Insights into early Middle Palaeolithic tool use and hafting in Western Europe. The functional analysis of level IIa of the early Middle Palaeolithic site of Biache-Saint-Vaast (France)

Rots, Veerle

doi:10.1016/j.jas.2012.06.042

Cited by 121 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In northern Europe, at the bridge between MIS 9 and MIS 8 as well as between MIS 8 and MIS 7, the adoption of the Levallois method is related to the systematic production of points that were occasionally retouched and thinned on the proximal end, probably to facilitate hafting with wooden implements [23], [83], [85], [86]. Meanwhile, in southern Europe Levallois technology was used in the production of large and more standardized flakes and Levallois points were produced in lesser percentages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In fact, the appearance of Levallois technology was not a simple modification in flake production, but was part of more wide-sweeping behavioral changes that included the habitual use of fire [21], the manipulation of pigments [22], the mastery of hafting [23] and more elaborate hunting strategies [24]. Determining the timing of the appearance of this technological improvement is crucial to tracing when these new social adaptations took place and how they correlate with other behaviors considered symbolic in later periods [25], [26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

San Bernardino Cave (Italy) and the Appearance of Levallois Technology in Europe: Results of a Radiometric and Technological Reassessment

Picin¹,

Peresani²,

Falguères³

et al. 2013

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of Levallois technology in Europe marked the transition from the Lower to the early Middle Paleolithic. This new method of flake production was accompanied by significant behavioral changes in hominin populations. The emergence of this technological advance is considered homogeneous in the European archaeological record at the Marine isotopic stage (MIS) 9/MIS 8 boundary. In this paper we report a series of combined electron spin resonance/U-series dates on mammal bones and teeth recovered from the lower units of San Bernardino Cave (Italy) and the technological analyses of the lithic assemblages. The San Bernardino Cave has yielded the earliest evidence of Levallois production on the Italian Peninsula recovered to date. In addition to our results and the review of the archaeological record, we describe the chronological and geographical differences between European territories and diversities in terms of technological developments. The belated emergence of Levallois technology in Italy compared to western Europe corresponds to the late Italian Neanderthal speciation event. The new radiometric dates and the technological analyses of San Bernardino Cave raise the issue of the different roles of glacial refugia in the peopling and the spread of innovative flaking strategies in Europe during the late Middle Pleistocene.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

San Bernardino Cave (Italy) and the Appearance of Levallois Technology in Europe: Results of a Radiometric and Technological Reassessment

Picin¹,

Peresani²,

Falguères³

et al. 2013

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Earlier evidence of hunting weapons is limited to wooden spears at Schöningen (400 ka; Thieme, ), Clacton on Sea (350 ka; Oakley et al, ), and at Lehringen (125 ka; Thieme and Veil, ), and to some bone damage, such as weapon impact notches on a horse scapula at Boxgrove (400 ka) and on a cervid scapula at Swanscombe (Smith, ). Levallois technology enabled the production of thin and pointed flakes, occasionally retouched on both sides, with high penetrative capacities once hafted in wooden implements (Rots, ). Examples of their utilization in hunting activities are highlighted by the impact scars on some Levallois blanks at Biache‐Saint‐Vaast (Rots, ), La Cotte de Saint Brelade (Callow and Conford, ), Bouheben (Villa and Lenoir, ), and Oscurusciuto rock‐shelter (Villa et al, ).…”

Section: Technological and Zooarchaeological Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

To meat or not to meat? New perspectives onNeanderthal ecology

Fiorenza

Benazzi

Henry

et al. 2014

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neanderthals have been commonly depicted as top predators who met their nutritional needs by focusing entirely on meat. This information mostly derives from faunal assemblage analyses and stable isotope studies: methods that tend to underestimate plant consumption and overestimate the intake of animal proteins. Several studies in fact demonstrate that there is a physiological limit to the amount of animal proteins that can be consumed: exceeding these values causes protein toxicity that can be particularly dangerous to pregnant women and newborns. Consequently, to avoid food poisoning from meat-based diets, Neanderthals must have incorporated alternative food sources in their daily diets, including plant materials as well. In this manuscript, we review traditional as well as more recent approaches for reconstructing the diet in past human populations, and we show how new archaeological discoveries and innovative methods are changing our views of Neanderthal ecology and behavior. We further underline the importance of reconstructing Neanderthal environments derived from palaeoecological data to better understand and interpret the dietary evidence obtained by these methods. Finally, since the intake of specific foods can be invisible to certain techniques and detect by others, we suggest using a more holistic approach by integrating the findings of more than one method. Such comprehensive analyses would enable the reconstruction of the whole dietary spectrum, which is particularly important for species like Neanderthal, who lived under severe and unstable climatic conditions. Neanderthals are undoubtedly the most studied and best-known group in the human fossil record. Despite that, for more than 100 years since their discovery, research on Neanderthal ecology, subsistence strategies, and diet have received remarkably little attention (Ready, 2010). It is only with the emergence of new archeological disciplines and development of innovative analytical approaches in the 1960s, that scholars began to look at Neanderthal behavior and adaptations to their environment. Methods such as faunal analysis, lithic technology, and taphonomic studies progressively led to a general portrait that defined Neanderthals as a homogenous group, with similar nutritional needs typified by a reliance on the consumption of terrestrial animals. This idea was reinforced by the study of stable isotopes and Neanderthal anatomy. The general robusticity of Neanderthal skeletons, with relatively short limbs and heavy trunks, has been interpreted as adaptation to cold stress environments that follow the ecogeographic principles of Bergmann's and Allen's rules (e.g., Trinkaus,

show abstract

“…In Eurasia and Africa, complex technological processes were applied in order to haft MP points (Lombard et al 2005;Shea 1993;Wadley et al 2009). However, flakes and retouched items, not necessarily used in fauna-related activities, were hafted in similar manners (e.g., Boëda et al 2008;Friedman et al 1994-5;Rots 2013;Rots et al 2011). MP stone tools, armatures among them, likely had multiple uses (e.g., Holdaway 1989;Plisson and Beyries 1988;Shea 1988Shea , 1991; and see reviews in Dibble et al 2017;Nelson 1991).…”

Section: A Functional Impassementioning

confidence: 99%

Are Lithics and Fauna a Match Made in (Prehistoric) Heaven?

Hovers

Belfer‐Cohen

2018

J Paleo Arch

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lithic artifacts and animal bones form the bulk of the material remains of the Paleolithic. This has led archeologists to interpret these two types of finds as tethered components of subsistence systems. Differences observed through time and space in the lithic repertoire were considered as functional adjustments, designed to maximize gains from a diverse faunal resource base. While we do not challenge the general notion that lithic artifacts were used (also) for exploiting faunal (and other) resources, we note that significant lithic technological breakthroughs, clearly directed towards higher efficiency of procurement of faunal resources (e.g., hafting, projectile weapons), are few and far-apart in the evolution of material culture. Based on case studies from the Levantine Middle Paleolithic (MP), we question the degree to which fauna-based subsistence determined lithic variability. Current research focus on functional relationship between lithics and fauna may preclude consideration of other causes for lithic typo-technological diversity. These may include technological traditions, differences in cultural transmission processes, or the level of within-and between-group connectivity, various combinations of which may have operated in the MP.

show abstract

Insights into early Middle Palaeolithic tool use and hafting in Western Europe. The functional analysis of level IIa of the early Middle Palaeolithic site of Biache-Saint-Vaast (France)

Cited by 121 publications

References 24 publications

San Bernardino Cave (Italy) and the Appearance of Levallois Technology in Europe: Results of a Radiometric and Technological Reassessment

San Bernardino Cave (Italy) and the Appearance of Levallois Technology in Europe: Results of a Radiometric and Technological Reassessment

To meat or not to meat? New perspectives onNeanderthal ecology

Are Lithics and Fauna a Match Made in (Prehistoric) Heaven?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About