No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Abstract
Unlike regions farther south, the timing of the appearance of the Aurignacian in the far northwest of Europe is very poorly defined. This is the result of a less abundant archaeological record and problems associated with its early excavation. Here, comparison is made between characteristic British Aurignacian artefacts and those from well-stratified continental assemblages. Burin busqué bladelet cores are present in British collections, and these are technologically indistinguishable from those found in continental Europe. The technological complexity of these artefacts allows the conclusion that the Aurignacian first appeared on the British peninsula c. 32 000 14C BP, or c. 37 000 years ago, at a time when the same burin busqué bladelet production method was being employed in southwestern France and in Belgium. The few radiocarbon measurements that date the British Aurignacian directly accord with this conclusion. The northward extension of the Aurignacian into Britain apparently occurred during or shortly after a particularly pronounced and prolonged warm climatic oscillation. This climatic event may suffice as explanation for the late appearance of the Aurignacian in Britain relative to other parts of Europe. The presence of two main methods of bladelet production probably indicates that Britain was the subject of two or more periods of Aurignacian occupation. The precise timing of what is interpreted as the later occupation is currently uncertain.
... The Aurignacian is generally considered the time in which H. sapiens began to fully disperse and colonise Europe (Davies et al. 2015). The movement strategies of these early pioneers has received much interest for their presence in Europe during MIS 3 (Davies 2001;van Andel & Davies 2003;Mellars 2006;Dinnis 2012). This is due to the likely climatic difficulties that they would have faced (Huntley et al. 2013). ...
... This northern migration during autumn avoiding areas with a snow depth of over 50cm would have meant that hunting groups following herds had to operate in a higher latitude region during the coldest months (Burch 1972). The scant few remains left by occupants at northern sites suggests occupation was as temporary as possible (Dinnis 2012;Mellars 2006;Binford 1980). ...
... This is interesting because Fontana (2017) argues reindeer in the Dordogne area were not migratory (see below This would have given the Aurignacian people several options: hunt other animals, follow the reindeer, or store meat. It is clear from many Aurignacian assemblages that hunters turned to other prey animals such as horse, bovids or other cervids further south (Dinnis 2012, Straus 1992, Niven 2007. ...
Understanding the challenges and trials faced by early Upper Palaeolithic people in north-west Europe has been an avenue of investigation since the earliest archaeological research of this time period. In the decades since, huge amounts of time and effort have been invested in studying the lithic and osseous tools found in caves, rock shelters and rare open-air sites. However, this time and effort has almost exclusively been focussed on understanding the objects that have stood the test of time, with little consideration of the components that may have once been attached to these surviving objects. The components that no longer survive are at least as important as the surviving parts. They can offer different insights into the challenges faced by the first modern humans in Europe which can give indications of the likely hunting or movement strategies of these early groups. Limited experimental study has shown that the osseous points of the Aurignacian (c. 44-31 ka cal BP) are almost certainly spear points and that they were effective at causing wounds to Pleistocene herbivores. However, like much past literature, the focus has been on the spear tips rather than the whole of the spear.
This thesis changes tack from previous research in that it gives the limelight to the other components and materials that would have made an Aurignacian spear. It also investigates the possible reasoning for the manufacture and form of the spear tips, but with a view on the relationship with the other parts. Key questions will look at the role other Aurignacian tools played in the production of spears and if glues or mastics were required. Whether the spear tips were over-engineered or whether they were carefully designed to improve the longevity of more valuable components (such as the spear shaft). If resource management can be identified based on simulated plant biomes of Europe during Marine Oxygen Isotope Stage 3 and organic samples from around Europe, and what it tells us about sources of viable spear shafts. How these spears may have performed is tested using semi-controlled throwing experiments at a sports field, and in a drop tower, with a focus on all the components of the spear. Finally, what the experimental, biome, organic sample and archaeological evidence are used to evaluate the hunting strategies of Aurignacian groups in NW Europe.
... Even if Hohle Fels IV is indeed characterised by a sparsity of retouched microblades, there are numerous ways through which they could become poorly represented, ranging from site function and raw material economy to taphonomic processes and excavation/ sampling method (Bordes & Lenoble 2002;Lenoble 2005;Pelegrin & O'Farrell 2005;Bertran et al. 2006;2012). Even when smaller pieces are present, collected, and searched for in the fine fraction, not (Allard 1978). ...
... Instead, these studies conclude that the distinction between the Proto-and Early Aurignacian is not entirely clear and stress that the two facies share some technotypological features. More problematic are claims that phases within the Aurignacian overlap chronologically between sites or between regions, by, in some cases, several thousand years (see Higham et al. 2011;2012;White et al. 2012;Nigst et al. 2014;Moreau et al. 2015;Tafelmaier 2017;Falcucci et al. 2017). No stratigraphy anywhere in Europe indicates inversion of the Proto-Aurignacian-Early Aurignacian-Late Aurignacian succession and where the CI tephra is found, its stratigraphic position is entirely consistent with it (d' Errico & Banks 2015;Davies et al. 2015;Dinnis et al. 2019; contrary to the claim of Davies et al. (2015, 236), who confusingly conclude that it evidences cultural heterogeneity at the time of the eruption). ...
Western Europe is often used as the basis from which to understand the Aurignacian of other regions. For some there is good inter-regional chronocultural agreement, whereas others see significant difference. One region frequently argued to differ is the Swabian Jura (southern Germany). In a recent contribution to this issue Bataille and Conard (2018) describe the Aurignacian assemblage from Layer IV of Hohle Fels. They convincingly outline important similarities with the Western European Late Aurignacian. However, they also argue that it is older than, and different from, the most comparable Western European assemblages, and therefore that it contradicts an Aurignacian chronocultural framework built on Western European evidence. Here we assess this claim, focusing on the sites used by Bataille and Conard in their comparison. Radiocarbon dates for Hohle Fels IV of 33–30,000 uncal bp are no older than dates for Western European Late Aurignacian assemblages. Most of the features of Hohle Fels IV argued to demonstrate its dissimilarity are, in fact, evident in the Western European Late Aurignacian. One potential difference is the reported absence from Hohle Fels IV of microblades with inverse/alternate retouch. However, due to the near absence of laterally retouched microblades and uncertainty over whether the fine fraction has been searched we doubt the significance of this observation. Other recent publications have similarly suggested that the Western European chronocultural model is incompatible with other regions. In light of this we consider Eastern Europe. Despite some difference, reliable data point to the pene-contemporaneity of characteristic bladelet/microblade technologies between the two regions, a pattern that stratigraphies from sites across Europe are also consistent with. The biggest complicating factor is radiocarbon dating, which has created a culturally complex picture that is inconsistent with all chronostratigraphic data. We therefore offer some thoughts as to the use of radiocarbon dates for this period. Despite ongoing problems dates are still frequently presented with an unwarranted confidence in their accuracy. Their presentation should instead explicitly acknowledge the method’s fallibility and its inferiority to more reliable evidence such as chronostratigraphic patterning and tephra. When radiocarbon dates contradict a consistent chronostratigraphic picture the burden of proof falls to those arguing the dates’ veracity. In these cases, the reasons for the discrepancy between the radiocarbon and chronostratigraphic records require exploration.
... Even if Hohle Fels IV is indeed characterised by a sparsity of retouched microblades, there are numerous ways through which they could become poorly represented, ranging from site function and raw material economy to taphonomic processes and excavation/ sampling method (Bordes & Lenoble 2002;Lenoble 2005;Pelegrin & O'Farrell 2005;Bertran et al. 2006;2012). Even when smaller pieces are present, collected, and searched for in the fine fraction, not (Allard 1978). ...
... Instead, these studies conclude that the distinction between the Proto-and Early Aurignacian is not entirely clear and stress that the two facies share some technotypological features. More problematic are claims that phases within the Aurignacian overlap chronologically between sites or between regions, by, in some cases, several thousand years (see Higham et al. 2011;2012;White et al. 2012;Nigst et al. 2014;Moreau et al. 2015;Tafelmaier 2017;Falcucci et al. 2017). No stratigraphy anywhere in Europe indicates inversion of the Proto-Aurignacian-Early Aurignacian-Late Aurignacian succession and where the CI tephra is found, its stratigraphic position is entirely consistent with it (d' Errico & Banks 2015;Davies et al. 2015;Dinnis et al. 2019; contrary to the claim of Davies et al. (2015, 236), who confusingly conclude that it evidences cultural heterogeneity at the time of the eruption). ...
