A few months ago, the discovery of the Springbok skull revealed to us the fact that many thousands of years ago there lived in South Africa a large-brained powerfully built race which was neither Bushman nor Bantu, and a race which in all essentials resembles the living Korannas [a Khoe group, remnants of whom lived along the Vaal and Riet Rivers^9,10] so closely as to leave little doubt that the Korannas are the descendants.

Thus, the discovery in 1929 of human remains at the known Acheulean site of CK¹¹ filled a vacant niche in an already well-constructed paradigm – one that influenced the thinking of physical anthropologists for many years.

The CK remains, comprising fragments of a human cranium, were discovered by a diamond digger named Kenneth Kemp and passed to J.G. van Alphen, ‘magistrate, writer and fossil collector’¹², who presented them to the McGregor Museum. The museum made the remains available to Robert Broom for examination. Broom¹¹ published the first description of the skull in Nature, describing it as a ‘fossilised human braincase recovered from an alluvial deposit of the Vaal River at Canteen Kopje near Barkly West.’ Curiously, he also refers to ‘some fragments of limb bones’ found with the skull, but did not describe them and they are not mentioned in the museum’s 1929 accession record (MMK 215: ‘Skull [incomplete]’).

According to Broom¹¹, the CK human remains were heavily mineralised and discovered ‘in a deep alluvial bank’ (the museum’s accession record suggests a depth of ‘8 ft’), but the exact find spot at the site is unknown. Seven decades later a 90-year-old digger, Mr Eddie Fortune,¹³ recalled that Mr Kemp’s claim had been along the north-western edge of the diggings, east of the old Kimberley Road. This recollection would place the find spot of the CK skull downslope from the declared Provincial Heritage site zone of Canteen Kopje (Figure 2), possibly in a unit of the Younger Vaal Gravels closer to the river and chronologically more recent than the deposits within the declared heritage zone (Figure 3).¹⁴ Previous claims that the skull fragments came from the Younger Gravels beneath the Hutton Sands within the main Canteen Kopje site seem unlikely, given that there is no fossil bone preservation at this locality.^15,16 The Younger Gravels at the main site are thought to be late Pliocene to Lower Pleistocene in age,³ corroborated by recent cosmogenic nuclide burial ages ranging from 1.89±0.19 Ma to 1.26±0.10 Ma for the Younger Gravels at Windsorton.¹⁷

Broom¹¹ described the CK specimen as one of the largest and most robust he had ever examined. Broom identified the specimen as ancestral to modern South Africans, probably more recent than the Tuinplaas or Boskop skulls. The CK specimen was one of a number of crania discovered in South Africa in the first part of the 20th century that were grouped together because of their large cranial capacity and presumed antiquity into the so called ‘Boskop’ physical type. These crania were found throughout South Africa, some apparently associated with Middle Stone Age artefacts or in ‘pre-Bushman’ archaeological horizons.^{18,19,20, 21,22,23, 24,25} Accordingly, the crania played an important role in early discussions of the origin of the southern African Khoesan.^{26, 27,28,29, 30,31,32,33} New developments in the field have enabled researchers to date some of these specimens and re-examine their association with a specific archaeological horizon. At the same time, the application of advanced imaging and statistical techniques have provided better resolution and analysis of the size and shape of incomplete specimens, thus enabling their integration into the current human evolutionary record. This reclassification has been carried out for skeletal remains from Tuinplaas,³⁴ Matjes River Rock Shelter,³⁵ Hofmeyr,³⁶ Peers Cave³⁷ and other localities.³⁸ Ranging in age from the late Pleistocene to the post-contact period, these specimens provide a chronological framework with which to evaluate the CK skull and assess the probability that it derives from the Vaal Gravels.

FIGURE 1: Map of South Africa showing the locations of Canteen Kopje and other sites.

FIGURE 2: Aerial photograph showing the Canteen Kopje Provincial Heritage Site zone (demarcated by broken line), Vaal River and surrounding area.

Broom modelled the missing parts of the cranium in plaster of Paris: the face, the orbits, the glabella, the vault and most of the right side of the frontal and parietal bones, and the sphenoid (Figure 4). The resulting reconstruction shows a very long and low calvarium with projecting supra-orbital ridges and a short, broad face. Based on this reconstruction, Broom¹¹ estimated cranial length (glabella to lambda) as 215 mm, maximum cranial breadth as 140 mm and basi-bregmatic height as 140 mm. It should be emphasised that three of the four landmarks used (glabella, bregma and basion) were missing and arbitrarily defined by Broom.

