Exploitation of large bovids and seals at Middle and Later Stone Age sites in South Africa

Richard G. Klein · Kathryn Cruz‐Uribe

117 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Human Evolution

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

1 known location can be tried.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology Archaeology and ancient environmental studies Archaeology and Rock Art Studies

Abstract

The faunal remains from the Middle Stone Age (MSA) layers at Klasies River Mouth (KRM) suggest that South African MSA people hunted and gathered less effectively than their Later Stone Age (LSA) successors. The newly enlarged faunal sample from the MSA layers of Die Kelders Cave 1 (DK1) supports the same basic conclusion. In particular, unlike LSA people living in comparable circumstances, the MSA inhabitants of both DK1 and KRM took many fewer buffaloes than eland, even though buffaloes were probably more common near the sites. The reason for the difference may be that MSA people lacked projectile weapons, and were thus forced to rely on relatively docile species like eland. Eland may have been particularly favored because they are very amenable to driving, and the abundance of prime-age adult individuals at both DK1 and KRM may reflect the relative ease with which eland could be driven over nearby cliffs. Also in contrast to LSA people, the MSA occupants of DK1, and especially KRM, took more subadult and adult seals compared with 9–11 month olds. In this respect, MSA people resembled the brown hyenas who accumulated seal bones in a fossil den at Boegoeberg 1 (BOG1). The relative lack of young seal bones at BOG1 probably reflects the hyenas' coastal presence throughout the year, including times when young seal wash-ups are unusual. By extension, the relative rarity of young seals in MSA (vs.LSA) sites may mean that MSA people failed to focus their coastal visits on the season of peak young seal availability. Together with artefactual and other faunal contrasts between the MSA and LSA, the differences in large bovid and seal exploitation help explain why MSA people did not spread from Africa, even though they were anatomically more modern than their Eurasian contemporaries.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 117 citations exist upstream.

References

1983The Hunters or the Hunted?: An Introduction to African Cave Taphonomy 1992The behavior guide to African mammals 1988Hadza Hunting, Butchering, and Bone Transport and Their Archaeological Implications 1959The prehistory of Southern Africa 1984The Middle Stone Age at Klasies River Mouth in South Africa 1995A Middle Stone Age Worked Bone Industry from Katanda, Upper Semliki Valley, Zaire 1995Anatomy, behavior, and modern human origins 1991Hunting income patterns among the Hadza: big game, common goods, foraging goals and the evolution of the human diet

Cited by

2009The Evolution of Hominin Diets 2017Human predatory behavior and the social implications of communal hunting based on evidence from the TD10.2 bison bone bed at Gran Dolina (Atapuerca, Spain)2003USING MORTALITY PROFILES TO INFER BEHAVIOR IN THE FOSSIL RECORD 2008Eland, buffalo, and wild pigs: were Middle Stone Age humans ineffective hunters?2013On Variability and Complexity

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.