New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa)

Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint

New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZuluNatal, South Africa) Paloma de la Peña*, Lyn Wadley Evolutionary Studies Institute, University of the Witwatersrand, PO Wits 2050, South Africa

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Available online xxx

The lithic technology study of layer Grey Sand at Sibudu reveals a large number of cores on flakes. Varying knapping methods of core reduction are presented here. Most of the core reduction techniques can be attributed to bladelet or small flake production. Also, we point to a new type of blade production, from prismatic cores, revealed by the study of debitage. These innovative knapping methods demonstrate the technological variability associated with Howiesons Poort lithic assemblages. Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Middle Stone Age Howiesons Poort Lithic technology Core Knapping method

1. Introduction: background to Howiesons Poort technology The Howiesons Poort of the southern African Middle Stone Age (MSA) has fascinated archaeologists for almost a century. It was first described at the beginning of the twentieth century (Stapleton and Hewitt, 1927, 1928; Goodwin, 1929), at which stage it was defined as a ‘variation’, not as an industry within the MSA (Wurz, 1999). The Howiesons Poort, with its well-developed blade technology, backed tools, particularly segments (also called crescents or lunates), some of which are microlithic, and a preference for fine-grained rock types, is in some ways reminiscent of mid-Holocene Later Stone Age (LSA) industries. For some years, archaeologists claimed that Howiesons Poort material culture demonstrated that complexity attributed to the LSA appeared much earlier than expected in the archaeological record (Clark, 1959; Deacon, 1989). For as long as it was thought to be a precursor to the LSA, the Howiesons Poort was regarded as precocious. Unfortunately, such an interpretation complicates the distinction between MSA and LSA, because it builds on a list of techno-typological criteria that appear and disappear and do not reflect developmental trajectories. The Howiesons Poort was regarded differently once it was realized that it was replaced in the cultural sequence by assemblages that bore little resemblance to the LSA, but were more like pre-Howiesons Poort MSA ones. The Howiesons Poort was then seen as enigmatic because it seemed unimaginable that this ostensibly advanced industry should * Corresponding author. Evolutionary Studies Institute, School of Archaeology, Geography & Environmental Studies, Yale Road, Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa. E-mail address: [email protected] (P. de la Peña).

disappear rather than progress. Singer and Wymer (1982) went so far as to suggest population replacement as an explanation, that is, the makers of ‘traditional’ MSA tools were replaced by a new population with Howiesons Poort tools, and that the original southern African inhabitants returned to their homeland after the demise of the Howiesons Poort. This explanation no longer has followers. Over time, the Howiesons Poort has become one of the best known African industries, considered by some to be a horizon marker within the MSA (Deacon and Wurz, 1996, 2005). More generally, the Howiesons Poort, as the Still Bay, is now thought of as a ’techno-tradition‘ (Henshilwood, 2012) and it continues to receive much attention (for example, Wurz, 1999, 2000; Minichillo, 2005; Soriano et al., 2007; Wadley, 2008; Mackay, 2009; Villa et al., 2010; Porraz et al., 2013). Part of the reason for renewed interest in the Howiesons Poort is the variety of material culture that is now known to accompany the lithic component at some sites. A range of worked bone is present in Klasies, Apollo 11 and Sibudu (Singer and Wymer, 1982; Vogelsang, 1998; d’Errico and Henshilwood, 2007; Backwell et al., 2008; d’Errico et al., 2012). Engraved ochre was found at Klein Kliphuis (Mackay and Welz, 2008), and ostrich eggshell engravings, probably originally from eggshell water bottles, at Diepkloof and Klipdrift, suggest geometric design traditions (Texier et al., 2010; Henshilwood et al., 2014). The chrono-stratigraphic development of the Howiesons Poort has long been a topic of discussion. Unfathomably recent radiocarbon ages for the Howiesons Poort, for example at the name site (Deacon, 1995), should be discarded or, at best, viewed as minimum ages. Electron spin resonance dating was used at Border Cave, where a range of ages between 75
4 ka and 55
2 ka was obtained for the Howiesons Poort (Grün et al., 2003). More recently,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043 1040-6182/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

2

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

Jacobs et al. (2008) calculated single-grain optically stimulated luminescence ages for the Howiesons Poort at Apollo 11, Klasies River, Melikane, Klein Kliphuis, Rose Cottage Cave and Sibudu and suggested that it spanned not more than about five thousand years, ending at about 62 ka. Recently published backed tools with ages of w71 ka from Pinnacle Point (Brown et al., 2012) imply that earlier Howiesons Poort expressions may occur at some sites. Older thermoluminescence ages obtained for the Howiesons Poort from Diepkloof have reopened chronological discussions (Tribolo et al., 2013). The principal technological hallmark of the Howiesons Poort is its well-developed blade technology, with backed tools as the dominant formal tool. In the last decade, technology and functional analysis have become some of the main ways of defining the Howiesons Poort. From the classic sequence of Klasies River, Wurz (2000) made the first technological study demonstrating that blade blanks were the main objective of the lithic production. Later, the technological studies of Rose Cottage Cave (Soriano et al., 2007), Diepkloof (Porraz et al., 2013), and Klasies River (Villa et al., 2010), added to the recognition of blade production in the industry. At Diepkloof, other knapping methods have been announced, but they are not yet presented in detail. Core technology has also been shown to be highly informative in Howiesons Poort analyses. As is the case with other elements of a technological production, it reflects cultural choices (Lemonnier, 1986). Clarkson’s (2010) studies of Howiesons Poort core technology have highlighted its potential for showing considerable variability between sites. The first technological study of Howiesons Poort cores (Wurz, 2000) describes a core reduction strategy designed to produce blanks for making backed artefacts at Klasies (in respect of backed tool blank production see also Mackay, 2008, 2009). Wurz described how thick flakes were selected as cores and two different types of surfaces were created: an ‘active‘ or ’upper’ surface, where the blanks were obtained; and a ‘passive’ or ‘under’ surface where a preparation-striking platform was created by centripetal removals (Fig. 1).

In a more recent publication, Villa et al. (2010) give an even more detailed model of the Klasies Howiesons Poort ‘core-type’, which essentially repeats the model proposed by Wurz: “The two surfaces are ranked, i.e. they are not interchangeable. One surface, the less convex one, carries almost exclusively blade or bladelet removals, the other is the core back and forms the striking platform. The debitage surface is generally quadrangular or oval, rarely triangular(.). Some cores abandoned before exhaustion or knapping accidents show a Levallois-like morphology, with a centripetal management of lateral and distal convexities, but the geometry of the flaking surface and the knapping techniques are completely different. In a Levallois core, the intersection of the debitage surface and the platform surface is a plane (Boëda, 1995). In a Klasies HP blade core the intersection does not form a plane because the convexities of the debitage surface are more pronounced” (Fig. 1) (Villa et al., 2010: 641e643). This model is presented to explain all production of blades and bladelets, seen as a continuum. Almost 38% of the Klasies cores are made on flakes (Villa et al., 2010: Table 9). Recently, Porraz et al. (2013) have also mentioned that this type of core appears in the three phases of the Howiesons Poort assemblages defined for Diepkloof. For the Howiesons Poort of Rose Cottage Cave another type of core was recognised for the knapping of opaline. In this case the knapping of blade/bladelets was begun with minimal preparation of the striking platform, or with none. The narrow side of the cobbles was exploited to start the knapping, advancing towards the broader part of the cores. The trimming of these types of cores was performed through plunging flake blades and crested and semicrested blades (Soriano et al., 2007). However, this type of reduction sequence may be heavily influenced by the rock type available from the Drakensberg: small opaline cobbles. 2. The new Howiesons Poort study of layer Grey Sand, Sibudu It seems clear that rock types influence core production. Here, we aim to investigate the way in which knappers at Sibudu, in

Fig. 1. Examples of technological descriptions of ‘Klasies Howiesons Poort cores’.