The occipital and parietal bones of CK are flattened superior-inferiorly, with lambda inferiorly located and there is a prominent occipital bun. How much of the flattening results from post-depositional compaction, and/or the reconstruction, is difficult to establish. Wells²⁵ questioned the accuracy of the restoration, specifically the curvature of the parietal fragments and angulation of the occipital bone. He pointed out that the vault contour was somewhat lower and flatter in the restoration than in the original illustration given by Broom¹¹, exaggerating the length of the skull. Even if the restoration exaggerated the length of the occipital chord, it would not have affected the length of the occipital arc, which is exceptionally long (measuring 120 mm from lambda to the most anterior portion of the incomplete basi-occiput).

A feature of the CK skull, which has not been previously described, is a well-defined circular depression located on the left side, some 44 mm posterior to the rim of the orbit and directly above the superior temporal line (Figures 4a–b and 5a). This lesion is approximately 2 cm in diameter with smooth, inwardly sloping margins and slightly raised edges (Figure 5a). The bone surrounding the lesion shows no cracks or breaks that would indicate that damage occurred around the time of death or post-mortem.

A depression of similar size and form is present on the frontal bone of at least one other cranium from the Northern Cape held in the McGregor collection – an adult female (catalogue number MMK 292) described in the McGregor museum’s accessions catalogue as: ‘Skull only, no lower jaw. Koffiefontein. 19/6/1946. [Presented by] W [illiam] Fowler’. It is one of about 57 burials excavated by Fowler in the environs of Koffiefontein that were attributed to the Late Stone Age Type-R stone-walled settlements along the Riet River.^{39, 40,41} In specimen MMK 292, there are clear signs of reparative bone formation in the central part of the affected area confirming that the lesion occurred during life (Figure 5b). It may have resulted from trauma, pressure from a cystic lesion of the scalp or an incomplete scrape trephination, as described by Drennan⁴² on Khoesan crania. If we assume a similar aetiology for the lesion present on the CK skull, we may conclude that it too resulted from such a non-lethal event.

Broom’s restoration of the CK cranium now shows many signs of wear and tear. The bones are coated with shellac that has discoloured with age and is chipped in places. The margins of the bones are deeply embedded in plaster, which obscures their edges, whilst the thick layer of shellac obscures the outer surface of the bones. A lateral skull X-ray radiograph was taken to evaluate the feasibility of freeing the bones from the plaster to facilitate a detailed study of its external and internal morphometry, as well as to check for matrix that could be used for dating or to establish provenance. The radiograph showed that the materials used by Broom in the skull reconstruction included a metal strut placed inside the cranial vault for support, whilst the bone fragments and joins were deeply embedded in the plaster, thus complicating any attempt to free them. As an alternative measure, a series of non-invasive investigations including X-ray computerised tomography (CT) scans was conducted to create a 3D computerised model of the skull that would differentiate between bone and plaster.

FIGURE 3: Two views of diamond diggings at Klipdrift (Canteen Kopje): (a) on the Vaal River and (b) above the river.

FIGURE 4: Broom’s reconstruction of the Canteen Kopje cranium. Reconstructed areas in plaster of Paris are grey. Note (a) the broken inferior margin of the supraorbital region; (a–b) the pronounced lateral projection bounded superiorly by a broad shallow groove, the sloping forehead, marked superior temporal line and lesion on the frontal bone; and (c-d) the pronounced muscle markings around the mastoid process with a deep digastric groove.

FIGURE 5: Photographs of cranial lesions on (a) the left side of the Canteen Kopje skull and (b) the frontal bone of Koffiefontein specimen MMK 292. Note the similar size and form of lesions in both specimens and the reparative bone on the floor of the lesion in MMK 292.

The wall thickness analysis menu, used to map the thickness of the cranial bones at different locations on surface images, is shown in Figure 7. The thickness of the bone at different locations varied between 2 mm and 5 mm. Selected 3D reconstructions of sagittal sections through the parietal and occipital bones are shown in Figure 8.

Detailed examination of the supra-orbital region showed no evidence of frontal sinus extension into the preserved portion of this bone, as would be expected if the supra-orbital region was especially thick. No evidence was found for sclerotic bone or bone resorption on the margins, on the surface of the parietal lesion or in the surrounding bone, nor was there any evidence of damage that might have been caused post-mortem.

