Until today, two alternatives have been discussed in order to reconstruct the cainozoic evolution of Etosha Pan. In the tradition of the early investigations by Jaeger (1926/27), Wellington (1938), Shaw (1988), Shaw and Thomas (1989) and Stuart-Williams (1992) picked up the idea that Etosha Pan is a desiccated palaeolake. While concluding that the Cunene River never played any role in the evolution of the Etosha Pan, Rust (1984, 1985) describes the evolution in terms of the well-known concepts on the morphology of cuesta landforms and 'scarp retreat' is regarded as the decisive process. Thus the 'super pan' of Etosha resulted from pluvial endorheic erosion processes, and its actual position was determined by epeirogenetic (Etosha depression) and stratigraphic (Kalahari sediments) conditions.