Not only Chauvet: Dating Aurignacian rock art in Altxerri B Cave (northern Spain)

The discovery and first dates of the paintings in Grotte Chauvet provoked a new debate on the origin and characteristics of the first figurative Palaeolithic art. Since then, other art ensembles in France and Italy (Aldène, Fumane, Arcy-sur-Cure and Castanet) have enlarged our knowledge of graphic activity in the early Upper Palaeolithic. This paper presents a chronological assessment of the Palaeolithic parietal ensemble in Altxerri B (northern Spain). When the study began in 2011, one of our main objectives was to determine the age of this pictorial phase in the cave. Archaeological, geological and stylistic evidence, together with radiometric dates, suggest an Aurignacian chronology for this art. The ensemble in Altxerri B can therefore be added to the small but growing number of sites dated in this period, corroborating the hypothesis of more complex and varied figurative art than had been supposed in the early Upper Palaeolithic.     

Coliboaia is not Chauvet

The decorated cave of Coliboaia in Romania has been claimed to date to the Aurignacian period, and to supply support for the Aurignacian attribution of France's Chauvet cave. In this paper, we examine the evidence and show that neither the radiocarbon dates obtained at Coliboaia nor the style and content of its cave art correspond to the Aurignacian period, and that comparisons with Chauvet cave – itself badly dated and erroneously attributed – are equally ill-founded. We also show that both caves are in regions which are bereft of Aurignacian occupation, and neither cave contains any artefacts from the period.     

Radiocarbon dating the late Middle Paleolithic and the Aurignacian of the Swabian Jura

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 Geissenkl?sterle 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.     

L’outillage lithique taillé dans le grand gisement paléolithique de Mitoc-Malu Galben

In this Palaeolithic site, at the moment the largest habitation undergoing investigations in Europe, several archaeological layers were discovered: Lower Aurignacian I, Aurignacian I, II, III and Upper Aurignacian III, Gravettian I, II, III, IV and Dispersed Gravettian. The systematic archaeological investigations were conducted between 1978 and 2017 and covered a surface of more than 900 square meters, reaching a depth of approximately 14 m. Stone artefacts worked in non-local raw materials were identified, as well as a survival of Aurignacian elements within the Gravettian medium, as suggested by the presence of carenated pieces, scarpers, etc.     

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 .     

The absolute dating of Upper Pleistocene subSaharan fossil hominids and their place in human evolution

In the evolution of anatomically modern man and his subspecies most specialists have concentrated on investigating geographical areas other than Africa as the possible area of origin.In this study 20 fossil hominids and associated faunal remains from South and East Africa were dated by microanalysis, radiocarbon, and amino-acid dating in order to see whether modern man appears later, was sympatric, or even predated Neandertal man.These dates indicate that anatomically modern man occurs sympatrically and possibly even predates the Rhodesian group of Neandertals in Africa. Modern man might also be contemporary to and possibly even predate the occurrence of Neandertal in Europe.This would indicate that modern man did not evolve from but possibly gave rise to the Neandertals as off-shoots.Two possibilities for the evolution of modern man are suggested. First, that Homo sapiens capensis evolved about 90,000 to 100,000 years ago from possibly Homo erectus by way of a “basic” Homo sapiens and later gave rise to Homo sapiens rhodesiensis, Homo sapiens afer, and possibly Homo sapiens palestinus around 50,000 years ago with Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens capensis evolving separately from Homo erectus. In this case Homo neanderthalensis would be a different species from Homo sapiens which includes Homo sapiens capensis, Homo sapiens rhodesiensis, Homo sapiens afer, and possibly Homo sapiens palestinus.Secondly, Homo sapiens capensis evolved by way of a “basic” Homo sapiens with Homo sapiens rhodesiensis and Homo sapiens palestinus branching off from Homo sapiens capensis around 50,000 years ago. Before that, around 90,000 to 100,000 years ago Homo sapiens capensis evolved first and was then followed by Homo sapiens neanderthalensis from a “basic” Homo sapiens stock, but diverged. This means, all Neandertals, Homo sapiens capensis, Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens afer can be considered as subspecies of Homo sapiens.The author favors the first scheme since on relative dating grounds the existence of Neandertal man in Europe before the earliest date of Homo sapiens capensis and a “basic” Homo sapiens seems to be fairly well documented. Irrespective of either one of these possibilities, modern man evolved in Africa and seems to have migrated into Europe and other parts of the world.New absolute dating techniques are mentioned in detail like the new radiocarbon-collagen method and amino acid dating.     

Nouvelles recherches sur l’identité culturelle et stylistique de la grotte Chauvet et sur sa datation par la méthode du C

The discovery of Chauvet cave, at Vallon-Pont-d’Arc (Ardèche), in 1994, was an important event for our knowledge of palaeolithic parietal art as a whole. Its painted and engraved figures, thanks to their number (425 graphic units), and their excellent state of preservation, provide a documentary thesaurus comparable to that of the greatest sites known, and far beyond what had already been found in the group of Rhône valley caves (Ardèche and Gard). But its study – when one places it in its natural regional, cultural and thematic framework – makes it impossible to see it as an isolated entity of astonishing precocity. This needs to be reconsidered, and the affinities that our research has brought to light are clearly incompatible with the very early age which has been attributed to it. And if one extends this examination to the whole of the Franco-Cantabrian domain, the conclusion is inescapable: although Chauvet cave displays some unique characteristics (like every decorated cave), it belongs to an evolved phase of parietal art that is far removed from the motifs of its origins (known from art on blocks and on shelter walls dated by stratigraphy to the Aurignacian, in France and Cantabrian Spain). The majority of its works are therefore to be placed, quite normally, within the framework of the well-defined artistic creations of the Gravettian and Solutrean. Moreover, this phase of the Middle Upper Palaeolithic (26,000–18,000) coincides with a particularly intensive and diversified local human occupation, unknown in earlier periods and far less dense afterwards in the Magdalenian. A detailed critique of the treatment of the samples subjected to AMS radiocarbon dating makes it impossible to retain the very early age (36,000 cal BP) attributed by some authors to the painted and engraved figures of Chauvet cave.     

A critical review of the German Paleolithic hominin record

We review the hominin fossil record from western Central Europe in light of the recent major revisions of the geochronological context. The mandible from Mauer (Homo heidelbergensis), dated to circa 500,000 years ago, continues to represent the earliest German hominin and may coincide with the occupation of Europe north of the high alpine mountain chains. Only limited new evidence is available for the Middle Pleistocene, mostly in the form of skull fragments, a pattern that may relate to taphonomic processes. These finds and their ages suggest the gradual evolution of a suite of Neandertal features during this period. Despite new finds of classic Neandertals, there is no clear proof for Neandertal burial from Germany. Alternatively, cut marks on a skull fragment from the Neandertal type site suggest special treatment of that individual. New Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) radiocarbon dates of previous finds leave little reliably dated evidence for anatomically modern humans (AMH) in Europe before 30,000 BP; the remains from Hahn?fersand, Binshof-Speyer, Paderborn-Sande, and Vogelherd are now of Holocene age. Thus, a correlation of AMH with the Aurignacian remains to be proven, and the general idea of a long coexistence of Neandertals and AMH in Europe may be questioned. In western Central Europe, evidence of Gravettian human fossils is also very limited, although a new double grave from lower Austria may be relevant. The only dated burial from the German Upper Paleolithic (from Mittlere Klause) falls into a time period (circa 18,600 BP) represented by only a few occupation sites in western Central Europe. A number of human remains at Magdalenian sites appear to result from variable (secondary) burial practices. In contrast, the Final Paleolithic (circa 12,000-9600 cal. BC) yields an increase of hominin finds, including multiple burials (Bonn-Oberkassel, Neuwied-Irlich), similar to the situation in western and southern Europe.     

Découverte d’un nouvel hominidé à Dmanissi (Transcaucasie,Géorgie)

Four human remains: one mandible, two skulls and one metatarsus were discovered between 1991 and 1999 at the open-air site of Dmanisi, Georgia, in a precise stratigraphic, palaeontological and archaeological context, in volcanic ashes dated to 1.81 ± 0.05 Ma. The first studies of these fossils enable the authors to compare them with the morphology of archaic African Homo erectus, ascribed to Homo ergaster, and to ascertain hominid presence at the gates of Europe 300 000 years earlier than the classical scenario forecasted. In September 2000, the discovery of a second more complete and robust mandible D 2600 presents a threefold interest: palaeontological, functional and pathological. A comparison with Homo habilis and Homo erectus leads to the recognition of a new Homo species: H. georgicus sp. nov. The morphofunctional characteristics and the antiquity of H. georgicus characterise the root of a long Eurasian line.     

Time for the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition in Europe

The Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition is a key period of change in the prehistory of the Old World and one of the most studied issues in paleoanthropology, as the nature of the transition(s) is still, after at least a century of archaeological research, largely unknown. Many of the issues at stake in the transition relate to the problem of building a reliable chronology for this period, which is at the limits of the radiocarbon method. The papers in this volume show that much progress has been made in our chronological knowledge of significant aspects of the transition, such as the age of the most recent Neandertal fossils and the earliest modern human remains in Europe, and the inferred overlap between the Chatelperronian and the Aurignacian. At the same time, the volume also shows where the chronological database for the period 40 to 30 ka 14C BP is flawed and that significant contextual and methodological problems have been underestimated in a number of studies of the biological and cultural changes during this crucial period. Chronology is employed by paleoanthropologists to relate the record of the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition to major biological and cultural developments. This paper takes a broader paleoanthropological perspective and attempts to evaluate and, to some degree, synthesize the main results of these proceedings, while also presenting a brief discussion of the Middle and Upper Paleolithic archaeological and fossil records, and possible explanations for the differences between the two, focusing on the role of differences in the ecology of Neandertals and early European modern humans.     

Coliboaia,art rupestre aurignacien en Roumanie

Dating at the same time as Chauvet in the very West, the Coliboaia rock arts in Romania are obvious proofs for traditional mythologies and arts unities, extended all across the continent during the Aurignacian expansion from the East of Europe. These traits are to be added to the ethnicity (modern people), technologies (antlers weapons) and behavior (fast animals riding).     

A Botanical Classroom of the Early Upper Paleolithic: The vault fragments of the Grotta di Fumane depict geophytes

In the Grotta di Fumane (GdF), five figuratively painted vault fragments were found in the debris of the cave floor. Dating to 35,000 B.P., the paintings are among the oldest known paintings in Europe. The paintings have been dated to an early phase of the Aurignacian. This should explain the “primitive” character of the works. We interpret the paintings as very accurate depictions of geophytes with an emphasis on their underground storage organs. Since the taxa presented here are also used in present-day HG communities, we conclude that there was a corresponding use by the inhabitants of Grotta di Fumane.     

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 Middle Stone Age of the northern Kenyan Rift: age and context of new archaeological sites from the Kapedo Tuffs

Rift Valley sites in southern Ethiopia and northern Kenya preserve the oldest fossil remains attributed to Homo sapiens and the earliest archaeological sites attributed to the Middle Stone Age (MSA). New localities from the Kapedo Tuffs augment the sparse sample of MSA sites from the northern Kenya Rift. Tephrostratigraphic correlation with dated pyroclastic deposits from the adjacent volcano Silali suggests an age range of 135-123 ka for archaeological sites of the Kapedo Tuffs. Comparisons of the Kapedo Tuffs archaeological assemblages with those from the adjacent Turkana and Baringo basins show broad lithic technological similarity but reveal that stone raw material availability is a key factor in explaining typologically defined archaeological variability within this region. Spatially and temporally resolved comparisons such as this provide the best means to link the biological and behavioral variation manifest in the record of early Homo sapiens.     

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.     

Τesting models for the beginnings of the Aurignacian and the advent of figurative art and music: the radiocarbon chronology of Geißenklösterle

The German site of Geißenklösterle is crucial to debates concerning the European Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition and the origins of the Aurignacian in Europe. Previous dates from the site are central to an important hypothesis, the Kulturpumpe model, which posits that the Swabian Jura was an area where crucial behavioural developments took place and then spread to other parts of Europe. The previous chronology (critical to the model), is based mainly on radiocarbon dating, but remains poorly constrained due to the dating resolution and the variability of dates. The cause of these problems is disputed, but two principal explanations have been proposed: a) larger than expected variations in the production of atmospheric radiocarbon, and b) taphonomic influences in the site mixing the bones that were dated into different parts of the site. We reinvestigate the chronology using a new series of radiocarbon determinations obtained from the Mousterian, Aurignacian and Gravettian levels. The results strongly imply that the previous dates were affected by insufficient decontamination of the bone collagen prior to dating. Using an ultrafiltration protocol the chronometric picture becomes much clearer. Comparison of the results against other recently dated sites in other parts of Europe suggests the Early Aurignacian levels are earlier than other sites in the south of France and Italy, but not as early as recently dated sites which suggest a pre-Aurignacian dispersal of modern humans to Italy by ∼45000 cal BP. They are consistent with the importance of the Danube Corridor as a key route for the movement of people and ideas. The new dates fail to refute the Kulturpumpe model and suggest that Swabian Jura is a region that contributed significantly to the evolution of symbolic behaviour as indicated by early evidence for figurative art, music and mythical imagery.     

Le mammouth dans l’art paléolithique

The mammoth, an emblematic animal of the Prehistory, possesses an important place in the depictions made by prehistoric artists, both in parietal art (cave art) and in mobile art. Its image is known from the Aurignacian, at the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic, until the end of the Last Ice Age, the Magdalenian. However, its geographical and chronological distribution is dissimilar. Mammoth depictions are generally more frequent during the Aurignacian where this animal is found engraved and painted in the Chauvet cave for example and carved from ivory in several cave sites of the Swabian Jura. The Magdalenian cave of Rouffignac and its 160 representations constitute a notable exception. From a formal point of view, the representations of mammoth are elaborated in a rather constant way, like the characteristic cephalic contour and the typical back of the animal, at least as it could be seen in nature. The representations are often even limited to a cursive line with a double curvature that expresses the pachyderm. On the other hand some drawings show intimate details. Sometimes the tusks of the mammoths are not indicated, but certain stylistic features, such as the ventral arch, are relatively reliable chronological markers. Finally, one cannot ignore the ethological or seasonal expressions that sometimes link the mammoths to each other, in a row or in confrontation. This animal obviously inspired the artists of the prehistory who created various portraits of the mammoth.     

晋西南旧石器考古学研究现状及其展望

晋西南古称河东,位于汾渭地堑中部,包括临汾盆地、运城盆地以及中条山南麓黄河沿岸。这里自古就是中华民族文明重要发祥地,也是研究人类起源、发展、演化的重要地区。20世纪50年代以来,考古工作者在山西地堑发现了300余处旧石器时代遗址和地点。这些发现业已证明晋西南的临汾、运城以及中条山南麓黄河沿岸,从早更新世初期直到更新世结束一直有人类在这片土地上繁衍生息。其中西侯度遗址、匼河遗址群、丁村遗址群、下川遗址群、柿子滩遗址群,代表了东亚旧石器时代人类200万年以来从能人→直立人→早期智人→晚期智人各个不同发展阶段一个完整的演化历程。因此,这里成为中国大陆一个非常重要的远古人类演化场。本文试图通过对这一区域旧石器考古的回顾,找出我们工作中的不足以及需要努力的方向,并向本地区考古学研究的开拓者贾兰坡、王建、王择义等老一辈考古学家致敬。     

Early Evidence of Acheulean Settlement in Northwestern Europe - La Noira Site,a 700 000 Year-Old Occupation in the Center of France

The human settlement of Europe during Pleistocene times was sporadic and several stages have been recognized, both from paleaoanthropological and archaeological records. If the first phase of hominin occupation (as early as 1.4 Ma) seems mainly restricted to the southern part of the continent, the second phase, characterized by specific lithic tools (handaxes), is linked to Acheulean settlements and to the emergence of Homo heidelbergensis, the ancestor of Neanderthals. This phase reached northwestern Europe and is documented in numerous sites in Germany, Great Britain and northern France, generally after 600 ka.At la Noira (Brinay, Central France), the Middle Pleistocene alluvial formation of the Cher River covers an archaeological level associated with a slope deposit (diamicton). The lithic assemblage from this level includes Large Cutting Tools (LCTs), flakes and cores, associated with numerous millstone slabs. The lithic series is classified as Acheulean on the basis of both technological and typological analyses. Cryoturbation features indicate that the slope deposits and associated archaeological level were strongly frozen and disturbed after hominin occupation and before fluvial deposition. Eight sediment samples were dated by the electron spin resonance (ESR) method and the weighted average age obtained for the fluvial sands overlying the slope deposits is 665±55 ka. This age is older than previous chronological data placing the first European Acheulean assemblages north of 45^th parallel north at around 500 ka and modifies our current vision of the initial peopling of northern Europe. Acheulean settlements are older than previously assumed and the oldest evidences are not only located in southern Europe. La Noira is the oldest evidence of Acheulean presence in north-western Europe and attests to the possibility of pioneering phases of Acheulean settlement which would have taken place on a Mode 1-type substratum as early as 700 ka. The lithic assemblage from la Noira thus provides behavioral and technological data on early Acheulean occupation in Europe and contributes to our understanding of the diffusion of this tradition.     

Precision dating of the Palaeolithic: a new radiocarbon chronology for the Abri Pataud (France), a key Aurignacian sequence

This paper presents a new series of AMS dates on ultrafiltered bone gelatin extracted from identified cutmarked or humanly-modified bones and teeth from the site of Abri Pataud, in the French Dordogne. The sequence of 32 new determinations provides a coherent and reliable chronology from the site’s early Upper Palaeolithic levels 5–14, excavated by Hallam Movius. The results show that there were some problems with the previous series of dates, with many underestimating the real age. The new results, when calibrated and modelled using a Bayesian statistical method, allow detailed understanding of the pace of cultural changes within the Aurignacian I and II levels of the site, something not achievable before. In the future, the sequence of dates will allow wider comparison to similarly dated contexts elsewhere in Europe. High precision dating is only possible by using large suites of AMS dates from humanly-modified material within well understood archaeological sequences modelled using a Bayesian statistical method.