Archaeological and Heritage Services Africa (Pty) Ltd

(AHSA) Archaeological and Heritage Services Africa (Pty) Ltd

Reg. No. 2016/281687/07

PHASE 1 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REQUESTED IN TERMS OF SECTION 38 OF THE NATIONAL HERITAGE RESOURCES ACT NO 25/1999 FOR MINING RIGHTS AT THE 2005 AND 2007 RETRENCHEES – KIMBERLEY MINES TRUST, KIMBERLEY, NORTHERN CAPE PROVINCE

Prepared by

Edward Matenga

(MPhil, Archaeology; PhD Archaeology &Heritage, Uppsala/Sweden)

Tuesday, 02 May 2017

Principal Researcher: Edward Matenga 8843 Odessa Cres, Cosmo City Ext 7 Northriding 2188, Johannesburg Cell: 073 981 0637 Email: [email protected]

DOCUMENT CONTROL

APPLICANT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT Kimberley Mines Trust Wadala Mining and Consulting (Pty) Ltd.

Name Signature Date

FIELD WORK & E. Matenga 30/04/2017 REPORT:

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

AHSA (Pty) Ltd is an independent consultancy: I hereby declare that I have no interest, be it business, financial, personal or other vested interest in the undertaking of the proposed activity, other than fair remuneration for work performed, in terms the National Heritage Resources Act (No 25 of 1999).

DISCLAIMER

All possible care was taken to identify and document heritage resources during the survey in accordance with best practices in archaeology and heritage management. However it is always possible that some hidden or subterranean sites are overlooked during a survey. AHSA will not be held liable for such oversights and additional costs thereof.

______

Full Name: Edward J. Matenga

Title / Position: Heritage Management Consultant

Qualifications: PhD (Archaeology and Heritage, Uppsala University, Sweden), MPhil (Uppsala), Certificate in the Integrated Conservation of Territories and Landscapes of Heritage Value (ICCROM, Rome)

TABLE OF CONTENTS DOCUMENT CONTROL ...... 2 ABBREVIATIONS...... 4 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 9 1.1. Location and Physical Setting ...... 9 2. LEGAL FRAMEWORK ...... 11 3. METHODOLOGY AND THEORETICAL APPROACHES ...... 15 3.1. Literature Survey ...... 15 3.2. Fieldwork ...... 15 3.3. South Africa’s Mining Heritage: A Theoretical Perspective ...... 15 5. FINDINGS OF THE HERITAGE SURVEY ...... 23 5.1. General Observations ...... 23 5.2. Relics worth Preserving as Heritage of Value ...... 24 5.3. Risk Assessment of the Findings ...... 27 6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 29 7. CATALAGUE OF SITES ...... 29 7.1. Significance Ranking ...... 29 7.2. Inventory of Sites ...... 30 7.3. Catalogue of Sites ...... 30 8. BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 39 9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 41 GLOSSARY ...... 42

ABBREVIATIONS EIA Environmental Impact Assessment HIA Heritage Impact Assessment LSA Late Stone Age LIA Later Iron Age PHRA Provincial Heritage Resources Authority MSA Middle Stone Age NHRA National Heritage Resources Act SAHRA South African Heritage Resources Agency

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was carried out in terms of Section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act (No 25 of 1999) to locate sites of heritage significance and assess potential adverse impacts of the proposed mining right for the Kimberley Mines Trust in an area in Kimberley called the 2005 and 2007 Retrenchees. The report is culmination of fieldwork conducted in November 2016.

Six sites were recorded. A colour scheme is used to rank the magnitude of perceived impacts and risk of the proposed development. Appropriate interventions and mitigation strategies are also proposed.

Ranking Explanation No of Sites

1 High National and Provincial heritage sites (Section 7 of 0 NHRA). All burials including those protected under Section 36 of NHRA. They must be protected.

2 Medium Substantial archaeological deposits, buildings 4 A protected under Section 34 of NHRA. Footprint of early modern mining. These may be protected at the recommendations of a heritage expert.

3 Medium Sites exhibiting archaeological characteristics of the 0 B area, but do not warrant further action after they have been documented.

4 Low Heritage sites deemed of less importance. Decisions 3 on mitigation will be made by a heritage expert including options for destruction with or without salvage.

TOTAL 7

The following is a list of the sites and the risk ranking:

SITE LATITUDE LONGITUDE DESCRIPTION S1 28°42'22.3"S 24°46'12.5"E Mine plant components Foundation remains of building, S2a 28°42'36.80"S 24°46'6.90"E eucalyptus Foundation remains of building, S2b 28°27'36.8"S 24°46'09.6"E eucalyptus

S3 28°42'38.36"S 24°45'52.98"E Kimberlite discard

S4 28°42'38.00"S 24°45'51.10"E Exposures of industrial/household waste Ramp for offloading material onto S5 28°42'31.21"S 24°45'24.59"E screens

S6 28°42'25.54"S 24°45'17.20"E Tailing - 2nd mining phase

General Observations

The existing landscape at the Retrenchees represents the cumulative impact of three mining phases spanning nearly 150 years.

(i) The first phase is identified with the early “Rush” which has been described in Sections 3.4 and 4.5. The foundation remains of buildings which were seen and recorded during the survey are likely to date back to this period from the 1870s. (ii) The second phase is defined by the introduction of new advanced methods of separating the diamond from the Kimberlite rock. With the information to hand it has not been possible to pinpoint the time of the transition in the last century. This necessitated reworking of tailings and further opencast operations in the area, until 2005-2007 when De Beers closed the mine. (iii) De Beers had expressed intention to hand over the land for development for public good.1 However soon after closure unlicensed operations started setting in the third phase (from around 2007) which has continued to the present. Many small holes have been opened with the screening for the mineral done on site. The operators can be seen working as individuals or in groups. Because of the unregulated nature of the operations the area has become a crime hotspot. Dumping of household and industrial waste in the south-eastern part of the property indicates lack of environmental monitoring. Both these activities have

1 Luke Mason, Pers. Comm. November 2016. 6

combined to accelerate degradation and to create a social landscape which stokes crime.

Relics worth preserving as heritage of value

(i) The foundation remains of buildings which appear to date to the first mining phase (S2a and S2b). The sites are 30m apart, with 7 mature eucalyptus standing in the same area, are worth retaining and incorporating into the landscape of the proposed mine offices. (ii) The broken plant components (S1): A local museum may be approached to assess their value as relics of the mining history of Kimberley. Since it was apparent that they have been deposited there recently, their present provenance is not important and preservation in situ is therefore not necessary. (iii) The mixture of household and industrial waste exposed by the holes of recent unlicensed miners indicate a disturbed provenance as a result of the first two mining events (S4). However this might be of interest to students of industrial and historical archaeology. Relevant departments in local museums and universities may be approached to run test pits if they are interested. (iv) Part of the relict ramp and concrete floor at the bottom (S6) may be preserved in part or as whole as representing the mineral screening process during the second mining phase.

Risk Assessment of the Findings EVALUATION CRITERIA RISK ASSESSMENT Description of potential Negative impacts range from partial to total destruction of surface and under-surface movable/immovable relics. impact Nature of Impact Negative impacts can both be direct or indirect. Legal Requirements Sections 34, 35, 36, 38 of National Heritage Resources Act No. 25 (1999) Stage/Phase Prospecting for minerals (test pits, drilling). Mining by opencast or shaft methods Nature of Impact Negative, both direct & indirect impacts. Extent of Impact Test pits, drilling and opencast excavation have potential to damage heritage resources above and below the surface not seen during the survey

Duration of Impact Any accidental destruction of surface or subsurface relics is not reversible, but can be mitigated Intensity Uncertain Probability of occurrence Medium Confidence of assessment High Level of significance of High impacts before mitigation Mitigation measures Preserve foundations remains of old buildings and the processing ramp. Should archaeological or other heritage relics be found during the construction phase, heritage authorities will be advised immediately and a heritage specialist will be called to attend. This is standard precaution in view of inherent limitations of archaeological fieldwork Level of significance of Low impacts after mitigation Cumulative Impacts None Comments or Discussion None

Recommendation and Conclusions

Recommendations are made to protect historically significant remains of buildings which are likely to be affected by the proposed development.

The project may go ahead subject to the precautions stated above. If heritage resources were to be found during the mining phase, the procedure is approach the relevant heritage authorities (SAHRA and/or the Provincial Heritage Resources Authority).

1. INTRODUCTION

A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was carried out in terms of Section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act (No 25 of 1999) in an area in Kimberley called the 2005 and 2007 Retrenchees to locate sites of heritage significance and assess potential adverse or positive impacts of the proposed mining right for the Kimberley Mines Trust. The report is culmination of fieldwork conducted in November 2016. The development entails the reworking of old tailings, opencast digging, drilling and construction of surface infrastructure (offices processing plant, roads, stockpiles/discard dumps). An HIA is a tool applied in Cultural Resource Management (CRM) to inform intervention strategies and decision-making for the protection of Heritage Resources in areas earmarked for development.

1.1. Location and Physical Setting

The property is located in Kimberley. Kimberley is one of the oldest towns in the North Cape Province located in the triangular wedge of land between the Orange and Vaal Rivers. In between the two big rivers the Riet River south of Kimberley runs to a confluence with the Vaal upstream of its confluence with the Orange (Fig 1). The Property is situated on the northern outskirts of the city, north of the suburb of Colville. Two small streams drain northwards into an artificial lake situated north of the property. The eastern stream creates wetland conditions in the property. Otherwise the natural drainage trends northwest-ward into the Vaal River. The landscape has largely been modified as a result of one and half centuries of mining. In the north-central parts of the property the Google-Earth map shows white lines and rectangles defined by white lines. On examining the ground, these are exposures of calcretic surface, most of the lines apparently opened by an earthmoving machine creating passages through an artificial layer of discard and tailing material (Fig 3).

Fig 1. Google-Earth map shows the location of Kimberley relative to the Vaal, Riet and Orange Rivers

Fig 2. Location of the Retrenchees on the northern outskirts of Kimberley.

Fig 3. Google-Earth map shows the boundaries of the property.

Below I present the legal framework, methodology and theoretical approaches that have underpinned the HIA process.

2. LEGAL FRAMEWORK

Sections 34, 35, 36 and 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act (No 25 of 1999) form the legal context in which Heritage Impact Assessments are prescribed. As statutory reference they guided fieldwork and preparation of this report.

2.1. Section 38 of NHRA: Heritage Impact Assessments

Section 38 of the NHRA states the nature and scale of development which triggers a HIA:

38. (1) Subject to the provisions of subsections (7), (8) and (9), any person who intends to undertake a development categorised as—

(a) the construction of a road, wall, powerline, pipeline, canal or other similar form of linear development or barrier exceeding 300m in length;

(b) the construction of a bridge or similar structure exceeding 50 m in length;

(i) exceeding 5 000 m2 in extent2; or

(ii) involving three or more existing erven or subdivisions thereof; or

(iii) involving three or more erven or divisions thereof which have been consolidated within the past five years; or

(iv) the costs of which will exceed a sum set in terms of regulations by

SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority;

(d) the re-zoning of a site exceeding 10 000 m2 in extent; or

(e) any other category of development provided for in the regulations by SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority, must at the very earliest stages of initiating such a development, notify the responsible heritage resources authority and furnish it with details regarding the location, nature and extent of the proposed development.

2.2. Protection of Buildings and Structures older than 60 years

Section 34 provides provisional protection of buildings and structures more than 60 years old:

(1) No person may alter or demolish any structure or part of a structure which is older than 60 years without a permit issued by the relevant provincial heritage resources authority.

2.3. Protection of Archaeological Sites

Section 35 (4) of the NHRA prohibits the destruction of archaeological, palaeontological and meteorite sites:

No person may, without a permit issued by the responsible heritage resources authority—

(a) destroy, damage, excavate, alter, deface or otherwise disturb any archaeological or palaeontological site or any meteorite;

2 The areal extent of the proposed development has triggered the HIA. 12

(b) destroy, damage, excavate, remove from its original position, collect or own any archaeological or palaeontological material or object or any meteorite;

(c) trade in, sell for private gain, export or attempt to export from the Republic any category of archaeological or palaeontological material or object, or any meteorite; or

(d) bring onto or use at an archaeological or palaeontological site any excavation equipment or any equipment which assist in the detection or recovery of metals or archaeological and palaeontological material or objects, or use such equipment for the recovery of meteorites.

2.4. Graves and Burial Grounds

Section 36 of the NHRA gives priority for the protection of Graves and Burial Grounds of victims of conflict and graves and burial grounds more than 60 years old. Within this frame cautious approaches are considered including managed exhumations and re- interment to pave way for development:

(1) Where it is not the responsibility of any other authority, SAHRA must conserve and generally care for burial grounds and graves protected in terms of this section, and it may make such arrangements for their conservation as it sees fit.

(2) SAHRA must identify and record the graves of victims of conflict and any other graves which it deems to be of cultural significance and may erect memorials associated with the grave referred to in subsection (1), and must maintain such memorials.

(3) (a) No person may, without a permit issued by SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority—

(a) destroy, damage, alter, exhume or remove from its original position or otherwise disturb the grave of a victim of conflict, or any burial ground or part thereof which contains such graves;

(b) destroy, damage, alter, exhume, remove from its original position or otherwise disturb any grave or burial ground older than 60 years which is situated outside a formal cemetery administered by a local authority; or

(c) bring onto or use at a burial ground or grave referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) any excavation equipment, or any equipment which assists in the detection or recovery of metals.

(4) SAHRA or a provincial heritage resources authority may not issue a permit for the destruction or damage of any burial ground or grave referred to in subsection (3)(a) unless it is satisfied that the applicant has made satisfactory arrangements for the exhumation and re-interment of the contents of such graves, at the cost of the applicant and in accordance with any regulations made by the responsible heritage resources authority. ….

Section 36(6) implies that all kinds of graves found during the course of development must be reported and investigated:

(6) Subject to the provision of any other law, any person who in the course of development or any other activity discovers the location of a grave, the existence of which was previously unknown, must immediately cease such activity and report the discovery to the responsible heritage resources authority which must, in co-operation with the South African Police Service and in accordance with regulations of the responsible heritage resources authority—

(a) carry out an investigation for the purpose of obtaining information on whether or not such grave is protected in terms of this Act or is of significance to any community; and

(b) if such grave is protected or is of significance, assist any person who or community which is a direct descendant to make arrangements for the exhumation and re- interment of the contents of such grave or, in the absence of such person or community, make any such arrangements as it deems fit.

A pre-development Heritage Impact Assessment is predicated on Subsection 6 which requires a developer to halt operations if graves are discovered, even as Section 36 does not specify what course of action to take in respect of graves other than those of victims of conflict or less than 60 years old found in an area earmarked for development.

2.5. International Principles on the Treatment of Human Remains

International principles on the protection of archaeological graves are based on ethical considerations and urge consultation with communities who by association might have strong feelings for protection of graves in situ. The World Archaeological Congress (WAC) Inter-Congress in South Dakota (USA) adopted the Vermillion Accord on Human Remains urging respect for the mortal remains of the dead shall be accorded to all, irrespective of origin, race, religion, nationality, custom and tradition.

2.6. The Burra Charter on Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance

Some generic principles and standards for the protection of heritage resources in South Africa are drawn from international charters and conventions. In particular South Africa has adopted the Australia Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (the Burra Charter 1999) as a benchmark best practice in heritage management.

3. METHODOLOGY AND THEORETICAL APPROACHES 3.1. Literature Survey

A review of all available relevant literature included reports of previous HIAs conducted in the general locality, books, and project planning documents.

3.2. Fieldwork

The survey was carried out on foot with a vehicle used to move between survey areas. Findings were recorded in a template in order to create a Catalogue which is presented in Section 5 of this Report. A site inventory (Spreadsheet) is a list of sites with summary of site attributes.

3.3. South Africa’s Mining Heritage: A Theoretical Perspective

Kimberley is the cradle of South Africa’s mining revolution, the mother town of mining since it started there on a large scale in 1871. Relics of mining history are therefore important in defining South Africa’s cultural, economic and political heritage. The city of Kimberley has been proactively engaging with the public in celebrating the mining heritage through initiatives to preserve the city’s historic buildings as well as the large diamond extraction quarry in the centre of the city called the Big Hole. As they frenetically followed a kimberlite pipe, miners razed a flat topped hill (Colesberg)

15 creating gaping hole 240m into the earth with a surface area of 17 ha, 463m wide and a perimeter of 1.6km. Although opencast operations ceased in 1914, the mining conglomerate, De Beers Consolidated Mines, pursued the kimberlite pipe to a depth of 1,097 metres.

Today mine operations have completely ceased, the Big Hole declared a national site (Grade 1 in terms of Section 7 of NHRA), and a monitoring programme put in place to stabilise and preserve it. The Kimberley Mine Museum, a De Beers Consolidated Mines (hereinafter De Beers) sponsored initiative with a lookout point over the famous Big Hole, captures various aspects of the lives of early miners and Kimberley’s residents.3

It is necessary as well to locate the mining theme in a regional perspective as the South African mineral wealth, in particular diamonds and gold, was used to finance British imperialism, in a fundamental way shaping the course of Southern African history, as we will see in Section 4. In view of the above, this HIA Reporting is therefore sensitive to the requirement to protect the mining heritage in South Africa.

It has been claimed that in May 2004 South Africa placed the Big Hole on UNESCO's World Heritage Tentative List under the theme "Kimberley Mines and associated early industries".4 This does not appear to be the case as we can confirm that the following sites are on South Africa’s official UNESCO Tentative List5:

i) Early Farmsteads of the Cape Winelands (submitted 15/04/2015)

ii) Human Rights, Liberation Struggle and Reconciliation: Nelson Mandela Legacy Sites (submitted 15/04/2015)

iii) Liberation Heritage Route (submitted 08/07/2009)

iv) Succulent Karoo Protected Areas (submitted 08/07/2009)

v) The !Xam Khomani Heartland (submitted 15/05/2004)

3 http://www.southafrica.net/za/en/articles/entry/article-southafrica.net-the-kimberley-mine-museum (Consulted 9 January 2016) 4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley,_Northern_Cape (Consulted 9 January 2017) 5 http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/state=za (Consulted 9 January 2017). 16

vi) The Barberton Mountain Land, Barberton Greenstone Belt or Makhonjwa Mountains (submitted 08/07/2009)

vii) The Emergence of Modern Humans: The Pleistocene occupation sites of South Africa (submitted 15/04/2015).

viii) The Emergence of Modern Humans: The Pleistocene occupation sites of South Africa (submitted 15/04/2015).

4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT

It is necessary to state from the outset that existing landscape characteristics of the property are a product of modern mining in the last 150 years (Figs 4-5). It has been observed that little if anything of the pre-mining period would have survived the scale of the mining operations. An outline of the general cultural sequence in South Africa is therefore only given here as required to fulfil minimum reporting standards.

Fig 4. General landscape characteristics show surface disturbance, movement and deposition of earth.

Fig 5. Recent unlicensed diggings and spread mine discard material

4.1. Appearance of Hominids

Hominid or proto-humans appeared in South Africa more than 3million years ago. Hominid sites and their fossil remains are largely confined to dolomite caves on the highveld in Gauteng, Limpopo and Northwest Provinces.6 Hominid refers to primate species which are the immediate ancestors of man.

The nearest hominid site is Taung near Vryburg (300km to the north).This site is inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage Site in a serial nomination with the Sterkfonteing (Krugersdorop) and Makapans Valley (Mokopane). The preservation of hominid remains is a function of geology and in the South African experience these are almost always found in association with limestone deposits.

4.2. The Stone Age

The Stone Age dates back more than 2 million years, and marks a more diagnostic appearance of the cultural sequence divided into three epochs, the Early, Middle and Late Stone Ages. These early people made stone and bone implements. Material

6 Deacon, J. and N. Lancaster. 1986. Later Quaternary Palaeo-environments of Southern Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 18 evidence is found in caves, rock-shelters and on river sides and edges of streams, and very rarely seen in open country.7

4.2.1. The Early Stone Age [2 million – 250 000 yrs BP]

The Early Stone Age marks the earliest appearance of stone artefacts about 2 million years ago. Such tools bore a consistent shape such as the pear-shaped handaxe, cleavers and core tools (Deacon & Deacon, 1999). These tools, which have been called Acheulian after a site in France, were probably used to butcher large animals such as elephants, rhinoceros and hippopotamus. Acheulian artefacts are usually found near sites where they were manufactured and thus in close proximity to the raw material or at kill sites. The early hunters are classified as hominids or proto-humans, meaning that they had not evolved to the present human form. Progressively a good profile of the Stone Age in the Northern Cape has been constructed from many heritage impact assessments that have been conducted in recent years. Early (ESA) and Middle Stone Age (MSA) lithics occur over most of area with a more recent find of Later Stone Age (LSA) occupations.8 The Wonderwerk Cave has become a benchmark for the characterisation of the Stone Age. Excavations reveal a long sequence of occupation spanning the Early (ESA), Middle (MSA) and Later Stone Ages (Humphreys & Thackeray 1983).

4.2.2. Middle Stone Age (MSA) [250 000 yrs – 30 000 yrs BP]

The Middle Stone Age (MSA), which appeared 250 000 years ago, is marked by the introduction of a new tool kit which included prepared cores, parallel-sided blades and triangular points hafted to make spears. By then humans had become skilful hunters, especially of large grazers such as wildebeest, hartebeest and eland. It is also believed that by then, humans had evolved significantly to become anatomically modern. Caves were used for shelter suggesting permanent or semi-permanent settlement. Furthermore there is archaeological evidence from some of the caves indicating that people had mastered the art of making fire.9 A number of field surveys

7 http://archaeology.about/od/bterms/g/bordercave.htm 8 Schalkwyk, J. 2015, Heritage Scoping Assessment for the Proposed Perseus-Kronos 765KV Transmission Power Line and Substations Upgrade, Northern Cape and Free State Provinces, p6. 9 Deacon, J & H. Deacon. 1999. Human Beginnings in South Africa. Cape Town: David Philip. 19 have been carried out around Danielskuil 130km northwest of Kimberley confirming significant hunter gatherer activity in the area from the MSA onwards.

