Advertisement

Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 389–414 | Cite as

Assemblage variability and bifacial points in the lowermost Sibudan layers at Sibudu, South Africa

  • Manuel Will
  • Nicholas J. Conard
Original Paper

Abstract

Building on the important work of Lyn Wadley at Sibudu, archeologists from the University of Tübingen have excavated the upper stratigraphic units of the Middle Stone Age (MSA) sequence down to the Howiesons Poort (HP). Here, we present the main results from lithic analyses of the lowest part of the Sibudan sequence to assess its overall variability and taxonomic status. Based on the new findings, we also discuss the implications for archeological systematics and the cultural evolution of modern humans in MIS 3 from a more general perspective. The Sibudan deposits encompass over 20 archeological horizons that span a 1.2-m-thick, well-stratified sequence whose base and top have been dated to ∼58 ka (MIS 3). In contrast to the upper stratigraphic units, the lower Sibudan assemblages that we analyzed here show much higher use of local sandstone, quartz, and quartzite. These older units are characterized by frequent use of expedient core reduction methods, bipolar reduction of locally available quartz and quartzite, less retouch of blanks, and lower find densities. Tongati and Ndwedwe tools, which feature abundantly in the upper part of the Sibudan sequence, are entirely absent, as are unifacial points. Instead, notched and denticulated tools are common. Surprisingly, knappers manufactured small bifacial points, mainly made from quartz, by means of alternating shaping in the course of the oldest occupations. The results highlight the great diversity of human technological behavior over even short periods during the MSA, raising important questions about the mechanisms of behavioral change, cultural taxonomy, appropriate scales of lithic analyses, and the relationship between the HP and the Sibudan. Our findings further erode the old idea that bifacial technology in southern Africa is limited to the Still Bay. Research is increasingly showing that bifacial points come and go in different forms and contexts of African Late Pleistocene technology, impeding their use as chrono-cultural markers.

Keywords

Lithic technology Middle Stone Age Bifacial technology Behavioral change Cultural evolution South Africa 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Lyn Wadley and Guillaume Porraz for the many constructive discussions on the lithic technology of Sibudu. We are also indebted to the many members of the Sibudu research team of the past 5 years, with particularly thanks to Chris Miller, Guillaume Porraz, Susan Mentzer, Veerle Rots, Jamie Clark, Mohsen Zeidi, Gregor Bader, and Viola Schmid for their many contributions to this work. We thank Paloma de la Peña for sharing her metric data on HP bifacials from Sibudu. This study was funded by a grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (CO226-28-1) and through funds from the Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften in the context of the long-term research project “The Role of Culture and the Early Expansions of Humans.” Manuel Will has been supported by a Doctoral Dissertation Grant from the Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

12520_2016_361_MOESM1_ESM.docx (398 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 397 kb)

References

  1. Ambrose S (2002) Small things remembered: origins of early microlithic industries in sub-Saharan Africa. In: Elston RG, Kuhn SL (eds) Thinking small: global perspectives on microlithization. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 12, pp 9–30Google Scholar
  2. Andrefsky W (1998) Lithics: macroscopic approaches to analysis. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Archer W, Gunz P, van Niekerk KL, Henshilwood CS, McPherron SP (2015) Diachronic change within the Still Bay at Blombos Cave, South Africa. PLoS One 10(7):e0132428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Auffermann B, Burkert W, Hahn J, Pasda C, Simon U (1990) Ein Merkmalsystem zur Auswertung von Steinartefaktinventaren. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 20:259–268Google Scholar
  5. Bader GD, Will M, Conard NJ (2015) The lithic technology of Holley Shelter, KwaZulu-Natal, and its place within the MSA of southern Africa. S Afr Archaeol Bull 70:149–165Google Scholar
  6. Barham L (2000) Backed tools in Middle Pleistocene of central Africa and their evolutionary significance. J Hum Evol 43:585–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barton R, Bouzouggar A, Collcutt SN, Schwenninger JL, Clark-Balzan L (2009) OSL dating of the Aterian levels at Dar es-Soltan I (Rabat, Morocco) and implications for the dispersal of modern Homo sapiens. Quat Sci Rev 28:1914–1931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beaumont PB, Vogel JC (2006) On a timescale for the past million years of human history in central South Africa. S Afr J Sci 102:217–228Google Scholar
