Taphonomic analysis of the Lingjing fauna and the first report of a Middle Paleolithic kill-butchery site in North China

Abstract

More than ten thousand bone fragments were recovered from the Lingjing site, Henan Province, during 2005 and 2006. A taphonomic analysis of the faunal remains strongly indicates that hominids have a dominant role in the accumulation and modification of the assemblage. Based on the taphonomic and zooarcheological characteristics of the animal remains, including species richness, mortality patterns, skeletal element profiles, and bone surface-modifications, and on the local ecology, we suggest that the Lingjing site is a Middle Paleolithic kill-butchery site rather than a home base for early humans. The presence of large numbers of stone artifacts may therefore signify a strong sense of planning and farsightedness in the subsistence strategies of early human groups. The Lingjing site is presently the only taphonomically-identified, Middle Paleolithic kill-butchery site known in North China.Lingjing site, Paleolithic, taphonomy, zooarcheology, kill-butchery site Citation:Zhang S Q, Gao X, Zhang Y, et al. Taphonomic analysis of the Lingjing fauna and the first report of a Middle Paleolithic kill-butchery site in North China.

Formation processes at the early Late Pleistocene archaic human site of Lingjing, China

“…The modification and use of bone materials as tools are also confirmed at Lingjing by a preliminary microwear analysis, which suggests that these artifacts were used for boring, piercing and scraping (Li and Shen, 2010). In addition, the large number of fragmentary bones in the faunal assemblage suggests humans were accessing the marrow (Zhang et al, 2011a). Diverse types of stone artifacts, as shown both in the previous (Li et al, 2007(Li et al, , 2010 and current excavated samples (Table 1), indicate both the manufacture and probable use of stone tools on-site.…”

“…Zooarchaeological analysis of the fauna from previous excavations indicates that Equus caballus and Bos primigenius are both dominant species. Based on a study of the mortality structure of these two species, adult individuals were preferentially hunted by humans (Zhang et al, 2009(Zhang et al, , 2011aLi et al, 2011). Bones with cut marks account for approximately 13% of the entire faunal sample, with 98.5% of these marks located on the midshafts of long bones.…”

Discovery of circa 115,000-year-old bone retouchers at Lingjing, Henan, China

“…Hyena remains are signalled in the faunal spectrum [ 47 ] and hyena coprolites were found [ 64 , 65 ]. The low percentage of faunal remains modified by carnivores, the high cranial-postcranial ratio, the high percentage of cut-marked bones (see below), the presence of complete epiphysis, and the mortality profile dominated by prime adults [ 51 ] suggest that hyenas played a marginal role in the accumulation of the bone assemblage, and only had a secondary access to carcasses [ 66 ].…”

External auditory exostoses in the Xuchang and Xujiayao human remains: Patterns and implications among eastern Eurasian Middle and Late Pleistocene crania

“…zibetha are represented at Xuchang (including coprolites of the first and canine marks on faunal remains), and Canis lupus and Panthera cf. tigris were present at Xujiayao [ 21 , 22 , 83 , 84 ]. In addition, both of these sites preserve abundant remains of a suite of large and potentially dangerous herbivores, including Palaeoloxodon sp., Coelodonta antiquitatis , Dicerorhinus mercki , Equus ferus , E .…”

“…The Xuchang 1 and 2 crania were excavated in situ in Layer 11 of the Lingjing site in Xuchang county, Henan Province, northern China (34° 04’ 08.6” N, 113° 40’ 47.5” E) between 2007 and 2014 [ 19 ]. Layer 11 has yielded a diverse late Middle to early Late Pleistocene macromammalian fauna [ 21 , 22 ], a Middle Paleolithic lithic and bone assemblage [ 23 , 24 ], and a consistent series of optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dates placing Layer 11 between 125,000 and 105,000 years ago [ 19 ]. The overlying Layers 10 and 9 have provided OSL determinations between 100,000 and 90,000 years ago, substantiating the early MIS 5 (MIS 5e or 5d) age of the human crania.…”