Investigating human and megafauna co-occurrence in Australian prehistory: Mode and causality in fossil accumulations at Cuddie Springs

Melanie Fillios; Judith Field; Bethan Charles

Arguments that megafaunal extinctions in Australia were anthropogenically mediated have focused on establishing terminal appearance ages. This approach has been underpinned by three principle tenets: (1) if megafauna disappeared before significant climate change, but after human colonisation, then it can be inferred that extinctions were human mediated; (2) climate change within the last glacial cycle was unremarkable relative to previous cycles; and (3) all or most Pleistocene megafauna were present when people arrived on the continent. We review the evidence for human causation and note mounting evidence suggesting that the last 400–300 ka in Australia has been characterised by escalating aridity and climatic variability, culminating in the breach of a hydrological threshold within the last glacial cycle. Only 21 species (35%) of megafauna whose disappearance has been attributed to human activity are known to have persisted after the Penultimate Glacial Maximum, a time of undoubtedly severe climate change. Thus, 39 species of megafauna (65%) cannot be reliably placed within 85,000 years of firm evidence for human arrival, ca 50–43 ka. At most eight species (13%) were clearly present at this time. Four or more persisted until the onset of full glacial conditions at ca 30 ka. We argue for a falsifiable model of staggered extinction in which most megafaunal extinctions predated human arrival and with the influence of people as a minor superimposition on broader trends in train since middle Pleistocene times.

The reasons for megafaunal extinction in Australia have been hotly debated for over 30 years without any clear resolution. The proposed causes include human overkill, climate, anthropogenic induced habitat change or a combination of these. Most protagonists of the human overkill model suggest the impact was so swift, occurring within a few thousand years of human occupation of the continent, that archaeological evidence should be rare or non-existent. In Tasmania the presence of extinct megafauna has been known since the early twentieth century (Noetling, 1912; Scott, 1911, 1915) with earlier claims of human overlap being rejected because of poor chronology and equivocal stratigraphic associations. More recent archaeological research has not identified any megafauna from the earliest, exceptionally well-preserved late Pleistocene cultural sites. In 2008 however an argument for human induced megafaunal extinctions was proposed using the direct dates from a small sample of surface bon...

The mechanisms leading to megafauna (>44 kg) extinctions in Late Pleistocene (126,000-12,000 years ago) Australia are highly contested because standard chronological analyses rely on scarce data of varying quality and ignore spatial complexity. Relevant archaeological and palaeontological records are most often also biased by differential preservation resulting in under-representated older events. Chronological analyses have attributed megafaunal extinctions to climate change, humans, or a combination of the two, but rarely consider spatial variation in extinction patterns, initial human appearance trajectories, and palaeoclimate change together. Here we develop a statistical approach to infer spatio-temporal trajectories of megafauna extirpations (local extinctions) and initial human appearance in southeastern Australia. We identify a combined climate-human effect on regional extirpation patterns suggesting that small, mobile Aboriginal populations potentially needed access to drinkable water to survive arid ecosystems, but were simultaneously constrained by climate-dependent net landscape primary productivity. Thus, the co-drivers of megafauna extirpations were themselves constrained by the spatial distribution of climate-dependent water sources.

Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint Investigating human and megafauna co-occurrence in Australian prehistory: Mode and causality in fossil accumulations at Cuddie Springs Melanie Fillios a, Judith Field a, b, *, Bethan Charles c a Australian Key Centre for Microscopy and Microanalysis, Electron Microscope Unit F09, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006 Australia School of Philosophical and Historical Inquiry, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia c Department of Archaeology, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006 Australia b a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: Available online 3 May 2009 Human arrival in Sahul – Pleistocene Australia and New Guinea – has long been argued as the catalyst in the decline and disappearance of a suite of extinct animals referred to as megafauna. The debate concerning causality in Sahul is highly polarised, with climate change often cited as the alternative explanatory model. On continental Australia, there are few datasets available with which to explore the likely processes leading to the extinction events. At the present time, there is one site in New Guinea (Nombe Rockshelter) and one on continental Australia (Cuddie Springs) where the coexistence and temporal overlap of humans and megafauna has been identiﬁed. The Cuddie Springs Pleistocene archaeological site in southeastern Australia contains an association of fossil extinct and extant fauna with an archaeological record through two sequential stratigraphic units dating from c. 36 to c. 30 ka ago. A taphonomic study of the fossil fauna has revealed an accumulation of bone in a primary depositional context, consistent with a waterhole death assemblage. Overall the faunal assemblage studied here (n: 8146; NISP: 1355) has yielded little direct evidence of carnivore damage or human activities. Post depositional factors such as physical destruction incurred by trampling, compaction of sediments, and/or the hydrological status of the lake at that time have played important roles. As the only known site on continental Australia where megafauna and humans co-occur, the Cuddie Springs faunal assemblage yields equivocal evidence for a signiﬁcant human role in the accumulation of the fauna here. At the present time there is no evidential basis to the argument that humans had a primary role in the extinction of the Australian megafauna. The ﬁrst colonisers are likely to have preyed upon those few species known to have persisted to this time, but their impact may have been restricted to the tail end of a process that had been underway for millennia prior to human arrival. Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The arrival of humans into new environments is often linked with distinct and irreversible changes in habitat and faunal populations. One of the best cited examples is New Zealand and the subsequent extinction of the Moa and other bird species (Anderson, 2003). However, the events that have been well documented on islands are not always mirrored on continents, though the two are often treated as one (see Wroe et al., 2002, 2004a). On the nearby * Corresponding author: Australian Key Centre for Microscopy and Microanalysis, Electron Microscope Unit F09, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006 Australia. Tel.: þ1 612 9351 7412; fax: þ1 612 9351 7862. E-mail addresses: m.ﬁllios@usyd.edu.au (M. Fillios), j.ﬁeld@usyd.edu.au (J. Field), bethan.charles@hotmail.com (B. Charles). 1040-6182/$ – see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2009.04.003 Australian continent, the impact of colonising humans on habitat and fauna is much less clear (see Wroe and Field, 2006). First, identifying the exact timing of colonization by humans has been problematic due to methodological issues with dating techniques, taphonomy and interpretation of stratigraphy (see O’Connell and Allen, 2004, 2007); and second, the currently available chronologies for megafauna are few and provide no clear indication of timing or direction in the extinction process (Field et al., 2008). The result of these two separate dilemmas is that almost any cause can be invoked for the Late Pleistocene faunal extinctions, and the two primary candidates – humans and climate change – are mostly presented as opposing positions rather than two elements of a complex puzzle (see Horton, 1984; Flannery, 1990; Wroe et al., 2004a; Johnson, 2006; Koch and Barnosky, 2006; Wroe and Field, 2006; Prideaux et al., 2007; Turney et al., 2008). As a debate continues over primary causes, empirical evidence implicating 124 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 people in the extinction of the megafauna is yet to be revealed. Recent claims of a human mediated extinction process in Tasmania (Turney et al., 2008) are unsupported and no evidence of a temporal overlap of humans with megafauna has yet been found (R. Cosgrove personal communication). Furthermore, full consideration of the potential for humans to effect a mass extinction is rarely given; though modeling studies have attempted to predict this potential (e.g. Brook and Bowman, 2004), they are usually based on the rather poor datasets currently available and unproven assumptions about human behaviour (see Field et al., 2008). Further advances in understanding the extinction problem in Sahul are constrained by the sparse nature of the fossil record (Wroe and Field, 2006). While megafauna in Australia are widely known from pit traps in caves (e.g. Reed and Bourne, 2000; Prideaux et al., 2007), it seems likely that any records of megafauna co-occurrence with people will be located near or in watering points on the landscape (e.g. the sites of Lanceﬁeld Swamp, Lime Springs and Cuddie Springs), where large animals will more often be encountered and taken (O’Connell, 2000). 1.1. Megafauna and Archaeology Sahul (Pleistocene Australia–New Guinea) has yielded only two sites where the questions of human and megafauna coexistence can be explored: Nombe Rockshelter, a limestone shelter in the New Guinea Highlands; and Cuddie Springs, an ephemeral lake in semiarid southeastern Australia (Field et al., 2008). If humans have had a profound impact on the Australian Pleistocene fauna, then this should be apparent at one or both sites where an association and temporal overlap of humans and megafauna are found. At Cuddie Springs, the association occurs over at least two stratigraphic horizons and is coincident with a palaeoenvironmental record of vegetation and lake hydrology spanning this period (Field and Dodson, 1999; Field et al., 2001, 2002, 2008; Field, 2004, 2006). Cuddie Springs is part of a dreaming track across central northern New South Wales. A long known Aboriginal Dreamtime story about Mullyan the eagle-hawk relates the formation of the fossil deposits (Anderson and Fletcher, 1934). While the presence of giant, extinct marsupials and ﬂightless birds at Cuddie Springs has been established for over a century, it was only in the early 1990s that an archaeological record was identiﬁed (Wilkinson, 1885; Anderson and Fletcher, 1934; Dodson et al., 1993; Furby et al., 1993). The evidence recovered therein helped to reignite the debate on the timing and cause of the Late Pleistocene faunal extinctions in Australia. Systematic excavation of the site has since revealed a long faunal sequence to at least 10 m depth. In the uppermost levels, the fossil fauna overlap with a record of humans in a sealed unit beginning around 36 ka ago (optically stimulated luminescence determinations), with the megafauna disappearing from the record around 30 ka ago (Field and Dodson, 1999; Field et al., 2001, 2002, 2008; Field, 2004, 2006). In the lower megafauna/human horizon, ﬂaked stone tools consistent with butchering were found in direct association with the bones of megafauna including Diprotodon sp. and Genyornis newtoni (Field et al., 2008). The Diprotodon was the largest marsupial known and weighed around 2.7 tonnes and was 4 m from head to tail (Wroe et al., 2004b). Genyornis newtoni was a large ﬂightless bird known from the arid zone to the more temperate settings of southeastern Victoria (Gillespie et al., 1978; Rich, 1979; Field and Boles, 1998; Miller et al., 1999; Murray and Vickers-Rich, 2003). 1.1.1. Intrusive or Primary Deposition at Cuddie Springs? Alternative interpretations have been forwarded to account for the co-occurrence of the stones and bones at Cuddie Springs (see Gillespie and David, 2001; Roberts et al., 2001a,b; David, 2002; Brook et al., 2006; Gillespie and Brooks, 2006). In each case the association of megafauna and humans is proposed to be the result of disturbance: the megafauna bones have been ‘reworked’ into the more recent levels, and/or the artefacts have been introduced into the deeper megafauna bearing deposits from overlying disturbed horizons. Initially, the megafaunal bones were argued to be a lag deposit (Roberts et al., 2001b). Gillespie and Brooks (2006) have declared that the megafaunal bones are in fact ‘bed-load’ derived from a palaeo-channel which can be seen in aerial photographs. Roberts et al. (2001b) argued that the original (and older) sediments were removed by wind or water. Subsequently, 36 ka year old sediments, charcoal and stones accumulated around the bones. If the bones were bed-load or a lag deposit then they should exhibit signs of signiﬁcant weathering and abrasion. Skeletal elements with thin cortical bone such as vertebrae would be severely degraded, the processes either missing or damaged. If they are bedload there would be no coherent association of bones and ﬂuvial sorting would be evident in directionality and skeletal part representation (after Voorhies, 1969). Assuming that 36 ka bones would also accumulate with the archaeology, then the 36 ka faunal assemblages from this horizon (SU6A and SU6B) would exhibit markedly different preservation to the lag assemblage, and overall there would be a great variation in Rare Earth Element signatures consistent with this scenario (see Trueman et al., 2005). Other researchers have proposed a mechanism by which the stones were moved downwards from a pavement (SU5) which seals the more recent (European) deposits from the underlying Pleistocene megafauna bearing sediments (Gillespie and David, 2001; David, 2002; Brook et al., 2006). This thin capping (c. 5 cm thick and c. 1 m subsurface) was interpreted by the site investigators and geomorphologists as a deﬂation pavement, comprised predominantly of ﬂaked stone artefacts, which formed over an extended time period of c. 10,000 years (Field and Dodson, 1999; Field et al., 2002, 2001). In contrast, David and others believe it was laid down by farmers 60 or so years ago, to stop cows sinking in the mud around a central well. It is argued that ‘local farmers’ raided other (as yet unidentiﬁed) local archaeological sites for ‘gravel-sized stones’ which they brought in with horse drawn drays (Gillespie and Brooks, 2006). Any stones found in association with the megafauna were pushed down by cow hooves when the sediments were wet. If the faunal assemblages are in situ and have not moved from elsewhere, then the archaeological stone assemblages introduced by the trampling of cows, would effectively be homogenous through the whole of SU6. It is not clear whether David et al. expect there to be any stone in a primary context in SU6 or what the characteristics of this stone would be. If the movement of stone by the cows was random then the features of the stone in the deﬂation pavement (SU5) should be mirrored in the stone assemblages from SU6A and SU6B, and this is not the case (Field and Dodson, 1999). The expectations are that the stone should be distributed as a ‘blanket’ over the bones in the underlying Pleistocene horizons and not underneath any of the material. Furthermore, modern European material should be found in SU6 that is ‘intrusive’ from the upper horizon (SU1–4). These intrusive materials should include wire, glass and tin, as well as modern fauna such as dog, cow or horse, but in fact no intrusive modern material has ever been found below SU5 (Field et al., 2001). The original excavators (Anderson and Fletcher, 1934) reported the presence of bullock and horse bones in the uppermost levels at Cuddie Springs and the current site investigators also found cow bones on the surface of SU5 (Field et al., 2001). Presumably these too should have been pushed into the Pleistocene sediments by trampling. A third possibility accounts for the co-occurrence of bones with the stone artefacts by the lateral movement of bones from another (as yet unidentiﬁed) fossil bearing horizon. In this case it must be M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 assumed that the events that led to the formation of SU6B were repeated during the formation of SU6A, which has yielded a faunal assemblage of markedly different characteristics to that observed in SU6B, but still including elements from some megafaunal species. As for the ﬁrst scenario, the faunal assemblage should be characterized by surface abrasions, preferred orientation of bone and size sorting as seen in ﬂuvial deposited assemblages (see Voorhies, 1969). 1.1.2. Why is Cuddie Springs contentious? There are a number of reasons why Cuddie Springs attracts critical review. First, it is the only known site where megafaunal remains and a human record co-occur in a stratiﬁed deposit on the Australian continent. Second, the archaeology and faunal evidence and the associated chronologies do not sit comfortably with the widely cited terminal extinction date of 46.4 ka proposed by Roberts et al. (2001a) for the Australian megafauna (but see Field et al., 2008). Third, the long overlap of humans and megafauna at Cuddie Springs undermines the blitzkrieg theory and brings into question the notion of a human mediated extinction process (see Flannery, 1990; Wroe et al., 2004a; Johnson, 2006). And ﬁnally, extinct fauna aside, some believe that the presence of grinding stones in the 30,000 year old horizon draws into question the notion of stratigraphic integrity at Cuddie Springs (e.g. Mulvaney and Kamminga, 1999: 222). While the arguments for site disturbance as the primary mechanism for the co-occurrence of the archaeology and faunal remains have largely been dealt with elsewhere (see Wroe and Field, 2001a,b; Wroe et al., 2004a; Field, 2006; Field et al., 2006, 2008), the most intractable problem has yet to be fully resolved (see Field, 1999). Is the accumulation of faunal remains at Cuddie Springs the result of natural processes (associated with an ephemeral waterhole in a marginal environment), the activities of people, or a combination of both? 1.2. Aims The aim of this paper is to present the results of a taphonomic study of the faunal assemblages from stratigraphic unit 6 (SU6) (a total 5 1 m2 excavations) at Cuddie Springs (Field et al., 2002). A taphonomic approach was adopted to determine whether the accumulation of faunal remains through two depositional episodes documented in SU6A and SU6B, was correlated with human activities or the result of natural processes either contemporary with, or predating human activities at the site. Establishing humans as the primary accumulator of the faunal remains at Cuddie Springs has implications for debates concerning the disappearance of the megafauna in this region and the impact of colonising humans on the Australian landscape. It is important to note that producing a deﬁnitive statement on site formation, and separating out the primary depositional agent at Cuddie Springs is a challenging task, considering the inevitable time averaging that occurs especially in open sites such as ephemeral lakes or waterholes (e.g. Conybeare and Haynes, 1984; Stern, 1993). While numerous studies have been undertaken at modern waterholes (e.g. Haynes, 1983), there have been no investigations of the subsurface record at these locations. The Cuddie Springs data has the potential to provide important information on waterhole death assemblages as the processes occurring here have been ongoing for millennia (see Field et al., 2001). The taphonomic study of these fossil faunal assemblages provides a robust and independent test of some of the alternative arguments that have been proposed for the co-occurrence of bones of extinct animals and the archaeological record, and these will be explored here. 125 2. Site Setting Cuddie Springs is an ephemeral lake in the semi-arid zone of southeastern Australia (Fig. 1A). During the Pleistocene, when the fossil deposits were formed, this region was located well within the arid zone. The lake is approximately 3 km in diameter and the fossil deposits are found in a treeless pan, approximately 200 m in diameter that lies at the lowest point in the lake (Fig. 1B). Cuddie Springs is situated in a landscape of low relief on the riverine plains of central northern New South Wales and is not connected to any current river system. The closest permanent channels are the Marra Creek, about 20 km west of the site, the Macquarie River, c. 15.5 km to the east and the Barwon River, c. 40 km to the north. A recent electromagnetic (EM) survey of the site has shown that no channels occur within the top 10 m of deposit and that the site is a closed basin (Field et al., 2008). The grey lacustrine sediments of Cuddie Springs are part of a back-plain depression of the Marra Creek, abutting the red-soil plains to the east of the site. There are distinct changes in vegetation from the lake ﬂoor across to the red-soil plains. The lake vegetation is dominated by Coolabah (Eucalyptus microtheca/E. coolabah Blakely & Jacobs) and Blackbox (E. largiflorens) trees with scattered belah (Casuarina sp.) and wattle (Acacia sp). The understorey is comprised of lignum, chenopods and a range of herbs. The red-soil plains to the east support a vegetation community typical of semi-arid conditions: Callitris sp., Poplar Box (E. populnea) and Leopardwood (Flindersia maculosa), including an understorey of Eremophila species and Wilga (Geijera parviflora) (Field et al., 2002). 3. Materials and Methods 3.1. Excavation Excavation was undertaken in arbitrary spits within stratigraphic units by trowel and dental pick in 1 m squares. All material encountered during excavation (e.g. charcoal, ochre, stone and bone) was bagged and logged (including 3D coordinate data). All sediment was wet sieved through 3 mm and 5 mm mesh sieves. Many of the bones that were encountered during excavation were complete or mostly complete and very fragile. Those bones in danger of being damaged after exposure were stabilized with Primal 500Ô or PlextolÔ with a gossamer stabilizer. Before removal, the bones were covered in a layer of plastic wrap and aluminium foil followed by jacketing either in Plaster of Paris or expanding foam (Macgregor, 2009). Sieve residues were sorted either on site or in the laboratories at the University of Sydney. Bones were cleaned in the same laboratories with water, an aspirator and brushes. 3.2. Site Sample The faunal assemblage reported here is from stratigraphic unit 6 which represents two depositional episodes (SU6A and SU6B) and was recovered from squares excavated across the central area of the site where the fossil bone and archaeology is concentrated: squares E10–12, and E17–18 (Fig. 2). The ﬁve squares were excavated at the centre of the Cuddie Springs claypan between 2001 and 2006, sampling sediments from either side of a central well that was sunk in 1878 (see Wilkinson, 1885; Anderson and Fletcher, 1934; Field et al., 2001) (Fig. 2). From the slope of the excavated horizons – which is towards the historic well – it would appear that the well was sunk in the very centre of the depression. The well placement also appears to coincide with the centre of the fossil accumulation. Squares E10–12 are on the northern side of the well, and squares E17 and E18 are on the southern side. 126 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 Fig. 1. (A) Location of Cuddie Springs in southeastern Australia. It is not part of any of the current river systems and may be dry when the surrounding area is in ﬂood. (B) View of the Cuddie Springs claypan where excavations from 1991 to 2007 have taken place. (Photo: J. Field). M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 127 Fig. 2. Excavation plan of the Cuddie Springs claypan showing the location of excavated squares discussed in text and the location of the well that was sunk in the 1870s. North is to the top of the ﬁgure. Contour lines relate to the deﬂation pavement (SU5). The pale-grey shading shows the location of some of the pits from the 1933 Australian Museum excavations. 3.3. Faunal Analysis The faunal assemblage analysed for this study comprised a total 8146 bone fragments, of which 6791 were non-diagnostic, with a number of identiﬁed specimens (NISP) of 1355 (roughly 17%). The range of attributes measured in this study targeted those features that provide key information about site formation in this particular context – an ephemeral waterhole. Weathering stage, degree of mineralization, bone breakage/fragmentation patterns (portion/ zone, crushing), skeletal element representation, surface modiﬁcation (abrasion, root etching, cut marks, gnaw/tooth marks, burning), articulation, and mortality proﬁles were assessed. Percussion marks were not visible on the analyzed material when examined under low or high power magniﬁcation. Measurements, where possible, were taken with Mitutoyo digital calipers following von den Driesch (1976). 3.3.1. A Note on Weathering Stages Weathering stages described by Behrensmeyer (1978) for modern assemblages were modiﬁed to accommodate the fossil material from Cuddie Springs. In brief, on a 0–5 scale a value of 0–1 suggests that the bones were exposed for a short period of time if at all, before burial. A value of 5 indicates bone has been severely affected by surface environmental conditions because of extended exposure to physical or chemical processes (see Table 1). 