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

3

Fig. 2. On the left upper part of the figure, location of Sibudu Cave in southern Africa. On the left bottom part, map of Sibudu. The squares analysed in this paper have been highlighted in grey. On the right, stratigraphy of the north wall of Sibudu. Layer Grey Sand (GS) has been highlighted with an arrow.

KwaZulu-Natal, produced cores from the three main rock types occurring at this site: dolerite, hornfels, and quartz. We concentrate on a single Howiesons Poort layer, Grey Sand (GS). Intuitively, we noticed high proportions of quartz both amongst retouched tools and cores, and we aim to investigate this quartz technology (de la Peña and Wadley, 2014). We have already shown that, unexpectedly, a large number of quartz bifacial points occur in the final Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (de la Peña et al., 2013). We observed that quartz cores include both freehand and bipolar types, and it seems from a preliminary study that new, unreported core types might be present in other rock types. Then we aim to investigate whether there is a difference in the chaînes opératoires of quartz versus dolerite and hornfels. In order to achieve our aims, we present a variety of knapping methods mainly associated with bladelet production from a general analysis of cores from Sibudu’s layer Grey Sand. When working with cores, we are dealing with residual elements of reduction sequences and it is essential to supplement the information on cores with the analyses of the debitage (Soriano et al., 2007). In other words, cores give us a somewhat partial view of the whole technology that must be completed with other technological sources of information (such as trimming and preparation by-

products and qualitative blank characteristics). We believe that the importance of studying the Howiesons Poort knapping methods is, on the one hand, that this will provide better understanding of the technological organization of this techno-tradition. On the other hand, new strategies might become important defining markers for future regional studies within the Howiesons Poort. Moreover, we demonstrate the interest that knappers had in microlithic blanks during the Howiesons Poort. We describe the Sibudu Howiesons Poort assemblage from layer Grey Sand and place it within the larger context of the site.

3. The Howiesons Poort sample: layer Grey Sand, Sibudu, KwaZulu-Natal Sibudu is located approximately 40 km north of Durban (Fig. 2), about 15 km inland of the Indian Ocean, on a steep cliff overlooking the uThongathi River. The shelter is 55 m long and 18 m in breadth and has a long occupation sequence with several layers and features corresponding to the pre-Still Bay, Still Bay, Howiesons Poort, post-Howiesons Poort, late MSA, final MSA and Iron Age (Wadley and Jacobs, 2006).

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

4

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

Howiesons Poort occupations reported here come from Grey Sand in six square metres (squares B4, B5, B6, C4, C5 and C6) of Wadley’s excavations in the deep sounding. The layers associated with the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu are (from the base to the top): Pinkish Grey Sand (PGS), Grey Sand (GS, GS2 and GS3), Dark Reddish Grey (DRG) and Grey Rocky (GR and GR2) (Fig. 2). The stratigraphy is clear, combustion features are discernible (Wadley, 2012), and micromorphology implies that most Sibudu layers have stratigraphic integrity (Goldberg et al., 2009), although rock fall between the oldest Howiesons Poort layer, PGS, and the underlying Still Bay layer, Reddish Grey Sand (RGS), has caused some disturbance. Earlier rock fall also disrupted pre-Still Bay layers. The layer that we discuss here is GS, which has an age estimate of 63.8
2.5 kyr obtained from single grain optically stimulated luminescence on sediment from GS2 (Jacobs and Roberts, 2008). This grey (5 YR 5/1) layer has an average thickness of 20 cm, and its field description is silty sand with ash and many small rock spalls. GS2 and GS3 are spits to divide GS artificially for excavation purposes, thus GS is about 10 cm deep and GS2 and GS3 are, together, also about 10 cm thick. The choice of this layer for the detailed analysis of the quartz technology stems from a preliminary analysis conducted on the Howiesons Poort assemblages during which a larger sample of cores was identified in GS compared to the other Howiesons Poort layers in Sibudu. In other words, the core sample in this layer possessed, a priori, some ideal conditions for presenting different knapping methods. 4. Methodology For the technological study we followed the chaîne opératoire approach (Lemonnier, 1976; Karlin et al., 1991; Pelegrin, 1995). The main objective of this paper is to describe, in a qualitative manner, the knapping methods revealed by cores and part of the debitage (as defined by Inizan et al., 1995). For this purpose we studied all the cores (n ¼ 255) and trimming and preparation by-products (n ¼ 113) of this layer in the three main rock types (to select these pieces we went through all the lithic material of the 6 squares excavated at GS), all the quartz blanks (n ¼ 15,175) and all the hornfels and dolerite blade/bladelets blanks from square C4 over 2 cm (dolerite, n ¼ 265; hornfels n ¼ 147). Moreover, the retouched pieces of this layer in the three main rock types were also analysed from a technological point of view (dolerite n ¼ 51, hornfels n ¼ 114, quartz n ¼ 216). We also analysed blanks that displayed evidence for knapping accidents, because usually these kinds of pieces are highly informative. Cores were analysed using a combination of metrical and technological (qualitative) attributes. The variables taken into account for quartz (Table 1) are different from the ones for hornfels and dolerite (Table 2). Most of the qualitative variables for the hornfels and dolerite core study come from the Pelegrin methodological proposal for Chatelperronian cores (see Pelegrin, 1995). Meanwhile, the study of cores on flakes has followed previous technological and experimental works, such as Mourre (1996a), Klaric (2003); de la Peña (2011), and Le Brun-Ricalens (2005). The study of Sibudu’s quartz cores has been made using the attributes presented in previous quartz studies such as the ones of: Callahan (1985), Knutsson (1988b), Driscoll (2010), and Díez-Martín et al. (2009). We have added other attributes. The selected attributes take into account not only the general size of the pieces, but measurements of the knapping surface and specific characteristics such as fissures, blunting, etc., that may be typical of bipolar knapping, even if freehand knapping of quartz may also produce such attributes (Lombera-Hermida, 2009). A general classification of the core type is also presented, based on the reduction sequence

performed. We have selected broad categories for core morphology and method of reduction such as: prismatic core, multifacial core, Klasies’s Howiesons Poort core (following the Wurz, 2000; Villa et al., 2010 descriptions), core on flake (see subtypes in Fig. 3), and bipolar core.

Table 1 Variables taken into account for the quartz core study. Variables taken into account Type of blank for the core quartz study Presence of cortex Length, Breadth, Thickness and Weight Volumetric shape Number of striking platforms Orientation of striking platforms Length and Breadth of Striking platforms (in case of several, the larger) Type of preparation of the striking platform Length and Breadth of knapping surface Geometric shape of knapping surface Orientation of last negatives Length and Breadth of last negative Presence of conchoidal negatives (Yes/No) Presence of fissuration in overhang or striking platform (Yes/No) Presence of bluntness in overhang or striking platform (Yes/No) Freehand or Bipolar cores Type of core: Prismatic, core on flake, multifacial, discoidal, Howiesons Poort type, bipolar Recycled core (from freehand to bipolar) Comments/Observations

Table 2 Variables taken into account for the dolerite and hornfels core study. Variables taken into account Type of blank for the core hornfels and Fragment (Yes/No) dolerite study Type of fracture Length, Breadth, Thickness and Weight Volumetric shape Lateral trimming (crest or semicrest, sensu Pelegrin, 1995) (Yes/No) Number of lateral trimmings Other type of trimming Number of striking platforms Orientation of the striking platforms Preparation of the striking platforms Shape of the striking platforms Shape of the exploitation surface Length and Breadth of the exploitation surface Curvature of the exploitation surface (Yes/No) Length and Breadth of last negative Type of shape of last blank Observations Type of core: Prismatic, core on flake, multifacial, discoidal, Howiesons Poort type, bipolar

Cores on flakes were recognized early on in Middle Palaeolithic sites in the Middle East. At the Nahr Ibrahim site (Lebanon) Solecki and Solecki (1970) mentioned a distinctive technique consisting of truncating one of the sides of a flint flake and the utilization of the facet created as a platform for flake removals. Subsequently, there have been numerous studies that have described this kind of technique (Dibble, 1984; Nishiaki, 1985; Goren-Inbar, 1988). Cores on flakes were recognized early in African studies, but mainly from a typological point of view, see for example Owen (1938). One of the first studies of core on flake technology in an African context is from an LSA assemblage at Gamble’s Cave in Kenya. In that paper,

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

5

Fig. 3. Different types of cores on flakes mentioned in the text.

