A Critical Review of the Middle Paleolithic in Western Central Europe from Its Beginnings to Its Rapid Decline

Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e22

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint

Leave at the height of the party: A critical review of the Middle Paleolithic in Western Central Europe from its beginnings to its rapid decline

Jürgen Richter

Institute of Prehistoric Archaeology, University of Cologne, Weyertal 125, 50923 Koln,€ Germany article info abstract

Article history: The German Middle Paleolithic is marked by two stages with abundant archaeological sites: The Eemian Available online xxx Interglacial (MIS 5e) and the Weichselian Interpleniglacial (MIS 3). On the other hand, several stages were seemingly void of any human population (the second half of MIS 6 and MIS 4) and two long periods Keywords: (MIS 8-6 and MIS 5d-5a) delivered very few archaeological sites, so far. The majority of all assemblages Middle Paleolithic Archeology seem to belong to the latest part of the Middle Paleolithic, during the ﬁrst half of MIS 3. Concerning this Paleolithic typology and technology period, the layer G stratigraphic complex (“G-Komplex”) of Sesselfelsgrotte yielded the longest cultural Holsteinian Interglacial sequence of late Middle Paleolithic unifacial-plus-bifacial industries (Keilmessergruppen, Micoquian in Saalian Glacial “ ” Eemian Interglacial the sense of a Mousterian with a Micoquian option , MMO) in Central Europe. Information from this sequence permitted a reconsideration of the internal structure and the dating of the MMO. Evidence is presented for an earlier MMO stage with almost no Levallois technology (MMO-A) and a later stage (MMO-B) with Levallois technology, both occurring at the very end of the European Middle Paleolithic, between 60,000 and 43,000 (cal.) B.P. The vast majority of all Middle Paleolithic sites in Germany belong to the MMO-B which was, in Southern Germany, rapidly followed by the Upper Paleolithic Aurignacian from 42 ka (cal.) B.P. onwards without any Proto-Aurignacian interlude. © 2016 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. This is an open access article under the CC BY- NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction allowing for human occupation with long gaps in between (Table 1). For a long time, the Central European Middle Paleolithic The next decade saw an extension of the typological approach appeared as a confused period in the history of mankind which was including all Middle Paleolithic assemblages of Germany (Bosinski, difficult to split up into temporal and regional cultural units. In the 1967). In his dissertation, Bosinski compiled a type list which he middle of the 20th century, three different cultural units had been subsequently applied to each assemblage resulting into four For- identified, the Mousterian, the Levalloisian and the Micoquian, but mengruppen (morphological groupings): Jungacheuleen, Micoquien, chronological separation of these units remained impossible (Zotz, Altmühlgruppe, “Mousterien” (in quotation marks because the term 1951, 277). was used in the sense of a more strictly defined variant of the In his attempt to separate chronological units during the 1950s, Middle Paleolithic as set up by Bosinski, 1967, 64). The extensive Müller-Beck underlined the effects of dramatic environmental catalogue section with ample illustrations made this work the changes (Müller-Beck, 1956) which, according to him, must have broadest overview whenever information about the Middle caused gaps in human occupation and resulted in discontinuity of Paleolithic typological variability is needed. On the other hand, the the cultural record. In his analysis of the southern German Middle notion turned out as too optimistic that the Formengruppen would Paleolithic assemblages, he applied a standardized typological be units in time and space defined by non-functional differences system (including tools and blanks) resulting into a descriptive (Bosinski, 1967, 84) e of the same “cultural” nature as the Leitfor- overview and a chronological scheme with five distinct “occupa- men (indicative types) used by Oscar Montelius to set up his Bronze tions”. These were to be understood as separate time windows Age periods. Consequently, much of the technical and typological characteristics of the assemblages available have since been E-mail address: [email protected]. confirmed, but their attribution to spatial-temporal units had http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.01.018 1040-6182/© 2016 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by- nc-nd/4.0/).

