The First Human Occupation of the Basque Crossroads

J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 DOI 10.1007/s10963-012-9058-x

Alvaro Arrizabalaga • Joseba Rios-Garaizar

Published online: 16 October 2012 Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Abstract In the last 15 years, knowledge of the ﬁrst human occupation of the Basque area has undergone important advances due to the excavation of new deposits and the application of new methodological approaches to previously known sequences. In this paper we present the state of knowledge of the Lower Palaeolithic in this region, outlining the difﬁculties encountered and the advances made in the last two decades.

Keywords Lower Palaeolithic Á Acheulean Á Basque Country Á Chronology Á Stratigraphy Á Material culture Á Palaeo-environments

Resumen En los u´ltimos quince anõs se han producido importantes avances en el conocimiento de las primeras ocupaciones humanas del territorio vasco debido fundamen- talmente a la excavacioń de nuevos depo´sitos y a la aplicacioń de nuevos enfoque metodolo´gicos a secuencias ya conocidas. En este trabajo presentamos el estado de la cuestioń sobre el Paleolı´tico Inferior en esta regioń, haciendo hincapie´ en las dificultades y avances de la investigacioń en las u´ltimas dos dećadas. Los depo´sitos del Paleolı´tico Inferior en esta regioń aparecen tanto en cueva como al aire libre, siendo los principales yacimientos Irikaitz, Lezetxiki y Arlanpe. El grueso de la informacion proviene de dep- o´sitos del final del Pleistoceno Medio siendo escasos los datos de momentos anteriores. Se discuten los datos paleoambientales, de fauna y de industria y se comparan con las regiones vecinas.

Palabrasclave Paleolı´tico inferior Á Achelense Á Paı´s vasco Á Cronologı´a Á Estratigrafı´a Á Cultura material Á Paleo-ambientes

A. Arrizabalaga Area de Prehistoria, Universidad del Paı´s Vasco, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain

J. Rios-Garaizar (&) Centro Nacional de Investigacio´n sobre la Evolucio´n Humana (CENIEH), Paseo Sierra de Atapuerca s/n, 09002 Burgos, Spain e-mail: [email protected] 123 158 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181

Laburpena Aztarnategi berrien indusketei eta ezagutzen zireneni aplikatutako metodologia berriei esker azken hamabost urtetan aurrerapauso garrantzitsuak eman dira Euskal Herriko lehenengo giza okupazioak ezagutzeko. Lurralde honetako Behe Paleolitoaren egungo egoera aurkezten dugu, azken bi hamarkadetako aurrerapauso eta oztopoak azpimarratuz. Behe Pale- olitoko aztarnategiak aire zabalean eta kobazuloetan agertzen dira, garrantzitsuenak Irikaitz, Lezetxiki eta Arlanpe dira. Gehienbat daukagun informazioa Erdi Pleistozenoko aztarnategitik dator, lehengo momentukoa askoz urriago delarik. Paleo-ingu rumena, fauna eta harri indus- triaren datuak eztabaidatuko ditugu gero ondoko lurraldeekin alderatzeko.

Hitzgakoak Behe Paleolito Á Acheul-Aldia Á Euskal Herria Á Kronologia Á Estratigraﬁa Á Kultura Materiala Á Paleo-ingurumena

Introduction

This paper has been written in response to the chain of discoveries about the first human population at the Basque crossroads that have been made in the last two decades. As will be explained below, scarcely 20 years ago no Lower Palaeolithic stratigraphies or materials were known in the Basque Country, a situation that created striking paradoxes in the explanations of human presence in other parts of the Iberian Peninsula. Indeed, the human groups who settled in the Iberian Peninsula in the Lower Palaeolithic must have crossed the western end of the Pyrenees on numerous occasions. Human settlements in the northern Meseta (including the site of Atapuerca), the upper Ebro Valley or the Cantabrian coast probably originated in the movement of these populations across this region. At the same time, it may be supposed that the oldest human groups in Catalonia, Valencia and the middle and lower Ebro Valley crossed the Pyrenean barrier to the east. Logically, these two routes form bidirectional axes, so that the groups would later move freely in either direction, but always following the same geographical axis. Under these circumstances, it was easily foreseeable that there should be some record of these first humans somewhere in the region they had passed through. By locating and studying them, we would also be contributing to a better understanding of the first populations in the Iberian Peninsula. Historically viewed, Palaeolithic studies in the Basque Country have suffered some difficulty in establishing a regional framework for an objective study, and in applying it systematically. The study area that we normally use, rather than forming a ‘natural region’ like the Aquitaine depression, the Cantabrian coast or the northern Castilian Meseta, is located between them or forms part of more than one of them (and, additionally, the upper Ebro Valley and the western Pyrenees). As we shall try to show in this paper, it is advisable to continue to evaluate this atypical region as a whole, since numerous aspects of the natural environment, and some aspects of the archaeological record, indicate that the geographical determinism that underlies any strict delimitation of archaeological territories by river drainage basins is simplistic. For example, three classic Basque Mousterian sites, Arrillor, Axlor and Lezetxiki, which contain classic levels or even levels on the boundary with the Lower Palaeolithic, are located on both sides of the Cantabrian–Mediterranean watershed, inside a triangle with 12-km long sides. So we have proposed the term ‘Basque Crossroads’ (Arrizabalaga 2005–2006, 2007) for this ‘non-regional area’ of the western Pyrenees, an area through which humans, animals and ideas have continually moved, en route between the Iberian Peninsula and the rest of Europe (Fig. 1). For much of the twentieth century, Palaeolithic researchers, influenced by the French tradition, searched for Upper and Middle Palaeolithic remains in karst areas, while 123 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 159

Fig. 1 Map of the Basque Crossroads with the location of the sites cited in the text. 1 Le Tambaou, 2 Lestaulan, 3 Jaizkibel, 4 Irikaitz, 5 Astigarraga, 6 Arnaileta, 7 Lezetxiki, 8 Mendieta I, 9 Arlanpe, 10 Axlor, 11 Urruńaga, 12 Urbasa, 13 Pamplona Basin, 14 Murba, 15 Bouheben, 16 Najerilla Valley, 17 Atapuerca, 18 La Garma, 19 Covalejos, Morıń, 20 Castillo, 21 Panes, 22 San Quirce de Rio Pisuerga assuming that evidence of earlier occupations should be sought in the large alluvial deposits on the Castilian meseta. This paradigm, and the imbalances it created in the record, have in recent decades been corrected in parts of Cantabrian Spain, thanks to the discovery of new sites and the re-assessment of some already-known deposits. In the region studied here, up to 1980, the only deposits to be cited, with reservations, were certain open-air sites in Lapurdi, the Urbasa mountains, Navarra and A´ lava (Bara- ndiarań-Maestu 1980). During the 1980s the catalogue of sites increased slightly, although the diagnostic material was found in redeposited contexts (Barandiarań-Maestu 1985, 1988). A debate began about the boundary between the Final Acheulean and the Early Mousterian, and a short chronology was still being advocated, no older than 120,000 BP. In 1990, as part of a tribute to Barandiarań-Ayerbe, a study was made of the available knowledge on the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic (Baldeoń 1990). This painted a discouraging picture, in which the evidence of human occupations was limited to deposits in a secondary position, whose attribution to the Lower or Middle Palaeolithic was very complicated (Table 1).

Brief Description of the Archaeological Record

The archaeological historiography of those parts of the Basque Country to the north of the Pyrenees, which commenced in the late nineteenth century, has been complex. Authors such as Passemard (1924) produced literature about finds of hand-axes on the terraces of the River Adour, which was taken up by Barandiarań-Ayerbe (1950, 1953) and Bara- ndiarań-Maestu (1967), and finally by Thibault (1976a, b). The latter researcher marks the start of a more recent phase in which Arambourou, Laplace, Chauchat and Normand, 123 6 ol rhs 21)25:157–181 (2012) Prehist World J 160 123 Table 1 Main sites described in the text

Site Type Location Levels Direct dating Relative Cultural Lithic record Faunal record Bibliography dating attribution

French Basque Country Biarritz–Anglet– Open air— River terraces – – – Middle Handaxes – Thibault (1976a) Bayonne (Multiple secondary (Adour, Acheulean Trihedrals Arambourou (1989, locations) position Nivelle) Upper 1990) Acheulean Chauchat (1993) Gipuzkoa Jaizkibel, Higer Open air— Coastal – – – Acheulean? Handaxes – Merino-Sanchez (1986) secondary mountain Arrizabalaga (1994) position Aitzbitarte III Cave—secondary Steep valley – – – Acheulean? Handaxe – Barandiara´n-Irizar position (Urumea) (lost) (1989) Txomin Enea Cave— Open valley – – Middle–Late –– Palaeoloxodon Altuna (1972) paleontological (Urumea) Pleistocene antiquus deposit Irikaitz Open air Open valley GIV – Interglacial Acheulean Handaxes – Arrizabalaga and Iriarte- (Urola) GV (IS 5e or (few) Chiapusso (2002, LII IS11) Choppers 2004, 2008) LIII Non- LIV Levallois Dihedrals Ikeitz Cave—secondary Open valley – – – Lower Yes ? Antxieta (2003) position (Urola) Paleolithic Astigarraga Cave Open valley Va – IS5 Lower Yes Yes Arruabarrena et al. (Urola) Paleolithic (2007) Arnaileta Cave Open valley – – Middle Lower Yes Yes Arrizabalaga (Urola) Pleistocene Paleolithic (2005–2006) ol rhs 21)2:5–8 161 25:157–181 (2012) Prehist World J Table 1 continued

