BUY TICKETS

Swartkrans Caves

Located about 1km northwest of the Blaauwbank River and opposite the Sterkfontein Caves, Swartkrans Cave is a vital site within South Africa’s Cradle of Humankind. Renowned for its wealth of fossilized bones and stone tools, the cave has played a crucial role in shaping our understanding of prehistoric human history. Spanning geological deposits from over two million years ago to around 11,000 years ago, Swartkrans offers an extraordinary glimpse into significant stages of human evolution.

 

Discovered in 1948 by Robert Broom and John Robinson, Swartkrans was first identified due to its sedimentary deposits, similar to those found at the nearby Sterkfontein Caves. During their initial excavation from 1948 to 1949, Broom and Robinson unearthed fossils from two distinct hominin species: Paranthropus robustus (like the SK 45 jaw fragment) and early Homo (such as the SK 15 jaw). This discovery provided groundbreaking evidence that two hominin species coexisted, offering new insights into human evolutionary history.

 

Swartkrans reveals a complex picture of early human life. Evidence shows that these ancient hominin species likely competed for resources while coexisting alongside large predators. Archaeological finds indicate the use of stone and bone tools for activities like butchering animal carcasses and digging for edible roots. Notably, Swartkrans is one of the earliest known sites where our ancestors controlled and used fire—burned animal bones with butchery marks suggest fire use for cooking and defense dating back nearly one million years.

 

However, exploration at Swartkrans faced setbacks in 1950 when lime mining operations damaged the site’s fossil deposits. Despite this, research resumed when John Robinson invited geologist CK "Bob" Brain to study the cave from 1953 to 1957, eventually leading Brain to oversee Swartkrans excavations from 1965 to 1986. During this time, Brain discovered numerous hominin fossils, tool assemblages, and some of the earliest known evidence of fire use.

 

Swartkrans’ contributions to paleoanthropology have been invaluable. The site has provided key insights into human evolutionary development, behavioral adaptations, and ancient ecosystems. Brain’s detailed analysis of fossil assemblages helped refine our understanding of how fossil bones accumulated in Southern African cave systems.

 

A pivotal moment in this research came with Brain’s challenge to Professor Raymond Dart’s “osteodontokeratic” hypothesis from the late 1940s. Dart suggested that early hominins brought animal bones into caves to use as tools, based on finds at the Makapansgat Cave site in Limpopo. Brain’s observations at Swartkrans and in Namibian Khoe villages, however, revealed that large carnivores like big cats and hyenas were more likely responsible for the accumulation of many of these bones, as evidenced by bite and scratch marks.

 

Brain’s groundbreaking work culminated in his 1981 book, "The Hunters or the Hunted?" which emphasized the importance of cave taphonomy—the study of how fossil deposits form under natural conditions. This research remains crucial for distinguishing human behavior from natural processes in the study of human evolution.

 

Today, Swartkrans Cave continues to be a vital window into our ancient past, offering remarkable insights into the evolution and survival strategies of early humans.

 

Points of Interest

  

Swartkrans Cave: Unlocking the Story of Early Human Evolution

  •  

    A Record of Tool Use Spanning Millions of Years

     

    Swartkrans Cave offers one of the most significant windows into human evolution, with its extensive record of tool use stretching from over 2 million years ago to less than 110,000 years ago. 

     

    The Member 1 sedimentary unit has been crucial in investigating early tool-making techniques. Our ancestors shared this landscape with large-bodied carnivores, sometimes falling victim to them. Competing for resources like animal meat and fat required innovation, and the tools found here reflect that struggle and adaptation.

     

    Importantly, stone tools weren’t created independently or randomly. They were the result of shared knowledge, observation, and collaboration — an early example of social learning. This cooperative behavior likely played a vital role in helping early humans secure food and avoid predators.

     

  •  

    A New Age for Member 1

     

    Understanding the age of archaeological assemblages — collections of stone tools found during excavations — is essential for mapping the evolution of technology over time. One of the key questions at Swartkrans is determining the exact age of the Member 1 sedimentary unit, which contains the site’s oldest known fossil hominins and stone tools.

     

    Multiple dating techniques have refined our understanding of Member 1’s timeline. In 2011, uranium-lead dating of flowstones (limestone deposits) produced ages between 2.31 and 1.64 million years. The two parts of Member 1 — the older Lower Bank and the younger Hanging Remnant — likely represent different periods of cave infilling.

     

    Further studies in 2014 used cosmogenic nuclide dating on the Lower Bank, yielding ages between 2.19 and 1.8 million years — a puzzlingly large gap. More recently, cosmogenic dating of chert rocks provided a more secure age of around 2.22 million years. This aligns with the earlier uranium-lead results and confirms the Lower Bank’s status as the older sedimentary unit.

     

    Interestingly, similar techniques at the nearby Sterkfontein Caves (Member 5 East) dated stone tool-bearing deposits to approximately 2.18 million years. This suggests that both sites may have been inhabited by tool-making hominins around the same time.

     

     

     

  •  

    Types of Stone Tools from Member 1

     

    The tools found at Swartkrans Member 1 are simple in appearance yet complex in their production — all the more remarkable considering the probable lack of formal language among their makers.

     

    In the late 1960s, renowned archaeologist Mary Leakey identified these tools as “developed Oldowan,” representing a transitional phase between Oldowan and Acheulean technologies. Later reassessments by Kathleen Kuman and her students confirmed that these tools were classically Oldowan, created through controlled percussion to produce sharp-edged flakes.

     

    One of the most fascinating discoveries is the difference in tool-making techniques and material choices between Swartkrans and Sterkfontein. At Swartkrans, a variety of rocks were used, including quartz (61.2%), chert (31.9%), and quartzite (5.2%). In contrast, Sterkfontein’s tools were predominantly made from quartz (90.5%).

     

    Moreover, over half of the Lower Bank tools at Swartkrans show evidence of bipolar knapping — a technique where a stone core is struck while anchored on an anvil stone. At Sterkfontein, freehand knapping was more common, involving striking a core held in hand.

     

     

     

  •  

    Why These Differences Matter

     

    The variability in tool-making methods offers valuable insights into the pressures faced by early hominins. Environmental conditions likely played a significant role. Swartkrans had wet, marshy surroundings with nearby woodlands and savannah, while Sterkfontein was characterised by rocky outcrops and higher elevation.

     

    These differences in habitat influenced tool-making strategies. At Sterkfontein, hominins likely sought safety overlooking the Bloubank River Valley, favoring more controlled, freehand knapping techniques. Swartkrans hominins, on the other hand, may have faced higher predation risk and therefore prioritised speed and efficiency in tool production.

     

    This need for quick tool-making aligns with the presence of large-bodied carnivores at Swartkrans. Evidence like the SK 54 skull cap indicates that hominins occasionally fell prey to these predators. By using a faster technique like bipolar knapping, early humans could quickly prepare tools needed to extract meat and fat from scavenged animal carcasses.

     

    What might appear as a more rudimentary approach to tool-making could actually reflect early intelligence — a strategic adaptation to balance the need for high-quality resources with the ever-present threat of predation.