FOCUS: The Scapula Representation could be the Key: A Further Contribution to the ‘Klasies Pattern’ Debate

Past discussion on the unusual skeletal part representations at Klasies River Mouth is briefly summarized. Recent discussion in this journal, regarding the “Klasies Pattern”, has focused upon the differential destruction of small and large bovid bone epiphyses by carnivore ravaging and density-mediated attrition. Bartram & Marean (1999) argue, from ethnoarchaeological study and consideration of other archaeological sites, that, unless shaft fragments are painstakingly identified, the upper limb bone epiphyses of large bovids will be seriously under-represented. They therefore suggest that the “Klasies Pattern” is likely to be artefact of taphonomic and analytical processes. Klein, Cruz-Uribe & Milo (1999) replied with a defence of the analytical procedures employed during the original Klasies River Mouth analysis. They also state that there was very little evidence of carnivore ravaging at Klasies River Mouth. In this paper, it is pointed out that Bartram & Marean's (1999) study only considered the humerus, radius, femur, tibia and metapodia. However, in the “Klasies Pattern” it is the scapula that is most notably abundant in the small bovid classes and most notably scarce in the large bovid classes. It is argued that, from the study of bone mineral densities and Brain's (1981) carnivore ravaging experiment, there is no reason to expect a differentially greater taphonomic destruction of large bovid scapulae. In fact, exactly the reverse may be true. It is therefore argued that at least this aspect of the “Klasies Pattern” must be considered to represent human differential bone transport, rather than an artefact of taphonomic processes.