Two Later Stone Age Sites on the Farm Honingklip in the Eastern Transvaal

South African Archaeological Society

Two Later Stone Age Sites on the Farm Honingklip in the Eastern TransvaalAuthor(s): Shirley Korsman and Ina PlugSource: The South African Archaeological Bulletin, Vol. 49, No. 159 (Jun., 1994), pp. 24-32Published by: South African Archaeological SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3889170 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 05:25

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 [email protected].

.

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 194.29.185.209 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 05:25:52 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=saas

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3889170?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


24 South African Archaeological Bulletin 49: 24-32, 1994

TWO LATER STONE AGE SITES ON THE FARM HONINGKLIP IN THE EASTERN TRANSVAAL*

SHIRLEY KORSMAN Department ofAnthropology & Indigenous Law University of South Africa, P 0 Box 382 Pretoria, 0001

&

INA PLUG Transvaal Museum, P 0 Box 413, Pretoria, 0001

ABSTRACT

Archaeological remains from old excavations can be of great value provided high standards were used during excavation, retrieval, documentation and storage. The stone tool assemblages from the sites HKLP I and HKLP V, excavated between 1962 and 1975 by HF. Sentker on the farm Honingklip in the eastern Transvaal have been analysed in accordance with current Later Stone Age (LSA) typological and technological classifications. The organic remains indicate a LSA hunter-gatherer subsistence strategy. Deposits at HKLP I have been radiocarbon dated to the mid-Holocene as well as to the period after 1000 BP. HKLP V has yielded a single date from the late Holocene.

*Received January 1993, revised January 1994

Introduction

Research on Holocene Stone Age sites in the eastern Transvaal has been fragmentary and uncoordinated compared with that in the Cape and Natal. Descriptions of sites have been limited mainly to surface collections and only two sites in this area have been fully documented in major studies (Plug 1978; Beaumont 1981). Research at the nearby Swaziland sites of Sibebe, Siphiso and Nyonyane (Price-Williams 1980, 1981; Barham 1989) has also provided relevant detail of Holocene occupation.

The late H.F. Sentker (University of South Africa) first visited the farm Honingklip near Badplaas in 1957 after he was made aware of a group of rock paintings at HKLP I by the late Professor D. Ziervogel. He subsequently conducted field surveys over approximately 700 sq km in the Carolina district, covering fifteen farms including Honingklip. He identified a number of surface sites but regarded HKLP I and V as the two major archaeological occurrences.

Between 1962 and 1975 Sentker excavated both HKLP I and V. Although he considered them to be key LSA sites in the eastern Transvaal he never analysed and interpreted the excavated remains. The finds were subsequently examined by the first author for a Masters project (Korsman 1990). The aims of the project were to obtain greater insight into the Holocene occupation of the eastern Transvaal by analysing and interpreting the remains, to evaluate the usefulness of material excavated many years ago, relying only on field notes and documentation by the excavator, and to identify possible social behaviour from the archaeological remains at the sites.

--HONINGKLIP 154 IT

environment at H ~~KLP I&V.Testsaelcedo

HELP

XXGRANITE XVII) ~~~ROCKS

DEPOSITS J-

loae on th020 oigli bu 30 km eas o

Fig. 1 Sentker's schematic illustration of the immediate environment at HKLP I & V. The sites are located on opposite sides of the Nhiazatshe River.

Site descriptions

HKLP I (26.nis 30.48E) and HKLP V (26S 30.46E) are located on the farm Honingklip about 30 km east of Badplaas. Figure 1 shows Sentker's schematic illustration of HKLP I and V situated on rocky hills on opposite sides of a bend in the Nhlazatshe River,, about i km west of its confluence with the Teespruit.

HKLP I consists of a terrace on the northern side of a low rock shelter formed by fallen boulders on which there are four panels of rock art. An unexcavated terrace on the western side of the shelter shows evidence of flood disturbance in the past. Although three possible entrances to the shelter were identified, access is now blocked by rockfalls and some stone walling.

HKLP V is a small rock shelter situated approximately 180 m across the river from HKLP I. It is formed by large fallen boulders, and has a very steep southern terrace facing HKLP I, as well as a steeply sloping northern terrace which Sentker excavated. The shelter is shallow with easily accessible northern and southern entrances. The surface area of the shelter is approximately 7 sq m. At the northern entrance are the remains of a man-made wall approximately 0,3 m high, resting on hard, calcified rock. The archaeological deposit extends northwards about 20 m towards a high granite ridge. Stone artefacts are still to be found on the steep southern slope which was not excavated. Inside the shelter barely discernible traces of small rock paintings are found on two boulders supporting the roof of the shelter. The paintings are badly damaged and, according to Sentker, are similar to those at HKLP I.

