15. delayed-return hunter-gatherers in africa? historic

2004. In: Hunters and Gatherers in Theory and Archaeology G.M. Crothers, ed. Center for Archaeological Investigations Southern Illinois University Carbondale

15. Delayed-Return Hunter-Gatherers in Africa? Historic Perspectives from the Okiek and Archaeological Perspectives from the Kansyore

Darla Dale l Fiona Marshall l and Tom Pilgram

Abstract: The material characteristics and past distribution of delayedreturn hunter-gatherers in Africa are investigated through ethnoarchaeological research among the Okiek and an archaeological study of the Kansyore. We recognize groups with delays in return but without hierarchy as moderate delayed-return hlmter-gatherers. The Ownership Model, developed here, allows identification of such groups through indicators of ownership: repeated use of sites, large quantities of ceramics, as well as specialized tools, and a rich and predictable resource base. The presence of such positive indicators must be combined with the absence of lines of evidence for complex delayed-rehlrn hunter-gatherers: large sites, permanent structures, and elaborate material cui hIre or exotic items. We conclude that the Kansyore were moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers and that there were probably forms of delayed-return hunter-gatherers in a number of contexts in Africa during the Holocene. Their identification will assist consideration of the effect of factors such as latihlde on the development of delayed-rehlrn hunter-gatherer systems worldwide.

There has been considerable discussion about the nature of, and under!ying reasons for, sociocultural variation among contemporary hun tergatherers (Bernard and Woodburn 1988; Binford 2001; Kelly 1995; Renouf 1991; Sahlins 1972; Testart 1982; Woodburn 1982, 1988). Most scholars recognize a broad distinction between hunter-gatherers with elaborate social systems and those who appear more egalitarian, but the ways in which those distinctions have been conceived vary. Terms used range from foragers and collectors (Binford 1980), storing and nonstoring (Testart 1982), generalized and

Hunters and Gatherers in Theory and Archaeology, edited by George M. Crothers. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 31. © 2004 by the TIoard of Trustees, Southern Illinois University. All rights reserved ISBN 0-88104-087-8.

340

Delayed-Return Hunter-Gatherers in Africa I 341

specialized (Gamble 1978; Price and Brown 1985), simple and complex (Arnold 1996; Gould 1976; Hayden 1990; Price and Brown 1985), egalitarian and nonegalitarian (Kelly 1995), to immediate-return and delayed-return hunter-gatherers (Woodburn 1982, 1988). Following Woodburn, we refer to hunter-gatherers with more elaborate social systems as delayed return and those with more egalitarian social systems as immediate return.

According to Woodburn, immediate-return hunter-gatherers are those who live in small, mobile groups with social and subsistence systems oriented to the present. Immediate consumption, egalitarian principles, and low levels of technology are all considered part of an immediate-return social orientation and are broadly associated with hunter-gatherers who do not have elaborate social systems (Bailey 1983; Lee and DeVore 1968; Renouf 1991; Testart 1982; see Table 15-1). By contrast, delayed-return hunter-gatherers are those who live in large, less-mobile communities and have social and subsistence systems oriented to the past, present, and future (Woodburn 1982, 1988). Such groups experience delays in return for labor invested and have ownership rights over valued assets, a high level of technological investment, and storage (see also Renouf 1991; Testart 1982). Binford (1980) draws a similar distinction between foragers with residential mobility and collectors associated with logistical mobility, but he places more emphasis on settlement systems and less on ownership. Class distinctions and rights over non-kin labor, key to identification of complex hunter-gatherers sensu Arnold (1996), are not always present among delayed-return hunter-gatherers, or logistical collectors.

Archaeological indicators used to identify delayed-return, or complex, hunter-gatherers include logistical mobility, large sites, permanent structures, storage, elaboration of and investment in material culture, diverse tool assemblages, marked spatial variation within sites, exotic items, burial areas, resource specialization, and specialized trash dumps (Ames 1994; Binford 1980, 1987; Lightfoot 1993; Price and Brown 1985; Zvelebil 1986; see Table 15-2). Most research has focused, however, on the material signatures of huntergatherers with very elaborate or very egalitarian social systems. Relatively little attention has been paid to groups with delays in return, but without hierarchy, that lie between.

There is continuing debate over the underlying causes for development of delayed-return over immediate-return systems and the relative roles of social and ecological factors in social change of this kind. Social theorists have emphasized factors such as risk reduction (Hegmon 1991; Kell y 1991), competition (Hayden 1990), and encapsulation (Woodburn 1982). Ecological theories can be broadly divided into those that expect social and economic complexity in areas where resources are abundant (Hayden 1990, 1995a, 1995b; Price and Gebauer 1992, 1995), where resources are patchy (Binford 1980; OyuelaCaycedo 1996), where the nature of the resource base is the detennining factor (Aikens and Akazawa 1996; Hayden 1981; Rowley-Conwy 1983; Soffer 1989), or where populations are high (Keeley 1995). Binford (1980,2001) and Keeley (1995) stress the relationship between latitude and socioeconomic systems and argue that logistical collectors are more likely to be found in temperate latitudes.

342 ID. Dale, F. Marshall, and T. Pilgram

Table 15-1. Characteristics of Delayed-Return vs. Immediate-Return Hunter-Gatherers

Delayed-Return Hunter-Gatherers Immediate-Retum Hunter-Gatherers

Large, less-mobile groups Ownership, sometimes social stratifica tion Social systems oriented to past, present,

fuhrre Storage and delayed consumption Technological investment/elaboration

Resource specialization

Small, mobile groups Egali tarian principles Social systems oriented to present

Immediate consumption Low levels of technological

investment/elaboration Generalized resource exploitation

Studies of hunter-gatherer societies are not evenly distributed, however. As a result, the ways in which ecological variables affect hunter-gatherer societies are not yet well understood. Much of what we know about prehistoric complex hunter-gatherers, or about prehistoric hunter-gatherer variation in general, comes from research focused on temperate regions like Europe, North America, and Japan (Aikens and Akazawa 1996; Bailey 1983; Gamble 1986; Rowley-Conwy 1986; Soffer 1989; Zvelebil 1986). Very few studies of prehistoric complex hunter-gatherers have been conducted in low-latitude, tropical environments (but see Marquardt 1986; Oyuela-Caycedo 1996). In Africa, this lack of study is striking considering the role that recent and historic African hunter-gatherers assume in Woodburn's formulation of the delayed-return concept.

In this chapter we examine material indicators of contemporary delayedreturn hunter-gatherers and the possible existence of prehistoric delayedreturn hunter-gatherers in East Africa. We present two East African case studies, an ethnoarchaeological study of the Okiek and an archaeological study of the Kansyore (Figure 15-1).

The Okiek Case

In this section, we discuss items cached in high-altitude forest houses used by Okiek honey hunters and material in the houses of a few Okiek forest hunter-farmers. We then discuss the relevance of house-content data to identification of the Okiek as delayed-return hunter-gatherers and to interpretation of archaeological sites.

Historically, the Piik ap Gom Okiek local group of the western Mau Escarpment, Kenya (Figure 15-1), had a lineage, or clan-based, social organization and specialized subsistence systems. Okiek subsistence among this and other Okiek local groups focused on beekeeping, honey storage, and hunting using altitudinal gradients to exploit different forest types and flowering times at different seasons (Blackburn 1971, 1982, 1996; Huntingford 1929, 1955; Kratz


Table 15-2. Archaeological Indicators of HunterGatherer Socioeconomic Complexity

Large sites Storage Variation between sites Specialized trash dumps Elaborate technology Exotic items

PerrnanentstrudITITes Resource specializa tion Variation within sites Investment in technology Burial areas

1981, 1986, 1994; Marshall 1994). That focus enabled them to obtain honey during most of the year. Among the Okiek, carbohydrates were derived largely from honey, and plant foods were of little importance (Ambrose 1986; Blackburn 1982; Huntingford 1955; Kratz 1994; Marshall 1994,2001).

The Piik ap Dam Okiek lived in single-family settlements, each usually consisting of only one simple house. Historically, families moved between houses on family or clan territories at different altitudes. The altitude gradient was key to historic Okiek subsistence. Forest plants at high altitude flower later than those at low altitude (Figure 15-2). Therefore, carefully timed movements led clans from houses on one ridge with full hives to houses on another. The Okiek had long delays built into the subsistence return for work on hives. Honey could not be collected for several months after a hive was made and put in place. The delay could be a year or more if the hive maker was unlucky. Even when a colony of bees was thoroughly established in a hive, honey could be harvested only a few times a year.

Small gaps in honey production were filled with increased hunting and use of stored honey, which keeps several years if buried in ceramic containers. Honey beer and wine were drunk often and in large quantities by most Okiek groups (Blackburn 1971; Kratz 1981, 1994). A variety of herbivores were hunted, the larger ones with dogs and spears, the smaller ones with snares. Hunting took place and hives were hung in trees on clan territories. The name for an individual territory, konoito (plural konotwek), means "ridge," which is the smallest physical unit of territory. The konotwek of a clan consisted of a patchwork pattern of ridges up a long altitude gradient, usually organized around a long stream channeL Individual clans moved up and down the altitude gradient as part of their subsistence round.

Patrilineal clans were the main Piik ap Oom social institution. Clan names and age sets were the same as those used by their Kipsigis farming neighbors. Age sets created bonds between unrelated men of the same age and increased the power of older age groups. Individual and clan territories were inherited, as were other honey-related assets such as hives and the right to hang them in certain trees. Such resources were not shared. The relatively elaborate nature of Okiek social organization was also reflected by rights of men over women in marriage and the existence of bridewealth historically paid in hives and hunting dogs (Blackburn 1971; Kratz 1994). There were no institutions for a \vhole local group historically, no chiefs and no counst'i of elders (Blackburn

3441 D. Dale, F. Marshnll, and T Pilgram

.~

~YBng'()mB

CJ

Lake Narrofl ~

.NaseTa V '>0:

o 100 km 1Ake~yarj OLDke ManyOTaI !

Mamba Rohle

Jl J2 Jl 34 ]5 )6 1.

Figure 15-1. The location of the Piik ap Oom ethnoarchaeological study area, the Kansyore archaeological study area at Siror, and keyarchaeological sites mentioned in the text.

1971). There were also no inherited status differences between families and no classes.

In identifying the Okiek as delayed-return hunter-gatherers, Woodburn (1982, 1988:35) stresses the delays built into Okiek subsistence return and distinctive social systems that "control and apportion the delayed yields." The reliance of the Okiek on bees and their storage of honey and on patterns of social organization also fits with distinctions that other scholars make between hunter-gatherers with more elaborate social organization and material culture and those with less elaborate organization (Hayden 1990; Price and Brown 1985; Soffer 1989; Testart 1982).