The sliced tomogram showing the interior of the posterior half of the skull, primarily represented by the occipital bone, is shown in Figure 9. The endocranial surface is obscured in places, probably by materials used in reconstruction (perhaps hessian impregnated with plaster or glue), but there is no evidence of adherent sedimentary matrix that could be used for dating or to assess provenance.

FIGURE 6: (a–b) Line profiles on a 2D slice of the reconstructed Canteen Kopje skull illustrating the grey values of voxels representing the background (red and region A), the plaster (green and region B) and the bone (blue and region C) used to separate the bone from the plaster and to calculate the bone thickness.

Measurements taken on the reconstructed tomogram show the CK skull to have had a thin-walled cranium (Figures 6, 7 and 8). Where bones were in anatomical contact, there were no overlapping or unnecessary gaps, indicating that the reconstruction did not exaggerate cranial length or modify angulation between bones. Broom’s¹¹ claim that the CK skull was one of the most robust that he had examined was based on the well-developed areas of muscle attachments, especially the marked supra-orbital ridges. These and the large size and outline of the incomplete brow ridge and somewhat flattened frontal region, led him to describe the specimen as ‘Australoid’. However, the partial suture closure at lambda indicates that the CK cranium represents a mature adult, so that the pronounced muscle markings on the temporal bones are not exceptional for a mature individual with powerful masticatory muscles. Moreover, Broom⁴⁶ had previously published a brief description of four crania of similar dimensions and robusticity to the CK skull, from what he described as a ‘Hottentot grave probably 150–250 years old from near Upington’. The largest of these crania was 202 mm long, 139 mm wide and 139 mm high (basion–bregma height), that is, very similar to CK. In a subsequent summary of then known prehistoric crania, Broom²¹ compared the specimens from Boskop, Florisbad, Fish Hoek, Tuinplaas and the Cape Flats, amongst others, and concluded that the CK cranium most closely resembled that from the Cape Flats. He referred to CK and the other skulls defined by him as ‘Australoid’, as specifically related to the robust ‘Korana’ population known from the Riet River and environs. However, although he identified the CK skull as ancient, at no point did he consider it to show specifically archaic features similar to those present in the Florisbad cranium.^47,48

Singer³⁰ reported that all the morphological features previously described as ‘Boskopoid’ or ‘Australoid’ were present in recent Khoesan populations and wrote a scathing denunciation of the use of type specimens for defining distinct racial types. Singer’s contention has been supported by more recent studies, such as Morris⁴¹ and Stynder et al.³⁸, which have demonstrated that the ‘Boskopoid’ specimens fall within the range of morphometric variation of recent Khoesan, when this definition is expanded to include specimens defined as ‘Hottentot’ or ‘Korana’ that were excluded from many analyses of indigenous South African populations defined as ‘San’ (see for example Howells⁴⁹).

Renewed excavations, with more precise stratigraphic control, at sites such as Matjes River Rock Shelter⁵⁰ showed that the alleged association of ‘Boskop type’ specimens with Middle Stone Age artefacts⁵¹ was erroneous and that the concept of an ancestral ‘Boskop type’ needed to be re-evaluated.^27,28,29 Indeed, many of the ‘Boskop type’ specimens are now known to be more recent than originally thought. For example, the Tuinplaas skull has now been dated to between 20 000–11 000 BP,³⁴ the Matjes River Rock Shelter skeleton No 1 to 2280±60 BP,³⁵ the Peers Cave specimen (SAM-AP4692) to the mid-Holocene³⁸ and the Cape Flats specimen has been dated by association to 150±50 BP.⁵² Noteworthy is the fact that the latter specimen was considered by Broom to most closely resemble the CK skull.

FIGURE 7: Three 3D tomograms of the CK skull showing bone thickness across the skull: (a) frontal (b) superior and (c) inferior views. Bone and plaster were separated using the grey values of voxel representation. Some thin layers of plaster (red) are still present in the 3D image.

FIGURE 8: Two 3D reconstructions taken through the left parietal and occipital bones with filling materials removed: (a) oblique view and (b) sagittal view.

FIGURE 9: Occipital and parietal bones shown as (a) a 3D reconstruction from X-ray tomography, and (b) an internal view of the same area showing the endocranial surface and metal strut used in Broom’s reconstruction of the Canteen Kopje skull. .