Hivernel-Guerre and Newcomer (1974) divided cores on flakes into four groups depending on the part of the flake exploited: the ones that exploit the dorsal part of flakes (i.e. Nahr Ibrahim or Kostienki cores), the ones that exploit the ventral part of flakes (i.e. Kombewa cores), the ones that exploit the lateral part (i.e. burin cores) and, finally, the ones that exploit both faces of cores (i.e. bipolar cores) (see Fig. 3). Although bipolar cores can be started from pebbles, they also can be made from flakes (for pebbles see for example Barham, 1987; for flakes see for example de la Peña and Vega Toscano, 2013). Bipolar knapping, contrary to freehand knapping, is defined as a method in which the core is placed on an anvil and held with the bare hand. The rock is struck, causing removal of blanks from the top and also from the edge which is in direct contact with the anvil (Crabtree, 1972). Therefore, bipolar cores have two opposed striking platforms (one from the direct percussion and the other one from contact with the anvil). Usually, bipolar cores present quadrangular or rectangular shapes. Both the striking platform and the edge in contact with the anvil are rectilinear, with much evidence for blunting and fissuring, and a striking platformsurface with a knapping angle close to 90 (Mourre, 1996a). For the trimming products analysis we followed a very similar approach to that of the cores. The main attributes are recorded in Table 3. The types of trimming products are explained in Fig. 4. As can be seen, most of these types of knapping by-products are related to blade-bladelet production. Table 3 Variables taken into account for the study of trimming products. Variables taken into account Type of blank for the trimming products study Presence of cortex Length, Breadth, Thickness and Weight Type (see Fig. 1) Is it showing previous accidents? Which? Observations/comments

When we refer to ‘bladelets’, we mean elongated by-products with parallel ridges (Pelegrin, 1995) and breadth less than 12 mm (Tixier, 1963). Therefore, all elongated by-products with breadth over 12 mm are considered as blades (or long blade production). We are aware that this is an arbitrary division, but as it is commonly used in technology studies we think it is useful as a comparative measurement.

5. The rock types in GS In the Howiesons Poort layers the majority of rocks knapped are dolerite, hornfels, and quartz. Dolerite is a coarse-grained igneous rock available in the vicinity of the site; it occurs as rounded alluvial cobbles on the banks of the uThongathi River and as tabular slabs in sills and dykes (Wadley and Kempson, 2011). Hornfels is much finer grained than dolerite and it is available today some 20 km south of Sibudu, but it may also have been collected closer to the site from outcrops that are now covered with dune sand (Cochrane, 2006; Wadley and Kempson, 2011). In the Sibudu area there are conglomerates containing quartz clasts and vein quartz, and some quartz and quartzite pebbles also occur in the river and on the river terraces (Wadley and Kempson, 2011, and personal observation). Quartz can be divided into two broad categories: crystalline quartz, commonly called macrocrystalline quartz, and the dense and compact forms, which usually are named cryptocrystalline or microcrystalline. The differences between these two broad categories are simply a consequence of the way they form. Macrocrystalline quartz grows by adding molecules to the crystal’s surface, whereas cryptocrystalline forms come from colloidal watery solutions of silica. Both varieties appear at Sibudu. However, cryptocrystalline material is extremely rare in Sibudu’s Howiesons Poort layers. On the contrary, crystalline quartz is very abundant. Within the crystalline quartz assemblage at Sibudu we can

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

6

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

Fig. 4. Different types of maintenance and trimming by-products (in grey) found in Sibudu’s layer GS lithic sample. A. Semicrested blade to correct a hinge accident during knapping. B. Crested blade to give a carination shape to a blade core. C. Overshoot flake-blade to eliminate a hinge negative. D. Blade exploiting an overhang (as a guiding ridge) to change the direction of knapping.

distinguish three main categories: vein quartz (milky), rock quartz (glassy) and crystal quartz. In GS, the layer under discussion, most of the quartz knapped is crystalline, and rock quartz is especially abundant. During the technological analyses we did not make the distinction between these last categories, owing to the fact that colour and transparency are highly subjective parameters. Quartz, which is 100% silica, is hard (7 on Moh’s scale) so it produces longlasting, sharp tool edges. Its disadvantage is that it contains faults and routinely shatters, often causing tools to break during knapping. Dolerite is tough and rigid with a rough surface, whereas hornfels is brittle, less tough than dolerite, and is fine-grained compared with dolerite (Wadley and Kempson, 2011). The toughness of dolerite is partly why this rock is more difficult to knap than hornfels. Although dolerite flakes are more challenging to produce than hornfels ones, they keep usable edges more effectively than hornfels flakes (Cochrane, 2006; Wadley and Kempson, 2011). Cochrane (2006) was able to demonstrate that fewer of Sibudu’s dolerite tools are broken than hornfels ones. Hornfels is relatively easy to knap, and produces sharp, thin edges, an attribute that is especially sought-after for blades, but hornfels products are more likely to break than those made from dolerite. Hornfels and dolerite in GS have a 48 and 49% representation (pieces above 2 cm); meanwhile quartz does not even reach 3% in squares B4 and B5 (Cochrane, 2006). However, this proportion inverts completely if

the representation of cores by rock type is taken into account (Table 4). The percentage of quartz cores is much greater than that of hornfels and dolerite cores. This means that quartz, although a minority Sibudu rock type in the Howiesons Poort, was highly exploited. Table 4 Types of cores in the three rock types in layer GS of Sibudu. Type of cores

Prismatic Multifacial Discoidal Core on flake ‘Klasies HP core’ Bipolar core Indeterminate and/or fragment Total

Hornfels

Dolerite

Quartz

N

N

N

1 2 15 4 19 2 43

% 2.33 4.65 0 34.9 9.3 44.2 4.65 100

4

10 1 13 7 35

% 11.4 0 0 28.6 2.86 37.1 20 100

21 1 2

134 9 167

% 12.57 0.599 1.198 0 0 80.24 5.389 100

6. Grey Sand’s knapping methods Most core types represented (Table 4) are cores on flakes and bipolar cores (that are sometimes also cores on flakes). These two

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

7

Fig. 5. Different typometrical measurements for cores and debitage in layer GS, Sibudu. A. Box-plot with the maximum length by rock type of cores, blades and bladelets, and maintenance by-products (MBP). B. Box-plot with the length of the last negative on cores by rock type. C. Length of knapping surface in quartz and dolerite (hornfels has not been included because the sample was too small). D. Histogram with breadth distribution of blades/bladelets in square C4.

broad categories are in the majority and they occur on the three main rock types. Another interesting characteristic is that the length distribution of the cores is strikingly small, especially for quartz (Fig. 5A) (de la Peña and Wadley, 2014). The different parameters shown in Fig. 5 reveal the importance of the production of small blanks, such as bladelets or micro-flakes. For example the length of the last negative on these cores (excluding accidental-knapping negatives) is, in the majority of cases, below 30 mm (Fig. 5B). In addition, the knapping surface of the cores is also conspicuously small (Fig. 5D). It is also evident that there is a typometrical difference between quartz and dolerite- hornfels (see Fig. 5B and C). This is probably influenced by the way these nodules appear naturally in the landscape. Nonetheless, the natural morphology of the nodules necessitated the deployment of different knapping methods for each of the three rock types represented in Sibudu.

