African Archaeological Review

, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 1–19 | Cite as

Early hominid behaviour and culture tradition: raw material studies in Bed II, Olduvai Gorge

  • Daniel Stiles


Two studies involving an analysis of artefact raw material use in Bed II at Olduvai Gorge (1.6–1.4 myr) are reported. The first study shows evidence for the manufacture of chert artefacts at a factory site and the subsequent transport of selected whole flakes to another site for use. Early hominids are thus shown to have been capable of planning a sequence of activities involving raw material extraction, processing, selection and transport for an ultimate use. The transported artefacts are found accumulated at sites associated with animal bones, suggesting that hominids were a principal agent in site formation. The second study demonstrates that the attributes of the artefacts said to differentiate the Developed Oldowan B from the Early Acheulean at Olduvai Gorge are the result of differential raw material use.


Cultural Study Culture Tradition Material Study Factory Site Site Formation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Deux études sur l'analyse de la matière première utilisée pour les outils du Bed II d'Olduvai Gorge (1.6–1.4 myr) sont présentées. La première étude prouve que les outils en chert étaient fabriqués dans un atelier de taille et que des éclats entiers étaient sélectionnés et transportés afin d'être utilisés sur un autre site. Ceci démontre que les anciens hominidés étaient capables de planifier une séquence d'activités comprenant l'extraction, le traitement, la sélection et le transport pour utilisation ultérieure, de la matière première. Les outils transportés sont retrouvés accumulés sur les sites, associés à des ossements d'animaux, ce qui suggère que les hominidés étaient les principaux responsables de la formation des sites. La deuxième étude démontre que les attributs des outils/objets sensés différencier l'Oldwayen développé B de l'Acheuléen ancien à Olduvai Gorge résultent d'une utilisation différente de la matière première.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ammerman, A. J. and Feldman, M. W. 1974. On the ‘making’ of an assemblage of stone tools.American Antiquity 39:610–16.Google Scholar
  2. Behrensmeyer, A. K. 1983. Patterns of natural bone distribution on recent land surfaces: implications for archaeological site formation. InAnimals and Archaeology 1. hunters and their prey (eds J. Clutton-Brock and C. Grigson): pp. 93–106. Oxford: BAR International Series 163.Google Scholar
  3. Binford, L. R. 1972. Contemporary model building: paradigms and the current state of Paleolithic research. InModels in Archaeology (ed. D. Clarke): pp. 109–66. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  4. Binford, L. R. 1973. Interassemblage variability: the Mousterian and the ‘functional’ argument. InThe Explanation of Culture Change: models in prehistory (ed. C. Renfrew): pp. 227–54. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  5. Binford, L. R. 1977. Olorgesailie deserves more than the usual book review.Journal of Anthropological Research 33:493–502.Google Scholar
  6. Binford, L. R. 1981.Bones: anicent men and modern myths. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  7. Binford, L. R. 1985. Human ancestors: changing views of their behavior.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 4:292–327.Google Scholar
  8. Binford, L. R. 1988. Fact and fiction about theZinjanthropus floor: data, arguments, and interpretations.C.A. 29:123–35.Google Scholar
  9. Binford, L. R. and Binford, S. R. 1966. A preliminary analysis of functional variability in the Mousterian of Levallois facies.American Anthropologist 68:238–95.Google Scholar
  10. Binford, L. R. and Stone, N. M. 1986. Zhoukoudian: a closer look.C.A. 27:453–64.Google Scholar
  11. Bordes, F. and de Sonneville-Bordes, D. 1970. The significance of variability in Paleolithic assemblages.W.A. 2:61–73.Google Scholar
  12. Brown, F., Harris, J., Leakey, R. and Walker, A. 1985. EarlyHomo erectus skeleton from west Lake Turkana, Kenya.Nature 316:788–92.Google Scholar
  13. Bunn, H. T. and Kroll, E. M. 1986. Systematic butchery by Plio/Pleistocene hominids at Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania.C.A. 27:431–52.Google Scholar
  14. Bunn, H. T. and Kroll, E. M. 1987a. Reply.C.A. 28:96–9.Google Scholar
  15. Bunn, H. T. and Kroll, E. M. 1987b. On inferences from the Zhoukoudian fauna.C.A. 28:199–202.Google Scholar
  16. Bunn, H. T. and Kroll, E. M. 1988. Reply.C.A. 29:135–49.Google Scholar
  17. Doran, J. E. and Hodson, F. R. 1975.Computers in Archaeology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Foley, R. 1988. Hominids, humans, and hunter-gatherers: an evolutionary perspective. InHunters and Gatherers 1 (eds T. Ingold, D. Riches and J. Woodburn): pp. 207–21. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  19. Goodall, J. 1976. Continuities between chimpanzee and human behaviour. InHuman Origins (eds G. L. Isaac and E. R. McCown): pp. 81–96. Menlo Park: Benjamin.Google Scholar
  20. Gowlett, J. A. J. 1988. A case of Developed Oldowan in the Acheulean?W.A. 20:13–26.Google Scholar
