acheulean artifact accumulation and early hominin land use, garden route casino road, pinnacle...

Acheulean Artifact Accumulation

and Early Hominin Land Use, Garden

Route Casino Road, Pinnacle Point,

South Africa

Erin Thompson*

Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona

An Early Stone Age Acheulean lithic assemblage collected along a 1.5-km transect at theGarden Route Casino near Pinnacle Point, Mossel Bay, South Africa, was examined in orderto assess the relative degree to which assemblage variability is impacted by post-occupationalprocesses and/or terrain. It was found that post-occupational variables do vary across thestudy area, and they affect the positions of artifacts to different degrees. Terrain structure wasdetermined to have minimal effect on artifact movement. Three analysis sections were iden-tified as having artifacts that were likely close to their original positions and compositions.Future interpretations of differential land use can now be tempered with considerations ofthe post-occupational processes that formed the recovered assemblage. © 2009 WileyPeriodicals, Inc.

INTRODUCTION

Sites have been historically conceptualized as specific points or “dots on thelandscape.” While this approach provides useful information about hominin behav-ior and technology, the data only reflect one specific aspect of the landscape and notthe entire spectrum of hominin behaviors possible across the landscape. Examiningarchaeological material in a more lateral manner provides more complete informa-tion about how early hominins differentially used landscapes. To begin investigatinglandscape use in this manner, I present as a case study an Acheulean lithic assem-blage collected at the Garden Route Casino near Pinnacle Point, South Africa. Beforebehavioral signatures can be interpreted, the integrity of the collection must be eval-uated. Therefore, this study is designed to test the degree to which post-occupationalprocesses have transformed evidence for the behavioral processes that first placedthe artifacts on the landscape.

The Acheulean of Africa dates to at least 1.6 mya at Olduvai Gorge (Issac, 1982)and was replaced prior to 200,000 years ago by several diverse Middle Stone Age flakeindustries (McBrearty & Brooks, 2000). Acheulean assemblages have traditionallybeen classified as Early, Middle, or Late based on an inferred chronological trend ofincreasing degrees of refinement and standardization in biface shape through time

Geoarchaeology: An International Journal, Vol. 24, No. 4, 402–428 (2009)© 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Published online in Wiley Interscience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI:10.1002/gea.20272

*Corresponding author; E-mail: [email protected].

(Jones, 1979). Refinement is measured in the same way as elongation and was firstdefined by Bordes (1961) as width divided by length. Longer and relatively thinnerbifaces are said to be more refined. Since such assessments are usually made with-out stratigraphic information or appropriate absolute dating techniques, datingassemblages based on this assumption is problematic (cf. McPherron, 1994).

The manufacture of the Acheulean Industrial Complex has been attributed to at least four hominin species: H. erectus (and similar forms), H. ergaster,H. heidelbergensis (and/or related archaic forms), and potentially H. sapiens forthe latest assemblages (Wood, 1992; Wood & Collard, 1999). H. ergaster is the mostlikely shared common ancestor of all later hominins, and the makers of the Acheuleanare widely assumed to represent the parent population of all behaviorally modern peo-ple (Deacon & Wurz, 2001; McBrearty & Brooks, 2000).

The distribution of Early Stone Age (ESA) occurrences geographically expandsbetween the Oldowan and Acheulean Industrial Complex. While Oldowan sites arefound only in Africa and a few areas of Asia, the Acheulean marks the first occur-rence of Homo in Europe and the rest of Asia. Most Oldowan sites are restricted tonear lake margins, while Acheulean sites are found in a wider variety of contexts,although most are still near permanent water sources, such as stream channels,springs, lakeshores, and coasts. The Acheulean represents the first multi-habitat use by our hominin ancestors and is found in every modern African vegetation zone(Issac, 1982); however, it is not known precisely what the ancient habitats in theseareas were. Therefore, the Acheulean is a useful period in which to start looking forearly expressions of pre-modern or modern human land use behavior.

BACKGROUND TO PALEOLITHIC LANDSCAPE STUDIES

Blumenschine and Peters (1998), Potts, Behrensmeyer, and Ditchfield (1999), andFuchs et al. (2008) have argued that studying sites as separate, discrete points on thelandscape spatially limits the data that are recovered from sites. Potts, Behrensmeyer,and Ditchfield have instead proposed conducting laterally extensive excavations toshed more light on how hominins might have been using and adapting to their micro-habitats. Paddayya and Petraglia (1993) have also argued for the advantages of spa-tially extensive excavations and survey to reconstruct the behavioral implications ofhominin land use in Acheulean assemblages from India. After taking into account post-occupational processes and by studying larger areas with survey and excavation,they were able to demonstrate functional variability among Acheulean assemblagesat different localities.

Many researchers question the untested assumption that sites of this age are gen-erally in primary context or are “living floors” (Blumenschine & Peters, 1998; Burroni,Donahue, & Pollard, 2002; Dibble et al., 1997; Issac, 1967; Paddayya, 1987; Paddayya &Petraglia, 1993; Petraglia & Potts, 1994; Potts, Behrensmeyer, & Ditchfield, 1999;Schick, 1986; Schiffer, 1983, 1987; Shea, 1999; Stern, 1994; Villa, 1982). For example,Dibble et al. define a living floor as “a discrete and undisturbed occupation surface,in which the composition and spatial distribution of the artifacts, fauna, and featuresreflect primarily or exclusively the behaviors of the past inhabitants over a relatively

GEOARCHAEOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL, VOL. 24, NO. 4

ACHEULEAN ARTIFACT ACCUMULATION AND EARLY HOMININ LAND USE

403

THOMPSON


restricted period of time” (Dibble et al., 1997:630). They argue that such settings arerare, and they stress that in order to assess the integrity of a site and reconstruct thebehavioral signatures of an assemblage, the post-occupational processes of the areamust be understood and accounted for before any behavioral interpretations can bemade with confidence.

Post-occupational studies are not only a way to determine whether sites are in pri-mary or secondary context but should be considered as part of a continuum betweenthe degree of post-occupational and behavioral processes working on the artifactsand their spatial positions (Paddayya, 1987). Paddayya and Petraglia (1993) distin-guish between a spot provenience and point provenience. Point provenience refersto the exact location where an artifact was discarded, and spot provenience refers tothe artifact still being in the general spot or locality where it was first discarded.While artifacts with point provenience are the best possible situation, it is a highlyunlikely situation. Spot provenience, though, can still preserve a large portion of theassemblage and significant inferences can often be made confidently (Schiffer, 1983).Before Acheulean landscape use can be examined, it must first be determined howthe artifacts in the Garden Route Casino Road assemblage came to rest in the posi-tions where they were collected. Given this assemblage’s great age and its geologi-cal context, it is unlikely that most of the artifacts were recovered exactly wherehominins originally discarded them, although there are rare cases of in situ Acheuleanassemblages, such as Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel (Goren-Inbar et al., 1999) andIsampur Quarry, India (Petraglia, LaPorta, & Paddayya, 1999).

