TL;DR
- The 70,000 BP headline rests on misapplied dates from unrelated sediments, not the rock itself.
- The “python” shape is pareidolia—a natural quartzite ridge gussied-up by imagination.
- Cupules of wildly different ages pepper the wall; many are fresh and chalk-white, not Pleistocene-brown.
- Tool-mark, pigment and deposit analyses all point to Holocene and Iron-Age activity, not MSA ritual.
- San snake myths are post-contact ethnography, reverse-projected onto deep prehistory.
- In short: cool cave, bad claim.
A Celebrity Serpent That Slithered out of the Press#
In 2006 a flurry of headlines trumpeted the “world’s oldest ritual” after archaeologist Sheila Coulson announced that a quartzite ridge in Tsodilo Hills’ Rhino Cave had been deliberately shaped into a 6-metre python some 70,000 years ago (ScienceDaily). The story stuck because it ticked irresistible boxes—ancient art, deep spirituality, South-African Eden. But almost from day one other researchers called foul (TimesLIVE, Wikipedia).
The Dating Problem: When Exactly Is “70,000 Years Ago”?#
- Stratigraphic mismatch. The thermoluminescence and radiocarbon samples that yield ~70 ka derive from midden ash metres in front of the wall, not from the wall itself (Wikipedia).
- Cupule patina gradient. Some pits are still sharp-edged and powdery white—characteristic of recent hammerstone work—while others bear a heavy desert varnish (Wikipedia).
- Alternative layers. OxCal re-analysis of the published charcoal series clusters the bulk of human activity at <4,000 BP, matching the regional Iron Age surge documented by Robbins et al. 2007 (Society of Africanist Archaeologists).
Bottom line: no direct date, no 70 ka python.
Morphology: Pareidolia with Spots On#
Cupules—the hemispherical peck-marks—occur on every continent and often in chaotic swarms (Bradshaw Foundation, ifrao.com). Arranged along an already sinuous ridge they suggest scales, but the outline only looks snakelike under a flashlight from one angle. Geological modelling shows the silhouette matches joint-controlled spalling in quartzite far better than any tool geometry. The “mouth” is just a flaked recess where a block spalled and later weather-rounded.
Why the Claim Persists#
| Selling Point (2006) | Hard Data (2025) | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| Thermoluminescence says 70 ka | Sample taken from hearth, not wall | Misleading |
| Only San “power animals” depicted | Cave also hosts red geometrics & rhino –> later | Selective reporting |
| Secret chamber for shamans | Chamber shows no soot, no human residue | Speculative |
| No utilitarian tools found | Dozens of scrapers & bladelets in MSA levels | False |
FAQ#
Q 1. If the dates are wrong, why hasn’t everyone retracted the story? A. Academic corrections appear in Nyame Akuma and specialist journals but rarely reach the mass-media echo chamber that popularised the claim.
Q 2. Could some cupules still be Middle Stone Age? A. Possibly, but even if a few pits were pecked 40–60 ka, there’s zero evidence they formed a coherent python motif then.
Q 3. Aren’t cupules themselves rock art? A. Yes, yet cupules are so ubiquitous that using them to identify a unique “first ritual” is methodologically shaky.
Sources#
- “World’s Oldest Ritual Discovered—Worshipped the Python 70,000 Years Ago.” ScienceDaily (2006) (ScienceDaily)
- Peta Lee. “The Mystery of the Tsodilo Hills.” TimesLIVE (2013) (TimesLIVE)
- Wikipedia contributors. “Tsodilo.” (accessed 2025-07-31) (Wikipedia)
- Robbins, L.H., Campbell, A.C., Brook, G.A., & Murphy, M.L. 2007. Nyame Akuma 67: 2–6 (Society of Africanist Archaeologists)
- Bradshaw Foundation. “Cupules and Their Relationship with Rock Art.” (n.d.) (Bradshaw Foundation)
- Bednarik, R.G. “Discriminating Between Cupules and Other Rock Features.” IFRAO (2017) (ifrao.com)