Table 1 Chronological overview of the German Middle Paleolithic. Stratiﬁed assemblages and important fossil-bearing sites (in capitals).

seemingly been premature in many cases. The German Junga- (Schafer,€ 1993) and by the chaine operatoire approach (Bourgignon, cheuleen has since turned out as containing both MIS 6 or MIS 8 1992; Richter, 1997; Joris,€ 2001; Pastoors, 2001). All these ap- (Markkleeberg: Schafer€ et al., 2003)alongwithMIS3assem- proaches led to better understanding the importance of functional blages (Lebenstedt: Pastoors, 2001), the German “Mousterien” variability and of production and reduction sequences, all influ- occurs in both MIS 8/7 (Ariendorf: Turner, 1997; Rheindahlen: encing the present occurrence of a given assemblage. At the present Schirmer, 2002) and MIS 3 (Kartstein: Bosinski and Richter, moment of research, formal metamorphosis of artifacts (Fig. 5) 1997; Balve IV: Joris,€ 1992), and at Kartstein III and Balve IV virtually appears as the principal idea of the Neanderthal's tech- the “Mousterien” occurrences combined with Micoquian/Keil- nological paradigms compared to more stable tool concepts among messergruppen and Altmuehlian attributes (see Richter, 1997). Upper Paleolithic humans. New excavations and especially radiometric dating of ice ad- Recent excavations have underlined such intra-site variation vances, volcanic events, soil formation and loess accumulation thus provoking the general impression that previous research has phases, along with the improvement of the radiocarbon record dramatically underestimated small-scale complexity (annual cy- led to independent geo-scientific dating of many archeological cles, mobility cycles, functional cycles, intra-group, intra-site, and assemblages. These dates have since contradicted many tem- even intra-tool-class variation) and over-interpreted large-scale poral attributions based alone on the hypothetic rule of “simi- variation: the notion turned out to be wrong that all of the observed larity equaling contemporaneity”. variations would be due to distinctiveness in time and space Moreover, typological and technological analysis have since (Richter, 2014). been refined by the introduction of statistically supported multi- The vast majority of Middle Paleolithic finds from Germany attribute surveys of the central European Middle Paleolithic come from surface collections, and stratigraphical contexts are

Early Middle Paleolithic (EMPal; MIS 8-6) Eemian Interglacial Middle Paleolithic (EemMPal; MIS 5e) Weichselian Early Glacial Middle Paleolithic (WegMPal; MIS 5d-a) Late Middle Paleolithic (LMPal; MIS 3)

2. The early Middle Paleolithic (EMPal; MIS 8-6)

2.1. Chronological and paleoclimatic overview

The following overview is based on the notion that the Middle Paleolithic in Germany begun after the end of the Holstein Interglacial, now dated to around 300,000 B.P. (for archeological consequences see: Richter, 2011). This implies a MIS 9 age of the Holstein Interglacial according to the corrected dates of the Holsteinian paleobotanical reference site at Bossel, near Hamburg in Northern Germany, proving the particular “Holstein” vegetational sequence to be around 330e310 ka old, thus coin- ciding with MIS 9 (Geyh and Müller, 2005)andnotwithMIS11 as previously thought. The new chronological evidence is currently mostly accepted in Central Europe but widely unknown or neglected in Western Europe (Gibbard and Cohen, 2011). In their comprehensive review Litt et al. have put the correction of the age of the Holsteinian Interglacial into a larger context (Litt et al., 2007) along with corrections of the age of the Saalian Glacial now appearing to have reached its major extensions around 150 ka (Drenthe ice advance) and 140 ka (Warthe ice advance), i.e. both major Saalian ice advances occurred during MIS 6 based on radiometric dates from glacial sediments (Litt et al., 2007). The lowermost glacial series following the Hol- steinian Interglacial has been identified as the Fuhne glaciation in central Germany, tentatively attributed to MIS 8 by its stratigraphic position between the Elsterian and Saalian (sensu stricto) glacial deposits. The Fuhne and Saale glaciations are since referred to as the “Saale-Complex” or “Saalian sensu lato” (Litt et al., 2007). In the Middle Rhine area, Loess accumulation is attested for MIS 8 preceding the stratigraphic marker horizon of the Wehr Tephra (dated to 220,000 B.P.; cf. Richter, 2011). Soil formation in the Lower Rhine Loess record document the following Interglacial period which would be contemporaneous with MIS 7. It is currently best attested in the triple soil complex (Schirmer, 2002) from the Lower Fig. 1. Early Middle Paleolithic sites in Germany (290,000e121,000 B.P.). The blue lines Rhine Loess sequences comprising the Wickrath soil (MIS 7e or 7.5), indicate the maximum extension of the Saalian ice sheets around 150,000 B.P. when the Rheindahlen soil (MIS 7c or 7.3) and the Erkelenz soil (MIS 7a or Central Europe was probably void of human occupation (MIS 8-6; for site references fi 7.1; Uthmeier et al., 2011; Schirmer, 2002). The correlation of the see Appendix 1). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this gure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) Lower Rhine Loess sections is supported by micropedological evidence (Ikinger, 2002) whereas the TL-dates (between 77 and 163 ka) must be regarded as minimum estimations. Moreover, as a 2.2. Archeological dataset terminus ante quem, the Jamaica paleomagnetic event (c. 190,000 B.P.) has been located on top of the triple soil sequence The Holsteinian type sequence displays the most favorable (Cofflet, 2005). interglacial environmental context during the Middle Pleistocene. In southern Germany, the Meikirch peat record, with its three Bilzingsleben (Central Germany), with its late Homo hei- vegetation peaks, also mirrors the threefold structure of MIS 7 delbergensis fossils, and the archaeological assemblages from the (Preusser et al., 2005). In Central Germany, the Schoningen€ Inter- lower horizons of Schoningen€ (Litt et al., 2007; Thieme, 2007; glacial, the Wacken Interglacial and the Domnitz€ Interglacial peat Voormolen, 2008; Serangeli and Bohner,€ 2012) date to the Hol- deposits all belong probably to MIS 7, the Schoningen€ paleobotanical steinian period. All over Europe, Holsteinian and/or MIS 9 assem- Interglacial not to be confused with the much older archaeological blages seem to belong to the Lower Paleolithic, characterized by sites of Schoningen€ 12B (“Klemmschafte€ ”) and Schoningen€ 13-II-4 Acheulean handaxes or/and simple flake technologies (“Clacto- (spears) dated to MIS 9 (Thieme, 1999; Serangeli and Bohner,€ 2012; nian”) in Western Europe and by simple flake technologies Serangeli and Conard, 2015). (“Clactonian”) in Central Europe. On the other hand, single Middle