GARDEN ROUTE CASINO ROAD ASSEMBLAGE

In order to preserve the cultural heritage resources of South Africa, the MosselBay Archaeological Project (MAP) offered to monitor the excavations of the foun-dations and services at the construction site of the new Garden Route Casino(34°11'30"S, 22°05'30"E) (Figures 1, 2). The resulting collection includes ESA andMiddle Stone Age (MSA) lithic artifacts made on local quartzites that were hand col-lected and excavated (in a CRM context) by Dr. Peter Nilssen1 during subsurfaceroad construction monitoring. A random sample of approximately 1100 ESAAcheulean artifacts was analyzed, drawn from a total collection of 7000 (Figure 3).The collection included 429 unretouched flakes, 16 scrapers, 5 notched pieces, 4denticulates, 4 flakes with general retouch, 275 angular fragments, 134 cobble frag-ments, 250 cores, 39 handaxes, and 7 cleavers. The collected artifacts were recov-ered along a 1.5-km � 30-m transect; a Garmin eTrex GPS unit (accurate to � 3 m)was used to spatially plot the location of groups of artifacts.

The Garden Route Casino is approximately 1.25 km from the coast, where cliffsof Table Mountain Sandstone are exposed (Figure 2). The elevation slopes gentlydown to the cliff tops, where it is about 60 m above sea level. The cliff faces arenearly vertical, and there is very little beach between the cliffs and the sea. Thecoastal platform, which is part of the Agulhas Bank, in this area has a very gentle slope1 Dr. Peter Nilssen is the director of the Mossel Bay Archaeological Project (MAP) CRM division in SouthAfrica.



405

that would have been extensively exposed during low sea levels. Remnant eolianitesat the base of the cliffs in the Pinnacle Point area attest that the coastal platform wouldhave been an active dune field during these times.

The coastal platform is one of the most impressive features of the southern Capecoast. Table Mountain quartzites, Bokkeveld shales, and local basins of Cretaceousclastics (Uitenhage Series) stretch uninterrupted over 500 km from Cape Agulhas toeast of St. Francis Bay. Representing a �170–200 m wave-cut platform dating to thebreak-up of Gondwanaland in the late Cretaceous, the coastal platform is overlain

Figure 1. Location of sites mentioned in the text, with the inset showing the location of the GardenRoute Casino at Pinnacle Point in relation to the town of Mossel Bay.

THOMPSON


by a series of eolian sands that were deposited during major eustatic sea-level fluc-tuations in the Quaternary (Butzer & Helgren, 1972; Helgren & Butzer, 1977;Illenburger, 1996).

GEOLOGY AND SEDIMENTOLOGY

During excavations, three natural strata and one layer of topsoil were recorded(Figure 4). The lowest soil horizon reached during the road excavations was a cal-crete (Layer 4). The next stratum (Layer 3) consists of the remnants of red sandy pale-osols. Layer 2 consists of massive unstratified sands that rest unconformably on the red sands of Layer 3. Thin and recent topsoil composes the uppermost layer(Layer 1) and varies in thickness from 15 to 30 cm. The bulk of the artifacts were exca-vated from the top sandy stratum (Layer 2) and in rare cases were pressed into the

Figure 2. Aerial photograph of Pinnacle Point area, showing the location of numbered analysis sectionsfor this study; the black lines indicate fluvial channels.



407

Figure 3. An assorted collection of artifacts representing the composition of the Garden Route CasinoRoad assemblage.

Figure 4. Representative section of the stratigraphy showing the layers disturbed during road con-struction.

THOMPSON


surface of the red sand layer (Layer 3). Few artifacts were discovered in the topsoil,and no artifacts were found in the red sand or calcrete layers (Nilssen, personalcommunication, 2005).

Bedrock

The Quaternary sediments that were disturbed during the road construction lieunconformably on a base of Table Mountain Sandstone. As part of the coastal plat-form, the light gray quartzitic bedrock underlying the Garden Route Casino RoadAssemblage is part of the Skurweberg Formation of the Table Mountain supergroup.

Calcrete (Layer 4)

Directly on top of the Table Mountain Sandstone is a hardpan calcrete layer (Layer 4) that varies in thickness between 20 and 80 cm (Van Rooyen, 2008). It occursin three forms: (1) a soft, chalky material; (2) nodules; and (3) extremely hard.Calcrete horizons were also observed in several other road cuts within the immedi-ate area.

Red Sand (Layer 3)

The next stratum (Layer 3) consists of red sand varying in thickness from 30 to50 cm. The red sand varies in color from red to light orange and is in some cases mot-tled. In a few areas of the transect, very thin layers of calcrete cap this layer.Discontinuous remnants of red sandy paleosols are also visible within this layer. Thered sand in the Garden Route Casino stratigraphic profile is related to the FormosaSoils (Butzer & Helgren, 1972). The Formosa soils date to the late Miocene orPliocene. Specifically, the red sand layer may be analogous to Units 3 and 4 of theFormosa Formation type site near Plettenburg Bay. At the type site, the FormosaSoils are represented by intensively weathered quartzite bedrock and a truncated mot-tled horizon of sandy clay loam (Butzer & Helgren, 1972).

Eolian Sands (Layer 2)

During the Pleistocene, the red sand layer of the study area was covered byrepeated depositions of eolian sands (Layer 2). Layer 2 belongs to the Waenhuiskransand Strandveld Formations of the Bredasdorp Group (Butzer & Helgren, 1972;Helgren & Butzer, 1977; Malan, 1987a, 1987b; Rogers, 1988), rests unconformably onthe red sands at the Garden Route Casino Road, and is a well-sorted, partially siltyand eolian sand stratum that varies in thickness from 30 to 60 cm. The WaenhuiskransFormation of the Cainozoic Bredasdorp Group is a Pleistocene eolian-derived dep-osition exposed along the coastline between Hermanus and Plettenburg Bay. TheStrandveld Formation lies unconformably on the Waenhuiskrans Formation. The Strandveld Formation is composed of unconsolidated wind-blown semi-stabilized sands (Butzer & Helgren, 1972; Helgren & Butzer, 1977; Malan, 1987a,1987b; Roberts et al., 2006; Rogers, 1988).



