(

_.__ -"'_I_~~~--'
In Bone Modification, R. Bonnichsen &
M. Sorgo editors. Institute for
Ouaternarv Studies. U. of Maine. Orono

Ethnographic Analogues for Interpreting Modified Bones:

Some Cases from East Africa

DIANE GIFFORD-GONZALEZ
Board of Studies in Anthropology
University of California, Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz, CA 95064
(

The meanings of modification to prehistoric bones are better understood because of research on analogolls
contemporary processes affecting bone. The range of variation in possible human effects on bones can be
studied in part by documenting assemblages produced in diverse ethnographic situations. This in turn will
facilitate analysis of ancient assemblages. This study documents mammal bone assemblages from eleven sites
created by Dassanetch people of northeast Lake Turkana. The Dassanetch herd, farm, and forage, creating
a variety of residential and special purpose sites. Assemblage traits are found to vary with the subsistence
base and activities of each site. Pastoral encampments display high proportions of midshaft breaks and trans-
verse, stepped fractures on long bones, whereas foraging camps display higher rates of impacts near epiphyses
and of spiral fractures. Various ungulate taxa at one large pastoral site display distinctive patterns of burns,
cuts, and chop marks, reflecting differing processing strategies. The analysis highlights the need for more re-
search on effects of cooking on bone breakage and cutmark patterning. Wild carnivore damage is more
frequent on ungulate bones in human sites than on like-sized wild ungulates dying in the same area of pre-
dation,. starvation, and disease, raising questions about the interpretation of such traces in ancient hominid
sites.

on implements on the bone itself (Bunn 1981; Bunn et al.

INTRODUCTION
Actualistic research undertaken over the last ten years
has produced a wealth of new understandings of mod-
\ ified bone. We have learned that the traces of the action
of carnivores and tool-USing hominids on bones differ.
Specific distinctive features include: marks of the action
1980; Potts and Shipman 1981; Shipman 1981, Shipman
and Rose 1983); the location of bone~redudng damage
relative to articular surfaces of long bones and other mar-
row-bearing elements (Binford 1981; Brain 1981), and
the points and sequence o.f tool-mediated disarticulation,
in relation to disarticulation patterns dictated by a spe-
des' anatomical structure (Binford 1981, Hill 1979). We

179

180 Bone Modification
have learned that sediments can mimic the traces of stone
tools, or perhaps it's the reverse (e,g., Behrensmeyer et
aI. 1986, this volume; Fiorillo this volume). Experimen-
tal research has specified detailed features of carnivore
bone processing and modification by geological
processes (Behrensmeyer 1978, this volume; Binford
1981; Brain 1981; Bromagc 1984; Crader 1974; Fiorillo
this volume; Haynes 1980, 1983b; Oliver 1986, this
volume). We have thus moved from ambiguity to clarity
in understanding numerous traces of discrete agents of
bone modification.
The study of bone modification is now beginning to
move to a new and more challenging phase of analysis
and comparison, that of tackling problematic assem-
blages as a whole. Now that we have some relatively re-
Hable indicators of agents of bone modification on in-
dividual bones, we must formulate methods for assessing
the relative contributions of different modifying agents
in forming assemblages that bear evidence of more than
one such agent. Some researchers have taken steps in this
direction. It has been suggested that the aggregate pat-
terns of element representation and the nature and place-
ment of cuts, gnawmarks, and fractures can be "read" to
infer the dominant modifying agencies and even the
specific type of hominid foraging behavior (Binford
1981,1984; Bunn 1981, 1983; Bunn and Kroll 1986;
Shipman 1983, 1984, 1986). It has further been claimed
that faunal assemblages produced by a single group of
modern humans can reflect situational variations in their
animal processing strategies. Arguments that such ambi-
tious analyses are even feasible have been based in part
on observations of contemporary human and nonhuman
bone accumulators and the assemblages they produce.
To assign specific origins to prehistoric accumulations,
researchers have cited regular relationships between con-
temporary carnivore and human behaviors and the fea-
tures of resultant bone assemblages (Binford 1981; Bunn
1982a, 1983; Shipman 1983,1984,1986). These asser-
tions have tremendous implications for archaeological in-
vestigations. If they are borne out by further research,
subtleties of past human subsistence behavior undreamt
of a decade ago may be accessible.
However, these assertions have sparked considera-
ble controversy among the community of scholars who
deal with these issues (Bunn 1982a; Bunn and Blumen-
schine 1987; Gifford-Gonzalez 1989; Grayson 1982;
Klein 1986; Lyman 1987; Scott 1986). One line of criti-
cism does not deny that such inferences may be possible
but rather cites problems in the application of actualistic
research findings in the works in question. Use of mod-
ern analogues raises questions about how appropriate the
analogy is, and whether the reference materials on which
inferences are based truly are sufficiently exhaustive. If
we are to isolate traits in earlier hominids' bone accumu-
lations that fundamentally differ from those of modern
humans, we must first understand the variability possible
among modern assemblages produced by analogous
agents. Ethnoarchaeologkal documentation of bone as-
1
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
semblages is a vital aspect of actualistic research on as-
semblage structure, since it can document behaviors and
underlying strategies that produce bone assemblages. In
reality, ethnographic cases which give us a sense of that
variation are as yet very few. It is therefore essential to
document more modern cases before moving too far
down the road of interpreting prehistoric materials ac-
cording to perceived correlations between behavior and
evidence in a few observed cases. When writing this
paper, I surveyed faunal assemblages reported from Afri-
can ethnographic situations. To my dismay, I found that
published accounts were nearly as sparse as they had
been in the mid- J970s, reflecting little ongoing research.
This means that our reference materials are perilously
small samples of what might be a much broader con-
tinuum of modern bone-processing behaviors. Only
Bunn (1983) and Yellen (1977) have reported on assem-
blages created by people who were subsisting on wild
plants and animals when studied. Three other authors,
Brain (e.g., 1967, 1969, 1981), Crader (1982,1983), and
myself (1977) have reported on assemblages created by
hunter/farmers or pastoralists. O'Connell et al. (1988),
Bunn and Kroll (personal communication 1986), and
Marshall (personal communication 1986) are currently
adding to this list of studies, which are truly urgent. The
paucity of African studies would perhaps be less distress-
ing if other continents had yielded numerous documented
bone assemblages. Unfortunately, the African sample is
just about the best. At present, South America is repre-
sented by one published study (Jones 1983), North Amer-
ica by Binford's and Bertram's (1977) Navajo study and
Binford's (1978,1981) Nunamiut research, Australia by
one study (Binford 1987) and Asia by none.
The opportunity to study mobile foragers has now
almost completely vanished in Africa and certainly has
the highest priority of study anywhere in the world. Sub-
stantial bone assemblages are also produced by pastoral-
ists in Africa and Asia, and opportunities still exist to
study them. However, such opportunities decrease with
every major drought or political upheaval that sunders
such people from their traditional ways of life. The deci-
sions pastoralists make about timing and location of kills,
butchery, and distribution of meat differ markedly from
those of most hunters, being embedded m a system of an-
imal management and social relations entirely unlike that
of foragers. Nonetheless, their assemblages can con-
tribute useful information on fundamental patterns of
carcass utilization as well as the effect of differing levels
of intensity of use.
The Nature of This Study
To expand the list of comparative modern materials, this
chapter summarizes findings from close study of three
ethnographic bone assemblages and analysis of eight
small bone samples from other recent sites created by the
Dassanetch people of northeastern Lake Turkana, Kenya.
I want to make clear at the outset this study's shortcom-
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
ings as ethnoarchaeological research. These stem from
the fact that I did not observe activities that generated
the bone debris on any of the sites in question. All as-
semblages were created before I did my fieldwork. In
some cases I observed similar inhabited sites and on-site
activities while I was in the ficld. I did see a limited
amount of small stock butchery and consumption, house-
keeping and refuse disposal practices at residential settle-
ments, as well as food processing and refuse disposal in
foraging camps. I never observed large animal butchery
and consumption, although I interviewed several male
and female informants on disarticulation procedures. As
will be clear later in this paper, the latter constitutes the
most serious flaw in the background to the study.
What I was able to document was for various rea-
sons less than an ideal sample. Sites I did monitor during
my stay were short-term foraging camps at which fish
and lake reptiles formed the food base to the near-total
exclusion of mammals (Gifford 1.977; Gifford and Beh-
rensmeyer 1977). Bone assemblages from these sites arc
not relevant to clarifying aspects of mammal bone mod-
ification. The sparseness of mammalian dements at these
sites led me to seek out and collect bones from older
campsites with more numerous mammal remains. Das-
sanetch residential settlements inhabited during my field-
work preserved substantially more mammal bones but
presented their own study problems. Because of inter-
group raiding and some families' desire for wage labor,
most Dassanetch south of the Ethiopian border aggre-
gated at a settlement next to the Heret Police Post. With
a population of over 500, the site was at the top end of
the range of size for Inkoria Dassanetch settlements and
had been continuously occupied for decades. During my
stay at neret, I was unable to accustom all residents to
my presence sufficiently to conduct relaxed on-site ob-
servations of butchery, consumption, and disposal of
food animals. My freedom to carryon close work with
individual households was further complicated by the so-
cial dynamics of such a large community. Because of the
varying impacts of a long drought on various families,
tensions among some households were considerable, and
even buying small stock for consumption elsewhere
caused ill-feelings among those not involved in the
"deals" These social factors, and the site's very complex
palimpsest of former and present houses, pens, and re-
fuse dumps, led me to decide against an ethnoarchaeo-
logical study of this inhabited settlement. Moreover,
some activities I would have liked to have seen, such as
ritual slaughter of cattle, were not taking place at I1eret
during my visit, since most cattle were north in better
grazing grounds across the Ethiopian border. I was able
to purchase sheep and goats for closely observed slaugh-
tering away from the main settlement, but doing so with
cattle was beyond my financial means.
The outcome of these circumstances is that the pre-
sent study is not ethnoarchaeological in the strict sense
of the word, since I lack observational control over many
of the processes that created the bone assemblages. Thus,
Bone Modification 181
the crucial component of actualistic research, observa-
tion of events and processes that generate traces and
structures analogous to those found in prehistoric
deposits, is lacking. My study, therefore, more closely ap-
proximates an archaeological analysis in the context of
strong historic continuities to the present. This is espe-
cially true of the large ungulate component in these as--
semblages. Such a "direct historic" approach relies on the
multiplicity of analogous relations between observable
behaviors and their results on the one hand and evidence
of past behaviors on the other. Clearly, this is not the
same as directly obserVing the actual behaviors that
generated the analyzed assemblages.
If this isnot strictly speaking cthnoarchaeology, why
include it in a section on modern analogues? I believe that
the collections constitute a useful addition to modern
cases because of the contextual information available,
and because they document patterns of modification not
previously published. In judging whether to proceed with
reanalyzing these collections, I asked myself whether they
were more, equally, or less useful to faunal analysts than
archaeological collections created by modern humans in
relativel y recent prehistory. Such assemblages have some-
times been compared to ones created by earlier hominid
species (Shipman 1986) as a "baseline" for modern hom-
inid behavior. I believe the Dassanetch assemblages, with
much richer contextual data, offer advantages for com-
parative purposes that the latter did not.
In reality, ethnoarchaeologists of bone deposits may
often face situations similar to mine with regard to direct
documentation. At sites of foragers or food producers
who do not engage in mass kills of prey species, bones
of larger mammals may accumulate slowly. To obtain
samples large enough to comprise a workable data base,
fieldworkers may have to supplement collections from
well-observed sites with samples from localities created
before they arrived. Even sites created during an ob-
server's stay may undergo significant additions oraltera-
tions while not directly monitored. The ideal of direct ob-
servation may thus not be realized in all situations. In
such cases, contextual information can be recovered by
intensive informant interview regarding unobserved ac-
tivities or even by experimental "staging" of analogous
activities.
In fact, well-dated and well-documented older site
assemblages should be gathered from an ethnoarchaeo-
logical study area, because they provide insight into two
vital aspects of archaeological bone analysis. First, they
offer a longer-term sample of variation in animal pro-
cessing strategies than may be observed during a re-
searcher's span of fieldwork. Many groups respond flex-
ibly to climatic cycles and variations in plant and animal
food resources. The full scope of these shifts in sub-
sistence tactics may only be perceptible through analysis
of a longer time sample. Second, older sites' samples per-
mit insight into impacts of nonhuman agents on assem-
blages originally structured by people. Bone may exhibit
behaviorally relevant patterning in freshly generated as-
182 Botle Modification
sembIages, but it is crucial to see whether such pattern-
ing endures the influences of subsequent biological and
geological processes.
Because my main intention is to augment the num-
ber of reasonably well-documented cases of ethnographic
bone assemblages, this chapter will not address any par-
ticular problem of archaeological analysis. These cases
may be used to evaluate generalizations about typically
human or nonhuman bone modification patterns, and
thus contribute to analytic methods and inferences. At
the same time, I have tried to move this study beyond
simple reportage by offering observations relevant to cur-
rent discussions of prehistoric bone modifications in ap-
propriate sections of this study_
THE ASSEMBLAGES IN THEIR
CONTEXTS
In 1973-1974, I collected the assemblages analyzed here
from sites created by the Dassanetch of northeastern Lake
Turkana. The largest assemblage comes from Dassanetch
pastoral encampment created by more than 30 house-
holds (Site 105) and the others from two foraging camps
created by small groups of Dassanetch fishermen/hunt-
105·
1<000. ~'QrtI Spl t
·06
Figure 1. Map of the study area showing location of sites
discussed.
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
ers (Sites 06, 08). Except for a previous brief treatment
("
of the assemblages (Gifford 1977), data on them have
not been published elsewhere. Sites 06 and 105 were
created and abandoned one to two months before I began
my fieldwork, but I was able to interview Dassanetch and
others who knew about their histories. Site 08 was
created substantially earlier, and I lack information on
details of its formation. As might be expected from their
different functions, the three assemblages show sharp
contrasts in their taxonomic composition, with domesti-
cates dominant at the pastoral camp and wild fish, rep-
tiles, and mammals at the foraging camps. What was less
expected was variation in damage to the bones of mam-
mals processed at the sites, especially the type and place-
ment of fractures on long bones and the nature of dam-
age associated with disarticulation. To check the
consistency of association of distinctive damage patterns
with different site types, I reanalyzed small bone samples
taken from eight abandoned residential camps similar to
Site 105, but located closer to the I1eret home settlement
(Figure 1). I also will make reference to my longitudinal
study of 48 large ungulate carcasses, all "natural" deaths
in 1973-74 along the Lake Turkana littoral from around
Site 105 at the north to Allia Bay at the south (Gifford
1977; Gifford-Gonzalez 1984).
These assemblages reflect some of the diversity
possible in bone debris of residential and special purpose
sites created by the Dassanetch of Kenya as they com- (
bined pastoralism, rainfall-dependent cultivation, and
foraging for reptiles, fish, and land mammals. Much of
this variation was produced by the interaction of three
factors: effects of local resource structure on Dassanetch
subsistence in creating a particular pattern of sites in the
landscape; effects of intergroup hostilities on the form
and placement of these sites; additional effects of artifact
scarcities on the particular expression of animal pro-
cessing activities at these diverse sites. A sketch of these
aspects of Dassanetch life provides a context for under-
standing the assemblage analysis to come.
Environmental and Cultural Context
The Dassanetch are a Cushitic-speaking people number-
ing between 12,000 and 15,000, most of whom live in
Ethiopia. Dassanetchland includes the delta of the Omo
River in southern Ethiopia and the region at the north-
east of Lake Turkana to about 45 km south of the Kenya-
Ethiopia border. When I did my research in 1973-1974,
about 10% of the group lived in Kenya, pursuing a mixed
subsistence economy, Most Dassanetch lived close to
either the Omo River or the lake, or along one of the
larger ephemeral river courses containing subsurface
water. The land away from the rivers is semiarid bush
and steppe. Rainfall is highly variable, falling in two sea-
sons, and averaging less than 400 mm annually (Carr
1977). Temperatures seldom fall below 20° C during the
night any time of the year, and daytime temperatures
range between 32° C and 45° C seasonally. In less heavily
c.
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
grazed parts of the Dassanetch territory wild mammals
are plentiful. Among the most abundant are common
zebra (Equus burchelli), topi (Damaliscus lunatus korri-
gum), oryx (Oryx gazel/a beisa), warthog (Phacochoerus
aeth iopicus), and such carnivores as lion (Panthera leo),
spotted hyena (Crocuta crocula), striped hyena (Hyaena
hyaena), black-backed jackals (Canis mesomelas), and an
assortment of smaller mongoose species. Dassanetch do
not normally hunt these animals, although they will
scavenge fresh meat from lion kills and kill larger car-
nivores that attack their herds. Bird life is abundant, but
the Dassanetch stated they never eat birds. Lake Turkana
supports the Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus), soft-
shell turtle (Trionix triuginus), and a terrapin (Pelusios
adansoni) all of which the Dassanetch do catch and eat.
This is a hard land in which to make a living, and
even the wealthiest families are aware of the tenuous na-
ture of their well-being. Although they conceive of them-
selves as pastoralists, during moister years the Kenyan
Dassanetch invest considerable time and energy in culti-
vating sorghum, peas, and two types of beans. Infor-
mants told me that meat and blood of cattle, sheep, and
goats sustain households during times of prolonged
drought, as is often the case amongst other documented
herder/farmers (Dyson-Hudson and Dyson-Hudson
1970). Cattle and caprines were regularly bled during dry
periods, and informants add that wealthier households
might slaughter one sheep or goat every three to four
days during the dry season. Unlike many similar East
African groups, the Dassanetch also eat fish and lake rep-
tiles in times of hunger. Some households, especially
poorer ones, may conserve their small stock by eating
these organisms. However, their use is considered the
mark of poverty and low status (the term for pauper and
fisherman is the same in Dassanetch, ma dies). However,
no one interviewed denied that they would eat these an-
imals in times of real hardship. Some Dassanetch at Heret
bartered small stock for maize meal with the local police
to supplement their diets during dry times. This was
scarcely a reliable strategy, since the police post received
supplies so sporadically that maize meal was often not
available to anyone. At the time I conducted my field-
work the Dassanetch were entirely self-supporting for
food. Neither Ethiopian nor Kenyan governments, nor
independent aid agencies provided any kind of food re-
lief in times of famine. Dassanetch also experienced dif-
ficulties in obtaining durable gear from outside sources,
since no accessible trading posts existed anywhere near
them on the Kenyan side of the border. This isolation was
not so much the result of geography as of intentional
policy by colonial and later independent Kenyan govern-
ments. From the early 1940s to the early 19705, police
from Kenya enforced a cordon sanitaire around Das-
sanetch lands in Kenya, Ethiopia, and Sudan, aimed at
suppressing hostilities between the Dassanetch and their
southern neighbors (Almagor 1978; Carr 1977). In ad-
dition to excising well over half of the Dassanetch dry
season grazing land, this policy effectively stifled contact
Bone Modification 183
with expanding down-country market systems. The Das-
sanetch keenly felt the resulting scarcity of items impor-
tant to their economy but not made locally, especially
cooking vessels and metal cutting tools.
The Dassanetch did not make ceramic vessels, but
nearly every household had at least one, obtained over
considerable distances and at vastly inflated prices from
Ethiopia. These were used to prepare porridge, meat, and
tea. When I was with them, Dassanetch women and men
expressed keen interest in obtaining cheap aluminum
cookpots of a sort common in most of rural Kenya, but
virtually inaccessible to them. Families with hundreds of
head of livestock certainly had the resources, including
actual currency, to acquire such pots but no means of get-
ting them. Likewise, pangas, or bushknives, the all-pur-
pose large cutting implement of East Africa, were so rare
that poorer households lacked them and richer ones often
had only one. Metal knives were similarly rare, although
some Dassanetch men were skilled at converting large
nails or other pieces of metal obtained from police posts
or researchers' camps into crude blades. At the time, no
one owned metal axes or hatchets. Many well-off Das-
sanetch households possessed a rifle, obtained for the
equivalent of about $700 in cattle on a long and danger-
ous journey north into Ethiopia. These were rarely used
to hunt game but were said to be primarily for self-
defense against raiders. Possession of firearms by private
citizens is illegal 10 Kenya, and the Dassanetch were care-
ful never to show or fire their arms near the police post.
The Dassanetch viewed the ban on firearms with distaste,
eiting their need for self-defense and the police's general
ineffectiveness as protectors. Several men told me of
using their rifles to defend their families from raiders,
only to have them and many cattle confiscated by the
police when the latter arrived after the attack. The need
for circumspection, plus the rarity and exorbitant prices
of bullets, led most men to reserve their firearms for com-
bat. These scarcities are noteworthy because they had, I
believe, a discernible impact on patterns of bone modifi-
cation in different types of Dassanetch sites.
Site Types
In the early 1970s the physical organization of sites
created by the Kenya Dassanetch reflected adjustment to
an arid and politically hostile environment. The Das-
sanetch were then in a state of hostility with two other
groups northeast of Lake Turkana, and raids by these
groups' warriors were a grave consideration in the Das-
sanetch's everyday lives. In this region raiders custo-
marily not only stole cattle but also killed as many people
as possible, including women and children.
The core of the settlement system was the residen-
tial settlement. Such sites were located dose to reliable
drinking water for humans and livestock and, normally,
close to arable land as well. In such unsettled times as the
mid-1970s, the settlements were constructed in a defen-
sive configuration, with the married women's portable
184 Bone Modification
Figure 2. Aerial view of an inhabited defensive residen-
tial settlement, showing houses in central area and sur-
rounding stock pens.
houses located within a surrounding ring of overlapping
livestock pens and barricaded gates, all fenced with
boughs of local thorn trees (Figure 2). Although in-
dividual families in these settlements might come and go,
a locality could be continuously occupied for years and
accumulate impressive amounts of food refuse and other
debris. Refuse was normally dumped into or over the
fences of the innermost (small stock) pens or, less com-
monly, discarded in one of the outermost pens where
women swept together and burned piles of cattle and-
donkey manure each day. Very small debris might remain
within the circumferences of the houses themselves as the
result of daily housekeeping practices. Floors of the
houses were covered by two to three rawhides, which the
woman of the house would flip over daily to dear of de-
bris, thus sending some small items into the substrate.
Residential settlements in zones not subject to raiding
were not built on the same plan, instead comprising a dis-
persed scatter of unbarricaded houses and stock pens.
Older people, including the influential "bulls," or
male elders, younger married people, and most of their
children lived in residential settlements which were thus
foci of social interaction, decision-making, and ritual life.
Within the larger aggregation, households of male ag-
nates, aHines, or friends commonly formed cooperative
herding units, materially expressed by close proximity of
wives' and widowed mothers' houses and common stock
pens. With the exception of firearms sometimes carried
by youths in stock camps, a family's most importantim-
plements and cooking facilities were kept "at home" in
such settlements.
Not all an average household's livestock could be
sustained on the sparse forage around the residential
settlements. Small stock and cattle not giving milk were
dispersed into stock camps in the hinterland, where they
were tended by boys and youths. During the 1971-1974
drought most of the cattle belonging to the Dassanetch
living around Ileret were about 45 km north in Ethiopia,
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
grazing in the eastern Omo delta under the care of older
(
sons or other close relatives of the stock owners. Small
stock were kept in numerous camps from 3 to 12 km
away from .the main residential settlements at Beret.
These camps consisted of one or more stock pens, usu-
ally lacking any shelter other than that of a shade tree.
Few cooking or food-processing artifacts were used by
the herders, who were expected to live from what milk
they could obtain from their flocks and whatever cooked
grains their homes could spare them.
fn times of raiding, the need to disperse stock into
dry season grazing zones had to be balanced against the
risks of loss of stock and family members isolated in the
small stock camps. Moreover, as the vicinity of residen-
tial settlements rapidly became grazed out, family milk-
ing stock ran the risk of losing condition and failing as a
major food source. One way of coping with these prob-
lems entailed numerous households moving into large-
scale residential camps. These resembled defensive resi-
dential settlements in their size, layout, and number of
households, although few senior elders joined these
camps. In contrast to the residential settlements, however,
large-scale residential camps were situated in nonarable
areas with ephemeral water and forage, being occupied
for only a few weeks or months. Numbers of households
in the abandoned residential camps on which I gathered
information from former residents ranged from 25 to 40.
This would have translated into a commensurate num-
ber of armed adult men, adequate to repel most raiding
parties of 5 to 20 men. Since married women lived in res-
idential camps, household equipment was essentially
similar to that of the residential settlements. Residential
camps parallel in their grazing functions the Single-family
"small foritch" camps described by Almagor (1971) for
an area of Dassanetchland not subject to raiding, but
their size and organization are obvious responses to the
danger of raiding. I revisited Dassanetch friends in 1976
after peace had been made between them and their ene-
mies, and many were living in such dispersed one- or two-
household camps.
A fourth Dassanetch settlement common In the early
1970s was the foraging camp. These were almost always
occupied only by men from the poorest Dassanetch fami-
lies. Until the creation of a national park in the richest
sector of their range in the late 1970s, foraging parties
travelled as much as 100 km along the eastern shore of
Lake Turkana, catching fish, crocodiles, and turtles with
spears and harpoons. Some made and used dugout
canoes, and very rarely a large group of canoeists would
attempt to harpoon and kill a hippopotamus. Foraging
parties kept a sharp eye out for new lion kills of zebra or
topi, which they scavenged as often as they could. Three
such camps I saw created had remains of lion-killed ze-
bras in the form of entire haunches or meat cut from the
carcasses and carried back in a kerosene tin used for
cooking. I had examined all three scavenged animals
within a few hours of their deaths, and all bore distinc-
tive traces of lion predation (claw marks around wounds
t'
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
Figure 3. Dassanetch small stock butchery, numbers de-
note butchery sequence. 1) Cut skin around carpal, tar-
sal Joints, sever joints, remove lower leg; 2) sever ribs
from sternum, 3) lever rib unit plus forelimb back, crack
ribs at vertebral articulation, cut tissue to remove
rib/forelimb muscles around scapula, 4) remove forelimb
from rib unit by severing muscles around scapula; 5)
sever remaining attachments of sternum, remove belly
muscles; 6) sever thoracic llumbar articulation; 7) sever
thoracic unit at 13/14; 8) remove head by cutting
through Cl/C2, 9) subdivide cervicals by severing as
C3/C4; 10) crack innominate at pubic symphysis, force
and sever iliac blade from sacrum, detaching hindlimbs.
and in one case, prior to scavenging, the lion himself still
at the kill). Although I never directly observed it, mem-
bers of one foraging group told me that they seized or
speared very young wild ungulates when they had the
chance. I never observed nor was I told of any attempts
by these men to capture healthy adult ungulates.
Foraging camps were distributed along the littoral
zone, normally very close to the shoreline. They ranged
from small "lunch stops" to repeatedly occupied sites with
huge scatters of fish and reptile bones, multiple hearths,
and in some locales low windbreaks of stone or tem-
porary sunshades of saplings and thatch. Repeatedly oc-
cupied sites often lay near stands of sedges in the lake,
which informants told me were good places to spear fish.
Foraging parties carried minimal gear, most commonly a
fishing spear with an iron head made from a large nail
hammered Hat and sharpened. Less frequently, detacha-
ble-head harpoons with a hookHke metal barb set into
an oryx horn foreshaft were manufactured and used.
Fishnets were unknown to the Dassanetch prior to their
introduction by missionaries, and the foragers had no
knowledge of how to maintain or repair them. Among
such poor Dassanetch it was exceptional for anyone to
own a bushknife, and not everyone possessed even a rudi-
mentary homemade knife. When I did my fieldwork,
most Dassanetch men and women knew how to flake
Bone Modification 185
stone for a cutting edge if needed (see Isaac 1976:495).
The foraging parties I met carried at least one cooking
container. In the 1970s this was usually a five-gallon
kerosene tin obtained from the Kenyan Police or fossil
hunting teams. However, informants' accounts of direct,
on-the-fire cooking techniques In foraging camps suggest
that access to such containers was recent, depending as
it did on the presence of foreigners willing to give away
imported goods.
Two other site types, the farming camp and meat-
feasting camp, will not be discussed in detail here. Farm-
ing camps in the Omo River drainage may be major
settlements staffed by women and men (Almagor 1978),
but in the Heret region they consist only of small thatched
sunshades, built by each household to shelter people
working in the fields or guarding crops from predators.
Most such camps I observed in the Heret area lacked
hearths and any kind of food debris. Meat-feasting
camps, created solely by young men of the warrior age
grade, were not shown to me during my stay, and I can
provide no documentation on them. From descriptions,
they would likely include bones of cattle and small stock
and hearths.
The scarcity of durable gear, along with their mo-
bile lifestyle, resulted in intense curation and recycling of
imported materials. Deserted Dassanetch settlements
were devoid of artifacts, except for items so damaged as
to be completely unusable or so small as to have been
lost in the soil underfoot.
Variability in Butchery and Cooking
Practices That Affects Bones
Dassanetch butchery and cooking practices varied with
the logistical circumstances and equipment of the group
processing the animals. Heavy duty butchering tools and
cooking pots were concentrated at the home settlements
and/or residential camps, whereas considerable numbers
of people, normally boys, youths, and men, had to
process animals well away from these settlements. Pro-
cessing strategies thus had the potential of differing con-
siderably, as did the final bone outputs of such proce-
dures. It is useful to recognize some common processing
patterns and their results before examining site assem-
blages.
In residential settlements small stock and young
male calves butchered for family use are slaughtered near
the house at night and immediately cooked and con-
sumed inside the house, to forestall begging by neighbors.
Figure 3 shows the sequence of actions I observed in
four caprine butcheries in which metal knives, hammer-
stones, and stone anvils were the only tools used. Skin-
ning was accomplished by making a midline incision, cut-
ting partially around the proximal metapodials with
knives, leaving cutmarks on the bone surfaces, then
making incisions up the inner legs to join the midline in-
cision, and pushing the fascia underlying the skin apart
from the muscles by hand. With animals of this size,
186 Bone Modification
Figure 4. Sheep leg units roasting, typical treatment at
campsites.
sectioning of much of the axial skeleton into useful units
was accomplished by leverage, cracking through bone,
and cutting connective tissue rather than cutting through
bone. Leverage was likewise frequently used to dislocate
joints of the limbs. Tightly connected joints or muscle at-
tachments were severed by cutting, as were the exposed
and flexed carpal and tarsal joints in removing the lower
legs along with the skin.
Dassanetch informants stated they preferred to boil
all cuts except the head and the legs from metapodia
down and to eat boiled meat and drink the broth. Foods
for household use were processed inside houses, com-
monly in ceramic or metal cookpots balanced on three
hearthstones over a small fire. According to informants
and my own observations, long bones, vertebral sections,
and ribs were broken up into pot-sized segments with
stones or other heavy objects. When limb segments were
roasted, long bones were fractured after cooking, usually
with hammerstones and anvils, and the marrow re-
moved. Unskinned heads, metapodia plus phalanges, and
mternal organs were roasted directly in the coals of the
fire. The singed heads and metapodial-foot units were
scraped, picked for flesh, and then broken up for extraC-
tion of tissues inside. Informants said that bones eaten in
houses were often tossed in the fire and later taken out,
along with ashes and other food refuse, by the woman
of the house. Women told me they cleaned the small
hearths of their homes daily, piling ash and other refuse
on a hide and carrying it away from the house to the
nearest fences, where they dumped it.
Individual or related households usually consumed
a small animal independently from other households and
as a social unit. However, consistent exceptions to this
pattern existed-. Youths In the warrior age grade were ex-
pected to avoid their mothers' homes and never to con-
sume food in the presence of women. These men formed
a spatially distinct sleeping and eating unit, and they
sometimes lacked cookpots. In such circumstances body
segments were roasted, Upper legs of small stock were
D. Gifford-Gonwlez
kept intact, with scapulae and innominate halves at-
tached, skewered on sticks, set vertically in the ground
near an open fire, and turned occasionally (Figure 4).
This resulted in the long bones remaining whole until the
actual act of consumption, when they were broken open
for marrow using hammerstone and anvil. Other caprine
body segments were treated similarly or roasted directly
on the fire. Men on foraging trips, youths in stock camps,
and others away from residential settlements were said
by informants to sometimes lack cookpots, and to roast
body segments.
I never observed butchery of mammals larger than
caprines, although I interviewed informants on treatment
of cattle, donkeys (which were only slaughtered to treat
persons suffering from certain illnesses), and wild game.
Cattle were butchered differently depending on whether
they were killed for household consumption or for con-
sumption in ritual contexts. Details of these differences
are outlined 111 my dissertation (Gifford 1977). These
mainly lay in subdivision of boneless cuts like the ten-
derloin and cooking techniques applied to limbs. As
described, they would have little impact on bone refuse.
General differences between caprine and cattle butchery
lay in the subdivision of fore-limb and thoracic body
segments into more pieces in cattle. Informants stated
that the backbone was cut rather than snapped, expectable
in view of the relatively greater strength of the joints and
their commensurate resistance to snapping by leverage. (
Legs and filleted muscles were roasted; head, ribs, and
vertebral units broken up and boiled if cookpots were
available. Informants stated that bones were broken using
the same methods as for small stock.
Donkeys were said to be killed by blows with a
stone, bled, and butchered as cattle would be if
slaughtered for household consumption. However, be-
cause donkeys were slaughtered only for consumption by
a sick person; meat was stripped raw from the bones and
dried for later use by the invalid, and its bones discarded.
Wild ungulates were also said to be butchered like cattle
slaughtered for household use. The head and back were
said to be broken up for boiling if cookpots were avail-
able; otherwise they were roasted along with the limbs.
Informants told me that they would eat wild animals
killed either by themselves or by lions, but not animals
suspected to have died of disease. How true this would
hold in truly desperate situations I cannot say. However,
during the severe drought of 1973, foraging parties I ob-
served used only lion kills, although other carcasses were
present in the landscape.
Informants' and my own observations of fish and
reptile processing in foraging camps indicate that treat-
ment of the carcasses would differ according to whether
or not cooking containers were available. Fish were by
preference boiled, either whole or in segments. Lacking
c.
containers, foragers roasted whole fish or segments of
larger fish in the skin directly on the coals of their fires.
Crocodiles were disembowelled with knives, their tail
and limbs removed, the pubic bone being cut through to
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
detach the two halves of the pelvic girdle with the legs.
By preference, legs, entrails, and muscles of the trunk
were boiled, while the head, tail, and back was roasted.
Shells of softshell turtles were removed and limbs and en-
trails detached. Again boiling was the preferred method
of cooking. Terrapins were roasted in their shells and
taken apart by hand.
Debris from meals in foraging and stock camps was
usually thrown away from the hearth, forming a toss
zone around each hearth (see Gifford 1977, Gifford and
Behrensmyer 1977 for illustrations). Bones with soft
tissue remaining were often charred to reduce its attrac-
tiveness to scavengers. No apparent care was taken to
systematize "housecleaning" at these sites. One exception
was Site 06, to be discussed later, in which the area under
the overhanging boughs of a tree was treated as house
space (see SITE 06).
METHODS OF STUDY
Field Methods
Sites 06, 07, and 08 were mapped in their entirety and
bones piece-plotted. All bones were initially identified in
the field. Fish and reptile bones were left at the sites, while
all mammal bones were collected for closer analysis of
modification. Because of its great areal extent, Site lOS
was treated differently, The site was mapped using
alidade and plane table (Figure 5). Bones and other de-
bris were piece-plotted over part of the house area, and
the location of bone concentrations were noted over the
rest of the site. Specimens not piece-plotted were pro-
venienced according to the house, subdivision of the
house area, or pen in which they lay. After field identifi-
cation of all the specimens, i decided to leave fish, rep-
tile, and nonidentifiable mammal bone fragments in the
field, and to collect the rest of the mammal bones for
further study. Later, due to considerations of shipping ex-
pense, more of the mammal bones from Site lOS were
discarded. Because damage to long bones was the focus
of much current research, 1chose to retain these elements'
epiphyses, and to sample the rest of the more identifia-
ble bone from Site 105 Accordingly,l shipped between
20% and 30% of crania, mandibles, vertebrae, scapulae,
pelves, podials, and phalanges back to the United States
in 1975. Less identifiable fragments. such as cranial and
vertebral scraps and rib shaft splinters, were all discarded
in Kenya.
Bones from all three sites that were shipped to the
United States in 1974 were reanalyzed in detail in 1984
and examined again in 1987. Materials from the area 300
sites were reexamined in 1987 The entire Site 105 as-
semblage, as seen and inventoried in the field, serves as
the basis for tables on taxonomic representation, on bone
of differing levels of identifiability, and on general pat-
terns of modification in the assemblage as a whole. Ta-
Bone Modification 187
Figure 5. Site 105; plan showing central house area with
outlines of abandoned house frames and stock pens.
bles that treat the long bones specifically are based on
the 1984 analysis. (A listing of elements from Site 105
and other sites is available to interested researchers on
request,)
All bone assemblages were surface samples, aug-
mented by some selective subsurface sampling (see
below). Given the propensity of materials to move
downward in certain substrates after very short-term
human traffic (Gifford and Behrensmeyer 1977; Gi fford-
Gonzalez et OIL 1985; Stockton 1973; Villa and Courtin
1983;), this collecting method raises questions as to how
representative the assemblages recovered are of the total
assemblages at the sites. The bones at Site 08 were most] y
distributed over a stone outcrop, with no possibility of
subsurface movement (Figure 23). The situation at Site
06 and 105 is more problematic, because each lay on and
in a relatively soft substrate of silty sand. Except for ex-
cavating both hearths at Site 06 and three hearths and
ash dumps each at Site 105, [undertook no excavations.
I thus have llO quantitative control of the amount of bone
not inventoried or collected because it was subsurface. I
collected almost all the bones on the surface at Site lOS
in September, 1973. When [revisited the site five months
later the spring rains had exposed numerous very small
bone fragments, indicating that there was indeed a con-
siderable amount of small subsurface bone which we did
not recover in our initial collection. These were mostly
small fragments of mammal bone and whole bones of
small fish, Their inclusion would have increased the pro-
portion of nonidentifiable mammal bone fragments to
more complete specimens and possibly altered the pro-
portion of smaller fish in the recovered assemblage.
However, I did not judge these pieces to be so numerous
as to warrant a second collection.
Bones from the abandoned residential camps in the
Il-Erriet Valley (all assigned to area 300 in my designa-