Delays in return for effort expend ed in constructing, hoisting, and maintaining hives and related concepts of private property held by the Okiek create the potential for inequalities because resources that are individually owned, such as honey, are not shared outside families. There are social structures that formalize inequalities between men and women and between older and younger men (such as bridewealth and the age-set system), but there is no hierarchy and no class system. The inequalities that do exist are small in scale compared with those characterizing well-known delayed-return huntergatherers such as the Calusa or Northwest Coast groups of North America.

Okiek women have less independence, however, than do their counterparts among immediate-return hunter-gatherers such as the !Kung. The existence of age sets also reflects a more bounded society, and more elaborate social struc

Delayed-Retllfn Hunter-Gatherers in Africa I345

Plant Months Honey Is Ready Altitude at Which It Grows' Okiek Name

Lukumeto Tang'otwet

Linnean Name

Macaranga k1ll 7

jFMAMJJASOND , i , i I I I I I iii I

• -- -- -Low Mid High V. High .---- I I I i

-Cemacet Setlot Tepengwet Ruandet Ororuet Tepeswet Caconet Silipwet Tlnet Teresyat Morona Seet AonU

Acanl:bapale pulse Mimulopsls solmsl Verunfca aurlca1lfera Laslantbus KJ11 Ekebergla cape Croron IDACT

7 Dombeyasp. SchlefflerJa Yolk 7 Allopbylus abys Alblzia sp. Polysdas fulva

-- •••• ••••---

---------Lemeyuet Schrebera alar

"Low region below forest reserve, which is now 1iumIand; mid region between the edge ofthe forest reserve and the beginning of the altitude at which bamboo grows; high region at which bamboo grows; very high region above bamboo growth.

Figure 15-2. Plants of the western Mau whose flowers provide honey, the times at which honey from them is ready, and the altitudes at which they grow. Results represent the combined reports from five Piik ap Oom honey experts. There was considerable minor disagreement, which we resolved by using the majority opinion.

ture, than has been noled among more egalitarian immediate-return groups. The social differences between such moderate delayed-return huntergatherers and egalitarian hunter-gatherers may not seem great to those accustomed to elaborate hunter-gatherer social systems. Taken together, however, they are profOlmd, and they affect both the rhythm of daily life and long-term trends of social change. For instance, food production is adopted with greater ease by hunter-gatherers with concepts of ownership (Brooks et al. 1984; Ingold 1980; Marshall 2000; Meillassoux 1972; Woodburn 1988). Age sets, moreover, can be an effective institution for political mobilization, and even for warfare. Hence, they may affect both internal and external forces for social change.

Historic Changes, Relevance, and the Study Context

The pace of social change among many Okiek local groups has been very rapid during the last 50 to 100 years. Among the Piik ap Gam, only rerrmants of the socioeconomic patterns described above now remain. We focus on those activities such as honey work, hunting, houses, and storage that reflect the delayed-return system of the past. We also describe the ways those activities fit into the complex socioeconomic variability of the present.

During the early 1900s, the first European farms were established on top of the Mau Escarpment, the upper part of the Piik ap Gam range. Kipsigis pastoralists also moved into the lower part of the Okiek range and cleared forestland, which they started cultivating in the 1920s. With the loss of both ends of

3461 D. Dale, F. Marshall, and T. Pilgram

their annual round, the Piik ap Gam thus had two periods of famine buil t into their year. Hunting and honey gathering no longer provided an adequate subsistence base.

The Piik ap Gam responded by attempting to take up food production, herding, and agriculture. However, the area of remaining forest between the Kipsigis agriculturalists and the colonial dairy farmers was declared forest reserve and prohibited to settlement. Piik ap Dam homes and fields were sometimes burned, and their cattle were killed or driven out of the forest. This pattern culminated in a memorable famine in the early 1940s, during which most young Piik ap Gam men sought wage labor with the colonists to earn money to feed their families.

Many of the men were happy with their new lives and moved their families to join them. Others disliked wage labor and returned to the forest. Some of them were able to clear unclaimed land among the Kipsigis near the edge of the forest reserve. Most of those Okiek cleared land on their clan's kanatwek. Many of the men continued to go into the forest to hunt and collect honey, however, leaving their wives to farm and effectively combining peasant and hunter-gatherer subsistence and lifestyles.

In the 1980s, Okiek families still tried to establish farms in the forest reserve, but the Forestry Department continued its policy of harassment in an attempt to preserve the forest. Living in the forest was possible, however, because there were no roads, the region was isolated, and outsiders, even forest guards, were generally afraid of the forest. Thus harassment, though longterm, occurred relatively seldom (only every few years), and outsiders were not encountered on a frequent basis. For the Okiek who owned farms, the effort was not worth the trouble, and they usually returned after a year or two to "Kipsigis" (Kipsigis country). The Okiek who did not own farms, usually those who worked for years for the colonists and were too late to claim uncleared land, had nowhere else to go, however.

This pattern of land-claiming resulted in a paradoxical pattern of subsistence activities. Most of the Okiek who lived in the deep forest were those who worked at wage labor for a relatively long period. During that time, they lost many of their honey-gathering skills and did not keep hives. Many did some hunting and had small kitchen gardens, usually on a kanaita they remembered from their youths. Some had a little livestock or maize; a few sold homemade beer to neighbors, or occasionally sold forest products, baskets, or charcoal in Kipsigis, or earned money by working a small-scale donkey train. By the 1980s, there was much variation from household to household in subsistence base and the extent to which families relied on forest resources. At that time, many families did some hunting, but few concentrated on honey production. Most people depended on some type of domesticate, and many aspired to being livestock owners. Wild and cultivated vegetables from kitchen gardens and traded maize were staples for most people (Marshall 2001).

The Okiek who lived outside the forest were those who worked only briefly, and they supplemented the products of their legally owned farms with hunting and honey gathering. Therefore, the Okiek who had well-developed farms in Kipsigis country had had a less interrupted experience of the forest, had


had a subsistence based on wild resources, and had practiced more hunting and gathering than the Okiek living in the forest.

Among those who had maintained a solid link with past subsistence patterns, and used high-altitude houses to continue the honey schedule, there were two key differences between present and past use of the forest. Hunting and gathering supplemented agriculture rather than being a mainstay. Time spent in the forest was more in the nature of a visit than part of a constant seasonal round. Second, the amount of time spent by families in the forest decreased gradually until by our study period women stayed on the farms when the men went into the forest. Movement up and down the altitude gradient was by that time made by small groups of older males and their sons rather than by complete families.

In contrast with the study area, the base of the western Mau forest was used very intensively by Kipsigis farmers in the 1980s. Some Kipsigis families were subsistence farmers growing maize and keeping cattle, but many grew tea (Camellia sinensis L.) as a cash crop (Donovan 1993; Manners 1962; Orchardson 1970; Peristiany 1964). Piikap Oom Okiek families were integrated with frontier Kipsigis society at the forest margins. Many of these Kipsigis families who Ii ved near the forest boundary came from Okiek lineages but called themselves either Okiek or Kipsigis depending on circumstances.

The Piik ap Gom Okiek data that we present are complex. Both the 1980s data and historic information show great variability in social and subsistence practices between families. As we indicate, these patterns of change are nonlinear and some of them are counterintuitive. The challenge for ethnoarchaeologists is to distinguish relationships between behavior and material culture that have relevance for thinking about the archaeolOgical record. We seek to establish relational analogies (sensu Wylie 1989) between the Okiek as delayed-return hunters~gatherersand patterns of use and accumulation of material culture. In the following sections, we indicate precisely which contemporary behaviors we think are relevant to understanding the role of material culture in the past.

Methods

The da ta discussed here were collected a t in tervals during 1989 and 1990 in a 13-month-Iong ethnoarchaeological study. This was an especially interesting and dynamic period of change. We were able to observe the final remnants of the delayed-return system in the area in which we worked. Since that time, forces for integration of the remaining Piik ap Oom families living in the forest into the socioeconomy of the larger region have multiplied. Incentives not to use the forest have been greatly increased by litigation over the right to live in the forest, construction of a new road through the study area, and expansion of government tea farms.

We focus on the contents of high-altitude honey houses, most of which were empty or abandoned. The data on currently occupied houses were collected with the participation of householders. The data that we present on houses that were not occupied were collected with the help of knowledgeable com


munity members but largely without help from the houses' owners, most of whom are no longer living or are no longer part of the socioeconomic world of the forest.

During our fieldwork, we lived with two Okiek families in the Langaam and Siratet areas of high-altitude Podocarpus and bamboo forest. This is an isolated region and an important "honey forest." As noted above, however, paradoxically most of these families worked little with honey, did some hunting, and focused more on small vegetable gardens or livestock herds. A good deal of hunting and all the honey-gathering activities we studied were carried out by Okiek men who lived in farming country and visited the forest at intervals. While in the forest; the men usually stayed in their own houses Or in those of their families located on clan territory. Those forest honey houses serve as bases for two main kinds of activity: hive making and hunting.

Honey and Hunting Activities and Forest Houses

Hive making, hoisting, maintenance, and the harvesting of honey was generally undertaken by elders. Hives were made with almost compulsive care, and making one required more than 12 hours of labor. The men usually worked just slightly more than half the day, stopping shortly after noon, because that is when rain becomes likely in the rainy season and when heat became severe in the dry season. Work was often stopped early if one phase of the building process was completed near stopping time. It might also be stopped in order to go drinking, an important part of Okiek culture and forest life (Blackburn 1971; Kratz 1977, 1994). As a result making and hanging a hive usually took more than four days' work.

There were two kinds of hunting, each favored by a different age group. Hunting with snares, which might be termed "passive" hunting, was generally conducted by elders. Hunting with spears, bow and arrow, and dog packs, which might be termed "active" hunting, was most frequently done by youths. These activities and their timing were probably similar to what was done in that area when such hunting was part of a full seasonal round of hunting and honey gathering.

In 1989 and 1990, there were many recently abandoned houses that had been used for honey and hunting as part of the "traditional" exploitation of the altitudinal gradient. There were also abandoned houses in clearings that marked attempts by Kipsigis farmers in the 1970s to move into areas that had been reoccupied by honey hunters.

Houses Used Seasonally for Honey and Hunting and Their Possessions

We visited more than 50 standing houses, sometimes ranging several kilometers from the konotwek in which we lived and usually worked. We knew the occupants of four of the houses bu t went to all the houses tha t householders and guides knew of in the area, both in use and abandoned. We recorded the condition of each house, its contents, and all that we could find out about the people who used or had used it.


Types of Structures or Shelters

We found two types of forest structures: the lean-to and the thatched wattleand-daub house. The lean-to was quite rare. It was made of a simple framework of long sticks, lashed together or propped against one another and covered with grass thatch and plastic sheeting. Lean-tos have a long history in the forest, although in the past they would have been covered with cut leafy branches rather than thatch and plastic. They occupied the intermediate level of comfort in the three kinds of shelter commonly sought by the Okiek in the past. The simplest form of shelter was just a large tree, usually sabtet (Neobutonia kili). Sabtet is very densely leaved and provides good shelter against rain. It is still the tree of preference for those caught out in thunderstorms. Lean-tos provide more shelter than trees, and the best and most permanent shelter was provided by rockshelters, which are, however, no longer used. The most common type of structure we encountered was a thatched wattle-and-daub house, which the Okiek said they began to copy from the Kipsigis about 40 years ago. The houses originally had a circular design, but many are now square. They tend to be occupied for short periods, a few days to two weeks.

Continuously Occupied vs. Reoccupied Forest Houses

Eighteen of the 50 houses were seasonally occupied. We focus our analysis on their contents. Eleven of those houses appeared never to have been abandoned. They were in a good state of repair, neatly organized, and contained either coals from a recent fire or, in one case, a swept hearth. Five of the houses were in deep forest, suggesting they had never been used for anything but forest work. Seven houses appeared to have been abandoned and reoccupied. They contained coals from a recent fire, which indicated occupation. However, they were either in disrepair or showed signs of decay and recent repair. Many had muddy patches on the floors from leaky roofs or rubble on the floors from collapsed sections of wall. Some were missing their hearthstones, which are often moved when a family constructs and occupies a new house near one it is abandoning. The houses that had been abandoned and later reoccupied were more commonly near pasture than houses that were continuously occupied. The difference suggests that houses originally built for farming were often abandoned and partially reoccupied, while most houses built for forest work remained in continuous use.

In the continuously occupied houses, we simply recorded all the items present. In the abandoned and reoccupied houses, we recorded all items present, but we also attempted to distinguish the items abandoned with the house from those brought in by the reoccupiers.

Forest Dwellers: Cultivators, Herders, Hunters, and Collectors

For comparative purposes, we also studied the contents of houses owned by two forest cultivator-herding families. One was oriented toward hunting, collection of greens, and cultivation of maize for trade. The other focused on cattle and collection of \vild and weedy greens.

'7


Okiek Farmer Outside the Forest in Kipsigis

Finally, we have some information on the house size and kinds of material culture used by an Okiek farmer living in Kipsigis at the boundary of the forest. He lived on clan territory in that area, and as a child had also used the rockshelter that we studied on a higher altitude konoito of his clan. He no longer used the forest, except for pleasure, and focused on dairy and tea farming.

Results

Forest Houses Used Seasonally for Honey and Hunting

Seventy-one different kinds of material-culture items were attributed to the current occupants of the 18 houses central to this study. Of those, 36 items were found in only one house, and 12 were found in only two. Our analysis focuses on items found in two or more houses but includes a few others of importance.

The 39 items that we analyze as having relevance to the activities typically carried out in high-altitude honey and hunting houses can be broadly divided into the following categories: general purpose, food collection, food consumption, and furniture (Table 15-3). We subdivide the food-collection category into material culture relating to honey and to hunting. Similarly, we recognize four subsets within the food-consumption category: items used for food processing, cooking, water or liquid collection and storage, and eating and drinking. We did not exclude other activities such as those relating to belief systems or ceremonies from our analysis, but they were not well represented in the material culture we saw.

Hive making was identified by the presence of seven specialized objects: wedges, awls, a hive-hanging rope, a drill, a kisienjit (adze), a hive in the process of being made, and lichen used to smoke bees. The numbers of each item found are reported in Table 15-3 and Figures 15-3 and 15-4. Six of the 18 houses contained at least one of the items, and most of the houses that contained any item held more than one. Hive-hanging ropes are more than 25 m long and are handmade by the user from the bark of meswot vines. They were beautifully made and looked like high-quality hemp rope. We were told that once all the bark has been gathered and soaked for several days, it takes a few more days to make the rope (Figure 15-5). Drills were heavy metal rods, with one end either pointed so they could be heated to burn a hole or flattened and sharpened so they cut a hole when spun between the hands. A kisienjit was a special adjustable adze characteristic of the Okiek. The cutting face could be set at different angles to trim the interior of the hive smooth. In the past they were also used to chop down trees. By the 1980s, purchased axes were used for that task. Finally, a hive in the process of being made was a sign that hive making was underway even if the tools to make it had been removed.

Four types of hunting tools were examined for their distribution in houses: bows, spears, snares, and wire rolls (Table 15-3 and Figures 15-3 and 15-4).


Table 15-3. Categories ofMaterial Culture Found in Honey and Hunting Houses

Material Culture Number Material Culture Number

General Purpose Boiling Panga 1 Wooden spoons-all types 21

Woven bag 1 Aluminum pots-sufarias 14

Bamboo snuff case 1 Liquid beaters 2 Food Collection Liquid Collection/S to rage: Hive making: 5-liter jugs 12

Hives 165 5-liter cans 7 Ropes: honey (4), sisal (3) 10 Clay pots 5 Hive adzes 4 Gourd 1

Hive drills 2 Leather bag 1 Log-splitting wedges 2 Plastic bottle 1 Lichen (smoking bees) 1 Eating/Drinking:

Hunting: Tin cans 27

Snares 34 Tin bowls 6 Wire rolls 7 Tin cups 5 Bows 5 Bamboo cups 3

Spears 3 Tin plates 3 Food Consumption Drinking horn 1

Processing: Honey spoon 1

Grindstones 3 Teapot 1 Knives 2 Furniture Sieves 2 Stools 0

Cooking: Sleeping skins 17

General Fire-starting kits 5

Roasting Roasting sticks 52 Roasting racks 2 Vine meat hanger 1

Bows were homemade. Spears were crafted, usually by Masai blacksmiths. Most Okiek purchased their spears at the market at Mulot, near Masai country. Spears were the single most expensive item found stored in the houses. The wire rolls were manufactured and kept in the houses as raw material for snares. All the rolls we saw were wire, almost all of it quite old barbed wire taken from fences. The large quantity of snares was due both to the importance of snares as a passive method of hunting for elders working on hives and to the fact that they were inexpensive and easy to make. Some snares were made of vines, while others were made from manufachlred rope or wire.

Grindstones, knives, sieves, and a vine meat hanger were included in the food-processing category. None of those were common: only three grind


lE !';I~

.~ ,I. _111 c

a

.,. ~'~---" z-,.-;-"· ....... .. '-"

. ~,,"7;, ,-'- '_.• _""~-'; ... _~:~:_~f' .

d. e. . ~

g. ~ I.

": . ':.;'.-. -."

I.f7--~. '. ':. 1118J. '. :,': _,....J5J~

Figure 15-3. Artifacts cached in or near Piik ap Oom forest honey houses. Descriptions and maximum dimensions: (a) hive, 142 em; (b) adze (kisienjit), 58 em; (c) vine for making snares, 30 em; (d) fire drill, hearth, 8 em; (e) aluminum pot (sufaria), 21 em; (f) open-mouthed clay pot, 25 em; (g) narrow-necked clay pot, 44 em; (h) leather honey bag, 30 em; (i) plastic 5-11ter jug, 24 em; (j) tin cans, 13 em; (k) bushbuek sleeping skin, 105 em; (1) stool, 75 em

stones, two knives, two sieves, and one meat hanger were found. Grindstones and sieves were not often used. Knives, on the other hand, were very important to forest life but are not cached. People owned one or two, which they carried wi th them.

Seven cooking implements were examined for their distribution in houses: fire-starting kits, roasting sticks, roasting racks, vine meat hangers, alurninum pots, wooden spoons, and liquid beaters (Table 15-3 and Figures 15-3 and 154). Fire-starting kits consisted of a hardwood drill, a softwood base, and tinder (often lichen), all tied up in a bundle with string. Roasting sticks were ordinary sticks, usually from 0.5 to 1 m long, with both ends sharpened. Meat was


Material Culture: Honey Material Culture: Liquids

14 12

12

14 1 12 1 6;~j'.J16~L. '~ 510

~i 4

4 3 2 2 2 1 2 1i~ ~~Oo

~~ :;; ~ :;; ~ <;:II ~ '" ~~ p

~ N § ~ ~ ~ 0> ~ '" 0> '" C Ult'" '" :c -0 « ~ ;/;~ ,;;r; 00- ~~ « reI -0 al :::; ~1O 0:'" 10 " 8"3: ~ m

Material Culture: Hunting Material Culture: Eating and DrinKing

40 30 27 34

35 25 30

2025 20 15

15 10 10 7 5 4 55

0 0 ~ n> !J) >-c C)'" tn ~c~gUl.!;2~g:§E~

I c

n>

~£ '" -

m '"'" F~ ~5 ~~ ~g- 1---5- rg. 0 0- -§2 ~'"

(J) (J) U -0 -u 0 '" I-

Material Culture: Cooking

60 1 52 50

40

30 I • 21

1~J • 0 2

20

• • - 0> C ~ ~ p 0> _n>E ~ C '" '" c => S~ c '"

"'0 c."l "''''~-t =~ '" 00 '" ~ 0- '" '" u :;:,'"c

o"'= 0- ::i~ ~ ~ o ~ ~K iL 0: 3 ~ '" « '"

Figure 15-4. Frequencies of material culture in Piik ap Oom forest honey houses, related to (a) honey; (b) hunting; (c) cooking; (d) liquid collection and storage; (e) eating and drinking.

placed on one end, and the other end was stuck in the ground near the fire. Roasting racks were wooden frameworks about 2 m long by 1 m wide by 1 m high, built over a fire to roast meat in large quantities, usually to lighten it for transport. Aluminum cooking pots were the most cornman all-purpose boiling pots used for soups, stews, kimnyet (maize paste), and even beer. Wooden spoons were used for stirring; food in sufarias (aluminum cooking pots) and for making kimnyet by stirring maize meal into boiling water. Carved wooden implements were also used to heat liquids.

Six liquid-collection and storage vessels were examined for their dis-tribuhan by house type: leather bags, clay pots, 5-liter plastic jugs, 5-liter sheetmetal cans, gourds, and plastic bottles (Table 15-3 and figures 15-3 and 15-4).

~~


Figure 15-5. Axe and hive-hanging rope handmade from meswot vines.

Most were used for water and sometimes for millet, honey beer, or honey. Most of the 5-liter plastic jugs originally held cooking oil, which is used most often by the small cafes in Kipsigis villages. Proprietors sold the jugs when they were empty. Most of the 5-liter sheet-metal cans originally held varnish used by Kipsigis furniture makers. These were also sold when empty. Clay pots were brought in from outside areas in Kipsigis country and sold in the markets in town. Leather bags have long been used by the Okiek for collection of water and of honey. In the 1980s, they were generally used only for honey. We found only one, but we saw more leather bags being used elsewhere. They were sometimes buried with honey inside and sometimes left in the open, so they were not common in houses.

Plastic jugs were better than metal cans or clay pots for carrying water because they were stronger, lighter, and a handier shape. The sheet-metal cans also had a useful shape, but their handles were not comfortable for long carries, and the containers rusted quickly. Clay pots were the least useful for water transport because they were heavy, easily broken, and an awkward shape for carrying. They were better for storage. However, smaller clay pots could also be used for cooking and could take the place of more expensive aluminum pots. Only one house had clay pots and no aluminum pots, suggesting that clay pots were not essential for cooking and were probably used for short- or long-term storage of water or other liquids such as beer or honey wme.

Eight eating-and-drinking implements were examined for distribution by house type: bowls, cups, tin cans, tin plates, wooden honey spoons, bamboo

Delayed-Return Hunter-Gatherers in Africa 1355

cups, drinking horns, and teapots (Table 15-3 and Figures 15-3 and 15-4). Bowls, cups, and teapots were purchased, and tin cans were recovered discards. Margarine was a staple for cooking in Kipsigis farming country, and vegetable shortening was also frequently used. Both were sold in cans of various sizes, of which the most commonly purchased was the 500 g kimbo size. When the contents had been used up, the cans were cleaned out and used as cups. So, although tin cans were manufactured, they were seldom purchased for their own sake but were the leftover by-products of other purchases. Tin cans could be purchased very inexpensively in the markets and were often casually given to friends. Bamboo was common in the high-altitude forest, and sections cut from large canes were often used as cups or larger liquidstorage vessels.

The only freestanding furniture found in houses was wooden stools made from forest wood (Table 15-3 and Figure 15-3). Some houses also had benches and sleeping platforms molded into the clay of the floor. Occasionally, bamboo sleeping platforms were also found. Sleeping skins (Figure 15-3) were derived from a range of wild forest animals including bushbuck, red duiker, blue dUiker, cattle, and goat. Their skins were only partially tanned and were used as mattresses.

The most common items left in houses were roasting sticks (52), followed by snares (34), nails (30), tin cans (27), wooden spoons (18), sleeping skins (17), beehives (16.5), aluminum pots (14), 5-liter jugs (12), and stools (10; Table 15-3 and Figure 15-6). These represented activities associated with cooking, hunting, hive making, liquid collection and storage, eating and drinking, furnihue, or bedding.

Forest Dwellers: Cultivators, Herders, Hunters, and Collectors

Most of the items in unoccupied houses were also found in the occupied forest houses that were seasonally used for honey and hunting. Material found in farming houses, but not in honey-hunting houses, included axes and jerry cans, as well as farming equipment: karais (large metal pans), hoes, and spades, one wheelbarrow, and one 44-gal drum. The main difference between honey-hunting and farming houses was that more and larger containers are found in permanent houses. In addition, as expected, there was more specialized farming equipment in the farming houses and a lack of specialized hunting and honey equipment.

Okiek Farmer Outside the Forest in Kipsigis

Most of the items found in the house of an Okiek farmer who lived near the forest boundary in Kipsigis farming country were also found in other houses that we studied. This house was much larger than forest houses, however, as were many of the items that were in the house, which included water containers, sufarias, and kisyets (small baskets for serving food). The house also held items not present in forest-farming houses: sacks of grain and furniture, a large bed, and a table. The gradient from small to large equipment and the presence of grain reflected both specialization in farming and the permanence of the settlements.


Most Commonly Found Items in Hive-Making Houses

60 50 40 30 20 10 o

U)U)bI) Q) .;;;l:::: VI .... .'::; .;.:

U) u Zro ._ l::::'" C/)o ~

~

(/)c b1) U) S V) U')

§ C .5 (/) ~::J gf-o(1)

u D o D..5 l:::: VI·""" 0 o 0 Q.) ~ ..c ._..... h ..... l:::: 0 D. Q) U) Q) S 0 Q) C/)

~ ~U)C/3 ~:JD. ~ <t: V)

Figure 15-6. Most commonly found items in forest honey houses.

Discussion of Okiek Data

The material culture we found in forest houses was stored there against future visits. Such storage contrasts with patterns seen among immediate-return hunter-gatherers where reuse of abandoned camp sites is casual, and caching is unsystematic (Brooks and Yellen 1987; Fisher and Strickland 1989; Kent 1987). The most common items of material culture left in Okiek honey-hunting houses (Figure 15-6) reflect hunting, hive making, liquid collection and its storage, cooking, sitting, and eating and drinking.

Material culture accumulated in houses because seasonal use of resources and the time delay built into the honey schedule resulted in scheduled revisiting of specific locations in forests at different altitudes at different times of the year. Visits were regular as a part of routine hive maintenance, hoisting, and harvesting activities. Even more importantly, ownership of property allowed the revisiting of the same ridges, trees, and houses and the long-term caching or storage and accumulation of much material culture in the same place. This form of storage is not so commonly associated with the Okiek as is storage of honey, but nevertheless it reflects an important form of storage and the presence of both a delayed-return system and ownership of property and resource rights.

How Meaningful Are These Results?

The first question to ask is how representative are the items found in honey and hunting houses of those used when the owners.of houses were in residence? When we were studying honey- or htmting-related activities, we spent time with two elders and two to six young men in and around three


honey-hunting houses. We had the opportunity, therefore, to gain some perspective on this question. When they returned to the high forest, honey hunters typically carried spears and axes and wore blankets. Sometimes they also carried a kilo or two of maize meal. In general, people did not like to carry much when traveling through the forest, so they used the material that they left in houses. On the basis of these observations, it seems that the material left or cached in houses is fairly representative of that used in the high forest. We noted interesting differences, however, between the use and caching of axes, spears, and machetes. Axes are a man's most important tool during honeyrelated work, but they are never left in houses because they are expensive and people do not own more than one. For the same reasons, as well as for their use on the trail, pangas, or machetes, and spears are usually carried from house to house and not left behind.

There is plenty of evidence for short-term storage, but the relative lack of honey stored for the long-term is another interesting difference between activities that we saw, what took place historically, and the material culture that we found. When hives were harvested, honey was eaten in large quantities and occasionally stored. We saw leather bags full of honey buried in remote parts of the forest. We did not see honey stored in houses, probably because it is now carried to low-altitude houses and stored there. Historically, Blackburn (1971, 1973), Kratz (1989), and people that we talked to emphasize the use of large ceramic containers to store honey in forest houses or caves (Figure 15-7). Just as with the leather bags, those containers were often buried to prevent honey badgers from smelling and eating the honey. When pots were used, they were usually stoppered with stone and sealed with propolis.

Another issue of importance is how similar material cached in forest houses and used by men is to that cached and used in the days when whole families stayed in high-altitude houses. Do cached items approximate the material residues of the hunter-gatherer system of residential mobility? There are several ways to address this qu"estion. First, a number of men told us that it was only during the last five to 10 years that women stopped coming to the forest altogether. So, the material in some of the abandoned houses we studied might date back to that period. Second, men said the houses were not much different now from what they had been in the past. To cross-check this, we compared the contents of men-only honey and hunting houses with those of two forest farming houses in which women and children live. We also looked at the house of an Okiek farmer outside the forest in Kipsigis. Finally, we refer to historic data on other Okiek local groups, Kaplelaclz and Kipclzornwonek (Blackburn 1971; Kratz 1994), and to our own interviews on the roles of Okiek women in the past.

Historically, Okiek women were not very much involved in hunting or in the search for food or honey. They were busy tending children, collecting water and firewood, cooking, and making skin dothing (Blackburn 1971; Kratz 1994). Kratz (1994), comments that a woman's tools, without which she could not take up a married woman's position in a new house, were fire, a knife; and a bone needle. Tending to children, preparation of food, and collection of firewood and water are vmrnen's chores to this day as can be seen among

--


O.':! ......'.~,;o..,-.:;:-. ..:::':~:, C. ,.,~," '; "

'. '

Honey Pots Kesumeet

Used for storage:

Forest Honey Pots

Large 30-40 em, Soft stone cap. Sealed with propolis,

Buried in a hole in the ground.

Used for storage orbrewing honey wine: Cave Honey Pots

OVery large 76-cm'

..' diameter, 60 em high,

: ." ..~.'.'~ 30-cm diameter mouth. ,>; Rounder than FlIP ., .,;S' because stand on floor or '.,~:";.,,, shelf in a cave,

Used for storage in the •

~:::,se. House Honey

O.

Round pot, freestandmg, 7.5-30-cm diameter,

::,. similar size as cooking ',. pots, but with narrower '.'.' mouth. Leather cover.

. ," Small pots store honey for children. This type can be used to store fat.

Cooking Pots Cepungut

Used to hold liquids

usually for boiling

Large round pot for boiling meat 15-40-cm diameter, ID-20-cm

mouth diameter. , Most are 20 em high,

C'""J"'",.'a:,..... :~.'.?.' ',~ ',,:

..;:<'"

·j:;:;;;ri;iF"'~ ,"

. 'io,'..

"\" .c.': '.:O U ed b 'I' s to OJ pOIson

Large wide-mouthed pot used for boiling poison. Size similar to meat-boiling pot 30-cm diameter (only used at low altitude).

Bowls Kesuugeets

Used to eat

honey out o~,also for a wide variety of foods

Wide bowl 13-18-cm diameter.

Thinner cup-shaped vessel. 7.5-1O-cm diameter.

Small cups used for children,

Small shallow

bowls for eating were also used.

S ff 'di nu -gnn ng

bowl (keiset). A small shallow bowl with rough "d IfInSl e su ace.

~.'.":'.'.':'.:'.' ,'; >:.:::

..

. ' _~, ...• rC'''-'='''f~j ~

'" .

