The Case of the Leporids in the Epipalaeolithic
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The exploitation of small prey among the last hunter-gatherers in the Northeast of the Iberian Peninsula: the case of the leporids in the Epipalaeolithic Nadihuska Y. Rosado-Méndez ADVERTIMENT. La consulta d’aquesta tesi queda condicionada a l’acceptació de les següents condicions d'ús: La difusió d’aquesta tesi per mitjà del servei TDX (www.tdx.cat) i a través del Dipòsit Digital de la UB (diposit.ub.edu) ha estat autoritzada pels titulars dels drets de propietat intel·lectual únicament per a usos privats emmarcats en activitats d’investigació i docència. No s’autoritza la seva reproducció amb finalitats de lucre ni la seva difusió i posada a disposició des d’un lloc aliè al servei TDX ni al Dipòsit Digital de la UB. No s’autoritza la presentació del seu contingut en una finestra o marc aliè a TDX o al Dipòsit Digital de la UB (framing). Aquesta reserva de drets afecta tant al resum de presentació de la tesi com als seus continguts. En la utilització o cita de parts de la tesi és obligat indicar el nom de la persona autora. ADVERTENCIA. La consulta de esta tesis queda condicionada a la aceptación de las siguientes condiciones de uso: La difusión de esta tesis por medio del servicio TDR (www.tdx.cat) y a través del Repositorio Digital de la UB (diposit.ub.edu) ha sido autorizada por los titulares de los derechos de propiedad intelectual únicamente para usos privados enmarcados en actividades de investigación y docencia. No se autoriza su reproducción con finalidades de lucro ni su difusión y puesta a disposición desde un sitio ajeno al servicio TDR o al Repositorio Digital de la UB. No se autoriza la presentación de su contenido en una ventana o marco ajeno a TDR o al Repositorio Digital de la UB (framing). Esta reserva de derechos afecta tanto al resumen de presentación de la tesis como a sus contenidos. En la utilización o cita de partes de la tesis es obligado indicar el nombre de la persona autora. WARNING. On having consulted this thesis you’re accepting the following use conditions: Spreading this thesis by the TDX (www.tdx.cat) service and by the UB Digital Repository (diposit.ub.edu) has been authorized by the titular of the intellectual property rights only for private uses placed in investigation and teaching activities. Reproduction with lucrative aims is not authorized nor its spreading and availability from a site foreign to the TDX service or to the UB Digital Repository. Introducing its content in a window or frame foreign to the TDX service or to the UB Digital Repository is not authorized (framing). Those rights affect to the presentation summary of the thesis as well as to its contents. In the using or citation of parts of the thesis it’s obliged to indicate the name of the author. UNIVERSITAT DE BARCELONA FACULTAT DE GEOGRAFIA I HISTÒRIA DEPARTAMENT D’ HISTÒRIA I ARQUEOLOGIA SOCIETAT I CULTURA: HISTÒRIA, ANTROPOLOGIA, ARTS, PATRIMONI I GESTIÓ CULTURAL THE EXPLOITATION OF SMALL PREY AMONG THE LAST HUNTER-GATHERERS IN THE NORTHEAST OF THE IBERIAN PENINSULA: THE CASE OF THE LEPORIDS IN THE EPIPALAEOLITHIC PhD Thesis by: NADIHUSKA Y. ROSADO-MÉNDEZ Supervised by: Dr. JORDI NADAL and Dr. LLUIS LLOVERAS BARCELONA, 2017. ! Tempus fugit ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! * ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! To my family, I could not have achieved this without your support. Thanks for believing in me guys! TABLE OF CONTENT Acknowledgments ……………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Why develop a Ph. D. dissertation on Epipalaeolithic leporid accumulations in the Northeast of the Iberian Peninsula ………………………………………………………………… 5 PART 1: INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………………... 13 1. THE EPIPALAEOLITHIC PERIOD IN THE NORTHEAST OF THE IBERIAN PENINSULA: A BRIEF SYNTHESIS ………………………………………………………………………………….. 15 1.1. Why EpipalaeolithiC instead of MesolithiC? …………………………………………………... 16 1.2. The PleistoCene-HoloCene transition in the NE Mediterranean region: landsCape and chronocultural evolution………………………………………………………………………… 19 1.2.1. LandsCape evolution ……………………………………………………………………… 19 1.2.2. ChronoCultural evolution ………………………………………………………………….. 22 1.3. The importanCe of small prey in the EpipalaeolithiC period: the role of leporids …………. 25 2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ………………………………………………………………………….. 31 3. LEPORIDS: ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS ……………………………………………….. 35 3.1. Taxonomy and geographiC distribution ……………………………………………………….. 35 3.2. Leporidae origins ……………………………………………………………………………….. 36 3.2.1. Origins of the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) ……………………………… 37 3.2.2. Origins of the European hares (Lepus sp.) …………………………………………… 38 3.3. MorphologiCal desCription ……………………………………………………………………… 38 3.3.1. General CharaCteristics …………………………………………………………………... 38 3.3.2. Differences between genera …………………………………………………………….. 42 3.4. The European rabbit ……………………………………………………………………………. 43 3.4.1. Habitat …………………………………………………………………………………….... 43 3.4.2. Behaviour ………………………………………………………………………………… 44 3.5. Hares (Lepus sp.) ……………………………………………………………………………….. 45 3.5.1. Habitat ……………………………………………………………………………………… 45 3.5.2. Behaviour …………………………………………………………………………………... 47 4. LEPORID ACCUMULATIONS: FORMATION PROCESSES AND ALTERATIONS ………... 51 4.1. Intrusive origins ……………………………………………………………………………….. 52 4.2. Exogenous origins ……………………………………………………………………………. 54 4.2.1. Non-human acCumulations …………………………………………………………….. 54 4.2.1.1. Terrestrial Carnivores ……………………………………………………….. 56 4.2.1.2. Raptors ………………………………………………………………………. 64 4.2.1.2.1. Diurnal raptors ……………………………………………………… 65 4.2.1.2.2. NoCturnal raptors …………………………………………………… 72 4.2.2. AnthropiC aCCumulations ………………………………………………………………… 74 PART II: EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH AND TAPHONOMICAL ANALYSIS …………………… 81 PART II.A: EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH ……………………………………………………………. 83 5. TOWARD THE CHARACTERIZATION OF DIFFERENT BUTCHERY ACTIVITIES ON LEPORIDCARCASSESTHROUGHEXPERIMENTALSTUDIES………………………………… 85 5.1. IntroduCtion ……………………………………………………………………………………… 85 5.2. Materials …………………………………………………………………………………………. 87 5.3. Method …………………………………………………………………………………………… 89 5.3.1. ButChery ………………………………………………………………………………….. 89 5.3.2. Sample preparation and analysis ……………………………………………………… 90 5.4. Results …………………………………………………………………………………………… 91 5.4.1. Defleshing ……………………………………………………………………………….. 92 5.4.2. Scraping ………………………………………………………………………………….. 93 5.4.3. Tendons removal ………………………………………………………………………… 94 5.5. DisCussion ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 94 5.6. ConClusions ……………………………………………………………………………………… 96 6. ANALYSIS OF MODERN AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL BURNT BONES BY FOURIER TRANSFORM INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY (FTIR-KBr) …………………………………….. 105 6.1. IntroduCtion …………………………………………………………………………………….. 105 6.2. Materials and method…………………………………………………………………………. 107 ii 6.3. Results ………………………………………………………………………………………… 109 6.4. DisCussion …………………………………………………………………………………….. 114 6.5. ConClusions …………………………………………………………………………………… 118 PART II.B: APPLIED METHODOLOGY FOR THE TAPHONOMICAL ANALYSIS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES ………..………………………………………………………………… 121 7. APPLIED METHODOLOGY ……………………………………………………………………… 123 7.1. Material proCessing and data reCording …………………………………………………… 123 7.2. TaxonomiC determination …………………………………………………………………… 124 7.3. Determination of age of death ……………………………………………………………… 125 7.4. AnatomiC representation and differential Conservation ………………………………….. 125 7.5. Breakage patterns and types of fraCtures …………………………………………………. 130 7.6. Bone surfaCe alterations …………………………………………………………………….. 133 7.6.1. Digestion ……………………………………………………………………………….. 133 7.6.2. Tooth/beak marks ……………………………………………………………………… 134 7.6.3. Cut marks ……………………………………………………………………………….. 137 7.6.4. Burnt marks …………………………………………………………………………….. 138 7.6.5. Other alterations ……………………………………………………………………….. 139 7.6.5.1. Tampling ……………………………………………………………………… 140 7.6.5.2. Rodent gnawing …………………………………………………………….. 141 7.6.5.3. ModifiCations by miCroorganisms …………………………………………. 142 7.6.5.4. Root marks …………………………………………………………………… 145 7.6.5.5. Weathering …………………………………………………………………… 148 7.6.5.6. Abrasion ……………………………………………………………………… 150 7.6.5.7. Dissolution …………………………………………………………………… 150 7.6.5.8. ConCretions ………………………………………………………………….. 151 7.6.5.9. Manganese oxide staining …………………………………………………. 151 iii 8. BALMA DEL GAI ……………………………………………………………………………………. 153 8.1. Location and arChaeologiCal background …………………………………………………... 153 8.2. StratigraphiC units ……………………………………………………………………………... 154 8.3. Chronology and material Culture …………………………………………………………….. 159 8.4. ReCovered remains ……………………………………………………………………………. 160 8.4.1. LithiC industry and habitation features ……………………………………………….. 160 8.4.2. Antler and bone industry ………………………………………………………………. 160 8.4.3. Floral remains ………………………………………………………………………….. 161 8.4.4. Faunal remains …………………………………………………………………………. 161 8.5. Analysis results ………………………………………………………………………………… 164 8.5.1. TaxonomiC determination …………………………………………………………….. 165 8.5.2. Age of death ……………………………………………………………………………. 165 8.5.3. AnatomiC representation and differential Conservation …………………………… 166 8.5.4. Breakage patterns and types of fraCtures …………………………………………… 169 8.5.5. Bone surfaCe alterations ………………………………………………………………. 175 8.5.5.1. Digestion ……………………………………………………………………… 175 8.5.5.2. Cut marks …………………………………………………………………….. 175 8.5.5.3. Tooth/beak marks ……………………………………………………………. 176 8.5.5.4. Burnt marks …………………………………………………………………. 179 8.5.5.5. Other alterations ……………………………………………………………. 180 8.6. DisCussion ……………………………………………………………………………………... 180 8.7. ConClusions ……………………………………………………………………………………. 195 9. COVA DE LA GUINEU …………………………………………………………………………….