Digging fast, digging slow: mining and archaeology, an uneasy relationship

Dusseldorp, G.L. (2022)

Article in monograph or in proceedings

A destructive force across entire landscapes, mining at times threatens the preservation of priceless archaeological sites across southern Africa. The UNESCO World Heritage site of the Mapungubwe Cultural Landscape is one of the recent legal battlegrounds pitting the interests of the natural world and archaeological heritage against mining. Mineral resource extraction carries within its destruction creative potential too. In southern Africa mining has been instrumental in illuminating human history and in the creation of archaeological landmarks.

The relationship between archaeology and mining is a complex one. The gold industry and associated lime-mining has specifically been instrumental in the development of palaeoanthropology in South Africa (Bonner 2007). With the discovery of gold, lime was required for the desulfurization process. This was obtained locally and many lime works were exploited during the 1890s (Esterhuysen 2019). The miners drew attention to fossils found within the deposits leading to the discovery of hominins at Taung, Makapan and Sterkfontein in the early 20^th century. Mining may thus be seen as crucial to the genesis of the Cradle of Humankind UNESCO World Heritage site in South Africa. Similarly guano, zinc and vanadium mining have yielded important palaeoanthropological finds in southern Africa.

In the 19^th and early 20^th century, scientific focus was on discovering unknown objects. In this context, the efficient removal of great quantities of overburden was a great asset. With increasing scientific rigour in the 20^th century, archaeological focus shifts from objects to their interrelationships and their context. The documentation of finds and find contexts requires time that is not available in the context of industrial resource extraction. Fruitful collaboration now becomes more difficult. As the early lime works closed down in the first half of the 20^th century, archaeologists were free to continue work at a comparative snail’s pace  but yielding far greater insight in the human past.

In active mining operations, collaboration is difficult. While mining still exposes valuable sites and materials that would otherwise be inaccessible, this is of limited value in current archaeological practice. Current ethical standards emphasise in situ preservation of archaeological remains over excavation. When finds are documented, the time-pressure from mining companies makes these situations ambiguous in value. Examples are the discovery of Pleistocene shell middens after their partial destruction, or the recovery of lithic materials from conveyor belts in diamond plants.

In the late 20^th century and 21^st century, the discipline of archaeology has been included in legal frameworks on environmental planning. Archaeological contractors conduct Heritage impact assessments and advise on mitigation measures for large-scale environmental projects such as mining operation and the building of large dams of infrastructure works.

Highlighting human history was an unintended consequence for large mining operations. Yet both on a grand level, the activity of mining, as well as on a personal level, the activities of miners and foremen have played a crucial role in uncovering ancient humans and their world in southern Africa. I argue that the insights produced as a result of early resource extraction are one (albeit often minor) consideration in the network of values, stakeholders and resources that embed mining operations in society.

• All authors: Dusseldorp, G.L.
• Date: 2022-06-02
• Link: https://www.ascleiden.nl/sites/default/files/pre-programme_gaping_holes_...
• Conference: Gaping Holes: Towards multi-species histories and ethnographies of mining in southern Africa
• Date: 2022-06-01 - 2022-06-03
• Location: Leiden
• Sponsorship: NWO
• Grant number: Vidi 276-60-004