After studying the cores from the six square meters together with the C4 debitage, it is clear that the cores do not reflect the blade blank production. What the cores are reflecting is mainly the bladelet and the small flake production. However, the breadth dispersion of blades and bladelets over 2 cm in hornfels and dolerite (Fig. 5D) implies large blade production coming from large cores that do not occur in our core sample. The reasons for this can be multiple: either the cores were completely reduced, or the large blade cores are still in other unexcavated parts of Sibudu, or large blades were imported to the site. The first solution seems the most reasonable, as there are trimming and maintenance by-products which also reveal a large blade production in situ (Fig. 5A and Table 5). Below, we present the main types of cores found and, moreover, the questions that arise from this particular typometric distribution of core and debitage measurements (Fig. 5).

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

8

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

Table 5 Maintenance and/or trimming knapping by-products in hornfels and dolerite in layer GS of Sibudu. In quartz no trimming and maintenance by-products have been found. Maintenance and or trimming knapping by-products

Hornfels

Crest Semicrest on flake/burin spall Semicrest Tablet (cleaning striking platform) Cleaning plunging flake/blade of a knapping surface Change of knapping direction flake Total

0 2 21 2 20

0 4.35 45.7 4.35 43.5

7 0 25 7 27

10.45 0 37.31 10.45 40.3

1 46

2.17 100

1 67

1.493 100

N

Dolerite %

N

%

6.1. Which new modalities of knapping are shown in these cores? It has not previously been observed that different varieties of cores on flakes occur in Sibudu’s Howiesons Poort. In the first place there are cores exploiting the laterals of small hornfels and dolerite flakes. This type of product can be classified as a burin-like core (Fig. 6). Usually there is a small striking platform (truncation) prepared on one or several edges of the flake. In addition, there are also examples of cores exploiting the dorsal face of flakes, after a short preparation of a striking platform, like a truncation, on the ventral face. Sometimes there is distal preparation and semicrested ridges on the lateral of the cores, to give them the desired shape (Fig. 7). Following previous core on

flake studies (see above) they could be classified as truncated faceted pieces or Kostienki cores (see also Fig. 3). Other cores on flakes exploit the dorsal part of the flake in a discoidal manner or, on the same flake, a different part of the face and edge is knapped. Even though they are unstandardized, they have in common with the previous examples, first, the pursuit of small blanks and, secondly, their manufacture on flakes (Fig. 8). Trimming and maintenance by-products associated with these cores on flakes have also been found, such as small semicrested ridges, plunging flake/blades, and even knapping accidents which also show examples of these kinds of cores (Fig. 8FeL). The frequent presence of bipolar cores must also be emphasized. These types of cores are especially abundant in quartz (above 80% of the core sample, Fig. 9 and Table 4). In the case of quartz it is very difficult to recognize the original form of the core. What seems apparent is that they were transformed from freehand cores (see de la Peña and Wadley, 2014). Bipolar cores also appear in dolerite and hornfels (Fig. 9), but for these two rock types they should be considered cores on flakes, because when the blank of the core can be recognized, it is usually a flake. Moreover, bipolar production in hornfels and dolerite seems more opportunistic than in quartz. The main knapping attributes for recognizing bipolar knapping are the appearance of fissured and blunted edges, and rectilinear opposite edges (de la Peña, 2011; de la Peña and Vega Toscano, 2013). The main objective of knapping during the reduction of cores on flakes, and bipolar cores, was obtaining small blanks such as bladelets and flakes, sometimes under 10 mm in length (such as in the case of the quartz pieces Fig. 5A, C).

Fig. 6. Examples of hornfels and dolerite burin-like cores in layer GS, Sibudu. The surface removals are marked with arrows.

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

9

Fig. 7. Examples of Kostienki-like cores, on hornfels (A, B, C, D) and dolerite (E) in layer GS, Sibudu. On the right pieces A and B presented in detail. The striking platform, the exploitation surface extractions and the trimming and preparation extractions are highlighted.

6.2. Was there large blade production from hornfels and dolerite on site? We began by describing the production of bladelets and small flakes. However, the breadth of blade debitage in square C4 (Fig. 5D) and the trimming and/or maintenance by-products from all six squares (such as plunging blades and crested and semicrested blades) (Table 5, Fig. 5A) show a bigger size range that does not match the size of the cores studied in hornfels and dolerite. The histogram in Fig. 5D shows blade production between 20 and 45e 50 mm. This would have not been noticed when only looking at the cores. In other words, the cores studied seem to be the very last steps of the reduction sequence, or an independent type of

production. For hornfels and dolerite the maintenance by-products and the debitage show a true blade production (blanks over 12 mm in breadth) which is not evident in the cores. Even though some examples of the ‘Klasies Howiesons Poort cores’ have been found in hornfels (all of them made from nodules, not flakes) (Fig. 10) we do not believe that these types of cores explain all the blade production (blanks over 12 mm in breadth) for the Howiesons Poort, at least not for this sample from layer GS at Sibudu. It seems more likely that ‘Klasies Howiesons Poort cores’ were designed for bladelet production (blanks under 12 mm in breadth). From the typometric and qualitative characteristics of blade debitage, and the trimming and/or maintenance by-products, it seems that blades were produced from big prismatic cores. These

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

10

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

Fig. 8. AeE: Different types of core on unstandardized flakes standardized from layer GS, Sibudu: A. Hornfels core for bladelets which is exploiting the dorsal and the left flank of the blank. B. Thick flake which has been knapped on the proximal part. C. Thick and carinated flake exploited as an end-scraper core in the distal and dorsal part of the blank. D and E. Discoidal flake cores in dolerite. FeL. Trimming and/or maintenance by-products of cores on flakes in hornfels. F, G, I, K, L core flakes, all of them overshoots. H. Semicrested bladelet. L. Core fragment of a piece very similar to C.

were probably heavily reduced and the original cores are no longer present in the GS assemblage. In Fig. 11 we show different examples of dolerite blades with prismatic sections and platforms, together with trimming and/or maintenance by-products that evoke blade production (blanks over 12 mm in breadth), probably from prismatic cores. We have also found maintenance and/or trimming by-products related to large blade technology (blanks over 12 mm in breadth). Semicrested blades are amongst the most common by-products. They should originate from two different types of strategies. On the one hand, they correct knapping accidents, such as hinge/step negatives, by creating a ridge that allows the removal of an elongated blank and, thereafter, continued knapping. On the other hand, as mentioned by Villa et al. (2010), semicrested blades can help to produce a desired shape or to increase the distal or lateral convexity of a core. Similarly, there are also plunging blades that were struck to compensate for an accident, to improve the convexity of a core or simply as an overshoot accident that indirectly displays a large portion of a core. We have also detected blanks that resemble semicrested blades, but instead are removals that

eliminated the overhang of a core. These are possibly related to a change of direction during knapping. These types of blanks demonstrate that the cores were heavily reduced; this may be one reason why there are no surviving large cores (see Figs. 4 and 11). 6.3. What about quartz? Why such a different core-type representation? In quartz, a large distinction can be made between freehand and bipolar cores. The dissimilarity between these two main categories of cores has been recognised during experimental work which has allowed observations of different qualitative characteristics (Callahan, 1985; Knutsson, 1988a, b; Mourre, 1996b; Díez-Martín et al., 2009; Driscoll, 2010). For example, conchoidal negatives are present abundantly on freehand cores, whereas bluntness and fissuring are visible on the striking platforms of bipolar cores. This distinction has also been noted when typometrical distributions were taken into account (de la Peña and Wadley, 2014). Blade and bladelet production in quartz is mainly from prismatic freehand cores (see Table 6 for a description of the quartz

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

11

Fig. 9. Bipolar cores on quartz (AeH) and dolerite (IeM) in layer GS, Sibudu.

