• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

15. SEASONALITY AT MIDDLE AND UPPER PALAEOLITHIC SITES BASED ON THE PRESENCE AND WEAR OF DECIDUOUS PREMOLARS FROM NURSING MAMMOTH CALVES Mietje Germonpré1,*, Hervé Bocherens2,3, Alexander Bessudnov4, Martina Lázničková- Galetová5,6, Natasha Reynolds7, Mikhail Sablin8, Christoph Wißing2 1Operational Direction “Earth and History of Life”, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Belgium 2Department of Geosciences, Biogeology, University of Tübingen, Germany 3Senckenberg Centre for Human Evolution and Palaeoenvironment (HEP), University of Tübingen, Germany 4Institute for the History of Material Culture RAS, Saint Petersburg, Russia 5Moravian Museum, Brno, Czech Republic 6Hrdlička museum of Man, Charles University, Czech Republic 7UMR 5199 PACEA, Université de Bordeaux, Pessac, France 8Zoological Institute RAS, Saint-Petersburg, Russia *[email protected] https://dx.doi.org/10.15496/publikation-55584 KEYWORDS | mammoth; hunting; Palaeolithic, diet; canid ABSTRACT suggest that the mammoth hunt was not restricted to the cold half of the year. Middle and Upper Palaeolithic sites, where mam- moths dominate the faunal assemblages, are mainly found in Central and Eastern Europe. At 15.1 INTRODUCTION these sites concentrations of skulls, tusks and long bones, interpreted as deliberate constructions, of- Middle and Upper Palaeolithic sites, where mam- ten occur. Rare instances of weapon tip fragments moth bones dominate the mammal assemblage, embedded in mammoth bones provide direct ar- are often interpreted as the camps of mammoth chaeological evidence of human hunting. Indirect hunters. Tese sites are mainly found in Central evidence, such as the accumulation of mammoth and Eastern Europe, such as Dolní Vĕstonice bones from multiple individuals with specifc and Předmostí (Přerov-Předmostí) in the Czech ontogenetic ages, occurs more frequently. Based Republic, Mezhirich and Mezin in the Ukraine, on the eruption sequence and wear of deciduous and Kostënki-1/I, Kostënki-11/Ia and Yudinovo premolars from mammoth calves, we examined in Russia, and date in general to the Gravettian whether a season of death could be deduced from and Epigravettian. At these sites, accumulations of the characteristics of the dentition. Our results mammoth skeletal elements have been interpret- Konidaris, G. E., Barkai, R., Tourloukis, V., Harvati, K. (Eds.), Human-elephant interactions: from past to present. Tübingen University Press, Tübingen 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.15496/publikation-55604 388 MIETJE GERMONPRÉ ET AL. ed as the remains of architectural constructions, man hunting of mammoths was probably executed places of storage and/or middens (Sofer, 1985; by groups of hunters using spear-throwers, throw- Svoboda et al., 2005, 2019; Germonpré et al., ing spears in sequence. Te initial butchering of 2008; Iakovleva, 2015; Pryor et al., 2020; Sablin the hunted mammoths probably took place at the et al., submitted). Some prehistorians assume that kill site (Germonpré et al., 2008). Body parts of these mammoth bones are derived from animals the mammoth carcasses were then brought back that have been hunted and slaughtered, and then to the camp, perhaps with the help of Palaeolithic transported to the camp (Germonpré et al., 2008; dogs (Germonpré et al., 2012, 2020). Péan, 2015). Others have argued that Palaeolithic In this contribution, our goal is to determine hunter-gatherers built their camps near the places, whether mammoth hunting was limited to the cold where mammoths died from a natural cause (Sof- half of the year or occurred as well during warmer fer, 1985). However, at several Upper Palaeolithic seasons. To answer these queries, we assigned an sites, direct evidence, such as a fragment of a weap- age of death to the dental remains of mammoth on tip embedded in a bone, testifes to the violence calves that were found at several late Middle and of the mammoth hunt (e.g., Praslov, 2000; Nikol- Upper Palaeolithic sites, aiming to deduce their skiy and Pitulko, 2013). In addition, also indirect season of death. We frst provide an overview of evidence, such as the accumulation of bones from the theoretical basis for attributing an age to the a multitude of individuals with specifc ontogenet- dental remains from mammoths and list the mate- ic ages, suggests an intentional hunting of mam- rial studied here. Ten, we present a non-exhaus- moths (e.g., Svoboda et al., 2005; Germonpré et tive list of Middle and Upper Palaeolithic sites in al., 2008, 2014; Brugère, 2014; Péan, 2015; Reyn- Western, Central and Eastern Europe that contain olds et al., 2019). In this study, we adhere to the important mammoth assemblages. Subsequently, idea that Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers organized we provide the results of the palaeobiological anal- mammoth hunts. yses. In the discussion, we compare the obtained Recent elephants create pathways between im- results from the studied sites with those from pub- portant places, such as water points, fodder plac- lished resources, and summarize some archaeolog- es, mineral springs, and socializing sites (Haynes, ical and palaeobiological consequences. Te fnal 1991, 2017). In Canada, successive mammoth section provides our conclusions. tracks following the bank of a palaeo-river valley indicate that mammoth herds used the same trails over a period of at least two centuries (McNeil et 15.2 METHODS AND MATERIAL al., 2005). Mammoths probably followed tradi- tional trails for generations. Palaeolithic hunters Laws (1966) established 30 age groups (I–XXX) could have used these paths to track the animals. for the extant African elephant Loxodonta afri- Alternatively, they could have sneaked up to mam- cana, based on the progress of eruption and wear moths that were grazing in moist meadows or of the cheek teeth, and allocated real ages in Afri- drinking water at river shores and attacked while can Equivalent Years (AEY) to these groups. In this the herd was distracted (Velichko and Zelikson, study, we follow Laws’ groups in order to estimate 2005; Germonpré et al., 2008; Haynes, 2017; the age at death of woolly mammoth (Mammuthus Wilczyński et al., 2019). Palaeolithic hunters could primigenius) calves from their deciduous premo- have targeted the matriarch frst by attempting to lars (DP; both for the upper and lower dentition). strike the animal from the rear side, aiming to hit Te anatomical position of the teeth was identi- vital organs (cf. Nikolskiy and Pitulko, 2013) and fed using the dimensions and number of plates, could then have killed the younger members of the following Musil (1968), Maglio (1973) and Ger- herd. According to Wilczyński et al. (2019), hu- monpré (1993), except for the mammoth decid- SEASONALITY AT MIDDLE AND UPPER PALAEOLITHIC SITES 389 Laws‘ age Mammoth References Age in Season of Description of deciduous group calf months death dentition I Lyuba Rountrey et al. 0–1 early spring DP2: no/little wear; DP3: germ (2012) with complete crown II Khroma Grigoriev et al. 2 spring DP2: completely worn; DP3: (2012); Maschenko erupting with first plates in wear et al. (2013) III - ca. 3–6 summer DP2: well worn; DP3: moderately worn IV Oimya- Boeskorov et al. 7.4 autumn/winter DP2: lost; DP3: well worn; DP4: konskii (2007); Rountrey erupting/slightly worn et al. (2012) V - >12 - DP3: completely worn; DP4: mode- rately worn VI - Craig (table A2) in 52 - DP3: almost lost; DP4: only last Haynes (1991) plates unworn VII - Craig (table A2) in 60 - DP3: lost; DP4: completely worn; Haynes (1991) M1: erupting Table 15.1: Comparison of Laws’ age groups of elephant deciduous premolars with mammoth calf dentition and their age attribution in months or years, for details see text. uous premolars from Předmostí, for which the are compared with those described by Maschen- identifcations and description by Musil (1968) ko (2002), Rountrey et al. (2012), Maschenko et were used. Complete and fragmentary mammoth al. (2013), Fisher et al. (2014) and Grigoriev et al. deciduous premolars were counted in Number of (2017) to estimate their age. A thorough study of Identifed Specimens (NISP) and in Minimum the mammoth calf Lyuba, found in the permafrost Number of Individuals (MNI) (Lyman, 1994). of the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous region, Rus- Detailed analyses of the microstructure of mam- sian Federation, revealed that its DP2 displays lit- moth tusks allowed to estimate that gestation in tle wear and has no cementum in the gaps between mammoths took about 20 to 22 months (Fisher the plates. Te germ of the DP3 has a fully devel- et al., 2014; Grigoriev et al., 2017) and could have oped crown but without fully developed enamel, been slightly shorter than that of the recent African while the germ of the DP4 is incomplete. A com- elephant, which usually has a gestational length of parison with the African elephant age groups as ~22 months (Poole et al., 2011). In mammoths, defned by Laws (1966) suggests that this calf can conception probably occurred in late spring and be assigned to Laws’ age group I with no/little wear birth took place in early spring (Rountrey et al., of the DP2, and the DP3 not yet erupted. Based 2012; Grigoriev et al., 2017). Inter-birth intervals on the number of increments found on the DP2, had probably a length of ~4 years during which the this calf died when it was ~1 month old, likely in previously born calf was nursing. Weaning likely spring (Rountrey et al., 2012). Maschenko et al. occurred, like in elephants, shortly before the next (2013) described the deciduous dentition of the calf was born (Grigoriev et al., 2017). Te proposed mammoth calf Khroma, discovered on the right length of the nursing period of mammoth calves bank of the Khroma River in Yakutia. Te DP2 of fuctuates between 3 years (Metcalfe et al., 2010) this calf is completely worn; the DP3 is erupting and 5 years (Rountrey et al., 2007). In our study, with the frst three plates in wear. Tese features we will consider a nursing period of ~4 years, up to correspond to Laws’ age group II with slight wear and including Laws’ age group VI.

Load more

  20

Copy Link