Indication for social interaction during the Central European Late Upper Palaeolithic: Evidence from the Magdalenian site of Oelknitz, Structure 1 (Thuringia, Germany)

Quaternary International 252 (2012) 165e174

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint

Indication for social interaction during the Central European Late Upper Palaeolithic: Evidence from the Magdalenian site of Oelknitz, Structure 1 (Thuringia, Germany) Sabine Gaudzinski-Windheuser Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Forschungsbereich Altsteinzeit, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Schloss Monrepos, 56567 Neuwied, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Available online 2 February 2011

The current paper reports on the faunal assemblage from Structure 1 at the German Magdalenian site of Oelknitz. The composition of the fauna is characterised by a dominance of horse. The horses were exploited for meat and marrow. A strict spatial separation of carcass parts is obvious, also observed at other Magdalenian sites, where the evidence was interpreted in terms of social interaction and food sharing. This is discussed against the contextual background of the site of Oelknitz. It is suggested that the way in which Magdalenians interacted socially is independent of site function. Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Differences in subsistence strategies between Neanderthals and Anatomically Modern Humans have been the focus of intense debate for the last few decades. This debate helped to more clearly define the Neanderthal niche, as it outlined features of subsistence which are present in the Upper Palaeolithic record but not in the Middle Palaeolithic, such as a broad range of diet (Stiner, 2001), or aspects of strategies which were employed during both the Middle and the Upper Palaeolithic (Speth and Clark, 2006). In this context it has lately been stated that, based on archaeozoological studies of subsistence strategies, it is difficult to support the claim of fundamental difference in behavioural or cognitive capacities between Neanderthals and Anatomically Modern Humans (Speth and Tchernov, 2007). However, analysis of reindeer assemblages from the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic reveal differences in exploitation patterns. In comparison to the Middle Palaeolithic, Early Upper-, and Middle Upper Palaeolithic, during the Late Upper Palaeolithic a shift towards a more focussed exploitation of resources is obvious. It was suggested that the reduced pattern of carcass exploitation that can be demonstrated for the Late Upper Palaeolithic was influenced by or resulted from the complex settlement system organisation witnessed for this period (Gaudzinski-Windheuser and Niven, 2009). Against this background it should be noted that spatial organisation of faunal exploitation is evident for some Late Upper Palaeolithic sites. In this instance definite differences to faunal assemblages from earlier periods can be outlined.

E-mail address: [email protected]. 1040-6182/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2011.01.031

The current paper reports on the faunal assemblage from Structure 1 at the German Magdalenian site of Oelknitz. After an introduction of the site of Oelknitz the horse assemblage from Oelknitz Structure 1 will be analysed for its qualitative and quantitative composition as well as for the spatial distribution of the horse remains. The spatial distribution of horse bones and teeth reflects differing functional activity zones. This is discussed in the context of patterns of human social interaction.

2. The Magdalenian open site of Oelknitz and evidence from Oelknitz, Structure 1 The open site of Oelknitz (Thuringia, Germany) is among the most complex Magdalenian open air sites known to date. The site was excavated from 1957e1967 by Günther Behm-Blancke and Rudolf Feustel (Behm-Blancke, 1976; Musil, 1985; Feustel, 1989). In the course of excavation an area of ca. 850m2 was uncovered. AMS dates give ages about 12,670 and 12,760
110 uncal. BP (Hedges et al., 1998). Thousands of lithics and bones as well as organic tools, items of personal ornament and pieces of art were unearthed during excavation, together with large worked and unworked stone slabs. The archaeological record is characterised by seven areas of spatially distinct concentrations of finds (Structures 1e7), which result from at least two phases of occupation (Fig. 1) (Gaudzinski-Windheuser, in press). Two areas of disturbance from earlier excavations run through the site in a North-South direction. Comprehensive analysis of the site is currently underway (Gaudzinski-Windheuser, in press; Brasser, in press).

Fig. 1. Oelknitz. Spatial distribution of finds, pits (hatched) and hearths (indicated by the outline).

Fig. 2. Oelknitz. Structure 1 with indication of the documentation units (trench a, trench d, trench r). In the left illustration dark patches indicate soil-colouring.

S. Gaudzinski-Windheuser / Quaternary International 252 (2012) 165e174

167

Table 1 Large mammal and bird remains uncovered from Oelknitz, Structure 1. NISP, number of identified specimen per taxon, NISPjuv, number of identified subadult specimen per taxon; MNI, minimum number of individuals. Species

NISP

NISPjuv

MNI

Haliaeetus albicilla Cygnus columbianus bewickii Lepus sp. Ursus sp. Canis lupus Alopex lagopus Rangifer tarandus Bos/Bison Capra ibex Equus sp. Mammuthus primigenius