4.2.3. Later Stone Age (LSA)[40 000 yrs to ca2000 yrs BP]

By the beginning of the LSA, humans are classified as Homo sapiens which refer to the modern physical form and thinking capabilities. Several behavioural traits are exhibited, such as rock art and purposeful burials with ornaments, became a regular practice. The practitioners of rock art are definitely the ancestors of the San and sites abound in the whole of Southern Africa. LSA technology is characterised by microlithic scrapers and segments made from very fine-grained rock. Spear hunting continued, but LSA people also hunted small game with bows and poisoned arrows. Because of poor preservation, open sites become of less value compared to rock shelters. A number of rock engravings have been reported in the vicinity of Lime Acres and Danielskuil including recent art ascribed to the Griquas and Khoikhoi.10

4.3. The Iron Age Culture [ca. 2000 years BP]

The Iron Age culture supplanted the Stone Age at least 2000 years ago, associated with the introduction of farming and use of several metals and pottery. Iron Age Communities practiced agriculture and kept domestic animals such as cattle, sheep, goat and chicken amongst others. There is however increasing evidence that sheep might have moved into the area much earlier than the Iron Age.11

4.3.1. Early Iron Age

According to Huffman (2007) there were two streams of Early Iron Age (EIA) expansion converging in South Africa, one originating in eastern Africa which has been called the Urewe-Kwale Tradition (or the eastern stream) and another from the west, spreading through Zambia and Angola, which he termed the Kalundu Tradition (or western stream).

10 Collins, S. 1973. Rock-engravings of the Danielskuil Townlands. South African Archaeological Bulletin 109- 110: 49-57.; Eastwood, E.B. & Smith, B.W. 2005. Fingerprints of the Khoekhoen: geometric and handprinted rock art in the Central Limpopo Basin, southern Africa. South African Archaeological Society Goodwin Series 9: 63–76. 11 Evers, T. M. 1988. Recognition of Groups in the Iron Age of Southern Africa. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Witwatersrand. Huffman 2007. A Handbook on the Iron Age. Scottsville: UKZN Press 20

There are few if any sites attributed to the EIA in the western parts of the country. Settlement preference for the relatively wetter woodlands to the east and eastern seaboard, compared to the arid west appears to have been a logical response to environmental opportunities and constraints. There is a strong possibility that transhumant pastoralism / seasonal hunting camps existed in the western regions from the Stone Age through to the Iron Age, and there would be little or no surviving physical evidence of these activities

4.3.2. The Later Iron Age

The LIA is marked by the presence of extensive stonewalled settlements such as the Tlhaping capital at Dithakong near Kuruman.12

4.4. Historical Context

The study area is historically home to the various groups of Tswana stock - Tlokwa, Fokeng, Hlakwana and Phuting, Tlhaping, and Tlaro, certainly descending from the Iron Age and probably some with Stone Age roots. The early 19th century was a political turning point characterised by an increasingly uncertain security situation and internal displacements. During the late 18th and early 19th centuries groups of Griqua herders settled in this area establishing a town called Klaarwater and subsequently renamed Griquatown. A little later the Afrikaners also arrived in the area as part of a mass exodus from the Cape called the Great Trek. The area subsequently became known as Griqualand West and incorporated into the Cape Colony in the 1880s.13

4.5. Brief History of Kimberley

Kimberley Mine, which became popularly called the New Rush or Colesberg, was discovered on 16 July 1871 on the Farm Johannes Nicholas De Beer. Mining activity increased dramatically within the first 12 months attracting a labour population of almost 50 000 men (Fig 6). Political stakes were heightened by competing claims of the governments of the time over the diamond fields: the Cape

12 De Jong 2010: De Jong, R.C. 2010. Heritage impact assessment report: proposed manganese and iron ore mining right application in respect of the remainder of the farm Paling 434, Hay Registration Division, Northern Cape. Unpublished report prepared for Kai Batla Minerals Industry Consultants. Pretoria: Cultmatrix, p 36 13 De Jong, R.C. 2010. Heritage impact assessment report: proposed manganese and iron ore mining right application in respect of the remainder of the farm Paling 434, Hay Registration Division, Northern Cape. Unpublished report prepared for Kai Batla Minerals Industry Consultants. Pretoria: Cultmatrix. 21

Colony, Transvaal, Orange Free State and Griqualand under Nikolaas Waterboer. The Free State Boers in particular wanted the area as it lay inside the natural borders created by Orange and Vaal Rivers. Following the mediation brokered by the governor of Natal, the Keate Award went in favour of Waterboer, who placed himself under British protection. Consequently Griqualand West was proclaimed on 27 October 1871, which subsequently joined the Cape Colony.

Fig 6. Kimberley in the early days (Photo on display at the Protea Hotel, Kimberley).

For more than a decade many operators staked claims for the precious mineral in cut- throat competition until the historic amalgamation in March 1888 which gave birth to the De Beers Consolidated Mines Ltd masterminded by Cecil John Rhodes, Alfred Beit, Barney Barnato and Charles Rudd. The impact of the diamond wealth was far reaching creating rich and powerful personalities such as the controversial Cecil John Rhodes, who became the chief proponent of British Imperialism in Southern Africa. Rhodes used the new found wealth not only to lay stakes in other mining areas such as the Witwatersrand, but to advance the imperial project which saw Britain extending its sphere of influence to Bechuanaland (now Botswana), Northern and Southern Rhodesia (Zambia and Zimbabwe respectively) and Nyasaland (Malawi).

