About this episode
25,000 years ago ... Right at the peak of the Last Ice Age, most people living on the African continent finally embraced microlithic tools, an innovation that had been around for tens of thousands of years.
Get every episode summarized
Each time Our Prehistory publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.
Email me new episodesFree for 3 shows. No card needed.
Hosts & guests
Transcript ready
55 searchable segments. Every word is indexed and playable.
Full transcript
Our Prehistory — 47. Last Glacial Maximum of Africa [Preview]. Machine-transcribed; use the interactive transcript above to jump the player to any line.
The following is a preview of Episode 47, last glacial maximum of Africa. To listen to the full episode, visit patreon.com slash our prehistory, or click the link in the description of this episode. So that leads to another question. What drove so many people without strong ties to adopt microlytic tools around the same time? What encouraged them to finally embrace an idea that had been around sub-Saharan Africa for tens of thousands of years? It's tempting to assume that environmental changes associated with the last glacial maximum drove this phenomenon. This was a period when most ecosystems around the world became less productive due to less precipitation and atmospheric carbon dioxide. Maybe the expansion of deserts and arid grasslands encouraged Africans to
find new tools to help them survive with fewer or different sources of food. This theory brings to mind an interesting parallel. Back in Episode 33, we learned about the invention of microplates in Northeast Asia, right at the peak of the last glacial maximum. This exceptionally small and standardized form of bladelet started spreading across northern China, Korea, Japan, and Eastern Russia around 25,000 years ago. We hypothesized that this sophisticated stone working technique originated in the desire to create more lethal and reliable hunting weapons. We know that rows of microblades were used to create cutting edges on spear points made from bone. When resources became scarce, the consequences for failure during hunting expeditions may become more dire.
So microlytic tools might have been a part of an adaptation to a harsher landscape. Maybe a similar driving force led to growing popularity of microlists in Africa. A common theory among archaeologists is that the shift from a larger stone points of the middle stone age to smaller microlists of the late stone age represents the switch from hunting primarily with spears to bows and arrows. Bows and arrows are more difficult to craft than spears, but they are more accurate and can be deployed with less movement by the hunter, making them stealthier. One interesting piece of evidence supports the bow and arrow hypothesis. At Border Cave in South Africa, a 24,000-year-old stick was discovered that bore traces of recinoleic acid, an extremely dangerous poison extracted from caster beans.
This chemical residue is strong evidence that by the time of the last glacial maximum, people in southern Africa were applying poisons to the tips of their hunting weapons. The use of poison makes arrows much more effective. One of the downsides of arrows compared to spears is that their smaller mass means they cause less physical damage to animals, a key factor when hunting larger game. But a single poisoned arrow can easily kill a large animal. So maybe the rise of microlists marks the widespread adoption of the bow and arrow across sub-Saharan Africa at a time when survival became more difficult. An investment in technology to mitigate risk. Maybe poisoned arrows in particular made people more effective hunters.
More episodes
