Sima de los Huesos; the earliest funerary behaviour?

          For one of my other classes I was looking into an interesting site in Spain that got me thinking. The site is Sima De Los Huesos and it is a cave site associated with H. heidelbergensis. Sima consistsof 28 individuals all under the age of 30, with one young child, adolescents, and young adults which compromises 80% of the Middle Pleistocene specimens ever found including a complete range of skeletal parts from the harder more durable bones to rare, soft bones like the hyoid and inner ear bones.  In addition to the hominid remains, which are all located in a continuous depositional context; there are remains of multiple carnivores including foxes, wolves and a very large number of bear specimens. The fact that there are only carnivore faunal remains at this site rather then herbivores and an absences of any materials indicating an occupation site leads some to believe that Sima could represent the earliest evidence of mortuary practices in the world. The age profile of the deceased as well does not indicate a natural occurrence but rather a cultural one.The site is dated to 400 kya which is abotu 300 ky before any other conclusive evidence of intentional burial.
         Another fact which makes this site extremely intriguing is the presence of a single quartzite handaxe associated with the bodies. The handaxe is the poster child of the Acheulean tradition and there exact purpose and use is still debated among many researchers. The one in Sima is a fairly nice representation; it is finely flaked and made of a material not common in handaxe manufacture from the time or area. This tool may have been accidentally introduced into the deposit but may have been symbolically introduced possibly being the first ever representation of grave goods.

Sima De Los Huesos handaxe

(Image from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_heidelbergensis) 

Overall when I look at this site I am not sure what to make of it but lean towards a non-symbolic stance. The remains are all just kind of dumped within the cave and I feel may have happened to end up like this as a result of taphonomic process. There have also been a few papers coming out recently which basically shut down all of the possible 'ritual' behaviour people have been mentioning with regards to this site. Given the sorts of burials we find in the Upper Paleolithic and then comparing those with what we see in Sima de los Huesos, it makes the argument for purposeful burial here look even less valid. There is a general lack of grave goods; specific body orientation and placement and structered symbolic space among many others. I think that the biggest issue in this debate needs to be taphonomy; the site meends ot be able to live up to examination in the context of taphonomy and if it can then still appear anthropogenic in nature it will be much easier to accept. There are though, still many researchers who belive that this site is a symbolic example of formal funerary behaviour, and wouldn't that be awesome if it was? In class we have learned about different funerary practices through time and space but where do they begin and why? Sima could possibly be the first instance of intentional possibly ritualized burial known and if it is it would be especially interesting considering it is associated with an early hominin species, H. Heidelbergensis.

Carbonell, E., & Mosquera, M. (2006). The emergence of a symbolic behaviour: the sepulchral pit of Sima de los Huesos, Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos, Spain. Comptes Rendus Palevol, 5(1/2), 155-160.