Kenneth Kemp was reportedly digging at a depth of some 2.4 m in an alluvial bank at Canteen Kopje when he found the skull. If Mr Fortune’s recollection is correct, Mr Kemp was probably closer to the river bank than the main CK locality (Figure 2). Fossil fauna, including extinct forms, have been found some 4 km – 6 km to the south-east of CK on the river bank, for example at Pniel 6 and Powers site, where they are associated with Acheulean and Fauresmith artefacts.^14,16,53,549 However, it is unlikely that the CK skull originated in these deposits, because the skull is completely modern in appearance, thin walled, and lacks archaic features such as those found in the Florisbad specimen, dated to ca. 260 000 BP.⁶⁰

The Hutton Sands cover the Vaal Gravels throughout the CK locality but vary greatly in thickness. They are thinnest in the distal part of the gravel units and increase in thickness in the lee of the gravel splay.³ This variation is demonstrated by the fact that, in the northern part of the site, Forssman et al.⁵⁷ reported that the Hutton Sands were 1.0 m – 1.4 m thick, whilst in the southern part, Chazan et al.⁵⁸ excavated sands 3.5 m deep without reaching the Vaal Gravels. This variability means that, if working in the main CK locality, Mr Kemp may have still been digging in the Hutton Sands or may have only just reached the Vaal Gravels when he found the CK skull at 2.4 m. Minute bone fragments have been found in a Late Stone Age context in one area of the CK site (No 2 in Figure 2) dated to AD 1436–1870.⁵⁷ No human or animal remains have been found in other excavated Late Stone Age or Middle Stone Age localities.^16,54,58

As we have shown, the known archaeological record of the site does not support an in situ provenance in the Vaal Gravels. The most likely interpretation is that the CK skull represents a recent intrusion either into the Hutton Sands, or alternatively into the Vaal Gravels at a locality where the sand cover was thin. Broom commented that the absence of jaws or teeth made it doubtful that the CK specimen derived from a burial. However, Broom did note in his initial report, that limb bones were found with the skull. Because these post-cranial elements are now missing (and were not described by Broom and presumably were not present when the CK skull fragments were first given to the museum in 1929), we cannot corroborate their existence nor whether they belonged to the same specimen. However, if the CK specimen originated in the Vaal Gravels, it is unlikely that skull fragments and limb bones from the same individual would be found together, given that, under fluvial conditions, bones of a skeleton tend to scatter and undergo hydraulic sorting based on shape, size and weight.⁶²

The significance attached to the discovery and interpretation of the CK cranium provides a salutary lesson as to the role played by preconceptions in academic research. In this case the acceptance of ‘Boskop man’ as a fossil ancestor established a precedent that influenced the subsequent course of South African anthropology. Thus, the reported context, that is, the presence of Acheulean artefacts and the state of mineralisation of the CK specimen, encouraged Broom to set it apart from other recent South African crania and declare it an example of an ancestral race. As graphically described by Singer⁵², this was based on:

the ‘divine method’ of analysis … i.e. using very few facts, inadequate data, lots of gut reaction and an overflow of subjective opinions to make a pronouncement on the origin (ethnic, racial or species) of a skull (or even a tooth).

Although the ‘Boskop’ theory has been discredited and laid to rest in most scientific circles,^{29,31, 32,33,52} it is suggested that the CK restoration made by Robert Broom should be preserved as part of the historical record of Canteen Kopje.

2. Péringuey L. The Stone Ages of South Africa. Ann S Afr Mus. 1911;8:1–218.

3. De Wit MCJ. Canteen Kopje at Barkly West: South Africa’s first diamond mine. S Afr J Geol. 2008;111:53–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.2113/gssajg.111.1.53

4. FitzSimons FW. Paleolithic man in South Africa. Nature. 1915;95:615–616. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/095615c0

5. Haughton SH. Preliminary note on the ancient human skull remains from the Transvaal. Trans Royal Soc S Afr. 1917;6:1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00359191709520168

6. Broom R. The Boskop skull (Homo capensis). Anthropol Papers Am Mus Nat Hist. 1918;23:63–79.

7. Pycraft WP. On the calvaria found at Boskop, Transvaal, in 1913, and its relationship to Cromagnard and Negroid skulls. J Roy Anthropol Inst Great Brit Ireland. 1925;55:179–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2843700

8. Broom R. The Transvaal fossil human skeleton. Nature. 1929;123:415–416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/123415a0

9. Elphick R. Kraal and castle: Khoikhoi and the founding of White South Africa. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1977.

10. Shillington K. The colonisation of the Southern Tswana. Johannesburg: Ravan Press; 1985.

11. Broom R. Australoid element in the Koranas. Nature. 1929;124:507. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/124507a0

12. Obituary of J.G. van Alphen. Diamond Fields Advertiser 1944 Oct 21.

13. Eddie Fortune, interviewed by D. Morris and P.B. Beaumont, 1999. Note held in the archive of the McGregor Museum, Kimberley.

14. Helgren DM. Geological context of the Vaal River faunas. S Afr J Sci. 1977;73:303–307.

15. McNabb J, Beaumont P. A report on the archaeological assemblages from excavations by Peter Beaumont at Canteen Koppie, Northern Cape, South Africa. Southampton Series in Archaeology 4. Oxford: Archaeopress; 2011.

16. Beaumont P. Canteen Kopje. In: Morris D, Beaumont P, editors. Archaeology in the Northern Cape: Some key sites [field guide]. Kimberley: McGregor Museum, 2004; p. 26–30.

17. Gibbon RJ, Granger DE, Kuman K, Partridge TC. Early Acheulean technology in the Rietputs Formation, South Africa, dated with cosmogenic nuclides. J Hum Evol. 2009;56:152–160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2008.09.006, PMid:19101709

18. Fitzsimons FW. Cliff dwellers of Zitzikama. S Afr J Sci. 1923;20:541–544.

19. Drennan MR. An Australoid skull from the Cape Flats. J Royal Anthropol Inst. 1929;59:417–427.

20. Drennan MR. Early man in southern Africa. S Afr Med J. 1929;3:631–634.

21. Broom R. Bushmen, Koranas and Hottentots. Ann Trans Mus. 1941;20:217–251.

22. Dart RA. Boskop remains from the south-east African coast. Nature. 1923;112:623–625. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/112623a0

23. Dart RA. Recent discoveries bearing on human history in southern Africa. J Royal Anthropol Inst. 1940;70:13–27.

24. Galloway A. The nature and status of the Florisbad skull as revealed by its non-metric features. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1937;23:1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330230103

25. Wells LH. The Canteen Koppie skull. S Afr J Sci. 1948;1:156–157.

26. Van Riet Lowe C. An artifact recovered with the Boskop calvaria. S Afr Arch Bull. 1953;9:135. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3886824

27. Wells LH. The problem of Middle Stone Age man in southern Africa. Man. 1959;244:1–2.

28. Wells LH. Late Stone Age and Middle Stone Age tool-makers. S Afr Archaeol Bull. 1972;27:5–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3888812

29. Tobias PV. History of physical anthropology in southern Africa. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1985;28(suppl S6):l–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330280503

30. Singer R. The Boskop ‘race’ problem. Man. 1958;232:173–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2795854

31. Dubow S. Scientific racism in modern South Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995.

32. Morris AG. Measure by measure: The history of race and typology in South African physical anthropology. Voyages in Science: Papers in honour of the 80th birthday of Phillip Valentine Tobias. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press, 2005; p. 121–140.

33. Morris AG. Biological anthropology at the southern tip of Africa: Carrying European baggage in an African context. Current Anthropology Supplement. Wenner-Gren International Symposium Series. In press 2011.

34. Pike AWG, Eggins S, Grün R, Thackeray F. U-series dating of TP1, an almost complete human skeleton from Tuinplaas (Springbok Flats), South Africa. S Afr J Sci. 2004;100:381–383.

35. Sealy J, Ludwig B, Henderson Z. New radiocarbon dates for Matjes River Rock Shelter. S Afr Archaeol Bull. 2006;61:98–101.