409

Dunes that form through the accumulation of wind-blown sand and the weather-ing of the quartzitic Table Mountain Sandstone are one the most common landformson the southern African coast (Butzer, 2004). Their morphology varies with topo-graphic irregularities or obstructions and depends on the strength and direction of thewind, sand availability, the size and source of sand grains, and the morphology of the surface beneath the dune, especially the presence or absence of relief. At the GardenRoute Casino, the morphology of the sands is a very gently rolling relief, ranging from150 to 175 m asl (Figure 5). The sands in this area are currently fixed by vegetation.At the times of artifact deposition, the dunes might have been fixed by vegetation asthey are today, with hominids living all over the landscape, or they might have beenactive dunes made up of hills and troughs, with hominins living in the troughs.

Most research on South African coastal and near-coastal eolian environments hasbeen done on dune cordons, with some potential implications for the formation anddating of the Garden Route Casino area. Cordons are large dune ridges running par-allel to the shore and occur along most of the South African coast as either activeor fossil dunes. These cordons are created through multiple phases of dune forma-tion. It is unclear if they form during high, low, or transitional sea levels (Batemanet al., 2004; Butzer, 2004; Butzer & Helgren, 1972; Illenburger, 1996). The dunes arecomposed of calcareous sand out of which runoff from rainwater gradually leachesout all of the carbonates, resulting in mainly quartz sand (Illenburger, 1996).Illenberger identified three dune cordons in the Wilderness area (50 km east ofMossel Bay): a seaward cordon of Holocene age, a middle cordon (250–500 ka), anda landward cordon (600–900 ka). He argued that deposition occurred during sea-level highstands of Pleistocene interglacials. However, Bateman et al. (2004) haveargued that this previously held view is not correct, and that dune deposition insteadoccurred during post-interglacial periods when sea levels were fluctuating and cli-matic conditions were cooler and wetter, and therefore more conducive to cemen-tation and preservation.

Recent geomorphological and sedimentological studies combined with OSL dat-ing of sand grains by Bateman et al. have revealed several periods of sand deposi-tion and subsequent eolianite formation on the southern coast of South Africa. Theyargue that eolianite construction occurred at 67–80 ka, 88–90 ka, 104–128 ka, 160–189 ka,and over 200 thousand years ago. The OSL chronology for the Wilderness and Agulhasancient dunes (Figure 1) shows that there has been some synchronicity along thecoastline with the Wilderness cordon dunes being constructed at a time similar tothe eolianites found at Hoë Walle, approximately 127 ka and 89 ka (2004). Illenberger(1996) assigned part of the middle cordon dune at Wilderness to OIS 7, which wouldtie in with the eolianites at Agulhas and Soetendals Valley.

METHODOLOGY

During monitoring at the Garden Route Casino Road, artifacts were hand col-lected while bulldozing activities were monitored. Each artifact location was recordedwithin polygons marked by sets of GPS waypoints. Using ArcGIS, the artifacts withineach polygon were linked to an attribute table containing all of the post-occupational

THOMPSON

Figure 5. Bar charts representing the proportions of each variable in each analysis section shown as atopographic profile. Each bar chart equals 100%. The shading of the Garden Route Casino road representsthe degree of slope.



411

and behavioral variables recorded for each artifact. The artifact groups werecombined into ten analysis sections of approximately equal area (30 � 150 m; seeFigure 2) for subsequent analysis.

Size

The distribution of size classes has been linked to sorting by post-occupationalprocesses in archaeological assemblages (Schiffer, 1983, 1987). Smaller, lighter arti-facts can be winnowed out from the rest of the assemblage by water transport andgravity. I calculated the percentage of artifact size in centimeters by analysis sec-tion to examine the frequency of smaller artifacts that remain in the assemblage(Dibble et al., 1997; Schick, 1986). Schick (1986) has shown experimentally that com-plete assemblages include a larger number of small artifacts with a decreasing num-ber of larger artifacts. A larger remaining portion of smaller artifacts would suggestthat more of the assemblage remains intact. When the artifacts were collected, theywere not screened, so these percentages cannot be used as absolute measures ofwhat was present at the time of collection. However, the same team collected allthe artifacts they saw, and because the artifacts tended to stand out quite starkly in the sands, I believe that these percentages can be used relative to each other tobroadly compare size classes across analysis sections.

Patination, polish, and rounding are visible results of geochemical and mechan-ical weathering processes on artifacts (Barton et al., 2002). Each of these three vari-ables was coded on an ordinal scale, as a qualitative and a quantitative measure ofthe degree of the expression of these traits. For the qualitative measurements, arti-facts were coded as the most dominantly expressed choice. For example, if 90% ofan artifact was moderately patinated while only a small portion (10%) of it wasextremely patinated, the artifact would be coded as “moderate.” If an artifact was 50% “moderate” and 50% “extreme” for a trait, it was coded as the more severestate (i.e., “extreme”). The classifications for these variables are similar to the clas-sifications used by Paddayya and Petraglia (1993) and Burroni, Donahue, and Pollard(2002).

Patination

Patination is a color change or staining resulting from the chemical weatheringor alteration of the surface of stone and/or accretion of material to a stone’s sur-face. Patina usually varies from shades of yellow-brown to red. This coloration hasbeen attributed to various oxides and hydroxides of iron from soil water (Paddayya &Petraglia, 1993; Rottländer, 1975; Schiffer, 1983; Stapert, 1976). However, Rottländer(1975) has shown that these conditions do not always cause patination even on thesame materials in the same surrounding context; therefore, the exact rates of pati-nation are not reliable indicators of age. Patina was qualitatively judged by lookingat the surface color of each artifact. For this quartzite assemblage, the patina is agolden brown or yellow color. See Figure 6 for an example of patination and Table I for how patination was coded.

THOMPSON


Polish

Polish refers to a qualitative macroscopic observation of a reflective property ofan artifact, which may be related to other attributes, such as smoothness, and bethe result of wind abrasion by fine-grained sediment, suggesting periods of surfaceexposure. The degree of polish of an artifact depends on the position of the artifactin relation to sediment-laden winds and the amount of time it has been exposed toabrasion by wind. If polish is primarily present on only one surface of an artifact oris more noticeable on only one face, it indicates that the artifact has not moved for a long time. Wind abrasion and the resulting polishing of artifacts may not be

Table I. Coding of patination.

Patination

1. Absent—no patina present2. Very slight—color of original material is still very visible on the surface between patches of patina3. Moderate—there is more patina than original color4. Extreme—no original color remains on the surface; material is a homogenous patinated color

Figure 6. Example of patination. The close-up on the left side is an example of what would be coded asvery slight for patination, and the close-up on the right is an example of what would be coded as mod-erate for patination.



413

constant through time, however, because of repeated cycles of reburial and exposureas eolian processes and landscapes change (Waters, 1992). See Figure 7 for exam-ples of polish and Table II for how polish was coded.