188 Bone Modification
tion system) were initially collected to obtain a bone-
weathering sequence. I had obtained information on the
times and durations of occupation of the sites from mul-
tiple former inhabitants. Samples from the sites are gener-
ally small, under 100 pieces each. They were obtained
from both the surface and below the surface of site sedi-
ments by successive lifting of surface materials and ex-
cavation in 5 cm levels until no more bone was en-
countered. Refits of broken bones and matching of limb
bones of one animal are common in these samples, indi-
cating that they are probably the end output of house-
hold meals and housecleaning episodes.
A note on levels of identifiability and taxonomic
ascriptions is necessary. I placed very fragmentary ele-
ments, or ones not diagnostic of species, in less precise
taxonomic categories. Thus, many vertebrae probably
belonging to cattle orcaprines are placed in a "large
bovid" or "small bovid" category (see Table 1 o'o) and can
be lumped with species of similar size. Because of my in-
experience in handling them, I chose to place most ribs
and rib fragments in size-ranked subdivisions of the cate-
gory "mammal". One can safely assume that nearly all
the medium-sized specimens in this category derived
from sheep and goats. However, in the medium-large
category one might have cattle, large wild bovid, and
equid elements. My failure to draw this distinction early
in analysis makes it impossible to ascertain whether zebra
rib segments were transported to the site.
Laboratory Analysis
Bones were initially examined for various types of dam-
age by naked eye and with a lOX hand lens. Selected cut-
marks and putative gnaw marks were then examined
under light microscope using illustrations published in
Shipman (1981), Shipman and Rose (1983), and Walker
and Long (1977). I ascribed functions to cuts in specific
locations on the basis of my ethnographic observations
of bu tcheries, close dissection of a mule deer carcass, and
critical consultation of works by Binford (1981), Frison
(1974), Guilday et al. (1962), Hole et al. (1969), and von
den Driesch and Boessneck (1975). Illustrations pub-
lished by Behrensmcyer et al. (1986), Binford (1981),
Brain (1981), and Haynes (1980, 1983) on various car-
nivore and geologically induced damage to bone were
compared to similar phenomena in the studied collec-
tions. I used Behrensmeyer's (1978) weathering stage sys-
tem to describe the condition of the bone brought back
to the United States and reanalyzed in 1984-87.
To describe breaks on long bones, I used the ter-
minology outlined by Haynes (1983a) to describe the
shape of the break surface on a long bone. The three
major break shape categories are: transverse (at right an-
gles to the long axis of the bone), longitudinal (parallel
to the long axis of the bone), and spiral {curved in a heIi-
cal, partially helical, or compositely helical pattern
around the circumference of the shaft). Haynes' c1assifi-
* All Tables accompanying this paper appear a:fter the text,-star-iingon page 222.
t.
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
catory system is not detailed, yet 1chose to use it because
it is based on long-standing medical terminology for
breaks (Eva;1s 1957,1973) and similar descriptive sys-
tems were used by Sadek~Kooros (1972) and Mengoni-
Goi'ialons (1980). The descriptive categories used here
are arbitrary divisions of a continuum in the range of
break shapes possible. The distinction between transverse
and spiral breaks may be especially ambiguous on some
bones. I applied the convention of classing as spiral any
break in which the distance between the lowermost and
uppermost parts of the break surface was greater than
the width of the bone, and as transverse those in which
it was less.
To describe the texture of the break surface, I used
two terms, smooth and stepped. The latter displays mlll,
tiple angular offsets, usually at right angles to the break
surface, resulting m a jagged appearance; the former lacks
such features. These descriptions only apply to fractures
through compact bone, since cancellous bone responds
differently to force.
Johnson (1985) distinguishes between spiral frac-
ture, helical breaks of very fresh long bone, and other
forms of fracture, notably horizontal torsional stress
failure, which may develop helically on more desiccated
specimens. I have not revised my classification system to
conform to Johnson's. This does not imply that I believe
her observations erroneous, but that [ have reservations
about the underlying logic of her system. It imputes (
cause, in this case dynamic loading to fully hydrated or
dehydrated bone, to a set of break forms in the absence
of truly exhaustive experimentation. This is a much sub-
tier variation of the problem affecting Sadek-Kooros'
(1967) classificatory system, in which a fundamentally
good descriptive scheme was hampered by labels that im-
puted one cause to spiral fractures, which we today know
to be the result of several possible causes. Johnson'sclassi-
fication and her discussion of it implicitly assume that
horizontal torsional stress failures result only from im-
pacts on bone desiccated in fresh air over a span of several
days to several months. My own work with the Site 105
long bones has led me to wonder if cooking can desic-
cate bones over a much shorter time, permitting horizon-
tal tension failure-type fractures soon after the death of
an animal. This matter will betaken up in more detail in
a later section (Long Bone Fracture Patterns and Cook-
mg Practices).
In generating comparative statistics from other
scholars' tables, I had to create categories not standard-
ized in our respective sources. This was especially true
in the case of "identifiable" and" nonidentifiable" elements
drawn from Binford's (1981) and Brain's (1981) publica-
!ions (see Degree of Fragmentation). To derive these from
data originally divided into more classes, I proceeded as
follows. Binford quantified identifiable specimens by
Minimum Animal Units (MAU) (Binford 1984:51). This
is the total number of specimens of a given element,
divided by the number of that element in a given animal's
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
body. Thus, 17 right humeri and 12 left are summed to
yield 29 and then divided by 2, the number of humeri in
the vertebrate body, yielding a MAU statistic of 14.5. Be-
cause I was interested in obtaining the total number of
identifiable clements actually in the assemblage, I
reversed the statistical procedures, multiplying each
MAU figure by the number of that element in the body.
To obtain the number of nonidentifiable fragments m
these assemblages, I consulted additional tables provided
by Binford on numbers of "shaft splinters" and unidenti-
fiable "articulator ends" of long bones. I included rib frag-
ments in the identifiable component of each assemblage.
Binford does not record a category of tooth, cranial, or
vertebral fragments so broken up that the number of ele-
ments cannot be estimated. When asked whether these
elements were present but not enumerated, he stated that
they were not present, since the Nunamiut seldom engage
in such intensive reduction of bone except in bone grease
manufacture (L.R. Binford, personal communication
1984). Brain notes a category of "bone flakes," which I
would call unidentifiable scrap, as well as a category of
long bone shaft fragments. I have lumped both these in
the "nonidentifiable" category because Brain's analyses
tend to yield more precise identifications of fragments
than do those of others, including myself. To enhance
comparability, I deleted all non-mammal elements from
Brain's (1981) tabulations of assemblages. Reptile and
bird bone offer different structure and contents than do
bones of mammals and will be treated differently in food
processing. In summing my own data for Site 105 and
Prolonged Drift (Gifford et al. 1980) and that of Crader
(1982), I aggregated all minimally identifiable bone ex-
cept long bone shaft fragments in the identifiable com-
ponent
SITE 105-
FUNCTION AND STRUCTURE
Site 105 is a defensive residential camp, located about 6
km northeast of the Koobi Fora sandspit (Figure 1), about
1 km inland from the lake shore. It is situated on a low
knoll, amidst a sparse growth of thorn acacia and Sal-
vidora persim trees. The only water supply available
when the site was created was the lake itself which, al-
though alkaline, is potable. The site's substrate is uncon-
solidated sandy silt.
The camp was occupied for six to eight weeks in July
and August, 1973, by 34 households from the Beret res-
idential settlements. This area was not normally occupied
by the Dassanetch on a permanent basis, although fami-
Bes from Beret had brought their stock into the zone
during the height of the dry season in previous years,
Dassanetch informants told-me that they do not construct
new encampments directly on the remains of recently
abandoned ones. Remains of a similar defensive camp lay
Bone Modifimtion 189
on a neighboring knoll about 50 m from Site 105. Based
on a comparison of the condition of the fences to those
of sites of known age, I concluded it had been created a
year earlier. Based on the average number of persons per
house in Heret region settlements, I estimate that Site 105
had about 150 inhabitants.
The site was roughly 105 m by 80 m in north-south,
east-west dimensions, laid out in the usual defensive pat·
tern, with the house area surrounded by stock pens
(Figure 5). The house area contained 34 hut frameworks,
33 with hearth and hearthstones left in place on aban-
donment. The area between the houses contained 14 ash
dumps, usually close to the houses, and a thin scatter of
artifacts and bone debriS over the entire surface. Bones
and other items were found in denser concentrations
along or in the inner walls of stock pens ringing the house
area., and under the only shade tree in the house area.
The outer pens contained lower densities of bone, some
of these concentrated in ash heaps or lenses. Ash heaps
were most numerous in the outer cattle pens (as identified
by dung) and were predominantly burned manure.
Four thorn trees outside the perimeter of the camp's
fences had compacted earth under their boughs and vary-
ing amounts of food and artifact manufacturing debris
scattered at the perimeter of each area. By analogy with
inhabited sites and abandoned ones explained to me by
former inhabitants, these were probably men's daytime
resting and conversation areas. Two of these trees had
small hearths in their shade areas. The branches of one
of these trees had been augmented by cut branches from
other, more leafy trees, thus providing denser shade.
Artifactual refuse in and around the settlement was
sparse, totalling 151 pieces for the entire fenced area plus
sitting trees. Most were discarded expedient tools of local
stone, wood, and vegetable fibers, or the by-products of
manufacturing wood, fiber, or leather artifacts. Others
were completely exhausted manufactured goods that
could not be repaired or recycled, such as a metal jerry
can with a huge hole in its side. Other small items, in-
cluding an imported fish hook, a metal crucifix, and
numerous glass and shell beads, were probably lost
during occupation.
SITE 105:
TAXONOMIC COMPOSITION
OF THE BONE ASSEMBLAGE
In all, I inventoried 2,800 bone specimens from site 105,
of which the vast preponderance were from domestic
mammals (Table 1). Wild bovids are sparsely repre-
sented, oryx by one horn sheath, and topi by a horn
sheath/horn core unit and one lower leg unit. The Das-
ssanetch use antelope horn sheaths to make tools and or-
naments, often collecting them from carcasses they en-
190 BOrle Modification
counter in the landscape. Thus, there is no compelling
reason to think that these bovids were hunted by the sites'
inhabitants. Skeletal remains of several zebra differ from
those of the wild bovids in both freshness and modifica-
tion, calling for <I more detailed discussion of their pro-
venience. All remains complete enough to ascribe to spe-
cies were definitely zebra and not domestic donkey. Less
taxonomically diagnostic fragments also exceeded the
normal size range for East African donkeys and are thus
likely to be zebra. The 83 specimens derive from at least
four individuals; a neonate, a young juvenile, a juvenile
close to maturity, and a prime adult. Most remains show
traces of disarliculation with cutting tools, breakage of
long bone shafts by impact, and burning, as will be de-
scribed in detail in ensuing sections. Zebra bone frag-
ments were encountered within house frames, in the area
between houses, in clusters in pens, interspersed with re-
mains of other animals. In other words, modification and
distribution of zebra bones parallels that of any other
food animals at the site, and these animals were probably
processed and consumed by the people at Site 105.
Scavenging Versus Hunting
of Site 105 Zebras
Although I stated earlier that the Dassanetch seldom prey
on mammals in the Kenyan part of their territory and do
scavenge lion kills, this set of zebra bones bear somewhat
ambiguous evidence concerning how they entered the
Site 105 menu. Some evidence hints that these animals
were hunted rather than scavenged from predators. Other
evidence indicates different processing strategies, which
may in turn reflect scavenging. In hindsight, it would
have been best to interview former site inhabitants about
my questions regarding the zebras while I lived at I1eret
a few months after mapping Site 105. I chose not to, be-
cause both ownership of firearms and unlicensed hunt-
ing of game was illegal, and because I was trying to es~
tablish myself as a friendly party with agroup that views
outsiders with some suspicion. I felt it impolitic to pursue
the matter of the zebras during my stay. Thus, I now can
only report on the equivocal evidence of the bones them-
selves.
A detailed discussion of the zebra bone evidence is
useful, because it shows how complex mferring primary
predation versus scavenging can be. It is useful at the out-
set to further clarify what is meant by "scavenging." Re-
cent literature on early hominid scavenging has used this
term to describe appropriation and use of carcass parts
after partial consumption of a prey animal by its primary
carniYore (Binford 1981, 1984; Bunn and Kroll 1986;
Shipman 1983, 1984, 1986). This type of scavenging
differs from expropriation of carcasses from predators
immediately after the kill. The latter, technically non-
predatory behavior, would leave osteological evidence
virtually indistinguishable from that of primary preda-
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
lion by hominids. In this discussion I will use the phrase (
"remnant scavenging" to distinguish this kind of carcasss
use from wholesale expropriation of carcasses, of which
the Dassanetch, if not early hominids, were perfectly
capable.
One possible way to discern remnant scavenging en-
tails asking whether the elements represented are from
body segments eaten early or late by nonhuman African
carnivores. The assumption underlying this approach is
that humans would retrieve bones from a carcass only jf
these had something to offer. Bones of high meat and/or
marrow utility (Binford 1978) and those first stripped of
their meat by feeding carnivores (Blumenschine 1986 a,
1986b) should thus have been transported to the site only
if they still bore meat and/or edible marrow. One might
infer that the appearance of such elements in a human
site reflected access to carcasses before carnivore con-
sumption. Except for the femur, zebra elements at Site
105 are not those stripped first by carnivores (B1umen-
schine 1986a, 1986b; personal observation). The femur
is in a body segment of very high nutritional utility (meat
utility and Modified General Utility Index (MGur):=100
in caribou, Binford 1978). It is stripped of flesh very early
in consumption by both lions and hyenas (Blumenschine
1986a, 1986b; Kruuk 1972; personal observation). At
first glance, one might thus infer that Site 105 inhabitants
scavenged the zebras after some consumption by lions
and/or hyenas.
However, elements that rank first in the consump-
(
tion sequence described by Blumenschine for zebra and
wildebeest (Blumenschine 1986a:40), the lumbar verte-
brae and sacrumlinnominate unit, are bulky, stoutly ar-
liculated segments not likely 10 be transported from a
death site. They are among the latest to disarticulate nat-
urally (Hill 1979; personal observation) and thus present
problems in detaching and breaking into transportable
units. At the same time, they are relatively readily de-
fleshed by cutling, and they have low marrow utilities
(Binford 1978). In three cases that I documented of poor
men scavenging zebras killed by !ions, each carcass had
considerable amounts of flesh when encountered. In none
of the three instances was any axial segment moved from
the kill site, although in two cases limbs were detached
and carried back to the foraging camp. In all scavenging
episodes meat was cut from the body in strips for trans-
port to camp. There is thus good reason to suppose that
these body segments could have been stripped and util-
ized by Site 105 inhabitants without any evidence at the
home base. If these elements are excepted, the zebra bones
at Site 105 are from all nine body segments consumed
earliest by carnivores (Table 2). The bulk of the evidence
thus does not necessarily imply that the human con-
sumers were necessarily eating carnivore leavings. Two
more bones found at Site 105, a metacarpal and a
metatarsal, are of low meat utility and not consumed
early by carnivores but have relatively high marrow utili-
ties (Binford 1978) and thus are likely to be transported
and processed by humans.
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
One could argue that the presence of these
metapodials, along with the other long bones, raises the
possibility that humans might have encountered them al-
ready defleshed and carried them back to the site solely
for their marrow. The upper long bones represented are
of moderate to high marrow utilities, according to Bin-
ford's (1978) caribou data. However, long bones of the
younger zebras would not have yielded any appreciable
marrow and were nonetheless transported to the site,
(The neonate's dentition shows slight wear, ruling out the
possibility that it is a fetal specimen obtained by scaveng-
ing or hunting a pregnant mare,) If the two older animals
were not obtained together, the question arises as to why
a maximum of 10 deHeshed marrow bones each would
have been carried back to the settlement instead of being
opened in the field, If the two older zebras were obtained
at the same time, it suggests a mode of death other than
lion predation, Another line of evidence that may argue
against remnant scavenging is the lack of carnivore mod-
ification on the zebra bones, Only 2 of 14 long bone
epiphyses show carnivore gnaw marks, and one set is
clearly superimposed on damage made by a chopping
tool. None of the zebra cranial parts, ribs, or processes
of the vertebrae display gnawing, despite the fact that
these were among the most likely to show gnawing in
sites 06, 08 and local taphonomic specimens.
The condition of the bone could thus be used to
argue for Dassanetch intervention before substantial de·
fleshing by either lions or hyenas, swinging the balance
toward direct predation by humans. However, my study
of natural ungulate deaths revealed the incidence of car-
nivore gnawing on 48 animals' bones within the first
month after death was only 1%.
The low incidence of gnawing on "natural" death car-
casses serves to add a note of caution concerning car-
nivore modifications to bone as an index of predation,
or even of scavenging, Intensity and completeness of car-
cass consumption by lions, hyenas, and other large
scavengers may vary considerably according to seasonal
levels of carcass availability. Blumenschine's (1986a)
study of seasonal scavenging opportunities in the Ser-
engeti region and my own observations of a drought pe-
riod at Lake Turkana (Gifford 1977; Gifford-Gonzalez
1984) indicate that gluts of large animals may result in
some being ignored by larger scavengers that might, in
less rich circumstances, modify or collect their bones, On
the Lake Turkana littoral I monitored for ungulate deaths
in October, 1973, through April, 1974, hyenas did not
prey on medium to large ungulates at all, and lions often
ate well under half of the muscle mass of their kills, Prey
species were concentrated near the lake during this pe-
riod, and the four lions who regularly preyed in this zone
ate little of their kills other than viscera and rump, aban-
doning their kills after their initial feed, Hyenas and jack-
als ignored many such carcasses, which usually
mummified over the next 24 hours, The result was that
complete zebra forelimbs, neck muscles, and even part of
the down-side haunch of lion kills were often untouched
Bone Modification 191
by carnivores and thus available for human use, A few of
these carcasses were llsed by Dassanetch foragers who
spotted them over the first day after the kill, These
observations cumulatively make me cautious about in-
ferring human predation from the presence of "choice"
meat bearing segments or absence of carnivore modifica-
tion on Site 105 zebra bones,
Another relevant line of evidence is the developmen-
tal age and associated durability of the zebra bones rep-
resented at Site 105. The Site 105 zebra sample differs
from the observed taphonomic sample in that immature
elements are well represented at Site 105, with crania,
dentitions, and postcranial remains of a neonate and a
somewliat older juvenile. These elements are relatively
delicate, and comparable ones did not not survive con-
sumption by primary predators in the taphonomic
sample (see also Blumenschine 1986a). This evidence in-
dicates the young animals were acquired very close to the
times of their deaths, Together with the element repre·
sentation data, this tends to raise doubts that at least these
individuals entered the assemblage by remnant scaveng-
ing,
The Site 105 zebra bones display different dismem-
bennent traces than those of large bovids, with more
chop marks and less midshaft cutmarks (see Cuts and
Chop Marks). However, this may stem more from the two
taxa's differing distances between death and secondary
processing sites than to their modes of acquisition.
To summarize, evidence from the Site 105 zebra
component is equivocal regarding its origins. One must
consider as well that not each animal was acquired m the
same way, with the younger animals more likely to have
been killed by humans and the older ones possibly
scavenged, Even with substantial contextual data on en·
vironment, carnivore habits, and human practices, I am
unable to definitively diagnose the mode of acquisition,
That local carnivore consumption patterns differ from
those described so far in the literature for other areas adds
to my caution. Hopefully, this will serve as a reminder
that any bone assemblage is the outcome of many inter-
acting variables, some of which, such as carnivore con-
sumption strategies, can themselves be highly variable, I
do not imply that inferring causal agency in assemblage
formation is impossible. Rather, I hope this example
serves to unfold additional considerations that should be
addressed in analyses with such goals,
SITE 105:
BONE MODIFICATION
Weathering
I chose to focus on the long bone assemblage to assess
weathering, with 153 specimens to evaluate, using Beh-
rensmeyer's (1978) weathering stage classification, Of
192 Bone Modification
these, five were completely burned and so not amenable
to this evaluation. Of the remaining 148, 130 (88%)were
at Behrensmeyer's Weathering Stage 0, lacking hairline
cracks. One bone, a bovine tibia, clearly stood out from
the rest of the assemblage, being at Weathering Stage 3,
with strong exfoliation of bone cortex and development
of a textured appearance along split-lines (Tappen and
Peske 1970). Deep longitudinal cracks in the shaft were
united by transverse cracks; the shaft had actually broken
along a network of such cracks, revealing a rectangularly
stepped fracture surface. This stage of weathering
develops in large bovid bones at Lake Turkana four to
six years after initial exposure to the clements (Gifford-
Gonzalez 1984). Clearly, this tibia was not laid down at
the same time as the rest of the assemblage, perhaps dat-
ing to an earlier Dassanetch habitation of the area.
The remaining 17 long bones, all from zebra or
cattle, displayed interesting surface features that might
be classified as weathering damage by someone unfamil-
iar with the actual products of weathering, Five bones
with hairline cracks might be classified as at Weathering
Stage 1, five others displayed exfoliation of cortex
roughly similar to Weathering Stage 2, and eight others
showed a loss of cortical bone and development of tex-
ture that might be called Weathering Stage 3. In fact, I
believe that none of these bones are "weathered" in Beh-
rensmeyer's definition of the term, but rather have
developed features that mimic or approach the appear-
ance of weathering through the action of other processes,
probably heating and abrasion,
Of the five "Stage 1" bones, four are complete long
bones of very young cattle, Each bears one or two longi-
tudinal hairline cracks. One shows clear evidence of ex-
posure to fire at the proximal articulation, I think it prob-
able that the four immature long bones developed such
cracks during cooking. Cracks have been reported to
develop in fleshed long bones exposed to high tempera-
tures in roasting (Buikstra and Swegle, this volume). The
low incidence of cracking on older animals' bones may
be due to the greater thickness of their wal1s or to differ-
ences in bone organization between the respective age
groups, The one older animal's bone displaying hairline
cracks is also bovine, a proximal tibia with about half
the shaft. It shows evidence of burning in the area of the
proximal articulation. The hairline crack lies on the shaft,
in a zone that does not display burning, nor does the
crack arise from a break surface. However, it is at least
possible that the crack developed when the bone was ex-
posed to heat.
Elements at "Stage 2" may have developed their ex-
foliation as a result of heating as well. All five display
traces of burning, either on periosteum or other connec-
tive tissues still attached to the bone, on cartilage plates
on an articular end, or on some segment of the bone it-
self. The flaking occurs on areas that bear no discolora-
tion suggestive of burning, but all cases lie close to zones
that do show burning, Buikstra and Swegle (this volume)
report that exfoliation of bone surfaces occurred m flesh-
D, Gifford-GollU/lez
bearing bones roasted in their experiments, Hence, I (
believe there is good reason to think that the five bones
from Site 105 developed exfoliation in the process of
cooking.
The remaining eight "textured" elements lack most
of the hallmarks of truly weathered bone, other than the
loss of cortex from a portion of their surface. Non~ of
these bones had hairline cracks or exfoliation. Since
weathering occurs as a continuous process, and the
development of a textured surface is the result of crack-
ing and exfoliation, the texture developed on these speci-
mens is likely to have originated in some other way. The
texturing actually results from loss of cortical bone from
some section of the clement. It normally occurs more on
one side of the long bone than others. Neither Buikstra
and Swegle nor any other reports on exposure of bone
to heat note this kind of damage. Only three of the eight
bones display signs of burning, all come from adult ani-
mals, and half are still very greasy. I believe this damage
may result from abrasion by the sandy substrate of the
site,
Abrasion
Five other long bones, all zebra, display rounding and
smoothmg of break surfaces, but no discernible loss of
cortical bone. The rounding on these elements all occurs
on breaks through extraordinarily dense compact bone,
while the textur.ing described above is found toward ar-
(
ticular ends, where a thin layer of cortical bone overlies
spongy bone, The process of abrasion may affect these
two bone structures differently, Shipman (1981a) reports
rounding of break surfaces apparently subjected to wa-
terborne sediments, Bromage (1984) reports major
changes in bone surfaces subject to airborne and water-
borne particle abrasion, with mdentations and roughen-
ing of bone surface and, in extreme cases, complete loss
of surface lamellae, When examined under lOx magnifi-
cation, Site 105 bones with textured surfaces were rough
and pitted, grossly resembling much higher magnifica-
lion illustrations i.n Bromage (1984) of airborne particle
abrasion, The bones at Site 105 could have been subject
to one of two kinds of abrasion: airborne abrasion or
abrasion through trampling into the substrate by live-
stock and/or humans. The site substrate was loose and
high in sand content. Blowing sand particles might have
modified these bones, but it seems unlikely that so few
would have been affected. Moreover, in my longitudinal
study of wild animal carcasses in the region, I noted a
"sandblasting" effect on bones, but only after four to six •
years' exposure. Thus, I suspect that a more spatially lo-
calized type of abrasion, such as trampling, to be re-
sponsible,
Behrensmeyer et al. (this volume) report pitting and
scoring of bone surfaces in a Miocene deposit that by
other criteria is inferred to have been heavily trampled.
Fiorillo (this volume) reports that striations closely re-
sembling stone tool cutmarks can be produced by large
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
hooved animals' trampling on a sandy substrate within
five weeks. The question is whether the rounding of break
surfaces and loss of cortical bone on the 10 elements at
Site 105 result from this process. Lacking direct observa-
tion, I can only report on the elements' contexts of dis-
covery 10 assess whether trampling is at least a feasible
explanation, All five of the long bones with rounded frac-
ture surfaces were recovered from stock pens, four from
cattle pens and one from a sheep/goat pen. The textured
bones varied in their location, one was found in a cattle
pen, one in a caprine pen, five in the house area, and one
within the walls of a house. Of the bones found in the
house area, two were in a major zone of circulation for
stock as they are led m and Ollt of their pens.. The other
three were recovered from areas of less heavy traffic. The
location of the bones with rounded break surfaces lends
some support to the possibility that trampling caused the
abrasion. Locations of the other bones yield equivocal
evidence on the matter.
No small stock long bones displayed any of these
types of modification. In the case of cracking and flak-
ing, I am not sure why this is so. It could be that caprine
body segments were not subjected to the same cooking
processes as were those oHarger animals, thereby making
them less liable to crack or flake. However, no control-
led observations have been made on the response of bone
to boiling or roasting, nor to its vulnerability to various
attritional processes after cooking. Any explanation
posited here is therefore extremely speculative. With re-
gard to abrasion by trampling, it is known that caprines
walking on the broken bones of similarly-sized animals
can produce rounding and high polish on the break sur-
faces (Brain 1981), In the case of the Site 105 assemblage,
which was created and abandoned within six weeks, it is
possible that only trampling by heavier animals could ef-
fect rounding on the bone. Caprine elements would tend
to break under the feet of larger animals, producing bone
splinters rather than rounded or textured surfaces.
Burning
Burning has already been mentioned in connection with
surface condition of the bone. A substantial proportion
of bones from all three taxonomic categories are burned
(Tables 3a, 3b). Because I did not see large animals
processed, I cannot add behavioral context to these data.
Placement of burning on a bone can provide some clues
to the stage in meat processing and consumption at which
a bone was directly exposed to fire. For example, a bone
burned all over was clearly subjected to burning after
flesh had been removed, either by prior food consump-
tion or by intensive incineration. However, burning on
articular surfaces only could have occurred when the rest
of the bone was protected by soft tissues, as when hair is
singed off a body segment or when a joint of meat is
roasted.
Cranial and mandibular fragments of all species
showed traces of direct exposure to fire, according with
Bone Modification 193
both informant interviews and my own observations that
heads were roasted directly on coals of a fire. Mandibles
of an older cow and a subadult zebra both bore similar
processing damage: dentary segments of the mandibles
were chopped from symphyses and rami, then exposed
directly to fire. This would heat the marrow cavities
under the molar rows, perhaps facilitating marrow ex-
traction.
Cattle scapulae were consistently (six of nine)
burned on the glenoid fossa and scapular spine, with five
of six adult scapulae sustaining such damage. This pat-
tern accords with informants' descriptions of removing
the scapula and its muscles in butchery and cooking this
segment by roasting. Caprine scapulae displayed the
same pattern of damage, but the one zebra glenoid frag-
ment did not. Since this specimen probabl y was chopped
in the field to detach the foreleg (see Cuts and Chop
Marks), it is not surprising it was handled differently in
cooking.
The Site 105 long bone assemblage shows differ-
ences in the rates and placement of burning among differ-
ent taxa, which in turn reflect differences in cookmg and
disposal. Cattle and caprines display relatively high rates
of burning to articular ends of long bones, indicating
common application of roasting to limb segments (Table
4). A comparison between roughly like-size zebra and
cattle is of interest (Table 4). Zebra long bones displayed
about two times more burning than those of cattle speci-
mens, but burning was not restricted to articular surfaces
as it was in cattle. This need not reflect a lessened ten-
dency to roast zebra bones but a greater tendency toward
more extensive burning of them. This in turn suggests
that defleshed shafts of zebra bones were exposed to fire
more regularly than were those of cattle. Caprine bones
show burning rates similar to those of zebra specimens
(Tables 3a, 3b) but, like cattle, low rates of extensive
burning. High rates of burning may reflect caprine speci-
mens' higher likelihood to sustain some damage from ex-
posure to Hre, m contrast to more heavily muscled cattle.
All species' long bones display relatively high rates
of exposure to flame after they were broken, although
zebra diaphyses bore morc extensive burning than those
of domestic species. This means that breakage of shafts
for marrow was associated in time and space with fire,
although it is not clear whether marrow was extracted
immediately after meat was removed or whether the
burning resulted from cleaning-up operations. The
former pattern was observed in staged caprine barbecues,
but these may reflect rather more hurried consumption
than typical of households. It thus appears that zebra
long bones were handled differently from those of domes-
ticates, a pattern that occurs again with regard to the oc-
currence of chop marks. The relatively heavier burning
raises several questions. If zebra bones were defleshed by
nonhuman carnivores before humans handled them and
were collected only for their marrow, why heat them to
the point that they char? Marrow can more readily be
retrieved from unheated or only lightly heated bone. Was
194 Bone Modification
the burning a refuse disposal tactic? If so, why only with
zebra?
Loss of cortical and cancellous bone from long bone
epiphyses occurs at a significantly higher rate on burned
specimens (Chi2 = 8 .2, p<.O 1). This suggests that exten-
sively burned bones at Site 105 were more likely to have
undergone subsequent damage and reduction.
Degree of Fragmentation
Recent works on vertebrate taphonomy have suggested
that one characteristic of bone assemblages generated by
human food processing is the high proportion of mini-
mally identifiable fragments in assemblages of human
origin (Binford 1981; Brain 1981; Bunn 1982a, 1983).
This pattern supposedly results from the interaction of
two sets of processes. First, tool-using humans are more
efficient at smashing bones and bone units such as the
cranium to extract nutritious tissues than are carnivores.
Second, bone splinters produced by carnivores as they
gnaw bones may be swallowed and digested or excreted
in scats away from the main bone accumulation, while
those generated by humans are discarded and become
part of archaeological deposits.
The Dassanetch do not fracture bones to produce
bone grease on the large scale typical of northern-latitude
peoples (Binford 1978; Bonnichsen 1973; Leechman
1951). However, the normal course of breaking up a car-
cass, extracting bone marrow soon after slaughter, pre-
paring body segments for cooking, and extricating edible
parts from bony units after cooking produces many bone
fragments. Table 5 presents data from Site 105 on the
relative proportions of fragments of differing levels of
identifiability. About one third of the mammalian assem-
blage was not identifiable to element, and another third
was identifiable only to general body segment. In nitro-
speet, I believe that a good proportion of the "noniden-
tiflable bones" were actually long bone shaft fragments,
since this class seems to be underrepresented in the
sample.
How do these proportions compare with those from
other bone assemblages generated by humans and by
other animals? Doe index of the degree of fragmentation
in an assemblage is the proportion of bones so broken up
as to make identification to element or taxon impossible.
Figure 6 and Table 6 present data on the proportion of
identifiable versus nonidentifiable bone in a number of
assemblages generated by modern humans, by various
modern carnivores, and in a few archaeological assem-
blages. The latter are all well-documented later Holocene
African sites for which the less identifiable components
of the assemblages were tabulated and presented. Clearly,
one must approach fragmentation data from archeologi-
cal sites, especially caves and rock shelters, with consider-
able caution. Although these late sites were chosen to
minimize ambiguity about hominid involvement in creat-
ing the assemblages, post-abandonment and post deposi-
D. Gifford-Gonwlez
