The archaeology of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project Phases IA and IB

Transcription

1 Southern African Humanities 24: 1 32 July 2012 KwaZulu-Natal Museum The archaeology of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project Phases IA and IB 1 Jonathan Kaplan and 2 Peter Mitchell 1 Agency for Cultural Resource Management, 5 Stuart Road, Rondebosch, Cape Town, 7700 South Africa; acrm@wcaccess.co.za 2 School of Archaeology, University of Oxford, & School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand. St Hugh s College, Oxford, OX2 6LE, United Kingdom; peter.mitchell@st-hughs.ox.ac.uk ABSTRACT This paper reports on excavations carried out at three sites during the 1990s as part of efforts to mitigate the impact on Lesotho s archaeological heritage of Phases IA and IB of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project (LHWP). Two of the sites, Muela and Lithakong, were subsequently drowned, while the third, Liphofung, was investigated ahead of its development as a site museum and nature reserve. All three sites were occupied during the Holocene by Later Stone Age hunter-gatherers, principally by makers of post-classic Wilton assemblages, although Liphofung and Muela also preserve evidence of earlier use by people whose stone tool assemblages are better described as Early Wilton and Oakhurst. Comparisons are drawn with excavated material elsewhere in the Maloti-Drakensberg region, focusing on the contribution that the sites can make to cultural history, long-distance connections and contact with Farming Communities. The importance of undertaking comparable work ahead of Phase II of the LHWP is also emphasised. KEY WORDS: Lesotho Highlands Water Project; Later Stone Age; hunter-gatherers; Muela; Liphofung; Lithakong. The Lesotho Highlands Water Project (LHWP) is one of the largest and most complex water engineering schemes in Africa. Damming rivers in Lesotho, it transfers the impounded water to South Africa s industrial heartland, simultaneously generating hydroelectric power for use within Lesotho. Although the full scheme may ultimately include six dams, thus far work has been completed on only two, with construction of a third, at the junction of the Senqu (Orange) and Khubelu Rivers, already agreed by the two governments. Archaeological components of Lesotho s cultural heritage have until now therefore experienced relatively little impact from the LHWP, though this will change dramatically if dams are constructed further downstream along the Senqu itself. As part of earlier efforts to mitigate the impact of flooding and construction activity, excavations were undertaken on behalf of the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority (LHDA) at three sites in the Phase IA area and one in the Phase IB area during the 1990s (Fig. 1). This paper reports on the results obtained from three of these investigations. The fourth site, Hololo Crossing, located in the Phase IA area, has already been published (Mitchell et al. 1994). We discuss each site in turn and then situate our observations within the wider regional context. Analysis of the finds from these sites (undertaken by Kaplan in the early 1990s) has, for various reasons, not been as complete as is often the case (for example, we are unable to provide metric data for the formal tools recovered, nor photographs of some of the artefacts such as the grooved bone and wooden peg recovered from Muela as sought by one of the paper s referees). We nevertheless feel that these shortcomings ought not to delay further placing the sites themselves in the public domain. While a 1

2 2 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, 2012 Fig. 1. Map of Lesotho showing the locations of the key sites discussed in the text. Site names are abbreviated thus: HC Hololo Crossing; HM Ha Makotoko; LIK Likoaeng; LIT Lithakong; LIP Liphofung; MUE Muela; NT Ntloana Tsoana; RC Rose Cottage Cave; SEH Sehonghong; TL Tloutle. general point could be made here regarding the importance of making the results of contract archaeology excavations more widely accessible to the discipline as a whole, in the specific context of Lesotho this assumes an even greater significance. Between them, Muela, Liphofung and Lithakong constitute over one tenth of all the archaeological sites ever excavated in the country, as well as the bulk of the archaeological work carried out to date in connection with the LHWP. Placing them on record here therefore contributes to a more broadly based understanding of hunter-gatherer archaeology in Lesotho and the wider Maloti-Drakensberg region. PHASE IA MUELA Phase IA of the LHWP focused on damming the Malibamatso River at Katse and constructing a tunnel to transfer water from the reservoir thus created to Muela in northwestern Lesotho, where a hydroelectric power station was built, complete with its own small dam and reservoir. This second reservoir destroyed two archaeological sites, the paintings of which were recorded, traced and photographed by Jannie Loubser (1993). Although one site (2828CD1) lacked archaeological deposit, this was not true of the

3 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS 3 other (2828CD2), which was excavated between 2 and 11 July 1993 as recommended by Lewis-Williams & Thorp (1989). Finds from that excavation form the basis of our report here, while the fauna is discussed by Plug (1997). Material from subsequent, follow-up excavations in 1996 and 1997 remains to be analysed and is not reported here. Located in Butha-Buthe District, Muela rock shelter (28º46'00"S, 28º27'47"E) was an isolated, but conspicuous, sandstone overhang situated approximately 1800 m a.s.l. on the east bank of the Ngoe River close to the village of Muela and about 1.5 km from today s Muela hydroelectric plant. It faced southwest and was approximately 20 m wide and 8 m in height, with a maximum depth behind the dripline of 5 m (Fig. 2). The site was almost completely enclosed by a stone wall and was used until just before excavation began as a temporary shelter for sheep and goats. Livestock dung, modern fires and maize leaves on the site s surface, and the seeds of pumpkins, sorghum and peaches found in excavation, further attest to this. A small collection of stone artefacts was taken from the site s surface and the talus slope and maize field in front of the dripline in 1989 during an initial assessment of the LHWP s likely impact on the archaeology of the Phase IA area. This collection appears to have subsequently been lost (Taole Tesele pers. comm.), but included at least two small scrapers of probable late/mid-holocene age, as well as a few artefacts of Middle Stone Age (MSA) origin (Lewis-Williams & Thorp 1989). x = Painting N x x x x x G2 x x x x x D3 G3 S t o n e w a l l i n g Metres Fig. 2. Muela: site plan. Excavation, stratigraphy and dating The 1993 excavations at Muela opened up a total area of 3 m 2. One square, D3, was excavated toward the western end of the shelter to a depth of approximately 40 cm below the modern surface (Fig. 3). Adjacent squares G2 and G3 were located in the central part of the shelter and excavated to depths of 12 and 40 cm respectively (Fig. 4). Bedrock was not reached in any of the squares, but excavation was discontinued within apparently sterile sandy deposits or (in G2) on reaching large rocks that could not be readily removed within the time available. All excavated deposit was sieved using a 1.5 mm mesh. Artefacts were analysed in Cape Town and remain in South Africa pending repatriation to Lesotho. The fauna was studied by Plug (1997). The twenty-five stratigraphic units (including two hearths) identified in excavation are listed and described in Table 1. Overall, the deposit was fairly dry and stratigraphic