Rounding

Rounding describes the obliteration of edge modification and a general decreasein sharpness of the ridges of flake scars and edges. Rounding can result from fluvialtransport and/or wind abrasion. Fluvial processes round artifacts in two ways. Ingeneral rounding, all edges are rounded due to contact with sedimentary particlesin flowing water. Differential rounding is produced when water flows over stable orpartially buried artifacts, causing only the exposed surfaces to be rounded (Paddayya &Petraglia, 1993).

Rounding of the original edges can also be caused by wind scouring or sand-blasting. Wind-blown sediment can be a powerful force that erodes and abrades any-thing in its path. Sand particles carried by the wind hit objects such as artifacts thatare exposed on the surface. Wind velocity, the hardness and concentrations of sed-iment in the wind, surrounding vegetation, and the nature of the topography are allfactors affecting the degree of eolian rounding on artifacts. Rounding caused bywind abrasion can also affect more than one side of an artifact. As the sands shiftand sediment is deflated from underlying artifacts, the artifacts can fall or roll intodepressions, causing additional surfaces of the artifact to be exposed to rounding.Often artifacts are reburied and re-exposed multiple times. Wind-blown sediment is

Figure 7. Examples of polish: (a) example of an artifact that would be coded as extreme for polish; (b) example of an artifact that would be coded as absent for polish.

Table II. Coding of polish.

Polish

1. Absent—no polish present; visible surface of area under scrutiny appears very dull 2. Very slight—visible surface of area under scrutiny reflects light slightly, particularly when rotated3. Moderate—visible surface of area under scrutiny almost continuously reflects light4. Extreme—visible surface of area under scrutiny continually reflects light to the extent that nearly

every aspect of the surface appears shiny

THOMPSON


the most likely cause of most of the rounding seen on the artifacts of the Garden RouteCasino assemblages due to the geological context of dune fields in this area and thelack of evidence of extensive fluvial action. Although there are fluvial channels in thelarger surrounding area (Figure 2), none of them actually extend into the study area.See Figure 8 for examples of rounding and Table III for how rounding was coded.

It is important to stress that these attributes are recorded on all exposed surfaces, not just cortical or noncortical ones. In fact, in some cases cortex wasimpossible to distinguish from noncortical surfaces due to the prevalence of thepost-occupational processes just described.

Edge damage and abrasion of lithic artifacts are often recorded as ways to iden-tify fluvial transport of an assemblage (Dibble et al., 1997; Shea, 1999). However,when coding the lithics of this assemblage, I noticed very little if any edge damage,so I did not code for it. In fact, many of the artifacts were so severely rounded thatany edge damage accrued previous to the rounding might well have been erased.The few fresh artifacts, those that still preserved most of the original diagnostic ele-ments and surfaces, also did not display noticeable edge damage or abrasion. Thisimplies that the rounding observed on the artifacts is more likely due to wind abrasionrather than fluvial processes. The geological context of coastal dunes also supportsan absence of fluvial post-occupational processes and makes sand blasting a farmore likely culprit for the observed rounding.

Table III. Coding of rounding.

Rounding

1. Absent—no smoothing present; features (flake scars and edges, etc.) are clearly defined 2. Very slight—less clearly defined features and obviously homogenized surface 3. Moderate—major surface features are still apparent but smaller features are discernible only as small,

smooth rises or depressions4. Extreme—surface features are indistinguishable and macrotopography is limited to very slight

gradual changes that allow for only the general shape to be recognized

Figure 8. Examples of rounding: (a) example of an artifact that would be coded as very slight for round-ing (b) example of an artifact that would be coded as extreme for rounding.



415

EXPECTATIONS

Archaeological remains are sometimes found buried in dunes, in deflated areasbetween dunes, or in sand sheets. Eolian processes often modify or destroy the original spatial positions of artifacts so that straightforward behavioral interpreta-tions can no longer be made. Rapid burial and sand stabilization help to betterpreserve the spatial positions of archaeological material. Vegetation is the most com-mon stabilizer. However, sand accumulations are constantly shifting, and even sta-bilized sands can become unstable and susceptible to later destruction. When sandaccumulations are reworked by the wind, sand is scoured out, and archaeologicalremains are often left on deflated surfaces, causing artifacts to move more verticallythan horizontally (Butzer, 1982).

Because of the nature of sand and deflationary contexts, several basic expecta-tions can be evaluated with the post-occupational variables previously described. Therolling topography of the collection area ranges between depressions and slope tops(a range of 25 m), which should cause the post-occupational variables to vary acrossthe study area with some predictable patterns. This analysis is also designed to testwhether post-occupational variables covary across space.

The Layer 2 sands in this area work as a veneer covering an older landscape.The topography of this older landscape is represented by the remnant paleosols on the red sands (Layer 3). This sand veneer is not the same thickness in all areas.This suggests that the artifacts that are directly on top of the red sands are follow-ing the topography of a past landscape, whereas the modern topography is basedmore on the depth of the more recent sand coverage. As the sands were beingdeflated, and artifacts were exposed to the surface, artifacts would have become con-centrated in depressions and blowouts. Therefore, polish and rounding due to longperiods of exposure should be more common in depressions where winds haveblown out much of the lighter sands. Also, size should vary with topography andslope because smaller artifacts that are more mobile should concentrate downslope.

If wind abrasion is responsible for both polish and rounding, they should positivelycorrelate with each other. Most patination is the result of subsurface processes(Stapert, 1976), so patination should have a negative correlation with polish androunding, since they are related to surface processes.

ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

In this section, basic descriptions of the distribution of size of the lithics and thepost-occupational variables of polish, patination, and rounding are presented withthe expectation that these should vary across the landscape. Following that, I exam-ine the relationships between the frequencies of the post-occupational variables.Finally, I examine the variation in the occurrence of the post-occupational variablesrelative to landscape characteristics such as slope and elevation, with the expecta-tion that they should vary as a function of terrain.

THOMPSON


Distribution of the Variables

As Table IV and Figure 5 illustrate, the distribution of artifact size varies acrossthe analysis sections, indicating the differential impact of post-occupational processeson the assemblages across space. In all sections, the smallest (1–2 cm) and largest(16–32 cm) artifacts are absent or very poorly represented. The very low abundanceor absence of the smallest artifacts in the context of this study is directly related tothe fact that sediments were not screened. However, even the limited presence of suchvery small pieces suggests that much of the original assemblages may be present, atleast in part of the analysis area. In more than half of all sections (excluding 7 and9), small artifacts (2–4 cm) are relatively abundant. In all sections, 4–8 cm artifactsare the largest proportion of artifacts; however, in section 8, artifacts of 8–16 cm arealmost as abundant. As stated before, this material was not screened, so the per-centage of each size class cannot be used as absolute measures of what was pres-ent at the time of collection in terms of size. This rules out the possibility of a truesize analysis, but the relative percentages between analysis areas do suggest someinferences. Even though Schick (1986) has shown that complete assemblages con-sist of much larger numbers of the smallest lithic artifacts, within these unscreenedassemblages the strong presence of 2–4 cm artifacts in most sections, and the factthat the largest two size categories (8–16 and 16–32 cm) do not dominate any of theanalysis sections suggests that these assemblages are relatively intact and that erosional and/or fluvial processes have not extensively sorted the materials.

