Taphonomy in early African archaeological sites: Questioning some bone surface modification models for inferring fossil hominin and carnivore feeding interactions

• Early human passive scavenging models remain empirically unsupported.
• Bootstrapping analyses require a minimum number of samples.
• Cut mark distribution on upper limb bones from FLK Zinj reflect bulk defleshing.
• Hammerstone-broken long bones from felid-consumed carcasses bear few tooth marks.

Taphonomy has developed powerful referential models in Africa through experimentation with humans and carnivores. Although some of these models have been useful in helping archaeologists understand the earliest Oldowan record, others present conceptual problems that bias interpretations. Pante et al. (2012) produced biased statistical models for inferring hominin and carnivore feeding behavior from fossil bone assemblages. Domínguez-Rodrigo et al. (2014) questioned this approach and provided an extensive list of arguments disproving that hominins opportunistically exploited carcasses at FLK Zinj (Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania). Pante et al. (2015) failed to prove the validity of their arguments, including that they identified tooth marks correctly on fossil assemblages and that tooth mark frequencies are not subjected to equifinal scenarios. Here we argue that our interpretations of the FLK 22 assemblage remain valid.