The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.

Modern humans replaced Neandertals ∼40,000 y ago. Close to the time of replacement, Neandertals show behaviors similar to those of the modern humans arriving into Europe, including the use of specialized bone tools, body ornaments, and small blades. It is highly debated whether these modern behaviors developed before or as a result of contact with modern humans. Here we report the identification of a type of specialized bone tool, lissoir , previously only associated with modern humans. The microwear preserved on one of these lissoir is consistent with the use of lissoir in modern times to obtain supple, lustrous, and more impermeable hides. These tools are from a Neandertal context proceeding the replacement period and are the oldest specialized bone tools in Europe. As such, they are either a demonstration of independent invention by Neandertals or an indication that modern humans started influencing European Neandertals much earlier than previously believed. Because these finds clearly predate the oldest known age for the use of similar objects in Europe by anatomically modern humans, they could also be evidence for cultural diffusion from Neandertals to modern humans.

The stratigraphy at Bacho Kiro Cave, Bulgaria, spans the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition, including an Initial Upper Palaeolithic (IUP) assemblage argued to represent the earliest arrival of Upper Palaeolithic Homo sapiens in Europe. We applied the latest techniques in 14 C dating to an extensive dataset of newly excavated animal and human bones to produce a robust, high-precision radiocarbon chronology for the site. At the base of the stratigraphy, the Middle Palaeolithic (MP) occupation dates to >51,000 yr bp. A chronological gap of over 3,000 years separates the MP occupation from the occupation of the cave by H. sapiens, which extends to 34,000 cal bp. The extensive IUP assemblage, now associated with directly dated H. sapiens fossils at this site, securely dates to 45,820-43,650 cal bp (95.4% probability), probably beginning from 46,940 cal bp (95.4% probability). The results provide chronological context for the early occupation of Europe by Upper Palaeolithic H. sapiens.

Use-wear analysis provides a means of studying traces produced on animal bone during manufacture and use in an effort to reconstruct these processes. Often, these analyses are qualitative and based on experience and expertise. Previous studies have focused on interpreting final traces, but little is known about how these traces develop and change over time. We propose the use of an innovative quantitative method for studying bone surface traces that aims to reduce any unreliable or non-replicable results that can confound more traditional qualitative analyses. We seek to understand the basics of use-wear formation over Time by taking incremental molds of bone specimens subjected to a controlled, mechanical experiment. This study assesses how bone wears during extended use on three Material types (fresh skin, processed leather, or dry bark), from three initial Manufacturing states (unworked, ground with sandstone, or scraped with flint). With data obtained from a confocal disc-scanning microscope, we then apply 3D surface texture analysis using ISO 25178 parameters: surface roughness [Sa], autocorrelation length [Sal], peak curvature [Spc], and upper material ratio [Smr1]. We employ a multilevel multivariate Bayesian model to explain parameter variation under experimental conditions. Our findings show how duration of use strongly affects the transformation of the bone’s surface. Unworked bone is completely distinguishable from bone used for long time intervals and those modified by scraping. Interestingly, material wear does not often produce type-specific traces, but does affect the rate of bone alteration and how it is transformed. Specifically, fresh skin transforms bone at a faster rate than other materials. This novel quantitative and experimental approach enhances our understanding of the use of bone as a raw material for making and using tools and provides a foundation for future exploration of archaeological materials and questions.

Five nearly identical fragments of specialized bone tools, interpreted as lissoirs (French for "smoothers"), have been found at two Middle Paleolithic sites in southwest France. The finds span three separate archaeological deposits, suggesting continuity in the behavior of late Neandertals. Using standard morphological assessments, we determined that the lissoirs were produced on ribs of medium-sized ungulates. However, since these bones are highly fragmented and anthropogenically modified, species determinations were challenging. Also, conservative curation policy recommends minimizing destructive sampling of rare, fragile, or small artifacts for molecular identification methods. To better understand raw material selection for these five lissoirs, we reassess their taxonomy using a non-destructive ZooMS methodology based on triboelectric capture of collagen. We sampled four storage containers and obtained identifiable MALDI-TOF MS collagen fingerprints, all indicative of the same taxonomic clade, which includes aurochs and bison (Bos sp. and Bison sp.). The fifth specimen, which was stored in a plastic bag, provided no useful MALDI-TOF MS spectra. We show that the choice of large bovid ribs in an archaeological layer dominated by reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) demonstrates strategic selection by these Neandertals. Furthermore, our results highlight the value of a promising technique for the non-destructive analysis of bone artifacts. It is now accepted that some Neandertals produced bone tools 1-3. These include the discovery of four specialized bone tools from a total of three layers at two late Middle Paleolithic sites in southwest France, Pech-de-l' Azé I (Pech I) and Abri Peyrony 4. Subsequently, a fifth example was found at Abri Peyrony 5. We interpreted these fragments of shaped and worn animal ribs as lissoirs, a term meaning "smoothers" in the French bone tool typology 6. Analyses suggest that these tools preserve traces consistent with abrasive pressure on animal skin 4,5. The use of these tools during the hide working process reflects a complex technical system where animal ribs were exploited for their specific raw material properties 7. Based on standard zooarchaeological assessments, their width and thickness suggest that they might have been produced from ribs of medium-sized ungulates (hooved animals such as red deer (Cervus elaphus) and reindeer (Rangifer tarandus)). However, taxonomic assignments of bone tools are difficult as their production and use often involves the deliberate reshaping of external surfaces, removing diagnostic features. Modified ribs present additional challenges due to shape and size variation across the ribcage. Though standard zooarchaeological analyses are needed to assess certain aspects of raw material selection (e.g., skeletal element), Zooarchaeology by Mass Spectrometry (ZooMS), a mass-spectrometric method for

Increasingly researchers have employed confocal microscopy and 3D surface texture analysis to assess bone surface modifications in an effort to understand ancient behavior. However, quantitative comparisons between the surfaces of purported archaeological bone tools and experimentally manufactured and used bones are complicated by taphonomic processes affecting ancient bone. Nonetheless, it may be reasonable to assume that bones within the same deposits are altered similarly and thus these alterations are quantifiable. Here we show how unworked bones can be used to quantify the taphonomic effect on bone surfaces and how this effect can then be controlled for and incorporated into an analysis for evaluating the modified surfaces of purported bone tools. To assess the baseline taphonomy of Middle Paleolithic archaeological deposits associated with typologically identified bone artifacts, specifically lissoirs, we directly compare the surface textures of ancient and modern unworked ribs. We then compare the ancient unworked ribs and lissoirs to assess their differences and predict the ancient artifacts’ original surface state using a multilevel multivariate Bayesian model. Our findings demonstrate that three of five tested surface texture parameters (Sa, Spc, and IsT) are useful for distinguishing surface type. Our model predictions show that lissoirs tend to be less rough, have more rounded surface peaks, and exhibit more directionally oriented surfaces. These characteristics are likely due to anthropogenic modifications and would have been more pronounced at deposition. Quantifying taphonomic alterations moves us one step closer to accurately assessing how bone artifacts were made and used in the ancient past.

Bone surface modifications are crucial for understanding human subsistence and dietary behaviour, and can inform about the techniques employed in the production and use of bone tools. Permission to destructively sample such unique artefacts is not always granted. The recent development of non-destructive proteomic extraction techniques has provided some alternatives for the analysis of rare and culturally significant artefacts, including bone tools and personal ornaments. The Eraser Extraction Method (EEM), first developed for ZooMS analysis of parchment, has recently been applied to bone and ivory specimens. To test the potential impact of the EEM on ancient bone surfaces, we analyse six anthropogenically modified Palaeolithic bone specimens from Bacho Kiro Cave (Bulgaria) through a controlled sampling experiment using qualitative and 3D quantitative microscopy. Although the overall bone topography is generally preserved, our findings demonstrate a slight flattening of the microtopography alongside the formation of micro-striations associated with the use of the eraser for all bone specimens. Such modifications are similar to ancient use-wear traces. We therefore consider the EEM a destructive sampling approach for Palaeolithic bone surfaces. Together with low ZooMS success rates in some of the reported studies, the EEM might not be a suitable approach to taxonomically identify Pleistocene bone specimens.

No abstract