Middle Pleistocene bird consumption at Level XI of Bolomor Cave (Valencia, Spain)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2009.06.006Get rights and content

Abstract

The consumption of small prey dates back to the Plio-Pleistocene chronologies in some African sites. However, the systematic acquisition and consumption of small prey in the pre-Upper Palaeolithic times is still a highly debated topic in Europe. Although the utilization of leporids has been recorded in several pre-Late Pleistocene European sites, the evidence of bird consumption is not as common for these periods. Nevertheless, Level XI (MIS 6) of Bolomor Cave has clear diagnostic elements to document the acquisition and use of birds (Aythya sp.) for food in the form of: (1) cutmarks on bones of both the front and hind limb; (2) presence of burning patterns on the extremities of the bones (areas of the skeleton with less meat); and (3) human toothmarks on limb bones. The capture of birds is classified as quick-flying game in the archaeological sites. The acquiring of fast-running (mostly lagomorphs) and quick-flying small prey requires a sophisticated technology and involves obtaining and processing ways different from those used for large- and medium-sized animals. From this perspective, the aim of this paper is to examine possible patterns in the processing sequence of birds from Level XI of Bolomor Cave and to improve the data on their butchery and human consumption in the Middle Pleistocene of Iberian Peninsula.

Introduction

Although several studies have used bird remains to determine the time of site occupation and past environmental conditions, too little attention has been given to the cultural significance of bird remains in the sites. Avian remains may have been ignored because some researchers have assumed that birds contribute little energy to the human diet (because of their low fat-to-lean ratio) or that the technology required for their obtaining is too complex and sophisticated for pre-Upper Palaeolithic chronologies. A potential problem is that the activities of anthropogenic processing are unlikely to leave telltale physical evidence on all bones (Lyman, 1994, Laroulandie, 2001, Steadman et al., 2002). Furthermore, there is an additional problem. The use of the hands or teeth as a tool for the immediate consumption of small prey seems to be a possibility. The smaller the prey, less need there is for the use of stone tools, and consequently, less evidences of human activity on the bones is likely to be observed. In these cases, the identification of other characteristics that identify anthropogenic processing on skeletal remains, such as human toothmarks, breakage or burning should be considered before ruling out the human groups as responsible for the accumulations. Ericson (1987) asserted that bird bones from archaeological sites cannot be considered the result of human activity unless obvious anthropogenic modifications are present or that the species does not naturally occupy the site (implying human transport). Vigne and Marinval-Vigne (1983) used burning patterns on specific skeletal parts to identify the human activities related to birds. On the other hand, several authors argued that the skeletal representation is also a valid criterion to identify the origin of avian accumulations (humans or raptors) (Mourer-Chauviré, 1979, Mourer-Chauviré, 1983, Vilette, 1983; Bramwell et al., 1987, Díez et al., 1995). For these researchers, the abundance of coracoids, humeri and femuri is related to the human activities and, on the contrary, the abundance of the distal elements (tarsometatarsi and carpometacarpi) is associated with the accumulations made by bird of prey.

