Deconstructing Olduvai: A Taphonomic Study of the Bed I Sites [electronic resource] / by Manuel Domínguez-Rodrigo, Rebeca Barba Egido, Charles P. Egeland.

The "home base" debate -- The Hunting-versus-scavenging debate -- The "physical attribute" taphonomic approach -- Geological and paleoecological overview of Olduvai Gorge -- New estimates of tooth-mark and percussion-mark frequencies at the FLK Zinjanthropus level: the carn -- The behavioral meaning of cut marks at the FLK Zinj level: the carnivore-hominid-carnivore hypothesis falsified (II) -- A cautionary tale about early archaeological sites: a reanalysis of FLK North 6 -- A palimpsest at FLK North 1-2: independent carnivore- and hominid-made bone accumulations -- A taphonomic study of FLK North 3 and 4: a felid-hyaenid and hominid palimpsest -- Zooarchaeology and taphonomy of FLK North 5 -- Natural background bone assemblages and their ravaging stages in Olduvai Bed I -- FLK North North 1: "living floor" or natural accumulation? -- Zooarchaeology and taphonomy of FLK North North 2 -- Reanalysis of FLK North North 3: yet another case of a palimpsest? -- Zooarchaeology and taphonomy of the DK site.

The Olduvai Bed I archaeological sites, dating back to almost 2 million years, have been at the epicenter of the debate on how early humans behaved. This book presents a new analytical approach which, after having been applied to these sites, has produced unexpected results: the association of stone tools and faunal remains at most Olduvai Bed I sites is accidental and not related to hominid behavior. Only at one site, FLK Zinj, is this association intentional. Through careful taphonomic analysis of this site, coupled with detailed experimental work, it is possible to rule out the hypothesis that hominids were passive scavengers. Hominids were targeting meat in the exploitation of animals, which they probably obtained through some degree of predation, and their behavior seems to have been more advanced than previously thought.