Site Type Location Levels Direct dating Relative Cultural Lithic record Faunal record Bibliography dating attribution

Lezetxiki, Lezetxiki Cave Steep valley VII Th/U: Middle Acheulean Flakes Ursus spelaeus Altuna (1972) II (Deba) 140 ± 6 kyr Pleistocene Levallois deningeri Barandiara´n-Ayerbe (IPH-Lz 07) Bos/Bison (1976) Arrizabalaga (2005a) Falgue`res et al. (2005–2006) Arrizabalaga et al. (2010) Artazu Cave Steep valley IS6–IS5 Lower Yes – Arrizabalaga (2005b) (Deba) Paleolithic Ea Cave— Coast – AAR: 95.1 kyr Middle Upper –– Equus caballus Torres and Ortiz (2006) paleontological (V89) Pleistocene eaensis deposit Biscay Punta Lucero Cave— Coast – – IS 5e – – Panthera leo Castan˜os (1988) paleontological Vulpes vulpes deposit Megaceros sp. Cervus elaphus Dicerorhinus sp. Bos primigenius Bison priscus Axlor Cave Step valley P – Middle Lower Yes Yes Gonza´lez-Urquijo et al. (Arratia) Pleistocene? Paleolithic? (2008) 123 6 ol rhs 21)25:157–181 (2012) Prehist World J 162 123 Table 1 continued

Site Type Location Levels Direct dating Relative Cultural Lithic record Faunal record Bibliography dating attribution

Arlanpe Cave Open valley D – IS 5e Recent Handaxes Capra Rios-Garaizar et al. (Arratia) Acheulean Levallois pirenaica (2011) Rupicapra sp. Ursus sp. Crocuta crocuta Cuon alpinus Panthera pardus Mendieta I Open air Coastal plain I – Interglacial Acheulean Chopping – Rios-Garaizar et al. II – (IS11?) without tool (2008b) handaxes sidescrapers Araba/A´lava Urrunaga Open air— River terraces – – – Upper Handaxes –Saénz de Buruaga et al. secondary (Zadorra) Acheulean Levallois (1989) position Zadorra Terraces Open air— River terraces – – – Acheulean? Handaxes – Baldeoń and Murga (Multiple secondary (Zadorra) (1989) locations) position Arrizabalaga (2005–2006) Arrizabalaga and Iriarte- Chiapusso (2005) Saénz de Buruaga et al. (1994) Penãcerrada Open air— River terraces – – – Acheulean? Cleaver – Baldeoń(1978) secondary (Ayuda) position Ilarduia Open air— River terraces – – – Acheulean? Handaxe – Beorlegi (2005) secondary (Araia) position Navarre ol rhs 21)2:5–8 163 25:157–181 (2012) Prehist World J Table 1 continued

Site Type Location Levels Direct dating Relative Cultural Lithic record Faunal record Bibliography dating attribution

Ega and Arga Open air— River terraces – – – Acheulean? Handaxes – Beguiristain (2000) terraces (Multiple secondary (Ega and locations) position Arga) Pamplona Basin Open air River terraces – – – Middle Handaxes – Garcıá-Gazo´laz (1994) (Multiple sites) (Ega and Acheulean Arga) 123 164 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 among others, have made new finds, many of which remain unpublished. The problem with these collections is that they are usually surface finds, in areas that are not clearly delimited, where remains of different ages are also found and are difficult to distinguish. In the French Basque Country, over and above the dense network of finds attributed to the Acheulean, three areas with special concentrations can be seen: the metropolitan area known as BAB (the conurbation of Biarritz–Anglet–Bayonne), with a prolongation in the lower terraces of the Adour (like Mouguerre); the area around St Jean de Luz, in the region of Labourd, next to the mouth of the Nivelle; and finally, the complex of terraces around Bidache/Labastide-Villefranche, on the border between Basse-Navarre and the department of Landes, by the River Adour. Thus, numerous hand-axes and trihedrals with a primitive appearance have been collected in Bidache (Low Navarre), forming an assemblage that probably corresponds to the Middle Acheulean (although these finds have not yet been published or studied in detail, they could belong to the site that Thibault called Le Tam- baou). The new finds at Laburdi, around both Bayonne and St Jean de Luz (Arambourou 1989, 1990; Chauchat 1993), are new contributions to the list of sites with archaeological material, but of the same kind as in previous decades: open-air locations with redeposited material, where only typological criteria determine the chronocultural ascription (with continued uncertainty concerning the differentiation of the Late Acheulean tradition and the ‘Mousterian of Acheulean’ tradition). Rather different is the case of Lestaulan (Chauchat 1993), on the outskirts of Bayonne, where the flint artefacts are classified according to their patina. Within the so-called light patina series, the ivory coloured pieces are ascribed to the Upper Acheulean, the beige to the Micoquian. The few quartzite remains cannot be classified. Altogether, most deposits (including the largest and best known collections) are assigned to the Late/Final Acheulean. The proximity to the Chal- osse region, with its abundant Middle Acheulean sites, has enabled some deposits to be attributed to that chronology, particularly in the Bidache/Labastide region. At present, the attribution to the Early Acheulean of a few lithic artefacts found out of context in the French Basque Country may be considered doubtful. Guipu´zcoa is the province on the southern side of the Pyrenees and is therefore the first stop on the route of groups entering the Iberian Peninsula. Within the manifestly provisional dispersion map of known sites belonging to the earliest human occupations, it is possible to intuit a fan-shaped spread from the narrow gap crossing the Pyrenees to the head of the Deba valley (the westernmost river, and the only one with known sites from the valley-head to near its mouth). For the present-day valleys of the rivers Bidasoa and Oiartzun, the only known archaeological record is in the area of Mount Jaizkibel, which dominates the geographical areas of both rivers, and the crossing of the Pyrenees itself. Together with the archaeological information from Jaizkibel that has been published in detail (Merino-Sanchez 1986; Arrizabalaga 1994), numerous surface finds have been made of Palaeolithic objects belonging to different periods. As regards the Lower Palaeolithic, two sites can be mentioned: J1 and Higer. In the case of J1, occasional materials have been found on the surface that can be ascribed to the Lower Palaeolithic; their source is a small coastal shelf, about 40 m above present sea level. Higer (Arrizabalaga 1994; Merino- Sanchez 1986) is a deposit in similar circumstances, although the Lower Palaeolithic objects appear to be residual, in the context of a Magdalenian deposit, badly affected by building work at the campsite of the same name. We have recently been able to enlarge this assemblage with finds collected by a local prospector in the San Telmo area, also possibly of Lower Palaeolithic age. These sites are a maximum distance of 500 m from the modern- day coastline. They can be related to other coastal Lower Palaeolithic sequences of a kind

