South African Archaeological Society

Economy and Technology in the Late Stone Age of Southern Natal by C. CableReview by: Aron MazelThe South African Archaeological Bulletin, Vol. 40, No. 141 (Jun., 1985), pp. 60-61Published by: South African Archaeological SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3888001 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 06:42

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

South African Archaeological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toThe South African Archaeological Bulletin.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.115 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 06:42:16 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

60 The South African Archaeological Bulletin

might be interpreted in terms of human behaviour and the palaeoen- vironments of the later Pleistocene. The large mammal fauna from the Klasies River Mouth sites was analysed by R. G. Klein and his ideas on the meaning of the fauna have developed from initial inferences that the inhabitants were hunting the new born young and mothers of the largest bovids, to postulates that there is a dichotomy represented in the age profiles inferred from the crown heights of the teeth of various animals represented in the deposits. He draws a distinction between those that are docile and easily driven and those that are dangerous to hunt. The hunting of easily driven animals, according to Klein, leads to a catastrophic mortality age profile in the faunal samples, whereas less easily driven animals are identifiable by an attritional age profile. All this assumes that the macrofauna from the Klasies sites is the product of human hunting. Not so, argues Binford. He is right in some respects. All the bone is not the product of human hunting, but the position is far more complex than even Binford assumes.

Binford's argument can be summarized in terms of Klein's obser- vations that first drew his attention to the sites. This was that at Klasies the ratio of cranial to postcranial parts increases while the ratio of upper limb bones to foot bones decreases with the size of the bovid. This pattern, Binford argues, is not the result of a 'schlepp' or transport effect, but a consequence of the scavenging of the remains of large sized bovids from carnivore kills and the active hunting of small bovids. Differences in the age profiles of bovid remains that Klein attempted to explain in terms of docile vs dangerous game is explicable in Binford's argument in a more subtle way by the difference in the availability of calves of residential and migratory species. The argument here involves some dubious manipulation of Klein's data.

Perhaps Binford's most useful contributions are his discussions on cut marks on the Klasies bone in relation to butchering techniques. Fig. 4.24 on p. 151, however, strains the imagination - it purports to show hominid tooth marks on the distal metatarsal of a bushbuck when central to the picture is a puncture mark that is typical of a hyaena canine. This lends weight to the suspicion that the hyaena and leopard contribution to the Klasies macrofauna sample has been underemphasized in Binford's analysis.

Binford makes some pertinent, if not original, comments on the way in which the dating of the culture-stratigraphic units at Klasies have been tied into the sequence of climatic changes inferred from the deep-sea or oxygen isotope record. There is no basis, as he points out, for Butzer's correlation of various depositional phases with warmer episodes in the last interglacial. The whole chronology of the deposit rests not on the dating of a 7-8 m beach in Cave 1 because there is no beach preserved, but on Shackleton's isotope data, a slender basis indeed. We are optimistic that current problems in the dating of the deposits will be resolved in due course and indications are that the deposits are older than the relatively young age that Binford would like to argue for on the basis of his faunal seriation. His argument that a trend towards increased hunting vs scavenging in the Cave 1 sequence can be equated with the kind of transitional trend between the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic in Europe is negated by the evidence we have that all the Cave 1 sequence up to layer 14 is older than 100 000 years. Binford mentions ostrich eggshell beads and personal ornaments associated with the Howiesons Poort which he would like to place close to the Middle-Upper Palaeolithic transition. In fact one bone point but no personal ornaments were found in the Howiesons Poort levels at Klasies. Ostrich eggshell beads have been reported from an equivalent horizon in Apollo 11 cave by Wendt, but must be considered anomalous until confirmed from another site. Although the dating of the Howiesons Poort substage of the Middle Stone Age has yet to be established beyond reasonable doubt, there is no good evidence to date it younger than 65 000 years. In his arguments about the significance of the time trends either in subsistence or technology, Binford is guilty of the same gradualist assumptions he argues have inhibited interpretation of older Pleistocene data. The presence of physically modemn remains of people in an apparently very early time range in southern Africa, the last interglacial Middle Stone Age at Klasies cannot be dismissed as lightly as Binford would argue. There is no evidence at present on either the artefacts or other lines of dating evidence to suggest that the base of the Cave lB sequence is younger than the basal Cave 1

deposits. The dating of the Cave 1B sequence with its early modem hominid remains is central to the argument and is an obvious focus for further research.

The paucity of contextual information on the Klasies macrofauna and Binford's own concern with the problem of distinguishing be- tween hunting and scavenging results in a very one-sided view of the meaning of the Klasies sites. He is concerned with arguing that the sites are somehow relevant to the debate on home bases and food sharing. In this he ignores the role of plant foods and pays scant attention to the massive shellfish accumulations at the site. Klasies has been facetiously described as the oldest seafood restaurant in the world and shellfish collecting was carried out on the same scale as in the Holocene. Why collect hundreds of thousands of shellfish and accumulate them at a specific locality if not to share? Food sharing at the Klasies River Mouth sites is not a subject for debate. It is self evident.

