3.8 Article

Ochre Resources, Behavioural Complexity and Regional Patterns in the Howiesons Poort

期刊

JOURNAL OF AFRICAN ARCHAEOLOGY
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 20-41

出版社

AFRICA MAGNA VERLAG
DOI: 10.1163/21915784-12340002

关键词

ochre pigment; Middle Stone Age; South Africa; Howiesons Poort; social interactions

资金

  1. Region Aquitaine, CNRS
  2. University Bordeaux Montaigne
  3. French Institute of South Africa, Johannesburg
  4. LaScArBx [ANR-10-LABX-52]
  5. National Research Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The widespread use of ochre during Oxygen Isotope Stage 5 and 4 in South Africa has often been interpreted as reflecting complex behaviours amongst modern human populations. The Howiesons Poort is one of the most documented technocomplexes identified within this timeframe. It is associated with an intensification of a combination of innovative technical and symbolic behaviours. Despite the notable focus on ochre use, detailed analyses of Howiesons Poort assemblages in this respect are rare. New data on ochre exploitation from the Howiesons Poort of Klasies River main site are presented in this paper. We used non-destructive microscopic, colorimetric and chemical analyses (SEM-EDS, XRD) in order to describe the raw materials and the transformation of a selected sample from the Singer and Wymer ochre collection. This sample is composed of red and yellow ferruginous rocks (shale, ferricrete, siltstone and sandstone), along with whitish lumps (calcium phosphates). These lumps may have an anthropogenic origin and may be considered as pigments. Some of the red ochre pieces were probably deliberately heated. Our results enhance the impression of complexity emerging from the technical processes mastered by Howiesons Poort populations. Comparison with other Howiesons Poort ochre assemblages allows a discussion of regional variability and 'connections' between the sites. The scale and organization of social interactions in the Howiesons Poort are questioned.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据