  9. Bleed P (2001) Trees or chains, links or branches: conceptual alternatives for consideration of stone tool production and other sequential activities. J Archaeol Method Theory 8:101–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boëda E (1995) Levallois: a volumetric construction, methods, a technique. In: Dibble HL, Bar-Yosef O (eds) The definition and interpretation of Levallois technology. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 41–68Google Scholar
  11. Boëda E (1997) Technogénèse des systèmes de production lithique au Paléolithique inférieur et moyen en Europe occidentale et au Proche-Orient. Unpublished habilitation dissertation, University of Paris X – NanterreGoogle Scholar
  12. Boëda E, Geneste JM, Meignen L (1990) Identification de chaînes opératoires lithiques du Paléolithique ancien et moyen. Paléo 2:43–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bonilauri S (2010) Les outils du Paléolithique moyen, une mémoire technique oubliée ? Approche techno-fonctionnelle appliquée à un assemblage lithique de conception Levallois provenant du site d’Umm el Tlel (Syrie centrale). Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Nanterre, Université de Paris-OuestGoogle Scholar
  14. Bordes F (1961) Typologie du Paléolithique ancien et moyen. Publications de l'Institut de Préhistoire de l'Université de Bordeaux, Mémoire n°1, BordeauxGoogle Scholar
  15. Bretzke K, Marks AE, Conard NJ (2006) Projektiltechnologie und kulturelle evolution in Ostafrika. Mitteilungen Gesellschaft Urgeschichte 15:63–81Google Scholar
  16. Breuil H (1930) Premieres impressions de voyage sur la préhistoire sud-africaine. l'Anthropologie 40:209–223Google Scholar
  17. Brew JO (1946) The use and abuse of taxonomy. In: The archaeology of Alkali Ridge Utah Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 21, 44–66Google Scholar
  18. Brezillon MN (1983) La dénomination des objets de Pierre taillée. Gallia Préhistoire, ParisGoogle Scholar
  19. Childe VG (1929) The Danube in prehistory. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Clark JD (1959) The prehistory of Southern Africa. Penguin Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Clark JD (1988) The Middle Stone Age of east Africa and the beginnings of regional identity. J World Prehist 2:237–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Clark JD (2001) Kalambo Falls prehistoric site volume III, the earlier cultures: Middle and Earlier Stone Age. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  23. Clark JD, Cole GH, Isaac GL, Kleindienst MR (1966) Precision and definition in African archaeology. S Afr Archaeol Bull 21:114–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cochrane GWG (2006) An analysis of lithic artifacts from the ∼60 ka layers of Sibudu Cave. S Afr Humanit 18:69–88Google Scholar
  25. Cochrane GWG (2008) The transition from Howieson’s Poort to post-Howieson's Poort industries in southern Africa. S Afr Archaeol Bull (Goodwin Series) 10:157–167Google Scholar
  26. Conard NJ, Adler DS (1997) Lithic reduction and hominid behaviour in the Middle Paleolithic of the Rhineland. J Anthropol Res 53:147–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Conard NJ, Porraz, G (2015) Revising models for the cultural stratigraphic sequence of the Middle Stone Age. S Afr Archaeol Bull 70: 127–130.Google Scholar
  28. Conard NJ, Will M (2015) Examining the causes and consequences of short-term behavioral change during the Middle Stone Age at Sibudu, South Africa. PLoS One 10(6):e0130001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Conard NJ, Soressi M, Parkington JE, Wurz S, Yates R (2004) A unified lithic taxonomy based on patterns of core reduction. S Afr Archaeol Bull 59:12–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Conard NJ, Porraz G, Wadley L (2012) What is in a name? Characterizing the post-Howiesons Poort at Sibudu. S Afr Archaeol Bull 67:180–199Google Scholar
  31. Conard NJ, Bader GD, Schmid VC, Will M (2014) Bringing the Middle Stone Age into clearer focus. Mitteilungen Gesellschaft Urgeschichte 23:121–128Google Scholar
  32. Cornelissen E (2016) The later Pleistocene in the northeastern Central African rainforest. In: Jones SC, Stewart BA (eds) Africa from MIS 6–2: population dynamics and paleoenvironments. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 301–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. de la Peña P (2015) Refining our understanding of Howiesons Poort lithic technology: the evidence from Grey Rocky layer in Sibudu Cave (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa). PLoS One 10(12):e0143451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. de la Peña P, Wadley L (2014a) Quartz knapping strategies in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa). PLoS One 9:e101534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. de la Peña P, Wadley L (2014b) New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu- Natal, South Africa). Quat Int 350:26–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. de la Peña P, Wadley L, Lombard M (2013) Quartz bifacial points in the Howiesons Poort of Sibudu. S Afr Archaeol Bull 68:119–136Google Scholar
