aspects of tool production, use, and hafting in palaeolithic assemblages from northeast africa

lable at ScienceDirect

Journal of Human Evolution 60 (2011) 637e664

Contents lists avai

Journal of Human Evolution

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ jhevol

Aspects of tool production, use, and hafting in Palaeolithic assemblagesfrom Northeast Africa

Veerle Rots*, Philip Van Peer, Pierre M. VermeerschPrehistoric Archaeology Unit, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Geo-Institute, Celestijnenlaan 200E (Pb: 02409), 3001 Leuven (Heverlee), Belgium

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 7 March 2008Accepted 6 October 2010

Keywords:MicrowearBifacial toolsProjectilesEconomic specialisation

* Corresponding author.E-mail address: [email protected] (V. Ro

0047-2484/$ e see front matter � 2011 Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.01.001

a b s t r a c t

A detailed microwear study was performed on several assemblages from Northeast Africa to provide ananthropological scenario of late middle and upper Pleistocene populations in the Nile Valley and adjacentzones. Results are presented from the wear analysis of five sites, and an interpretation is provided of thekeystones of MSA behaviour and its evolution throughout about 150,000 years. Locally available rawmaterials were predominantly used. Different tool uses were identified based on wear evidence, and itwas demonstrated that stone tools were hafted from at least the early MSA onwards. In particular stonetools for which hafting was a necessity for their use, such as percussion implements and projectiles, werehafted. Both tool functions remain important throughout the Middle Stone Age. For tools with other uses,such as knives, hafting was demonstrated in certain cases. Hafting proved to be integrated into the stonetool production process, indicating a certain degree of anticipation and planning. Ochre was present atmost of the sites in different forms, and mainly seems to have served a utilitarian function, and a possiblesymbolic use. The included sites could be interpreted as specialised sites, and in all but one case weresituated in a production context. The evidence indicates the existence of a regional settlement systemwith different logistic nodes.

� 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction

In the past, detailed microwear studies of Middle Stone Age(MSA) material were rarely attempted due to the perception thatpreservation conditions would preclude positive results. Thanks toprogress in microwear studies, the impact of post-depositionalprocesses is currently better understood (Levi-Sala, 1986, 1996),and interpretations rest on firmermethodological grounds. The riseof residue analysis (Fullagar et al., 1996; Fullagar, 1998) positivelyinfluenced the renewed interest in functional studies of MSAmaterial (Lombard, 2004, 2005, 2008). MSA stone tools are oftenmade from coarser-grained raw materials (e.g., quartz, quartzite)than the fine-grained flint that is generally used in European sites.These coarser materials initially discouraged more standardmicrowear analyses. Residue analysis, preferably in combinationwith use-wear analysis (Rots and Williamson, 2004), providesa solution to this problem, at least for newly excavated sites whereprecautions that are necessary to prevent contamination can beobserved during excavation and subsequent handling (Fullagar

ts).

All rights reserved.

et al., 1996; Fullagar, 1998). Nevertheless, more standard micro-wear analyses have also been performed (Donahue et al., 2004).Interpretative possibilities now extend beyond wear resulting fromtool use only (Keeley, 1980; Odell, 1980) and include inferencesregarding tool production, handling, and hafting (Rots et al., 2001,2006; Rots, 2002a,b, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2010a). For more recentperiods in Europe, it has been demonstrated that an integratedfunctional analysis of different raw materials (Van Gijn, 2008) andthe integration of functional results with typological, technological,and spatial data contribute significantly to a better comprehensionof behavioural systems (Cahen et al., 1979; Cahen and Keeley, 1980;Pétrequin et al., 1998; De Bie and Caspar, 2000). The latter proce-dure is also believed to have important potential for MSA studies,particularly now that prehension and hafting can be integrated(Rots and Van Peer, 2006; Van Peer et al., 2008). Hafting has alwaysbeen considered an important issue in human evolution studiesand has been proposed as one of the indicators of modern behav-iour (McBrearty and Brooks, 2000).

Systematic wear analysis has formed part of a large-scaleresearch project aimed at the description of technological chaînesopératoires of MSA sites in Northeast Africa as evidenced in boththe appearance and the structure of their lithic assemblages. On thepremise that an understanding of the operational principles in the

mailto:[email protected]

www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00472484

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jhevol

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.01.001



V. Rots et al. / Journal of Human Evolution 60 (2011) 637e664638

domain of lithic technology offers insight into aspects of the socialsystem at work, the overall goal of this project is to provide ananthropological scenario of late middle and upper Pleistocenepopulations in the environments of the Nile Valley and adjacentzones. In a number of contributions we have reported on the wearanalysis of specific assemblages (Rots and Van Peer, 2006; Van Peeret al., 2008). Here, it is our intention to present primary data fora number of other assemblages from five sites and to provide aninterpretation of some keystones of behaviour and their evolutionthroughw150,000yearsof theMiddleStoneAge inNortheastAfrica.

The sites

Short descriptions of all the sites concerned in this wear analysisare presented below (Fig. 1). First, however, we recapitulate someissues relating to general taxonomy. In this article we adopt ourpreviouslyexpressedposition (VanPeerandVermeersch, 2007) that

Fig. 1. Map with analysed archaeological sites. 1) Nazlet Khater (early Upper Palaeolithic), EgSai 8-B-11 (early and late MSA), Sudan.

the sub-Saharan nomenclature is appropriate for the designation ofnortheast African assemblages from the projected window of time.

Within the MSA, the Nubian Complex has been defined asa regional variant (Clark, 1988). Conceived at the taxonomic level ofthe techno-complex (Clarke, 1968), the term identifies a number ofMSA industries of Northeast Africa that share a number of techno-logical features. In its original definition (Van Peer, 1998), theconcept referred to lithic assemblages with almost exclusivelyLevallois-based production systems, attesting to the use of theNubian 1 method for pointed blanks in particular. While thenumbers of retouched tools in these workshop assemblages arealways very small, types such as Nazlet Khater points, truncated-facetted pieces (Nahr Ibrahim cores), and sometimes bifacial foliatesare represented. This techno-typological constellation was con-trastedwith another, called the LowerNile Valley Complex, inwhichonly classical Levallois production methods were present andwhich lacked the tool types mentioned above. Based on the

ypt; 2) Taramsa (Nubian Complex), Egypt; 3) Sodmein Cave (Nubian Complex), Egypt; 4)

V. Rots et al. / Journal of Human Evolution 60 (2011) 637e664 639

geomorphology of sites in the Nazlet Khater area of Middle Egyptboth complexes were seemingly contemporaneous (Vermeersch,2002a), but the geographical distribution of the Lower Nile ValleyComplex seemed to be restricted to Upper Egypt and Nubia.

The improved chronologies of today necessitate certain modi-fications of this taxonomic framework. First, it is clear that thetechno-typological structure of the Nubian Complex as describedabove is heralded in latest middle Pleistocene industries withSangoan and Lupemban affinities at sites such as Sai 8-B-11 andTaramsa 1. In early Last Interglacial sites in the Bir Sahara and BirTarfawi depressions, symmetrical bifacial foliates have replaced thelarge, pointed lanceolates of Lupemban-like industries (Wendorfet al., 1993). We propose to bring all the Marine Isotope Stage(MIS) 5 industries together under the taxonomic umbrella of theNubian Complex. The Nubian Complex as described above is part ofthis larger unit and seems chronologically restricted to the laststage of MIS 5. It is provisionally identified here as late NubianComplex. Second, the idea of contemporaneity of the latter and theLower Nile Valley Complex needs to be abandoned (Van Peer,2004). The technological analysis of a number of MIS 4 assem-blages at Nazlet Safaha 1 and 2 indicates that the productionsystems of such industries can be seen as the result of adaptationsto Nubian Complex lithic technology. The Lower Nile ValleyComplex is only one of several different trajectories of culturalchange that are evidenced in theMIS 4 Lower Nile Valley. The bladeproduction system of the Upper Palaeolithic site of Nazlet Khater-4(Vermeersch et al., 2002) forms part of this trajectory of change aswell. In the latter case, the European taxonomic system should beused. For an in-depth discussion of this formal issue, the reader isreferred to Van Peer et al. (2010).

In this article we shall use the general terms early MSA toidentify middle Pleistocene assemblages and late MSA (includingtransitional assemblages) for MIS 4/3, except for the Nazlet Khater-4 assemblage which is identified as Upper Palaeolithic. The termlate Nubian Complex is used for late MIS 5 assemblages and earlyNubian Complex for older MIS 5.

Site 8-B-11, Sai Island, middle Nile Valley

The archaeological sequence at this site provides a transectthroughout the MSA, starting with early MSA assemblages con-tained in the lower part of the sediment fill of an ancient Nilebranch (Van Peer et al., 2003, 2004) and late MSA horizons withinoverbank silts, accumulated from 60 ka onwards as indicated byprovisional OSL age estimates (Burrough, pers. comm.). Both earlyand late MSA levels have been analysed for wear traces.

Taramsa 1 and 8, Lower Nile Valley

Taramsa 1 is a workshop located on the western bank of the Nilenear Qena in Upper Egypt. Numerous dug-in features from whichchert pebbles were extracted from underlying coarse graveldeposits are present. Both OSL dates and stratigraphic observationsindicate an intermittent use of this locale since at least Last Inter-glacial times. The present analysis is concerned with assemblagesector 91/04 Concentration 28, belonging to Activity Phase V andshowing transitional technological features from Nubian ComplexLevallois technology to a blade production system (Vermeerschet al., 1998; Van Peer et al., 2010).

The site of Taramsa 8 was discovered and briefly exploredduring a survey in 2003 (Vermeersch et al., 2005). The site isa workshop where chert pebbles were extracted from a remnant ofthe same gravel terrace that was exploited at Taramsa 1. Extractionpits filled with aeolian sands are covered by an extremely weath-ered desert pavement suggesting that the formermay be older than

similar features found at Taramsa 1. The same is suggested by therubification of the fill deposits as a result of intensive pedogenesis,most likely during MIS 5.

Sodmein Cave, Red Sea Mountains, Egypt

Sodmein Cave is located in the Red Sea Mountains to thenorthwest of the town of Qoseir (Vermeersch et al., 1994).A number of occupation levels occur within a sequence thatextends from the late middle Pleistocene to the middle Holocene(Van Peer et al., 1996; Mercier et al., 1999). A small selection of toolsfrom different, sometimes dense MSA levels is considered in thepresent analysis.

Nazlet Khater-4, Lower Nile Valley

Nazlet Khater-4 is an early Upper Palaeolithic chert mining sitewhere vertical shafts were cut through consolidated silts in order toreach the underlying gravels containing chert nodules (Vermeerschet al., 2002). Next to dense scatters of lithic productionwaste, a fewthin bifacial axes were found in the fill deposits within the shaftsand galleries. This would suggest that they have been used asexploitation tools. One bifacial axe was found in a burial pit at thesite of Nazlet Khater 2 containing a modern human skeleton(Crevecoeur, 2008). Its age is most likely around 39 ka cal BC (fora discussion, see Vermeersch, 2002b). The axe had been placed asa burial gift underneath the head of the individual.

Methods

Functional wear studies have used different procedures toobtain data, differing mainly in the magnification and equipmentused (Anderson-Gerfaud, 1980; Keeley, 1980; Odell, 1981; Fullagaret al., 1996). As demonstrated elsewhere, the most fruitful andreliable approach is one that combines different methods (Rots,2003; Rots et al., 2006). Therefore, whenever possible, a macro-scopic, low power and high power analysis were combined for thisresearch. Low power analysis is performed with a stereoscopicbinocular microscope (magnifications ranging from 6 to 100�;Odell, 1981; Tringham et al., 1974) and mainly allows examinationof edge scarring, followed by polish, rounding, and striations. Highpower analysis makes use of a reflected light microscope withbright field illumination and polarising filters (magnifications50e500�; Keeley, 1980); polish, scarring, rounding, and striationsare examined. The presence of residues was examined visuallyunder the latter type of microscope (Fullagar et al., 1996; Fullagar,1998). All causes of wear were considered, including traces fromproduction, use, and prehension or hafting. Interpretations reliedon comparison with an experimental reference collection consist-ing of about 500 experimental tools (Rots, 2002a, 2010a), mainlyflint, but also some Egyptian chert and quartz. A large variety of tooluses (e.g., adzing, scraping, cutting, drilling), workedmaterials (e.g.,wood, bone, antler, hide, earth, schist), use durations (a few secondsup to 4 h), hafting modes (e.g., male, male split, juxtaposed,wrappings), and hafting materials (e.g., wood, bone, antler) arerepresented in the collection (Rots et al., 2001; Rots, 2002a, 2004,2010a). More details on the interpretative principles of use andprehensile wear as well as additional illustrations are provided inthe Supplemental Online Material (SOM) that accompanies theonline version of this article (10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.01.001).

One of the major problems of microwear studies is that they aretime-intensive in nature, which generally results in small toolsamples that are poor representatives for the assemblage asa whole (Odell and Odell-Vereecken, 1980). This problem can beovercome by using the chosen “staged” procedure in which pieces



are first examined macroscopically and with low power analysis,both of which allow a relatively fast analysis without intensivecleaning. A first selection is made and interesting pieces aresubsequently examined in more detail under high power. Largersamples can thus be investigated, resulting in a more representa-tive image of the assemblages in question.

Within this research, we had the advantage that part of thematerial was available for study in the laboratory, while anotherpart had to be examined in the field. In the latter case, a stereo-scopic microscope was always available in the field so that a large-scale low power analysis could be performed. Based on the resultsof this analysis, pieces were selected that required further, moredetailed (high power) study Belgium. For the first field campaignsat Sai 8-B-11, the selections for themicroscopic analysis (campaigns2000e2003) were based on specific research questions, formulatedbased on the results of the first excavations and technologicalanalyses. One of these studies, for example, was devoted to the useand prehensile mode of Sangoan core-axes in an attempt to resolvethe long-standing issue concerning their function (Rots and VanPeer, 2006). For the 2004 field campaign, all (2,650) pieces wereexamined macroscopically for visible signs of wear. Pieces withpotential wear were selected for closer examination under lowpower magnification. Pieces with signs of use were selected forexport and closer examination, including an analysis under highpower magnification, in the laboratory.

It is clear that the sampling procedure differs for the includedassemblages depending on the exact analytical situation, whichmay reduce comparability between sites. However, we believe thatthese problems are transcended by the obtained results, whosesystematic and recurrent nature allows statements with broaderrelevance.

Sai 8-B-11: the early MSA levels

The functional results discussed here concern the Lower andMiddle Sangoan and the Lupemban levels (Van Peer et al., 2004).Results obtained for the core-axes of theMiddle Sangoan level werepublished in Rots and Van Peer (2006). Here, the remaining part ofthe Middle Sangoan assemblage is incorporated and the core-axedata are compared with data obtained for other levels.

A total of 656 pieces, for the three levels, was examined underthe microscope for wear traces (Table 1). This number includes allpieces with visible signs of wear from the three levels. About 150pieces showed potential traces of use and 123 of these were suffi-ciently well preserved to justify export for closer examination in thelaboratory. Based on the final analysis, 81 pieces were used and 45were possibly used. The majority, however, remained unused (477pieces). For the remaining pieces the interpretation was eitheruncertain, incomplete, or proved impossible. Incomplete interpre-tations are generally due to the fact that these pieces were intendedfor export and were thus not examined in detail at the site. Giventhat export turned out to be impossible for these pieces, theiranalysis remained incomplete. For unused pieces, it cannot beentirely excluded that pieces used for a short time on a soft materiallike meat were missed, which is a recurring problem in microwearstudies.