Table V and Figure 5 illustrate how patination, polish, and rounding vary acrossanalysis sections. In all except one section, patination was “extreme” in abundance.Section 7 is unique; the dominant state of patination is “absent” followed by “extreme.”Section 2 is also slightly different. It is represented by more evenly distributed pati-nation states except for “absent.”

Polish varies more than patination. Again, the dominant pattern is for the “extreme”state to be the most prevalent in each analysis section. However, in sections 2 and 3all states are more evenly represented, similar to the pattern observed in section 2

Table IV. Percentages of size in cm by analysis section for graphs shown in Figure 5.

AnalysisSections 1–2 2–4 4–8 8–16 16–32 N

1 0.0 11.2 52.1 35.7 1.0 982 0.0 5.9 58.8 35.3 0.0 173 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 0.0 94 0.9 29.2 47.8 22.0 0.0 1135 0.0 16.4 63.6 20.0 0.0 556 0.0 25.0 62.5 12.5 0.0 167 0.0 0.0 60.0 33.3 6.7 158 0.0 5.3 50.0 44.7 0.0 389 2.3 0.0 68.2 25.0 4.5 44

10 7.7 7.7 76.9 7.7 0.0 13



417

for patination. Section 7 is again unique, with a much higher proportion of “absent”than “extreme.”

Rounding shows a similar pattern to polish except in section 2. Unlike patinationand polish, rounding in section 2 is represented by higher proportions of “very slight”and “moderate” states and very low proportions of both “extreme” and “absent.”Rounding in section 3 is again represented by a more even distribution of states.Section 7 shows the same pattern as with patination and polish of a higher propor-tion of “absent.”

The distribution of post-occupational variables suggests that while there is vari-ation between sections, there is also patterning between patination, polish, androunding. Sections 2 (Figure 9) and 7 (Figure 10) stand out for all three variables from

Table V. The proportion of post-occupational variable states by analysis section.

AnalysisSection Absent Very Slight Moderate Extreme N

Patination 1 2.1 12.4 14.5 71.0 1452 0.0 26.1 30.4 43.5 233 0.0 20.0 15.0 65.0 204 6.6 4.4 7.8 81.2 1815 5.7 5.7 15.5 73.3 1056 10.7 3.6 10.7 75.0 287 48.2 14.8 3.7 33.3 278 11.9 13.6 18.6 55.9 599 2.9 11.4 11.4 74.3 70

10 10.5 21.0 5.3 63.2 19

Polish 1 4.1 9.0 26.2 60.7 1452 17.4 26.1 30.4 26.1 233 10.0 35.0 35.0 20.0 204 6.1 12.7 18.2 63.0 1815 10.5 14.3 32.4 42.8 1056 14.3 7.1 35.7 42.9 287 55.6 11.1 18.5 14.8 278 11.9 15.2 35.6 37.3 599 5.7 20.0 38.6 35.7 70

10 21.1 26.3 10.5 42.1 19

Rounding 1 6.2 16.6 25.5 51.7 1452 8.70 39.13 47.83 4.35 233 15.0 30.0 20.0 35.0 204 8.8 18.2 29.3 43.7 1815 4.8 15.2 28.6 51.4 1056 10.7 3.5 42.9 42.9 287 44.5 3.7 18.5 33.3 278 15.2 13.6 30.5 40.7 599 7.1 7.1 37.2 48.6 70

10 21.1 15.8 10.5 52.6 19

THOMPSON


Figure 9. Photograph showing the stratigraphy at analysis section 2.

Figure 10. Photograph showing the stratigraphy at analysis section 7. There is no scale available for thisphotograph.

the rest of the analysis sections. Section 3 (Figure 11) stands out for polish androunding. The lower representation or lack of dominance by “extreme” states in sec-tions 2, 3, and 7 may suggest that these sections have not been exposed on the sur-face as long or as many times as the other analysis sections. However, sections 2, 3,and 7 do not stand out in the same way when looking at size. The processes that



419

produce the post-occupational variables, then, are different from those affecting thedistribution of size classes.

Inter-Variable Correlations

The next step was to determine whether any of the post-occupational variablescorrelated with each other. The purpose was to examine whether observed post-occupational processes were working the same throughout the study area or if dif-ferent post-occupational processes could be identified in separate sections. Forexample, relating to the preceding stated expectations, does polish vary positivelyor negatively with rounding? Is patination related to rounding or polish? To test this I ran Spearman’s rank correlations on all combinations of variables. As Table VIshows there are significant relationships between patination and polish, patinationand rounding, and polish and rounding. The highest correlation is between patina-tion and rounding (r � 0.58, p � 0.0001), explaining 34% of the observed variation.Patination also correlates fairly high with polish (r � 0.46, p � 0.0001) and explains21% of the observed variation. The lowest correlation is between polish and round-ing (r � 0.33, p � 0.0001), explaining 11% of the observed variation. This means thatthe associations between post-occupational variables are not random. There is stilla large amount of variation that is not accounted for by the post-occupational vari-ables. The analysis of the impact of terrain in the next section sheds more light onvariation observed within these assemblages.

Figure 11. Photograph showing the stratigraphy at analysis section 3.

THOMPSON


The Impact of Terrain

Correlations were calculated between size and elevation and size and slope (Table VII). Slope was measured using elevations from an EDM survey of the studyarea and the slope tool in ArcGIS. The slope tool uses the maximum change in ele-vation value and distance between a cell and its neighbors to calculate slope. Allvalues for slope within a given analysis were then averaged to give a mean slopevalue for each analysis area. As stated previously, size is expected to correlate withelevation and/or slope because smaller artifacts that are more mobile should con-centrate in depressions. This was not the case. Spearman’s r showed very low cor-relations between elevation and size and between slope and size.

Correlations were also run between the post-occupational variables and eleva-tion and slope (Figures 12–17). Although there are no statistically significant patterns represented by these graphs, there are slight general trends that should bediscussed. Between patination and elevation (Figure 12), a slight trend of more“extreme” patinated pieces at higher elevations than “very slight” or “moderate” pati-nation pieces is visible. There is also a pattern of fewer patinated pieces (“veryslight,” “moderate,” and “extreme”) at higher slopes, the maximum being 16° (Figure13). Pieces without polish generally occur more at lower elevations and higher slopes(Figures 14, 15). For rounding, very few artifacts of “absent” or “very slight” statesoccur above 166 m (the midpoint of elevation). “Moderate” or “extreme” roundedpieces occur across the range of elevations (Figure 16). Pieces with any rounding atall tend to occur on lower slopes, the minimum being 0°, than pieces lacking round-ing (Figure 17). All of these trends, which are all very slight, are what one wouldexpect if the post-occupational variables were related to terrain; however, becauseno statistically significant results exist for any of the variables, these patterns are justas likely to have occurred by chance. The same is true for size and terrain.

Table VI. Spearman’s rank correlation valuesbetween post-occupational variables.

Patination Polish

Rounding 0.58 0.33Polish 0.46

Table VII. Spearman’s rank correlation values forelevation and slope.

Elevation Slope

Size �0.05 �0.13Patination 0.09 0.06Polish �0.06 �0.05Rounding 0.05 0.02



421

Figure 13. Whisker and box plots of patination by slope. The diamond is the confidence interval, andthe midline is the mean. The lines extending from the diamond show the parametric percentile range. Thenotched box shows nonparametric statistics. The middle of the box is the median. The upper and lowerlines are quartiles and the confidence interval around the mean.

Figure 12. Whisker and box plots of patination by elevation. The diamond is the confidence interval, andthe midline is the mean. The lines extending from the diamond show the parametric percentile range. Thenotched box shows nonparametric statistics. The middle of the box is the median. The upper and lowerlines are quartiles and the confidence interval around the mean.

THOMPSON


Figure 14. Whisker and box plots of polish by elevation. The diamond is the confidence interval, andthe midline is the mean. The lines extending from the diamond show the parametric percentile range. Thenotched box shows nonparametric statistics. The middle of the box is the median. The upper and lowerlines are quartiles and the confidence interval around the mean.

Figure 15. Whisker and box plots of polish by slope. The diamond is the confidence interval, and the midline is the mean. The lines extending from the diamond show the parametric percentile range. Thenotched box shows nonparametric statistics. The middle of the box is the median. The upper and lowerlines are quartiles and the confidence interval around the mean.



423

Figure 16. Whisker and box plots of rounding by elevation. The diamond is the confidence interval,and the midline is the mean. The lines extending from the diamond show the parametric percentile range.The notched box shows nonparametric statistics. The middle of the box is the median. The upper and lowerlines are quartiles and the confidence interval around the mean.

Figure 17. Whisker and box plots of rounding by slope. The diamond is the confidence interval, and the midline is the mean. The lines extending from the diamond show the parametric percentile range. Thenotched box shows nonparametric statistics. The middle of the box is the median. The upper and lowerlines are quartiles and the confidence interval around the mean.

This means that current elevation and slope have little to no effect on the distribu-tion of size or the post-occupational variables.

DISCUSSION

Most Acheulean sites represent points on the landscape where a cluster of lithicswas discovered. Such discoveries can arise from chance, such as the natural orhuman-induced act of erosion. We often consider these sites to be discrete and theresult of clustered hominin action when in fact it is becoming increasingly clear thatancient landscapes have a rather continuous distribution of artifacts across them, andthat these distributions vary in character. This collection represents a 1.5-km tran-sect across an ancient landscape and is thus rare (see also, Cruz-Uribe et al., 2003;Manhire, 1987; Parkington et al., 1992), as most archaeology in southern Africa usu-ally focuses on caves, rockshelters, and coastal shell middens (Fuchs et al., 2008).Potts, Blumenschine, and others have noted the need for excavated collections thatare more spatially extensive (Barton et al., 1999; Barton et al., 2002; Blumenschine &Peters, 1998; Paddayya & Petraglia, 1993; Potts, Behrensmeyer, & Ditchfield, 1999).The Garden Route Casino Road artifacts provide an opportunity to examine the rolehominin behavior plays in structuring lithic variation across the landscape.

Although behavioral interpretations are an ultimate goal of this project, beforeassessing variation suspected to be related to behavior, it was first necessary toexamine variation that may be the result of various post-occupational processes.Such processes postdate the hominin behavior we are concerned with, standingbetween the researcher and the behaviors of interest. This study explored that problem through a spatial analysis of a series of variables that track a range of post-occupational processes such as wind scouring, water movement, and vertical and horizontal movement.

This study furthermore investigated whether a collection of Acheulean lithics distributed across a landscape showed differences in the representation of post-occupational variables across that landscape, and whether or not those distribu-tions are related to current topographic characteristics, as would be expected if theartifacts were transported from their original location. It is a measure of the relia-bility of the results of any behavioral interpretation.

Acheulean assemblages are extremely variable in their preservation. This analy-sis has shown that the post-occupational variables are not patterned as would beexpected if the artifacts had moved relatively large distances that would have changedthe assemblage composition across space. Current terrain characteristics are unre-lated to the distribution of post-occupational variables. In fact, the correlationsbetween the post-occupational variables and not with the current terrain suggestthat the artifacts are reflecting the topography of a past terrain. A point proveniencewould be if the artifacts were resting exactly where they were first discarded; how-ever, the general pattern of post-occupational variables in this study suggests that adegraded spot provenience applies to this area. The artifacts are close horizontallyto where they were first laid down. As sand systems have shifted over time, theartifacts have been buried and re-exposed repeatedly, causing the artifacts to move

THOMPSON


more vertically than laterally. Because patination, polish, and rounding are the resultsof surface processes, the high proportions of “extreme” patination, “extreme” pol-ish, and “extreme” rounding all suggest long periods of surface exposure. However,the presence of less extreme states illustrates that there is also considerable vari-ability, both in time of exposure and perhaps in the time elapsed, since depositionof the artifacts. Less extreme states imply that not all artifacts were continuouslyexposed or even exposed contemporaneously. The variability in post-occupationalstates fits with the nature of sand accumulations and repeated cycles of reburial andexposure.

The lack of correlations of any of the post-occupational variables with eitherelevation or slope is somewhat surprising. The expectations were that roundingand polish as well as size would vary with elevation and/or slope. This lack ofcorrelations may be due to the shifting nature of the sands. The very gently rollingnature of the dunes in this area could suggest that the underlying topography ofthe land in this area does not cause much of an obstruction to actively shiftingsands, since coastal dunes are constantly moving. At some locations in the studyarea the sand layer on top of the calcrete covered the lower layers more thicklythan others. The variation of depth in the more recent sand cover suggests thatthe peaks and depressions of the present landscape are unlikely to have beencontinuous through time. As the sands shift, the artifacts move down vertically butstay in their relative positions horizontally. Shifting patterns of wind and vegeta-tion stabilization have moved the sands sufficiently to obscure any relationshipbetween current elevation and slope with the other post-occupational variablesmeasured. Lancaster (1986, 1987) has noted for the deflation hollows at Elands Baythat shifting sands tend to concentrate artifacts in the hollows, suggesting that thepresent locations of artifact assemblages do not reflect their positions when theassemblages formed. This was not the case at the Garden Route Casino Road.Artifacts were not concentrated at lower elevations, but instead were locatedacross the entire study area.

As the sands shifted, finer sand would have been eroded away from around theartifacts. The result would be areas containing time-averaged palimpsests such asthose described by Stern (1994) for the Lower Okote Member at Koobi Fora. Thesepalimpsests represent the “aggregated material residues of many hominid socialgroups, few of whom shared the same landscape” (Stern, 1994:101). The longer theaccumulation period of the artifacts, the more improbable it is that the same eco-logical conditions persisted in this area.

Sections 2, 3, and 7 deviate from the general pattern of the study area. Section 2is more evenly represented by all states of variation within patination and polish.Section 2 is also unique in rounding due to a much higher proportion of “very slight”and “moderate” rounding than either “absent” or “extreme” rounding. Section 3 ismore evenly represented by all states of variation for polish and rounding. The onlyvisible feature on the landscape that differentiates sections 2 and 3 from all of theothers is that those two areas may have been previously developed for an unknownpurpose. Perhaps this previous development has mixed the artifacts here more thanin other sections, but this cannot be tested with the existing data. Section 7 is



425

THOMPSON


particularly interesting compared to the rest of the study area. There is a higher inci-dence in this section of “absent” patination, “absent” polish, and “absent” rounding.

One explanation for the unique patterns observed in sections 2, 3, and 7 is that theircurrent spatial locations are closer to their original locations than any of the otheranalysis sections. The greater relative abundance of post-occupational states other than “extreme” suggests that these artifacts were buried for longer periods oftime than those in the other analysis sections. These three sections may also bereflecting past topography more than the other sections. The entire study area is ina deflationary context; however, the post-occupational variables from these three sec-tions imply that the artifacts have not been exposed as long as those from other sections more likely to represent depositional palimpsests. This means that if furtherexcavations were undertaken in this area, sections 2, 3, and especially 7 would bethe most likely sections to contain artifacts in a more primary condition.

CONCLUSIONS

One of the most important goals of any archaeological study is to reconstructpast human behavior. However, the connection between artifact patterning andbehavioral interpretations is not a straightforward process. Site formation or post-occupational processes have been affecting artifacts from the time they first enteredthe archaeological record. When artifacts have been subjected to those processes forlong periods of time, as is the case for any Acheulean assemblage, it becomes morelikely that any original behavioral signatures will be blurred.

For the Garden Route Casino Road collection, it has been shown that while the arti-facts are not exactly where they were first laid down, most are within a meter of theiroriginal horizontal positions, especially those in sections 2, 3, and 7. The study areafor the Garden Route Casino Road collection was rare in that it was a long trench.Researchers often look at small areas and extrapolate their results over a much largerarea. By studying the artifacts in this collection across the landscape, it has becomeclear that some areas are better preserved than others. If more investigations in thisarea were to take place, those sections that show less evidence for post-depositionalmovement would be the best places to focus on. This also means that after variablesthat affect artifact location, such as size, patination, polish, and rounding, as well asterrain are examined, behavioral interpretations can be made with more certaintynot only for the assemblage as a whole but for different sections of the assemblage.When post-occupational site formation processes have been properly considered,the behavioral interpretations are more robust. This study has been an initial attemptto peel away those processes that obscure the original patterning of the artifacts, sothat future research can focus on the behavioral implications of this collection. Thepoor preservation potential of archaeological contexts in sand accumulation settingsand the problem of site detection hinder our knowledge of how humans used theselandscapes. More research on how these landscapes affect current artifact pattern-ing is a crucial step in understanding how these landscapes were utilized.

I thank the National Science Foundation (USA) (grant #s BCS-9912465 and BCS-0130713 to Marean), mycommittee (Curtis Marean, Michael Barton, and Geoffrey Clark), and all those who read countless drafts



427

and provided constructive criticism: Jocelyn Bernatchez, Sarah Lansing, Peter Nilssen, Lydia Pyne, JulienRiel-Salvatore, Jessica Thompson (especially for the help with developing the coding system), and HopeWilliams. I would also like to thank my reviewers, whose comments have substantially added to this paper.

REFERENCES

Barton, C.M., Bernabeau, J., Aura, J., & Garcia, O. (1999). Land-use dynamics and socioeconomic change:An example from the Polop Alto Valley. American Antiquity, 64, 609–634.

Barton, C.M., Bernabeau, J., Aura, J., Garcia, O., & La Roca, N. (2002). Dynamic landscapes, artifacttaphonomy, and land use modeling in the western Mediterranean. Geoarchaeology, 17, 155–190.

Bateman, M.D., Holmes, P.J., Carr, A.S., Horton, B.P., & Jaiswal, M.K. (2004). Aeolianite and barrier duneconstruction spanning the last two glacial-interglacial cycles from the southern Cape coast, SouthAfrica. Quaternary Science Reviews, 23, 1681–1698.

Blumenschine, J., & Peters, C. (1998). Archaeological predictions for hominid land use in the paleo-Olduvai Basin, Tanzania, during lowermost Bed II times. Journal of Human Evolution, 34, 565–607.

Bordes, F. (1961). Typologie du paléolithique ancien et moyen. Bordeaux: Delmas.Burroni, D., Donahue, R.E., & Pollard, A.M. (2002). The surface alteration features of flint artifacts as a

record of environmental processes. Journal of Archaeological Science, 29, 1277–1287.Butzer, K.W. (1982). Archaeology as human ecology: Method and theory for a contextual approach.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Butzer, K.W. (2004). Coastal eolian sands, paleosols, and Pleistocene geoarchaeology of the Southwestern

Cape, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science, 31, 1743–1781.Butzer, K.W., & Helgren, D.M. (1972). Late Cenozoic evolution of the Cape coast between Knysna and

Cape St. Francis, South Africa. Quaternary Research, 2, 143–169.Cruz-Uribe, K., Klein, R.G., Avery, G., Avery, M., Halkett, D., Hart, T., Milo, R.G., Sampson, C.G., & Volman,

T.P. (2003). Excavation of buried Late Acheulean (Mid-Quaternary land surfaces at Duinefontein,Western Cape Province, South Africa). Journal of Archaeological Science, 30, 559–575.