4 4 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, 2012 Unit 2 Unit 5 Unit 6 Surface Unit 1 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 7 Unit 8 Unit 9 Unit 10 Unit 11 Unit Metre Fig. 3. Muela: D3/D2 section. units were distinguished by variation in both colour and texture. The deposits removed in D3 were more humic, more loamy and darker in colour than those in G2/G3, where rootlet activity was more strongly evident. The deposits from both excavations were grouped into the same five layers for analysis. Intrusive recent plant material was present in both Layers 1 and 2 in D3, but only in Layer 1 in G2/G3, which in these squares was clearly separated from the underlying deposits. Discrete hearths were recognised in Layer 2 in G2/G3 and in Layer 3 in D3. In both excavation areas Layer 5 had relatively few artefacts, some perhaps displaced from above. Surface Surface cleanings Light Grey Ash Light Grey Ash 2 Light Brown Ash Light Grey Brown Ash Mocha Patches Yellow Brown Sand Yellow Brown Sand Metre Fig. 4. Muela: G3/H3 section.

5 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS 5 Layer Stratigraphic unit 1 Unit 1 2 Unit 2 2 Unit 3 2 Unit 4 TABLE 1 Muela: summary of the stratigraphy in Square D3. Description Loose soft grey-brown, disturbed deposit representing cleaning of the site s surface; cattle and caprine dung; modern plant remains. Significantly more compact, light yellow-brown deposit, with some modern plant remains. Light grey, with visible ash component. Slightly granular texture. Some modern plant material. Brown with white/grey ash and charcoal speckling. Soft, fine texture with some modern plant material. 3 Unit 5 Darker brown, fine to soft, becoming more compact and darker with depth. 3 Unit 6 Compact, but fine, dark brown deposit within which is D3-Hearth 1. 4 Unit 7 Dark brown, compact, fine deposit. 4 Unit 8 4 Unit 9 5 Unit 10 Dark brown, but less compact than Unit 7, with possible traces of animal burrowing. Lighter brown, less compact, soft and fine deposit. Some root activity visible. Lighter brown, loose and soft, becoming yellow-brown with depth. More root activity visible. 5 Unit 11 Sandier, yellow-brown deposit with root activity visible. 5 Unit 12 Very soft and sandy, yellow-brown, with very few artefacts. Layer Muela: summary of the stratigraphy in Squares G2 and G3. Stratigraphic unit Description SC (Surface Loose soft grey-brown, disturbed deposit; cattle and caprine dung; modern Cleanings) plant remains. LGA (Light Light grey, fine for the most part, with variable ash content and darker grey Grey Ash) in places. Includes G2/G3-Hearth 1. LGAM (Light Grey Ash Mostly light grey deposit with small, dispersed patches of mottled, lighter Mottled) grey ash. Some large sandstone inclusions present. LGA2 (Light Softer and finer continuation of LGA, becoming lighter and more ashy Grey Ash 2) with depth. GBA (Grey Soft and fine, light grey-brown deposit mixed with ash. Brown Ash) LGBA (Light Grey Brown Ash) LBA (Light Brown Ash) 5 Mocha 5 Patches 5 5 YBS (Yellow Brown Sand) YBS2 (Yellow Brown Sand 2) Soft, fine, light grey and brown deposit with some ash, root activity and broken sandstone inclusions. Very fine and soft, light brown deposit with ash, some rootlet activity and some rotted sandstone inclusions. Very soft and fine deposit, varying in colour from light and dark brown to light yellow. More extensive root activity evident. Very soft, fine, lighter brown with patches of dark brown, humic soil. Some rootlet activity and sandstone inclusions. Soft, sandy yellow-brown deposit with rootlet activity and an increasing number of sandstone inclusions. Soft, fine yellow-brown sandy deposit with small sandstone inclusions and pebbles.

6 6 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, 2012 Five radiocarbon determinations were obtained, three from D3 and two from G2. All used unidentified charcoal. Those from D3 Layers 2 and 3 returned modern or near-modern ages and clearly do not relate to past hunter-gatherer activity at the site, although a date from Layer 4 (240 ± 50 b.p.; Pta-6328) is not implausible. The two samples from G2 (Layer 2: 360 ± 45 b.p., Pta-6332; Layer 4: 730 ± 50 b.p., Pta-6329) are in stratigraphically correct sequence (Table 2; dates for all sites calibrated using OxCal 4.1 and IntCal09). Despite the evident anomalies in the stratigraphic patterning of radiocarbon dates, which suggest a degree of disturbance to the deposit, it seems reasonable to consider the material from Layers 1 4 in toto as deriving from occupations during the second millennium AD, although as we indicate below there is reason to think that Layer 5 samples a much earlier presence at the site. Site TABLE 2 Lesotho Highlands Water Project Phases IA and IB: radiocarbon determinations. Stratigraphic context Laboratory number Material dated Date b.p. Calibrated date range (2 sigma) IntCal09 Hololo Crossing Spit 4 Pta-5411 Charcoal 260 ± 45 AD Hololo Crossing Spit 6 Pta-5412 Charcoal 330 ± 100 AD Muela D3 - Layer 2 Pta-6327 Charcoal Modern - Muela G2 - Layer 2 Pta-6332 Charcoal 360 ± 45 AD Muela D3 - Layer 3 Pta-6335 Charcoal 30 ± 45 AD Muela D3 - Layer 4 Pta-6328 Charcoal 240 ± 50 AD Muela G2 - Layer 4 Pta-6329 Charcoal 730 ± 50 AD Liphofung Layer 2 DBS Pta-6106 Bone 2700 ± BC Liphofung Layer 4 BS2 Pta-6109 Bone 4390 ± BC Liphofung Layer 5 BS3 Pta-6113 Bone 7230 ± BC Lithakong Layer 2 Pta-7072 Charcoal 890 ± 35 AD Lithakong Layer 2 Pta-7077 Charcoal 510 ± 40 AD Lithakong Layer 3 Pta-7075 Charcoal 4790 ± BC Lithic assemblages A total of flaked stone artefacts was recovered from the 1993 excavations at Muela (Table 3), some 96 % of them made on opaline, the most favoured raw material in all known Later Stone Age (LSA) assemblages from Lesotho. The other raw materials, all of minimal significance, include shale, quartz, quartzite and basalt. Consistent with other Holocene LSA assemblages in Lesotho, irregular cores are the most common type found; only 17 out of 134 have single platforms. No blade or bladelet cores were found and bipolar cores are restricted to just two, from Layer 2. Interestingly, MSA flakes, presumably recovered from nearby open-air artefact scatters (Lewis-Williams & Thorp 1989), were also used as a source of raw material. In all, 75 such flakes were found, some recycled to make adzes, scrapers, miscellaneously retouched pieces and utilised artefacts. Best known from sites in South Africa s Western Cape Province (e.g. Kaplan 1987), such small-scale recycling is extremely rare in Lesotho.

7 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS 7 TABLE 3 Muela: flaked and ground stone artefacts. Artefact class Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 3 Layer 4 Layer 5 Total Chips, chunks, flakes MSA flakes Cores Blades Bladelets Total unmodified Utilised flakes Total utilised Scrapers Adzes Segments Backed points Backed flakes Awls MRPs Total retouched Total flaked stone Hammerstones Grindstone fragments Upper grindstones Milled edge pebbles The formal tool component of the 1993 Muela assemblage is relatively large (N = 552), but still accounts for only 1.7 % of all the flaked stone analysed. Scrapers are by far the most common artefact class present (N = 308), accounting for 55.7 % of all formally retouched artefacts (Fig. 5). Endscraper and sidescraper forms dominate. In Layer 5 some scrapers bearing the classic adze-like lateral retouch diagnostic of Woodlot scrapers (Mitchell 2000) suggest that the site was also used in the early Holocene. Artefacts classed as miscellaneously retouched form an unusually high 31.3 % of the formal tool class, possibly pointing to a more expedient reduction and use strategy at Muela compared to other LSA sites in Lesotho. Backed microliths (Fig. 6), which include two segments and a backed point, are nevertheless few in number relative to adzes, as expected of a late Holocene LSA occurrence (cf. Mitchell et al. 1994; Mitchell 1996a). Artefacts identified and described in analysis as awls were found only in Layers 3 and 4 in Square D3, hinting at some spatio-temporal

8 8 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, mm Fig. 5. Muela: scrapers. 1 2 D3 Layer 1; 3 5 D3 Layer 2; 6 8 D3 Layer 3; 9 12 D3 Layer 4. All in opaline. patterning in the discard of these artefacts or the hide-piercing activities in which they were used (Fig. 6). The small ground-stone assemblage includes four upper grindstones, a hammerstone and two milled edge pebbles. A single piece of ground red ochre was also found (in Layer 1). Worked bone The few worked bone artefacts found consist mostly of bone points (N = 11), one from Layer 1, four from Layer 2 and six from Layer 3. In addition, two miscellaneous pieces of worked bone were recovered from Layer 3, along with a fairly flat piece that has a small, ground groove in its centre, suggesting a possible use in smoothing or grinding the edges of ostrich eggshell beads or bone points. A further, partially polished bone flake (from Layer 4) was found in the material submitted for archaeozoological analysis (Ina Plug pers. comm.).

9 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS 9 Fig. 6. Muela: adzes, backed microliths and awls. Adzes: 1 2 D3 Layer 1; 3 D3 Layer 2; 4 5 D3 Layer 3; 6 D3 Layer 5. Segment: 7 D3 Layer 4. Backed point: 8 G2/G3 Layer 3. All in opaline. Ostrich eggshell beads and unworked ostrich eggshell Seven ostrich eggshell beads were found in the 1993 excavation, three each from Layers 3 and 4, plus one from Layer 5, along with nine unworked fragments of ostrich eggshell. Worked wood Wooden artefacts tend to be rare in LSA contexts in southern Africa and are exceptionally uncommon in Lesotho. A few items were recovered at Muela, all from Layer 1. They include a wooden peg of a kind that could have been inserted into a crack in the rock shelter wall for suspending a bag, or used to peg out and stretch animal skins for drying and cleaning. Other items include a split stick, four other pieces of worked wood, three wood shavings and a firestick, the tip of which is burnt. The attribution of all these items must necessarily remain uncertain given their stratigraphic context and recent Basotho activity at the site, but a hunter-gatherer origin is not impossible. Pottery Twenty-eight sherds were recovered, mostly (N = 15) from Layer 2, although one small sherd was present (perhaps displaced) as far down as Layer 4; three more came from

