TY - JOUR
T1 - A critique of the evidence for scavenging by Neandertals and early modern humans
T2 - new data from Kobeh Cave (Zagros Mountains, Iran) and Die Kelders Cave 1 Layer 10 (South Africa)
AU - Marean, Curtis W.
N1 - Funding Information:
I thank the following students for their assistance with the Kobeh faunal assemblage: Nick Boccio, Carol Frey, Sondra Goldman, Virginia Heisey, Christopher Norton, Godfrey Palaia, Margaret Robinson, Deanna Rochford, Mary Sera, and Jennifer Teremy. Bruce Howe and John Lindly provided helpful information on the Kobeh sites and lithics. I thank the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, for lending the Kobeh material. I also thank the South African Museum for providing space and access to the Die Kelders and comparative collections, and particularly Graham Avery and the staV of the Department of Archaeology at the South African Museum. The Die Kelders portion of this paper was partially funded by NSF grant DBS-9120117 to Fred Grine (PI), Richard G. Klein, and myself, and NSF grant SBR-9727491 to myself.
PY - 1998/8
Y1 - 1998/8
N2 - The primary mode of faunal exploitation by Meandertals and early modern humans remains a debated topic. Binford (1981, 1984, 1985, 1988) has argued for an obligate scavenging mode, Stiner (1991a, 1991b, 1991c, 1993, 1994) for a more opportunistic scavenging mode, while other researchers (Chase, 1986, 1988, 1989; Klein, 1989, 1994, 1995; Klein and Cruz-Uribe, 1996) deny the importance of scavenging as a faunal exploitation tactic. The scavenging interpretations rely primarily on several patterns in the faunal remains: the presence of a skeletal element pattern dominated by heads or head and foot parts, the presence of carnivore tooth marks on bone fragments, and infrequent cut marks that typically are not located on shaft regions of long bones or on fleshy bones. Five sites have been used to argue for scavenging: Klasies River Mount, Combe Grenal, Grotta Guattari, Grotta dei Moscerini, and Grotte Vaufrey. The former four of the five sites are biased samples in that long bone shafts and other difficult to identify fragments were discarded at excavation. The analysis of Grotte Vaufrey included only those shafts identifiable to species or genus, thus excluding the vast majority of shaft specimens. This bias systematically shapes the skeletal element and surface modification patterning in ways that make the assemblages appear to fit a model of scavenging, when in fact the main determinant of the pattern is the bias in the flawed samples. This problem is illustrated with two unbiased faunal assemblages (Kobeh Cave and Die Kelders Layer 10). Skeletal element abundance is calculated in a way that mimics the bias in the sites listed above by excluding the shafts. Using this procedure, both Kobeh and Die Kelders have a head and foot skeletal element pattern and thus appear scavenged. Both assemblages are then analyzed in their entirety and a new pattern, consistent with hunting, is revealed. Taphonometric data on bone survival and destruction provide an explanation for this result. Excluding shaft fragments from the analysis also biases the surface modification patterning in such a way as to produce a pattern more consistent with scavenging. The conclusion is that there is no reliable evidence for scavenging by Neandertals or early modern humans.
AB - The primary mode of faunal exploitation by Meandertals and early modern humans remains a debated topic. Binford (1981, 1984, 1985, 1988) has argued for an obligate scavenging mode, Stiner (1991a, 1991b, 1991c, 1993, 1994) for a more opportunistic scavenging mode, while other researchers (Chase, 1986, 1988, 1989; Klein, 1989, 1994, 1995; Klein and Cruz-Uribe, 1996) deny the importance of scavenging as a faunal exploitation tactic. The scavenging interpretations rely primarily on several patterns in the faunal remains: the presence of a skeletal element pattern dominated by heads or head and foot parts, the presence of carnivore tooth marks on bone fragments, and infrequent cut marks that typically are not located on shaft regions of long bones or on fleshy bones. Five sites have been used to argue for scavenging: Klasies River Mount, Combe Grenal, Grotta Guattari, Grotta dei Moscerini, and Grotte Vaufrey. The former four of the five sites are biased samples in that long bone shafts and other difficult to identify fragments were discarded at excavation. The analysis of Grotte Vaufrey included only those shafts identifiable to species or genus, thus excluding the vast majority of shaft specimens. This bias systematically shapes the skeletal element and surface modification patterning in ways that make the assemblages appear to fit a model of scavenging, when in fact the main determinant of the pattern is the bias in the flawed samples. This problem is illustrated with two unbiased faunal assemblages (Kobeh Cave and Die Kelders Layer 10). Skeletal element abundance is calculated in a way that mimics the bias in the sites listed above by excluding the shafts. Using this procedure, both Kobeh and Die Kelders have a head and foot skeletal element pattern and thus appear scavenged. Both assemblages are then analyzed in their entirety and a new pattern, consistent with hunting, is revealed. Taphonometric data on bone survival and destruction provide an explanation for this result. Excluding shaft fragments from the analysis also biases the surface modification patterning in such a way as to produce a pattern more consistent with scavenging. The conclusion is that there is no reliable evidence for scavenging by Neandertals or early modern humans.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032147729&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032147729&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1006/jhev.1998.0224
DO - 10.1006/jhev.1998.0224
M3 - Article
C2 - 9719992
AN - SCOPUS:0032147729
SN - 0047-2484
VL - 35
SP - 111
EP - 136
JO - Journal of human evolution
JF - Journal of human evolution
IS - 2
ER -