Sunday 5 November 2023

Evidence for shoes in the Middle Stone Age of the Cape Coast, South Africa.

The appearance of clothing is considered to be one of the key stages in the development of Modern Humans, and the development of footwear, a complex form of clothing, is in itself an important technological leap. However, the exact time when footwear first appeared is unknown, with the first foot-coverings presumed to have been made of perishable materials unlikely to have survived. In the absence of preserved footwear, ichnology (the study of tracks and traces) provides the most plausible technique for detecting the first use of footwear among Hominins.

The oldest known shoes in the archaeological record are sandals made of woven Sagebrush bark from Oregon in the United States, the oldest of which have been dated to between 10 500 and 9200 years old. Also from the United States, a variety of sandals, moccasins, and slip-on footwear have been uncovered in Missouri, dating from between 8000 and 1000 years ago. The oldest shoe from Eurasia is a leather wrap-around shoe from southeastern Armenia, dated to between 5600 and 5400 years ago. Also from Eurasia, ‘Ötzi the Iceman' a frozen natural mummy found in the High Alps on the border between Austria and Italy, dated to more than 5000 years old, had a complete set of clothing, including complex footwear made from Bear-skin, Deer hide, and tree bark. A pair of Cow-hide sandals from Israel has also been dated to more than 5000 years ago.

Hominin trackways are known from many sites around the world, and can be identified by features such as the alignment and shape of the hallux, relative digit lengths, and the presence of a prominent medial longitudinal arch. However, these identifying features are based upon the assumption that the track-maker was unshod, and it is unlikely that all would be present were they to have been wearing some form of foot-covering. Thus, unsurprisingly, the majority of known Hominin tracks are considered to have been made by unshod tracemakers, although a few exceptions are known.

The oldest apparently shod Human tracks in the Americas are in Jaguar Cave, Tennessee, which are thought to be about 5000 years old. In Europe such traces include traces associated with a Magdalenian (Upper Palaeolithic) tool assemblage in Fontanet Cave, France, which appear to have been made by an individual wearing a soft shoe or sock. Also in France, Cussac Cave, footprints associated with a Gravettian assemblage and dated to between 38 000 and 31 000 years ago lack any digit impressions, despite these being present on both Human handprints and Bear footprints within the same cave, leading to the possibility that the trace-makers may have been shod.

Footprints without digit impressions are also known from a third site in France, Le Rozel, although these are about 80 000 years old, implying that the trace-makers were Neanderthals rather than Modern Humans. Possible evidence for footwear use by Neanderthals comes from Theopetra Cave in Greece, where a mixture of shod and unshod traces appears to have been left by a group of children around 130 000 years ago.

In South Africa, a number of possible footwear traces have been found on the Cape Coast, an area noted for its excellent Pleistocene tracks, including one trace which appears to show a clear sandal-imprint.

The use of clothing is thought to have been developed by Hominins inhabiting cool environments during Pleistocene cold spells, although the perishable nature of the material from which such cloths are likely to have been made, makes it unlikely that any preserved material will ever be found. Instead, tools used for the processing of skins, leather, and textiles are used as proxies for the materials themselves. This begins with the appearance of scrapers presumed to have been used for the preparation of skins, shortly followed by bone awls, needles and eyed needles, which imply the manufacture of increasingly complex clothing. Based upon this, it has been calculated that the first simple clothing probably appeared around 800 000 years ago, long before the emergence of Modern Humans, with several different Hominin species probably manufacturing and wearing cloths, with the possibility that footwear appeared at the same time. Molecular clock analysis suggests that Body Lice probably diverged from Head Lice between 170 000 and 80 000 years ago, by which time is is assumed that Humans were habitually wearing cloths all the time.

The Contrebandiers Cave site in Morocco, which has been dated to between 120 000 and 90 000 years ago, has yielded a variety of bone tools thought to have been used for the processing of leather and furs, but for the most part Pleistocene sites with evidence for tools likely to have been used in clothing manufacture and tracks made by Hominins are restricted to two areas, Western Europe and the Cape Coast of South Africa.

Such tools in Europe are known from the Middle Palaeolithic of southwestern France, with the oldest dating to about 51 400 years ago, and other examples between 48 000 and 41 000 years ago. These tools were presumably made by Neanderthals, and include lissoirs, tools which can be used to process hides, giving a smooth, tough, and reasonably impermeable finish (although not the same as modern commercially produced leathers).

The oldest sites in South Africa yielding tools which could have been made for making cloths are at Klasies River and Blombos Cave on the Cape Coast, with the Klasies River site dated to about 100 000 years ago and Blombos Cave mostly to about 80 000 years ago, although one awl, made from the bone of a Bird, was dated to at least 125 000 years ago.