123 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 165 well known in Cantabria and Asturias, possibly with Kurtzia in Biscay and certainly with those of the Labourd coast, which displays similar characteristics. The next valley in Guipu´zcoa is that of the river Urumea. It is a relatively short valley and has only been explored in detail in its final section. It has provided little information for the reconstruction of human societies before the classic Mousterian. In the early twentieth century, Breuil found a hand-axe (unpublished and lost) at the entrance of Aitzbitarte III, of which he informed Barandiarań-Ayerbe (Barandiarań-Irizar 1989). Evidence of Middle Pleistocene fauna has been found in several places in the valley, such as Txomin Enea cave (Altuna 1972). The Oria valley, which has been described by several geographers as the backbone of Guipu´zcoa, is a totally unknown territory as concerns Pleistocene occupations. Not a single site older than the Mesolithic camps at San Esteban, in Tolosa, and at Artegieta, in Idiazabal, has been published. Historiographic factors may be responsible for this apparent occupation vacuum, which is even more noticeable because of the relative wealth of the record in the neighbouring Urola valley. Indeed, some very attractive stratigraphic sequences for Early Palaeolithic studies are known along the Urola river. Recent studies at the open-air site of Irikaitz by one of the authors (Arrizabalaga and Iriarte-Chiapusso 2002, 2004, 2008) have yielded a stratified lithic assemblage, including several contexts attributed to the Lower Palaeolithic. The archaeobotanical study situates the occupation in a temperate climate—probably an interglacial period. The position of the site at 55 m above current mean sea level (MSL) suggests either the Eemian (?8 m MSL) or (more probably, given the nature of the lithic record) the Holsteinian (?40 m MSL). A surface area of some 80 m2 has been excavated in two zones (Geltoki and Luebaki), the first of which was published in an interim report in 2003, with a stratigraphy 5 m thick and two levels (G.IV and G.V) where the finds are particularly dense. The assemblage at Geltoki, which has clearly been found in a primary position, contains hardly any bifacial elements or evidence of centripetal knapping techniques, and certainly no Levallois objects. In the Luebaki area (Arrizabalaga and Iriarte- Chiapusso 2011), the stratigraphic series is much more compressed than at Geltoki, and it is necessary to separate out the materials from Gravettian occupations, which contaminate it. However, the density of lithic objects is very high in this second excavation. In the area of Irikaitz, Iriarte-Chiapusso carried out trial excavations in the residual sequence at Ikeitz cave in 2003 and 2004 (Antxieta 2003). This sequence contains typological elements that can be ascribed to the Palaeolithic and post-Palaeolithic, including some lithic artefacts very similar to those at Irikaitz, which still have not been studied in detail. Amalda cave is located in the neighbouring Alzolarats valley, and its lower level (Altuna et al. 1990), Level VII, includes a more classically Mousterian component (Rios-Garaizar 2009). In the same area as Ikeitz, a test excavation has recently been undertaken at Astigarraga cave (in the municipal district of Deba, although it lies in the Urola valley). This test has revealed a thick stratigraphic sequence (Arruabarrena et al. 2007) comprising several classic Middle Palaeolithic (Level III) and Lower Palaeolithic (Level Va) units. Finally, upriver and also in a cave (Errexil), a discovery at Arnaileta needs to verified in detail: together with abundant fauna (in which cave bear, Ursus spelaeus, predominated), a dozen roughly-shaped lithic artefacts have been found, which can probably be attributed to the Early Palaeolithic. Of all these sites, the one that has provided the largest assemblage is that at Irikaitz, the only known open-air site. It is situated just 7.2 km from the present-day coast, or 14.8 km away following the course of the river Urola downstream over low-lying land. The Deba Valley, to the west, completes the geography of Guipu´zcoa. It is the only valley in the Basque Country with Early Palaeolithic evidence from its head to the 123 166 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 river-mouth. Beginning in the upper course, we must mention Lezetxiki cave, a deposit that was first dug by Barandiarań-Ayerbe and collaborators (Barandiarań-Ayerbe 1976), and later by the authors (Arrizabalaga 2005a). The publication of the assemblages in the lower levels by Baldeoń(1993), the assessment of the various different absolute dates obtained for Levels V, VI and VII (Falgue`res et al. 2005–2006), and other palaeoenvironmental data for Level VII, together with renewed interest in the fossil humerus found by the classic excavations (which seems to resemble other remains found in Sima de los Huesos at Atapuerca), all suggest that there could be a cave sediment level dating from the late Middle Pleistocene, as well as an important series of Mousterian levels. Also at Lezetxiki, we have excavated a secondary locus called Lezetxiki II, which directly connects on the surface with the stratigraphy of Leibar cave, where the famous human humerus was found, identified as a female adult Neanderthal (Basabe 1966). Thus, two levels in Lezetxiki II, Levels J and K, attributed to marine isotope stages 5 and 6 (MIS 5 and MIS 6) respectively, are the probable stratigraphic context for this fossil. Level J has recently yielded a mandible fragment of Barbary macaque, Macaca sylvanus (Castanõs et al. 2011). Another new find nearby, reported as having dates ranging between MIS 5 and MIS 6, is the lower level in Artazu II (Arrizabalaga 2005b), a cave located close by the Lezetxiki complex, which has yielded some lithic material from relict portions of stratigraphy which are reminiscent of the Lezetxiki materials. Finally, between 2002 and 2006, Saénz de Buruaga excavated a thick stratigraphic sequence in Zerratu, a cave at the mouth of the river Deba (Saénz de Buruaga and Mujika 2005) associated with assemblages with a Mousterian appearance, where it seems quite likely that the sequence will reach a human occupation in at least isotope stage 5. The province of Biscay is articulated around the drainage basin of the river Ibaizabal, which crosses the country from east to west and connects with the upper Ebro valley, through the valleys of the Arratia, Nervioń and Kadagua, and mountain passes at between 600 and 800 m above sea level. To the north of the region, short valleys—Artibai, Lea, Oka, Butroń and Barbaduń—run perpendicular to the coast. Finally, the coastal strip between the rias of the Butroń and the Nervioń is drained by the River Gobelas and the Asua valley, which runs parallel and to the north of the Ibaizabal. There are no references to sites attributed to these periods in the Artibai and Lea valleys, although there is abundant evidence for the late Upper Palaeolithic. We find a similar situation in the Oka valley, where, in contrast with the wealth of Upper Palaeolithic sites (Aguirre et al. 1998–2000), there is a paucity of older materials: only the site of Atxagakoa (Lo´pez-Quintana et al. 2005) has yielded these, with a base level situated between the Wu¨rm I and II in which some evidence of human activity has been detected. In the drainage basins of the Ibaizabal and the Nervioń, one of the few sites yielding archaeological evidence older than the Upper Palaeolithic is Asuntze (Aguirre and Lo´pez- Quintana 2001). At the mouth of the Ibaizabal, the palaeontological site at Punta Lucero consists of a faunal association that has been dated in the last interglacial period or the start of the Wu¨rm (Castanõs 1988), and the existence of Eemian deposits has been noted in certain areas such as the terraces of the Axpe or at Deusto. In the Arratia valley, we should draw attention to the cave of Axlor. It contains a long Mousterian sequence (Gonza´lez-Urquijo et al. 2005), with an older sedimentary sequence at its base, from which some evidence of lithic industry and fauna has been recovered (Gonza´lez-Urquijo et al. 2008). Also of interest is the site of Arlanpe, which has been excavated under the direction of one of the authors since 2006 (Rios-Garaizar et al. 2007). This cave is near the confluence of the rivers Arraita and Ibaizabal, and a sequence of three levels (B, C and D) with lithic material and fauna has been identified. The lithic 123 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 167 assemblage is archaic in appearance and radically different from the more recent Mous- terian assemblages in the region. Its traits include the use of local raw material, the preparation of large blanks and the presence of bifacial macro-tools. Indirect dating and palaeoclimatic evidence suggest an occupation during the Eemian (Rios-Garaizar et al. 2011). Finally, the coastal strip between the estuaries of the Ibaizabal and the Butroń has provided the largest concentration of Early Palaeolithic evidence. At the open-air site of Mendieta I, a rescue archaeological operation has revealed the presence of a well-preserved stratigraphic context with remains of lithic industry. The sedimentological (Iriarte- Avile´s et al. 2006), pollen and archaeological (Rios-Garaizar et al. 2008b) data show that the deposit, situated in sand and silt that filled a low-energy channel, was formed in a warm and humid climate, possibly in the Eemian or Holsteinian, while the soil that sealed the sequence was laid down in a colder and humid climate. The lithic assemblage is characterised by the absence of bifacial tools, the presence of chipped or barely-worked cobblestones, the scarcely-standardised unipolar knapping of flakes and a low proportion of retouched implements. This occupation is probably related to the nearby flint outcrop at Kurtzia and the exploitation of the coastal environment. Some isolated evidence, such as hand-axes and cleavers, has been found in the Kurtzia area, and Middle Pleistocene soil formation has been seen in the Gorliz dunes (Gonza´lez-Amucha´stegui 2000) and the raised dunes at Muriola (Merino et al. 1991). The province of A´ lava is located on the Mediterranean side of the Basque watershed, and forms part of the upper Ebro valley. Several landscape units can be distinguished, particularly the Alavese Plain at about 500 m above sea level, drained by the river Zadorra, which flows into the Ebro. Other units are the valley of the river Araya, which crosses the Burunda corridor and flows into the river Arga in Navarre; the basin of the river Ayuda, which is a tributary of the Zadorra; the rivers Bayas and Omecillo, which flow into the Ebro; and finally, the left bank of the Ebro. These features mean that the area of A´ lava is a communication node between the northern coast, the Ebro Valley and the North Meseta. Most of the archaeological evidence has been picked up on the surface or from badly altered contexts. However, A´ lava is the most promising area for finding open-air sites, because of the greater development of the drainage basins. The finds from the basin of the river Zadorra must be mentioned, especially the series recovered from around the Urrunaga reservoir, attributed to the Upper Acheulean (Saénz de Buruaga et al. 1989). This assemblage is characterised by the massive tools (hand-axes and chipped cobblestones) made from mineralised limestone cobbles, and by the presence of centripetal flake production systems, particularly Levallois cores. Other assemblages found near the reservoir, such as Itsetsasi (Fernańdez-Eraso et al. 2004) and Tribitu (Fernańdez-Eraso et al. 2005), contain some elements, such as chipped lutite (siltstone or mudstone) cobbles, with an archaic appearance. Also in the Zadorra basin, in its final section, the Manzanos assemblage was recovered in a gravel-pit (Baldeoń and Murga 1989). Other finds in this basin have occurred at Mendiguri, Ondabia, Murua and Aitzabal (Arrizabalaga 2005–2006; Arrizabalaga and Iriarte-Chiapusso 2005;Saénz de Buruaga et al. 1994). In the Ayuda river-basin, we should mention the cleaver, found at Penãcerrada (Baldeoń 1978) and the finds at Murba, finally attributed to the Middle Palaeolithic (Baldeoń 1988). Finally, some Early Palaeolithic materials have been found in the basin of the river Araia, notably a cordiform hand-axe in flint, at the site of Ilarduia (Beorlegi 2005), only a few kilometres away from the sites of Coscobilo and Urbasa in Navarre. As in the case of A´ lava, almost the whole of Navarre lies within in the upper Ebro basin. In particular, the valleys of the Ega and the Arga have yielded interesting new results, 123 168 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 creating a situation that contrasts sharply with that pertaining only 15 years ago (Bara- ndiarań-Maestu 1988; Beguiristain 1975; Montes-Ramirez 1988; Vallespı´ 1971, 1975). Two papers (Beguiristain 2000;Saénz de Buruaga 2000) elucidate the present situation with regard to this period in an area where numerous isolated, out-of-context finds were made in 1990. These included: Venta de Judas, in Lumbier; Zuń˜iga; Ordoiz, in Estella; material from the destroyed cave of Coscobilo; and assemblages from the high Urbasa plateau, including Balsa de Aranzaduya, Andasarri, Otsaportillo, Regajo de los Yesos, Fuente de Aciarri and Pozo Laberri. To these can now be added new out-of-context finds at Viana and Lezaun (Armendariz-Martija 1998; Beguiristain 1989; Beguiristain and Labeaga 1993; Irigaray 1992). The increase in the collections from the Pamplona basin is particularly significant from the numerical point of view, with a quite coherent assemblage that can be identified with the Middle Acheulean. It includes (Barandiarań-Maestu 1997; Garcıá-Gazo´laz 1994) over 500 artefacts from as many as 15 sites (such as Gazo´laz, Ibero, Baternain, Arazuri, Orkoien and Cordovilla), which can possibly be dated to MIS 6.