Table 1Total amount of pieces examined for wear traces, minimally under low power magnifica

Analysis Used Possibly used Unused Uncertain

Lupemban 14 11 47 9Middle Sangoan (TLG) 31 16 254 5Lower Sangoan (BLG) 36 18 176 2Total 81 45 477 16

The difference between the number of pieces that were usedand those that remained unused is important and seems to berecurrent for all levels. Based on the microscopically examined andinterpreted sample, 17% of the Lupemban pieces included in thefinal analysis were used while 58% remained unused, 10% of theMiddle Sangoan oneswere usedwhile 83%were unused, and 15% ofthe Lower Sangoan pieces were used versus 75% that remainedunused. These are important data for the interpretation of the siteas a whole, especially when one examines what kinds of tools arerepresented in the used items category. When the totality of theexamined assemblage is taken into account, the percentage of useditems reduces to about 6% for the Lupemban, 5% for the MiddleSangoan, and 5% for the Lower Sangoan assemblage. Given thesmall number of represented tool categories, each category is dis-cussed individually.

Core-axes and core-axe fragments

The 48 core-axes that formed the basis of the Rots and Van Peer(2006) paper were all derived from the Middle Sangoan level. Mostof the core-axes proved to be production failures, all of which weremade out of local quartz. The remaining core-axes proved to beused in a haft for sub-surface exploitation; most of these werefabricated out of a non-local material and were imported in finalform to be replaced at the site. The inferred hafting arrangementconcerned a terminal hafting in a male split or wrap-around(Dickson, 1981) wooden haft in which the axe was fixed withbindings (Fig. 2).

Here we discuss new, additional results that were obtained onthe core-axes derived from the Lower Sangoan and the Lupembanlevels (details are included in the SOM). These results confirm theinterpretation presented for the Middle Sangoan core-axes (Rotsand Van Peer, 2006). This demonstrates that the derived patternis not an isolated case but rather is part of a recurring behaviouralpattern.

In total, 13 core-axes remained undetermined because theywere not exported to Belgium for closer examination; thus, 105core-axes were studied (Table 2). Out of these, only 29 weredetermined to have been used and hafted (Fig. 3b and c), 13 ofwhich are made out of rawmaterial other than quartz. On the otherhand, 66 core-axes proved to be production failures, all of which aremade out of quartz (Fig. 3a). These production failures includeunfinished core-axes due to, for example, abrupt terminations ofshaping scars, intense edge crushing, raw material impurities, andpieces that fractured during production (Rots and Van Peer, 2006).For 10 core-axes, their use is assumed. These results confirm theresults of the earlier core-axe study (Rots and Van Peer, 2006) anddouble the initial body of evidence. Again, no production failuresoccurred for core-axes manufactured out of materials other thanquartz. In addition, the pattern remains constant throughout thesequence, implying that the function of the sitedwhat the core-axes concernsddid not change and that Sai 8-B-11 remained a sitewhere core-axes weremanufactured and re-tooled during the earlyMSA. There are only minor differences in use intensity or charac-teristics between the quartz and other core-axes, which could pointto on-site (perhaps more limited) use of the quartz core-axes: non-quartz core-axes tend to be exhausted more frequently, while

tion, Sai 8-B-11

Not interpretable Not interpreted Total exported Total examined

0 3 26 840 21 72 3273 10 25 2453 34 123 656

Fig. 2. a) Experimental quartz core-axe hafted in split wooden haft and fixed with bindings; b) detail of a; c) experimental quartz core-axe hafted in a wrap-around wooden handle.

Table 2Results for analysed core-axes of all levels (including published), Sai 8-B-11

Interpretation Quartz Other Undetermined Total

Lupemban Production error 5 e e 5Possibly used e 1 e 1Used & hafted e 2 e 2Undetermined 1 e e 1

Middle Sangoan Production error 42 e e 42Possibly used 3 1 e 4Used & hafted 9 9 e 18Undetermined 1 1 5 7

Lower Sangoan Production error 19 e e 19Possibly used 3 2 e 5Used & hafted 7 2 e 9Undetermined 1 3 1 5

Total 91 21 6 118


slightly more quartz core-axes proved to represent items thatfractured during use. Both aspects suggest that quartz core-axesmay have been prepared for both immediate use on the site as wellas export to other sites. More details regarding the core-axe anal-ysis are included in the SOM.

Hammers and hammer fragments

Several hammers and hammer fragments were recovered forthe early MSA levels at Sai 8-B-11: 41 for the Lower Sangoan, 28 forthe Middle Sangoan, and 4 for the Lupemban (counts based on VanPeer et al., 2004). All of these were identified based on the presenceof distinct concentrations of percussion marks in one or morezones. Different raw materials are represented in the hammerassemblage as a whole, ranging from quartz, quartzite, and sand-stone to a kind of basalt. In addition, different sizes are represented,from heavy, more elongated cobbles to very small, round cobbles.Some of these hammers show typical scarring or scratches that arethe result of percussion or core edge grinding. Some larger scarsprobably caused discard.

Burins, burin spalls, and “burins de siret”

Aside from intentionally manufactured burins, examples ofaccidental burins (i.e., “burin de siret ” Bordes, 1961; Fig. 4aec)were recovered at Sai 8-B-11. Such “burins” are the result ofa fracture initiated from the impact point on the flake’s butt,thereby causing an additional intersection of the fracture plane andthe platform and splitting the artefact in two pieces. This results in

pieces that morphologically resemble the recovered dihedralburins (Fig. 4e). From a functional perspective, it seems appropriateto consider burins and burins de siret together and to examine thegrounds on which items were selected for use. Was the morpho-logical similarity of a burin de siret sufficient for it to be used asa burin?

The results of this analysis (details in the SOM) indicate thatburins were intentionally manufactured for their anticipatedfunctions and not merely selected from a range of items withsimilar fractures. However, it does not directly answer the questionof whether the fracture plane was an initial intentional morpho-logical adjustment of the flake for the task at hand or whether it

Fig. 3. Core-axes from the early MSA at Sai 8-B-11: a) production failure (S04/2/773);b) used & hafted (S04/2/161); c) used & hafted (S04/26/537).


was a consequence of resharpening. The lack of use-wear evidenceon the burin spalls supports the former interpretation.

Polyhedral cores

Polyhedral cores are quite frequent at MSA sites (e.g., McBrearty,1988; Wendorf et al., 1993; Fig. 5). Given their small size and theirparticularly consistent morphologies, one wonders whether thesepieces might have been intended for use in specific tasks, such ashunting (“bolas;” Hutchinson, 1865; Leakey, 1931; Harrison, 1947),percussion (Goren-Inbar et al., 2002), grinding, etc., instead ofhaving been exploited as cores. Therefore, the pieces were

examined under themicroscope in order to examine their function:tools, small cores, or both (details in SOM). All of the polyhedralcores recovered at Sai are made out of quartz.

Based on the functional analysis, polyhedral cores do not seem torepresent a specific functionally relevant category. There are nodistinct signs of a particular use. One would expect that use inhunting, percussion, or grinding should leave at least some identi-fiable concentrations of crushing, for example on projecting points.Used examples would then be located at kill sites (Leakey, 1931).This, however, remains a matter to be proven by actual empiricaldata. Based on the currently available evidence for Sai 8-B-11, onecan only conclude that the polyhedral cores are generally used ascores, and the rarity of visible percussion marks suggests onlyoccasional use as hammers, possibly in a final life cycle stage.

Projectiles

At least one point fragment (triangular, in quartz) with distinctimpact damage was found for the Middle Sangoan. The damageconsists of a step-terminating impact scar on the tip, associatedwitha pseudo-burin spall, initiated from the tip (Fig. 6a and b). On theopposite edge, a series of sliced scars was formed under impact(Fig. 6a). The proximal part of the piece was not preserved buthafting is evident and a projectile function necessitates hafting.Whether itwasmounted on a thrownor thrustedweapon cannot bedetermined. Another triangularquartz fragment shows impactwear(S01/17-2). It has two fracture planes, one of which is anterior to thetool’s use,while theother is causedbyuse. Basedon the impactwearand the fractures, the piece is interpreted as the hafted part of animplement thatwas used under impact, probably as a projectile. Theimpact wear is a result of counter-pressure against the haft.

For the Lupemban, a proximal flake fragment (quartz) shows animpact fracture and associated wear, but its origin is not entirelyclear. The piece may have been a projectile fragment. Again,a triangular quartz fragment (S01/38-2; Van Peer et al., 2004:Fig. 12:4, tranchet) was found with distinct impact damage. It hasone fracture plane, with associated scarring (e.g., pseudo-burinspalls from counter-pressure upon impact), which is an argumentfor it being caused by use (Fig. 6c). In addition, the opposite part(tip) shows distinct impact damage. The orientation of the piece inits haft is not entirely clear, but most evidence seems to indicatethat this part protruded from the haft, while the hafted portionwasnot preserved. This implies an axial hafting, as a tip, in contrast toa transverse point (Fig. 6c). The latter option assumes that thefracture was anterior to the piece’s use. While this cannot beentirely excluded, we tend to favour the first option.

The three triangular pieces discussed above all share the pres-ence of a fracture plane forming an intersection with both otheredges in order to form a triangle. These pieces are reminiscent ofthe petits tranchets or backed pieces of the Central AfricanSangoan/Lupemban (Twin Rivers [Clark, 2001b], Gombe [Cahen,1976], Kalambo Falls [Clark, 2001a]; Barham, 2002a; Van Peeret al., 2004). If these pieces can indeed be compared to theCentral African ones, their interpretation as part of a projectile isimportant. In contrast to their assumed hafting as transverse points(e.g., Barham, 2002a), the triangular pieces of Sai 8-B-11 seem tohave been hafted as true points with the fracture being the result ofuse instead of being an intentional aspect of their manufacture.

Despite the scarce nature of the projectile evidence at Sai 8-B-11,its mere presence is important given the early date of the site. Eventhough we may not be dealing with points that are equally for-malised as foliates (based on the recovered fragments), there is nodoubt about thepresenceof projectiles in the earlyMSA at Sai 8-B-11.Formalised points are present at Sai 8-B-11 in the form of foliates inthe Lupemban (1) and Lower Sangoan (i.e., S04/26/661). However,


the foliate fragment recovered for the Lower Sangoan appeared to bea production failure and no use-wear was found.

Conclusions

The results strengthen and enhance the inferences that werebased on the core-axe analysis alone (Rots and Van Peer, 2006) andagain indicate a complex behavioural pattern involving a speci-alised production and retooling process of core-axes. In contrast,the remaining tools reflect a more expedient, generally hand-heldtool use. Hafting in the early MSA at Sai 8-B-11 was apparentlyapplied only when it was necessary for the tool’s use (i.e., adzing,axing, projectiles). The presence of at least one projectile point

Fig. 4. Sai 8-B-11. “Burin de siret” (a, c), burins (b, e), and burin spalls

fragment, with impact wear, indicates the use of hafted projectilesfor hunting. Rare formal points were recovered but they do notshow evidence of use.

Sodmein cave

Ten pieces were examined, all of which are end products andsome of which are retouched (Table 3; see also Van Peer et al., 1996;Van Peer and Vermeersch, 2000). The results are summarised inTable 3.

Most pieces showed signs of use and the pieces with a preservednon-active part showed distinct evidence of hafting in the form ofwear traces and residues. Tip fragments with evidence of use in

(d), some with use scarring (f), from the early MSA at Sai 8-B-11.

Fig. 5. Polyhedral cores from the early MSA at Sai 8-B-11.


hunting also provide indirect evidence of hafting, as hafting wasa condition for their use as a projectile. The tools can be subdividedaccording to their function.

Percussion tools

One percussion tool was identified: a broken Levallois flakewitha transversal ochre band (Van Peer and Vermeersch, 2000; Fig. 7).

The piece was used, probably as an axe, and hafted. Due to a distalfracture, few direct use-wear traces are visible. Hinge- and step-terminating scars are initiated from the distal extremity, probablyat the same time as the fracture. They are indicative of an importantimpact, in particular adzing or axing (“Percussion lancée,” seeLeroi-Gourhan, 1943), on a medium-hard to hard material. Argu-ments in favour of this type of use are the distal initiation of thefracture, the scarring at its termination, the clear directional nature,the association of the scars and fracture, and the fact that thefracture stops at the haft limit; the combination of these charac-teristics is typical for use fractures on hafted implements (Rots,2002a, 2010a; cf. SOM). Scar depth, crushing, and superimposingstep terminations indicate that significant pressure was exerted onthe tool. A few spots of polish remain visible in spite of the fracture,and these suggest the piece was used on wood (Fig. 8).

All evidence points towards hafted use, with the most typicalhafting damage present around the ochre band. The haftingdamage supports the idea that an intense pressure was exerted.Different ventral and dorsal scar patches are present on both edges,generally consisting of a series of sliced scars with curved initia-tions, typical for the use of bindings (Rots, 2002a, 2003, 2010a).Their organised position as well as the position of incipient frac-tures allows reconstruction of the exact position and direction ofthe bindings. An incipient scar, initiated from the butt onwards andlocated on the right ridge of the dorsal butt, requires that at leasta part of the hafting arrangement was in contact with the butt.

Apart fromthe ochreband, charcoal residue is also presenton thetool (Fig. 9). A possible charcoal line runs to the proximal side of theochre band. Its ancient origin is suggested by at least one spot that issuperimposed by the ochre band (Fig. 9a). Other spots are locatedoutside the ochre band, but their similar appearance suggestsa contemporaneous origin. A few short lines are preserved near theridges, proximal of the ochre band in associationwith the describededgedamage.Additional charcoal spots are located inbetween theselines, in themost proximal zone and distal to the ochre band (dorsalleft). This evidence suggests more intense colouring in the past.Interestingly, the charcoal pattern nicely corresponds with thebindingdamagepattern. Perhaps somecharcoal particles adhered tothe bindings, which would explain the observed pattern. The col-ouring would in that case be unintentional.

The tool was probably hafted with bindings in a split (wooden)haft. The bindings may have been covered with resin in order tosecure them and protect them against moisture. The combined useof resin and bindings is a practise that is also observed on Neolithictools preserved in their hafts (e.g., Mallet,1992). The ochre band is inthat case probably linked with hafting. It is not unlikely that ochrewas mixed with resin before being applied to the tool. The currentlyvisible ochre band would then be a consequence of resin degrada-tion. In addition, the charcoal could have been a resin ingredient.

Projectiles

Two projectiles and one projectile tip fragment were identified(Fig. 10). Distinct impact damage was observed, including intensebifacial damage with step-terminating scars, MLIT’s (i.e., micro-scopic linear impact trace, see Fischer et al., 1984; Fig. 11), frictionspots or striations at the terminations or in the axis of scars, andpseudo-burin spalls detached from the tip, lateral edges, or fromthe fracture plane due to the counter-pressure on impact.