  37. de Mortillet LLG (1883) Le Préhistorique antiquité de l’homme. C. Reinwald, ParisGoogle Scholar
  38. Deacon HJ (1979) Excavations at Boomplaas cave—a sequence through the upper Pleistocene and Holocene in South Africa. World Archaeol 10:241–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Deacon HJ (1989) Late Pleistocene palaeoecology and archaeology in the southern cape, South Africa. In: Mellars P, Stringer C (eds) The human revolution: behavioural and biological perspectives on the origins of modern humans. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 547–564Google Scholar
  40. Débenath A (1992) Hommes et cultures matérielles de l’Atérien Marocain. l'Anthropologie 96:711–720Google Scholar
  41. Debénath A, Dibble HL (1994) Handbook of Paleolithic typology, Lower and Middle Paleolithic of Europe, vol I. The University Museum, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  42. Dibble HL (1984) Interpreting typological variation of Middle Paleolithic scrapers: function, style or sequence of reduction. J Field Archaeol 11:431–436Google Scholar
  43. Dibble HL (1987) The interpretation of Middle Paleolithic scraper morphology. Am Antiq 52:109–117Google Scholar
  44. Dibble HL (1995) Middle Paleolithic scraper reduction: background, clarification, and review of the evidence to date. J Archaeol Method Theory 2:299–368Google Scholar
  45. Dibble HL, McPherron SP (1996) A multimedia companion to the Middle Paleolithic site of Combe-Capelle Bas (France). University of Pennsylvania Museum, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  46. Dibble HL, Aldeias V, Jacobs Z, Olszewski DI, Rezek Z, Lin SC, Reed K (2013) On the industrial attributions of the Aterian and Mousterian of the Maghreb. J Hum Evol 64:194–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Discamps E, Henshilwood CS (2015) Intra-site variability in the Still Bayfauna at Blombos Cave: Implications for explanatory models of the Middle Stone Age cultural and tchnological evolution. PLoS ONE 10(12):e0144866.Google Scholar
  48. Evans U (1994) Hollow rock shelter, a Middle Stone Age site in the Cederberg. S Afr Field Archaeol 3:63–73Google Scholar
  49. Faith JT, Tryon C, Peppe DJ (2016) Environmental change, ungulate biogeography, and their implications for early human dispersals in equatorial East Africa. In: Jones SC, Stewart BA (eds) Africa from MIS 6–2: population dynamics and paleoenvironments. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 233–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Faivre J-P, Gravina B, Bourguignon L, Discamps E, Turq A (2016) Late Middle Palaeolithic lithic technocomplexes (MIS 5-3) in the northeastern Aquitaine Basin: advances and challenges. Quat Int. doi: 10.1016/j.quaint.2016.02.060 Google Scholar
  51. Garcea EAA (2004) Crossing deserts and avoiding seas: Aterian North African- European relations. J Anthropol Res 60:27–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Gobert E (1910) Recherches sur le Capsien (1 re série). Bull Soc Préhistorique France:595–604Google Scholar
  53. Goldberg P, Miller CE, Schiegl S, Ligouis B, Berna F, Conard NJ, Wadley L (2009) Bedding, hearths, and site maintenance in the Middle Stone Age site of Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Archaeol Anthropol Sci 1:95–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Goodwin AJH (1928) An introduction to the Middle Stone Age in South Africa. S Afr J Sci 25:410–418Google Scholar
  55. Goodwin AJH (1958) Formative years of our prehistoric terminology. S Afr Archaeol Bull 13:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Goodwin AJH, Van Riet Lowe C (1929) The Stone Age cultures of South Africa. Ann S Afr Mus 27:1–289Google Scholar
  57. Grine FE, Klein RG, Volman TP (1991) Dating, archaeology and human fossils from the Middle Stone Age levels of Die Kelders, South Africa. J Hum Evol 21:363–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Grün R, Beaumont PB (2001) Border Cave revisited: a revised ESR chronology. J Hum Evol 40:467–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Grün R, Beaumont PB, Tobias PV, Eggins SM (2003) On the age of the Border Cave 5 human mandible. J Hum Evol 45:155–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Hahn J (1991) Erkennen und Bestimmen von Stein- und Knochenartefakten: Einführung in die Artefaktmorphologie. Archaeologica Venatoria, TübingenGoogle Scholar
  61. Hallinan E, Shaw M (2015) A new Middle Stone Age industry in the Tanwka Karoo, Northern Cape Province, South Africa. Antiquity Project Gallery 89:344Google Scholar
  62. Heese CHTD (n.d.) Collected papers of CHTD Heese. On file at the African Heritage Research Institute, Cape TownGoogle Scholar