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

12

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

Fig. 10. On the left, drawings of ‘Klasies Howiesons Poort cores’ in hornfels from layer GS, Sibudu. On the right both pieces presented in detail, highlighting the striking platform, the exploitation surface and shaping removals (different colours). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

blanks in GS). These cores come from small river pebbles and have either modest preparation or none at all. A simple flake was usually removed to prepare the striking platform; while for the knapping surface, the longest side of the core was generally chosen. For freehand cores, unifacial (36.8%) and opposed (47.4%) scars of the last negatives are dominant. The most typical morphotypes are pyramidal-unipolar cores and opposed platform prismatic cores. However, it looks as though freehand quartz cores were exploited more from the restrictions imposed by the morphological characteristics of the quartz pebbles, and less from a preconceived design. Most of the laminar freehand cores have plenty of negatives from step and hinge accidents (Fig. 12).

Table 6 Main categories of debitage in quartz over 1 cm (without debris and retouched pieces) from layer GS, Sibudu. Pieces >1 cm

N

%

Platform flake Bipolar flake Blade/Bladelet Fragment without platform Chunk Total

588 379 221 585 187 1960

30 19.34 11.28 29.85 9.54 100

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

13

Fig. 11. Blades and trimming and maintenance by-products from layer GS, Sibudu. On the left (AeH) dolerite large blades (>12 mm in breadth). Note the prismatic platforms and sections. On the right, trimming and maintenance by-products in dolerite for the same kind of production: I, J, K. Semicrested blades. L and M. Plunging blades of prismatic cores. N and O. Change of knapping direction flake.

Bipolar cores have quadrangular or rectangular shapes. Both the striking platform and the edge in contact with the anvil are rectilinear with much evidence of blunting and fissuring (Fig. 9). The small size of bipolar cores in the GS sample is particularly striking: the length, breadth and thickness means are 15.81, 10.68, and 6.22 mm, respectively (de la Peña and Wadley, 2014). A plausible hypothesis for the frequent representation of quartz cores (Table 5) is that many freehand cores were transformed into bipolar cores. Bipolar cores are more abundant than freehand ones, and there are some examples of bipolar cores with characteristics of freehand cores in a previous knapping cycle, as if knapping continued through anvil percussion. Perhaps when freehand knapping was no longer possible, because of the small size of the core, knappers switched to bipolar knapping. This type of strategy has been observed in many other archaeological contexts (see for example Callahan, 1985; Hisckock, 1996). 6.4. Synthesis of knapping methods in layer GS To summarize, there is great variability within the knapping methods of the GS sample analysed. For hornfels and dolerite, a large blade production, from prismatic cores, has been proposed from the study of the debitage. ‘Klasies Howiesons Poort cores’ have also been found on hornfels. However, they do not seem to explain all the blade/bladelet production. Many different types of

cores on flakes have also been found to produce small bladelets. In addition, bipolar knapping was occasionally used for hornfels and dolerite. The exploitation of quartz was markedly different from that of dolerite and hornfels, since it started from small quartz river pebbles. Apart from a bifacial technology focused on point production (de la Peña et al., 2013), a freehand prismatic-conical like production was developed in order to obtain bladelets. Moreover, these cores were exploited beyond this initial use. Our interpretation is that they were converted into bipolar cores in order to continue the knapping process. This type of strategy seems systematic for quartz. 6.5. What were the objectives of knapping in layer GS? After presenting the different knapping methods it seems clear that there was a strong focus on blade/bladelet production, which is not a novelty for the Howiesons Poort. However, what does seem a novelty is the variety of reduction methods used, the confirmation of the presence of extensive bipolar knapping and the great difference between quartz and hornfels/dolerite chaînes opératoires. The main question is: what were the objectives of knapping? Judging by the knapping methods it is evident that laminar blanks were desired and, in the case of quartz, small flakes and bladelets were also sought. The latter were obtained by bipolar knapping (as a recycling strategy) because, as we have already mentioned,

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

14

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

bipolar knapping seems merely opportunistic for hornfels and dolerite. Formal tools and retouched pieces are generally considered as one of the main objectives of knapping (Table 7). Therefore, another question that we must formulate is: what tool classes are present and which are the blanks for those tools? In Table 7 we present the formal tools and retouched pieces in the three main rock types. The first aspect to draw our attention is that in this layer quartz has the highest frequency of retouched tools. This retouched representation by rock type seems inversely proportional to the abundance of the three rocks in Sibudu’s surroundings. The preferences might be related, on the one hand, to the mechanical properties of the rocks (Wadley and Kempson, 2011) or, as other possibilities, to function or even to cultural choice. Although all three rocks (dolerite, hornfels, and quartz) are local, dolerite undoubtedly is the most accessible and abundant (it even outcrops adjacent to the base of the rock shelter). However, the toughness and coarse-grained texture of the dolerite possibly rendered it less suitable to be retouched, shaped and re-sharpened.

Table 7 Formal tools and retouched pieces in layer GS, Sibudu, according to rock type. The different backed morphotypes have been highlighted in grey. Folmal tools and retouch pieces GS Micro-notch (single and double) Notch End-scraper Strangulated piece Denticulate Burin Marginal retouch bipolar blank Marginal retouch bladelet Borer Bifacial fragment Retouch bipolar blank Retouch flake Retouch blade Backed bladelet (straight backed) Curved backed blade (segment over 12 mm breadth) Indeterminate backed piece Segment Truncation Trapeze Triangle Diverse Bifacial point Total

Dolerite

Hornfels

Quartz

N

N

N

1 1 1 2

3 1 5 1 5 8 15 6

%

0 1.961 0 1.961 1.961 3.922 0 0 5.882 1.961 0 9.804 0 1.961 9.804 2

15.69 29.41 11.76 0 2 3.922 0 0 51 100

33 37 5 1 2

% 3 6 3 1 3

1 8

0 2.632 0 5.263 2.632 0.877 0 2.632 0 0 0 0.877 7.018 0 1.754

28.95 32.46 4.386 0.877 1.754 9 7.895 0 114 100

%

42 9 8 3 10 5 3 14

19.44 0 4.167 0 3.704 0 1.389 4.63 2.315 0 1.389 6.481 0 0 0

16 44 19

7.407 20.37 8.796 0 5 2.315 1 0.463 37 17.13 216 100

Furthermore, the blanks of the formal tools are, in most cases, blades and bladelets, as was also noted at Klasies by Villa et al. (2010). In our study, we have observed that blade/bladelets are the blanks for 72.5% of dolerite formal tools, 78.8% of hornfels tools and 44.94% of quartz formal tools. Most are backed tools, which are 72.5% for dolerite, 70.1% for hornfels and 38.8% for quartz. Some backed tools from Sibudu appear to have been parts of hunting weapons (Lombard, 2008, 2011), but there is also the possibility that some backed tools had another function (cf. de Igreja and Porraz, 2013). Microwear analysis of some LSA backed tools demonstrated that they were used for cutting plants (Wadley and Binneman, 1995). Among the segments and backed morphotypes it seems likely that some were used as projectile elements, while others were different types of hunting weapons. Macrotraces of use are evident and there is a great disparity amongst length and breadth measurements, particularly between