  21. Hay, R. L. 1968. Chert and its sodiumsilicate precursors in sodium-carbonate lakes in East Africa.Contributions to Minerological Petroleum 17:255–74.Google Scholar
  22. Hay, R. L. 1976.Geology of the Olduvai Gorge. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  23. Isaac, G. L. 1971. The diet of early man: aspects of archaeological evidence from Lower and Middle Pleistocene sites in Africa.W.A. 2:278–98.Google Scholar
  24. Isaac, G. L. 1972a. Early phases of human behaviour: models in Lower Palaeolithic archaeology. InModels in Archaeology (ed. D. Clarke): pp. 167–99. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  25. Isaac, G. L. 1972b. Chronology and the tempo of cultural change during the Pleistocene. InCalibration of Hominoid Evolution (eds W. W. Bishop and J. A. Miller): pp. 381–430. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.Google Scholar
  26. Isaac, G. L. 1975. Early stone tools — an adaptive threshold? InProblems in Economic and Social Archaeology (eds G. de G. Sievking, I. H. Longworth and K. E. Wilson): pp. 39–47. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  27. Isaac, G. L. 1976. The activities of early African hominids: a review of archaeological evidence from the time span two and a half to one million years ago. InHuman Origins (eds G. L. Isaac and E. R. McCown): pp. 483–514. Menlo Park: Benjamin.Google Scholar
  28. Isaac, G. L. 1983. Bones in contention: competing explanations for the juxtaposition of Early Pleistocene artifacts and faunal remains. InAnimals and Archaeology 1. hunters and their prey (eds J. Clutton-Brock and C. Grigson): pp. 3–20. Oxford: BAR International Series 163.Google Scholar
  29. Jones, P. R. 1980. Experimental butchery with modern stone tools and its relevance for Palaeolithic archaeology.W.A. 12:153–65.Google Scholar
  30. Kawabe, M. 1966. One observed case of hunting behaviour among wild chimpanzees living in the savanna woodland of western Tanzania.Primates 7:393–6.Google Scholar
  31. Kurashina, H. 1987. Comparison of the Gadeb and other Early Stone Age assemblages from Africa south of the Sahara.A.A.R. 5:19–28.Google Scholar
  32. Leakey, M. D. 1971.Olduvai Gorge. Volume 3. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Leakey, M. D. 1975. Cultural patterns in the Olduvai sequence. InAfter the Australopithecines (eds K. W. Butzer and G. L. Isaac): pp. 477–94. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  34. Leakey, M. D. 1976. The early stone industries at Olduvai Gorge. InLes Plus Anciennes Industries en Afrique (eds J. D. Clark and G. L. Isaac): pp. 24–41. Nice: IX I.U.P.P.S.Google Scholar
  35. Potts, R. 1983. Foraging for faunal resources by early hominids at Olduvai Gorge. InAnimals and Archaeology 1. hunters and their prey (eds J. Clutton-Brock and C. Grigson): pp. 51–62. Oxford: BAR International Series 163.Google Scholar
  36. Potts, R. 1984. Hominid hunters? Problems in identifying the earliest hunter/gatherers. InHominid Evolution and Community Ecology (ed. R. Foley): pp. 128–66. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  37. Potts, R. 1987. On butchery by Olduvai hominids.C.A. 28:95–6.Google Scholar
  38. Potts, R. and Shipman, P. 1981. Cutmarks made by stone tools on bones from Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania.Nature 291:577–80.Google Scholar
  39. Shipman, P. 1983. Early hominid lifestyle: hunting and gathering or foraging and scavanging? InAnimals and Archaeology 1. hunters and their prey (eds J. Clutton-Brock and C. Grigson): pp. 31–49. Oxford: BAR International Series 163.Google Scholar
  40. Shipman, P. 1986. Scavenging or hunting in early hominids: theoretical framework and tests.American Anthropologist 88:27–43.Google Scholar
  41. Stiles, D. N. 1979a. Early Acheulean and Developed Oldowan.C.A. 20:126–29.Google Scholar
  42. Stiles, D. N. 1979b. Recent archaeological findings at the Sterkfontein site.Nature 277:381–2.Google Scholar
  43. Stiles, D. N. 1979c. Paleolithic culture and culture change: experiment in theory and method.C.A. 20:1–21.Google Scholar
  44. Stiles, D. N. 1980. Industrial taxonomy in the Early Stone Age of Africa.Anthropologie 18:189–207.Google Scholar
  45. Stiles, D. N., Hay, R. L. and O'Neil, J. R. 1974. The MNK Chert Factory Site, Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania.W.A. 5:285–308.Google Scholar
  46. Strathern, M. 1969. Stone axes and flake tools: evaluations from two New Guinea Highland societies.P.P.S. 35:311–29.Google Scholar
  47. Suzuki, A. 1971. Carnivority and cannibalism observed among forest-living chimpanzees.Journal of the Anthropological Society of Nippon 79:30–48.Google Scholar
  48. Teleki, G. 1975. Primate subsistence patterns: collector-predators and gatherer-hunters.J.H.E. 4:125–84.Google Scholar
  49. White, J. P. and Thomas, D. H. 1972. What mean these stones? ethnotaxonomic models and archaeological interpretations in the New Guinea Highlands. InModels in Archaeology (ed. D. Clarke): pp. 275–308. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  50. Wilmsen, E. N. 1968. Functional analysis of flaked stone artifacts.American Antiquity 33:156–61.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Cambridge University Press 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Stiles

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations