Ancient Stingray Sand Sculpture Found Along South Africa’s Coast
The discovery of a 130,000-year-old sand sculpture resembling a stingray sheds light on the artistic prowess of our ancestors
Who hasn’t walked along the beach and started drawing or building sculptures and images? Just about everyone has, and it’s not limited to children; adults will stop at the beach and make their marks in the sand from time to time. However, it was a mystery when this little fascination with building sand sculptures began and how far into antiquity it may reach. However, every once in a while, evidence of such activity may be preserved in the form of ammo glyphs. Sadly, the chances of your next sand sculpture surviving the sands of time are meager but not impossible.
Unveiling the Stingray Sand Sculpture
An extraordinary discovery of a stingray sand sculpture, estimated to be 130,000 years old, was unearthed in deposits on the coast of South Africa. This remarkable find, resembling a stingray minus the tail, is hypothesised to be the first instance of art where our human ancestors depicted another species.
The ammoglyph was discovered in 2018 near Still Bay at the base of a coastal cliff where it had likely been dislodged.
It was immediately recognised for its incredibly symmetrical and unnatural shape. Further observation led to the hypothesis that it resembled a stingray and could have been made by hominins thousands of years ago.
Stingrays, known to hominins who hunted and foraged along the coast 130,000 years ago, could have been a source of both awe and fear. These majestic creatures, with their dangerous and sometimes deadly tail, might have inspired the creation of this sand sculpture, adding a layer of wonder to its discovery.
The concept of hominins creating patterns in sand is not new; some research suggests that some of the earliest art was likely scratched into the sand. However, these artworks are seldom preserved for long. Sand could serve as a practice canvas. However, drawing in sand could also have been done on purpose because it would not last. Ethnographic accounts of the Yolung in Australia report how sand patterns and sculptures had their meaning and purpose tied to being temporary.
Scrutinising the Clues
I admit I was initially skeptical when I read about this find. However, the researchers eventually convinced me of the plausibility. They acknowledge that the problem with palaeoart interpretations and hypotheses is that they cannot be falsified or verified and thus offer limited scientific value. To address this concern, they made the ammoglyph accessible for study and hoped that other interpretations might introduce new concepts they had not considered.
So, what made the researchers believe this to be a human creation and not a misidentified natural formation? To answer this, they first considered the plausibility of an ammoglyph being created and preserved at the site.
Considering the regional abundance of track-sites, which reserve the footprints of humans and animals, it is proven that the palaeo-surface could preserve prints and potentially sculptures in the sand. Furthermore, the ammoglyph was found in a region known for its palaeoart that dates to the same time period as the ammoglyph. And lastly, it would be odd to assume that only human footprints would be preserved on the sand while all other human activity would be excluded.
The ammoglyph has a series of scratches on its surface; to determine its origin, the ammoglyph was extensively studied. The potential that these scratches were made by wind, water, plants, invertebrates, reptiles, birds, and other mammals was explored. The lines were also considered to be made by modern humans (graffiti). Various strategies were developed to distinguish between ancient human-made patterns and naturally occurring ones.
One of these was determining if these natural agents could have created such symmetrical lines and shapes. Almost every aspect of the ammoglyph is proportioned and balanced and corresponds in shape and size to real-life stingrays. Although symmetry is not an exclusively human feature, it can suggest a human signature.
The lines scratched into the ammo glyph corresponded to the patterns found on some species of stingray, specifically the blue stingray (Dasyatis chrysocolla).
Further evidence that these lines were made on purpose comes from an ethnographic account first reported by Australian anthropologist Viktor Lebzelter.
The translated sighting reads as follows:
Before they go out to hunt, the Bushmen draw the animals in the sand and shoot their arrows in various ceremonies. They believe the wild animal will also be hit where the figure of the animal is hit.
Now, one should be cautious about applying recent ethnographic thinking to humans living 130,000 years ago because human thought, beliefs and culture evolve. However, the seeds or origins of the idea/hunting ritual could find their roots in antiquity, and perhaps the markings on the ammoglyph are a forerunner to what Lebzelter observed thousands of years later.
What about the missing tail?
Blue stingrays without a tail can survive and do exist in nature; considering the stingray is a staple of some shark species, it is possible the sand sculpture was modelled after an individual who had no tail. It is also possible that the ‘dangerous’ tail of the ammoglyph was intentionally removed by the creator of the ammoglyph to symbolically wound the creature, similar to how Lebzelter described the symbolic wounding of the animal drawings. Alternatively, the tail could also have simply broken off at some point and was buried somewhere along the cliffside.
In conclusion, the discovery of the stingray sand sculpture along the South African coast showcases the artistic capabilities of our human ancestors. It raises questions about the origins of human art depicting non-human creatures.
The near-perfect shape and multiple levels of symmetry suggest the deliberate creation of this ammoglyph, likely depicting a creature inspiring both awe and fear. The finding contributes to our understanding of early human artistic practices and rituals and highlights the significance of art in shaping our human existence in the past and present.
What do you think it is? A lump of sand that happened to preserve over time, a stingray, or something else entirely?
References
- Helm, C.W., Carr, A., Cawthra, H., Cowley, P.D., De Vynck, J., Gräbe, P.J., Rust, R., Stear, W. and Whitfield, A., 2024. A PURPORTED PLEISTOCENE SAND SCULPTURE FROM SOUTH AFRICA. Rock Art Research, 41(1), p.58–73.
