AUSTRALOPITHECINES — ROBINSON 489 



In 1956 Brain found evidence of a stone industry in breccia lying 

 loose on the surface at Sterkfontein, and in 1957 and 1958, in two 

 seasons of excavation in that site, I was able to demonstrate for the 

 first time the direct association of an australopithecine (Australopi- 

 thecus) and a true stone industry. As a consequence most students 

 accepted the idea that Australopithecus must have been a stone-tool 

 maker. The discovery by Dr. and Mrs. Leakey of a stone industry 

 with the Olduvai Paranthropus seems to have clinched the matter 

 in the minds of most workers, who are now convinced that the austra- 

 lopithecines were stone-tool makers and say so without reservation. 



However, it seems to me, as I have pointed out elsewhere (Kobinson, 

 1958, and in Robinson and Mason, 1957), that this is far too facile a 

 view of the situation. At Sterkfontein there is a considerable depth of 

 deposit, which has yielded a hundred specimens of Australopithecus 

 and not a trace of stone artifacts or even unworked foreign stone. Un- 

 conformably overlying this is breccia which is demonstrably more 

 recent by both faunal and lithological evidence. This breccia still 

 contains Australopithecus but also a genuine stone industry, chiefly 

 consisting of rock foreign to the immediate neighborhood of the exca- 

 vation. This industry, it should be noted, is not of extreme primitive- 

 ness; it is not the very beginnings of toolmaking. In the opinion of 

 Dr. R. Mason, of the Archeological Survey, Johannesburg, the indus- 

 try belongs to the early levels of the Chelles-Acheul culture (Robinson 

 and Mason, 1957; Mason, 1961). Even if the most conservative esti- 

 mate is employed, it must be regarded as late Oldowan ; perhaps it is 

 most reasonable to regard the industry as being more or less transitional 

 between Oldowan and Chelles-Acheul. This means that at Sterk- 

 fontein a large deposit of breccia has yielded the largest known sample 

 of Australopithecus but no evidence of a stone industry, while a 

 breccia immediately overlying it, and only a little later in time, has 

 yielded a well-established stone industry. This time gap appears to 

 correspond closely in age with the Australopithecus deposit at Maka- 

 pan Limeworks, where tons of breccia have so far yielded no such 

 stone industry as that at Sterkfontein. That is to say, roughly 96 

 percent of the known South African material of Australopithecus is 

 not associated with a stone industry, but suddenly a stone industry 

 representing a stage near the beginnings of the Chelles-Acheul cul- 

 ture appears in reasonable quantity toward the end of Sterkfontein 

 time. Wliere did it come from? The only reasonable conclusion 

 seems to be that a toolmaker invaded the Sterkfontein Valley during 

 the time represented by the unconformity — and that invader could 

 not have been Australopithecus as he had already been there for a 

 long time. 



It seems anything but coincidence that the stone industry appears 