Although these tools are taken as the earliest tools which are clearly associated with clothing manufacture, in both Europe and South Africa earlier stone tools could have been used to cut or pierce hides during the manufacture of simple garments, as could sharpened shell tools known from the Cape Coast. However, the fact that the oldest surviving footwear was made from woven Sagebrush rather than leather does suggest that caution should be applied when judging what ancient populations would have seen as suitable materials for making footwear.

It has also been suggested that wearing shoes might affect the way in which the foot develops, something which has been implied for a set of Human remains from Tianyuan in China dated to about 50 000 years ago, although the phalanges of the foot are seldom well preserved, limiting the number of instances in which this method can be applied.

Another Upper Palaeolithic site at Sunghir, in northern Russia, yielded a buried individual with remnant body decoration implying leggings or boots, as well as having extremely gracile lateral phalanges, something thought to be associated with habitual shoe wearing. This was particularly surprising as all Upper Palaeolithic Hominin tracks from Eurasia appear to have been made by barefoot trace-makers.

The relationship between footwear and foot morphology is complicated. Individuals who minimise their use of footwear are thought to have stronger foot muscles, and fewer pathologies of the feet, but this would be unlikely to result in any detectable skeletal difference between someone who never wore shoes and someone who occasionally did so, or even somebody who habitually wore very lightweight shoes.

In a paper published in the journal Ichnos on 28 August 2023, Charles Helm of the African Centre for Coastal Palaeoscience at Nelson Mandela University, Martin Lockley, also of the African Centre for Coastal Palaeoscience at Nelson Mandela University, and of the Dinosaur Trackers Research Group at the University of Colorado Denver, Hayley Cawthra, again of the African Centre for Coastal Palaeoscience at Nelson Mandela University, and of the Minerals and Energy Unit at the South African Council for Geoscience, Jan De Vynck, again of the African Centre for Coastal Palaeoscience at Nelson Mandela University, and of the Evolutionary Studies Institute at the University of the Witwatersrand, Mark Dixon, again of the African Centre for Coastal Palaeoscience at Nelson Mandela University, Renée Rust, again of the African Centre for Coastal Palaeoscience at Nelson Mandela University, and of the School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies at the University of the Witwatersrand, Willo Stear and Monique Van Tonder, once again of the African Centre for Coastal Palaeoscience at Nelson Mandela University, and Bernhard Zipfel, also of the Evolutionary Studies Institute at the University of the Witwatersrand, describe three Middle Stone Age sites on South Africa’s Cape Coast where tracks appear to have been made by Hominins wearing shoes, and discuss ways in which future studies of this topic could be approached.

Map of the Cape Coast of South Africa, showing Cenozoic deposits and places mentioned in the text. Helm et al. (2023).

Scientists from the African Centre for Coastal Palaeoscience have been studying the trace fossils of the Cape Coast since 2007. Here, a 350 km section of coast has frequent coastal aeolianites (wind-blown sand deposits) which have been buried by subsequent similar deposits than set with a carbonate cement, preserving a record of the people and animals which moved over them during the Middle Stone Age. As well as trackways left by Hominins, these studies revealed imprints left by Crocodiles, Giraffe, breeding Sea Turtles and very large Tortoises, none of which have left skeletal remains in the area.

The Cape Coast region has a remarkably rich archaeological record, tracing the appearance and development of numerous stages considered key steps on the way to Modern Human behaviour, including personal adornments, jewellery, the heat treatment of stone tools, art, and the use of abstract symbols. Palaeoclimatic studies of the same region indicate that the coastal plains upon which these deposits were laid down went through a cycle of exposure and inundation throughout the Pleistocene, which probably helped to maintain an ideal Hominin environment in the region. 

Prior to this project, Hominin tracks had previously been discovered at Langebaan on the west coast of South Africa, and Nahoon on the east coast of the country. Extensive study of the Cape Coast has produced four new track localities, and while another probable set of tracks has recently been identified at Langebaan. Combined with a set of tracks on an ancient lakebed in the Nefud Desert of Saudi Arabia, this represents the entire global inventory of tracks more than 46 000 years old which are attributed to Modern Humans.

All of the Hominin tracks on the Cape Coast are within the aeolianites of the Waenhuiskrans Formation, which together with the cemented foreshore, shoreface and lagoon deposits of the Klein Brak Formation, comprise the Bredasdorp Group. These deposits have been dated to between 400 000 and 36 000 years old, although the majority belong to Marine Isotope Stage 5, making them between 130 000 and 80 000 years old. To the east of Robberg, the correlate of the Waenhuiskrans Formation is the Nahoon Formation, which forms part of the Algoa Group. These Pleistocene aeolianites split readily along their bedding planes, so that tracks are often exposed on fallen blocks on the coast. Thes blocks are ephemeral, quickly being eroded away by the action of the waves.

Due to this ephemeral nature, tracks needed to be recorded quickly when exposed. This was done by recording their locality with a GPS unit and taking numerous photographs, which were then used to build photogrammetric models. Exposed trackways and footprints were also measured for track length, track width, track depth, pace length, stride length, and thickness of foresets, and individual footprints were examined for evidence of strap attachment points. 

In addition, studies were made of newly created tracks on sandy surfaces on the Cape Coast, with varying levels of moisture, slope, and firmness, and a variety of shoe types, including shoes with an open soft sole, an open hard sole, a closed soft sole and a closed hard sole. The best match for the fossil footprints was made by using an open hard soled shoe on soft, moist sand.

Shoe designs for this study were based upon shoes made by examples of sandals made by San peoples of southern Africa from the collections of the Blombos Museum of Archaeology in South Africa and Zambezi Heritage Museum in Namibia. The shoe which gave the closest results to the preserves footprints was based upon two such sandals, and was made from two layers of Cow-hide glued together, and laced by piercing three holes through this sole, one between the big toe and the adjacent digit, and two about half way along the length of the shoe, one at each side. The laces were made from the same Cow-hide as the upper part of the shoe, and were threaded through the holes and knotted underneath, protruding below, although in the museum examples prolonged use had levelled out the knots with the base of the sole. These sandals proved easy to attach to the foot.

Helm et al. present details of three footprint-bearing sites on the Cape Coast, these being, from west to east, Kleinkrantz, Goukamma, and Woody Cape.

At Kleinkrantz a slab measing 55 cm x 55 cm and 20 cm thick with apparent footprints on its upper surface, was found lying on a modern coast dune beneath a vegetated slope, which in turn lies beneath a cliff with an exposure of the Waenhuiskrans Formation. There was no sign of a recent rockfall, and samples taken from the Waenhuiskrans Formation in this area have been dated to between 148 000 and 79 000 years old.

(A) The Kleinkrantz site in the Garden Route National Park; scale bar is 10 cm. (B) Photogrammetry colour mesh of the Kleinkrantz site, using 48 images. Photos were taken average 36.4 cm from the surface. The reprojection error is 0.39 pix. Vertical and horizontal scales are in metres. Arrows indicate possible strap attachment point impressions. Helm et al. (2023).

This slab has two similar depressions, one in front of the other, each with crisp three crisp and well-defined margins, two straight parallel, the third near semicircular. One of these appears to have been a double impression, with a slightly narrower impression overlying an slightly wider one. The wider of these is 9 cm wide, the narrower 7 cm, while the single impression is 8 cm wide. Both features are at least 16 cm long. The narrowest impression also has three depressions within it consistent with the position of the strap knots on the experimental sandal.

Two other possible track prints are also present, although these are more amorphous, and were apparently made by a person travelling in a different direction, though again possible strap-attachment knot impressions are present. 

The second site lies within the Goukamma Nature Reserve, between Sedgefield and Knysna, where the Waenhuiskrans Formation has been dated to between 136 000 and 79 000 years old, although recent dates obtained suggest parts of the formation may be as young as 73 000 years old. Here a fallen slab has three footprints with crisp margins and no signs of digits, one of which particularly resembles the imprint of a shod foot. This print measures 11.5 cm in length and 6 cm in width.

(A) The Goukamma surface; scale bar = 10 cm. (B) Angled view of the Goukamma site; scale bar is 10 cm. (C) Photogrammetry colour mesh of the Goukamma site, using 59 images. Photos were taken average 29.9 cm from the surface. The reprojection error is 0.39 pix. Vertical and horizontal scales are in metres. Helm et al. (2023).

The third site, Woody Cape, is situated in the coastal portion of the Addo Elephant National Park. Here a detached slab from the Nahoon Formation shows a trackway comprising four footprints, one of which is partial. The prints are 10-12 cm long and 5-6 cm wide, with a pace length of 19 cm. Raised areas to the left of each print imply some downslope movement.

Photogrammetry colour mesh of the Woody Cape site, using 37 images. Photos were taken average 29.2 cm from the surface. The reprojection error is 0.57 pix. Vertical and horizontal scales are in metres. Helm et al. (2023).

Helm et al. also attempted to recreate a trackway similar to the Pleistocene examples, using a hard-soled sandal based upon museum specimens, on a modern, moist, soft, level dune surface. This produced footprints with slight out-toeing about 26 cm in length, with a width of 11.5 cm and a pace length of 63 cm. The front and back margins of the prints were semicircular, the sides parallel. Strap attachment marks can be seen.

Photogrammetry colour mesh of the neoichnological trackway (level surface, hard-soled sandal, soft substrate) using 63 images. Photos were taken average 37 cm from the surface. The reprojection error is 2.07 pix. Vertical and horizontal scales are in metres. Helm et al. (2023).

Helm et al. accept that the evidence they provide cannot be seen as irrefutable, however, the presence of similar tracks at three separate sites, combined with the recreation of similar prints with a pair of modern sandals based upon a historic design, does strongly suggest that similar sandals were being worn by Humans in the area more than 70 000 years ago. All three sets of footprints appear to have been made by trackmakers smaller than modern adult Humans, suggesting that they were either adults of smaller stature, or children.

A pair of sandals on exhibit in the Blombos Museum of Archaeology in Still Bay, viewed from above (A), and below (B), showing strap attachment points; scale bars are 10 cm. Helm et al. (2023).

The tracks of bare feet are distinctive, due to the presence of digits and the raised arch of the foot. The impression likely to have been made by a shoe of unknown design is less easy to predict, but it is likely to have followed the general plan of a Hominin footprint, i.e. twice as long as wide, and soft foot-coverings may still preserve the presence of an arch, and rounded front and back margins. It is also quite likely that the front portion of the print will be wider than the rear portion, and that the curve of the front and back parts of the foot will be different. Trackways will reflect the fact that Hominins are bipeds with a narrow stride. In some cases, distinctive traces may be made by the footwear, such as attachment marks from straps.

A pair of sandals on exhibit in the Zambezi Heritage Museum in Katima Mulilo, Namibia, viewed from above (A), and below (B), showing strap attachment points; scale bars are 10 cm. Helm et al. (2023).

Previous attempts to recreate impressions likely to have been made by ancient footwear mostly concentrated on the use of soft leather shoes by persons walking over clay substrates. These studies found that shod tracks were typically longer and narrower than unshod tracks, and that this became more exaggerated as the substrate got moister and the footprints deeper. Shod footprints were also typically simpler than unshod ones, most obviously in the lack of toe-prints. 

These findings may have some implications for studies being carried out on the Cape Coast of South Africa, where some footprints have been considered questionable due to their apparently elongate shape.

Historic sandals in the collections of museums shed light on the appearance of shoes within the region in the recent past, and therefore possibly those that might have been used by people in the remote past armed with similar resources and environmental challenges. These sandals are remarkably symmetrical, with little difference between the width of the front and rear portions of the shoe. The pair from the Zambezi Heritage Museum in Namibia are believed to have been made from Buffalo hide in the 1920s.

The San people who made these sandals are known to have used a variety of Animal skins, with different groups using specific hides, including Eland, Hartebeest, and Wildebeest, while other Animals, such as Gemsbok, were avoided by all groups. Furthermore, different types of sandals were made for different purposes, including special shoes for seniors, shoes for uphill travel, and running sandals with a hook under the toe giving extra purchase when running over soft sand (possibly in imitation of the foot of an Ostrich, the fastest bipedal Animal present in the region).

A pair of ‘running sandals’ in the Fourie Collection in Museum Africa, accession number MM40-69-2416; scale bar is 10 cm. Justine Wintjes in Helm et al. (2023).

Rock art in Southern Africa also provides a record of the use of footwear in the region, albeit one that only stretches back a few thousand years. The artwork at Baviaanskloof in Eastern Cape Province is thought to be about 2000 years old, and includes a 21 cm high figure interpreted as a shaman, naked apart of a pair of laced sandals and a kaross (cloak made from Animal skin). The fact that a largely naked figure is wearing elaborate sandals suggests that these were important items to the people of the region.

(A) A male figure, apparently with footwear and shoelaces (magnified in inset), in a San pictograph from Baviaanskloof.  (B) Rock art of footwear that appears to depict shoelaces, Baviaanskloof. Helm et al. (2023).

In total, four figures with footwear are present within at Baviaanskloof, two of which have identifiable laces. Sandals can also be seen in the rock art of the western US, where Pueblo petroglyphs made between 1000 and 1200 AD also depict footwear.

Helm et al. note that the identification of tracks made by Hominins with footwear can be difficult, and suggest a set of criteria which may make this easier for future researchers. Firstly, any trackway examined should be of sufficient length for the study to be useful. Secondly, Hominins are bipedal, with a narrow gait, and any track made by them should reflect this. Thirdly, Hominin footprints are roughly twice as long as wide, regardless of footwear. Fourthly, Hominin tracks tend to have rounded fronts and backs. Fifthly, any trackway analysed for the presence of footwear should be of sufficient quality, with crisp margins. Sixthly, shod footprints will lack the diagnostic features of unshod footprints, such as digit marks. Finally, the footprints may have diagnostic features associated with the footwear, such as strap attachment points.

See also...

Follow Sciency Thoughts on Facebook.

Follow Sciency Thoughts on Twitter.