10 10 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, 2012 Layer 1 and four from Layer 3. All are body sherds and no refits were possible between them. They include thicker walled, unburnished sherds and thinner, burnished ones, but apart from burnishing no decoration is present. All the sherds were grit-tempered. Glass beads Twenty-three glass beads were found, 20 of them so-called seed or embroidery beads, with three of larger size. All came from Layers 1 3. They have not been studied further. PHASE IA LIPHOFUNG The rock shelter known as Liphofung ( place of the elands, from the many painted on its walls) is located (28º14'16"S, 28º29'43"E) on a sidestream of the same name that flows into the Hololo River. It is just a few kilometres northeast of Muela and is also in Butha-Buthe District. Lying approximately 1820 m a.s.l., Liphofung is a large, horseshoe-shaped shelter, some 80 m wide, 15 m high and with a maximum depth behind the dripline of between 4 and 18 m (Fig. 7). An area of about 20 m 2 of archaeological deposit survives, broken up by exposed bedrock and fallen roof spall. The site faces east and does not receive direct sunlight, although the expansive talus slope immediately in front of the dripline does. Stonewalling inside the rock shelter points to the site having been used in the relatively recent past, as it was until the 1990s, as a temporary refuge for livestock, something that has resulted in significant disturbance of the uppermost archaeological deposits, both horizontally and probably also vertically. Trampling by cattle has also led to the formation of a very compact deposit in the northern part of the shelter. Liphofung differs from the other sites we discuss in that it was never directly threatened by the LHWP s construction activities, although increased visitor numbers were thought to pose a danger to its extensive rock paintings, which were recorded, traced and photographed by Loubser (1993). Excavations were instead motivated by the LHDA s decision to develop Liphofung as a visitor attraction as recommended MN Paintings x x x x x x x x Paintings Excavation Excavation Stone wall Pool Rock Tree Rock Stream Rock D r i p l i n e Metres Fig. 7. Liphofung: site plan.

11 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS 11 by Ambrose (1988). While the relatively good state of preservation of many of its paintings was one motivation for this decision, the other, and more important, reason was the site s associations with Lesotho s first king, Moshoeshoe I, who visited it in 1840 in the company of the French missionary Thomas Arbousset (1991: ). This followed an earlier visit around 1821 or 1822 when Moshoeshoe took refuge from his enemies in the shelter for five or six months, along with some of his followers and their livestock (Arbousset 1991: 134). Liphofung accordingly now offers visitors a site museum, guided visits and craft centre. A small surrounding area forms a designated nature reserve that protects some of the plants recorded as growing there in the early nineteenth century (Ambrose et al. 2000: 81 2). Excavation, stratigraphy and dating Excavations were undertaken between 7 and 18 July 1992 over a total area of 8 m 2 divided between three locations. An initial excavation of 4 m 2 in the most sheltered part of the site was discontinued when it became clear that little, if any, in situ archaeological deposits survived there, probably because of disturbance by water percolating through the shelter s rear wall. Four square metres were then excavated across the dripline, two in front of it and two behind. These four squares (X9/10, Y9/10) were all excavated onto bedrock or a culturally sterile deposit, with all excavated soil sieved through a 1.5 mm mesh. Visible stratigraphy was only clearly evident in the drier, uppermost part of the X/Y deposits, below which distinctions of colour or texture were less obvious. The distinctions represented in Figure 8 should therefore be understood as only approximate in nature and were most clearly apparent only after excavation had ceased and the section had dried out. The stratigraphic units removed are described in Table 4. They were grouped after excavation into a total of eight layers for purposes of analysis. Three radiocarbon determinations were obtained (Table 2), all on unidentified bone as charcoal was only minimally present in Layer 2 and absent below this. A fourth sample, from a hearth in Layer 2, did not preserve sufficient collagen for analysis. Y 10 Y 9 Rock Hearth Hearth/DBS Dark brown sand Brown sand Yellow brown sand Dark brown sand 2 Brown sand 2 Dark brown sand 3 Rock Rock Yellow brown sand 2 Grey brown sand Brown sand 3 Surface scrape Unexcavated deposit Brown sand 4 Grey brown sand Metre Brown sand 5 Rock Grey brown sand 2 Grey brown sand 3 Fig. 8. Liphofung: Y9/Y10 section.

