An actualistic taphonomic model of human tooth marks on bone remains: A sample recovered in villages of continental Equatorial Guinea

Identifying human tooth marks in archaeological assemblages remains a challenging and unresolved matter. In stark contrast to the extensive comparative work conducted on tooth marks from living carnivores, the field of taphonomy has yet to establish a distinct pattern of modifications attributed to human chewing. Furthermore, the identification of human tooth marks is surrounded by significant and unresolved issues of equifinality. Addressing these zooarchaeologically relevant challenges necessitates the analysis of bone assemblages recovered in actualistic contexts under controlled conditions. Subsequently, reference models must be formulated, allowing for extrapolation to the archaeological record. In this study, we present the results of the examination of human tooth marks on a sample of bones, remnants resulting from vertebrate (both domestic and bushmeat) consumption. These specimens were recovered from the vicinity of houses in five villages of the Fang people and one of the Bayele people (descendants of African rainforest hunter-gatherers) in rural areas of the continental region of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea. We employ standard zooarchaeological methods for our analyses. Human tooth marks are categorized into the following types: scores, pits, punctures, furrowing, scooping out, crushing, cracks, peeling, classic peeling, general bend, end notches, and pseudo-notches. Additionally, we consider the presence of tubes. The results indicate that the range and types of modifications caused by humans are as diverse as those produced by carnivores, albeit with a lower frequency. This enables us to establish a pattern of identification. Besides, various types of modifications were observed based on size class, distinguishing between animals in size classes 1 through 6. In size 1 animals, modifications are more prevalent and often coexist within the same bone. Tubes, resulting from the consumption of epiphyses along with other modifications such as punctures, pits, scores, crushing, and bent ends, are distinctive of human chewing. This pattern aids in identifying the exploitation of small game at archaeological sites, as cut marks are uncommon on animals of this size group. On size 2 or larger animals, the generation of tooth marks is less intense, and modifications do not occur as frequently as on smaller animals. The most fragile and thinnest bones are primarily affected in animals of this size.