Deacon, H.J., & Wurz, S. (2001). Middle Pleistocene populations of southern Africa and the emergenceof modern behaviour. In L. Barham & K. Robson-Brown (Eds.), Human roots: Africa and Asia in theMiddle Pleistocene (pp. 55–64). Bristol, England: Western Academic & Specialist Press Limited.

Dibble, H., Chase, P., McPherron, S., & Tuffreau, A. (1997). Testing the reality of a “living floor” witharchaeologial data. American Antiquity, 62, 629–651.

Fuchs, M., Kandel, A.W., Conard, N.J., Walker, S.J., & Felix-Henningsen, P. (2008). Geoarchaeological andchronostratigraphical investigations of open-air sites in the Geelbek dunes, South Africa.Geoarchaeology, 23, 425–449.

Goren-Inbar, N., Feibel, C.S., Verosub, K.L., Melamed, Y., Kislev, M.E., Tchernov, E., & Saragusti, I. (1999).Pleistocene milestones on the Out-of-Africa Corridor at Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel. Science, 289,944–947.

Helgren, D.M., & Butzer, K.W. (1977). Paleosols of the southern Cape Coast, South Africa: Implicationsfor laterite definition, genesis, and age. Geographical Review, 67, 30–45.

Illenburger, W.K. (1996). The geomorphologic evolution of the Wilderness dune cordons, South Africa.Quaternary International, 33, 11–20.

Issac, G.L. (1967). Towards the interpretation of occupation debris: Some experiments and observations.Kroeber Anthropological Society Papers, 37, 31–57.

Issac, G.L. (1982). The earliest archaeological traces. In J.D. Clark (Ed.), Cambridge history of Africa (pp. 157–247). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jones, P. (1979). Effects of raw materials on biface manufacture. Science, 204, 835–836.Lancaster, N. (1986). Dynamics of deflation hollows in the Elands Bay area, Cape Province, South Africa.

Catena, 13, 139–153.Lancaster, N. (1987). Dynamics and origins of deflation hollows in the Eland’s Bay area, Cape Province,

South Africa. BAR International Series, 332, 78–96.Malan, J.A. (1987a). The Bredasdorp Group in the area between Gansbaai and Mossel Bay. South African

Journal of Science, 83, 506–507.

THOMPSON


Malan, J.A. (1987b). Cainozoic sea-level movements, Hermanus to Mossel Bay southern Cape coastalplain, Proceedings Sixth National Oceanographic Symposium, C-66, Stellenbosch.

Manhire, A. (1987). Later Stone Age settlement patterns in the Sandveld of the south-western CapeProvince, South Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge Monographs in African Archaeology 21, BritishArchaeological Reports International Series 351.

McBrearty, S., & Brooks, A.S. (2000). The revolution that wasn’t: A new interpretation of the origin ofmodern human behavior. Journal of Human Evolution, 39, 453–563.

McPherron, S. (1994). A reduction model for variability in Acheulian biface morphology. UnpublishedPh.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.

Paddayya, K. (1987). The place of the study of site formation processes in prehistoric research in India.In D.T. Nash & M.D. Petraglia (Eds.), Natural formation processes and the archaeological record (pp. 74–85). Oxford: International Bar Series.

Paddayya, K., & Petraglia, M.D. (1993). Formation processes of Acheulian localities in the Hunsgi andBaichbal Valleys, peninsular India. In P. Goldberg, D.T. Nash, & M.D. Petraglia (Eds.), Formationprocesses in archaeological context (pp. 61–82). Madison, WI: Prehistory Press.

Parkington, J.E., Nilssen, P., Reeler, C., & Henshilwood, C.S. (1992). Making sense of space at Dunefieldmidden campsite, Western Cape, South Africa. Southern African Field Archaeology, 1, 63–70.

Petraglia, M., & Potts, R. (1994). Water flow and the formation of Early Pleistocene artifact sites in OlduvaiGorge, Tanzania. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 13, 228–254.

Petraglia, M., LaPorta, P., & Paddayya, K. (1999). The first Acheulian quarry in India: Stone tool manufacture,biface morphology, and behaviors. Journal of Anthropological Research, 55, 39–70.

Potts, R., Behrensmeyer, A.K., & Ditchfield, P. (1999). Paleolandscape variation and Early Pleistocenehominid activities; members 1 and 7, Olorgesailie Formation, Kenya. Journal of Human Evolution,37, 747–788.

Roberts, D.L., Botha, G.A., Maud, R.R., & Pether, J. (2006). Coastal Cenozoic deposits. In M.R. Johnson,C.R. Anhaeusser, & R.J. Thomas (Eds.), The geology of South Africa (pp. 605–628). Johannesburg andPretoria, South Africa: Geological Society of South Africa and Council for Geoscience.

Rogers, J. (1988). Stratigraphy and geomorphology of the three generations of regressive seqences in theBredasdorp Group, southern Cape Province, South Africa. In G.F. Dardis & B.P. Moon (Eds.),Geomorphological studies in southern Africa (pp. 407–435). Balkema, Rotterdam: Proceedings of theSymposium on the Geomorphology of Southern Africa.

Rottländer, R. (1975). The formation of patina on flint. Archaeometry, 17, 106–110.Schick, K.D. (1986). Stone Age in the making: Experiments in the formation and transformation of archae-

ological occurrences. Oxford: BAR International Series 319.Schiffer, M. (1983). Toward the identification of formation processes. American Antiquity, 48, 675–706.Schiffer, M. (1987). Formation processes of the archaeological record. Albuquerque: University of New

Mexico Press.Shea, J. (1999). Artifact abrasion, fluvial processes, and “living floors” from the Early Paleolithic site of

‘Ubeidiya (Jordon Valley, Israel). Geoarchaeology, 14, 191–207.Stapert, D. (1976). Some natural surface modifications on flint in the Netherlands. Palaeohistoria, 18, 7–41.Stern, N. (1994). The implications of time-averaging for reconstructing the land-use patterns of early tool-

using hominids. Journal of Human Evolution, 27, 89–105.Van Rooyen, T. (2008). Specialist study report: Semi-detailed study of the soil landform resources of

Pinnacle Point Beach and Golf Resort.Villa, P. (1982). Conjoinable pieces and site formation processes. American Antiquity, 47, 276–290.Waters, M.R. (1992). Principles of geoarchaeology a North American perspective. Tuscon: University of

Arizona Press.Wood, B. (1992). Origin and evolution of the genus Homo. Nature, 355, 783–790.Wood, B., & Collard, M. (1999). The changing face of genus Homo. Evolutionary Anthropology, 8, 195–207.

Received 27 August 2008

Accepted for publication 25 February 2009

Scientific editing by Paul Goldberg

acheulean artifact accumulation and early hominin land use, garden route casino road, pinnacle...

Documents