Stone walling at the northern and western entrances to HKLP I, and at the northern entrance to HKLP V, is stratigrapohically associated with the last phases of hunter-



South African Archaeological Bulletin 25

protection against intruders, predators and the elements. Similar stone walling has been ascribed to San builders by other writers (Walton 1951; Potgieter 1955:19).

Excavation records

The excavations were carried out according to methods advocated by Goodwin (1953). Sentker's records made it possible to reconstruct the excavations and analyse the assemblages approximately 25 years later. The records document how the sites were cleared, datum points established, grids laid out in imperial units, and excavation areas chosen. Both sites were excavated in arbitrary spits of 6, 3, and 1,5 inches (152, 76 and 38 mm). Whenever necessary the grid squares were subdivided into smaller units to cope with the steep terrain. Site and grid plans were drawn and the relative heights of each square above the datum points were recorded. Notes were made on the removal of each layer and any soil changes, root disturbances and possible water disturbances were described. A lack of charcoal remains and ash lenses and the presence of some yellow brown gravel was noted. Plans were drawn for each excavated layer. All bone and charcoal fragments, seeds, soil samples, pottery, and all stone debris were retained and the relevant square and level recorded. Sieves of one-eighth and one-quarter inch mesh were used and the finds were systematically packed and stored.

The sealed deposit of HKLP I, excavated from the northern terrace in front of the rock paintings, was covered with fine humic soil. Figure 2 shows the site plan for HKLP I with squares measuring 3 ft x 3 ft (1,2 m x 1,2 m).

C A

+

< v t + + ? ?bouId er s

bedim+ + + -I-

units for the excavatedare on te notentraei

bedro k + +e +e b

+vragn boldrs bedrockanrubereso .

unitws foricthe excavated araonther rn-offrther terrcetions

of AB and CD are given in Fig. 4.

Sentker's site plan for HKLP V (Fig. 3) shows the grid system with squares measuring 12 ft x 12 ft (3,6 m x 3,6 m). Sentker built retaining walls at HKLP V to prevent erosion. The following excavated areas at HKLP V were identified from his notes:

a) The area inside the shelter, including a hearth under low overhanging boulders which formed a natural chimney. Charcoal retrieved from the hearth provided the only radiocarbon date for HKLP V.

b) The area immediately outside the rock shelter, including a portion of square F2, which had a single occupation layer with cultural remains in fine humic soil that were similar to those from the humic soil in (a).

c) Square F3, which was excavated to bedrock. The stratigraphy was difficult to interpret from the notes and sketches. A cardboard model of the main excavation, square F3, was built to scale by the author. All Sentker's notes were recorded on this model and cross-sections of F3 were reconstructed.

H G F E

4

3

1 3

2

0 4m H K L P V

Fig. 3. Extract from the site plan for HKLP V showing the main excavation at F3 (subdivided into 3 x 3 ft squares), and the location of the low rock shelter in squares H3, H4, G3, G4. Large boulders and the dripline at the shelter entrance are shown.

Stratigraphy Sentker's excavation notes indicate that two distinct

occupation layers were present at both sites. These consist of an upper humic layer and a lower gravel layer. Layer 1, the upper layer, consisted mainly of humus, some rubble, and some fine gravel. Very fine humus, which was possibly windblown and of more recent origin, was found in the upper levels of Layer 1. Because of the slope, some excavation units had distinct humus and gravel sections in Layer 1. These were excavated and packed separately. Layer 2, the lower layer, consisted of gravelly soil, with some yellow brown gravel, and some decomposed gravel on bedrock. Sentker regarded the clear distinction between Layer 1 and Layer 2 as an indication of a possible change in



26 South African Archaeological Bulletin

climate, and also of two separate occupations. He suspected that the cultural finds represented two different cultures: the LSA and a contact period between LSA and Iron Age people.

The deposit at HKLP I was on average 608 mm (2 fi) deep (Fig. 4). Sentker's notes refer to some stones which appear to be the remains of an old hearth found in Layer 1, but the context of the find is not given. Burnt stones found in a cluster with charcoal fragments from squares 2, 3 and 6 may have been part of the hearth. On the lower section of the terrace to the west, some pockets of humic soil occurred in the granite rock. Sentker suggested that remains appear to have been washed down by rainwater and lodged in these pockets in the weathered rock. It was relatively easy to identify and isolate the areas which may have been disturbed.