Overview of the First Human Occupation in the Western Pyrenees

We can tentatively begin to sketch out the general circumstances in which the Basque crossroads was ﬁrst occupied. The small number of deposits and materials included within this synthesis mean we have to be circumspect about the model’s validity and the range of its application.

Absolute Chronology and Internal Systematisation of the Period

At a slower rate than we might like, the number of absolute dates available for the Lower Palaeolithic in the western Pyrenees is gradually increasing. A serious problem is presented by the fact that it is only the Final Mousterian that falls within the chronological range of the application of radiocarbon dating, and even then it is at the limits of the technique. This means that the period must be dated with alternative forms of sampling and analysis, with their greater restriction on appropriate sample material, such as thermoluminescence (TL), Th/U, Th/Th, ESR, OSL, and palaeomagnetism. Of particular note is the set of determinations obtained for the Lezetxiki karst system (Lezetxiki, Leibar and Lezetxiki II) and surrounding area (Artazu II), which we hope to enlarge in the coming years with the samples taken during our own excavations at both sites. These dates have already been fully published and discussed in a paper (Falgue`res et al. 2005–2006), and therefore we shall simply refer to them as a historiographic land- mark allowing us to propose the presence, at least in Level VII, of an occupation dating to the end of the Middle Pleistocene, in a stratified deposit. The oldest available dates for all Euskal Herria are still from the base levels (VI and VII) at Lezetxiki. At the moment, we know of only a few deposits dating from between MIS 5 and MIS 6 at the base of Lezetxiki, and Arlanpe, and the Late Mousterian dates at Axlor, Kurtzia, Arrillor or Lezetxiki. Practically the whole chronology of MIS 4 remains unknown. Recent determinations for the nearby cave of Artazu II (Julia`, unpublished) situate the base of this sequence also in MIS 6 and MIS 5. We equally know of an unpublished date in the MIS 5 for the basal level at Astigarraga cave. The internal systematisation of the period being studied has traditionally been subor- dinate to the techno-typological description of the lithic assemblages. The boundary between the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic, or between the Final Acheulean and—in the 123 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 169 opinion of some—the Mousterian of Acheulean Tradition, has not stood up to the accu- mulation of data that has become available in the last few decades. In this respect, Mousterian-type technocomplexes or Levallois techniques are generally accepted as having existed during the Middle Pleistocene (Bourguignon et al. 2008;Meńdez-Quintas et al. 2008; Moncel et al. 2005; Rodrı´guez-Alvarez 2004), alongside the occasional survival of assemblages rich in hand-axes (which might well be considered Acheulean) after the last interglacial. In such circumstances as we have at the Basque crossroads (with half a dozen stratified deposits containing Lower Palaeolithic artefacts), as long as no anomalies are found, we can propose, in general terms, that the groups which produced Acheulean assemblages (or perhaps, Lower Palaeolithic assemblages without hand-axes) were replaced, approximately during the MIS 5 or final interglacial period, by other human groups, responsible for the classic Mousterian, in the form of monotonous technocomplexes characterised by large numbers of sidescrapers and other substrate elements (denticulates, simple retouched points). But this ‘transition’ has so far only been docu- mented in the sequence at Lezetxiki.

Palaeo-environmental Information

Three main sources of information enable a palaeoenvironmental reconstruction of the Palaeolithic sites: ecological considerations derived from archaeozoology and archae- obotany respectively, and sedimentological studies. While archaeozoology usually pro- vides information for all the excavated deposits, the other disciplines display less balanced results for the period being studied. We have palynological studies for the sites of Irikaitz, Lezetxiki, Arlanpe and Mendieta I, while sampling has been carried out at another five sites, although the results are not yet available. Irikaitz has also provided anthracological (charcoal) and carpological (seed and fruit pip) data. With regards to sedimentology, for the moment we only have information for the caves at Lezetxiki and for the open-air site of Mendieta I. In addition, we can situate these sites approximately within a global sequence, at an isotopic or alpine scale, together with other deposits with a non-anthropic genesis, such as certain sites located on the coast. For a variety of reasons, we only possess relative and fragmentary information with which to reconstruct the environment in which the first occupants of the Basque Country lived. The historiographic development of research has been irregular and poorly-coor- dinated, until the last two decades. This circumstance is exacerbated by another: the poor conservation of the different palaeoenvironmental records in many archaeological deposits of this period. We know of very few Basque Lower Palaeolithic deposits in a primary position, as over 80 % of the finds come from derived deposits, lacking any context susceptible to study. The archaeozoological (and anthropological) remains are not usually preserved at open-air archaeological sites, and for this reason our information of this kind is limited to the deposit at Lezetxiki and the preliminary data from Arlanpe. For different reasons, the archaeobotanical disciplines have so far only provided information for the sites of Irikaitz, Lezetxiki and Mendieta I. Finally, in the absence of a geochronological framework and other forms of analysis, sedimentological studies (which have been applied systematically at all the excavated sites) are able to describe the environmental conditions in which the sediments were deposited but, lacking a more precise chronological structure, can only suggest a chronological position within a regional system. Taking first the archaeozoological information, until the promising results from the new excavations at Axlor, Lezetxiki and Arlanpe are published (and leaving on one side non- anthropic deposits because of the difficulty of correlating these with archaeological sites), 123 170 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 the published information is practically restricted to the old excavations at Lezetxiki (Altuna 1972, 1990), and some interim data from the assemblages at Astigarraga (Arruabarrena et al. 2007), Arnaileta (Olarte 2002) and Arlanpe (Rios-Garaizar et al. 2008a, 2011). In many cases, we encounter similar difficulties in distinguishing faunal remains brought by humans as a result of hunting from those introduced by other carnivores such as bears. Although carnivore bones (apart from bear bones) are not numerous, other evidence is found in several sequences (coprolites, signs of bites and corrosion on the bones, anatomical representation patterns) to suggest that some assemblages should be considered the result of both kinds of contribution. Detailed taphonomic studies, like those carried out at Lezetxiki (Altuna 1972; Arrizabalaga et al. 2010; Martıńez-Moreno 2005), have succeeded in assessing these factors in terms both of the general characterisation of the deposit and of the problems involved in its conservation. Beyond this alternating use of Cueva de Lezetxiki as a carnivores’ den and a human dwelling, archaeozoological study of the site has provided information about the relative chronology of Level VII (the presence of Ursus spelaeus deningeri suggests this level is Middle Pleistocene in age). From the environmental point of view, the relative abundance of red deer (followed by large bovines and horses) in the sequence and the lack of interest of the rest of the series do not allow many conclusions to be reached. Large bovids and horses correspond to more open, steppe-like environments than do deer. Although indi- cators of extreme cold are virtually absent from the series, the new excavations in the old Unit VII appear to have identified marmot, a species indeed indicative of such conditions. The archaeobotanical information available for this period is also equivocal, especially taking into account the reservations about the geochronology of Lezetxiki mentioned above, and the fact that the author of the first pollen study, Sańchez-Gon˜i(1993), tied her pollen zones in with a presumed date sequence extending back some 300,000 years. We recently made a brief review of this complex issue (Arrizabalaga and Iriarte-Chiapusso 2005), comparing the information from the old excavations at Lezetxiki with our own research. This indicated that it would be advisable to repeat all the analytical studies in relation to the presently understood stratigraphy and the new dates. From the geochronological point of view, we prefer to remain cautious about the dates that were once proposed, placing Levels V and VI in two phases of the Mousterian occupation of the rock- shelter, still within the Upper Pleistocene and isotope stages 4 and perhaps 5. We believe that an ascription to the Middle Pleistocene is likely for Levels VII and VIII at Lexetxiki. Although we disagree with the chronological proposal that Sańchez-Gon˜i derived from her analysis (whose pollen zone C3, associated with archaeological sublevels IVa and IVb should be before 70,000 BP), the environmental reconstruction appears to be correct. In this, pollen zones A and C represent forest formations with the abundant presence of deciduous trees (including chestnut). In between, pollen zone B represents an open landscape, with a degradation of the climatic conditions. The other deposit that has provided archaeobotanical information for this chronological and geographical context is Irikaitz (Zestoa, Guipu´zcoa). At this open-air site, which has been excavated since 1998, no archaeozoological data is available, but we possess a correct pollen and anthracological record and even some carpological data. The pollen and charcoal record (Arrizabalaga et al. 2004) is highly coherent at Irikaitz, and shows that human occupations during the Lower Palaeolithic took place in a moist, temperate climate, probably in the interglacial period. The tree cover was dominated by a mixed deciduous forest, principally with oak and hazel, also enriched by riverside woodland (alder, ash, etc.) and other characteristic interglacial taxa, such as hornbeam.

123 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 171

In Arlanpe, initial results from pollen analysis suggest relatively warm and wet climate conditions during the formation of Level D, with a predominance of deciduous trees among arboreal taxa (Rios-Garaizar et al. 2011). In the same way, the open-air site at Mendieta has provided some data about the climate and the geochronology. The deposit would have formed in a moist and temperate, probably interglacial, environment (Iriarte-Avile´s et al. 2006). This was covered by a palaeo-soil formed in a wetter and colder climate, with a plant association consisting of grasses, reeds, ferns, conifers and alder (Rios-Garaizar et al. 2008b).

Types of Territorial Occupation

In this part of our synthesis, more than in any other, we should take a cautious approach, bearing in mind the interim nature of our impressions. We are aware that the distribution map of the finds, although it has fewer blank spaces than it had scarcely 20 years ago, is clearly biased owing to several factors that should be mentioned here. In the first place, a technical-legal peculiarity of Basque regulations makes it very easy to apply for permission to carry out a series of test excavations (which must be halted as soon as any significant finds are made); this contrasts with the complicated application procedure for an excavation that is permitted to study the full sequence of an archaeological deposit. This rule favours discoveries of more recent age, almost always post-Palaeolithic, within the total number of regional sites. We can illustrate this with the following example: once the excavation at Irikaitz began, in the open-air (in 1998), it affected new research in the area, which was now regarded as full excavations and not tests. The result has been finds of contemporary material in the caves of Arnaileta, Ikeitz and Astigarraga, in a very small radius around Irikaitz. Our second consideration relates to a difference between sites in the open-air and in caves. Whereas the latter tend to be stratified, accumulating successive human occupations in a finite and predictable space, open-air sites are much more difficult to locate and to delimit. It is hard to recognise them in such a humid climate and forested environment as the Basque Country, which is a problem affecting all chronologies, at least until the appearance of the first settlements made with durable structures: we know of hardly any Palaeolithic or Mesolithic sites in the open-air. Furthermore, as Irikaitz has once again shown us, when a site has been found it is also difficult to delimit, as the occupations tend to be distributed laterally, instead of accumulating vertically in the same place. This gives rise to complex stratigraphic problems. It is easy to draft strategies for exploring and sampling new deposits of any age when they are inside caves (it is only necessary to propose the systematic excavation of sondages down to bedrock), while open-air deposits require a very different model, and the search for them cannot be systematised so easily. In addition, caves are found almost exclusively in limestone areas (their location can be predicted with a geological map), whereas Quaternary deposits in the open-air are inad- equately identified and mapped. As if all these advantages of cave sites were not enough, the conservation of the record inside caves tends to be much better, firstly because of the greater protection from leaching afforded by being inside an environment of alkaline rocks. Secondly, areas of caves are less attractive for urban development, in comparison with river valleys, which in the Basque Country are generally covered by housing and industrial installations. This leads us to believe that in years to come, the record will be completed basically by cave deposits, and the gap with respect to open-air sites is only going to widen. We have already referred to our third consideration, to do with the overall conservation of the record. As well as the local factors mentioned above, other regional factors exist (the 123 172 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 evolution of the karst, the erosion of Quaternary environments) that militate against the survival of sedimentary deposits. Most of the karst in the Basque Country is in an inter- mediate stage of evolution, with active levels only a short distance from the levels containing the archaeological deposits—the best circumstance for the conservation of the archaeology. However, for different reasons, on both the Atlantic and Mediterranean sides of the watershed the external sedimentary environments are badly affected by active erosion mechanisms that seriously damage the deposits and their contents. On the one hand, on the Atlantic side, the rivers are short, with a steep profile and high energy, sometimes even in their lower courses, and this has produced complexes of a few small terraces. As some small raised marine abrasion shelves indicate, changes in the shoreline have flooded large areas below 40 m, and even 60 m, in recent phases of the Middle Pleistocene, removing the previous record. On the other hand, if we apply some of the facts we know about the sedimentary record during the Pleistocene in the middle and lower Ebro Valley, we can imagine that large areas of terraces and embankments have been eroded away (together with the archaeological evidence they might have contained) and deposits will now be restricted to marginal areas that were better sheltered from such processes. This might explain why areas such as the Navarre’s Ribera region or the Alavese Rioja are represented so poorly in the ancient record. Before reaching conclusions about such site distributions, we need to assess their reliability through intensive surveying programmes in certain areas. Having shown the relative formal value of the known network of deposits discovered during the last two decades, we shall now try to observe in it any interesting patterns as regards the articulation of the territory. We are referring to groups of hunter-gatherers with certain mobility, and this should be taken into account when studying their settlements, which are always susceptible to functional biases consequent on their having been, vari- ously, camps, hunting grounds, workshops, etc., which will influence their interpretation. At first glance the territory and settlement pattern seem indicative of movement and the utilisation of routes, rather than a primary articulation aimed at the exploitation of the local environment. The pattern of coastal/inland territories seems to indicate a vector that lines up the main sites along two axes: a coastal corridor (although not strictly along the coast, if we want to include deposits between 50 and 60 m above present-day sea level, like Mendieta, J1 and Irikaitz); and a double corridor, comprising the Aramaio Valley in Guipu´zcoa and the parallel Arratia Valley in Biscay, which connects the Bay of Biscay coast with the Ebro Valley. This is the location of the sequences at Lezetxiki, Arlanpe and Urruńaga, and equally, in the later Mousterian, Lezetxiki, Axlor and Arrillor. In view of this provisional distribution map of sites, it may be supposed that these have been the main routes for the movement of populations (in both directions) and are therefore particularly interesting for more intensive archaeological surveys. Although it may still be too soon to make affirmations, from this provisional map it can be deduced that once in the Ebro Valley, the populations would have moved towards the west (northern sub-meseta, with such areas of special interest as the Sierra de Atapuerca), to the east (the Ega and Arga valleys, with deposits like those in the Pamplona basin) and to the south (isolated finds in the Alavese Rioja and Navarre’s Ribera region, and the large ensembles in the lower Rioja).

Material Culture

Practically the only record preserved in the material culture at the above-mentioned sites is the lithic assemblage. Substantial progress has been made in the study of Lower 123 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 173

Palaeolithic lithic industries at the Basque crossroads in the last decade. The analysis of quite large collections, recovered in almost unaltered contexts, has enabled the study of the lithic assemblages from a more integral standpoint. In the coming years, this will supply important data about techno-economic organisation during the Lower Palaeolithic, providing new elements with which to compare and contextualise the assemblages. Of these assemblages, the most important are those from the open-air site of Irikaitz, from Lezetxiki VII and VI, Mendieta I and Arlanpe. The lithic assemblage at Irikaitz displays particular characteristics, including the use of local raw materials, mainly sandstone, vulcanite and limonite. The production system is simple, and combines the preparation of bifacial tools (cleavers, bifaces and trihedrals), chipping cobblestones to produce flakes according to undeveloped patterns, and the simple shaping of retouched implements, generally resulting in macro tools. Some of these characteristics are also present in the assemblage from Mendieta I, although in this case, the presence of a flint outcrop in the vicinity means that this material is selected preferentially, even though it is exploited with very simple procedures (Fig. 2). The assemblages from Lezetxiki and Arlanpe, both from cave deposits, display similar characteristics, with the use of local raw materials, generally of average quality, such as lutite or limonite, and a use of flint objects imported into the site. Retouched objects are generally found among these flint tools and the proportion of Levallois knapping is high. The local raw materials are generally used to manufacture massive tools, made with simple flaking production methods. These artefacts are rarely retouched. However, there is evidence of bifacial tools or tools made from cobblestones at Arlanpe, and these kinds are practically absent at Lezetxiki VII and VI. These characteristics seem to relate these assemblages to industries half-way between the Lower and the Middle Palaeolithic. The presence of bifacial tools at Arlanpe appears to bring this assemblage closer to the Upper Acheulean. In contrast, neither isolated finds, nor series in derived positions, present many opportunities for such inference. These collections usually show the bias typical of this type of find and accumulate a great deal of uncertainty as they may include materials of different periods. However, some large assemblages may be tackled with a degree of confidence. These are the collections from the Pamplona basin and the assemblage recovered from around the Urruńaga reservoir. The series from the Pamplona basin appears to be quite homogeneous. It is characterised by the almost exclusive use of a local raw material, namely cobblestones of ferruginous quartzite. We can highlight the tools made from cobblestones, including cobbles knapped unifacially and monofacially, some of them with denticulate edges, crude bifaces with little re-knapping, trihedrals, and tools made from flakes, particularly poorly-shaped cleavers, for which there does not appear to be any particular chaıˆne ope´ratoire. The remaining flake tools consist essentially of sidescrapers and denticulates. Levallois knapping has not been detected, and there is only occasional evidence of discoid knapping. These characteristics situate the assemblage within the Middle Acheulean (Garcıá-Gazo´laz 1994). The collection from the Urruńaga reservoir is characterised by an almost exclusive use of local raw material, mineralised limestone; the presence of macro tools, particularly knapped cobblestones and bifaces; and by the production of flakes using centripetal techniques, in some cases Levallois. These characteristics suggest that the assemblage belongs to the Upper Acheulean (Saénz de Buruaga et al. 1989) (Fig. 3).

Exploitation of the Abiotic and Biotic Environment

The exploitation of lithic resources seems to be the key to determining the territories that might have been used in the Lower Palaeolithic. Thanks to a study by A. Tarrin˜o, we know 123 174 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181

Fig. 2 Material culture of the oldest sites in the Basque Crossroads. 1 Bifacially worked pebble made on Vulcanite, Irikaitz; 2 Macro-tool made on sandstone, Mendieta I the main flint outcrops and the geographical distribution of the flint types at different sites throughout prehistory (Tarrinõ 2006). Equally, a study has been published (Tarrinõ 2003) for the site of Axlor, and preliminary observations have been made by the same researcher and ourselves for Lezetxiki, J1, J2, Artazu II, Irikaitz, Mendieta I and Arlanpe. At these sites, the use of flint is conditioned by the proximity of the outcrops. Where they do not exist (Irikaitz) the level of flint use decreases in favour of other local materials (including 123 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 175

Fig. 3 Material culture from the recent Acheulean levels. 1–4 Arlanpe Level D; 5 Lezetxiki Level VII; 6–8 Lezetxiki Level VI (5–7 adapted from Baldeoń 1993) sandstone, limestone, limonite, ferruginous nodules, vulcanite, quartz and quartzite), whereas in those places where flint can be found (Mendieta I) it is used preferentially, even though no strict selection criteria seem to be operating. The sites of Lezetxiki and Arlanpe have yielded, however, a discrete grouping of flint artefacts whose provenance is over 20 km away. This situation will change radically in the Middle Palaeolithic when the use of flint increases significantly, with the incorporation of a wider number of varieties. It is more difficult to describe the exploitation of the biotic environment for food. All the reflections and observations made in the Palaeoenvironmental Information section of 123 176 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 this paper are valid here too. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that the interpretation of archaeozoological and, to a greater extent, archaeobotanical information in terms of the diet requires additional corrections and filters. We shall begin with the latter as it is simpler to summarise: despite the presence of potentially edible resources in the environment (chestnuts, walnuts, hazelnuts, etc), which can be deduced from the pollen and anthracological studies at Lezetxiki and Irikaitz, consumption of hazelnuts can be assumed only in the Lower Palaeolithic levels at Irikaitz, where some carbonised shell fragments have been preserved (Arrizabalaga et al. 2004). In the practical absence of human remains to study, and given the conservation problems of the archaeobotanical record, little more can be said. With regards to the other part of the diet, that involving animal proteins, a little more information is available, although it should be borne in mind that not all the remains that have been preserved were brought to the cave by humans and that, at the same time, the remains of other dietary contributions, such as fish, birds, molluscs and small mammals, will not have been preserved, or in all likelihood would not have been recovered. What we can say adds little to the above: three taxa (red deer, large bovine and horse) constitute the main part of the ungulate assemblage. In the Lower Palaeolithic, there is no observable trend towards the selection of one or other prey, a development that begins to be recog- nisable during the Mousterian and is completed in the Upper Palaeolithic. Nor can it be claimed that hunting was carried out systematically. The number of remains is small, and they are found associated with and mixed with remains from carnivore scavenging; it is impossible to detect significant patterns that can be followed between levels in the same deposit (much less between different deposits).

The Human Actor

The paucity of human fossil remains is a serious handicap when we attempt to frame our region within the European record. The catalogue for the Lower Palaeolithic (in the Basque Country and the rest of the northern Iberian Peninsula) comprises a single ﬁnd (known as the Lezetxiki humerus) which may be attributed to the end of the Middle Pleistocene and, in all probability, phyletically to either Homo heidelbergensis or another archaic form, such as the Neanderthals. It is thus fortunate that the Basque Country is located geo- graphically near two of the best fossil human records for both species: Sima de los Huesos, at Atapuerca (Ibeas de Juarros, Burgos), and Cueva del Sidro´n (Borines, Asturias) respectively. For the moment, we must resign ourselves to the need to somehow refer our limited record (Basabe 1966) to these important sites, and hope that future research may be able to increase the amount of information, especially in terms of the recovery of further diagnostic osteological remains.

Discussion

As we have spelt out in this paper, the available archaeological record for the earliest human occupations at the Basque crossroads is still relatively small and fragmentary. We have explained the different administrative, historiographical and archaeological problems that have affected its construction. These problems can be summarised as the inadequacies of the legislation pertaining to the administration of archaeological heritage, the lack of general interest in the study of these periods throughout the twentieth century, and the difficulties of conserving and rendering visible this type of evidence. Although the outlook 123 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 177 may seem discouraging, in the last two decades great progress has been made in the understanding of this period, largely in response to the commencement of specific research projects. The discovery of new deposits with good conservation of the archaeological and sedimentary record at Irikaitz, Mendieta I and Arlanpe, among other sites, and the new excavations at the classic site of Lezetxiki have enabled methodological advances. They are providing new and reliable data with which to approach aspects such as environmental reconstruction or the behaviour of the first settlers in this territory. Putting this data into a wider regional context, encompassing the territories for which the Basque crossroads acted as a communications route, is rather more complex. Available information for the oldest occupations, like those at Irikaitz, is quite scarce. However, the virtual absence of complex flake production systems suggests that Irikaitz could be compared with sites older than the Upper Acheulean, such as at TD6 in Atapuerca (Rodrı´guez-Alvarez 2004); the Middle Acheulean assemblages in the Chalosse region (Thibault 1976a); Level V at Cabo Busto (Rodriguez-Asensio 2001); or outer Garma A (Arias et al. 1999). In contrast, according to the available data for the south of France (Mourre and Cologne 2007); the Ebro Valley; the northern meseta (Meńdez-Quintas et al. 2008); and the Can- tabrian region (Montes-Barquıń 2003), there appears to be a significant number of deposits attributed to the Upper Acheulean, with industries characterised fundamentally by an increasing importance of tools made from flakes and using Levallois production methods, situated chronologically around the last glaciation. This apparent coherence is disrupted by the existence of similar industries at about 350,000 BP in Level TD10 in the Trench Doline at Atapuerca (Rodrı´guez-Alvarez 2004); or the appearance of the first Mousterian assemblages at about 300,000 at some French sites such as Petit Bost (Bourguignon et al. 2008) or Orgnac 3 (Moncel et al. 2005). This scenario seems to indicate an older period, with a much smaller and more dispersed population, and a recent period, between the Lower Palaeolithic and the early Middle Palaeolithic, in which some of the technological and organisational solutions were being tested, to be developed further throughout the Mousterian. This time of change is reflected, at the Basque crossroads, by the sequence at Lezetxiki, and more particularly in the occupations at Arlanpe and Urruńaga. The present paper should therefore be understood as an interim report, produced at what may be a crucial moment of epistemological change. However, true progress is yet to be made, and can only happen through a profound methodological reflection enabling us to overcome the imbalances in the record and the uncertainty of the chronological and environmental frameworks, and to approach the study of the evidence of human occupations from a more complete and integrated standpoint.

Acknowledgments Joseba Rios-Garaizar was a Basque government postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Human Evolution at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, during the preparation of this work.

References

Aguirre, M., & Lo´pez-Quintana, J. C. (2001). Yacimiento de Asuntze (Abadin˜o). Arkeoikuska, 2000, 348–350. Aguirre, M., Lo´pez-Quintana, J. C., & Sa´enz de Bururaga, A. (1998–2000). Medio ambiente, industrias y poblamiento prehisto´rico en Urdaibai (Gernika, Bizkaia) del Wu¨rm reciente al Holoceno Medio. Illunzar, 4, 13–38. Altuna, J. (1972). Fauna de mamı´feros de los yacimientos prehisto´ricos de Guipu´zcoa. Munibe, 24, 1–464.

123 178 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181

Altuna, J. (1990). La caza de herbı´voros durante el Paleolı´tico y el Mesolı´tico del Paı´s Vasco. Munibe, 42, 229–240. Altuna, J., Baldeoń, A., & Mariezkurrena, K. (1990). La cueva de Amalda (Zestoa, Paı´s Vasco): Ocupaciones paleolı´ticas y postpaleolı´ticas. San Sebastiań: Eusko Ikaskuntza. Antxieta, J. T. (2003). Cueva de Ikeitz. Arkeoikuska, 2002, 172–175. Arambourou, R. (1989). Pre´histoire autour de Saint-Jean-de-Luz (France). Munibe (Antropologia–Arkeo- logia), 41, 29–44. Arambourou, R. (1990). Pre´histoire en Pays Basque Nord et Sud des Landes. Munibe (Antropologia– Arkeologia), 42, 91–96. Arias, P., Gonza´lez-Sainz, C., Moure-Romanillo, A., & Ontanõn, R. (1999). La Garma: Un descenso al pasado. Santander: Consejeria de Cultura y Deporte del Gobierno de Cantabria/Universidad de Cantabria. Armendariz-Martija, J. (1998). Hallazgo de dos nuevos bifaces paleolı´ticos en el valle del rıó Ega. Trabajos de Arqueologıá Navarra, 13, 349–357. Arrizabalaga, A. (1994). Hallazgo de un bifaz y de otros restos lı´ticos en el monte Jaizkibel (Hondarribia, Gipuzkoa). Munibe (Antropologia–Arkeologia), 46, 23–41. Arrizabalaga, A. (2005a). Retorno a Lezetxiki (Arrasate, Paı´s Vasco): Nuevas perspectivas de la Investi- gacioń. In M. Santonja-Go´mez, A. Pe´rez-Gonza´lez, & M. J. Machado (Eds.), Geoarqueologıáy patrimonio en la Penıńsula Iberica y el Entorno mediterrańeo (pp. 81–98). Almazań: ADEMA. Arrizabalaga, A. (2005b). Cueva de Artazu II (Arrasate). Arkeoikuska, 2004, 383–386. Arrizabalaga, A. (2005–2006). Las primeras ocupaciones humanas en el Pirineo Occidental y Montes Vascos: Un estado de la cuestioń en 2005. Munibe (Antropologia–Arkeologia). Homenaje al Prof. Jesu´s Altuna, 57, 53–70. Arrizabalaga, A. (2007). Frontie`res naturelles, administratives et e´piste´mologiques: L’unite´ d’analyse dans l’archeólogie du Paleólithique (dans le cas basque). In N. Cazals, J. E. Gonza´lez-Urquijo, & X. Terradas (Eds.), Frontie`res naturelles et frontie`res culturelles dans les Pyreńeés pre´historiques/ Fronteras naturales y fronteras culturales en los Pirineos prehisto´ricos (pp. 27–37). Santander: PubliCan/Ediciones de la Universidad de Cantabria. Arrizabalaga, A., & Iriarte-Chiapusso, M. J. (2002). El yacimiento de Irikaitz (Zestoa, Gipuzkoa): Apo- rtacioń al conocimiento del Paleolı´tico antiguo en Euskal Herria. In XV8 Congreso de Estudios Vascos (pp. 115–122). Donostia: Eusko Ikaskuntza. Arrizabalaga, A., & Iriarte-Chiapusso, M. J. (2004). El yacimiento arqueolo´gico de Irikaitz (Zestoa, Paı´s Vasco): Descripcioń del depo´sito y caracterizacioń industrial de su nivel IV. In G. Flor (Ed.), Actas de la XI Reunioń Nacional del Cuaternario. Oviedo (Asturias), 2–4 julio 2003 (pp. 205–210). Oviedo: Consejerıá de Cultura del Principado de Asturias, Concejo de Candamo, CajAstur. Arrizabalaga, A., & Iriarte-Chiapusso, M. J. (2005). El Paleolı´tico antiguo en el medio pirenaico occidental. In M. Santonja-Go´mez, A. Pe´rez-Gonza´lez, & M. J. Machado (Eds.), Geoarqueologıá y patrimonio en la Penıńsula Iberica y el Entorno mediterrańeo (pp. 219–234). Almazań: ADEMA. Arrizabalaga, A., & Iriarte-Chiapusso, M. J. (2008). Irikaitz (Zestoa, Paı´s Vasco). Tafonomıá dun depo´sito pleistoceńico ao aire libre. In E. Meńdez Quintas (Ed.), Estudos sobre Paleolı´tico. Homenaxe a X. M, A´lvarez Bla´zquez. (Vol. II, pp. 139–162). Gondomar: Instituto de Estudios Minõranos. Arrizabalaga, A., & Iriarte-Chiapusso, M. J. (2011). Lower and Upper Palaeolithic settlements in Irikaitz (Zestoa, Basque country, Spain): Deconstruction of a Pleistocene archaeological site in the Eastern Cantabrian range. Cuaternario y Geomorfologıá, 25, 105–119. Arrizabalaga, A., Iriarte-Chiapusso, M. J., & Ruiz-Alonso, M. (2004). El yacimiento arqueolo´gico de Irikaitz (Zestoa, Paı´s Vasco): Contextualizacioń arqueobotańica y en el marco del Paleolı´tico Inferior vasco. In G. Flor (Ed.), Actas de la XI Reunioń Nacional del Cuaternario. Oviedo (Asturias), 2–4 julio 2003 (pp. 211–218). Oviedo: Consejerıá de Cultura del Principado de Asturias, Concejo de Candamo, CajAstur. Arrizabalaga, A., Iriarte-Chiapusso, M. J., & Villaluenga, A. (2010). Labeko Koba y Lezetxiki (Paı´s Vasco): Dos yacimientos una problema´tica comuń. In E. Baquedano & J. Rosell (Eds.), Primera reunioń cientı´fica sobre cubiles de hiena en la Penıńsula Ibe´rica (pp. 252–264). Madrid: Comunidad Auto- noma. Servicio de Documentacion y Publicaciones. Arruabarrena, J., Mujika, J. A., & Sasieta, M. (2007). Cueva de Astigarraga (Deba). Arkeoikuska, 2006, 179–181. Baldeoń, A. (1978). Estudio de un hachereau aparecido en Penãcerrada (Alava). Estudios de Arqueologıá Alavesa, 9, 11–16. Baldeoń, A. (1988). El yacimiento de Murba. Estudios de Arqueologıá Alavesa, 16, 7–160. Baldeoń, A. (1990). El Paleolı´tico Inferior y Medio en el Paı´s Vasco: Una aproximacioń en 1990. Munibe, 42, 11–22.

123 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 179

Baldeoń, A. (1993). El yacimiento de Lezetxiki (Gipuzkoa, Pais Vasco). Los niveles musterienses. Munibe, 45, 3–97. Baldeoń, A., & Murga, F. (1989). U´ tiles paleolı´ticos en una gravera del rıó Zadorra, afluente del Ebro (Alava). Kobie (Paleoantropologıá), 18, 113–122. Barandiarań-Ayerbe, J. M. (1950). La industria prehisto´rica de la regioń inferior del Nive. Eusko Jakintza, 4, 1–3. Barandiarań-Ayerbe, J. M. (1953). El hombre prehisto´rico en el Paı´s Vasco. Buenos Aires: Ekin. Barandiarań-Ayerbe, J. M. (1976). Excavaciones en Lezetxiki (1956–1968). In J. M. Barandiarań-Ayerbe (Ed.), Obras Completas de J. M. de Barandiarań, 13 and 14 (pp. 7–131; 323–333; 423–480). Bilbao: La Gran Enciclopedia Vasca. Barandiarań-Irizar, L. (1989). Cartas a Jose´ Miguel de Barandiarań (primera etapa 1915–1936). San Sebastiań: Caja de Ahorros Municipal de San Sebastiań. Barandiarań-Maestu, I. (1967). Paleomesolı´tico del Pirineo Occidental: Bases para la sistematizacioń tipolo´gica del instrumental o´seo paleolı´tico. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza. Barandiarań-Maestu, I. (1980). Las primeras formas de organizacioń del ha´bitat y del territorio en el Paı´s Vasco. In R. Basan˜ez (Ed.), El Ha´bitat en la Historia de Euskadi (pp. 11–27). Bilbao: Colegio de Arquitectos vasco Navarro. Barandiarań-Maestu, I. (1985). Harri-landu adinaren bilakaera kulturala Euskal Herrian: Paleolito eta Epipaleolito (Mesolito) aroak. In Euskal Herriaren Historiaz II: Historiaurrea (pp. 69–105). Bilbao: Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea. Barandiarań-Maestu, I. (1988). Prehistoria: Paleolı´tico, historia general de Euskalerria. San Sebastiań: Aunãmendi. Barandiarań-Maestu, I. (1997). El paleolı´tico y el epipaleolı´tico: Arqueologıá de Vasconia Peninsular. Isturitz, 7, 5–21. Basabe, J. M. (1966). El hu´mero premusteriense de Lezetxiki (Guipu´zcoa). Munibe, 17, 13–32. Beguiristain, M. A. (1975). Contribucioń al conocimiento del Paleolı´tico en Navarra: La Coleccioń Barandiarań de Coscobilo de Olazagutıá. In Congreso Nacional de Arqueologıá XIII (Vitoria) (pp. 119–124). Zaragoza: Secretarıá General de los Congresos Arqueolo´gicos Nacionales. Beguiristain, M. A. (1989). Dos nuevos bifaces de tipologıá Achelense en Tierra Estella (Navarra). In Congreso Nacional de Arqueologıá XIX (Zaragoza) (pp. 37–48). Zaragoza: Secretarıá General de los Congresos Arqueolo´gicos Nacionales. Beguiristain, M. A. (2000). Paleolı´tico Medio en Navarra. Nuevos datos para una sıńtesis. SPAL, 9, 209–224. Beguiristain, M. A., & Labeaga, J. C. (1993). Pieza de tipologıá abbevillense procedente del te´rmino de Viana (Navarra). Cuadenos de Arqueologia Universidad de Navarra, 1, 9–16. Beorlegi, M. (2005). Hallazgos de industria lı´tica del Paleolı´tico Antiguo en Ilarduia (A´ lava). Estudios de Arqueologıá Alavesa, 22, 37–50. Bourguignon, L., Djema, H., Bertran, P., Lahaye, C., & Guibert, P. (2008). Le gisement Saalien de Petit- Bost (Neuvic, Dordogne) a` l’origine du Mouste´rien d’Aquitaine? In J. Jaubert, J.-G. Bordes, & I. Ortega-Cordellat (Eds.), Les socie´te´s du Paleólithique dans un Grand Sud-Ouest de la France: Nouveaux gisements, nouveaux re´sultats, nouvelles me´thodes. Journeés SPF, Universite´ Bordeaux 1, Talence, 24–25 Novembre 2006 (pp. 44–55). Paris: Socie´te´ Pre´historique Française. Castanõs, P. (1988). Estudio de los restos de la cantera de Punta Lucero (Abanto y Cie´rvana, Bizkaia). Kobie (Paleoantropologıá), 17, 157–165. Castanõs, P., Murelaga, X., Arrizabalaga, A., & Iriarte-, M. J. (2011). First evidence of Macaca sylvanus (Primates, Cercopithecidae) from the Late Pleistocene of Lezetxiki II Cave (Basque Country, Spain). Journal of Human Evolution, 60, 816–820. Chauchat, C. (1993). La station pre´historique de plein air de Lestaulan, quartier de Maignon, a` Bayonne (Pyreńeés Atlantiques). Munibe (Antropologia–Arkeologia), 46, 3–22. Falgue`res, C., Yokoyama, A., & Arrizabalaga, A. (2005/2006). La Geocronologıá del yacimiento pleis- toceńico de Lezetxiki (Arrasate, Paı´s Vasco). Crı´tica de las dataciones existentes y algunas nuevas aportacione. Munibe (Antropologia–Arkeologia), 57, 93–106. Fernańdez-Eraso, J., Larreina, D., & Tarrinõ, A. (2004). El conjunto lı´tico de superficie de Itsetsasi en el embalse de Urruńaga (A´ lava). Estudios de Arqueologıá Alavesa, 21, 17–66. Fernańdez-Eraso, J., Tarrinõ, A., & Larreina, D. (2005). El conjunto lı´tico de Tribitu en el embalse de Urruńaga (A´ lava). Estudios de Arqueologıá Alavesa, 22, 69–122. Garcıá-Gazo´laz, J. (1994). Los primeros depredadores en Navarra: Estado de la cuestioń y nuevas apor- taciones. Cuadenos de Arqueologia Universidad de Navarra, 2, 7–48. Gonza´lez-Amucha´stegui, M. J. (2000). Evolucioń morfoclima´tica del Paı´s Vasco durante el Cuaternario: Estado de la cuestioń. Revista de Cuaternario y Geomorfologıá, 14, 79–99.

123 180 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181

Gonza´lez-Urquijo, J. E., Ibań˜ez-Este´vez, J. J., & Rios-Garaizar, J. (2008). Axlor. Arkeoikuska, 2007, 218–223. Gonza´lez-Urquijo, J. E., Ibań˜ez-Este´vez, J. J., Rios-Garaizar, J., Bourguignon, L., Castanõs, P., & Tarrinõ, A. (2005). Excavaciones recientes en. Axlor Movilidad y planificacioń de actividades en grupos de neandertales. In R. Montes-Barquıń & J. A. Lasheras (Eds.), Actas de la Reunioń cientı´fica: Nean- dertales Canta´bricos. Estado de la cuestioń (pp. 527–539). Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura. Iriarte-Avile´s, E., Cearreta, A., Rios-Garaizar, J., & Garate-Maidagan, D. (2006). Paleoambiente y procesos de formacioń de un depo´sito paleolı´tico al aire libre: El yacimiento arqueolo´gico de Mendieta I (Sopelana, Bizkaia). Geogaceta, 40, 215–218. Irigaray, S. (1992). Estudio del yacimiento de Matamala (Viana): los materiales paleolı´ticos y la industria holocena. In II8 Congreso General de Historia de Navarra (pp. 75–86). Pamplona: Principe de Viana. Lo´pez-Quintana, J. C., Castanõs, P., Guenaga, A., Murelaga, X., & Areso, P. (2005). La cueva de Atxagakoa (Forua, Bizkaia): Ocupacioń humana y guarida de carnı´voros durante el Musteriense en Urdaibai. Illunzar, 5, 11–24. Martıńez-Moreno, J. (2005). Una aproximacioń zooarqueolo´gica al estudio de los patrones de subsistencia del Paleolı´tico Medio Canta´brico. In R. Montes-Barquıń, & J. A. Lasheras (Eds.), Actas de la Reunioń cientı´fica: Neandertales Canta´bricos. Estado de la cuestioń. Monografıás del Museo Nacional y Centro de Investigacioń de Altamira n8 20 (pp. 209–230). Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura. Meńdez-Quintas, E., Santonja, M., & Pe´rez-Gonza´lez, A. (2008). O Paleolı´tico antigo na Penıńsula Ibe´rica. In E. Meńdez-Quintas (Ed.), Estudos sobre Paleolı´tico. Homenaxe a X. M, A´lvarez Bla´zquez (pp. 21–74). Gondomar: Instituto de Estudios Minõranos. Merino, A., Garcıá-Rodeja, E., & Ugarte, F. M. (1991). Suelos y paleosuelos de los sedimentos arenosos del Pleistoceno de Barrika (Bizkaia): Geńesis y clasificacioń. In A. Cearreta & F. M. Ugarte (Eds.), The Late Quaternary in the Western Pyrenean region (pp. 373–383). Bilbao: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad del Paı´s Vasco. Merino-Sanchez, J. M. (1986). Yacimiento de Cabo Higuer en el monte Jaizkibel (Fuenterrabıá). Munibe (Antropologia–Arkeologia), 38, 61–94. Moncel, M.-H., Moigne, A.-M., & Combier, J. (2005). Pre-Neandertal behaviour during isotopic stage 9 and the beginning of stage 8. New data concerning fauna and lithics in the different occupation levels of Orgnac 3 (Arde`che, southeast France): Occupation types. Journal of Archaeological Science, 32, 1283–1301. Montes-Barquıń, R. (2003). El primer poblamiento de la regioń canta´brica: El Paleolı´tico Inferior Cant- a´brico. Monografıás de Altamira 18. Montes-Ramirez, L. (1988). El Musteriense de la cuenca del Ebro. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza. Mourre, V., & Cologne, D. (2007). Et si l’Acheuleén me´ridional n’e´tait pas la` ou` on l’attendait? In Evin, J. (Ed.), Un sie`cle de construction du discours scientifique en Pre´histoire,3:Aux conceptions d’aujourd’hui. Actes du XXVIe Congre`s pre´historique de France, Avignon, Septembre 20–25, 2004 (pp. 63–78). Paris: Socie´te´ pre´historique française. Olarte, I. (2002). Deba-Errezil. Arkeoikuska, 2001, 150–151. Passemard, E. (1924). Les stations paleólithiques du Pays Basque et leurs relations avec les terrasses d’alluvions de la Nive. Bayonne: Bodiou. Rios-Garaizar, J. (2009). Variabilidad tecnolo´gica en el Paleolı´tico Medio de los Pirineos Occidentales: Una expresioń de las dina´micas histo´ricas de las sociedades neandertales. Treballs d’Arqueologia, 14, 172–195. Rios-Garaizar, J., Garate, D., Go´mez-Olivencia, A., Iriarte-Avile´s, E., Aranburu-Artano, A. Arceredillo- Alonso, A., et al. (2011). The Lower to Middle Palaeolithic transition in northern Iberia: New data from Arlanpe Cave. Antiquity, 85(329). Rios-Garaizar, J., Iriarte-Avile´s, E., Garate-Maidagań, D., Cearreta, A., & Iriarte-Chiapusso, M. J. (2008a). The Mendieta site (Sopelana, Biscay province, northern Spain): Palaeoenvironment and formation processes of a Lower Palaeolithic open-air archaeological deposit. Comptes Rendus Palevol, 7, 453–462. Rios-Garaizar, J., Iriarte-Avile´s, E., Go´mez-Olivencia, A., Garate-Maidagan, D., Marcos-Go´mez, Z., Regalado-Bueno, E., et al. (2008b). Cueva de Arlanpe (Lemoa). Arkeoikuska, 2007, 270–272. Rios-Garaizar, J., Iriarte-Avile´s, E., Go´mez-Olivencia, A., Garate-Maidagan, D., & Regalado-Bueno, E. (2007). Cueva de Arlanpe (Lemoa). Arkeoikuska, 2006, 145–148. Rodrı´guez-Alvarez, X. P. (2004). Technical systems of lithic production in the Lower and Middle Pleis- tocene of the Iberian Peninsula. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Rodriguez-Asensio, J. A. (2001). Yacimiento de Cabo Busto. Los orı´genes prehisto´ricos de Asturias. Luarca: Gran Enciclopedia Asturiana.

123 J World Prehist (2012) 25:157–181 181

Saénz de Buruaga, A. (2000). El Paleolı´tico Inferior y Medio en el paı´s Vasco: Sıńtesis de datos y algunas reflexiones. SPAL, 9, 49–68. Saénz de Buruaga, A., Fernańdez-Eraso, J., & Urigoitia, T. (1989). El conjunto industrial Achelense del embalse de Urrunaga (A´ lava). Zephyrus, 41–42, 27–54. Saénz de Buruaga, A., & Mujika, J. (2005). Cueva de Zarratu, en Astigarrabia (Mutriku). Arkeoikuska, 2004, 144–153. Saénz de Buruaga, A., Urigoitia, T., & Madinabeitia, J. A. (1994). Nuevos indicios industriales en cuarcita del Paleolı´tico antiguo en A´ lava. Veleia, 11, 23–33. Sańchez-Gon˜i, M. F. (1993). De la taphonomie pollinique a` la reconstitution de l’environnement: L’exemple de la re´gion cantabrique. Oxford: Archeopress. Tarrinõ, A. (2003). La piedra como materia prima en la Prehistoria. In Manos a la Piedra. Las herramientas de la Prehistoria (pp. 17–30). Bilbao: Museo Vasco. Tarrinõ, A. (2006). El sı´lex en la cuenca Vasco-Canta´brica y Pirineó Navarro. Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura. Thibault, C. (1976a). Les civilisations du paleólithique inferieur dans le sud ouest (Pays Basque, Landes, Gironde). In H. De Lumley (Ed.), La pre´histoire française (Vol. 1, pp. 905–908). Paris: CNRS. Thibault, C. (1976b). Les civilisations du Paleólithique moyen du sud-ouest (Pays Basque et Beárn, Landes, Gironde). In H. De Lumley (Ed.), La pre´histoire française (Vol. 1, pp. 1048–1052). Paris: CNRS. Torres, T., & Ortı´z, J. E. (2006). Datacioń por racemizacioń de aminoaćidos del yacimiento de Equus caballus eaensis Torres 1970 de la rıá de Ea (Vizcaya). Sautuola, 12, 333–337. Vallespı´, E. (1971). Novedades del Paleolı´tico inferior y medio vascos: los yacimientos navarros de Urbasa y Olazagutıá. In Actas I Seminario Antropologıá Vasca (pp. 565–579). Bilbao. Vallespı´, E. (1975). Achelense final y Musteriense en el alto valle del Ebro. In Miscelańea Arqueolo´gica dedicada al Prof. Antonio Beltrań (pp. 1–27). Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza.

123