  63. Henshilwood CS (2005) Stratigraphic integrity of the Middle Stone Age levels at Blombos Cave. In: d’Errico F, Backwell L (eds) From tools to symbols: from early hominids to modern humans. Witwatersrand University Press, Johannesburg, pp. 451–458Google Scholar
  64. Henshilwood CS (2012) Late Pleistocene techno-traditions in southern Africa: a review of the Still Bay and Howiesons Poort, c. 75–59 ka. J. World Prehist 25:205–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Henshilwood CS, Dubreuil B (2012) The Still Bay and Howiesons Poort, 77-59 ka: symbolic materials and the evolution of the mind during the African Middle Stone Age. Curr Anthropol 52:361–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Henshilwood CS, Sealy JC, Yates R, Cruz-Uribe K, Goldberg P, Grine FE, Klein RG, Poggenpoel C, Van Niekerk K, Watts I (2001) Blombos Cave, southern cape, South Africa: preliminary report on the 1992–1999 excavations of the Middle Stone Age levels. J Archaeol Sci 28:421–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Hiscock P, Clarkson C, Mackay A (2011) Big debates over little tools: ongoing disputes over microliths on three continents. World Archaeol 43:653–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Högberg A, Larsson L (2011) Lithic technology and behavioural modernity: new results from the Still Bay site, Hollow Rock Shelter, Western Cape Province, South Africa. J Hum Evol 61:133–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Inizan ML, Reduron M, Roche H, Tixier J (1995) Technologie de la pierre taillée. Préhistoire de la pierre taillée, Tome 4. Cercle de recherches et d'études préhistoriques, MeudonGoogle Scholar
  70. Jacobs Z, Roberts RG (2008) Testing times: old and new chronologies for the Howieson’s Poort and Still Bay industries in environmental context. S Afr Archaeol Bull (Goodwin Series) 10:9–34Google Scholar
  71. Jacobs Z, Roberts RG (2009) Catalysts for Stone Age innovations. What might have triggered two short-lived bursts of technological and behavioral innovation in southern Africa during the Middle Stone Age? Commun Integr Biol 2:191–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Jacobs Z, Roberts RG, Galbraith RF, Deacon HJ, Grün R, Mackay A, Mitchell PJ, Vogelsang R, Wadley L (2008a) Ages for the Middle Stone Age of southern Africa: implications for human behaviour and dispersal. Science 322:733–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Jacobs Z, Wintle AG, Duller GA, Roberts RG, Wadley L (2008b) New ages for the post-Howiesons Poort, late and final Middle Stone A at Sibudu, South Africa. J Archaeol Sci 35:1790–1807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Jacobs Z, Hayes EH, Roberts RG, Galbraith RF, Henshilwood CS (2012) An improved OSL chronology for the Still Bay layers at Blombos Cave, South Africa: further tests of single-grain dating procedures and a re-evaluation of the timing of the Still Bay industry across southern Africa. J Archaeol Sci 40:579–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Kandel AW, Bolus M, Bretzke K, Bruch AA, Haidle MN, Hertler C, Märker M (2015) Increasing behavioral flexibility? An integrative macro-scale approach to understanding the Middle Stone Age of southern Africa. J Archaeol Method Theory:1–46. doi: 10.1007/s10816-015-9254-y
  76. Kaplan J (1990) The Umhlatuzana rock shelter sequence: 100 000 years of Stone Age history. S Afr Humanit 2:1–94Google Scholar
  77. Kleindienst MR (2006) On naming things: behavioral changes in the Later Middle to Earlier Late Pleistocene, viewed from the Eastern Sahara. In: Hovers E, Kuhn SL (eds) Transitions before the transition: evolution and stability in the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 13–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Krukowski S (1939) Paleolithic Prehistoria Ziem Polskich. In: Krukowski S, Kostrzewski J, Jakimowicz R (eds) Prehistoria Ziem Polskich. Polska Akademia Umiejtenosci, Krakow. pp. 1–117.Google Scholar
  79. Lepot M (1993) Approche techno-fonctionnelle de l’outillage lithique moustérien: essai de classification des parties actives en termes d’efficacité technique. Unpublished Masters thesis. University of Paris X, NanterreGoogle Scholar
  80. Lombard M (2005) The Howiesons Poort of South Africa: what we know, what we think we know, what we need to know. S Afr Humanit 17:33–55Google Scholar
  81. Lombard M (2009) The Howieson’s Poort of South Africa amplified. S Afr Archaeol Bull 64:4–12Google Scholar
  82. Lombard M, Parsons I (2011) What happened to the human mind after the Howiesons Poort? Antiquity 85:1433–1443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Lombard M, Wadley L, Jacobs Z, Mohapi M, Roberts RG (2010) Still Bay and serrated points from Umhlatuzana rock shelter, Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa. J Archaeol Sci 37:1773–1784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Lombard M, Wadley L, Deacon J, Wurz S, Parsons I, Mohapi M, Swart J, Mitchell P (2012) South African and Lesotho Stone Age sequence updated. S Afr Archaeol Bull 67:123–144Google Scholar
