sign in sign up
<<
Home , Howiesons Poort, Hunting hypothesis, Sibudu Cave

Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 2523–2531

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Archaeological Science

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jas

Hunting with segments: pilot experimental study and the functional interpretation of archaeological

Marlize Lombard a,*, Justin Pargeter b a Institute for Evolution, University of the Witwatersrand, PO WITS 2050, Johannesburg, b Department of Archaeology, University of the Witwatersrand, PO WITS 2050, Johannesburg, South Africa article info abstract

Article history: For many decades the use of backed pieces from the Howiesons Poort, between about 70 ka and 55 ka Received 31 December 2007 ago, in South Africa has been a point of discussion. Recently direct evidence has been provided to Received in revised form 8 April 2008 associate these tools with Middle strategies. Yet, whether they were used to tip Accepted 8 April 2008 hunting weapons or as barbs remained an open question. In this paper we introduce a set of pilot experiments designed to test the effectiveness of Howiesons Poort segments, the type fossils of the , hafted in four different configurations as tips for hunting weapons. It is shown that the mor- Keywords: phological type can be used successfully in this way. We present the results of a macrofracture analysis Howiesons Poort conducted on the experimental tools and compare these to results obtained from three Howiesons Poort Experimental archaeology backed samples. By correlating experimental outcomes, macrofracture data and the interpretation of Hunting behaviour micro-residue distribution patterns, we provide some insight into the functional variables that might be Sibudu associated with Howiesons Poort segments. Umhlatuzana Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Klasies River Cave

1. Introduction used for other activities. In fact, it is most likely their functional flexibility that contributes to the repeated appearances of similar Few categories have received as much attention as the -based across the globe over the last 300 ka or so backed tools from the Howiesons Poort Industry in South Africa. (Barham, 2002; Bar-Yosef and Kuhn, 1999; Bleed, 2002; Elston and From early on they were considered unusual. Initially, the backed Brantingham, 2002; Hiscock, 2002; Lombard and Parsons, in press; tools drew attention because they seemed so similar to Later Stone Marean et al., 2007; McDonald et al., 2007; Mitchell, 1988, 1995; Age and Upper Palaeolithic artefacts, but appeared much earlier in Soriano et al,. 2007; Wadley, 1996, 2005). the archaeological sequence (e.g. Deacon, J., 1995). When debates Increasing interest in Middle Stone Age hunting technologies about the origins of modern human behaviour became increasingly and their role in modern or complex human behaviour stimulate relevant, they were studied in terms of their symbolic or stylistic discussions around all tool types that could have been used in potential (e.g. Deacon, 1989; Wurz, 1999). Recently, a series of weapon systems. One of the debates centres on the origins and studies was launched to generate evidence about the functions and antiquity of projectile weaponry, where weapons are not hand- technologies associated with Howiesons Poort segments, delivered (), but projected with the aid of throwers the backed tool category that is considered the type specimen for or bows (darts and ) (e.g. Brooks et al., 2006; McBrearty the industry (e.g. Delagnes et al., 2006; Gibson et al., 2004; and Brooks, 2000; Shea, 2006; Villa and Lenoir, 2006). Because of Lombard, 2005a, 2006, 2007a, 2008; Pargeter, 2007; Wurz and their morphology and/or the uncertainty about whether Lombard, 2007). Howiesons Poort segments were used to tip hunting weapons or This paper continues along this line of investigation, combining not, these tools are often excluded from morphometric studies archaeological use-trace evidence with new macrofracture data concerned with the evolution of hunting technologies (e.g. from experimental work. We build upon previous interpretations of Brooks et al., 2006; Shea, 2006). Our methods are not yet suitable these tools as insets in composite (hafted) hunting weapons. As our to generate convincing evidence for or against either in- methods are chosen explicitly to explore and assess this particular terpretation. However, with this paper we aim to provide and function we do not exclude the possibility that segments were also discuss some evidence that suggests Howiesons Poort segments could have been used to tip hunting weapons, and that stone- * Corresponding author. tipped hunting during this phase was variable and E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Lombard). adaptable.

0305-4403/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jas.2008.04.004 2524 M. Lombard, J. Pargeter / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 2523–2531

