Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T22:14:33.070Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Excavations at Koongine Cave: Lithics & Land-use in the Terminal Pleistocene & Holocene of South Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2014

C.F.M. Bird  and
David Frankel
C.F.M. Bird
Affiliation:
PO Box 1699, Midland, WA 6936, Australia. birho@bigpond.com
David Frankel
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, La Trobe University, Victoria 3086, Australia. d.frankel@latrobe.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Koongine is a sizeable limestone cave set in a low ridge some 4 km from the sea in the lower South-east of South Australia. It was used for about 2000 years at the transition from the Pleistocene to Holocene, and then again during the last millennium. The sequence at this site exposes issues of the appropriate scale and form of explanation for changes in site use. The stratified deposits of stone artefacts provide an opportunity to define for the first time the nature of the ‘Gambieran’ Industry. This spatially and temporally restricted industry characterised by large convex scrapers made on large, often asymmetrical, flakes is otherwise known mainly from older surface collections. The formal definition of this local industry adds to the growing evidence of considerable variation in the earlier stone tools of Australia, and provides an additional basis for rejecting the concept of a widespread Core Tool and Scraper Tradition, and replacing it with a model which recognises a mosaic of different tool-making traditions embedded in local social, economic, and technological contexts.

Résumé

Koongine est une grotte calcaire de belle taille creusée dans une crête peu élevée à quelques 4 kms de la mer dans la partie basse du sud-est de l'Australie méridionale. Elle a été utilisée pendant près de 2000 ans au moment de la transition entre le Pléistocène et l'Holocène, puis à nouveau au cours du dernier millénaire. La séquence sur ce site met en évidence les questions d'échelle pertinente et de la forme que prennent les explications sur les changements dans l'utilisation du site. Les dépôts stratifiés d'objets manufacturés en pierre nous offrent pour la première fois l'opportunité de définir la nature de l'industrie ‘Gambierienne’. Cette industrie, limitée aussi bien dans le temps que dans l'espace, et qui se caractérise par de grands grattoirs convexes taillés sur de grands éclats, souvent asymétriques, est d'autre part surtout connue grâce à des collections plus anciennes découvertes en surface. La définition systématique de cette industrie localisée vient ajouter à l'évidence grandissante que des variations considérables existent dans les outils en pierre primitifs en Australie, et nous fournit une raison supplémentaire de rejeter le concept d'une tradition universelle d'outil sur noyau et de grattoirs, et de le remplacer par un modèle qui reconnaît l'existence d'une mosaïque de traditions diverses de fabrication d'outils ancrées dans des contextes locaux, sociaux, économiques et technologiques.

Zusammenfassung

Koongine ist eine beträchtliche Sandsteinhöhle, die auf einer niedrigen Hügelkette ungefähr 4 km vom Meer entfernt im unteren Südosten von Südaustralien liegt. Sie wurde für circa 2000 Jahre im Übergang vom Pleistozän zum Holozän, und dann wieder während des letzten Jahrtausends benutzt. Die Abfolge an dieser Fundstelle wirft Fragen zu geeigneten Erklärungsmodellen für Veränderungen in der Nutzung einer Fundstelle auf. Die stratifizierten Ablagerungen von Steinartefakten liefern zum ersten Mal eine Möglichkeit den Charakter der ‚Gambieran‘ Industrie zu definieren. Diese räumlich und zeitlich beschränkte Industrie, die durch große konvexe Schaber aus großen, und oft asymmetrischen Abschlägen gekennzeichnet ist, ist sonst nur aus älteren Oberflächenfunden bekannt. Die formale Definition dieser lokalen Industrie ist ein wichtiger Beitrag, der mit anderen Belegen die beträchtlichen Variation in den frühen Steingeräten Australiens zeigt, und damit ein zusätzliches Argument gegen das Konzept liefert, das von einer weit verbreiteten Tradition von Kerngeräten und Schabern ausgeht. An dessen Stelle tritt ein Modell eines Mosaiks aus verschiedenen Geräte Traditionen, die in einen lokalen sozialen, ökonomischen und technologischen Kontext eingebettet sind.

Resúmen

Koongine es una cueva de caliza de considerable tamaño situada en un pequeño escarpado a unos 4 km. del mar en la parte inferior del sureste de Australia. Fue utilizada a lo largo de unos 2000 años, durante la transición del Pleistoceno al Holoceno, y de nuevo durante el ultimo milenio. La secuencia de este yacimiento pone en cuestión la escala y forma de explicación adecuadas para los cambios en la utilización del yacimiento. Los depósitos estratificados de material lítico proporcionan una oportunidad de definir por vez primera la naturaleza de la industria “Gambiera”. Esta industria lítica, de limitada extensión espacial y temporal, está caracterizada por rascadores convexos de gran tamaño, elaborados en grandes lascas a menudo asimétricas, y se la conoce principalmente a través de antiguos hallazgos de superficie. La definición formal de esta industria local aumenta la cada vez mas numerosa evidencia de una considerable variabilidad en los instrumentos líticos más tempranos en Australia, y proporciona motivos adicionales para el rechazo de la idea de una extendida tradición de Instrumentos de Núcleo y Rascadores, remplazándola con un modelo que reconoce un mosaico de distintas tradiciones de producción de instrumentos enraizadas en contextos locales, sociales, económicos, y tecnológicos.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 67 , 2001 , pp. 49 - 83
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allen, J. & O'Connell, J.F. (eds). 1995. Transitions. Pleistocene to Holocene in Australia and Papua New Guinea. Antiquity 69Google Scholar
Andrefsky, W. 1998. Lithics. Cambridge: University PressGoogle Scholar
Aslin, G.D. & Bednarik, R.G. 1984a. Karlie-ngoinpool Cave: a preliminary report. Rock Art Research 1, 36–45Google Scholar
Aslin, G.D. & Bednarik, R.G. 1984b. Koorine Cave, South Australia. Rock Art Research 1, 142–4Google Scholar
Aslin, G.D., Bednarik, E.K. & Bednarik, R.G. 1985. The ‘Parietal Markings Project’ – a progress report. Rock Art Research 2, 71–4Google Scholar
Barker, B. 1987. A faunal analysis of Narcurrer Shelter, south-east South Australia. Unpublished BA thesis, Department of Anthropology & Sociology, University of Queensland, St LuciaGoogle Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1980. The potential of rock patination analysis in Australian archaeology – part 2. The Artefact 5, 47–77Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1981. Malangine & Koongine Caves, South Australia. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1986. Parietal finger markings in Europe and Australia. Rock Art Research 3, 30–61Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1989. Perspectives of Koongine Cave and scientistic archaeology. Australian Archaeology 29, 9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1990. The cave petroglyphs of Australia. Australian Aboriginal Studies 1990/1992, 64–8Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1992. Early subterranean flint mining. The Artefact 15, 11–24Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1999. The speleotherm medium of finger flutings and its isotopic geochemistry. The Artefact 22, 49–64Google Scholar
Bird, C.F.M. & Beeck, C. 1980. Bone points and spatulae: salvage ethnography in southwest Australia. Archaeology & Physical Anthropology in Oceania 15, 168–71Google Scholar
Bird, C.F.M. & Frankel, D. 1991. Chronology and explanation in western Victoria and south-east South Australia. Archaeology in Oceania 21, 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, C.F.M. & Frankel, D. 1998. Pleistocene and early Holocene archaeology in Victoria. A view from Gariwerd. The Artefact 21, 48–62Google Scholar
Bølviken, E., Helskog, E., Helskog, K., Holm-Olsen, I.M., Solheim, L. & Bertelsen, R. 1982. Correspondence analysis: an alternative to principal components. World Archaeology 14, 41–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, S. 1993. Mannalargenna, Cave: a Pleistocene site in Bass Strait. In Smith, M.A., Spriggs, M. & Fankhauser, B. (eds), Sahul in Review. Pleistocene archaeology in Australia, New Guinea and island Melanesia, 258–71. Canberra: Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National UniversityGoogle Scholar
Campbell, T.D. & Edwards, R. 1966. Stone implements. In Cotton, B.C. (ed.), Aboriginal Man in South and Central Australia, 159–220. Adelaide: Government PrinterGoogle Scholar
Campbell, T.D., Edwards, R. & Hossfeld, P.S. 1966. Archaeological Excavations in the South East of South Australia. Canberra: Unpublished report to the Australian Institute of Aboriginal StudiesGoogle Scholar
Clark, D.J. 1979. The Gambieran Stone Tool Tradition. Unpublished BA thesis, Division of Prehistory, La Trobe University. MelbourneGoogle Scholar
Cosgrove, R., Allen, J. & Marshall, B. 1990. Palaeoecology and Pleistocene human occupation in south central Tasmania. Antiquity 64, 59–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cottrell, B. & Kamminga, J. 1987. The formation of flakes. American Antiquity 52, 675–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dibble, H.L. 1987. The interpretation of Middle Paleolithic scraper morphology. American Antiquity 52, 109–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dingli, G. 1995. Karremarter. A Holocene Site in South East South Australia. Unpublished BA Thesis, School of Archaeology, La Trobe University. MelbourneGoogle Scholar
Draper, N. 1987. Context for the Kartan: a preliminary report on excavations at Cape de Couedic Rockshelter, Kangaroo Island. Archaeology in Oceania 22, 1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flood, J. 1997. Rock Art of the Dreamtime. Sydney: Angus & RobertsonGoogle Scholar
Flood, J., David, B., Magee, J. & English, B. 1987. Birrigai: a Pleistocene site in the south-eastern highlands. Archaeology in Oceania 22, 9–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, D. 1986. Excavations in the lower south east of South Australia, November 1985. Australian Archaeology 22, 75–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, D. 1988. Characterizing change in prehistoric sequences: a view from Australia. Archaeology in Oceania 23, 41–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, D. 1989. Koongine Cave excavations 1986–1997: investigating spatial patterning. Australian Archaeology 28, 3–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, D. 1990. Stratigraphy and argument at Koongine Cave. Australian Archaeology 30, 71–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, D. 1991a. Remains to be Seen: archaeological insights into Australian prehistory. Melbourne: Longman CheshireGoogle Scholar
Frankel, D. 1991b. First-order radiocarbon dating of Australian shell-middens. Antiquity 65, 571–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, D. 1993. Pleistocene chronological structures and explanations: a challenge. In Smith, M.A., Spriggs, M. & Fankhauser, B. (eds), Sahul in Review: Pleistocene archaeology in Australia, New Guinea and island Melanesia, 24–33. Canberra: Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National UniversityGoogle Scholar
Fresløv, J. & Frankel, D. 1999. Abundant fields? A review of coastal archaeology in Victoria. In Hall, J. & McNiven, I. (eds), Australian Coastal Archaeology, 239–54. Canberra: Research Papers in Archaeology and Natural History 31, Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National UniversityGoogle Scholar
Godfrey, M.C.S. 1989. Shell midden chronology in southwestern Victoria: reflections on change in prehistoric population and subsistence? Archaeology in Oceania 24, 65–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfrey, M.C.S. 1994. The Archaeology of the Invisible. Seasonally and Shellfishing at Discovery Bay, Victoria: the application of oxygen isotope analysis. Unpublished PhD thesis, La Trobe University, BundooraGoogle Scholar
Godfrey, M.C.S., Bird, C., Frankel, D., Rhoads, J.W. & Simmons, S. 1996. From time to time: radiocarbon determinations on Victorian archaeological sites held by Aboriginal Affairs Victoria. The Artefact 19, 3–51Google Scholar
Hiscock, P. 1984. A preliminary report on the stone artefacts from Colless Creek Cave, northwest Queensland. Queensland Archaeological Research 1, 120–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiscock, P. 1985. The need for a taphonomic perspective in stone artefact analysis. Queensland Archaeological Research 2, 82–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiscock, P. 1986. Technological change in the Hunter River valley and its implications for the interpretation of late Holocene change in Australia. Archaeology in Oceania 21, 40–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiscock, P. & Allen, H. 2000. Assemblage variability in the Willandra Lakes. Archaeology in Oceania 35, 97–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holdaway, S. 1995. Stone artefacts and the transition. Antiquity 69, 784–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holdaway, S. & Cosgrove, R. 1997. The archaeological attributes of behaviour: difference or variability. Endeavour 21(2), 66–71CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holdaway, S. & Porch, N. 1995. Cyclical patterns in the Pleistocene human occupation of Southwest Tasmania. Archaeology in Oceania 30, 74–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaac, G. 1977. Olorgesailie: Archeological studies of a Middle Pleistocene lake basin in Kenya. Chicago: University PressGoogle Scholar
Isaac, G.L. 1980. Comment on Parkington ‘Time and place: observations on spatial and temporal patterning in the Later Stone Age sequence in southern Africa’. South African Archaeological Bulletin 35, 96–8Google Scholar
Izard, K. 1988. Holocene Subsistence Strategies: Koongine faunal analysis. Unpublished BA Thesis, Department of Archaeology, La Trobe University, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
Jones, R., 1977. The Tasmanian paradox. In Wright, R.V.S. (ed.), Stone Tools as Cultural Markers, 189–204. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal StudiesGoogle Scholar
Kamminga, J. 1982. Over the Edge. Functional Analysis of Australian Stone Tools. St Lucia: Occasional Papers in Anthropology 12. Anthropology Museum, University of QueenslandGoogle Scholar
Lampert, R. 1981. The Great Kartan Mystery. Canberra: Terra Australis 5. Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National UniversityGoogle Scholar
Lourandos, H. 1980. Forces of Change: Aboriginal technology and population in south western Victoria. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of SydneyGoogle Scholar
Lourandos, H. 1983. Intensification: a late Pleistocene–Holocene archaeological sequence from southwestern Victoria. Archaeology in Oceania 18, 81–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luebbers, R. 1978. Meals and Menus: a study of change in prehistoric coastal settlement in South Australia. Unpublished PhD thesis, Australian National University. CanberraGoogle Scholar
McBryde, I. 1977. Determinants of assemblage variation in New England prehistory. In Wright, R.V.S. (ed.), Stone Tools as Cultural Markers, 225–50. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal StudiesGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, F.D. 1976. Australian Aboriginal Stone Implements. Sydney: The Australian MuseumGoogle Scholar
McNiven, I.J. 2000. Backed to the Pleistocene. Archaeology in Oceania 35, 48–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, S.R. 1949. Stone Age Craftsmen. Melbourne: Tait Book CompanyGoogle Scholar
Morwood, M. J. & Hobbs, D.R. 1995a. Quinkan Prehistory: the archaeology of Aboriginal art in SE Cape York Peninsula, Australia. Brisbane: Tempus 3. Anthropology Museum, University of QueenslandGoogle Scholar
Morwood, M.J. & Hobbs, D.R. 1995b. Themes in the prehistory of tropical Australia. Antiquity 69, 747–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulvaney, D.J. 1961. The Stone Age of Australia. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 27, 56–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulvaney, J. & Kamminga, J. 1999. Prehistory of Australia. Sydney: Allen & UnwinGoogle Scholar
Nelson, M.C. 1991. The study of technological organisation. Archaeological Method and Theory 3, 57–100Google Scholar
Parkington, J. 1980. Time and place: some observations on spatial and temporal patterning in the Later Stone Age sequence in Southern Africa. South African Archaeological Bulletin 35, 73–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perlès, C. 1992. In search of lithic strategies: a cognitive approach to prehistoric chipped stone assemblages. In Gardin, J.-C. & Peebles, C.S. (eds), Representations in Archaeology, 223–47. Bloomington: Indiana University PressGoogle Scholar
Pickering, M.P. 1979. Aboriginal Bone Tools from Victoria. Unpublished BA thesis, Division of Prehistory, La Trobe University, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
Porch, N. & Allen, J. 1995. Tasmania: archaeological and palaeo-ecological perspectives. Antiquity 69, 714–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwebel, D.A. 1983. Quaternary dune systems. In Tyler, M.J., Twidale, C.R., Ling, J.K. & Holmes, J.W. (eds), Natural History of the South East, 15–24. Adelaide: Royal Society of South AustraliaGoogle Scholar
Scott-Virtue, L. 1982. Flint. The Foundations for an Hypothesis. Unpublished BA thesis, Division of Prehistory, La Trobe University, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
Smith, M.A. 1982. Devon Downs reconsidered: changes in site use at a lower Murray Valley rockshelter. Archaeology in Oceania 17, 109–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, A.P., & Rozen, K.C. 1985. Debitage analysis and archaeological interpretation. American Antiquity 50, 755–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tindale, N.B. 1941. The antiquity of man in Australia. Australian journal of Science 3, 144–7Google Scholar
Tindale, N.B. 1957. A dated Tartangan implement site from Cape Martin, South East of South Australia. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 79, 109–23Google Scholar
Twidale, C.R., Campbell, E.M. & Bourne, J.A. 1983. Granite forms, karst and lunettes. In Tyler, M.J., Twidale, C.R., Ling, J.K. & Holmes, J.W. (eds), Natural History of the South East, 25–37. Adelaide: Royal Society of South AustraliaGoogle Scholar
Webb, C. 1987. Use-wear on Bone Tools: an experimental program and three case-studies from south-east Australia. Unpublished BA thesis, Department of Archaeology, La Trobe University. MelbourneGoogle Scholar
Witter, D. 1977. The archaeology of the Discovery Bay area, Victoria. Memoirs of the Victoria Archaeological Survey 2, 51–67Google Scholar
Wright, R.V.S. 1975. Stone artifacts from Kow Swamp, with notes on their excavation and environmental context. Archaeology & Physical Anthropology in Oceania 10, 161–79Google Scholar
Zobel, D., Vanderwal, R.L. & Frankel, D. 1982. The Moonlight Head Rockshelter. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria 96, 1–24Google Scholar