3.3.2. Quantification All bone fragments were counted, recorded and identiﬁed to skeletal element and species where possible, and NISP and minimum number of elements (MNE) were calculated (after Lyman, 1994, 2008) by stratigraphic unit. MNE’s were minimized by dividing each element into zones (adapted from Cohen and Serjeantson, 1996) and summing the identiﬁable portions, including shaft fragments. For example, if a proximal humerus (zone 1), a medial humerus shaft fragment (zone 4), and a distal humerus fragment (zone 8) were all Table 1 Weathering stages and descriptions for fossil bone used in the analysis of the Cuddie Springs assemblage (following Behrensmeyer, 1978). Weathering stage Description Stage 0 Stage 1 Bone shows no cracking or ﬂaking, surfaces are smooth. Cracking parallel to the ﬁbre structure and articular surfaces may show mosaic cracking of the bone. Outermost concentric layers show ﬂaking, usually associated with cracks; long thin ﬂakes. More extensive ﬂaking follows until most of the outer layer of bone is gone. Crack edges are angular in crosssection. Surface of bone characterised by patches of rough, homogeneously weathered bone, resulting in a ﬁbrous texture that eventually extends to cover the whole bone. Weathering does not penetrate more than 1–1.5 mm at this stage. Crack edges are rounded in cross section. Bone surface is coarsely ﬁbrous and rough in texture; large and small splinters occur and may fall away from the bone when moved. Weathering penetrates inner cavities. Cracks are open and have splintered or rounded edges. Bone falling apart in situ with large splinters lying around. Bone is fragile and easily broken. Cancellous bone usually exposed and may outlast all traces of former more-compact sections. Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 128 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 present, and from the same side of the body, a NISP of 3 and an MNE of 1 were recorded. Furthermore, if a proximal and distal humerus were both present, but one was from a larger individual, a NISP of 2 and an MNE of 2 were recorded. Minimum number of individuals (MNI) calculations, while a useful analytical tool in most contexts, was not an appropriate application for this study. At Cuddie Springs, MNIs do not provide an accurate reﬂection of the number of individuals in the assemblage due to the heavy fragmentation of the bone and the time averaging of the deposit. SU6A and SU6B both represent depositional episodes spanning several thousand years and further reﬁnement of the chronological sequence has not been possible (Field et al., 2001). 4. Results 4.1. Stratigraphy The upper portion of the stratigraphic sequence at Cuddie Springs consists of 3 m of lacustrine clays (Field et al., 2002). Bone is found throughout the sequence in varying concentrations. The horizon of interest in this analysis is SU6, where the megafaunahuman overlap is found, and occurs at a depth of between c. 1.7 and c. 1 m from surface (see Field and Dodson, 1999; Field et al., 2002). SU6 is sealed between two old land surfaces (SU5 and SU7) (Fig. 3). 4.1.1. Stratigraphic Unit 5 Stratigraphic unit 5, at c. 1–1.05 m depth, is a deﬂation pavement comprising mostly artefactual stone with bone and charcoal (Fig. 4). Radiocarbon determinations and OSL analyses have returned ages of c. 28,000 BP and 27 ka respectively (Field et al., 2001). SU5 is only a few centimetres thick and has yielded c. 800–1000 stones per metre square. The upper surfaces of the stones are weathered and the undersides of the stone are generally fresh and sharp. Most of the stone is artefactual, being either ﬂaked or ground (Field and Dodson, 1999; Fullagar et al., 2008) and the bone is heavily mineralized. Charcoal is also found in this unit. 4.1.2. Stratigraphic Unit 6 Stratigraphic unit 6 is divided into two units, SU6A and SU6B, corresponding to at least two different depositional episodes as indicated by the geomorphology, pollen and lake records, bone geochemistry, archaeology and fauna (Furby, 1996; Field and Dodson, 1999; Field et al., 2001, 2002; Field, 2004, 2006; Trueman et al., 2005). Stratigraphic unit 6A lies directly under SU5 (Fig. 4) and has been dated by radiocarbon and OSL to c. 30 ka (Field et al., 2001). It was formed during a period of extended dry conditions for the lake, and accumulated in an environment of grasslands with scattered trees. The sediments comprise intercalated, pale-grey silts and clays with some ﬁne sands, and is consistent with a low energy depositional environment (Field et al., 2002). Stone artefacts are found throughout this unit as well as some ochre and high concentrations of charcoal and bone. The ﬁrst appearance of grinding stones is documented in SU6A, at the interface with SU6B (see Fullagar and Field, 1997; Field and Fullagar, 1998). Functional studies of the stone artefacts indicate that the assemblage from SU6A consists of tools from all stages of manufacture, with usewear/residue studies identifying a wide range of tasks including butchering, woodworking, plant working and seed grinding (Furby, 1996; Fullagar and Field, 1997). Stratigraphic unit 6B was formed under lake full conditions. While the sediments were constantly wet, there was not always standing water in the lake (Field et al., 2002). The concentration of stone tools in this horizon is low, expedient in nature, and from the early-to-middle stages of manufacture, in clear contrast to the ﬁnds from SU6A. Charcoal concentrations are also very low relative to SU6A (Field and Dodson, 1999). The environment at this time was dominated by saltbush (Chenopodiaceae) shrubland and the sediments are predominantly green/grey structured silts and clays; the ﬁne grained sediments indicating a low energy depositional environment (Field et al., 2002). The presence of abundant plant roots, Azolla massulae, Nitella oogonia, and Chyclorid Cladocera carapace head and shield fragments is also indicative of still shallow freshwater conditions (R. Ogden personal communication; Field et al., 2002). 4.1.3. Stratigraphic Unit 7 Stratigraphic unit 7 underlies the human/megafauna unit and has been described as an old land surface (see Figs. 3 and 6; also Field et al., 2002, 2008). It comprises a consolidated horizon of well-sorted bone (of widely varying preservation and condition) and non-artefactual stone. Most of the bone is present as fragments that are rounded and abraded, though complete elements do occur. The horizon is consistent with a ‘fragipan’, which forms in open arid/semi-arid environments. It is consolidated but not concreted when dry, and may become relatively ﬂuid when wet, which would account for some bones that are consistent with SU6B becoming embedded in the surface of this horizon (see Fig. 13 in Field and Dodson, 1999). It overlies a discontinuous horizon of ferruginized sands then a highly stratiﬁed lacustrine deposit of ﬁne silts and clays which continues to c. 3 m depth. 4.2. Faunal Analysis 4.2.1. Species Representation The range of taxa identiﬁed from SU6 is presented by stratigraphic unit in Table 2 and the distribution of bone through SU6 is shown for square E12 in Fig. 5. Extinct and extant taxa are present throughout SU6, with Genyornis newtoni and Macropus sp. contributing the largest number of elements to SU6B. The representation of Genyornis newtoni drops markedly from SU6B to SU6A. Also notable is the presence of Crocodylus sp. in SU6B, the representative elements of which are comparable in size to Crocodylus johnsoni, the modern freshwater crocodile. Crocodylus sp., along with the turtle and ﬁsh remains are consistent with the palaeoenvironmental record of lake full conditions at this time (see Field et al., 2002), and notably are not present in the overlying SU6A. In SU6A, megafauna are still present though reduced in element frequency. Palorchestes cf. azael (sometimes referred to as a ‘marsupial tapir’) is represented by a single isolated tooth and is considered intrusive. Isolated teeth have been identiﬁed in other squares not included in this study (e.g. a Palimnarchus sp. [terrestrial crocodile] tooth from SU6A F10) and are also considered intrusive. Species not represented in the lake full period but appearing for the ﬁrst time in SU6A are Onychogalea fraenata (bridled nailtail wallaby) and Trichosurus vulpecula (common brush tail possum). Bettongia sp. (bettong), while present in SU6B, has not been identiﬁed in SU6A in this analysis and perhaps reﬂects the change in environment and climatic conditions. 4.2.2. Physical Condition of the Skeletal Remains 4.2.2.1. Weathering Stage. Over 96% of the material from SU6 falls within the 0–1 weathering stage (Table 1, after Behrensmeyer, 1978). No specimens were identiﬁed beyond stage 3 and the low weathering stages are consistent with rapid burial after death. Any subsequent re-exposure of the skeletal elements would have been reﬂected in more advanced weathering stages, or abraded surfaces (see below). In general, the bones were in good condition though M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 129 Fig. 3. The section proﬁle at square E10–F10 at Cuddie Springs covering parts of the sequence discussed in text – SU5–7. The horizons slope towards the centre of the pan where a well sunk in the 1870s is located. (Illustration: J. Dortch and J. Field). very friable (Fig. 6) and deteriorated very quickly if allowed to dry out. 4.2.2.2. Degree of Mineralization and Colour. An inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES) analysis of bone from Cuddie Springs has shown that the degree of mineralization with Manganese (Mn) is correlated to the colour of the bones (K. Privat and J. Field, unpublished results): the darker the bone the higher the Mn content. Overall, the bones were similar in colour in SU6, with over 99% being a mottled brown or dark-grey colour (see Fig. 6). The assemblage is completely fossilized, with no collagen preservation (Coltrain et al., 2004). 4.2.2.3. Fragmentation and Breakage Patterns. In SU6A c. 3% (n ¼ 11) of the identiﬁable specimens are complete, in contrast to c. 6% (n ¼ 45) in SU6B (Table 3). A distinctive feature of SU6B is the large number of nearly complete elements belonging to Genyornis newtoni. Of the 111 post-cranial specimens identiﬁed as G. newtoni, over 32% (n ¼ 36) are complete or nearly complete, and 39% (n ¼ 44) are over 50% complete (Table 3). Of all the complete specimens, 49% are attributed to G. newtoni. The SU6 assemblage as a whole shows a high degree of fragmentation, as indicated by NISP:MNE and epiphyses:diaphyses ratios (see Grayson, 2001; Grayson and Delpech, 2003). Chi-square analyses comparing E17–18 with E10–12 for SU6A and SU6B show no signiﬁcant differences in fragmentation between the two areas (P ¼ 0.6580, c2 ¼ 0.196 df ¼ 1). Upper-limb elements were rarely complete, while in contrast, a relatively high proportion of the lower body limb elements are complete or nearly complete. Longitudinal breaks/cracks and dorso-ventral crushing is typically due to the weight of overburden (see Figs. 6 and 7A; cf. Villa and Mahieu, 1991: Fig. 2). In SU6B, evidence of crushing appears as in situ breaks – that is fragments of the same bone lie adjacent to one another and several ‘‘intact’’ bones were characterized by incomplete fractures prolonged by ﬁssure lines (see Villa and Mahieu 1991: 29). Fracturing as the result of trampling is often 130 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 et al., 2000: 208). The presence of complete skeletal elements, coupled with crushed elements in which all fragments are extant, attest to in situ breakage (Fig. 7). As such, the effects of crushing from the weight of overburden and trampling have resulted in a high number of unidentiﬁable long-bone-shaft fragments and intact distal elements. Physical evidence of trampling (e.g. ﬁne striations, see Fig. 11 in Norton et al., 2007) are not present on the bone surfaces because the enclosing sediments are a ﬁne-grained silt/clay composition. A number of vertically orientated bones from G. newtoni in SU6B are indicative of trampling as a signiﬁcant factor in this horizon (Fig. 8) (cf. Haynes, 1985). Fig. 4. Stratigraphic unit 5 at Cuddie Springs being exposed during excavation. SU5 is a deﬂation pavement of stone, predominately ﬂaked stone artefacts, which forms a continuous capping across the site sealing the Pleistocene deposits from the disturbed overburden (see Field et al., 2001). (Photo: J. Field). characterized by transverse breaks and fragmentation of long bones into three main parts (Fig. 7B). It has been noted, in some cases, that the shaft may be more deeply sunk into the sediments than the epiphysis (cf. Alberdi et al., 2001: 13). Several intact elements exhibited fractures consistent with either trampling by large animals, or breakage/compression due to weight of overburden. Crushing is more frequent in SU6B than SU6A (11% n ¼ 86 vs. <2% n ¼ 6, respectively), is found on most major bones, and does not appear to be conﬁned to any particular element or species (Table 4). The faunal assemblage in both strata is dominated by shaft fragments (Table 3), which is a pattern commonly associated with nutritive processes resulting from human or carnivore activity (Klein and Cruz-Uribe, 1984; Lyman, 1994; Marean et al., 2000). However, the absence of percussion marks coupled with low frequencies of cut and tooth marks suggests that the fragmentation cannot be wholly attributed to either humans or carnivores. A Chisquare analysis with Yates correction indicates that there is no signiﬁcant difference in fragmentation between strata (P ¼ 0.5928, c2 ¼ 0.286, df ¼ 1). There is however a