. 2005. A late Middle Stone Age artefact assemblage from Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal): comparisons with
the European Middle Palaeolithic. Journal of Archaeological Science 32:
399–422.
Vogelsang, R. 1996. The Middle Stone Age in south-western Namibia.
In: Pwiti, G. & Soper, R. (eds) Aspects of African Archaeology: 207–212.
Harare: University of Zimbabwe Publications.
Volman, T.P. 1981. The Middle Stone Age in the southern Cape. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Chicago.
Volman, T.P. 1984. Early prehistory of southern Africa. In: Klein, R.G.
(ed.) Southern African Prehistory and Paleoenvironments: 169–220.
Rotterdam: Balkema.
Wadley, L. 1993. The Pleistocene Later Stone Age south of the Limpopo
River. Journal of World Prehistory 7: 243–296.
Wadley, L. 1997. Rose Cottage Cave: archaeological work 1987–1997.
South African Journal of Science 93: 439–444.
Wadley, L. 2001. Preliminary report on excavations at Sibudu Cave,
KwaZulu-Natal. Southern African Humanities 13: 1–17.
Wadley, L. & Harper, P.T. 1989. Rose Cottage Cave revisited: Malan’s
Middle Stone Age collection. South African Archaeological Bulletin 44:
23–32.
Wadley, L. & Jacobs, Z. 2004. Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal: background to the excavations of Middle Stone Age and Iron Age occupations. South African Journal of Science 100: 145–151.
Wadley, L. & Vogel, J. C. 1991. New dates from Rose Cottage Cave. South
African Journal of Science 87: 605–608.
Wadley, L., Williamson, B. & Lombard, M. 2004. Ochre in hafting in
Middle Stone Age southern Africa: a practical role. Antiquity 78:
661–675.
South African Archaeological Bulletin 60 (182): 51–63, 2005
Walker, N.J. 1995. Late Pleistocene and Holocene Hunter-gatherers of the
Matopos: an Archaeological Study of Change and Continuity in Zimbabwe.
Studies in African Archaeology 10. Uppsala: Societas Archaeologica
Upsaliensis.
Walker, N.J. & Wadley, L. 1984. Evidence for an early microlithic industry at Duncombe Farm in Mashonaland, Zimbabwe. Cookeia 1: 4–13.
Wallsmith, D. 1990. Driekoppen: a Middle Stone Age rockshelter.
Nyame Akuma 33: 13–16.
Wendt, W.E. 1976. ‘Art mobilier’ from the Apollo 11 Cave, South West
Africa: Africa’s oldest dated works of art. South African Archaeological
Bulletin 31: 5–11.
Williamson, B.S. 2004. Middle Stone Age tool function from residue
63
analysis at Sibudu Cave. South African Journal of Science 100: 174–178.
Willoughby, P.R. 1996. Middle Stone Age technology and adaptation in
southwestern Tanzania. In: Pwiti, G. & Soper, R. (eds) Aspects of African Archaeology: 177–189. Harare: University of Zimbabwe Publications.
Wurz, S. 1999. The Howiesons Poort backed artefacts from Klasies
River: an argument for symbolic behaviour. South African Archaeological Bulletin 54: 38–50.
Wurz, S., le Roux, N.J., Gardner, S. & Deacon, H.J. 2003. Discriminating
between the end products of the earlier Middle Stone Age sub-stages
at Klasies River using biplot methodology. Journal of Archaeological
Science 30: 1107–1126.