Scientific Services

An analysis of tools found at archaeological sites can be analysed for evidence of hunting intensity. At Little Muck, a large portion of stone scrapers (as would be used to treat skins and hides) and a fair proportion of stone tools showing signs of hunting damage were found, but more data is needed to verify the contribution that hunting made to livelihoods at the time.

Formerly, the San people lived forager lifestyles in which hunting was an important activity. It provided food, materials for tools, clothing, and ornamentation. The importance of hunting is reflected in associated spiritual activities, such as preparing for the hunt or trance dances after an important kill, often captured in San art. Evidence for hunting can be found in faunal assemblages recovered through archaeological excavations, which include zebra, impala and eland bones with damage caused by stone weapons or tools. Conclusive evidence of hunting impact damage on artifacts, such as bone arrowheads, hunting-related stone tools and other weapon types, is less often recorded.

It is generally considered that backed stone tools formed part of weapons or equipment used for hunting. These tools come in various shapes and sizes (Fig. 1). Depending on the intended use, the tools can be attached to a wooden handle in a row, forming a knife, or to the end of a shaft to form an arrowhead. Backed stone tools are found at many sites dating from the last 7500 years, but their abundance varies in frequency. For example, at our study site, Little Muck Shelter, excavations revealed only 27 backed stone tools from a period spanning more than a 1000 years, ending in AD 1300. This seems very low if we offset the number of tools with the time that the shelter was occupied.

Figure 1. There are two main types of backed stone tools and one that is a combination of these: segments (crescent-shaped curving tools; A – C, E – F), segmented backed bladelets (partial crescents that straighten at the base; D, G) and backed bladelets (two straight sides with one being roughly chipped for attaching to a shaft; H) (Photo: Tim Forssman).

Stone scrapers, on the other hand, were used largely in scraping activities, such as preparing animal hides, working bone, and debarking and trimming wood. At Little Muck, we found 396 (nearly 15 times the number of backed tools, which are normally not so vastly different) and over 90% were small (<20mm in length) with one sharpened edge. The relatively large number of these at the site suggests that substantial amounts of hide-working activities took place, but subsequent investigation of the scrapers in terms of damage along their edges showed that they were also used in processing hard materials like wood and bone.

When considering the ratio of backed stone tools to scrapers, we concluded that craft activities, such as producing clothing or implements, dominated over hunting activities. These items were likely produced for the purpose of trade, which is supported by the fact that both the number of scrapers as well as evidence of trade (e.g., ceramics, glass beads, and metal) increased at a similar time period. These “luxury” items procured through trade are thought to have come from neighbouring farmer communities who settled in the area from around AD 500.

With so few backed hunting tools, was hunting taking place? To try to answer this, we examined the backed tools from the site for breakages consistent with hunting damage. Previous work has shown through experimentation that stone tools break in specific ways when involved in the types of impact caused by hunting and when at least 40% of tools at a site show this type of impact, it can be relatively confidently concluded that hunting took place. Of the 27 tools, 10 (37%) had evidence of impact damage likely caused by hunting. As such, our results are inconclusive with regards to whether hunting was practised intensely. The small assemblage of hunting-related tools may indicate that collecting or snaring of animals was favoured at Little Muck, although limited evidence precludes any firm conclusions.

Scrapers peak in the record between AD 900 and 1000, which coincides with the first widespread farmer settlement of the area. During this period, foragers and farmers appear to have interacted regularly and although social relations in the area took various forms (e.g., inter-marrying, exchanging knowledge), from Little Muck it appears to be primarily based on trade arrangements and the mercantile economy. Of particular interest, is the indication that forager groups were part of the socio-political network, participating in the local economy, trading goods and acquiring wealth, during the phases that led to the appearance of Mapungubwe, southern Africa’s first state level society.

Left: Tim Forssman and Master’s student Siphesihle Kuhlase excavating during the COVID pandemic. Right: An aerial view of Little Muck Shelter where the ancestors of modern San people contributed to the rise of Greater Mapungubwe state by making and trading in “luxury” articles (Photos: Tim Forssman).

This article was written by Tim Forssman and Sonja van Zyl and originally published in the 2021/2022 Research Report.

The article is based on a publication in South African Archaeological Bulletin

Forssman T & van Zyl S. 2022. A preliminary analysis of Little Muck Shelter’s backed stone tool assemblage. South African Archaeological Bulletin 77(216).