statistically signiﬁcant difference between the degree of fragmentation between macropods as a whole and G. newtoni (P ¼ 0.0430, c2 ¼ 4.095, df ¼ 1). Fragmentation of the bone in SU6B is principally comprised of transverse breaks, which is often a feature of dry bone. Spiral fracturing which is usually associated with fresh bone, occurs in low frequency (<1%; n ¼ 16) and was only observed in SU6B (see Johnson, 1985; Haynes, 1988, 2006; Villa and Mahieu, 1991; Marean 4.2.3. Spatial Patterning – Bone Orientation, Articulations and Site Patterning In SU6B, several G. newtoni lower-limb elements show semiarticulations; in a number of cases the main leg elements (tarsometatarsus, tibiotarsus and femur) are found within a 1 m square (Figs. 9A,B). The fragile nature of these bones, the good preservation (i.e. completeness and low weathering) plus the close proximity to one another indicate that they are in a primary deposit. The remains in SU6B were buried quickly with no signiﬁcant post depositional disturbance. The argument for a rapid burial is also supported by experimental data where a direct correlation has been established between the degree of dispersal of individual bones and the length of time an individual is exposed prior to burial (Lyman, 1994: 162). Furthermore, individuals and/or elements buried rapidly prior to skeletonization are more likely to remain articulated than those exposed on the surface for long periods of time or those subject to re-deposition. If ﬂuvial action were responsible for the accumulation of the faunal remains, then sorting would be apparent in the preferred orientation of elements. Presence or absence of particular elements (Voorhies groups) relative to ﬂow would be observed and those bones retained would present as perpendicular to the ﬂow if partly buried or parallel to the ﬂow if lying on the surface (Voorhies, 1969; summary in Lyman, 1994: 180). Orientation data prepared as rose diagrams (Kreutzer, 1988) from SU6A and SU6B reveals no preferred orientation (Figs. 10A,B; see also Field et al., 2008). Further support for random patterning is offered by statistical analysis with a one-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov Test. The bone orientation in SU6A and SU6B presents as a normal distribution (SU6A: mean ¼ 76.25, SD ¼ 51.23, n ¼ 16; SU6B: mean ¼ 89.38, SD ¼ 52.67, n ¼ 131). If the bones had been subject to transport resulting in preferred orientation then the frequency distribution would not plot as a normal curve. 4.2.4. Bone surface modifications – cultural Possible cut marks were discernible on three specimens in SU6A, and six specimens in SU6B (Table 5). In all cases but one (pelvis), these marks were located on the diaphyses of long bone fragments (Fig. 11). Marks were only identiﬁed on macropod elements, and no marks were found on G. newtoni elements. Ethnographic observations indicate that modern Emu bones are not broken to recover marrow (see below). Trampling is known to produce features that mimic cut marks. These usually result from sediment or stone being dragged across the bone surface (see Behrensmeyer et al., 1986; Olsen and Shipman, 1988). The orientation of mimic cut marks is usually random and will be affected by the particle size of the enclosing sediment matrix (e.g. coarse grained sands) as well as deposition rates. All of the marks tentatively identiﬁed as the result of butchery in SU6A and SU6B are found on shaft fragments and tend to be parallel pairs. Their speciﬁc location and orientation is consistent with skinning (see Binford, 1981). The ﬁne grain enclosing sediments at Cuddie Springs comprises silts and clays with little sand (Field et al., 2002). As such the particle size is M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 131 Fig. 5. Graph showing extant and extinct NISP by excavation unit through stratigraphic unit 6. The spread of bones throughout the unit is not consistent with a lag deposit. The patterning seen here correlates to bones incorporated into the waterhole sediments after death. (Illustration: J. Wells). inconsistent with the morphology and dimensions of the putative cut marks on the bone surfaces. Six fragments from SU6A exhibited traces of burning, and only three in SU6B (Table 5). All the burnt bone from SU6A is calcined and therefore white in colour. Calcined bone is generally a product of campﬁres as opposed to natural bush ﬁres or landscape burning by people (David, 1990; Stiner et al., 1995). 4.2.5. Bone surface modification (non-cultural) There was little or no abrasion of the bone examined in this study, nor was there any rounding and polishing of the bone surfaces. At Cuddie Springs, root etching is present on approximately 3% of the assemblage in SU6A and nearly 13% of the assemblage in SU6B (Fig. 12). Gnaw marks from rodents and/or carnivores were identiﬁed on only two specimens. Fig. 6. Square E12 showing an element of Genyornis newtoni in situ. The bone is very fragile and prone to damage if allowed to dry. Note the longitudinal cracks (arrows), from crushing (weight of overburden), and also the good condition of the bone surface compared to the rounded and abraded material in the exposed surface of SU7. The bone was enclosed in the ﬁne silts and clays of SU6B. Centre scale is 10 cm. (Photo: J. Field). 132 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 Table 2 NISP of extinct (*) and extant taxa by stratigraphic unit for squares E10–12 and E17–18 at Cuddie Springs (LM ¼ Large Mammal, MM ¼ Medium Mammal, SM ¼ Small Mammal). Class Family Genus/species Mammalia Diprodotontidae Diprotodontid* Diprotodon cf. optatum* Palorchestes cf. azael* Phascolonus sp.* Vombatus sp. Sthenurus sp.* Protemnodon cf. brehus* Protemnodon sp.* cf. Macropus giganteus titan* Macropus giganteus Macropus rufus Macropus sp. Macropus cf. rufogriseus Onychogalea fraenata Lagorchestes cf. hirsutus Trichosurus vulpecula Bettongia sp. Bettongia lesueur Indeterminate extinct* LM – Indet. MM – Indet. SM – Indet. Genyornis newtoni* Dromaius novaehollandiae Aves sp. Crocodylus sp. cf. Pallimnarchus sp.* Varanus sp. Testudinus sp. Fish Palorchestidae Vombatidae Macropodidae Phalangeridae Potoroidae Aves Dromornithidae Casuariidae Reptilia Crocodylidae Varanidae Testudinae Common name (description) Diprotodon Marsupial Tapir Wombat Wombat (Giant Wallaby) (Giant Wallaby) (ancestor of the Eastern Grey Kangaroo) Eastern Grey Kangaroo Red kangaroo Kangaroo Red-necked Wallaby Bridled Nailtail Wallaby Rufous Hare-wallaby Common Brush-tail Possum Bettong Burrowing Bettong (giant ﬂightless bird) Emu Freshwater Crocodile Terrestrial Crocodile Lizard Giant turtle Total NISP SU6A SU6B 10 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 30 10 19 71 20 27 1 11 0 0 19 62 77 8 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 31 2 0 1 1 10 2 4 87 9 42 143 11 0 2 0 3 1 64 100 84 6 141 1 3 2 1 3 1 1 374 764 M. giganteus titan has been included with the extinct taxa because, while recognized as the ancestral form of M. giganteus, it is morphologically distinct and much larger than its modern form. 4.2.6. Skeletal Element Representation Long-bone-shaft fragments (18%), vertebra (13%), tibia (12%) and innominates (9%) consistently comprise the highest percentage of skeletal elements in the SU6 (Table 6). Although the relative bodypart frequencies are similar within the two distinct horizons in SU6, there are signiﬁcant differences between SU6A and SU6B. Most notably, SU6A and SU6B differ with respect to degree of fragmentation and element distribution. In general, SU6A is characterized by a high frequency of lower-limb bones and axial elements, as well as a statistically signiﬁcant higher number of long-bone fragments, 21 vs. 16% (P ¼ 0.001, c2 ¼ 127.415, df ¼ 1). As it was not possible to discern between forelimb and hindlimb fragments, the possibility remains that the frequency of lower-limb elements may in fact be much closer between SU6A and SU6B than indicated by the relative frequencies of part or whole elements. The high fragmentation rate in SU6A could reﬂect human breakage for marrow consumption (see Solomon, 1985; Outram, 2004; Outram et al., 2005) and cutmarks on some extant species have been observed (see Field and Dodson, 1999). As for SU6B, percussion marks were not visible, and evidence for human agency in the formation of SU6A is best supported by the association of stone tools with faunal remains. Furthermore, the relatively even distribution of elements from the entire skeleton in SU6B, including a high frequency of G. newtoni vertebrae and ribs may be due to the lake conditions at the time and perhaps limited access for people to all animals that died here. Differential bone density is recognized as an important factor in the survival of skeletal elements (Brain, 1981; Lyman, 1994; Lam et al., 1998, 2005; Stiner, 2002; Faith et al., 2007). Low density bones are more susceptible to breakage from the weight of overburden and/or trampling; and they are also subject to transport and loss by alluvial and ﬂuvial action. There is no evidence for any size sorting and patterning with respect to long bone orientation at Cuddie Springs. Rose diagrams do not show any preferred directionality, and analysis of elemental frequencies reveal not only the presence of most appendicular and axial elements, but several different size classes (see Fig. 10 and Tables 2 and 6). 4.2.6.1. Age profiles. Few cranial elements were present in the assemblage and the degree of epiphyseal fusion was therefore used to estimate the numbers of juvenile vs. mature individuals. While only a small percentage of the assemblage could be evaluated in this way, the results suggest that the difference between the SU6A age proﬁle and the SU6B age proﬁle is statistically signiﬁcant (P < 0.001, c2 ¼ 15.908, df ¼ 1). SU6A contains a higher proportion of unfused limb elements, suggesting a younger and prime-age dominated proﬁle (Table 7). Furthermore, isolated macropod molars, the most frequently occurring teeth, show little wear and are suggestive of prime-aged individuals. 5. Discussion The Cuddie Springs assemblage is unique in the archaeological record for Australia. As the only site known with a stratigraphic association of megafaunal remains and cultural material, the level of proof required to establish an association and perhaps interaction, exceeds those normally demanded of archaeological ﬁnds. Investigating the nature of the archaeological record at Cuddie Springs brings a range of logistical and methodological issues associated with the investigation and interpretation of an open site. There has been little research into open-site taphonomy in Australia, as these types of deposits are relatively rare. The archaeological and palaeontological endeavours have often been more successfully focused on caves and rockshelters, though spring deposits have received some attention (e.g. Black Swamp: Wells 133 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 Table 3 Fragmentation of major post-cranial limb bones by taxon for SU6A and SU6B. Element M. titan 6A Humerus Complete Proximal Shaft Distal 1 1 1 1 1 6B 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 8/3 2.7 1 3 11 3 1 32/18 1.8 1 1 2 3/3 1.0 4/3 1.3 6A G. newtoni 6B 6A 6B * * 1 1 1 2 * * * * 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 6 1 5 6 2 9 2 1 17 2 8 4 10 5 3 Femur Complete Proximal Shaft Distal NISP/MNE Ratio 6A 1 1 Macropus sp. M. rufus 6B 1 Ulna Proximal Shaft Distal Metatarsal Complete Proximal Shaft Distal 6A 2 Radius Proximal Shaft Distal Tibia Complete Proximal Shaft Distal M. giganteus 6B 1 1 1 2 7 2 7 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 13/6 2.2 22/13 1.7 24/12 2.0 1 1 3 35/11 3.2 12 2 2 3 n/a 38/16 2.4 MNE was calculated independently for E10–12 and E17–18, and the resulting sums added to produce MNE for NISP/MNE ratio. Complete bones were not factored into these ratios (after Lyman 1994: 103). *The humerus, radius and ulna in Genyornis are not meat bearing bones and are very small in comparison to macropod elements and therefore are not relevant as a direct comparison (see Murray and Vickers-Rich, 2003: 67–69). et al., 2006, Lanceﬁeld Swamp: Gillespie et al., 1978, and Lime Springs: Gorecki et al., 1984). Much of the information about large animals and waterholes is derived from African models, but subsurface investigation of these modern day environments is yet to be pursued (Haynes, 2006). For Australia, the taphonomic literature is fairly sparse (but see Solomon, 1985; Solomon et al., 1990; Reed, 2001) and there have been few advances on characterizing the taphonomy of open sites where the combination of fauna and environment differ markedly to other continents. Nonetheless, the principles of site formation in ephemeral waterhole deposits are global, and the analysis of the Cuddie Springs deposits has drawn on much of the international literature to establish the primary factors at play. The horizon of interest at Cuddie Springs, as it relates to the extinction of the megafauna, is stratigraphic unit 6 which is dated from c. 36 ka (OSL) to c. 30 ka (OSL). There are two depositional episodes in SU6: the ﬁrst correlates to the ﬁrst detectable human occupation at Cuddie Springs, which began around 36 ka, is up to c. 35 cm thick and is referred to as SU6B; the second episode dates to c. 30 ka, is up to 30 cm thick and is referred to as SU6A. The low chronological resolution (c. 5 ka window) in each unit precludes resolution of a more detailed depositional sequence, though it is likely that the site was continually visited through this time period. The analysis undertaken here is only a sample of the total site excavation, and this area was targeted in order to explore whether the deposits were continuous across the central portion of the claypan. It extends either side of a 19thcentury well that was sunk in the centre of the fossil deposits (Wilkinson, 1885). To further understand the overall site structure it has been important to investigate the patterning and composition of the fossil records across the central area of the site where the fauna and archaeology are concentrated. Importantly, the stratigraphy and faunal content was found to be consistent through the ‘E transect’ as the stratigraphic sequence identiﬁed in E10–12 of the main excavation trench is also found in squares E17–18. The study of the faunal remains in SU6 has shown them to be a primary deposit in an ephemeral waterhole setting. There is no evidence to support the proposal that any fossil material is a lag deposit that has been re-exposed and buried in more recent sediments, or has been transported either from a lateral (and older) local accumulation, or derived from the bed-load of a palaeochannel. The palaeo-channel noted by Gillespie and Brooks (2006) is clearly unrelated to the lacustrine deposits discussed here and is signiﬁcantly older than the horizons in question (Field et al., 2008). Furthermore, there is no geomorphological explanation that would account for this type of event, especially when the strongly banded sequence that characterises the lacustrine sediments underlying SU6 (see Figs. 3 and 13) and the low-relief landscape (Fig. 14) are taken into account. An in situ bone bed has been discovered around c. 40 cm below the level of SU7 in which articulated and separated articulations were found in enclosing silts (Figs. 3 and 15). It also represents a waterhole death assemblage associated with a small, closed basin, as demonstrated by the Electromagnetic Survey undertaken in 134 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 2007 (Field et al., 2008). In a direct parallel, the remains of modern cows were recovered in the disturbed overburden immediately overlying SU5, the pavement that seals the Pleistocene deposits from the disturbed overburden. Excavation of the cow remains revealed separated articulations (Field et al., 2001), with bones of a number of cows found separately in discrete areas where most of the axial and appendicular elements are found together. The more recent depositional episodes suggest a continuity of events that has been ongoing for millennia. The fossil fauna deposits are restricted to a tightly deﬁned area in the middle of a treeless pan at the lowest point on the lake ﬂoor. Despite additional excavation and survey, no evidence has been found of any additional fossil deposits beyond the central area of the claypan. The suggestion that reworking and re-deposition of the fossil bone from elsewhere (either below or laterally) is rejected, primarily because there is no empirical evidence to support such an interpretation. Samples collected from Cuddie Springs and analysed by Roberts et al. (2001a) showed mixed age populations in single grain and small aliquot samples. These results were interpreted by these authors as evidence of sediment mixing, and as such brought into question the stratigraphic integrity of the site. The Cuddie Springs OSL analysis yielded two to three age populations for the samples analysed from SU5 and SU6 (R. Roberts, personal communication): SU5 1-26.6 1.9 ka (50%), 2-c.10 ka (25%), 3-3 ka (25%) SU6A 1-30.3 2.3 ka (>80%), 2-c.8 ka (<10%) SU6B 1-36.5 2.9 ka (50%), 2-9 ka (c. 25%), 3-2 ka (c. 25%) The site was dismissed by Roberts et al. (2001a,b) on the basis of these dating results, even though the majority of the samples (1) are consistent in age with the existing radiocarbon chronology (Field et al., 2001). Considerable site data is also available which contradicts the conclusions by Roberts et al., but these have been ignored or overlooked (e.g. Field and Dodson, 1999; Field et al., 2001, 2002; Trueman et al., 2005). In a recent study by the same authors, similar results were obtained from sediments recovered from a museum specimen apparently collected from Mt Cripps in NW Tasmania and identiﬁed as Protemnodon cf. anak. The OSL analyses revealed multiple age populations in samples extracted from the skull nasal cavity (Turney et al., 2008). The age populations were: P. cf. anak k3-36 3 ka 77% (n ¼ 53) k2-13.2 1.4 ka 22% (n ¼ 15) k1-1.5 0.2 ka 7% (n ¼ 5) Fig. 7. Fragmentation of bones is common in stratigraphic unit 6. (A) An example of in situ breakage is the Genyornis tibiotarsus from square E10, which shows longitudinal cracks (small white arrows) as a result of crushing by weight of overburden. Large white arrows in background indicate stone artefacts. Scale ¼ 1–2 cm markings. (B) A Genyornis tibiotarsus (square E17) with three postmortem transverse breaks typical of damage to dry bones and consistent with trampling. (Photos: J. Field). No report on the Mt Cripps site, describing details concerning the recovery of material or contextual data, has yet been published, and any explanation other than that proposed by the authors could not be explored. Turney et al. accepted the result that appeared to be most consistent with the radiocarbon ages (k3) and the remaining two age populations (k2 and k1) were dismissed. The inconsistency in the treatment of results from Mt Cripps and Cuddie Springs highlights the deﬁciencies of using dating studies alone to evaluate either the stratigraphic integrity of a site or the possible/probable age of material associated with these samples. It is well established that single grain OSL studies provide useful data when investigating bioturbation in archaeological and fossil deposits and palaeoenvironmental contexts (e.g. Forrest et al., 2003; Bateman et al., 2007). The OSL single grain method is a valuable taphonomic tool, but as pointed out by Boulter et al. (2006), these investigations are just one component of multidisciplinary approaches to establishing conﬁdent interpretations of stratigraphy and depositional histories. The importance of contextual information is well illustrated in the Cuddie Springs example M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 Table 4 Frequency of crushed bone by species/element in SU6A and SU6B. Stratigraphic unit Element/NISP Species 6A Tibia/2 Non-diagnostic/3 Humerus/1 Radius/1 Ulna/2 Ulna/1 Femur/1 Femur/5 Femur/1 Femur/1 Femur/2 Tibiotarsus/9 Tibia/3 Tibia/3 Tarsometatarsus/3 Metatarsal/1 Rib/1 Rib/7 Rib/7 Rib/2 Vertebra/1 Vertebra/11 Vertebra/2 Vertebra/3 Sacrum/1 Sacrum/1 Sacrum/1 Pelvis/1 Pelvis/1 Pelvis/3 Pelvis/1 Pelvis/2 Non-diagnostic/7 Macropus sp. Non-diagnostic Macropus sp. Diprotodontid Macropus sp. Diprotodontid Diprotodontid Genyornis newtoni Macropus titan Macropus rufus Macropus sp. Genyornis newtoni Macropus titan Macropus sp. Genyornis newtoni Macropus rufus Diprotodontid Genyornis newtoni Macropus sp. Non-diagnostic Diprotodontid Genyornis newtoni Macropus sp. Non-diagnostic Genyornis newtoni Macropus titan Macropus sp. Diprotodontid Macropus titan Macropus rufus Macropus sp. Non-diagnostic Non-diagnostic 6B Total NISP 6A ¼ 6 Total NISP 6B ¼ 86 135 (Field, 2006; Field et al., 2008). Rather than representing massive sediment disturbance, the OSL results from Cuddie Springs attest to bioturbation, an active process identiﬁed in most fossil deposits and one that does not compromise the overall integrity of the associated archaeological or faunal accumulations. The taphonomic study of the faunal accumulations presented here, when considered with the geomorphological, geochemical and archaeological investigations, points to an in situ accumulation of both fauna and cultural material. As such, three possible site formation scenarios remain and are presented below. 5.1. The fossil fauna are a lag deposit that predates human arrival by several millennia Bones in SU6A and SU6B that were re-exposed for any period of time should exhibit signiﬁcant weathering and abrasion and general physical deterioration, and no articulations or separated articulations would be evident. If the bones were exposed then there would also be some dispersal of material away from the claypan centre and only the most robust elements would have survived. As it has already been established that there is no evidence of any older sand grains in the OSL samples, it must be assumed that if these bones were re-exposed, then all enclosing sediments must have been removed (by wind or water). Physical/taphonomic evidence is absent for re-exposure of the fossil bone from SU6B as the bone exhibits low weathering with well preserved surfaces. No bias was detected in the range of skeletal elements preserved and extinct and extant bone was recovered throughout SU6B. The bone in SU6B lying immediately above the surface of SU7 is similar in many respects to the cow bones recovered from the surface of SU5 (Field et al., 2001). These latter remains are from cows that have died on site and their bones have been rapidly incorporated into the claypan sediments, having moved to the base of the uppermost horizon at Cuddie Springs through bioturbation – principally trampling by large herbivores Fig. 8. View of partially excavated square E17 SU6B showing a Genyornis tarsometatarsus on end (GTB) and in association with other leg elements – two femurs (GF) and a tarsometatarsus (GTM). Note, upper left Genyornis femur has been encased in Plaster of Paris to reduce damage from drying before removal. Scale ¼ 10 cm. (Photo: J. Field). 136 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 (cattle and horses). The general experience during site excavation was that the Pleistocene material was very friable and vulnerable to damage (as described in materials and methods). In summary, the faunal remains in SU6B are consistent with a waterhole death assemblage that is in a primary depositional context and is not the product of any lateral movement, transport, or re-deposition. There is no evidence to suggest the megafauna bone is a lag deposit (see Fig. 5). The content and form of the bone assemblage is consistent with rapid burial shortly after death. Changes to the physical state of the bone are a post depositional artefact due to trampling, and/or sediment compaction from the weight of the overburden. 5.2. The bones are in a primary depositional setting and became incorporated into the 36 ka sediments just prior to human arrival with any megafaunal material in SU6A being intrusive Fig. 9. (A) Plan of skeletal elements from the same depth in SU6B in squares E10–12 (each square is approximately 1 m2). The plan for E10 was at the base of excavation overlying SU7. In E12, the Genyornis bones in this plan were lying about 20 cm above SU7, the surface of which slopes steeply to the south, and further elements of Genyornis were recovered from SU6B below this depth, immediately overlying SU7. Elements marked with arrows are the three lower-limb bones (left-hand side) from Genyornis newtoni. (B) The (LHS) tibiotarsus and (LHS) tarsometatarsus of Genyornis newtoni from square E10, as shown in the plan. The available chronological resolution cannot eliminate the possibility that humans ﬁrst arrived locally decades, perhaps centuries, after the megafauna had died at the waterhole. However, the presence of ﬂaked stone artefacts above, beside and beneath the bones suggest otherwise, and perhaps it will be the analysis of the residues from use on these tools that will end up providing the deﬁnitive answer (see Field et al., 2008). We argue that there is compelling evidence for a human involvement based on the functional studies of the stone (indicating butchering) and their stratigraphic location in the deposits (Field, Fullagar and van Gijn, unpublished results, 1997; Field and Dodson, 1999). The low incidence of stone artefacts in SU6B and the fact that they are all in the early to middle stages of manufacture (Field and Dodson, 1999), suggests an expedient technology. People were not camping on the claypan during the formation of SU6B as it was a marshy lake at the time, but instead they were preying on animals tethered to a diminishing water supply. The presence of cutmarks has been argued to be one of the key criteria in assessing evidence for a human-megafauna association (see Haynes and Stanford, 1984), and are speciﬁc to, and dependent on, contextual data, (see Solomon, 1985; Lyman, 2005). As such it is difﬁcult to conﬁdently predict the incidence of cutmarks on a faunal assemblage comprised of a range of extinct fauna for which we have no modern analogues, such as many of those found in SU6B. In general terms, it has been established that a higher frequency of cut marks will be found on bones at camp sites, where on-site butchery, food preparation and consumption occurs. It is