Fractures occur and are generally diagnostic of impact (e.g.,fracture with double initiation and termination in feather and stepon ME95/16/119). The tip of ME93/495 (Fig. 10) is fractured trans-versally, but in a non-diagnostic way. It consists of a snap fracturethat terminates in a tiny feather. The fracture is initiated in a smallintrusion (flaw) in the flint (invisible from the surface) on the

Fig. 6. Projectiles with impact damage from the early MSA at Sai 8-B-11: a) S04/2/625; b) microscopic detail of impact wear on S04/2/625; c) S01/38-2.


ventral face. The fracture’s cause is uncertain and not necessarilyuse-related, but adjacent to it on the dorsal face is a small frictionspot that may have been caused during use.

On the lateral edges adjacent to the tip, scars with curvedinitiations frequently occur. These scars reflect the cutting motionthat occurs during penetration of the projectile into an animal. Theabrupt termination of many scars reflects the high impact underwhich this scarring formed. Polish development on the edges isgenerally poor.

Haft boundaries were identified based on the occurrence ofdistinct scar concentrations on both lateral edges, at matchingheights (Figs. 9 and 12), as supported experimentally (Rots, 2002a,2003, 2010a) (details in the SOM). On ME93/495, large binding

Table 3Wear observations and size measurements of selected items for early to late Nubian Com

Tool nr. Typological specification Use Premo

ME93/60 Emireh point Projectile HaME95/16/131-134 Composite tool Thrusting spear element HaME95/17/689 Tool fragment Tip fragment of thrusting

spear point(Ha

ME95/16/119 Tool fragment Tip fragment of projectile point (HaME93/413/52 Possibly tanged Levallois flake Thrusting spear element HaME93/452/7 Truncated-facetted piece Probably unused NoME93/373 Levallois end product Butchering knife HaME95/49 Levallois end product,

distal fractureWood adze, ochre band,distal fracture

Ha

ME93/495 Levallois end product,distal fracture

Projectile, fractured distal tip Ha

ME93/264 Levallois end product Butchering knife Ha

scars mark the haft boundary, and their size and intensity againindicate an important impact. The scar concentrations are associ-ated with striations (Fig. 9b). In some cases, the haft limit is markedby several striations, perpendicular to the edge. Such a pattern isoften associated with a prominent bulb, which increases thepressure on the haft boundary in the case of contact with a hardhafting material (e.g., wood; Rots, 2002a).

Residues occur mostly in patches, in perfect relation with thehafting damage. On ME93/495, several small spots of potentialresin residue are observed on the ventral and dorsal surfaces, andon the dorsal butt (one within a scar).

The presented evidence supports hafting in a male split(wooden) haft in which the stone piece is fixed with bindings. The

plex levels in the Sodmein Cave sequence

hensilede

Period(relative)

Max. length(mm)

Max. width(mm)

Max. thickness(mm)

Weight(g)

fted Late MSA 79 38 5.5 19.6fted Late MSA 97.5 45 13 57.3fted) Late MSA 25 22 7 3.9

fted) Late MSA 17 30 4 2.0fted Late Nubian Complex 89 43 13 52.5ne Late Nubian Complex 115 57 26 148.46fted Late Nubian Complex 85 38 13 31fted Late Nubian Complex 90 84 22 181.9

fted Early Nubian Complex 81 31.5 7 13.2

fted Early Nubian Complex 80 53 6 28.2

Fig. 7. Levallois flake with ochre band and evidence of use and hafting from the Nubian Complex at Sodmein Cave (ME95/49). Drawing reprised and adapted from Van Peer andVermeersch (2000: Fig. 3).


bindings were probably treated with resin, which increases thestrength of the fixation and prevents moisture from loosening thebindings (see above).

Thrusting spears

Two pieces and one tip fragment were identified as tips forthrusting (stabbing) spears (Fig. 13). Their damage pattern reflects

an impact, but it differs from the pattern on the other projectiles.Instead of a pure end-on impact, as traditionally expected forprojectiles, there is a distinct combination of an end-on androtating impact on all three implements. This pattern is interpretedas being caused by a thrusting spear that is turned (twisted) to oneside (the right) immediately after insertion as a means to increasethe size and severity of the inflicted wound. The more significantweight of the pieces in comparison to the projectiles supports this

Fig. 8. Sodmein Cave, ME95/49. Remains of wood use-wear on ventral right distal extremity (not fractured): a) 200�; b) 500�.


interpretation (cf. Table 3). After all, the required weight balance ofthrusting spears differs from thrown spears, and heavier stone tips(as well as shorter, heavier shafts) thus form an advantage (Hughes,1998). Even though only a small fragment of ME95/17/689 ispreserved, the wear evidence is sufficiently distinctive to deter-mine that this piece probably had the same function.

The potentially very particular nature of thrusting spear wearevidence in comparison to other projectile wear evidence is beingtested experimentally (work in progress). If experimental confir-mation is obtained, it would allow straightforward identificationsof thrusting spears in archaeological assemblages. While thecombined impact wear (i.e., end-on and rotating) seems indicativefor identifying thrusting spear points, all thrusting spear points donot necessarily have to show this combined evidence and itsabsence does not warrant identification as a throwing spear point.Nor can a combined use as a thrusting and throwing spear point beexcluded.

Tip wear consists of step-terminating scars, large pseudo-burinspalls, impact striations often associated with the termination ofimpact scars, bright spots associated with scarring, and frictionpolish (Figs. 14 and 15).

Damage concentrations at matching heights on both edgesinterrupt the damage pattern at the haft limit. Hafting damage onthe lateral edges consists of scars associated with bright spots andstriations, and scars associated with a friction polish (Fig. 16). Thefrequent occurrence of scars associatedwith striations attests to theimportance of impact. Hafting traces are most explicit in the mostproximal area and around the haft limit (details in the SOM). Scarswith curved initiations also occur, suggesting the use of bindings

Fig. 9. Sodmein Cave, ME95/49: a) charcoal sp

for fixation purposes (Rots, 2003). Polish is present on the haftededges, but always relatively limited in extent and relatively poorlydeveloped. Hafting damage on the proximal extremity consists offractures and scar patches due to the counter-pressure against thehaft upon impact.

Interesting is the great similarity between ME93/413/52 andME95/16/131-134 (see Fig. 13 and infra). Given the above indica-tions for the use of thrusting spears, additional reflection isrequired on the exact mode of use of these pieces. One option isthat they were used for killing an already wounded or trappedanimal (Frison, 1978, 1989; Hughes, 1998). Such an animal is rela-tively immobile, which could explain the systematic occurrence ofa wear pattern that reflects a twist of the tool to the right. Thisoption seems the most supported, but an alternative would be thatthe wear pattern is caused by the fact the animal was moving at themoment of insertion. However, given the recurring nature ofa nearly identical wear pattern, the option that the wear patternwould be an indirect consequence of the mobility of the animaldoes seems less likely. Obviously, the thrusting spear may also havebeen used in close combat killing, even though it is not entirelyclear how the rotating motion would be part of this. Given thecombined presence of projectiles and thrusting spear points for thislevel at Sodmein Cave, the first option remains the most likely one.

Butchering knives

Two butchering knives were identified, one (ME93/373) moreexplicit than the other (Fig. 17). Use-wear evidence consists ofdistinct bifacial tip and edge scarring typical for cutting. Scars are

ot superposed by ochre; b) resin þ ochre.


small but relatively abundant on ME93/373, reflecting a combinedhard and soft material contact (cf. butchering). Under high power(only possible on ME93/373), the damage is associated witha polish that is identified as due to meat contact and incidentalbone contact, again corresponding to butchering. The bone polish isdistributed in spots, mostly away from the edge on the higher zonesof the microtopography, or near the edge in between scars. Stria-tions are associated, generally with an oblique orientation to theedge. The meat polish is poorly developed, which is expected sinceit is known to form slowly (Keeley, 1980) and is probably partiallyremoved by edge scarring during use.

Both butchering knives appear to have been used hafted.A distinct change in the damage pattern on the left edge of ME93/264 is visible at about 2 cm distal to the butt (Fig.17b), and, togetherwith a continuous series of scars on the ventral edge, it marks thestart of the hafted area. As expected, the last use-related scars aresomewhat larger and relatively irregular. On the right edge, thehafted area starts at the first sudden protrusion of the edge in thedistal zone, that is, about 2.5 cm below the tip, where it is markedby a large ventral scar (details in the SOM).

Several areas with resin residuewere documented onME93/373(Fig. 18). The identification of resin was based on morphologicalcriteria because the amount of preserved resin proved too limitedfor chemical analysis. Non-destructive techniques, such as micro-Raman were attempted, but proved unsuccessful: the preservedamount of resin appeared too small to be detectable. For the samereason, other destructive techniques, such as gas chromatography,were not attempted. For a chemical confirmation, we will have toawait more powerful techniques. Nevertheless, the macro- andmicroscopic evidence is very convincing in itself and certainlysufficiently sound to be able to accept the residues as resin. Oneimportant characteristic is the presence of an imprint of vegetalmaterial in the residue that was observed on ME93/373 (Fig. 18c;confirmed by Field and Fullagar, University of Sydney, Australia).Such an imprint is only possible when the observed material was atone point liquid. In addition, the resin is cracked in one area,another argument for the fact that it was liquid at one point in time(Fig. 18d). The resin is limited to a well-defined and restricted area(right part) of the tool, both on the dorsal and ventral faces,opposite the working edge (left edge, Fig. 17). A last factor is thepresence of starch residue within the resin. These argumentsconfirm that we are indeed dealing with some kind of resin. Anoccurrence of resin in a restricted area opposite the working edge isa functionally meaningful pattern that is also regularly observed inlater periods, for example on Neolithic sickle blades (e.g., Ramseyer,1987). Resin evidence for this early time period remains scarce(Mazza et al., 2006; Boëda, 2008). On the most proximal left edge,a different scarring pattern is observed that suggests that this toolpart was partially integrated in the hafting arrangement. This isconfirmed by the continuation of resin remains on the butt and itsedges. Consequently, the butt probably rested within a (minor)concavity in a haft. On the distal right edge (where it starts toconverge towards the point), steep scarring is formed by thecontact with the other haft boundary. This implies that the tool wasblocked in a groove of a probably wooden haft. The hafted edgecould only be partially examined under high power since intensivecleaning would potentially have removed the residues. The damagepattern nevertheless supports the resin distribution and there is nodoubt regarding the hafted nature of this piece. In the cleanedareas, striations and polish were observed that were attributed tohafting.

To conclude, ME93/373 is a hafted butchering knife with resinresidues. ME93/264 was used for butchering or a comparableactivity. The point shows damage that corresponds with a relativelystrong impact; it was definitely used to intrude into another

material. The tool was hafted with bindings on a handle. The toolfractured in the haft during use.

Other

A final piece concerns a large flake that removed the edge andextremity of the core (lateral flake). There is no conclusive evidenceto consider this piece as having been used. An expedient short usecannot be excluded, in particular given the problematic preserva-tion of the piece with regard to a high power analysis. A thin calcitecrust and alterations are present, hindering valid observationsunder high power.

Conclusions

The Sodmein Cave evidence consists of distinct traces of use,hafting, ochre, and resin. The used pieces were all determined tohave been used hafted, which suggests the existence of systematichafting procedures. The presence of hafted projectiles is a constantelement, which no doubt reflects the general function of the site inlate MSA times. Interesting is the fact that all identified thrustingspear elements were found in association with thrown projectileelements indicating the combined use of both systems, an ethno-graphically known tactic considered to be very successful (e.g.,confrontational attacks, finishing off wounded prey; Frison, 1978,1989; Lowie, 1982; Hughes, 1998). The fact that hafted butcheringknives may have occurred during the early Nubian Complex, butwere definitely in use from the late Nubian Complex onwards issignificant, as hafting is not a condition for their use. It indirectlyimplies that the advantages of a haft for efficient tool use wereunderstood and that the extra time required to produce them wasconsidered worthwhile.

Taramsa 1

The analysis of a late MSA assemblage with transitional techno-logical features fromTaramsa 1 differs in nature from the previouslyanalysed sites. First of all, it is clear that the site, throughout its longhistory, exclusively served as a chert extraction andworkshop locale(Van Peer et al., 2010). Hence, a different realm of the behaviouralspectrum of the late MSA groups is represented here, posing otherquestions and challenges to a wear analysis. Furthermore, thefeatures of lithic production activities are verywell demonstrated ina number of completely refitted sequences. They show the adapta-tion of the Levallois concept to continuous blade production. Hence,our analysis was designed to achieve a better understanding of thetechnical aspects of blank production. The products from elevensequences were available for this analysis.

For a long time, it has been assumed that Levallois reductionmethods made use of stone hammers given the size andmorphology of the bulbs of percussion, especially those on Levalloisend products (Boëda,1994). However, this assumptionmay be validonly in a European context (Rots and Locht, in prep.). For Taramsa 1,the wear analysis suggests a different pattern (Table 4), supportingthe conclusion that this is a changing technological system.

While past hammer identifications were largely based onmorphological criteria of the butt, bulb, and the detached flake (e.g.,longitudinal convexity; Pelegrin, 1995, 2000), the impact ofa hammer on the butt also leaves a microscopic mark consisting ofsmall (incipient) fractures, scarring, striations, friction spots, etc.The advantage of microscopic evidence is its direct link with thehammer used, whereas the morphological criteria judge the effectof a particular hammer, which may be obscured or influenced byother factors such as force, angle, and so on. After all, the micro-scopic mark of each kind of hammer differs, as inferred based on an

Fig. 10. Hafted projectile from the Nubian Complex at Sodmein Cave (ME93/495).


experimental program involving different kinds of hammers (stonevariety and organic material) in direct and indirect percussion(details in Rots (2010b) and in the SOM). In general, stone hammersleave a very distinct microscopic wear pattern on the butt of theartefact, consisting of incipient cracks and/or circles, associatedwith distinctive striations (Fig. 19a and b). This contrasts withorganic hammers that only occasionally result in limited or faintincipient cracks. Generally, no cracks are visible and striations andpolish form the main types of wear (Fig. 19c and d). In addition, thebutt regularly shows signs of limited to moderate intentionalabrasion, which was applied to improve knapping as well as toprotect the knapping surface on the organic hammer.

The wear analysis of 11 entire reduction sequences from Tar-amsa 1, sector 91/04 Concentration 28, demonstrated that thechoice of a particular hammer was conscious and guided by theneeds of the production process itself. In summary, the cortexremoval phase was performed with a heavy hard stone hammer,while a lighter stone hammer was chosen for the preparation of theconvexities. Heavier hammers result in a more significant intensityand visibility of incipient percussion circles and cracks, an

Figure 11. Sodmein Cave. Impact wear on ventral tip of projectile (ME93/60):

increased intensity and frequency of the associated striations, anda larger area of contact as based on the extent of the microscopicevidence. For the end products a distinction should be madebetween technological end products and morphological ones. Thelatter show similar characteristics to the former, but when placed intheir refitted sequence their mode of surface consumption appearsdifferent and they more likely belong to the preparation stage.While the true end products had abraded butts and were system-atically detached with a hard organic hammer (Fig. 20), the prep-aration flakes were systematically detached with a stone hammer,generally without an abrasion of the butt.

These observations imply that the detachment of the final endproduct was a conscious process involving careful abrasion of thestriking platform and the use of a different (i.e., organic) hammer.Based on the currently available evidence, a bone hammer seems tobe the most likely raw material (see Rots, 2010b).

The conscious use of a particular kind of hammer for a particularstage in the Levallois reduction sequence provides an additionalargument for the specialised nature of production sites and theexpert knowledge of knappers. If this pattern proves to extend

a) Impact damage (8�); b) Microscopic linear impact trace (MLIT; 200�).

Fig. 12. Sodmein Cave. Hafting edge damage on projectiles: a) Around the haft limit on the ventral left edge of ME93/60 (8�); b) On the ventral proximal left edge of ME93/495(25�).

Fig. 13. Hafted thrusting spears from Sodmein Cave: a) ME93/413/52 (Late Nubian Complex); b) ME95/16/131-134 (Late MSA).


Fig. 14. Sodmein Cave. Microscopic linear impact trace (MLIT) on ventral tip of thrusting spear point (ME93/413/52): a) 100�; b) 200�.


beyond Taramsa 1, the insights regarding hammer use maycontribute to the understanding of end product variability. Asidefrom that, the mere identification of the use of organic hammers ina late MSA context is important, as it stresses once again that theavailable assemblages lack a perhaps very important organic partdue to preservation conditions (and possibly also curation).

Sai 8-B-11: the upper levels

As mentioned, late MSA occupation levels are found withinNilotic silts overlying the middle Pleistocene sediments thatcontain the early MSA. These silts have been heavily affected byvertisol formation, resulting in serious post-depositional displace-ment of the lithic debris. Deflation and slope wash processes havefurther added to the loss of primary contexts. Even if a succession ofdistinct occupation events took place during the deposition of thesefloodplain sediments, it can be assumed that the integration of thisdebris into one overall assemblage is valid at the coarse resolutionof Pleistocene timescales. In its techno-typological features, it isreminiscent of the Khormusan (Marks, 1968) which in its turnpresents close similarities with the Nubian Complex sensu stricto(Van Peer, 1998).

For the wear analysis, pieces were selected for which potentiallyinteresting results were expected on a functional level. Selectionwas thus not objective or representative for the assemblage asa whole. Excavation years 2002, 2003, and 2004 are included.Different technological and typological categories are represented(cf. Table 5).

Cores

None of the cores show traces of use.

Fig. 15. Sodmein Cave. Impact damage on the tip of thrusting spear p

Flakes

Three out of 23 flakes were used, and an additional one waspossibly used. The used flakes include a flake fragment, a large flake,and a retouched cortical flake formally a tool; the possibly usedpiece is a partially cortical flake. Only two tasks are represented,cutting (2) and scraping (2). Only the retouched cortical flake, usedfor scraping, shows possibledthough uncertaindevidence ofhafting. All other pieces were hand-held during use.

Among the flakes, two other pieces were retouched but thesedid not show any evidence of use-wear.

Blades

Use-wear was documented on only two of the 11 includedblades and blade fragments. For neither of these pieces, one ofwhich was retouched, can the interpretation be entirely certain andno exact use could be identified. One other blade fragment showedretouch, but no evidence of use.

Core tools

Three axes were examined; two of thesewere definitely used forpercussion tasks while hafted. The evidence is similar to thatobserved on the core-axes of the Sangoan levels. Wear wasobserved on the third ax, but the use could not be interpreted withcertainty. Given that this piece was not loaned for export, it couldnot be re-examined in the laboratory.

Tools

Ten tools were examined (Table 6), most of which proved tohave been used. The dihedral burin proved to be used for grooving

oint (ME95/16/131-134): a) Dorsal tip (8�); b) Ventral tip (8�).

Fig. 16. Sodmein Cave. Hafting wear on proximal part of thrusting spear points: a) Friction spot and striation associatedwith scarring on the ventral proximal right edge of ME93/413/52 (100�); b) Striations associated with scarring from counter-pressure against the haft on impact on the ventral proximal right edge near butt of ME95/16/131-134 (100�).


a hard material while hand-held (based on the presence of smallscars typical of prehension and the absence of hafting wear;Fig. 21a). Both used naturally backed knives were hand-held, one ofwhich was used for perforating or splitting a hardmaterial (e.g., nutcracking). The Nazlet Khater point showed evidence of cutting, butthe prehensile mode was unclear. By contrast, the use-wearevidence on the sidescraper was unclear, while it could be deter-mined that the piece was used in the hand. One tranchet was usedfor percussion as an axe or adze while being hafted (S02/104-1;Fig. 21b), while the other was too aeolised to allow interpretation.

Levallois products

Of 22 Levallois flakes and flake fragments, only five piecesshowed definite signs of use, while two were possibly used. Onlyone of the two retouched Levallois flakes showed signs of use: oneshowed small distal fractures and was used as an axe or adze forpercussion, while being hafted.

Three Levallois flakes were definitely used as hand-held knives,one was possibly used as such, and one Levallois flake (Fig. 21c) andone Levallois flake fragment showed possible evidence of use asprojectiles while hafted.

A Levallois point and a retouched Levallois blade fragment didnot show any use-wear evidence.

Foliates and foliate pre-forms

Among the assemblage, several pieces were identified thatappeared to be failures from different stages of the foliateproduction process. These include a wide variety of different tooltypes (cf. Table 7). These pieces are generally only partially worked(e.g., one face, one edge), but the general foliate morphology isalready recognisable. They typically show evidence of a problem-atic production in the form of abruptly terminating shaping scars,fractures, raw material impurities, and so on.

With the exception of one piece, typologically a convergentsidescraper that was possibly used, none of the items identified asbeing part of the production cycle of foliates showed traces of use.On the contrary, they all reflected problems that were encounteredduring the foliate production, such as abrupt scar terminations andfractures. The observations are highly similar to those observed onthe Sangoan core-axes (Rots and Van Peer, 2006) and to some of theobservations made on Still Bay points of Blombos Cave (Villa et al.,2009).

The foliate production failures identified at Sai 8-B-11 can bedivided into different groups representing failures that occurred atdifferent subsequent stages of the foliate production process.

The first and most speculative group concerns large flakes thatcould potentially be transformed into foliates (as these wereprepared on flake), but were not used for this purpose due toa variety of reasons, such as (partial) production fractures, trans-versal production fractures, morphological non-conformities(irregularities), etc. It is clear that it is difficult to prove that thesepieces were actually part of the foliate production cycle, but givenother evidence (see below), this option should nevertheless beconsidered. These pieces were not included in Table 7.

The second group concerns unfinished foliates, with a varyingdegree of shaping: flakes with partial shaping, partial bifacialshaping, covering unifacial retouch, unfinished and broken, bifa-cially worked but very irregular (thinning problems; Fig. 22a). Onepiece could also be categorised among the partial bifacial shapingcategory, given its irregular nature, but this piece might have beenused (due to the intense aeolisation, this is difficult to establishwith certainty).

A last group concerns (nearly) finished foliates, for which themajor problem generally concerns the unequal thickness of bothfaces and/or a fracture (Fig. 22b).

The remaining pieces concern finished foliates with evidence ofuse-wear. These may be fractured, leaving only the hafted or the tipfragment behind. Some of the used pieces also show an unequalthickness of both faces, but generally the difference is not verysignificant and did not prevent use. Foliates were used as projec-tiles while hafted or as hafted adzes/axes (e.g., tranchet). For onepiece, the use and prehensile mode were not entirely clear. Frac-tures can be considered as the main reason for discard of thesepieces, be it a fracture that occurred during use (Fig. 22c) or duringresharpening.

Conclusions

The presence of pieces corresponding to different foliateproduction stages indicates that during the late MSA, Sai 8-B-11was a production place for foliates. The presence of finished pieceswith evidence of use demonstrates that foliates were also re-tooledat Sai 8-B-11.

Interestingly, several unretouched pieces showed use-weartraces, while some of the retouched implements did not show anyevidence of use. The use of unretouched pieces is not new (Odell,1980), but once again it stresses the importance of includingunretouched pieces in functional studies. It also demonstrates thattraditional typological approaches might miss an important part ofthe used lithic assemblage.

Most of the unretouched used implements were used as knives:unretouched edges are sharper and thus more suitable for cutting

Fig. 17. Hafted butchering knives from the Nubian Complex at Sodmein Cave: a) ME93/373 with evidence of resin; b) ME93/264.


tasks. Knives may thus be underrepresented as a functional cate-gory when only the retouched part of the assemblage is considered.In addition, projectiles in a broad sense may have been used in anunretouched state, but generally these are better recognised asa category.

The observation that retouched implements were not system-atically used is equally important as it questions the relevance ofretouch for an adequate identification of prehistoric tools in theoperational sense. Several causes can be proposed to explain thispattern: the retouch may have been resharpening retouch thusremoving initial use-wear evidence, it may have been unsuccessfulshaping retouch resulting in discard, or the task for which the toolwas preparedwas finished. Obviously, it needs to be stressed that inthe present case, most retouch of these unused pieces is relativelylimited. The more intensively retouched pieces, transformed intoa specific tool type, were all used. The Levallois point lacked use-wear and among the Levallois flakes and fragments, only a minorityshowed use-wear evidence. Most of the unretouched used Levalloisflakes were used for cutting tasks, which agrees with our earliercomment. Possible explanations for this are the unsuccessfulnature of these products or the termination of the intended task.

The majority of hafted pieces concerns tools used for percussiontasks (axes, adzes; 6/12), followedbyprojectiles (4/12þ 2/3 possiblyhafted). The main remaining activity is scraping (1/12 þ 1/3). Forscraping, hafting is not a necessity for use, in contrast to adzes/axesand projectiles. The fact that these tools nevertheless show distinctevidence of hafting is very important, independent of its cause. Itmay signify a different attitude towards hafting (e.g., in comparisonto the Sangoan), being that the extra investment required for haftinga tool is opted for as ameans to facilitate use, notmerely because it isa condition for use (e.g., projectiles). However, given that thenumber of pieces remains small (2/12), we need to be careful withgeneralisations.

Another important observation is the frequency of hafting withregard to hand-held use. Based on the observations, most of thepieces that were recovered show evidence of hafted use (15/26),while only 11 were (probably) hand-held (Table 8). Two explana-tions can be proposed. On the one hand, if the main function of thesite is tool production, it is not unlikely that more hafted pieceswere discarded as these were probably re-tooled at Sai 8-B-11.Hand-held pieces are generally discarded where they were used,while hafted pieces more often tend to be transported between

Fig. 18. Sodmein Cave, ME93/373: a, b) resin distribution; c) vegetal imprint in resin; d) solidified fluid state of resin.


sites (Keeley, 1982; Rots and Van Peer, 2006). Local tool use mayhave been limited at Sai 8-B-11. On the other hand, one could alsointerpret this pattern as a confirmation of the fact that haftingseems to be a more generally applied procedure. In this light it isinteresting that the knives were hand-held, in contrast to those atSodmein Cave. Efficient hafting of knives is largely facilitated by theuse of resin or another adhesive, which is not the case for scrapingtools. The use of resin is not currently known at Sai 8-B-11, while itis for Sodmein Cave. Even projectiles for which hafting withadhesives is often assumed, based on recovered evidence (e.g.,Boëda et al., 1996), may not have been hafted with adhesives at Sai8-B-11. It may be the case that the hafting of scraping tools in thelate MSA at Sai 8-B-11 remains a less systematic procedure incontrast with the clearly systematic and planned hafting ofprojectiles and percussion tools. This may be linked with the site’sfunction and the lack of intense local tool use.

Nazlet Khater-4

The early Upper Palaeolithic axes of Nazlet Khater-4 showa remarkable degree of morphological similarity to the Sangoancore-axes of Sai 8-B-11 (Fig. 23). It has been argued elsewhere thatthe early Upper Palaeolithic industry of Nazlet Khater-4 is part ofa process of technological transformation from within the NubianComplex (Van Peer et al., 2010). An axe of Nazlet Khater-type alsooccurs in one of the latest assemblages at Taramsa 1 and at otherNubian Complex sites like Bir Tarfawi (e.g., BT-14, Area A; Wendorfet al., 1993: 277, Fig. 21.11). Nazlet Khater-4 is a mining site and theaxes were discovered in the shafts, which is of course highlysuggestive of their function.

In comparison to the Sangoan core-axes, morphologicaldifferences are the presence of lateral concavities on the Nazlet

Khater-4 axes (Fig. 23) and their general thinness, which may bedue in part to raw material properties. The Nazlet Khater axes arefabricated out of chert, which is easier to work and allows themanufacture of thinner products. Due to the rougher fractureproperties of quartz, thin products in this size category (particu-larly this width) are very difficult to obtain. Such thinness wouldonly be possible based on flat raw material cobbles, which areabsent in raw material outcrops at Sai. In addition, the chertallowed the manufacture of concavities (by shaping retouch) onthe lateral edges of the axes. These concavities are pronounced ontwo of the four examined axes. Concavities like these contribute toan easier and more secure hafting. Their production is extremelydifficult in quartz.

Four axes were available for study. The hafting damage on theNazlet Khater axes is similar to the Sangoan core-axes if the rawmaterial impact is taken into account (e.g., higher chance of abruptterminations on quartz). Some differences are necessarily presentgiven the differences in thickness and the higher visibility of indi-vidual scars on chert. The lateral concavities show distinct bifacialscarring, mainly step terminating, that are linked with the contactagainst the haft. The damage is more intense within one of theconcavities, which should be linked with the type of haftingarrangement and the orientation of the axe in the haft. On theproximal extremity, no hafting damage is present, which nicelycorresponds to the observations on the Sangoan core-axes. Again,the evidence points at a male haft, more specifically a male split orwrap-around arrangement (see Fig. 2). The presence of concavitieson the axe would never allow a secure hafting in a hole: the size ofthe hole would have to be too large to allow an insertion of one ofthe broader extremities. A male split haft accommodates thisproblem. In addition, the presence of lateral concavities is highlysuggestive of a wrap-around handle (i.e., with a flexible wood that

Table 4Wear observations summarised by reduction stages for 11 Levallois and Taramsanreduction sequences from Taramsa 1

De-cortication*Preserved number of flakes Min. 114*Number of cortical butts Min. 27*Characteristics Cortical butts are generally avoided*Bulb of percussion Pronounced to very pronounced*Bulb initiation Presence of convex protrusion

varies from rare to frequent*Dominant area of impact Impact on flat larger area (i.e., zone),

except line butts*Butt Not prepared but morphology varies

(heavy; line or flat)*Microscopic traces Distinct incipient cracks and circles,

sometimes associated with spotsof friction polish

*Used hammer Stone, mostly hard and heavy

Preparation upper face*Number preserved Min. 62*Dominant butt type Generally prepared*Bulb of percussion Relatively prominent*Bulb initiation Convex protrusion is rare*Dominant area of impact Impact in flat zone or on ridge*Butt Varies, often relatively heavy*Microscopic traces Impact circles and cracks, sometimes light

polishing within impact circle, striations are rare*Used hammer Stone, generally moderate weight

End products*Number Min. 40*Dominant butt type Generally prepared*Bulb of percussion Relatively clear*Dominant area of impact Flat zone or ridge*Butt Relatively thin*Microscopic traces Impact cracks and circles,

polish is rareImpact cracks andcircles are absent,polish spots andstriations are frequent

*Used hammer Stone Organic


is tied around the axe), an arrangement that was suggested earlier(Dickson, 1981; Ramseyer, 1987; Rots and Van Peer, 2006; seeFig. 2b). Such a haft would not only account for the difference indamage intensity on both lateral edges, it would also explain theneed for lateral concavities to secure the position of the axe in thehaft. It implies that the axe was mounted with the most damagedconcavity upward, which is confirmed by the use-wear location.

The use damage consists of bifacial step-terminating damage; itis caused by percussion and is similar to the damage on the Sangoancore-axes. The differences in size and visibility are due to the rawmaterial differences and to the reduced thickness of the NazletKhater axes. Interestingly, the use damage on the Nazlet Khateraxes is also slightly off-centre, despite the carefully prepared,broad, regular, and convex working edge. This further confirms thesimilarity in activity, even though not necessarily for extracting thesame raw material. The use of the Nazlet Khater axes in under-ground mining activities is further confirmed by their find locationin the shafts and by the numerous parallel, shallow (1 cm deep)scratches and grooves that were discovered on the walls of theshafts (Vermeersch et al., 2002). The axes could have functioned toremove the silt and enlarge the gallery, which fits well with theobserved damage pattern.

Despite the raw material differences, the wear patterns on boththe Sangoan core-axes and the Nazlet Khater-4 axes are very similar(Fig. 23). These patterns suggest that both tool types were used andhafted in a similar way (see Fig. 2b or Dickson, 1981: plate 1, 10).

Discussion

Before discussing somewider implications of these results, someconsiderations are essential regarding the nature of the presenteddata. While the functional analysis of the material from Sai 8-B-11concerned large percentages of the assemblages (for the early MSAeven the complete assemblages) and is thus representative for Sai8-B-11 as a whole, this is not the case for the Egyptian materialwhere the functional analysis is restricted to small or very smallsamples. For Sodmein Cave, only ten tools or tool fragments,belonging to different levels, were analysed. Nevertheless, given theresults, the indications are considered valuable and relevant, inparticularwhenplaced in a larger perspective. The data for SodmeinCave will obviously need to be supplemented in the future. ForTaramsa 1, results are of a different nature. The analysis concerneda specific concentration (sector 91/04 concentration 28) consistingof 27 refitted sequences, eleven of which were examined.

Raw material use

Quartz is the dominant raw material used in the early MSA atSai. Good-quality quartz is abundant locally. Few other raw mate-rials were used: only a very small percentage of flaked tools weremade of sandstone (locally available) or red chert (only availablelocally in small cobbles). Generally it concerns atypical, more or lessisolated flakes, a minority of which were retouched. Among thecore-axes, a slightly different pattern is visible: core-axes arepredominantly made out of quartz, but quartzite (among others) isclearly represented even though it is not in the terrace deposit fromwhich quartz was exploited. Given the absence of core-axeproduction waste in raw materials other than quartz and given thefunctional interpretation of the core-axes, these non-quartz usedcore-axes can be considered as curated and imported in finalisedform on the site. If only the core-axes (cf. Table 2) are taken intoaccount, imported raw materials are documented for slightly lessthan 20% for the Lower andMiddle Sangoan, which are percentagesthat approach those mentioned by Wurz for the Howieson’s Poortat Klasies River (Wurz, 2002). The only other group of implements

that are not exclusively made out of quartz are hammers (e.g.,quartzite, some kind of basalt) and all grinding stones (localsandstone). Based on the core-axe analysis, it is clear that earlyMSASai can be viewed as a quartz procurement, core-axe production,and retooling site in a regional system involving other (core-axe)production sites for other raw materials (e.g., quartzite). Thedistance between these sites and their potential seasonality isdifficult to evaluate.

For the late MSA sites, raw material variability is limited, whichis probably due to the abundance of good quality local chert. AtTaramsa 1, only local chert was used. Raw material use is morevaried and includes small quartz artefacts only in the olderassemblages. At Sodmein Cave, only chert was used, but in differentvarieties. For now, the evidence indicates a use of local raw mate-rials during the late MSA. In part, this observation is due to theproduction context of most sites and their location on a rawmaterial outcrop. Nevertheless, one would still expect the discardof imported tools out of other rawmaterials, as is visible during theearly MSA. Such transport may only have occurred over shortdistances, but the lack of good provenance studies hampers reliableinterpretations of this pattern. Raw materials other than quartz arealso rare for the late MSA at Sai 8-B-11.

If only general raw material percentages are taken into account,there is no doubt about the predominant use of local raw materialat these MSA sites, which corresponds to general patterns observedelsewhere in Africa (Watts, 1999; Wurz, 2002) and also in MiddlePalaeolithic Europe (Conard, 2001a), but no increase in the use ofexotic raw materials in the late MSA can yet be observed (Ambrose,2002).

Fig. 19. Experimental knapping wear: a) circular impact crack associated with striations on the butt of exp. 34/39 from contact with a sandstone hammer in direct percussion (50�);b) striations associated with a circular impact crack on the butt of exp. 34/72 from contact with a hammer in basalt in direct percussion (50�); c) striations on the butt of exp. 30/53from contact with a bone hammer in direct percussion (100�); d) striations on the butt of exp. 33/23 from the contact with a wooden hammer in direct percussion (100�).


Bifacial tool production

For the early MSA, there is a sharp contrast between the spe-cialised production, use, and hafting of core-axes and the expedientnature of other implements. Sai 8-B-11 appears as a highly speci-alised site for the production and re-tooling of core-axes (and theprocessing of ochre). The intensity of core-axe manufacturing,however, is not constant throughout all early MSA levels. In the

Fig. 20. Knapping wear on butt of Levallois end product ME91/230, Taramsa 1 (100�).

Lower Sangoan, about 38 core-axes and pre-forms are involved (incomparison to 136 flaked tools), in the Middle Sangoan, about 70(cf. 76 flaked tools), and in the Lupemban only 9 (cf. 36 flaked tools).This clearly indicates a peak in the Middle Sangoan, after which theimportance of this activity at Sai 8-B-11 significantly decreased.However, post-depositional processes may be partially responsiblefor this pattern: the Lupemban is clearly reworked, whichmay havecaused the important reduction of core-axe manufacturingevidence.

This pattern continues to some degree during the early NubianComplex with Taramsa 8 and its evidence for foliate manufactureand hafting (Van Peer et al., 2008), and in the late MSA at Sai when

Table 5Functional interpretations for the upper levels of Sai 8-B-11

Categories Unused Possibly used Used Uncertain Numberexamined

Cores 8 0 0 2 10Flakes 15 1 3 4 23Blades 9 2 0 0 11Core tools 0 0 2 1 3Tools 2 2 5 1 10Levallois flakes 11 2 5 5 23Levallois blade 1 0 0 0 1Foliate pre-forms 7 1 0 0 8Foliates 0 2 5 5 12Other 30 0 1 0 31Total 83 10 21 18 132

Table 6Interpretations from the wear analysis of the tools from the upper levels of Sai8-B-11

Tool type Possibly used Uncertain Unused Used Unknown Total

Dihedral burin 1 1Endscraper 1 1Naturally backed knife 1 1 1 3Nazlet Khater point 1 1Sidescraper 1 1Tranchet 1 1 2Accidental burin 1 1


there is again important manufacture and re-tooling activitydirected towards foliates. The production activity consists of about20 foliates or pre-forms (in comparison to 42 flaked tools).

This consistent evidence of specialised re-tooling can be inter-preted as scheduled gearing up sessions within a collector strategy(Binford, 1980; Bousman, 1993, 2005).

Percussion techniques

Based on the production wear analysis, a strategic use of specifichammers for a particular reduction stagewas identified at Taramsa 1.The main observation was the use of a hard organic hammer fordetaching intentional end products. Based on the present experi-mental reference collection, the organic material in question wasdetermined to be bone. Bone is a relatively hard material and whenused as a hammer can produce several macroscopic features similarto pieces produced with stone hammers (e.g., relatively thick bulbs,percussion ripples, bulbar scars, etc.).

The question arises whether similar observations can be madeon Levallois end products from other sites. The Levallois products ofSodmein Cave do appear to be detached with a hard organichammer. This seems to suggest that the use of organic hammers fordetaching end products may have been a widespread phenomenonduring theMSA. Given the rawmaterial used at Sai 8-B-11, this kindof interpretation is more difficult.

Tool use

Except for the production and retooling of core-axes (“gearing-up”), few activities took place at Sai 8-B-11 during the early MSA.There are some projectiles, but they are rare, and apart from theseonly some minor grooving activities were identified. The later MSA

Fig. 21. Used tools from the late MSA at Sai 8-B-11: a) hand-held groover (S02

sites seem to represent specialised task camps. At Sodmein Cave inparticular, all identified activities are focussed on animal huntingand processing. The site location also points in that direction. ForTaramsa 1, there is as of yet no evidence of activities other than toolproduction. However, the older concentrations appear less focussedgiven the higher number of retouched implements (Van Peer et al.,2010). In addition, several foliate tip fragments were recovered inconcentration 5, with probable evidence of impact (based ondetailed drawings: impact fractures, pseudo-burin spalls fromcounter-pressure, probable impact scars on the tip, etc. [Van Peeret al., 2010]). At Sodmein Cave, used tip fragments were alsorecovered for the late MSA. The associated bone remains leave nodoubt that the tips reflect hunting in the vicinity and processing ofkilled animals at the site (entirely or in parts). In general terms, theglobal activity variability and the number of used tools are rela-tively low during the entire Nubian Complex, with a predominanceof animal hunting and processing followed by general subsistenceactivities.

During the late MSA, activities are more varied, includingbutchering, cutting, percussion, perforating, grooving, andscraping, as demonstrated at Sai 8-B-11. Given the importance offoliate production at Sai 8-B-11, one may doubt that all of theidentified activities (e.g., hunting) were carried out at Sai 8-B-11itself. Without the presence of bone remains (due to poor preser-vation) any interpretation regarding the location of the performedactivities remains uncertain, but the relative abundance of knives(8/27 used implements) suggests that at least a part of these cuttingactivities must have taken place at Sai 8-B-11. Knives have a rela-tively short life span due to the necessity of a sharp edge. The largervariability in tool use activities, along with evidence of specialisedproduction and re-tooling of foliates, may point to a slightlydifferent settlement system in comparison to the early MSA.

Throughout these assemblages and time periods, there are a fewconstant elements that need to be stressed, in particular withregard to percussion implements and projectiles. In the early MSAat Sai 8-B-11, percussion implements (in the form of hafted core-axes) are highly specialised and abundant (Van Peer et al., 2004).The hafted core-axes proved to be used for sub-surface exploitationpurposes (see also Rots and Van Peer, 2006). Percussion imple-ments continue to be important during the later MSA, be it inreduced frequencies and with more varied uses. At Sodmein Cave,the large Levallois flake showed percussion damage from wood-working. For Taramsa 1, there was no evidence for the analysedconcentration, but bifacials were reused for cobble extraction (see

/133-2); b) hafted axe/adze (S02/104-1); c) hafted projectile (S02/104-3).

Table 7Interpretation of the foliates and foliate pre-forms from the upper levels of Sai 8-B-11, based on the wear analysis

Groups Tool type Possibly used Uncertain Unused Used Unknown Total Group total

Foliate pre-forms Retouched flake 2 2 8Retouched medial flake fragment,partially cortical

1 1

Bifacial piece 1 1Convergent sidescraper 1 1Sidescraper 1 1Foliate preform 1 1Fractured unfinished foliate 1 1

Foliates Foliate 1 2 3 12Foliate fragment 1 3 2 2 8Foliate, fragment, “tranchet” 1 1


Van Peer et al., 2010). At Sai 8-B-11, percussion activities wereperformed with small axes and tranchets, both for digging andwoodworking activities.

Another constant element is the projectile evidence. In the earlyMSA, projectiles are present, but given their fragmentary nature(tip fragments), there are no further indications about their generalmorphology. Remarkably, they systematically occur as triangularfragments (cf. petits tranchets). Based on current wear data, thismorphology seems to be a direct consequence of use fractures(under impact). This means that the triangular fragments havenever functioned as such, but at the same time there are few dataavailable to reconstruct their original morphology. A possible basalfragment was recovered, but it concerns a simple flake fragment.This would imply that the projectiles only experienced limitedretouch, probably mainly to adjust the distal morphology. As such,they are hard to recognise within an assemblage (if impactevidence is not examined), which may explain the dominance oftriangular fragments as evidence of projectile use given their moreapparent nature. This early evidence of the use of hafted projectilespushes its earliest use in Africa further back in time. Other earlyevidence of hafted projectiles was observed for the Howieson’sPoort and late MSA (50e60 ka) in South Africa (Lombard, 2005,2008) and the MSA in Botswana (Donahue et al., 2004). In theNear East, evidence dates to the Mousterian (Shea, 1988; Boëdaet al., 1996; Plisson and Beyries, 1998) from about 70 ka onwards(Boëda, 2008). In Europe, evidence for hafted projectiles dates backto at least the Late Middle Palaeolithic (Sesselfelsgrotte, ca. 45 ka;Rots, 2009), but new evidence (pers. obs.) is also appearing for themuch older sites of Biache-Saint-Vaast (Tuffreau and Sommé, 1988;Rots, in prep) and Maastricht-Belvédère (Roebroeks, 1988; DeLoecker, 2005; Rots and De Loecker, in prep), both currentlydated to OIS 7. All the later evidence (from about 70 ka) is actuallymore comparable to what we observed for the MSA, during whichprojectiles are far more characteristic. At Sodmein Cave, a Levalloispoint was identified as projectile. In addition, two pieces (and onefragment) were identified as representing the tip elements ofthrusting spears. At Taramsa 1, two foliate tip fragments withprobable impact damage are present in one of the early concen-trations (5). For the late MSA, several foliates have distinctprojectile evidence (Sai 8-B-11). In addition, a Levallois flake frag-ment showed impact damage, indicating that a variety of projectiletypes existed.

Given the recurrent nature of percussion and projectile evidenceat the examined sites, there is no doubt that both elements formimportant and characteristic features of the Nubian Complex.

Fig. 22. Sai 8-B-11: Foliates and foliate pre-forms: a) bifacially worked but veryirregular foliate preform (S04/75-8); b) nearly finished foliate with tip fracture (S02/156-1); c) hafted fragment of used foliate (S04/30-5).

Hafting

Based on our wear analysis, it is clear that explicit haftingevidence is present from the Sangoan onwards. During these early

Fig. 23. Nazlet Khater-4 axes. Reprised and adapted from Vermeersch et al. (2002).


periods (Sangoan and Lupemban; Sai 8-B-11), hafting is restrictedto tools for which it is a necessity for their use, such as percussiontools (core-axes) and projectiles. The hafting method is relativelystraightforward and involves the use of bindings. There is noevidence for the use of resin for hafting purposes. The lack ofrecovered hearths (up to now)may be a factor in this, as hearths arerequired for softening the resin. On the other hand, resin is not anideal material to haft percussion tools given that it does not resistshocks well (unless beeswax is added; Kamminga, 1982; Rots,2002a, 2010a). For the identified projectiles, the hafted part wasnot preserved, so their hafting arrangement could not bedetermined.

The hafting procedure in the early MSA forms part of a speci-alised production process and took place at the production siteitself of, in this case, quartz core-axes. This means that hafting wasdefinitely not coincidental or isolated but that it was part of

a planned procedure in the production process of core-axes. Apartfrom rare projectile evidence, no other implements proved to beused while hafted. The limited tool use outside the core-axes onlyconfirms the specialised nature of the site.

Other early evidence of hafting apart from the projectilesmentioned above is rare. Probable hafting evidence was observedon small bifacial tools and on convergent side-scrapers from theMSA site GwJill, Kenya, dating between 60 and 40 ka (Beyries,1987b). Early evidence of woodworking was observed on Acheu-lean tools from Peninj, Tanzania, but whether these pieces werehafted is not clear (Dominguez-Rodrigo et al., 2001). For Europe,hafting evidence was observed for sites dating to OIS 3 such asSesselfelsgrotte (Rots, 2009), Corbiac, and Pech de l’Azé (Anderson-Gerfaud and Helmer, 1987), but also for much older sites, such asBiache-St-Vaast (OIS7; Beyries, 1988; Rots, in prep). In Crimea,hafting evidence was observed on various tools from Starosele

Table 8Summary of prehensile mode in the Nubian Complex at Sai 8-B-11

Prehensile mode Certainty level Total

Uncertain Moderate High Certain

Possibly hand-held 1 1Probably hand-held 1 1Hand-held 1 3 5 9Possibly hafted 3 3Hafted 2 2 3 5 12Total 7 6 8 5 26


(Hardy and Kay, 1999; Kay, 1999), derived from different levelsdating between 40 ka and >80 ka (Chabai et al., 1999), and thesomewhat younger site of Buran Kaya III (32e37 ka; Hardy et al.,2001). While evidence of hafting is thus gradually becomingmore frequent, it generally appears to be of a more recent date and,importantly, none of the presently available evidence is of sucha specialised nature as that presented here for early MSA Sai 8-B-11.

From the Last Interglacial onwards, an elaboration of hafting andhafting techniques can be identified. An important observation isthe fact that tools are hafted even when hafting is not a necessityfor their use, implying that the advantages of hafting were appre-ciated despite the extra time investment required. The hafting ofknives is probable from the early Nubian Complex onwards asevidenced at Sodmein Cave, but other tools such as scrapers arealso used while hafted in the late MSA (Sai 8-B-11). Hafting tech-niques still involve mainly the use of bindings, but the firstsuggestive evidence for the use of resin for hafting purposes may beobserved on the foliate of Taramsa 8 (Van Peer et al., 2008). In thelate Nubian Complex, the hafting in non-essential instances isexplicit, and resin may have been a regular ingredient for haftingpurposes (Sodmein Cave). Perhaps the identified percussion toolwith wood use-wear found at Sodmein Cave was, among othertasks, linked with resin extraction (e.g., a scar is made in the treeafter which the dripped-out resin can be collected), even thoughthere is no certain evidence that the hafting process itself tookplace at Sodmein Cave. Tools may have been imported hafted.However, there are hearths present in the sequence and on-sitehafting with resin (e.g., acacia) was theoretically possible and onecould consider that some basic re-hafting or maintenance tookplace. The great morphological similarity between the two identi-fied thrusting spear elements as well as their nearly identical wearpattern and the identification of their haft boundaries at similardistances from the butt suggests similar hafting modes. It suggestsa high degree of formalisation in their production (i.e., templates)and hafting to arrive at two very similar end products and wearpatterns).

For the more formalised tools, like foliates, the hafting proce-dure is again integrated into the tool production process asdemonstrated by the broken foliate of Taramsa 8 (Van Peer et al.,2008) and the foliates of Sai 8-B-11 for the late MSA. The “degreeof formalisation” of a tool is here determined by the requiredinvestment for their production. For foliates this investment isconsidered as high, for Levallois end products as medium, and forscrapers and similar tools as low. For less formal tools, an integra-tion of hafting in the tool production process could not be identi-fied, but its demonstration is also far more difficult. It requiresa recognisable number of systematically discarded, once hafted butused-up tools, which is not the case. On the contrary, used toolsproved variable in nature and seem to be part of a more expedientuse cycle. This finds confirmation in the fact that only two scrapingtools proved to be hafted. If this pattern is real, it may imply that forless formal tools, a stock of suitable flakes was made so that in thecase of fractures or tool failure, retooling could take place whenrequired. Knapping took place during the occupation events atSodmein and tools may have been replaced when dysfunctionalwith a suitable flake from a stock. The Taramsa 1 workshop couldalso be interpreted in this light, but then as a production centre forsuch stocks of suitable flakes.

From a hafting perspective, a distinction between the hafting offormal and less formal tools (Levallois end products) is certainlynot unlikely. For core-axes and foliates, aspects such as thicknessand weight balance are important, because of the high risk offailures during the production process. These issues may havebeen sufficient grounds on which to consider the integration ofhafting at the production site as essential (see Van Peer et al.,

2008). Given the high morphological predetermination of Leval-lois end products, such a procedure may be less essential for theseproducts. Their morphology and thickness are highly similar,allowing easy hafting in one and the same or similar hafts whenthe need occurs.

With regard to the frequency of hafted tools compared to hand-held tools, an increase in hafted tools can be noted during the laterMSA (Sodmein Cave and Sai 8-B-11): the majority of used toolsproved to be hafted. Retooling cannot account for this increase,given that retooling was already important during the early MSA.

Morphological adjustments (e.g., tangs; Tixier, 1959; Ferring,1975; Stordeur, 1987) are frequently linked with hafting. Suchadjustments are considered to facilitate the hafting process and thestrength of the hafting arrangement. When viewing the availablenortheast African evidence, the following pattern is observed. Inthe early MSA, no true morphological adjustments are identified,apart from the obvious attention that was devoted to the width/thickness ratio of the core-axes. A particular morphology wasstrived for, but no true morphological adjustments to facilitatehafting were made. The same is true of the foliates of the earlyNubian Complex and the Levallois end products in general. The firstpotential evidence of morphological adjustments favouring haftingis observed in the late Nubian Complex of Sodmein Cave. One of theidentified thrusting spear elements (ME93/413/52, Fig. 13) showsproximal notches that could form an intentional adjustment. Givenposterior hafting-related damage and thus the absence of scarinitiations, the intentional nature of these notches cannot bedemonstrated, but it nevertheless seems likely based on, forexample, their size and their termination that both are atypical forhafting damage. A second stabbing element (ME95/16/131-4) fromthe late MSA of Sodmein Cave does not show such notches, but thebutt type, a chapeau de gendarme, resulted in a similar proximalmorphology making further morphological adjustments unneces-sary. The advantage of such a proximal width reduction is that itallows more secure hafting if the proximal extremity rests withina concavity of the stopping ridge of the haft. In this way the piece isprevented from moving in the haft in either a lateral or axialdirection. Such an advantage would increase the efficiency and uselife of the tool in question when dealing with tools used for impactpurposes (projectiles, thrusting spear elements) while hafted in anaxial direction with regard to the haft. Percussion tools are gener-ally hafted perpendicular to the haft’s axis, except in the case ofbent hafts (In the case of bent hafts, a stopping ridge is essential inorder to prevent the tool from moving inward, but a concaveadjustment of this stopping ridge has no function given that pres-sure is exerted in an axial direction with regard to the stone tool’saxis).

The Aterian tangs (Tixier, 1959; Ferring, 1975) may perhaps beinterpreted in a similar way, but no functional data are yet availableto support such a claim. The lateral concavities of the Nazlet Khateraxes can be understood as a means to increase the strength of thehafting arrangement. The main problem when hafting percussiontools is that they are pressed deeper in their haft during use.


Concave adjustments prevent such a movement and thus increasethe strength of the arrangement and the tool’s use life.

It is significant to stipulate that the first morphological adjust-ments again concern the percussion and projectile use category,two tool groups for which hafting existed from a very early date.Together with the elaboration of hafting towards other use cate-gories and the elaboration of hafting techniques, the appearance ofmorphological adjustments point at an increasing expert knowl-edge regarding hafting.

Ochre

On several implements, both at Sai 8-B-11 and the Egyptiansites, ochre was recovered. At Sai 8-B-11, ochre nodules are abun-dant in the early MSA (Van Peer et al., 2004).

For Sodmein Cave, ochre is only recovered on flaked imple-ments, but in a remarkable fashion. On one broken large Levalloisflake, a marked transversal ochre band about 1 cm wide is presentand it is continuous on the dorsal and ventral face, albeit somewhatmore intense on the dorsal face (Fig. 7). In addition, ochre wasobserved on several of the flaked tools from Sodmein Cave, in atleast one case in relation with potential resin residues (ME93/373,Fig.17). The ochre band on the Levallois flake is not entirely uniformin appearance. One zone in the ochre band, at the right side of therightmain ridge, is different in nature, which seems to be due to thepresence of a residue, in particular an adhesive. The identificationof the residue as an adhesive is based on several criteria, includingthe similarity with another tool, ME93/373. Other arguments arethe microscopic appearance of the residue, the possible inclusion ofstarch within the residue, the particular association of the residuewith the ochre band, and the associationwith distinct hafting wear(cf. supra). At Taramsa 8, possible ochre evidence was observed onthe foliate, again in relation with potential resin residue (Van Peeret al., 2008). At Taramsa 1, no ochre was observed.

For the late MSA at Sai 8-B-11, no ochre was recovered innodules while occasional ochre spots were observed on the flakedimplements. Specifically, a red ochre spot was frequently observedon the exact impact point visible on the butt (e.g., S04/30-4). Therecurrent nature of this observation could imply that hammerswere partially or entirely covered in ochre during use. No evidencewas, however, observed on the recovered hammers. Another,tentative, option is that hammers used in ochre processing(perhaps those discarded from the early MSA) were re-used.

Based on the evidence of Sodmein Cave and Taramsa 8, itappears that ochre may be a resin ingredient, which is a commonpractise given the necessity of an abrasive to prepare resin for use(Rots, 2002a; Wadley, 2005a). While charcoal, sand, and similarlyeasily available agents could have been used, ochre may have beenpreferred for its colouring properties, its availability, or for other(symbolic?) reasons. Based on the Levallois flake fragment, it issuggested that the ochre band could be the result of resin degra-dation and, consequently, the only residue that remains from theoriginal compounded resin. While suggestions about the possiblelink of ochre and hafting have been made in the past (Inizan, 1976;Beyries and Inizan,1982; Couraud,1988;Wadley et al., 2004, 2009),sound evidence in support of this assumption remains scarce. Theevidence of Sodmein Cave contributes convincing data to thediscussion. Next to the presence of ochre in a well-defined band ona broken Levallois flake, the evidence consists of (red-coloured)resin and distinct hafting wear. Small spots of resin remains are alsofound in association with the ochre band on the Levallois flake,based on which the interpretation of ochre as a possible ingredientof resin rests. In addition, resin was recovered on minimally twoother tools, and explicit hafting wear was observed on all tools inquestion (see above). The hafting wear includes sliced scars and

scars with curved initiation (bending scars) that could be attributedto the use of bindings based on extensive experimental reference(Rots et al., 2001, 2006; Rots, 2002a, 2003, 2005).

Ochre may also have had other purposes aside from its rele-vance for the preparation of resin. The abundant ochre from theearly MSA levels is not correlated with evidence of resin use, whichsignifies that the ochre was probably used for other reasons. Someof the ochre nodules show flat or ground surfaces, no doubt due togrinding activities in order to transform them into powder. Theochre staining on pebbles may be a direct consequence of usingpebbles in these grinding activities (Van Peer et al., 2004). Thissituation would imply that the ground form of ochre was soughtand that staining on other stones was an indirect consequence ofthis process. The ground ochre could subsequently be used for resinproduction, for decorative purposes (e.g., body painting), or for hideprocessing. It has been demonstrated experimentally that red ochrehas preservative (antibacterial) properties that protect the hideagainst decay and make it more flexible (Audouin and Plisson,1982; Büller, 1988). The evidence for the existence of projectilesindicates that animal hides must have been available at certaintimes. The absence of distinct hide-working tools does not supportthis hypothesis, but perhaps organic tools were used for thisprocess (e.g., bone tools; Beyries, 2002). However, there are alsonumerous indications that ochre may have been used for symbolicpurposes in the MSA. Ochre finds are quite abundant in MSAcontexts (Barham, 1998, 2002b; McBrearty et al., 2001;Henshilwood et al., 2002; Wadley, 2005b) and their distributionand frequency contradicts a direct link with hide working andfavours a symbolic use (Knight et al., 1995; Watts, 1999, 2002;Hovers et al., 2003).

Tool technology/settlement system

For the early MSA at Sai 8-B-11, a significant contrast is apparentbetween a complex, specialised tool technology, as evidenced bythe hafted core-axes, and a simple tool technology for theremaining, mainly hand-held, tool kit. Only the point fragmentattests to the fact that there existed another, perhaps specialised,tool kit for which more substantial evidence may be present atother sites. The site itself also seems specialised, showing a distinctcontrast between the intense production and retooling activity towhich the core-axes attest while showing evidence of few otheractivities. The presence of core-axes made out of rawmaterial otherthan quartz indicates that Sai was part of a regional system withsimilar logistic nodes for other raw materials.

The evidence for the early Nubian Complex points in a similardirection. Foliates proved to be produced and hafted at productionsites as evidenced at Taramsa 8. In contrast to the predominantproduction context of Taramsa 1 and 8, Sodmein Cave representsa different kind of node where hunting and animal processing mayhave dominated even though a representative image is difficult toobtain based on the small number of analysed tools. The combinedpresence of both throwing and thrusting spears may, however, bean important argument in thewhole issue. This functional evidencesupplements data obtained based on spatio-technological studiesof material from the same sites and is in line with the proposedmodular structure of the Nubian Complex settlement system (VanPeer, 2001).

During the late MSA at Sai 8-B-11, there is evidence for a speci-alised production and retooling of foliates. This again contrasts withthe remaining assemblage that is far less specialised in nature.Nevertheless, the variety of activities represented at Sai 8-B-11increased in comparison to the early MSA levels. Again, theevidence suggests that there existed a regional settlement systemwith different logistic nodes.


While evidence of logistically organised settlement systems wasobserved at other sites from this broad time period, such as for theEuropean Middle Palaeolithic (e.g., Rhineland, Germany; Conard,1992, 2001a; Conard and Adler, 1997), these studies did notinclude functional data. Most studies are based on raw materialeconomy (Marks and Chabai, 2001; Richter, 2001), site location(Clark, 2001c), lithic technology, and/or faunal remains, as nicelysummarised in Conard (Conard, 2001b, 2004). Only rarely, arefunctional data also included, such as for the Crimean MiddlePalaeolithic sites (Hardy and Kay, 1999; Marks and Chabai, 2001). Itis clear that use and hafting data are important for evaluatingsettlement organisation and for identifying functional nodes, aswell as for evaluating import/export of artefacts, re-tooling issues,specialisation, and so on.

Conclusion

The predominance of percussion implements and projectilesthroughout the MSA is important. Percussion tools and projectilesare the first tools to be hafted and in a later stage also the first toolsthat are morphologically adapted to facilitate hafting. The percus-sion implements are obviously linked with heavy-duty work, in theform of sub-surface exploitation of resources, but in later stagesalso with woodworking. The projectiles indicate the existence ofhunting, both in the form of thrown and thrusting spears, from thebeginning of the Middle Stone Age onwards. Both may haveoccurred simultaneously, given their slightly differing function, andthere is no evidence for a transition from one kind of projectile toanother. Evidence for thrusting spears was until now only observedfor the laterMSA (Sodmein Cave), while evidence for thrown spearswas observed at earlier and later dates.

From the early MSA onwards, hafting is frequently integratedinto the tool production process reflecting an organised behav-ioural pattern. Based on the currently available data, an increasecan be observed in the expertise regarding hafting proceduresthroughout the MSA, possibly including the use of resin during theearly upper Pleistocene, which may reflect a changing behaviouralattitude towards hafting: a larger variety of tools is hafted in theNubian Complex and the firstmorphological adjustments in viewofhafting appear. This seems to indicate the existence of a morecomplex technological system.

At this moment, hafting data indicate the existence of a gradualprocess towards more elaborate hafting and more complex proce-dures. This may be due in part to the scarce nature of the currentlyavailable data resulting in amisunderstanding of hafting variability.However, it remains the case that there are, for now, no indicationsfor the hafting of other implements than percussion tools andprojectiles at an early date, while such evidence exists for laterperiods, limited as it is. It will remain an object of future study tobetter grasp the variability of hafting and to extend the analysistowards other assemblages.

Future studies will have to encompass detailed study of the bulkof the material of Sodmein Cave and Taramsa 1 in order tocomplement the obtained data, as well as an elaboration towardsother sites. In particular for Sodmein Cave, an analysis of theremaining assemblage is considered essential given the excellentpreservation of organic material. New data are thus expected,which may involve additional tools with organic hafting residuesthat may strengthen the presented interpretations. For Taramsa 1,the older concentrations need to be included in the analysis, giventheir differing characteristics. Given the limited variety in tool usesrepresented at the present sites, there is a great need for sites withmore extensive occupation in order to adequately evaluate thisissue. For now, there is only evidence of a sharp contrast betweena specialised tool assemblage involving percussion and hunting

mainly and a more expedient assemblage used for a few other non-intensive tasks. One should also not forget that an elaborate organictool assemblage may have existed at the sites in question. Thepresented indirect evidence for the existence of hafts is only one ofthe indications for more elaborate processing of organic material.Aside from that, there is ample direct evidence thanks to preservedorganic tools (d’Errico et al., 2001; Henshilwood et al., 2001;Barham et al., 2002). Perhaps some of this organic material mayhave functioned as hafts, but this has not yet been properlyaddressed.

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to the Onderzoeksfonds of the “KatholiekeUniversiteit Leuven and the Fund for Scientific Research e Flandersfor their financial support of this research. The Egyptian sites wereexcavated over the years as part of the Belgian Middle EgyptPrehistoric Project of the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. Researchat Sai Island is a joint effort of the Mission archéologique françaisefrom the University of Lille III (former director F. Geusy) and of thePrehistoric Archaeology Unit from the Katholieke UniversiteitLeuven. Sincere thanks to the Chercheurs de la Wallonie (CETREP)for their contribution to the experimental program. P. Vandena-beele (UGent) and A. Hubin (VUB) are thanked for their attempts toanalyse the residue on artefacts from Sodmein Cave with Ramanspectroscopy.

Appendix. Supplementary data

Supplementary data related to this article can be found online atdoi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.01.001.

References

Ambrose, S.H., 2002. Small things remembered: origins of early microlithic indus-tries in Sub-Saharan Africa. In: Elston, R.G., Kuhn, S.L. (Eds.), Thinking Small:Global Perspectives on Microlithization. Archaeological Papers of the AmericanAnthropological Association Number 12.

Anderson-Gerfaud, P., 1980. A testimony of prehistoric tasks: diagnostic residues onstone tool working edges. World Archaeol. 12 (2), 181e193.

Anderson-Gerfaud, P., Helmer, D., 1987. L’emmanchement au Moustérien. In:Stordeur, D. (Ed.), La main et l’outil: manches et emmanchementspréhistoriques. Maison de l’Orient Méditerranéen, Lyon, pp. 37e54.

Audouin, F., Plisson, H., 1982. Les ocres et leurs témoins au Paléolithique en France:enquête et expériences sur leur validité archéologique. Cahiers du centre derecherché préhistoriques 8, 33e80.

Barham, L.S., 1998. Possible early pigment use in South-Central Africa. Curr.Anthropol. 39, 703e710.

Barham, L.S., 2002a. Backed tools in middle Pleistocene central Africa and theirevolutionary significance. J. Hum. Evol. 43 (5), 585e603.

Barham, L.S., 2002b. Systematic pigment use in the middle Pleistocene of South-central Africa. Curr. Anthropol. 43 (1), 181e190.

Barham, L.S., Pinto Llona, A.C., Stringer, C.B., 2002. Bone tools from broken Hill(Kabwe) cave, Zambia, and their evolutionary significance. Before Farming[online version] 2: article 3.

Beyries, S., 1987b. Quelques exemples de stigmates d’emmanchements observés surdes outils du Paléolithique moyen. In: Stordeur, D. (Ed.), La main et l’outil:manches et emmanchements préhistoriques. Maison de l’Orient Mediterra-néen, Lyon, pp. 55e62.

Beyries, S., 1988. Étude tracéologique des racloirs du niveau IIA. In: Tuffreau, A.,Sommé, J. (Eds.), Le Gisement Paléolithique Moyen de Biache-Saint-Vaast(Pas-de-Calais) Volume I Stratigraphie. Environnement, Etudes Arché-ologiques (1ère Partie), vol. 21. Mémoire de la Société Préhistorique Française,Paris, pp. 215e230.

Beyries, S., 2002. Le travail du cuir chez les Tchouktches et les Athapaskans:implications ethno-archéologiques. In: Beyries, S., Audouin-Rouzeau, F. (Eds.),Le travail du cuir de la préhistoire à nos jours, XXIIe rencontres internationalesd’archéologie et d’histoire d’Antibes. APDCA, Antibes, pp. 143e159.

Beyries, S., Inizan, M.-L., 1982. Typologie, ocre, fonction. Tailler! pour quoi faire:Préhistoire et technologie lithique II. Recent Progress in Microwear Studies,Tervuren, pp. 313e22.

Binford, L.R., 1980. Willow Smoke and Dogs’ Tails: hunter-gatherer settlementsystems and archaeological site formation. Am. Antiq. 45, 4e20.

Boëda, E., 1994. Le concept Levallois: variabilité des méthodes. CNRS éditions, Paris.



Boëda, E., 2008. Middle Palaeolithic bitumen use at Umm el Tlel around 70,000 BP.Antiquity 82 (318), 853e861.

Boëda, E., Connan, J., Dessort, D., Muhesen, S., Mercier, N., Valladas, H., Tisnerat, N.,1996. Bitumen as a hafting material on Middle Palaeolithic artefacts. Nature 380(6572), 336e338.

Bordes, F., 1961. Typologie du Paléolithique ancien et moyen. Delmas, Bordeaux.Bousman, C.B., 1993. Hunter-gatherer adaptations, economic risk and tool design.

Lithic Technol. 18, 59e86.Bousman, C.B., 2005. Coping with risk: later stone age technological strategies at

Blydefontein rock shelter, South Africa. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 24, 193e226.Büller, J., 1988. Handling, hafting and ochre Stains. In: Beyries, S. (Ed.), Indus-

tries Lithiques Tracéologie et Technologie. BAR International Series, Oxford,pp. 5e32.

Cahen, D., 1976. Typologie Nouvelles fouilles à la pointe de la Gombe (ex-pointe deKalina), Kinshasha, Zaire. L’Anthropologie 80, 573e602.

Cahen, D., Keeley, L.H., 1980. Not less than 2, not more than 3. World Archaeol.12 (2), 166e180.

Cahen, D., Keeley, L.H., Vannoten, F.L., 1979. Stone tools, toolkits, and human-behavior in prehistory. Curr. Anthropol. 20 (4), 661e683.

Chabai, V.P., Marks, A.E., Monigal, K., 1999. Western Crimea Middle Palaeolithicpaleoenvironment and paleoeconomy. In: Chabai, V.P., Monigal, K. (Eds.), TheMiddle Paleolithic of Western Crimea, vol. 2. ERAUL, Liège, pp. 211e233.

Clark, J.D., 1988. The middle stone age of East Africa and the beginnings of regionalidentity. J. World Prehist. 2, 235e306.

Clark, J.D., 2001a. Kalambo Falls Prehistoric Site: Volume 3, the Earlier Cultures:Middle and Earlier Stone Age. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Clark, J.D., 2001b. The Twin Rivers Kopje, Zambia: stratigraphy, fauna, and artefactassemblages from the 1954 and 1956 excavations. J. Archaeol. Sci. 28 (3),305e330.

Clark, J.D., 2001c. Ecological and behavioral implications of the siting of MiddleStone Age rockshelters and cave settlement in Africa. In: Conard, N.J. (Ed.),Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age. KernsVerlag, Tübingen, pp. 91e98.

Clarke, D.L., 1968. Analytical Archaeology. Methuen, London.Conard, N.J., 1992. Tonchesberg and Its Position in the Paleolithic Prehistory of

Northern Europe. Rudolph Habelt, Bonn, Germany.Conard, N.J., 2001a. River terraces, volcanic craters and Middle Paleolithic Settle-

ment. In: Conard, N.J. (Ed.), Settelement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic andMiddle Stone Age. Kerns Verlag, Tübingen, pp. 221e250.

Conard, N.J. (Ed.), 2001b. Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and MiddleStone Age. Kerns Verlag, Tübingen.

Conard, N.J. (Ed.), 2004, Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and MiddleStone Age, vol. II. Kerns Verlag, Tübingen.

Conard, N.J., Adler, D.S., 1997. Lithic reduction and Hominid behavior in the middlepaleolithic of the Rhineland. J. Anthropol. Res. 53 (2), 147e175.

Couraud, C., 1988. Pigments utilisés en Préhistoire: provenance, préparation, moded’utilisation. L’Anthropologie 92, 17e28.

Crevecoeur, I., 2008. Étude anthropologique du squelette du Paléolithique supérieurde Nazlet Khater 2 (Égypte). Apport à la compréhension de la variabilité passéedes hommes modernes. Egyptian prehistory monographs 8, Leuven UniversityPress, Leuven.

De Bie, M., Caspar, J.-P., 2000. Rekem. A Federmesser Camp on the Meuse RiverBank. I.A.P. & Leuven University Press, Asse-Zellik and Leuven.

De Loecker, D., 2005. Beyond the Site. The Saalian Archaeological Record at Maas-tricht-Belvédère (The Netherlands). Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia, vol. 35/36.Leiden University Press.

d’Errico, F., Backwell, L.R., Berger, L.R., 2001. Bone tool use in termite foraging byearly hominids and its impact on our understanding of early hominid behav-iour. S. Afr. J. Sci. 97, 71e75.

Dickson, F.P., 1981. Australian Stone Hatchets. A Study in Design and Dynamics.Academic Press, Sydney.

Dominguez- Rodrigo, M., Serrallonga, J., Juan-Tresserras, J., Alcala, L., Luque, L., 2001.Woodworking activities by early humans: a plant residue analysis on Acheulianstone tools from Peninj (Tanzania). J. Hum. Evol. 40 (4), 289e299.

Donahue, R.E., Murphy, M.L., Robbins, L.H., 2004. Lithic microwear analysis ofMiddle Stone Age Artifacts from white paintings rock shelter, Botswana. J. FieldArchaeol. 29, 155e163.

Ferring, C., 1975. The Aterian in North African prehistory. In: Wendorf, F., Marks, A.E.(Eds.), Problems in Prehistory: North Africa and the Levant. Southern MethodistUniversity Press, Dallas, pp. 113e126.

Fischer, A., Hansen, P.V., Rasmussen, P., 1984. Macro and micro wear traces on lithicprojectile points. J. Danish Archaeol 3, 19e46.

Frison, G.C., 1978. Prehistoric Hunters of the High Plains. Academic Press, New York.Frison, G.C., 1989. Experimental use of Clovis weaponry and tools on African

elephants. Am. Antiq. 54, 766e784.Fullagar, R. (Ed.), 1998. A Closer Look: Recent Australian Studies of Stone Tools.

Sydney University, Sydney.Fullagar, R., Furby, J., Hardy, B., 1996. Residues on stone artefacts: state of a scientific

art. Antiquity 70 (270), 740e745.Goren-Inbar, N., Sharon, G., Melamed, Y., Kislev, M., 2002. Nuts, nut cracking, and

pitted stones at Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99 (4),2455e2460.

Hardy, B.L., Kay, M., 1999. Stone tool function at Starosele: combining residue anduse-wear evidence. In: Chabai, V.P., Monigal, K. (Eds.), The Middle Paleolithic ofWestern Crimea, vol 2. ERAUL, Liège, pp. 197e209.

Hardy, B.L., Kay, M., Marks, A.E., Monigal, K., 2001. Stone tool function at thepaleolithic sites of Starosele and Buran Kaya III, Crimea: behavioral implica-tions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 98 (19), 10972e10977.

Harrison, H.S., 1947. A Bolas-and-Hoop Game in East Africa. Man 47, 153e155.Henshilwood, C.S., d’Errico, F., Marean, C.W., Milo, R.G., Yates, R., 2001. An early

bone tool industry from the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave, South Africa:implications for the origins of modern human behaviour, symbolism andlanguage. J. Hum. Evol. 41 (6), 631e678.

Henshilwood, C.S., d’Errico, F., Yates, R., Jacobs, Z., Tribolo, C., Duller, G.A.T.,Mercier, N., Sealy, J.C., Valladas, H., Watts, I., Wintle, A.G., 2002. Emergence ofmodern human behavior: middle stone age engravings from South Africa.Science 295, 1278e1280.

Hovers, E., Ilani, S., Bar-Yosef, O., Vandermeersch, B., 2003. An early case of colorsymbolism e Ochre use by modern humans in Qafzeh cave. Curr. Anthropol.44 (4), 491e522.

Hughes, S.S., 1998. Getting to the point: evolutionary change in prehistoric weap-onry. J. Archaeol. Meth. Theor. 5 (4), 345e408.

Hutchinson, T.J., 1865. On the Chaco and other Indians of South America. Trans.Ethnol. Soc. London 3, 321e333.

Inizan, M.L., 1976. Outils lithiques capsiens ocrés. L’Anthropologie 80, 39e61.Kamminga, J., 1982. Over the Edge: Functional Analysis of Australian Stone Tools. In:

Occasional Papers in Anthropology, vol. 12. University of Queensland Anthro-pology Museum, St. Lucia.

Kay, M., 1999. Starosele stone tool use-wear analysis. In: Chabai, V.P.,Monigal, K. (Eds.), The Middle Paleolithic of Western Crimea, vol. 2. ERAUL,Liège, pp. 153e177.

Keeley, L.H., 1980. Experimental Determination of Stone Tool Uses: a MicrowearAnalysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.

Keeley, L.H., 1982. Hafting and retooling e effects on the archaeological record. Am.Antiq. 47 (4), 798e809.

Knight, C., Powers, G., Watts, I., 1995. The human symbolic revolution: a Darwinianaccount. Cambridge Archaeol. J. 5 (1), 75e114.

Leakey, L.S.B., 1931. The Stone Age Cultures of Kenya Colony. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge.

Leroi-Gourhan, A., 1943. Evolution et technique: l’homme et la matière. AlbinMichel, Paris.

Levi-Sala, I., 1986. Use wear and post depositional surface modification: a word ofcaution. J. Archaeol. Sci. 13 (3), 229e244.

Levi-Sala, I., 1996. A Study of Microscopic Polish on Flint Implements. TempusReparatum, Oxford, England.

Lombard, M., 2004. Distribution patterns of organic residues on middle stone agepoints from Sibudu Cave, Kwazulu-natal, South Africa. S. Afr. Archaeol. Bull. 59(180), 37e44.

Lombard, M., 2005. Evidence of hunting and hafting during the middle stone age atSibidu cave, KwaZulu-natal, South Africa: a multi analytical approach. J. Hum.Evol. 48, 279e300.

Lombard, M., 2008. Finding resolution for the Howiesons Poort through themicroscope: micro-residue analysis of segments from Sibudu Cave, SouthAfrica. J. Archaeol. Sci. 35, 26e41.

Lowie, R.H., 1982. Indians of the Plains. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Mallet, N., 1992. Suppl. au Bull. Le Grand-Pressigny. Ses relations avec la civilisation

Saône-Rhône, vol. 2. de la Société des Amis du Musée du Grand-Pressigny.Marks, A.E., 1968. The Khormusan: an upper Pleistocene industry in Sudanese

Nubia. In: Wendorf, F. (Ed.), The Prehistory of Nubia. Fort Burgwin ResearchCenter and Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, pp. 315e391.

Marks, A.E., Chabai, V.P., 2001. Constructing Middle Paleolithic settlement systemsin Crimea: potentials and limitations. In: Conard, N.J. (Ed.), SettlementDynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age. Kerns Verlag,Tübingen, pp. 179e204.

Mazza, P.P.A., Martini, F., Sala, B., Magi, M., Colombini, M.P., Giachi, G., Landucci, F.,Lemorini, C., Modugno, F., Ribechini, E., 2006. A new Palaeolithic discovery: tar-hafted stone tools in a European Mid-Pleistocene bone-bearing bed. J. Archaeol.Sci. 33 (9), 1310e1318.

McBrearty, S., 1988. The Sangoan-Lupemban and middle stone-age sequence at theMuguruk site, western Kenya. World Archaeol. 19 (3), 388e420.

McBrearty, S., Brooks, A.S., 2000. The revolution that wasn’t: a new interpretation ofthe origin of modern human behavior. J. Hum. Evol. 39 (5), 453e563.

McBrearty, S., Deino, A., Tryon, C., 2001. Chronology of middle Pleistocene events inthe Kapthurin formation, Baringo, Kenya. J. Hum. Evol. 40 (3), A14.

Mercier, N., Valladas, H., Froget, L., Joron, J.L., Vermeersch, P.M., Van Peer, P.,Moeyersons, J., 1999. Thermoluminescence dating of a middle palaeolithicoccupation at Sodmein cave, red Sea Mountains (Egypt). J. Archaeol. Sci. 26 (11),1339e1345.

Odell, G.H., 1980. Toward a more behavioral-approach to archaeological lithicconcentrations. Am. Antiq. 45 (3), 404e431.

Odell, G.H., 1981. The Mechanics of Use-breakage of stone tools: some testablehypotheses. J. Field Archaeol. 8, 197e209.

Odell, G.H., Odell-Vereecken, F., 1980. Verifying the reliability of lithic use-wearassessments by ’Blind Tests’: the low power approach. J. Field Archaeol. 7,87e120.

Pelegrin, J., 1995. Technologie lithique: le Châtelperronien de Roc-de-Combe (Lot) etde La Côte (Dordogne). CNRS éditions, Paris.

Pelegrin, J., 2000. Les techniques de débitage laminaire au Tardiglaciaire: critères dediagnose et quelques réflexions. In: Valentin, B., Bodu, P., Christensen, M. (Eds.),L’Europe centrale et septentrionale au Tardiglaciaire: confrontation des


modèles régionaux de peuplement. Éditions de l’APRAIF, Nemours, pp. 73e86(Mémoire du Musée de Préhistoire d’Île-de-France, 7).

Pétrequin, P., Arbogast, R.-M., Bourquin-Mignot, C., Lavier, C., Viellet, A., 1998.Demographic growth, environmental changes and technical adaptations:responses of an agricultural community from the 32nd to the 30th centuries BC.World Archaeol. 30 (2), 181e192.

Plisson, H., Beyries, S., 1998. Pointes ou outils triangulaires? Données fonctionnellesdans le Moustérien Levantin. Paléorient 24 (1), 5e16.

Ramseyer, D., 1987. Emmanchements de l’outillage lithique néolithique de quelquesstations littorales du canton de Fribourg (Suisse occ.). In: Stordeur, D. (Ed.), Lamain et l’outil: manches et emmanchements préhistoriques. Maison de l’OrientMediterranéen, Lyon, pp. 211e218.

Richter, J., 2001. For lack of Wise Old Man? Late Neanderthal Land-use patternsin the Altmühl River Valley, Bavaria. In: Conard, N.J. (Ed.), SettlementDynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age. Kerns Verlag,Tübingen, pp. 205e219.

Roebroeks, W., 1988. From Find Scatter to Early Hominid Behaviour: a Study ofMiddle Palaeolithic Riverside Settlements at Maastricht-Belvédère (TheNetherlands). Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia, vol. 21. Leiden University Press,Leiden.

Rots, V., 2002a. Hafting Traces on Flint Tools: Possibilities and Limitations of Macro-and Microscopic Approaches. Ph.D. Dissertation. Katholieke UniversiteitLeuven.

Rots, V., 2002b. Bright spots and the question of hafting. Anthropol. Praehist. 113,61e71.

Rots, V., 2003. Towards an understanding of hafting: the macro- and microscopicevidence. Antiquity 77 (298), 805e815.

Rots, V., 2004. Prehensile wear on flint tools. Lithic Technol. 29 (1), 7e32.Rots, V., 2005. Wear traces and the interpretation of stone tools. J. Field Archaeol.

30 (1), 61e73.Rots, V., 2009. The functional analysis of the Mousterian and Micoquian assem-

blages of Sesselfelsgrotte, Germany. Tool use and hafting in the European latemiddle paleolithic. Quartär 56, 37e66.

Rots, V., 2010a. Prehension and Hafting Traces on Flint Tools. A Methodology.Leuven University Press, Leuven.

Rots, V., 2010b. Un tailleur et ses traces. Traces microscopiques de production:programme expérimental et potentiel interprétatif. Bulletin de la Société RoyaleBelge d’Etudes Géologiques et Archéologiques. Les Chercheurs de la Wallonie,hors-série 2, 51e67.

Rots, V. Functional analysis of Level IIa of Biache-St-Vaast, in press.Rots, V., De Loecker, D. Functional analysis of site K at Maastricht-Belvédère, in

press.Rots, V., Locht, J.-L. Functional analysis of a selection of Levallois Points from level

N2b at Bettencourt (France), in press.Rots, V., Pirnay, L., Baudoux, O., Vermeersch, P.M., 2001. Experimental hafting traces.

identification and characteristics. Notae Praehistoricae 21, 129e137.Rots, V., Pirnay, L., Pirson, P., Baudoux, O., 2006. Blind tests shed light on possibilities

and limitations for identifying stone tool prehension and hafting. J. Archaeol.Sci. 33 (7), 935e952.

Rots, V., Van Peer, P., 2006. Early evidence of complexity in lithic economy: core-axeproduction, hafting and use at Late Middle Pleistocene site 8-B-11, Sai Island(Sudan). J. Archaeol. Sci. 33 (3), 360e371.

Rots, V., Williamson, B.S., 2004. Microwear and residue analyses in perspective: thecontribution of ethnoarchaeological evidence. J. Archaeol. Sci. 31 (9),1287e1299.

Shea, J.J., 1988. Spear points from the middle paleolithic of the Levant. J. FieldArchaeol. 15, 441e456.

Stordeur, D. (Ed.), 1987. La main et l’outil: manches et emmanchementspréhistoriques. Maison de l’Orient Méditerranéen, Lyon.

Tixier, J., 1959. Les pièces pédonculées de l’Atérien. Lybica 6e7, 127e158.Tringham, R., Cooper, G., Odell, G.H., Voytek, B., Whitman, A., 1974. Experimentation

in the formation of edge-damage: a new approach to lithic analysis. J. FieldArchaeol. 1, 171e196.

Tuffreau, A., Sommé, J. (Eds.), 1988, Le Gisement Paléolithique Moyen de Biache-Saint-Vaast (Pas-de-Calais), vol. I: Stratigraphie, Environnement, Etudesarchéologiques (1ère partie), vol. 21. Mém. Soc. Préhist. Française.

Van Gijn, A., 2008. Toolkits and technological choices at the middle Neolithic site ofSchipluiden, the Netherlands. In: Longo, L., Della Riva, M. (Eds.), Proceedings ofthe Congress “Prehistoric Technology: 40 years later Functional Studies and theRussian Legacy.” Verona, Italy, 20e23 April 2005, pp. 217e225.

Van Peer, P., 1998. The Nile corridor and the out-of-Africa model - An examinationof the archaeological record. Curr. Anthropol. 39, S115eS140.

Van Peer, P., 2001. The Nubian complex settlement system in Northeast Africa. In:Conard, N.J. (Ed.), Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and MiddleStone Age. Kerns Verlag, Tübingen, pp. 45e64.

Van Peer, P., 2004. Did middle stone age moderns of sub-Saharan African DescentTrigger an upper palaeolithic revolution in the lower Nile Valley? Anthro-pologie 42 (3), 241e251.

Van Peer, P., Vermeersch, P.M., 2000. The Nubian complex and the dispersal ofmodern humans in North Africa. In: Krzyzaniak, L., Kroeper, K., Kobusiewicz, M.(Eds.), Recent Researches into the Stone Age of Northeastern Asia. PoznanArchaeological Museum, Polish academy of sciences, Poznan, pp. 47e60.

Van Peer, P., Vermeersch, P.M., 2007. The place of northeast Africa in the earlyhistory of modern humans: new data and Interpretations on the Middle StoneAge of Northeast Africa. In: Mellars, P., Boyle, K., Bar-Yosef, O., Stringer, C. (Eds.),Rethinking the Human Revolution: New Behavioural and Biological Perspec-tives on the Origins and Dispersal of Modern Humans. McDonald Institute forArchaeological Research, Cambridge, pp. 187e198.

Van Peer, P., Fullagar, R., Stokes, S., Bailey, R.M., Moeyersons, J., Steenhoudt, F.,Geerts, A., Vanderbeken, T., De Dapper, M., Geus, F., 2003. The early to middlestone age transition and the Emergence of modern human behaviour at site8-B-11, Sai Island, Sudan. J. Hum. Evol. 45 (2), 187e193.

Van Peer, P., Rots, V., Vermeersch, P.M., 2008. AWasted effort at the Quarry. Analysisand interpretation of an MSA lanceolate point from Taramsa-8, Egypt. Paleo-anthropology 2008, 234e250.

Van Peer, P., Rots, V., Vroomans, J., 2004. A Story of Colourful Diggers and Grinders.The Sangoan and Lupemban at site 8-B-11, Sai Island, Northern Sudan. BeforeFarming [online version], article 1.

Van Peer, P., Vermeersch, P.M., Moeyersons, J., Van Neer, W., 1996. Palaeolithicsequence of Sodmein cave, red Sea Mountains, Egypt. In: Pwiti, G., Soper, R.(Eds.), Aspects of African Archaeology. Papers from the 10th Pan-AfricanCongress of the Panafrican Association for Prehistory and Related Studies.University of Zimbabwe Publications, Harare, pp. 149e156.

Van Peer, P., Vermeersch, P.M., Paulissen, E., 2010. Chert Quarrying, Lithic Tech-nology and a Modern Human Burial at the Palaeolithic Site of Taramsa 1, UpperEgypt. Egyptian Prehistory Monographs 5. Leuven University Press, Leuven.

Vermeersch, P.M., Van Peer, P., Rots, V., 2005. A middle paleolithic site with bladetechnology at Al Tiwayrat, Qena, upper Egypt. Antiquity 79 (305) (Project Gallery).

Vermeersch, P.M. (Ed.), 2002a. Palaeolithic Quarrying Sites in Upper and MiddleEgypt. Leuven University Press, Leuven.

Vermeersch, P.M., 2002b. Two upper palaeolithic burials at Nazlet Khater. In:Vermeersch, P.M. (Ed.), Palaeolithic Quarrying Sites in Upper and Middle Egypt.Leuven University Press, Leuven, pp. 273e282.

Vermeersch, P.M., Paulissen, E., Vanderbeken, T., 2002. Nazlet Kahter 4, an upperpalaeolithic underground chert Mine. In: Vermeersch, P.M. (Ed.), PalaeolithicQuarrying Sites in Upper and Middle Egypt. Leuven University Press, Belgium,pp. 211e272.

Vermeersch, P.M., Van Peer, P., Moeyersons, J., Van Neer, W., 1994. Sodmein cave site(Red Sea Mountains, Egypt). Sahara 6, 31e40.

Vermeersch, P.M., Paulissen, E., Stokes, S., Charlier, C., Stringer, C., Lindsay, W., 1998.A middle palaeolithic burial of a modern human at Taramsa Hill, Egypt.Antiquity 72 (277), 475e484.

Villa, P., Soressi, M., Henshilwood, C.S., Mourre, V., 2009. The still Bay points ofBlombos cave (South Africa). J. Archaeol. Sci. 36 (2), 441e460.

Wadley, L., 2005a. Putting ochre to the test: replication studies of adhesives thatmay have been used for hafting tools in the Middle Stone Age. J. Hum. Evol.49 (5), 587e601.

Wadley, L., 2005b. A typological study of the final middle stone age stone tools fromSibudu cave, KwaZulu-Natal. S. Afr. Archaeol. Bull. 60 (182), 51e63.

Wadley, L., Williamson, B., Lombard, M., 2004. Ochre in hafting in Middle Stone Agesouthern Africa: a practical role. Antiquity 78 (301), 661e675.

Wadley, L., Hodgskiss, T., Grant, M., 2009. Implications for complex cognition fromthe hafting of tools with compound adhesives in the Middle Stone Age, SouthAfrica. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 106 (24), 9590e9594.

Watts, I., 1999. The origin of symbolic culture. In: Dunbar, R., Knight, C.,Power, C. (Eds.), The Evolution of Culture. Edinburgh University Press,Edinburgh, pp. 113e146.

Watts, I., 2002. Ochre in the middle stone age of southern Africa: ritualised displayor hide preservative? S. Afr. Archaeol. Bull. 57 (175), 1e14.

Wendorf, F., Schild, R., Close, A.E., 1993. Egypt during the Last Interglacial. TheMiddle Paleolithic of Bir Tarfawi and Bir Sahara East. Plenum Press, New Yorkand London.

Wurz, S., 2002. Variability in the middle stone age lithic sequence, 115,000e60,000years ago at Klasies River, South Africa. J. Archaeol. Sci. 29 (9), 1001e1015.

aspects of tool production, use, and hafting in palaeolithic assemblages from northeast africa

Documents