Bone and antler working at Grotta Paglicci (Rignano Garganico, Foggia, southern Italy)

Borgia, Valentina; Boschin, Francesco; Ronchitelli, Anna María

doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2015.11.116

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It comprises the Marginally Backed Bladelets Aurignacian (layer 24), the Ancient Gravettian (layers 23–22), the Evolved Gravettian (layers 21–19b), the Late Gravettian (layers 19a–18b), the Ancient Epigravettian (layers 17–12), the Evolved Epigravettian (layers 11–8), and the Final Epigravettian (layers 7–3a). As the cave was eventually obstructed by sedimentation, it was not frequented during the Romanellian, a later phase of the Epigravettian of southern Italy (Palma di Cesnola, 2001, 2004b, 2006, 2011, and references cited therein; Wierer, 2013; Ricci et al, 2016; Borgia et al, 2016). The importance of the site also derives from the presence of three human burials and several isolated Upper Palaeolithic human remains (Ronchitelli et al, 2015; Fu et al, 2016; Posth et al, 2016), as well as from Upper Palaeolithic rock paintings (the only case known in Italy to date) (Zorzi, 1963; Arrighi et al, 2012b), mobiliary art objects (Mezzena and Palma di Cesnola, 1972, 1992, 2001, 2004; Arrighi et al, 2008, 2012a), and evidence of Gravettian plant-food processing (Mariotti Lippi et al, 2015; Revedin et al, 2015).…”

Section: The Sitementioning

confidence: 99%

The palaeoecological meaning of macromammal remains from archaeological sites exemplified by the case study of Grotta Paglicci (Upper Palaeolithic, southern Italy)

Boschin

Boscato

Berto³

et al. 2018

Quat. res.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone accumulation in Palaeolithic archaeological sites is often the result of activities carried out by hunter-gatherer groups. Cultural choices may have influenced prey representation in archaeological assemblages, distorting their palaeoecological meaning. We present a comparison between large mammal and small mammal assemblages from the Upper Palaeolithic sequence of Grotta Paglicci (Apulia, southern Italy) that extends from the Marginally Backed Bladelet Aurignacian (about 39,000 cal yr BP) to the Final Epigravettian (about 13,000 cal yr BP). At Paglicci, the high frequency of horse and ibex remains indicates open and dry environments for most of the Upper Palaeolithic. This is confirmed by the predominance of the common vole among small mammals. The alternation between horse and ibex, which takes place during the Upper Palaeolithic, however, looks to be more related to variations in hunting territories. Taxon frequencies change abruptly at 17,955–16,696 cal yr BP, with an increase in woodland-related ungulates together with micromammals, indicating a climatic evolution towards milder and more humid conditions. Results demonstrate that when the association of ungulate taxa is considered as a whole, it has a good palaeoecological signal, whilst considering taxa separately can help to better understand cultural choices of past hunter-gatherer communities.

show abstract

Section: The Sitementioning

confidence: 99%

The palaeoecological meaning of macromammal remains from archaeological sites exemplified by the case study of Grotta Paglicci (Upper Palaeolithic, southern Italy)

Boschin

Boscato

Berto³

et al. 2018

Quat. res.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Upper Palaeolithic sequence uncovered inside the cave is one of the most complete in Europe and spans from the Aurignacian (about 39,000 years ago), notably characterized by the presence of marginally backed bladelets, to the Final Epigravettian (about 13,000 years ago) 30 . In addition to the large number of artifacts and faunal remains 31 , 32 , Grotta Paglicci yielded several human specimens 33 , as well as mobiliary symbolic objects (engraved stones and bones) and the only Upper Palaeolithic wall paintings discovered in Italy so far 34 – 37 . Among the faunal remains, here we analyse twelve Canis remains that show remarkably small dimensions or a reduced size of the lower first molar (3150, 3151, 1632, 1566, 2053, 5110, 7460, 13427, 17165, 21865, R4, R64; Fig.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The first evidence for Late Pleistocene dogs in Italy

Boschin

Bernardini

Pilli

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The identification of the earliest dogs is challenging because of the absence and/or mosaic pattern of morphological diagnostic features in the initial phases of the domestication process. Furthermore, the natural occurrence of some of these characters in Late Pleistocene wolf populations and the time it took from the onset of traits related to domestication to their prevalence remain indefinite. For these reasons, the spatiotemporal context of the early domestication of dogs is hotly debated. Our combined molecular and morphological analyses of fossil canid remains from the sites of Grotta Paglicci and Grotta Romanelli, in southern Italy, attest of the presence of dogs at least 14,000 calibrated years before present. This unambiguously documents one of the earliest occurrence of domesticates in the Upper Palaeolithic of Europe and in the Mediterranean. The genetic affinity between the Palaeolithic dogs from southern Italy and contemporaneous ones found in Germany also suggest that these animals were an important common adjunct during the Late Glacial, when strong cultural diversification occurred between the Mediterranean world and European areas north of the Alps. Additionally, aDNA analyses indicate that this Upper Palaeolithic dog lineage from Italy may have contributed to the genetic diversity of living dogs. Dogs were the first animals domesticated by humans, long before the advent of agriculture 1. Besides occupying a special place in our present day lives, dogs had important functional and symbolic roles throughout human history. However, the spatiotemporal context of their early domestication is debated from both archaeological and genetic perspectives: there is scant consensus on the location of first domestication centres, and the presence of one or more domestication events 1-5 , as well as a debate on the correct identification of the oldest archaeological specimens considered to represent dogs 6-11. Latest genetic models suggest the presence of dogs in Europe at least 15,000 years ago, and a divergence between dogs and wolves between about 20,000 and 40,000 years ago 5,12. Earlier potential dog domestication attempts may be represented by canid remains from Northern and Eastern Europe, and Russia 6-9,13-15 , even if their attribution to dogs or wolves is debated 5,10,16-20. The earliest archaeological specimens unequivocally attributed to dogs lived around 16,000 years ago 21-23 , and were related to Magdalenian contexts in Western Europe. Available genetic evidence suggests that the domestication process

show abstract

“…Few Protoaurignacian specimens (Table 4) are documented at Grotta di Castelcivita (an awl from a metapodial of roe deer) (Gambassini, 1997), Grotta della Cala (four fragmentary bone points of which one is from a rib) (Benini et al, 1997;Fig. 4.13-16) and Grotta Paglicci (an awl made on a shaft fragment of a medium-large mammal) (Borgia et al, 2016;Fig. 4.12).…”

Section: The Protoaurignacianmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A fragmented awl has been also recorded in the so-called "Uluzzo-Aurignaziano" of Serra Cicora A (Spennato, 1981;Palma di Cesnola, 1993). Table 3: Protoaurignacian bone tool kits (data from: Spennato, 1981;Benini et al, 1997;Gambassini, 1997;Kuhn and Stiner, 1998;Bertola et al, 2013;Jéquier, 2014;Tejero and Grimaldi, 2015;Borgia et al, 2016) 3 Ornaments and other unusual objects…”

Section: The Protoaurignacianmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone tools, ornaments and other unusual objects during the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition in Italy

Arrighi

Moroni

Tassoni

et al. 2020

Quaternary International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The arrival of Modern Humans (MHs) in Europe between 50 ka and 36 ka coincides with significant changes in human behaviour, regarding the production of tools, the exploitation of resources and the systematic use of ornaments and colouring substances. The emergence of the socalled modern behaviours is usually associated with MHs, although in these last decades findings relating to symbolic thinking of pre-Sapiens groups have been claimed. In this paper we present a synthesis of the Italian evidence concerning bone manufacturing and the use of ornaments and pigments in the time span encompassing the demise of Neandertals and their replacement by MHs. Current data show that Mousterian bone tools are mostly obtained from bone fragments used "as is". Conversely an organized production of "fine shaped" bone tools is characteristic of the Uluzzian and the Protoaurignacian, when the complexity inherent in the manufacturing processes suggests that bone artefacts are not to be considered as expedient resources. Some traces of symbolic activities are associated to Neandertals in Northern Italy. Ornaments (mostly tusk shells) and pigments used for decorative purposes are well recorded during the Uluzzian. Their features and distribution witness to an intriguing cultural homogeneity within this technocomplex. The Protoaurignacian is characterized by a wider archaeological evidence, consisting of personal ornaments (mostly pierced gastropods), pigments and artistic items.

show abstract

Bone and antler working at Grotta Paglicci (Rignano Garganico, Foggia, southern Italy)

Cited by 13 publications

References 27 publications

The palaeoecological meaning of macromammal remains from archaeological sites exemplified by the case study of Grotta Paglicci (Upper Palaeolithic, southern Italy)

The palaeoecological meaning of macromammal remains from archaeological sites exemplified by the case study of Grotta Paglicci (Upper Palaeolithic, southern Italy)

The first evidence for Late Pleistocene dogs in Italy

Bone tools, ornaments and other unusual objects during the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition in Italy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About