The question revolves rather around the role hunting and scaveng- ing played in the subsistence ecology of these last interglacial people. In Cave 1A the massive shell midden accumulations associated with the so-called MSA II are evidence for a coastal economy that is replaced higher in the sequence, in horizons associated in part with the Howiesons Poort, by an essentially terrestrial economy as seen in the occurrence of carbonized plant food residues and a low frequency of shell midden intercalations. This suggests the same kind of seasonal replacement of gathered geophyte plant staples by shellfish gathering in the early part of the Late Pleistocene that has been documented in the Holocene in this area. The subsistence system was constrained by the availability of plant foods and meat obtained by whatever means provided a protein supplement for people with a high carbohydrate diet. Supplementary foods, even in small packages that are shared, go a long way and the argument in this book that the small size of the meat packages is evidence against food sharing holds no weight. The postulate that the Klasies River sites were simply protected sleeping places conveniently near a waterhole for scaveng- ing, and that they were not comparable to home bases for food sharing in the modern ethnographic sense, follows from a misunder- standing of the significance of the fauna in the subsistence of the occupants and a lack of familiarity with the evidence from the sites. Judging from this book, the whole debate on home bases and food sharing has lost a certain reality. The challenge in the investigation of the Klasies River Mouth sites is to determine how different the behaviour of the early Late Pleistocene people was from the behav- iour of the Holocene people and there are good indications that they were using the habitat for subsistence activities in very similar ways.

What relevance has the information from the Klasies River Mouth sites for the question of hominization in the earlier Pleistocene? I am very doubtful that the Klasies data have any direct relevance and I am particularly doubtful that they provide "an important control on arguments as to the ecological pressures guiding hominid physical and behavioural evolution as hominid populations successfully radi- ated out of the more tropical settings." These are simply pious words.

The book is made up of patches - patches of good discussion, patches of preaching down to the readers, and patches of poor scholarship in the misuse of analogy and uninformed speculation. It is not always on target and should be read with the healthy scepticism that the author himself advocates. Overall it is an enthusiastic exercise in leaving no stone, bone or argument unturned, right or wrong.

H. J. DEACON University of Stellenbosch

CABLE, C. 1984. Economy and technology in the Late Stone Age of southern Natal. Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology. Oxford: BAR International Series 201. 267 pp., 8 plates, 34 figs. Price ?13.00.

One-and-a-half decades ago the pre-colonial history of the province of Natal was poorly known and understood. This, however, was by no means a reflection of the archaeological potential of this province. Happily, because since then this situation has changed considerably. Iron Age studies in areas of Natal now match those in other parts of

S. Afr. archaeol. Bull. 40: 60. 1985

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.115 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 06:42:16 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The South African Archaeological Bulletin 61

southern Africa and investigations into the Late Stone Age (LSA) are rapidly gaining ground. Cable's project on the LSA of southern Natal, which grew out of earlier preliminary excavations by Patrick Carter, has contributed greatly to this changing scene. Cable saw as the fundamental aim of his project the extension of our knowledge of the LSA in southern Natal, in particular the last 3 500 years.

The theoretical framework underlying the work was ecological. Following in the wake of other ecologically orientated research in southern Africa, Cable organized his fieldwork programme to sam- ple LSA sites in the different ecological zones of southern Natal: the highlands, the midlands and the coastal zones. The basic hypothesis under investigation was "that later Holocene populations in southern Natal exploited the resources of the area by moving seasonally across the major ecological zones to coincide with fluctuations in the availability and productivity of resources" (p. 4). Cable excavated two sites (Umbeli Belli Shelter and Borchers Shelter) in the coastal zone, and collected artefacts from Borchers Shelter Annexe and The Falls in the coastal zone and Bottoms Up Shelter and Grindstone Shelter in the highlands zone.

This monograph, which is the final report on this project, is divided into nine chapters and three appendices. In the first chapter Cable introduces his objectives and hypotheses and the methodology he followed. Background information on the research area is presented in Chapter 2 and in Chapter 3 the available natural resources in the area are outlined. Previous archaeological research in the area is evaluated in Chapter 4. Chapters 5 and 6 are the data chapters; in the former the results of his fieldwork are presented and in the latter pertinent published data are summarized. Information from the previous four chapters is brought together in Chapter 7 where the patterns in the archaeological record are presented. These patterns are further discussed and interpreted in Chapter 8 under the headings seasonality, subsistence, and social organization. In the final chapter Cable provides a short overview of LSA research in Natal and hunter-gatherer studies in southern Africa.