1 1 3 1 4 26 93 8 1 1402 1

e e e e e e e e e 78 e

1 1 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 21 1

Total

1541

78

35

Excavation at Oelknitz was conducted and documented following a grid system and comprised trenches, square-metre rows, metre squares and quarter metre squares. The spatial distribution of the archaeological material was recorded in two dimensions, accompanied by photo-documentation. Detailed threedimensional information is available only for finds uncovered in and around the evident structures such as pits and hearths. Structure 1 (Fig. 2) is located in the westernmost part of the site of Oelknitz. This spatial structure covers an area of 26 m2. It is represented by a scatter of ca. 5000 unmodified stones, bones and lithics only rarely exceeding 30 cm in length. The find material was deposited on sterile loess. For this structure an evident hearth was not documented, but traces of fire (charcoal and soil-colouration) were recorded in the southern part of the find scatter as well as directly to its north. Structure 1 was attributed to a single phase during the latest phase of occupation at the site of Oelknitz (Gaudzinski-Windheuser, in press). The archaeological material uncovered at Structure 1 comprised 1720 faunal remains. The assemblage is completed by 2187 lithics, among them 345 tools and 56 cores, worked bone (n ¼ 9), worked antler (n ¼ 13), engraved slate plaques (n ¼ 6), geodes (n ¼ 3) as well as unmodified stones. During excavation all bones and lithics larger than 1 cm were recovered. Nevertheless, finds smaller than 1 cm, e.g. small beads, were also frequently recorded. As the sediment was not sieved during excavation it cannot be excluded that the sample is biased in the size class smaller than 1 cm. During excavation the structure was documented according to three trenches (trenches a, d, and r). Trench a comprises the most northern part of the structure, while its southern annex was documented with trench r. Trench d separates both trenches from each other (Fig. 2).

Fig. 3. Oelknitz, Structure 1. Age profile for horses (M1 sup. and M3 sup.).

Fig. 4. Oelknitz, Structure 1. Age profiles for M1 sup. and M3 sup. indicating primedominated mortality (after Stiner 1990).

3. Material and methods The faunal assemblages uncovered from Structure 1 comprised 1539 taxonomically determined large mammal remains as well as two bird bones (Table 1). One-hundred and seventy nine bone fragments complete the assemblage. These fragments most probably come from horse though their exact anatomical position could not be determined. With an MNI of 21, horse clearly dominates the assemblage. Data sampling for the faunal assemblage from Oelknitz, Structure 1 followed standard methods in zooarchaeology and taphonomy (e.g. Binford, 1981; Lyman, 1994; Stiner, 1994; Gaudzinski, 1995; Gaudzinski-Windheuser, 2005; Lam and Pearson, 2005; Dominguez-Rodrigo et al., 2007; Kindler, 2007; Pickering et al.,

Fig. 5. Oelknitz, Structure 1. Sexual dimorphism for horse.

168

S. Gaudzinski-Windheuser / Quaternary International 252 (2012) 165e174

Table 2 Horse remains uncovered from Oelknitz, Structure 1. NISP, number of identified specimen per taxon; MNE sin., minimum number of left elements; MNE dext., minimum number of right elements; MAU, minimum animal unit. NISP Incisivi Premolar Molar P/M Isolated teeth/Mandible (I3 inf.) Isolated teeth/Maxilla (M3 sup.) Skull fragments Ribs Cervical Thoracal Lumbar Caudal Vertebrae fragments Sacrum Pelvis Scapula Humerus prox. Humerus dist. Radius prox. Radius dist. Ulna Metacarpus prox. Metacarpus dist. Femur prox. Femur dist. Patella Tibia prox. Tibia dist. Metatarsus prox. Metatarsus dist. Calcaneus Astragalus Mt4, MT2 Metapodial fragments Carpals/Tarsals Phalanx 1 Phalanx 2 Phalanx 3 Long bone fragments

MNE sin.

MNE indet.

MNE dext.

%-MAU

Skeletal element and Scansite Mandible cervical thoracal lumbar Pelvis

BMD2 BMD1 BMD1 BMD1 BMD1

Scapula Humerus prox. Humerus dist. Radius prox. Radius dist. Ulna Metacarpus prox. Metacarpus dist. Femur prox. Femur dist. Tibia prox. Tibia dist. Metatarsus prox. Metatarsus dist. Calcaneus Astragalus Phalanx 1 Phalanx 2 Phalanx 3 r¼

BMD2 BDM2 BDM2 BMD2 BMD2 BMD1 BMD2 BMD2 BMD2 BMD2 BMD2 BMD2 BMD2 BMD1 BMD1 BMD1 BMD2 BMD1 BDM1

78 51 78 52 49

(6

e

8)

73.7

13

(7

e

6)

68.4

e e e e

11 7 9 7

e e e e

16.5 4.0 15.7 4.9

5 5 4 7 6 7 2 5 e 3 6 7 3 10 7 7 9 8

e e e e e e e e 13 e e e e e e e e e

6 4 1 7 6 5 9 10 e 7 9 2 4 9 6 6 7 5

57.9 47.4 26.3 73.7 63.2 63.2 57.9 78.9 68.4 52.6 78.9 47.4 36.8 100 68.4 68.4 84.2 68.4

e e e

11 12 7

e e e

28.9 31.5 18.4

12 86 40 16 15 7 58 7 45 27 5 16 28 22 10 30 20 10 22 9 10 26 32 14 17 16 48 17 84 66 49 38 179

