The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2000
DOI: 10.5944/etfi.13.2000.4694
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Esquemas operativos laminares en el Musteriense final de la cueva de El Castillo (Puente Viesgo, Cantabria)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
2

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
8
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The lack of any human skeletal remains in this transitional period has prevented further interpretations relative to the makers of this technocomplex, who remain unknown today in Spain, in contrast to the French Châtelperronian levels at Saint‐Césaire and Grotte du Renne, where Neanderthal skeletal remains were found. In Level 18B of El Castillo Cave, classified as ‘Transitional Aurignacian’ (Wood et al ., 2018), there are several isolated deciduous teeth, with advanced states of wear that prevent a diagnostic species attribution, although some authors propose similarities in size and morphology with Neanderthals (Cabrera et al ., 2005; Garralda, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The lack of any human skeletal remains in this transitional period has prevented further interpretations relative to the makers of this technocomplex, who remain unknown today in Spain, in contrast to the French Châtelperronian levels at Saint‐Césaire and Grotte du Renne, where Neanderthal skeletal remains were found. In Level 18B of El Castillo Cave, classified as ‘Transitional Aurignacian’ (Wood et al ., 2018), there are several isolated deciduous teeth, with advanced states of wear that prevent a diagnostic species attribution, although some authors propose similarities in size and morphology with Neanderthals (Cabrera et al ., 2005; Garralda, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Apart from a lithic collection attributed to the Mousterian and a brief mention of an Aurignacian flint point found among remains of cave bears (Carrión Santafé & Baena Preysler 1998; Ochoa 2017, 298), the lack of materials attributable to the Magdalenian suggests that it may not have been habitually occupied when its art was created. Archaeological deposits may be present under the calcite floor in the entrance hall (García-Diez et al 2021, 311) but it remains possible that, given the proximity of La Pasiega and El Castillo, and the late Upper Palaeolithic deposits in the latter (Cabrera Valdés 1984), these nearby caves were the places of residence (Ortega Martínez & Ruiz-Redondo 2018, 804).…”
Section: Site Backgroundsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.) older than the rest of the dates, given that level 8 of El Castillo, attributed to the Initial/Lower Magdalenian (Utrilla, 1981;Cabrera Valdés, 1984), yielded an uncalibrated AMS age of 16,850 ± 220 years BP (Barandiarán, 1988). However, level 8 is about 2 m thick and, in the absence of 3D provenance data, this date would have been excluded from our analysis.…”
Section: Chronological Distributionmentioning
confidence: 99%