also possible that evidence of butchering by humans may be absent from large animal remains (Pickering, 1995; Lyman, 2005: 1726). Certainly this appears to be the case for the Cuddie Springs assemblage from SU6B where only extant fauna have exhibited limited evidence for butchering (see Fig. 11). Pickering (1995) has argued that in Pleistocene Australia, small, mobile groups would not be able to consume a large animal like a Diprotodon, targeting only the removal of the gluteal and lumbar muscle portions, as observed in butchering of modern bovids. In these contexts, people might have ﬁlleted carcasses or undertaken only selective removal of edible portions because of the size of the group, the amount of meat they could consume, the presence of other scavengers (e.g. crocodile and Megalania sp.) and/or environmental conditions at the time. It is also likely that the remains of megafauna preyed upon by humans will be scattered thinly across the landscape. As noted previously, it will only be at particular focal points on the landscape, such as places with standing water, that the evidence for a human association may be found and where the faunal remains will be preserved (O’Connell, 2000). Soft tissues such as the periosteum shield bones from being marked by either stone or metal tools. This could help explain the M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 137 Fig. 9. (continued). low percentages or absence of cut marks on bones of butchered animals (Shipman and Rose, 1983; Pickering, 1995). Consistent with the evidence from Cuddie Springs is the suggestion by Pickering of ‘‘a trend to minimal artefact generation or use, bone damage or disarticulation’’ (Pickering, 1995: 20). Fragmentation of major post-cranial limb bones, with respect to the ratio of diaphyses to epiphyses and NISP:MNE ratios reveals a highly fragmented assemblage dominated by diaphyses for all macropods, and epiphyses and complete elements for G. newtoni. The relatively high proportion of complete and mostly-complete lowerlimb elements with respect to G. newtoni might partly be explained by the lower-limbs being rapidly buried and subsequently sequestered from destructive taphonomic processes. Furthermore, the lower-limb elements from G. newtoni are substantial; the largest tibiotarsus we have encountered was close to 60 cm in maximum length. However, humeri have also been recovered from the same species, are on average only measure c. 10 cm in length, and are much more vulnerable to complete destruction, as are the lightly built cranium and sternum (see Murray and Vickers-Rich, 2003). Elements from the upper portion of the body if not buried rapidly are likely to degrade very quickly yet they are also represented here. Some of the faunal remains at Cuddie Springs may have been the result of animals dying prior to human arrival and buried. It is also entirely possible that extinct and extant taxa perished there without human involvement, when people were present elsewhere on the landscape. Human population densities in the marginal environment of the arid zone were very low in modern times and this is likely to have been the case in the arid environs of Cuddie Springs around 36 ka ago. Nonetheless, the multiple lines of evidence present at Cuddie Springs imply a complex story and the evidence for a human involvement is compelling (Field and Dodson, 1999). 5.3. The fossil bones in SU6B are c. 36 ka old and contemporary with the archaeology The fossil assemblages at Cuddie Springs are likely to be comprised of some faunal remains that accumulated independently of human activities while others were human prey. People were not permanently camped at Cuddie Springs but were highly mobile hunter gathers. In the arid environment of this time small bands would have covered a large territory following resources and this is reﬂected in the diverse stone tool raw materials that have been recovered here (Field and Dodson, 1999). The geomorphological evidence indicates that the sediments were permanently wet through this period (P. Hughes, personal communication). The low incidence of artefacts (expedient technology and primarily used for butchering) through this unit suggests that people were ﬁlleting some of these animals and transporting the meat away from the marshy centre. The faunal taxa at Cuddie Springs ranges from the largest marsupial known – the Diprotodon – to red kangaroos, bettongs and bandicoots. How hunters may have dealt with any of these animals will have varied signiﬁcantly (see Metcalfe and Barlow, 1992). The large Diprotodon is unlikely to have been dismembered or transported, especially by the small human populations that were present (see Pickering, 1995). As observed for the Alyawara, animals up to the size of the modern day red kangaroo (mean weight of 25 kg) would have been transported away from the point of kill and were likely to be butchered elsewhere where hunters often removed the metapodials and tail (O’Connell and Marshall, 1989). It has been observed that when transporting kangaroos, a cooked and butchered kangaroo is more difﬁcult to handle than a whole animal (O’Connell and Marshall, 1989: 395). Macropod skeletal element frequencies initially suggest a classic reverse utility curve, in which the higher economic elements (with respect to greater amounts of meat and marrow) are under-represented (see Marean and Frey, 1997). For the red kangaroo, these elements are the vertebrae and lower-limbs, followed by the upperlimbs (O’Connell and Marshall, 1989: 400). However, the high frequency of long-bone fragments may represent the missing limb elements and these may have been crushed through a human (butchering/consumption) or natural agency (trampling/overburden weight) (see Solomon, 1985: 42–47). It is predicted that large animals such as a Diprotodon sp., G. newtoni and even the 138 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 Other factors such as local environmental conditions (which may have reduced the keeping period of the meat) as well as the lower subsistence requirements of small mobile populations, must also be taken into account. O’Connell (2000) reports modern intercept hunting of Emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae) at points where water is either perennial or seasonal. O’Connell posits that in the prehistoric past some of the practices used in these modern day contexts, such as drugging the water with Nicotiana leaves, may also have been used for the purpose of making the Pleistocene megafauna a more accessible prey. Butchering of modern Emu involves dismembering as well as ﬁlleting, followed by cooking (O’Connell, 2000: 177). Gould (personal communication) relates that the bones of Emu were not broken for marrow but were placed in trees away from dogs and children, presumably to prevent access to the long bones. It has been suggested that some long bone may contain spicules (calciﬁed bone on medullary bone surfaces) (cf. Dacke et al., 1993: 63), and are therefore dangerous to ingest (S. Solomon personal communication). Spicules are a feature of the medullary bone in female egg laying birds and act as a mineral reservoir, although they are present only during ovulation (Schweitzer et al., 2005). At the present time it is unclear whether spicules are a factor in the avoidance of Emu (and by extension Genyornis newtoni) long bones for marrow. The sample size in this study is relatively small (2 1 and 3 1 m) and as such provides only a limited window on the events that occurred here. In order to investigate site patterning, much larger areas are required for study (e.g. Spurling and Hayden, 1984; O’Connell, 1987; Nicholson and Cane, 1991; O’Connell et al., 1992), so broader statements about the site are not currently possible. What we can say from the limited spatial data that is available pertains mostly to the site formation processes, which are the subject of this investigation. The most parsimonious explanation for the co-occurrence of the megafauna and the cultural material, based on the available evidence, is that at the very least humans and megafauna co-existed at Cuddie Springs. The presence of ﬂaked stone artefacts primarily used for butchering suggests that opportunistic acquisition of prey occurred during periods when people were passing through this area, perhaps travelling from the Macquarie Marshes in the southeast up to the Barwon/Darling River system to the north. Fig. 10. Rose diagrams for the orientation of bones. (A) SU6A (n ¼ 16); (B) SU6B (n ¼ 131). There is no preferred orientation of the bone in either horizon. (Images courtesy of L.D. Field). larger extinct kangaroos would have been ﬁlleted due to their enormous size. It is predicted that the bones of these larger animals will be over-represented at a kill-site when compared to the smaller more easily transported species such as the kangaroos. Table 5 Frequency of burning and cut marks on bone by stratigraphic unit, species and element for the Cuddie Springs assemblage from squares E10–12, E17–18. Stratigraphic unit Genus/species Element Location 6A – Cut marks Macropus giganteus Macropus rufus Macropus giganteus Macropus giganteus titan Macropus rufus Macropus sp. Macropus sp. Macropus rufogriseus Medium mammal Non-diagnostic Non-diagnostic IV metatarsal Tibia Long bone shaft fragment Tibia Pelvis Tibia Long bone shaft fragment Ulna Long bone shaft fragment 6 fragments (<2 cm) 3 fragments (<2 cm) Shaft Shaft Shaft Shaft Ilium Shaft Shaft Shaft Shaft 6B – Cut marks 6A – Burning 6B – Burning Total NISP Cut ¼ 9 Total NISP Burned ¼ 9 5.4. Megafauna bones in SU6A are either reworked from another horizon and intrusive or are part of the archaeological record The megafauna bones in SU6A are in the same preservational condition as the extant fauna in this horizon, suggesting the two are contemporaneous, as conﬁrmed by a rare earth element (REE) study (Trueman et al., 2005). The REE study also demonstrates that the SU6A assemblage has an REE signature that is different to the SU6B material. As in SU6B, the bone in SU6A is very friable and difﬁcult to recover intact from the enclosing sediments. The frequency of megafauna in SU6A is reduced compared to SU6B, and a number of species are no longer represented there (e.g. Protemnodon sp.), while other species appear for the ﬁrst time. Bone in SU6A is mostly fragmented with few complete elements, a situation that is paralleled in SU6B (the G. newtoni remains aside). The overall picture drawn from the SU6A record is in contrast to that obtained from SU6B. SU6A is also completely different to SU6B with respect to the stone assemblages, (all stages of manufacture, a wide range of tasks, and ground stone tools), the environment and the lake hydrology. Some material may be intrusive (e.g. isolated teeth from Palorchestes sp. and Palimnarchus sp.), and its presence can be explained by the activities of people digging for 139 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 Fig. 11. Surface modiﬁcations on bone from SU6B. All putative cutmarks are on the long bones of extant macropods and are indicated by arrows (in B, C and D). Individual ﬁnd numbers are listed in brackets and denote square, spit, quadrant of square and allocated ﬁnd number. Note that all bones with cutmarks shown here are from the same square and spit. Three are from quadrant C. (Photos: J. Field). water and breaching the lower fossil horizons which are within 30– 40 cm of this level (SU7). People were camping on the lake ﬂoor at Cuddie Springs around 30 ka. The lake hydrology for this period was characterized by extended dry periods which allowed people to camp around the claypan centre. There are various reasons why people camp in the open; these include visibility in the event of the presence of large predatory carnivores, perhaps Megalania – the giant goanna or Table 6 Element frequencies by stratigraphic unit for the Cuddie Springs square E transect. Fig. 12. Evidence for root etching was more prevalent in SU6B then SU6A and is consistent with ‘lake full’ conditions at Cuddie Springs. Numerous small plant roots were found through the SU6B sediments, evidence that is typical of marshy conditions (see Field et al., 2002). Arrows indicate roots growing across the surface of two Genyornis femurs from square E17. (Photo: J. Field). Element SU6A (%) SU6B (%) Total NISP (%) Cranium Mandible Tooth Scapula Rib Vertebra Pelvis Humerus Radius Ulna Femur Tibia Fibula Long Bone frag. Metatarsal Tarsal Cuboid Calcaneus Astragalus Phalanx 3 4 17 8 12 35 30 12 1 11 20 51 4 77 32 5 2 16 12 21 10 4 78 7 73 108 68 16 8 13 52 83 17 12 43 11 1 5 2 39 13 8 95 15 85 143 98 28 9 24 72 134 21 203 75 16 3 21 14 60 Total NISP 374 (<1) (1) (4) (2) (3) (9) (8) (3) (<1) (3) (5) (14) (1) (21) (9) (1) (<1) (4) (3) (6) 764 (1) (<1) (10) (1) (10) (14) (9) (2) (1) (2) (7) (11) (2) (16) (6) (1) (<1) (1) (<1) (5) (1) (1) (8) (1) (7) (13) (9) (2) (1) (2) (6) (12) (2) (18) (7) (1) (<1) (2) (1) (5) 1138 140 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 Table 7 Fusion of epiphyses of ageable populations from SU6A and SU6B at Cuddie Springs. Epiphysis SU6A SU6B Fused % of ageable population (F) Un-fused % of ageable population (UF) NISP ¼ 66 7 35 13 65 40 87 6 13 Thylacoleo carnifex – the marsupial lion if they were still extant, and protecting their water source from fouling by other animals. The latter is especially important if a well had to be dug to obtain clean near-surface water. In terms of the aim of this paper, the faunal evidence for SU6A provides no indication of reworking or re-deposition and the most Fig. 14. A bone bed identiﬁed about 40 cm below the base of SU6. The bone accumulated prior to human arrival and is estimated to be >350 ka. No artefacts were identiﬁed and articulated elements and a range of extinct species, not identiﬁed higher up the sequence, were present. The bone from this horizon exhibits low weathering and is found in an enclosing clay-silt matrix. (Photo: J. Dortch). parsimonious explanation for this horizon is that the archaeology and the fauna are contemporary. The fossil record indicates that megafauna were in decline, and with the shift in the local environment to grasslands, the habitat for some of the megafauna had disappeared and with that so perhaps had the animals. An increasing presence by people and a diminishing water supply in the lead up to the Last Glacial Maximum could have led to the local extinction of megafauna from this region. 5.5. Stratigraphic Unit 6 Summary Fig. 13. Part of the stratigraphic section for square E11/F11 at Cuddie Springs. SU6B and SU7 are shown towards the top of this image; the white lines mark the change to different depositional episodes. These horizons are clearly deﬁned by changes in sediment and colour. Bones are present throughout most of the deposit in varying concentrations. (Photo: J. Field). The main ﬁnding of the taphonomic study of the Cuddie Springs faunal assemblage is that the animals died here, were not washed in, and did not accumulate as the result of carnivore activities. The site is an ephemeral waterhole where animals perished over tens of thousands of years, their remains becoming incorporated into the ﬁne grained sediments of the lake bed. These ﬁndings are further supported by an REE analysis (Trueman et al., 2005). Coupled with the pollen and sedimentary studies of the site (Field et al., 2002), a clear picture of faunal turnover through time and changing climatic conditions can be drawn. G. newtoni remains dominate the assemblage in SU6B and accumulated during a period of constantly wet conditions at Cuddie Springs around 36 ka. Other extinct and extant species are also represented. The involvement of humans in the accumulation of these remains is implied by the presence of stone artefacts throughout SU6B. While the stone artefacts are predominantly butchering tools, the absence of cutmarks on the megafaunal remains is inconclusive (see Pickering, 1995). In the transition to SU6A, a number of species disappear, including Protemnodon sp., while there is a sharp decline in the representation of G. newtoni. These changes coincide with a shift in local vegetation and lake conditions (Field et al., 2002). The sharp increase in ﬂaked and ground stone artefacts, charcoal and other cultural material is consistent with people camping on the claypan M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 141 Fig. 15. Surveyed east–west proﬁle of the Cuddie Springs lake. Note the exaggerated vertical scale to 1 m. Cuddie Springs is in a landscape of low relief and the lake itself exhibits only a 1 m drop from edge to centre in this and the north south proﬁle (see Field, 2004). around a central watering point, perhaps digging for water when required. The events at Cuddie Springs occur against a backdrop of large scale climatic change and the presence of people through both phases. By association, the remains of the extinct and extant fauna are part of the archaeological record. In SU6B, functional analyses of the stone tools have indicated that they were primarily used for butchering. The concentration of stone in this ‘lake full’ phase is low and the predominance of butchering implements provides compelling evidence that people were butchering the fauna found there. In SU6A, the composition of the stone tool assemblage sharply contrasts with the SU6B assemblage. Grinding stones appear for the ﬁrst time, and the ﬂaked stone tools are used for a variety of tasks, signifying a broad-based subsistence economy. Cutmarks on the bones of extant species have been identiﬁed and burnt bone is also found. The radiocarbon dates from single pieces of charcoal and the OSL dates on sediments overlap, the latter providing a chronological resolution not forthcoming from the radiocarbon sequence. The notion of sediment disturbance/reworking of the deposit and re-deposition of material is refuted by the taphonomy of the faunal assemblages and is consistent with previous analyses undertaken at the site (see Field et al., 2001, 2002, 2008; Trueman et al., 2005). It is likely that the fossil-fauna record is the product of natural events and the activities of people. Separating these two factors is still a problem, as it is with most archaeological sites where faunal remains are found, especially those in an open setting such as this. 5.6. Humans and Megafauna In Australia Australia is the driest continent on earth and consequently there have been limited preservational opportunities for fossil fauna through the Late Pleistocene. Most ﬁnds are restricted to pit traps in caves, secondary deposition in ﬂuvial settings and the occasional swamp or aeolian deposit (see Wells, 1978). The thin datasets currently available are dominated by dating studies and as such provide few answers to the critical questions of context and association (see Field et al., 2008). The evidence for a human-megafauna association on the Australian continent is tantalizing at best, yet aside from Cuddie Springs and Nombe Rockshelter, no other empirical evidence has been found of an in situ co-occurrence, let alone interaction between the two. It is systematic investigations such as those at Cuddie Springs that are important in assessing the evidence and exploring the questions relating to a human role in the demise of megafauna. It also provides an opportunity to identify the issues involved in establishing either interaction or association in any deposit where an archaeological record co-occurs with fossil fauna. With so few records available that infer any sort of temporal overlap with megafauna, it appears likely that many of the megafaunal species were extinct before humans arrived, and those that may have persisted were restricted to isolated pockets across the continent (Wroe and Field, 2006; Field et al., 2008). 6. Conclusions A primary role for humans in the demise of the Australian megafauna cannot be demonstrated on the basis of one site, and support for this position is further undermined when most of the megafauna cannot be placed within 100,000 years of human arrival (Wroe and Field, 2006; Field et al., 2008). As with the formation of the Cuddie Springs deposits, the Late Pleistocene faunal extinctions are a complex puzzle. Humans may have had a deﬁning role in the ﬁnal moments of the extinction process but a range of other environmental factors are likely to have had a signiﬁcant impact. Acknowledgements We are indebted to the continuing support of the Brewarrina Local Aboriginal Land Council and the Ngemba Community Working Party. The ﬁeld work could not have proceeded without the generous support and assistance of the Johnstone, Currey and Green families, the Walgett Shire Council and the many volunteers and colleagues involved in the work. Garry Lord, Brett Cochrane, Tom Cochrane, Chris Boney and Colin Macgregor were indispensable in the ﬁeld. Thanks to the Australian Museum (esp. Sandy Ingleby) for access to reference collections. We are enormously grateful to Don Grayson for comments on an earlier draft – the mistakes and errors are truly our own. We appreciated the comments by Chris Norton and two anonymous reviewers. Thanks also to Kyle Ratinac for comments and discussions. The authors acknowledge the facilities as well as scientiﬁc and technical assistance from the staff in the Australian Microscopy and Microanalysis Research Facility (AMMRF) and the Australian Key Centre for Microscopy and Microanalysis at the University of Sydney. The project was funded by the Australian Research Council and the University of Sydney. References Alberdi, M.T., Alonso, M.A., Azanza, B., Hoyos, M., Morales, J., 2001. Vertebrate taphonomy in circum-lake environments: three cases in the Guadix-Baza Basin (Grenada, Spain). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology. Palaeoecology 165, 1–26. Anderson, A., 2003. Prodigious Birds: Moas and Moa-hunting in Prehistoric New Zealand. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Anderson, C., Fletcher, H.O., 1934. The Cuddie Springs bone bed. The Australian Museum Magazine 5, 152–158. Bateman, M.D., Boulter, C.H., Carr, A.S., Frederick, C.D., Peter, D., Wilder, M., 2007. Preserving the palaeoenvironmental record in Drylands: bioturbation and its signiﬁcance for luminescence-derived chronologies. Sedimentary Geology 195, 5–19. Behrensmeyer, A.K., 1978. Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering. Paleobiology 4 (2), 150–162. 142 M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 Behrensmeyer, A.K., Gordon, K.D., Yanagi, G.T., 1986. Trampling as a cause of bone surface damage and pseudo-cutmarks. Nature 319, 768–771. Binford, L.R., 1981. Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths. Academic Press, New York. Boulter, C.H., Bateman, M.D., Carr, A.S., 2006. Assessment of archaeological site integrity of sandy substrates using luminescence dating. Newsletter of the Society for Archaeological Sciences 29 (2), 8–12. Brain, C.K., 1981. The Hunters of The Hunted? An Introduction to African Cave Taphonomy. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Brook, B.W., Bowman, D.M.J.S., 2004. The uncertain blitzkrieg of Pleistocene megafauna. Journal of Biogeography 31 (4), 517–523. Brook, B.W., Gillespie, R., Martin, P., 2006. Megafauna mix-up. Australasian Science (June), 35–37. Cohen, A., Serjeantson, D., 1996. A Manual for the Identiﬁcation of Bird Bones from Archaeological Sites. Archetype Press, London. Coltrain, J.B., Field, J., Cosgrove, R., O’Connell, J.F., 2004. Stable isotope and protein analyses of Genyornis remains from Cuddie Springs: implications for site chronology and the timing of megafaunal extinction. Archaeology in Oceania 39 (1), 50–51. Conybeare, A., Haynes, G., 1984. Observations on elephant mortality and bones in water holes. Quaternary Research 22, 189–200. Dacke, C.G., Arkle, S., Cook, D.J., Wormstone, I.M., Jones, S., Zaidi, M., Bascal, Z.A., 1993. Medullary bone and avian calcium regulation. Journal of Experimental Biology 184, 63–88. David, B., 1990. How was this bone burnt? In: Solomon, S., Davidson, I., Watson, D. (Eds.), Problem Solving in Taphonomy. Archaeological and Palaeoenvironmental Studies from Europe, Africa and Oceania, Tempus 2, p. 65. David, B., 2002. Landscapes, Rock-Art and the Dreaming: an Archaeology of Preunderstanding. Continuum Press, London. Dodson, J.R., Fullagar, R., Furby, J.H., Jones, R., Prosser, I., 1993. Humans and megafauna in a Late Pleistocene environment from Cuddie Springs, north western New South Wales. Archaeology in Oceania 28, 94–99. Faith, J.T., Marean, C.W., Behrensmeyer, A.K., 2007. Carnivore competition, bone destruction, and bone density. Journal of Archaeological Science 34, 2025–2034. Field, J., 1999. The role of taphonomy in the identiﬁcation of site function at Cuddie Springs. In: Mountain, M.J. (Ed.), Taphonomy ’95. Proceedings of the 1995 Taphonomy Symposium. ANU, Canberra, pp. 51–54. Field, J., 2004. The archaeology of Late Pleistocene faunal extinctions in Australia: a view from Cuddie Springs. In: Murray, T. (Ed.), Archaeology from Australia. Australian Scholarly Publishing, Melbourne, pp. 18–35. Field, J., 2006. Trampling the Pleistocene: does taphonomy matter at Cuddie Springs? Australian Archaeology 63, 9–20. Field, J., Boles, W., 1998. Genyornis newtoni and Dromaius novaehollandiae at 30,000 b.p. from Cuddie Springs, southeastern Australia. Alcheringa 22, 177–188. Field, J., Dodson, J., 1999. Late Pleistocene megafauna and human occupation at Cuddie Springs, southeastern Australia. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 65, 275–301. Field, J., Fullagar, R., 1998. Grinding and pounding stones from Cuddie Springs and Jinmium. In: Fullagar, R. (Ed.), A Closer Look: Recent Australian Studies of Stone Tools. Sydney University Archaeological Methods Series 6, pp. 95–108. Field, J., Fullagar, R., Lord, G., 2001. A large area archaeological excavation at Cuddie Springs. Antiquity 75, 696–702. Field, J., Dodson, J., Prosser, I., 2002. A Late Pleistocene vegetation history from the Australian semi-arid zone. Quaternary Science Reviews 21 (8-9), 1005–1019. Field, J., Wroe, S., Fullagar, R., 2006. Blitzkrieg: fact or ﬁction at Cuddie Springs. Australasian Science (July), 24–25. Field. J., Fillios, M., Wroe, S., 2008. Chronological overlap between humans and megafauna in Sahul (Pleistocene Australia–New Guinea): a review of the evidence. Earth Science Reviews (DOI:10.1016/j.earscirev.2008.04.006). Flannery, T., 1990. Pleistocene faunal loss: implications of the aftershock for Australia’s past and future. Archaeology in Oceania 25, 45–67. Forrest, B., Rink, W.J., Bicho, N., Ferring, C.R., 2003. OSL ages and possible bioturbation signals at the Upper Paleolithic site of Lagoa do Bordoal, Algarve, Portugal. Quaternary Science Reviews 22, 1279–1285. Fullagar, R., Field, J., 1997. Pleistocene seed grinding implements from the Australian arid zone. Antiquity 71, 300–307. Fullagar, R., Field, J., Kealhofer, L., 2008. Grinding stones and seeds of change: starch and phytoliths as evidence of plant food processing. In: Rowan, Y.M., Ebeling, J.R. (Eds.), New Approaches to Old Stones: Recent Studies of Ground Stone Artifacts. Equinox Publishing P/L, pp. 159–172. Furby, J.H., 1996. Megafauna under the microscope: archaeology and palaeoenvironment at Cuddie Springs. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Geography, UNSW, Australia. Furby, J.H., Fullagar, R., Dodson, J., Prosser, I., 1993. The Cuddie Springs bone bed revisited, 1991. In: Spriggs, M., Smith, M. (Eds.). Sahul in Review, NU, Canberra, pp. 204–210. Gillespie, R., Brooks, B., 2006. Is there a Pleistocene archaeological site at Cuddie Springs? Archaeology in Oceania 41 (1), 1–11. Gillespie, R., David, B., 2001. The importance or impotence of Cuddie Springs. Australasian Science 22 (October), 22–24. Gillespie, R., Horton, D.R., Ladd, P., Macumber, P.G., Rich, T.H., Thorne, R., Wright, R.V.S., 1978. Lanceﬁeld Swamp and the extinction of the megafauna. Science 200, 1044–1048. Gorecki, P.P., Horton, D.R., Stern, N., Wright, R.V.S., 1984. Coexistence of humans and megafauna in Australia: improved stratiﬁed evidence. Archaeology in Oceania 19, 117–119. Grayson, D.K., 2001. Explaining the development of dietary dominance by a single ungulate taxon at Grotte XVI, Dordogne France. Journal of Archaeological Science 28, 115–125. Grayson, D.K., Delpech, F., 2003. Ungulates and the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transition at Grotte XVI (Dordogne, France). Journal of Archaeological Science 30, 1633–1648. Haynes, G., 1983. Frequencies of spiral and green-bone fractures on ungulate limb bones in modern surface assemblages. American Antiquity 48, 102–114. Haynes, G., 1985. On watering holes, mineral licks, death, and predation. In: Mead, J., Meltzer, D. (Eds.), Environments and Extinctions. Man in Late Glacial North America. Center for the Study of Early Man, Orono, Maine, pp. 53–71. Haynes, G., 1988. Longitudinal studies of African elephant death and bone deposits. Journal of Archaeological Science 15, 131–157. Haynes, G., 2006. Mammoth landscapes: good country for hunter-gatherers. Quaternary International 142-143, 20–29. Haynes, G., Stanford, D., 1984. On the possible utilization of Camelops by early man in North America. Quaternary Research 22, 216–230. Horton, D.R., 1984. Red Kangaroos: last of the Australian megafauna. In: Martin, P.S., Klein, R.G. (Eds.), Quaternary Extinctions: A Prehistoric Revolution. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona, pp. 639–680. Johnson, E., 1985. Current developments in bone technology. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 8, 157–235. Johnson, C., 2006. Australia’s Mammal Extinctions: A 50,000 year History. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Klein, R.G., Cruz-Uribe, K., 1984. The Analysis of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Koch, L., Barnosky, A.D., 2006. Late Quaternary extinctions: state of the debate. Annual Review of Ecology and Evolutionary Systematics 37, 215–250. Kreutzer, L.A., 1988. Megafaunal butchering at Lubbock Lake, Texas: a taphonomic reanalysis. Quaternary Research 30, 221–231. 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 densitometry. Journal of Archaeological Science 25, 559–570. Lyman, R.L., 1994. Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Lyman, R.L., 2005. Analyzing Cut marks: lessons from Artiodactyl remains in the Northwestern United States. Journal of Archaeological Science 32, 1722–1732. Macgregor, C., 2009. The role of the conservator in the preservation of megafaunal bone from the excavations at Cuddie Springs, NSW. In: Fairbairn, A., O’Connor, S., Marwick, B. (Eds.), Terra. New Directions in Archaeological Science, Australis, pp. 255–262 (Chapter 17). Marean, C.W., Frey, C.J., 1997. Animal bones from caves to cities: reverse utility curves as methodological artifacts. American Antiquity 62 (4), 698–711. Marean, C.W., Abe, Y., Frey, C.J., Randall, R.C., 2000. Zooarchaeological and taphonomic analysis of the Die Kelders Cave 1 Layers 10 and 11 Middle Stone Age larger mammal fauna. Journal of Human Evolution 38, 197–233. Metcalfe, D., Barlow, K.R., 1992. A model for exploring the optimal trade-off between ﬁeld processing and transport. American Anthropologist 94 (2), 340–356. Miller, G., Magee, J.W., Johnson, B.J., Fogel, M.L., Spooner, N.A., McCulloch, M.T., Ayliffe, L.K., 1999. Pleistocene extinction of Genyornis newtoni: human impact on Australian megafauna. Science 283, 205–208. Mulvaney, J., Kamminga, J., 1999. Prehistory of Australia. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington. Murray, P.F., Vickers-Rich, P., 2003. Magniﬁcent Mihirungs: The Colossal Flightless Birds of the Dreamtime. Indiana University Press, Indiana, p. 416. Nicholson, A., Cane, S., 1991. Desert camps: analysis of Australian Aboriginal protohistoric camp-sites. In: Gamble, C.S., Boismier, W.A. (Eds.), Ethnoarchaeological Approaches to Mobile Campsites. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, pp. 263–354. Norton, C.J., Hasegawa, Y., Kohno, N., Tomida, Y., 2007. Distinguishing archaeological and paleontological faunal collections from Pleistocene Japan: taphonomic perspectives from Hanaizumi. Anthropological Science 115, 91–106. O’Connell, J.F., 1987. Alyawara site structure and its archaeological implications. American Antiquity 56 483–593. O’Connell, J.F., 2000. An emu hunt. In: Anderson, A., Murray, T. (Eds.), Australian Archaeologist: Collected Papers in Honour of Jim Allen. Division of Archaeology and Natural History, Research School of Paciﬁc and Asian Studies. Australian National University, Canberra, pp. 172–181. O’Connell, J.F., Allen, J., 2004. Dating the colonization of Sahul (Pleistocene Australia–New Guinea): a review of recent research. Journal of Archaeological Science 31, 835–853. O’Connell, J.F., Allen, J., 2007. Pre-LGM Sahul (Pleistocene Australia–New Guinea) and the archaeology of early modern humans. In: Mellars, P., Boyle, K., BarYosef, O., Stringer, C. (Eds.), Rethinking the Human Revolution. McDonald Institute, Cambridge, pp. 395–410. O’Connell, J.F., Marshall, B., 1989. Analysis of kangaroo body part transport among the Alyawara of Central Australia. Journal of Archaeological Science 16, 393–405. O’Connell, J.F., Hawkes, K., Blurton-Jones, N.G., 1992. Patterns in the distribution, site structure and assemblage composition of Hadza kill-butchering sites. Journal of Archaeological Science 19, 319–345. M. Fillios et al. / Quaternary International 211 (2010) 123–143 Olsen, S.L., Shipman, P., 1988. Surface modiﬁcation on bone: trampling versus butchery. Journal of Archaeological Science 15, 535–553. Outram, A.K., 2004. Applied models and indices vs. high-resolution, observed data: detailed fracture and fragmentation analyses for the investigation of skeletal part abundance patterns. Journal of Taphonomy 2 (3), 167–184. Outram, A.K., Knusel, C.J., Knight, S., Harding, A.F., 2005. Understanding complex fragmented assemblages of human and animal remains: a fully integrated approach. Journal of Archaeological Science 32, 1699–1710. Pickering, M., 1995. Notes on the Aboriginal hunting and butchering of cattle and buffalo. Australian Archaeology 40, 17–20. Prideaux, G.J., Long, J.A., Ayliffe, L.K., Hellstrom, J.C., Pillans, B., Boles, W.E., Hutchinson, M.N., Roberts, R.G., Cupper, M.L., Arnold, L.J., Devine, P.D., Warburton, N.M., 2007. An arid-adapted middle Pleistocene vertebrate fauna from south-central Australia. Nature 445, 422–425. Reed, E.H., 2001. Disarticulation of kangaroo skeletons in semi-arid Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 49, 615–632. Reed, E.H., Bourne, S.J., 2000. Pleistocene fossil vertebrate sites of the South East region of South Australia. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 124 (2), 61–90. Rich, P.V., 1979. The Dromornithidae, an Extinct Family of Large Ground Birds Endemic to Australia. Australian Government, Canberra. Roberts, R.G., Flannery, T.F., Ayliffe, L.K., Yoshida, H., Olley, J.M., Prideaux, G.J., Laslett, G.M., Baynes, A., Smith, M.A., Jones, R., Smith, B.L., 2001a. New ages for the last Australian megafauna: continent wide extinction about 46,000 years ago. Science 292, 1888–1892. Roberts, R.G., Flannery, T.F., Ayliffe, L.K., Yoshida, H., Olley, J.M., Prideaux, G.J., Laslett, G.M., Baynes, A., Smith, M.A., Jones, R., Smith, B.L., 2001b. Response to ‘Archaeology and Australian Megafauna’. Science 294 7a. Schweitzer, M.H., Wittmeyer, J.L., Horner, J.R., 2005. Gender-speciﬁc reproductive tissue I ratites and Tyrannosaurus rex. Science 308, 1456–1460. Shipman, P., Rose, J., 1983. Early hominid hunting, butchering, and carcass-processing behaviors: approaches to the fossil record. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 2, 57–98. Solomon, S., 1985. People and other aggravations: taphonomic research in Australia. Unpublished BA (Hons) thesis. University of New England, Australia. Solomon, S., Davidson, I., Watson, D., 1990. (Eds.), Problem Solving in Taphonomy: Archaeological and Palaeoenvironmental Studies from Europe, Africa and Oceania, Tempus, 2. Spurling, B., Hayden, B., 1984. Ethnoarchaeology and intrasite spatial analysis: a case study from the Australian Western Desert. In: Hietala, H.J. (Ed.), Intrasite Spatial Analysis in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 224–241. Stern, N., 1993. The structure of the Lower Pleistocene archaeological record: a case study from the Koobi Fora formation. Current Anthropology 34 (3), 201–225. 143 Stiner, M., 2002. On in situ attrition and vertebrate body part proﬁles. Journal of Archaeological Science 29, 979–991. Stiner, M., Kuhn, S.L., Weiner, S., Bar-Yosef, O., 1995. Differential burning, recrystalization, and fragmentation of archaeological bone. Journal of Archaeological Science 22 23–237. Trueman, C.N.G., Field, J.H., Dortch, J., Charles, B., Wroe, S., 2005. Prolonged coexistence of humans and megafauna in Pleistocene Australia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 102 (23), 8383–8385. Turney, C.S.M., Flannery, T.F., Roberts, R.G., Reid, C., Fiﬁeld, L.K., Higham, T.F.G., Jacobs, Z., Kemp, N., Colhoun, E.A., Kalin, R.M., Ogle, N., 2008. Late-surviving megafauna in Tasmania, Australia, implicate human involvement in their extinction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105 (34), 12150–12153. Villa, P., Mahieu, E., 1991. Breakage patterns of human long bones. Journal of Human Evolution 21 (1), 27–48. von den Driesch, A., 1976. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. Peabody Museum Bulletins, Cambridge, MA. Voorhies, M.R., 1969. Taphonomy and population dynamics of an early Pliocene vertebrate fauna, Knox County, Nebraska. University of Wyoming Contributions to Geology. Special Papers 1, 1–69. Wells, R., 1978. Fossil animals in the reconstruction of Quaternary environments with examples from the Australian fauna. In: Walker, D., Guppy, J.C. (Eds.), Biology and Quaternary Environments. Australian Academy of Science, Canberra, pp. 103–124. Wells, R.T., Grun, R., Sullivan, J., Forbes, M.S., Dalgairns, S., Bestland, E.A., Rhodes, E.J., Walshe, K.E., Spooner, N.A., Eggins, S., 2006. Late Pleistocene megafauna at Black Creek Swamp, Flinders Chase National Park, Kangaroo Island, South Australia. Alcheringa Special Issue 1, 367–387. Wilkinson, C.S., 1885. President’s address, annual general meeting. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of N.S.W. 9, 1207–1241. Wroe, S., Field, J., 2001a. Megafaunal mystery remains. Australasian Science 22 (Sept), 21–25. Wroe, S., Field, J., 2001b. Red herrings and giant wombats. Australasian Science 22 (Nov), 18. Wroe, S., Field, J., 2006. A review of the evidence for a human role in the extinction of Australian Megafauna and an alternative explanation. Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 2692–2703. Wroe, S., Field, J., Fullagar, R., 2002. Lost giants. Nature Australia 27 (5), 54–61. Wroe, S., Field, J., Fullagar, R., Jermiin, L., 2004a. Megafaunal extinction in the Late Quaternary and the global overkill hypothesis. Alcheringa 28, 291–332. Wroe, S., Crowther, M., Dortch, J., Chong, J., 2004b. The size of the largest marsupial and why it matters. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 271 (Suppl. 3), S34–S36.

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

Investigating human and megafauna co-occurrence in Australian prehistory: Mode and causality in fossil accumulations at Cuddie Springs

Investigating human and megafauna co-occurrence in Australian prehistory: Mode and causality in fossil accumulations at Cuddie Springs

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS