Hammer or crescent wrench? Stone-tool form and function in the Aurignacian of southwest Germany

The early Upper Paleolithic of Europe is associated with the appearance of blade/bladelet technology (e.g., Aurignacian). These industries include a wider range of formal tool types than seen in the Middle Paleolithic. Greater diversity in tool types is often interpreted as specialized tools created for specific tasks. This, in turn, is said to reflect dramatic behavioral shifts between Neandertals and modern humans. In order to test previous interpretations, it is necessary to have a detailed understanding of early Upper Paleolithic stone-tool function. Toward this end, analyses of microscopic residue and use-wear were undertaken on 109 stone tools from three Aurignacian sites in southwest Germany (Hohle Fels, Geissenkl?sterle, and Vogelherd). These cave sites evidenced remarkable residue preservation, with approximately 82% of the sample showing some form of functional evidence. Residues observed included hair, feathers, bone/antler, wood, plant tissue, phytoliths, starch grains, and resin. The results suggest that tool typology is not strongly linked to the processing of specific materials. For example, endscrapers from the sample show evidence of processing wood, charred wood, plants, starchy plants, birds, bone/antler, and animals (hair). Hairs are found on tools typologically classified as blades, flakes, borers, pointed blades, and combination tools (nosed endscraper-borer, burin-laterally-retouched blade). In the early Upper Paleolithic of southwest Germany, a wide range of tool types appears to have been used to process a diverse array of materials. These results suggest that the interpretation of behavioral patterns from stone tools must consider more than tool typology.     

Early Upper Paleolithic Man and Late Middle Paleolithic Tools

The appearance of anatomically modern Homo sapiens in Europe, the Near East, and Africa must represent either an in situ evolution of Neandertals or a migration. Those who suggest the latter claim a sudden replacement of Neandertals by anatomically modern Homo sapiens. However, the "evidence" actually cited claims only the sudden replacement of Middle by Upper Paleolithic industries. We criticize the migration explanation on two grounds. (1) There is no "sudden replacement" of Middle Paleolithic by Upper Paleolithic industries, but rather a gradual change in the frequencies of already present tools. Numerous sites in these areas exhibit transitional industries. (2) Concomitantly, there is no morphological evidence indicating a "sudden replacement" of hominids. There is no absolute association between anatomically modern Homo sapiens and Upper Paleolithic industries. Instead, the evidence clearly shows that early anatomically modern Homo sapiens is a late Middle Paleolithic local phenomenon .     

辽东半岛的旧石器文化

辽东半岛旧石器研究可追溯至20世纪30年代, 但较大的进展则在70年代以后所取得。迄今为止, 包括以庙后山石器工业和营口金牛山人类化石为代表的旧石器早期、以海城小孤山下层石器工业为代表的旧石器中期和以海城小孤山中层石器工业、骨角制品和前阳人类化石为代表的旧石器晚期组成的辽东旧石器文化发展序列已经初步建立起来。从古生态环境和石器技术、类型学而言, 辽东半岛旧石器文化和华北同期文化存在密切的联系。     

Des armes en ivoire de mammouth : deux cas particuliers

The Upper Palaeolithic material made from mammoth ivory comprises many hunting weapons, mostly spear points and a few big hand spears, mainly from Eastern Europe notably Poland, the Czech Republic and Russia… Two objects stand out through their uniqueness. The first one is a fragment of a spearthrower, the only one made in ivory, decorated in semi round, in the shape of a young bovid, probably a bison. It dates to the Middle Magdalenian and comes from the La Madeleine shelter in Dordogne (France). The second one is a non-returning boomerang with a striated handle, dating to the Early Gravettian and coming from the Obłazowa cave in Poland. Its morphology and morphometry are very like some Australian examples.     

Is human longevity a consequence of cultural change or modern biology?

Increased longevity, expressed as the number of individuals surviving to older adulthood, represents a key way that Upper Paleolithic Europeans differ from earlier European (Neandertal) populations. Here, we address whether longevity increased as a result of cultural/adaptive change in Upper Paleolithic Europe, or whether it was introduced to Europe as a part of modern human biology. We compare the ratio of older to younger adults (OY ratio) in an early modern human sample associated with the Middle Paleolithic from Western Asia with OY ratios of European Upper Paleolithic moderns and penecontemporary Neandertals from the same region. We also compare these Neandertals to European Neandertals. The difference between the OY ratios of modern humans of the Middle and Upper Paleolithic is large and significant, but there is no significant difference between the Neandertals and early modern humans of Western Asia. Longevity for the West Asian Neandertals is significantly more common than for the European Neandertals. We conclude that the increase in adult survivorship associated with the Upper Paleolithic is not a biological attribute of modern humans, but reflects important cultural adaptations promoting the demographic and material representations of modernity.     

Neandertal Archaeology—Implications for Our Origins

This article identifies key aspects of the metaphysical paradigms under which European Paleolithic archaeological research is conducted and contrasts the anthropological approaches typical of anglophone New World workers with those of the "his- tory-like" natural science-based traditions of Latin Europe. Because the Middle–Upper Paleolithic transition in Europe is thought by many to correspond to the biological replacement of Neandertals by modern humans over the ten millennia bracketing 40 kyr B.P., generalizations about the archaeological transition invoked in support of biological replacement are examined and are found to lack empirical support. Patterns in lithic technology, typology, raw material variability, reduction strategies, blank frequencies, bone and antler technologies, Paleolithic art, subsistence strategies, and settlement patterns all indicate a temporal-spatial mosaic of changing monitors of human adaptation over the transition interval that cannot be reconciled with any construal of a relatively abrupt and complete biological replacement. [Key words: conceptual frameworks, research traditions, archaeological systematic, Middle–Upper Paleolithic transition, Neandertals, adaptation]     

Nonhuman primate hybridization and the taxonomic status of Neanderthals

The present study examines the taxonomic status of Middle Paleolithic Neanderthals by comparing their observed minimum genetic divergence from Upper Paleolithic modern humans in Europe with that observed between macaque species from Sulawesi that are known to hybridize and fully intergrade in the wild. The genetic divergence, and differentiation between Neanderthals and Upper Paleolithic modern humans, as indicated by pairwise minimum genetic distances and F(ST) values calculated from the estimated minimum genetic relationship (R) matrix derived from craniometric data, are significantly greater than those observed both between hybridizing and noninterbreeding Sulawesi macaque species, suggesting that mate recognition and the possibility of gene flow between Neanderthals and Upper Paleolithic modern humans might have been greatly reduced. These results support a species-level taxonomic distinction for the Neanderthals as suggested by proponents of the replacement model. Furthermore, assumptions regarding the monophyletic origin of modern humans from outside Europe are likely valid.     

Seasonal variations of the middle-upper paleolithic transition at El castillo, Cueva Morín and El pendo (Cantabria, Spain)

With debate escalating in regard to the prolonged contemporaneity of neandertal and modern human groups in the Franco-Cantabrian region on the one hand, and the late persistence of neandertals (until ca. 28-30,000 B.P.) and Mousterian industries in southern Iberia on the other; sites with Mousterian-Upper Paleolithic sequences from northern Spain play a pivotal role in the ongoing investigation of the Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition in western Europe. An important line of inquiry into the nature of social and economic change from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic is the monitoring of shifts in land use and resource procurement patterns. The recognition of short-term, seasonal patterning in settlement and resource provisioning may provide insights into changes in mobility, territoriality, and social organization that might otherwise be missed. This paper presents results of a seasonality study of fauna from archaeological levels spanning the Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition from the sites of El Castillo, El Pendo, and Cueva Morín in Cantabrian Spain. Data concerning season of death and age at death of prey animals presented here are derived from dental growth mark (increment, annuli) analysis. These data, along with other artifactual and faunal evidence suggest to us that: (1) economic strategies and technologies pervasive in the Upper Paleolithic are rooted in the Cantabrian Middle Paleolithic; and, (2) the apparent increase in deposits from the Middle through Upper Paleolithic may be the signature of a gradual increase in logistical economic strategies including the heightened level of social organization required for their implementation.     

The oldest anatomically modern humans from far southeast Europe: direct dating, culture and behavior

Background

Anatomically Modern Humans (AMHs) are known to have spread across Europe during the period coinciding with the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition. Whereas their dispersal into Western Europe is relatively well established, evidence of an early settlement of Eastern Europe by modern humans are comparatively scarce.

Methodology/Principal Finding

Based on a multidisciplinary approach for the study of human and faunal remains, we describe here the oldest AMH remains from the extreme southeast Europe, in conjunction with their associated cultural and paleoecological background. We applied taxonomy, paleoecology, and taphonomy combined with geomorphology, stratigraphy, archeology and radiocarbon dating. More than 160 human bone remains have been discovered. They originate from a well documented Upper Paleolithic archeological layer (Gravettian cultural tradition) from the site of Buran-Kaya III located in Crimea (Ukraine). The combination of non-metric dental traits and the morphology of the occipital bones allow us to attribute the human remains to Anatomically Modern Humans. A set of human and faunal remains from this layer has been radiocarbon dated by Accelerator Mass Spectrometry. The direct-dating results of human bone establish a secure presence of AMHs at 31,900+240/−220 BP in this region. They are the oldest direct evidence of the presence of AMHs in a well documented archeological context. Based on taphonomical observations (cut marks and distribution of skeletal elements), they represent the oldest Upper Paleolithic modern humans from Eastern Europe, showing post-mortem treatment of the dead as well.

Conclusion/Significance

These findings are essential for the debate on the spread of modern humans in Europe during the Upper Paleolithic, as well as their cultural behaviors.     

The upper paleolithic of Europe: An overview

The Upper Paleolithic of Europe, 40,000–10,000 years ago, presents one of the richest, most complex records for the anatomy and cultural adaptations of fossil hominids in the world. New chronological information points to roughly simultaneous appearance of certain Upper Paleolithic technological traits in both SE and SW Europe, while growing evidence suggests a significant degree of biological and cultural continuity between the Middle and Upper Paleolithic. On the other hand, there is considerable evidence that evolution continued to operate in both domains throughout the course of the late Upper Pleistocene, apparently in adaptive relationship to the major environmental changes of the Upper Pleniglacial and Tardiglacial. Spectacular developments in the realms of art and ideology may be understood in the special biogeographical, social, and economic conditions of Europe at the height of the Last Ice Age; both ended rather abruptly with the onset of the Holocene as the landscapes of Europe underwent pervasive upheavals.     

The early upper Paleolithic of eastern Europe reconsidered

Artifacts of Paleolithic age were first recognized in eastern Europe during the 1870s. Archeologists have struggled ever since to integrate them into the better known record of western Europe, where the interpretive framework of Paleolithic archeology was originally developed. The essential elements of both the Middle and Upper Paleolithic were recognized quickly in eastern Europe, and a close connection with a major middle Upper Paleolithic industry of central Europe (Gravettian) was established many years ago. The early Upper Paleolithic (EUP) has remained a major challenge, however; it is represented primarily by a bewildering array of local archeological cultures that exhibit limited similarity to contemporaneous industries of western and central Europe.6-9.     

From the Bay of Naples to the River Don: the Campanian Ignimbrite eruption and the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition in Eastern Europe

The Campanian Ignimbrite (CI) eruption, dated by ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar and various stratigraphic methods to ca. 39,000 cal BP, generated a massive ash plume from its source in southern Italy across Southeastern and Eastern Europe. At the Kostenki-Borshchevo open-air sites on the Middle Don River in Russia, Upper Paleolithic artifact assemblages are buried below, within, and above the CI tephra (which is redeposited by slope action at most sites) on the second terrace. Luminescence and radiocarbon dating, paleomagnetism, and soil and pollen stratigraphy provide further basis for correlation with the Greenland and North Atlantic climate stratigraphy. The oldest Upper Paleolithic occupation layers at Kostenki-Borshchevo may be broadly correlated with warm intervals that preceded the CI event and Heinrich Event 4 (HE4; Greenland Interstadial: GI 12-GI 9) dating to ca. 45,000-41,000 cal BP. These layers contain an industry not currently recognized in other parts of Europe. Early Upper Paleolithic layers above the CI tephra are correlated with HE4 and warm intervals that occurred during 38,000-30,000 cal BP (GI 8-GI 5), and include an assemblage that is assigned to the Aurigancian industry, associated with skeletal remains of modern humans.     

Evolutionary trends of stature in upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europe

Long bone lengths of all available European Upper Paleolithic (41 males, 25 females) and Mesolithic (171 males, 118 females) remains have been transformed into stature estimates by means of new regression equations derived from Early Holocene skeletal samples using "Fully's anatomical stature" and the major axis regression technique (Formicola & Franceschi, 1996). Statistical analysis of the data, with reference both to time and space parameters, indicates that: (1) Early Upper Paleolithic samples (pre-Glacial Maximum) are very tall; (2) Late Upper Paleolithic groups (post-Glacial Maximum) from Western Europe, compared to their ancestors, show a marked decrease in height; (3) a further, although not significant, reduction of stature affects Western Mesolithics; (4) no regional differences have been observed during both phases of the Upper Paleolithic; (5) a high level of homogeneity has also been found in the Mesolithic, both in Western and Eastern Europe; (6) the internal homogeneity found during the Mesolithic in Western and Eastern Europe is associated with marked inter-regional variability, with populations of the latter region showing systematically significantly greater stature than their Western contemporaries. Evaluation of possible causes for the great stature of the Early Upper Paleolithic samples points to high nutritional standards as the most important factor. Results obtained on later groups clearly indicate that the Last Glacial Maximum, rather than the Mesolithic transition, is the critical phase in the negative trend affecting Western European populations. While changes in the quality of the diet, and in particular decreased protein intake, provide a likely explanation for that trend, variations in levels of gene flow probably also played a role. Reasons for the West-East Mesolithic dichotomy remain unclear and lack of information for the Late Upper Paleolithic of Eastern Europe prevents insight into the remote origins of this phenomenon. Analysis of regional differentiation of stature, particularly well supported by data from Mesolithic sites, points to the absence of today's latitudinal gradients and suggests a relative homogeneity in dietary, cultural and biodemographic patterns for the last hunter-gatherer populations of Western Europe.     

The impossible coincidence. A single‐species model for the origins of modern human behavior in Europe

Few topics in palaeoanthropology have generated more recent debate than the nature and causes of the remarkable transformation in human behavioral patterns that marked the transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic in Europe. 1 - 11 Those of us who have argued for an effective technological and cultural “revolution” at this point in the Paleolithic sequence have emphasized three main dimensions 1 , 2 , 9 , 11 - 14 : the wide range of different aspects of behavior that appear to have been affected (Fig. 1); the relative speed and abruptness with which most of these changes can be documented in the archeological records from the different regions of Europe; and the potentially profound social and cognitive implications of many of the innovations involved. Most striking of all in this context is the abrupt appearance and proliferation of various forms of perforated animal teeth, shells, beads, and other personal ornaments, and the even more dramatic eruption of remarkably varied and sophisticated forms of art, ranging from representations of male and female sex organs, through the highly stylized animal and combined animal‐human figures from southern Germany, to the striking wall paintings of the Chauvet Cave. 8 , 15 - 18 One might add to this the similar proliferation of more enigmatic but potentially equally significant abstract “notation” systems on bone and ivory artifacts. 19 To describe the Upper Paleolithic revolution in Europe as reflecting preeminently an explosion in explicitly symbolic behavior and expression is in no sense an exaggeration, as most prehistorians would now agree. We are probably on safe ground in assuming that symbolic behavior and expression of this level of complexity would be inconceivable in the absence of highly structured language systems and brains closely similar, if not identical to, our own. 5 , 17 , 20 - 28 .     

Test excavations and initial results at the Middle and Upper Paleolithic sites of Gilvaran,Kaldar, Ghamari caves and Gar Arjene Rockshelter,Khorramabad Valley,western Iran

This paper introduces the excavations in several Paleolithic sites in the Khorramabad Valley, Western Iran. Apart from the two well-known sites of Ghamari Cave and Gar Arjene rock shelter, first excavated by Frank Hole and Kent Flannery in the 1960s, the Gilvaran and Kaldar caves were excavated for the first time. Here we present the stratigraphy of these sites, general data from the lithic assemblages, and the identifications of a small part of the faunal remains. Preliminary results are showing that all of the sites were occupied from the Middle and Upper Paleolithic onward, and therefore provide great potential for the study of the transition between these cultural periods. Our preliminary techno-typological observations show that the lower levels of the Gilvaran and Ghamari sequences may represent an early phase of the Middle Paleolithic.     

Paleolithic and neolithic lineages in the European mitochondrial gene pool.

Phylogenetic and diversity analysis of the mtDNA control region sequence variation of 821 individuals from Europe and the Middle East distinguishes five major lineage groups with different internal diversities and divergence times. Consideration of the diversities and geographic distribution of these groups within Europe and the Middle East leads to the conclusion that ancestors of the great majority of modern, extant lineages entered Europe during the Upper Paleolithic. A further set of lineages arrived from the Middle East much later, and their age and geographic distribution within Europe correlates well with archaeological evidence for two culturally and geographically distinct Neolithic colonization events that are associated with the spread of agriculture. It follows from this interpretation that the major extant lineages throughout Europe predate the Neolithic expansion and that the spread of agriculture was a substantially indigenous development accompanied by only a relatively minor component of contemporary Middle Eastern agriculturalists. There is no evidence of any surviving Neanderthal lineages among modern Europeans.     

The beginning of the Upper Paleolithic in the Iranian Zagros. A taphonomic approach and techno-economic comparison of Early Baradostian assemblages from Warwasi and Yafteh (Iran)

Southwest Asia is a key region in current debates surrounding the appearance of the first cultures attributed to anatomically modern humans, particularly the Aurignacian and preceding cultural units of the Iranian Zagros, Levant, and the Balkans (Baradostian, Ahmarien, Kozarnikien, etc.). The Zagros mountain range encompasses an immense territory that remains understudied with regard to the Upper Paleolithic as well as the first bladelet industries traditionally presumed to be the work of anatomically modern humans. Concerning the emergence of the Aurignacian, the sites of Warwasi rockshelter and Yafteh cave in the central Zagros are considered to show evidence of in situ evolution of the Upper Paleolithic from the local Mousterian. This hypothesis is tested by way of a taphonomic, techno-typological and economic approach applied to the Upper Paleolithic levels of Warwasi (spits LL–AA) and Yafteh (the series from the lower part of the sequence). A comparison of the techno-economic features of both assemblages demonstrates a conceptual bond with contemporaneous techno-complexes from Levant and Europe (Ahmarian, Protoaurignacian, etc.). The techno-typological Middle Paleolithic character of the Warwasi lithic assemblage permits a discussion of a possible in situ dependence/continuum from the Mousterian or perhaps particular activities linked to the type of the occupation of the site. However, bladelet technology cannot be considered as rooted in the Zagros Mousterian. Consequently the origin of the Aurignacian sensu stricto has to be reconsidered.     

L’industrie du site néandertalien de la grotte de Vindija (Croatie) : une révision des matières premières lithiques

The new analysis of the Middle Paleolithic industry from the cave Vindija (Croatia), showed a necessity of revision of the previous obtained data especially considering the use and origin of the raw materials (Kurtanjek and Marci, 1990). The results presented in this study pointed out some new aspects of interpretation. First, the significance of quartz in the Middle Paleolithic was underestimated. At the same time it is obvious that the major change in the use of the raw material was at the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic and of the Epigravettian, especially in the use of chert. The second change is registered in the use of chert between Middle and Upper Paleolithic: the chalky nodules of chert are more frequent in the Upper Paleolithic then the river pebbles used in the production of Middle Paleolithic artefacts. Still, the origin of this new raw material is at the moment unknown.