100
AAA
EA
w 80
..;
lC
cE
lO c
u.
A
§ 60 e
w
c Ww
g 40 ECE
!zUl E'E
u
a:
w '-l.o
20
Q.
L
H
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
PERCENT IDENTIFIABLE
Figure 6. Proportion of identifiable to nonidentifiable
elements in various human and carnivore assemblages
(see Table 6). A=archaeologicaL E=ethnographic, C=
spotted hyena, H=brown hyena, D=dog, L=leopard,
W=wolf, and "=site 105.
tional processes have undoubtedly affected the bone. My
purpose in juxtaposing them with modern data sets is to
examine them for their unique qualities rather than to
imply they are homologous to the modern human assem-
blages.
As can be seen in Figure 6, most assemblages
generated by humans have moderately to extremely high
proportions of nonidentifiable bone, while those of most
(
carnivores have moderately to extremely low ones.
However, there is some overlap. To appreciate this pat-
tern more fully, and especial1y to understand ex.ceptions
to the overall rule, one must examine the actual dynam-
ics underlying these different levels of fragmentation.
The most extreme fragmentation exists in archaeo-
logical examples: Chencherere shelter (Crader 1982) and
Fackeltrager shelter (Brain 1981). A number of processes
have interacted to produce this pattern. Nonhuman car-
nivores may be attracted to both the locality and the bone
assemblages and act to further comminute the bone.
Compaction of bones within superimposed strata may
also contribute to fragmentation (Klein and Cruz-Uribe
1984). From my own work with open air and rockshelter
assemblages, I suspect that some of the extreme fragmen-
tation of these bones results from human waste disposai
and trampling within the enclosed living space of such
sites. However, the stratigraphically simple open air site
of Prolonged Drift (Figure 6, third archaeological case
from the left) displays more extreme degrees of fragmen-
tation than do the other rockshe1ters plotted, indicating
that each site has its own depositional history.
The ethnographic assemblage with the greatest pro-
portion of nonidentifiable scrap is Tul11kana, a Nunamillt
fall residential site, where Binford (1978) reports that
bone grease was manufactured. Bone grease production
entails pounding articular ends of long bones to open
grease-bearing cells of cancellous bone prior to boiling
and skimming off grease. The bony refuse of this opera-
,r
Ethnographic Analog~ll?$ from East Africa
tion consists of bone meal and larger fragments, many
broken beyond recognition. Other of Binford's ethno-
graphic cases approach a 70 :30 ratio of identifiable to
nonidentifiable elements, reflecting in part that no bone
grease processing occurred at these sites. One site that
lies just to the right of the wolf data, the Net site, IS an
excavated assemblage from the late nineteenth century
which Binford, reasoning from the number of certain
other elements present at the site, states is probably
missing both articular ends and bone chips. He suggests
that bone grease processing went on at the site, but that
excavations failed to recover the debris of this operation.
The assemblages from part of another late nineteenth
century site, Palangana House 1 area, has even fewer
non identifiable fragments. Although Binford did recover
a dump of marrow bone fragments associated wi th House
1, he notes that head, mandible, and some vertebral sec-
tions are "overrepresented" in the assemblage, relative to
limb bones. He speculate5 that this results from use of
nearly exhausted meat caches by House 1 inhabitants,
who stayed at the locality through most of the winter. If
this scenario is correct, it may explain the relatively low
proportion of nonidentifiable bones. Skull elements and
vertebrae are usually not so fragmented as limb bones,
since extracting nourishing tissue from these elements can
be done without comminuting the bone (see discussion
of complete bones from 105, below). Alternatively, he-
cause Palangana was not completely excavated, a bone
dump may have been missed, as Binford (1978) suggests
for the Net site.
The ethnographic assemblage with an extraordinary
proportion of identifiable pieces is Brain's (1981) Kuiseb
River sample (Figure 6, right-most archaeological case). I
suspect that this may be due to the fact that a substan-
tial number of smaller fragments were not collected when
the assemblage was gathered. Photographs of the area
over which the bones were scattered show the substrate
to be loose and sandy. Based on my own experience with
subsurface migration of smaller pieces of bone, I believe
it likely that some fragments were below the surface and
not gathered. Alternatively, the dogs present at the site
may have consumed and redeposited bone scrap
generated by humans.
The assemblages modified by carnivores serve to
warn us away from thinking of a generic carnivore that
invariably produces assemblages that differ from those
made by humans. The proportions of identifiable bone
in carnivore assemblages results at least in part from spe-
cies differences in feeding behavior. Assemblages pro-
duced by the spotted hyena, two from Kenya and one
from South Africa, fall in the range of those created by
humans on the basis of simple degree of fragmentation.
Data from Richardson's (1980) paper on carnivore dam-
age to antelope bones could not be cast in this form, but
supports the view that spotted hyenas can produce many
times more bone fragments in feeding than do other Afri-
can carnivores. Blumenschine (personal communication
1984) suggests that bone collecting behavior by this spe-
Bone Modification 195 .
des varies inversely with a region's productivity. This
could account for the variation in the rates at which this
species produces bone fragments in various ecological
settings. Given the spotted hyena's great flexibility as a
predator/scavenger (Kruuk 1972) and its formerly wide
distribution, it can be expected that caves or rockshelters
may yield assemblages in which hyenas have produced
proportions of nonidentifiable bone similar to those
generated by hominids.
To summarize, although most carnivores tend to
produce less small bone scrap than do humans, there are
exceptions in bone accumulations generated by both
humans and carnivores, specifically hyenas. It is there-
fore essential to approach ambiguous assemblages llsing
several analytical tactics. The most promising involve
seeking traces on the bone of the processor (tooth marks,
impact scars, cutmarks, etc.) and element segment repre-
sentation patterns. Since carnivores get nutrition from
bones by gnawing and reducing the elements, their de-
bris looks very different from that produced by humans
(Binford 1981; Bonnichsen 1973, Brain 1981 Haynes
1983a).
To understand nutritional choices underlying bone
fragmentation by humans one may examine which bones
arc complete at Site 105. Of the 2,800 mammal elements
recorded, 10.4% (290) were complete. Table 7 lists ele-
ments found in a complete state. About 40% are verte-
brae, from which little additional nourishment can be
gained by breaking them. Of the rest, 28% arc hones
without marrow cavities (patella, carpals, tarsals).
Phalanges, represented here by bovid elements, do con-
tain a little marrow that can be extracted by breaking
them However, their marrow utility mdex is low (Bin-
ford 1978) compared to everything but vertebrae, ribs,
scapula, pelvis, carpals, and tarsals. Binford (1978) re-
ports that, while his oldest Nunamiut informants recalled
breaking up phalanges under the more stringent dietary
conditions of their early youth, modern hunters discard
phalanges as not worth the eHort for the return. I 5uspect
that a similar set of judgments contributed to the rela-
tively low rate of breakage on these bones at Site 105.
Most (30%) of the rest of the unbroken bones from
Site 105 are from subadults. Mandibles and long bones
of younger animals lack fatty yellow marrow containing
blood-prodUcing tissue and fluid. One may well ask why
the pelvis and scapula, bones relatively poor in marrow
or other Internal tissue, show high breakage rates. The
answer probably lies in the preferred method of cooking
meat at home bases, boiling. In order to be fit into con-
tainers of limited dimensions, bones must be broken into
smaller segments, a process that coincidentally frees what
marrow is contained in the elements during cooking. The
requirements and opportunities of pot-boiling can have
a strong influence on bone breakage practices and the re-
sulting patterns of fracture type and form. This will be
discussed in more detail in following sections.
The Site 105 fragmentation rate can be compared
with that of like-sized animals dying as the result of nat-
196 Bone Modification
ural causes in the same region. My longitudinal ta-
phonomic study of wild ungulate carcasses focused on
48 zebras, topis, and oryx, antelopes of roughly similar
size as Dassanetch cattle (Gifford 1977; Gifford-Gon-
zalez 1984). About 40% of these animals were killed by
lions; the rest died of disease, starvation, and/or old age.
Only four were handled by humans subsequent to their
deaths. Whereas 94.1 % of the long bones at Site 105 were
broken, only 13 of 565 (2.3%) limb bones surveyed in
the taphonomic sample were broken at the time of death
or within a month of death. The odd number of bones
resuIts from transport away from the kill site of some
limbs by carnivores immediatelyaher the death of the
animal.
Long Bone Fracture Patterns and
Cooking Practices
The broken long bones from Site 105 merit special con-
sideration because they raise some issues relevant to
archaeological cases. Before discussing these in detail, it
IS useful to summarize common long bone fracture pat-
terns at Site 105, as reflected by the nature and place-
ment of damage on the bones. Of 152 long bones dis-
playing breakage of the diaphyses, 28 bear traces of the
means used to break them. This rate of occurrence would
probably have been considerably higher had all long
bone shaft fragments been retained for examination. The
overall pattern of evidence suggests use of a single anvil
with the bones of zebras and cattle. Of 28 broken zebra
bones, 9 displayed dear impact points, diagnosed by in-
ternal and external flaking (Johnson 1985). Of these, 8
appear to have been caused by a blunt instrument, prob-
ably a stone, and 1 has chop marks next to the impact
(Figure 7). Five zebra long bones bore crushing and pit-
ting, probably caused by an anvil, roughly opposite or
diagonal to points of impact (Johnson 1985), and 2 had
hackle marks running m opposing directions, suggesting
bipolar loading. Of 82 broken cattle long bones, 13 bore
blunt impact scars,S had panga chop marks at the frac-
ture, and 11 bore anvil marks, again roughly opposite or
slightly diagonal to the points of impact. No bipolar
hackle marks were observed. Only 1 caprine long bone
showed an impact scar and one a chop mark associated
with the break. None displayed anvil marks, contrasting
with a nearly 20% rate of anvil marks in bones from the
controlled caprine butcheries I observed. The pattern at
Site 105 could reflect breakage of sheep and goat bones
by direct percussion, or the tendency for these more deli-
cate bones to shatter at points of impact, thereby delet-
ing percussor traces on the epiphyses recovered for study.
Elements of all three ungulate species are relatively
few in number. However, even with relatively few speci-
mens, a consistent tendency to locate impacts in the
middle third of the shafts is apparent among zebra and
cattle elements. These are described here by real speci-
mens counts, rather than percentages. Sheep and goat
long bones sometimes display other patterns. Four of five
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
Figure 7. Site 105; zebra femur shaft with chop mark at
fracture, showing transverse stepped break surface and
traces of burning on break.
cattle humeri were broken near midshaft, as were two of
three zebra humeri. Four of five caprine humeri show the
same pattern. The remaining breaks in all three taxa lie
closer to one or the other epiphysis. Radioulnae of zebras
and cattle likewise display a tendency toward midshaft
impacts (Figures 8 and 9), with three of five zebra and all
of nine cattle elements reflecting this pattern. All taxa
show removal of the olecranon by percussion, a tactic
apparently used in disarticulation (see Cuts and Chop
Marks). This pattern of olecranon removal also occurs
on all 19 proximal radioulnae from Area 300. Caprine
radioulnae, by contrast, show greater (five of seven) ten-
dency toward blows at either proximal or distal ends.
The tendency toward midshaft breakage occurs again for
femora of zebra (four of five cases) and cattle (all of nine),
whereas caprine femora show higher rates (five of eight)
of impact near the proximal or distal ends of the shafts.
The same pattern repeats with tibiae of larger animals: 4
of 5 zebra and lOaf 12 cattle elements reflect impact near
the middle of the diaphysis. Of four caprine tibia frag-
ments not reduced from the ends by gnawing (see Gnaw-
ing: Carnivore and Human), three have midshaft im-
pacts. The two zebra metapodials are broken near
midshaft, and 12 of 13 cattle metapodials reflect a simi-
lar pattern. Caprine metapodia are more variable, with
three of six not gnawed at the ends displaying midshaft
breaks and the other three reflecting impacts positioned
closer to one or the other diaphysis. This midshaft break-
age tactic on larger animals' long bones contrasts with
that described by Binford (1981) for Nunamiut marrow
extractors, who fracture bones closer to the epiphyses. It
is somewhat similar to that reported by Bonnichsen
(1973) for the Calling Lake Cree. In concert with this
high frequency of midshaft breakage, the Site 105 assem-
blage includes high proportions of specimens broken
transversely to the long axis of the bone, often with a
stepped or jagged break surface texture. These breaks are
more common than in long bone samples from stone age
(~.
archaeological sites in Africa which I have analyzed. I
 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
Figure.S. Site 105i refit bovine radioulna showing midshaft impact on upper surface, damage to ulna shaft where bone
rested on anviL
Figure 9. Site 105/ refit zebra radioulna showing midshaft break.
have, however, recently been informed by two South
American colleagues that transverse fractures near
epiphyses are relatively common on artiodactyl long
bones at Alero Entrada Baker, Chile (F. Men'l, personal
communication 1987) and sites in Argentine Patagonia
(L. Borrero, personal communication).
Figures 7,10/ and 11 illustrate such breakage; Table
10 summarizes frequencies of longitudinal, spiral, and
transverse fracture shapes, and of smooth versus stepped
break surfaces in the Site 105 assemblage. Although step-
p.ing is relatively common on spiral fractures, a signifi-
cant association of stepping with transverse breaks ex-
ists. Of 40 transverse breaks, 34 exhibit stepping,
whereas of 66 spiral fractures, 30 show stepping
(Chi 2 =14.6697, p<.OOl). Only 6 of 27 longitudinally
fractured bones show stepping, presenting a very differ-
ent case from that of transverse breaks (Chi 2 = 3.86,
p< .0001). The combi ned long bones sample from the area
300 sites display similarly high rates of transverse frac-
tures, with 33% occurrence in 247 cases, as opposed to
Bone Modification 197
29% in 124 cases at Site 105 Stepping IS highly signifi-
cantly associated (Chi 2 probabilities <.001) with trans-
verse breaks in the Area 300 sample as well. Thus, this
pattern of breakage appears to be a common product of
Dassanetch diaphysis smashing.
Checks with illustrations and descriptions of bone
fracture in other ethnoarchaeological studies (Binford
1978,1981; Yellen 1977) have convinced me that the Site
105 breakage pattern is as yet unreported from contem-
porary human bone-processors. My conviction was
strengthened by the queries of Bone Modification Con-
ference participants familiar with long bone fractures
commonly occurring in archaeological and paleontologi-
cal assemblages. Colleagues who examined a sample of
the Site 105 bones questioned whether the transverse and
jagged break surfaces on long bones were actually frac-
tures on fresh bone, since they had never seen such breaks
except on weathered bone in their assemblages (B.M.
Gilbert and J.S. Oliver, personal communication 1984;
see also Haynes 1983a).
198 Bone Modification
Figure 10. Site 105; bovine radioulna shaft showing
jagged break surface {compare with Figures 7 and 12}.
Figure 11. Site 105; caprine femur shaft showing trans-
verse break.
Figure 12. Site 105; bovine tibia at Weathering Stage 3,
showing columnar fracture surface typical of such
weathered long bones (compare with Figures 7 and IO).
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
However, documented timing of site occupation ar- ('
gues against prolonged exposure of the bones to the ele-
ments, as does their overall condition. As stated earlier,
the majority of bones were at Behrensmeyer's Weather-
ing Stage 0, which lasts no more than six months in the
Lake Turkana area (Gifford 1977; Gifford-Gonzalez
1984). None of several hundred longitudinally moni-
tored long bones in my taphonomic sample displayed
such fractures when at Weathering Stage O. The one
specimen at Weathering Stage 3 (Table 10; Figure 12) had
a different fracture surface, resulting from the effects of
much more deeply developed split lines on the transmis-
sion of the fracture through the bone. This is classic "hori-
zontal tension failure" breakage, as described by Johnson
(1985), which occurs when a long bone fails to withstand
stresses applied at right angles to the preferential align-
ment of its collagen fibers. It is characteristic of bone that
had undergone considerable depletion of moisture and
collagen. The Site 105 bones displaying jagged, trans-
verse fractures were not at this advanced stage of split
line development.
These facts call for discussion of the determinants of
fracture shape and surface texture. Johnson (1985) dis-
tinguishes between spiral fracture, which she says charac-
terizes very fresh bone, and "horizontal tension failure)'
which she states is typical of bone that has lost some of
its original moisture through exposure to the air. John-
son argues impact stresses to very fresh diaphyses are
preferentially transmitted along the orientation of col-
(
lagen bundles in the bone, resulting in helical movement
of fracture fronts and, inevitably, spirally fractured
bones. The implication of Johnson's discussion is that
bones displaying stepping and horizontal tension failures
were air-dried for some time before breakage. My review
of the experimental literature on breakage of both whole
bones and bone tissue samples leads me to believe that
the causes of non-spiral, stepped breaks may be more
complex than implied by Johnson. I believe that the ef-
fects of variable amounts of dynamic loading and the ef-
fects of heating on the tensile and compressive strength,
elasticity, and strain properties of bone merit further in-
vestigation. Before elaborating, I stress, as I did in the
earlier section on methods, that some of the breaks I
characterized as transverse (length of break less than
width) might be called spiral by Johnson (1985:179).
Thus, the rates of transverse breaks in the Site 105 as-
semblage would be lower according to her classificatory
system (Figure 10 is a possible example). However, that
non-spirally fractured bone exists in good numbers in the
assemblage is unarguable. Moreover, Johnson's and my
criteria for describing stepping are very similar, and so
the high rates of this type of fracture surface are also not
an artifact of one classificatory system.
With regard to the two factors affecting bone break-
age noted above, the literature suggests but does not de-
monstrate that each may affect tendencies of bone to
break in a non-spiral manner. Samples of fully hydrated,
fresh bone tissue have been shown to break transversely
 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
( when subjected to sufficient dynamic loading perpendic-
ular to the predominant alignment of collagen fibers in
the specimen (Bonfield and Li 1966). There are good
theoretical grounds for expecting transverse fractures of
long bones to display stepped fracture surfaces. Bonfield
and Li (1966) report jagged fracture surfaces on trans-
versely impact-loaded fresh bone specimens. Fracture ex-
periments by Bonnichsen (1973; 1979) and Mengoni-
Gofialons (1980) with fresh whole cattle bones have
produced somewhat conflicting results. Bonnichsen re-
ports that bones struck at midshaft while supported at
each end tend to develop spiral fractures with smooth
fracture surfaces. However, Mengoni-Gofialons (1980)
reports that bones struck midshaft while supported at
either end tended break in a transverse fashion with
jagged break surfaces. Mengoni reports the same fracture
pattern for bones struck dose to either epiphysis while
supported by anvils at either end, but that bones struck
while supported at midshaft with an anvil produce spi-
ral or longitudinal fractures. In both Bonnichsen's and
Mengoni's experiments bones were of the same species,
lay in the same positions, were struck by similar objects
and in a similar orientation. The factors which may have
varied are the force with which the blows were struck
and the relative freshness of the bone, with the resulting
effects discussed by Johnson. A greater degree of tensile
strain to the bone on impact might have resulted in prop-
agation of fracture fronts across rather than along the ex-
isting orientation of collagen fibers. If Mengoni's "fresh"
bone had dried longer than Bonnichsen's, this could have
conditioned more jagged breaks. In any case., research to
date yields equivocal data on the causes of jagged, trans-
verse fractures in fresh bones.
In addition, questions arise regarding the properties
of cooked bone when subjected to impacts. Heating may
swiftly reduce long bones' tensile and compressive
strength and elasticity. Most caprine and bovine long
bones at Site 105 were roasted before breakage, so the
influence of heating must be considered. Little work has
been published on effects of cooking on whole bones or
parts of bone, although some work with bone tissue
samples is suggestive. Shipman et al. (1984) established
that permanent changes in the crystalline structure of
bone occur only at temperatures far in excess of those of
normal cooking. Bonfield and Li (1966) exposed long
bone segments to impact and tensile stress at tempera-
tures ranging from -196° to 500° C. Within the range
from 50° C to 100° C (realistic bolling and roasting
temperatures), the authors found that heating did not
alter bone's fracture properties. However, this experi ment
may not be relevant to cooking because specimens were
quickly heated and then broken, with no effort to main-
tain the bones at the target temperatures for a span before
impacting them. This treatment thus fundamentally
differs from the process involved in roasting, baking, or
boiling.
More relevant is work by Richter (1986), who notes
that collagen strands in fish bone begin to unravel and
Bone Modification 199
denature when baked at temperatures between 60° C and
100° C for 30 minutes. Collagen in fish bones boiled for
30 minutes was completely denatured. No parallel work
has yet been published for mammal bones, and Richter
(1986) notes that it can be expected that collagen in mam-
mal bone may be somewhat more protected from the ef~
feets of heating than that in thinner fish elements.
However, one of the intended effects of boiling is to ex-
tract collagen from bones. Given this, one might expect
breakage of boiled bone to mimic that of slightly
weathered elements. Changes in bones encased in meat
while roasted may be of lesser magnitude than in boiled
specimens, but collagen can be expected to alter due to
heating. Since split lines develop according to the disposi-
tion patterns of collagen bundles in bones (Ruangwit
1967), accelerated denaturing of the collagen by heating
will permit development of more transverse and jagged
breaks, since fracture fronts will tend to move across
bundles of fibers. It is therefore possible that frequent
jagged fracture surfaces of Site 105 long bones (Table 10)
result from breakage after boiling or roasting. Paola Villa
(personal communication 1985) reports that roasted
sheep long bones, when smashed for marrow, broke with
jagged edges. She cautions that the sample generated was
very small, but her observations suggest further research
in this area would be useful to archaeologists. Horwitz
(1987) has done a brief pilot study of fracture patterns
produced after boiling and roasting. She found that
roasted and boiled bones tended to have rougher break
surfaces than did fresh elements subjected to the same
breakage tactics.
These observations may be relevant to the frequen-
cies of midshaft smashing in the assemblage. Bonnichsen
(1973) reports that Calling Lake Cree informants pre-
pared defleshed long bones for breakage by first heating
and then allowing them to cool. Heating was said to facil-
itate breaking the shaft. Binford (1981) argued that mid-
shaft breakage would not be pursued by expert bone
breakers because fresh bone would resist all but the heav-
iest blows to this region and since the blows would drive
bone splinters into the marrow. However, if previously
heated bone does break more readily than fresh because
of the a weakening of collagen structure, perhaps mid-
shaft breakage is a more efficient option than Binford
surmised. This area requires further detailed experimen-
tal research.
Yet a third factor to be considered in connection with
the common occurrence of transverse fractures is the use
of pl:mgas as percllssors in breaking long bone shafts. A
significant number of chop marks on long bones lie at
the fracture face and appear to have been inflicted as part
of the breakage process (see Cuts and Chop Marks). Used
as a percussor, the panga offers the advantage of simul-
taneously applying dynamic loading and notching to the
bone shaft. Notching radically reduces a bone's ability to
absorb the force of a blow, thereby increasing its ten-
dency to break (Bonfield and U 1966; Mengoni-
Gofialons 1980). Borrero {personal communication
200 Bone Modification
1987) reports notching on about 70% of guanaco
radioulnae from Patagonian forager sites, all associated
with transverse fracture. These notches are near
epiphyses and made by sawing with a cutting tool rather
than by a chopper. Other, unnotched bones in Borrero's
sites display spiral fractures. The Site 105 long bones thus
may reflect facilitated midshaft breakage through the use
of metal chopping tools. I became especially interested in
this possibility after encountering similar rates of trans-
verse fracture on zebra bones from Site 08, which also
display panga chop marks (see SITE 08).
I had originally hypothesized that midshaft break-
age at Site 105 was aimed a reducing raw bones to pot-
sized segments for boiling, as I had been told was the
general practice by Dassanetch informants. I was even
more inclined to take this view after seeing precise
matches for Site 105 caprine bone breaks in a set of
broken sheep bones collected by Binford from contem-
porary Navajo living sites in eastern Arizona. Binford
(personal communication 1985) had seen Navajo pro-
duce transverse, stepped midshaft breaks by breaking
raw long bones into pot-sized segments for stewing. This
was accomplished by striking the bone at miclshaft with
a knife or hatchet to form a notch or cut, then cracking
the bone over the acute angle of a stone anvil. I reasoned
that since it is more difficult to extract marrow from
bones broken into two halves, this breakage pattern
would be serviceable only if marrow were extracted by
boiling the bones and drinking the broth. However, the
placement of burning and cuts on long bones indicates
that site 105 specimens were roasted in joints of meat
before breakage. Midshaft marrow bone smashing is
thus, in this case, not predicated on the use of cooking
vessels to process the broken bone. Marrow turns liquid
at roasting temperatures, but solidifies again as the bone
cools. Marrow could readily be extracted from lukewarm
bones fractured transversely, since it will simply slide out,
lubricated by the semiliquid outer surface of the marrow
fillet. It is possible that burning on bl"Oken ends of Site
105 long bones reflects slight reheating to facilitate ex-
traction.
Why So Little Work on Cooked Bones?
In researching the literature on bone breakage by
humans, I noticed that experimental work on the topic
has focused on treatment of uncooked bones. These stu-
dies serve as an essential baseline for understanding the
basic properties of bone when subject to dynamic load-
ing. However, emphasis on uncooked specimens tends to
ignore the fact that many if not most ethnographically
documented foragers and others cooked meat with bones
left in the flesh, either by roasting or boiling. 1 believe
good historic reasons exist for this research emphasis on
uncooked bone. Much of the seminal work on butchery
practices derives from analyses of mass bison kills on the
Great Plains. By analogy with ethnographically docu-
mented kills, these situations present unique problems for
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
food extractors. Since such kills were normally made to
provision social groups for long periods, transport and
slorage were major considerations In butchery strategies.
Given these factors, on-site discard of bones would have
been very high (e.g., Frison 1970, 1974; Frison et al.
1976; Wheat 1972, 1979). Filleting would have been a
major on-site butchery activity, as would have been mar-
row extraction in quantity. Binford's Nunamiut study
(1978, 1981) arose from rather different motivations
than the Great Plains research, but also concentrates on
mass processing, with the result that much of the Eng-
lish-language literature on cutmarks and marrow extrac-
tion is seen from a mass-processing perspective.
Wholesale extraction of edible tissue and discard of
bone at mass kill sites differs from that reported for many
hunting peoples who killed fewer large animals at a time
and at a steadier rate over the year. Since meat is easier
to remove from bones when cooked, one could say that
filleting of uncooked bones imposes costs in time and
energy that must be balanced against the potential bene-
fits of reducing the net weight of tissue to be transported.
For groups killing only a few large animals at a time,
transport weights may not have been so crucial a con-
sideration, and limb segments would have been trans-
ported to sites of consumption with bones ineluded. Were
marrow bones of meat-rich body segments transported
to the consumption site and cooked in joints of meat,
marrow extraction might be deferred until"dessert:' with (
effects on diaphysis breakage that result from heating.
My point here is not that the perspective derived from
research on mass kills has produced erroneous findings.
Rather, research on bone modification should be ex-
panded to reflect other animal processing and culinary
strategies, with greater emphasis on the effects of cook-
ing technology and techniques.
Cuts and Chop Marks
Identifiable mammal elements were checked for damage
inflicted by CUlling implements. Two types appeared on
the bones. First and more numerous were relatively shal-
low and narrow marks with roughly V-shaped cross sec-
tions lacking internal striations parallel to the long axis
of the mark (Tables 8a, 8b; Figures 13, 14, 15). Given
their similarity to cuts of metal knives described in the
literature (Guilday et al. 1962; Walker and Long 1977)
and their lack of attributes characteristic of stone tool
Cll tmarks (Shipman and Rose 1983), 1 infer that these
indeed were made by the same types of metal knives I
saw local people usc in other butchery episodes. The sec-
ond type of cutmarks were deeper, broader, and longer,
sometimes associated with impact damage, also lacking
parallel striations within the mark (Tables 9a, 9b; Figures
9,16). These I interpret as chopping marks of a heavy
metal tool, most likely a panga. In addition, two bones,
a zebra femur with one mark, and a zebra tibia with two
closely spaced marks, display'ed what I interpret as
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
Figure 13. Site 105; cut marks on topi tibia showing nar-
row, V-shaped section.
Figure 15. Site 105; zebra proximal radioulnae, show-
ing detachment of olecranon process. Bottom specimen
also shows notching of ulna shaft.
pseudo-cutmarks (Behrensmeyer et aI., this volume;
Fiorillo, this volume). The marks lay on shafts away from
locations of muscle, tendons, ligaments, or joint capsules
normally cut during butchery. They were relatively shal-
low and displayed parallel striations within the mark.
At this point a few remarks regarding the functional
meanings of morphologically different butchery traces
may be useful. Despite the fact that it is, in most cases, a
straightforward matter to distingu ish chopping from cut-
ting damage to bone, it should be borne in mind that they
sometimes bear testimony to essentially identical actions
in processing carcasses. Similar butchery operations can
be performed with a fine or a heavy-duty cutting edge,
depending on tool availability, mechanical considera-
tions stemming from carcass size and condition, and per-
haps even personal preference. Guilday et al. (1962) re-
port two strategies, one using an axe and the other a
Bone Modification 201
Figure 14. Site 105: chop marks on zebra femur shaft
Figure 16. Site 105; hyena-sized canine puncture mark
on bovine proximal femur.
knife, for removing deer scapulae and their muscle
masses from the rest of the foreleg. Archaeologists thus
often describe traces of cutting and hacking as subsets of
a general cutting category, as I do here, to account for
the overlapping functions of fine and heavy cutting
edges. Those of us who deal with paleolithic assemblages
may be less accustomed to the fact that chopping tools
may be used to break long bones for marrow or as per-
cussors in butchering larger animals. The Site 105 assem-
blage reflects use of heavy cutting tools as percussors to
break mto long bone marrow cavities. They were also
probably used to fracture large animals' bones as part of
a systematic dismemberment strategy (see discussion of
cattle and zebra below). This requires that chop marks
and fracture patterns sometimes be considered together
to allow a fuller understanding of carcass processing at
the site.
202 Bone Modification
The following section reports the occurrences of cuts
and chop marks among caprine, cattle, and zebra bones,
offering functional interpretations of the traces and their
variations among these groups, and ending with discus-
sion of some wider issues in assigning functional mean-
ing to cutmarks on bones. Tables 8a, 8b, 9a, and 9b will
serve as bases for most of the ensuing section's discus-
sion.
The Site 105 assemblage reflects its creators' ten-
dency to use chopping tools as well as knives in separat-
ing the body segments of large animals and to use knives
nearly exclusively on caprines (Tables 8a, 8b, 9a, 9b).
Cutmarks occur in the overall assemblage more
frequently on the bones of larger ungulates, with zebra
displaying significantly higher proportions than domes-
tic species (Table 8a, 8b). However, when long bones only
are considered, caprines bear proportionately more cuts
than do those of cattle, and the rates of occurrence of cuts
among the three taxonomic groups (32%,26%, and 39%,
for caprine, cattle, and zebra long bones, respectively)
are statistically indistinguishable.
That caprine axial, scapular, and pelVic elements
show few cuts in comparison with those of larger ungu-
lates ac£ords with my observations of caprine butcher-
ies, in which removal of forelimb and ribs and segmen-
tation of vertebrae were effected by cutting soft tissue,
leverage, and snapping, supplemented by cutting only at
particularly strong articulations. This is possible with
carcasses the size of sheep or goats but much less so with
those of cattle or zebras because of the greater strength
of articulations relative to human strength. Marshall
(1986) reports similarly lower frequencies of cuts on ca-
prine versus bovine bones at the Kenyan Neolithic site of
Ngamuriak. In view of thiS tendency, the relatively high
frequencies of cuts on caprine limb bones requires ex-
planation. I believe it relates less to the greater intensity
of cutting on caprine limb segments than to the role soft
tissues play in fortuitously protecting bone of larger an-
imals from the impacts of cutting implements.
The Site 105 mamma] bone collection was never
boiled or otherwise cleaned, thus permitting examination
of cuts on adhering muscle remnants, tendons, and other
connective tissues. On some cattle and zebra elements not
all cuts discernible on remnant soft tissues penetrate to
the bone. For this reason, these cuts were not tallied as
cuts on bone, although they testify to functionally signif-
icant action. Were these tissues removed, as they would
be in archaeological cases, no trace of the use of cutting
implements at the points in question would remain. Thus,
among larger animals at Site 105 soft tissue masses
severed during butchery are sufficiently bulky or long
that cutting may sometimes be completed successfully
without a knife blade touching bone, whereas among ca-
prines, the same-sized blade may well cut through the
tissue and score the bone. Given this consideration, it re-
mains open to question why archaeological collections
such as Marshall's (1986) show few cuts to sheep and
goat elements. Are stone tools less likely to cut so deeply
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
as metal knives, or do different butchery and culinary
strategies exaggerate or downplay the tendency noted
here?
Most traces of cutting tools on caprine bones can be
related to dismemberment, rather than to either removal
of flesh or breakage for marrow. All the cutting damage
to scapulae, either excisions of a small segment of bone
or incisions, occurs on the medial face of the acromion
process, at the point of origin of the coracobrachialis, and
on part of the biceps brachii muscles. Severing these ef-
fectively exposes the scapulohumeral joint from the me-
dial side and permits disarticulation. This implies that,
as in observed butcheries, the entire forelimb with
scapula already had been removed from the thorax. Such
marks are not recorded by Binford (19B1) for Nunamiut
caribou butcheries nor by Guilday et al. (1962) for deer,
who instead cite detachment of the foreleg by chopping
through the scapular neck. Wi th regard specifically to ca-
prines, blows by some kind of percussor were also ap-