rock types (Lombard, 2008, 2011; Wadley and Mohapi, 2008). For hornfels and dolerite, there is an evident lack of domestic tools (such as end-scrapers, burins, adzes, etc.), but these are not common in quartz either (Table 7). Probably domestic tasks were performed with the large numbers of blades that were not retouched. Apart from the retouched tool distributions, we observed a high frequency of pieces without retouch that nevertheless exhibit macro-traces of use. This has been specifically demonstrated for quartz, where bipolar blanks tend to have evidence for use without being retouched (de la Peña and Wadley, 2014). 7. Discussion The Howiesons Poort assemblage from layer GS at Sibudu shows a great variety of technological strategies. There are examples of bifacial technology (de la Peña et al., 2013), blade and bladelet production, and microlithic strategies such as the quartz segments and bipolar blanks (de la Peña and Wadley, 2014). This combination of knapping methods makes it clear that the Sibudu Howiesons Poort techno-tradition does not fit completely into the traditional concept of MSA technology, and this comment has been made previously by other authors in reference to the wider context of southern African sites (for example Volman, 1984; Thackeray, 1992). The archetypal model of an MSA industry is focused on flake knapping methods and points (but see also Thackeray, 1992: 389 and Wurz, 2013: S312). Flakes are subsidiaries of blade production and flakes were sometimes utilized, but they do not necessarily constitute the main objective of knapping. The reworking of flakes into cores partially supports this argument. The presence of points in the Howiesons Poort is an interesting one that has been largely neglected or downplayed in the past. Howiesons Poort points have been mentioned only incidentally in earlier publications, sometimes together with a comment that they might be out-of-context (for example Singer and Wymer, 1982; Wurz, 2000). However, in situ bifacial points and bifacial knapping biproducts have been recently identified in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu, and also in Diepkloof (Porraz et al., 2013; de la Peña et al., 2013). Sibudu joins other South African Howiesons Poort assemblages in having blade production as a prominent aim of its technology, and in transforming blade and bladelet blanks into a variety of backed tools. Although no cores from blade production are present in our collection, the blades were probably struck from prismatic cores. We think this because of the characteristics of the blade debitage. Freehand knapping of prismatic cores was probably also the initial strategy used for quartz knapping. Our study has, however, demonstrated that Howiesons Poort technology at Sibudu is more complex than merely blade production. We analysed cores and debitage from layer GS. The technological study reveals a large proportion of cores on flakes, and also completely exhausted cores that could not have more flakes or bladelets removed from them. In this paper, varying knapping methods of core reduction are presented, and all can be attributed to bladelet or small flake production. These are different from the blade/bladelet reduction sequences reported in previous technological analyses of the Howiesons Poort. We show that there are likely to be regional differences in core production. Five ‘Klasies Howiesons Poort cores’ are present at Sibudu, but together with other blade/bladelet reduction modalities. The ‘Klasies Howiesons Poort core’ does not occur on quartz at Sibudu. The Rose Cottage method of working cores was not used at Sibudu, probably because the nodules in the Sibudu area are morphologically different from the Rose Cottage ones. Opaline nodules at Rose Cottage demand a particular reduction

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

15

Fig. 12. Different examples of freehand quartz cores from layer GS, Sibudu.

strategy that focuses on the ‘corners’ of nodules as starting points. One of the first features that caught our attention in this Sibudu assemblage from layer GS is the high percentage of cores on flakes amongst the other reduction strategies. We found a high frequency of cores on flakes, but these occurred only on dolerite and hornfels, not on quartz. They included burin-like cores, Kostienki-like cores, and cores on flakes that exploit the dorsal face in a discoidal manner. Trimming by-products and maintenance by-products are associated with all the types of cores on flakes. This knapping method emphasizes that the variability within the putatively homogeneous Howiesons Poort techno-tradition must be explored (as suggested by Clarkson, 2010). Cores on flakes have not previously been described in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu. Examples of cores on flakes are abundant in Middle and Upper Palaeolithic contexts of Eurasia. These types of cores were recognized early in the Middle Palaeolithic sites in the Middle East. The same situation can be recognised in the Mousterian industries of Western Europe, or in the well-known Kostienki knives of the Gravettian, later on interpreted as cores (Otte, 1980; Klaric, 2000; Dibble and McPherron, 2007). As Dibble and McPherron (2007) point out, there is no consensus on whether these lithic types represent a core reduction strategy, a thinning strategy or a technique to produce a special type of working edge. However, these pieces always require a technological in-depth study and not merely recognition of their existence. Microlithic blanks are particularly noteworthy in the Sibudu Howiesons Poort; there was a massive production of small blanks probably used without retouch in layer GS. Bipolar knapping is particularly prevalent in quartz (Tables 4 and 6), though it also occurs to a lesser extent on dolerite and hornfels cores on flakes. The large numbers of quartz bipolar cores represent a reduction continuum strategy that enabled the production of small flakes and bladelets. Furthermore, they point to the desirability of obtaining thin, sharp quartz slivers for the creation of some retouched tools, but also for use with no modification. The extensive bipolar knapping in Sibudu’s Howiesons Poort predates

the LSA equivalents (Beaumont, 1978; Villa et al., 2012) by more than 20 ky. Van Riet Lowe (1956), a pioneer in South African archaeology, was one of the first researchers to recognize bipolar knapping in South Africa. Much later, Barham’s experimental work (Barham, 1987) contributed significantly to the identification of pieces with bipolar knapping in African contexts. Bipolar knapping is accepted as an important part of LSA technology (Wadley, 1993; Mercader and Brooks, 2001; Ambrose, 2002; Orton, 2004; Villa et al., 2012). Large amounts of bipolar knapping have sometimes been used as a technological marker to indicate the arrival of the LSA (Beaumont, 1978; Villa et al., 2012). In contrast, bipolar knapping in the MSA has been treated ambiguously, and sometimes it has not been mentioned. However, bipolar knapping was common at Diepkloof (65e62 ka and 62e60 ka) and also 62e60 ka at Klein Kliphuis (Mackay, 2009). The origins of quartz bipolar knapping are very much earlier, and the method was sometimes used in the Oldowan of Olduvai Gorge (Leakey, 1971). In conclusion, the Sibudu Howiesons Poort knapping strategies were varied and complex, and they included innovative knapping methods that were the fore-runners of some techniques that became better known at other sites tens of thousands of years later. However, a non-accumulative set of technological characteristics is generally demonstrated for MSA industries in southern Africa. The Howiesons Poort is an example of one particular technological development. It should not be contemplated as more complex or advanced when it is compared to pre- and post-Howiesons Poort techno-traditions. Acknowledgments Lyn Wadley has received funding from the National Research Foundation. Opinions expressed in the paper are not necessarily those of the NRF. J. M. Maíllo kindly provided some papers for Paloma de la Peña. Lyn Wadley and Paloma de la Peña thank the Evolutionary Studies Institute for support and laboratory space. We also thank the three anonymous reviewers for their constructive