Fig. 2. Eemian Middle Paleolithic sites in Germany (121,00e110,00 B.P.). The map Fig. 3. Early Weichselian Middle Paleolithic sites in Germany (110,000e70,000 B.P.) shows the present land surface (MIS 5e; for site references see Appendix 2). The map shows the minimal number of reliably dated sites (MIS 5d-MIS 5a; for site references see Appendix 3). Paleolithic attributes such as Mousterian tool forms have sometimes been observed in these assemblages (Serangeli and Bohner,€ and Frank, 2002, but see critique by Schafer,€ 2007 arguing for a 2012) which needs future consideration. MIS 5 attribution). In Europe, the earliest truly Middle Paleolithic assemblages, In the Middle Rhine area, the most important Early Middle dominated by the Levallois concept, seem to occur during MIS 8, Paleolithic stratigraphy comes from the Ariendorf gravel pit the cold phase after the MIS 9 interglacial. The climatic deteriora- (Bosinski et al., 1983; Turner, 1997) e most important because of its tion of MIS 8 has been identified with the Fuhne glaciation, newly relation with Tephra chronology. Here, 150 m2 of the Ariendorf 1 defined by Eissmann (1994) as the major glaciation preceding the site were excavated in 1982/1983 from the lowest level of Loess LD Saale sensu stricto (Drenthe and Warthe) glaciation which is now I. Ariendorf 1 has been dated to MIS 8, because the site must be argued to be of MIS 6 age (see above; Litt et al., 2007). older than the overlying soil horizon, followed by another Loess Only very few stratified sites are available for the Early Middle layer (LD II) and by the “Wehrer Kessel” tephra layer (ARI-BT1) Paleolithic before the maximum extension of the continental ice dated to around 220 ka. Around 250 ka (MIS 8; Bosinski and Richter, sheet at 150,000 B.P. Two different kinds of archives play an 1997: 10), humans were present at the site situated close to a small important role in preserving EMPal assemblages: Moraine contexts brook. One hundred and twenty-six stone artifacts have been and Loess contexts. The occurrence of travertine assemblages is found, made of quartz, quartzite and lydite coming from river seemingly restricted to the MIS 9 and MIS 5e interglacials, and gravels. Refitted artifacts not only demonstrate core reduction at claims for MIS 7 interglacial travertine occurrences remain the site, but at the same time point to an in situ preservation of the ambiguous (f.e. Ehringsdorf with MIS 7 radiometric data: Mallick assemblage that includes prepared cores of Levallois character.

Fig. 4. Late Middle Paleolithic sites in Germany (70,000e43,000 cal. B.P.) The blue lines indicate the maximum extension of the Weichselian ice sheets around 20,000 B.P. (MIS 2) to illustrate possible ice extension as expected during MIS 4 (70,000e60,000 B.P.) when Central Europe was mostly void of human occupation. The site distribution displays all sites tentatively attributed to the MMO on stratigraphical, typological and/or technological grounds (MIS 3; for site references see Appendix 4). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this ﬁgure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Scrapers and denticulated pieces were found among the retouched claims for a Weichselian age of the upper part of the sequence have tools, and horse, mammoth, woolly rhino, red deer, bovid and wolf clearly been disapproved. were among the faunal remains. The 1982 excavations uncovered a According to radiometric ages from Loess sequences, the second, younger archeological site (above the “Wehrer Kessel” mentioned Tonchesberg€ 1A, Ariendorf 2, Schweinskopf and Wan- tephra) within the MIS 6 Loess of the Ariendorf sequence. Only one nen belong to the subsequent MIS 6, all assemblages displaying retouched tool was found among 37 stone artifacts, comprising nothing else than conventional Mousterian assemblages, some- some cores, but mostly flakes made of lydite, quartz and quartzite times along with a mammoth steppe fauna. Most interestingly, along with bones of mammoth, woolly rhino, horse, red deer, bovid some tools were made of Maas flint, thus indicating mobility ranges and wolf. The find scatter has formerly been interpreted as a of more than 100 km (Bosinski and Richter, 1997, 14). dwelling structure, but has since been demonstrated to be a natural pit which may have attracted human activities (Turner, 1997). 2.3. Anthropological remains The largest group of the EMPal comprises of all sites which are stratigraphically underlying the Saalian glaciation covering the A skull fragment of a Neanderthal found in 1997 in Ochtendung North-German Lowlands and the northern fringes of the central and dating to MIS 6 occurs currently as the only Pre-Eemian Middle mountains (Fig. 1; Drenthe and Warthe ice advances, both be- Paleolithic human remnant (Van Berg et al., 2000). Other anthro- tween 150 and 140,000 years ago: Litt et al., 2007). These are pological remains were previously or occasionally correlated with mostly single finds and small assemblages, except Markkleeberg this MIS 8-6 time period but their age has been revised, such as (Leipzig) with its thousands of artifacts found so far (see Schafer€ Steinheim (now generally attributed to MIS 9, see Ziegler, 2012,in et al., 2003). Here, the Middle Paleolithic archeological horizon is accordance with the original attribution given by Adam, 1954) and securely stratified, underlying the Drenthe gravels, which previ- Hunas (now again attributed to MIS 5e; Reisch, 2014) or they ously gave reason to date the archeological find horizon to early remain debatable (Ehringsdorf: MIS 7 or MIS 5e; Schafer,€ 2007). MIS 8, but might now be either MIS 8 or as young as MIS 6 (after reconsideration of the age of the Drenthe main ice advance of the 2.4. Synthesis Saalian, 150,000 B.P.). The Markkleeberg assemblage combines bifacial tools (handaxes and bifacial scrapers) with highly devel- Correlations between the principal archives (Moraine and Loess) oped Levallois products of various kinds (Mania, 1997). Moreover, are hypothetical and rely mostly on radiometric dating and on a the site monograph (Baumann and Mania, 1983) displayed network of environmental indicators connected with the artifacts. laminar production with volumetric blade cores as one major Consequently, all essays remain premature guesswork and specu- component of the Markkleeberg assemblage thus clearly com- lation to subdivide the MIS 8-6 time range into different cultural plementing the Levallois component. Surprisingly, the Mark- units or phases (Fig. 1). The Jungacheuleen of Markkleeberg, usually kleeberg laminar industry has widely been neglected by seen as the dawn of EMPal, may well be younger than the Mous- subsequent research. terian of Ariendorf and the Rheindahlen sequence with all its A couple of assemblages add to this record which come from techno-typological variability is probably representing a time span Loess sequences (MIS 8-6) in the Middle and Lower Rhine area, (MIS 7) much shorter and earlier than previously thought. At the such as Rheindahlen and Tonchesberg,€ Schweinskopf and Wannen end of the early Middle Paleolithic, from the time of the Saalian (Fig. 1). The traditional way of counting back the interglacial soils (sensu stricto) ice advance to the onset of the Eemian Interglacial represented in one Loess sequence came to an end when double (150,000 to 121,000 B.P.) most of what is now Germany was and triple interglacial soil formations were recognized which probably void of any human occupation. belong to one and the same interglacial (MIS 7). This was observed in the Rheindahlen Loess sequence which is 3. Eemian Middle Paleolithic (MIS 5e) also mirrored in the neighbouring (non-archaeological) Frimmersdorf-West and Erkelenz sequences (Schirmer, 2002, 3.1. Chronological and paleoclimatic overview 31e47). It turns out that three subsequent Loess and soil formations do not represent one separate full glacial/interglacial cycle each (as The last interglacial or Eemian Interglacial, from 121,000 to proposed by Bosinski et al., 1966 and repeated by Klostermann and 110,000 B.P. (Brewer et al., 2008; Sier et al., 2015), saw warm and Thissen, 1995). By contrast, they belong to (triple) interglacial MIS humid climatic conditions in Europe similar to those of the present 7: the Wickrath soil (MIS 7.5; underlying find horizon C1including time, or even a little more favourable (overview: Van Kolfschoten some non-diagnostic artifacts, formerly classified as Lower Paleo- and Gibbard, 2000). Thus, archaeological sites from the last inter- lithic), followed by the Rheindahlen soil (MIS 7.3; underlying find glacial (Fig. 2) offer the opportunity to observe the behaviour of horizon B4/5, some kind of Middle Paleolithic, and B3, the so-called Middle Paleolithic humans under similar climatic conditions and in, Ferrassie type Middle Paleolithic), followed by the Erkelenz soil potentially, comparable environments as they prevail today. (MIS 7.1; including find complex B2 and find horizon B1, the so- Eemian archaeological sites are not very numerous in Europe called laminar Middle Paleolithic). The Loess layer following up- except its central part including Germany, southern Poland, Czechia wards is now attributed to MIS 6 and the uppermost soil (the so- and Slovakia which together display more sites than the whole rest called 1st Bt) might possibly represent a mixture of Eemian and of Europe. A comprehensive study lists 30 sites for all of Central Holocene components (overview: Ikinger, 2002, 82 and 90). The Europe (Wenzel, 1998, 3; see also; Richter, 2005). Belgium, France revised Lower Rhine chronology is also supported by micro- and Spain display a comparably small number of sites (cf. Monnier pedological and paleomagnetic evidence (see 2.2 above). To sum- et al., 2002; Locht et al., 2014), and human traces dated to the last marize: Whereas the soil sequence had previously been dated by interglacial from the British Isles are completely lacking (Lewis counting back the soil formations (last soil e MIS 5e, second-last et al., 2011). Very few sites in Eastern Europe are tentatively soil e MIS 7, third-last soil e MIS 9), it now appears to represent attributed to the Eemian, most of the claimed Eemian ages still a much shorter period from MIS 8 to MIS 5e, the Rheindahlen B3 being highly questionable (Chabai et al., 2004, 425). On the other assemblage of Mousterian-Ferrassie type dating to the middle MIS hand, Eemian human occupation might have stretched as far east as 7 interglacial and the Rheindahlen B1 Middle Paleolithic blade Siberia, as finds from the Yenisei area indicate (Chlachula et al., assemblage to the last warm phase of MIS 7 (Ikinger, 2002). Former 2003).