parently used to disjoint the scapula from the humerus
by the people of Neolithic Deh Luran Plain villages (Hole
et al. 1969). Von den Driesch and Boessneck (1975) do
report cuts similar to those on the Site 105 caprine
scapulae on bones from Neolithic sites in Portugal and
Germany.
Caprine distal humeri have cuts at the origins of the
middle and common digital extensors. Binford (1981)
characterizes cuts at this location (his Hd-6) as deflesh-
ing marks. However, their removal also exposes the an-
(
terolateral, more readily cut, side of the elbow joint and
allows hyperflexion of the joint. This in turn would facil-
itate cutting the internal ligaments of the joint Similar
marks are illustrated by von den Driesch and Boessneck
(1975) for caprines. Cuts on the anterior face of the
humerus, reported by Hole et al. (1969) for Tepe Sabz
caprines and by Guilday et al. (1962) for Eschelman deer,
are probably' at these locations as well, although they
were not closely specified in the texts.
Cuts oncaprine proximal radioulnae probably stem
from defleshing. Of the seven radioulnae examined, 43%
were cut at the tendinous radial origin of the deep digi-
tal flexor and one at the insertion of brachialis, a muscle
that crosses the inner elbow. No marks were noted on
olecranons near the very strongly inserted triceps brachii
and other muscles attached to the tuberosity, as might be
expected had these muscles been severed in separating the
humerus from radioulna. However, 9 of 11 adult and 1
of 3 immature ulnae of all taxa have had the olecranon
broken off, which would have effectively detached the
triceps and superimposed deltoid muscles from the lower
foreleg. This pattern of butchery damage is reported by
Frison et al. (1976) for bison at the Hawken site. Binford
(1981) contests Frison's assertion that missing muscle at-
tachments signal smashing-off by humans, instead
positing carnivore reduction for many instances. Ulnae
at Site 105 that display the breakage described above do
not display carnivore damage. If they display any mod-
ification, it is panga chop marks. Thus, Site 105 at least
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
provides an instance in which percussion was used to
detach the olecranon.
Site 105 caprine radii lack heavy cutting across the
tuberosities of the anterior proximal radius, Binford's
(1981) RCp-5, that nearly aU authors consulted report as
disarticulation damage (Guilday et a1. 1962; Hole et al.
1969; von den Driesch and Boessneck 1975). Their ab-
sence indicates that Site 105 caprine upper forelimbs were
either consistently left articulated through cooking or,
less probably, dismembered in a manner not common in
other faunal assemblages reported. The one midshaft cut
on the posterior face of the radius is not readily related
to severing muscle masses or tendons, nor is it immedi-
ately next to a fracture surface, thereby diminishing the
likelihood that it was a notch intended to weaken the
bone prior to striking it. Cuts are absent from distal
radioulnae and proximal metacarpals, probably reflect-
ing the fact that it is relatively easy to separate the upper
from lower foreleg by hyperflexing the carpal joint and
cutting between the first and second row of carpal bones.
With one exception, carpals examined were not affected
by cutting implements. The only other cuts on a meta-
carpal are two near the break on the posterior shaft of a
distal fragment, probably associated with breaking the
bone, or possibly with skinning (Binford 1981:142).
Caprine innominates bear little evidence of cutting
implements. Pubic bones, which from ethnographic ob-
servations were expected to show damage, were very rare
in the assemblage. This is probably because the act of
splitting them caused so much damage that they were re-
duced to unidentifiable fragments. One pelvis specimen
bears three chop marks just below a fracture on the neck
of the ilium, probably resulting from the same set of ac-
tions that detached the iliac blade. Two other innomi-
nates are fractured (without traces of cutting tools)
through the iliac segment of the acetabulum. All other
innominate halves lack discernible cuts or chop marks.
This contrasts with heavy damage to caprine acetabula
and iliac necks from Ali Kosh (Hole et a1. 1969) and from
Neolithic sites reported by von den Driesch and
Boessneck (1975), but accords with observations of Guil-
day et al. (1962) on the Eschelman deer. In all, this indi-
catcs that caprine mnominate halves were not disarticu-
lated from the hindleg units before cooking at site 105,
since, as Guilday et al. (1962) note, it is virtually im-
possible to sever the rectus femoris muscle and teres liga-
ment without marking the ramus of the ilium and
acetabulum.
Cutmarks on caprine femora lie m the area of the
bursa of the hip joint capsule, or on the rear of the greater
trochanter, which would have severed the glu teus medius
(Fp-5, Binford 1981) at its insertion and the vastus later-
alis at its origin. Cutting the gluteus muscle would allow
the joint to be strongly flexed, exposing the joint bursa
and ligaments for cutting. One distal femur of four shows
cuts at the origin of the gastrocnemius (Fd-4, Binford
1981), detachment of which removes a major muscle
mass from the tibia and exposes the rear of the femoro-
Bone Modification 203
tibial joint for dismemberment. In contrast with larger an-
imals processed, caprine tibiae have few cuts for either
dismemberment or flesh removal, with only one display-
ing a cut at the origin of the tibialis anterior (Tp-3, Bin-
ford 1981). Tarsal and metatarsal elements show little or
no cutting, contrasting with treatment of the tarsals re-
ported by von den Driesch and Boessneck (1975) and
that of metatarsals reported by Hole et al. (1969).
Chop marks appear on only 9 of 612 caprine ele-
ments. Most of them occur along the inside of the infe-
rior margin of the mandible in the areas of insertion of
the digastric and masseter muscles and are clearly related
to detachment of the lower jaw. (Damage to this area is
actuaJly even more frequent: two thirds of the mandibles
in the sample displayed some form of damage to this re-
gion.) Other bones with chop marks are the innominate
fragment noted above, a proximal femur, and a distal
metatarsal. The latter two both appear to have incurred
chopping damage during breakage of their diaphyses.
In sum, caprine long bones bear more incisions that
would remove muscle masses than those aimed at disar-
ticulation by a factor of five to one. Four midshaft cuts
could not be attributed to either of these functions, nor
to skinning, and may be associated with cutting through
the periosteum during diaphysis smashing.
Cattle bones display relatively low rates of cut-
marks, but they do present some contrasts with those of
the caprines. Cuts at points of dismemberment are
slightly more numerous than those associated with
muscle removal, and midshaft cuts not associated with
skinning are proportionately fewer. Crania, mandibles,
and vertebrae have chop marks rather than cuts. Two
cattle hemimandibles, both from the same older in-
diVidual, are chopped into segments, exposing the mar-
row cavity in the dentary section of the bone. One hemi-
mandible was chopped into three pieces, while the other
was chopped in tWo. In each case, the dentary segment
and no other fragmcnts bore traces of exposure to fire.
Most vertebrae have multiple chop marks. Cervical,
thoracic, and lumbar vertebrae of mature cattle are
chopped both transversely, which served to segment the
spinal column, and sagittally, which served to divide the
vertebral units longitudinally. One thoracic vertebra row
shows removal of ribs by chopping. The longest re-
covered vertebral segment of either cattle or zebra was
three vertebrae long (both cervicals and thoracics are rep-
resented). None of the vertebrae examined showed traces
of burning, and chopping may have been aimed at fitting
them into cooking pots.
Scapulae were so heavily damaged subsequent to ex-
posure to fire that no cutmarks could be discerned. Chop
marks on cattle scapula fragments merit discussion, since
they lead into a consideration of the sources of variabil-
ity in butchery strategy. Chops on the Site 105 cattle
scapulae all lie on the rim of the glenoid fossa, and are
dearly related to disarticulation rather than to reducing
the bone for potboiling. Binford (1981) questioned state-
ments in the literature (e.g., Frison 1974) that it is neces-
204 Bone Modification
sary to chop the scapulohumeral joint of artiodactyls to
effect disarticulation. He argued that this is such a loosely
articulated joint that it can be dismembered by simple
leverage and a few cuts through tendons. The frequency
of chopping on cattle scapulae indicates that some mod-
ern butchers find chopping an expeditious method of
breaching this joint.
A brief survey of the detailed literature on artioclac-
tyl butchery indicates that no simple, one-factor explana-
tion for this difference can be accepted. At first sight, the
contrast between Binford's observations and those of
other North American researchers working with bison
kills might be seen to stem from differences in the rela-
tive sizes of the animals in question. Large caribou arc
smaller, and probably much easier to manipulate, than
adult bison or cattle of either sex. However, Binford
(1981) cites a moose butchery in which the scapula was
detached from the humerus by a combination of lever-
age and cutting after muscles overlying the shoulder joint
were stripped from lower on the foreleg upwards, thereby
exposing the joint. Thus, it is possible to disjoint a large
artiodactyl without use of chopping tools. (Binford does
note, however, that this butchery was carried out with a
pen knife, which suggests that the size of the cutting edge
may have constramed the dismemberment and deflesh-
ing strategy used.) By contrast, roughly caribou-sized
white-tailed deer from the Eschelman site, a historic Sus-
quehannock village, regularly displayed chopping dam-
age to scapulae (Guilday et aL 1962). These authors re-
port that 18 of 26 deer scapulae encountered at the site
had been chopped through at the neck by an axe blow
delivered to the axillary side of the bone after the entire
foreleg had been removed from the thorax. The interest-
ing aspect of the Nunamiut and Eschelman data is that
both human groups had access to hatchets, but only one
chose to use them at a particular joint on like-sized ar-
tiodactyls. Guilday ct al. (1962) note that, while a single
hatchet blow was sufficient to breach the scapular neck
in white-tailed deer, Susquehannock butchers used knives
to cut muscles of the larger elk (Cervus canadensis)
scapulae, intervening at exactly the same point as in the
deer, but with a different cutting strategy.
The variation outlined above should serve to stress
that neither carcass size nor tool type availability in and
of themselves determine a given dismemberment strategy.
This matter will be discussed in more detail at the end of
this section. In the case of the Site 105 bones, chopping
around the glenoid may have been a more eHicient
method for freeing the scapula from the forelimb than
trying to breach the neck with a panga , and quicker than
cutting the muscles lying along the neck of the bone with
a knife.
Humeri show two types of cutmarks: cuts close to a
fracture surface on the shaft and those at the origins of
the flexor carpi radialis and the flexor carpi ulnaris (two
of seven specimens). The former are probably associated
with the act of breaking the bone, either by exposing the
bone before it was struck or by weakening the tensile
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
strength of the shaft by notching (see Long Bone Fracture
Patterns). The cuts at the origins of the wrist flexors lie
on the lateral and medial sides of the posterior face of the
distal humerus. Binford (1981) states cuts in this zone
(his Hd-2) in caribou reflect dismemberment. It is re-
ported for small stock by von den Driesch and Boessneck
(1975), by Guilday et al. (1962) for deer and elk (Cer-
vus canadensis), but not for bison at the Casper site (Fri-
son 1974). The discussion by Hole et al. (1969) of wild
and domestic cattle in the Deh Luran sample suggests that
this damage pattern occurred there as well.
Cattle radioulnae are almost devoid of cuts, with
only one on the insertion of the biceps brachii, which
would allow for fuller extension of the foreleg in dismem-
berment. This kind of modification is not reported by
Binford (1981), Frison (1974), Hole at al.(1969), or Guil-
day et a!. (1962) for similar-sized animals. Three meta-
carpals have cuts, one on the posterior in the area of in-
sertion of flexor carpi radialis, which would permit easier
dislocation of the wrist joint. The other two arc trans-
verse or oblique cuts on the shaft near fractures probably
associated with diaphysis smashing. Carpals are rare in
the sample, and mainly still in articulation with either
distal radius or proximal metacarpal and normally sep-
arated between the first and second rows. Cuts are rela-
tively infrequent on them.
Cattle innominate specimens bear more chops than
cuts, but hind limbs show substantial proportions of cut-
marks. One specimen with transverse cuts at the origin
(
of biceps femoris on the ischium (Ps-6, Binford 1981)
probably reflects defleshing, and is also reported by von
den Driesch and Boessneck (1975). The rest are as-
sociated with chops and breaks. Cattle innominates show
heavy chopping damage, some of which reflects disartic-
ulation, but other of which may have been aimed at re-
ducing the bones to cookpot dimensions. One innomi-
nate was found in three refitting pieces, chopped and
fractured at the ramus of the ilium and across the ischium
just below the acetabulum.
Proximal femora display cuts on the posterior face
of the greater trochanter, at the insertion of the gluteus
medius muscle (Fp-S, Binford 1981), and around the
bursa of the hip joint, deriving from disarticulation. Von
den Driesch and Boessneck (1975) do not report cuts on
this part of the greater trochanter, but both report cuts
at the base of the femoral neck. Three of 10 specimens
show cuts in the area of the insertion of the gluteus pro-
fundus, which Binford (1981) characterizes as filleting
marks (his Fp-7). One case of cuts on the origin of the
vastus lateralis occurs, which is not reported by Binford
(1981) or other authors. This may be incidental to sever-
ing insertions of guteal muscles also attached on the post-
erior surface of the greater trochanter, or it may have
been intended to lift this large muscle mass from under-
lying muscle and bone. Since innominates and femora of
deer and elk at the Eschelman site were apparently not
separated prior to culinary processing, the lack of both
such traces at this site is not surprising (Guilday et al.
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
1962). Frison (1974) and Wheat (1972) describe removal
of the hind leg at the hip joint in mass bison kills, but the
precise location and nature of cutting damage is not de-
scribed. Since Frison (1974) describes for the Casper
bison a wholesale meat stripping operation that em-
bodied strategies different from that typically followed
in single animal butcheries, this site IS not relevant for
consideration of filleting damage. Hole et al. (1969) do
not present a sufficiently detailed description of damage
to cattle limb bones to use comparatively.
One of eight proximal tibiae displays cuts on the
lateral tuberosity, probably to sever the femoro-tibial
ligament on that side for dismemberment, being cut Tp-
2 of Binford (1981), also reported by von den Driesch
and Boessneck (1975). Three of eight are cut at the origin
of the large tibialis anterior muscle, noted by Binford
(1981) as Tp-3. The tibialis anterior could have been re-
moved by severing its tendinous insertion at the tarsal
joint, lifting it up the leg, and cutting it at its origin. Bin-
ford, following his own observations on caribou and
those of Wheat (1979) on bison, testifies to a filleting
function of these cuts. All three tibia shaft portions bear
cuts on the posterior face, at about midshaft. One of these
is dose to a break and so resembles such marks discussed
earlier. However, the other two cases are located well
away from breaks and have associated scrapes. I could
find no counterparts to this pattern in the literature, but
the cuts lie at a point that one could sever the digital flex-
ors, just where their meaty masses become tendons. Thus,
these may reflect muscle stripping from the inferior to su-
perior direction on the back of the tibia after the overly-
ing gastrocnemius was removed. Two cuts of seven at the
anterior distal tibia reflect an incision at the location of
the proximal annular ligament, Binford's Td-4 (1981),
which may actually have been aimed at severing under-
lying tendons of the peroneus tertius and the long and
medial digital extensors that underlie the ligament. This
would permit lifting these anterior muscles, again in an
inferior to superior direction. Taken together, the major-
ity of cuts on the tibia would seem to reflect defleshing
rather than dismemberment (see section on Chop Marks
below).
Bovine tarsals display lower rates of cutting than
might be expected given Dassanetch descriptions of
detaching the lower leg from the upper at this joint. This
may stem in part from the fact that about half of the cattle
tarsals in the collection are from animals probably in
their first six months of life, whose joints may be more
readily forced apart with minimal cutting than those of
older animals. The lack of cuts may also result from
buffering by connective tissues. Bones with soft tissues
adhering show consistent cutting into and only some-
times through the ligaments and periosteum around the
bones themselves. Culs were noted on calcanea and astra-
gali only. Cuts on two calcanea are placed just anterior
to the tuber calcis (severing the tendon of the gastrocne-
mius) and on the anterior part of the lateral and inferior
faces (severing the short lateral and plantar ligaments, re-
Bone Modification 205
spectively). Cuts on two astragali lay on the anterior face
of the bone, at the base of the upper trochlea, which
would be impacted by transversely severing the tendons
of tibialis anterior and the digital extensors. All such
damage derives from disarticulation. Cattle metatarsals
show low rates of cuts to surfaces underlying the flexor
and extensor muscle groups, more probably skinning
damage than damage inflicted during disarticulation.
Cattle long bones display evidence of heavier use of
chopping tools than do those of caprines. Four chop
marks occur in locations suggesting they result from the
use of pangas in dismembering. These are a distal
humerus, femur, and tibia, all chopped through a major
attachment of a ligament at the articular end. The fourth
lies on the olecranon process of the ulna, clearly having
begun a break that detached the end of the process. This
ulna is one of many from which the olecranon has been
broken; in larger animals this would entail a blow of con-
siderable force. As noted earlier, this is such a consistent
pattern among ulnae of all sizes and species (71 % of all
ulnae, 82% of all adult ulnae) that I suspect it reflects a
consistent detachment of the insertions of triceps, deltoid,
and other muscles by percussion. The cattle ulna is the
only one bearing a clearly discernible chop mark just
below the fracture. Although I cannot be certain, pangas
may have been used to break other specimens without
leaving clear evidence of their action on the remaining
bone. In four other cases, each a different metapodial,
chops are near or at a fracture that breaches the marrow
cavity and are clearly related to diaphyseal smashing.
These reflect the use of pangas as percussol'S noted at the
beginning of this section. As with the olecranons, I sus-
pect that other long bones were broken by pcmga blows
and that the evidence was carried off on small fragments
that I did not collect for study.
Although zebra elements constitute only a small por-
tion of the identifiable mammal bone, they display high
rates of chops and cuts, even compared with those of
roughly like-sized cattle. They show proportions of dis-
memberment to defleshing cutmarks similar to those of
cattle. Chop marks on zebra elements seem to be aimed
at dismemberment and/or chopping body segments into
units that could be fit into cookpots.
A cut on the zygomatic arch of one zebra cranium
probably helped in detaching the jaw by freeing the
masseter muscle, as did a cut on the inferior part of the
angle of the jaw of another mandible. Two equid
mandible halves were chopped and broken immediately
behind the older immature zebra's dP3, in. a dental row
that included an erupted first molar. This patterned break
was probably intended to break into the medullary cavi-
ties of the jaws, since it is a bit too far forward to be op-
timal for breaking the jaw from the cranium. Like the
bovine mandibles described earlier, the dentary sections
were exposed to fire after they were broken.
Cervicals are the most numerous zebra vertebrae at
Site 105, apparently transported to the site at a higher
rate than thoracics or lumbars {see Element Frequencies,
206 Bone Modification
Survival, and Transport). Chop marks are the most com-
mon damage on them (Tables 8a, 8b). As with cattle
vertebrae, chop marks are both transverse to the verte-
bral column and sagittal to the vertebral bodies. The
longest segment is, again as with cattle, three vertebrae
long. The three zebra thoracic vertebrae in the assemblage
show similar damage. None of these bones show evidence
of direct exposure to fire; they were probably hoiled.
Some of this damage could have been inflicted during
rough field butchery of carcasses for transport back to
camp, while other of it may have occurred in camp in
preparation for boiling. Cutmarks by small€r blades are
missing from these specimens. Bunn (1983) notes that
chop marks on bones from a San hunter-gatherer site he
studied all resulted from cutting the bones into pot-size
pieces, rather than primary butchery.
One of two zebra glenoid segments of scapula bears
evidence that it was chopped through the neck. Cuts
occur on two distal humeri, at the origins of the flexor
carpi radialis and flexor carpi ulnaris, which also oc-
curred on cattle humeri, reflecting a disarticulation
strategy (Binford's Hd-2). Radioulna€ and the one meta-
carpal, like those of cattle, lack cutmarks. One zebra
radioulna shows a chop mark at the olecranon process
(Figure 15).
Femora bear cutmarks in the same locations as those
of cattle: the bursa region and gluteus medius insertion
on the greater trochanter, one midshaft cut near a break,
and at the origin of the gastrocnemius. These reflect dis-
articulation of the femur from the acetabulum, diaphy-
seal smashing, and defleshing (Hd-4, Binford 1981), re-
spectively. Both proximal tibiae show cuts in the origin
of tibialis anterior, probably reflecting removal of this
muscle. Three distal femora bear chop marks at their
heads and greater trochanters, indicating dismember-
ment. Two reflect detachment of the lateral epicondyle
with a single panga blow. In addition, one chop mark
was noted on a proximal femur at the insertion of the
gluteus profundus muscle, which in a fresh animal has
been taken to indicate filleting (Binford 1981). The use
of a chopping implement might reflect either that the
butcher lacked a knife or that the carcass was somewhat
stiff when processed. One distal tibia bears cuts in the
area of the tendon of peroneus tertius, which would allow
this muscle to be lifted from its inferior end. One proxi-
mal tibia bears chop marks at a shaft fracture, reflecting
the use of a panga in diaphysis smashing.
In all, the cutmarks on equid vertebrae and limbs re-
flect much the same pattern of disarticulation and de-
fleshing as observed on the same bones of cattle.
However, most chops show a somewhat different pattern
of placement, there being relatively more of such dam-
age associated with dismemberment in zebras. This dam-
age occurred on three separate proximal femora, deriv-
ing from at least two larger individuals, reflecting the use
of considerable force to detach femur from innominate.
It may be that this reflects processing of stiff carcasses,
but the different damage could also stem from differences
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
in the bony and muscular structure of equine versus
bovine hip joints. Horse acetabula are deeper and more
(
completely enclosed by bone than are those of hovids
and may present a greater challenge to butchers. The
general pattern of cuts and chop marks, plus relevant
burning and fracture data, accords with informant de-
scriptions and my own observations of disarticulation
patterns for caprines and bovines. Sites in Area 300
yielded similar patterns in the placement of cuts but no
chop marks on any of the specimens. The overall rate of
occurrence of cuts on the Area 300 long bones was
slightly but not significantly higher than on site lOS long
bones (10.7% versus 8.3%).
General Observations on Inferences
from Cutmarks
The discussion of scapulohumeral dismemberment in ar-
tiodactyls suggested that a taxon's overall anatomy and
size are simply constraming conditions, within which a
number of different dismemberment and defleshing
strategies may be used. These strategies may in turn be
conditioned by the form of the desired end product. Con-
siderable attention has been paid to transport considera-
tions in structuring butchery strategies, from the classic
works of White (1952, 1953, 1954, 1955) and Perkins
and Daly (1968) to recent discussions by Binford (1978,
1981, 1984), Bunn and Kroll (1986), and others. Less
emphasis has been placed on the influence of culinary (
goals on butchery strategies, which are a major con-
sideration at least in modern hominids, if not in earlier
forms. How an animal is disjointed and filleted will de-
pend on whether the butcher aims to produce joints of
meat to roast on a fire, segments of bones and flesh to
boil in a pot, or boneless slices to be dried jerky. Mass
bison kills on the North American Plains entailed muscle-
stripping strategies testified to by some ethnographic
sources, and inferred for prehistoric and protohistoric
cases (e.g., Frison 1970, 1974; Wheat 1972). These
strategies were aimed at quickly removing the most
readily transported meat units from many animals with
the intention of drying and storing most of the flesh. Con-
siderations of spoilage, transport, and the ultimate form
in which the meat was to be consumed interacted to pro-
duce given patterns of bone modification at kill/butchery
sites (Frison 1970). Detailed butchery data from these
sites reflects a substantially different approach to limb
segmentation and muscle removal than, for example, that
of the Eschelman site, in which single animals entered a
residential site over a span of decades, with deer and elk
meat being roasted in joints. It thus seems prudent to con-
sider the relations among transport costs, nutritional
benefits, and the units ultimately eaten when analyzing
steps of a butchery sequence. The preferred culinary units
of any given species will themselves be determined by a
combination of carcass size, nutritional utilities, need for
preservation and storage, butchery and cooking tech-
nology, and such social factors as the number of people
 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
( sharing cuts of a carcass. Because bones are discarded
either in some stage of the butchery process or soon after
they have been handled m a meal, they can testify to "tar-
geted" culinary units by their cutmark, chopping, burn-
ing, and fracture patterns.
Other points are raised by focusing on the consump-
tion phase of animal processing. Most recent discussions
of dismemberment versus filleting marks have proceeded
on the presumption that muscle stripping is accomplished
when body segments are fresh and uncooked. This is a
reasonable presumption in the case of Plio-Pleistocene
hominids (e.g., Binford 1984; Bunn and Kroll 1986).
However, those working with modern hominids should
expect to Hnd fewer defleshing traces on bones of roasted
or boiled body segments. Meat is much easier to remove
from bone when cooked, necessitating less intervention
with cutting edges. As already noted in connection with
long bone fracture, closer examination of the effects of
cooking on cutmark traces would probably repay the at-
tention.
Gnawing: Carnivore and Human
Relatively few specimens in the Site 105 assemblage dis-
play evidence of carnivore gnawing, although long bones
bear proportionatel y more traces (Tables 11 a, 11 b). Af-
fected bones have the tooth scratches, canine puncture
marks, chipping-back, andlor the "scooping out" of can-
cellous bone typical of carnivore gnawing (Figures 16 and
17). Among specimens other than long bones, most dam-
age occurs at locations noted as common points for
gnawing by other workers: the neural spines and trans-
verse processes of vertebrae, the blade of the scapula, and
the iliac crest of the innominate (Binford 1981, Haynes
1980). In addition to such modification, some caprine
long bones have gnawing damage which, although in and
of itself ambiguous, is identical to that displayed by bones
from controlled sheep and goat butcheries in which no
agents other than humans were involved In modifying
the bones.
Not all modified bones bore sufficiently clear punc-
ture, channeling, or score marks to discern the size of the
carnivores' teeth. However, of those which did, hyena-
sized teeth predominated, with only two bones showing
small puncture marks, perhaps made by a jackal or small
dog. I do not know if any dogs lived at Site 105; I sus-
pect that they did not. The Dassanetch do have dogs,
which they seldom feed, and fresh bones would have been
a food source. Dogs were not numerous among the
Kenyan Dassanetchi in 1974 the Heret Police Post settle-
ment had about 465 human inhabitants and 3 dogs. The
Dassanetch situation is thus one in which the ratio of
dogs to bone output at residential settlements and camps
is sufficiently low that bone survival rates are high, con-
trasting with situations described by Lyon (1970) and
Walters (1984). Dogswere more likely to be found in the
stock camps, where they were used to repel jackals and
hyenas. The low rates of modification of relatively fragile
Bone Modification 207
Figure 17. Site 105; furrowing on bovine prOXimal
humerus, hyena-sized tooth marks.
vertebrae and other bones at Site lOS suggest that dogs
were not regularly present. Dassanetch residential camps
in the II-Erriet River bottoms also displayed rather low
rates of gnawing (15% for the aggregate sample of 280
bones). Since the bones gnawed by jackals and hyenas
were found within or immediately outside the settlement
fences, it seems reasonable to assume most of this dam-
age was done after the site was abandoned. In two cases,
one a zebra femur, hyena damage was superimposed on
chopped surfaces of long bones, indicating priority of
human processing.
Carnivore gnawing on zebra long bones is localized
on epiphyseal areas of immature animals' bones, and on
the vertebrae of the adults'(Tables 11 a, lIb). Long bones
of immature cattle and caprines do not display signifi·
cantly higher rates of gnawing than those of adults. The
relatively higher rates of gnaWing on cattle versus caprine
long bones may stem from interaction of carnivore ac-
tion and relative -bone durabilities. Caprine elements
might have been equally attractive but more readily be
reduced to unidentifiable fragments by gnawing..
In addition to bones with clear evidence of carnivore
gnawing, I encountered 10 caprine long bones with ap-
parent human gnawing damage (Table 12). These are
long bone cylinders, with proximal and distal articula-
tions removed. Six derive from animals with fused
epiphyses, four from bones with unfused epiphyses. Ends
of the bones display either blunt crushing or small spiral
fractures invading the compact bone of the shaft or a
combination of the two. I had originally thought these
cylinders were generated by carnivores (Binford 1981),
until Lewis Binford (personal communication 1984) sug-
gested that I examine them more closely for indications
of human processing. Finding incontrovertible evidence
of human modification on the bones themselves proved
to be difficult. Some negative evidence exists. All but one
bone lacked clear traces of carnivore gnawing in the form
of scores or punctures; one cylinder shows a score mark
just below the damaged region, horizontal to the long
axis of the bone. However, Solomon (1985) points out
208 Bone Modification
that human teeth can mimic carnivore score marks, so
this evidence is somewhat equivocal. I was more inclined
to think that humans generated these cylinders after I
found exact matches for damage to radii, tibiae, and
metapodia in the caprines bones from the staged
butchery/consumption events. I didn't actually observe
the actions that generated the latter cylinders, but I do
know that dogs or other carnivores never touched these
bones. From my general observations and photographs
of the caprine feasts, I believe the damage results from a
combination of gnawing and light percussion with ham-
merstones or knife handles.
The rate of gnawing on the bones at Site 105 is five
times higher than documented for carcasses of zebra,
topi, and oryx that I monitored from the day of death in
the same region over 1973-1974. These an imals died of
lion predation, starvation, or disease, and derived from
a population that did not differ in numbers or concen-
tration neal' the lake from that which existed when Site
105 was created. In a sample of 48 animals, the incidence
of carnivore gnawing on their bones within the first
month after death was only 1 %, contrasted with 5.5% for
a commensurate span of exposure at Site 105. This find-
ing has implications for interpreting archaeological as-
semblages. It is possible that all the carnivore gnawing
on the Site 105 bone was done by wild carnivores. If this
were the case,. then a bone assemblage generated by
humans sustained higher rates of "natural" carnivore
modification than did natural deaths in the same region
within more or less the same span of time. Human sites
that accumulate considerable amounts of animal debris
may act as magnets for local scavengers, who find them
a more spatially predictable and rich resource than
chance encounters with single animal deaths. This could
result in greater intensities of carnivore modification in
these assemblages than on bones dispersed throughout
the landscape, posing some potential interpretive prob-
lems. We will seldom encounter human traces superim-
posed over carnivon! traces, as found by Shipman (1981)
on some specimens from Olduvai, or vice versa.
However, aggregate patterns of bone modification can
yield information on the succession of bone processors.
At 105, for example, it is possible to factor out the
sequence of bone processors by noting in conjunction
frequencies of elements of varying utilities and the loca-
tion of humanly caused damage (cuts, placement of frac-
tures) in relation to the incidence of carnivore gnawing.
SITE 105:
ELEMENT FREQUENCIES,
SURVIVAL, AND TRANSPORT
Taphonomists have long been aware that biologic and
geologic agents can have two general effects on element
frequencies in prehistoric assemblages. The first is selec-
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
tive destruction of some elements and preservation of
others; the second is selective transport of elements to or
away from the sampled locality. In the case of vertebrate
remains, variable qualities of specific bones make them
more 01' less prone to destruction or transport. Different
skeletal elements have distinct and regular durabilities in
the face of physical agents of attrition (Binford and Ber-
tram 1977; Brain 1981; Lyman 1984, 1985). Elements
vary in their blood, fat, and marrow content, and hence
in their appetibility to bone destroying and transporting
carnivores. Bones also vary in specific gravities and
shape, which influence selective transport by fluids (Beh-
rensmeyer 1984; Gifford 1980).
The Site 105 assemblage displays percent survival
patterns that stem from both differential destruction and
differential transport (Tables 13a, 13b). These patterns
are expressed here as a "percentage survival" statistic
(Brain 1981). This statistic is calculated as follows: first,
the minimum number of individuals that could have con-
tributed the most numerous element in the assemblage is
determined (in the case of the Site 105 zebras, for ex-
ample, this is four, based on the atlas and distal femur);
second, expected number of specimens is computed for
each element by projecting the number of bones of each
type that would be there were the entire skeleton of each
of the minimum number of individuals present; third, the
"percent survival" of each clement is calculated by divid-
ing the minimum number of elements observed by that
expected. This statistic does not imply that all the ex- (
pected elements ever actually were at the site; it is simply
a method of displaying the relative frequencies with
which identifiable specimens of various bones exist in the
observed assemblage.
To assess the possibil ity of destruction of less durable
bones on assemblage structure, I plotted percent survival
figures for caprines, cattle, and zebra elements against
Lyman's bulk density statistics for similar bones of deer
(Lyman 1985). Lyman's photon densitometry determina-
tions estimate the amount of bone tissue in given ele-
ments, and hence reflect their relative durabilities In the
face of various mechanical stresses. Although recorded
for two species of deer, the values are probably good ap-
proximations of values for caprines and cattle (but see
comments on caprine atlas and axis below). Doubtless
they are less appropriate for equid elements, but the
general relations, if not the numeric values, of various
elements' bulk densities are probably similar. My as-
sumption was that a strong positive relationship between
bulk density as the independent variable and percent sur-
vival would exist in samples most heavily influenced by
destructive processes.
Site 105 caprine elements show no relationship be-
tween durability and rate of survival (Figure 18; coeffi-
cient of determination of 0.000; correlation coefficient of
0,015). This probably reflects low intensities of pro-
cessing and post-discard damage to all classes of ele-
ments, regardless of durability. For comparison, I have
included data on the goat bone assemblage collected by
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa BOrle Modificc<tion 209

.700 .700
.. cel • cal
.600 mtc-p .600
• man man
• Intt.p .. mto-p
• mll-p
.500 mlC1 • tlb-d >-
.500 tib-d
>-
l:
f/l
z
w .400 rib.
.. mlt-d
• rad·d
• la,
.. ast
• utn-d
.. hu~d
• phl . rad·p
sac
~
Z
w .400
Q Q
fefn.p
~ .aco ~
.
lem-<t • • tlb-p .lum .. uln~p :> .300
'"
Cll
sle • /lum-p
• ph2 • ph3
• pel
• 1Il0
Gl
.ph2 .ph3
• ste
.200 sac .. • eer .200 _eor • sac
.oxJ .. oxi
• au • aU
.100 .100
a w ro ao ~ ~ 00 n ~ ~ 100 0 10 20 ac 40 50 60 70 eo 90 10C>
PERCENT SURVIVAL PERC ENT SURVIVAL

Figure 18. Site 105; plot of percent survival of caprine Figure 20. Site 105; plot of percent survival of cattle ele-
elements against bulk densities for deer (Lyman 1986). ments against bulk densities for deer (Lyman 1986).

.700 .700
• cal • cal
.600

.500
mlc-p
mllXl
. .man·
.600

.500
mJ-dn.<J
~z ast ... >-
1 t::
f/l
.400 tat • rib red-d Z .400
IU
Q
• hum-<t IU
fem·p • • sac Q
....:::l"" .300 •• -tlb-p .. uln·p ::s::> .300
·,Ium .-pel
'" .200
,Iho (em.<J
;--;=::=: ste hum-p
ell

.200
~r • axl
sac • ell • atl
.100 .100

o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 eo 90 100 0 10 20 30 4C> 50 60 70 80 90 100

PERCENT SURVIVAL PERCENT SURVIVAL

Figure 19. Kuiseb Riber goat sample; plot of percent sur- figure 21. Site 105; plot of percent survival of zebra ele-
vival of caprine elements (Brain 1981) against bulk den- ments against bulk densities for deer (Lyman 1986).
sities for deer (Lyman 1986).

Brain (1969,1981) from "Hottentot" people of the Kuiseb head clashing throughout the year as part of their dom-
River in Namibia (Figure 19). The Kuiseb collection inance behaviors, their anterior cervicals may be more
shows a stronger positive relationship between bulk den- strongly constructed than those of deer. Moreover, males
sities and survival rates, but not a compelling one, in are likely to have contributed the majority of elements in
terms of coefficients of determination (0 170) or of cor- these samples, since about 95% of each caprine male co-
relation (0.413). Since the Kuiseb goats were butchered hort is culled between 12 and 18 months of age among
at the site from which their bones were recovered, this nearly all documented of African pastoralists (Dahl and
pattern probably reflects more intense action of destruc- Hjort 1976). Most of thecaprine dentitions from Site 105
tive processes, rather than effects of utility-related trans- are of subadult animals in this age range. Were anterior
port (Lyman 1985). Bones in the Kuiseb sample were, by cervicals more dense in male caprines, their survivorship
Brain's account (1981), heavily affected by several of me- values would lie to the right on the plot, more in line with
chanical stresses: human culinary processing, dog gnaw- other values in the distribution. Grayson (1988) has ob-
ing, and trampling by hoofed animals. Vertebrae present served a similar anomaly cervical survival among
an especially strong contrast with the Site 105 case. In bighorn sheep in some Great Basin archaeological faunas.
both samples, however, survivorship of caprine atlas and Site 105 cattle (Figure 20) show little relationship
axis is higher than those of other vertebrae. It is possible between percent survival and bone density. They have
that actual bulk densities for these goat and sheep ele- generally higher rates of survival of long bone epiphyses
ments may differ from those of deer. According to Lyman than do caprines, which may reflect the greater ease with
(personal communication 1987), his deer sample was which both humans and scavengers can reduce the lat-
composed of about equal proportions of male and female ter. Vertebrae, however, are less well represented than in
deer. Because caprine males engage in horn sparring or the caprine sample, thus creating a more positively sloped
210 Bone Modification
regression line. Howevel~ the coefficient of determination
is 0.095 and the correlalion coefficient 0.308, indicating
lack of a strong relationship between durability and ex-
istence in the assemblage. The lower survival rate of cattle
vertebrae probably reflects different processing strategies
for large as opposed to small stock. Identifiable cattle
vertebrae bore heavy chopping damage not found en ca-
prine elements, as discussed earlier. This rough treatment
may have reduced some cattle vertebrae to unidentifia-
ble scrap, or at least to pieces classifiable only as verte-
brae of a certain mammal size class, which are not
enumerated in Table 13a. Support for this thesis can be
drawn from the relative frequencies of vertebral frag-
ments in the taxonomic categories probably referable to
caprines (i.e., "Med ium Mammal" and "Small Bovid") and
to cattle (I.e., "Medium-Large Mammal" and "Large
Bevid"). The caprine group contains only 3 specimens so
fragmentary as to be labelled simply vertebra, whereas
the cattle group contains 40. This is despite the fact that
the overall number of elements referable to the Caprini
is nearly twice as numerous as those referable to Bos (660
to 350).
The lower frequency of bovine crania compared to
those of caprines may also result from processing prac-
tices. In both caprine and cattle samples, the number of
crania was estimated from maxillae, which were the most
numerous identifiable cranial specimens.. Nearly all ca-
prine maxillary specimens were either complete right and
left maxillae or maxillary halves. By contrast, identifia-
ble cattle maxillary fragments were often broken in
several places, and such processing probably reduced the
number of identifiable elements. Cattle scapulae are less
well represented than those of caprines. This is also likely
to be the result of destructive human processing rather
than of selective transport. Identifiable Bas scapulae
showed frequent traces of both chopping and burning,
evidence that lends some support to this contention.
Zebra elements show no strong relationship between
bulk density and percent occurrence in the assemblage,
with a correlation coefficient of 0.264 and a coefficient
of determination of 0.070 (Figure 21). In contrast to ca-
prines and cattle, zebra clements with some of the lowest
bulk densities were among the most frequently repre-
sented and vice versa (Table 2, Figure 21). I believe this
10 be the product of selective transport of body segments
to the site rather than selective destruction of elements at
the site. Although no one has published a density scale
for bone tissue in the equid skeleton, my observations of
equid and bovid bone durabilities in the longitudinal ta-
phonomic study indicate equ id elements are more heavily
constructed than those of like-sized artiodactyls and
more resistant to al1 attritional agents (Gifford-Gonzalez
1984). Thus, I think it unlikely that zebra elements
missing in the 105 sample are absent because they were
utterly destroyed by processing at the site.
Zebra elements present are those of the head, the
neck, and the anterior thorax, as well as the upper fore-
and hindleg. Carpals and tarsals occur as "riders" on one
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
radioulna, tibiae, and the only proximal metatarsal pre-
sent. Only one phalanx is present. As noted earlier, lum- r
bar and sacral segments of the vertebral column and the
pelvis are absent, and I believe the absence of these rela-
tively high utility units reflects defleshing and abandon-
ment of bulky elements in the field. Given the hypothe-
sis that transport considerations had a major influence
on zebra clement frequencies, why consistent efforts were
made to detach and carry the heavy heads and neck seg-
ments back to Site 105 is less dear. I have no ethno-
graphic information on this practice. While artiodactyl
and equid anatomy is sufficiently different that these seg-
ments of zebra bodies could have higher utilities than
those indicated for artiodactyl species, striking differ-
ences are doubtfuL It is possible that cultural considera-
tions were involved, since zebra meat and zebra skins arc
thought by the Dassanetch to have medicinal and spir-
itual qualities (Gifford 1977). Binford (1978) noted that
traditional Nunamiut hunters transported more Dall
sheep heads to residential camps than predicted by simple
utility measures. Sheep are considered to have "power,"
and their horns are thought to best symbolize the ani-
mals. Hunters who kill sheep carry their heads home to
display on meat racks. Perhaps similar considerations in-
fluenced detachment and transport of zebra heads by the
inhabitants of Site 105.
The low representation of zebra metapodia at Site
105 may reflect consumption of their marrow in the field,
as is typical of hunters of artiodactyls in various circum- (
stances (Binford 1978; Yellen 1977). However, their ab-
sence could also reflect discard in the field. Blumenschlne
(personal communication 1987) notes that zebra
metapodia contain much less marrow than those of like-
sized bovids. The low representation of phalanges would
also be explained by either treatment of the cannon bones
in the field, since these bones articulate distally to the
metapodia and would be discarded with them.
The zebra bones from Site 105 reflect operation of
different selective processes than those affecting bones of
small stock and cattle. Given the low durability of many
of the elements present in the zebra sample, and the high
durability of many elements missing, I assert that selec-
tive transport rather than destruction was the dominant
process affecting the structure of the zebra assemblage.
SITE 06:
FUNCTION AND STRUCTURE
In contrast to Site 105, Site 06 is a foraging camp and
lacks domestic animals as a food base. It is a small, single-
occupation camp 1.2 km south of the Koobi Fora sand-
spit (Figure 1), located about 300 m from the lake shore
atop a high stabilized beach dune. The site area is Hat
and sandy, with low shrubs and one Salvadora persica
 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
( tree, The tree was used for shelter by the site's creators,
a married couple who lived there for about six weeks in
july and August, 1973. Informants at I1eret told me that
the couple were poor people who normally lived in the
Ileret area; they owned no stock, nor at the time did they
have any children. Toward the end of their stay at Site
06 they were joined by two other men from lIeret. This
foraging camp is unusual in that it is the only one I know
that was inhabited by a woman, The couple was oc-
casionally visited by Mr. Kamoya Kimeu, leader of the
National Museums of Kenya hominid fossil search team,
who provided me with information on their living ar-
rangements and gear. The camp was abandoned in
August, 1973, when the couple, who had given Koobi
Fora camp staff the impression that they were from the
Turkana ethnic group on the western shore of the lake,
were carried across the lake in a camp motor boat.
Having visited among the Turkana for a while, they then
made their way back to Heret on foot. With the help of
assistants I mapped the site and mventoried all bone m
November, 1973, collecting the mammal bone for later
analysiS. The fish and reptile bone was left in the field
and monitored for weathering over the next 10 years.
Features at the site included a shelter under the Sal-
vadora tree which, as typical of the species, had willow-
like hanging branches reaching the ground on all sides of
the trunk (Figures 22a and 22b), The area enclosed by
the branches was cleared of debris, the inner sand banked
up against the branches, and the windward side rein-
forced with cut boughs from another tree. One hearth
was placed to the left just inside the entry to the shelter.
This is the customary location of hearths in Dassanetch
houses, reflecting the division of the house into the
woman's (hearth) and man's (opposite) sides. Of five
foraging camps with makeshift shelters constructed
during my fieldwork, this is the only one with the hearth
in this position. The area was devoid of naturally occur-
ring stone., and the inside hearth contained three chunks
of poorly indurated sandstone, probably quarried from
the base of the dune, in the triangular configuration typi-
cal of local fireplaces that use cookpots, An ash dump
lay about 3.5 m north of the entrance to the shelter.
Another hearth was located west of the tree, with a hard-
packed sitting area between it and the western wall of
branches. This hearth was leeward of the prevailing wind
and in the morning shadow zone with three sandstone
hearthstones also set in a triangle, About 10 m north of
the tree was an activity area comprised of oryx and topi
crania, frontlets, horn cores, and horn sheaths. Some of
the horn sheaths had been shaved and their tips removed.
Worked horn sheaths form the foreshaft of detachable-
head harpoons used in fishing and catching lake reptiles.
The couple possessed at least one spear and a small
fishnet the man regularly set in waters near the site
(Kamoya Kimeu, personal communication 1973). Inside
the tree shelter near the hearth lay a grindstone of non-
local stone, broken in two. Roots of sedges that grew on
the other side of the sandspit, about 2 km from the site,
Bone Modification 211
lay near the grindstone. Dassanetch people at Ileret told
me that they would collect, roast, and grind sedge roots
in times of hunger, Food processing with grindstones is
customarily women's work, and no other foraging camp
I visited contained either grinding equipment or remains
of wild foods processed by grinding. Cutmarks on the
mammal bone, like those of Site lOS, had the steep V-
shaped cross-section I judge to have been made by a met·
al implement. From the disposition of the hearthstones, I
infer that the inhabitants had some kind of container for
cooking. One thin band of zebra skin, sometimes worn
by Dassanetch men on their wrists and ankles, was found
near the second hearth, and a scrap of rawhide was found
about 1.5 m east of the tree. Mr. Kimeu told me that the
man intentionally set about searching for lion kills and
other dead animals by scanning the morning sky for cir-
cling vultures,
Site 06 yielded 609 bone specimens, representing
several species of fish, crocodile, softshell turtle, terrapin,
and land mammals (Table 14). They were distributed
over an area 25 m north of the tree and 10 m to either
side, with a heavy concentration of fish elements in and
around a 50 cm high shrub north of the tree (Figure 22a).
Mammal bones were found in denser concentrations ncar
the hearths, and especially around and in the hearth in
the tree shelter (Figure 22b). Tables 12a and 12b present
the number of identifiable specimens and minimum num-
bers of elements represented in the assemblage.
SITE 06: TAXONOMIC
REPRESENTATION
The mammal bones contrast with those of Site 105 in
several ways, reflecting differences in procurement, tech-
nology, and processing strategies. Thirteen cranial ele-
ments, deriving from two oryx and a topi, were found in
the activity area. Two animals' bones were at Weather-
ing Stage 2 and the third was at Weathering Stage 3 when
collected (all other bones were at Weathering Stage 0
when collected). These elements were obviously not
brought into the site fresh, but probably collected from
naturally occurring bone scatters in the local landscape.
The remainder of mammal bones at the site were all un-
weathered, and some had considerable connective tissue
adhering, These are all likely to result from the inhabi-
tants' foraging. Three animals are represented by the
balance of the specimens: 2 adult topi, a newborn to two-
weebold Grant's gazelle, and a young zebra between 2
and 12 weeks old (ages estimated by tooth eruption and
wear, Smuts 1974).
One adult topi is represented by both mandible
halves, atlas, last lumbar vertebra, sacrum, and both in-
nominates, right and left humeri, femora and tibiae. The
long bones were smashed, but refits of shaft and epiphy-
seal fragments yielded nearly complete specimens, with
212 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

only a few diaphyseal fragments impossible to refit to

long bone specimens (Table 15b). All bones are at
on a more complete left tibia. This is also at Weathering
Stage O.
('
Weathering Stage O. Given that the topi cranium in the The inf<mt zebra is represented by nearly every bone
activity area was at Weathering Stage 3, which develops in the skeleton, from cranium and mandible to hooves.
after four to five years in the Lake Turkana environment Despite the delicacy of the bones, all vertebrae but the
(Gifford-Gonzalez 1984), it is most unlikely to have come sixth and seventh cervicals and first thoracic are present,
from the same animal as these fresh bones. The carcass as are the sternum and ribs. One scapula, one humerus,
is selectively represented, and it seems more likely that it both radioulnae, one femur, and both tibiae are repre-
entered the site as a scavenged item rather than as a prey sented. At least two metapodia are present, but carpals,
animal. A second topi is represented by the posterior all but one tarsal, and all but two phalanges are missing,
shaft fragment of a left tibia, duplicating that represented though the hooves without the third phalanges arc prc-

• 0
o.
00
.. o •

o
o .
o

r$::"
D

•o
D'
o • (
o

o
o. 0

. •

0" D
. .
.
o
o

d
o

(.~:)
o o
o
SITE 06
D

8
00 W4! III!'" FJit,1I
o
.
:Swttorl NORTH
o o
o
o
•
.
FISH ELEMENTS
!/ ........ \
o UTES
i ~
, II
../ o • • • ill TlLAP1A

. .
.~ 06 o Cl.M1A$
(~; . " "11)~U$
'_.-I o
o REPTILE ELEMENTS
• POLUSIOS
o • TmottlX
• 0 -0 CROCOOILt

(§J SC.<lIltt oflt'8 w.e~ QI oni WI~

CSH'"'l'''

.
o
o
• C~)

\ 00

Figure 22a. Site 06; plot of features, fish, and reptile bone.

"
 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 213

( sent. Given the loose substrate on which the site was
created, these smaller bones may have migrated suffi-
ciently below the surface that they were not visible to us.
The zebra skeleton is so complete, despite the fragility of
its bones, that it must have entered the site as a whole
carcass. I saw a stillborn zebra foal, only a few weeks
younger than the one at Site 06, born and consumed by
jackals and vultures within a few hours of birth. Within
24 hours, little more than maxillary and mandibular
tooth rows remained where it was eaten. Had the Site 06
zebra been preyed on or scavenged by a carnivore, noth-
ing like a complete skeleton would have been left. I do
not know if the Site 06 inhabitants ran down and killed
the young animal, or if they found it dead or debilitated
before other carnivores did.
The neonate Grant's gazelle is represented by only
12 specimens, but these come from nearly all segments
of the body, including cranium, mandible, axis, rib,
scapula, humerus, radioulna, innominate, and tibia. This
animal probably weighed less than 10 kg live. Its bones
arc exceedingly delicate and would not have survived
consumption by jackals, much less larger carnivores. My

SITE 06
~
S~~

.
~
o ~~1!r1o NORTH

~
,
"
.. MAMMAL ELEMENTS
~ EQIJUS euR(ttEuJ

• 4 BOvIO
• /\V.h~P
e •
• MMW~.L

..
, OAMALe$CUS UJHATUS} 11+11\.
• OR'fX GAZEl.lA
o G.-lEllA. GRAtm
l'OfQ4

l. lEPUS

Figure 22b. Site 06; plot of features and mamma) bones.

214 Bone Modification
" thoracic, These are all probably associated with detach-
.'
.. .,
: .
........
Figure 23. Site 06; plot of features and bones.
own observations of very young Grant's newborns indi-
cate they cannot run more than very short distances and
CQuid easily be overtaken by a person. Given these con-
siderations, I think it likely that the antelope was caught
by the inhabitants of Site 06. The site lay in the home
range of a herd of Grant's gazelle, and at least one other
infant was born in the herd in the autumn of 1973.
SITE 06: CONDITION OF AND
MODIFICATIONS TO THE
MAMMAL BONES
Burning is relatively rare on Site 06 mammal bone and
usually only lightly affects the bones (Table 16a) of zebra
and topi. Burning occurs only on the symphysis of the
topi mandible and its atlas. Six young zebra cranial ele-
ments, the dentary portion of one hemimandible and all
four hooves display traces of burning. No burning was
observed on the small gazelle's bones. None of the bones
display the rounding or apparent abrasion that charac-
terize some Site 105 specimens.
Cutmarks on the Site 06 bones were V-shaped in
cross-section and relatively small. No traces of chopping
tools were found on any of the Site 06 bones. Nearly all
traces of cutting on topi bones reflect dismemberment
(Table 16b). Five topi elements display cuts: those on the
dentary segment of the mandible are near the insertion
of the masseter muscle; the rib has cuts on its distal shaft;
the iliac blade fragment is cut near the origin of rectus
femoris; the distal humerus has cuts at the origin of the
lateral ligament, and another humerus shaft fragment has
a cut close to a break. In addition} the pubic symphysis
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
of one topi innominate appears to be sheared through by
metal implement. Eight zebra elements bore cutmarks, in-
(
cluding the atlas, the sixth cervical. and the second
ing the head and breaking the spinal column down into
smaller segments. Cuts on the superior acetabular rims
of both innominates reflect dismemberment of the hind
legs. Cuts on the humerus and tibia lie next to fractures.
Cuts on the zebra metacarpal probably were inflicted
during skinning. No gazelle specimens had cuts. The ma-
jority of cuts on bones of both large ungulates are thus
related either to dismemberment or to exposing the bone
for shaft smashing.
Refits of Site 06 topi and zebra long bones revealed
contrasts with the Site 105 assemblage in shaft smashing
tactics and in the form of the resulting fragments. Eleven
long bones displayed impact notches, and 10 refit bones
showed independent impacts to the shafts near the
epiphyses at either end (Table 17, Figures 24, 25). This
contrasts with the tendency toward midshaft breaks on
Site 105 long bones. One distal zebra humerus bears an
anvil mark diagonal to an impact notch. Frequencies of
various long bone break shapes and break surface tex-
ture contrasts as well with those of Site 105 (Tables 10
and 18). Transverse breaks are rarer in the Site 06 long
bone assemblage, amounting to 12 .5% of the assemblage,
as opposed to 29.4% In the Site 105 assemblage. Spiral
fractures differ somewhat less, comprising about a third
of the breaks at Site 06 and about one half at Site 105. (
Longitudinal fractures comprise slightly over half of the
long bone breaks in the Site 06 assemblage but only
about a fifth of those in the Site 105. This may have as
much to do with the organization of neonate bone as with
shaft-smashing tactics. Nineteen of 25 longitudinal frac-
tures are on the young zebra's long bones. These had a
texture with a strong lengthwise orientation and ap-
peared to break preferentially along these lines. I suspect
that had these bones been of adult texture, they might
have broken in spiral fractures. Stepping is relatively rare
(15.6%) on the Site 06 long bone fracture surfaces, as op-
posed to 51.5% for the Site 105 long bones. In view of
the earlier discussion of the determinants of break form
and texture, it is interesting to note the strong association
of stepping with the few transverse breaks on the Site 06
long bones. A fuller discussion of the implications of
these intersite differences wilJ follow presentation of the
Site 08 data.
Other body segments bear evidence of smashing
with a blunt object as well. The topi mandible halves are
broken to expose the inner cavity, and one shows an im-
pact notch. Both topi iliac blades arc snapped at the neck,
in much the same way as Site 105 innominates were
treated. One specimen from Site 06 shows crushing,
probably from impact, at this break. One zebra thoracic
segment displays impact damage to the posterior part of
the centrum.
Six topi and 14 zebra bones bear traces of carnivore (
gnawing. One of these, on the femur of a topi, bears a
 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
Figure 24. Site 06; topi femur showing multiple impact notches.
Figure 25. Site 06; refit topi tibia showing impact near proximal epiphysis.
hyena-sized canine puncture (Table 16c). The balance
have scoring and puncture marks produced by jackal-
sized teeth. Both topi and zebra innominates show chew-
ing on iliac blades and ischial tuberosities. Two topi
femora have been chewed distally (one by a hyena). Of
the zebra elements, seven are vertebrae chewed on spines
and/or transverse processes. Two zebra proximal
humerus fragments and one proximal metacarpal have
score and/or puncture marks. From the placement of
scoring on one refitting fragment, it can be assumed that
the metacarpal was chewed by a small carnivore after it
was smashed. Two zebra ribs display crushing at their
distal ends, which may reflect human gnawing, although,
as with the Site 105 caprine long bones, incontrovertible
evidence is lacking. Despite carnivore tooth marks on
some bones, the presence of so many delicate immature
animals' bones at Site 06 indicates a relatively light car-
nivore impact on the assemblage.
None of the surviving gazelle bones show cuts, burn-
ing, or clear carnivore damage, nor are they broken. An
( animal this small could literally be pulled apart by hand,
obviating the need for cutting through joints. The long
Bone Modification 215
bones have no matrow cavities and would have yielded
little if broken open. Epiphyses of the surviving long
bones are missing and the adjacent diaphyses are crushed,
presumably by human gnawing. Were a carnivore to
have gnawed any of these bones, the entire element would
probably be destroyed.
In sum, the Site 06 mammal assemblage represents
a very different "take", in terms of species and ages of an-
imals, than does that of Site 105 Scavenging of mature
animals and procurement of very young ungulates, either
by direct predation or vigilant scavenging, probably ac-
counts for the unweathered mammal elements at the site.
Breakage patterns resemble those of Site 105 in the sense
that almost all bones are broken, and that long bones dis-
play the typically human combination of articular ends
and shaft splinters. However, damage patterns on the Site
06 bones suggest a different shaft-smashing strategy, with
higher rates of impact near the articular ends of the long
bones, rather than at midshaft, and absence of heavy
chopping tools as percussors. Probably as the result of
this and different culinary treatments, Site 06 long bone
break shapes and surface textures differ. Smooth-sur-
216 Bone Modification
faced spiral and longitudinal breaks predominate as Site
06, similar to fracture patterns in many stone age assem-
blages. This topic will be treated In greater detail after
parallel data from Site 08 are presented.
SITE 08:
FUNCTION AND STRUCTURE
Site 08 was created years before my 1973 fieldwork and
is thus less well documented than the other two sites. It
is a foraging camp located about 15.2 km south of the
Koobi Fora sandspit, on the edge of a low strike ridge of
sandstone (Figure 1). It lay about 400 m inland from the
1973 shoreline, but close to a remnant beach of the higher
1970 lake stand. It is situated in a grassy zone, without
shrubs or trees. I do not know the number of inhabitants,
nor whether the site was occupied once or repeatedly.
Mammal bones are mostly at Weathering Stages 2 and
3, suggesting they had been exposed in this environment
between 5 and 7 years (Gifford 1977; Gifford-Gonzalez
1984). This would place occupation between 1966 and
1967, during a higher stand of the lake. I mapped the site
and collected the mammal bones in November, 1973
(Figure 23). Unfortunately, most non identifiable and di-
aphyseal fragments were discarded in Kenya.
Features at the site suggest repeated occupation. One
hearth was composed of a semicircle of 35 sandstone
slabs, about 1.5 m wide at the open end of the arc. SiIn-
Har structures existed at other sites near stone outcrops
which I know were repeatedly occupied by foraging par-
ties. The leeward side of the enclosed hearth faces south,
with ash, charcoal, and burned bone within the arc.
Another hearth lay closer to the sandstone outcrop, with
two slabs set up on the windward side of three fire-red-
dened sandstone cobbles spaced in a triangular arrange-
ment about 10 em from one another. Gear used by the
foragers that created Site 08 cannot be documented.l as-
sume it included the kinds of implements described for
foraging parties from my own observations. The arrange-
ment of three hearth stones suggests that a cooking ves-
sel was present during at least one occupation. Cuts on
bone in the assemblage are of the same morphology as
noted earlier for metal cutting implements; both Hne cuts
and large chop marks are present on the bones, suggest-
ing the use of at least two types of cutting tools.
SITE 08: TAXONOMIC
REPRESENTATION
The 355 pieces of bone, mainly mammal (Table 19), were
most dense close to the hearths, but spread over some 20
mZ • Of these, 120 (33.8%) were nonidentifiable or mini-
mally identifiable fragments of large mammal elements.
The identifiable part of the assemblage contains bones of
D. Gifford-Gol12tllez
at least three zebras, two mature animals and a subadult (
of 8 to 12 months (Smuts 1974), and a large wild bovid,
probably a topi (Table 20a, 20b). Dominance of mam-
mal elements at the site may reflect preservational bias, I
monitored fish and reptile bones at Site 06 and another
foraging camp created in 1973 for nine subsequent years.
After only five years, smaller fish bones were disintegrat-
ing and even large reptile elements were friable. After
nine years, only the very largest reptile bones (such as
crocodile long bones of 10 em length) were in recogniz-
able shape although very fragile. I therefore suspect that
any elements of smaller fish deposited at the same time
as the mammal bones at Site 08 may have disintegrated
by the time I studied the site.
The immature zebra is represented unequivocally
only by its skull and two scapula blade fragments (Table
20a). Older zebras are represented by most of one in-
dividual and several elements of at least one other in·
dividual. The more complete individual is represented by
a cranium and two hemimandibles, all in many pieces,
and by all cervical, thoracic, lumbar, and sacral verte-
brae, as well as by numerous ribs. Right and left scapulae,
humeri, radioulnae, and carpals, presumably from the
same individual are present, plus another scapula and
another matching pair of humeri, and yet a third
humerus, Also present are fragments of an entire pelvis,
fragments of a femur, a tibia, two metatarsals, and one
set of phalanges. This suggests that one older individual
was incorporated into the site in a nearly complete state, (
while other adults and the younger zebra were obtained
either at a greater distance or in less complete condition
when encountered. How these animals were obtained is
not possible to determine. As noted in the discussion of
the Site 105 zebras, the completeness of representation
of the older zebra need not necessarily imply it was
hunted.
The large bovid bones derive mainly from scapula,
pelvis, and upper fore and hind limb, with four
thoracic/lumbar vertebrae present as well. This suggests
transport from a more distant location. Again, the
method of acquisition cannot be determined.
SITE 08: CONDITION AND
MODIFICATION OF THE
MAMMAL BONES
The Site 08 mammal bones were so fragmentary as to
differ even on preliminary inspection from similarly
weathered remains encountered in the landscape away
from human campsites. Among equid and large bovid
bones in my taphonomic sample, only 7 .8 %were broken
five years after the animals' deaths, and all elements were
sufficiently whole to be identifiable. This contrasts
sharply with the much higher proportion of nonidenti-
fiable scrap at Site 08 (Table 19).
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
The bones are, as noted above, mainly at Behrens-
meyer's (1978) Weathering Stages 2 and 3 (Table 21).
Over three quarters of the equid bone is at Stage 3,
whereas over half the bovid bone is only at Stage 2 My
taphonomic observations at Lake Turkana (Gifford-Gon-
zalez 1984) indicate that the more lightly built bones of
large bovids tend to move through weathering stages
more rapidly than equid bones. For example, after four
years exposure most of the topi and oryx bones in my
sample were at Weathering Stages 3 and 4, while most
of the equid bones were at Stages 2 and 3 (Gifford-Gon-
zalez 1984). The greater degree of weathering on equid
specimens at Site 08 might be taken to imply that the
bovid bones were deposited in a later occupation than
the equid. This pattern might also reflect differences in
clement representation between the two taxa. Bovid
specimens are mainly the denser appendicular elements
which weather more slowly than do axial parts, which
are heavily represented in the zebra sample (Behren-
smeyer 1978). Zebra long bones often have an outer sur-
face at Weathering Stage 2 or 3, with bone under this
layer (exposed by recent damage) translucent and waxy
in appearance.
Both equid and bovid bones show distinctive traces
of human processing. Burning (Table 22a) was discern-
ible on the angle of the ramus on one of the immature
zebra's hemimandibles, on a zebra orbit fragment found
in Hearth I, on two rib fragments, and on over 50 small
nonidentifiable fragments in Hearth 1 Cuts occur on
both bovid and equid bones (Table 22b). Chop marks
appear only on equid elements. Cuts may be underesti-
mated here because of the extent of surface weathering,
but only a few discernible scratches on the bones were of
sufficiently ambiguous morphology to merit exclusion
from the sample. Functionally, cut and chop marks re-
semble those at Site 105. Cuts on the bovid humerus
would have removed the brachialis muscle (Hp-4, Bin-
ford 1981), a probable filleting operation. Those on the
bovid femur shaft would have removed the vastus inter-
medius, a cut not noted in Binford's (1981) enumeration,
but which probably reflects filleting. I am unable to
ascribe functions for cuts on the ulna and posteromedial
tibia shaft. No chop marks appear on any of the bovid
bones, which could imply these were processed when a
heavy chopping tool was not available, and so at some
other time than the adult zebra whose bones bear most
of the chops.
Cuts and chop marks on the z.ebra elements prob-
ably reflect disarticulation, flesh removal, and shaft-
smashing. Those on the maxilla and mandible cut the
origin and insertion of the masseter muscle. Cuts on
vertebral bodies probably reflect dismemberment. Ribs
bear cuts both proximally and distally, and two shafts
display chop marks at their proximal ends. The chop
marks probably derive from removal of the ribs from the
axial skeleton. The two complete right scapulae of zebras
show virtually identical multiple long cuts parallel to the
spinous process in the infraspinatus area, closely resem-
Bone Modification 217
bUng filleting marks (his S-3) pictured by Binford (1981).
Cuts between the glenoid and acromion would sever a
head of triceps (S-2, Binford 1981), which would have
opened the shoulder joint for disarticulation. One right
scapula of an adult bears a chop mark about in the middle
of the inner face of its blade, which actually lifted out a
small segment of bone. This location does not correspond
to attachments of any major soft tissue mass, and I can-
not account for its placement in functional terms. Cuts
on the medial and lateral epicondyles of zebra distal
humeri would have severed the medial and lateral col-
lateral ligaments. Cuts and scrapes on the neck of the
ilium lie close to the origin of rectus femoris, a probable
point of disarticulation. Cuts and chops on the bones of
zebra hind limbs bear some interesting resemblances to
similar damage in the Site 105 assemblage, a similarity
that repeats itself in shaft-smashing patterns (see below).
A femur and a tibia bear clear chop marks at or near
break surfaces, suggesting that a panga was used as a per-
cussor on at least some of the bones. Three other hind
limb bones bear cuts andlor scrapes near the break sur-
face, which may be the result of exposing the bone for
impact. One tibia is cut at the origin of tibialis anterior
(Tp-3, Binford 1981), suggesting defleshing.
Carnivore modifications to Site 08 bovid and equid
bones arc similar to those on Site 06 bones (Table 22c).
Bovid innominates are chewed on iliac blades and ischial
tuberosities, adult zebra ribs bear score marks on their
shafts, long bones show chewing at their articular ends.
The tibia shaft fragment displays scalloped edges typical
of advanced stages of long bone reduction by canids (Bin-
ford 1981). The rates of carnivore modification in the
three assemblages will be discussed in the next section.
In addition to the chop marks associated with long
bone staff breaks, impacts are evidenced on Site 08 bones
by heavy flaking at break surfaces and notches (Johnson
1985). Table 23 presents data on the placement of im-
pacts on elements, mainly long bones. As with Site 06,
marks on bovid bones and most zebra elements reflect a
blunt percussor. Many specimens lacking impact or anvil
marks nonetheless bear evidence of smashing. The adult
equid braincase is broken through the right parietal, and
the basioccipital is also smashed, allowing access to the
brain. The texture of break surfaces differs from that of
zebra crania broken after several years' weathering, indi-
cating that these fractures occurred when the bone was
relatively fresh. AJI zebras' mandibles are broken into
several segments, with the dentary forming at least one
independent unit in all cases. When recovered, most teeth
were separate from maxillary or mandibular bone; this
may be an artifact of the length of their exposure to
weathering while part of broken bone segments.
So many diaphyseal flakes were missing from the
sample that long bone refits were not possible.. However,
evidence suggests that shaft smashing tactics applied to
zebra long bones resembled those at Site lOS, whereas
those applied to bovids did not. Zebra distal hu meri from
Site 08 display transverse fractures virtually identical to
218 Bone Modification
those from Site 105 (Figure 26), either at the distal third
of the shaft (three of five) or slightly higher (two of five).
As at Site 105, olccranons of the ulnae are smashed off
(two of two), and tibiae and metapodials are broken in
the middle third of the shaft (four of four). All but one
of 12 bovid long bone specimens display spiral, smooth
surfaced fracture (Table 24). By contrast, about 53% of
zebra long bones have transverse, stepped fractures. The
differences In raw counts of the break shapes for the two
taxa is significant (Chi 2 p= .01). No bovid bones bear
chop marks near breaks, and they tend to resemble
broken bovid bones from Site 06 in placement of impacts.
A femur shaft listed in Table 23 bears three notches in a
very similar pattern to the Site 06 femoral fragment
shown in Figure 24 The assemblage thus presents an in-
teresting variant on the patterns described for the two
previous sites, with treatment of adult zebras resembling
Site 08 and that of adult bovids resembling that of Site
06.
COMPARISON OF BONE
MODIFICATIONS AT SITES 06,
08, AND lOS
Long Bone Fracture Types
long bones at Sites 06,08, and 105 show high rates of
breakage, Sites 06 and 105 both with rates of 88% and
Site 08 with 100%. This contrasts with about 2% frac-
tUfe rates to taphonomic specimens in the same environ-
ment withm one month of their deaths. Discussiol\of Site
08 long bone fracture types introduced the complexity of
this aspect of all three assemblages. When working with
the Site 06 assemblage after reanalyzing that from Site
105, I initially believed that I had a pattern of difference
in treatment of long bones which correlated with the gear
accessible to poor versus well-to-do Dassanetch. I rea-
soned that the metal chopping tools, as exclusive posses-
sions of wealthier households, facilitated a novel bone
breakage strategy, frequently resulting in transverse,
stepped breaks. Poor Dassanetch, according to this hy-
pothesis, would have had to rely on smaller metal cut-
ting. tools and stone perCllssors, producing morc "paleo-
lithic" bone breakage patterns. This neat dichotomy
broke down on close reexamination of the Site 08 assem-
blage. I was forced to set aside facile correlations of site
type to accessible gear to economic status and simply
look at possible determinants of break morphology.
Lacking direct observational data, I can once again only
speculate, but the exercise has the virtue of revealing
some aspects of the complexity of factors affecting as-
semblage patterning.
In this and ensuing comparisons of the three assem-
blages, I considered Grayson's (1984) discussion of the
relation between relative abundance statistics (often ex-
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
pressed as percentages) and sample size. To assess
whether intersite differences in relative frequencies of
break types and other modifications might have been de-
pendent on sample size, I plotted their percent frequen-
cies against the logarithm of the number of identifiable
specimens. In the case of spiral, longitudinal, and trans-
verse fractures in the three long bone assemblages, no re-
lationship between rates of occurrence and sample size
exists.
Table 25 presents a matrix of chi-square statistics on
raw counts of break shapes and stepping, with levels of
significance indicated by brackets (based on counts in Ta-
bles 10, 18, and 24). This helps unveil what aspects of
the assemblages differ. Spiral fractures occur at a signif-
icantly different rate only between Sites 06 and 08, with
Sites 105 and 08 not significantly different in occurrences
of spiral and transverse breaks, nor in stepping. Sites 105
and 06 display significantly different rates of occurrence
of transverse and longitudinal breaks and stepping. The
greatest consistent differences, reflected by the chi-square
statistic, are between Site 06 and 08 in their rates of oc-
currence of spiral, transverse, and longitudinal breaks.
They also display strong disparities in the rates of occur-
rence of stepping.
These differences stem from the very low frequency
of transverse breaks and high rate of occurrence of longi-
tudinal breaks at Site 06. These in turn can be attributed
to the fact that such a large proportion of the Site 06 long
bone assemblage is composed of bones of a very young
(
zebra, the texture of whose bones appears to have dic-
tated preferentially longitudinal fracture patterns. As
noted earlier, I suspect that had this animal been older
the placement of percussion on its diaphyses would have
produced more spiral breaks. Site 08, with its strong rep-
resentation of adult zebra processed so as to produce
transverse fractures, adds to the contrast between the two
sites. It appears that heavy chopping tools were used on
at least the nearly complete zebra carcass, and p,mga-me-
diated shaft smashing may well be responsible for the
high rates of transverse fracture on these zebra bones and
those from Site 105.
This does not imply that each Dassanetch site exhib-
its idiosyncratic patterning in long bone breaks. Rates of
occurrence of fracture types on the aggregate of 247 long
bones from the eight Area 300 sites are indistinguishable
from those at Site 105 Specimens from Area 300 sites
display 48.5% spiral, 29.4% transverse, and 19.1% longi-
tudinal fractures, while Site 105 has 48.6% spiral, 32.8%
transverse, 18.6% longitudinal, and 3% other breaks.
These comparisons suggest that Dassanetch forag-
ing camps, by virtue both of the brevity of occupation,
and of the hit-or-miss nature of land mammal procure-
ment, tend to have smaller mammal bone assemblages
dominated by bones of a few animals. Modifications to
bones in such sites thus exhibit a kind of interdependence
eHect, with properties of an individual's bones and
specific exigencies of a single butchery episode strongly l
affecting overall assemblage patterning. Longer-term
 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
Figure 26. Distal zebra humeri (left: Site 105; right: Site 08), showing similar transverse breaks.
pastoral sites produce larger faunal assemblages that
simply by virtue of incorporating more individuals re-'
duee the effects of anyone animal processing event.
Moreover, the means by which animals are obtained and
processed for food at pastoral sites enhances redundan-
cies in the resultant faunal assemblages. Pastoralists in-
tentionally and repeatedly select certain age/sex classes
from herds and flocks and process them in one locale
with a predictable set of gear. The comparison also sug-
gests that there may be no such thing as a "typical" poor
forager or rich pastoralist assemblage, since either type
of actor may sometimes resort to cooking strategies
and/or use of specific tools that produce variable bone
residues. At the same time, it is clear that specific pro-
cessing strategies, such as midshaft versus proximal/dis-
tal percussion, produce consistent and distinctive signa-
tures.
Degree of Fragmentation
The degree of fragmentation, as assessed by the propor-
tion of nonidentifiable scrap, at Sites 08 and 105 arc vir-
tually identical (33.8% and 32.4%, respectively). Site 06
lacked Ilonidentifiable bone scrap. These ratios clearly
are not dependent on sample size, which range from 211
at Site 06 to 1,147 at Site 105. I suspect that the lack of
nonidentifiable mammal fragments at Site 06 stems, as
Bone Modification 219
does the long bone shaft breakage pattern, from the
youth of the animals that make up most of the assem-
blage. Little would have been gained by breaking up the
infant zebra and Grant's gazelle bones.
Cuts
Rates of cutmarks on bones from the three assemblages
appear to differ slightly in the frequencies of cuts, with
5.3%,7.0%, and 8.3% for Sites 06,08 and 105 respec-
tively. However, in this case percent cuts correlates well
with sample size at all three sites (r 2 =.807 with raw
counls of number of identifiable specimens against per-
cent cut). These figures thus do not of themselves suggest
that cutting was more intense in butchery events at Site
105 versus Site 06.
Carnivore Modification
The rate of camivore modifications in the Site 06 assem-
blage is 9.6%, in the Site 08 assemblage is 4.2%, and in
Site 105 is 5.5 %. These frequencies have no strong rela-
tion to sample size. They all contrast with the 1 % rate of
carnivore modification observed in the taphonomic
sample at the time of death. In view of the fact I prob-
ably was not able to discern some carnivore modifica-
tions because of bone weathering, the rate for Site 08 is
220 Bone Modification
quite similar to that trom Site 105 These statistics again
raise the issue of interactions ot wild scavengers with
bone accumulations generated by humans, since all three
sites received heavier damage from carnivores than did
wild animal carcasses in the same region. Sites 06, 08,
and 105 all lay in the same zone as my taphonomic
sample, and Sites 06 and 105 tormed under the same cli-
matic circumstanc'es.
CONCLUSIONS AND
SUGGESTIONS FOR
FUTURE RESEARCH
The assemblages described here were all created by mem-
bers of the same cultural group, and two were produced
virtually simultaneously. They diHer in some fundamen-
tal ways, most importantly in the methods in which
mammal carcasses of various taxa were handled. Much
of these differences are attributable to three factors:
whether the mammals processed were domestic and
killed at the base camp or wild and encountered at a re-
move from the base; whether the animals were killed by
the sites' creators or whether they were scavenged;
whether those processing larger carcasses had any heavy
duty metal tools at hand or whether butchery and con-
sumption was aided only by light cutting tools and
stones. Different bone reduction strategies come into play
in varying circumstances ot implement availability and
cooking strategies. Marrow bone breakage in the Site 06
assemblage and the bovid component of the Site 08 as-
semblage display the "classic" spiral or longitudinal frac-
ture pattern seen in numerous hunter-gatherer assem-
blages, with impacts located near epiphyses. Site 105 and
other Area 300 residential camps display transverse,
stepped breaks, with midshaft breakage the norm. The
precise causes of transverse, stepped fractures are am-
biguous. They may stem from structural alterations of
large animals' long bones before breakage by cooking or
from the the use of prmgas in diaphysis fracture, or to
both. Further experiment is needed to clarify these rela-
tions.
These assemblages give those of us using faunal as-
semblages to infer human behavior cause for both cau-
tion and optimism. They demonstrate that assemblages
can display a complex mix of modification features, such
as break patterns, which cannot be read through simple
correlations of site type to processing strategy. They also
demonstrate that specific processing strategies do leave
distinctive signatures and that repeated enactments of a
given strategy are reHected in faunal aggregates. They
serve to remind us that each small faunal sample must be
examined closely for the effects of individual animals' in-
corporation on overall assemblage structure. The assem-
blages support statements made by Binford (1978, 1981)
and more recently by Speth (1983) that the osseous by-
D. Gifford-Gonzalez
products of one people's subsistence round may vary
considerably according to the mix of nutritional needs,
available foods, and other circumstances at any given
time. This study reports similar flexibility in carcass pro-
cessing for a mixed food producing/foraging society. It is
thus becoming lOcreasingly clear that any given people
who kill and butcher animals at both residential sites and
other locations in their home ranges may show a diver-
sity in butchery techniques. The details of this diversity
will depend in part on decisions by the actors regarding
transport and on-site storage and consumption, and in
part on the tools for processing and cooking available to
the actors. One might object that this study has limited
applicability because archaeological cases will seldom at-
test to politically-maintained artifact scarcities such as
that affecting the Dassanetch. However, similar patterns
of diversity in processing damage will occur in any group
of people in which not every actor has the fun range of
tools used in processing animals for consumption at all
times. Thus, any group in which women's meat pro-
cessing practices and gear differ from men's, and in which
either sex may engage in butchery and cooking in the
others' absence is likely to produce a range of differently
damaged faunal assemblages. This category includes not
only foragers and pastoralists but also farmers who hunt
away from their home settlements. Likewise, groups in
which not all members, by virtue of age or economic
standing, have equal access to either animal resources or
processing gear are likely to produce similarly diverse
(
faunal assemblages.
This study has also highlighted some areas that ur-
gently require further research. One area is the effect of
cooking on patterning of fracture types, cutmarks, or
other modifications. Previous experimental focus on raw
meat and bone processing should now be expanded to
include boiled and roasted bones, since we can assume
that much archaeological bone from later periods was
cooked. Even if we are interested in the most ancient ves-
tiges of hominid meat-eating, this research is vital. Many
ethnographic groups we could study as comparative
cases for explicating ancient bone modification boil or
roast bones. We must establish whether sufficient differ-
ences exist in the response of cooked bone to various
stresses to make such comparative cases inappropriate.
We need to answer a number of questions. What altera-
tions to water content, collagen structure, or other physi-
cal properties do boiled or roasted bones undergo? Does
cooked bone respond to static, dynamic, or torsional
loading differently from uncooked green or slightly
weathered bone? How do these alterations affect rates
and sequences of weathering? The effects on bone of
direct exposure to fire and to indirect heat have been dealt
with in a preliminary way by a number of authors (Buik-
stra and Swegle this volume).
Another area in which research is needed is that of
the effect of both butchery and cooking technology on
bone breakage strategies and their products. The use of
heavy metal chopping tools might, as noted earlier, facil-
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa
Hate otherwise impractical shaft breakage tactics by
simultaneously notching and applying dynamic loading.
The presence of cookpots facilitates extraction of
nutrients from bone in stews but also requires reduction
of larger elements, as well as breakage to expose can-
cellous bone and its marrow to boiling liquid. Long bone
fracture types and frequencies could thus differ between
groups using boiling techniques and those not doing so.
lf boiling helps extricate and/or soften bone chips, less
care may be taken to avoid splintering of long bones and
other elements in preliminary breakage, resulting in
greater variation in fracture tactics and their products.
Researchers collecting comparative data on modern
forager assemblages should consider how much the pat-
terns of modification in bones they study have been in-
fluenced by the relatively recent addition of cookpots as
a food processing technology.
Yet another area of interest is the apparent attrac-
tiveness of human habitation debris to wild scavenging
carnivores in my study area. Higher rates of wild car-
nivore modification on these bones than on wild animal
carcasses suggest that human sites might act as a magnet
to scavengers. This could produce bone assemblages with
relatively more carnivore modification than observable
in bones collected from non-archaeological deposits in
the same environment. In turn, this would present inter-
pretive problems to anyone aiming to infer the order in
which humans utilized bones solely from intensities of
human versus carnivore modification in on-site versus
off-site samples. In the absence of repeated overlays of
carnivore on human modifications, one might infer that
such an assemblage was composed of bone scavenged by
humans after having been modified by other carnivores.
To begin to explicate such an assemblage, one could re-
sort to clement frequency, carnivore consumption
sequences, utility and bulk density data. However, my
own attempts to determine how the Site 105 zebras were
acquired should indicate that this is a complex matter. I
hope other fieldworkers will assess wild carnivore mod-
ifications to bone on- and off-site in other regions that
support natural animal populations.
I believe this study's main defects stem from my not
observing the day-to-day behavior that created the de-
bris studied. Much of the foregoing discussion is there-
fore more speculative than a sound ethnoarchaeological
analysis should be. The problem itself indicates the direc-
tion ethnoarchaeological research on bone now needs to
take. Long-term and comprehensive studies of the bone
Bone Modification 221
fallout of subsistence foragers and food producers are ur-
gently needed. This kind of work will provide a key to
the variations in assemblage structure we encounter
archaeologically. Such research is urgent because self-sus-
taining subsistence systems are vanishing. Although
archaeological sites around the world are disappearing
quickly, the lives of peoples whose subsistence and mo-
bility patterns even remotely resemble those of the
humans that made such sites are transforming more
swiftly. Research on animal utilization by self-sustaining
human groups must be done soon, while the behaviors
that produce modified bone residues can still be observed
and documented.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Field research on which this paper is based was under-
taken with permission of the Office of the President of
the Republic of Kenya, under the sponsorship of the
Trustees of the National Museums of Kenya and sup-
ported by a National Defense Education Act Fellowship
and a National Science Foundation Dissertation Im-
provement Grant. Logistical support was provided by the
Koobi Fora Research Project. Kamoya Kimeu and Lori-
ano Kesia gave me valuable information on Dassanetch
settlements. Field and laboratory assistance was given by
Ingrid Herbich, Andrew KiIonzo, Jack Kilonzo, and Mi-
chael Mehlman. Laboratory help was provided by David
Barry, Francisco Mena, and Andrea Scott. Andrea Scott's
work was supported by an EOP/SAA Faculty Mentor
Program stipend.
Support for data analysis was provided by the Com-
mittee on Research and the Social Science Divisional Re-
search Fund, University of California, Santa Cruz. The
first draft of this paper was written while a Resident
Scholar at the School of American Research. GraphicS
were drafted by David Barry and Jennifer Morris.
Melessa Hemler patiently typed and revised tables. I
thank David Barry, Lewis Binford, Luis ~orrero, Jane
BUikstra, R. Lee Lyman, Francisco Mena, Paola Villa,
Chip Wills, Robin Winks, and an anonymous reviewer
for commenting on drafts.
My greatest debts are to the Dassanetch people of
Ileret, who bore my prying into their lives with good
cheer, and to my mentor, the late Glynn Isaac, who set
me on this journey of discovery with bones.
222 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Table 1. Site 105: Total Number of Elements in Faunal Assemblage, by Taxon.

NUMBER OF PERCENT OF
TAXON ELEMENTS ASSEMBLAGE

Mammal Indeterminate 724 25.9

Mammal Small 1 "tr/'

Mammal Medium 297 10.6
Mammal Large 394 14.1

Equid 41 1.5
Equus burchelli 30 1.1

Medium Bovid 236 8.4

Large Bovid 152 5.4
Bos taurus 201 7.2

Oryx gaze/la 1 "tr.,1

Damaliscus /unatus 15 0.5
Caprini 322 11.5
Capra hircus 2 0.1
Sub-total 2416 86.3

Trionixsp. 2 0.1
PelUSi05 sp. 109 3.9
Crocodylu5 niloticus 27 1.0
Sub-total 138 5.0 (
Fish indeterminate 2 0.1
Lates sp. 48 1.7
Small Lates sp. 7 0.3
Medium Lales sp. 24 0.9
Large Lates sp. 40 1.4
Very large Lates sp. 4 0.1
Tilapia sp. 11 0.4
Medium Tilapia sp. 10 0.4
Large Ti/apia sp. 28 1.0
Clarias sp. 40 1.4
Small Clarias sp. 7 0.3
Medium Clarias sp. 5 0.2
Large Clarias sp. 13 0.5
Very large Clarias sp. 7 0.3
Sub-total 246 8.8
Total 2,800 100.0
 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 223

( Table 2. Zebra Bones Represented at Site 105 (as Minimum Number of Elements), Place in Carnivore Consumption
Sequence (Blumenschine 1986), Caribou MGUl (Binford 1978), and Deer Bulk Densities (Lyman 1985). five Podials Ex-
cluded.

MNE CONSUMPTION MGUl BULK

ELEMENT SEQUENCE DENSITY
..
,~ __.-.------------_._.. _--
Cranium 2 12,14
Mandible 2 13 44 .57
Cervical 12 9 36 .19
Thoracic 6 6 46 .24
Scapula 2 8 43 .36
Humerus
Proximal 0 7 43 .24
Distal 3 7 37 .39
Radioulna
Proximal 2 11 22 .42
Distal 3 11 32 .43
Metacarpal
Proximal 0 21 12 .56
Distal 1 21 10 .49
Femur
Proximal 4 3 100 .36
Distal 4 3 100 .28
Tibia
Proximal 2 10 65 .30
Distal 5 10 47 .50
Metatarsal
Proximal 1 18 30 .55
Distal 0 18 24 .46
First phalanx 1 17 14 .42

Table 3a. Site 105: Burning on Mammal Elements, Less Long Bones.

ZEBRA BOS & LARGE BOVIO CAPRINI & SMALL BOVIO

BURN N % BURN N % BURN N %

Cranium 2 8 25.0 13 22 59.1 3 49 6.1

Mandible 2 12 16.7 5 38 13.2 7 25 28.0
Vertebrae
Cervical 8 12 66.7 5 13 38.5 8 28 28.6
Thoracic 1 3 33.3 17 22 77.3 26 82 31.7
Lumbar 0 0 0 1 15 6.7 16 30 53.3
Sacral 0 0 0 1 2 50.0 4 5 80.0
Rib * * * 79 178 44.4* 190 244 779*
Scapula 2 6 33.3 10 12 83.3 9 20 45.0
Innominate 0 0 0 5 20 25.0 5 20 25.0
Podials 0 13 0 15 31 48.4 20 43 46.5
Phalanges 1 1 100.0 10 13 76.9 9 15 60.0
Total 16 83 20.5 161 366 44.0 297 561 52.9

Note: Individual articulated vertebral rows counted as one occurrence. Percent indicates proportion of all such ele-
ments burned.
* The second column includes "Medium-Large Mamma!," which might contain both bovid and equid ribs, since
these were not separated in the field (sec text). The third column includes "Small Mammal" ribs.
224 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Table 3b. Site 105: Burning on Mammal Long Bones.

("
ZEBRA BaS & LARGE BOVIO CAPRINI & SMALL BOVID
BURN N % BURN N % BURN N %

Humerus
Proximal 0 0 0 1 9 111 0 1 0
Shaft 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 33.3
Distal 0 3 0 1 7 14,3 5 6 83.3
Radioulna
Proximal 2 3 66.7 1 8 12.5 2 4 50.0
Shaft 0 0 0 1 2 50.0 4 6 66.7
Distal 2 3 66.7 2 2 100.0 1 1 100.0
Metacarpal
Proximal 0 0 0 4 8 50.0 3 3 100.0
Shaft 1 1 100.0 1 2 50,0 1 1 100,0
Distal 1 1 100.0 4 6 66,7 2 2 100,0
Femur
Proximal 3 3 100.0 1 9 11.1 2 5 40,0
Shaft 2 3 66.7 0 7 0 1 2 50.0
Distal 2 3 66,7 1 7 14.3 1 4 25.0
Tibia
Proximal 0 2 0 4 8 50,0 0 2 0
Shaft 1 2 50.0 0 2 0 0 3 0
Distal 2 4 50,0 0 7 0 2 2 100,0
Metatarsal
Proximal 0 1 0 1 4 25.0 2 3 66,7
Shaft
Distal
0 0
0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 (
0 0 0 1 0 1 2 50.0
Total 16 28 57.1 22 91 24.8 28 51 54.9

Note: Tallies may count one complete bone three times. Percent indicates proportion of all such elements burned.

Table 4. Site 105: Distribution and Proportions of Traces of Burning on Long Bones.

ZEBRA BaS & LARGE SaVIO CAPRINI & SMALL SaVIO

N % N % N %

Total Long Bones 28 91 51

Total Burned 16 57.1 22 24.2 28 54.9
Only On Epiphyses 6 27.0 11 50.0 19 67,8
On Break Surfaces 13 59.0 10 45.5 15 53.6
On Entire Bone 3 14,0 1 4,5 1 3.6
 '.

Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 225

( Table 5. Site 105: Bones Classified by Element Type,

ELEMENT TYPE NUMBER PERCENT

Identifiable 80S 33.3

Cranial fragment 21 0.9
Vertebral fragment 125 5.2
Rib fragment 411 17.0
Scapula/Innominatefragment 8 0.3
Longbone shaft fragment 244 10.1
Tooth fragment 19 0.8
Nonidentifiable fragment 783 32.4
Total 2,416 100.0

Table 6. Proportions of Identifiable and Nonidentifiable Elements in Human and Carnivore Assemblages.
SITE NATURE IDENTIFIABLE NONIOENTIFlABLE
N % N %

Site 105 E: pastoral 2,010 72.0 783 28.0

Namib River Khoi a E: pastoral 1,520 64.1 853 35.9
Rulland Fall Site b E: forager 125 40.1 187 59.9
Kakinya Fall Site b E: forager 191 24.2 597 75.8
(excludin~ dog yard)
Net Fall Site E: forager 521 61.2 331 38.8
Tulukana Fall Site b E: forager 251 11.8 l,B74 88.2
Palangana Fall Site b E:forager 3,912 55.4 3,147 44.6
Pomongwe C A:LSA 5,364 33.7 9,549 66.3
Bushman Rock Shelter C A:LSA 532 14.8 3,074 B5.2
Fackeltrager Shelter C A: LSA 183 6.4 2,655 93.6
Prolonged Drift d A: Neolithic 13,197 8.0 161,721 92.0
Chencherere Shelter e A:LSA 2,639 3.9 65,535 96.1
Kakinya Dog Yard b C: dog 156 78.8 42 21.2
Alaska Wolf Kills .f C: wolf 983 45.1 1,195 54.9
Itikmalaiyak Den f C: wolf 187 46.6 214 53.4
Tambavati Hyena Dens C C: hyena 88 21.5 321 78.5
Crocuta crocuta
Amboseli Hyena Den g C: hyena 553 27.4 1,537 72.6
Crocuta crocuta
Syokimau Hyena Den h C: hyena 678 58.3 484 41.7
Crocuta crocuta
Kalahari N.r. Hyena Dens C C: hyena 200 8B.l 27 11.9
Hyaena brunnea
Suswa Locality 36E C C: leopard 124 73.8 35 26.2
Portsmut Lair C C: leopard 136 75.1 45 24.9
Hakos River Lair C C: leopard 203 61.0 130 39.0
Quartzberg Lair C C: leopard 170 84.5 31 15.4

E=Ethnographic, A=Archaeological, C=Carnivore.

a=Brain 1967, b=Binford 1978, c=Brain 1981 d=Gifford et al. 1980, e=Crader 1982, f=Binford 1981, g=Hill
this volume, h=Bunn 1982.
226 Bone Modijictltion D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Table 7. Site 105: Complete Elements in Mammal Assemblage; Includes Elements with Slight Damage but Basically Whole. ('

PERCENTAGE COMMENTS
OF TOTAL ON AGES OF
ELEMENT NUMBER ELEMENTS SPECIMENS

Hemimandible 21 31.1 NE;2, JU:16, AD:3

Hyoid 1 25.0 d. AD
Vertebrae 117 44.5 NE:4, JU:35, AD:77
Cervical = 34
Thoracic= 64
Lumbar=17
Scapula 7 21.2 NE;2, JU:4, AD:l
Innominate 7 16.3 JU:4, AD:3
Humerus 4 15.4 1U:4
Radioulna 4 13.3 JU:4
Femur 5 13.9 JU:2
Patella 1 100.0 d. AD
Tibia 5 17.2 NE:l
Metacarpal 1 4.3 NE:1, JU;l, AD:1
Metatarsal 2 20.0 JU:2
Accessory metapodial 1 100.0 d. AD
Carpals 41 100.0 AD;41
Tarsals 39 92.3 NE:1, JU:10, AD:28
Phalanges 25 71.4 NE:l, lU:7, AD:17
Total 298

NE= Neonate; JU = Juvenile; AD = Adult (

Table 8a. Site 105: Cutmarks on Mammal Elements, Less Long Bones.

ZEBRA BaS & LARGE BaVID CAPRINI & SMALL BOVIO

CUT N % CUT N % CUT N %

Cranium 0 8 0 0 22 0 0 49 0
Mandible 4 12 33.3 2 38 5.3 0 25 0
Vertebrae
Cervical 2 12 16.6 4 13 30.8 0 28 0
Thoracic 1 3 33.3 2 22 9.1 0 82 0
Lumbar 0 0 0 1 15 6.7 0 30 0
Sacral 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 0
Rib * * * 7 178 3.9* 1 244 0.4*
Scapula 1 6 16.6 1 12 8.3 4 20 20.0
Innominate 0 0 0 2 20 10.0 0 20 0
Podials 4 13 30.8 4 31 12.9 1 43 2.3
Phalanges 0 1 0 0 13 0 0 15 0
Total 12 55 21.8 23 366 6.3 6 561 1.1

Note: Individual articulated vertebral rows are counted as onc occurrence.

* The second column includes "Medium-Large Mamma!," ribs and may contain some equid elements, since bovid
and equid ribs were not separated in the field (see text). Third column contains "Medium Mammal" ribs. Count of
cuts on ribs is very likely spuriously low, since small fragments were not examined for cutmarks.
(j
Ethnographic ArUl!ogues from East Africa Bone Modification 227

Table 8b. Site 105: Cutmarks on Mammal Long Bones.

ZEBRA BaS & LARGE BOVIO CAPRINI & SMALL BOVIO

CUT N % CUT N % CUT N %

Humerus
Proximal 0 0 0 1 9 11.1 0 1 0
Shaft 0 0 0 1 2 50.0 0 3 0
Distal 2 3 66.7 3 7 42.9 2 6 33.3
Radioulna
Proximal 0 3 0 1 8 12.5 3 4 75.0
Shaft 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 6 33.3
Distal 0 3 0 0 2 0 1 1 100.0
Metacarpal
Proximal 0 0 0 2 8 25.0 0 3 0
Shaft 1 1 100.0 0 2 0 0 1 0
Distal 0 1 0 0 6 0 1 2 50.0
Femur
Proximal 3 3 100.0 6 9 66.7 4 5 80.0
Shaft 3 3 100.0 2 7 28.6 0 2 0
Distal 2 3 66.7 0 7 0 1 4 25.0
Tibia
Proximal 2 2 100.0 3 8 37.5 0 2 0
Shaft 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 3 66.7
Distal 1 4 25.0 2 7 28.6 0 2 0
Metatarsal
Proximal 0 1 0 2 4 50.0 0 3 0
Shaft 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
Distal 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0
Total 14 28 50.0 23 91 25.6 17 51 33.3

Note: Tallies may count one complete bone three times.

Table 9a. Site 105: Chop Marks on Mammal Elements, Less Long Bones.

ZEBRA BaS & LAI{GE BOVIO CAPRINI & SMALL BOVIO

CHOP N % CHOP N % CHOP N %

Cranium 1 8 12.5 0 22 0 0 49 0
Mandible 2 12 16.7 0 38 0 8 25 32.0
Vertebrae
Cervical 4 12 33.3 6 13 46.2 1 28 3.6
Thoracic 2 3 66.7 8 22 36.4 7 82 8.5
Lumbar 0 0 0 9 15 60.0 4 30 13.3
Sacral 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 5 20.0
Rib * * * 0 178 0-' 0 244 0*
Scapula 0 6 0 3 12 25.3 0 20 0
Innominate 0 0 0 5 20 5.0 1 20 0
Podials 0 13 0 0 31 0 0 43 0
Phalanges 0 1 0 0 13 0 0 15 0
Total 9 83 10.8 28 366 7.7 23 561 4.1

Individual articulated vertebral rows are counted as one occurrence.

* The second column mcludes "Medium-Large Mamma!," which might contain both bovid and equid elements, as
these were not separated in the field. Third column includes "Medium Mammal" ribs. Count of chop marks on ribs
may be spuriously low, since small fragments were not examined for such damage.
228 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gom:alez

Table 9b. Site 105: Chop Marks on Mammal Long Bones.

(
ZEBRA BaS & LARGE BOVIO CAPRINI & SMALL SaVIO
CHOP N % CHOP N % CHOP N %

Humerus
Proximal 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 1 0
Shaft 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 0
Distal 0 3 0 1 7 14.3 0 6 0
Radioulna
Proximal 1 2 50.0 1 8 11.1 0 4 0
Shaft 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 6 0
Distal 0 3 0 0 Z 0 0 1 0
Metacarpal
Proximal 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 3 0
Shaft 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0
Distal 0 1 0 0 6 0 1 2 0
Femur
Proximal 1 3 33.3 0 9 0 1 5 20.0
Shaft 1 3 33.3 0 7 0 0 2 0
Distal 2 3 66.7 1 7 14.3 0 4 0
Tibia
Proximal 1 2 50.0 0 8 0 0 2 0
Shaft 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 3 0
Distal 0 4 0 1 7 14.3 0 2 0
Metatarsal
Proximal 0 1 0 1 4 25.0 0 3 0
Shaft 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 (
Distal 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 50.0
Total 5 28 17.9 5 91 5.5 3 51 5.9

Note: Tallies may count one complete bone three times.

Table 10. Site 105: Incidence of Fracture Types On Mammal Long Bone Epiphyses. *
FRACTURE ZEBRA AMAUSCUS/BOS CAPRINI TOTAL
SHAPE/SURFACE N % N % N % N %

Longitudinal/smooth 3 11.1 9 13.4 9 21.4 21 15.4

longitudinal/stepped 0 0 4 6.0 2 4.8 6 4.4
Spiral/smooth 5 18.5 16 23.9 15 35.7 36 26.5
Spiral/stepped 7 22.2 19 28.4 5 11.9 30 22.1
Transverse/smooth 2 7.4 3 4.5 1 2.4 6 4.4
Transverse/stepped 9 33.3 15 22.4 10 23.8 34 25.0
Cancellous fracture 2 7.4 0 0 0 0 2 1.5
Columnar fracture 0 0 1 1.4 0 0 1 0.7
(weathered bone)
Total 27 99.9 67 100.0 42 100.0 136 100.0

* Totals differ from the overall long bone totals because complete elements were excluded and elements with multi-
ple breaks were counted more than once. Conjoining fragments of weathered tibia were counted as one occurrence.

l.c
 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 229

(
Table 11a. Site 105: Carnivore Gnawing On Mammal Elements, Less Long Bones.

ZEBRA BaS & LARGE SaVIO CAPRINl & SMALL BOVIO

GNAW N % GNAW N % GNAW N %

Cranium 1 8 12.5 0 22 0 0 49 0
Mandible 0 12 0 1 38 2.6 0 25 0
Vertebrae
Cervical 3 12 25.0 3 13 23.1 0 28 0
Thoracic 1 6 16.7 3 22 13.6 0 82 0
Lumbar 0 0 0 3 15 20.0 1 30 3.3
Sacral 0 0 0 1 2 50.0 0 5 0
Rib * * " 2 178 1.1 0 244 0
Scapula 1 6 16.7 1 12 8.3 0 20 0
Innominate 0 0 0 0 20 0 5 20 25.0
Podials 0 5 0 0 31 0 0 43 0
Phalanges 0 1 0 0 13 0 0 15 0
Total 6 50 7.2 13 366 3.6 6 561 1.1

Note: Articulated vertebral rows are counted as one occurrence.

" Second column includes "Medium-Large Mammal" ribs and may contain both bovid and equid elements, as these
were not separated in the field (see text). Third column contains "Medium Mammal" ribs. Count may be spuriously low,
since small fragments were not examined for gnawing.

Table lIb. Site 105: Carnivore Gnawing On Mammal Long Bones.

ZEBRA BaS & LARGE BOVIO CAPRINI & SMALL SaVIO

GNAW N % GNAW N % GNAW N %

Humerus
Proximal 0 0 0 4 9 44.4 0 1 0
Shaft 0 0 0 1 2 50.0 0 3 0
Distal 0 3 0 3 7 42,9 1 6 16.7
Radioulna
Proximal 0 3 0 2 8 25.0 0 4 0
Shaft 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 6 0
Distal 0 3 0 2 2 100.0 0 1 0
Metacarpal
Proximal 0 0 0 0 8 0 1 3 33,3
Shaft 1 1 100.0 0 2 0 1 1 100.0
Distal 0 1 0 2 6 33.3 0 2 0
Femur
Proximal 0 3 0 5 9 55.6 0 5 0
Shaft 0 3 0 1 7 14,3 1 2 50,0
Distal 2 3 66.7 1 7 14,3 2 4 50,0
Tibia
Proximal 1 2 50,0 2 8 25.0 0 2 0
Shaft 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 3 0
Distal 2 4 50.0 0 7 0 0 2 0
Metatarsal
Proximal 0 1 0 0 4 0 1 3 33,3
Shaft 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Distal 0 0 0 1 1 100.0 1 2 50,0
Total 6 28 21.4 24 91 26.4 8 51 15.7

Note: Tallies may count one complete bone three times,

230 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Table 12. Site 105: Caprine Long Bones With Probable Human Chewing; All But One Are Cylinders Lacking Both c
Epiphyses.

ELEMENT SIDE AGE LOCATION OF DAMAGE

Humerus L neonate proximal, distal

R adult proximal
Radius R adult distal
L adult distal
Radius * L juvenile distal
Femur L adult distal
Tibia L neonate proximal
L juvenile proximal
R adult proximal
Metatarsal R adult distal

* Distal shaft only.

 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 231

(
Table 13b. Site 105: Observed Frequencies of Long Bones {Minimum Number of Elements}, Expected Element Frequen-
cies Predicted by the Minimum Number of Individuals, and Percent Survival for Each Element.

ZEBRA BOS & LARGE BOVIO CAPRINI & SMALL BOVIO

% % %
ELEMENT 0 E SURVIVAL 0 E SURVIVAL 0 E SURVIVAL

Humerus
ProximIal 0 8 0 9 14 64.2 3 20 15.0
Distal 3 8 37.5 7 14 50.0 7 20 35.0
Radioulna
Proximal 2 8 25.0 10 14 71.4 7 20 35.0
Distal 3 8 37.5 5 14 35.7 3 20 15.0
Metacarpal
Proximal 2 8 25.0 8 14 57.1 3 20 15.0
Distal 3 8 37.5 7 14 50.0 2 20 10.0
Femur
Proximal 4 B 50.0 10 14 71.4 6 20 30.0
Distal 4 8 50.0 8 14 57.1 4 20 20.0
Tibia
Proximal 2 8 25.0 8 14 57.1 5 20 15.0
Distal 5 8 62.5 7 14 50.0 3 20 15.0
Metatarsal
Proximal 1 8 12.5 6 14 42.8 4 20 20.0
Distal 0 8 0 1 14 7.1 2 20 10.0

Note: Tallies may count one complete bone twice.

232 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Table 14. Site 06: Total Number of Elements in Faunal Assemblage by Taxon.

NUMBER OF
IDENTIFIABLE MINIMUM NUMBER
TAXON SPECIMENS OF INDIVIDUALS

Equus burchelli common zebra (very young) 142 1

Large bovid d. Damaliscus 4 NA
Damaliscus /unatu5 * topi 36 2
Oryx gaze/la * oryx 12 2
Gazella granti Grant's gazelle (neonate) 15 1
Lepus d. capensis Cape hare 2 1
Trionix sp. softshel1 turtle 17 2
Pelusios cf. adansoni terrapin 9 3
Crocodylus niloticus Nile crocodile 7 1
Lates niloticus Nile perch 183 18
Tilapia nilotica Nile tilapia 72 10
Clarias sp. catfish 120 32
Bagrus bayad catfish 2 2
Total 621 75

* All oryx elements and all but three mandible fragments of topi are weathered and part of horn-working activity
area. Hare elements are also weathered.

(
Table 15a. Site 06: Inventory of Identifiable Mammal Specimens (NISPj and Minimum Number of Elements (MNEj, less
Long Bones.

ORYX TOPI LARGE BQVIO GRANT'S GAZELLE ZEBRA

NISP MNE NISP MNE NISP MNE NISP MNE NI$P MNE

Cranium 12 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 14 1
Mandible 0 0 3 2 0 0 2 2 4 2
Vertebrae
Cervical 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 6 6
Thoracic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 16
Lumbar 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 7 7
Sacrum 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 1
Rib 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 55 22
Scapula 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 2
Innominate 0 0 4 2 0 0 1 1 2 2
Carpals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Podials 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
Total 12 2 10 7 0 0 7 7 112 62
 ~,

Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 233

(
Table Ish. Site 06: Inventory of Mammal Long Bones (Oryx Not Represented by Any Specimens).

TOI'l LARGE BQVIO GRANT'S GAZELLE ZEBRA

NISI' MNE NISI' MNE NISI' MNE NISI' MNE

Humerus
Proximal 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Shaft 3 2 0 0 1 1 2 1
Distal 2 1 0 0 1 1 2 1
Radioulna
Proximal 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1
Shaft 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 1
Distal 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Metacarpal
Proximal 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1
Shaft 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Distal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Femur
Proximal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shaft 8 2 0 0 0 0 1 1
Distal 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tibia
Proximal 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shaft 10 3 0 0 2 2 4 2
Distal 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
Metatarsal
Proximal 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1
Shaft 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2
Distal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Metapodial Indet.
Proximal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shaft 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1
Distal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diaphysis fragment 0 0 4 NA 0 0 3 NA
TOTAL 26 11 4 NA 8 8 30 13
 , .
234 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Table 16a. Site 06: Mammal Elements with Burning.

ELEMENT SIDE SEGMENT LOCATION OF MODIFICATION

Topi
Mandible x symphysis fragment inferior margin
Atlas X fragment axis articulation
Immature Zebra
Maxilla L fragment light overall
Maxilla L fragment light overall
Maxilla R fragment light overall
Basioccipital X fragment occipital condyles
Cranium o fragment light overall
Cranium o fragment light overall
Mandible L fragment light overall
Hoof Cover o complete light overall
Hoof Cover o complete light overall
Hoof Cover o complete light overall
Hoof Cover o complete light overall

Table 16b. Site 06: Mammal Elements with Cutmarks.

ELEMENT SIDE SEGMENT LOCATION OF MODIFICATION

Topi
Mandible R dentary masseter insertion
(
Rib L shaft distal shaft
Sacrum/Ilium L fragment cuts superior segment ilium
Humerus L distal cuts lateral condyle
Humerus R anterior fragment, shaft cut at Impact notch
Immature Zebra
Atlas x fragment cuts left of anterior articulation
Cervical 6 X complete cut lateral process
Thoracic 2/Rib X complete cut right prezygapophysis
Humerus R distal & most shaft cuts anterior at fracture
Metacarpal R proximal & most shaft cuts proximallmedial
Innominate L complete cuts superior acetabular rim
Innominate R complete cuts superior acetabular rim
Tibia L posterolateral shaft 3 cuts near impact notch

c.
 Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 235

i
I,
Table 16c. Site 06: Mammal Elements with Carnivore Modification.:

ELEMENT SIDE SEGMENT LOCATION OF MODIFICATION

Topi
Ilium R superior fragment blade (jackal)
Innominate R complete ischial tuberosity (jackal)
Innominate L complete ischial tuberosity (jackal)
Sacrum/Ilium L fragment blade
Femur R posterior fragment, shaft inferior margin shaft
Femur R fragment, shaft distal (hyena)
Immature Zebra
Hyoid R fragment inferior
Thoracic 4/Rib X complete neural spine
Thoracic 5 X complete neural spine,transverse process (jackal)
Thoracic 6 X complete neural spine, transverse process (jackal)
Thoracic 7-8 X complete neural spine, transverse process (jackal)
Thoracic 9-13/5 Ribs X complete neural spine, transverse process (jackal)
Lumbar 1-3 X complete transverse process (jackal)
Lumbar 4-7 X complete transverse process (jackal)
Scapula R fragment, blade crushing at border
Humerus R proximal, shaft proximal
Humerus R proximal, epiphysis superior side epiphysis
Metacarpal R proximal & most shaft proximal, subsequent to fracture
Innominate L complete iliac blade, ischal tuberosity (jackal)
Innominate R complete iliac blade (jackal)

Table 17. Site 06: Mammal Elements with Impact Notches and Anvil Damage.

LONGBONE
ELEMENT SIDE SEGMENT LOCATION OF IMPACT FRACTURE +

Topi
Dcntary L most posterolateral cavity
Humerus (2)* L distal anterior shaft, laUmed. epicondyle SP/ST
Humerus R anterior shaft lateral shaft SP/SM LN/SM
fragment
Ilium R fragment anterior
Femur (3) R posterior shaft 3 on medial border/Proximal at 2nd troch. TR/ST SP/SM
Femur (5) R shaft proximal SP/SM LN/SM
Tibia (6) R complete ** inferolateral of prOXimal artic. SP/SM LN/SM
/Iateral midshaft
Tibia (4) L complete ** Inferoposterior proximal artic. SP/3M LN/3M TR/ST.
/midshaft/distomedlal
Tibia L posterior shaft posterior SP/SM LN/SM
Immature Zebra
Thoracic 14-15X complete posterior centrum of TIS
Humerus (3) R distal & shaft superior lat. epicondyle SP/SM TR/ST
/anvi! posterior
Radius (3) L proximal & shaft midshaft LN/3M
Metacarpal (3) R proximal & shaft Infefomedial of proximal artie LN/SM
Tibia L posterior shaft distolateral LN/SM

* Number of refitting pieces making up element.

** Missing distal articulation.
+ SP=spiral, LN=longitudinal, TR=transverse, SM=smooth, ST=stepped
236 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Table 18. Site 06: Incidence of Fracture Types on Mammal Long Bone Epiphyses.*
c-'
FRACTURE DAMALlSCUS/
SHAPE/SURFACE ZEBRA LARGE BOVID TOTAL
N % N % N %

Longitudinal/smooth 17 80.9 6 26.1 24 53.3

Longitudinal/stepped
Spiral/smooth
Spiral/stepped
Transverse/smooth
Transverse/stepped
Total
1 4.8 0 0 1 2.2
2 9.5 12 52.2 15 33.3
0 0 1 4.3 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 4.8 4 17.4 5 11.1
21 100.0 23 100.0 45 99.9

'k Totals differ from the overall long bone totals because complete elements were excluded and elements with multi-
ple breaks were counted more than once. Conjoining fragments of weathered tibia were counted as one occurrence.

Table 19. Site 08: Total Number of Elements in Faunal Assemblage by Taxon.

NUMBER OF
IDENTIFIABLE MINIMUM NUMBER
TAXON SPECIMENS OF INDIVIDUALS

Indeterminate Mammal 3 NA
Indeterminate Large Mammal 170 NA
Equus burchelli common zebra (immature) 21 1
Equus burchelli common zebra (adult) 136 1
Large bovid (d. Damaliscus Junatus) topi 25 1
Crocodylus niloticus Nile crocodile 1 1
Synodol1tis schall wahrindi 1 1
Total 357 5

Table 20a. Site 08: Inventory of Identifiable Mammal Specimens (NISP) and Minimum Number of Elements (MNE), Less
Long Bones.

LARGE BOVID IMMATURE ZEBRA ADULT ZEBRA

NISP MNE NISP MNE NISP MNE

Cranium 1 1 6 1 24 1
Mandible 0 0 10 1 12 1
Vertebrae
Cervical 0 0 0 0 7 7
Thoracic 0 0 0 0 18 18
Lumbar 5 5 0 0 7 7
Rib 0 0 0 0 70 28
Scapula 4 2 0 0 2 2
Innominate 2 2 2 2 0 0
Podials 0 0 0 0 5 5
Phalanges 0 0 0 0 3 3
Total 12 10 18 4 148 72
, f'
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 237

(
I
Table 2ob. Site 08: Iventory of Mammal Long Bones.

LARGE BOVID IMMATURE ZEBRA ADULT ZEBRA

NISP MNE NISP MNE NISP MNE

Humerus
Proximal 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shaft 1 1 1 1 1 1
Distal 0 0 2 2 3 3
Radioulna
Proximal 0 0 0 0 3 2
Shaft 1 1 0 0 1 2
Distal 0 0 0 0 0 0
Metacarpal
Proximal 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shaft 0 0 0 0 0 0
Distal 0 0 0 0 0 0
Femur
Proximal 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shaft 5 2 0 0 1 1
Distal 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tibia
Proximal 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shaft 5 2 0 0 4 2
Distal 1 1 0 0 0 0
Metatarsal
Proximal 0 0 0 0 2 1
Shaft 0 0 0 0 3 1
Distal 0 0 0 0 1 1
Total 13 7 3 3 19 14

Table 21. Site 08: Weathering on Mammal Bones (After Behrensmeyer 1978).

WEATHERING STAGE
1 2 3 4
N % N % N % N %

Large Bovid 0 0 10 55.6 6 33.3 2 11.1

Zebra 1 0.7 33 22.6 112 76.7 0 0
Total 1 0.6 43 26.2 118 72.0 2 1.2

Table 22a. Site 08: Mammal Elements with Burning.

ELEMENT SIDE SEGMENT LOCATION OF MODIFICATION

Zebra
Mandible R angle and ramus burning on posterior break
Orbit L fragment heavily burnt overall
2 Ribs L complete proximal shaft
238 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Table 22b. Site 08: Mammal Elements with Cutmarks.

ELEMENT SIDE SEGMENT LOCATION OF MODlFICATION

Large Bovid d. Topi

Humerus L proximal shaft cut at distal break, oblique posterolateral
Radioulna L proximal shaft cut on ulna shaft
Femur L posterior shaft cuts/scrapes medial to linea aspera
Tibia L proximal half shaft 12 cuts/scrapes posteromedial midshaft
Zebra
Maxilla R fragment cut above M3
Mandible R ramus cut laterally below articulation
Atlas X complete cut superior arch, inferior articulation
Cervical X fragment cut posterior transverse foramen
Thoracic X complete cut anterior centrum
3 Ribs L complete Cllt proximal shaft
2 Ribs R complete cut proximal shaft
2 Ribs R head 1 cut proximal shaft, 1 cut distal shaft
4 Ribs R shaft 2 cuts proximal shaft, 2 chopped on shaft
Scapula R complete between glenOid and acromion, cuts longitudinal infraspinous,
heavy chops on interior blade
Scapula R complete cuts longitudinal infraspinous
Scapula R blade fragment chop at break surface on neck
Humerus L distal cuts/scrapes anteromedial
Humerus L distal cuts/scrapes anterolateral
Humerus R distal cuts anterolateral, anteromedial
Ilium L fragment cuts/scrapes lateral
Femur R shaft 3rd troch. 2 chops at distal break (
Tibia L posterolateral shaft scrapes/2 chops at break
Tibia R distal & half shaft cuts anteromedial
Metatarsal L proximal & half shaft scrapes at break, perpendicular to long axis
Metatarsal L anterior fragment, multiple cuts medial
proximal artic.

Table 22c. Site 08: Mammal Elements with Carnivore Modification

ELEMENT SIDE SEGMENT LOCAnON OF MODlFlCATlON

Large Bovid d. Topi

Scapula R complete score inner acromion surface
Innominate R complete puncture, furrowing iliac blade, ischial tuberosity
Innominate L acetabulum (pubis) scooping-out on pubiS
Tibia L distal & half shaft score, puncture above epiphysis
Zebra
Rib R complete score on shaft
2 Ribs L head scores on shaft
Rib R head scores on shaft
Rib R head & shaft fragment score on shaft
3 Ribs L shaft scores on shaft
Rib R prOXimal shaft score on shaft
Humerus R distal hyena puncture distal
Radioulna R proximal & most shaft hyena puncture proximal
 Ethnographic AnQlogues from EQst Africa Bone Modification 239

( Table 23. Site 08: Mammal Elements with Impact Notches and Anvil Damage.

LONG BONE
ELEMENT SIDE SEGMENT LOCATION OF IMPACT FRACTURE*

Large Bovid d. Topi

Scapula R blade fragment at neck
Humerus L proximal shaft lateral TR/ST SP/SM
Radioulna R posterior fragment, posterior fracture surface SP/SM
shaft
Femur L posterior shaft 3 on posterior border TR/ST SP/SM
Tibia R proximal shaft medial distal shaft SP/SM SP/SM
Tibia L posterior shaft lateral midshaft SP/SM
Zebra
Ilium R fragment at break on neck
Humerus L distal & 1/2 shaft anterior shaft SP/SM
Humerus L distal posterior shaft TR/ST
2 Humerus R distal posterior shaft TR/ST
Radioulna L proximal & 3/4 shaft lateral shaft TR/ST
Radioulna R proximal & 112 shaft anvil mark on ulna shaft SP/SM
Tibia R posterior lateral shaft posterior shaft TR/ST
Tibia R distal & shaft posterior shaft TR/ST
Metatarsal L proximal anterior medial on proximal artie. SP/SM
Metatarsal L distal & shaft posterior shaft SP/SM
Metatarsal L proximal & shaft lateral shaft SP/SM

* SP=spiral, LN=longitudinal, TR=transverse, SM=smooth, ST=stepped

Table 24. Site 08: Incidence of Fracture Types on Mammal Long Bone Epiphyses. *

LONG BONE FRAGMENT BOVID4 JUVENILE ZEBRA ADULT ZEBRA TOTAL

Longitudinal/smooth o o o o
Longitudinal/stepped o o o o
Spiral/smooth 1.2 1 5 18
Spiral/stepped o o 1 1
Transverse/smooth o o o o
Transverse/stepped 2 1 11 14
Total 14 2 17 33

* Totals differ from the overall long bone totals because complete elements were excluded and elements with multi-
ple breaks were counted more than once. Conjoining fragments of weathered tibia were counted as one occurrence.
 r ,.

240 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonwle-z

Table 25. Sites 06, 08,105: Comparison of Chi 2 Statistics and ProbabiliUes for Fracture Shapes and Textures.*
C'
06:SP 08:SP 06:TR 08:TR 06:LN 08:LN 06:ST 06:ST

105:SP 3.158 0.869

105:TR (5.122) 2.068
105:LN {22.183] [6.060]
06:SP (12.877]
06:TR [8.503]
06:LN [24.490]
105:5T [16.404] 0.869
06:ST (5.687)

* SP=spiral, TR=transverse, LN=longtudinal, ST=stepped

[ ] p:i.01
() p:5:.05

REFERENCES CITED
Almagor, U.
1971 The Social Organization of the Dassanetch of the Lower Omo. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University
of Manchester, Manchester.

Almagor, U.
1978 Pastoral Partners, Affinity and Bond Partnership Among the Dassanetch of South-West Ethiopia. Manchester
University Press, Manchester.

Behrensmeyer, A.K.
1978 Taphonomic and Ecologic Information from Bone Weathering. Paleobiology 4:150-162.

Behrensmeyer, A.K.
1984 Taphonomy and the Fossil Record. American Scientist 72:558:566.

Behrensmeyer, AX., K.D. Gordon, and G.T. Yanagi

1986 Trampling as a Cause of Bone Surface Damage and Pseudo-cutmarks. Nature 319:768-771.

Binford, LIt
1978 Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology. Academic Press, New York.

Binford, L.R.
1981 Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths. Academic Press, New York.

Binford, LR.
1984 Faunal Remains from Klassies River Mouth. Academic Press, New York.

Binford, L.R.
1987 Researching Ambiguity: Frames of Reference and Site Structure. In Method and Theory for Area Research.
An EthnoarchaeologicaJ Approach, edited by S. Kent, pp. 448-512. Columbia University Press, New York.

Binford, loR. and J. Bertram ,

1977 Bone Frequencies-and Attritional Processes. In For Theory Building m Archaeology, edited by L.R. Bin- \...
ford, pp. 77-153. Academic Press, New York.
" "
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 241

Blumenschine, R.J.
1986a Early Hominid Scavenging Opportunities: Implications of CClrcClSS AUClilability in the Serengeti Clnd Ngoron-
goro Ecosystems. BAR International Series No. 283, BAR, Oxford.

Blumenschine, R.J.
1986bCarcasss Consumption Sequences and the Archaeological Distinction of Scavenging and Hunting. JournClI
of Human Evolution 15:639-659.

Bonfield, W., and C.H. Li

1966 Deformation and Fracture of Bone. Journal of Applied Physics 37:869-875.

Bonnichsen, R.
1973 Some Operational Aspects of Human and Animal Bone Alteration. In Mammalian Osteo-Archaeology:
North America, edited by B. M. Gilbert, pp. 9-24 Missouri Archaeological Society, Columbia.

Bonnichscn, R.
1979 Pleistocene Bone Technology in the Beringian Refugium. Archaeological Survey of Canada Paper No. 89,
Mercury Series, National Museum of Man, Ottawa.

Brain, C.K.
1967 Hottentot Food Remains and Their Bearing on the Interpretation of Fossil Bone Assemblages. Scientific
Papers, 32:1 11 Namib Desert Research Station.

Brain, C.K
1969 The Contribution of Namib Desert Hottentots to an Understanding of Australopithecine Bone Accumula-
tions. Scientific Papers, 39:13-22. Namib Desert Research Station.

Brain, C.K.
1981 The Hunters or the Hunted? An Introduction to South African Cave Taphonomy. University of Chicago
Press, Chicago.

Bromage, T.G.
1984 Interpretation of Scanning Electron Microscope Images of Abraded Forming Bone Surfaces. American Jour-
nal of Physical Anthropology 64:161-178.

Bunn, H.
1981 Archaeological Evidence for Meat-eating by Plio-Pleistocene Hominids from Koobi Fora and Olduvai Gorge.
Nature 291 :574-577.

Bunn, H.
1982a Animal Bones and Archeological Inference. Science 215 :494·495.

Bunn, H.
1982b Meat-eating and Human Evolution. Studies on the Diet and Subsistence of Plio-Pleisticene Ho min ids in East
Africa. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.

Bunn, H.
1983 Comparative Analysis of Modern Bone Assemblages from a San Hunter-Gatherer Camp in the Kalahari
Desert, Botswana, and from a Spotted Hyena Den Near Nairobi, Kenya. In Animals and Archaeology: 1
Hunters and Their Prey, edited by J. Clutton-Brock and C. Grigson, pp. 143-148. BAR International Series
No. 163, BAR, Oxford.

Bunn, H.T. and R.J. Blumenschine

1987 On "Theoretical Framework and Tests" of Early Hominid Meat and Marrow Acquisition-A Reply to Ship-
man. American Anthropologist 89:444-448.
 .',

242 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Bunn, H.T., and E. Kroll

1986 Systematic Butchery by Plio/Pleistocene Hominids at Oldllvai Gorge, Tanzania. Current Anthropology
27:431-452.

Bunn, H., J.W.K. Harris, G. Isaac, Z. Kaufulu, E. Kroll, K. Schick, N. Toth, and A.K. Behrensmeyer
1980 FxJj50: An Early Pleistocene Site in Northern Kenya. World Archaeology 12:109-136.

Carr, c.J.
1977 Pastoralism in Crisis. The Dasanetch and Their Ethiopian Lands. The University of Chicago Department of
Geography Research Paper No. 180. Chicago.

Crader, D.C.
1974 The Effects of Scavengers on Bone Material from a Large Mammal: An Experiment Conducted Among the
Bisa of the Luangwa VaHey, Zambia. In Ethnoarchaeology, edited by C.B. Donnan and CW. Clewlow, Jr.,
pp. 161-173. Archaeological Survey Monograph 4. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los
Angeles.

Crader, D.C.
1982 Hunters in Iron Age Malawi: The Zooarchaeology of Chencherere Rockshe1ter. Ph.D. dissertation, Univer-
sity of California, Berkeley. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.

Crader, D.C.
1983 Recent Single-Carcass Bone Scatters and the Problem of "Butchery" Sites in the Archaeoloical Record. In
Animals and Archaeology: 1. Hunters and Their Prey, edited by J. Clutton-Brock and C Grigson, pp. 107-
141. BAR International Series No. 163, BAR, Oxford.

Dahl, G., and A. Hjort C'"

1976 Having Herds. Pastoral Herd Growth and Household Economy. Stockholm Studies In Social Anthropology
No.2. Department of Anthropology, University of Stockholm, Sweden.

Dyson-Hudson, R., and N. Dyson-Hudson

1970 The Food Production System of a Semi-Nomanid Society: The Karimojong, Uganda. In African Food Pro-
duction Systems,: Cases and Theory, edited by P.EM. McLoughlin, pp. 91-124. Johns Hopkins Press, Bal-
timore.

Evans, EG.
1957 Stress and Strain in Bones: Their Relation to Fractures and Os.teogenesis. CC Thomas, Springfield, IL.

Evans, EG.
1973 Mechanical Properties of Bone. Cc. Thomas, Springfield, IL

Frison, G.c.
1970 The Glenrock Buffalo lump, 48C0304. Plains Anthropologist Memoir No.7, Part 2.

Frison, G.C (editor)

1974 The Casper Site: A Hell Gap Bison Kill on the High Plains. Academic Press, New York.

Frison, G., M. Wilson, and D.]. Wilson

1976 Fossil Bison and Artifacts from an Early Altithermal Period Arroyo Trap in Wyoming. American Antiquity
41:28-57.

Gifford, D.P.
1977 Observations of Modern Human Settlements as an Aid to Archaeological Interpretation. Ph.D. dissertation,
University of California, Berkeley. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.
Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 243

Gifford, D.P.
1980 Ethnoarchaeological Contributions to the Taphonomy of Human Sites. In Fossils in the Making, edited by
A.K. Behrensmeyer and A.P. Hill, pp. 93-106. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Gifford, D.P. and A.K. Behrensmeyer

1977 Observed Formation and Burial of a Recent Human Occupation Site in Kenya. Quaternary Research 8:245-
266.

Gifford, D.P., Gt. Isaac, and CM. Nelson

1980 Evidence for Predation and Pastoralism at Prolonged Drift: A Pastoral Neolithic Site in Kenya. Azania 15 :57-
108.

Gifford-Gonzalez, D.P.
1984 Taphonomic Specimens, Lake Turkana. In National Geographic Research Reports, 1976 Projects, pp.419-
428. National Geographic Society, Washington, DC.

Gifford-Gonzalez, D.P.
1989 Shipman's Shakey Foundation: The Prolonged Drift Cut Marks. American Anthropologist, 91:180-186.

Gifford-Gonzalez, D.P., D.B. Damrosch, OK Damrosch, l. Pryor, and R.t. Thunen

1985 The Third Dimension in Site Structure: An Experiment in Trampling and Vertical Dispersal. American An-
tiquity 50:803-818.

Grayson, O.K.
1982 Review of Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths, by LR. Binford. American Anthropologist 84:439-440.

Grayson,D.K.
1984 Quantitative Zooarchaeology: Topics in the Analysis of Archaeological Faunas. Academic Press, New York.

Grayson,D.K.
1988 Danger Cave, Last Supper Cave, Hanging Rock Shelter; The Faunas. American Museum of Natural History
Anthropological Papers 66:Part 1.

Guilday, J.E., P.W. Parmalee, and D.P. Tanner

1962 Aboriginal Butchering Techniques at the Eschelman Site (36LA12), Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Penn-
sylvania Archaeologist 32:59-83.

Haynes, G
1980 Evidence of Carnivore Gnawing on Pleistocene and Recent Mammalian Bones. Paleobiology 6:341-351.

Haynes, G
1983aFrequencies of Spiral and Green-Bone Fractures on Ungulate Limb Bones in Modern Surface Assemblages.
A merican Antiquity 48:102-114.

Haynes, G
1983b A Guide for Differentiating Mammalian Carnivore Taxa Responsible for Gnaw Damage to Herbivore Limb
Bones. Paleobiology 9:164-172.

Hill, A.P.
1979 Butchery and Natural Disarticulation: An Investigatory Technique. American Antiquity 44:739-744.

Hole, E, K.V.Flannery, and l.A. Neely

1969 Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Deh Luran Plain, an Early Village Sequence from Khuzistan Iran.
Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology No.1. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
 .,,,

244 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Horwitz, V.D. (
1987 Experiments on Cooked Bone Breakage. Paper presented at the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Society for
American Archaeology, Toronto.

Isaac, G.L.
1976 The Activities of Early African Hominids: A Review of the Archaeological Evidence for the Time Span Two
and a Half to One Million Years Ago. In Human Origins: Louis Leakey and the East African Evidence, edited
by G.L. Isaac and E.R. McCown, pp. 482-514 Staples Press, Menlo Park, CA.

Johnson, E.
1985 Current Developments in Bone Technoloogy. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 8:157-235

Jones, K.
1983 Forager Archaeology: The Ache of Eastern Paraguay. In Carnivores, Human Scavengers, and Predators: A
Question of Bone Technology, edited by C.M. Lemoine and A.S. Maceachern, pp. 171-191 Archaeologi-
cal Association, Department of Archaeology, University of Calgary, Alberta.

Klein, R.G.
1986 Review of Faunal Remains from Klasies River Mouth, by L. Binford. American Anthropologist 88:494-495.

Klein, R. and K. Cruz-Uribe

1984 Analysis of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Kruuk, H.
1972 The Spotted Hyena: A Study of Predation and Social Behavior. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Leechman, D.
1951 Bone Grease. American Antiquity 16:355-356. (
Lyman, R.L.
1984 Bone Density and Differential Survivorship in Fossil Classes.lournal of Anthroplogical ArChaeology 3:259-
299.

Lyman, R.L.
1985 Bone Frequencies: Differential Transport in situ Destruction, and the MGUL Journal of Archaeological
Science 12:221-236.

Lyman, R,L.
1987 Hunting for Evidence of Plio-Pleistocene Hominid Scavenger-Butchers. American Anthropologist 89:710-
715,

Lyon, P.].
1970 Differential Bone Destruction: An Ethnographic Example. American Antiquity 35:213-215.

Marshall, F.B.
1986 Aspects of the Advent of Pastoral Economies in East Africa. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of
California, Berkeley.

Mengoni-Gonalons, G.
1982 Notas Zooarqueologicas I: Fracturas en Huesos. VII Congreso Nacional de Arqueologia, Colonia del Sacra-
mento, Uruguay, Dec. 1980, pp 87-91. Centro de Estudios Arqueologia, Montevideo, Uruguay.

O'Connell, J., K. Hawkes, and N.B. Jones

1988 Hadza Hunting, Butchering, and Bone Transport Practices and Their Archaeological Implications. Journal
of Anthropological Archaeology, in press.
 I'

Ethnographic Analogues from East Africa Bone Modification 245

( Oliver, I.
1986 The Taphonomy and Paleoecology of Shield Trap (24CB91) Carbon County, Montana. Unpublished Master's
thesis, Institute of Quaternary Studies, University of Maine, Orono, ME.

Perkins, D., and P. Daly

1968 A Hunters' Village In Neolithic Turkey. Scientific American 219:97-106.

Potts, R., and P. Shipman

1981 Cutmarks Made by Stone Tools on Bones from Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania. Nature 291:577-580

Richardson, P.RK
1980 Carnivore Damage to Antelope Bones and its Archaeological Implications. Palaeotologia Africana 23:109-
125

Richter, I
1986 Experimental Study of Heat Induced Morphological Changes in Fish Bone Collagen. Journal of Archaeo-
logical Science 13:477-481.

Ruangwit, U.
1967 The Split-Line Phenomenon and the Microscopic Structure of Bone. American Journal of Physical Anthro-
pology 26:319-330.

Sadek-Kooros, H.
1972 Primitive Bone Fracturing: A Method of Research. American Antiquity 37;369-382

Scou, K.
1986 Review of Faunal Remains from Klasies River Mouth, by L.R. Binford. Journal of Archaeological Science
13:89-100.

Shipman, P.
1981 Applications of Scanning Electron Microscopy to Taphonomic Problems. In The Research Potential of An-
thropological Museum Collections, Vol. 376, edited by A.M.E. Cantwell, J,13. Griffin, and N.A. Rothschild,
pp, 357-385. New York Academy of Sciences, New York.

Shipman, P.
1983 Early Hominid Lifestyle: Hunting and Gathering or Foraging and Scav.enging? In Animals and Archaeology:
1. Hunters and Their Prey, edited by]. Clutton-Brock and C. Grigson, pp. 31-49. BAR International Series
No. 163, BAR, Oxford.

Shipman, P.
1984 Scavenger Hunt. Natural History 93(4):20-27.

Shipman, P.
1986 Scavenging or Hunting in Early Hominids: Theoretical Framework and Texts. American Anthropologist
88:27-43.

Shipman, P., and J.l. Rose

1983 Early Hominid Hunting, Butchering and Carcass-Processing Behaviors: Approaches to the Fossil Record.
Journal of Anth ropological Archaeology 2:57-98.

Shipman, Po, G. Foster, and M. Schoeninger

1984 Burnt Bones and Teeth: An Experimental Study of Color, Morphology, Crystal Structure and Shrinkage.
Journal of A rchaeological Science 11 :307-325.

Smuts, G.L.
1974 Age Determination in Burchel1's Zebra (Equus burchelli antiquorum) from the Kruger National Park. Jour-
nal of the South African Wildlife Management Association 4:103-115.
246 Bone Modification D. Gifford-Gonzalez

Solomon, S. (_.
1985 People and Olher Aggravations: Taphonomic Research in Australia. Unpublished Bachelor's thesis, Univer-
sity of New England, New South Wales, Australia.

Speth, ).D.
1983 Bison Kills and Bone Counts. Decision Making by Ancient Hunters. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Stockton, £.0.
1973 Shaw's Creek Shelter: Human Displacement of Artifacts and its Significance. Mankind 9:112-117

Tappen, N.C., and G.R. Peske

1970 Weathering Cracks and Split-Line Patterns in Archaeological Bone. American Antiquity 35:383-386.

Villa, P., and) Courtin

1983 The Interpretation of Stratified Sites: A View from Underground. Journal of Archaeological Science 10:267-
281

Von den Driesch, A., and) Bocssneck

1975 Schnittspuren an Neolithischen Tierknochen: Ein Beitrag zur Schlachtticrzerlegung in vorgeschichtlicher Zeit.
Germania 53:1-23.

Walker, P.L., and J.e. Long

1977 An Experimental Study of the Morphological Characteristics of Tool Marks. American Antiquity 42:605-
616

Walters, I.
1984 Gone to the Dogs: A Study of Bone Attrition at a Central Australian Campsite. Mankind 14:389-400.
<.
Wheat, ).B.
1972 The Olsen-Chubbuck Site: A Paleo4ndian Bison Kill. Society for American Archaeology Memoir No. 26.
Society for American Archaeology, Washington, De.

Wheat, ).6.
1979 The Jurgens Site. Plains Anthropologist Memoir No. 15. ParI 2.

White, T.E.
1952 Observations on the Butchering Techniques of Some Aboriginal Peoples, No.1 A merican Antiquity 17:337-
338.

White, T.E.
1953 Observations on the Butchering Technique of Some Aboriginal Peoples, No.2. American Antiquity 19:160-
164.

White, TE.
1954 Observations on the Butchering Technique of Some Aboriginal Peoples, Nos. 3,4,5, and 6. American An-
tiquity 19:254-264.

White, T.E.
1955 Observations on the Butchering Techniques of Some Aboriginal Peoples, Nos. 7, 8, and 9. American An-
tiquity 21:170-178.

Yellen, J.E.
1977 Cultural Patterning in Faunal Remains: Evidence from the !Kung Bushmen. In Experimental Archaeology,
edited by D. Ingersoll, ).E. Yellen, and W. Macdonald, pp. 271-331. Columbia University Press, New York.

l.