Table 3 Skeletal element, scansite (Lam et al., 1999, Fig. 1), density values (Lam et al., 1999, Table 1, BMD1 und BMD2) and %-MAU for horse. Density value Mean DN2eDn7 Mean CE1eCE2 Mean TH1eTH2 Mean LU1eLU3 Mean AC1;IS1,2; IL1,2;PU1,2 SP1, SP2, SP4 HU2 HU4 RA2 RA4 Mean UL1,UL2 MC2 MC2 FE3 FE5 TI2 TI4 MR2 Mean MR4-MR6 Mean CA1eCA4 AS1eAS2 P12 P22eP21 P31

0.95 0.65 0.4 0.44 0.5 1.01 0.33 1.05 1.04 1 0.54 1.03 0.71 0.99 0.51 0.77 1.05 1.07 0.63 0.6 0.65 1.02 0.6 0.57

%-MAU for horse 73.6 16.5 4.0 15.7 57.9 47.4 26.3 73.7 63.2 63.2 57.9 78.9 68.4 52.6 78.9 36.8 100 68.4 68.4 84.2 68.4 28.9 31.5 18.4 0.47784974

2007; Lyman, 2008). As the assemblage was already uncovered during the 1950s and 1960s, the biostratonomic sequence of the thanatocoenose at Oelknitz could not be tested by actualistic studies (Gaudzinski-Windheuser et al., 2010). Bones were identified to specimen and taxon by the author using the osteological collections at the Römisch Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Palaeolithic Research Unit and the Senckenberg Museum, Frankfurt. Epiphyseal fusion, tooth wear patterns and biometric data were documented to provide population data and give insight into the modes and season of death. Skeletal elements were quantified according to the following criteria: the number of identified specimens (NISP), the minimum number of individual animals (MNI), the minimum number of skeletal elements (MNE), and the minimum number of animal units (MAU) (Binford, 1981; Lyman, 1994). When calculating the MNI, the

Fig. 6. Oelknitz, Structure 1. Skeletal element representation for horse. MAU, minimum animal unit.

S. Gaudzinski-Windheuser / Quaternary International 252 (2012) 165e174

169

Fig. 7. Oelknitz, Structure 1. Bone density vs. %-MAU for horse.

Fig. 8. Oelknitz, Structure 1. Humerus showing cut-marks indicated by the arrow and traces of marrow processing.

most common anatomical part of a particular taxon served as the basis for estimation, after having taken into account body side, age, and sex. The MNE was obtained by counting the epiphyses of a bone per body side, along with long bone shaft fragments whose anatomical position could be exactly determined (Lam et al., 1998). When calculating the MAU, the number of documented skeletal elements was divided by the frequency in which the particular bone occurs in a skeleton (Binford, 1984). As differential bone preservation due to post-depositional processes can be related to mineral density (g/cm3), the skeletal element representation for horse was analysed with the use of density data (Lam et al., 1999). Bones with low mineral density are more easily affected by density-mediated attrition than highdensity bones. Skeletal elements abundance is frequently used in order to evaluate economic utility at a site. The frequency of horse remains were correlated with “Utility Indices” (Outram and Rowley-Conwy, 1998) obtained for horse. The study also included observations on abiotic and biotic bone surface modifications. For the analysis of the bone surface modifications, a stereo light microscope with a magnification of 10e40 was used. Analyses of these data enable to define the role of hominins and carnivores in the formation of the assemblage and will enable to reconstruct exploitation sequences for nutritional and raw-material resources. Among the abiotic surface modifications weathering, abrasion but also bone breakage patterns were documented (Lyman, 1994). In the present study bone modifications described by Behrensmeyer (1978) to define five stages of weathering were used to illustrate bone preservation in Oelknitz. Preservation stage 1 in this study describes unweathered bone, preservation stage 2 corresponds to Behrensmeyer’s descriptions for weathering stages 2 and 3, and finally preservation stage 3 corresponds to Behrensmeyer’s descriptions for weathering stage 4. Bone surface modifications caused by animals and hominins are among the biotically induced surface modifications analysed in this study. Anthropogenic cut- and percussion marks were recorded according to criteria defined by Binford (1981), Shipman (1981, 1986), and Shipman and Rose (1983). Semi-circular notches, sometimes accompanied by intentional or unintentional retouch, were defined as impact marks according to Blumenschine and Selvaggio (1988). Bone damage caused by animals and hominins was documented according to the anatomical position.

170

S. Gaudzinski-Windheuser / Quaternary International 252 (2012) 165e174

Fig. 9. Oelknitz, Structure 1. M2 sup., lingual. Detail shows cut-marks in 11x magnification.

4. Results 4.1. Horse assemblage from Oelknitz, Structure 1 Horse remains dominate the faunal assemblage uncovered from Oelknitz, Structure 1. A total of 1402 faunal remains indicate a minimum number of 21 horse individuals. The first phalanges point to a minimum of 15 individuals older than 15 months. Bones and teeth from at least 6 animals younger than 15 months, including a neonate and a foetal individual, can additionally be calculated. For an assessment of the population structure of horse uncovered from Structure 1 crown height measurements for M3 sup. (n ¼ 13) and M1 sup. (n ¼ 11) were undertaken. Crown heights were measured according to Klein and Cruz-Uribe (1984) and Table 4 Horse remains uncovered from Oelknitz, Structure 1. NISP, number of identified specimen per taxon, MAU, minimum animal unit and Standardized Food Utility Index (S)FUI for horses (Outram and Rowley-Conwy, 1998, Table 6).