As stated in Section 3.3 the Big Hole located in the centre of the city is preserved as a centrepiece of the city and the country’s mining heritage.

The above historical and cultural profile is the context for the identification of heritage resources presented in the next Section.

5. FINDINGS OF THE HERITAGE SURVEY 5.1. General Observations

The existing landscape at the Retrenchees represents the cumulative impact of three mining phases spanning nearly 150 years.

(iv) The first phase is identified with the early “Rush” which has been described in Sections 3.3 and 4.5. The foundation remains of buildings which were seen and recorded during the survey are likely to date back to this period from the 1870s. (v) The second phase is defined by the introduction of new advanced methods of separating the diamond from the kimberlite rock. With the information to hand it has not been possible to pinpoint the time of the transition in the last century. This necessitated reworking of tailings and further opencast operations in the area, until 2005-2007 when De Beers closed the mine. (vi) De Beers had expressed intention to hand over the land for development for public good.14 However soon after closure unlicensed operations started, setting in the third phase (from around 2007) which has continued to the present. Many small holes have been opened with screening for the mineral done on site. The operators can be seen working as individuals or in groups. Because of the unregulated nature of the operations, the area has become a crime hotspot. Dumping of household and industrial waste in the south-eastern part of the property indicates lack of environmental monitoring. Both these activities have combined to accelerate degradation and to create a social landscape which stokes crime (Fig 7).

14 Luke Mason, Pers. Comm. November 2016. 23

Fig 7. Trenching by unlicensed operators.

5.2. Relics worth Preserving as Heritage of Value (v) The foundation remains of buildings which appear to date the first mining phase (S2a and S2b). The sites are 30m apart, with 7 mature eucalyptus standing in the same area, are worth retaining and incorporating into the landscape of the proposed mine offices (Fig 8).

Fig 8. Foundations remains of building possibly dating to the early mining phase (Site S2a)

(vi) The broken plant components (S1): A local museum may be approached to assess their value as relics of the mining history of Kimberley. Since it was apparent that they have been deposited there recently, their present provenance is not important and preservation in situ is therefore not necessary (Fig 9).

Fig 9. Broken components of mine plant/processing machine (Site S1)

(vii) The mixture of household and industrial waste exposed by the holes of recent unlicensed miners indicate a disturbed provenance as a result of the first two mining events (S4). However this might be of interest to students of industrial and historical archaeology. Relevant departments in local museums and universities may be approached to run test pits if they are interested (Fig 10).

Fig 10. Mixed industrial and household waste.

(viii) Part of the relict ramp and concrete floor at the bottom (S6) may be preserved in part or as whole as representing the mineral screening process during the second mining phase (Fig 11).

Fig 11. Relict ramp / screening site

(ix) Site S6 does not warrant protection as the developer has advised about intention to reprocess the kimberlite waste using modern methods to recovering possible residual minerals (Fig 12).

Fig 12. Kimberlite waste.

Fig 11. Google-Earth Map shows location of sites identified during the survey.

5.3. Risk Assessment of the Findings

EVALUATION CRITERIA RISK ASSESSMENT Description of potential Negative impacts range from partial to total destruction of surface and under-surface movable/immovable relics. impact Nature of Impact Negative impacts can both be direct or indirect. Legal Requirements Sections 34, 35, 36, 38 of National Heritage Resources Act No. 25 (1999) Stage/Phase Prospecting for minerals (test pits, drilling). Mining by opencast or shaft methods Nature of Impact Negative, both direct & indirect impacts. Extent of Impact Test pits, drilling, opencast excavation, deep level underground mining have potential to damage heritage resources above and below the surface not seen during the survey

6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

In Section 5.2 recommendations have been made to protect historically significant remains of buildings which are likely to be affected by the proposed development.

The project may therefore go ahead subject to the precautions stated above. If heritage resources were to be found during the mining phase, the procedure is approach the relevant heritage authorities (SAHRA and/or the Provincial Heritage Resources Authority).

7. CATALAGUE OF SITES 7.1. Significance Ranking

The significance ranking refers to perceived impacts and risk of the proposed development. Appropriate interventions and mitigation strategies are also proposed. A colour scheme is used in both the Catalogue and Inventory.

Ranking Explanation No of Sites

1 High National and Provincial heritage sites (Section 7 of 0 NHRA). All burials including those protected under Section 36 of NHRA. They must be protected.

2 Medium A Substantial archaeological deposits, buildings 4 protected under Section 34 of NHRA. Footprint of early modern mining. These may be protected at the recommendations of a heritage expert.

3 Medium B Sites exhibiting archaeological characteristics of the 0 area, but do not warrant further action after they have been documented.

4 Low Heritage sites deemed of less importance. Decisions 3 on mitigation will be made by a heritage expert

including options for destruction with or without salvage.

TOTAL 7

7.2. Inventory of Sites

The site inventory must be read in conjunction with the risk assessment table above.

S3 28°42'38.36"S 24°45'52.98"E Kimberlite discard

S4 28°42'38.00"S 24°45'51.10"E Exposures of industrial/household waste Ramp for offloading material onto S5 28°42'31.21"S 24°45'24.59"E screens

S6 28°42'25.54"S 24°45'17.20"E Tailing - 2nd mining phase

7.3. Catalogue of Sites

The Site Recording Template creates a basic Register or Catalogue of Heritage Sites:

No COORDINATES PERIOD

S1 28°42'22.3"S, 24°46'12.5"E Mining

DESCRIPTION: Parts of mine equipment / processing machinery either recently deposited or moved by an earth machine. Recent discard is a mixture of earth with clay, construction aggregate, stone and other material.

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE: The site itself is not significant, but a museum might be interested in curating the plant components associated with mine activities.

No COORDINATES PERIOD

2a 28°27'36.8"S, 24°46'09.6"E Mining Phase 1

Square hole

DESCRIPTION: Foundation remains and debris of a square building measuring 10m by 10m. The building frame was of fired clay bricks with cement plaster. Cement or concrete blocks also found, appear to have served as reinforcement. Solid slate blocks probably decorated facades or corners. The function of two square holes (90cm x 90xm) located at diagonally opposite corners (SW/NE) of the buildings is uncertain; possibly drainage holes. Eucalyptus trees.

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE: The building may date back to the first mining phase.

PROPOSED MITIGATION: The foundations are located at the site of the proposed new mine offices. They may be preserved as part the new landscape design of the new office grounds.

No COORDINATES PERIOD

2b 28°27'36.8"S, 24°46'09.6"E Mining

DESCRIPTION: Rectangular foundation of a building made of slate blocks (8m x 4m). Building debris including fired clay bricks and a short concrete pillar. A rectangular step set against the NE corner of the foundation shows position of entrance to the building. The building is likely to be of the same age as Site 2a.

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE: The building may date back to the first mining phase.

PROPOSED MITIGATION: The foundations are located at the site of the proposed new mine offices. They may be preserved as part the new landscape design of the new office grounds.

No COORDINATES PERIOD

3 28°42'38.36"S, 24°45'52.98"E Mining

DESCRIPTION: Extensive old tailing of kimberlitic rocks, may span the first and second mining phase. Some of the material may be reworked using modern methods.

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE: None

No COORDINATES PERIOD

4 28°42'38.00"S, 24°45'51.10"E Mining

DESCRIPTION: New mining holes have exposed industrial and household waste with a miscellany of items: animal bones, metal, and various kinds of monochrome, bi-chrome and polychrome porcelain sherds.

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE: The hole (and many others seen in the area) might be cutting through disturbed material with difficult stratigraphic

36 sequence. Even then this might contribute to studies in industrial archaeology / historical archaeology

No COORDINATES PERIOD

5 28°42'31.21"S, 24°45'24.59"E Mining Phase II

DESCRIPTION: A relict concrete ramp and below to the north an extensive concrete floor and short pillars indicate the location of a screen and plant to process the kimberlite.

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE: Part of the structure in particular the ramp may be preserved as a relic of old mining kimberlite processing methods

PROPOSED MITIGATION: The ramp including or excluding the concrete floor may be preserved as footprint of the second mining phase.

No COORDINATES PERIOD

6 28°42'25.54"S, 24°45'17.20"E Mining Phase II

DESCRIPTION: A large tailing is a footprint of the second mining phase. The relict deposit is less than 60 years old.

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE: None

8. BIBLIOGRAPHY Almond, J.E.2011. Proposed Solar Thermal Energy Power Park on the Farm Arriesfontein, near Danielskuil, Postmasburg District, Northern Cape Almond, J.E. 2012. Palaeontological specialist assessment: desktop study. Proposed 16 MTPA expansion of Transnet existing Manganese ore export railway line and associated infrastructures’ between Hotazel and the port of Ngqura, Northern and Eastern Cape Almond, J.E. 2014. Palaeontological heritage basic assessment: desktop study. Proposed mineral prospecting on the farms Achambachs Puts 56, Plaas 53, Plaas 566 and Plaas 567 near Griekwastad, Siyancuma Local Municipality, Hay Magisterial District, Northern Cape Beaumont, Peter. 2007. Phase 1 Heritage Impact Assessment Report on the Farm Portions Potentially Affected by a Proposed Direct Rail Link between the Sishen

South Mine near Postmasburg and the Sishen - Saldanha line, Siyanda District Municipality, Northern Cape Province. McGregor Museum. Beaumont, P. & Morris, D. 1990. Guide to the archaeological sites in the Northern Cape. Kimberley: McGregor Museum. Beaumont, P.B. & Vogel, J.C. 2006. On a timescale for the past million years of human history in central South Africa. S. Afr. J. Sci. 102,217 - 228. Beaumont, P.B. & Boshier, A.K. 1974. Report on test excavations in a prehistoric pigment mine near Postmasburg, Northern Cape. S. Afr. Archaeol. Bull. 29, 41 - 59. Deacon, J. and N. Lancaster. 1986. Later Quaternary Palaeo-environments of Southern Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press. De Jong, R. C. 2010. Heritage Impact Assessment Report: Proposed Manganese and Iron Ore Mining Right Application in Respect of the Remainder of the Farm Paling 434, Hay Registration Division, Northern Cape Province. Cultmatrix. Dreyer, Corbus. 2014. First Phase Archaeological & Heritage Investigation of the Proposed Mine Prospecting at the Remaining Extent of the Farm Inglesby 580 near Olifantshoek, Northern Cape Province Evers, T. M. 1988. Recognition of Groups in the Iron Age of Southern Africa. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Witwatersrand. Huffman 2007. A Handbook on the Iron Age. Scottsville: UKZN Press Huffman, T. N. 2007. A Handbook of the Iron Age. Cape Town: UKZN Press The National Heritage Resource Act (25 of 1999) Hutten, M. 2013. Heritage Impact Assessment for the Proposed Manlenox Solar Park west of Barkly West, Northern Cape. Matenga, Edward. 2015. Heritage Impact Assessment Requested in Terms of Section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act No 25/1999 for the Proposed Pine Prospecting on the Farm Plaas 503 near Postmasburg in the Northern Cape Province. Phillipson, D. W. 2005. African Archaeology. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press. Morris, D. 2005: Report on a Phase 1 Archaeological Impact Assessment of proposed mining areas on the farms Ploegfontein, Klipbankfontein, Welgevonden, Leeuwfontein, Wolhaarkop and Kapstevel, west of Postmasburg, Northern Cape. Muller, C. F. J. 1986. Five Hundred Years: A History of South Africa. 5th Edition. Pretoria. 40