It has always been assumed that backed artefacts from the The industry has been recorded at more than 20 sites in South were hafted as parts of weaponry (e.g. Bocquentin and Africa, a number of which have been comprehensively dated Bar-Yosef, 2004; Clark, 1977; Clark et al., 1974; Crombe´ et al., 2001; (Feathers, 2002; Gru¨ n et al., 1990; Gru¨ n and Beaumont, 2001; Nuzhnyi, 2000; Phillipson, 1976; Wadley, 1987). Previous experi- Miller et al., 1999; Parkington, 1999; Tribolo et al., 2005; Valladas ments with backed similar to those of the Eurasian et al., 2005; Vogel, 2001; Wadley and Jacobs, 2006). Age calcula- have shown them to be useful when used to tip and/or tions obtained from various dating methods applied to samples barb hunting weapons (e.g. Barton and Bergman, 1982; Crombe´ from , Klasies River, Rose Cottage Cave and Diepkloof et al., 2001). Conversely, an experiment by Binneman and Hall with point to the placement of Howiesons Poort assemblages firmly replicated San (ethnographic hunter-gatherers) bows and arrows, within the period of 70 ka to 60 ka ago. Recent thermolumines- where segments were hafted transversely or end-on, showed them cence data support this consensus, indicating that the Howiesons ineffective for penetrating a calf carcass (Binneman, 1994). Seeing Poort appeared about 70 ka ago and that it was still in use at 54 ka that most ideas about the possible uses of Howiesons Poort to 62 ka ago at sites such as Rose Cottage Cave (Valladas et al., segments have been based on Later Stone Age/San ethnographic 2005). examples, the question of whether these segments could have been The age of the industry, its similarities to Holocene backed tool used successfully to tip hunting weapons remained open-ended. industries, and the use of unusual raw materials resulted in far- The Pargeter (2007) experiments are the first to focus specifically reaching behavioural hypotheses concerning the origins of human on testing whether Howiesons Poort-like segments, hafted in modernity (Lombard 2005b). Some of these models discuss aspects a variety of positions can be used effectively to tip hunting such as mobility patterns, gift exchange, symbolic behaviour, weapons. The resulting macrofractures therefore represent the first technical conventions and the origin of San languages (e.g. modern reference sample that is directly relevant to the study of Ambrose, 2006; Ambrose and Lorenz, 1990; Deacon, 1989, 1992; Howiesons Poort segments that could have been used in this way. Deacon, H.J., 1995; Deacon and Shuurman, 1992; Deacon and Wurz, 1996, 2001, 2005; Minichillo, 2006; Wurz, 1999). Most recently, 2. A short background to the Howiesons Poort of South Africa hunting technologies other than those based on stone tools are tentatively associated with the Howiesons Poort. Faunal data from Lombard (2005b) provided a full review of research conducted indicate a predominance of the small blue duiker since the Howiesons Poort was first identified elsewhere. Here we (Philantomba monticola) in the Howiesons Poort assemblage, briefly highlight the most relevant points concerning the industry, suggesting the use of traps to capture these small antelope (see its evolutionary themes and dating. The Howiesons Poort is Clark and Plug, in press; Wadley, 2006), and an argument for characterised by a blade-based technology and found primarily in a bone-tipped bow-and- technology at the site during the sub-Saharan Africa south of the Limpopo River (Fig. 1). The label same period was presented recently (Backwell et al., 2008). was first used by Stapleton and Hewitt (1927, 1928) to describe a stone artefact assemblage from a small in the Eastern 3. The experiments Cape. They gave the main characteristics for the ‘‘Howiesons Poort Series’’ as the presence of burins, large segments, obliquely pointed It has long been acknowledged that not all variables can be blades, and trimmed points. However, the Stapleton and Hewitt tested with a single set of experiments, and that controlled assemblage is probably from a mixed context as more recent experiments are most useful when variables are limited in order to excavations at stratified sites show that points are absent or rare isolate and address specific questions (e.g. Ingersoll and Macdon- during the Howiesons Poort, and that the technocomplex is rather ald, 1977; Mathieu, 2002; Odell and Cowan, 1986; Shea et al., 2002). characterised by its distinctive backed pieces such as segments Within this paradigm, Pargeter’s work (Pargeter, 2006, 2007) (also referred to as crescents or lunates) and trapezes made on represents the pilot study in a series of experiments that will each blades (Singer and Wymer, 1982; Deacon, H.J., 1995; Deacon, J., seek to address specific questions regarding the use and hafting of 1995; Deacon and Wurz, 1996; Wadley, 2005, in press; Wurz, 1999, backed tools from the Howiesons Poort. Shea (2006: 841) indicates 2000, 2002). that most researchers who have discussed Middle Stone Age backed pieces as possible weapon armatures have proposed they were mounted as barbs on the sides of spears and other weapons, rather than on the tip. Nevertheless, use-trace studies indicate that at least some pieces could have been used to tip hunting weapons and that there could have been variability in the preferred hafting configurations of such weapons (Lombard, 2005a, 2008; Wurz and Lombard, 2007). Thus, for the purposes of this study we are not concerned with variability in aspects such as raw materials, velocity, weight, angle of impact or the stopping power of targets. Rather, the experiments were designed explicitly to investigate whether segments, hafted in four different configurations, could function effectively as tips for hunting weapons, and to provide some initial macrofracture data. Sylvain Soriano prepared 33 flint segments that were used to construct 27 hunting weapons. This is an average sample size for experimentation with a single morphological type used for a single function, and proved adequate for testing the effectiveness of the different hafting configurations. Although the sample size is too small for the statistical analysis of macrofracture frequencies, the initial macrofracture data raised interesting questions with regard to the interpretation of some archaeological pieces, and some of these aspects will be explored and assessed during future Fig. 1. Archaeological sites with the Howiesons Poort mentioned in the text. experimentation. M. Lombard, J. Pargeter / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 2523–2531 2525

The morphological characteristics of the replicated segments weapons firmly in the carcass (Fig. 3). Of the six back-to-back are comparable to Howiesons Poort backed tools excavated from hafted weapons five penetrated the carcass’s and flesh. Again, sites such as Sibudu Cave, Rose Cottage Cave and Klasies River Cave. the slicing action caused by the cutting edges of the segments They are thus suitable for establishing whether Howiesons Poort proved to be very effective. These weapons created large gaping segments, as a distinct morphological type, can be used effectively wounds in the carcass (Fig. 4). Although we do not consider these to tip hunting weapons. The segments were glued into slotted and experimental results as direct evidence for the interpretation of weighted pinewood shafts in four different hafting positions. These archaeological material, we believe that they clearly indicate that positions included longitudinal (n ¼ 7) (Fig. 2a), transverse (n ¼ 7) Howiesons Poort-type segments, hafted in various positions, could (Fig. 2b), diagonal (7 ¼ )(Fig. 2c), and back-to-back hafting (n ¼ 6) function successfully as tips for hunting weapons. In order to start (Fig. 2d). The weapons were launched at a suspended impala building a comparable database we conducted a macrofracture (Aepyceros melampus) carcass using a machine built for this analysis on this first experimental sample. purpose. In this way variations in load, velocity and angles of delivery that can be expected during hand delivery was controlled 4. Macrofracture analysis (e.g. Shea et al., 2002). The weapons were each fired into the carcass ten times or until they became unusable. This was done to assess 4.1. Background the robustness of the hafting configurations, and because it is likely that hunters would have re-used undamaged weapons until they Many fractures on archaeological tools no doubt resulted needed re-hafting or became too damaged for effective use. For the accidentally, but some fractures are the result of use (Barton and full description and protocol of the experiments we refer to Bergman, 1982; Bergman and Newcomer, 1983; Moss and Pargeter (2007). Newcomer, 1982; Shea, 1988). There is a wide degree of variation in The 27 weapons were shot into the carcass 167 times. Eighty- fracture patterns (combinations of fracture types and positions) five percent of the weapons were considered successful as they associated with impact damage because hunting weapons are penetrated the target’s hide and flesh. Of these successful weapons, subject to a wide range of targets, velocities, angles of impact and 33% penetrated deep into the carcass (30 mm), and a further 33% fracture initiations (e.g. Odell, 1981). Thus, even though ‘‘typical of these penetrations could have damaged vital organs. The patterns’’ cannot always be reliably defined, there are certain remaining successful weapons caused less severe damage to the aspects of fracture mechanics that can allow the elimination of animal’s hide or flesh. Only 15% of the replicated weapons were other causes (Odell, 1981; Dockall, 1997). For example, when unable to penetrate the target. Thirty-seven percent of the weapons isolated, some fracture types produced by impact have certain traits survived all ten shots. The various hafting configurations showed that distinguish them from those caused under other circum- slight differences in success rates. Of the seven weapons hafted stances (Geneste and Plisson, 1993; but also see Shea et al., 2002). longitudinally, six successfully penetrated the carcass. The seven In order to establish a tightly defined and replicable analytical transversely hafted weapons lacerated, rather than penetrated the method, and to build a directly comparable database, we closely animal’s hide and flesh. Three of these penetrated somewhat, but follow Fischer et al. (1984). They conducted experiments to isolate the other four deflected off the animal causing cuts to the hide and and define types of fractures that could be considered diagnostic for tissue. Although such wounds would not kill or cripple an animal, impact use of stone-tipped hunting weapons. The term ‘‘diagnostic they are sufficient to create a blood trail for tracking down impact fracture’’ (DIF) refers to evidence for impact use in the form wounded prey or introducing poison into the bloodstream. of fracture types that could hardly have originated in any other way Five diagonally hafted weapons successfully pierced the than through forceful longitudinal collisions (Fischer et al., 1984). animal’s hide and flesh. The slicing action of the diagonal cutting These wear traces are also diagnostic of the fracture mechanics of edge caused deep penetrations and relatively wide lacerations. The brittle solids subjected to both static and dynamic loadings depth of the cuts in combination with the barbs lodged these (Cotterell and Kamminga, 1987). Many other researchers have conducted hunting experiments with stone tools and have discussed resulting fractures (see Dockall, 1997 and references therein), and although terminology frequently differs, it seems that the formation of the fracture types is similar regardless of the type of hunting experiment (Dockall,

Fig. 2. Different hafting configurations of the replicated hunting weapons; (a) longi- tudinal, (b) transverse, (c) diagonal and (d) back-to-back. Fig. 3. Deep penetration of a weapon tipped with a diagonally hafted segment. 2526 M. Lombard, J. Pargeter / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 2523–2531

archaeological samples associated with hunting (see Dockall, 1997: 326). We are unaware of such fractures having been recorded in association with other use-related activities. Other fracture types that occur on broken stone tools such as snap terminating and hinge or feather terminating bending fractures are recorded and presented in the data. These fracture types could result from impact-use, but have also been recorded as a result of trampling or accidental breakage and are therefore not considered unambiguous evidence for stone-tipped hunting weapons. We follow Fischer et al. (1984), using only the four DIF types (step terminating bending fractures, unifacial spin-off fractures 6 mm, bifacial spin-off fractures and impact burination) as analytical criteria. Some adaptations have been made to the Fischer et al. (1984) method in an effort to further reduce the margin of interpretative error on archaeological samples. For example, flakes manufactured using the bipolar technique are exposed to forces similar to those that tips of hunting tools are exposed to. Odell and Cowan (1986) addressed this problem, and established the major differences between use-impact fractures and bipolar knapping Fig. 4. Large wound caused by a weapon tipped with segments in the back-to-back fractures, the most important being that the location of bipolar position. damage coincides with other knapping characteristics. Normally these traces are not located along the distal ends of the piece, and 1997: 321), tool morphology (Fischer et al., 1984), or raw materials are not in association with a usable sharp tip or edge that could (Lombard et al., 2004). However, it is important to note that, have functioned as the business end of a hunting tool (Odell and although we consider macrofracture analysis a useful preliminary Cowan, 1986). Therefore, DIFs occurring in close association with indicator of whether an archaeological tool class could have been striking platforms, ripples and bulbs of percussion are not included used to tip hunting weapons, we do not necessarily consider such in the data. During the analysis of archaeological samples, consid- results conclusive (e.g. Shea et al., 2002). Functional inferences for eration is also given to the morphology of the pieces, and whether archaeological samples, including hunting interpretations, should the tools could have been used for other impact functions such as ideally be assessed with additional strands of evidence such as chopping (Fischer et al., 1984). morphometric analyses and more extensive functional analyses Fischer et al. (1984) showed that the morphology of the stone such as microwear and micro-residues. pieces did not affect the fracture types that developed as a result of hunting use. DIFs were recorded on 39% of their experimental , ranging from transverse to acutely angled in shape, 4.2. Method and 55% of the points that were used as tips for throwing spears. A large number of prehistoric flint points from various sites, differing The simplest DIFs are step terminating bending fractures. These in age, size and shape, also displayed DIFs, suggesting that the result from longitudinal pressure from the distal and proximal ends defined characteristics of impact function are universal for stone of the objects. In the case of occasional damaging processes, such as tips of flint and related raw materials (Fischer et al., 1984). Exper- trampling, bending fractures will initiate by means of transverse iments conducted with convergent flakes made from South African pressure more or less perpendicular to the dorsal and ventral sides raw materials, and with considerable variation in proportions, of the objects. Probably the most easily recognisable DIFs are demonstrated that local stones of various grain sizes and bending fractures from which ‘‘spin-offs’’ initiate (see Fischer et al., dimensions develop similar frequencies of DIFs (57%) when all the 1984). Bending fractures that result from pressure perpendicular to pieces were used as stabbing or throwing spears (see Lombard the dorsal and ventral sides of the objects will result in spin-offs on et al., 2004). The seeming differences between DIF frequencies from only one broad side to a limited extent. But on artefacts used as experimental samples that have been hand-delivered (55–57%) and impact tools, where the forces run parallel to the broad sides, the those that were used as projectiles (30–40%) could possibly spin-off fractures can have considerable dimensions (>6 mm), and indicate variation between the two weapon systems. While this long spin-offs can occur on one, or even both, sides. Spin-off might be a future possibility we are, however, not confident that fractures on both sides, initiating from the same bending fracture, the current data can be used in this way. Continued experimenta- can in practice occur in hardly any other way than through use as tion with this question in mind is needed. a hafted impact implement. This type of fracture is therefore considered diagnostic for impact use, irrespective of the 4.3. Results dimensions of the fractures (for further fracture definitions and illustrations see Fischer et al., 1984; Ho Ho Committee, 1979). Of the replicated segments used in this experiment (n ¼ 33), 30 Another fracture associated with impact use sometimes tools were analysed for macrofractures. The remaining three were resembles the effect of a blow (pseudo burination or impact unusable because of severe fracturing in the carcass. This observa- burination). These fractures usually occur along either one of the tion may account for the presence of many broken stone tool lateral edges (Barton and Bergman, 1982; Bergman and Newcomer, fragments excavated from archaeological sites associated with the 1983). They are difficult to distinguish from intentional burination, processing and consumption of hunted prey. Also, it might be of but usually lack the negative bulb of percussion at the burin initi- interest to note that even though stone tips or insets are prone to ation or Herzian ripples usually associated with intentional such severe fracturing, some ethnographically-known hunters be- removals (Lombard et al., 2004; Paola Villa, pers. commun., 2004). lieve that they are more lethal when they break up in the prey as the Dockall (1997) describes these fractures as lateral macrofractures, fragments increase tissue damage and bleeding (e.g. Rudner, 1979). and reports that it was documented on several experimental Forty percent of the analysed pieces developed DIFs and many samples used to replicate hunting activities and many more had non-diagnostic fractures. While the non-diagnostic M. Lombard, J. Pargeter / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 2523–2531 2527 fracture types are not indicative of hunting on their own, when combined with the DIFs recorded in this analysis, they represent a useful indication of fracture patterns that might occur on stone tipped hunting weapons. Table 1 provides the results of the detailed macrofracture analysis according to hafting configurations summarised below:

One longitudinally hafted segment developed an impact burination. Two transversely hafted pieces also developed impact burina- tions, while two smooth, semi-circular notches developed on the cutting edge on one of these tools (Fig. 5a). Five segments hafted back-to-back developed DIFs in the form of impact burinations (Fig. 5b), unifacial spin-off fractures >6mm(Fig. 5c), and a step terminating fracture (Fig. 5d). The diagonally hafted segments developed the highest DIF frequencies (66%), three of which are impact burinations (Fig. 5e). One of the impact burinations has an associated unifacial spin off fracture >6mm(Fig. 5f). Fig. 5. Diagnostic impact fractures and impact notches documented on the experi- These results verify previous conclusions that DIFs develop on mental tools; (a) impact notches, (b) impact burination, (c) unifacial spin-off fracture 6 mm with step termination, (d) step terminating fracture, (e) impact burination and stone tools used to tip hunting weapons regardless of raw material, (f) unifacial spin-off fracture 6 mm. tool morphology, dimension or mode of delivery. Macrofracture results obtained from archaeological samples such as Howiesons Poort segments can thus be compared successfully with results resistance on impact. For example, impact burination has been from other tool types and industries to generate comparable data attributed to a direct hit on a hard object (Bergman and Newcomer, for hunting technologies and their associated behaviours across 1983; Shimelmitz et al., 2004). This would be consistent with time and space (e.g. Lombard, 2007b). The frequencies of impact Pargeter’s experiment where the weapon launcher was placed in burination on the experimental tools, and the development of a direct line with the unmoving carcass and all weapons were smooth, semi-circular notches on one of the transversely hafted launched from the same spot resulting mostly in direct hits into the segments have implications for the interpretation of archaeological ribcage of the animal. Of course, real hunting scenarios are more assemblages and deserve some consideration. variable, and will therefore probably result in different combina- tions and frequencies of DIF types. 5. Discussion Segments with burination from the Howiesons Poort layers at Diepkloof are interpreted as having been handheld and used to 5.1. Impact burination and impact notching score the surfaces of ostrich eggshell water containers (Parkington et al., 2005). It is not clear whether the removals on the Diepkloof The experimental sample shows a relatively high frequency of segments have characteristics indicating intentional burination, or impact burination (26%). Impact burination were documented on whether impact burination was considered. Even though there now 4% of the backed tool sample from Sibudu Cave (n ¼ 132), 10% on exist multiple strands of evidence that some segments at other the sample from Umhlatuzana (n ¼ 101) and only 2% of the sample Middle Stone Age sites were hafted and used in hunting weapons from Klasies River Cave 2 (n ¼ 85) (Table 2)(Fig. 6c, f). This could be (Lombard, 2005a, 2008; Wurz and Lombard, 2007), we encourage due to the fact that all of the experimental tools were shot into the consideration of multi-faceted explanations. For example, where carcass multiple times, testing them towards the upper limits of negative bulbs of percussion are lacking, pieces damaged during their stress tolerance. Therefore, they could have developed such hunting could have been employed subsequently to mark the fractures more frequently than the archaeological samples, some of surfaces of other materials. Use-trace analyses should be able to which may also have been used as barbs, cutting insets, functions give a glimpse into such recycling behaviour practiced in the past. other than hunting or not used at all. It is further possible that This could add interesting dimensions with regard to behavioural nuances in DIF type frequencies may reflect aspects of variables comparisons between contemporaneous groups who had access to such as haft weight, velocity of delivery, angle of impact and resources such as ostrich eggshells (e.g. Diepkloof, Western Cape),

Table 1 Macrofracture results according to the different hafting configurations

Fracture types Vertical (n ¼ 6) Horizontal Back-to-back Diagonal Totals (n ¼ 7) (n ¼ 11) (n ¼ 6)

n % n % n % n % n % Step terminating 0 0 0 0 1 9 0 0 1 3 Bifacial spin-off 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unif. Spin-off >6mm000 0218116310 Impact burination 1 16 2 28 2 18 3 50 8 26 Unif. Spin-off <6mm000 00 00 00 0 Snap terminating 1 16 1 14 2 18 1 16 5 16 Hinge/feather term. 1 16 0 0 1 9 1 16 3 10 Impact notching 0 0 1 14 0 0 0 0 1 3

Note that more than one diagnostic impact fracture can occur on a single tool, therefore DIF frequencies do not necessarily correlate to the number of tools with diagnostic impact fractures. 2528 M. Lombard, J. Pargeter / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 2523–2531

Table 2 Results of the experimental sample compared to the results obtained for three archaeological samples from Howiesons Poort contexts

Fracture types Pargeter Sibudu Cave Umhlatuzana Klasies River Cave experiments HP (n ¼ 132) HP (n ¼ 101) 2HP(n ¼ 85) (n ¼ 30)

n % n % n % n % Step terminating 1 3 13 10 15 14 12 14 Bifacial spin-off 0 0 6 4.5 0 0 2 2 Unif. spin-off >6mm 3 10 9 7 0 0 2 2 Impact burination 8 26 5 4 10 10 2 2 Unretouched notches 2 7 5 4 4 4 No rec. No rec. Unif. spin-off <6mm 0 0 9 7 1 1 3 4 Snap terminating 6 20 51 39 42 42 24 28 Hinge/feather term. 3 10 21 16 3 3 3 4

Tools with DIFs 12 40 29 22 24 24 18 21 and those who occupied environmental niches where such a result of impact. As in the case of impact burination, we are not resources were absent (Sibudu, KwaZulu-Natal), but, none the less aware that impact notching has previously been described as a use- used similar stone tool industries. trace or a result from trampling. Future experimentation will An unexpected outcome relates to the development of the semi- investigate these possibilities. Again, we propose that intentionally circular impact notches on one of the experimental pieces. Notches manufactured notches will probably display small negative bulbs of are often observed on backed tools from the Howiesons Poort, and percussion or Herzian ripples, analogous to retouch scars, while sometimes they are intentionally retouched (Singer and Wymer, impact notches lack them. It is not yet apparent whether these 1982; Wurz, 2000). Some segments from Sibudu Cave and Umh- notches are similar to those recorded as ‘‘simple notches’’ on tools latuzana, however, also have smooth (un-retouched), semi-circular from European Middle Palaeolithic sites such Combe Geral, La notches similar to those documented on the experimental tool Quina, Combe-Capelle and Pech de l’Aze´ (Hiscock and Clarkson, (Fig. 6a,b,e). On the Sibudu sample subjected to microresidue 2007; Holdaway et al., 1996). analysis, combinations of bone, fat, collagen and animal tissue residues were documented in close approximation to the notches 5.2. Variability in Howiesons Poort hunting technology on five tools, supporting a . While intentionally retouched notches could have been used for functions such as When compared to the macrofracture results from Pargeter’s shaping bone or wood points and shafts, Pargeter’s experiments and other experiments, percentages for Howiesons Poort backed show that smooth notches could also develop inadvertently as tool samples from Sibudu Cave, Umhlatuzana and Klasies River Cave 2 with DIFs seem relatively lowd between 21% and 24% (Table 2). This is within the range documented on European archaeological samples consisting of points or transverse artefacts from the Holocene known to have been used as weapon tips (Fischer et al., 1984). The Howiesons Poort archaeological samples included all the backed pieces, whole and broken, from the assemblages, as segment fragments are not always distinguishable from other broken backed pieces. Independent hunting experi- ments conducted with microliths comparable to those from the European Mesolithic might provide further explanation for the observed pattern. During these experiments conducted by Crombe´ et al. (2001), geometrically-shaped pieces such as segments, triangles and obliquely truncated points were used as barbs while microlithic points were used to tip arrows shot into sheep cadavers with a bow. More than 30% of the tools used as projectile tips de- veloped DIFs as a result of these experiments. Segments and tri- angles used exclusively as barbs, however, showed a low frequency of diagnostic impact fractures, only about 5% (Crombe´ et al., 2001). Based on (a) the micro-residue and use-wear data from Sibudu Cave segments (see below and Lombard, 2008), (b) the macro- fracture results from Sibudu, Umhlatuzana and Klasies River, and (c) Pargeter’s experiments demonstrating that segments, as a mor- phological type, are functionally effective as tips for hunting weapons, we suggest that segments were part of the Howiesons Poort hunting technology. Even though it cannot be expected that DIFs will form as a constant, the relatively low macrofracture frequencies might indicate that some of these tools could have functioned as cutting insets or barbs along the shafts of weapons or Fig. 6. Archaeological examples with notches and impact burination; (a, b) notches on as insets in composite tools used for other tasks. This interpretation hornfels segments from the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu Cave, (c) impact burination on is supported by the low frequencies of DIFs (5%) recorded on seg- a felsite segment from Umhlatuzana, (d) step terminating impact fractures on the opposite end of the same tool, fractures, (e) notch on a dolerite segment from ments used as barbs (Crombe´ et al., 2001), and other observations Umhlatuzana and (f) impact burination on the same tool. that seem to indicate that fractures usually associated with hunting M. Lombard, J. Pargeter / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 2523–2531 2529

(but not necessarily DIFs) develop in much lower frequencies on Single TCSA values for the experimental sample also fall in the tools used as daggers, butchery or chisels, or on trampled arrow range; however, when the values are calculated for back-to- tools (Shea et al., 2002). back hafted weapons they fall in the spear range (Pargeter, 2007). It is also possible that not all archaeological pieces were used. Even though these values represent hypothetical functional possi- Some may have been lost before use, or some may have been bilities, they might be a further indication of change and variability prepared and stockpiled in anticipation of use. Stone-tipped in Howiesons Poort hunting technologies. Increasing evidence for weapons are composite tools in which the stone component is such shifts and variability is of foremost interest for Middle Stone often expendable (Bamforth and Bleed, 1997). Weapon systems Age behavioural studies, and could have been caused by adapta- based on blade technologies are especially well adapted to allow tions to aspects of economy, demography, social and symbolic the expedient replacement of a damaged tip or inset without behaviour, procurement, maintainability, reliability, risk manage- having to manufacture a new weapon. Large quantities of blades ment, and the environment (e.g. Ambrose and Lorenz, 1990; Bleed, can be manufactured in a short period of time, thus batches of 1986; Costa et al., 2005; Fitzhugh, 2001). While direct evidence for insets can be produced in anticipation of need (e.g. Elston and or against stone-tipped projectile weaponry during the Howiesons Brantingham, 2002). It is consequently conceivable that archaeo- Poort is still lacking, we suggest that tools such as segments could logical samples will often display relatively low frequencies of DIFs have been used successfully as tips or insets for both hand- compared to some experimental samples where all the tools were delivered and projectile weapon systems in variable, adaptable and used in hunting activities. changing hunting technologies. Detailed micro-residue and use-wear analyses on 53 segments In this context it might be useful to consider real-life hunting from Sibudu Cave supports the interpretation of Howiesons Poort scenarios. We do not suggest that recent hunter-gatherer behaviour segments as adjustable insets used in hunting weapons. Almost can or should be indiscriminately mapped onto that of the 2000 organic residue occurrences were documented on the sample Howiesons Poort. Yet, ethnographic case studies serve to illustrate that was excavated and curated under ideal circumstances for that hunters operate in a real world of opportunity and risk, micro-residue analysis. Most of the animal residues were docu- providing examples of the dynamics that could exist within a single mented on the bladed portions of the segments. This is especially social/temporal context (Kusimba, 2002). Such examples provide true for animal tissue, collagen, blood residue and fragments. contextual variables for choices of weapon systems, hunting The distribution patterns of fatty and bone residues were less strategies and prey. More often than not, hunter-gatherer groups distinct and it is possible that some tools were hafted to bone use a variety of weapon systems such as bow-and-arrow, spears, (Lombard, 2008). In contrast, plant residues are concentrated on clubs, nets and snares. Although some variety in hunting behaviour the backed portions of the segments, with 67% of the plant residue and equipment may reflect social/group preferences (Bartram, component comprising resin or gum, often associated with 1997; Hitchcock and Bleed, 1997), the !Kung of the Kalahari and (Lombard, 2007a). Additional use traces on the Sibudu sample, such other San groups also vary hunting strategies and the associated as striations, polish, micro-damage to tool edges and edge round- weaponry according to season or prey type. ing, show little indication of cutting, sawing or scraping. We do not, Schapera (1963) noted that the San would hunt certain antelope however, rule out multi-functionality for backed tools from the species during the rainy season by overtaking them and killing Howiesons Poort. Functions such as knives and implements for them with wooden clubs or spears. During the dry season they cutting plant material have previously been suggested (Deacon, J., often made pitfalls in game paths, and animals trapped in the pits 1995; Wadley and Binneman, 1995). are killed with spears. Traps are also used mainly in the dry season The distribution patterns of the micro-residues associated with to catch birds, hares, wild cats, foxes and small antelope. Many hafting provided evidence for variability in hafting configurations. varieties of big game are run down until they are exhausted and Two main clusters of hafting configurations could be identified. The killed with spears. Some game species such as giraffe, eland, first cluster represents tools with adhesive residues recorded all hartebeest and springbok are, however, generally hunted with along the backed portions that could have been hafted transversely, bow-and-arrow (Schapera, 1963). More recent work with the Kua back-to-back or longitudinally. The second cluster represents tools and Tyua San of also shows that animal foods are with adhesive residues restricted to one end of a tool. These tools obtained by methods that vary seasonally (Bartram, 1997; could have been hafted end-on or in diagonal positions. During the Hitchcock and Bleed, 1997). One of the noted differences between oldest Howiesons Poort layer (PGS) at Sibudu, where segments were spear and bow hunting is that the former is an effective method mostly made on hornfels and and are generally smaller than throughout the year, whereas bow-and-arrow hunting is more during the younger layers, people seem to have preferred longitu- restricted to particular seasons. The effectiveness of poisoned dinal, transverse or back-to-back hafting configurations. During the arrows is also dependent on season, mainly because of variability in intermediate layers (GS and GS2) there seem to have been a shift the toxicity of the poison. Data collected amongst the Kua in the towards diagonal or end-on hafting configurations, with no seeming eastern Kalahari indicate that the quality of the poison declined in preferences and a higher degree of variability during the youngest the late dry season, and that during drought years and extremely layers (GR and GR 2) (Lombard, 2008; Wadley, in press). wet years it was often not available at all (Hitchcock and Bleed, Wadley and Mohapi (Wadley, in press; Wadley and Mohapi, 1997). If we accept that people in southern Africa behaved in 2008) showed that the tip-cross-sectional area (TCSA) values (see a modern way at least since the Still Bay technocomplex or earlier, Shea, 2006 for method) for Howiesons Poort segments from Sibudu we predict that evidence for variability and complexity in their Cave places them in the range of ethnographically known North hunting behaviours will become increasingly evident. Variation in American arrowheads. However, if we assume that some were the hafting configurations of Howiesons Poort segments might hafted transversely there are differences in the TCSA values for the provide one such example. different morphometric groups that are correlated to raw materials. The short, deep and robust quartz segments, mostly present in the 6. Conclusion oldest Howiesons Poort layer at Sibudu, still have TCSA values falling within the arrow range. Hornfels segments fall within the Replication experiments produce a range of variability within range of North American darts, and dolerite segments, mostly from parameters that can be controlled and understood. When such the youngest Howiesons Poort layers at Sibudu, are closer to ex- variability is compared with archaeological assemblages, we gain perimental spears. indirect insight into some aspects associated with the tool classes 2530 M. Lombard, J. Pargeter / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 2523–2531 under investigation (Andrefsky, 2005). The Pargeter experiments Brooks, A.S., Nevell, L., Yellen, J.E., Hartman, G., 2006. Projectile technologies of the showed that Howiesons Poort segments, as a morphological type, MSA: implications for modern human origins. In: Hovers, E., Kuhn, S.L. (Eds.), Transitions Before the Transition: Evolution and Stability in the Middle could function effectively as tips for hunting weapons hafted in Palaeolithic and Middle Stone Age. Springer, New York, pp. 233–255. a variety of positions. Although much larger experimental samples Clark, J., Plug, I. Animal exploitation strategies during the South African Middle are needed to generate reliable macrofracture data, the initial Stone Age: Howiesons Poort and post-Howiesons Poort fauna from Sibudu Cave. Journal of , in press, doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2007.12.004. comparisons between experimental and archaeological samples Clark, J.D., 1977. Interpretations of from ancient Egyptian and have highlighted interesting points with regard to impact burina- other sources. Part II: Prehistoric arrow forms in Africa as shown by surviving tion, impact notching and variability in DIF frequencies. These examples of traditional arrows of the San Bushmen. Pale´orient 3, 127–150. Clark, J.D., Phillips, J.L., Staley, P.S., 1974. Interpretations of prehistoric technology observations can now be used to focus future research, and should from ancient Egyptian and other sources. Part I: Ancient Egyptian bows and lead to increased caution regarding some functional assumptions. It arrows and their relevance for African . Pale´orient 2, 323–388. is our opinion that through a reflexive process between replication, Costa, L.J., Sternke, F., Woodman, P.C.,2005. to macrolith: the reasons behind the transformation of production in the . Antiquity 79, 19–33. experimentation, testing and examination of archaeological Cotterell, B., Kamminga, J., 1987. The formation of flakes. American Antiquity 52, material, we are starting to gain insight into the intricacies of 675–708. hunting behaviour during the Howiesons Poort. Together with the Crombe´, P., Perdaen, Y., Sergant, J., Caspar, J.