A 1 4 1 1 7 3 C H N B

+ 30 H K L P I

0 -n--

bed r o ck=--A

-36-

C 2 D~w

+24-

0 -- ---- ----

X _=-~~---- --_ -_-_---

.' f t

~~~-------- -

-36- 1 Zi ;

L h um us ,LI. yel low -brown soili

D g ravel

mbotil Id e r

O A /

- 24- X'

---- ----- --- -

\ v -- -- -- _ _

-36 \ \\ - -=---

42 -___--------_ Fg._ 4. Examples of the cro = s s i

il i te stratigraphy at HKLP I an K V.\ Ye== _=e_ = ---

Tw cross setins AB==== and==== CD,= fro=HKP=Iar

excavation a IK V, sqar , is given bow. Bot

sit. 4. Examples h u thumus andtlower gv layers. Sentkerapreparednocrosstionsgf the stratigraphy atI

HKL V. Thesec wee recot ar d 4from dtls I in

theoiednoe (Fig). 4). Interpretation ofro the noemasn diffculatio beauethe slopear of thi terraenwa steepw andh

helt at VhKLe was shallow. Crse humicsoil wa

found at greater depth outside. The existence of the shelter may be due to decomposition of the granite boulders, which caused them to fall and create the present shelter formation (N.B.C. Korsman pers. comm.).

Radiocarbon dating Charcoal remains from HKLP I and HKLP V are

minimal and very fragmented. At HKLP I charcoal fragments from four different areas provided sufficient mass for radiocarbon dating. At HKLP V charcoal fragments from the hearth provided a single date, but fragments recovered from the main excavation, F3, were insufficient for dating purposes. Radiocarbon results are as follows: HKLP I: Gravel layer in Square 4 at about 200-300 mm

depth in front of rock art panel: 4870 ? 70 BP (Pta- 5049). Humus layer outside rock shelter in Square 6 at 0-80 mm depth: 710 ? 50 BP (Pta-5058). Humus layer outside rock shelter in Squares 2/3/5/619 at 0-380 mm depth: 640 ? 50 BP (Pta-5056). Humus layer outside rock shelter in Squares 12A/16/8A at 0-250 mm depth: 300 ? 40 BP (Pta-5057).

HKLP V: Humus layer from hearth in rock shelter in Squares H31G3 at 50-100 mm depth: 210 ? 45 BP (Pta- 5048).

Indirect dating It was not possible to obtain a radiocarbon date for the

gravel layer at HKLP V. The cultural assemblage is, however, typologically similar to that from the dated gravel layer at HKLP I and the two are therefore regarded as roughly contemporary, at between 4000 and 5000 BP.

Environmental conditions Palaeoclimatic research shows that conditions were

probably drier than at present in Swaziland from approximately 6000 to 4000 BP (Prior & Price-Williams 1985). In the Transvaal, it may have been moister from about 6000 until 3000 BP (Tyson 1986). There are no reliable data to indicate major shifts in climate compared with the present over the past 5000 years (Deacon & Lancaster 1988). The Honingklip sites are in the foothills of the Drakensberg in the eastern Transvaal, where the climate is warmer than the highveld, yet cooler than the lowveld.

Utilization of lithic raw materials at HKLP I and HKLP V

The Nkomati and Nhlazatshe Rivers and the Teespruit, Buffelspruit, and Seekoeispruit, plus their tributaries, appear to have been the main source of the various lithic raw materials used by the occupants of the sites. HKLP I and HKLP V are closest to the Nhlazatshe River and the Teespruit which originate in the Drakensberg. These rivers carry hornfels, diabase, dolerite, schist, and basaltic type rocks from their original sources directly to the river below the sites. Rough quartz is found in seams in the granite rocks at Honingklip, but milky quartz, which has better flaking properties, is available from the river bed of the Seekoeispruit at Badplaas, about 30 km away, where quartz crystals are also plentiful. The main chert source is found to the east and south of Honingklip. Opaline is available to the north-east, between the Barberton area and Honingklip. Sandstone is mainly available from the area to the south- west of the sites, especially in the Lake Chrissie area. Chert, opaline and sandstone were imported to the sites.

A similar range of raw materials was used for stone tool manufacture at both sites. Some inherent properties were significant in the selection of raw materials. Relatively few formal tools were made from the quartz available from seams running through the local granite rock as it fractures




easily along natural crystal planes. Scrapers, awls, bladelets and bladelet cores were made mainly from milky quartz which is more suitable for tool manufacture. Items identified as quartz crystal had at least one visible crystal facet. Hornfels is relatively easy to flake and the hornfels