  85. Losos JB (2011) Convergence, adaptation, and constraint. Evolution 65:1827–1840. doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01289.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Mackay A (2008) A method for estimating edge length from flake dimensions: use and implications for technological change in the southern African MSA. J Archaeol Sci 35:614–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Mackay A (2011) Nature and significance of the Howiesons Poort to post-Howiesons Poort transition at Klein Kliphuis rockshelter, South Africa. J Archaeol Sci 38:1430–1440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Mackay A (2016) Technological change and the importance of variability: the Western Cape of South Africa from MIS 6–2. In: Jones SC, Stewart BA (eds) Africa from MIS 6–2: population dynamics and paleoenvironments. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 49–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Mackay A, Orton J, Schwortz S, Steele TE (2010) Soutfontein (SFT)-001: preliminary report on an open-air site rich in bifacial points, southern Namaqualand, South Africa. S Afr Archaeol Bull 65:84–95Google Scholar
  90. Mackay A, Stewart BA, Chase BM (2014) Coalescence and fragmentation in the late Pleistocene archaeology of southernmost Africa. J Hum Evol 72:26–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Malan BD (1955) The archaeology of Tunnel Cave and Skildergat Kop, Fish Hoek, Cape of Good Hope. S Afr Archaeol Bull 10:3–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Malan BD (1956) The South African Archaeological Society: ten years of archaeology in South Africa. Presidential address, 1955. S Afr Archaeol Bull 11:31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Marks A, Conard NJ (2007) Technology vs. typology: the case for and against a transition from the MSA to LSA at Mumba Cave, Tanzania. In: Aubry T, Almeida F, Araujo A, Tiffagom M (eds) Space and time: which diachronies, which synchronies, which scales? Typology vs technology. Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 123–131Google Scholar
  94. McBrearty S (1988) The Sangoan-Lupemban and Middle Stone Age sequence at the Muguruk site. Western Kenya World Archaeol 19:388–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. McBrearty S (2003) Patterns of technological change at the origin of Homo sapiens. Before Farming 3:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. McBrearty S, Brooks AS (2000) The revolution that wasn’t: a new interpretation of the origin of modern human behaviour. J Hum Evol 39:453–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. McCall GS (2007) Behavioral ecological models of lithic technological change during the later Middle Stone Age of South Africa. J Archaeol Sci 34:1738–1751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. McCall GS, Thomas JT (2012) Still Bay and Howiesons Poort foraging strategies: recent research and models of culture change. Afr Archaeol Rev 29:7–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Mellars PA (2006) Why did modern human populations disperse from Africa ca. 60,000 years ago? A new model. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103:9381–9386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Mellars PA (2007) Rethinking the revolution: Eurasian and African perspectives. In: Mellars P, Boyle K, Bar-Yosef O, Stringer C (eds) Rethinking the revolution: behavioural and biological perspectives on the origin and dispersal of modern humans. McDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge, pp. 1–14Google Scholar
  101. Mellars P, Gori KC, Carr M, Soares PA, Richards MB (2013) Genetic and archaeological perspectives on the initial modern human colonization of southern Asia. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110:10699–10700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Miller CE (2015) High-resolution geoarchaeology and settlement dynamics at the Middle Stone Agesites of Diepkloof and Sibudu, South Africa. In: Connard NJ, Delagnes A (eds) Settlement dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age, vol IV. Kerns Verlag, Tübingen, pp. 31–50Google Scholar
  103. Minichillo TJ (2005) Middle Stone Age lithic study, South Africa: an examination of modern human origins. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Washington, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  104. Mitchell P (2008) Developing the archaeology of Marine Isotope Stage 3. S Afr Archaeol Bull (Goodwin Series) 10:52–65Google Scholar
  105. Mohapi M (2012) Point morphology and the Middle Stone Age cultural sequence of Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. S Afr Archaeol Bull 67:5–15Google Scholar