Cable has without a doubt fulfilled his fundamental aim of extend- ing our knowledge of the LSA in southern Natal. In doing so he has collated a wide range of information on the natural resources (food and other resources) of the research area which will be extremely useful to other researchers not only in southern Natal but elsewhere in the province. This information has been imaginatively combined with the archaeological material to support his primary hypothesis of San seasonal movement across the major ecological zones. For these accomplishments he needs to be congratulated. However, having said this, attention must be drawn to some of the weaknesses in the research programme and report. The field work programme was not as extensive as a project of this nature requires. Understandably, time and money are major constraints but if regional projects are to begin realizing their full potential, more than a couple of excavations and surface collections will have to be done. In mitigation, though, Cable did mention that the reason no sites were investigated in the midlands zone was that no suitable ones were found, and that this reflected a real dearth in sites in this zone and not insufficient searching. A further problem lies in Cable's uncritical use of ecological theory. Disenchantment with the ecological paradigm has been growing amongst several archaeologists in the last few years. Even though Cable may disagree with these criticisms they should have been acknowledged. Cable's almost complete avoidance of hunter- gatherer/farmer relations represents another flaw in this report. Farmers occupied parts of southern Natal for over half the period concentrated on by Cable and their presence must have had some (if not a considerable) influence on the San hunter-gatherer ways of life. Their impact should have been considered.

Despite these criticisms, the importance of the research and this report must not be in any doubt. The report is logically constructed and clearly written and adds enormously to the growing body of knowledge on the LSA of Natal and southern Africa. It is, therefore, a very welcome contribution.

ARON MAZEL Natal Museum

Pietermaritzburg

CLARKE, H. 1984. The archaeology of medieval England. London: British Museum Publications (a Colonnade Book). 224 pp., 46 photographs, 50 charts, maps and line illustrations, 1 table. R33,95.

This is a disappointing book and an apparent lapse from the British Museum's usually high standard of publication. The title is sweeping and full of promise and the author states that "The aim of the book is to present what we know about medieval England from archaeologi- cal, that is mainly excavated evidence, not from historical sources" (p. 9). However once inside, the reader is given only tantalizing glimpses of some interesting excavations. There are photographs, drawings and distribution maps some of which can be much improved as there is little information contained in them, while the photographs often give more information than the text.

The archaeology of medieval England is rather a catalogue of sites often with little description or information and it is obvious that the text is distilled from masses of research reports and publications.

The six chapters which total 180 pages deal with six major features: the countryside, parish churches, monasteries, castles, craft and industry, and towns and trade. The division of those 180 pages does not appear to be based on the amount of information available: 47 pages are devoted to the countryside but only 17 pages to parish churches which are amongst the most researched of all medieval structures. It seems that the author has little first-hand knowledge of the sites themselves and appears to have done limited fieldwork herself. The book seems to be aimed at a relatively uninformed readership and one is almost tempted to suggest that it was written as a basic text-book for first-year students of the subject. Anyone with an interest in and some knowledge of the archaeology of medieval England will benefit little by reading it.

One of the most annoying features of the book - perhaps the fault of the editor or publishers - is that there are copious footnote symbols in each chapter and the reader is forced to page to the end of the book to find the reference. A great pity that such an interesting field has been covered so superficially, but a lengthy bibliography is included and those who wish to know more will probably find this the most valuable part of the book. In the reviewer's opinion this book appeared too soon as there is an increasing impetus in archaeological investigation of the medieval period and a more informative and useful book will be possible in a few years' time.

W. J. J. VAN RIJSSEN South African Museum

COE, M. 1984. Mexico. London: Thames & Hudson. 180 pp. 128 illustrations. R39,95.

Michael Coe's Mexico is a volume in the well known 'Ancient Peoples and Places' series under the general editorship of Glyn Daniel. The title in fact first appeared in 1962 and again in 1977 in revised form. The book under review is not only a further revision but also an enlargement, for as Coe says, "a great deal of archaeological water has gone over the dam since Mexico first appeared."

The book is concerned with tracing the story of the inhabitants of the present day Mexico up to the time of the Spanish conquest. The best known people from this area are the Maya and the Aztecs, but anyone expecting a detailed description of these civilizations will be disappointed. The Maya are not discussed at all for there is a companion volume in the series entitled The Maya, also by Coe, wherein this complex civilization is given the detailed consideration that it deserves. The Aztecs are confined to a single chapter in Mexico because, as Coe points out, "they were late arrivals and their empire but a final and brilliant flicker before the light of native civilization was put out once and for all." The exclusion or down-playing of the more 'spectacular' civilizations of ancient Mexico in no way detracts from the interest of the book.

After an introductory chapter setting the environmental and human scene in Mexico, Coe traces in a highly readable way the story of the earliest stone tool makers from about 21 000 to 24 000 years ago (Chapter 2) through to the Archaic period with the origins of domestication and settled life (Chapter 3). He then goes on to discuss the Formative period in Chapters 4 and 5, and the Classic period in

S. Afr. archaeol. Bull. 40: 61. 1985

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.115 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 06:42:16 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions