original shape to provide better tools. This is not a far-fetched idea when 

 we know that chimpanzees will whittle away the end of a stick to make a 

 sharp point for prising, as in a crowbar, or will modify the form of a piece 

 of wood to make a tool serviceable for solving problems. Yet Dart's claims, 

 stated with his accustomed vigor, have aroused much opposition, especially 

 from those who have not studied the original specimens. Some of his fellow 

 scientists, it would seem, have been more ready to accept that Australopithe- 

 cus made stone tools than that he modified and used a material readily at 

 hand, namely the bones of the animals eaten— and this despite the fact that 

 bone has formed an integral part of the cultural materials of man in every 

 other culture from that of Choukoutien to the present. 



A few points relevant to the bone-tools hypothesis are as follows: 



1. The Makapansgat cave deposit contains mountainous accumulations 

 of bone. The more than 100,000 pieces thus far collected represent a small 

 fraction of the largely untouched in situ accumulations apparent in numer- 

 ous exposures within the cave earth. No natural accumulations of bone by 

 scavengers or predators have ever been found to equal this for sheer quantity. 



2. Tooth-marks of hyena, leopard, and porcupine are conspicuously 

 absent from all but a handful of the many thousands of bones. 



3. Statistical analysis of the bones from the Makapansgat deposit has 

 shown definite evidence that certain bones have been selected, and others 

 neglected. Thus, the ratio of proximal to distal humeral fragments is less 

 than 1 to 10, while the ratio of humeri to femora is over 5 to 1. Some selec- 

 tive agency has clearly been at work. 



4. Large concentrations of ungulate humeri and other long bones show 

 signs of damage inflicted before fossilization on the epicondyles or extremi- 

 ties. 



5. Many of the bone objects can be classified in categories of recurring 

 patterns, such as those that Dart has rather fancifully named daggers, scoops, 

 pestles and mortars, and compound ripping tools. Whatever the names and 

 whatever the uses that may be attributed to them, the fact remains that regu- 

 lar and consistent patterns do occur (Figures 33 and 34). Has anyone been 

 able to demonstrate similar regularities and constant patterns among the 

 bone debris of carnivores? 



6. Many of the bone flakes show signs of differential wear and tear 

 along one edge, or at one end, but not the other. 



7. A number of special cases included horn-cores and smaller long 



^ 128 