36. Grine FE, Bailey RM, Harvati K, et al. Late Pleistocene human skull from Hofmeyr, South Africa, and modern human origins. Science. 2007;315:226–229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1136294, PMid:17218524

37. Stynder D, Brock F, Sealy JC, Wurz S, Morris AG, Volman TP. A mid-Holocene AMS 14C date for the presumed upper Pleistocene human skeleton from Peers Cave, South Africa. J Hum Evol. 2009;56:431–434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2008.11.004, PMid:19349065

38. Stynder D, Ackermann R, Sealy J. Craniofacial variation and population continuity during the South African Holocene. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2007;134:489–500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.20696, PMid:17786993

39. Humphreys AJB. The remains from Koffiefontein burials excavated by W. Fowler and preserved in the McGregor Museum, Kimberley. S Afr Archaeol Bull. 1970;25:104–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3888134

40. Humphreys AJB, O’C Maggs TM. Further graves and cultural material from the banks of the Riet River. S Afr Archaeol Bull. 1970;25:116–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3888135

41. Morris AG. The skeletons of contact: A study of protohistoric burials from the Lower Orange River Valley, South Africa. Johannesburg: University of Witwatersrand Press; 1992.

42. Drennan MR. Some evidence of a trepanation cult in the Bushman race. S Afr Med J. 1937;11:183–190.

43. De Beer FC. Characteristics of the neutron/X-ray tomography system at the SANRAD facility in South Africa. Nucl Inst Meth Phy Res. 2005;A542:1–8.

44. Image-ProPlus (IPPLUS) Software. Version 6.0.0.260 for Windows 2000/XP Professional. Bethesda, MD: Media Cybernetics Inc.; 1996–2006.

45. VG Studio Max 3D visualisation software. Version 4.0.0. Heidelberg, Germany: Volume Graphics GmbH; 2011.

46. Broom R. A contribution to the craniology of the yellow-skinned races of South Africa. J Royal Anthropol Inst. 1923;53:132–149.

47. Dreyer TF. A human skull from Florisbad, Orange Free State, with a note on the endocranial cast by C. U. Ariens Kappers. Proc Koninklijke Akad Wetenschappen te Amsterdam. 1935;38:3–12.

48. Galloway A. The characteristics of the skull of the Boskop physical type. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1937;23:31–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330230105

49. Howells WW. Skull shapes and the map. Craniometric analyses in the dispersion of modern Homo. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology vol. 79. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum; 1989.

50. Louw JT. Prehistory of the Matjes River Rock Shelter. National Museum of Bloemfontein Memoir No 1. Bloemfontein: National Museum of Bloemfontein; 1960.

51. Dreyer TE. The archaeology of the Matjes River Rock Shelter. Trans Royal Soc S Afr. 1933;21:187–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00359193309519320

52. Singer R. Mythical African ‘Australoids’ and triangular bricks: The Cape Flats skull in retrospect. S Afr Archaeol Bull. 1993;48:105–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3888950

53. Beaumont PB. Canteen Kopje (Klipdrif). In: Beaumont P, Morris D, editors. Guide to archaeological sites in the Northern Cape. Kimberley: McGregor Museum, 1990; p. 14–16.

54. Beaumont P, McNabb J. Canteen Kopje: The recent excavations. The Digging Stick. 2001;17(2):3–7.

55. McNabb J. The shape of things to come: A speculative essay on the role of the Victoria West phenomenon at Canteen Koppie during the South African Earlier Stone Age. In: Milliken S, Cook J, editors. A very remote period indeed: Papers on the Palaeolithic presented to Derek Roe. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2001; p. 37–46.

56. Sharon G, Beaumont P. Victoria West – A highly standardized prepared core technology. In: Goren-Inbar N, Sharon G, editors. Axe age: Acheulian toolmaking from Quarry to Discard. London: Equinox, 2006; p. 181–200.

57. Forssman TR, Kuman K, Leader GM, Gibbon RJ. A Later Stone Age assemblage from Canteen Kopje, Northern Cape. S Afr Archaeol Bull. 2010;65:204–214.

58. Chazan M, Porat N, Sumner A, Horwitz LK. The use of OSL dating in unstructured sands: The archaeology and chronology of the Hutton Sands at Canteen Kopje (Northern Cape Province, South Africa). In press 2011.

59. Klein RG. The archaeological significance of animal bones from Acheulean sites in southern Africa. Afr Archaeol Rev. 1988;6:3–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01117110

60. Grün R, Brink JS, Spooner NA, et al. Direct dating of Florisbad hominid. Nature. 1996;382:500–501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/382500a0, PMid:8700221

61. Nielsen-Marsh CM, Hedges REM. Patterns of diagenesis in bone I: The effects of site environments. J Archaeol Sci. 2000;27:1139–1150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1999.0537

62. Fernández-Jalvo Y, Andrews P. Experimental effects of water abrasion on bone fragments. J Taph. 2003;1:147–163.