... Conversely, the incursions into the east were limited to the Carpathian basin (Chu, 2018;Davies & Hedges, 2008;Demidenko et al., 2017Demidenko et al., , 2020Nejman et al., 2017;Wright et al., 2014) and Crimea (Demidenko, 2014). The expansion in other regions above 49° latitude north seems to be uneven as dispersals in Belgium and England took place at 37 ka BP (Dinnis, 2012;Dinnis & Flas, 2016) whereas in other areas of Central Europe occurred only well after 35 ka BP suggesting that these territories were an ecological barrier or occupied by other groups (e.g., LRJ) (Flas, 2015;Kozłowski, 2002;Terberger et al., 2003). However, lamellar technology and bone tools are documented between 45 and 41 ka BP at 51° latitude north, at Kostenki 14 layer IVb and Kostenki 17 layer II (Anikovich et al., 2007;Dinnis et al., 2019b) whereas, at ~ 38-40 ka BP, the assemblages of Kostenki 14 (Markina Gora) and Kostenki 1 level III show many affinities with the Early Aurignacian of Central Europe (Hoffecker et al., 2016). ...
Research on the timing of Homo sapiens dispersals in Central Europe is pivotal for understanding the behavioral trajectories of human adaptation to low biomass environments and cold climates. Previous studies on the Early Upper Paleolithic of Poland described a different scenario from the European panorama characterized by the local development of a laminar/lamellar technology from the foregoing Middle Paleolithic and the coexistence of different Aurignacian variants after 35 ka BP. In this paper, we examine this technical diversity by reassessing and revising the chronological and technological information of the key Aurignacian sites in Poland. Our study reveals that the distinctive techno-typological features of the different Aurignacian types are most likely the result of the mixing of artifacts from different chronologies. In our view, Poland was visited intermittently by Homo sapiens since the Early Aurignacian. The deterioration of the climatic conditions during the second half of MIS 3 converted the Polish territories into a satellite area of the Aurignacian settlement system.
... This is significant, as it indicates a rapid AMH dispersal across Europe prior to the appearance of the earliest AMH evidence in S.E. France and Belgium ~36-40kaBP with the Aurignacian (Jöris & Street 2008;Dinnis 2012 with AMH populations dating to those of the Aurignacian and Gravettian being of key concern for spotted hyaena extirpation in N.W. Europe (Table 1). Human populations consisted of mobile HG groups structured around a settlement system of semi-permanent residential and temporary/seasonal camps (Zilhão 2014 AMH subsistence involved 'opportunistic' hunting strategies of herbivore taxa in surrounding landscapes during warm/cold periods, with regional and temporal variation in prey preference (e.g. ...
Radiocarbon dating has played a pivotal role in establishing trajectories of decline and terminal dates for Late Quaternary Extinctions (LQEs) over the last 50,000 years. Absolute dating chronologies are essential to academic debate into understanding the causal factors for taxa’s disappearance, with Climatic Change and Anatomically Modern Human activity debated as the main drivers since the 1960s. Recent reviews of LQEs have highlighted issues with inaccurate and limited radiocarbon evidence for taxa, with a need to stop and expand restricted reliable datasets to prevent the continuation of circular arguments for the wrong timings and causes of extinction events. The project addresses these issues via evaluating past and present extirpation theories and current radiocarbon evidence for 1 taxon, spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta) in N.W. Europe. A 3 phase strategy is devised to tackle the paucity of reliable chronometric dating evidence. Site candidate lists are obtained for redating and new dating programmes for each phase, while potential benefits and limitations to the method are discussed, alongside a consideration into the relevance of studying extirpated hyaenas to aid conservation efforts for extant relatives in East and Southern Africa.
... parts of northern France. Finally, southern Iberia and the British Isles are considered during discussion, but were excluded from the geostatistical analysis since occupation is confined to the final phase of the Aurignacian [29,36,37] and therefore expected to produce a distinct site-density pattern. ...
Demographic estimates are presented for the Aurignacian techno-complex (~42,000 to 33,000 y calBP) and discussed in the context of socio-spatial organization of hunter-gatherer populations. Results of the analytical approach applied estimate a mean of 1,500 persons (upper limit: 3,300; lower limit: 800) for western and central Europe. The temporal and spatial analysis indicates an increase of the population during the Aurignacian as well as marked regional differences in population size and density. Demographic increase and patterns of socio-spatial organization continue during the subsequent early Gravettian period. We introduce the concept of Core Areas and Extended Areas as informed analytical spatial scales, which are evaluated against additional chronological and archaeological data. Lithic raw material transport and personal ornaments serve as correlates for human mobility and connectedness in the interpretative framework of this study. Observed regional differences are set in relation with the new demographic data. Our large-scale approach on Aurignacian population dynamics in Europe suggests that past socio-spatial organization followed socially inherent rules to establish and maintain a functioning social network of extremely low population densities. The data suggest that the network was fully established across Europe during the early phase of the Gravettian, when demographic as well as cultural developments peaked.
... (Dinnis 2012, but see Higham et al. 2011 & Dinnis 2015). Unfortunately, none of these pieces is associated with detailed contextual information, and it is not possible to assess the degree of association between the two scrapers and the other laminar pieces. ...
In this paper we present the results of the first detailed study of the Palaeolithic archaeological record from Worcestershire. We demonstrate the presence of fluvially derived Lower Palaeolithic artefacts (mostly bifaces) associated with terrace gravels of the rivers Severn, Avon and Carrant Brook and identify the first possible evidence of earlier Middle Palaeolithic archaeology from the west Midlands. We also discuss the important, but largely overlooked, middle Devensian (~60–26 ky BP) archaeology from the Carrant Brook. Broadly associated with extensive palaeoenvironmental proxies and sizeable Devensian mammalian faunal assemblages, this contains evidence indicative of three phases of human activity attributable to the late Middle (~58 ky BP), final Middle (~38–36 ky BP) and early Upper Palaeolithic (~33–31 ky BP). Obtained from two localities (Beckford Priory and Aston Mill gravel pits), the three groups all contain artefacts which have undergone minimal reworking. They are indicative of a significant middle Devensian landscape associated with dynamic fluvial and geliflucted deposits within the Carrant Brook valley.
Large river valleys have long been seen as important factors to shape the mobility, communication, and exchange of Pleistocene hunter-gatherers. However, rivers have been debated as either natural entities people adapt and react to or as cultural and meaningful entities people experience and interpret in different ways. Here, we attempt to integrate both perspectives. Building on theoretical work from various disciplines, we discuss the relationship between biophysical river properties and sociocultural river semantics and suggest that understanding a river’s persona is central to evaluating its role in spatial organization. By reviewing the literature and analyzing European Upper Paleolithic site distribution and raw material transfer patterns in relation to river catchments, we show that the role of prominent rivers varies considerably over time. Both ecological and cultural factors are crucial to explaining these patterns. Whereas the Earlier Upper Paleolithic record displays a general tendency toward conceiving rivers as mobility guidelines, the spatial consolidation process after the colonization of the European mainland is paralleled by a trend of conceptualizing river regimes as frontiers, separating archaeological entities, regional groups, or local networks. The Late Upper Paleolithic Magdalenian, however, is characterized again by a role of rivers as mobility and communication vectors. Tracing changing patterns in the role of certain river regimes through time thus contributes to our growing knowledge of human spatial behavior and helps to improve our understanding of dynamic and mutually informed human-environment interactions in the Paleolithic.
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10816-015-9263-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
A rare and important AMS sample provides an Aurignacian date for Britain. The artefact and its implications are discussed.
After the demonstration that no Châtelperronian/Aurignacian interstratifications existed at Roc-de-Combe, Le Piage, and El Pendo, the Grotte des Fées remained the single instance conceivably documenting the putative longterm regional contemporaneity of the two technocomplexes which is required by the “acculturation” and “imitation” models of the innovations (ornaments, decorated bone tools) that characterize the Châtelperronian. Based on our own inspection and study of the lithic and faunal collections and of the site itself, on consideration of the published and unpublished literature, and on the available dating evidence, we show that the putative interstratified deposits reported by Henri Delporte, who last excavated at the Grotte des Fées in 1951–54 and 1962, are in fact 19th-century backfill. In situ remnants may have been found in 1962, but, in the part of the site excavated at that time, Delporte failed to recognize the previously described interstratification. The stratigraphic consistency of 10 (out of the 13) radiocarbon dates available relates to the fact that those 10 dates are on samples from the conceivably in situ remnants excavated in 1962. Three samples from Level B5 date the Châtelperronian occupation to ca 39–40,000 14C BP, while seven samples from Level B1–3 relate to carnivore denning at the site throughout the ca 36,500–34,500 14C BP interval. Subsequent sporadic incursions by bearers of an Aurignacian I tool-kit are documented by diagnostic material scattered from top to bottom of the backfill deposits excavated by Delporte between 1951 and 1954. Originally, that Aurignacian material must have been contained in a surficial occupation lens capping the site's Mousterian-to-Châtelperronian stratigraphic succession.
The chronology of Early Upper Palaeolithic settlements across Europe is a key research issue. This note reports on new dating work at the Trou Magrite, Belgium, and includes the first direct dating of an Aurignacian type fossil. Résumé L'établissement de la chronologie de site archéologique du début du Paléolithique supérieur à travers l'Europe prend une partie de notre recherche. Cette note fait référence à une nouvelle date par AMS du Trou Magrite, en Belgique, et à la première datation d'une pointe aurignacienne, qui est un fossile-directeur de la période. Mots-clés : Aurignacien, fossile-directeur, Belgique, Trou Magrite, datation AMS.
Durant l'Aurignacien, diverses techniques ont été développées afin de produire des lamelles. Dans la séquence aurignacienne de l'abri Pataud (9 niveaux), ces différentes chaînes opératoires ont pu être mises en évidence et leur importance précisée pour chaque stade de l'Aurignacien. La production de lamelles à partir des grattoirs aurignaciens (carénés et à museau) est présente durant toute la séquence. Comme c'est généralement le cas, la production à partir des burins busqués se situe quasi exclusivement dans l'Aurignacien évolué, cependant, une chaîne opératoire identique a pu être décrite dans l'un des niveaux de l'Aurignacien ancien. Dans l'Aurignacien ancien, les petites lamelles qui sont produites à partir des grattoirs sont plutôt des lamelles rectilignes ou courbes, alors que dans l'Aurignacien évolué elles sont essentiellement courbes et torses, qu 'elles soient produites à partir des grattoirs ou des burins. Une production de lamelles de plus grandes dimensions à partir de nucléus prismatiques existe durant toute la séquence, même si elle est toujours faible. L'outillage lamellaire est peu développé, à l'exception des lamelles Dufour du niveau 8 (Aurignacien évolué), et ce malgré la grande quantité de lamelles produite, ce qui pose la question de leur utilisation brute.
This paper addresses the recent debate surrounding claims about the presence of a small Aurignacian assemblage interstratified between Châtelperronian deposits at the site of Grotte des Fées de Châtelperron. We review the current debate and provide an assessment of the various studies that have been published in its context. As a way to evaluate whether the original claims stand irrespective of potential taphonomic disturbances at the site, we undertake a comparison of the frequency of putative ‘Aurignacian diagnostics’ in this and nineteen other Châtelperronian assemblages from south-western France. No matter how these diagnostics are defined, this analysis demonstrates that such implements are not abnormally more abundant at Châtelperronian assemblages, even when considered solely for Level B4, which is said to document the debated interstratification. We propose alternative explanations for the presence of such curated tools made of exotic lithic raw materials in the context of the assemblage from Grotte des Fées that are more concordant with what is known about the impact of sample size on typological richness and about the mobility patterns of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers, and conclude with some thoughts about the significance of interstratification in Paleolithic deposits.
La couche 2 des Vachons a livré un type de burin particulier reconnu par J. Coiffard (Coiffard 1914, 1922), puis J. Bouyssonie (Bouyssonie 1948) et défini par M. Perpère comme le « burin des Vachons » (Perpère 1972 a et b). Le façonnage de ces burins correspond à une intention de production lamellaire orientée vers la recherche de lamelles à tendance rectiligne, mesurant de 20 à 60 mm de long. Un schéma opératoire complexe peut alors être restitué. Cette redéfinition confirme la forte charge culturelle de ce procédé, dont témoigne sa position chronologique dans les gisements du nord de l’Aquitaine.En effet, les ensembles comprenant des burins des Vachons clôturent certaines séquences aurignaciennes classiques dont la Ferrassie, le Roc-de-Combe, l’Abri Pataud, le Facteur et le Flageolet I. La nature du procédé opératoire et de l’objectif sous-jacent révèlent un changement fort dans les conceptions lamellaires de la fin de l’Aurignacien, en décalage avec les productions antérieures issues des burins busqués. Ce travail propose de documenter cette évolution technique qui permet d’envisager sur des bases nouvelles les dernières phases de l’Aurignacien.
Data related to the emergence of the Gravettian are very scarce. In that period, deep modifications of the codes of the Aurignacian culture occurred all over Europe. In France, where data are especially rare, we present three case studies concerning the lithic industries of Abri Pataud, Grotte de Font-Yves and La Gravette, with the aim of understanding those cultural processes. The last Aurignacian level of Abri Pataud, layer 6, is dated to between 29347 ± 1374 BP and 28510 ± 280 BP (GrN 6273) (Bricker 1995). Its coherence has been verified by a recent geo-archaeological study (Agsous et al. 2008). The industry reveals a clear diversification of production schemes and the development of new techniques and new goals, such as obtaining small straight pointed blades. Those technical objectives are structurally different from prior Aurignacian schemes and, in a way, announce Gravettian technical habits. By comparison with the lithic industry of Grotte de Font-Yves, the presence of the "Font-Yves point" in layer 6 of Abri Pataud has been confirmed. The lithic rectilinear axial armature, heretofore considered as a Gravettian feature, can now be attributed to the last Aurignacian stages. The production of the "Font-Yves point" shares some technical characteristics with Bayacian methods of producing flechettes. Indeed, the Bayacian corresponds with the first Gravettian traditions (Pesesse 2008b). This suggests the possibility of a transfer of technical traditions between Aurignacian and Gravettian cultures. However, some differences between these assemblages argue against a progressive evolution from Aurignacian to Gravettian. Historical processes at the origin of the Gravettian are far more complex than previously assumed, and the limits between Aurignacian and Gravettian are no longer clear.
This chapter reviews the mammalian biostratigraphic scheme for the Late Pleistocene of the British Isles proposed some years ago. As in the original chapter, the faunas of this time are seen as forming a sequence of mammal assemblage-zones. The most significant change concerns the fauna of the Banwell Bone Cave mammal assemblage-zone, now seen as a cool fauna existing in a warm stage (MIS 5a) during a time of insularity. For the first time, we are led to speculate on the faunas of the Dimlington Stadial and that part of the Lateglacial that is younger than Gough's Cave. This has been made possible by new ultrafiltered radiocarbon determinations on bone.
Eastern France, and particularly northern and southern Burgundy, provides an important archeological record of early Upper Paleolithic industries. This paper presents dates and distribution patterns of the Châtelperronian and the Aurignacian and tries to discuss possible relations between the last Neandertals and the first anatomically modern humans in this area.
As with many terrestrial areas, the British Quaternary sequence is characterised by incomplete, fragmentary records, whose correlation is based on stratigraphic or biostratigraphic techniques due to the lack of radiometric ages beyond the ∼40 kyr limit of 14C dating. Speleothems (secondary cave calcite deposits) offer a significant advantage over many sources of palaeoenvironmental information; they can be dated to a high precision and accuracy by uranium-thorium (238U-230Th) thermal ionisation and inductively coupled plasma (ICP) mass spectrometry in the time period back to 500 kyr. They may also contain sufficient well-preserved pollen representative of contemporary vegetation above the cave to allow palaeoenvironmental reconstruction. This study adopts the novel approach of combining pollen and thermal ionisation mass spectrometric (TIMS) U-Th dating of British speleothems to produce well-constrained palaeoenvironmental records. We report for the first time precisely dated records of pollen assemblages from speleothems suggesting the presence of thermophilous arboreal species in phases previously considered to have been consistently cool or cold and devoid of trees. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
The British Middle Palaeolithic is divided into two discrete periods of occupation: the Early Middle Palaeolithic (MIS 9–7,
~330–180ka BP) and the Late Middle Palaeolithic (MIS 3, ~59–36ka BP), separated by a long hiatus. Owing to the relative
poverty of the record and historical difficulties in dating and correlating archaeological sites, the British Late Middle
Palaeolithic has, until recently, received scant attention, and has largely been regarded as the poor man of Europe, especially
by British archaeologists. Indeed, there has been more discussion of the absence of humans from Britain than of what they
did when they were present. We aim here to redress that situation. Following from recent considerations of the Early Middle
Palaeolithic (White et al. in J. Quat. Sci. 21:525–542, 2006; Scott, Becoming Neanderthal, Oxbow, Oxford, 2010), we offer an interpretative synthesis of the British Late Middle Palaeolithic, situating ‘British’ Neanderthals in their
chronological, environmental and landscape contexts. We discuss the character of the British record, and offer an account
of Neanderthal behaviour, settlement systems and technological practices at the northwestern edge of their known Upper Pleistocene
range. We also examine the relationship of the enigmatic Early Upper Palaeolithic leafpoint assemblages to Neanderthals.
KeywordsBritain–Neanderthals–Late Middle Palaeolithic–Doggerland
Woolly rhinoceros bones, from a number of sites in Britain, have been AMS radiocarbon dated following ultrafiltration pre-treatment. These determinations give a coherent set of ages between >50 and c. 35 cal ka BP. The youngest (35,864–34,765 cal BP) come from the area around Bishopbriggs in western central Scotland and are derived from glaciofluvial sand and gravel overlain by till, both deposited during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) glaciation. A previous radiocarbon date from the site suggested that woolly rhinoceros lived c. 27 14C ka BP and the region was ice-free at the time. This date has had significant influence on the timing of extinction of woolly rhinoceros and the onset of glaciation over Britain during the LGM. The new dates revise this earlier determination and confirm that woolly rhinoceros became extinct in Britain after c. 35 cal ka BP, that central Scotland was ice-free at this time, and glaciation extended across this region sometime after 35 cal ka BP.
Many lines of evidence point to the period between roughly 40 and 30 ka BP as the period in which modern humans arrived in Europe and displaced the indigenous Neandertal populations. At the same time, many innovations associated with the Upper Paleolithic – including new stone and organic technologies, use of personal ornaments, figurative art, and musical instruments – are first documented in the European archaeological record. Dating the events of this period is challenging for several reasons. In the period about six to seven radiocarbon half-lives ago, variable preservation, pre-treatment, and sample preparation can easily lead to a lack of reproducibility between samples and laboratories. A range of biological, cultural, and geological processes can lead to mixing of archaeological strata and their contents. Additionally, some data sets point to this period as a time of significant spikes in levels of atmospheric radiocarbon. This paper assesses these questions in the context of the well-excavated and intensively studied caves of Geißenklösterle and Hohle Fels in the Swabian Jura of southwestern Germany. We conclude that variable atmospheric radiocarbon production contributes to the problems of dating the late Middle Paleolithic and the early Upper Paleolithic. To help establish a reliable chronology for the Swabian Aurignacian, we are beginning to focus our dating program on short-lived, stratigraphically secure features to see if they yield reproducible results. This approach may help to test competing explanations for the noisy and often non-reproducible results that arise when trying to date the transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic.
A series of distinctive mammalian assemblages spanning much of the British Late Pleistocene is defined on the basis of type localities and a formal biozonation proposed. The Joint Mitnor Cave mammal assemblage-zone includes the famous “Hippopotamus fauna” of the early part of the Last Interglacial complex (Oxygen Isotope Substage 5e). This is succeeded by the Bacon Hole mammal assemblage-zone in which hippopotamus is no longer present and species like mammoth, roe deer and northern vole re-enter the British region. This assemblage-zone appears to represent the later substages of OIS 5. A faunal grouping dominated by bison and reindeer is named the Banwell Bone Cave mammal assemblage-zone and is believed to correlate closely with the Early Devensian (OIS 4). The Pin Hole mammal assemblage-zone includes the familiar mammoth-steppe faunas of the Middle Devensian (OIS 3) dominated by horse, woolly rhinoceros and mammoth. The Lateglacial Interstadial is characterized by the Gough's Cave mammal assemblage-zone in which horse, red deer and humans are well represented (part of OIS 2). No definitive evidence for human activity can be found for a period spanning the Last Interglacial complex (OIS 5) and the Early Devensian (OIS 4). Human populations return to Britain with the Pin Hole mammal assemblage-zone fauna during the Middle Devensian (OIS 3) and reappear after the Dimlington Stadial during the Late Devensian (OIS 2) but in a different faunal association.
The question of the coexistence and potential interaction between the last Neanderthal and the earliest intrusive populations of anatomically modern humans in Europe has recently emerged as a topic of lively debate in the archaeological and anthropological literature. Here we report the results of radiocarbon accelerator dating for what has been reported as an interstratified sequence of late Neanderthal and early anatomically modern occupations at the French type-site of the Chatelperronian, the Grotte des Fées de Châtelperron, in east-central France. The radiocarbon measurements seem to provide the earliest secure dates for the presence of Aurignacian technology--and from this, we infer the presence of anatomically modern human populations--in France.