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.