Mandible Maxilla Cervical Thoracal Lumbar Pelvis Scapula Humerus prox. Humerus dist. Radius prox. Radius dist. Metacarpus prox. Metacarpus dist. Femur prox. Femur dist. Tibia prox. Tibia dist. Metatarsus prox. Metatarsus dist. Calcaneus Astragalus Phalanx 1 Phalanx 2 Phalanx 3 r

NISP

%-MAU

(S) FUI

49 13 40 16 15 45 27 5 16 28 22 30 20 10 22 10 26 32 14 17 16 66 49 38

73.7 68.4 16.5 4 15.7 57.9 47.4 26.3 73.7 63.2 63.2 78.9 68.4 52.6 78.9 36.8 100 68.4 68.4 84.2 68.4 28.9 31.5 18.4

7.4 17.9 45.2 100 22.4 53 15 15 14.1 8.7 6 1.6 0.7 45.4 45.4 25.3 15.2 3.8 1.8 7.6 7.6 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.37983595

correlated with crown heights of a living population (Levine, 1982). Eruption for M1 sup. was stipulated to 12 months and for M3 sup. to 36 months with a maximum life expectancy of 20 years (Fig. 3). The age profile points to prime-dominated mortality according to Stiner (1990), which could be interpreted in terms of a selective choice of horses by humans (Fig. 4) (but see also Enloe and Turner, 2006). This selective preference is also underlined by observations on the distribution of the sexes within the assemblage. Sexual dimorphism is only weakly developed in modern horses. Morphology of the pelvis and the presence/absence of canine teeth could potentially support the analysis of the population structure Table 5 Qualitative and qualitative composition of horse remains, trench a. NISP, number of identified specimen per taxon; MNE sin., minimum number of left elements; MNE dext., minimum number of right elements; MAU, minimum animal unit.

Mandible (I3 inf.) Maxilla (M3 sup.) cervical thoracal lumbar caudal Pelvis Scapula Humerus prox.l Humerus dist. Radius prox. Radius dist. Ulna Metacarpus prox. Metacarpus dist. Femur prox. Femur dist. Patella Tibia prox. Tibia dist. Metatarsus prox. Metatarsus dist. Calcaneus Astragalus Phalanx 1 Phalanx 2 Phalanx 3

NISP

MNE sin.

MNE indet.

MNE dext.

%-MAU

12

8

e

4

75.0

4

2

e

2

25.0

23 7 8 3 28 22 1 10 17 11 9 8 5 9 17 5 9 18 17 6 11 10 22 28

e e e e e 5 e 5 4 8 2 3 2 6 5 4 3 8 6 2 7 6 e 4 e

9 3 4 3 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 16 e 16

e e e e 5 4 1 4 6 3 7 3 2 3 7 1 3 8 6 3 3 4 e 7 e

16.0 2.0 8.2 2.5 31.3 56.3 6.3 56.3 62.5 68.8 56.3 37.5 25 56.3 75 31.3 37.5 100 75.0 31.3 62.5 62.5 50.0 34.4 50.0

S. Gaudzinski-Windheuser / Quaternary International 252 (2012) 165e174 Table 6 Qualitative and quantitative composition of horse remains, trench d. NISP, number of identified specimen per taxon; MNE sin., minimum number of left elements; MNE dext., minimum number of right elements; MAU, minimum animal unit.

Mandible Maxilla (P3 sup.) Cervical Thoracal Lumbar Caudal Pelvis Scapula Humerus prox. Humerus dist. Radius prox. Radius dist. Metacarpus prox. Metacarpus dist. Femur prox. Femur dist. Patella Tibia dist. Metatarsus prox. Metatarsus dist. Calcaneus Astragalus Phalanx 1 Phalanx 2 Phalanx 3

NISP

MNE sin.

MNE indet.

MNE dext.

%-MAU

22 4

3 2

e e

3 2

48.0 32.0

12 7 7 2 16 4 3 5 10 9 16 6 1 3 3 6 9 8 4 5 30 8 11

e e e e 1 1 3 2 2 4 2 4

2 3 6 2 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 25 7 3

e e e e 1 1 e 3 4 3 5 1 1 2 1 3 2 3 4 2 e e e

4.5 2.6 13.3 2.1 16.0 16.0 24.0 40.0 48.0 56.0 56.0 40.0 8.0 24.0

1 2 2 4 5 e 1 e e e

40.0 48.0 64.0 32.0 24.0 100 28.0 12.0

(Sisson and Grossman, 1953). As the assemblage from Structure 1 lacks complete pelves and the canines were often artificially cut from the skulls, as documented from other structures at Oelknitz (Brasser, in press), both characteristics are not suitable for analysis here. Dive and Eisenmann (1991) observed that the greatest length of phalanx 1 is often larger in males than in females. For the assemblage from Structure 1 the greatest length and breadth for 17 complete anterior phalanges from adult individuals were measured in addition to a specimen from a juvenile individual (Fig. 5). The Table 7 Qualitative and quantitative composition of horse remains, trench r. NISP, number of identified specimen per taxon; MNE sin., minimum number of left elements; MNE dext., minimum number of right elements; MAU, minimum animal unit.

Mandible (M3 inf.) Maxilla (M1 sup.) thoracal caudal Pelvis Scapula Humerus prox. Humerus dist. Radius prox. Radius dist. Metacarpus prox. Metacarpus dist. Femur prox. Femur dist. Patella Tibia prox. Tibia dist. Metatarsus prox. Metatarsus dist. Calcaneus Astragalus Phalanx 1 Phalanx 2 Phalanx 3

NISP

MNE sin.

MNE indet.

MNE dext.

%-MAU

3

3

e

e

50.0

4

1

e

3

66.6

3 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 6 7 2 2 1 1 2 6 e 2 1 14 4 11

e e e e 1 e 1 2 2 e 2 1 1 e 2 2 e 2 1 e e e

3 2 1 1 e e e e

e e e e e 1 e e 4 e e 1 e 1 e 2 e e e e e

5.5 4.4 16.6 16.6 16.6 16.6 16.6 33.3 100 66.6 33.3 33.3 16.6 16.6 33.3 66.6 e 33.3 16.6 25.0 18.8 18.8

4 e e e e e e e e 4 3 3

171

measurements clearly demonstrate that the assemblage is composed of larger (n ¼ 11) and smaller (n ¼ 4) phalanges which might represent males and females and/or individuals from varying populations. From the analysis of the age structure and sex composition it can generally be concluded that the horse assemblage deposited in Structure 1 most probably results from a selective prey exploitation of different horse populations. The qualitative and quantitative composition of the horse remains is listed in Table 2 and illustrated in Fig. 6. The majority of the skeletal elements show %-MAU values well over 50%. In contrast, skull, rump, the proximal humerus and the proximal tibia are clearly underrepresented. In order to test whether the observed skeletal element representation results from bone density-mediated destruction, a statistical correlation between the observed %-MAU values for horse and bone density values was established (Table 3 and Fig. 7). A significant correlation between the quantitative bone representation and bone density could not be observed (r ¼ 0.47). However it seems highly plausible to suggest depositional bone destruction and the activity of carnivores as agents responsible to bone loss. Bone preservation is quite inhomogeneous in Structure 1. A total of 3.1% of the bones showed excellent preservation (preservation stage 1). For the majority on the skeletal elements preservation stage 2 (54.9%) and 3 (42%) were documented. Thirty-one horse remains displayed carnivore activity. Almost half of these traces (45.1%) were recorded for the humerus, the proximal end of which is underrepresented in the assemblage. The same is true for the proximal tibia and the patella for which 6.5% of all carnivore gnawing marks were documented. A total of 201 (14.3%) horse remains show traces of anthropic modification. Cut-marks were observed on the bones as well as traces of marrow processing (Fig. 8). These traces were documented on all qualitatively represented elements of the horse skeleton (Gaudzinski-Windheuser, in press). All stages of the butchering sequence could be reconstructed from the analysis of the anatomical position of cut-marks, including the skinning of the animals. Cutmarks were also documented on the lingual face of mainly maxillary teeth (Fig. 9) which could attest to the exploitation of the palatinate. The skeletal element representation for horse was considered against the Standardized Food Utility Index ((S)FUI) obtained for horse (Outram and Rowley-Conwy, 1998) (Table 4). A statistically significant correlation between the quantitative bone representation and their nutritional value could not be observed as is expressed in r ¼ 0.37. It can be concluded that bone destruction did not significantly selectively affect the less dense parts of the horse skeleton. 4.2. Spatial distribution of the horse remains In order to test whether the archaeological record reflects a random spatial distribution or follows a particular anthropogenic spatial patterning the spatial distribution of horse remains was analysed. During excavation at Oelknitz, Structure 1 was documented according to three trenches covering 23 m2 of a total spatial extension of 26 m2 (compare Fig. 2). Trench a encompasses an area of ca. 10 m2 in the northern part of Structure 1. With trench r the most southern 3 m2 of the structure were recorded. Both trenches are separated by trench d, encompassing a further 10 m2 of the record. From a total of 1402 horse remains a number of 1260 elements could be attributed to the different trenches. Six hundred and sixtyfour elements including 39 (5.8%) bones of subadult individuals and 103 elements (15.5%) with traces of butchery were uncovered from trench a. For trench d 466 elements were recorded, among them 26

Fig. 10. Oelknitz, Structure 1. Qualitative and quantitative composition of horse remains for trenches a, d and r. MAU, Minimum animal unit. Table 8 Qualitative and quantitative composition of horse remains in trench d and (S)FUI values for horse (after Outram and Rowley-Conwy, 1998, Table 6). MAU, minimum animal unit.

