Charognage ou chasse ?

Les premiers humains étaient-ils plutôt chasseurs ou plutôt charognards ? La question est très débattue depuis 1981 et la parution du livre de Lewis Binford, Bones : ancient men and modern myths. La thèse de Binford était que la chasse aux grands animaux n’apparaît chez les humains qu’au début de la dernière période glaciaire (vers -100 000 ans), et que jusque-là, les humains étaient surtout des charognards passifs (pour la différence entre charognage passif et actif, voir mon article C’est une bonne situation, ça, charognard ? [Article]). Bien que de nombreuses publications aient depuis suggéré que les humains pratiquaient déjà soit le charognage actif, soit la chasse aux grands animaux, depuis en gros 2 millions d’années, avec une forte présomption sur la chasse après -2 millions d’années et l’apparition d’Homo erectus, Binford est encore convoqué régulièrement contre l’idée d’une humanité chasseuse de longue date.

Synthèses de la controverse

–

Pas un article de synthèse en soi, mais la (longue) introduction donne une idée du foisonnement et de la complexité de la question, ainsi que de la difficulté de donner des réponses précises, notamment pour les périodes les plus anciennes.

A taphonomic analysis of PTK (Bed I, Olduvai Gorge) and its bearing on the interpretation of the dietary and eco-spatial behaviors of early humans [Texte]
Organista et al.
Quaternary Sciences, 2023

The abundance of juvenile individuals extends our understanding, as in Kanjera (Kenya), about the hunting skills of early Homo sensu lato. The increasing number of sites, where bulk defleshing of small and medium-sized carcasses took place is underscoring the importance of meat in the diets of some of the early hominins, and their patterned use of the space for food processing and consumption.

–

Using machine learning on new feature sets extracted from 3D models of broken animal bones to classify fragments according to break agent [PDF]
Yeddzi-Woodley et al.
Arxiv.org, 2022

–

The zooarchaeology and paleoecology of early hominin scavenging [PDF]
Briana L. Pobiner
Evolutionary anthropology, 2020

–

–

Shoot first, ask questions later: Interpretative narratives of Neanderthal hunting [Texte]
White et al.
Quaternary Science Reviews, 2016

This maturing picture builds on two decades of research that saw dramatic changes in our appreciation of Neanderthal hunting. After many years of being characterised as predominantly, if not obligate, scavengers (e.g. Binford, 1981, Binford, 1984, Binford, 1985, Stiner, 1991, Stiner, 1994), Neanderthals have come to be seen as capable hunters, even top-level carnivores, possessing similar capabilities in the hunting realm as Homo sapiens. As noted by Gaudzinski-Windheuser and Kindler (2012, 60), the discovery of preserved wooden spears at the late Middle Pleistocene site of Schöningen (Germany) effectively ended a research paradigm in which the ‘hunter or scavenger’ dichotomy was a major issue for debate. It has simply been assumed since that Neanderthals were (or perhaps could be is a better term) efficient hunters of large mammals.

–

–

Research perspectives for the study of Neandertal subsistence strategies based on the analysis of archaeozoological assemblages [Texte]
Gaudzinski-Windheuser & Kindler
Quaternary International, 2012

The rising awareness of the consequences of hunting behaviour soon led to new questions addressing this strategy which developed into a new and important focus for research: faunal analysis. New methodology was developed to explain the nature and origin of a faunal accumulation. Applied to faunal assemblages from Pleistocene sites, this new methodology led to the almost immediate invalidation of previously held conceptions of our ancestors’ hunting abilities (Binford, 1985). This approach sharpened the perception of the problems encountered in discussing former subsistence strategies. Further methodology soon developed in this field (e.g. to assess scavenging opportunities (Blumenschine, 1986), population structures (Stiner, 1994), the depositional history of bones (Lyman, 1994), carcass exploitation strategies (e.g. Binford, 1981, Brain, 1981, Shipman, 1986, Domínguez-Rodrigo, 2002)) which helped to systematically view Pleistocene faunal assemblages against an ecological perspective.

This methodology successfully proved its potential, as evidenced by the changing paradigm in the field. Hunting as a way of life of our ancestors has been shown to be deeply rooted in our past, suggesting that ‘modern’ forms of behaviour already have a long evolutionary history (Gaudzinski, 2004a, Domínguez-Rodrigo et al., 2007).