  106. Mohapi M (2013) The Middle Stone Age point assemblage from Umhlatuzana Rock Shelter: a morphometric study. S Afr Humanit 25:25–51Google Scholar
  107. Moncel M-H, Arzarello M, Boeda E, Bonilauri S, Chevrier B, Gaillard C, Forestier H, Yinghua L, Sémah F, Zeitoun V (2016) Assemblages with bifacial tools in Eurasia (third part). Considerations on the bifacial phenomenon throughout Eurasia. C R Palevol. doi: 10.1016/j.crpv.2015.11.007 Google Scholar
  108. Mourre V, Villa P, Henshilwood C (2010) Early use of pressure flaking on lithic artifacts at Blombos cave, South Africa. Science 330:659–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Odell GH (2004) Lithic analysis. Manuals in archaeological method, theory, and technique. Kluwer Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  110. Opperman H (1996) Strathalan Cave B, north-eastern Cape Province, South Africa: evidence for human behaviour 29,000-26,000 years ago. Quat Int 33:45–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Orton J (2008) A useful measure of the desirability of different raw materials for retouch within and between assemblages: the raw material retouch index (RMRI). J Archaeol Sci 35:1090–1094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Otte M (2003) The pitfalls of using bifaces as cultural markers. In: Soressi M, Dibble HL (eds) Multiple approaches to the study of bifacial technologies. University of Pennsylvania Museum of Anthropology, Philadelphia, pp. 183–192Google Scholar
  113. Pearce T (2012) Convergence and parallelism in evolution: a Neo-Gouldian account. Br J Phil Sci 63:429–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Pelegrin J (2000) Les techniques de débitage laminaire au Tardiglaciaire: critères de diagnose et quelques réflexions. L’Europe Centrale et Septentrionale au Tardiglaciaire Confrontation des modèles régionaux 7:73–86Google Scholar
  115. Peers B (1929) Preliminary report on the archaeology of Fish Hoek–Noord Hoek valley. Unpublished report, South African Museum, Cape TownGoogle Scholar
  116. Pickering R (2006) Regional geology, setting and sedimentology of Sibudu Cave. S Afr Humanit 18:123–129Google Scholar
  117. Porraz G, Texier P-J, Archer W, Piboule M, Rigaud J-P, Tribolo C (2013) Technological successions in the Middle Stone Age sequence of Diepkloof Rock Shelter, Western Cape, South Africa. J Archaeol Sci 40:3376–3400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Powell A, Shennan S, Thomas MG (2009) Late Pleistocene demography and the appearance of modern human behavior. Science 324:1298–1301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Roberts BW, Vander Linden M (2011) Investigating archaeological cultures: material culture, variability, and transmission. In: Roberts BW, Vander Linden M (eds) Investigating archaeological cultures: material culture, variability, and transmission. Springer, New York, pp. 1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Roussel M, Bourguignon L, Soressi M (2009) Identification par l’expérimentation de la percussion au percuteur de calcaire au Paléolithique moyen: le cas du façonnage des racloirs bifaciaux Quina de Chez Pinaud (Jonzac, Charente-Maritime). Bulletine Societé Préhistorique Francaise 106:219–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Sampson CG (1974) The Stone Age archaeology of southern Africa. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  122. Scerri EML (2013) The Aterian and its place in the North African Middle Stone Age. Quat Int 300:111–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Schiegl S, Conard NJ (2006) The Middle Stone Age sediments at Sibudu: results from FTIR spectroscopy and microscopic analyses. S Afr Humanit 18:149–172Google Scholar
  124. Shea JJ (2006) The origins of lithic projectile point technology: evidence from Africa, the Levant, and Europe. J Archaeol Sci 33:823–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Shea JJ (2014) Sink the Mousterian? Named stone tool industries (NASTIES) as obstacles to investigating hominin evolutionary relationships in the Later Middle Paleolithic Levant. Quat Int 350:169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Shott MJ (1994) Size and form in the analysis of flake debris: review and recent approaches. J Archaeol Method Theory 1:69–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Shott MJ (2003) Chaîne opératoire and reduction sequence. Lithic Technol 28:95–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Singer R, Wymer J (1982) The Middle Stone Age at Klasies River Mouth in South Africa. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  129. Soressi M, Geneste J-M (2011) The history and efficacy of the chaîne opératoire approach to lithic analysis: studying techniques to reveal past societies in an evolutionary perspective. PaleoAnthropology 2011:334–350Google Scholar
  130. Soriano S (2001) Statut fonctionnel de l'outillage bifacial dans les industries du Paléolithique moyen: propositions méthodologiques. Les industries à outils bifaciaux du Paléolithique moyen d’Europe occidentale, 77–84Google Scholar
