Archéologie, Art Préhistorique

Methodical studies on bone accumulations left by modern hyaenids started in the 1950s with contributions by Hughes. They are still continuing in order to highlight comparisons and to develop models for the interpretation of Pleistocene samples, in which hyaenid fossils are common. Between 1999 and 2007, studies on modern hyaenids have involved visits and/or excavations of: 2 striped hyaena dens (Arad, in Israel, Datagabou in Djibouti), the analysis of 1 brown hyaena den (Uniab in Namibia) and 7 spotted hyaena dens (Agna, Doumali, Galahela, Haraide, Oboley, Ouarabeley, Yangula and Ari in Djibouti) as well as 2 spotted hyaena kill-sites (Doumali and Haraide in Djibouti:). Taphonomic study examined data on the species composition, frequency of preserved and altered skeletal elements, the location and dimensions of tooth marks on the bones and the spatial distribution of remains inside and outside dens. Results allow us to make the following general remarks:
1. The 3 hyaena species carry bones to their dens but spotted hyaenas seem to abandon more bones around than inside dens, compared to striped and brown hyaenas (Datagabou vs Haraide). At the Uniab bones were distributed outside the burrows;
2. Distribution of bones varies between sites and does not support the ‘mirror effect’ Binford noted (den s.s. / entrance borders / kill-sites);
3. Basal deposits of den sediments are often inaccessible, creating problems with assessing sample composition (bone representation, quantification and spatial distribution;
4. Bones are concentrated along the walls (Datagabou, Doumali);
5. The osteological material comes mostly from small/medium size mammals, domesticated (goats for Djibouti’s sites) or wild (springbok and oryx at Uniab), but there are more robust mammals (dromedary at Djibouti);
6. Long bones appear to have few fractures. Anatomical connections of complete and sub complete long bones, mostly of donkey / oryx / dromedary size, are present;
7. Despite being numerous, biting or nibbling traces are small and this leads to questions about consumer identification; and
8. Dens are often re-used by secondary collectors such as Hystrix.
It quickly became apparent at the start of our research that available documentation on modern hyaenas should be assessed and reinterpreted. Thus far we have checked 266 known dens (137 C. crocuta, 68 P. brunnea, 61 H. hyaena). In order to discuss the significance of and characteristics of fossil dens the following details are recorded: geomorphologic context (cave dens/burrow dens); functional context (birth dens/communal dens); topographic location of the bone remains (inside/outside); quantification of the identified species (NISP, MNE, MNI); distribution of the skeleton elements as well as the traces left by the hyaena.

ABSTRACT We compare taphonomically relevant aspects of 6 bone accumulations produced by extant spotted hyaenas Crocuta crocuta, striped hyaenas Hyaena hyaena, and brown hyaenas Parahyaena brunnea) from eastern and southern Africa (Republic of Djibouti and Namibia) and published accounts. We highlight similarities and differences in the bone-cracking/consumption and bone collecting habits of each hyaena species with a view to revealing criteria that might be used to distinguish these species. Four parameters are described: i) the prey taken and preferences, ii) the skeletal part distribution, iii) the long bone fragmentation, iv) the tooth mark diversity and frequency. Information from hyaena ecology and the ungulate remains recovered from each bone accumulation reveals differences (or a lack thereof) related to environment, anthropogenic pressure and ethology. Spotted hyaena hunting strategy and clan size suggest a low degree of inter-group competition, but high levels of intra-group on-carcass competition; fewer osteological remains are brought back to dens. In contrast, striped and brown hyaenas are primarily scavengers (removing carcass remnants) and produce significant accumulations of bones at their dens. These differences are likely to be related mainly to inter-specific competition and serve to reduce interaction with other carnivores and to limit kleptoparasitism; the composition of accumulations at dens is determined by food availability and foraging behaviour to a greater or lesser degree. Modern analogues are essential baseline tools for elucidating characteristics that might distinguish each species. The development of neo-taphonomic models is the first step towards comparison and greater understanding of the palaeo-ethology of extinct Pleistocene hyaenids.