FAUNAL EXPLOITATION IN THE MSA AND LSA: FAITH 2008

To follow up on a previous review of an article on faunal exploitation patterns during the Last Glacial Maximum in western France (Faith 2007), I just got to read the in-press article by the same author on a similar topic but in Africa in Middle Stone Age (MSA; emergence of our species and modern behavior?) and Late Stone Age (LSA; “cultural explosion”?) contexts. In this new study, Faith looked at the representation of different animal species in an impressive sample of both MSA (n=51) and LSA (n=98) faunal assemblages from South Africa and Lesotho. The core of his argumentation is similar to the one of the 2007 article: scrutinize the claim that MSA hunters were less effective than LSA ones to demonstrate that the differences between MSA and LSA hunting effectiveness are not solely based on cognitive differences, less effective procurement strategies or lack of modern hunting capabilities. This is part of the broader topic of changes in hunting practices and diet breadth (e.g. Chase 1986; Grayson and Delpech 2002, 2003; Marean and Assefa 1999) associated with the emergence of our species and/or modern behavior (assuming that both may be correlated.).


I am a big fan of such approach since, like my own research, it focuses on reevaluating current or old claims using existing datasets and new methods as a very efficient way to move forward beyond preconceived ideas within the broader debate of the origins of modernity and modern behavior. It would be necessary to go over the datasets used here in details to fully review this new study. As he did when studying the French assemblages, Faith’s goal is to compare assemblages controlling for many factors that could have biased the assemblages (variation of the environment, natural population estimates and taphonomic processes). As a result, he was able to identify both differences and similarities between MSA and LSA assemblages.


“First, in the complete sample and the environmentally controlled sample, there are two distinct relationships between assemblage sample size and the number of ungulate taxa, with a greater number of taxa in the MSA (Figs. 1, 6). The straightforward interpretation is that MSA diet breadth exceeded LSA diet breadth, in terms of ungulate utilization. This is the opposite of what is predicted if MSA hunters were somehow limited in their ability to acquire ungulate prey. However, diet breadth as measured in archaeological contexts (NTAXA) is not analogous to diet breadth as measured in ethnographic contexts. Rather, NTAXA is best interpreted as the maximum diet breadth of the foragers who accumulated faunal remains over a given period of time (Broughton and Grayson, 1993; Grayson and Delpech, 1998). Consequently, time-averaging plays an important role in mediating apparent diet breadth; increased time-averaging can increase apparent maximum diet breadth (Grayson and Delpech, 1998). Marean and Assefa (1999) have argued that MSA faunal assemblages sample much longer periods of time than those from the LSA. Following this argument, the apparent difference in diet breadth could be partially or completely an artifact of differential time-averaging.” (Faith 2008: 9)

“If technological and/or behavioral constraints forced MSA hunters to selectively prey upon certain ungulate taxa, particularly docile species such as eland, it is predicted that MSA ungulate assemblages should be even less than corresponding LSA assemblages. However, the 51 MSA and 98 LSA assemblages examined in this study provide no evidence of this. Instead, MSA and LSA faunas are characterized by similar evenness values at any sample size, indicating that MSA assemblages are no more or less dominated by a particular taxon (Fig. 2). This broad pattern is not supported by the environmentally controlled comparison, which found LSA assemblages to be even less than their MSA counterparts (Fig. 7). Although the results are different, the interpretations are the same: MSA ungulate assemblages display no evidence of being more dominated by any particular taxon.” (Faith 2008:10)

Regarding diet breadth and based on current foraging theory (Prey Choice Model):

“According to the prey choice model, the elevated abundances of large prey in MSA assemblages suggest that encounter rates with the highest-ranking ungulates were more frequent during the MSA than during the LSA. Why would encounter rates with large ungulates decline from the Middle to Later Stone Age? Increased predation rates associated with expanding human populations are known to influence the abundances of high-ranked prey, since they should be taken whenever they are encountered (Charnov et al., 1976; Winterhalder and Lu, 1997; Broughton, 1999). Larger prey are particularly susceptible to population declines because their lower reproductive rates (Western, 1980; Peters, 1983) decrease their ability to maintain population densities in the face of increasing predation pressure (Vickers, 1991; Winterhalder and Lu, 1997). In contrast, smaller, more rapidly breeding ungulates are better equipped to maintain their populations. Indeed, Klein (1995; 1998; 1999; Klein and Cruz-Uribe, 2000) and others (Volman, 1978; Parkington, 2003) have provided evidence suggesting that LSA human populations were larger than MSA populations.” (Faith 2008: 10-11)

Faith concludes:
“Simple quantitative analyses indicate that, for any given sample size, MSA and LSA faunas yield similar numbers of buffalo and wild pigs. Eland appear to be equally abundant in MSA and LSA faunas as well, although this is not supported by the environmentally controlled analysis. MSA ungulate assemblages are distinct in that there are greater numbers of large ungulates, which are presumed to be the highest-ranking prey types. The taxonomic composition of MSA and LSA ungulate assemblages provides no evidence that MSA foragers were less adept hunters. In fact, the faunal evidence suggests that relative to their successors, MSA hunters enjoyed higher meat yields because they had more frequent access to larger prey. These differences need not be attributed to any behavioral difference, but are consistent with increasing human population densities from the Middle to Later Stone Age.” (Faith 2008:12)

“Rather, an increasing body of literature suggests that both early modern humans and Neandertals were fully adept hunters (Grayson and Delpech, 2003; Morin, 2004; Adler et al., 2006), with most differences in subsistence behavior reflecting environmental factors rather than behavioral differences (Grayson and Delpech, 2003; Faith, 2007).” (Faith 2008:12)


REFERENCES

Adler, D. S., G. Bar-Oz, A. Belfer-Cohen and O. Bar-Yosef

2006 Ahead of the Game: Middle and Upper Paleolithic Hunting Behaviors in the Southern Caucasus. Current Anthropology 47(1):89-118.

Broughton, J. M. and D. Grayson

1993 Diet breadth, adaptive change, and the White Mountain faunas. Journal of Archaeological Science (20):331-336.

Charnov, E. L., G. H. Orians and K. Hyatt

1976 Ecological implications of resource depression. American Naturalist (110):247-259.

Chase, P. G.

1986 The hunters of Combe Grenal: approaches to Middle Paleolithic subsistence in Europe. BAR international series. 286. B.A.R., Oxford, England.

Faith, T.

2007 Changes in reindeer body part representation at Grotte XVI, Dordogne, France. Journal of Archaeological Science (34):2003-2011.

2008 Eland, buffalo, and wild pigs: were Middle Stone Age humans ineffective hunters? Journal of Human Evolution:1-13.

Grayson, D. K. and F. Delpech

1998 Changing Diet Breadth in the Early Upper Palaeolithic of Southwestern France. Journal of Archaeological Science 25:1119-1129.

2003 Ungulates and the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transition at Grotte XVI. Journal of Archaeological Science (30):1633-1648.

2002 Specialized Early Upper Paleolithic Hunters in Southwestern France? Journal of Archaeological Science 29:1439-1449.

Marean, C. W. and G. Assefa

1999 Zooarchaeological evidence for the faunal exploitation behavior of Neandertals and early modern humans. Evolutionary Anthropology 8:22-37.

Morin, E.

2004 Late Pleistocene population interactions in Western Europe and modern human origins: newinsights based on the faunal remains from Saint-Cesaire, southwestern France. PhD Dissertation, University of Michigan.

Winterhalder, B. and F. Lu

1998 A forager-resource population ecology model and implications for indigenous conservation. Cons. Biol. (11):1354-1364.