  131. Soriano S, Villa P, Wadley L (2007) Blade technology and tool forms in the Middle Stone Age of South Africa: the Howiesons Poort and post-Howiesons Poort at Rose Cottage Cave. J Archaeol Sci 34:681–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Soriano S, Villa P, Delagnes A, Degano I, Pollarolo L, Lucejko JJ, et al. (2015) The Still Bay and Howiesons Poort at Sibudu and Blombos: understanding Middle Stone Age technologies. PLoS One 10(7):e0131127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Stapleton P, Hewitt J (1927) Stone implements from a rock-shelter near Howieson’s Poort near Grahamstown. S Afr J Sci 24:574–587Google Scholar
  134. Stapleton P, Hewitt J (1928) Stone implements from Howieson’s Poort, near Grahamstown. S Afr J Sci 25:399–409Google Scholar
  135. Stewart BA, Dewar GI, Morley MW, Inglis RH, Wheeler M, Jacobs Z, Roberts RG (2012) Afromontane foragers of the Late Pleistocene: site formation, chronology and occupational pulsing at Melikane Rockshelter, Lesotho. Quat Int 270:40–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Taylor N (2011) The origins of hunting and gathering in the Congo basin: a perspective on the Middle Stone Age Lupemban industry. Before Farming 2011:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Taylor N (2016) Across rainforests and woodlands: a systematic re-appraisal of the Lupemban Middle Stone Age in Central Africa. In: Jones SC, Stewart BA (eds) Africa from MIS 6–2: population dynamics and paleoenvironments. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 273–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Thackeray AI (1992) The Middle Stone Age south of the Limpopo River. J World Prehist 6:385–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Thackeray AI (2000) Middle Stone Age artifacts from the 1993 and 1995 excavations of Die Kelders Cave 1, South Africa. J Hum Evol 38:147–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Tostevin GB (2003) Attribute analysis of the lithic technologies of Stránská skála II–III in their regional and inter-regional context. In: Svoboda J, Bar-Yosef O (eds) Stránská skála: origins of the Upper Palaeolithic in the Brno Basin. Peabody Museum Publications, Cambridge, pp. 77–118Google Scholar
  141. Tostevin GB (2013) Seeing lithics: a middle-range theory for testing cultural transmission in the Pleistocene. Oxbow Books, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  142. Tribolo C, Mercier N, Selo M, Valladas H, Joron J-L, Reyss J-L, et al. (2006) TL dating of burnt lithics from Blombos Cave (South Africa) and the antiquity of modern behaviour. Archaeometry 48:341–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Tribolo C, Mercier N, Douville E, Joron J-L, Reyss J-L, Rufer D (2013) OSL and TL dating of the Middle Stone Age sequence of Diepkloof Rock Shelter (Western Cape, South Africa): a clarification. J Archaeol Sci 40: 3401–3410.Google Scholar
  144. Trigger B (2006) A history of archaeological thought, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Tryon CA, Peppe DJ, Faith JT, Van Plantinga A, Nightengale S, Ogondo J (2012) Late Pleistocene artefacts and fauna from Rusinga and Mfangano islands, Lake Victoria, Kenya. Azania 47:14–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Tryon CA, Faith JT (2013) Variability in the Middle Stone Age of eastern Africa. Curr Anthropol 54:S234–S254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Tschauner H (1994) Archaeological systematics and cultural evolution: retrieving the honour of culture history. Man 29:77–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Van Peer P (1998) The Nile Corridor and the Out-of-Africa Model: an examination of the archaeological record. Curr Anthropol 39:S115–S140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Van Peer P (2016) Technological systems, population dynamics and historical process in the MSA of northern Africa. In: Jones SC, Stewart BA (eds) Africa from MIS 6–2: population dynamics and paleoenvironments. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 147–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Van Peer P, Vermeersch PM (2007) The place of Northeast Africa in the early history of modern humans: new data and interpretations on the Middle Stone Age. In: Mellars P, Boyle K, Bar-Yosef O, Stringer CB (eds) Rethinking the human revolution: new behavioural and biological perspectives on the origin and dispersal of modern humans. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge, pp. 187–198Google Scholar
