Variability in the foraging behavior of early Homo: A taphonomic perspective from Bed II, Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania

Aspects of hominid behavioral ecology in the Early Pleistocene are evaluated from the perspective of archaeological sites in Bed II, Olduvai Gorge. New zooarchaeological data on macro-mammalian faunas from Mary Leakey's excavations are used to develop inferences on hominid carnivory, foraging strategies and site formation. In the context of paleoenvironmental and other archaeological data, Bed II is then compared to Bed I, which has dominated debate on these topics.; In order to make behavioral inferences about resource availability and/or selection from the zooarchaeological data, it is first necessary to: identify who (i.e., hominids or carnivores) modified which animals and skeletal parts; and, determine the order of hominid and carnivore bone modification to demonstrate who was scavenging from whom. To this end, stone tool and carnivore tooth marks, skeletal part representation, and long bone fragmentation and portion representation are reported in the context of experimental and actualistic control samples and Bed I data.; Results demonstrate that the bone assemblages at HWK E 1-2 refer to bone-crunching carnivores, not hominids, and were modified in low competition settings (e.g., refuge locations). Given evidence for wooded vegetation and for stone tool discard throughout the basal Bed II paleosol (= HWK E 1), this calls into question the woodland scavenging models of hominid foraging and implies that stone tool-using hominids and bone-crunching carnivores foraged in the same general habitat.; BK and MNK (Main) resemble primary hominid bone collections scavenged by bone-crunching carnivores after hominid meat- and marrow-processing. Thus, Middle-Upper Bed II hominids appear to have been in full control of carcasses and landscape locations. Inferred aspects of hominid carnivorous foraging in Middle-Upper Bed II include: early carcass acquisition; focus on larger animals ({dollar}ge{dollar} 250 lbs); and, a relatively unselective, flexible foraging strategy. Discussion focuses on the extent to which these characterizations contrast with or converge on Bed I, although resolution is elusive given the diversity of views on the latter. Whatever Bed I hominids were like, multiple lines of evidence suggest that behavioral variability in Middle-Upper Bed II significantly increased starting around 1.7-1.6 mya.