Archaeological excavations at Mungo

Abstract

This is a report on the uncompleted programme of field surveys and excavations of two large trenches, carried out by the author at Mungo between 1974 and 1980. The objective was to substantiate and develop the discoveries of 1969. Influences on the research design and methods, and a short history of ideas in Archaeology and their impact during the protracted study are given. The excavation results reveal an anomaly between the apparent stratigraphy and artefact deposits. This distribution of artefacts is tested by regression, which leads to the identification of micro topography within the Upper Mungo unit, not obvious from the stratigraphy. The reinterpretation is successfully tested by artefact conjoining. The micro topography is then shown to explain other observations on the faunal assemblage and stratigraphy. It is now possible to interpret the site as a specialised manufacturing area located on a part of the lake shore chosen for its local climatic conditions.

Dating the colonization of Sahul (Pleistocene Australia–New Guinea): a review of recent research

“…One is a collection of eleven silcrete flakes found well down in LM phase quartz sands at Joulni (Fig. 2) [24,120]. Stratigraphic position and roughly bracketing OSL dates of 50.1 2.4 ka and 49.7 2.7 ka (above the artifacts) and 47.9 2.4 ka and 45.7 2.3 ka (below) are read by Bowler et al [24] and Shawcross [120] to indicate a 46-50 ka age for the assemblage; but we are skeptical, partly because of the small size of the assemblage, but mainly because of its problematic sedimentary context and the inversion of the bracketing dates.…”

“…2) [24,120]. Stratigraphic position and roughly bracketing OSL dates of 50.1 2.4 ka and 49.7 2.7 ka (above the artifacts) and 47.9 2.4 ka and 45.7 2.3 ka (below) are read by Bowler et al [24] and Shawcross [120] to indicate a 46-50 ka age for the assemblage; but we are skeptical, partly because of the small size of the assemblage, but mainly because of its problematic sedimentary context and the inversion of the bracketing dates. Bowler [19, p. 122] notes that LM quartz sands are typically marked by "steep avalanche bedding" and "cross sets," indicating erosional and depositional processes likely to facilitate the movement of artifacts well below the point of initial deposition.…”

Pleistocene shell tools from Lake Mungo lunette, Australia: Identification and interpretation drawing on experimental archaeology

“…Allen, 1972, Bowler et al, 1970, Shawcross, 1998, Hiscock and Allen, 2000. The first formal description of Pleistocene Australian stone tools was based on an assemblage of artefacts eroding out from the same horizon as Mungo Lady, at the southern tip of the Mungo lunette.…”

Both half right:Updating the evidence for dating first human arrivals in Sahul

“…An important critical review of this general field was recently undertaken by Richardson (2010:16-41), who examined 19 conjoining studies worldwide, together with an additional 22 studies involving experimentation and other research designed to elucidate taphonomic processes; these included only five Australian studies (Hughes 1977;Hughes and Lampert 1977;Shawcross 1998;Stern 1980;Stockton 1973). Listed causes for these processes include occupational disturbances (pits, post-holes) and artefact re-use and removal; together with a range of non-cultural processes, such as erosion, surface cracking in wet/dry sediments, fluvial action and bioturbation.…”