used at the sites had undergone double metamorphosis during formation which resulted in hinging when flakes were struck (G. Cawthorne, pers. comm.). The fine-grained chert was used to produce finely retouched artefacts with relatively little evidence of waste. Many quartz, hornfels

Table 1. Raw materials used for formal tools and utilised pieces at HKLP I and V (most common types only).

Mid-Holocene Late Holocene HKLP I HKLP V HKLP I HKLP V

Quartz 46,0 50,4 49,5 32,5 Hornfels 29,9 26,3 32,3 45,7 Chert 7,5 5,4 5,1 7,6

Table 2. Summary of mid- and late Holocene lithic assemblages at HKLP I & V.

HKLP I HKLP V Mid-Holocene Late Holocene Mid-Holocene Late Holocene

n fi n i n I n

MANUFACTURING WASTE Manuports 474 7,3 328 7,3 1287 9,9 2961 11,1 Chunks 469 7,2 367 8,2 965 7,4 1925 7,2 Chips 1632 25,2 935 20,9 3690 28,4 8114 30,5 Cores 45 0,7 24 0,5 48 0,4 114 0,4 Corerejuvenation flakes 41 0,7 34 0,8 15 0,1 39 0,1 Core reduced pieces 5 0,1 2 < 0,1 4 < 0,1 7 < 0,1 Waste flakes 3626 56,1 2695 60,1 6592 50,8 12615 47,5

Total waste 6292 97,0 4383 97,8 12600 97,0 25775 97,0

FORMAL TOOLS All scrapers 56 0,8 32 0,8 137 1,1 200 0,8

Scrapers < 20mm 39 0,6 16 0,4 67 0,5 98 0,4 Scrapers 20-30mm 8 0,1 13 0,3 48 0,4 67 0,3 Scrapers > 30mm 9 0,1 3 0,1 22 0,2 35 0,1

Allbackedtools 21 0,4 4 0,1 2 <0,1 14 <0,1 Segments 11 0,2 3 0,1 1 < 0,1 6 < 0,1 Backed bladelets 5 0,1 1 < 0,1 0 - 4 < 0,1 Backed irregular pieces 5 0,1 0 - 1 < 0,1 4 < 0,1

Adzes 11 0,2 8 0,2 31 0,2 146 0,5 Spokeshaves 2 0,0 3 0,1 2 < 0,1 21 0,1 Awls 10 0,2 2 <0,1 4 <0,1 8 <0,1 Borers 0 0,0 0 - 3 <0,1 3 <0,1 Miscellaneous retouch 22 0,3 7 0,2 45 0,3 87 0,3 Groundand/orpolishedtools 0 - 0 - 5 <0,1 12 <0,1

Total formal 122 1,9 56 1,2 229 1,8 491 1,8

UTILISED PIECES Grindstones 0 - 0 - 3 <0,1 15 <0,1 Hammerstones 3 <0,1 7 0,2 9 0,1 40 0,2 Utilised flakes 40 0,6 23 0,5 109 0,8 166 0,6 Utilisedcores I <0,1 2 <0,1 0 - 4 <0,1 Blades 7 0,1 2 < 0,1 8 0,1 16 < 0,1 Bladelets 12 0,2 8 0,2 11 0,1 29 0,1

Total utilised 65 1,0 43 1,0 140 1,1 270 1,0

MSAPIECES 5 <0,1 0 - 6 <0,1 28 0,1

TOTAL 6484 4482 12975 26564




and chert scrapers are finely retouched and similar in form and size. Opaline, an opaque, fine-grained green stone, flakes easily, in a manner similar to chert, and these tools are finely retouched. Dolerite and diabase were used for grindstones and hammerstones. Other raw materials are mainly basaltic rocks used as hammerstones and grindstones, sandstone which was probably imported from the south-east, and various schists which are abundant in the area. Table 1 shows that during the mid-Holocene quartz predominated in the production of formal tools and utilised pieces at both sites. During the late Holocene a higher percentage of hornfels was used to produce formal tools and utilised pieces at HKLP V than at HKLP I. In the late Holocene the percentage of chert in these tool categories increases at HKLP V and decreases at HKLP I. At both sites, small pieces of quartz crystal were used to make tools such as small scrapers, segments and bladelets. Opaline was found in limited quantities at both sites, and the fine workmanship on three formal artefacts from HKLP I and ten from HKLP V suggests that opaline was valued by the inhabitants. Opaline waste was rare.

Typological analysis of stone tools The assemblages from HKLP I and V conform

typologically and technologically to the presently accepted criteria for LSA assemblages (Deacon 1984; Wadley 1987, 1989; Mazel 1989). The number of formal tools and amount of manufacturing waste indicates greater manufacturing productivity at HKLP V than at HKLP I during both occupation phases. A comparison of tool frequencies at the two sites is given in Table 2. At HKLP I microlithic scrapers comprise 70% of the scraper class during the mid- Holocene, and 50% during the late Holocene occupation. Scrapers dominate the formal tool category during both occupations. During the mid-Holocene backed tools comprise 17% of the formal tool category, whereas during the late Holocene occupation they contribute only 7%. Adzes and spokeshaves form only 11% of the formal tools during the mid-Holocene, but 20% during the late Holocene. The relatively high frequencies of backed tools and microlithic scrapers during the mid-Holocene supports the hypothesis that HKLP I was an aggregation centre where hxaro gift exchange may have been important (Korsman in preparation). The appearance of and fine retouch on these artefacts is consistent with the suggestion that they were possibly exchange items. Microlithic artefacts with a strategically positioned flake removed were probably hafted, and composite tools may have been made at the site.

At both sites, microlithic scrapers occur more frequently than other scrapers during both occupations. In the mid- Holocene at HKLP V 60% of formal tools are scrapers and 14,4% are adzes and spokeshaves. Although adzes and

spokeshaves increase to 34% of the formal tools during the late Holocene, with a corresponding decrease in scrapers to 41%, scrapers still dominate the formal tool category. A number of similar looking notched pieces do not conform with the scraper definition, but may have been used as scrapers for woodworking, similar to the findings by Cable (1984) and Carter (1970) in Natal. The incidence of unused and/or broken bladelets is higher during the later occupation. Possibly the need for composite tools increased. There are only two backed artefacts at HKLP V in the mid- Holocene layer, whereas there are fourteen in the late Holocene layer. Although the assemblages at HKLP I and V are typologically and technologically similar in appearance, the discrepancy in the numbers of backed tools may mean that the occupation at HKLP V is later than the dated mid- Holocene occupation at HKLP I. Backed artefacts could, however, have been removed from HKLP V for use elsewhere. During both occupation phases segments and pieces suitable for composite tools were made on the finer grained materials such as milky quartz, chert and opaline and, in one instance, fine hornfels. Awls and borers are found during both occupations. However, due to poor preservation, most of the leather, shell, wood and bone tools made with awls and borers have not survived.

Mid-Holocene cores at HKLP V are mostly made of quartz and are irregular in shape. In both levels diabase/dolerite cores are large. The increase in quartz cores during the late Holocene parallels the high incidence of quartz formal tools and waste. Numbers of hornfels cores also increase slightly but formal tools increase markedly. Utilised pieces, including hammerstones, pounding stones and similar heavy duty tools, are more abundant during the late than mid-Holocene. A hammerstone made from a broken grindstone with a trace of ochre was recovered from Square Cl/D1. An incomplete pendant-like quartz crystal was recovered from Square E3.

Non-lithic remains at HKLP I and HKLP V

Beads

Only seven beads (five ostrich eggshell, one Achatina, and one iron) were recovered from the sites. Normally bead- making is well represented at LSA sites. Beads are probably under-represented in the materials recovered from the Honingklip sites. The beads which were retrieved were very fragile, and there may well have been others which were not preserved in the acidic soil.

Pottery

The potsherds recovered from both sites (Table 3) were examined and, based on the decoration and rim shapes, are

Table 3. Summary of potsherds recovered from HKLP I and V.

Site/Layer Rim Decoration Rim + Fragments Total potsherds Decoration recovered

HKLP I; Humus 18 26 6 337 387 HKLP I: Gravel 3 3 1 61 68 HKLP I: Total recovered 21 29 7 398 455

HKLPV: Humus 21 96 17 1310 1444 HKLP V: Gravel 1 26 4 279 310 HKLP V: Total recovered 22 122 21 1589 1754




Fig. 5. Examples of potsherds from HKLP I & V. I & 2 recovered from late Holocene layers at HKLP V, 3 from mid-Holocene layer at HKLP V, 4 from mid-Holocene layer at HKLP I. 1, 2 & 3 are copies of Sentker's illustrations.

considered to be similar to the Iron Age pottery described and illustrated as Eiland and Lydenburg and dated to approximately 1000 and 500 AD respectively (A. Meyer pers. comm;, Evers 1981). There is no evidence of burnishing on the potsherds. Examples of potsherds recovered from the sites are shown in Fig. 3. There is no direct evidence of Iron Age intervention at the sites, and the intrusion of potsherds into the mid-Holocene gravel layers at both sites is problematic. A possible explanation is that the occupants of the late Holocene levels had social contact with Iron Age people and obtained pottery from them which they buried in the gravel layers. This suggestion is supported by the ethnographic study by Potgieter (1955) of the Batwa San from the Lake Chrissie area to the south-west of Honingklip who traded ostrich feathers with the Swazi for pots of grain which they then buried in the earth for use during times of need (Korsman & Plug 1992).

Wood

A single wooden peg was retrieved from the later phase of the late Holocene occupation at HKLP V. It may have been used, with others, to stretch drying animal skins.

Faunal remains and hunting

Although faunal remains are limited, the species identified provide evidence of a basic hunter-gatherer subsistence strategy (Table 4). The organic remains do not realistically reflect subsistence activities at the sites, since perishable material has not preserved well in the acidic soil and moist conditions. Faunal remains do not, therefore, necessarily represent the full scope of hunting activities. It is also possible that only selected skeletal remains of the hunted animals are incorporated into the deposits. This may lead to under-representation of some skeletal parts and over- r of ohrsI. W t o n a ,I

would~~~~~ ~~ hvbenmrsutdttrpigadnringa during~~ ~~~~ th/e umrmnh1 an ol aeafce h

Femig. s. Exampltes ofm poserids fhrom HKL eidec & f V. &

saxatilis and a bird at HKLP V. The only evidence of snaring during the mid-Holocene is the presence of a single bone fragment of Hystrix africaeaustralis at HKLP V.

Hunting and skin preparation are normally important activities within hunter-gatherer bands. Although no trace of animal skins has been found in the archaeological remains, skins could have been brought back to the sites for processing. Skins of a number of species represented would have been significant for gift-giving purposes, or for making clothing items, bags and quivers.

Only two fish species are represented in the remains. These consist of the single fish vertebra from the mid- Holocene occupation at HKLP I, and the five fish remains from the late Holocene occupation at HKLP V.

Botanical remains and gathering activities Botanical remains retrieved from the Honingklip sites

are minimal and do not allow a study of subsistence strategy to be done. However, the species identified indicate that a range of food resources and a variety of medicinal remedies were available to the inhabitants at HKLP V (Table 5).

Rock art At HKLP I there are four panels of rock art on the

granite boulders which form a backdrop to the excavated terrace area in front of the shelter. The existence of any direct relationship between the archaeological deposits and the rock paintings cannot be ascertained. However, the presence of colouring material in the gravel layers at HKLP I suggests that some painting was done during the mid- Holocene, although it is impossible to tell whether this was body or rock painting. Colouring material was also found in the later deposits. At HKLP V the rock paintings are barely discernible on a granite boulder forming part of the rock shelter, and appear to be limited to two, indistinct, painted figures. Colouring material was recovered from both levels at HKLP V, so it is difficult to relate the art to either occupational phase with any certainty.

Discussion and conclusions The radiocarbon dates and the stratigraphic correlations

between HKLP I and HKLP V indicate that the sites were first occupied at least 5000 years ago. The lithic assemblages from both the Honingklip sites are similar to other LSA assemblages in southern Africa (Mason 1962; Humphreys & Thackeray 1983; Deacon 1984; Opperman 1987; Wadley 1987, 1989; Mazel 1989). The high percentages of scrapers and adzes present at HKLP V indicate that skin preparation and woodworking activities were carried out at the sites. Some quartz crystal and MSA pieces were possibly symbolic items or used as shamanistic paraphernalia similar to that described by Wadley (1989). The lithic assemblages are formal and the raw materials favoured for stone tool manufacture are quartz and hornfels. Materials such as chert, quartz crystal and opaline were imported from sources identified along the river routes in the area (Korsman 1990:244). Dolerite and diabase are used for large artefacts such and grindstones and hammerstones.

Although the assemblages are typologically and technologically similar, stone tool manufacture was more limited at HKLP I than at HKLP V. The main focus of manufacturing activities during both occupation phases was at HKLP V where typical LSA artefacts such as scrapers, adzes, segments and backed tools, awls and pieces with miscellaneous retouch were manufactured to a consistently high standard of workmanship. There is evidence for a




decrease in stone tool manufacture during the late Holocene at HKLP I. However it was during this period that adze- related activities became significant at both sites, although small scrapers remained the dominant tool type. The increase in adzes at Honingklip coincides with a similar tendency observed in the western Cape and in the Thukela basin research area, and may relate to increased gathering activities during times of stress.

A typical LSA hunter-gatherer subsistence strategy is evident as small, medium and large bovids were hunted, although from the limited remains recovered, game hunting does not appear to have been significant at HKLP I and V.

The limited remains may, however, be due to lack of preservation in the acidic soil at Honingklip. Snaring and fishing were also part of the subsistence strategy. A restricted range of underground plants was identified in the remains from HKLP V. These provided food as well as medicine to treat a variety of ailments. Colouring material is associated with both mid-Holocene and late Holocene occupations at both sites. Pottery at the sites may reflect the Batwa custom of burying pots containing grain (Potgieter 1955; Korsman & Plug 1992), thus explaining why groups of potsherds are recovered from the mid-Holocene levels.

This paper has shown that the original research carried

Table 4. Fauna identified at the HKLP sites: number of identified specimens (NISP) and minimum number of individuals

(MNI). Mid-Holocene Late Holocene

Species HKLP I HKLP V HKILP I HKLP V

NISP/MNI NISP/MNI NISP/MNI NISP/MNI

Homo sapiens sapiens (human) 108/1 Soricidae (shrew) 8/1 Canis mesomelas (jackal) Itl cf. Canis mesomelas 1/1 Ictonyx striatus (striped polecat) 2/1 cf. Ictonyx striatus 1/l cf. Suricata suricatta 3/1 Proteles cristatus (aardwolf) 3/1 Pantherapardus (leopard) 1/1 Felis caracal (caracal) 1/1 cf. Felis caracal 1/1 Procavia capensis (hyrax) 3/1 5/1 10l1 Orycteropus afer (aardvark) 1/1 Phacochoerus aethiopicus (warthog) 6/3 cf. Phacochoerus aethiopicus 1/1 Suidae sp. indet. (pig) /// Giraffa camelopardalis (giraffe) 11 Bos taurus (cattle) 1/1 Ovis aries (sheep) 1/1 Connochaetes taurinus (blue wildebeest) 3/1 cf. Alcelaphus buselaphus (red hartebeest) 1/1 Damaliscus dorcas phillipsi (blesbok) 4/2

cf. Damaliscus sp. (probably blesbok) 1/1

Sylvicapra grimmia (common duiker) 3/2 6/1 10/2 cf. Sylvicapra grimmia 1l1 4/1 Oreotragus oreotragus (klipspringer) 1/1 411 Raphicerus campestris (steenbok) 3/1 3/1 14/4 cf. Raphicerus campestris 2/1 4/1 2/1

cf. Raphicerus sp. 4/2 1/1

Aepyceros melampus(impala) 1/1 5/1

cf. Aepyceros melampus 1/i 6/1 2/1

Pelea capreolus (grey rhebuck) 2/1 2/1

Hippotragus equinus (roan) 11/11/1 Hippotragus cf. niger (probably sable) 1/1 Hippotragus sp. (roan or sable) 1/1 Tragelaphus cf. strepsiceros (probably kudu) 1/1 Taurotragus oryx (eland) 1/1 1/1 cf. Taurotragus oryx 6/1 Redunca arundinum (reedbuck) 6/1 Reduncafulvorufula (mountain reedbuck) 2/1 6/2 Redunca cf. fulvorufula 1/1 5/1 Redunca sp. 3/1 cf. Redunca sp. 3 2/1 5/1 Bovid size class I Bovid size class II (non-domestic) 10/1 1/1 5/1 9/3

Bovid size class III (non-domestic) 5/1 4/1 4/1 9/1 Bovid size class IV 4/1 2/2

Pedetes capensis (springhare) 1/1 1/1 1/1

Hystrix africaeaustralis (porcupine) 5/1 1/1 11 cf. Hystrix africaeaustralis 2/1 Thryonomys sp. (cane rat) 4/1 2/1 cf. Thryonomys sp. 4/1 Aethomys chrysophilus (red veld rat) 2/1 Otomys cf. irroratus (probably vlei rat) 19/3 4/1 Lepus saxatilis (scrub hare) 7/2 Macroscelididae (small reptile) 2/125/1 Struthio camelus (ostrich) 1/1 2/1 Aves gen. et sp. indet. (bird) 2/1 1/1 Testudinidae sp. indet. (tortoise) 1/1 8/1 1/1 19/2

Varanus sp. (monitor lizard) 1/1 1/1 1/1

Reptilia gen. et sp. indet, (reptile) 1/1

Bufo/Rana sp. (toad/frog) 1/1 2/2

Xarias sp. (barbel) 1/1 1/1

Labeo sp. (mudfish) 5/1

Potomonautis sp. (crab) 3/2 17/1 3886/172 Achatina sp. (giant landsnail) 55/2 109/7 42/6 1/1 Euonyma sp. (small terrestrial snail) 3/1 Unio/Aspatheria sp. (freshwater mussel) 2/1 3/2 49/10

Other freshwater mollusc 1/1




Table 5. Plant remains recovered from the late Holocene at HKLP V, and some of their possible uses.

Name Domes- Food Medi- Food Magical Total tic procure- cinal source proper- no.

ment ties frags

Ekebergia capensis (Cape ash) I Combretum sp. (bush willow) x x x x x 5 Canthium inerme (common turkey berry) x x 2 Rhoicissus digitata (baboon grape) x x x x 2 Pappea capensis (jacket plum) x x 2 Kiggelaria africana (wild peach) 3 Cussonia sp. (cabbage tree) x x I Ficus sp. (fig) x x x x x 2 Manihot sp. (cassava) x I Olea sp. (wild olive) x x x x I Diospyros lycioides (Transvaal blue bush) x x I Sclerocarya birrea (marula) x x 1 TOTAL 22

out by Sentker was worth further assessment and full analysis. This research project provides evidence of the mid-and late Holocene occupation of HKLP I and V and supplements knowledge of the LSA in the eastern Transvaal. Further research in the region should include possible social interaction between known and new sites in this area. Although social behaviour was not yet considered a part of research goals at the time when the Honingklip sites were excavated, the possibility that social behaviour is reflected in the material remains from the Honingklip sites is the subject of further research (Korsman in prep.).

Acknowledgements We thank the Department of Anthropology and

Indigenous Law, University of South Africa, for allowing us access to the Sentker collection. The Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, University of Pretoria supervised the MA thesis of S.A. Korsman on which this paper is based. Mrs E.J. du Plessis, University of Pretoria, identified the botanical remains. Dr J.C. Vogel of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research kindly provided the radiocarbon dates. Figure 1 is reprinted from Korsman & Plug (1992), by permission of the editor. S.A. Korsman was supported by a grant from the Human Sciences Research Council for the Masters research. Opinions expressed in this publication and conclusions reached are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Human Sciences Research Council.

References

Barham, L.S. 1989. A preliminary report on the Later Stone Age artefacts from Siphiso Shelter in Swaziland. South African Archaeological Bulletin 44:33-43.

Beaumont, P.B. 1981. The Heuningneskrans shelter. In: Voigt E.A. (ed.) Guide to archaeological sites in the northern and eastern Transvaal: 132-145. Pretoria: Transvaal Museum.

Cable, C. 1984. A model for terminal Later Stone Age subsistence strategies in southern Natal. In: Hall, M., Avery, G., Avery, D.M., Wilson, M.L. & Humphreys, A.J.B. (eds) Frontiers: southern African archaeology today: 167-181. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series 207.

Carter, P.L. 1970. Late Stone Age exploitation patterns in southern Natal. South African Archaeological Bulletin 25:55-58.

Deacon, J. 1984. The Later Stone Age of southernmost Africa. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series 213.

Deacon, J. & Lancaster, N. 1988. Late Quaternary palaeoenvironments of southern Africa. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Evers, T.M. 1981. The Iron Age in the eastern Transvaal. In Voigt, E.A. (ed.) Guide to archaeological sites in the northern and eastern Transvaal: 7-22. Pretoria: Transvaal Museum.

Goodwin, A.J.H. 1953. Method in prehistory. Claremont: South African Archaeological Society Handbook Series 1.

Humphreys, A.J.B. & Thackeray, A. 1983. Ghaap and Gariep: Later Stone Age studies in the northern Cape. Claremont: South African Archaeological Society Monograph Series 2.

Korsman, S.A. 1990. A reconstruction of the Later Stone Age on the farm Honingklip in the eastern Transvaal. Unpublished MA dissertation: University of Pretoria.

Korsman, S.A. & Plug, I. 1992. Archaeological evidence and ethnographic analogy: interpreting prehistoric social behaviour. South African Journal of Ethnology 15:120- 126.

Mason, R. 1962. Prehistory of the Transvaal. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand Press.

Mazel, A.D. 1989. People making history: the last ten thousand years of hunter-gatherer communities in the Thukela Basin. Natal Museum Journal of Humanities 1:1-168.

Opperman, H. 1987. The Later Stone Age of the Drakensberg range and its foothills. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series 339.

Plug, I. 1978. Die Latere Steentydperk van die Boesmanrotsskuiling in oos-Transvaal. Unpublished MA thesis: University of Pretoria.

Potgieter, E.F. 1955. The disappearing Bushmen of Lake Chrissie. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

Price-Williams, D. 1980. Archaeology in Swaziland. South Africap Archaeological Bulletin 35:13-18.




Price-Williams, D. 1981. A preliminary report on recent excavations of Middle and Late Stone Age levels at Sibebe Shelter, north-west Swaziland. South African Archaeological Bulletin 36:22-28.

Prior, J. & Price-Williams, D. 1985. An investigation of climatic change in the Holocene epoch using archaeological charcoal from Swaziland, southern Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 12: 457-475.

Tyson, P.D. 1986. Climatic change and variability in southern Africa. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.

Wadley, L. 1987. Later Stone Age hunters and gatherers of the southern Transvaal. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series 380.

Wadley, L. 1989. Legacies from the Later Stone Age. South African Archaeological Society Goodwin Series 6:42- 53.

Walton, J. 1951. Occupied rock-shelters in Basutoland. South African Archaeological Bulletin 6:9-13.



Documents

Two Later Stone Age Sites on the Farm Honingklip in the Eastern Transvaal