Wil Roebroeks 17 the Earliest Occupation of Europe: Thijs Van Kolfschoten a Reappraisal of Artefactual and Chronological Evidence
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
wil Roebroeks 17 The earliest occupation of Europe: Thijs van Kolfschoten a reappraisal of artefactual and chronological evidence A reappraisal of the artefactual and chronological data collected in our own research. Our paper begins with a evidence for the earliest occupation of Europe - with proper short review of the artefactual character of assemblages and attention to its limitations and its reliability - makesfor a the chronological framework of the Quaternary, focussing short chronology, The first solid traces of hominid activities on how sites are put in a chronological succession (section 2). in this part of the world are around 500,000 years old. In section 3 we survey the biostratigraphical position of important mammalian assemblages (from both archaeological 1. Introduction and non-archaeological sites), while section 4 reviews early Establishing the earliest doeumented evidence for human sites in central and northwestern Europe. We then turn to occupation has always involved controversy, usually evidence from other parts of Europe and close with brief centred around the artefactual character of assemblages discussion of the implications. and/or their chronological position. Examples of such controversia] cases are Brixham cave, the eolith-problem, 2. The earliest occupation of Europe: artefacts Calico Hills. the KBS-tuff controversy and, very recently, and chronology the agc of the earliest hominid remains from Java (Swisher 2.1. EVALUATING THE ARTEFACTUAL CHARACTER OF et al. 1994). Our science thrives on such disagreements; ASSEMBLAGES discussions (ideally) test the strength of data and hypotheses One century ago, Palaeolithic archaeologists were and thus provide us with constant fresh and solid ground to involved in a fierce debate over the alleged existence of build our archaeological theories. Tertiary humans in Europe. Eolithophiles, both on the One of the reasons to plan a workshop on 'The Earliest continent and in Britain, presented thousands of flints from Occupation of Pleistocene Europe' was the virtual absence Tertiary deposits, that in their opinion were humanly worked of scientific discussions on this subject. Despite the large implements. The long lasting debate over the character of number of meetings devoted to Europe's first traces of 'eoliths' assemblages produced a vast literature on the seltlcmenl (e.g. Andernach ll)SS: "Die crslc Besiedlung subject, summarised in popular handbooks from those days, Europas"; Paris 1989: "Les premiers peuplements humains like Sollas Ancient hunters and their modern representa- de 1'Europe" [Bonifay and Vandermeersch 1991]; Milan tives (1911), Obermaier's Der Mensch der Vorzeit (1912) 1990:; "The Earliest Inhabitants of Europe") the dates and Boule's Les Hommes Fossiles (1921). This debate led given to the first 'Europeans' vary enormously, depending to very detailed field observations and experiments and so on the book or the journal one opens. On the 'very old' created a vast body of knowledge concerning the variety of side, Bonifay and Vandermeersch (1991) present a number artefact-like forms produced by various natural processes. of sites allegedly dating from earlier parts of the Early The crux of the matter is elegantly summarized by Warren Pleistocene, around two million years ago (<ƒ. Ackerman (1920:250): 1989; Delson 1989). An age of about one million years is considered a good estimate for the first occupation of "What is important, however, is the fact that such Europe by most workers (cf Rolland 1992), referring to phenomena as the flaking of flints and occasional sites such as Le Vallonet in France (De Lumley et al. 1988) bulbs and also edge-knapping are produced by and Karlich A in Germany (Wiirges 1986; 1991; Bosinski, causes entirely apart from direct human effort. The this volume). In contrast to these long chronologies we likeness between the flaking produced by Nature and demonstrate in this paper that Europe's earliest human that produced by human agencies is sufficiënt to traces are considerably younger, dating from well into the shift any burden of proof upon those who maintain the human origin of the stones; and this must not be Middle Pleistocene. We have come to this conclusion while done by a careful selection of picked specimens, but trying to give a synthesis of the evidence presented in pre- by a survey of the whole group" (Warren 1920: circulated papers by attendants of the Tautavel-meeting and 250). 298 THE EARLIEST OCCUPATION OF EUROPE The artefactual nature of 'primitive' assemblages has separated from each other by warm-temperate intervals. been an omnipresent issue ever since. In 1958 for instance, Detailed investigations of pollen-bearing deposits in J. Desmond Clark's study of natural fractures of pebbles northwestern Europe yielded a rather complete record of the showed very convincingly (in the African context of complex history of the vegetation in that area. Palaeobotani- 'Kafuan' industries in river valleys) that nature can make cal data was transformed into palaeoclimatic information, 'pebble tools': they are produced by a sharp 'follow making a terrestrial chronostratigraphical subdivision of the through' blow, very unlikely under water, but possibly the Pleistocene (cf. Fig. 1 and Zagwijn 1985), a scheme that result of a rock falling from above on to a wedged pebble has been the Standard for northwestern Europe. (Clark 1958). These fractures can simulate artificial fracture Preliminary results of recent investigations in an open to such a remarkable degree, that these specimens would lignite mine at Schöningen near Helmstedt (Germany) and not be out of place in any "Pebble Culture" context. His in the Don-Basin (Russia) indicate, however, that the figure 1 studies once again stress that one cannot build a strong subdivision is incomplete. The Pleistocene sediments argument for early occupation on the basis of pieces with exposed in the Schöningen quarry date from the Elsterian to only a few negatives, selected out of river-laid deposits. In the Holocene and are rich in palaeobotanical. malacological fact, any analysis of early sites must take into account the and palaeontological information, while Middle Pleistocene whole range of natural conditions at the site that could artefacts are present too (cf. Thieme et al. 1993). Studies of produce artefact-like forms, as well as the geological setting the Middle Pleistocene sequences indicate that there were at of the find-spot (see Raynal et al., this volume, for a good least three phases with a distinct, well developed example of such an approach). interglacial vegetation between the Elsterian and the Saalian It is for these reasons that for instance Tuffreau (1987) till. It is however not clear yet whether the two older warm- and Tuffreau and Antoine (this volume) do not accept the temperate periods there were separated from each other by a Ferme de Grace (Somme) terrace material as evidence for distinct cold (glacial) phase. Theorctically they might have Early Pleistocene occupation of northern France (contra been separated by an important but relatively short cooler Bourdier et al. 1974), or that Santonja and Villa (1990) fluctuation, more or less comparable to the stronger intra- and Raposo and Santonja (this volume) consider isolated Eemian fluctuations recently reported by the GRIP-members pieces collected from Iberian river terraces as too rare and (GRIP 1993), or to the intra-Stage 7 'cold' interval, sub- undiagnostic to prove human settlement in the Early Stage 7b (cf. Andrews 1983). Pleistocene, while Mania (this volume) has serious doubts Long sequences in the Don Basin show at least five about the German Schotter-Palaolithikum (gravel- glacial/interglacial cycles in the time span between the palaeolithic). Brunhes/Matuyama boundary and the Oka (= Elsterian) In section 4 we evaluate some important early sites by glaciation. Two ice-sheet extensions earlier than the the issues in the eolith debate. It is of course necessary to Elsterian could be recorded in the sections. The most have a good knowledge of the assemblages and their important ice-sheet there was that of the Don Glaciation, context, either by a detailed site-publication or by first- covering the Don Basin much further south than the ice- hand knowledge. Unfortunately, only a small number of caps of the Oka-Elster, the Dnjepr-Saale and the Valdai- 'early' sites have been published in such a detail that Weichsel. Two disctinct interglacial intervals and one cold evaluation of interpretations concerning the artefactual phase separate the Don Glacial from the Oka Glacial phase. character of 'primitive' assemblages is possible. We start Correlation between the Don Basin and northwestern our review therefore with the evidence from central and Europe, mainly on the base of mammal fauna-associations, northwestern Europe, where we have first-hand indicates that the northwestern Standard subdivision is knowledge of the relevant assemblages. The findings incomplete for the lower part of the Middle Pleistocene, i.e. from that area are confronted with those from other areas in the first half of the "Cromerian Complex". The in section 5. incompleteness of the Standard continental subdivision is also apparent when comparing it with the oxygen isotope 2.2. THE CHRONOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK record, which counts 9 interglacial and 9 glacial phases The classical subdivision of the Pleistocene period is by within the Brunhes Epoch. the glacial-intcrglacial scheme, based on the extensions of The oxygen isotope record,