Pelser, A. J. 2011. A Report on a Phase I Heritage Impact Assessment for Proposed Mining on the Farm Koedoeskloof in the Hay District, Northern Cape. Pelser, A. J. 2011. A Report on a Heritage Impact Assessment for the Upgrade of Transnet’s Glosam Siding for PMG’s Bishop Mine (Loading Bay)on Portion 2 and the Remainder of Gloucester 674 near Postmasburg, Tsantsabane Local Municipality, Northern Cape. Orton. J. 2015. Heritage Impact assessment for the Proposed 132 KV Olien-Karats Power Line at Lime Acres, Postmasburg Magisterial District, Northern Cape. Rasmussen, R. K. 1977. Mzilikazi of the Ndebele. African Historical Biographies. London: Heinemann. Schalkwyk, J 2015. Heritage scoping assessment for the proposed Perseus-Kronos 765kv Transmission Power Line and Substations Upgrade, Northern Cape and Free State Provinces. Van Vollenhoven A.C. 2014. Heritage Scoping Report Related to the Eskom Kimberley strengthening phase 4 project between the Boundary and Ulco Substations in the Northern Cape Province.

Websites http://www.southafrica.net/za/en/articles/entry/article-southafrica.net-the-kimberley- mine-museum (Consulted 9 January 2016) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley,_Northern_Cape (Consulted 9 January 2017) http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/state=za (Consulted 9 January 2017).

Legislation National Heritage Resources Act (No 25: 1999)

9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Mr Luke Mason, Kimberley Mine Trust.

GLOSSARY Archaeological material: remains resulting from human activity left as evidence of their presence which, as proscribed by South African heritage legislation, are older than 100 years, which are in the form of artefacts, food remains and other traces such as rock paintings or engravings, burials, fireplaces and structures. Artefact/Ecofact: Any movable object that has been used, modified or manufactured by humans. Catalogue: An inventory or register of artefacts and/or sites. Conservation: All the processes of looking after a site/heritage place or landscape including maintenance, preservation, restoration, reconstruction and adaptation. Cultural Heritage Resources: refers to physical cultural properties such as archaeological sites, palaeolontological sites, historic and prehistorical places, buildings, structures and material remains, cultural sites such as places of rituals, burial sites or graves and their associated materials, geological or natural features of cultural importance or scientific significance. This include intangible resources such religion practices, ritual ceremonies, oral histories, memories indigenous knowledge. Cultural landscape: “the combined works of nature and man” and demonstrate “the evolution of human society and settlement over time, under the influence of the physical constraints and/or opportunities presented by their natural environment and of successive social, economic and cultural forces, both internal and external”. Cultural Significance: is the aesthetic, historical, scientific and social value for past, present and future generations. Early Stone Age: Predominantly the Acheulean hand axe industry complex dating to + 1Myr yrs – 250 000 yrs. before present. Early Iron Age: Refers cultural period of the first millennium AD associated with the introduction of metallurgy and agriculture in Eastern and Southern Africa Later Iron Age: Refers to the period after 1000AD marked by increasing social and political complexity. Evidence of economic wealth through trade and livestock keeping especially cattle Excavation: A method in which archaeological materials are extracted, involving systematic recovery of archaeological remains and their context by removing soil and any other material covering them. Grave: a place of burial which include materials such as tombstone or other marker such as cross etc. Historic material: means remains resulting from human activities, which are younger than 100 years and no longer in use, which include artefacts, human remains and artificial features and structures. Intangible heritage: Something of cultural value that is not primarily expressed in a material form e.g. rituals, knowledge systems, oral traditions, transmitted between people and within communities.

Historical archaeology: the study of material remains from both the remote and recent past in relationship to documentary history and the stratigraphy of the ground in which they are found; or archaeological investigation on sites of the historic period. In South Africa it refers to the immediate pre-colonial period, contact with European colonists and the modern industrial period. In situ material: means material culture and surrounding deposits in their original location and context, for instance archaeological remains that have not been disturbed. Later Iron Age: The period from the beginning of the 2nd millennium AD marked by the emergence if complex state society and long-distance trade contacts. Late Stone Age: The period from ± 30 000-yr. to the introduction of metals and farming technology Middle Stone Age: Various stone using industries dating from ± 250 000 yr. - 30 000 yrs. ago Monuments: architectural works, buildings, sites, sculpture, elements or structures of an archaeological nature, inscriptions, cave dwellings which are outstanding from the point of view of history, art and science. Place: means site, area, building or other work, group of buildings or other works, together with pertinent contents, surroundings and historical and archaeological deposits. Preservation: means protecting and maintaining the fabric of a place in its existing state and retarding deterioration or change, and may include stabilization where necessary. Sherd: ceramic fragment. Significance grading: Grading of sites or artefacts according to their historical, cultural or scientific value. Site: a spatial cluster of artefacts, structures, organic and environmental remains, as residues of past human activity.