~

.~ ~

t--------------+ Clay Pipe Ormoti! Used for smoking

tobacco

~p

Figure 15-7. Ceramics used by Kaplelach and Kipchomwonek Okiek local groups in the recent past. Information from Blackburn (1971, 1973) and Kratz (1989); figures redrawn from photographs in Blackburn (1973:58-61, with permission of the British Institute in Eastern Africa) and figures in Kratz (1989:67, with permission of Corinne Kratz),

Okiek forest-farmers and among farmers outside in Kipsigis areas. Without women and children in high-altitude honey-hunting houses, however, the men collect water and firewood and prepare food, These tasks are done on a more limited basis than if the women were doing them, but they require the


same tools and techniques. On the other hand, honey houses wi thout women and children lack a number of classes of material culture, including artifacts related to women's dress, such as beads (Klumpp and Kratz 1993), to sewing, or to children's activities. Such artifacts would include toys and small containers for feeding (Blackburn 1973). Interestingly, none of those items is cornman in houses where women and children are present, and most are small and not easy to detect. The same is true of material culture relating to ceremonies. Such material is rare and sometimes, as in the case of clay figurines made for female initiation, intentionally destroyed.

The contention that men do the essential women's work of collecting water and firewood and cooking when in forest houses is supported by the fact that almost all of the items found in forest-farming houses where women are present are also found in honey-hunting houses. Only a few very specialized farming tools, such as a plow and shovels, are absent. If anything, there is more material culture present in hunter-gatherer houses and absent in farming houses. In particular, specialized hive-making and hunting tools are not present in fanning houses. Items most used by women for getting water and for cooking and serving food are, however, more abundant in farming houses, as are clothing and piles of firewood. That abundance reflects the presence of women and children as well as the greater length of time spent in farming houses than in honey-hunting houses.

Archaeological·Visibility

When thinking about applying the Piik ap Gom data to archaeological cases, one must consider how visible the materials used today would be archaeologicallyand how representative they are of the kinds of material culture used in the remote past. Because of the recent substitutions of plastics and metals for ceramics, data collected by Blackburn (1973) and Kratz (1989) between the 1960s and 1980s among the Kipchornwonek and Kaplelach Okiek are very helpful.

As Blackburn (1973) and Kratz (1989) note, among the families they studied, clay pots and dishes had been recently replaced by metal sufarias, light and unbreakable enameled iron plates and cups, and a variety of tin cans, but clay pots were still used to brew and serve beer. In the past, the Knplelach and Kipchornwonek Okiek used large pots 30-60 cm high to store honey (see Figure 157). Very large free-standing pots were hidden in rockshelters, where slightly smaller pots were buried in the ground. Honey was also stored in houses in considerably smaller and rounder pots approximately 20 cm high. Sometimes very small pots were used in houses to store fat or honey for children. Medium-sized cooking pots were commonly used for boiling meat. At low altitudes, a similar shaped pot was used for boiling poison. A variety of ceramic bowls was also used for eating honey and other foods; they were often about 7-18 cm wide and about 6-10 cm high. A very similar shallow bowt 14 cm wide and anI y a few cm high, was used for snuff grinding. The Okiek also made and used clay pipes.

Other metal or plastic artifacts would have been made of wood, leather, basketry, or (further back in the past) stone. Many wooden spoons and other

-:.'!9:


cooking utensils were still used, however, as were gourds, tightly woven baskets, and leather bags. By going through the list of items found in currently occupied forest houses and interpolating backward, replacing metal containers with ceramics or wood and knives with stone, one can achieve a better estimate for the archaeological visibility of forest houses and the materials cached in them (see Table 15-4). Ceramics are the only items found that were common in the recent past and also well preserved archaeologically. They are important indicators of food preparation, consumption, and storage. Residue analysis might in some cases be able to detect their use for storage of honey or fat. Stone is also likely to have been important and may have reflected specialized hunting and woodworking activities in archaeological si tes better than metal items.

All Okiek sites, whether honey-hunting or farming houses, were small, isolated, and made of mud and wooden poles. They would not be easy to detect archaeologically on the basis of features. In some cases, postholes would be preserved, or where houses had burned, fragments of compacted floor might be seen. Micromorphological studies would be necessary to detect such floors. Most houses contained hearthstones, which would preserve, as might the ash between them. Pits were not dug for storage or rubbish, dogs were active, and houses did not accumulate a significant rubbish-dump area or visible assemblages of animal bones. (Some historic rockshelter sites did, however, accumulate large quantities of animal bones.) In addition, because houses were isolated, located in areas with abundant forest vegetation, and received up to an inch of rain a day, there was much insect, carnivore, and soil-formation activity. Breakdown of organic matter was rapid, and preservation of many classes of material culhIre unlikely.

Moderate Delayed-Return Hunter-Gatherers: The Ownership Model

Given the potential significance of moderate delayed-return groups for understanding socioeconomic variation and trajectories of social change among past hunter-gatherers, it is important for archaeologists to con sider hunter-gatherer socioeconomic systems of such intermediate groups. It is always easier, however, to identify extremes, as reflected in the binary nature of current categories for hunter-gatherer variation. We argue that more nuanced archaeological research will reveal considerable variation in social organization among delayed-return hunter-gatherers in the middle of the scale of socioeconomic variation.

To conduct such research, however, it is necessary to develop expectations for material signatures of intermediate groups. VYe develop a model here for recognition of moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers with socioeconomic structures similar to those of the Okiek. We base that model on relational analogies drawn from the Okiek and on criteria for identification of huntergatherer socioeconomic complexity derived from other hunter-gatherers, as well as from the archaeological record. ldentifica tion of ownership of re


Table 15-4. Prehistoric Equivalents of Material ClIlture Found in Honey-Hunting Houses

Material Culture (Number) Probable Prehistoric Equivalent

General Purpose Panga (1) Woven bag (1) Bamboo snuff case (1) Food Collection Hive making: Hives (16.5) Ropes (10) Hive adzes (4) Hive drills (2) Log-splitting wedges (2) Lichen (for smoking bees) (1) Hunting: Snares (34) Wire rolls (7) Bows (5) Spears (3) Food Consumption Processing: Grindstones (3) Knives (2) Sieves (2) Cooking: Fire-starting kits (5) Roasting sticks (52) Roas ting racks (2) Vine meat hanger (1) Wooden spoons-all types (21) Aluminum pots-sufarias (14) Liquid beaters (2) Liquid CollectionlStorage 5-liter jugs (12) 5-liter cans (7) Clay pots (5) Gourd (1) Leather bag (1) Plastic bottle (1) fa tinglDrinking Tin cans (27) Tin bowls (6) Tin cups (5) Bamboo cups (3) Tin plates (3) Drinking hom (1) Honey spoon (1) Teapot (1) Furniture Stools (10) Sleeping skins (17)

Stone tool

Stone tools Stone tools

Stone tools

Grindstones Stone tools

Stone bases

Ceramic vessels

Ceranlic vessels Ceramic vessels Ceramic vessels

Ceramic vessel

Ceramic vessels Ceramic vessels Ceramic vessels

Ceramic vessels

3621 D. Dale, F. Marshnll, and T. Pilgram

sources is the key to recogmtlon of the Okiek as delayed-return huntergatherers. Repeated use of sites, a relatively high density of archaeological material, and the presence of ceramic storage vessels are excellent indicators of ownership.

High densities of archaeological material caused by redundancy of site use reflect a delayed-return system, as much as or more than does any single artifact class. Ownership of property, the time delay built into the honey schedule, and seasonal use of resources allow scheduled revisiting of the identical ridges and houses at different times of the year. Houses function not only as shelter but also as storage facilities for artifacts needed for honey, hunting, and daily forest life.

In the Okiek case, ceramics are the most useful individual class of material culture and a powerful tool for identifying delayed-return hunter-gatherers because they survive well archaeologically and provide evidence of ownership. Large quantities of ceramics suggest investment of labm in making pots, use of pots for short- and long-term storage, and patterns of accumulation indicative of rights to resources and concepts of ownership, as well as delays in return.

Other material signatures of the Okiek are consistent with widespread expectations for hunter-gatherer socioeconomic complexity. The association of sites with rich and predictable resources, in this case populations of bees and hives full of honey in forests at a variety of altitudes, is often considered characteristic of inegalitarian hunter-gatherers (see Table 15-2). Tools for specialized tasks are another such characteristic. Woodworking tools used for making Okiek hives are quite specialized, and although unlikely to survive, it is possible that-in the past-lithic assemblages would have reflected that specialization.

Settlement patterns are not, however, good indicators of Okiek social organization. The Okiek, although delayed-return hunter-gatherers, had a more residential than logistical pattern of movement. Few traces of permanent structures would be recovered. Sites are also small but may be quite dense. In addition, there is little elaboration of material culture. Time is not significantly invested in any class of material culture except beehives, and they are wood and not likely to preserve. There are also few prestige or exotic items, and there is no specialized discard of trash.

However, it is apparent from these findings that identification of groups such as the Okiek as moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers, with ownership and small-scale inequality, cannot be accomplished on the basis of the presence of one or even a few items of material culture. Indicators of delayedreturn hunter-gatherers such as ownership, specialized tools, or the presence of a rich and predictable resource base must be combined with the absence of evidence for complex delayed-return hunter-gatherers. Such lack of evidence includes the absence of large sites, permanent structures, elaborate material culture or exotic items, and specialized discard of trash. We summarize the Ownership Model in Table 15-5.

We recognize that this complex of features does not indicate specific social


Table 15-5. Archaeological Indicators of Moderate Delayed-Return Hunter-Gatherers: The Ownership Model

Presence Absence

Indicators of Ownership Repeated use of sites High density of archaeological material Ceramic storage vessels Wooden, fiber, or hide storage containersa

Other factors Rich and predictable resources Specialized tooL'>, e.g., woodworking

Elaboration of material culhrre Large quantities of prestige or exotic items Specialized discard of trash Elaborate architectural feahrres

aItems that may not preserve.

institutions held by the Okiek, such as bridewealth or age sets. It does, however, provide useful indicators of moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers with delays in return, ownership, limited sharing, and some inequalities, but without hierarchy or hereditary differences in status. We expect the precise configuration of features present and features absent to vary according to the socioeconomic organization of the moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers investigated. In the following section, we apply this model to interpretation of Kansyore middle Holocene sites in East Africa.

Kansyore Hunter-Gatherers

Later Stone Age hunter-gatherers in East Africa are usually considered to have been highly mobile groups occupying small sites, using local raw materials, and hunting a wide variety of mammals (Merrick and Brown 1984; Phillipson 1977a, 1977b). They are best known from Eburran sites such as Enkapune Ya Muto in the Central Rift Valley (Figure 15-1; Ambrose 1984, 1998; Marean et al. 1994). The socioeconomic patterns of these huntergatherers most closely resemble those of immediate-return hunter-gatherers. Less well known in East Africa are the Kansyore, hunter-gatherers who are associated with large quantities of highly decorated ceramics (for which they are named), lacustrine and riverine-based subsistence, and relatively intense occupations. Although the socioeconomic patterns associated with Kansyore sites contrast starkly with those of other Later Stone Age hunter-gatherers, there has been little or no discussion of the possible presence of delayedreturn hunter-gatherers in the East African Later Stone Age.

