TESTING ANALOGICAL TAPHONOMIC SIGNATURES IN BONE BREAKING: A COMPARISON BETWEEN HAMMERSTONE‐BROKEN EQUID AND BOVID BONES

Current analogical data used to infer prehistoric human bone breakage rely on a plethora of experimental hammerstone‐broken bovid bone sets. Several criteria have been argued to be diagnostic of bone breakage by humans, among which the most important are: a specific range of broken specimens bearing percussion marks, a specific distribution of different percussion mark types, metric properties of notches, differential notch type distribution, and the angle of oblique breakage planes. The present work shows that those properties derived from the breakage of bovid bones cannot be universally applied to all types of animals. As an example, here it is experimentally demonstrated that hammerstone‐broken equid bones (with different thickness and structural properties compared to bovid bones) show different values in all these variables and some of them overlap with criteria documented in bones broken by static loading. This suggests that the agents of equid bone breakage are more difficult to identify, and that the number of variables that can be successfully used to that end is smaller than in bovid bones.