Diagnostic evidences of human consumption have been identified on bird remains in several sites of Upper Palaeolithic and Holocene chronologies (Eastham, 1986, Vilette, 1999, Steadman and Intoh, 1994, Díez et al., 1995, Cassoli and Tagliacozzo, 1997, Gotfredsen, 1997, Higgins, 1999, Laroulandie, 2000, Laroulandie, 2003, Laroulandie, 2004, Laroulandie,2005a, Louchart and Soave, 2002, Steadman et al., 2002; inter alia). However, little evidence of anthropogenic processing marks on bird remains in the pre-Upper Palaeolithic times has been documented. So far, the older evidences on avian remains were identified in the Early Pleistocene of Sima del Elefante (Spain) (Huguet, 2007) and of Dursunlu (Turkey) (Güleç et al., 2009). At the Sima del Elefante site, one cutmark on a proximal metaphysis of a large sized-bird radius was observed at Level TE9a. In Dursunlu, several incisions on distal metatarsus of a large bird were also documented. In more recent chronologies, an anthropogenic use on Pyrrhocorax graculus bones was suggested in the “acheulean cabin” of the Lazaret in France (Bouchud, 1969). This study was based on the spatial distribution of the bird remains, which are more abundant inside the cabin. Nevertheless, this distribution has been the subject of debate. According to Villa (1983), this phenomenon is due to the natural formation process at Level V of the site. Some species, such as crows and pigeons, are known to nest on the wall of the caves and their bones are frequently found in karstic contexts. It is possible that some of these birds died from natural causes and others may have been brought by birds of prey (Bubo bubo) in form of pellet or by carnivores (Vulpes vulpes, Felis silvestris or Lynx spelaea) that occasionally inhabited the cavity (Lumley et al., 2004). However, cutmarks on one Columba livia right humerus have been identified at UA 25 of Lazaret cave (Lumley et al., 2004, Roger, 2004). On the other hand, the bird accumulations in the Middle Pleistocene of the Áridos site (Spain) were interpreted by Mourer-Chauviré (1980) as the result of human hunting. However, the avian skeletal representation of this site is not biased (Mourer-Chauviré, 1980) and therefore, the interpretation of bird accumulation by hominids could be problematic. In these cases, the identification of other diagnostic elements of anthropogenic processing on skeletal remains should be considered.

In more recent chronologies, incisions have been noted on Aquila chrysaetos phalanges in the Mousterian site of Pech de l'Aze in France (Mourer-Chauviré, 1975, Soressi et al., 2008) and at Mousterian Level A of Grotta di Fumane in Italy (Fiore et al., 2004). According to Fiore and colleagues, the cutmarks on one phalanx of a golden eagle were probably produced when the talon, or its keratin sheath, was being removed, possibly for use as an ornament. Also, cutmarks on Cygnus cygnus remains were recovered at Mousterian Level XV from Baume de Gigny in France (Mourer-Chauviré, 1989). In Grotte de l'Hortus (France) anthropogenic processing marks on bird bones were not documented, however, statistical analysis of avian remains by Mourer-Chauviré (1972) suggested that Neanderthals were hunting birds.

From the above it is clear that the systematic acquisition and consumption of avian prey during pre-Upper Palaeolithic times is still a highly debated topic in Europe (Brugal and Desse, 2004).

In Bolomor Cave, the consumption of small prey is common throughout the entire stratigraphic sequence. At this site, cutmarks on leporid bones (Oryctolagus cuniculus) are documented repeatedly from MIS 9 to MIS 5e (Blasco, 2006, Sanchis Serra and Fernández Peris, 2008). Anthropogenic processing marks are also observed on tortoise remains (Testudo hermanni) at Level IV (Blasco, 2008) and on one swan humerus (Cygnus olor) at Level XII (Blasco, 2006). This paper aims to add available data on the consumption and butchery of birds at Level XI in Bolomor Cave. Level XI is one of the levels, within the stratigraphic sequence of the site, which presents the highest percentage of very small-sized animals in relation to ungulates and allows us to examine possible patterns of bird consumption.

Section snippets

Bolomor Cave

Bolomor Cave is located on the southern slope of the Valldigna valley, approximately 2 Km southeast of the town of Tavernes (Valencia, Spain) (Fig. 1). The site is a karstic rock shelter in the Monduver Mountain, which was opened around 500 Ky, when the Bolomor Ravine, in which it is located, was eroded. The cave is situated approximately 100 m above sea level and northeast; the coast runs almost perpendicular to the valley. The sedimentary sequence of Bolomor Cave consists mainly of allochthonous

Methodology

Level XI faunal analysis of Bolomor Cave was carried out following standard archaeozoological methods (Lyman, 1994, Reitz and Wing, 1999) and includes all fossil material from the 2007 to 2008 excavation seasons. Currently, the rest of species from Level XI are being studied. Anatomical, taxonomic and modification details were recorded.