Mandible Maxilla cervical thoracal lumbar Pelvis Scapula Humerus prox. Humerus dist. Radius prox. Radius dist. Metacarpus prox. Metacarpus dist. Femur prox. Femur dist. Tibia prox. Tibia dist. Metatarsus prox. Metatarsus dist. Phalanx 1 Phalanx 2 Phalanx 3 r

%-MAU trench d

(S)FUI

48 32 4.5 2.6 13.3 16 16 24 40 48 56 56 40 8 24 0 40 48 64 100 28 12

7.4 17.9 45.2 100 22.4 53 15 15 14.1 8.7 6 1.6 0.7 45.4 45.4 25.3 15.2 3.8 1.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.61

(5.5%) bones from subadult individuals and 64 (13.7%) remains attesting to horse butchering. Finally 130 horse remains, among them 10 (7.6%) elements from subadults and 17 (13.0%) butchery remains, were recorded for trench r. Bone preservation in terms of fragmentation is similar for the different trenches. The average fragment length is 0.43 cm for trench a, 0.41 cm for trench d and 0.39 cm for trench r. In addition the minimum number of individuals calculated for the different trenches is also similarly represented. For trench a, a minimum number of eight individuals was calculated. The remains uncovered from trench d point to a minimum number of 7 individuals. For the small trench r, covering only 3 m2, a minimum of 4 individuals was documented. For the 142 faunal elements without spatial provenance a further MNI of 2 can be calculated. Major differences in the relative quantitative spatial distribution of horse remains are not obvious, as Structure 1 is characterised by a relatively homogeneous overall distribution of bones and teeth. The same is true for elements from subadult individuals and elements showing traces of butchery. The proportion of subadult horse remains and elements with traces of butchery in the different trenches displays the overall composition of the horse assemblage already outlined above. Therefore it is striking that the qualitative composition of the horse remains reveals distinct differences in their spatial

Fig. 11. Oelknitz, Structure 1. %-MAU (trench d) for horse vs. the standardized food utility index (S)FUI (after Outram and Rowley-Conwy, 1998, Table 6).

S. Gaudzinski-Windheuser / Quaternary International 252 (2012) 165e174

distribution (Tables 5e7, Fig. 10). It was already outlined that their overall qualitative composition is characterised by the underrepresentation of particular elements and that carnivore activity is a plausible agent responsible here. This particular trend in the skeletal element representation can be traced in the overall assemblage composition for the different trenches. However, for trench a (Table 5, Fig. 10) a dominance of elements of the jaw and the hind leg including pelvis, femur, tibia, astragalus, calcaneus and the proximal metatarsus is apparent when comparing the distribution of elements for the different trenches. Moreover the distinct under-representation of the metacarpus and the distal metatarsus is obvious. For trench d the distinct dominance of the distal metatarsus and the phalanx 1 is striking (Table 6, Fig. 10). Finally for trench r elements of the skull and the metacarpus are frequently preserved (Table 7, Fig. 10). 5. Conclusion and discussion For the spatial distribution of horse remains distinct differences are evident for Oelknitz, Structure 1. The evidence suggests that the complete hind leg without the major part of the autopodium was primarily exploited in the northern part of Structure 1 (trench a). The autopodium was most probably separated from the hind leg by smashing the bone, as is indicated by the differing spatial distribution for proximal and distal metatarsi. Processing of the distal metatarsus, phalanx 1 and skulls was among the major activities in the centre of the structure (trench d). The pattern of spatial distribution might reflect different activity zones during the process of horse exploitation. In the northern part of the structure primary disarticulation of the hind leg and defleshing can be assumed to have taken place, whereas in the centre of the structure the frequent occurrence of the autopodium and the skull might indicate secondary carcass exploitation, i.e. the exploitation of tendons and hide. The supposed secondary processing of horse carcasses at the centre of Structure 1 (trench d) was tested by a correlation of the quantitative skeletal element representation with the standardized food utility index ((S)FUI) (Outram and Rowley-Conwy, 1998). It would be expected to find a negative correlation here. Analysis in fact revealed a statistically relevant negative correlation (r¼ 0.61, r2 ¼ 0.64) between the two variables (Table 8, Fig. 11). It can be concluded that the spatial distribution of horse elements represents differing functional activity zones within Structure 1. The overall analysis of the site of Oelknitz is hampered by the incomplete spatial documentation of the site and it can be assumed that the size of trenches a, d and r, according to which Structure 1 was documented, was randomly chosen. Against this background it is quite astonishing that a spatially distinct distribution of horse remains can still be recognized. This points to a very strict separation of the differing activities in Structure 1. A further perspective becomes apparent when comparing the evidence from Oelknitz with other Magdalenian sites where a spatially distinct spatial distribution of skeletal elements was observed as e.g. at the site of Pincevent in the Paris Basin (Enloe, 2003a). Against the background of ethnoarchaeological studies, (e.g. Yellen, 1977; Binford, 1984) demonstrating that the spatial distribution of animal carcass parts can result from human food sharing practices, the spatial distribution of reindeer remains at Pincevent serves interpretations about individual acts of social/ economic interaction (Enloe, 2003a). Qualitative and quantitative plotting of refitting of skeletal elements of particular reindeer individuals was employed to demonstrate the circulation of reindeer carcass parts in food distribution. Upper elements of the limbs that carry substantial quantities of meat were often found spatially distributed over the site in association with the various hearths, interpreted as