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

16

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17

comments that have improved this manuscript. Finally, we thank the kind invitation and comments from Editor Huw Groucutt. References Ambrose, S.H., 2002. Small things remembered: origins of early microlithic industries in sub-Saharan Africa. In: Kuhn, S.L., Elston, R.G. (Eds.), Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, Arlington, pp. 9e30. Backwell, L., d’Errico, F., Wadley, L., 2008. Middle Stone Age bone tools from the Howiesons Poort layers, Sibudu Cave, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 35, 1566e1580. Barham, L., 1987. The bipolar technique in Southern Africa: a replication experiment. The South African Archaeological Bulletin 42 (145), 45e50. Beaumont, P.B., 1978. Border Cave (MA thesis). University of Cape Town, South Africa. Boëda, E., 1995. Levallois: a volumetric construction, methods, a technique. In: Dibble, H.L., Bar-Yosef, O. (Eds.), The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology, Monographs in World Archaeology, Madison, pp. 41e68. Brown, K.S., Marean, C.W., Jacobs, Z., Schoville, B.S., Oestmo, S., Fisher, E.C., Bernatchez, J., Karkanas, P., Matthews, T., 2012. An early and enduring advanced technology originating 71,000 years ago in South Africa. Nature 491, 590e593. Callahan, E., 1985. An Evaluation of the Lithic Technology in Middle Sweden during the Mesolithic and Neolithic. Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis, Uppsala. Clark, J.D., 1959. The Prehistory of Southern Africa. Penguin, Harmondsworth. Clarkson, C., 2010. Regional diversity within the core technology of the Howiesons Poort Techno-Complex. In: Lycet, S.J., Chauhan, P.R. (Eds.), New Perspectives on Old Stones: Analytical Approaches to Paleolithic Technologies. Springer, New York, pp. 43e59. Cochrane, G.W.G., 2006. An analysis of lithic artefacts from w60 ka layers of Sibudu Cave. Southern African Humanities 18 (1), 69e88. Crabtree, D.E., 1972. An introduction to flint working. In: Occasional Papers of the Idaho State University, Pocatello. de la Peña, P., 2011. Sobre la identificación macroscópica de las piezas astilladas: Propuesta experimental. Trabajos de Prehistoria 68 (1), 79e98. de la Peña, P., Vega Toscano, G., 2013. Bipolar knapping method in gravettian ocupations of El Palomar rockshelter (Yeste, Southeastern Spain). Journal of Anthropological Research 69, 33e64. de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., Lombard, M., 2013. Quartz bifacial points in the Howiesons poort of Sibudu. South African Archaeological Bulletin 68 (198), 136e199. de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., 2014. New Insights into Howiesons Poort Lithic Technology: the Quartz Knapping Strategies at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa) (under revision). Deacon, H.J., 1989. Later Pleistocene palaeoecology and archaeology in the southern Cape. In: Mellars, P.A., Stringer, C.B. (Eds.), The Human Revolution: Behavioural and Biological Perspectives on the Origins of Modern Humans. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 547e564. Deacon, J., 1995. An unsolved mystery at the Howieson’s Poort name site. South African Archaeological Bulletin 50, 110e120. Deacon, H.J., Wurz, S., 1996. Klasies River Main site, cave 2: a Howieson’s Poort occurrence. In: Pwiti, G., Soper, R. (Eds.), Aspects of African Archaeology. University of Zimbabwe Publications, Harare, pp. 213e218. Deacon, H.J., Wurz, S., 2005. A Late Pleistocene archive of life at the coast, Klasies River. In: Stahl, A.B. (Ed.), African Archaeology: A Critical Introduction. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, pp. 130e149. Dibble, H.L., 1984. The mousterian industry from Bisitun cave (Iran). Paléorient 10 (2), 23e34. Dibble, H.L., McPherron, S.P., 2007. Truncated-faceted pieces: hafting modification, retouch or cores? In: McPherron, S.P. (Ed.), Tools versus Cores. Alternative Approaches to Stone Tool Analysis. Cambridge Scholar Publishing, Newcastle, pp. 75e90. Díez-Martín, F., Sánchez, P., Domínguez-Rodrigo, M., Barba, R., 2009. Were Olduvai Hominins making butchering tools or battering tools? Analysis of a recently excavated lithic assemblage from BK (Bed II, Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania). Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28, 274e289. Driscoll, K., 2010. Understanding Quartz Technology in Early Prehistoric Ireland (Ph.D. thesis). University College Dublin, Ireland. D’Errico, F., Henshilwood, C.S., 2007. Additional evidence for bone technology in the southern African Middle Stone Age. Journal of Human Evolution 52, 142e163. d’Errico, F., Backwell, L., Wadley, L., 2012. Identifying regional variability in Middle Stone Age bone technology: the case of Sibudu Cave. Journal of Archaeological Science 39, 2479e2495. Goldberg, P., Miller, C.E., Schiegl, S., Ligouis, B., Berna, F., Conard, N.J., Wadley, L., 2009. Bedding, hearths, and site maintenance in the Middle Stone Age of Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 1, 95e122. Goodwin, A.J.H., 1929. The Stone Ages in South Africa. Africa: Journal of the International African Institute 2 (2), 174e1812. Goren-Inbar, N., 1988. Too small to be true? Reevaluation of cores on flakes in Levantine Mousterian assemblages. Lithic Technology 17 (1), 37e44. Grün, R., Beaumont, P.B., Tobias, P.V., Eggins, S.M., 2003. On the age of the Border Cave 5 human mandible. Journal of Human Evolution 45, 155e167.

Henshilwood, C.S., 2012. Late Pleistocene techno-traditions in southern Africa: a review of the still Bay and Howiesons Poort, c. 75e59 ka. Journal of World Prehistory 25, 205e237. Henshilwood, C.S., van Niekerk, K.L., Wurz, S., Delagnes, A., Armitage, S.J., Rifkin, R.F., Douze, K., Keene, P., Haaland, M.M., Reynard, J., Discamps, E., Mienies, S.S., 2014. Klipdrift shelter, southern Cape, South Africa: preliminary report on the howiesons poort layers. Journal of Archaeological Science 45, 284e303. Hisckock, P., 1996. Mobility and technology in the Kakadu coastal wetlands. IndoPacific Prehistory Association Bulletin 15, 151e157. Hivernel-Guerre, F., Newcomer, M.H., 1974. Nucléus sur éclat: technologie et utilisation par différentes cultures préhistoriques. Bulletin de la Société préhistorique de France 71, 119e128. Igreja, M., Porraz, G., 2013. Functional insights into the innovative Early Howiesons Poort technology at Diepkloof Rock Shelter (Western Cape, South Africa). Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (9), 3475e3491. Inizan, M.-L., Reduron, M., Roche, H., Tixier, J., 1995. Technologie de la pierre taillée. C.R.E.P, Paris. Jacobs, Z., Roberts, R.G., 2008. Testing times: old and new chronologies for the Howieson’s Poort and Still Bay industries in environmental context. South African Archaeological Society Goodwin Series 10, 9e34. Jacobs, Z., Roberts, R.G., Galbraith, R.F., Deacon, H.J., Gran, R., Mackay, A., Mitchell, P., Vogelsang, R., Wadley, L., 2008. Ages for the Middle Stone Age of Southern Africa: implications for human behavior and dispersal. Science 322 (5902), 733e735. Karlin, C., Bodu, P., Pelegrin, J., 1991. Processus tecniques et chaînes opératoires. Comment les préhistoriens s’appropient un concept élaboré par les ethnologues. In: Balfet, H. (Ed.), Observer l’action technique, les chaînes operatoires, pour quoi faire? CNRS, Paris, pp. 101e117. Klaric, L., 2000. Notes sur la présence de lames aménages par technique de Kostienki dans les couches gravettiennes du Blot (Cerzat, Haute-Loire). Bulletin de la Societé Préhistorique Française 97 (4), 625e636. Klaric, L., 2003. L’unite technique des industries a burin du raysse dans leur contexte diachronique. Reflexions sur la diversite culturelle au gravettien a partir des donnes de la Picardie, d’Arcy-Sur-Cure, de Brassempouy et du cirque de la Patrie (Ph.D. thesis). U. F. R. D’Histoire de l’art et de archeologie. Université Paris I, France. Knutsson, K., 1988a. Making and Using Stone Tools. The Analysis of the Lithic Assemblages from Middle Neolithic Sites with Flint in Vasterbotten, Northern Sweden. Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis, Uppsala. Knutsson, K., 1988b. Patterns of Tool Use. Scanning Electron Microscopy of Experiments Quartz Tools. Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis, Uppsala. Le Brun-Ricalens, F. (Ed.), 2005. Productions lamellaires attribuées à l’Aurignacien chaînes opératoires et perspectives technoculturelles, Luxembourg. Leakey, M.D., 1971. Olduvai Gorge. In: Excavations in Beds I and II, vol. 3. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 1960e1963. Lemonnier, P., 1976. La description des chaînes opératoires: contribution a l’analyse des systemes techniques. Techniques et Culture vol. 1, 101e150. Lemonnier, P., 1986. The study of material culture today: toward an anthropology of technical systems. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5, 147e186. Lombard, M., 2008. Finding resolution for the Howiesons Poort through the microscope: micro-residue analysis of segments from Sibudu Cave, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 35, 26e41. Lombard, M., 2011. Quartz-tipped arrows older than 60 ka: further use-trace evidence from Sibudu, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 38, 1918e1930. Lombera-Hermida, A., 2009. The scar identification of lithic quartz industries. In: Sternke, F., Costa, L.-J., Eigeland, L. (Eds.), Non-Flint Raw Material Use in Prehistory. Old Prejudices and New Direction, Proceedings of the XV World Congress of the U.I.S.P.P. BAR International Series. Archeopress, Oxford, pp. 5e11. Mackay, A., 2008. On the production of blades and its relationship to backed artefacts in the Howiesons Poort at Diepkloof, South Africa. Lithic Technology 33, 87e99. Mackay, A., 2009. History and Selection in the Late Pleistocene Archaeology of the Western Cape, South Africa (PhD thesis). Australian National University, Australia. Mackay, A., Welz, A., 2008. Engraved ochre from a Middle Stone Age context at Klein Kliphuis in the Western Cape of South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 35, 1521e1532. Mercader, J., Brooks, A.S., 2001. Across forests and savannas: Later Stone Age assemblages from Ituri and Semliki, Democratic Republic of Congo. Journal of Anthropological Research 57 (2), 197e217. Minichillo, T.J., 2005. Middle Stone Age Lithic Study, South Africa: an Examination of Modern Human Origins (Ph.D. thesis) University of Washington. United States of America. Mourre, V., 1996a. Le debitage sur enclume au Paleolithique inférieur et moyen. Techniques, méthodes et schemas conceptuels. Master thesis. Paris X, France. Mourre, V., 1996b. Les industries en quartz au Paléolithique: terminologie, méthodologie et technologie. Paléo 8, 205e223. Nishiaki, Y., 1985. Truncated-faceted Flakes from Levantine Assemblages. University of Tokyo Bulletin 4, pp. 215e226. Orton, J.D.J., 2004. The Quartz Conundrum: Understanding the Role of Quartz in the Composition of Late Pleistocene and Holocene Lithic Assemblages from the Verlorenvlei area, Western Cape. Masters thesis. University of Cape Town, South Africa. Otte, M., 1980. Le “couteau de Kostienki”. Helinium 20, 54e58.

