1 The original usage of the term "Hominidae" encompassed those fossils regarded as being more closely aligned to Homo sapiens than to our nearest relative the chimpanzee, with whom we have 98.3% of our genes in common (Goodman 1999). In the last few years genetic evidence, combined with new anatomical studies, has put forward a compelling case for revision in order for the morphological similarities to be classified in a clearer manner. Tables 2 and 3 outline the contrasting positions in further detail. This study follows the latter convention and therefore the term “hominin” is used throughout in place of the more commonly known "hominid".

2 What wonders the mind creates when thinking of the distant past. Were our ancestors deformed with four toes, were modern humans secretly walking the earth 4 million years ago hidden in a shroud of contemporary mystery, or could reality be more simplistic yet infinitely more fascinating? Humans, by nature, enjoy inventing mysteries and have been doing so since time immemorial. Religions have been built up around factual events, cultural perspectives of the world and gross elaborations over time until they come to be regarded as indisputable fact. It was natural, therefore, when hominin footprints came to light that they received special scrutiny from both academics and creationists. Footprints have the potential to inform us about a person’s height, weight and their form of bipedalism. So when Mary Leakey’s expedition, at the site of Laetoli in Tanzania, uncovered footprints dating to 3.5 mya (Tuttle 1996: 97), which are generally interpreted as having been made by the contemporary Australopithecus afarensis, creationists objected.

3 The biggest problem that modern archaeologists have is that right from the start of our assignment we are distanced in time from our subject. Archaeologists are unable to go back in time to see first-hand what our extinct hominin ancestors were doing, how they survived, how they created artifacts and how they responded to challenges.

However, the sites that our ancestors have left behind provide us with the opportunity to examine some of the mysteries of the past. What makes a site? What events and/or activities by man made tools? And how does that help in our understanding of the past? The direction to take at first in attempting to understand the formation of Stone Age sites is to have a close look at the system of artifact manufacture - a purpose that will become clear.