Vol.:(0123456789) Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 https://doi.org/10.1007/s41982-022-00111-1 1 3 ARTICLE Unravelling Hominin Activities in the Zooarchaeological Assemblage of Barranco León (Orce, Granada, Spain) José Yravedra1,2  · José Antonio Solano3 · Darío Herranz‑Rodrigo1,2 · Gonzalo J. Linares‑Matás4 · Juha Saarinen5 · Juan José Rodríguez‑Alba1, et al. [full author details at the end of the article] Accepted: 5 April 2022 © The Author(s) 2022 Abstract Little is known about the subsistence practices of the first European settlers, mainly due to the shortage of archaeological sites in Europe older than a million years. This article contributes to the knowledge of the subsistence of the first Europeans with new zooarchaeology and taphonomic data from the Palaeolithic site of Bar- ranco León (Orce, Granada, Spain). We present the results of the analysis of the faunal assemblages retrieved in the context of new excavations undertaken between 2016 and 2020. We have followed a standard methodology for the identification and quantification of species, mortality profiles, skeletal representation and taphonomic analysis. With regard to the taphonomic evidence, we have documented the extent of rounding, abrasion and other alterations. Finally, we examined traces from the activ- ities of carnivores and hominins that led to the accumulation and alteration of the bone assemblages. Results indicate that the archaeo-paleontological deposits from Barranco León present a dual-patterned mixed taphonomic origin. The first phase primarily involved waterborne processes (BL-D1), which led to the accumulation of lithic raw materials, a few archaeological stone tools, and some faunal remains with percussion and cutmarks. The second phase (BL-D2) contains several stone tools associated with faunal remains with more anthropogenic alterations, such as cutmarks and percussion marks. After analysing the Barranco León zooarchaeologi- cal assemblage, the present study concludes that hominins had access to the meat and within-bone nutrients of animals of diverse sizes. However, the specific carcass acquisition mechanisms that hominins followed are less certain because the pres- ence of tooth marks suggests that carnivores also played a role in the accumulation and modification of the Barranco León faunal assemblage. Keywords Early Pleistocene · Taphonomy · First settlement of Europe · Cutmarks · Hominin-carnivore interactions · Bone surface modifications http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4323-3379 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s41982-022-00111-1&domain=pdf Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 2 of 33 Introduction Barranco León (Guadix-Baza, Spain) is one of the oldest Early Pleistocene open- air sites in Europe (1.4 Ma). This site, alongside the nearby locality of Fuente Nueva 3, presents evidence of hominin behaviour, including the earliest lithic assemblages documented in the Iberian Peninsula (Turq et al., 1996; Gibert et al., 1998; Barsky et  al., 2010, 2015; Titton et  al., 2019, 2020, 2021; Toro-Moyano et  al., 2009, 2010a, b, 2011, 2013; Yravedra et  al., 2021). Barranco León has also produced hominin remains, specifically a mandibular left dm1 (Toro Moyano et al., 2013, although see also Gibert et al., 1999; Ribot et al., 2015). Bone modi- fications by biotic agents, including hominins, have also been documented at the site (Espigares, 2010; Espigares et  al., 2019). On the basis of these associated discoveries, Barranco León is one of the main localities for the study of hominin subsistence strategies at the onset of the first hominin settlement of Europe (Rod- ríguez-Gómez et al., 2016). Nevertheless publications dealing with archaeozool- ogy and taphonomy of the fauna assemblages have been scarce (Espigares, 2010; Huguet et al., 2013, 2017; Cheheb et al., 2019; Espigares et al., 2019). From a sedimentological point of view, Barranco León level D was described as a secondary deposit whose archaeo-paleontological remains have been reworked (Anadón et  al., 2003, 2015; Anadón and Gabàs, 2009; Anadón and Julià, 2010; Oms et  al. 2011) and interpretations described a secondary origin of the paleontological remains assemblages (e.g. Turq et  al., 1996; Toro-Moy- ano et  al., 2010a, 2010b, 2011, 2013). The presence of in  situ knapping activi- ties was pointed out by Toro et  al. (2013) based on a lithic refitting in level D. Nevertheless a recent study (Titton et al., 2021) has proved that Barranco León D1 (BL-D1) was both a raw material source and a knapping site. BL-D1 is there- fore a mix of primary and secondary archaeo-paleontological evidence sealed by another depositional event (BL-D2). Thus, the present study aims to expand the zooarchaeological and taphonomic interpretation of Barranco León. Specifically we focus on (1) unravelling the activities played by hominins in the bone accumu- lation (2) establishing the timing of hominin access to animal carcasses. Prior taphonomic assessments of the site have integrated insights from Fuente Nueva 3 (Espigares et al., 2019). The interplay of taphonomic factors in the Bar- ranco León sequence demand a more in-depth focus on the evidence from this locality. This new analysis will allow for a re-assessment of the interpretations provided by Espigares et al. (2019), who claim that hominins only played a sec- ondary role in terms of access to carcasses. From this perspective, these early hominin groups have been interpreted as scavengers of mammalian carnivore prey. This interpretation is in stark contrast with the evidence documented at other Early Pleistocene sites in Europe pre-dating 1Ma, such as Sima del Ele- fante, where taphonomic research has shown evidence of early human access to the carcasses prior to secondary carnivore involvement (Huguet et  al., 2013, 2017). The interpretation of hominins as scavengers offered by Espigares et  al. (2019) are also at odds with taphonomic evidence, such as the identification of cutmarks attributed to defleshing and evisceration activities reported in Espigares 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 3 of 33 6 et  al. (2019, SF table  s11), because evisceration cutmarks (i.e. those found on the ventral side of ribs) are generally associated with primary hominin access to carcasses. This reasoning is based on the fact that, upon hunting their prey, car- nivores consume the viscera first; as such, cutmarks associated with evisceration imply that hominin access to the carcass preceded carnivore feeding. Establishing the timing of carcass access by the different agents involved in the formation of the Barranco León assemblage is paramount for understanding and reconstructing hominin behaviour across the Orce Basin palaeolandscapes. As shown by Titton et al. (2021), the lithic assemblage from Barranco León evidences the existence of localised knapping activities involving the exploitation of blanks through several differentiated knapping sequences, as well as the use of multi-pur- pose tools. Furthermore, the taphonomic analyses of the faunal remains retrieved during the excavations carried out at Barranco León between 2017–2020 provide additional insights into the subsistence strategies of the first European populations. This research contributes to enhancing our knowledge of hominin behaviour in Europe before 1Ma. The Site of Barranco León The Early Pleistocene site of Barranco León (37°43’28.4"N 2°27’03.7"W) is located in the northeastern part of the Cenozoic Guadix-Baza Basin, in close proximity to the town of Orce (Granada, Spain) (Fig.1), where the Plio-Pleistocene Baza Forma- tion contains abundant archaeo-paleontological deposits. This open-air site has an excavated area extension of ca. 150 m2. The site is in the Upper Member, a deposit of lacustrine and palustrine origin resulting from the accumulation of silty calcare- ous deposits as well as a coarser fraction (Oms et al., 2011). The BL section has a thickness of roughly 25 m, and consists of mudstones, grey to yellow sands, grav- els and limestones. The stratigraphy bounding the site is divided into nine levels (Anadón et al., 2003; Anadón and Gabás, 2009; Oms et al., 2011). From oldest to youngest these are: level A, beige calcisiltite to calcarenites; level B, black and dark green feldspar quartz muddy sands; level C, beige calcisiltites to calcarenites; level D is divided in BL-D1, greyish gravels with a sandy matrix; BL-D2, greyish quartz- bioclastic sands, ending in whitish limestones; level E, fine-to-medium grained quartz and feldspar sands, with reddish, brown and greenish colorations; level F1, black sandy mudstones; level F2, bioclastic sands of greyish quartz with small chalk nodules in the upper part; and finally, level G corresponds to beige-colored sands. The two most important archaeological and palaeontological levels and those ana- lysed in this study are BL-D1 and BL-D2. The chronology of level D has been esti- mated at ca. 1.5 Ma using a combination of ESR and U/Th dating techniques (Toro- Moyano et al., 2013). BL-D1 is the main level with more fossil and lithic material. It has a thickness steadily increasing from 0 to 75 cm in a NW-SE direction. At its base, the gravels and cobbles have eroded a large part of the underlying level C and come into direct contact with the level B. This erosion is more evident in the SE, where the central axis of the palaeocurrent that gave origin to this level is located. The formation of BL-D1 is associated with a sudden event whereby high-energy Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 4 of 33 Fi g. 1 Lo ca tio n of B ar ra nc o Le ón (G ua di x- B az a ba si n) . A . G en er al lo ca tio n of G ua di x- B az a ba si n, B . R eg io na l l oc at io n of B ar ra nc o Le ón . C . S tra tig ra ph y fo r B ar ra nc o Le ón (G ua di x- B az a ba si n) 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 5 of 33 6 water flows brought gravels together with most of palaeontological and archaeologi- cal remains (Oms et al., 2011). The sedimentology and lateral variations of this level have been studied in detail by Anadón et al. (2003). The cobbles and the pebbles of the gravels were characterised by Anadón and Juliá (2010), who showed that they are dominated by palustrine intrabasinal siltstones with scarce Mesozoic siltstones from the adjacent External Zones. According to the stratigraphical sequence pro- vided by Oms et  al. (2011), we would therefore be dealing with a reworked level with a mixture of materials contributed from nearby distances and materials in pri- mary position. BL-D2 has a regular thickness of between 15 and 20 cm of sands very similar to those found in BL-D1. Nevertheless, this level does not seem to be posteriorly modified. The density and dimensions of the archaeo-palaeontological assemblage are lower compared to D1. The upper part of BL-D2 is a level of whit- ish chalky limestone with abundant ostracods, mollusks and charophyte remains (Fig. 1c). Thus, it is important to point out that due to the statigraphic complexity of Barranco León, well known since the work carried out by Oms et al. (2011), it is essential that all interpretations of this site refer to the levels defined there. Sedimentological analyses indicate the existence of a marginal freshwater area in the periphery of the saline main lake (Anadón et al., 2015). The freshwater was sourced from the adjacent highlands and mixed with surface waters and hydrother- mal ones. Palaeoecological analyses based on microfauna and tooth wear patterns indicate a predominance of Mediterranean woodland and open environments in the basin during much of the Early Pleistocene (e.g. Agustí et  al., 2010; Blain et  al., 2011; Sánchez-Bandera et  al. 2020; Saarinen et  al. 2021). Recent herpetofaunal studies (Sánchez-Bandera et al., 2020) show a tendency towards more arid condi- tions from BL-D1 to level E. The BL-D1 and BL-D2 depositional events took place in the context of a humid and wooded biotope. Table 1 showing the faunal spectrum for large vertebrates has been updated after Martínez-Navarro et  al. (2010) and includes Ursus etruscus, Canis mosbachensis, Xenocyon cf. lycaonoides, Vulpes alopecoides (Bartolini Lucenti and Madurell- Malapiera, 2020), Meles cf. meles, Martellictis ardea (Ros-Montoya et  al., 2021), Pachycrocuta brevirostris, Homotherium sp., Stephanorhinus etruscus, Equus alti- dens, E. sussenbornensis, Hippopotamus antiquus, Bison sp., Hemitragus cf. albus, Praemegaceros cf. verticornis and Metacervocerus rhenanus. A rich micromam- mals set is also represented by Mimomys savini (showing a representativity of 80% in relation to the total rodents), Allophaiomys aff. lavocati, Erinaceinae indet., Cro- cidura sp., Sorex minutus, Sorex sp., Galemys sp., Asoriculus gibberodon, Apode- mus aff. flavicollis and Hystrix sp (e.g. Agustí et al., 2015). In addition, Oryctolagus cf. lacosti is recorded. In addition the herpetofauna list is composed by Discoglos- sus sp., Pelobates cultripes, Epidalea calamita, Bufotes viridis s.l., Bufonidae indet., Hyla sp., Pelophylax cf. perezi, Anura indet., Lacertidae indet. Ophisaurus sp., Mal- polon monspessulanus, Natrix maura, Natrix natrix s.l., Natrix indet., cf. Coronella sp., Zamenis scalaris, Colubrinae indet. and Ophidia indet. (e.g. Blain et al., 2016; Sánchez-Bandera et al., 2020). The lithic association from BL is composed of a considerable number of artefacts typical of the Oldowan (e.g. Turq et  al., 1996; Gibert et  al., 1998; Toro-Moyano et  al., 2009, 2010a, b, 2011, 2013; Barsky et  al., 2010, 2015; Titton et  al., 2019, Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 6 of 33 Ta bl e 1 T ax on om ic re pr es en ta tio n in th e zo oa rc ha eo lo gi ca l a ss em bl ag es o f B ar ra nc o Le ón D 1 an d D 2, b as ed o n th e fa un al re m ai ns re tri ev ed fr om th e 20 17 –2 02 0 fie ld se as on s, qu an tifi ed in te rm s o f N IS P an d M N I N IS P da ta M N I d at a N IS P D 1 % D 2 % To ta l D 1 % S/ A /J/ I D 2 % S/ A /J/ I St ep ha no rh in us e tr us cu s 37 6. 7 0. 0 37 3 8. 3 1/ 0/ 1/ 1 Eq uu s s us se nb or ne ns is 11 2. 0 1 4. 3 12 1 2. 8 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 1 10 .0 0/ 0/ 0/ 1 Eq uu s a lti de ns 90 16 .3 3 13 .0 93 6 16 .7 1/ 3/ 1/ 1 2 20 .0 0/ 1/ 0/ 1 Eq uu s s p. 82 14 .9 1 4. 3 83 2 5. 6 0/ 1/ 1/ 0 1 10 .0 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 H ip po po ta m us a nt iq uu s 93 16 .9 4 17 .4 97 4 11 .1 0/ 2/ 1/ 1 1 10 .0 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 Bi so n sp . 11 2. 0 0. 0 11 2 5. 6 0/ 1/ 1/ 0 B ov id ae 29 5. 3 2 8. 7 31 2 5. 6 0/ 2/ 0/ 0 1 10 .0 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 C ap ra a lb a 36 6, 6 0. 0 36 2 5. 6 0/ 2/ 0/ 0 C er vi da e 77 14 .0 3 13 .0 80 2 5. 6 0/ 1/ 1/ 0 1 10 .0 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 M et ac er vo ce ru s r he na nu s 23 4. 2 2 8. 7 25 2 5. 6 1/ 1/ 0/ 0 1 10 .0 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 Pr ae m eg ac er os c f. ve rt ic or ni s 9 1. 6 2 8. 7 11 1 2. 8 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 1 10 .0 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 C an is m os ba ch en si s 1 0. 2 0. 0 1 1 2. 8 0/ 0/ 1/ 0 Xe no cy on ly ca on oi de s 1 0. 2 0. 0 1 1 2. 8 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 C an id ae in de t. 5 0. 9 0. 0 5 0. 0 Pa ch yc ro cu ta b re vi ro st ri s 3 0. 5 0. 0 3 1 2. 8 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 Fe lid ae in de t. 1 0. 2 0. 0 1 1 2. 8 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 M us te lid ae in de t. 1 0. 2 0. 0 1 1 2. 8 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 U rs us e tr us cu s 2 0. 4 0. 0 2 1 2. 8 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 C ar ni vo re in de t. 10 1. 8 0. 0 10 0. 0 O ry ct ol ag us la co st i 30 5. 4 5 21 .7 35 3 8. 3 0/ 2/ 1/ 0 1 10 .0 0/ 1/ 0/ 0 To ta l m am m al ia d et er m . 55 1 10 0. 0 23 10 0. 0 57 4 36 10 0. 0 3/ 23 /8 /3 10 10 0. 0 0/ 8/ 0/ 2 C he lo ni a 89 6 33 92 9 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 7 of 33 6 Ta bl e 1 (c on tin ue d) N IS P da ta M N I d at a N IS P D 1 % D 2 % To ta l D 1 % S/ A /J/ I D 2 % S/ A /J/ I M am m al ia in de t s iz e 0 44 3. 0 5 5. 0 49 M am m al ia in de t s iz e 1 45 3. 0 1 1. 0 46 M am m al ia in de t s iz e 2 31 4 21 .1 19 18 .8 33 3 M am m al ia in de t s iz e 3 37 6 25 .2 29 28 .7 40 5 M am m al ia in de t s iz e 3a 79 5. 3 6 5. 9 85 M am m al ia in de t s iz e 3b 39 1 26 .2 18 17 .8 40 9 M am m al ia in de t s iz e 4 19 5 13 .1 21 20 .8 21 6 M am m al ia in de t s iz e 5 53 3. 6 2 2. 0 55 In de t 7, 90 4 14 1 8, 04 5 To ta l 10 ,8 48 29 8 11 ,1 46 Fa un al re m ai ns d et er m in ab le 1, 44 7 56 1, 50 3 % F au na d et er m in ab le 13 19 13 .4 8 M am m al ia in de t 9, 40 1 24 2 9, 64 3 % F au na in de te rm in ab le 87 81 87 A ge c la ss es : S , S en ile s; A , A du lts ; J , J uv en ile s; I, In fa nt s. Re m ai ns a ttr ib ut ed to c he lo ni an s w er e ex cl ud ed fr om o ve ra ll M N I a nd N IS P pe rc en ta ge s; th ey a re o nl y re pr e- se nt ed b y ca ra pa ce fr ag m en ts Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 8 of 33 2020, 2021). These include cores, flakes, flake fragments, debris, retouched pieces, angular fragments, hammers and unmodified cobbles. The raw materials used are predominantly flint and limestone from the nearby Jurassic formations, although there are several quartzite implements too (Toro-Moyano et  al., 2011). Flint is mainly used for small and sharp tools while limestone is mostly used for the manu- facture of percussion objects (Titton et al., 2019). The tool-kit is primarily focused on obtaining small, sharp-edged tools for immediate use on site. The in situ knap- ping processes at this site have been confirmed by several refitted lithic artefacts refittings (Toro-Moyano et al., 2013; Titton et al., 2021). Nevertheless, there is evi- dence for the use of heavy tools in the development of various active percussion activities other than knapping, such as bone fracturing, tendon processing, vegetal matter crushing or woodworking (Barsky et al., 2015; Titton et al., 2019). Among these tools, several spheroids and subspheroids may also have been used for these purposes (Titton et al., 2020; see also Assaf et al., 2020). Materials and Methods The materials analysed for this study came from BL-D1 and BL-D2, retrieved between 2016 and 2020. These levels account for 11,146 remains. The zooarchaeo- logical and taphonomic analysis focused on the entirety of this assemblage. Faunal remains were quantified by number of identifiable specimens (NISP), minimum number of elements (MNE) and minimum number of individuals (MNI). MNI estimates considered specimen side, ontogenetic age and all other relevant osteological data derived from morphological and taphonomic variables (Brain, 1969). Mortality profiles were generated by assigning elements to one of four cat- egories described in Yravedra (2006): infantile, juvenile, prime adult-adult and senile, based on tooth eruption and crown wear and epiphyseal fusion. Anatomical pattern were quantified in MNE, these are based on a division of the following anatomical regions: cranial (i.e. horn, cranium, mandible and teeth); axial (vertebrae, ribs, pelves and scapulae, according to Yravedra and Domínguez- Rodrigo (2009). Appendicular limbs are classified according to upper appendicular elements (humerii and femora); intermediate (radii, tibiae, patella and ulnae) and lower appendicular bones (metapodials, carpals, tarsals, phalanges and sesamoids). Long limb bones were further divided into anterior elements (scapulae, humerii, radii, ulnae, carpals and metacarpals), as well as posterior elements (pelves, femora, tibiae, patella, tarsals and metatarsals). Indeterminate herbivore and carnivore specimens that could not be identified were assigned a weight/size class. The categories used for herbivores follow the taxonomic adaptation made by Espigares et al. (2019) of the classification system developed by Bunn (1982): (0), including species weighing less than 25 kg; very small size (1), including macro-vertebrates species weighing 25–50 kg; small size (2), including spe- cies weighing 50–125 kg; intermediate size (3), including species weighing 125–500 kg, with an additional division between 3a (125–250 kg) and 3b (250–500 kg); large size (4), including species weighing 500–1000 kg; and very large size (5) for species weighing >1000 kg. Carnivores were classified according to three size classes: small 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 9 of 33 6 carnivores (e.g. foxes), intermediate carnivores (e.g. wolves), and large carnivores (e.g. lions and hyenas), following Espigares et al. (2019). Bone fragmentation was analysed according to three variables. Firstly, bones were divided into several categories according to their length: <3cm, 3.1–5.0cm, 5.1–10cm and >10 cm, in order to identify the intensity of bone fragmentation within the sample. Secondly, bones were classified according to the nature of their breakage planes (green or dry) following the criteria of Villa and Mahieu (1991). Criteria used to diagnose dry breaks included the existence of abundant breaks that are longitudinal and/or transverse to the axis of the bone as well as breakage planes that are uneven, rough and exhibiting micro-step fractures. Dry breaks are further characterised by cortical medullary surface angles that are close to 90°. In contrast, green breaks specimens have smoother surfaces and more abundant oblique breakage planes. Lastly, shaft preservation was recorded according to circumference types; where type 1 refers to specimens with <25% of the shaft circumference intact, type 2 refers to specimens with 25–50% of the shaft circum- ference intact, and type 3 refers to specimens with >50% shaft circumference and those with a complete circumference, following Bunn (1982). The impact of water alterations was estimated with fragment size distributions, as well as the presence of abrasion, polishing and rounding on bone surfaces according to Cáceres (2002) and Yravedra (2006). Rounding and abrasion were additionally classified into different stages (light, intermediate, and intense) on the basis of their intensity on bone surfaces, following Yravedra (2006). According to Lyman (1994) and Fernández Jalvo and Andrews (2016), abrasion is a physical phenomenon that can be caused by a range of different processes. At Barranco León, bone abrasion has a mechanical origin, associated with friction with the sedimentary matrix. This fact was already noticed in lithic industries (Titton et  al., 2021) and small verte- brates (Blain et al., 2011). Weathering intensity was analysed following Behrensmeyer et  al. (1978). Bone surface modification analyses were carried out using hand-held lenses at 10–40x magnification (Blumenschine, 1986). Tooth marks were classified as pits, scores or puncture, while furrowing was also analysed, following established criteria by mul- tiple authors (Binford, 1981; Blumenschine, 1995; Blumenschine et al., 1996). Cut and percussion marks were classified according to Binford (1981), Blumenschine and Salvaggio (1988) and Blumenschine et al. (1996). Modifications were quantified for specimens with well-preserved bone surfaces, in terms of NISP values. Cut and trampling marks were analysed according to Olsen and Shipman (1988), Yravedra (2006) or Fernández Jalvo and Andrews (2016). Other processes, such as manganese staining or biochemical alterations, were recorded using the criteria outlined by Fernández Jalvo and Andrews (2016). Results Zooarchaeological Analyses The sample analysed comprises 11,146 remains, with most remains derived from BL-D1 (n=10,848), and 298 from BL-D2, of which 13% and 19% respectively Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 10 of 33 could be determined (Table  1). The herbivores are more heavily represented than carnivores, albeit both exhibit a considerable taxonomic diversity. The carnivore assemblage includes remains of canids, mustelids, small felids and ursids. Among the herbivores, several species of bovids, caprids, cervids and equids have been identified. Fron BL-D1 the most represented taxon in terms of MNI is Equus alti- dens (NISP=90, MNI=6), followed by Hippopotamus antiquus (NISP=93, MNI=4) and Stephanorhinus etruscus (NISP=37, MNI=3). The remaining species for BL-D1 are less well abundant, with generally only one or two individuals (Table 1). On the basis of taxonomic groups, equids are the best represented, followed by cervids, bovids and caprids. Regarding indeterminate remains, the size 3 group (medium-sized animals) is the best represented group, in accordance with the predominance of equids and cervids at the site (Table 1). From a palaeoecological perspective, a wide range of species from many different ecological settings are represented at BL-D1. While species associated with open environments, such as equids and rhinoceroses, predominate, cervids – generally linked to more wooded environments – are also well represented (Saarinen et  al., 2021). Species that favour watercourses and wetland environments, such as hippo- potami and turtles, are common, with taxa associated with upland areas or rocky settings such as Capra alba also being present. The BL-D1 mortality profiles show a predominance of adult individuals across most taxa, with the exception of the largest species, such as rhinoceros and hippo- potamus, for which infant and juvenile age classes are better represented. Excavations of BL-D2 have returned a much smaller faunal assemblage (n=298), of which only 13.48% could be identified (Table  1). Among the specimens iden- tified, species from various groups of herbivores have been found (Table 1), with remains from hippopotamus, bovids, several species of deer and equids identified at the species level. From a palaeoecological perspective, the species represented also imply a wide diversity of habitats, as there are animals well adapted to open spaces, such as equids, species associated with wooded environments, such as cervids, and animals dependent on watercourses, such as hippopotami and turtles. Mortality pat- terns show a predominance of adults in all taxa, although two infant individuals of horse were identified. The skeletal part profiles observed for BL-L1 and BL-L2 show that only taxa of size 2 and 3 (50-500Kg) have a representative MNE (n > 100) (see Suppl. File 1). None of the remaining size classes exceed an MNE count of 100 elements, render- ing them to be not very representative. Cranial elements, including teeth, are the most commonly represented remains identified at species level, with teeth compris- ing between 30-60% of the MNE for all size classes other than size 4. The remaining anatomical sections are also represented in the assemblage, although in compara- tively lower quantities. Axial, carpals, tarsal and appendicular remains all reach over 10% for sizes 2-3 (Suppl. File 1), which imply that most anatomical elements were present at BL. The skeletal part biases identified, such as the mismatch between anterior and posterior appendicular elements, or the low MNE/MNI ratios for most size classes, could correspond to the impact of different taphonomic agencies in the assemblage, such as carnivore ravaging or waterborne processes, which could affect the loss of fossils. 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 11 of 33 6 Taphonomic Analyses The fragmentation of the faunal assemblage is very high, with a predominance of bones smaller than 3 cm. This fact constrains taxonomic identification, and 87% of bones had to be categorised as indeterminate (Table 1). Upon analysing each level, it can be seen that bone fragmentation is extensive across two levels. Among the long bones, the high level of fragmentation is reflected in both their circumference index as well as their relative length. More than 95% of long bones at both levels have either less than 25% of the circumference of the diaphysis or less than 25% of the total relative length of the bone (Table 2). This fragmentation likely reflects the impact of diverse biological and physical processes, given that >32.0% of bones from BL-D1 and >41.7% of bones from BL-D2 exhibit green fractures (Table 2). Nevertheless, a large number of long bone fragments pre- sent fracture planes that could not be ascribed to either category, and for which no cause of fragmentation could be established (Table 2). In terms of preservation conditions, 61% of BL-D1 specimens and 57% of BL-D2 remains exhibit a poor cortical bone surface preservation (Table 3). Subaerial expo- sure is not the primary cause of these preservation conditions, since most bones show no weathering or only the early stages of this process (Table 3). In contrast, it is evident that hydraulic alterations are a more relevant factor for understanding assemblage composition and bone preservation, given the high incidence of round- ing, abrasion and polishing alterations in the BL assemblages. The main hydraulic alteration observed on bones from Barranco León is round- ing; 53.9% of the BL-D1 bone sample and 49.3% of BL-D2 bones show rounding, Table 2 Fragmentation patterns for the bones of BL-D1 and BL-D2 zooarchaeological assemblages Taphonomic characteristics D1 % D1 D2 % D2 Bones < 3 cm 9489 87.5 209 70.1 Bones 3.1–5cm 1016 9.4 72 34.4 Bones 5.1–9.9 cm 303 2.8 14 19.4 Bones > 10 cm 40 0.4 3 21.4 Total NISP 10,848 298 % Long Bone with fractures and their nature   % Green fracture: oblique smooth 375 32.8 30 41.7   % Dry fracture: transverse jagged 217 19.0 7 9.7   % Indet. fracture 551 48.2 35 48.6 % Degree of circumference of shafts of long bones   <25% 946 97.6 60 95.2   26–50% 18 1.9 1 1.6   >51% 5 0.5 2 3.2 % Length of shafts with respect to long bones   <25% 967 99.7 60 95.2   26–50% 2 0.2 1 1.6   >51% 1 0.1 2 3.2   Total NISP 970 63 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 12 of 33 with advanced stages of rounding in 33.6% and 26.5% of the assemblages, respec- tively (Table 3). The other two types of waterborne alterations (abrasion and polish- ing) feature less prominently at the site. Abrasion affects 3.3% of BL-D1 remains and 4.7% of BL-D2 remains, with polishing affecting 9.3% of the BL-D1 assem- blage and 19.1% of the BL-D2 assemblage. Bones exhibit only a light stage of abra- sion intensity, indicating a low incidence of abrasive sediment in the water flows. Moreover, the greater incidence of rounding in relation to abrasion suggests that Table 3 Taphonomic alterations for Barranco León, levels D1 and D2 (see Methods section for details) Taphonomic characteristics (NISP) D1 D2 %D1 %D2 Samples with bone surfaces preservation excluding teeth   Bad 5749 152 61.8 57.4   Good and moderate preservation 3559 143 38.2 54.0 Weathering stages (according Behrensmeyer, 1978)   Weathering stage 0 8368 203 89.9 76.6   Weathering stage 1–2 873 57 9.4 21.5   Weathering stage 3–4 68 5 0.7 1.9 Water alteration   Light stage abrasion 266 9 75.1 64.3   Intermediate stage abrasion 66 3 18.6 21.4   Intense stage abrasion 30 2 8.5 14.3   Polishing 1012 57 9.3 19.1   Rounding 5842 147 53.9 49.3   Light stage rounding 1552 78 26.6 53.1   Intermediate stage rounding 2325 30 39.8 20.4   Intense stage rounding 1965 39 33.6 26.5   Calcitic concretions 176 11 1.6 3.7   Oxides (MN, FE) 6833 136 63.0 45.6 Trampling   Trampling alterations 330 25 9.3 17.5 Biochemical alterations   Biochemical and root-etching alterations 339 19 9.5 13.3 Rodent tooth marks   Bones with rodent tooth marks 2 – 0.06 Carnivore activity   Bones with carnivore tooth marks 167 16 4.7 11.2   Digestive alterations 9 – 0.3 Anthropogenic bone alterations   Bones with cut marks 70 12 2.0 8.4   Bones with percussion marks 46 4 1.3 2.8 Total sample NISP   Sample NISP 10848 298   Sample NISP excluding teeth 9308 265 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 13 of 33 6 bones were not exposed to repeated water flows damaging their cortical surface, and instead the waterborne alterations are more likely to have resulted from the high- energy fluvial processes, which transported and introduced these bones into the Bar- ranco León sequence. Other waterborne alterations, such as oxide staining over the bone surfaces, have been frequently documented in the assemblages (63% of BL-D1 and 45.6% of BL-D2), but they do not seem to have masked other bone surface modifications. With regard to biochemical alterations, root etching had no impact on bone sur- face preservation. Likewise, rodent activity was very limited, with only 0.06% of bones showing rodent tooth marks. The main biological alterations observed in the BL faunal assemblage were associated with carnivore activity; 4.7% of BL-D1 bones and 11.2% of BL-D2 remains exhibit carnivore tooth marks (Table 3). Nevertheless, carnivore activity was not particularly intense; only 0.3% of bones show digestive alterations, 3% of toothmarked bones have more than five tooth marks, and furrow- ing was detected in only 0.4% (BL-D1) and 1.4% (BL-D2) of the Barranco León faunal assemblage. The size of tooth mark pits exhibits some degree of variability (between 1 and 5 mm in diameter), with two pits reaching 5 mm. When we compare the toothmark frequencies with actualistic reference frameworks (see Supplemen- tary File 1), the impact of carnivore activity in the assemblage appears low. Only cheetah carcass modification frequencies resemble those for animal size 1–2 from BL-D1 and BL-D2 (Fig. 2). The same patterns are observed with regard to tooth- mark distributions on bone shafts (Fig. 3) and on appendicular bones (Fig. 4), where only leopard and cheetah exploitation patterns show similar tooth mark frequencies to the upper limb bone patterns documented at BL-D1 (Fig. 4). The low toothmark frequencies documented at Barranco León therefore resemble more closely the pat- terns associated with secondary carnivore ravaging following human processing of the carcasses. Evidence of human activity was also documented in the faunal assemblages from Barranco León. At BL-D1, 1.2% of the bones show cutmarks and 1.3% exhibit per- cussion marks, while at D2, 8.4% of the assemblage shows cutmarks and 2.8% of the bones exhibit percussion marks (Table 3). Cutmarks have been observed on remains from animals of all sizes, including large specimens of sizes 4 and 5 (Table 4). The anatomical distribution of cutmarks offers insights into the type and degree of systematization of butchery behaviours represented in a faunal assemblage (López-Cisneros et al., 2019). In both levels, the presence of cutmarks on appendicular bone shafts is associated with filleting, and some cutmarks on bone joints are associated with disarticulation. We were not able to identify evidence for other butchery processes such as skinning or evisceration. The presence of percussion marks on long bones indicates that butchery processes included the intentional breakage of marrow cavities in order to gain access to their contents (Table 3). However, the percussion mark frequencies documented in BL-D1 and BL-D2 are very low and do not directly correspond with either of the models generated through experimental and actualistic references (Fig. 5). With regard to cutmark frequencies, the pattern is ambiguous. The frequencies of cutmarks for animal sizes 4–5 from BL-D1 fit with primary human access, and Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 14 of 33 Fi g. 2 To ot h m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s on a pp en di cu la r el em en ts f ro m B ar ra nc o Le ón le ve ls B L- D 1 an d B L- D 2 by s iz e cl as se s in r el at io n to th e ac tu al ist ic f ra m ew or k de riv ed fro m c ar ni vo re fe ed in g be ha vi ou rs w er e do cu m en te d in d iff er en t c on te xt s. Th e bl ue b ox h ig hl ig ht s th e ra ng e of to ot hm ar k fr eq ue nc ie s th at c ar ni vo re s te nd to le av e on bo ne s d ur in g se co nd ar y sc av en gi ng a ct iv iti es a fte r h um an a ba nd on m en t o f t he c ar ca ss es . T he y el lo w b ox sh ow s t he to ot hm ar k fr eq ue nc ie s r es ul tin g fro m a m od el in w hi ch vu ltu re s ac ce ss ed fi rs t t he c ar ca ss es , f ol lo w ed b y hu m an s an d th en c ar ni vo re s, w hi le th e re d bo x do cu m en ts th e m ai n ra ng e of to ot hm ar k fr eq ue nc ie s as so ci at ed w ith p ri- m ar y ca rn iv or e ac cu m ul at io ns . S ee S up pl em en ta ry F ile 2 fo r t he fu ll bi bl io gr ap hi c de ta ils o f t he re le va nt so ur ce s 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 15 of 33 6 Fi g. 3 To ot h m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s on li m b bo ne d ia ph ys es fr om B ar ra nc o Le ón le ve ls B L- D 1 an d B L- D 2 on a ni m al s iz e cl as se s 1– 2, 3 , a nd 4 –5 , i n re la tio n to th e ac tu al ist ic fr am ew or k de riv ed fr om c ar ni vo re fe ed in g be ha vi ou rs d oc um en te d in d iff er en t c on te xt s. Th e bl ue b ox h ig hl ig ht s t he ra ng e of to ot hm ar k fr eq ue nc ie s t ha t c ar ni vo re s t en d to le av e on b on es d ur in g se co nd ar y sc av en gi ng a ct iv iti es a fte r h um an a ba nd on m en t o f t he c ar ca ss es . T he y el lo w b ox sh ow s t he to ot hm ar k fr eq ue nc ie s r es ul tin g fro m a m od el in w hi ch v ul tu re s ac ce ss ed fi rs t t he c ar ca ss es , f ol lo w ed b y hu m an s an d th en c ar ni vo re s – bl ue b ox , w hi le th e re d bo x do cu m en ts th e m ai n ra ng e of to ot hm ar k fr eq ue nc ie s as so ci at ed w ith p rim ar y ca rn iv or e ac cu m ul at io ns . S ee S up pl em en ta ry F ile 2 fo r t he fu ll bi bl io gr ap hi c de ta ils o f t he so ur ce s Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 16 of 33 Fi g. 4 To ot h m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s on a pp en di cu la r r em ai ns fr om B ar ra nc o Le ón le ve ls B L- D 1 an d B L- D 2 on a ni m al s iz e cl as se s 1– 2, 3 , a nd 4 –5 , i n re la tio n to th e ac tu al is - tic fr am ew or k de riv ed fr om c ar ni vo re fe ed in g be ha vi ou rs d oc um en te d in d iff er en t c on te xt s. U LB re fe rs to to ot hm ar ks o n up pe r l im b bo ne s, su ch a s hu m er ii an d fe m or al re m ai ns , I LB re fe rs to in te rm ed ia te li m bs (t ib ia e, ra di i), w hi le L LB s ta nd s fo r l ow er li m b bo ne s (i. e. m et ap od ia ls ). Se e Su pp le m en ta ry F ile 2 fo r m or e in fo rm at io n on th e co m pa ra tiv e sa m pl es a nd th ei r f ul l b ib lio gr ap hi c de ta ils 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 17 of 33 6 a similar behavioural interpretation can be deduced from the cut-mark data for size 3 animal remains from BL-D2. Nevertheless, the low frequencies documented for the remaining taxa resembles some scenarios with secondary hominin access (Fig.  6). Cut-mark frequencies on appendicular elements follow a similar pattern, as upper and intermediate limb bone data only indicate primary access for the larger size classes (4–5), whereas the low incidence of cutmarks on these elements may correspond to secondary access (Fig. 7). The data from lower limb bones are also ambiguous, since some frequencies are consistent with primary access while others may suggest secondary access. Lastly, the higher frequency of cutmarks on diaphy- ses is more indicative of primary anthropogenic access, particularly for BL-D2. In the case of BL-D1, the frequencies reported could fit carnivore-first or hominin-first actualistic scenarios (Fig. 7). The different lines of evidence described in Figs. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 show frequen- cies of tooth, cut and percussion marks that are somewhat ambiguous to interpret, preventing a clear assessment of temporality of access to animal carcasses accumu- lated at Barranco León. The presence of percussion marks indicates an exploitation Table 4 Anatomical distribution of cut marks for Barranco León D1 and D2 by animal size class (see Methods section for details) D1 (NISP) 1 2 3 3a 3b 4 5 Indet Total Vertebrae 1 1 2 4 Ribs 1 3 2 6 Scapula 1 1 Humerii 1 4 5 Femur 1 1 1 3 Estilopodials 1 1 2 Radii 1 1 Zeugopodials 1 1 Tibiae 1 1 1 3 Metacarpals 1 1 Metapodials 2 1 1 4 Carpals 1 1 Phalanges 1 1 Indeterminate fragment shafts 1 3 3 2 4 6 1 4 24 Plate of carapace 2 2 Indet 3 2 2 4 11 Total 1 8 13 3 13 15 2 15 70 D2 1 2 3 3a 3b 4 5 Indet Total Ribs 1 2 3 Indeterminate fragment shafts 2 1 1 1 5 Indet 1 1 2 Placa 2 2 Total 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 12 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 18 of 33 Fi g. 5 Pe rc us si on m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s on a pp en di cu la r e le m en ts fr om B ar ra nc o Le ón le ve ls B L- D 1 an d B L- D 2 on th e ba si s of c ar ca ss s iz e (1 –2 , 3 , a nd 4 –5 ) i n re la tio n to th e co m pa ra tiv e fr am ew or k ge ne ra te d by se ve ra l e xp er im en ta l a nd a ct ua lis tic st ud ie s. Th e bl ue b ox re pr es en ts th e pe rc us si on m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s g en er at ed b y hu m an s w he n th ey h av e ea rly a cc es s to c ar ca ss es , a nd th e re d bo x en co m pa ss es th e pe rc us si on m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s in c on te xt s of s ec on da ry a cc es s. Se e Su pp l. Fi le 2 fo r bi bl io gr ap hi c de ta ils o f t he c om pa ra tiv e sa m pl es e m pl oy ed 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 19 of 33 6 Fi g. 6 C ut -m ar k m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s o n ap pe nd ic ul ar e le m en ts fr om B ar ra nc o Le ón le ve ls B L- D 1 an d B L- D 2 on th e ba si s o f c ar ca ss si ze (1 –2 , 3 , a nd 4 –5 ) i n re la tio n to th e co m pa ra tiv e fr am ew or k ge ne ra te d by s ev er al e xp er im en ta l a nd a ct ua lis tic s tu di es . T he b lu e bo x re pr es en ts th e cu t-m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s ge ne ra te d by h um an s w he n th ey h av e ea rly a cc es s to c ar ca ss es , t he y el lo w b ox c or re sp on ds to c ut -m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s w he n hu m an a cc es s fo llo w ed th e pr es en ce o f v ul tu re s bu t p re ce de d ca rn iv or e ac ce ss , w hi le th e re d bo x en co m pa ss es c ut -m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s f ro m c on te xt s o f s ec on da ry a cc es s. Se e Su pp l. Fi le 2 fo r b ib lio gr ap hi c de ta ils o f t he c om pa ra tiv e sa m pl es e m pl oy ed Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 20 of 33 Fi g. 7 C ut -m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s on a pp en di cu la r re m ai ns f ro m B ar ra nc o Le ón le ve ls B L- D 1 an d B L- D 2 on a ni m al s iz e cl as se s 1– 2, 3 , a nd 4 –5 . U LB r ef er s to to ot hm ar ks on u pp er li m b bo ne s, su ch a s hu m er ii an d fe m or al re m ai ns , I LB re fe rs to in te rm ed ia te li m bs (t ib ia e, ra di i), w hi le L LB s ta nd s fo r l ow er li m b bo ne s (i. e. m et ap od ia ls ). Th e bl ue b ox re pr es en ts c ut -m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s le ft by h um an s in e ar ly c ar ca ss a cc es s co nt ex ts , w hi le th e re d bo x sh ow s cu t-m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s in c on te xt s of s ec on da ry a cc es s. C ut -m ar k fr eq ue nc ie s o n di ap hy se s a re sh ow n on th e rig ht h an d si de o f t he g ra ph . S ee S up pl . F ile 2 fo r m or e in fo rm at io n on th e co m pa ra tiv e sa m pl es a nd th ei r f ul l b ib lio - gr ap hi c de ta ils 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 21 of 33 6 of medullary contents of limb bones across all animal sizes, and the cut-mark data indicate patterns of defleshing and disarticulation across all animal sizes (Table 4). Although we do not have conclusive results regarding the precise timing of access to carcass, we can confidently say that hominids had access to high-quality animal resources, such as meat and within-bone nutrients resources from various species, including very large prey. At this stage, however, it is important to bear in mind that over half of the faunal assemblage from BL-D1 show signs of waterborne rounding, of which 39% exhibit a stage of intense alteration and 36% correspond to an intermediate stage of altera- tion. The depositional origin of these bones with considerable hydraulic alterations may correspond to the high-intensity fluvial flash flood processes responsible for the incorporation of part of the mixed lithic and faunal assemblages (Titton et al., 2021); as such, they may contribute little to our assessments of the temporality of carcass access by hominin and carnivore agents. Under this premise, it is paramount to assess whether there are taphonomic differences between the subset of the assem- blage that exhibits considerable waterborne alterations resulting from fluvial trans- port and those that are in primary position. According to the data from Table  5, it appears that bone surface modification frequencies of bones with little to no rounding, attributed to a primary depositional context, do not show substantial differences from the calculations derived from the total sample. Both samples exhibit both anthropogenic and carnivore alterations, although frequency data suggest that carnivores played a more relevant role than humans in the modification of the faunal assemblage with greater waterborne round- ing. This pattern also suggests that the bones with intense rounding were transported from an accumulation area (i.e. potentially a different site) where both humans and carnivores were also involved. Therefore, it is clear that BL-D1 is a very complex depositional and taphonomic sequence, encompassing a palimpsest of carnivore and hominin activities, with the added caveat of including exogenous elements with their own taphonomic biographies involving both carnivores and early humans, and origi- nating from a different place in the landscape. In this context, it would be prema- ture to establish a definitive temporality of carcass access by the different biological agents involved in the accumulation. Discussion and Conclusions Zooarchaeological and taphonomic analyses of fauna from Barranco León offer use- ful perspectives on site formation processes and hominin and carnivore behaviour. The considerable number of faunal remains with intense rounding (Table 1), along- side lithic implements featuring waterborne alterations (Titton et  al., 2019, 2020, 2021), represent a first depositional input in secondary position, with materials transported into the site by high-intensity hydraulic processes. On the other hand, a large number of bones with good cortical preservation, with green fracture planes and without waterborne alterations (Tables 1, 3, and 5) most likely derive from a subsequent accumulation in primary position (Oms et al., 2011; Titton et al., 2021). Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 22 of 33 Ta bl e 5 B on es m od ifi ed b y hu m an s an d ca rn iv or es fr om B L- D 1 an d B L- D 2. T he fa un al a ss em bl ag e w as s ub di vi de d in to th re e ca te go rie s: to ta l s am pl e, s am pl e w ith c le ar ev id en ce o f r ou nd in g, sa m pl e w ith li gh t t o no ro un di ng (s ee M et ho ds se ct io n) Ta ph on om y B ar ra nc o Le ón - le ve l D 1 N IS P % N IS P w ith n o ro un di ng o r lig ht st ag e ro un di ng % N IS P w ith ro un di ng al te ra tio ns % N IS P to ta l 10 84 8 65 53 42 95 B on e su rfa ce s To ta l ( ex cl . t ee th ) 93 08 85 .8 53 00 80 .9 40 08 93 .3 Sp ec im en s w ith p oo r p re se rv at io n 57 49 61 .8 30 51 57 .6 26 98 67 .3 Sa m pl es w ith g oo d or re gu la r p re se rv a- tio n ex cl ud in g te et h 35 59 38 .2 22 49 42 .4 13 10 32 .7 Ro un di ng B on es w ith ro un di ng (i nc l. te et h) 58 42 62 .8 15 52 23 .7 42 90 99 .9 Li gh t s ta ge ro un di ng 15 52 15 52 0 In te rm ed ia te st ag e ro un di ng 23 25 0 23 25 In te ns e st ag e ro un di ng 19 65 0 19 65 T ra m pl in g Tr am pl in g al te ra tio ns 33 0 9. 3 20 0 8. 9 13 0 9. 9 C ar ni vo re a ct iv ity B on es w ith to ot h m ar ks 16 7 4. 7 13 3 5. 9 34 2. 6 H um an a ct iv ity B on es w ith c ut m ar ks 70 2. 0 63 2. 8 7 0. 5 B on es w ith p er cu ss io n m ar ks 46 1. 3 41 1. 8 5 0. 4 M or e sp ec ifi c ev id en ce o f h um an a nd c ar ni vo re a ct iv ity N IS P % N IS P w ith li gh t t o no ro un di ng % N IS P w ith c le ar ro un di ng a lte ra tio ns % Sa m pl e w ith g oo d co rti ca l s ur fa ce a nd ex cl ud in g te et h A ni m al si ze 1 –2 22 8 19 4 34 A ni m al si ze 3 54 3 39 8 14 5 A ni m al si ze 4 –5 14 2 11 0 32 El em en ts w ith c ut m ar ks A ni m al si ze 1 –2 9 3. 9 8 4. 1 1 2. 9 A ni m al si ze 3 29 5. 3 26 6. 5 3 2. 1 A ni m al si ze 4 –5 17 12 .0 15 13 .6 2 6. 3 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 23 of 33 6 Ta bl e 5 (c on tin ue d) Ta ph on om y B ar ra nc o Le ón - le ve l D 1 N IS P % N IS P w ith n o ro un di ng o r lig ht st ag e ro un di ng % N IS P w ith ro un di ng al te ra tio ns % Sa m pl e w ith p er cu ss io n m ar ks A ni m al si ze 1 –2 14 6. 1 13 6. 7 1 2. 9 A ni m al si ze 3 21 3. 9 20 5. 0 1 0. 7 A ni m al si ze 4 –5 4 2. 8 3 2. 7 1 3. 1 Sa m pl e w ith to ot h m ar ks A ni m al si ze 1 –2 24 10 .5 21 10 .8 3 8. 8 A ni m al si ze 3 75 13 .8 61 15 .3 14 9. 7 A ni m al si ze 4 –5 19 13 .4 13 11 .8 6 18 .8 Sa m pl e of a pp en di cu la r l im bs w ith go od su rfa ce s p re se rv at io n A ni m al si ze 1 –2 92 81 11 A ni m al si ze 3 22 4 17 6 48 A ni m al si ze 4 –5 50 35 15 A pp en di cu la r l im bs w ith c ut m ar ks A ni m al si ze 1 –2 5 5. 4 4 4. 9 1 9. 1 A ni m al si ze 3 18 8. 0 15 8. 5 3 6. 3 A ni m al si ze 4 –5 13 26 .0 12 34 .3 1 6. 7 A pp en di cu la r l im bs w ith to ot h m ar ks A ni m al si ze 1 –2 12 13 .0 9 11 .1 3 27 .3 A ni m al si ze 3 37 16 .5 27 15 .3 10 20 .8 A ni m al si ze 4 –5 10 20 .0 5 14 .3 5 33 .3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 24 of 33 These co-occurring assemblages are both characterised by a low incidence of weathering alterations, which implies two possible interpretations: (1) that only a short timespan had elapsed between the first natural accumulation and the traces of hominin behaviour at the site recorded in the primary-position deposit, suggest- ing rapid burial; (2) that bones were on a relatively humid substrate, with vegeta- tion providing shelter from subaerial exposure, particularly sun radiation, and sud- den changes in temperature and humidity, thus delaying bone weathering trends (Andrews and Whybrow, 2005; Fernández-Jalvo and Andrews, 2016). This second interpretation is not implausible, given how the BL palaeoenvironmental data sug- gests a humid and wooded biotope (Sánchez-Bandera et al., 2020; Saarinen et al., 2021). Moreover the presence among herpetofauna of a treefrog (Hyla sp.) suggest that the body of water would have been surrounded by abundant marshy vegetation (Blain et  al., 2011; Sánchez-Bandera et  al., 2020). Either way, the processes that contributed to the formation of both subsets of the BL D1 faunal assemblage pal- impsest described in the present study led to low weathering patterns. Barranco León therefore presents a complex taphonomic history that is difficult to interpret. Previous taphonomic research on the Barranco León assemblage that focused almost entirely on carnivore and hominin behaviour (e.g. Espigares et  al. 2019) have not taken into sufficient consideration other crucial site formation pro- cesses. BL-D1 comprises two intertwined taphonomic histories, with bones exhibit- ing differences in the nature and intensity of waterborne alterations (rounding, pol- ish, abrasion), weathering, and breakage types (dry vs green) that may indicate a sequence of different depositional events. At the same time, Fernández-Jalvo and Andrews (2003) showed that variability in the nature and intensity of waterborne alterations do not necessarily imply different stages or sub-assemblages; bones may all be simultaneously abraded to varying extents. These results imply that the differ- ent waterbone alterations may correspond to a single depositional event. While the assessment of these site formation processes is well discussed in the taphonomic literature, particularly regarding palimpsest formation due to waterborne inputs (Voorhies, 1969, 1970; Behrensmeyer, 1982; Fiorillo, 1988; Aslan and Behrens- meyer, 1996; Ziegler and van Huet 2021); discriminating between these two sce- narios is still difficult, particularly since weathering patterns at Barranco León may offer little additional insights regarding the temporality of accumulation. This is because of the aforementioned pattern that favourable climatic conditions, such as those documented at the site (Sánchez-Bandera et al., 2020), may delay the weather- ing trends of exposed bones (Andrews and Whybrow, 2005; Fernández-Jalvo and Andrews, 2016). Nonetheless, despite these caveats, other lines of evidence further reinforce the plausibility of the hypothesis that two depositional events took place at Barranco León. Titton et al. (2021) suggests that it is likely that different depositional events contributed to the formation of the lithic assemblage, with a first input of transported material, and a second phase representing more localised processes with a greater and clearer anthropogenic signature. In terms of hominin–carnivore interactions, the dual-patterned taphonomic sequence recorded in BL-D1 led to the incorporation of bones with both carnivore and hominin alterations to the site. The fossil remains in secondary position are 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 25 of 33 6 therefore likely to derive from a different locality where both hominins and carni- vores interacted with animal carcasses. The action of carnivores appears more sub- stantial in this subset of the assemblage than in the remains associated with a pri- mary deposition, although the unknown nature of the inferred locality from where the displaced elements would have derived from prevents the suggestion of further behavioural hypotheses. With regard to the subset of the assemblage in primary position, both hominins and carnivores played a role in the modification, and likely accumulation, of the fau- nal assemblage. Nevertheless, the results in Table  5 are ambiguous, and it is not possible to determine if hominins had primary or secondary access to the carcasses. With regard to early human behaviour and the role that hominins played in the accumulation of the fossil assemblage of BL-D1, the results obtained are not entirely conclusive. When analysing the frequency and distribution of tooth marks, the pre- sent data reports carnivores to have had a rather limited impact on the assemblage (Figs. 2, 3 and 4). The comparison of tooth mark data with actualistic frameworks suggests that carnivore access to carcasses was likely secondary to hominins. This assessment, and the data presented in Yravedra et al. (2021) for Fuente Nueva 3, are actually in agreement with the conclusions reached by Espigares et al. (2019:10) for these Orce localities: ‘carnivore activity in these sites seems to have been residual compared to hominin activity’. At the same time, primary access to animal carcasses by hominins at Barranco León cannot be conclusively determined on the basis of comparative assessments of cut and percussion mark frequencies with actualistic frameworks (Figs. 5, 6 and 7). The data from Fig. 6 suggests hominins to have had primary access to animal sizes 4–5 at BL-D1 and size 3 carcasses at BL-D2. Nevertheless, the small sample sizes included here hinder further conclusions, while the remaining size classes at BL-D1 had rather low cut-mark frequencies, inconsistent with the expectations of primary access by hominins. The ambiguity from cut-mark frequency data is also reflected in Fig. 7, since the counts per anatomical unit are generally very low, and only those on limb bone diaphyses would match actualistic expectations of primary access to car- casses by hominins. Nevertheless, overlap is still present between secondary homi- nin access models. Therefore, the detailed taphonomic and zooarchaeological data for BL-D1 presented here does not currently allow the establishment of a definitive order of whether hominins or carnivores had primary access to the carcasses. The present study was able to identify cutmarks on a wide range of carcass sizes, such as hippopotamus (size 5, BL-D1), equids and chelonian remains in both BL-D1 and BL-D2. These results are consistent with the reported observations by Espig- ares et al. (2019). Nevertheless, in contrast to these previous efforts (Espigares et al., 2019, Table S11), the present study was unable to identify cutmarks that could be unambiguously attributed to evisceration. While the present study was able to iden- tify cutmarks on several rib fragments (Table 4), future research with more detailed documentations of these types of trace could be useful to confirm an early access to the carcasses by hominins. Carnivores tend to consistently consume viscera first when processing a newly acquired prey, as documented for felines (Schaller, 1972; Blumenschine, 1986; Blumenschine and Cavallo, 1992; Rodríguez-Alba et al. 2019), canids (Mech, 1970; Stahler et  al., 2006; Yravedra et  al., 2011) or hyenas Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 26 of 33 (Kruuk, 1972; Blumenschine, 1995; Faith, 2007). As such, the evidence of eviscera- tion reported by Espigares et al. (2019) would therefore be inconsistent with their proposed secondary scavenging scenario at BL and Fuente Nueva-3. In addition to the intertwined depositional histories of the two sub-assemblages from BL-D1, the archaeological sequence of Barranco León also encompasses BL-D2, a finer coarse deposit with few small pebbles and some associated fauna accu- mulated in the context of low-energy fluvio-lacustrine sedimentation. The BL-D2 fau- nal sample is small and the inferred insights into hominin–carnivore interactions, as well as early human subsistence strategies, are similarly ambiguous and inconclusive (Figs. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7). Undertaking future analyses once the available samples for taphonomic examination are expanded through fieldwork or careful restoration of less well-preserved specimens may offer more conclusive results. Furthermore, the incorporation of new technologies applied to the study of cut- marks, such as artificial intelligence, 3D microscopic images and confocal micros- copy, may allow the identification of which raw materials and types of lithic imple- ments were employed in the activities of defleshing and disarticulation documented at the site (e.g. Bello and Soligo, 2008; Courtenay et al., 2017; Linares-Matás et al., 2019; Maté-González et  al., 2019; Yravedra et  al., 2019). This approach would assist in relating the zooarchaeological and the lithic assemblages at BL. Similarly, a geometric morphometric assessment of the tooth marks would give us insights into the specific carnivore(s) that played a role in the accumulation and/or altera- tion of the bone assemblages at the site (cf. Aramendi et al., 2017; Arriaza et al., 2019; Courtenay et  al., 2019, 2020). Additionally, future high-resolution spatial analyses may provide additional evidence for resolving the issue of the occupational sequence at BL, as well as potentially enable a better understanding of distribution patterns, which may provide evidence of site space management in the context of hominin-carnivore interactions in the Early Pleistocene (e.g. Giusti and Arzarello 2016; Luzón et al. 2021; Linares-Matás et al. 2021). In summary, even though insights from the zooarchaeological and taphonomic study of Barranco León are constrained by the nature, size and resolution of the samples under analysis, there are some relevant conclusions that can be put forward in an attempt to enhance our understanding of early European subsistence strate- gies >1 Ma. These communities were able to exploit a considerable range of car- cass sizes in a multi-stage butchery sequence, combining access to meat with the acquisition of within-bone nutrients, such as marrow, in line with behaviours docu- mented in the African continent during the Early Pleistocene (e.g. Bunn and Ezzo, 1993; Ferraro et al., 2013; Linares-Matás and Clark 2021), including the exploita- tion of large and very large animal taxa (cf. Linares-Matás and Yravedra 2022). In the absence of clear evidence regarding the order of carcass access, and joint exploi- tation by hominins and carnivores, suggestions of secondary or confrontational scavenging at BL (e.g. Palmqvist et al., 2005, 2011; Rodríguez Gómez et al., 2016; Espigares et al., 2019) must be regarded with caution. At the same time, based on the present data, conclusions cannot be drawn to confirm whether or not hominins had primary access to the carcasses, a pattern documented, for example, at Sima del Elefante (Huguet et al., 2013). In this regard, the available evidence from Barranco León resembles the pattern observed at other Early Pleistocene localities in Europe 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 27 of 33 6 predating 1 Ma, such as Kozarnika (Sirakov et al, 2010), Trilika (Vislobokova et al., 2020) or Pirro Nord (Cheheb et al., 2019), where complex site formation processes, insufficient sample sizes and/or issues related to bone surface preservation are obscuring the inferences to be derived from faunal assemblages. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s41982- 022- 00111-1. Acknowledgements We thank all the researchers and students involved in the excavations, recovery and preparation of the archeo-paleontological record from Barranco León. We also want to thank the anony- mous reviewers for their comments and suggestions that have contributed to improve this work. Funding Open Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. This research was funded and authorized by the Junta de Andalucía, Consejería de Educación, Cultura y Deporte: Orce Research Project ‘Primeras ocupaciones humanas y contexto paleoecológico a partir de los depósitos pliopleistocenos de la cuenca Guadix-Baza: zona arqueológica de la Cuenca de Orce (Granada, España), 2017–2020’ (BC.03.032/17). We extend our gratitude to PALARQ Foundation with the convocatory of Analitics 2019: ‘Identificando Carnívoros a partir de análisis Tafonómicos de última generación aplicando Fotogrametría y Morfometría Geométrica de las Marcas de Diente. Aplicación a Yacimientos del Pleistoceno Inferior Ibérico: Fuente Nueva III, Venta Micena 3 y 4 (Granada), Pontón de la Oliva (Patones, Madrid)’. Lloyd Austin Courtenay is also funded by the Spanish Ministry of Sci- ence, Innovation and Universities with an FPI Predoctoral Grant (Ref. PRE2019-089411) associated with project RTI2018-099850-B-I00 and the University of Salamanca. The doctoral research of Gonzalo Lin- ares-Matás is supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council [grant number AH/R012709/1] through a Baillie Gifford AHRC Scholarship (OOC-DTP program) at the University of Oxford. Christian Sánchez-Bandera is supported by a FPI Predoctoral Scholarship (PRE2020-094482) associated with pro- ject CEX2019-000945-M-20-1 with the financial sponsorship of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation. Stefania Titton. is beneficiary of a Margarita Salas contract (Spanish System of Science, Technology and Innovation) at Universitat Rovira i Virgili (2021URV‐MS‐03) funded by the European Union–NextGenerationEU, the Ministry of Universities and Recovery, Transformation and Resilience Plan. Stefania Titton, Christian Sánchez-Bandera, Deborah Barsky, Jordi Agustí and Hugues-Alexandre Blain are part of research group 2017SGR-859 (Generalitat de Catalunya). IPHES belongs to the CERCA Program (Generalitat de Catalunya). The Institut Català de Paleoecologia Humana i Evolució Social (IPHES-CERCA) has received financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation through the ‘María de Maeztu’ program for Units of Excellence (CEX2019-000945-M). Oriol Oms is part of research group 2017SGR-1666 (Generalitat de Catalunya). Juan Manuel Jiménez-Arenas belongs to the Junta de Andalucía Research Group HUM-607 and the Unit of Excellence ‘Archaeometrical Stud- ies. Inside the Artefacts & Ecofacts’ (University of Granada). Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Com- mons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/. References Agustí, J., Blain, H.-A., Furió, M., de Marfá, R., & Santos-Cubedo, A. (2010). The early Pleistocene small vertebrate succession from the Orce region (Guadix-Baza Basin, SE Spain) and its bearing on the first human occupation of Europe. Quaternary International., 223-224, 162–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41982-022-00111-1 https://doi.org/10.1007/s41982-022-00111-1 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 28 of 33 Agustí, J., Blain, H.-A., Lozano-Fernández, I., Piñero, P., Oms, O., Furió, M., & Sala, R. (2015). Chrono- logical and environmental context of the first hominin dispersal into western Europe: The case of Barranco León (Guadix-Baza Basin, SE Spain). Journal of Human Evolution, 87, 1–8. Anadón, P., & Gabás, M. (2009). Paleoenvironmental evolution of the early Pleistocene lacustrine sequence at Barranco León archeological site (Orce, Baza basin, southern Spain) from stable iso- topes and Sr and mg chemistry of ostracod shells. Journal of Paleolimnology, 42, 261–279. Anadón, P., Juliá, R., (2010). Estudio petrológico de los clastos de las excavaciones de Barranco León (BL-5) y Fuente Nueva-3 (FN-3). Pleistoceno inferior. Orce (Granada). In: Toro, I., Martínez-Nav- arro, B., Agustí, J., Coord (Eds.), Ocupaciones humanas en el Pleistoceno inferior y medio de la Cuenca de Guadix-Baza. Junta de Andalucía, Consejería de Cultura, Arqueología Monografía. Anadón, P., Juliá, R., & Oms, O. (2003). Estratigrafía y estudio sedimentológico preliminar de diversos afloramientos en Barranco León y Fuente Nueva (Orce, Granada). In I. Toro, J. Agustí, & B. Mar- tínez (Eds.), El Pleistoceno inferior de Barranco León y Fuente Nueva 3, Orce (Granada). Memo- ria científica Campañas 1999-2002, Monografías de Arqueología, (Vol. 17, pp. 47–72). Junta de Andalucía. Anadón, P., Oms, O., Riera, V., & Julià, R. (2015). The geochemistry of biogenic carbonates as a paleoen- vironmental tool for the Lower Pleistocene Barranco León sequence (BL-5D, Baza Basin, Spain). Quaternary International., 389, 70–83. Andrews, P., & Whybrow, P. (2005). Taphonomic observations on a camel skeleton in a desert environ- ment in Abu Dhabi. Palaeontologia Electronica, 8(1), 23A 17p, http:// palaeo- elect ronica. org/ paleo/ 2005_1/ andre ws23/ issue1_ 05. htm Aramendi, J., Maté-González, M. A., Yravedra, J., Ortega, M. C., Arriaza, M. C., González-Aguilera, D., Baquedano, E., & Domínguez-Rodrigo, M. (2017). Discerning carnivore agency through the three- dimensional study of tooth pits: Revisiting crocodile feeding behaviour at FLK- Zinj and FLK NN3 (Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 488, 93–102. Arriaza, M. C., Aramendi, J., Maté-González, M. A., Yravedra, J., Baquedano, E., González-Aguilera, D., & Domínguez-Rodrigo, M. (2019). Geometric-morphometric analysis of tooth pits and the iden- tification of felid and hyenid agency in bone modification. Quaternary International, 517, 79–87. Aslan, A., & Behrensmeyer, A. K. (1996). Taphonomy and time resolution of bone assemblages in a contemporary fluvial system: The east Fork River, Wyoming. PALAIOS, 11(5), 411–421. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2307/ 35152 09 Assaf, E., Caricola, I., Gopher, A., Rosell, J., Blasco, R., Bar, O., Zilberman, E., Lemorini, C., Baena, J., Barkai, R., & Cristiani, E. (2020). Shaped stone balls were used for bone marrow extraction at lower Paleolithic Qesem cave. Israel. PLoS ONE, 15(4), 1–28. Barsky, D., Celiberti, V., Cauche, D., Grégoire, S., Lebègue, F., Lumley, H., & Toro Moyano, I. (2010). Raw material discernment and technological aspects of the Barranco León and Fuente Nueva 3 stone assemblages (Orce southern Spain). Quaternary International, 223-224, 201–219. Barsky, D., Sala, R., Menéndez, L., & Toro-Moyano, I. (2015). Use and re-use: Re-knapped flakes from the mode 1 site of Fuente Nueva 3 (Orce, Andalucía, Spain). Quaternary International, 361, 21–33. Bartolini Lucenti, S., & Madurell-Malapeira, J. (2020). Unraveling the fossil record of foxes: An updated review on the Plio-Pleistocene Vulpes spp. from Europe. Quaternary Science Reviews, 236, 106296. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. quasc irev. 2020. 106296 Bello, S. M., & Soligo, C. (2008). A new method for the quantitative analysis of cutmark micromorphol- ogy. Journal of Archaeological Science, 35, 1542–1552. Behrensmeyer, A. K. (1978). Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering. Paleobiology, 4, 150–162. Yravedra, J., Solano, J. A., Courtenay, L. A., Saarinen, J., Linares-Matás, G., Luzón, C., Serrano-Ramos, A., Herranz-Rodrigo, D., Cámara, J. M., Ruiz, A., Titton, S., Rodríguez-Alba, J. J., Mielgo, C., Blain, H.-A., Agustí, A., Sánchez-Bandera, C., Montilla, E., Toro-Moyano, I., Fortelius, M., et al. (2021). Use of meat resources in the Early Pleistocene assemblages from Fuente Nueva 3 (Orce, Granada, Spain). Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 13, 213. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s12520- 021- 01461-7 Behrensmeyer, A. K. (1982). Time sampling intervals in the vertebrate fossil record. Vol. 1. Proc. Third N. Am. Paleontol. Conv. (Montreal, Aug. 1982). Binford, L. R. (1981). Bones: Ancient men and modern myths. Academic Press. Blain, H.-A., Bailon, S., Agustí, J., Martínez-Navarro, B., & Toro, I. (2011). Paleoenvironmental and paleoclimatic proxies to the early Pleistocene hominids of Barranco León D and Fuente Nueva 3 http://palaeo-electronica.org/paleo/2005_1/andrews23/issue1_05.htm http://palaeo-electronica.org/paleo/2005_1/andrews23/issue1_05.htm https://doi.org/10.2307/3515209 https://doi.org/10.2307/3515209 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2020.106296 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-021-01461-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-021-01461-7 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 29 of 33 6 (Granada, Spain) by means of their amphibian and reptile assemblages. Quaternary International., 243, 44–53. Blain, H.-A., Lozano-Fernández, I., Agustí, J., Bailon, S., Menèndez, L., Espígares Ortiz, M. P., Ros- Montoya, S., Jiménez Arenas, J. M., Toro, I., Martínez-Navarro, B., & Sala, R. (2016). Refining upon the climatic background of the Early Pleistocene hominid settlement in Western Europe: Bar- ranco León and Fuente Nueva-3 (Guadix-Baza basin, SE Spain). Quaternary Science Reviews, 144, 132–144. Blumenschine, R. J. (1986). Early hominid scavenging opportunites. Implications of carcass availability in the Serengeti and Ngorongoro ecosystems. Oxford: BAR International Series 283. Blumenschine, R. J. (1995). Percussion marks, tooth marks, and experimental determination of the tim- ing of hominid and carnivore access to long bones at FLK Zinjanthropus, Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania. Journal of Human Evolution, 29, 21–51. Blumenschine, R. J., & Cavallo, J. A. (1992). Carroñeo y evolución humana (pp. 90–97). In: Libros de Investigación y Ciencia. Orígenes del Hombre Moderno. Blumenschine, R. J., & Salvaggio, M. M. (1988). Percussion marks on bone surfaces as a new diagnostic of hominid behaviour. Nature, 333, 763–765. Blumenshchine, R. J., Marean, C. W., & Capaldo, S. D. (1996). Blind test of interanalyst correspond- ence and accuracy in the identification of cutmarks, percussion marks, and carnivore tooth marks on bone surfaces. Journal of Archaeological Science, 23, 493–507. Brain, C. K. (1969). The probable role of leopards as predators of the Swartkrans australopithecines. South African Archaeological Bulletin, 24, 170–171. Bunn, H. T. (1982). Meat eating and human evolution: studies on the diet and subsistence patterns of pliopleistocene hominids in East Africa. PhD, Universidad de California, Berkeley. Bunn, H. T., & Ezzo, J. A. (1993). Hunting and scavenging by Plio-Pleistocene hominids: Nutritional constraints, archaeological patterns, and behavioural implications. Journal of Archaeological Science, 20, 365e398. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1006/ jasc. 1993. 1023 Cáceres, I. (2002). Tafonomía de yacimientos antrópicos en karst, Complejo Galeria (sierra de Atapu- erca, Burgos), vanguard cave (Gibraltar) y Abric Romaní (Capellades, Barcelona). Tarragona: PhD university Rovira i Virgili. Cheheb, R. C., Arzarello, M., Arnaud, J., Berto, C., Cáceres, I., Caracausi, S., Colopi, F., Daffara, S., Montanari Canini, G., Huguet, R., Karambatsou, T., Sala, B., Zambaldi, M., & Berruti, G. L. F. (2019). Human behavior and homo-mammal interactions at the first European peopling: New evidence from the Pirro Nord site (Apricena, southern Italy). The Science of Nature, 106, 16. Courtenay, L., Yravedra, J., Maté-González, M. A., Aramendi, J., & González Agulera, D. (2017). 3D analysis of cutmarks using a new geometric morphometric methodological approach. Archaeo- logical Anthropological Sciences., 11(2), 651–665. Courtenay, L. A., Yravedra, J., Huguet, R., Aramendi, J., Maté-González, M. A., González Aguilera, D., & Arriaza, M. C. (2019). Combining machine learning algorithms and geometric morpho- metrics: A study of carnivore tooth marks. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 522, 28–39. Courtenay, LA., Herranz-Rodrigo, D., Huguet, R., Maté-González, MA., González-Aguilera, D., Yravedra, J., (2020). Obtaining new resolutions in carnivore tooth pit morphological analyses: A methodological update for digital taphonomy. PLoS One 15(10): e0240328. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pone. 024032 Espigares, M.P. (2010). Análisis y modelización del contexto sedimentario y los atributos tafonómi- cos de los yacimientos pleistocénicos del borde nororiental de la Cuenca de Guadix-Baza. PhD Dissertation. Universidad de Granada (Spain). https:// digib ug. ugr. es/ handle/ 10481/ 4949, Espigares, M. P., Palmqvist, P., Guerra-Merchán, A., Ros-Montoya, S., García-Aguilar, J. M., Rod- ríguez-Gómez, G., Serrano, F., & Martínez-Navarro, B. (2019). The earliest cutmarks of Europe: A discussion on hominin subsistence patterns in the Orce sites (Baza basin, SE Spain). Scientific Reports, 9, 15408. Faith, J. T. (2007). Sources of variation in carnivore toothmark frequencies in a modern spotted hyena (Crocuta crocuta) den assemblage, Amboseli Park, Kenya. Journal of Archaeological Science, 34, 1601–1609. Fernández Jalvo, Y., & Andrews, P. (2003). Experimental effects of water abrasion on bone fragments. Journal of Taphonomy, 1(3), 147–163. Fernández Jalvo, Y., & Andrews, P. (2016). Atlas of Taphonomic identification. Ed: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1993.1023 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.024032 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.024032 https://digibug.ugr.es/handle/10481/4949 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 30 of 33 Ferraro, J. V., Plummer, T. W., Pobiner, B. L., Oliver, J. S., Bishop, L. C., Braun, D. R., Ditchfield, P. W., Seaman III, J. W., Binetti, K. M., Seaman Jr., J. W., Hertel, F., & Potts, R. (2013). Earliest archaeological evidence of persistent hominin carnivory. PLoS One, 8, 62174. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pone. 00621 74 Fiorillo, A. R. (1988). Taphonomy of Hazard homestead quarry (Ogallala group), Hitchcock County, Nebraska. Contributions to Geology - University of Wyoming, Laramie, 26(2), 57–97. Gibert, J., Gibert, L., Iglesias, A., & Maestro, E. (1998). Two ‘oldowan’ assemblages in the Plio- Pleistocene deposits of the Orce region, Southeast Spain. Antiquity, 72, 17–25. Gibert, J., Gibert, L. I., Albadalejo, S., Ribot, F., Sánchez, F., & Gibert, P. (1999). Molar tooth frag- ment BL5-0: The oldest human remain found in the Plio-Pleistocene of Orce, (Granada province, Spain). Human Evolution, 14, 3–19. Giusti, D., & Arzarello, M. (2016). The need for a taphonomic perspective in spatial analysis: For- mation processes at the Early Pleistocene site of Pirro Nord (P13), Apricena, Italy. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 8, 235–249. Huguet, R., Vallverdú, J., Rodríguez-Álvarez, X. P., Terradillos-Bernal, M., Bargalló, A., Lombera-Her- mida, A., Menéndez, L., Modesto-Mata, M., Van der Made, J., Soto, M., Blain, H.-A., García, N., Cuenca-Bescós, G., Gómez-Merino, G., Pérez-Martínez, R., Expósito, I., Allué, E., Rofes, J., Bur- jachs, F., et al. (2017). Level TE9c of Sima del Elefante (sierra de Atapuerca, Spain): A comprehen- sive approach. Quaternary International, 433, 278–295. Huguet, R., Saladié, P., Cáceres, I., Díez, C., Rosell, J., Bennasar, M., Blasco, R., Esteban-Nadal, M., Gabucio, J., Rodríguez-Hidalgo, A., & Carbonell, E. (2013). Successful subsistence strategies of the first humans in South-Western Europe. Quaternary International, 295, 168–182. Kruuk, H. (1972). The spotted hyena: A study of predation and social behavior. University of Chicago Press. Linares-Matás, G. J., & Clark, J. (2021). Seasonality and Oldowan behavioural variability. Journal of Human Evolution, 103070. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jhevol. 2021. 103070 Linares-Matás, G. J., & Yravedra, J. (2022). “We hunt to share”: Social dynamics and very large mammal butchery during the Oldowan-Acheulean transition. World Archaeology. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 00438 243. 2022. 20307 93 Linares-Matás, G., Yravedra, J., Maté-González, J., Aramendi, J., Courtenay, L., Cuartero, F., & González-Aguilera, D. (2019). A geometric-morphometric assessment of three-dimensional models of experimental cutmarks generated using flint and quartzite flakes and handaxes. Quaternary Inter- national, 517, 45–54. Linares-Matás, G. J., Fernández, N., Haber, M., López, M., & Walker, M. J. (2021). Hyenas and early humans in the latest Early Pleistocene of South-Western Europe. Scientific Reports, 11, 24036. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s41598- 021- 03547-7 López-Cisneros, P., Yravedra, J., Álvarez-Alonso, D., & Linares-Matás, G. (2019). The exploitation of hunted resources during the Magdalenian in the Cantabrian region. Systematisation of butchery pro- cesses at Coímbre cave (Asturias, Spain). Quaternary International, 506, 46–58. Luzón, C., Yravedra, J., Courtenay, L. L. A., Saarinen, J., Blain, H.-A., DeMiguel, D., Viranta-Kovanen, S., Azanza, B., Rodríguez-Alba, J. J., Herranz-Rodrigo, D., Serrano-Ramos, A., Solano, J. A., Oms, O., Agustí, J., Fortelius, M., & Jiménez Arenas, J. M. (2021). Taphonomic and spatial analyses from the Early Pleistocene site of Venta Micena 4 (Orce, Guadix-Baza Basin, southern Spain). Scientific Reports, 11, 13977. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s41598- 021- 93261-1 Lyman, R. L. (1994). Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge University Press. Martínez-Navarro, B., Palmqvist, P., Madurell-Malapeira, J., Ros-Montoya, S., Espigares, M.-P., Tor- regrosa, V., & Pérez-Claros, J. A. (2010). La fauna de grandes mamíferos de Fuente Nueva-3 y Barranco León-5: Estado de la cuestión. In I. Toro, B. Martínez-Navarro, & J. Agustí (Eds.), Ocu- paciones Humanas en el Pleistoceno inferior y Medio de la Cuenca de Guadix-Baza (pp. 197–236). Junta de Andalucía. Maté-González, M. A., González-Aguilera, D., Linares-Matás, G., & Yravedra, J. (2019). New technolo- gies applied to modelling taphonomic alterations. Quaternary International, 517, 4–15. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. quaint. 2018. 12. 021 Mech, L. D. (1970). The wolf: The ecology and behavior of an endangered species. The Natural History Press. Olsen, S. L., & Shipman, P. (1988). Surface modification on bone: Trampling Vs butchery. Journal of Archaeological Sciencie, 15, 535–553. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062174 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062174 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2021.103070 https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2022.2030793 https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2022.2030793 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-03547-7 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93261-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2018.12.021 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2018.12.021 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 31 of 33 6 Oms, O., Anadón, P., Agustí, J., & Julià, R. (2011). Geology and chronology of the continental Pleisto- cene archeological and mammal sites of the Orce area (Baza Basin, Spain). Quaternary Interna- tional, 243, 33–43. Palmqvist, P., Martínez-Navarro, B., Pérez-Claros, J.A., Torregrosa, V., Figueirido, B., Jiménez-Arenas, J.M., Espigares, M. P, Ros-Montoya, S., De Renzi, M., (2011). The giant hyena Pachycrocuta brevi- rostris: modelling the bone-cracking behavior of an extinct carnivore. Quaternary International, 243, 61-79. Palmqvist, P., Martínez-Navarro, B., Toro, I., Espigares, M. P., Ros-Montoya, S., Torregrosa, V., & Pérez- Claros, J. A. (2005). A re-evaluation of the evidence of human presence during Early Pleistocene times in southeastern Spain. L’anthropologie., 109, 411–450. Ribot, F., Gibert, L., Ferràndez-Cañadell, C., García-Olivares, E., Sánchez, F., & Lería, M. (2015). Two deciduous human molars from the Early Pleistocene deposits of Barranco León (Orce, Spain). Cur- rent Anthropology, 56, 134–142. Rodríguez-Alba, J. J., Linares-Matás, G., & Yravedra, J. (2019). First assessments of the taphonomic behaviour of jaguar (Panthera onca). Quaternary International, 517, 88–96. Rodríguez-Gómez, G., Palmqvist, P., Rodríguez, J., Mateos, A., Martín-González, J. A., Espigares, M. P., Ros-Montoya, S., & Martínez-Navarro, B. (2016). On the ecological context of the earliest human settlements in Europe: Resource availability and competition intensity in the carnivore guild of Bar- ranco León-D and Fuente Nueva-3 (Orce, Baza Basin, SE Spain). Quaternary Science Reviews, 134, 69–83. Ros-Montoya S., Bartolini-Lucenti S., Espigares, M. P., Palmqvist, P., & Martínez-Navarro B. (2021). First review of Lyncodontini material (Mustelidae, Carnivora, Mammalia) from the Lower Pleisto- cene archaeo-palaeontological sites of Orce (Southeastern Spain). Rivista Italiana de Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, 127, 33–47. Saarinen, J., Oksanen, O., Žliobaitė, I., Fortelius, M., deMiguel, D., Azanza, B., Bocherens, H., Luzón, C., Yravedra, J., Courtenay, L., Blain, H.-A., Sánchez-Bandera, C., Serrano-Ramos, A., Rodríguez- Alba, J., Viranta, S., Barsky, D., Solano-García, J., Tallavaara, M., Oms, O., et al. (2021). Pliocene to middle Pleistocene climate history in the Guadix-Baza Basin, and the environmental conditions of early homo dispersal in Europe. Quaternary Science Reviews, 268, 107132. Sánchez-Bandera, C., Oms, O., Blain, H.-A., Lozano-Fernández, I., Bisbal-Chinesta, J. F., Agustí, J., Saarinen, J., Fortelius, M., Titton, S., Serrano-Ramos, A., Luzón, C., Solano-García, J., Barsky, D., & Jiménez-Arenas, J. M. (2020). New stratigraphically constrained palaeoenvironmental recon- structions for the first human settlement in Western Europe: The Early Pleistocene herpetofaunal assemblages from Barranco León and Fuente Nueva 3 (Granada, SE Spain). Quaternary Science Reviews, 243. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. quasc irev. 2020. 106466 Schaller, G. B. (1972). The Serengeti lion: A study of predator-prey relations. University of Chicago Press. Sirakov, N., Guadelli, J.-L., Ivanova, S., Sirakova, S., Boudadi-Maligne, M., Dimitrova, I., Fernandez, P., Ferrier, C., Guadelli, A., Iordanova, D., Iordanova, N., Kovatcheva, M., Krumov, I., Leblanc, J. C., Miteva, V., Popov, R., Spassov, R., Taneva, S., & Tsanova, T. (2010). An ancient continuous human presence in the Balkans and the beginnings of human settlement in western Eurasia: A Lower Pleis- tocene example of the Lower Palaeolithic levels in Kozarnika cave (North-western Bulgaria). Qua- ternary International, 223–224, 94–106 Stahler, D. R., Smith, D. W., & Guernsey, D. S. (2006). Foraging and feeding ecology of the gray wolf (Canis lupus): Lessons from Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, USA. Journal of Nutrition, 136(7 Suppl), 1923–1926. Titton, S., Barsky, D., Bargalló, A., Serrano-Ramos, A., Vergès, J. M., & Toro-Moyano, I. (2020). Y con- testé subspheroids in the lithic assemblage of Barranco León (Spain): Recognizing the late Oldowan in Europe. PLoS One, 15(1), e0228290. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pone. 02282 90 Titton, S., Barsky, D., Bargallo, D., Vergès, JM., Guardiola, M., García-Solano, J., Jiménez-Arenas, JM., Toro-Moyano, I., Sala, R., (2019). Active percussion tools from the Oldowan site of Barranco León (Orce, Andalousie, Spain): The fundamental role of pounding activities in hominin lifeways. Jour- nal of Archaeological Science, 96, 131–147 Titton, S., Oms, O., Barsky, D., Bargalló, A., Serrano-Ramos, A., Solano-García, J. A., Sánchez-Ban- dera, C., Yravedra, J., Blain, H.-A., Toro-Moyano, I., Jiménez-Arenas, J. M., & Sala-Ramos, R. (2021). Oldowan stone knapping and percussive activities on a raw material reservoir deposit 1.4 million years ago at Barranco León (Orce, Spain). Anthropological Archaeological Sciences, 13, 108. https:// link. sprin ger. com/ artic le/ 10. 1007/ s12520- 021- 01353-w https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2020.106466 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228290 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12520-021-01353-w Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 1 3 6 Page 32 of 33 Toro-Moyano, I., Barsky, D., Cauche, D., Celiberti, V., Grégoire, S., Lebegue, F., Moncel, M.H., Lumley, H. de, (2011). The archaic stone-tool industry from Barranco León and Fuente Nueva 3, (Orce, Spain): Evidence of the earliest hominin presence in southern Europe. Quaternary International, 243, 80-91. Toro-Moyano, I., de Lumley, H., Barrier, P., Barsky, D., Cauche, D., Celiberti, V., Grégoire, S., Lebègue, F., Mestour, B., Moncel, M.H. (2010a). Les industries lithiques archaïques du Barranco León et de Fuente Nueva 3, Orce, basin du Guadix-Baza, Andalousie. In Monography, CNRS Éditions. Toro-Moyano, I., de Lumley, H., Fajardo, B., Barsky, D., Celiberti, V., Grégoire, S., Martínez-Navarro, B., Espigares, M. P., & Ros-Montoya, S. (2009). L’industrie lithique des gisements du pleistocène inférieur de Barranco León et Fuente Nueva 3, Granade, Espagne. L’Anthropologie, 113, 111–124. Toro-Moyano, I., Martínez-Navarro, B., & Agustí, J. (2010b). Ocupaciones Humanas en el Pleistoceno inferior y medio de la Cuenca de Guadix-Baza. Memoria Científica. Toro-Moyano, I., Martínez-Navarro, B., Agustí, J., Souday, C., Bermúdez de Castro, J. M., Martinón-Tor- res, M., Fajardo, B., Duval, M., Falguères, C., Oms, O., Parés, J. M., Anadón, P., Julià, R., García- Aguilar, J. M., Moigne, A. M., Espigares, M. P., Ros-Montoya, S., & Palmqvist, P. (2013). The old- est human fossil in Europe, from Orce (Spain). Journal of Human Evolution, 65, 1–9. Turq, A., Martínez Navarro, B., Palmqvist, P., Arribas, A., Agustí, J., & Rodríguez Vidal, J. (1996). Le Plio-Pléistocène de la région d’Orce, province de grenade, Espagne : Bilan et perspectives de recherche. Paléo, 8, 161–204. Villa, P., & Mahieu, E. (1991). Breakage patterns of human long bones. Journal of Human Evolution, 21, 27–48. Vislobokova, I. A., Agadzhanyan, A. K., & Lopatin, A. V. (2020). The case of Trlica TRL11–10 (Mon- tenegro): Implications for possible early hominin dispersals into the Balkans in the middle of the Early Pleistocene. Quaternary International, 554, 15–35. Voorhies, M. R. (1969). Taphonomy and population dynamics of an early Pliocene vertebrate fauna, Knox County, Nebraska. Univ. Wyo. Contrib. Geol. Sp. Pap., 1, 69. Voorhies, M. R. (1970). Sampling difficulties in reconstructing late tertiary mammalian communities. Proc. N. Am. Paleontol. Conv. Evolution of Communities, Pt., E, 454–468. Yravedra, J. (2006). Tafonomía aplicada a zooarqueología. Aula Abierta. Yravedra, J., & Domínguez-Rodrigo, M. (2009). The shaft-based methodological approach to the quan- tification of long limb bones and its relevance to understanding hominin subsistence in the Pleisto- cene: Application to four Paleolithic sites. Journal of Quaternary Science, 24, 85–96. Yravedra, J., Lagos, L., & Bárcena, F. (2011). A Taphonomic study of wild wolf (Canis lupus) modifica- tion of horse bones in northwestern Spain. Journal of Taphonomy, 9, 37–65. Yravedra, J., Maté-González, M. A., Courtenay, L., López-Cisneros, P., Estaca-Gómez, V., Aramendi, J., de Andrés-Herrero, M., Linares-Matás, G., González-Aguilera, D., & Álvarez-Alonso, D. (2019). Approaching raw material functionality in the upper Magdalenian of Coímbre cave (Asturias, Spain) through geometric morphometrics. Quaternary International, 517, 97–106. Ziegler, T., & Van Huet, S. (2021). Testing the reliability of the Fiorillo bone surface abrasion scale. Journal of Archaeological Science Reports, 36, 102865. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jasrep. 2021. 102865 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.102865 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.102865 1 3 Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology (2022) 5:6 Page 33 of 33 6 Authors and Affiliations José Yravedra1,2  · José Antonio Solano3 · Darío Herranz‑Rodrigo1,2 · Gonzalo J. Linares‑Matás4 · Juha Saarinen5 · Juan José Rodríguez‑Alba1 · Stefanía Titton6,7 · Alexia Serrano‑Ramos8 · Lloyd A. Courtenay9 · Clara Mielgo7 · Carmen Luzón8 · José Cámara8 · Christian Sánchez‑Bandera6,7 · Eva Montilla10 · Isidro Toro‑Moyano11 · Deborah Barsky6,7 · Mikael Fortelius5 · Jordi Agusti12,6,7 · Hugues‑Alexandre Blain6,7 · Oriol Oms13 · Juan Manuel Jiménez‑Arenas14,15 * José Yravedra joyravedra@hotmail.com; jyravedr@ucm.es Juan Manuel Jiménez-Arenas jumajia@ugr.es 1 Department of Prehistory, Ancient History and Archaeology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain, Prof. Aranguren Sn, 28040 Madrid, Spain 2 C. A. I. Archaeometry and Archaeological Analysis, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain 3 Department of Prehistory and Archaeology, University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain 4 Stipendiary Lecturer in Archaeology and Anthropology, St. Hugh’s College, Oxford, UK 5 Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland 6 IPHES-CERCA, Institut Català de Paleoecologia Humana i Evolució Social, Tarragona, Spain 7 Departament d’Historia i Historia de l’Art, Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV), Tarragona, Spain 8 History and Arts Doctoral Program, University of Granada, Granada, Spain 9 Department of Cartographic and Land Engineering, Higher Polytechnic School of Avila, University of Salamanca, Avila, Spain 10 Museo Primeros Pobladores de Europa, Josep Gibert, Orce, Granada, Spain 11 Archaeological and Ethnological Museum of Granada, Granada, Spain 12 ICREA, Barcelona, Spain 13 Departament of Geology, Unitat d’Estratigrafia, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain 14 Department of Prehistory and Archeology, University of Granada, Granada, Spain 15 Institute of Peace and Conflict Research, University of Granada, Granada, Spain http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4323-3379 Unravelling Hominin Activities in the Zooarchaeological Assemblage of Barranco León (Orce, Granada, Spain) Abstract Introduction The Site of Barranco León Materials and Methods Results Zooarchaeological Analyses Taphonomic Analyses Discussion and Conclusions Acknowledgements References