Dental remains from the Grotte du Renne at Arcy-sur-Cure (Yonne)

Human remains associated with the earliest Upper Paleolithic industries are sparse. What is preserved is often fragmentary, making it difficult to accurately assign them to a particular species. For some time it has been generally accepted that Neandertals were responsible for the Chatelperronian and anatomically modern humans for the early Aurignacian industries. However, the recent re-dating of several of the more-complete modern human fossils associated with the early Aurignacian (e.g., Vogelherd) has led some to question the identity of the makers and the context of these early Upper Paleolithic industries. The Grotte du Renne at Arcy-sur-Cure, France has yielded many hominin remains, from Mousterian, Chatelperronian, Aurignacian, and Gravettian layers. Previously, a child's temporal bone from the Chatelperronian Layer Xb was recognized as belonging to a Neandertal; however, most of the teeth from Chatelperronian layers VIII-X remain unpublished. We describe the dental remains from the Chatelperronian layers, place them in a comparative (Mousterian Neandertal and Upper Paleolithic modern human) context, and evaluate their taxonomic status. The teeth (n = 29) represent a minimum of six individuals aged from birth to adult. The permanent dental sample (n = 15) from the Chatelperronian layers of Arcy-sur-Cure exhibits traits (e.g., lower molar mid-trigonid crest) that occur more frequently in Neandertals than in Upper Paleolithic modern humans. Furthermore, several teeth show trait combinations, including Cusp 6/mid-trigonid crest/anterior fovea in the lower second molar, that are rare or absent in Upper Paleolithic modern humans. The deciduous teeth (n = 14) significantly increase the sample of known deciduous hominin teeth and are more similar to Mousterian Neandertals from Europe and Asia than to Upper Paleolithic modern humans. Thus, the preponderance of dental evidence from the Grotte du Renne strongly supports that Neandertals were responsible for the Chatelperronian industry at Arcy-sur-Cure.     

Who made the Aurignacian and other early Upper Paleolithic industries?

The Aurignacian is typically taken as a marker of the spread of anatomically modern humans into Europe. However, human remains associated with this industry are frustratingly sparse and often limited to teeth. Some have suggested that Neandertals may, in fact, be responsible for the Aurignacian and the earliest Upper Paleolithic industries. Although dental remains are frequently considered to be taxonomically undiagnostic in this context, recent research shows that Neandertals possess a distinct dental pattern relative to anatomically modern humans. Even so, it is rare to find mandibles or maxillae that preserve all or most of their teeth; and, the probability of correctly identifying individuals represented by only a few teeth or a single tooth is unknown. We present a Bayesian statistical approach to classifying individuals represented exclusively by teeth into two possible groups. The classification is based on dental trait frequencies and sample sizes for ‘known’ samples of 95 Neandertals and 63 Upper Paleolithic modern humans. In a cross validation test of the known samples, 89% of the Neandertals and 89% of the Upper Paleolithic modern humans were classified correctly. We then classified an ‘unknown’ sample of 52 individuals: 34 associated with Aurignacian or other (non-Châtelperronian) early Upper Paleolithic industries, 15 associated with the Châtelperronian, and three unassociated. Of the 34 early Upper Paleolithic-associated individuals, 29 were assigned to modern humans, which is well within the range expected (95% of the time 26-33) with an 11% misclassification rate for an entirely modern human sample. These results provide some of the strongest evidence that anatomically modern humans made the Aurignacian and other (non-Châtelperronian) early Upper Paleolithic industries.     

The Early Middle Palaeolithic lithic industry of Dederiyeh Cave,Northwest Syria

The Lower-to-Middle Paleolithic transition of the Levant has attracted much attention, particularly because the early Middle Paleolithic is the period when the earliest anatomically modern humans fossils known to date in Eurasia have been attested in that part of Asia . The associated lithic assemblages are a significant source of information for investigating the cultural landscape of this important transition. This paper presents a new dataset from the 2003–2009 excavations at Dederiyeh Cave, northwest of Syria. A techno-typological analysis of the lithic industry reveals a common practice of blade blank production, which corroborates the other known early Middle Paleolithic assemblages of the Levant. However, its strong emphasis on Levallois core reduction and sidescraper manufacturing is noteworthy. The significance of this finding deserves further research from multiple viewpoints, including the functional and spatio-temporal variability of hominin activities in this period. It will be also important to interpret the techno-typological diagnostics of the early Middle Paleolithic assemblage of Dederiyeh considering its geographic location at the northern end of the Levant, distant from the previously known sites in the central and southern Levant.     

L’Aurignacien archaïque de la grotte El Castillo (Espagne) : caractérisation technologique et typologique

In this paper, we present the techno-typological study of level 16 of El Castillo cave (Archaic Aurignacian). In this level, we can identify an important bladelet production from schémas opératoires of unipolar prismatic cores, carinated endscraper and carinated burins types. Besides, we find a specific production of Discoid conception. The retouched blanks, though scanty, are dominated by the Dufour bladelets. Level 16 is in relation with the Archaic Aurignacian at the Cantabrian Iberia, which is present in sites like Cueva Morín, Labeko Koba, Gatzarria, or Isturitz and it also is in relation with the Mediterranean Archaic Aurignacian. Finally, we analyse the different hypotheses about the Initial Upper Paleolithic origin in Europe. The mosaic hypothesis is acceptable for us.     

The Paleolithic of northwestern Zagros. 2012–2019 MAFGS Survey: Data and preliminary results

Between 2012 and 2019, the surveys conducted by the French archaeological mission of the Soulaimanih Governorate in the Rania and Peshadar plains of Iraqi Kurdistan, previously devoid of Paleolithic records, have yielded numerous lithic assemblages from open-air sites, caves and rock-shelters. We present here six lithic assemblages from the three districts surveyed, Rania, Peshdar and Dukan. Despite the absence of chronostratigraphic contexts and the still fragmentary data, the first typo-technological analyses carried out allow us to propose a first techno-cultural attribution to the Paleolithic and, more specifically for some assemblages, to the Middle Paleolithic. Among the sites uncovered, it is certainly the Paleolithic shelter of Sarsyan-Rostam Agha that was the most distinctive and which represents, with the Shanidar cave, one of the rare Paleolithic sites preserved in the northwestern Zagros. Its preserved Paleolithic sequence, rich in archaeological remains, and explored in a test-pit conducted in 2018, shows clear affinities with the Mousterian Zagros industries, a well-defined entity based on sites such as Shanidar, Bisitun, Warwasi and Mar Tarik.     

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.     

Mousterian technology and settlement dynamics in the site of Hummal (Syria)

The site of Hummal is one of several artesian springs in the El Kowm area (Central Syria) that became the focus of archaeological research at the beginning of the 1980s. The archaeological sequence spans the whole Paleolithic period and the spring is therefore a reference site for the Paleolithic in the interior part of the Levant. Archaeological remains are found in a more than 15 m thick succession of deposits that contain Lower, Middle and Upper Paleolithic assemblages. The present paper addresses archaeological and geological data, which were recovered during recent years’ excavations of Mousterian deposits. With a compiled stratigraphy of over 6 m and more than 30 archaeological levels, the Hummal Mousterian sequence is especially apt for the reconstruction of changing site-use patterns through time. Lithic analysis helps to elucidate technological traditions as well as organization and the changing ways in which mobile foragers used a site in the context of an arid steppe. Results contribute further to existing models of Levantine Middle Paleolithic land-use strategies and demography in the time span of between 130,000 and 50,000 BP, and partly contradict existing interpretations. Two different lithic industries were defined, which correspond to a C- and B-type Levantine Mousterian according to the three-stage Tabun model. The discovery of a C-type Mousterian in the lower deposits further extends the geographical range of this cultural facies into the interior arid part of the Levant. An increasing importance and standardization of Levallois points is observable and thereby supports models that postulate a growing specialization of hunting techniques at the end of the Middle Paleolithic.     

A modern human humerus from the early aurignacian of Vogelherdhöhle (Stetten, Germany)

Implicit in much of the discussion of the cultural and population biological dynamics of modern human origins in Europe is the assumption that the Aurignacian, from its very start, was made by fully modern humans. The veracity of this assumption has been challenged in recent years by the association of Neandertal skeletal remains with a possibly Aurignacian assemblage at Vindija Cave (Croatia) and the association of Neandertals with distinctly Upper Paleolithic (but non-Aurignacian) assemblages at Arcy-sur-Cure and St. C?esaire (France). Ideally we need human fossil material that can be confidently assigned to the early Aurignacian to resolve this issue, yet in reality there is a paucity of well-provenanced human fossils from early Upper Paleolithic contexts. One specimen, a right humerus from the site of Vogelherd (Germany), has been argued, based on its size, robusticity, and muscularity, to possibly represent a Neandertal in an Aurignacian context. The morphological affinities of the Vogelherd humerus were explored by univariate and multivariate comparisons of humeral epiphyseal and diaphyseal shape and strength measures relative to humeri of Neandertals and Early Upper Paleolithic (later Aurignacian and Gravettian) modern humans. On the basis of diaphyseal cross-sectional geometry, deltoid tuberosity morphology, and distal epiphyseal morphology, the specimen falls clearly and consistently with European early modern humans and not with Neandertals. Along with the other Vogelherd human remains, the Vogelherd humerus represents an unequivocal association between the Aurignacian and modern human morphology in Europe.     

Os fossiles humains des grottes Muierii et Cioclovina, Roumanie

This paper presents the cultural and archaeological context of the human fossil bones from Muierii Cave, dated by us to the age of 30 150 ± 800 ¹⁴C years BP (Before Present) or 34 810 ± 927 cal years BP (calibrated years Before Present), and from Cioclovina Cave, dated to the age of 29 000 ± 700 ¹⁴C years BP or 33 540 ± 832 cal years BP, in the Southern Carpathians. These are among the most ancient dated human fossil remains from Central and South-Eastern Europe and are described in conjunction with other sites with Mousterian assemblages of the recent Neanderthal population, and sites with Aurignacian assemblage of early modern humans, from Romanian region, for the interval of time 34,000-26,000, the transitional period from the Middle Paleolithic to the Upper Paleolithic.     

Les relations entre l’Extrême-Orient eurasien et le nord de l’archipel du Japon au Paléolithique

The aim of this paper is to present a review of current knowledge concerning the Paleolithic records and the related natural environmental setting in the Eurasian Far East and Hokkaido, located at the northern tip of the Japanese islands. At present, it is quite difficult to answer whether the archaic humans dispersed from Siberia and northern China across the Amur River basin and Sakhalin into Hokkaido or not, because there is no reliable evidence indicating the Lower and Middle Paleolithic in Hokkaido. We demonstrate that the Upper Paleolithic assemblages in Hokkaido can be divided into at least three phases such as the early Upper Paleolithic (EUP), the middle Upper Paleolithic (MUP), and the late Upper Paleolithic (LUP), based on a synthesis of available radiocarbon dates and the techno-typological characteristics of lithic assemblages. It is reasonable to suggest that the lithic assemblage from the Rubenosawa site, located in northern Hokkaido, and some of lithic assemblages at the transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic or the initial Upper Paleolithic (IUP) in Siberia share the relative similarities of techno-typological attributes in the reduction sequences, although the reliable radiocarbon dates have not been obtained from the Rubenosawa site unfortunately. Also, the emergence of microblade technology at the MUP in Hokkaido, such as represented by the microblade assemblage recovered from the Kashiwadai-1 site, central Hokkaido, indicates a close interaction between the Eurasian Far East and Hokkaido. As a result, the comparison of archaeological evidence in these regions provides us with a suggestion that the appearance and development of the Upper Paleolithic assemblages in Hokkaido were sometimes associated with the human dispersions and the mutual contacts crossing between the Eurasian Far East and Hokkaido.     

Diet of upper paleolithic modern humans: Evidence from microwear texture analysis

This article presents the results of the occlusal molar microwear texture analysis of 32 adult Upper Paleolithic modern humans from a total of 21 European sites dating to marine isotope stages 3 and 2. The occlusal molar microwear textures of these specimens were analyzed with the aim of examining the effects of the climatic, as well as the cultural, changes on the diets of the Upper Paleolithic modern humans. The results of this analysis do not reveal any environmentally driven dietary shifts for the Upper Paleolithic hominins indicating that the climatic and their associated paleoecological changes did not force these humans to significantly alter their diets in order to survive. However, the microwear texture analysis does detect culturally related changes in the Upper Paleolithic humans' diets. Specifically, significant differences in diet were found between the earlier Upper Paleolithic individuals, i.e., those belonging to the Aurignacian and Gravettian contexts, and the later Magdalenian ones, such that the diet of the latter group was more varied and included more abrasive foods compared with those of the former. Am J Phys Anthropol 153:570–581, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Are Upper Paleolithic blade cores more productive than Middle Paleolithic discoidal cores? A replication experiment

It is widely believed that the change from discoidal flake production to prismatic blade-making during the Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition in Europe led to enhanced technological efficiency. Specifically, blade-making is thought to promote higher rates of blank production, more efficient and complete reduction of the parent core, and a large increase in the total length of cutting edge per weight of stone. Controlled replication experiments using large samples, computer-assisted measurements, and statistical tests of several different measures failed to support any of these propositions. When resharpened, the use-life of flake edges actually surpasses that of blades of equivalent mass because the narrower blades are more rapidly exhausted by retouch. Our results highlight the need to replace static measurements of edge length that promote an illusion of efficiency with a more dynamic approach that takes the whole reduction sequence into account. An unexpected by-product of our replications was the discovery that real gains in cutting-edge length per weight of stone are linked to surface area. There is now a need to test the proposition that all the perceived advantages currently bestowed upon blades only occurred during the shift from macroblade to bladelet production. If our results are duplicated in further experiments, the notion of "economical" blades will have to be rejected and alternative explanations sought for their appearance in the early Upper Paleolithic. While Aurignacian bladelet (Dufour) production could signal the advent of composite tool technology (wooden handles or shafts with bladelet inserts), this does not help to explain why macroblades were also produced in large numbers. We may need to reexamine the notion that macroblades were of more symbolic than functional significance to their makers.     

Le Moustérien du Zagros : une vision synthétique à partir de la grotte de Shanidar

The Zagros Mousterian is a Middle Palaeolithic techno-typological lithic complex, found down the length of the Zagros mountain range in Iraq and Iran. It is associated with Neanderthal skeletal remains at four sites, most famously Shanidar Cave. Dating is problematic, but the indications are that Neanderthals with this cultural apparatus were present in the Zagros region from the beginning of the last interglacial (Marine Isotope Stage 5e) c.130.000 years ago through to c. 40.000 years ago during the last glacial. The humid deciduous woodland of MIS 5 was replaced by increasingly dry steppe in MIS 4 and MIS 3. Microfaunal assemblages and paleosols indicate that Neanderthals visited Shanidar Cave when environmental conditions were broadly similar to those of today, primarily in the humid phases of MIS 5 and then during brief climatic ameliorations in MIS 4 and MIS 3 that may correlate with Dansgaard-Oescheger events. Caves with Mousterian occupations at high altitudes suggest that they, too, were used by Neanderthals when conditions were not dissimilar to those of today. The indications are that the Zagros Mousterian represents the seasonal activities of highly mobile small and dispersed groups of Neanderthal foragers connected in social networks of shared cultural values and/or norms.     

Metrical reconsideration of the Skhul IV and IX and Border Cave 1 crania in the context of modern human origins.

The "out-of-Africa" models for origins of modern Homo sapiens incorporate Skhul as one site documenting that early origination. However, only Skhul V is usually considered in the comparative craniology of the question, neglecting the other substantial crania, Skhul IV and IX. Craniometric comparison demonstrates that IV and IX amplify the picture of continuous gradations of Neandertal-to-modern variations throughout the Levant; much variation is thus represented within this one site, raising serious questions about Neandertals and moderns being discrete and long-separated species. Qafzeh 6 too is craniophenetically closer to Neandertals than to the true anatomically modern people of the European Upper Paleolithic. Proper distance analysis of Border Cave 1 cranium shows it is actually far removed from modern African populations. References to Qafzeh, Skhul, and Border Cave as "fully anatomically modern" require reconsideration.     

Le Protoaurignacien : première culture de l'homme moderne de Provence et Ligurie

G. Laplace defined the Protoaurignacian in Liguria (“abri Mochi”) as the earliest occurrences of Upper Paleolithic in Italy. Stratigraphic sequences in Var exemplify that the Protoaurignacian is the first sequence of Upper Paleolithic in Provence and widely different from classic Aurignacian defined in southwestern France. Recorded in Languedoc-Roussillon, that one is documented in some other stratigraphic sequences from Monaco to southern Spain (“cueva del boquete de Zafarraya”). The Protoaurignacian argue that first modern humans arrived and occupied all along the Mediterranean coasts from Gibraltar to Toscana.     

Neandertals,competition, and the origin of modern human behavior in the Levant

The East Mediterranean Levant is a small region, but its paleoanthropological record looms large in debates about the origin of modern humans and the fate of the Neandertals. For most of the twentieth century, the Levantine paleoanthropological record supported models of continuity and evolutionary transition between Neandertals and early modern humans. Recent advances in radiometric dating have challenged these models by reversing the chronological relationship between Levantine Neandertals and early modern humans. This revised chronostratigraphy for Levantine Middle Paleolithic human fossils raises interesting questions about the evolutionary relationship between Neandertals and early modern humans. A reconsideration of this relationship moves us closer to understanding the long delay between the origin of morphologically modern‐looking humans during the Middle Paleolithic (>130 Kyr) and the adaptive radiation of modern humans into Eurasia around the time of the transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic (50 to 30 Kyr).     

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 .     

Re-dating the Early Upper Paleolithic Levels of Le Trou Magrite (Pont-à-Lesse,Belgium)

All but one of the published radiocarbon dates from the 1991–1992 excavations of Strata 3 and 2 at le Trou Magrite are considered too recent because the dating was done with then-standard chemical pretreatment protocols. This study re-dates Stratum 2 using the same, then-pioneering, XAD-2 purification method on bone collagen as had been used for the 44,650 cal BP date from Stratum 3. The results are two averaged dates that are in stratigraphic order between themselves and in relation to the Stratum 3 date: 43,400 and 43,500 cal BP, according to the IntCal20 curve. These dates are very similar to recently published dates for the earliest Aurignacian in SW Germany and the latest Neanderthal remains in Belgium and they are associated with artifact assemblages that, without obvious evidence of mixture (other than that which was highly localized), include Upper Paleolithic stone tools and blades/bladelets together with numerous sidescrapers, denticulates and notches which are not exclusively Mousterian artifacts. Nineteenth-century excavations in the cave of le Trou Magrite yielded unambiguously diagnostic Aurignacian artifacts and works of portable art that could conceivably have been from a deposit equivalent in age to these strata on the contiguous terrace. It is clear that the first blade(let)-rich assemblages in the site were created on the cusp of the transition from the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transition and replacement of the Neanderthals in NW Europe.     

Hearth-side socioeconomics, hunting and paleoecology during the late Lower Paleolithic at Qesem Cave, Israel

The late Lower Paleolithic archaeofaunas of Qesem Cave in the southern Levant span 400-200 ka and associate with Acheulo-Yabrudian (mainly Amudian) industries. The large mammals are exclusively Eurasian in origin and formed under relatively cool, moist conditions. The zooarchaeological findings testify to large game hunting, hearth-centered carcass processing and meat sharing during the late Lower Paleolithic, not unlike the patterns known from Middle and Upper Paleolithic caves in the region. Well-defined hearth features are rarely preserved in Qesem Cave, but the heterogeneous distributions of burned bones indicate areas of frequent hearth rebuilding throughout the occupation sequence. The hominins delayed consumption of high quality body parts until they could be moved to the cave, where hearths were hubs of processing activities and social interaction. Paradoxically, the cut marks on the Qesem bones are both more abundant and more randomly oriented than those observed in Middle and Upper Paleolithic cases in the Levant. These results suggest that several individuals were directly involved in cutting meat from the bones and that the social mechanics of meat sharing during the late Lower Paleolithic at Qesem Cave differed from those typical of both the Middle and Upper Paleolithic in the region.