Re-examining the South African Middle-to-Later Stone Age transition: Multivariate analysis of the Umhlatuzana and Rose Cottage Cave stone tool assemblages

被引:22
作者
McCall, Grant S. [1 ]
Thomas, Jonathan T. [2 ]
机构
[1] Tulane Univ, Dept Anthropol, New Orleans, LA 70118 USA
[2] Univ Iowa, Dept Anthropol, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA
关键词
Middle Stone Age; Later Stone Age; behavioural modernity; stone tools; behavioural ecology; South Africa; HOWIESONS-POORT; BLOMBOS CAVE; TECHNOLOGICAL-CHANGE; SIBUDU; MODERNITY; BEHAVIOR; SHELTER; LITHICS; POINTS;
D O I
10.1080/00672700903337519
中图分类号
K85 [文物考古];
学科分类号
0601 ;
摘要
This paper explores the nature and timing of the Middle Stone Age/Later Stone Age transition in South Africa and considers some of the potential causes of this technological reorganisation. It uses multivariate statistical methods to re-examine two important case studies: Umhlatuzana in KwaZulu-Natal, described by Kaplan (1989), and Rose Cottage Cave in the Free State, described by Clark (1997). Consistent with these previous analyses, it concludes that the Middle Stone Age/Later Stone Age transition at the sites occurred around 28 kya, involved a pre-Robberg transitional early Later Stone Age (ELSA) industry lasting until around 20 kya, and is defined by a series of secular changes demonstrating broad continuity over time. The paper also seeks to articulate these case studies with other explanations of the MSA/LSA transition, from the perspective of technological organisation and models of forager behavioural ecology. It argues that the microlithic technology seen with the origins of the LSA was a response to increasingly risky environments created by fluctuations in climate around the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) and rising human populations. Microlithic technology may have emerged as a strategy for adding value to tools and weapons, increasing both their effectiveness and reliability in the face of riskier environments. It is also possible that new knapping strategies seen during the LSA resulted from restricted access to preferred sources of lithic raw material and were methods of optimising the use of poorer-quality local stone.
引用
收藏
页码:311 / 330
页数:20
相关论文
共 68 条
[1]  
Ambrose S.H., 1998, SCIENCE, V25, P377
[2]  
Ambrose S.H., 2002, Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization, V12, P9, DOI DOI 10.1525/AP3A.2002.12.1.9
[3]  
AMBROSE SH, 1990, ORIGIN MODERN HUMANS, P3
[4]  
[Anonymous], PAPERS PREHISTORY W
[5]  
Bamforth D.B., 1997, REDISCOVERING DARWIN, P109, DOI [10.1525/ap3a.1997.7.1.109, DOI 10.1525/AP3A.1997.7.1.109]
[6]  
Barham L., 2008, The first Africans: African archaeology from the earliest tool makers to most recent foragers
[7]  
Barham L., 1987, S AFR ARCHAEOL BULL, V42, P45, DOI [10.2307/3887773, DOI 10.2307/3887773]
[8]  
Baxter MJ., 2003, STAT ARCHAEOLOGY
[9]  
Beaumont P. B., 1978, THESIS U CAPE TOWN
[10]  
Binford LewisR., 1984, FAUNAL REMAINS KLASI