  151. Van Peer P, Fullagar R, Stokes S, Bailey RM, Moeyersons J, Steenhoudt F, et al. (2003) The Early to Middle Stone Age transition and the emergence of modern human behaviour at site 8-B-11, Sai Island, Sudan. J Hum Evol 45:187–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Villa P, Delagnes A, Wadley L (2005) A late Middle Stone Age artifact assemblage from Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal): comparisons with the European Middle Paleolithic. J Archaeol Sci 32:399–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Villa P, Soressi M, Henshilwood CS, Mourre V (2009) The Still Bay points of Blombos Cave (South Africa). J Archaeol Sci 36:441–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Villa P, Soriano S, Teyssandier N, Wurz S (2010) Howiesons Poort and MSA III at Klasies River Main Site, Cave 1A. J Archaeol Sci 37:630–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Vogelsang R, Richter J, Jacobs Z, Eichhorn B, Linseele V, Roberts RG (2010) New excavations of Middle Stone Age deposits at Apollo 11 Rockshelter, Namibia: stratigraphy, archaeology, chronology and past environments. J Afr Archaeol 8:185–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Volman TP (1981) The middle stone age in the southern Cape. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Chicago, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  157. Volman TP (1984) Early prehistory of southern Africa. In: Klein RG (ed) Southern Africa prehistory and paleoenvironments. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 169–220Google Scholar
  158. Wadley L (2001) Excavations at Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal. Digging Stick 18:1–4Google Scholar
  159. Wadley L (2005) A typological study of the final Middle Stone Age stone tools from Sibudu Cave. KwaZulu-Natal S Afr Archaeol Bull 60:51–63Google Scholar
  160. Wadley L (2007) Announcing a Still Bay industry at Sibudu Cave, South Africa. J Hum Evol 52:681–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. Wadley L (2008) The Howieson’s Poort industry of Sibudu Cave. S Afr Archaeol Bull (Goodwin Series) 10:122–133Google Scholar
  162. Wadley L (2013) MIS 4 and MIS 3 occupations in Sibudu, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. S Afr Archaeol Bull 68:41–51Google Scholar
  163. Wadley L (2015) Those marvellous millennia: the Middle Stone Age of southern Africa. Azania 50:155–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Wadley L, Harper P (1989) Rose Cottage Cave revisited: Malan’s Middle Stone Age collection. S Afr Archaeol Bull 44:23–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Wadley L, Jacobs Z (2004) Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal: background to the excavations of Middle Stone Age and Iron Age occupations. S Afr J Sci 100:145–151Google Scholar
  166. Wadley L, Jacobs Z (2006) Sibudu Cave: background to the excavations, stratigraphy and dating. S Afr Humanit 18:1–26Google Scholar
  167. Wadley L, Kempson H (2011) A review of rock studies for archaeologists, and an analysis of dolerite and hornfels from the Sibudu area, KwaZulu-Natal. S Afr Humanit 23:87–107Google Scholar
  168. Wadley L, Sievers C, Bamford M, Goldberg P, Berna F, Miller C (2011) Middle Stone Age bedding construction and settlement patterns at Sibudu, South Africa. Science 334:1388–1391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Wake DB, Wake MH, Specht CD (2011) Homoplasy: from detecting pattern to determining process and mechanism of evolution. Science 331:1032–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. White M, Ashton N, Scott R (2011) The emergence, diversity and significance of Mode 3 (prepared core) technologies. In: Ashton N, Lewis S, Stringer C (eds) The ancient human occupation of Britain. Elsevier Science, London, pp. 53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Will M, Bader GD, Conard NJ (2014) Characterizing the Late Pleistocene MSA lithic technology of Sibudu, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. PLoS One 9:e98359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Will M, Mackay A, Phillips N (2015) Implications of Nubian-like core reduction systems in southern Africa for the identification of early modern human dispersals. PLoS One 10(6):e0131824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. Wurz S (2000) The middle stone age at Klasies River, South Africa. Ph.D. thesis, Stellenbosch UniversityGoogle Scholar
  174. Wurz S (2002) Variability in the Middle Stone Age lithic sequence, 115,000–60,000 years ago at Klasies River. South Africa J Archaeol Sci 29:1001–1015Google Scholar
  175. Wurz S (2013) Technological trends in the Middle Stone Age of South Africa between MIS 7 and MIS 3. Curr Anthropol 54(suppl 8):S305–S319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Ziegler M, Simon MH, Hall IR, Barker S, Stringer C, et al. (2013) Development of Middle Stone Age innovation linked to rapid climate change. Nat Commun 4:1905. doi: 10.1038/ncomms2897 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Early Prehistory and Quaternary EcologyUniversity of TübingenTübingenGermany
  2. 2.Senckenberg Center for Human Evolution and PalaeoenvironmentUniversity of TübingenTübingenGermany

Personalised recommendations