--,


Background to the Knnsyore

Kansyore hW1ter-gatherers lived over a wide area of East Africa ca. 8,000-3,000 years ago but were loosely concentrated around Lake Victoria (Figure 15-1). Of the better documented sites, five are rockshelters (Nasera Mumba-Hohle, Chabula, Nyang'oma, Chole), four are shell middens (Luanda' Kanjera West, Kanam, White Rock Point), and five are open sites (Kansyor~ Island, Gogo Falls, Ugunja, Siror, Haa; Chapman 1967; Collett and Robertshaw 1980; Dale 2000; Karega-Munene 1993; Mehlman 1989; Robertshaw 1991' Robertshaw et al. 1983; Soper and Golden 1969; Thorp 1992). At all of the sites'

. Kansyore levels are associated with wild faW1a (Robertshaw et al. 1983; Stew~ art 1991; but see Karega-Munene 1993), Later Stone Age lithics, and large quantities of highly decorated ceramics. They are the earliest ceramics in western Kenya and the only known sites in East Africa with large quantities of ceramics prior to the beginnings of food production (ca. 5000-4000 B.P.).

Kansyore pottery was first identified by Chapman (1967) at the type site of Kansyore Island on the Kagera River, west of Lake Victoria (Figure 15-1). The pottery is distinctive due to its abundance on East African sites and to the amoW1t, complexity, and intricate nature of its decoration. Kansyore ceramic decoration most commonly consists of walked punctates, or comb impressions, in vertical, horizontal, or a combination of vertical and horizontal bands around the vessel. Wavy-line and zigzag motifs, which are very similar to those fOW1d on earlier fisher-gatherer pottery from the north (Ambrose 1990; Chapman 1967; Sutton 1974), are also present among the motifs in Kansyore assemblages. Common Kansyore vessel forms include open hemispherical bowls and bowls with inturned rims. Less common forms are platters and polygonal bowls (Collett and Robertshaw 1980; Robertshaw 1991).

Dates for the Kansyore archaeological entity range from about 8240 to 2640 B.P., suggesting that the Kansyore material culture was long-lived (Robertshaw 1991). At sites with appropriate stratigraphy, however, it is clear that Kansyore levels underlie the first evidence for food production in East Africa.

New Data from Siror (GPJB 16)

Siror, a Kansyore site recently excavated by Dale in western Kenya, is located on a terrace near rapids of the Nzoia River, approximately 20 km from Lake Victoria (Figure 15-1). It is one of three sites investigated. Excavations at Siror focused on obtaining well-provenienced, datable material to address Kansyore chronological issues and well-contextualized information on Kansyore socioeconomic practices (Dale 2000).

Siror is an open site extending approximately 100 x 150 m. Although portions of the site are W1der hoe cultivation (the remainder lies fallow or has not yet been cultivated), surface visibility is good, and an extensive surface collection was made. Two units, a 1 x 1 m and a 2 x 1 m, were excavated to depths of 129 cm and 100 cm, respectively. It was originally planned to excavate more extensively, but the quantity of archaeological material recovered from the two units made that impracticable. The deposits from both units appeared in


tact with little or no apparent disturbance from human or animal activity, or agents of bioturbation. Following is a summary of the material culture and information recovered from Siror.

Cerarrucs

From those small exploratory units 3,155 sherds were recovered. That number does not include sherds recovered during surface collection of the site. The quantity of cerarrucs found at Siror is striking and an order of magnitude higher than was previously expected for East African huntergatherer sites.

Cerarrucs were found throughout the levels in Units 1 and 2 but were concentrated in levels that were 15-45 cm below the surface, with an average of 286 sherds per 5-cm spit (50 litres). Unit 1 yielded 1,116 sherds, 327 (29%) of which were decorated. Unit 2 yielded 2,039 sherds, 682 (33%) of which were decorated.

Kansyore sites appear to have much higher densities of ceramics than do other Later Stone Age sites in East Africa, but within the Kansyore there is considerable variability. Quantities of cerarrucs sirrular to those found at Siror have been recovered at the Kansyore rockshelter site of Mumba-Hohle (of the 507 diagnostic sherds recovered 207 are related to Kansyore) and the open site of Gogo Falls (- 3,000 Kansyore-type sherds; Dale, personal observation 1997). These quantities contrast with the much smaller amounts of pottery from the shell-rrudden sites Luanda (- 50)/ Kanjera West (- 10), and White Rock Point (- 60) and from Nasera (- 21), a rockshelter site.

A wide variety of Kansyore decoration is present at Siror/ including punctate and rocker-stamp motifs (Figure 15-8) as well as sherds exhibiting unusual applique and circular motifs (Figure 15-8) similar to those identified by Robertshaw (Robertshaw et al. 1983:11; Figure 5-8) from the shell rruddens at Luanda and by Collett and Robertshaw (1980:136; Figure 4a) from Gogo Falls. Zigzig motifs made by rocker-stamp technique with either a plain comb or one with a serrated edge account for 75% of the decorated sherds from Unit 2. That percentage contrasts sharply with decorative patterns from Unit 1 where sherds with Zigzag motifs account for only 7% of the decorated assemblage. Sherds with punctate, simple impression, and incision of different kinds make up 64% of the assemblage.

Vessel reconstruction was hampered to some extent by the sizes of the body and rim sherds recovered. Based on rim angles and wall inclinations, Dale thinks the sherds probably came from small- to medium-sized open-mouthed, herruspherical vessels. This assessment fits with reconstructions for Kansyore pottery from other sites. Sherds from a polygonal bowl were also recovered at Siror.

Fauna

Bone preservation at Siror is excellent. The faunal remains from Unit 2, identified by Chester Cain, suggest high species diversity with an emphaSis on fish. Non-fish taxa include suids, primates, carnivores, equids, snakes, birds/ tortoise, and bovids of various size classes.


~~ /~~ .'- 3~~~ .~~-: ,~<~~ ~,.< -=::=';::?": . ;:2:~-' :~~~5

a. b. ~L?J£-f1~:..~ . ..<'

, D'f'5~ox" o v\l Co

... _~~r) ~.::. O.-t:~-{~I'+~'

. ::Jt~~~'cp i;~~/ c. d.

Figure 15-8. Kansyore pottery from Siror: (a) punctate sherd, typical of Kansyore, 5.3 x 5.4 cm; (b) rocker-stamp sherd, typical of Kansyore, 7.5 x 6 cm; (c) circular-motif sherd, 4 x 3 cm; (d) applique-motif sherd, 3.5 x 5.6cm.

Terrestrial fauna (all non-fish bone including human, mammal, bird, reptile, and amphibian) is found throughout the levels in quantities approximating 150-550 g per level. Human bone is often associated with Kansyore sites. Small numbers of scattered human finger and toe bones throughout Unit 2 may reflect disturbed or secondary burials. An undisturbed human burial was identified between 70 and 85 cm.

Overall pa ttems of non-fish remains suggest exploitation of a wide range of species and ungulate sizes in the upper levels. Small to medium and large ungulates make up the majority of the faunal remains between 30 and 60 cm, and large ungulates dominate between 60 and 90 cm. A similar range of bovid taxa was identified at Kansyore shell midden sites excavated by Robertshaw (Robertshaw et al. 1983).

Fish bone, found throughout the units, is highly concentrated (~ 200-600 g per 5-cm level) between 10 and 35 cm in Unit 2 and between 15 and 45 cm in Unit 1. At least eight fish taxa were identified. The majority of remains are Cyprinidae. Clarias (mud fish, catfish) is common, but just as at Gogo Falls, Barbus (yellowfish, carp) dominates the fish assemblage. Stewart (1991) has suggested that the abundance of Barbus at Gogo Falls is related to ease of capture during their spawning season when they congregate at the bottoms of rapids on rivers tributary to Lake Victoria. This scenario would apply equally to Siror and to other Kansyore sites in the area, located near rapids of the Nzoia River.


Lithic Artifacts

The lithic assemblage at Siror, as at other Kansyore sites, is primarily quartz based and nonuniform in character. The most common formal tools are small quartz crescents and bipolar cores. Obsidian microliths were found in small quantities in the upper levels. The presence of obsidian at the site suggests contact with distant sources (Merrick and Brown 1984). Chert, another nonlocal material, appears to have been used much more frequently at Siror than at other Kansyore sites. Interestingly, one of the few formal tools recovered, a chert blade, was found in association with a human burial (7G-85 em, Unit 2).

Dates and Additional Finds

Secure AMS dates from Siror on wood charcoal and fruit seed range from 6194 ± 47 bp (A0316) to 2889 ± 36 bp (A0318). Additional finds from Siror and other Kansyore sites are few, but those such as shellfish and ostrich-eggshell beads, ocher, and engraved bone may be important for thinking about issues surrounding the socioeconomic organization of the Kansyore.

Kansyore: Delayed-Return Hunter-Gatherers?

Many features of the Kansyore archaeological record, such as association with rich and predictable resources, site density, and abundant ceramics, are consistent with general expectations for delayed-return or inegalitarian hunter-gatherers and the Ownership Model (Table 15-5).

The location of Kansyore sites, like Siror and others in western Kenya, near rapids that provide good spots for annual fish spawns suggests the possibility of resource specialization and corresponds with ecological theories that predi ct economic complexity/specialization where resources are rich, predictable, and storable. At Siror, the probability of resource specialization is further supported by the presence of large quantities of Barbus, a fish that congregates at the bottoms of rapids during the spawning season and is therefore easily exploited in large numbers (Dale 2000; Stewart 1991).

The very high density of material culture (ceramics, fauna, and lithics) atSiror and other Kansyore sites suggests reuse of specific locations. Sites such as Siror and Gogo Falls have high frequencies of ceramics, and the human groups who occupied them were apparently focusing on both fish and terrestrial mammals. It may be that they fit into a system of land use that incorporated seasonal exploitation of shellfish at shoreline localities, such as the shellInidden sites (White Rock Point, Luanda, Kanam, and Kanjera West) on the shores of Lake Victoria. In contrast to Siror and Gogo Falls, the shell-midden sites have low frequencies of ceramics, a focus on lacustrine resources, and less evidence of intensive occupation. Mehlman (1989) similarly suggested the idea of a complementary system of land use for the Kansyore sites of MumbaHohle and Nasera in northern Tanzania. Mumba-Hohle has large quantities of ceramics and accumulations of shellfish and fish, as well as wide arrays of ter


restrial mammals, birds, amphibians, and snakes. Nasera, on the other hand has small quantities of ceramics, and its location at the foot of a kopje in th: grasslands, an area with seasonal rainfall, makes it ideal for hunting large un. gulates.