12 12 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, 2012 TABLE 4 Liphofung: summary of the stratigraphy. Layer Stratigraphic units Description 1 SC (Surface Scrape) Loose, sandy, brown deposit with caprine dung, vegetation and some modern glass and plastic. 2 Hearth A circular, grey, ashy unit 4 10 cm thick in Squares X10 and Y10, with bone but little charcoal. 2 Hearth/Dark A mixture of Hearth and a dark brown, crumbly deposit, rich in Brown Sand bone and with an oily texture. 2 DBS (Dark Brown Very compact, with some rootlet activity and the same oily texture Sand) as the previous unit. 3 BS (Brown Sand) A light brown sandy deposit slightly mixed with ash from the overlying Hearth unit. 3 DBS2 (Dark Brown A compact, less oily dark brown sandy deposit rich in artefacts. Some Sand 2) rootlet activity present. 4 A culturally sterile, yellow-brown sand with numerous pieces of YBS (Yellow Brown roof spall, some rotted. The few artefacts and bone fragments are Sand) probably intrusive from BS. 4 BS2 (Brown Sand 2) Not unlike BS, but with more roof spalls, giving it a lighter colour. 4 DBS3 (Dark Brown Less compact and more crumbly than DBS2. More roof spalls also Sand 3) give it a lighter colour. Some rootlet activity present. 5 YBS2 (Yellow A culturally sterile yellow-brown sandy deposit in Squares X10 and Brown Sand 2) Y10 largely composed of rotted bedrock. 5 BS3 (Brown Sand 3) A localised area of brown sand with roof spalls and rotted bedrock at the base of the occupation deposits in X10 and Y10. 5 GBS (Grey Brown A softer, grey-brown sandy deposit with quite prominent rootlet Sand) activity. 6 BS4 (Brown Sand 4) A brown, sandy deposit with numerous roof spalls and pieces of rotted bedrock restricted to the rear of squares X9 and Y10. 6 GBS1 (Grey Brown Sand 1) 7 BS5 (Brown Sand 5) 7 8 GBS2 (Grey Brown Sand 2) GBS3 (Grey Brown Sand 3) Varying in colour from a darker brown to a much more obvious greyish-brown and soft and sandy in texture. Some rootlet activity is present and bone preservation is poor. Some light brown sand, but mostly loose rock and rotted sandstone spalls. A lighter grey deposit, becoming sandier towards its base, but with rotted bedrock giving it a more yellow-brown colour toward the rear of the excavation. A lighter grey to yellow-brown sand, soft and with many rotted roof spalls and pieces of bedrock, some of them large. The oldest of the three successful samples came from BS3 in Layer 5, the basal unit in squares X10 and Y10. It returned an age of 7230 ± 140 b.p. (Pta-6113), which calibrates to cal. BC. The older part of the Liphofung deposits is thus of early Holocene age. Above this, bone from unit BS2 in Layer 4 returned an age of 4390 ± 70 b.p. (Pta-6109), which calibrates to cal. BC. The youngest of the three samples, from unit DBS in Layer 2, was dated to 2700 ± 60 b.p. (Pta-6106), which calibrates to cal. BC. Although the three radiocarbon determinations secured are in reassuringly correct stratigraphic order, it is clear that the Liphofung deposits have undergone some

13 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS 13 disturbance and the difficulties experienced in recognising natural stratigraphy in much of the excavation have undoubtedly contributed some further mixing of artefacts of different ages. Rootlet activity was present throughout the sequence, particularly in Layer 5. The presence of two potsherds in deposits dated to before the introduction of ceramics to southern Africa confirms that disturbance has taken place; one is present in Layer 2, the other in Layer 4. Analysis of the fauna supports this in that the remains of a single baboon were found dispersed across Layers 2, 3 and 4 (Ina Plug pers. comm.). A full list of the Liphofung fauna is given by Plug (1997). Lithic assemblages Notwithstanding the stratigraphic concerns just noted, some trends are evident in the lithic assemblages recovered from the Liphofung excavations, indicating that the site does preserve a useful sequence of hunter-gatherer occupation. Artefacts were analysed from the two richest squares, X9 and Y9, in Cape Town. Finds remain in the care of the Agency for Cultural Resource Management pending repatriation to Lesotho. The analysed assemblage comprises flaked stone artefacts, along with a small number of ground stone or otherwise unflaked items (Table 5). Opalines comprise over 99 % of all the flaked stone artefacts found, with the remainder being made in quartz, quartzite or shale. No changes in raw material usage are present across the sequence. As at Muela, irregular cores are by far the most common core type, with single platform cores restricted to Layers 5 and 6. The bipolar technique was little used and the low frequencies of laminar cores match the small numbers of blades and bladelets overall, and the extreme rarity of backed blades or bladelets in the formal tool category. A very small number of MSA flakes, all made in quartzite, is present. Distributed across the sequence, these items must have been brought into the site by its Holocene occupants, but, unlike the situation at Muela, there is no indication here that they were reused. Within the utilised category, blades and bladelets are restricted almost entirely to the lower part of the deposit (Layers 5 8), while 10 of the 39 utilised flakes from Layer 6 display a characteristic pattern of use involving one, or at most two, notches, suggesting they were used in a specific way. The ground stone component of the Liphofung assemblage principally consists of grindstone fragments (N = 11). Four complete upper grindstones were also found (one in Layer 4, three in Layer 5), along with three complete lower grindstones (two in Layer 2 and one in Layer 5). One grindstone bore traces of red ochre. A single milled stone was also found (in Layer 2). It is the formal tool category that shows clearest evidence of change over time. Altogether, 278 formally retouched artefacts were identified, although at 0.7 % of the total flaked assemblage they are few compared to other Holocene occurrences in Lesotho. Scrapers number 153 (55.0 %) (Fig. 9), while miscellaneous retouched pieces comprise the second largest class (N= 80; 28.8 %) and adzes the third (N = 20; 7.2 %). Although scrapers were not measured, the vast majority fall within the small convex, thumbnail form characteristic of Classic and Post-Classic Wilton assemblages. Their frequency does, however, vary over time: absent from the admittedly small assemblage from Layer 8, they account for less than 38 % of all the scrapers in Layers 6 and 7, but 50 % of those in Layers 5 and 4 and almost two thirds (64.3 %) of those in Layer 2. Significantly, several of the scrapers from Layers 5, 6, 7 and 8 (e.g. Fig. 9, nos. 16 and

14 14 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, 2012 TABLE 5 Liphofung: flaked and ground stone artefacts. Artefact class Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 3 Layer 4 Layer 5 Layer 6 Layer 7 Layer 8 Total Chips, chunks, flakes Irregular cores Bladelet cores Bipolar cores Bladelets Blades Total unmodified Utilised flakes Utilised bladelets Utilised blades Total utilised Scrapers Adzes Segments Backed bladelets Backed flakes MRPs Total retouched Total flaked stone Hammerstones Grindstone fragments Upper grindstones Lower grindstones Milled edge pebbles

15 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS 15 17) have adze-like retouch down one or both of their lateral margins, identifying them as Woodlot scrapers as known from early Holocene assemblages in the Phuthiatsana Basin (Mitchell 2000) and at Sehonghong in Lesotho s eastern highlands (Mitchell 1996b). An exceptionally large jumbo, D-shaped scraper from Layer 7 (Fig. 9 no. 15) can likewise be paralleled in early Holocene contexts elsewhere in Lesotho (e.g. Mitchell 1993a: 51). Other changes are also evident. Of the 20 adzes identified (Fig. 10), all but two come from Layers 1 4 and thus date to the second half of the Holocene, consistent with the proliferation of adze use widely noted across southernmost Africa at this time (e.g. Mazel 1989). Backed microliths are relatively few in number (N = 25) and mostly consist of backed flakes (N = 14). However, segments are only found in Layer 5 and above (Fig. 10 nos. 7 14), co-occurring there with three of the four backed bladelets recovered (Fig. 10 nos. 15 and 16). This too compares well with sites elsewhere in western Lesotho, where segments are absent from deposits predating 7230 BP, although rare examples of backed flakes, bladelets and points are found there in early Holocene contexts (Mitchell 2000). Worked bone, ostrich eggshell beads, stone beads and pottery A small sample of non-lithic artefacts was also found. The worked bone artefacts comprise three points, one a mini-point comparable to those reported by Mazel (1989: 98) from the Thukela Basin of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. A fourth item is an unidentifiable fragment of worked bone, while a fifth has been highly polished on one side and bears multiple striations on both surfaces that do not appear to be cut marks or the result of animal activity. A further engraved fragment identified during analysis of the site s faunal assemblage has a chevron-like pattern cut into one face near the edge, while another flake has had regular chips removed along one side, simulating a scraper edge (Ina Plug pers. comm.). All the worked bone came from Layer 3. Six ostrich eggshell beads were found at Liphofung, three from Layer 2 and three from Layer 3. Twelve unworked fragments of ostrich eggshell were also recovered, two in Layer 1, five in Layer 2, two in Layer 3 and three in Layer 4. A single stone bead of unidentified material from Layer 3 can be paralleled in the Phuthiatsana Basin at Tloutle, also in a Post-Classic Wilton context (Mitchell 1993b: 115). As previously mentioned, ceramics were extremely rare at Liphofung and the two sherds recovered have clearly been displaced downward through the deposit. They are small, well-fired body sherds that are black in colour and burnished, but otherwise undecorated. Together, these characteristics suggest a Later Farming Community or recent Basotho origin (Jannie Loubser pers. comm.). PHASE IB LITHAKONG Phase IB of the LHWP involved construction of a dam at Mohale near the village of Masaleng and subsequent flooding of a 22 km 2 area of the catchment of the upper Senqunyane River between the Front and Central Ranges of the Maloti Mountains. Initial survey work identified nine archaeological sites within this area, including three with paintings (Kaplan 1995). A fourth rock shelter, recorded as SQY 8 and known as Lithakong, was identified as requiring excavation because of the likely presence of surviving archaeological deposits.

16 16 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, mm Fig. 9. Liphofung: scrapers. 1 2 Layer 1; 3 6 Layer 2; 7 Layer 3; 8 10 Layer 4; Layer 5; Layer 6; Layer 7; 18 Layer 8. All in opaline.

17 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS mm Fig. 10. Liphofung: adzes and backed microliths. Adzes: 1 Layer 1; 2 3 Layer 2; 4 5 Layer 4; 6 Layer 5. Segments: 7 8 Layer 2; 10 Layer 4; Layer 5. Backed bladelets: 9 Layer 4; 15 Layer 6; 16 Layer 8. All in opaline.

18 18 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, 2012 Lithakong was a small rock shelter located about midway between the villages of Masaleng and Ha Raboshabane in Maseru District (29º23 92 S, 28º09 36 E). Facing north, it lay at an altitude of 2061 m a.s.l. within the basalts of the Lesotho Formation. It remains the only archaeological site to have been excavated in this geological context within Lesotho as all other rock shelters investigated to date lie in the underlying Clarens Formation sandstones. Despite its aspect, its altitude suggests that it was likely used only in summer, perhaps by specialised task groups or small communities from lower down the Senqunyane Valley. The shelter, which was located below a small, unnamed tributary of the Senqunyane, measured approximately 13 by 6 m, with an average height of approximately 8 m (Fig. 11; note that the position of the dripline is only schematically recorded here). At its western end a low stone wall closed off this part of the site to form a small kraal. The surviving deposit occurred within this walled area. No artefacts were visible along the dripline, although a few were present on the site s surface. Lithakong does not appear to have been painted. N D r i p l i n e Stone wall Excavation C2 C1 C B3 B2 B1 B Shelter wall Fig. 11. Lithakong: site plan Metres Excavation, stratigraphy and dating Excavation took place between 30 October and 4 November 1995 over an area of 6.25 m 2. All squares were excavated onto bedrock or into a sterile, wet deposit. All excavated material was sieved through a 3 mm mesh and finds underwent preliminary sorting on site before more detailed analysis in Cape Town. The wetness of the deposit rendered recognition of any natural stratigraphy problematic below a depth of about 30 cm and the lower part of the deposit was therefore removed in arbitrary spits of approximately 5 cm thickness (Fig. 12). These lower units were also extremely difficult to sieve. The moisture appears to be the result of water percolating through the wall of the shelter, compounded by the entry of spray from the waterfall running over the shelter s lip. The nineteen stratigraphic units recognised were grouped into three layers for analysis (Table 6).

19 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS 19 C2/C3 Above surface Surface Below surface 1 Below surface 2 Below surface 3 Below surface 4 Ash 2 Rock Below surface 5 Ash 1 Hearth Rock Below surface Fig. 12. Lithakong: C2/C3 section. 1 Metre Three radiocarbon determinations were obtained, all on unidentified charcoal (Table 2). The oldest (4790 ± 50 b.p.; Pta-7075) came from a depth of cm within Layer 3 and calibrates to cal. BC. The second date (510 ± 40 b.p.; Pta-7077) came from a depth of cm in Layer 2 and the third (890 ± 35 b.p.; Pta-7072) from one of 5 7 cm in Layer 1. Although the inversion of these last two dates is disappointing, on calibration both are in agreement with the ceramics and metalwork found in Layer 2 in indicating that this upper part of the Lithakong deposit falls within the second millennium AD. Earlier deposits clearly extend, however, into the middle Holocene. Lithic assemblages The Lithakong excavation produced a relatively small lithic assemblage (N = 1546) (Table 7). Opalines account for the vast majority of the flaked stone (89.8 %), with shale (10.1 %) accounting for most of the rest; quartzite (0.2 %) and quartz (0.1 %) are only minimally present. The two grindstone fragments present are made from shale and from quartzite respectively, while the single hammerstone recovered, which was found within a concentration of bone in Layer 1, suggesting a possible use in marrow TABLE 6 Lithakong: summary of the stratigraphy. Layer Stratigraphic units Description 1 Above Surface, Surface, Ash 1 A fine, brown deposit with quantities of sheep dung and some dung crust, along with a few roof spalls. Layer 1 was removed in three units. 2 Below Surface, Ash in Below Surface, Below Surface 1, Ash 2 in C1, Ash 3 in C2, Below Surface 2, Brick Red, Brick Red 1, Brick Red 2, Brick Red 3, Ash in C, Brick Red 4, Brick Red 5, Brick Red 6 3 Below Surface 3, Below Surface 4, Below Surface 5, Below Surface 6 This was principally a light-brown, ashy deposit with some quartzitic pebble inclusions ranging in texture from compact to soft. The Brick Red deposits were only present in Square C and were also distinguished by their compact, granular texture. Brick Red 3 and Brick Red 5 6 were particularly rich in microfauna, as was Ash in C, which underlay Brick Red 3 and was a distinctly grey, dusty soft ash deposit. These units completely lacked any visible natural stratigraphy and were therefore removed as arbitrary spits. They appear to represent a water-percolated lag deposit.

20 20 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, 2012 TABLE 7 Lithakong: flaked and ground stone stone artefacts. Artefact class Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 3 Opaline Shale Quartzite Opaline Shale Quartz Opaline Shale Quartzite Total Chips, chunks, flakes Irregular cores Total unmodified Utilised flakes Total utilised Scrapers Adzes Segments Backed bladelets Backed flakes MRPs Total retouched Total flaked stone Grindstone fragments Hammerstones

21 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS 21 extraction, is also made of quartzite. There is very little difference in raw material usage between the three layers and the opalines used were probably obtained in cobble or pebble form from the Senqunyane River. Unmodified artefacts account for 92.4 % of the total flaked stone count, with no bladelet cores or other evidence of bladelet manufacture present. Formally retouched tools number 67, all but 13 of them scrapers (80.6 %). Most scrapers are endretouched and clearly at home within a Post-Classic Wilton industry (Fig. 13). Perhaps unsurprisingly given its larger size (N = 730), most of the remaining formal tool types present are restricted to Layer 2. They include two adzes and a single segment (Fig. 14). One further backed item (a backed bladelet) was also present, along with a single backed flake and another segment in Layer 3. Formal tools are noticeably less frequent in the Layer 1 assemblage (1.0 % of all flaked stone artefacts compared with 4.7 % in Layer 2 and 5.0 % in Layer 3), but sample size here is particularly small mm Fig. 13. Lithakong: scrapers.

22 22 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, mm Fig. 14. Lithakong: adzes and backed microliths. Worked bone, pottery and metal A small assemblage of worked bone was recovered, mostly consisting of points (N = 6), four from Layer 3 and one each from Layers 1 and 2. In addition, Layer 3 also produced a bone tube that may have been used as a pendant. A single rimsherd from Layer 2, which is burnished but otherwise undecorated, is the only evidence for pottery. Its general appearance suggests that its affiliation may lie with ceramics made by Late Farming Communities, rather than with the hunter-gatherer pottery known elsewhere in highland Lesotho, such as Sehonghong (Mitchell 1996a). More compelling evidence for contact between hunter-gathers and farmers is an iron point from Layer 2, which measures almost 15 cm in length and 0.5 cm at its thickest point; the object is pointed at both ends and must have been obtained from farmers on the opposite side of the ukhahlamba-drakensberg escarpment in KwaZulu-Natal or, possibly, depending on its exact age, to the west of Lesotho in the eastern Free State/Caledon Valley. Fauna The faunal assemblage from Lithakong was analysed by James Brink of the National Museum, Bloemfontein, South Africa, and is reported in the Appendix (Brink 2012). DISCUSSION Notwithstanding evident problems with the stratigraphic integrity of their deposits and the small size of the excavations undertaken at them, the three sites reported in

23 KAPLAN & MITCHELL: ARCHAEOLOGY OF LESOTHO HIGHLANDS 23 this paper make an important contribution to our knowledge of the archaeology left by Holocene hunter-gatherers in Lesotho and thus the wider Maloti-Drakensberg region. They do this in part because Lesotho still has a very small number of excavated sites (barely more than 20) and Liphofung, Lithakong and Muela thus constitute a sizeable fraction of the total dataset. Moreover, along with Hololo Crossing, which was also excavated on behalf of the LHDA during Phase IA of the LHWP (Mitchell et al. 1994), Liphofung and Muela are the only archaeological sites to have been excavated in northwestern or northern Lesotho (the whole of today s Hlotse, Butha- Buthe and Mokhotlong Districts). Meanwhile, Lithakong is the only site to have been excavated in the central part of the country, even though the lower reaches of the Senqunyane River have long been known to be rich in rock art and potential for excavation (Bousman 1988; and see Aitken et al for areas closer to the Mohale Dam). In discussing them together here, we thus exploit these opportunities, focusing on three themes: their contribution to the broader cultural sequence and settlement history of Lesotho during the Holocene; their relevance for understanding longdistance connections between people living in Lesotho and those elsewhere; and their pertinence to discussions of contact between hunter-gatherers and farmers within the broader Maloti-Drakensberg region. We conclude by underlining the significance of the work reported here for the future impact on Lesotho s archaeological heritage of the LHWP. Previous excavations on Lesotho s side of the Caledon River focused on the Phuthiatsana Basin and demonstrated that large rock shelters there preserve evidence of terminal Pleistocene and early to mid-holocene hunter-gatherer occupation. Far more difficult to pick up, except by inference from surviving rock paintings or open-air/ within rock shelter surface artefact scatters, was evidence of hunter-gatherer presence from the second half of the Holocene (Mitchell 1994). Such occupation has, however, been noted at several sites in the eastern Free State (Wadley 1995) and we can now begin filling that gap as far as western Lesotho is concerned. In so doing, we nevertheless need to recall that, in common with most radiocarbon dates from southern Africa, those reported here were run using conventional technology on unidentified bone and charcoal. A precise chronology for southern Africa s recent prehistory demands that we shift to a situation where AMS-dating of identified, short-lived samples becomes the norm, calibration is consistently practised and, perhaps most important of all, every layer in a site is routinely dated, preferably by more than one sample. Regrettably, this is not yet the state in which the archaeology of Lesotho finds itself and the observations developed here are therefore necessarily provisional in nature, though supported by inferences from the associated stone tools. At Liphofung, Layer 5 returned a date of 7230 ± 140 b.p., almost identical to those from two sites in the Phuthiatsana Basin, Tloutle (Layer CSLLR; Mitchell 1993a) and Lehaha Fateng Tsa Pholo (Mitchell & Arthur 2010), for assemblages that likewise combine Woodlot scrapers with small convex scrapers and rare backed microliths. Precisely the same combination is evident in the undated Layer 5 assemblage at Muela. Matched by the material from Layer ALP at Sehonghong in Lesotho s eastern highlands, which also dates to c BP (Mitchell 1996b), we may be looking here at a pronounced occupation pulse across Lesotho and perhaps into the eastern Free State (Wadley 2000a). Esterhuysen and Smith (2003) suggest that the region s

24 24 SOUTHERN AFRICAN HUMANITIES 24: 1 32, 2012 climate experienced a cooler, drier episode at this time and the implications of this for human populations and their innovation/acceptance of those new technological strategies backed microliths (especially segments) and small, convex scrapers that help designate these assemblages as Early Wilton warrant further investigation (cf. Mitchell 2000). Still older material at Liphofung (Layers 6 8) lacks segments, though other (rare) backed microlith forms are present alongside further Woodlot scrapers; this material finds its closest parallels with the assemblages from Layer GS at Tloutle (Mitchell 1993b), Layers O Ja at Rose Cottage Cave (Wadley 2000b), the GWA/BLOS-UR layers at Ha Makotoko and the BLOS layer at Ntloana Tsoana (Mitchell 1993a), and the frustratingly undated multiple occupations at Adullam Cave near Clarens in the northeastern Free State (Wadley & Laue 2000). If so, then, like them, it probably dates to within the period BP. The assemblages from Liphofung Layers 2 4 provide the first excavated evidence from western Lesotho for the presence of hunter-gatherers during the second half of the Holocene. Scraper-dominated formal tool assemblages that include small frequencies of backed microliths and adzes fit into the Post-Classic part of the overall Wilton sequence as discussed by Wadley (2000a) at Rose Cottage Cave. The Layer 3 assemblage at Lithakong shares these features and, like Liphofung Layer 4, is dated to the fourth millennium cal. BC. Interestingly, this is a time for which the archaeological record of more easterly parts of Lesotho is still completely lacking. Whether this reflects a genuine difference in settlement history, with the upper Senqunyane Valley where Lithakong lies being accessed from the west, rather than the east, or whether it is an artefact of differential research activity and luck, is difficult to say; the extensive late second/first millennium cal. BC sequence from the open-air site of Likoaeng on the Senqu River hints at the latter (Mitchell et al. 2011). Like Hololo Crossing (Mitchell et al. 1994), both Lithakong (Layers 1 and 2) and Muela (Layers 1 4) register a strong occupation signature in the second millennium AD, perhaps, as in eastern Lesotho (Mitchell 2009; Collis 2010), particularly focused on the Medieval Warm Epoch rather than the ensuing Little Ice Age. Some huntergatherer presence is also certain at Liphofung (Layer 1), not least from its abundant rock art, but surviving traces of this in the excavated record are not as rich. Segments are virtually missing from these assemblages, with some indication of an increased frequency of adzes relative to scrapers. These upper assemblages clearly fall within the last stages of the Post-Classic phase of the Wilton Industry. As we now discuss, however, they lack some of the distinctive artefact types found elsewhere in the region at this time. Artefacts made elsewhere or on materials with distant origins and similarities in material culture help archaeologists address issues of connections, whether by exchange, direct access or even migration, between one area and another. Previous work in the wider Maloti-Drakensberg/eastern Free State/Thukela Basin region has explored several such lines of evidence, including ostrich eggshell and marine shell jewellery, pressure-flaked backed microliths, bifacial stone points, macrofaunal remains and rock art (Mazel 1989, 1996; Ouzman 1995; Mitchell 1996c; Ouzman & Wadley 1997; Plug 1997). The sites reported here are of interest on three counts. Firstly, the few ostrich eggshell beads found at Muela and Liphofung are all finished and neither site produced evidence of in situ bead manufacture. Ostriches were present in west-central