This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library]On: 03 November 2014, At: 23:23Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: MortimerHouse, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Azania: Archaeological Research in AfricaPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/raza20

Contacts Between the Later Stone Age and theEarly Iron Age in Southern Central AfricaSheryl F. MillerPublished online: 26 Feb 2010.

To cite this article: Sheryl F. Miller (1969) Contacts Between the Later Stone Age and the Early Iron Age in SouthernCentral Africa, Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa, 4:1, 81-90, DOI: 10.1080/00672706909511508

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00672706909511508

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitabilityfor any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinionsand views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy ofthe Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources ofinformation. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands,costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution inany form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Contacts Between the Later Stone Age and the Early Iron Age in Southern Central Afyica

Sheryl F. Miller

D r . Mil ler is Assistant Professor of Archaeology at P i t z e r College, Clnremont, Cnli- fornia. In the fol lowing article she surveys possibilities o f cori,tact between Later Stone A g e and Early Iron A g e groups in Southern Central Africa. N e w arckneological evidence and radiocarbon dutes indicate a considerable period during which both Stone A g e and Iron A g e w a y s of& were represented in the area.

There has been little discussion of the relationship between Later Stone Agc and Early Iron Age peoples. This has largely been due to the lack of conviiiciiig cvidcncc, as well as problems of definition. In the latter regard, use of the word ‘age’ has tciidcd to imply a sequential relationship of the Later Stone Age and Early Iron Agc. This has discouraged archaeologists from focusing their attention on the period of overlap and the cultural contacts which might have occurred then between geographicalIy contiguous groups representing the two very different ways of life.

A fLirther problem of definition lies in the meaning of the term ‘Early Iron Agc’. The Wenner-Gren Research Conference on Bantu Origins, held in 1968, discussed at length the nature of the Early Iron Age. At the conference it was concludcd that agricul- ture, domestic stock, and iron-working must not be assumed to have spread throughout sub-Saharan Africa as a single culture complex.

Even in the limited area of Southern Central Africa not cnough is yet kiiowii to define the constituents of the Early Iron Age with confidence. However, it seciiis that Early Iron Age peoples in the region generally were workers of iron who practised agriculture. Many Early Iron Age groups no doubt entered the arca over a long period, each beaiing a somewhat different material culture. Features of this new culture probably comprised agriculture, various domestic animals, techniques of manufacturing iron and pottery, and settled village life. Every group need not have brought all of these elcrnents, but all were present in the early contact situation.

Evidence from radiocarbon dates indicates that the close proximity of Later Stoiie Age and Early Iron Age groups in Southern Central Africa began nearly two thousand years ago. Thus cultural contact has been possible in at least some parts of the region since that time. Archaeological evidence of such contact has been scanty, however, and that which was known has often been disregarded or explained away as the result of disturbance in the deposit or accidental mixing of materials.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

23:

23 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

82 Corltflds

Now, new archaeological evidence and radiocarbon dates are available which call for a thorough consideration of the subject. This report presents material from several previously unpublished sites recently analyzed by the author, and draws this new infor- mation together with various published data in a discussion of the Later Stone Age and Early Iron Age contact situation.

Several particularly interesting features of the contact situation emcrge from this analysis. It is demonstrated that the Later Stone Age way of life persisted in relatively remote areas into fairly recent times, lasting for nearly two thousand years aftcr the Early Iron Age first appeared in Southern Central Africa. It is apparent, as well, that almost no amalgamation occurred on a technological basis between the two very different cultures. A few material goods were exchanged, probably by peaceful barter. However each culture retained its own identity, surprisingly little influenced by the other, through- out the long period of contact.

Survey of evidence Zambia

Most of the new evidence comes from Zambia, where the contact situation differed from region to region.

On the southern Zambian plateau and extcnding eastward to the Lusaka arca tlic Early Iron Age replaced the Later Stone Age fairly quickly. The fertile soil and light savannah woodland made the region well suited to agriculture, and huntcr-gatherers there were soon absorbed into the new economy or forced into less desirable territory. The earliest dated Early Iron Age occurrence on the southern plateau is at Machili, where pottery identified as Situmpa Ware was found in a horizon dated 96f212 A.D. (C-829) (Clark and Fagan, 1965). By 500 A.D. the new subsistence pattern was well established in the area, as indicated by several dated Early Iron Age sites, for example Kalundu, 300+90 A.D. (SR-65) (Fagan, 1967), and Kapwirimbwe, 410,t 85 A.D. (GX-1013b) (Phillipson, 1968).

The actual contact situation was brief on the southern plateau. The lack of evidence for cultural exchange supports the inference from radiocarbon dates that the two ways of life did not co-exist there for long. At Lusu, for instance, on the upper Zambezi River west of the plateau, a Later Stone Age horizon without pottery or any other Early Iron Age element is dated to 400f 100 B.C. and 75f230 B.C. (C-830) ; this is overlain by an Early Iron Age occurrence containing sherds of Situmpa Ware (Clark and Fagan, 1965). To the east of the plateau, at Leopard’s Hill Cave, a purely Later Stone Age deposit lies immediately below an Early Iron Age layer dating from 535% 125 A.D. (SR-126) (Millcr, 1969). Remains of game and wild plants have been found in many of the Early Iron Agc sites (Fagan, 1967). Even these do not necessarily indicate any Later Stone Age influence, since modern agricultural villagers also rely fairly heavily on wild products to round out their diet (Kay, 1964).

The valley of the middle Zambezi River may have served as a retreat area for Later Stone Age hunter-gatherers displaced from the southern plateau, at least temporarily. Surface scatters of artefacts there sometimes include both lithic materials and potsherds, apparently in situ together. The same sort of aggregate, probably left by a Later Stone Age group which had made contact with Early Iron Age people, was found in the top layer of a midden excavated by L. Hodges at Pambazana, in the Gwembe Valley (Phillipson, 1968).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

23:

23 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Sheryl F. Miller 83

A long-term retreat area for hunter-gatherers lay in the more densely wooded, less fertile regions of northern Zambia which were relatively unfavourable for agriculture. The Muchinga Escarpment provided an ideal refuge of this sort.

hi the Muchiiiga Escarpment the earliest dated aggregate which iiicludes pottery along with a full lithic coinponent is found at Nakapapula (Phillipson, 1968). There sherds first appear in a Latcr Stone Age level datcd to 770f 100 A.D. (GX-0535).

Evidence from farther north, at Nachikufu, suggests that Iron Age influence did not reach that part of the Muchiiiga Escarpment until later. In the shelter area of thc site, the horizon from 1.5 to 2 m contains a completely Later Stone Age assemblage without any Iron Age elements; this is dated to 890&95 A.D. (Y-799) (Miller, 1969).

In Nachikufu Shelter the Later Stone Age deposit immediately above 1.5 m is accompanied by potsherds. These are largely undecorated body sherds from globular pots, along with a few stamped or incised pieces and a single channeled sherd. The quantity of this pottery, about a hundred sherds found lying between 1 and 1.5 ni, indicates that it is an integral part of the deposit and not mixed in from the overlying horizon. At a depth of 1.2 m iron slag first appears, while remains of a furnace were discovered lying 1 m below the surface. The lithic matcrials are present along with these other elcments, although in steadily decreasing quantity, almost to the surface of the deposit. In the top few centimetres of the horizon copper appears in the form of fine wire tightly coiled, a narrow strip which may have been a bracelet, and a small earring or bead.

Unfortunately, the first appearance of pottery at Nachikufu Shelter is undated; this is zlso true of the first smelting evidence. However, the level lying immediately above the furnace, from 0.6 to 1 ni, has been dated to 1750f100 A.D. (Y-796). It is extremely interesting to find good evidence of iron smelting as well as the use of pottery in a basically Later Stone Age horizon. It is also surprising to find a full lithic tradition at this late date, especially since the 0.5 m of deposit containing lithic materials which overlie the dated sample implies that the industry continued until even more recently.

Evidence indicates that no basic change occurred in the subsistence pattern at Nachi- kufu Shelter, despite the addition of pottery and iron to the material culture. In the top 1.5 in of deposit are found stone tools such as rubbers, pestles, and bored stones, which are often associated with agriculture. However, they do not indicate the recent introduction of agriculturc at Nachikufu, since they occur along with grindstones down to the base of the Later Stone Age deposit. These tool types represent a tradition, probably associated with the preparation of wild seeds and nuts, which began at the site some ten thousand years earlier than their most recent use there. The continued presence ofniicroliths, commonly interpreted as arrow barbs, also suggests preservation of earlier tradition. Hunting must have remained a mainstay in the economy, still depending on lithic technology even after the introduction of iron.

In Nachikufu Cave, adjoining the shelter, a similar sequence is found although it is much compressed (Miller, 1969). Once again sherds and slag OCCUL in association with a good lithic assemblage, from near the surface to a depth of 0.5 ni. The level from 15 to 30 cm has been dated to 1650f200 A.D. (Y-618). This correlates well with the date for the analogous aggregate in the shelter, and substantiates the continued presence of hunter- gatherers still maintaining their traditional lithic technology a milknnium after contact with Iron Age agriculturalists had begun in the Muchinga Escarpment.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

23:

23 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

84 Contacts

Two other excavated sites in the Muchinga Escarpment, unfortunately undated, support the appearance of Iron Age influence in Later Stone Age deposits. At Bimbe wa Mpalabwe Shelter two archaeological horizons were found. The lower contained a strictly Later Stone Age assemblage with no Iron Age elements, while the upper included numerous potsherds as well as the same lithic tradition (Miller, 1969). 111 neigh- bouring Nsalu Hill Cave a shallow deposit yielded an abundant Later Stone Age aggregate along with pottery, the stem of an iron arrowhead, coiled copper wire, and several glass beads (Miller, 1969). The evidence from both of these sites corroborates that from Nachikufu, which indicates a contact situation in the Muchinga Escarpment quite different from that on the southern plateau.

In the extreme north of Zambia contact between Later Stone Age hunter-gatherers and Early Iron Age agricultuialists must have begun only shortly after it did on {he southern plateau. At Kalambo Falls an undated Later Stone Age horizon is succeeded by Early Iron Age materials dating from 345340 A.D. (GrN-4646) (Clark, ms.). However, Kalambo Falls remains the only major Early Iron Age site known in the northern plateau, and it is possible that the poor local soils and dense brachystegia woodland of the region discouraged the rapid expansion of the Early Iron Age agriculturalists there.

Evidence from the northern plateau indicates that Later Stone Age peoples remained there for some time after contact with agricultural groups began. At Mwela Rocks Shelter, near Kasama, sherds first appear at a depth of 45 cm, in the middle of a Later Stone Age horizon. These sherds are related to Early Iron Age wares from Kalambo Falls by the presence of a similar horizontal channeled motif with pendant chevrons. Impressed chevrons in false relief on and below vessel rims also occur at Mwela Rocks, along with various other impressed and stamped designs. There is no significant change in the relative frequencies of stone tool types after the introduction of pottery, and the lithic tradition continues to the surface of the deposit. Associated with the upper part of the horizon are remains of three iron arrowheads, one with an interesting twisted stem (Miller, 1969).

The available evidence from some other parts of Zambia also suggests contact between Later Stone Age and Iron Age peoples. On the Copperbelt the excavation of N. Filmer and E.A.C. Mills at Chondwe Farm yielded a lower horizon, 30 cm of deposit, which contained a small quantity of Later Stone Age type lithic material, Early Iron Age pottery, and iron slag. This lower horizon has been dated to 8151130 A.D. (GX-1009) and 890395 A.D. (GX-1010) (Phillipson, 1968). In eastern Zambia, on the Mozambique border, an extensive Later Stone Age deposit at Makwe was found to include sherds in its highest levels (Phillipson, 1968).

All of the sherds, iron, and trade goods in these Later Stone Age horizons probably indicate contact with Iron Age peoples. The dates so far available suggest that this first occurred in Zambia during the early part of the first millennium A.D., when Early Iron Age agriculturalists replaced Later Stone Age hunter-gatherers on the southern plateau and also made contact at the northern border of the country. By the latter part of that millennium the agriculturalists had expanded their territory closer to Later Stone Age retreat areas. It is apparent from the evidence at Nachikufu that this contact continued nearly up to the present, at least in limited areas, while the basic subsistence pattern of some Later Stone Age hunter-gatherers never changed.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

23:

23 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Sheryl F. Miller 85

Malawi Contacts between Later Stone Age and Early Iron Age groups outside of Zambia

seem to have followed much the same variety of patterns, although not as much evidence is as yet available.

In Malawi, two sites on the Nyika Plateau indicate that contact began there about when it did in Zambia. At Chowo a Later Stone Age horizon lacking any Early Iron Age elements is dated 175f 120 B.C. (SR-127) ; the Early Iron Age immediately above contains some lithic materials along with Mwavarambo ware (Robinson and Sandelowsky, 1968). The same pottery is found at Phopo Hill, in a purely Early Iron Age horizon dating from 295f95 A.D. (SR-128) (Sandelowsky and Robinson, 1968).

The mountainous northern region of Malawi probably served as a retreat area similar to the Muchinga Escarpment of Zambia. From the top horizon of Hora Mt. Cave,which extends down to 45 cm, a Later Stone Age lithic assemblage is accompanied by abundant sherds and a little slag (Clark, 1956). Further evidence of contact in Malawi comes from Mphunzi Shelter, where an excavation made by J. D. Clark yielded numerous potsherds and a microlithic Later Stone Age assemblage from the surface to a depth of 60 cm. Daga is also present, but there are no iron tools or slag (Miller, ms.b).

Unfortunately, both of these excavated Later Stone Age sites containing Early Iron Age elements are undated. When more sites and dates are known, the Malawi contact situation may well be found to approximate that of Zambia, with Early Iron Age agriculturalists soon established in favourable regions and Later Stone Age groups preser- ving their traditional way of life in remote areas.

Rhodesia In Rhodesia, contact between Later Stone Age and Early Iron Age peoples began at

least by the early first millennium A.D. In fact, the earliest known pottery in the country has been dated to 20i-80 B.C. (UCLA-929). This comes from the site of Calder’s Cave, in north-western Rhodesia near the Zambia border. The pottery is typologically related to that found north of the Zambezi River (Summers, 1967).

Early Iron Age sites in the Ft. Victoria area indicate extensive occupation by agricul- turalists in the succeeding few centuries. At Mabveni, for instance, a rich site has yielded hut and granary remains, Gokomere ware pottery, figurines, iron and copper, ostrich egg and snail shell beads of Later Stone Age type (Robinson, 1961). The shell beads may indicate trade with Later Stone Age peoples remaining in the area. The site is dated 180f120 A.D. (SR-43) and 570f 110 A.D. (SR-79); the excavator suggests the later date may be from an intrusive or contaminated sample (Robinson, pers. comm.).

At the type site of Gokomere ware, Tunnel Site, the Early Iron Age horizon overiies a Later Stone Age deposit with a clearly defined break between them. This site, dating from 540k 120 A.D. (SR-26), is later than the earliest occupation at Mabveni. It contains much the same elements except that the characteristically Later Stone Age artefacts are absent (Robinson, 1963). Perhaps by this date the Later Stone Age peoples no longer inhabited the area.

In the Inyanga region of north-eastern Rhodesia, sites containing Ziwa ware are known from the beginning of the fourth century A.D. Along with the pottery, iron, and gold, the first phase of this Early Iron Age tradition includes bone points and ostrich egg-shell beads (Summers, 1967). Once again these elements suggest contact with Later

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

23:

23 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

86 Corltacfs

Stone Age groups during the initial stage of Early Iron Age occupation, after which the agriculturalists completely dominated the region.

The evidence just cited indicates that Early Iron Age peoples became widely established in Rhodesia by the middle of the first millennium A.D. In most areas, elements typical of Later Stone Age material culture are found in the earliest agricultural horizons, but not thereafter. Although the Early Iron Age peoples themselves could have manufactured these items, it seems more likely that they indicate contact with indigenous Later Stone Age peoples who subsequently disappeared.

There is also evidence from Rhodesia, analogous to that found in Zambia and Malawi, suggesting that Later Stone Age groups persisted in retreat areas for a long time after contact with the agriculturalists began. In the Matopo Hills of south-western Rhodesia numerous caves and shelters have yielded Later Stone Age horizons, several ofwhich contain pottery, e.g. Bambata (Schofield, 1940) and Tshangula (Cooke, 1963). A particular style known as Bambata ware has been identified in these occurrences (Robinson, 1966). It probably represents contact with Early Iron Age peoples in the area, although the pottery style has yet to be associated with open sites of an Early Iron Age complex.

Unfortunately, the advent of Bambata ware in Later Stone Age deposits in the Matopo area is still undated. However, a date of 300% 100 A.D. (SR-17) from charcoals found in dubious association with sherds of Bambata ware in a burial fill fromZiwa Farm, in north-eastern Rhodesia, suggest that the pottery may also have been obtained by Later Stone Age peoples in the Matopo Hills by that time.

Other pottery styles in the topmost horizons of Later Stone Age deposits in the Matopo region indicate that hunter-gatherers remained there for at lcast several centuries after their initial contact with Early Iron Age groups. Farther south, near the Limpopo River, the site of Dombozanga has yielded a Later Stone Age horizon in which sherds of Bambata ware were found lying 30 cm above a sample dated to 750% 100 A.D. (SR-15) (Robinson, 1964).

Types of Contact

From archaeological evidence alone it is difficult to know just what sort of inter- relationships existed between Later Stone Age and Early Iron Age peoples during the centuries of contact. The occurrence of peaceful trade is strongly suggested by the presence of potsherds and rare metal objects in Later Stone Age horizons, and of shell beads and bone points in Early Iron Age sites. Even in modern times hunter-gatherers such as the Ituri Forest Pygmies exchange their products for those of their agricultural neighbours (Turnbull, 1961). Bones of wild animals in Early Iron Age deposits indicate that hunting supplemented the domestic economy (Fagan, 1967) ; probably in areas where they encountered Later Stone Age peoples the agriculturalists took advantage of the oppor- tunity to trade their goods for game.

Honey was another wild product no doubt in demand among Early Iron Age agricul- turalists. Informants from the Vamari of Rhodesia reported that their people replaced an earlier agricultural group, the Ngoa, who had lived peacefully in the area along with Bushmcn. These Ngoa customarily left hemp (Cannabis safiva) at a certain place, and would return later to find it replaced by honey or a freshly-killed buck (Robinson, pers. comm.). Probably Early Iron Age peoples traded their commodities for wild products in a similar manner.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

23:

23 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Sheryt F. Miller 87

The existence of trade between Later Stone Age and Early Iron Age groups is often supported by the contention that the former never learned to make pots or smelt iron, despite the occurrence of both items in their occupation horizons. Pottery found in Later Stone Age aggregates probably was manufactured by the agriculturalists, because in most cases it is typologically similar to pottery known from Early Iron Age sites.

Concerning iron smelting, however, the evidence from Nachikufu suggests that hunter-gatherers retaining a traditional lithic technology finally learned how to work iron. While the presence of a few iron objects in a Later Stone Age horizon may reason- ably be attributed to trade, the presence of slag and even furnace remains indicates actual smelting on the site, either by itinerant Iron Age craftsmen or by the Later Stone Age occupants themselves. At Nachikufu the abundance of smelting dkbris apparently in situ with traditional lithic materials is strong evidence that the hunter-gatherers had learned to smelt iron even though they continued to work and use stone (Miller, 1969).

Outside of trade relationships, almost nothing is known at present about contacts between Later Stone Age and Early Iron Age peoples. Small-scale conflicts probably occurred occasionally, such as those depicted in Rhodesian rock paintings. However, there is no evidence to indicate that the displacement of the Later Stone Age hunter- gatherers by the Early Iron Age agriculturalists was accompanied in its early stages by extensive fighting.

Pertinent skeletal evidence is scarce; it is not certain what physical stock each cultural group represented, nor is it even definite that they were of different laces. The hunter- gatherers were probably of Khoisan type, like former Later Stone Age peoples in Zambia (Gabel, 1965). It has been suggested that the Early Iron Age was introduced by Negro peoples; however, there is not yet enough evidence from very early agricultural sites to confirm this (Fagan, 1967).

It is not known how much physical mixing occurred between peoples of the different cultures. No doubt individuals from each population were sometimes absorbed into the other one. Perhaps even whole groups may have become acculturated while retaining their physical identity. Skeletal remains slightly later than the first Early Iron Age sites are said to have combined Khoisan and Negro features (Fagan, 1967).

The adoption of new material elements by either culture from the other appears to have included only a few items. An occasional group may have changed cultures com- pletely. However, the cultures themselves remained almost entirely separate entities, each retaining its own identity and traditions. Even when the Later Stone Age peoples finally learned to smelt iron, their lithic technology seems to have persisted and their subsistence pattern to have continued unchanged.

Recent Later Stone Age Survivals The extinction of the Later Stone Age way of life in Africa is not yet complete.

Although they are now numerically trivial in comparison with the expanding agricultural population, small groups of hunter-gatherers have managed to persist, either by retreating into regions completely unsuited to farming or by serving the Iron Age agriculturalists. Their weapons are now customarily tipped with iron, so they have technically left the Later Stone Age behind. However, the use of stone tools continues for some functions, and the basic hunting and gathering subsistence pattern represents a survival of Later Stone Age tradition.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

23:

23 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

88 Contacts

The Bushmen of South Africa are the largest such group still extant. Historical accounts and tribal legends, however, report a surprising number of similar people north of the Limpopo River within the recent past.

In much of northern and eastern Zambia, and extending into the Congo and Malawi, agricultural tribes report the former existence of non-Bantu peoples who disappeared only a few generations ago (Clark, 1950). East of the Luangwa these people were known as Akafirla or Abativa. They had no knowledge of agriculture, and practised a hunting and gathering economy in which skill with the bow and arrow was important. These early inhabitants customarily built crude, temporary huts but sometimes occupied caves, rock shelters, and even ant-bear holes.

These people were known as iron smiths; in fact, the name A k a j d a may be derived from the verb “ku-fula” which means “to work iron”. An iron arrowhead with a twisted stcni, identified as made by the A k d u l u , was recovered from an excavation near Lundazi on the Zambia-Malawi border. It resembles a specimen associated with the most recent Later Stone Age horizon at Mwela Rocks, as well as two specimens found at Mumbwa Caves (Dart and del Grande, 1931).

In 1937 an excavation was made by F. B. Macrae at an AkaJula site, the Ntembwe of Mwaze Lundazi, which was destroyed cu. 1850. It was found to contain potsherds, a piece of iron slag, numerous microlithic flakes and one retouched flake in its lower horizon (Clark, 1950). Thus the Ak4firla evidently made use of stone in addition to iron. They also continued the Later Stone Age practice by which grinding grooves were created on flat rocks near streams, and decorated their bodies with red ochre as Later Stone Age people probably did.

Other cultural descendants of the Later Stone Age have been reported from west of the Luangwa River, in Zambia and the Congo. There they are commonly known as Bativa, meaning “seekers of forest products”, although many different names have been applied to them locally. At present they are represented by small groups living south and west of Lake Mweru, and in the swamps of Lake Bangweulu, the Lukanga Swamp, and the Kafue Flats (Clark, 1950).

Farther west and south, Hukwe Bushmen still inhabit the south-western corner of Barotscland in Zambia, and Bushmen were also known from the Bulawayo area of Rhodesia until recently. These localities are not far from the present Bushmen concentra- tions in Botswana.

Physiologically these hunter-gatherers have been variously described, but all accounts agree that they were short and unlike the Bantu agriculturalists. They are said to have been light or dark in skin colour, and sometimes to have had beards, peppercorn hair, large heads, steatopygia, or wrinkled stomachs (Clark, 1950). For the most part, those north and west of the Luangwa Valley appear to have resembled Pygmies, while those farther south were much like modern Bushmen. At least in some characteristics this evidence suggests physical as well as cultural descent from the peoples of the Later Stone Age.

Most of these descendants of the Later Stone Age have only disappeared during the last centuty. In some areas they made themselves valuable to their agricultural neighbours by providing game and honey, and sometimes by serving as smiths. In more remote regions they avoided contacts. However, in recent times those associated with the Bantu were either absorbed into the agricultural economy or were killed in retaliation for stealing, The others, pushed into more remote retreat areas by expansion of the farming population,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

23:

23 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Sheryl F. Miller

finally fought fiercely to defend their dwindling territory. Most of them were extermin- ated, and only a scattered few remain whose way of life today recalls earlier Later Stone Age patterns.

Conclusion

In summary, a growing body of evidence suggests that Early Iron Age agriculturalists first made contact with the indigenous Later Stone Age hunter-gatherers of Southern Central Afiica at the very beginning of the Christian era. This contact situation has apparently continued into modern times.

Tangible evidence of such contact is scen in the pottery and sometimes iron or trade goods which appear in the fuial phases of Latcr Stone Age occupations, and perhaps in the Later Stone Age type shell beads and bone points found occasionally in Early Iron Age deposits. These items probably represent trade between the two groups. Ethno- graphic evidence indicates that products of the hunt also played a major part in such barter.

Physical anthropology is unable, as yet, to offer much information regarding the racial characteristics of the peoples involved in this contact situation, either as to their origins or their subscquent interrelationships. However, tribal legends and recent history indicate that the two peoples remained culturally distinct until the present, the hunter- gatherers adopting only a few iniiova tions from the agriculturalists and maintaining their basic subsistence pattern intact until driven to retreat or extinction.

Acknowledgements

A number of people have most gcnerously aided me as I prcpared this paper by discussing, through correspondencc, various problcms concerning the Early Iron Age. I particularly wish to thank D. W. Phillipson, K. R. Robinson and R. Summers in this regard. I am also indebted to J. D. Clark for his helpful comments, which brought certain issues into sharper focus; and to H. N. Chittick for his editorial assistance.

Clark, J. D. 1950

1956

Clark, J. D. and Fagan, B. M. 1965

Cooke, C. K. 1963

Dart, R. A. and 1931

Fagan. B. M. 1967 del Grande, N.

Gabel, C. Kay, G. Miller. S. F.

1965 1964 1969

ins.

REFERENCES

‘A note on the pre-Bantu inhabitants of Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland’, S.A.J. Sci., 47, pp. 80-85. ‘Prehistory in Nyasaland’, The NyusulundJournal, IX, 1, pp. 92-115. Kulurribo Falls, Vol. 11, Cambridge, in preparation. ‘Charcoals, sands, and channel-decorated pottery from Northern Rhodesia’, American Anthropologist, LXVII, 2, pp. 354-371. ‘Report on excavations at Pomongwe and Tshangula Caves, Matopo Hills, Southern Rhodesia’, S.A.A.B., XVIII, 71, pp. 75-150. ‘The ancient iron smelting cavern at Mumbwa’, Trans. Roy. Soc. S. Afiica, XIX, 4, pp. 379-427. ‘The Iron Age peoples of Zambia and Malawi’, in Background to Evolritioii in Akicu, ed. Bishop and Clark, Chicago, pp. 659-686. Stone k lqc Himtcrs of the Kafe, Boston. ‘Chief Kalaba’s village’, Rhodes-Livingstone Pprs., 35, Manchester. ‘The Nachkufan industries of the Later Stone Age in Zambia’, Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley. (a) ‘The archaeological sequence of the Zambian Later Stone Age’

in Actes rltr Vle C o q r i s Punafricuin de Prikistoire et de E t u d e du Quatermire, Dakar, 1967, in press.

(b ) ‘Mphunzi Shelter, a Later Stone Age site in Malawi’, in preparation.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

23:

23 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

90

Phdipson, D. W.

Robinson, K. R.

1968

1961

1963

1964

1966

Robinson, K. R. and 1968

Sandelowsky, B. H. and 1968

Schofield, J. F. 1940 Summers, Roger 1967

Sandelowsky, B. H.

Robinson, K. R.

Turnbull, C. M. 1961

Contacts

‘The Early Iron Age in Zambia-regional variants and some tentative condusions’,].A.H., IX, 2, pp. 191-211. ‘An Early Iron Age site from the chibi District, Southern Rhodesia’,

‘Further excavations in the Iron Age deposits at the Tunnel site, Gokomere Hill, Southern Rhodesia’, S.A.A.B., XVIII, 72, pp. 155-171. ‘Dombozanga rock shelter, Mtetengwe River, Beitbridge, Southern Rhodesia: excavation results’, Arnoldia, I, 7. ‘Bambata ware: its position in the Rhodesian Iron Age in the light of recent evidence’, S.A.A.B., XXI, 82, pp. 81-85. ‘Further work in the Iron Age of Northern Malawi’, Amnia, 111,

Fmgira : preliminary report’, Dept. Antiq. Publ., 3, Government Press, Zomba, Malawi. ‘A report on the pottery from Bambata Cave’, S.A.].S., 37, p. 361. ‘Iron Age industries of southern Africa, with notes on their chrono- logy, terminology, and economic status’, in Background to Evolrrtion it? @ica, ed. Bishop and Clark, Chicago, pp. 687-700. The Forest People, New York.

S.A.A.B., XVI, 63, pp. 75-102.

pp. 107-145.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

23:

23 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014