-P., 2001. Wear analysis on early results from morphometric studies on segments (Wadley, in press; Mesolithic microliths from Verrebroek Site, east Flanders, . Journal of Field Archaeology 28, 253–269. Wadley and Mohapi, 2008), faunal material (Clark and Plug, in Deacon, H.J., 1989. Late Palaeoecology and archaeology in the southern press) and worked bone (Backwell et al., in press) from Sibudu Cave, Cape, South Africa. In: Mellars, P., Stringer, C. (Eds.), The Human Revolution: the evidence suggests that Howiesons Poort hunting technologies Behavioural and Biological Perspectives on the Origins of Modern . Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 547–564. and their associated behaviours were probably much more com- Deacon, H.J., 1992. Southern Africa and modern human origins. Philosophical plex, varied and interchangeable than what has been accepted until Transactions of the Royal Society B 337, 177–183. recently. Deacon, H.J., 1995. Two late Pleistocene/Holocene archaeological depositories from the southern Cape, South Africa. South African Archaeological Bulletin 50, 121–131. Acknowledgements Deacon, H.J., Shuurman, R., 1992. The origins of modern people: the evidence from Klasies River. In: Bra¨uer, G., Smith, S.H. (Eds.), Continuity or Replacement: Controversies in sapiensEvolution. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 121–129. We thank Sylvain Soriano for producing the segments used in Deacon, H.J., Wurz, S., 1996. Klasies River main site, cave 2: a Howiesons Poort the experiments, Rodger Govender for providing the carcass, and occurrence. In: Pwiti, G., Soper, R. (Eds.), Aspects of . Lyn Wadley and Sarah Wurz for access to the material from Sibudu University of Publications, Harare, pp. 213–281. Deacon, H.J., Wurz, S., 2001. Middle Pleistocene populations and the emergence of Cave and Klasies River Cave 2. The comments and suggestions of modern behaviour. In: Barham, L., Robson Brown, K. (Eds.), Human Roots: Africa the reviewers strengthened the paper. J. P. received financial sup- and Asia in the Middle Pleistocene. Western Academic and Specialist Press, port from the University of the Witwatersrand and the ACACIA Bristol, pp. 55–63. Deacon, H.J., Wurz, S., 2005. A Late Pleistocene archive of life at the coast, Klasies Research Unit at the University under the directorship of Lyn River. In: Stahl, A.B. (Ed.), African Archaeology: A Critical Introduction. Blackwell Wadley. M. L. received support from the Palaeontological Scientific Publishing, Oxford, pp. 130–149. Trust and the Natal Museum. Opinions expressed in this article, or Deacon, J., 1995. An unsolved mystery at the Howiesons Poort name site. South African Archaeological Bulletin 162, 110–120. any oversights, are our own and do not necessarily reflect the views Delagnes, A., Wadley, L., Villa, P., Lombard, M., 2006. Crystal quartz backed tools of our funding agencies or colleagues. from the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu Cave. Southern African Humanities 18 (1), 43–56. Dockall, J.E., 1997. Wear traces and projectile impact: a review of the experimental References and archaeological evidence. Journal of Field Archaeology 24, 321–331. Elston, R.G., Brantingham, P.J., 2002. Microlithic technology in Northern Asia: a risk- Ambrose, S.H., 2006. Howiesons Poort lithic raw material procurement patterns minimizing strategy of the late and early Holocene. In: Elston, R.G., and the evolution of human behaviour. Journal of Human Evolution 50, Kuhn, S.L. (Eds.), Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization. 365–369. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 12, pp. 103– Ambrose, S.H., Lorenz, K.G., 1990. Social and ecological models for the Middle Stone 116. Arlington. Age in southern Africa. In: Mellars, P. (Ed.), The Emergence of Modern Humans. Feathers, J.K., 2002. Luminescence dating in less than ideal conditions: case studies Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 3–33. from Klasies River Main site and Duinefontein, South Africa. Journal of Andrefsky Jr., W., 2005. Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis, second ed. Archaeological Science 29, 177–194. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Fischer, A., Vemming Hansen, P., Rasmussen, P., 1984. Macro and micro wear traces Backwell, L., d’Errico, F., Wadley, I., 2008. Middle Stone Age bone tools from the on lithic projectile points: experimental results and prehistoric examples. Howiesons Poort layers, Sibudu Cave, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Journal of Danish Archaeology 3, 19–46. Science 35, 1566–1580. Fitzhugh, B., 2001. Risk and invention in human technological evolution. Journal of Bamforth, D.B., Bleed, P., 1997. Technology, flaked stone technology, and risk. In: Anthropological Archaeology 20, 125–167. Barton, C.M., Clark, G.A. (Eds.), Rediscovering Darwin: Evolutionary Theory and Geneste, J.-M., Plisson, H., 1993. Hunting technologies and human behaviour: lithic Archaeological Explanation. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropo- analysis of shouldered points. In: Knecht, H., Pike-Tay, A., White, R. logical Association, Arlington, vol. 7, pp. 109–139. (Eds.), Before : The Complex Record of the Early Upper Palaeolithic. CRC Barham, L.S., 2002. Backed tools in the Middle Pleistocene central Africa and their Press, Boca Raton, pp. 117–135. evolutionary significance. Journal of Human Evolution 43, 585–603. Gibson, N.E., Wadley, L., Williamson, B.S., 2004. Microscopic residues as evidence of Barton, R.N.E., Bergman, C.A., 1982. Hunters at Hengistbury: some evidence from hunting on backed tools from the 60,000 to 68,000 year-old Howiesons Poort experimental archaeology. World Archaeology 14, 237–248. layers of Rose Cottage Cave, South Africa. Southern African Humanities 16, 1–11. Bartram, L.E., 1997. A comparison of Kua (Botswana) and Hadza () bow and Gru¨ n, R., Beaumont, P., 2001. Border Cave revisited: a revised ESR chronology. arrow hunting. In: Knecht, H. (Ed.), Projectile Technology. Plenum Press, New Journal of Human Evolution 40, 467–482. York, pp. 321–344. Gru¨ n, R., Schackelton, N.J., Deacon, H.J.,1990. Electron-spin resonance dating of tooth Bar-Yosef, O., Kuhn, S.L., 1999. The big deal about blades: laminar technologies and enamel from Klasies River Mouth Cave. Current Anthropology 31, 427–432. human evolution. American Anthropologist 101, 322–338. Hiscock, P., 2002. Pattern and context in the Holocene proliferation of backed Bergman, C.A., Newcomer, M.H., 1983. Flint breakage: examples from artefacts in . In: Elston, R.G., Kuhn, S.L. (Eds.), Thinking Small: Global , . Journal of Field Archaeology 10, 921–947. Perspectives on Microlithization. Archaeological Papers of the American Binneman, J., 1994. A unique stone tipped arrowhead from Adam’s Kranz Cave, Anthropological Association 12, pp. 163–178. Arlington. Eastern Cape. Southern African Field Archaeology 3, 60–62. Hiscock, P., Clarkson, C., 2007. Retouched notches at () and the Bleed, P., 1986. The optimal design of hunting weapons: maintainability or reduction hypothesis. American Antiquity 72, 176–190. reliability. American Antiquity 51, 737–747. Hitchcock, R., Bleed, P., 1997. Each according to need and fashion: spear and arrow Bleed, P., 2002. Cheap, regular and reliable: implications of design variation in late use among San hunters of the Kalahari. In: Knecht, H. (Ed.), Projectile Pleistocene Japanese . In: Elston, R.G., Kuhn, S.L. (Eds.), Technology: Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology. Plenum Press, New Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization. Archaeological Papers York, pp. 345–368. of the American Anthropological Association 12, pp. 95–102. Arlington. Ho Ho Committee, 1979. The Ho Ho classification and nomenclature committee Bocquentin, F., Bar-Yosef, O., 2004. Early Natufian remains: evidence for physical report. In: Hayden, B. (Ed.), Lithic Use-Wear Analysis. Academic Press, New conflict from Mt. Carmel, . Journal of Human Evolution 47, 19–23. York, pp. 134–158. M. Lombard, J. Pargeter / Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (2008) 2523–2531 2531

Holdaway, S., McPherron, S., Roth, B., 1996. Notched tools and raw material avail- In: d’Errico, F., Backwell, L. (Eds.), From Tools to Symbols: From Early Hominids ability in French Middle Paleolithic sites. American Antiquity 61, 377–387. to Modern Humans. University of the Witwatersrand Press, Johannesburg, pp. Ingersoll, D., Macdonald, W.K., 1977. Introduction. In: Ingersoll, D., Yellen, J.E., 475–492. Macdonald, W.K. (Eds.), Experimental Archaeology. Columbia University Press, Phillipson, D.W., 1976. The Prehistory of Eastern . British Institute in Zambia, New York, pp. xi–xviii. Nairobi. Kusimba, S.B., 2002. What is a Hunter-Gatherer? Variation in the Archaeological Rudner, J., 1979. The use of stone artefacts and among the Khoisan Record of Eastern and Southern Africa. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. peoples in historic and protohistoric times. South African Archaeological Lombard, M., 2005a. A method for identifying Stone Age hunting tools. South Bulletin 34, 3–17. African Archaeological Bulletin 60, 115–120. Schapera, I., 1963. The Khoisan Peoples of South Africa. Routledge, London. Lombard, M., 2005b. The Howiesons Poort of South Africa: what we know, what we Shea, J.J., 1988. Spear points from the Middle Palaeolithic of the Levant. Journal of think we know, what we need to know. Southern African Humanities 17, 33–55. Field Archaeology 15, 441–450. Lombard, M., 2006. Direct evidence for the use of ochre in the hafting Shea, J.J., 2006. The origins of lithic projectile technology: evidence from Africa, the technology of Middle Stone age tools from Sibudu Cave. Southern African Levant, and Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 33, 823–846. Humanities 18 (1), 57–67. Shea, J.J., Brown, K.S., Davis, Z.J., 2002. Controlled experiments with Middle Palae- Lombard, M., 2007a. The gripping nature of ochre: the association of ochre with olithic spear points: Levallois points. In: Mathieu, J.R. (Ed.), Experimental Howiesons Poort adhesives and Later Stone Age mastics from South Africa. Archaeology: Replicating Past Objects, Behaviours, and Processes. BAR Journal of Human Evolution 53, 406–419. International Series 1035, pp. 55–72. Oxford. Lombard, M., 2007b. Evidence for change in Middle Stone Age hunting behaviour at Shimelmitz, R., Barkai, R., Gopher, A., 2004. The geometric Kebaran microlithic : results of a macrofracture analysis. South African Archaeological assemblage of Ain Miri, northern Israel. Pale´orient 30, 127–140. Bulletin 62, 62–67. Singer, R., Wymer, J., 1982. The Middle Stone Age at Klasies River Mouth in South Lombard, M., 2008. Finding resolution for the Howiesons Poort through the Africa. Chicago University Press, Chicago. microscope: micro-residue analysis of segments from Sibudu Cave, South Soriano, S., Villa, P., Wadley, L., 2007. Blade technology and tool forms in the Middle Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 35, 26–41. Stone Age of South Africa: the Howiesons Poort and post-Howiesons Poort at Lombard, M., Parsons, I., in press. Blade and bladelet function and variability in risk Rose Cottage Cave. Journal of Archaeological Science 34, 681–703. management during the last 2000 years in the Northern Cape. South African Stapleton, P., Hewitt, J., 1927. Stone implements from a rock-shelter at Howieson’s Archaeological Bulletin 63. Poort near Grahamstown. South African Journal of Science 24, 574–587. Lombard, M., Parsons, I., Van der Ryst, M.M., 2004. Middle Stone Age lithic point Stapleton, P., Hewitt, J., 1928. Stone implements from Howieson’s Poort, near experimentation for macro-fracture and residue analysis: the process and Grahamstown. South African Journal of Science 101, 169–174. preliminary results with reference to Sibudu Cave, South Africa. South African Tribolo, C., Mercier, N., Valladas, H., 2005. Chronology of the Howiesons Poort and Journal of Science 100, 159–166. Still Bay techno-complexes: assessment and new data from luminescence. In: Marean, C.W., Bar-Matthews, M., Bernatchez, J., Fisher, E., Golberg, P., Herries, A.I.R., d’Errico, F., Backwell, L. (Eds.), From Tools to Symbols: From Early Hominids to Jacobs, Z., Jerardino, A., Karkanas, P., Minichillo, T., Nilssen, P.J., Thompson, E., Modern Humans. University of the Witwatersrand Press, Johannesburg, pp. Watts, I., Williams, H.M., 2007. Early human use of marine resources and 493–511. in South Africa during the Middle Pleistocene. Nature 449, 905–908. Valladas, H., Wadley, L., Mercier, N., Tribolo, C., Reyss, J.L., Joron, J.L., 2005. Mathieu, J.R., 2002. Introductiondexperimental archaeology: replicating past Thermoluminescence dating on burnt lithics from Middle Stone Age layers at objects, behaviours, and processes. In: Mathieu, J.R. (Ed.), Experimental Rose Cottage Cave. South African Journal of Science 101, 169–174. Archaeology: Replicating Past Objects, Behaviours, and