The abundance of ceramics at Siror, Gogo Falls, and Mumba-Hohle, together with a focus on fishing, suggests that pots were used for short- or longterm storage, possibly in connection with a specialized, seasonal exploitation of fish. As in the Okiek case, we argue that the storing of resources is indicative of ownership. The highly decorated nature of Kansyore ceramic vessels also suggests a degree of technical elaboration and labor investment in material culture more characteristic of items that are owned than shared (Barnett and Hoopes 1995; Goodyear 1988; Hayden 1990; Soffer 1989).

Taken together, abundant ceramics, dense accumulations of material culture, location near rich and predictable resources, and burials associated with some sites are consistent with general expectations of material culture associated with delayed-return hunter-gatherers. There is nothing, however, to indicate that the Kansyore were delayed-return hunter-gatherers with a high degree of inequality. The absence of structures and the low frequency of prestige or exotic goods are consistent with expectations of the Ownership Model for moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers.

The Later Stone Age Kansyore, although probably moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers, differed from the moderate delayed-return Okiek in interesting ways. They lived at low altitudes in riverine and lacustrine environments, rather than in high-altitude rain forests. They focused on fish rather than honey. Significantly, the Kansyore used much larger quantities of, and much more highly decorated, ceramics than did the Okiek. Whether the Kansyore had clan-based systems or bridewealth, we do not know. However, evidence of ownership, resource specialization, storage, and degree of elaboration of material culture are all suggestive of more elaborate socioeco nomic organization than previously suggested for Holocene hunter-gatherers of East Africa.

Conclusion

Binary categories currently used to describe socioeconomic variation among hunter-gatherers limit understanding of varia tion that may have existed among past hunter-gatherer societies. We postulate the existence of moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers without the hierarchies or class systems characteristic of elaborate delayed-return systems such as the Calusa or groups from the Northwest Coast of North America. Such groups are characterized by concepts of ownership, limited sharing, more inequalities, and more bounded societies than those of immediate-return hunter-gatherers such as the !Kung.

To recognize moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers archaeologically, we have developed a model that fits with and amplifies thinking about widely


used indicators for prehistoric delayed-return hunter-gatherers. We emphasize the utility of linking specific material indicators to broader concepts such as ownership. Moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers may be recognized by the presence of ownership indicators, as well as specialized tools and rich and predictable resource bases. But, the presence of such indicators must be combined with the absence of evidence for complex delayed-return huntergatherers including large sites, permanent structures, elaborate materialculture or exotic items, and specialized discard of trash.

Application of these findings to the Later Stone Age Kansyore site of Siror near Lake Victoria, Kenya, suggests that the Kansyore were moderate delayed-return hunter-gatherers. Large quantities of highly decorated ceramics, their accumulation at high densities indicating redundant use of space, and probable use of pots for short- and long-term storage support this interpretation. Locations of sites near rapids and the presence of large quantities of fish also suggest resource specialization, revisiting of sites as part of a seasonal round, and the presence of a delayed-return pattern. But the absence of structures and the low frequency of prestigious or exotic artifact groups fit with a moderate rather than elaborate delayed-return system. The heavy use of ceramics with a focus on lacustrine resources suggests a hitherto umecognized East African hunter-gatherer socioeconomic system.

Barich (1998a:49, 52, 1998b:109) has also recently suggested that some form of delayed-return hunter-gatherers were present in Africa, specifically in the Libyan Acacus and other Saharan sites. She bases her suggestion on evidence for semipermanent occupation, probable logistical mobility, storage (pits), and seasonal use of territory at Ti-n-Torha, ca. 8500 B.P. The presence of delayedreturn hunter-gatherers near Lake Victoria on the equator and in North Africa (ca. 24° N) in the then-wetter central Sahara suggests that there were forms of delayed-return hunter-gatherers in both tropical and subtropical regions of Africa during the mid-Holocene.

We argue that more nuanced archaeological research will reveal considerable variation in social organization among delayed-return hunter-gatherers. In Africa, it is likely that new research will show that there were forms of delayed-return hunter-gatherers in several different contexts during the midand later Holocene (e.g., the Sudanese Nile, where hunter-gatherer ceramics are abundant). In many cases recognition of such groups will require new fieldwork and new, fine-scaled analyses (e.g., of residues and micromorphology).

Africa possesses more tropical land area than all other continents (Goudie 1996). Identification of a range of delayed-return hunter-gatherers there will refine understanding of delayed-return hunter-gatherer distributions in tropical environments. Such new data will assist reconsideration of ecological and social factors, including latitude, resource abundance and distribution, storage of food, task specialization, and competition or encapsulation in the development of a variety of delayed-return hunter-gatherer systems worldwide (Binford 1980, 2001; Hayden 1990; Keeley 1995; Kelly 1991; Rowley-Conwy 1983; Woodburn 1982; Zvelebil 1986).


Acknowledgments

We are grateful to George Crothers for inviting us to Carbondale and to participants of the conference for their comments and camaraderie. We thank Patty Jo Watson and three anonymous reviewers for their comments, which greatly improved this essay. We are grateful to Peter Robertshaw for introducing us to the Kansyore and to Roderick Blackburn for his comments, Okiek ceramic data, and images. We thank the Kenyan National Museums, the British Institute in Eastern Africa, and Washington University for supporting this research, and the Kenyan government for research clearance. Our field research was funded by the Leakey Foundation, Wenner Gren grant 6611, and National Science Foundation grants BSN-8805939 and 9904483. I (Dale) am especially grateful to the Reverend Emmanuel Jakasewe and Mr. Michael Odihambo, as well as to the people of Siror and lJgunja for their assistance with my project. We (Marshall and Pilgram) are indebted to Corinne Kratz for ceramic data, interviews, genealogies and oral histories in the field and for introducing us to the Okiek. We owe a particular debt of gratitude to the people of the western Mau Escarpment.

References

Aikens, C. Melvin, and Takeru Akazawa 1996 The Pleistocene-Holocene Transition in Japan and Adjacent Northeast Asia.

In Humans at the End of the Ice Age: The Archaeology of the Pleistocene-Holocene Transition, edited by Lawrence G. Straus, Berit V. Eriksen, Jon M. Erlandson, and David R. Yesner, pp. 215~227. Plenum Press, New York.

Ambrose, Stanley 1984 The Introduction of Pastoral Adaptations to the Highlands of East Africa. In

From Hunters to Farmers, edited by J- Desmond Clark and Steven A. Brandt, pp. 212-239. University of California Press, Berkeley.

1986 Hunter-Gatherer Adaptations to Non-Marginal Environments: An Ecological and Archaeological Assessment of the Dorobo Model. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 7.2:11-42.

1990 Hunter-Gatherer/Herder Interactions in Highland East Africa. Paper presented at the Society of Africanist Archaeologists Meetings, Center for African Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville.

1998 Chronology of the Later Stone Age and Food Production in East Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 25:377-392.

Alnes, Kenneth M. 1994 The Northwest Coast: Complex Hunter-Gatherers, Ecology, and Social Evo

lution. Annual Review of Anthropology 23:209-229. AInold, Jeanne E.

1996 The Archaeology of Complex Hunter-Gatherers. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theon) 3:77-126.

Bailey, Geoff N. 1983 Hunter-Gatherer Economy in Prehistory. Cambridge University Press, Cam

bridge.


Barich, Barbara E. 1998a People, Water, and Grain: The Beginnings of Domestication in the Sahara and the

Nile Valley. L'Erma di Bretsclmeider, Rome. 1998b Social Variability Among Holocene Saharan Groups. In Gender in Afriwn

Prehistory, edited by Susan Kent, pp. 105-114. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, California.

BaTI1ett, William K., and Jolm W. Hoopes (editors) 1995 The Emergence of Pottery: Technology and Innovation in Ancient Societies.

Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Bernard, Alan, and James WoodbUTI1

1988 Property, Power and Ideology in Hunter-Gatherer Societies: An Introduction. In Hunters and Gatherers 2: Property, Power and Ideology, edited by Tim Ingold, David Riches, and James Woodburn, pp. 4~31. St. Martin's Press, New York.

Binford, Lewis R. 1980 Willow Smoke and Dogs' Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and

Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45:4--20. 1987 Researching Ambiguity: Frames of Reference and Site Structure. In Method

and Theory for Activity Area Research: An Ethnoarchaeological Approach, edited by Susan Kent, pp. 449-512. Columbia University Press, New York.

2001 Constructing Frames ofReference. University of California Press, Berkeley. Bla<:kburn, Roderick H.

1971 Honey in Okiek Personality, Culture and Society. Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State UniverSity. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.

1973 Okiek Ceramics: Evidence for Central Kenya Prehistory. Azania 8:55-70. 1982 In the Land of Milk and Honey: Okiek Adaptations to Their Forests and

Neighbors. In Politics and History in Band Societies, edited by Eleanor B. Leacock and Richard B. Lee, pp. 283--305. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

1996 Fission, Fusion, and Foragers in East Africa: Micro- and Macroprocesses of Diversity and Integration Among Okiek Groups. In Cultural Diversity Among Twentieth-Century Foragers, edited by Susan Kent, pp. 188-212. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Brooks, Allison, Diane E. Gelburd, and John E. Yellen 1984 Food Production and Culture Change Among the 'Klmg San: Implications

for Prehistoric Research. In From Hunters to Farmers: The Causes and Consequences of Food Production in Africa, edited by J. Desmond Clark and Steven A. Brandt, pp. 293-310. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Brooks, Alison, and Jolm E. Yellen 1987 The Preservation of Activity Areas in the Archaeological Record: Etlmoar

chaelogical and Archaeological Work in Northwest Ngarni Land, Botswana. In Method and Theory for Activity Area Research: An Ethnoarchaeological Approach, edited by Susan Kent, pp. 63-106. Columbia University Press, New York.

Chapman, Susannah 1967 Kantsyore Island. Azanm 2:165-191.

Collett, David P., and Peter T. Robertshaw 1980 Early Iron Age and Kansyore Pottery: Finds from Gogo Falls, South

Nyanza. Azania 15:133-145. Dale, Darla D.

2000 Recent Archaeological Investigation of Kansyore Sites in Western Kenya. Azanm 35:204-207.


Donovan, Michael 1993 A Study of Changing Structure of Everyday Life Within a Kipsigis Farming

Community in Western Kenya. Unpublished PhD. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, New York University, New York.