173

households. Metapodials and heads, valuable for their marrow portion show a much more restricted pattern of spatial distribution. The latter elements have often been reported in the ethnographic literature as the hunter’s portion. According to this perspective predictions about differing patterns of food sharing are made for Pincevent. The evidence is interpreted in terms of a complex social and economic interaction at the site (Enloe, 2003a). It is quite striking that at Oelknitz Structure 1 we trace a pattern quite similar to that outlined for the overall spatial distribution of reindeer remains at Pincevent. For Structure 1 it was argued that the overall spatial distribution of finds probably results from a circular arrangement of large stone blocks that probably restricted the spatial radiation of lithics, bones and unmodified stones while the structure was in use. As Structure 1 differs distinctively from other structures at Oelknitz, in that elements and especially unmodified stone blocks larger than 30 cm were not uncovered, the recycling of the proposed original outer stone circle for the construction of other structures was assumed. Other structures at Oelknitz (e.g. Structure 3) (Fig. 1) are characterized by distinct activity zones around a central hearth. These activity zones can be identified by the analysis of finds associated with numerous pits. The central area around the hearths is often void of find material. For Structures 2 and 3, e.g., only some lithics and bones were found entangled between larger stone slabs that encircle posthole stands. The inner part of Structure 4 even lacks bones entirely. This evidence justifies an interpretation of many of the structures uncovered at Oelknitz in terms of dwelling structures, i.e. households. In comparison the character of Structure 1 is quite different in that a central hearth, post-hole stands and other pit structures as well as a clear spatial patterning of material groups within the structure could not be observed. Thus Structure 1 was not interpreted in terms of a dwelling structure (i.e. household) but in terms of a spatially distinct activity area that obviously primarily served the exploitation of horses (Gaudzinski-Windheuser, in press). The overall archaeological evidence from Oelknitz (Fig. 1) varies from the evidence at Pincevent. It seems plausible to suggest that both sites might have served different purposes in Magdalenian land use. Pincevent, as well as other sites in the Paris Basin, are characterised by seasonally redundant reindeer hunting and carcass exploitation. It was outlined that, among other aspects, the pattern of carcass exploitation in the Paris Basin shows considerable variation compared to evidence from the Perigord (Enloe, 2003b), illustrating that variation in exploitation patterns must be expected. Anyhow, since at Oelknitz Structure 1 we trace a pattern quite similar to that outlined for the overall spatial distribution of reindeer remains from Pincevent we might have an indication here that the way in which Magdalenians interacted socially is independent of site function. This hypothesis can easily be tested when comprehensive analysis of other Magdalenian sites providing evidence for spatially distinct distributions of faunal remains is completed (e.g. Gönnersdorf (Street and Turner, in press) and Andernach, Germany). Acknowledgements The author would like to thank Martin Street (Palaeolithic Research Unit, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Germany) for numerous discussions and English editing of the text. I thank an unknown reviewer for commenting on the paper. Special thanks goes to Regina Hecht (Palaeolithic Research Unit, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Germany) for producing the figures. References Behm-Blancke, G., 1976. Das jungpaläolithische Zeltlager von Oelknitz bei Jena. Ausgrabungen und Funde 21, 30e32.

174

S. Gaudzinski-Windheuser / Quaternary International 252 (2012) 165e174

Behrensmeyer, A.K., 1978. Behrensmeyer, taphonomic and ecological information from bone weathering. Palaeobiology 4, 150e162. Binford, L.R., 1981. Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myth. Academic Press, New York. Binford, L.R., 1984. Faunal Remains From Klasies River Mouth. Academic Press, Orlando. Blumenschine, R.J., Selvaggio, M.M., 1988. Percussion marks on bone surfaces as a new diagnostic of hominid behaviour. Nature 333, 763e765. Brasser, M., Die Struktur 5 der Magdalénien-Fundstelle Oelknitz - Befundanalyse, faunistische und lithische Untersuchungen zum Jungpaläolithikum in Thüringen. Alt-Thüringen 42, in press. Dive, J., Eisenmann, V., 1991. Identification and discrimination of first phalanges from Pleistocene and Modern Equus, wild and domestic. In: Meadow, R.H., Uerpmann, H.P. (Eds.), Equids in The Ancient World. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients. Reihe A, Wiesbaden, pp. 278e333. Dominguez-Rodrigo, M., Egeland, C.P., Barba, R., 2007. Deconstructing Olduvai: A Thaphonomic Study of the Bed I Sites. Springer, New York. Enloe, J.G., 2003a. Food sharing past and present: archaeological evidence for economic and social interactions. Before Farming 1, 1e23. Enloe, J.G., 2003b. Acquisition and processing of reindeer in the Paris Basin. In: Costamagno, S., Laroulandie, V. (Eds.), Mode de vie au Magdalénien: Apports de l’archéozoologie/Zoological insights into Magdalanian lifeways. Acts of the XIVth U.I.S.P.P. Congress, University of Liège, Belgium, 2e8th September 2001. Colloque/Symposium 6.4. British Archaeological Reports, International Series, vol. 1144, pp. 23e31. Enloe, J.G., Turner, E., 2006. Methodological problems and biases in age determinations: a view from the Magdalenian. In: Ruscillo, D. (Ed.), Recent Advances in Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones. Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the International Council of Archaeozoology (ICAZ), Durham, August 2002. Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 129e144. Feustel, R., 1989. Oelknitz, Ot. von Rothenstein, Kr. Jena (Bez. Gera). In: Herrmann, J. (Ed.), Archäologie in der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart, pp. 379e380. Gaudzinski, S., 1995. Wallertheim revisited: a re-analysis of the fauna from the Middle Palaeolithic Site of Wallertheim (Rheinhessen/Germany). Journal of Archaeological Science 22, 51e66. Gaudzinski-Windheuser, S., 2005. Subsistenzstrategien Frühpleistozäner Hominiden in Eurasien. Taphonomische Faunenbetrachtungen der Fundstellen der Ubeidiya Formation (Israel). Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums. Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn. Gaudzinski-Windheuser, S., Einblicke in spätjungpaläolithisches Siedlungswesen. Die Fundstelle Oelknitz (Thüringen, Deutschland). Die Siedlungsstrukturen 1e3. Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz. Habelt, Mainz & Bonn, in press. Gaudzinski-Windheuser, S., Niven, L., 2009. Hominin subsistence patterns during the Middle and Late paleolithic in Northwestern Europe. In: Hublin, J.J., Richards, M.P. (Eds.), The Evolution of Hominin Diets. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 99e111. Gaudzinski-Windheuser, S., Kindler, L., Rabinovich, R., Goren-Inbar, N., 2010. Testing heterogeneity in faunal assemblages from archaeological sites. Tumbling and trampling experiments at the Early-Middle Pleistocene site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov (Israel). Journal of Archaeological Science 37, 3170e3190. Hedges, R.E.M., Pettitt, P.B., Bronk Ramsey, C., van Klinken, G.J.,1998. Radiocarbon dates from the Oxford AMS system: archaeometry datelist 25. Archaeometry 40 (1), 227e239. Kindler, L., 2007. Die Rolle von Raubtieren in der Einnischung und Subsistenz jungpleistozäner Neandertaler e Archäozoologie und Taphonomie der

mittelpaläolithischen Fauna aus der Balver Höhle (Westfalen). Unpublished Dissertation, Johannes Gutenberg Universität, Mainz. Klein, R.G., Cruz-Uribe, K., 1984. The Analysis of Animal Bones from Archeological Sites. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago/London. Lam, Y.M., Chen, X., Marean, C.W., Frey, C.J., 1998. Bone density and long bone representation in archaeological faunas: comparing results from CT and photon densiometry. Journal of Archaeological Science 25, 559e570. Lam, Y.M., Chen, X., Pearson, O.M., 1999. Intertaxonomic variability in patterns of bone density and the differential representation of bovid, cervid and equid elements in the archaeological record. American Antiquity 64, 343e362. Lam, Y.M., Pearson, O.M., 2005. Bone density studies and the interpretation of the faunal record. Evolutionary Anthropology 14 (3), 99e108. Levine, M., 1982. The use of crown height measurement and eruption-wear sequences to age horse teeth. In: Wilson, B., Grigson, C., Payne, S. (Eds.), Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. British Archaeological Reports, British Series, vol. 109, pp. 223e250. Lyman, R.L., 1994. Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Lyman, R.L., 2008. Quantitative Paleozoology. Cambridge University Press, New York. Musil, R., 1985. Die Fauna der Magdalénien-Siedlung Oelknitz. In: Weimarer Monographien zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte, vol. 17. Weimar. Outram, A., Rowley-Conwy, P., 1998. Meat and marrow utility indices for horse (Equus). Journal of Archaeological Science 25, 839e849. Pickering, R., Hancox, P.J., Lee-Thorp, J.A., Grün, R., Mortimer, G.A., McCulloch, M., Berger, L.R., 2007. Stratigraphy, UeTh chronology, and paleoenvironments at Gladysvale Cave: insights into the climatic control of South African homininbearing cave deposits. Journal of Human Evolution 53, 602e619. Shipman, P., 1981. Applications of scanning electron microscopy to taphonomic problems. Annals New York Academy of Sciences 376, 357e386. Shipman, P., 1986. Studies of hominid-faunal interactions at Olduvai Gorge. Journal of Human Evolution 15, 691e706. Shipman, P., Rose, J., 1983. Early hominid hunting, butchering, and carcass-processing behaviors: approaches to the fossil record. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 2, 57e98. Sisson, S., Grossman, J.D., 1953. The Anatomy of Domestic Animals. W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia. Speth, J.D., Clark, J.L., 2006. Hunting and overhunting in the Levantine late Middle Palaeolithic. Before Farming 3, 1e42. Speth, J.D., Tchernov, E., 2007. The Middle Paleolithic Occupations at Kebara Cave. A faunal perspective. In: Bar-Yosef, O., Meignen, L. (Eds.), Kebara Cave, Mt. Carmel, Israel. The Middle and Upper Paleolithic Archaeology. Part I. Peabody. American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin, vol. 49. Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 165e260. Stiner, M.C., 1990. The use of mortality patterns in archaeological studies of hominid predatory adaptations. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 9, 305e351. Stiner, M.C., 1994. Honor Among Thieves: A Zooarchaeological study of Neandertal Ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Stiner, M.C., 2001. Thirty years on the “broad spectrum revolution” and paleolithic demography. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA (Washington) 98 (13), 6993e6996. Street, M., Turner, E., The Faunal Remains from Gönnersdorf. Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz. Habelt, Mainz & Bonn, in press. Yellen, J.E., 1977. Archaeological approaches to the present. Models for Reconstructing The Past. Academic Press, New York, San Francisco.