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043

P. de la Peña, L. Wadley / Quaternary International xxx (2014) 1e17 Owen, W.E., 1938. The Kombewa Culture, Kenya colony. Man 38, 203e205. Pelegrin, J., 1995. Technologie lithique. Le Chàtelperronien de Roc-De-Combe (Lot) et de la Côte (Dordogne). Cahiers du Quaternaire, Paris. 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. Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (9), 3376e3400. Singer, R., Wymer, J., 1982. The Middle Stone Age at Klasies River Mouth in South Africa. University of Chicago, Chicago. Solecki, L., Solecki, R.S., 1970. A new secondary flaking technique at the Nahr Ibrahim Cave site, Lebanon. Bulletin du Musee de Beyruth XXIII, 138e140. 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. Journal of Archaeological Science 34 (5), 681e703. Stapleton, P., Hewitt, J., 1927. Stone implements from a rock-shelter near Howieson’s Poort near Grahamstown. South African Journal of Science 24, 574e587. Stapleton, P., Hewitt, J., 1928. Stone implements from Howieson’s Poort, near Grahamstown. South African Journal of Science 25, 399e409. Texier, P.-J., Porraz, G., Parkington, J., Rigaud, J.-P., Poggenpoel, C., Miller, C., Tribolo, C., Cartwright, C., Coudenneau, A., Klein, R.G., Steele, T., Verna, C., 2010. Howiesons Poort tradition of engraving ostrich eggshell containers dated to 60,000 years ago at Diepkloof Rock Shelter, South Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 107, 6180e6185. Thackeray, A.I., 1992. The Middle Stone Age south of the Limpopo River. Journal of World Prehistory 6 (4), 385e431. Tixier, J., 1963. Typologie de l’Epipaléolithique du Maghreb. Mémoires du Centre de recherches anthropologiques, préhistoriques et ethnographiques, Arts et Métiers graphiques, París. Tribolo, C., Mercier, N., Douville, E., Joron, J.L., Reyss, J.L., Rufer, D., Cantin, N., Lefrais, Y., Miller, C.E., Porraz, G., Parkington, J., Rigaud, J.P., Texier, P.J., 2013. OSL and TL dating of the Middle Stone Age sequence at Diepkloof Rock Shelter (South Africa): a clarification. Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (9), 3401e3411. Van Riet Lowe, C., 1956. The coastal Smithfield and bipolar technique. South African Journal of Science 42, 240e246.

17

Villa, P., Soriano, S., Teyssandier, N., Wurz, S., 2010. The Howiesons Poort and MSA III at Klasies River main site, Cave 1A. Journal of Archaeological Science 37, 630e655. Villa, P., Soriano, S., Tsanova, T., Degano, I., Higham, T.F.G., d’Errico, F., Backwell, L., Lucejko, J.J., Colombini, M.P., Beaumont, P.B., 2012. Border Cave and the beginning of the Later Stone Age in South Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 109 (33), 13208e13213. Vogelsang, R., 1998. Middle Stone Age Fundstellen in Südwest-Namibia. Heinrich Barth Institut, Köln. Volman, T.P., 1984. The Middle Stone Age in the Southern Cape (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Chicago, Chicago. Wadley, L., 1993. The Pleistocene Later Stone Age south of the Limpopo River. Journal of World Prehistory 7 (3), 243e296. Wadley, L., 2008. The Howieson’s Poort Industry of Sibudu Cave. South African Archaeological Society Goodwin Series 10, 122e132. Wadley, L., 2012. Some combustion features at Sibudu, South Africa, between 65,000 and 58,000 years ago. Quaternary International 247, 341e349. Wadley, L., Binneman, J., 1995. Arrowheads or penknives? A microwear analysis of mid-Holocene stone segments from Jubilee Shelter, Transvaal. South African Journal of Science 91, 153e155. Wadley, L., Jacobs, J., 2006. Sibudu Cave: background to the excavations, stratigraphy and dating. Southern African Humanities 18 (1), 1e26. Wadley, L., Kempson, H., 2011. A review of rock studies for archeologists, and an analysis of dolerite and hornfels from the Sibudu area, KwaZulu-Natal. Southern African Humanities 23, 87e107. Wadley, L., Mohapi, M., 2008. A segment is not a monolith: evidence from the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 35, 2594e2605. Wurz, S., 1999. The Howiesons Poort backed artefacts from Klasies River: an argument for symbolic behaviour. The South African Archaeological Bulletin 54 (169), 38e50. Wurz, S., 2000. The Middle Stone Age Sequence at Klasies River, South Africa (Ph.D. thesis). University of Stellenbosch, South Africa. Wurz, S., 2013. Technological Trends in the Middle Stone Age of South Africa between MIS 7 and MIS 3. Current Anthropology 54 (S8), S305eS319.

Please cite this article in press as: de la Peña, P., Wadley, L., New knapping methods in the Howiesons Poort at Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa), Quaternary International (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.03.043