Pioneering research in the
early stone ages of south east Africa contributed significantly to the
development of broader issues in early African prehistory, such as the spread
of the transition of lithic tools from south/east to the north/east Africa
including large cutting tools.
Early beginnings of
stone tools studies in Africa started in Oldvai and Kenya by Leakey from 1931 –
1971, to answer some questions about the early human behavior. Besides that, there
is little research focused in the sites of Omo, Awash, Olorgesailie and Ismailia.
The early study of Oldvai and its Acheulean phase became the standard of classifying
large cutting tools in Africa (Leakey 1951).
The large cutting tools
from these sites show primary sloping transition in technology and typology
from cobble one side to bifacial tools to MSA small bifacial tools. These
complex sites also provided early camps and particular attention has been paid
to the hominid fossils, climate changes, economy and social structures (Cooke
1963:32).
In the Sudan, there was
no specific research into large cutting tools. Large cutting tools were mentioned
through the history of Sudan and Old Stone Age in the Nile Valley (Arkell 1949,
Wendorf 1968, Chmielewski 1987, Wendorf & Schild 1974).
In general, the Sudan
Paleolithic culture developed for over half a million years. This date is given
based on the relative dating of lithics attested from a wide geographical
expanse. Further dating using organic remains from the site of Kaddanarti puts
the Sudan Paleolothic culture at one and a half million years ago (Louis et-al
2000:37).
The complete work of
early Sudan Paleolithic tools, is its large cutting tools (LCTs), primary disc
and a few side chopping and hand axes (see Arkell 1949, and Chmielewski 1968). A
comprehensive overview of late Acheulean and early MSA technology has demonstrated
that discoveries in northern Sudan show complex development of taxonomical
items. Indeed, the large cutting tools from the site of Khor Abu Anga, studied
by A.J. Arkell in 1949, is where hand axes were first identified as early
prehistoric stone tools in the Sudan (Arkell 1949: 22-32). This identification is
supported by many finds from central Sudan around Khartoum province.
Many taxonomic items were
used by Arkell to describe the Khor Abu Anga collections, most of its related
to the Leakey method in Kenya, some of which later disappeared. After Arkell,
no assemblages parallel to the Khor Abu Anga have been reported from any others
sites in the Sudan. However, many sites in northern Sudan and the desert containing
large flakes and disc tools relatively dated to the Middle and Late Paleolithic
have been discovered.
For all that has been
cited above, the logical conclusion is that the early large cutting tools in
Sudan were different and later than the early African discoveries. There is no
indication of Oldvai tools, and early Acheulean tools are rare. Even Khor Abu
Anga which is an example of the early Paleolithic, only revealed small and
bifacial tools.
In general, the early
large cutting tools are still mysterious. There are no clear developments and
transitions from one phase to another. However, different methods have been
taken to classify the assemblages which increased the depth of understanding of
the Paleolithic in Sudan.
The goal of this paper is to understand the
roots of problems related to the large cutting tools in the Sudan, which will
be summarized as follows:
1-
Most studies on early
Paleolithic Sudan focused on the time, place and environment.
2-
The presence of
large geographical gaps in understanding early Paleolithic Sudan
3-
The complexity
of taxonomical items used to classify the Paleolithic stone tools in the Sudan which
is based on taxonomical items used in south east Africa and the Sahara.
4-
Lack of
preserved sites to offer a precise dating.
5-
The mystery of the
beginning and the end of Acheulean age in the Sudan.
..jpg)