To assess completeness of the sample, number of identified specimens (NISP), minimum number of elements (MNE), minimum number of individuals (MNI) and skeletal

Data presentation

Level XI provided 1047 faunal remains, of which 555 were identified taxonomically (Table 1). Among the determinate bones at a specific level, 469 (84.5%) belongs to small vertebrates (tortoises, birds, fishes and leporids). Although the consumption of small prey seems to be a constant throughout the sequence of Bolomor Cave, Level XI presents the highest proportion of small prey compared with the ungulates.

Level XI of Bolomor Cave provided 202 bird remains. These belong to the subfamily

Discussion

The bird remains identified at Level XI of Bolomor Cave show sufficient evidence to attribute their presence to human activity during the Middle Pleistocene (MIS 6). First, the avian species identified at Level XI (Anatinae) do not naturally occupy the cave (implying transport). Second, there was no evidence of carnivore damage on the avian remains, and none of the bones shows signs of having passed through the gut of a predator. Third, the analysis of Level XI bones illustrates clear evidence

Conclusions

Level XI of Bolomor Cave has provided sufficient evidence to show proof of human consumption of birds (Aythya sp.) in the Middle Pleistocene, during MIS 6. The diagnostic elements of human activity identified on the avian remains allow us to establish the processing sequence of these animals. There are numerous ethnographic examples that show different systems to capture birds. However, with the archaeological data currently available at Level XI, we cannot identify the technique used by the

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Prehistory Museum of Valencia, to SIP (Prehistoric Investigation Service) and to Conselleria de Cultura de la Generalitat Valenciana for their economic contribution to the excavation. Thanks to the fieldwork team. Special thanks to Lluis García and Nuria Ibañez for her help with the taxonomical identification of the birds. Thanks to Helle Kettner for English corrections. Finally, I would like to acknowledge Jordi Rosell and anonymous reviewers for very helpful comments on a previous

References (101)

  • I. Cruz et al.

    Structural bone density of the Lesser Rhea (Pterocnemia pennata) (Aves: Rheidae) taphonomic and archaeological implications

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (2003)
  • S.D. deFrance

    Late Pleistocene marine birds from southern Peru: distinguishing human capture from El Niño-induced windfall

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (2005)
  • F.J. Dirrigl

    Bone mineral density of wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) skeletal elements and its effect on differential survivorship

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (2001)
  • J. Higgins

    Túnel: a case study of avian zooarchaeology and taphonomy

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (1999)
  • B.S. Hockett

    Corroded, thinned and polished bones created by golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos): taphonomic implications for archaeological interpretations

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (1996)
  • M.J. Landt

    Tooth marks and human consumption: ethnoarchaeological mastication research among foragers of the Central African Republic

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (2007)
  • S.D. Livingston

    The taphonomic interpretation of avian skeleton part frequencies

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (1989)
  • K.D. Lupo et al.

    Small prey hunting technology and zooarchaeological measures of taxonomic diversity and abundance: ethnoarchaeological evidence from Central African forest foragers

    Journal of Anthropological Archaeology

    (2005)
  • R.A. Nicholson

    A morphological investigation of burnt animal bone and an evaluation of its utility in Archaeology

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (1993)
  • T.R. Pickering et al.

    Experimental patterns of hammerstone percussion damage on bones: implications for inferences of carcass processing by humans

    Journal of Human Evolution

    (2006)
  • P. Shipman et al.

    Early hominid hunting, butchering and carcass-processing behaviors: approaches to the fossil record

    Journal of Anthropological Archaeology

    (1983)
  • P. Shipman et al.

    Burnt bones and teeth: and experimental study of colour, morphology, crystal structure and shrinkage

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (1984)
  • D.W. Steadman et al.

    Prehistoric butchery and consumption of birds in the kingdom of Tonga, South Pacific

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (2002)
  • M.C. Stiner et al.

    Differential burning, recrystallization, and fragmentation of archaeological bones

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (1995)
  • P. Andrews et al.

    Small mammals bone accumulations produced by mammalian carnivores

    Paleobiology

    (1983)
  • J.L. Arsuaga et al.

    Fósiles humanos del País Valenciano

  • L.R. Binford

    Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths

    (1981)
  • R. Blasco

    Estrategias de Subsistencia de los Homínidos del Nivel XII de la Cova del Bolomor (La Valldigna, Valencia), Departament d'Història, Història de l'Art i Geografia

    (2006)
  • R.J. Blumenschine et al.

    Percussion marks on bone surfaces as a new diagnostic of hominid behavior

    Nature

    (1988)
  • Z.M. Bochenski et al.

    Preservation of bird bones: erosion versus digestion by owls

    International Journal of Osteoarchaeology

    (1997)
  • J. Bouchud

    Les paléolithiques utilisant-ils les plumes?

    Bulletin de la Societé Préhistorique Française

    (1953)
  • J. Bouchud

    L'avifaune découverte sur le sol de la cabane acheuléenne du Lazaret

  • C.K. Brain

    The contribution of Namib desert Hottentots to an understanding of australopithecine bone accumulations

    Scientific Papers of the Namib Desert Research Station

    (1969)
  • C.K. Brain

    The Hunters or the Hunted? An Introduction to African Cave Taphonomy

    (1981)
  • T.G. Bromage et al.

    Microscopic criteria for the determination of directionality cutmarks on bone

    American Journal of Physical Anthropology

    (1984)
  • J.-P. Brugal et al.

    Petits Animaux et Sociétés Humaines. Du Complement Alimentaire aux Ressources Utilitaires. XXIV Rencontres Internationales d'Archéologie et d'Histoire d'Antibes

    Editions APDCA, Antibes

    (2004)
  • J. Buikstra et al.

    Bone modification due to burning: experimental evidence

  • S.D. Capaldo et al.

    A quantitative diagnosis of notches made by hammerstones percussion and carnivore gnawing on bovid long bones

    American Antiquity

    (1994)
  • P. Correia

    Fire modification of bone: a review of the literature

  • P.F. Cassoli et al.

    Butchering and cooking of birds in the palaeolithic site of Grotta Romanelli (Italy)

    International Journal of Osteoarchaeology

    (1997)
  • J.C. Díez et al.

    Grupos avicaptores del Tardiglaciar: las aves de Berroberria

    Munibe

    (1995)
  • J. Driver

    Medullary bone as an indicator of sex in bird remains from archaeological sites

  • A. Eastham
  • J. Emperaire

    Los nómades del mar

    (2002)
  • G.P. Ericson

    Interpretations of archaeological bird remains: a taphonomic approach

    Journal of Archaeological Science

    (1987)
  • J. Fernández Peris

    La Cova del Bolomor (Tavernes de la Valldigna, Valencia). Las industrias líticas del Pleistoceno medio en el ámbito del Mediterráneo peninsular

    Serie de Trabajos Varios del SIP (Servicio de Investigación Prehistórica) 108

    (2007)
  • I. Fiore et al.

    Ecology and subsistence strategies in the eastern Italian Alps during the Middle Palaeolithic

    International Journal of Osteoarchaeology

    (2004)
  • M.P. Fumanal

    Los depósitos cuaternarios en cuevas y abrigos rocosos. Implicaciones sedimentológicas

    El Cuaternario del País Valenciano

    (1995)
  • M.A. Giardina

    Anatomía económica de Rheidae

    Intersecciones Antropológicas

    (2006)
  • A.B. Gotfredsen

    Sea bird exploitation on coastal Inuit sites, west and southeast Greenland

    International Journal of Osteoarchaeology

    (1997)
  • Cited by (123)

    • Diet and ecological interactions in the Middle and Late Pleistocene

      2022, Updating Neanderthals: Understanding Behavioural Complexity in the Late Middle Palaeolithic
    • Small animal use by Neanderthals

      2022, Updating Neanderthals: Understanding Behavioural Complexity in the Late Middle Palaeolithic
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text