–

–

Flaked stones and old bones: Biological and cultural evolution at the dawn of technology [PDF]
Thomas Plummer
American journal of biological anthropology, 2004

By 2.0 Ma, hominin rank within the predatory guild may have been moderately high, as they probably accessed meaty carcasses through hunting and confrontational scavenging, and hominin-carnivore competition appears minimal at some sites. […] Reconstruction of H. erectus reproductive energetics and socioeconomic organization suggests that reproductively active females received assistance from other group members. This inference, combined with archaeological evidence for acquisition of meaty carcasses, suggests that meat would have been a shared food.

–

Early Hominid Hunting and Scavenging: A Zooarcheological Review [PDF]
Dominguez-Rodrigo & Pickering
Evolutionary anthropology, 2003

. . . accurate reporting of cutmark location per bone section is vital to
inferences of the timing of hominid access to large mammal carcasses.

–

–

A critique of the evidence for scavenging by Neanderthals and early modern humans: new data from Kobeh Cave (Zagros Mountains, Iran) and Die Kelders Cave 1 layer 10 (South Africa) [Abstract]
Curtiss W. Marean
Journal of Human Evolution, 1998

The primary mode of faunal exploitation by Neandertals and early modern humans remains a debated topic. Binford (1981, 1984, 1985, 1988) has argued for an obligate scavenging mode, Stiner (1991a, 1991b, 1991c, 1993, 1994) for a more opportunistic scavenging mode, while other researchers (Chase, 1986, 1988, 1989; Klein, 1989, 1994, 1995; Klein & Cruz-Uribe, 1996) deny the importance of scavenging as a faunal exploitation tactic.

–

Sabertooth cats and their relevance for early hominid diet and evolution
Curtiss W. Marean
Journal of Human Evolution, 1989

Scavenging opportunities in the closed habitat community would have been much better than in more open habitats. Homo habilis with its inferred arboreal abilities could have passively scavenged very effectively in dense woodlands and forests.

Paleoenvironmental and paleontological data indicate that these closed habitats shrunk after 1·7 million years ago and the sabertooths probably went extinct in sub-Saharan Africa. Homo habilis perhaps increasingly utilised more open habitats and would have been forced to confront large predators to gain adequate scavenging returns. Archaeological data of stone tool raw materials and site placement suggests that early hominids switched from an emphasis on dense woodland habitats to increased usage of more open habitats after 1·6 million years ago. Confrontational scavenging along with increased predation pressure may have contributed to the morphological changes associated with the shift to Homo erectus.

–

Were There Elephant Hunters at Torralba? [Abstract]
Lewis Binford
In Evolution of human huning, 1987

In recent years there has been growing skepticism among some students of the pre-Sapiens sapiens hominids that the earlier romantic views, which pictured early man as a mighty hunter, are an accurate construction of the past. In fact, the trend in much recent work has been to modify this view and to see as unwarranted much of the evidence previously cited in support of the “mighty hunter” view of the past. Some have begun the serious investigation of the distinct possibility that early man was more commonly a scavenger of animal carcasses than a successful predator.
[…] Recent analysis (Binford 1985; Binford and Stone 1986) of the
archaeological remains of Europe and Asia seeking to document the successful penetration of Homo erectus, or at least « erectus-grade » hominids, into the temperate zone yields ambiguous results suggesting that hominids were not successful hunters even as late at 200,000 years ago!

–

Scavenging or Hunting in Early Hominids: Theoretical Framework and Tests [PDF]
Pat Shipman
American anthropologist, 1986

Evidence from Bed I, Olduvai, supports the hypothesis that scavenging, not hunting, was the major meat-procurement strategy of hominids between 2 and 1.7 million years ago.

Hunting for evidence of Plio-Pleistocen Hominin Scavengers [PDF]
R. Lee Lyman
American Anthropologist, 1987

I do not argue that Shipman’s conclusion that Olduvai hominids were scavengers is wrong. I believe, however, that her conclusion cannot be substantiated with the butchery data she presents.

–

Carcass consumption sequences and the archaeological distinction of scavenging and hunting [Abstract]
Robert J. Blumenshine
Journal of human evolution, 1986

A preliminary application of the consumption sequence model to the Klasies River Mouth fauna indicates that medium-sized (size 3) and large (size 4) bovids at Klasies were scavenged primarily. Smaller (size 1 and 2) bovids show a distinct pattern, one more consistent with hunting. These results are similar to Binford’s (1984), but for reasons that are argued to have a firmer empirical basis.

–

–

A taphonomic analysis of PTK (Bed I, Olduvai Gorge) and its bearing on the interpretation of the dietary and eco-spatial behaviors of early humans
Organista et al.
Quaternary Science Reviews, 2023

In essence, hominins were repeatedly transporting fleshed animal resources into the site, and all taphonomic evidence indicates that these were acquired through primary access […] The predominance of juvenile individuals that preserve a high frequency of cut marks, similar to primary access models (Domínguez-Rodrigo, 1997a), is suggestive of hunting and not of scavenging, since carnivores rapidly destroy small carcasses leaving no remains available for secondary consumers […] A similar age pattern has been documented at Kanjera South, Kenya (2.0 Ma) where 50% of the sample belongs to juvenile carcasses, which were also interpreted as having been acquired through hunting […] As in Kanjera (Parkinson et al., 2022), a substantial amount of cut marks not only occur on meat/bearing long bones (namely, upper and intermediate elements), but are also located on hot zones where carcasses are usually devoid of scraps if accessed after felids.

–

A case of hominin scavenging 1.84 million years ago from Olduvai Gorge (Tanzania) [PDF]
Dominguez-Rodrigo et al.
Annals of the New-York Academy of Sciences, 2022

Uncontroversial evidence of meat eating goes back to 2.6 million years ago; however, little is known about the frequency and timing with which early hominins acquired animal resources. Here, we show that the combination of hunting and scavenging documented in some modern human foragers may have a long evolutionary trajectory. Using a new set of artificial intelligence methods for objective identification, we present direct evidence of an episode of hominins scavenging from large felids—probably lions—discovered at Olduvai Gorge. […] Hominins probably accessed the carcass when bulk flesh still existed on the radius. This lends support to a confrontational scavenging episode, or to the less common possi-bility of access to a partially fleshed carcass already abandoned by felids. […] Had hominins repeatedly obtained carcasses from felid kills, one would expect an abundance of direct evidence of traces of felids and hominins (like those presented here) on the same bones from archaeofaunas unearthed at early Pleistocene sites. The dearth of this type of direct evidence can only indicate that such an opportunistic behavior was probably marginal or infrequent enough to be archaeologically hard to detect. […] In sum, the virtual lack of evidence supporting felid–hominin interaction at Olduvai’s anthro-pogenic sites indicates that hominins might have been enjoying predominantly primary access to carcasses in combination with secondary access when possible. This is not only what is documented among modern Hadza, but also what characterizes behaviors of some top predators, like lions, which may scavenge up to 16–25% of what they eat, substantially more than what is documented at the anthropogenic BedI sites.

–

New site at Olduvai Gorge (AGS, Bed I, 1.84 Mya) widens the range of locations where hominins engaged in butchery [PDF]
Stancampiano et al.
Nature scientific reports, 2022

As hominins at AGS performed similar butchering activities as at other Bed I sites, our results suggest they did not need the shelter of trees and thus occupied a competitive position within the predatory guild.

–

Comment dire sans le dire que l’on soutient la thèse de l’hominisation par la chasse (pas kleptoparasites = chasseurs ; impacted the evolution of human anatomy and socio-ecology = impactent l’hominisation).

Mammal butchery by Homo erectus at the Lower Pleistocene acheulean site of Juma’s korongo 2 (JK2), bed III, Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania
Yravedra et al.
Quaternary Science Reviews, 2020

Butchery activities have been documented throughout Bed II, including the exploitation of megafauna in a larger number of sites. Among these, Hippopotamus, giraffe, sivatherium and large bovids have been documented to be consumed by hominins in, BK, TK, FLK-West and SHK between 1.3 and 1.7 Ma. Similar evidence has also been found in sites from Koobi Fora (Kenya), Peninj (Tanzania) and Ain Hanech (Marroco). Contrary to sites of lower Pleistocene earlier than 1.3 Ma, human butchery practices later than this are scarce during the transition between the Lower and Middle Pleistocene. This is due to a lack of sites with lithic tools associated with faunal remains during this period in Eastern Africa. The Acheulean site of Juma’s Korongo 2 (JK2) of the Olduvai Gorge Bed III is one of the few known sites with faunal remains associated with stone tools in East Africa. Under this premise, the present study therefore revisits the taphonomy of JK2, confirming that hominins had primary access to carcasses in this site, followed by carnivores.

–

–

–