70 years later – New research at Holley Shelter, a Middle and Later Stone Age site in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Abstract

In 1952, Gordon Cramb published the first report on his excavations at Holley Shelter, in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Although Cramb’s work implied organic preservation associated with a unique stone tool assemblage from a Middle Stone Age (MSA) context, Holley Shelter disappeared from the archaeological landscape until 2015, when we provided a reinvestigation of the lithic assemblages from the 1950s. Our study indicated a tentative chronological framework around Marine Isotope Stage 3 (MIS3) for the human occupation of the site. However, Cramb’s excavations did not produce reliable chronometric ages and the botanical and zoological finds from Holley Shelter remain for the most part unstudied. This is problematic as the site constitutes one of the few inland MSA rock shelters of KwaZulu-Natal featuring organic preservation. In 2022, 70 years after Cramb’s first report, we started a new research project focusing on renewed excavations to obtain archaeological remains from a controlled stratigraphy, absolute chronometric ages and reliable data on the palaeoenvironment at the border between the coastal belt and the midlands of KwaZulu-Natal. Here, we provide initial results from the first field campaign in 2022 on the stratigraphic sequence and archaeological finds and discuss their implications for future multidisciplinary research.

No one home? New evidence for MIS 3 occupations in the Western Cape (South Africa) from Mertenhof Rock Shelter

“…10) show small splintering (< 5 mm) along opposed edges suggestive of use instead of the removal of large blanks as in bipolar cores. Some of these pieces are made on relatively thin (average 7.9 mm) blades on hornfels, similar to comparable forms at the MIS 3 of Holley Shelter (Bader et al, 2015;. Another similarity is the occurrence of three de ned types from this site, namely single-edge, opposed-edge and diagonal splintered pieces, indicating high variability of edge damage among the relatively small (n = 13) MRS sample.…”

“…While increases in expedient core reduction, and more use of hornfels and quartz could be seen as trends towards later developments, these changes stand in opposition to a reduction in blade/bladelet frequencies and the frequent presence of prepared aking platforms. High proportions of splintered pieces in both LRS and LGS/CWGA could be a signal of an LSA technology such as claimed for Border Cave (Villa et al, 2012), but MSA sites of comparable age in late MIS 3 such as Holley Shelter show that this is not an unambiguous marker (Bader et al, 2015;. Based on MRS and Holley Shelter, splintered pieces appear to be a feature of technological variability in the nal phases of the MSA before becoming prevalent in the LSA.…”

“…How does MRS lithic technology from the middle and later MIS 3 compare to other regions? KwaZulu-Natal has provided most of the recent and well-studied data in this time frame coming from Sibhudu, Umhlatuzana, and Umbeli belli, along with the Free State site of Rose Cottage Cave and Sibebe in Eswatini (Bader et al 2015(Bader et al , 2018(Bader et al , 2022a(Bader et al , 2022bKaplan, 1990;Lombard et al, 2010;Soriano et al, 2007: Villa et al, 2015Wadley, 2005). While differences exist between these sites, there is an overarching signal of a long persistence of the MSA until ~ 27 ka with frequent unifacial and bifacial points -including special forms with hollow-shaped bases in the nal MSA -high lithic densities and frequent platform but also less prevalent bipolar and Levallois technology.…”

“…While similarities appear between those sites and MRS in the higher usage of platform and bipolar core reduction and the frequent production of both akes and blades, there are major differences such as the more intense use of shelter sites, the dominance of various pointed implements, and a generally higher curation of the lithic assemblages. Taking all of these sites together, and considering recent comparisons of early MIS 3 (Bader et al, 2015;2018;Mackay et al, 2014a;Will et al, 2014;Will & Conard, 2018), the lithic technology of MRS and the WRZ differs at least as strongly in the period < 50 ka from sites in KwaZulu-Natal and the SRZ (see summary in Bader et al, 2022b). While there are few sites so far, current data allows to postulate the following scenario: after initial fragmentation of populations and their technologies after MIS 4 and the Howiesons Poort (e.g.…”