Fisher, John W., and Helen C. Shicklal1d 1989 Ethnoarchaeology Among the Efe Pygmies, Zaire: Spatial Organization of

Campsites. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 78:473-484. Gamble, Clive S.

1978 Resource Exploitation and the Spatial Patterning of Hunter-Gatherers: A Case Study. In Social Organisation and Settlement, edited by David Green, Colin Haselgrove, and Matthew Spriggs, pp. 153-185. BAR International Series 47. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.

1986 The Mesolithic Sandwich: Ecological Approaches and the Archaeological Record of the Early Postglacial. In Hunters in Transition: Mesolithic Societies of Temperate Eurasia and Their Transition to Farming, edited by Marek Zvelebil, pp. 33-42. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Goodyear, Albert C. 1988 On the Study of Technological Change. Current Anthropology 29:320-322.

Goudie, Andrew S. 1996 Climate: Past and Present. In The Physical Geography of Africa, edited by Wil

liam M. Adams, Andrew S. Goudie, and A11tony R. Orme, pp. 34-59. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Gould, Richard 1976 Ecology and Adaptive Response Among the Tolowa IndiallS of Northwest

ern California. In Native Californians: A Theoretical Retrospective, edited by LoweD J. Bean and Thomas C. Blackburn, pp. 49-78. Ballena Press, Ramona, California.

Hayden, Brian 1981 Research and Development in the Stone Age: Technological Transitions

Among HUllter-Gatherers. Current Anthropology 22:519-548. 1990 Nimrods, Piscators, Pluckers and Planters: The Emergence of Food Produc

tion. Journal ofAnthropological Archaeology 9:31-69. 1995a The Emergence of Prestige Technologies and Pottery. In The Emergence of

Pottery: Technology and Innovation in Ancient Societies, edited by William K. Barnett and John W. Hoopes, pp. 257-265. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

1995b Pathways to Power: Principles for Creatillg Socioeconomic Inequalities. 111 Foundations of Social Inequality, edited by T. Douglas Price and Gary M. Feinman, pp. 15--78. Plenum Press, New York.

Hegmon, Michelle 1991 The Risks of Sharillg and Sharing as Risk Red uction: In terhousehold Food

Sharillg in Egalitarian Societies. In Between Bands and States, edited by Susal1 A Gregg, pp. 309-329. Occasional Paper No.9. Center for Archaeological Investi gations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

Huntingford, George W. B. 1929 Modem HUllters: Some Account of the Kamelilo-Kapchepkendi Dorobo

(Okiek) of Kenya Colony. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 59:333-376.

1955 The Economic Life of the Dorobo. Anthropos 50:602-634. Ingold, Tim

1980 Hunters, Pastoralists and Ranchers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Delayed-Return Hlmter-Gatherers in Africa I373

Karega-Munene 1993 Neolithic/Iron Age Subsistence Economies in the Lake Victoria Basin of

East Africa. Ph.D. thesis in archaeology, Cambridge University, Cambridge. Keeley, Lawrence H.

1995 Agricultural Practices Among Hunter-Gatherers. A Cross-Cultural Survey. In Last Hunters First Farmers, edited by T. Douglas Price and Anne Birgitte Gebauer, pp. 243-272. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Kelly, Robert L. 1991 Sedentism, Sociopolitical Inequality, and Resource Fluctuations. In Between

Bands and States, edited by Susan A. Gregg, pp. 135-158. Occasional Paper No.9. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

1995 Foraging Spectrum: Diversity in Hunter-Gatherer Lifeways. Smithsonian Insti tution Press, Washington, D.C.

Kent, Susan 1987 Method and Theory for Activity Area Research: An Ethnoarchaeological Approach.

Columbia University Press, New York. Klumpp, Dorma, and Corinne A. Kratz

1993 Aesthetics, Expertise, and Ethnicity: Okiek and Maasai Perspectives on Personal Ornament. In Being Maasai, edited by Thomas Spear and Richard Waller, pp. 195--221. James Curry, London.

Kratz, Corinne A. 1977 The Liquors of Forest and Garden: Drinking in Okiek Life. Unpublished

Masters thesis, Department of Anthropology, Wesleyan University, Middletown, Cormecticut.

1981 Are the Okiek Really Masai? or Kipsigis? or Kikuyu? Cahiers d'Etudes Africaines 78:3355-3368.

1986 Ethnic Interaction, Economic Diversification and Language Use: A Report on Research with Kaplelach and Kipchornwonek Okiek. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika 7.2:189-226.

1989 Okiek. In Kenyan Pots and Potters, edited by Jane Barbour and Simuyu Wandibba, pp. 64-74. Oxford University Press, Nairobi.

1994 Affecting Performance: Meaning, Movement, and Experience in Okiek Women's Initiation. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Lee, Richard B., and Irven DeVore (editors) 1968 Man the Hunter. Aldine, New York.

Lightfoot, Kenneth 1993 Long-Term Developments in Complex Hunter-Gatherer Societies: Recent

Perspectives from the Pacific Coast of North America. Journal of Archaeological Research 1:167-201.

Manners, Robert 1962 Land Use, Labor, and the Growth of Market Economy in Kipsigis Country

In Markets in Africa, edited by Paul Bohannan and George Dalton, pp. 493-519. Northwestern University Press, Evanston, Illinois.

Marean, Curtis, Nina Mudida, and Kaye E. Reed 1994 Holocene Paleoenvironmental Change in the Kenyan Central Rift as indi

cated by Micromammals from Enkapune Ya Muto Rockshelter. Quaternary Research 41:376-389.

Marquardt, William H. 1986 The Development of Cultural Complexity in Southwest Florida: Elements

374/ D. Dale, F Marshall, and T. Pilgram

of a Critique. Southeastern Archaeology 5:63-70. Marshall, Fiona

1994 Food Sharing and Body Part Representation in Okiek Faunal Assemblages. Journal ofArchaeological Science 21:65-77.

2000 The Origins and Spread of Domestic Animals in East Africa. In The Origins and Development of African Livestock: Archaeology, Genetics, Linguistics and Ethnography, edited by Roger M. Blench and Kevin c:. McDonald, pp. 191-221. University College London Press, London.

2001 Agriculture and Use of Wild and Weedy Vegetables by the Piik Ap Oom Okiek of Kenya. Economic Botany 55:32--46.

Mehlman, Michael J. 1989 Later QuaternanJ Archaeological Sequences in Northern Tanzania. Unpublished

Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois, UrbanaChampaign.

Meillassoux, Claude 1972 On the Mode of Production of the Hunting Band. In French Perspectives in

African Studies, edited by Pierre Alexandre, pp. 39-58. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Merrick, Harry V., and Francis H. Brown 1984 Obsidian Sources and Patterns of Source Utilization in Kenya and Northern

Tanzania: Some Initial Findings. African Archaeological Review 2:129-152. Orchardson, Ian

1970 The Kipsigis. East African Literature Bureau, Nairobi. Originally published 1961.

Oyuela-Caycedo, Augusto 1996 The Study of Collector Variability in the Transition to Sedentary Food Pro

ducers in Northern Columbia. Journal of World Prehistory 10:49-93. Peristiany, John G.

1964 The Social Institutions of the Kipsigis. Routledge and K. Paul, London. Originallypublished 1939.

Phillipson, David W. 1977a The Later PrehistonJ of Eastern and Southern Africa. Africana Publishing Com

pany, New York. 1977b Lowasera. Azania 12:1-32.

Price, T. Douglas, and James A. Brown 1985 Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers: The Emergence of Cultural Complexity. Academic

Press, Orlando. Price, T. Douglas, and Anne Birgitte Gebauer

1992 The Final Frontier: First Farmers in Northern Europe. In Transitions to Agriculture in Prehistory, edited by Anne Birgitte Gebauer and T. Douglas Price, pp. 97-116. Prehistory Press, Madison, Wisconsin.

1995 Last Hunters First Fanners. School of American Research Press, Sante Fe. Renout, M. A. P.

1991 Sedentary Hunter-Gatherers: A Case for Northern Coasts. In Between Bands and States, edited by Susan A. Gregg, pp. 89-107. Occasional Paper No.9. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

Robertshaw, Peter 1991 Gogo Falls: A Complex Site East of Lake Victoria. Aznnia 26:63-195.

Robertshaw, Peter, David Collett, Diane Gifford, and Nubi B. Mbae 1983 Shell Middens on the Shores of Lake Victoria. Azania 18:1--43.


Rowley-Conwy, Peter 1983 Sedentary Hunters: The Ertebolle Example. In Hunter-Gatherer Economy in

Prehistory, edited by Geoff N. Bailey, pp. 111-126. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

1986 Betw·een Cave Painters and Crop Planters: Aspects of the Temperate European Mesolithic. In Hunters in Transition: Mesolithic Societies of Temperate Eurasia and '{heir Transition to Farming, edited by Marek Zvelebil, pp. 17-32. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Sahlins, Marshall 1972 Stone Age Economics. Aldine, Chicago.

Soffer, Olga 1989 Storage, Sedentism and the Eurasian Palaeolithic Record. Antiquity

83:719-732. Soper, Robert c., and Bernard Golden

1969 An Archaeological Smvey of Mwanza Region, Tanzania. Azania 4:15-78. Stewart, Kathleen

1991 Appendix III: Fish Remains from Gogo Falls. In "Excavations at a Complex Archaeological Site East of Lake Victoria." Azania 18:1-43.

Sutton, John 1974 The Aquatic Civilization of Middle Africa. Journal of African History

15:527-546. Testart, Alain

1982 The Significance of Food Storage Among Htmter-Gatherers: Residence Patterns, Population Densities, and Social Inequalities. Current Anthropology 23:523--536.

Thorp, Carolyn 1992 Nguru H.ills: Iron Age and Earlier Ceramics. Azania 27:21-44.

Woodburn, James 1982 Egalitarian Societies. Man (n.s.) 17:431-451. 1988 African Hunter-Gatherer Social Organization: Is It Best Understood as a

Product of Encapsulation? In Hunters and Gatherers 1: History, Evolution, and Social Change, edited by Tim Ingold, David Riches, and James Woodburn, pp. 31--64. Berg Press, Oxford.

Wylie, Alison 1989 Archaeological Cables and Tacking: The Implications of Practice for Bern

stein's Options Beyond Objectivism and Relativism. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 19:1-18.

Zvelebil, Marek 1986 Mesolithic Prelude and Neolithic Transition. In Hunters in Transition: Meso

lithic Societies of Temperate Eurasia and TheIr Transition to Farming, edited by Marek Zvelebil, pp. 5--15. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

15. delayed-return hunter-gatherers in africa? historic

Documents