Processes. BAR Villa, P., Lenoir, M., 2006. Hunting weapons of the Middle Stone Age and the Middle International Series 1035, Oxford, pp. 1–11. Palaeolithic: spear points from Sibudu, Rose Cottage and Bouheben. Southern McBrearty, S., Brooks, A.S., 2000. The revolution that wasn’t: a new interpretation of African Humanities 18 (1), 89–122. the origin of modern human behaviour. Journal of Human Evolution 39, 453–563. Vogel, J., 2001. Radiometric dates for the Middle Stone age in South Africa. In: McDonald, J.J., Donlon, D., Field, J.H., Fullagar, R.L.K., Brenner Coltrain, J., Mitchell, P., Tobias, P.V., Raath, M.A., Moggi-Cecchi, J., Doyle, G.A. (Eds.), Humanity from Rawson, M., 2007. The first archaeological evidence for death by spearing in African Naissance to Coming Millennia. University of the Witwatersrand Press, Australia. Antiquity 81, 877–885. Johannesburg, pp. 261–268. Miller, G.H., Beaumont, P.B., Brooks, A.S., Deacon, H.J., Hare, P.E., Jull, A.J.T., 1999. Wadley, L., 1987. Later Stone Age Hunters and Gatherers of the Southern Transvaal: Earliest modern humans in South Africa dated by isoleucine epimerization in Social and Ecological Interpretation. In: BAR International Series 380 Oxford. ostrich eggshell. Quaternary Science Review 18, 1537–1548. Wadley, L., 1996. The Robberg Industry of Rose Cottage Cave, eastern Free State: the Minichillo, T., 2006. Raw material use and behavioural modernity: Howiesons Poort technology spatial patterns and environment. South African Archaeological lithic foraging strategies. Journal of Human Evolution 50, 359–364. Bulletin 51, 64–74. Mitchell, P., 1988. Human adaptation in southern Africa during the last Glacial Wadley, L., 2005. A typological study of the final Middle Stone Age stone tools from maximum. In: Bower, J., Lubell, D. (Eds.), Prehistoric Cultures and Environments Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal. South African Archaeological Bulletin 60, 51–64. in the Late Quaternary of Africa. BAR International Series 405, pp. 163–196. Wadley, L., 2006. Partners in grime: results of multidisciplinary archaeology at Mitchell, P., 1995. Revisiting Robberg: new results and revision of old ideas at Sibudu cave. Southern African Humanities 18 (1), 315–341. Sehonghong Rock Shelter, . South African Archaeological Bulletin 50, Wadley, L., in press. The Howiesons Poort Industry of Sibudu Cave. South African 28–38. Archaeological Society Goodwin Volume. Moss, E.H., Newcomer, M.H., 1982. Reconstruction of tool use at Pincevanent: Wadley, L., Binneman, J., 1995. Arrowheads or pen knives? A micro-wear analysis of microwear and experiments. In: Cahen, D. (Ed.), Tailler! Pour Quoi Faire: mid-Holocene stone segments from Jubilee Shelter, Transvaal. South African Pre´histoire et Technoloque. Studia Praehistorica Belgica 2, pp. 289–321. Journal of Science 91, 153–155. Nuzhnyi, D., 2000. Development of microlithic projectile weapons in the Stone Age. Wadley, L., Jacobs, Z., 2006. Sibudu Cave: background to the excavations, stratig- Anthropologie et Pre´histoire 111, 95–101. raphy and dating. Southern African Humanities 18 (1), 1–26. Odell, G.H., 1981. The mechanics of use-breakage of stone tools: some testable Wadley, L., Mohapi, M., 2008. A segment is not a monolith: evidence from the Ho- hypotheses. Journal of Field Archaeology 13, 195–212. wiesons Poort of Sibudu, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science, 35 (9), Odell, H.G., Cowan, F., 1986. Experiments with spears and arrows on animal targets. 2594–2605. Journal of Field Archaeology 13, 195–211. Wurz, S., 1999. The Howiesons Poort backed artefacts from Klasies River: an Pargeter, J., 2006. To tip or not to tip: a multi-analytical approach to the hafting and argument for symbolic behaviour. South African archaeological Bulletin 54, use of Howiesons Poort segments. Honours Dissertation, University of the 38–50. Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. Wurz, S., 2000. The Middle Stone Age sequence at Klasies River, South Africa. DPhil Pargeter, J., 2007. Howiesons Poort segments as hunting weapons: experiments Thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch. with replicated projectiles. South African Archaeological Bulletin 62 (pp to Wurz, S., 2002. Variability in the Middle Stone Age lithic sequence, 115,000–60,000 follow). years ago at Klasies River, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 29, Parkington, J., 1999. Western Cape landscapes. Proceedings of the British Academy 1001–1015. 99, 25–35. Wurz, S., Lombard, M., 2007. 70,000-year-old geometric backed tools from the Parkington, J., Poggenpoel, C., Rigaud, J.-P., Texier, P.-J., 2005. From tool to symbol: Howiesons Poort at Klasies River, South Africa: were they used for hunting? context of intentionally marked ostrich eggshell from Diepkloof, Western Cape. Southern African Humanities 19, 1–16.