Given the short duration of the Eemian, of only 11,000 years or in the swamp, remains open to discussion. It was certainly butch- 0.5% of the Quaternary (see Sier et al., 2015) there are still more ered, as is equally attested for an elephant skeleton found at sites than one might expect, especially in Central Germany and in Grobern,€ again at a lake-side, and again along with 27 artifacts of Slovakia, where many travertine sites with excellent preservation Levallois production (Wenzel, 1998, 202; Mania et al., 1990; Mania, of organic matter concentrate. Eemian archaeological sites are 2000). The nearby Neumark-Nord sites NN1 and NN2, formerly mostly preserved in travertines, and more rarely in lake basins, dated to MIS 7 and now dated to the Corylus phase (Eemian 4a) of fluvial and beach deposits, volcanic deposits and, very rarely, in the first half of the Eemian Interglacial (Bottger€ et al., 2004; caves (Wenzel, 1998, 3). Gaudzinski-Windheuser et al., 2013; Gaudzinski and Roebroeks, 121,000 years ago, climatic amelioration came very rapidly. 2014), yielded several in-situ butchery zones. Elephant (Palae- Whereas the Greenland GRIP ice core would appear to indicate oloxodon antiquus), forest rhino (Dicerorhinus kirchbergensis) and short, cold interruptions in the interglacial climate, the terrestrial aurochs (Bos primigenius) were exploited by humans, and abundant pollen record from more than 100 localities in northern Central stone artifacts from discoid and Levallois concepts were found Europe argues for relatively stable climatic conditions during the along with their bones (Mania, 2000, 27). Lehringen, Grobern€ and last interglacial (Kühl and Litt, 2003). Neumark-Nord all have a similar ecological setting in common, A simultaneous drop in steppe landscapes and a rise in forested with butchery of megafauna in the vicinity of small lakes (f.e. landscapes characterized the vegetation of Central Europe at the Gaudzinski-Windheuser and Roebroeks, 2011). beginning of the Eemian Interglacial. When the Eemian period Another important group of interglacial sites occurs near began at about 121,000 B.P., the polar ice caps had already reached springs, and travertine deposits have usually led to a good con- their minimum extension, as such contrasting the situation in the servation of the embedded archeological remnants. Several sites in early Holocene. Birches dominated (pollen stage E1), followed by northern Germany (Veltheim-Steinmühle), central Germany (Tau- pine-birch (pollen stage E2), pine-oak-mixed forest (pollen stage bach, Burgtonna), southwest Germany (Stuttgart), and Slovakia E3), oak-mixed forest-hazel (pollen stage E4a) and hazel-yew- (Ganovce, Horka-Ondrej etc.) belong to this group. All these belong linden tree (pollen stage E4b), stage E4 representing the climatic e together with the lake-side group e to the first half of the Eemian optimum in Central Europe, when the Helicigona banatica mollusc (Fig. 2). At Taubach, the age profile of forest rhino and bear con- fauna appeared north of the Alps. The intermediate part of the nected with abundant cut-marks attest the hunting or trapping of interglacial displays a dominance of hornbeam (pollen stage E5), these dangerous animals. The minimum count of individuals at followed, during the second half of the interglacial, by hornbeam- Taubach was 76 rhinos and 52 bears (Wenzel, 1998, 231). spruce (pollen stage E6a), pine-fir-spruce (pollen stage 6b) and Less spectacular, but perhaps more important as a daily source finally pine forest (pollen stage E7; Zagwijn, 1961; Zagwijn and of meat, were cervidae, such as red deer and bovids such as Pape, 1968; Kühl and Litt, 2003). aurochs. Red deer served as primary hunting prey in Eemian Correlations between the deep sea chronology and terrestric southern France (Boyle, 1998) and were possibly exploited at records have shown that the Eemian vegetational stage appeared Rabutz (along with rhino and aurochs), and certainly at Stuttgart- with an offset of some 10 ka compared with the base of MIS 5e Untertürkheim. Red deer hunting continued into the earliest (Shackleton et al., 2003, 155) and survived into marine isotope Weichselian (MIS 5d) at Tonchesberg€ 2B (Conard, 1992; Wenzel, stage 5d (MIS 5d; Sier et al., 2015) at the same time as substantial 1998, 232; see below). continental ice was accumulating in North America. Therefore, the Possibly indicative of plant diets (Wenzel, 1998, 230) are burnt following overview includes all archaeological assemblages from nuts (Corylus avellana) from Rabutz, and the burnt fruits of the the middle of MIS 5e to the onset of MIS 5d. linden tree (Tilia) and burnt fruits from Kornel cherry (Cornus mas) from Ehringsdorf. Some of the travertine (f.e. Taubach) lake-side 3.2. Archeological dataset: human adaption during the interglacial places (f.e. Lehringen; Uthmeier, 2006) delivered fish remnants, but human exploitation is not proved. Because dense forests tend to offer less vegetation accessible for Only few assemblages come from caves in southern and central ungulates operating from the ground, the carrying capacity for Germany: The collapsed limestone cave of Hunas in Bavaria yielded a ungulate biomass might have been much lower in densely forested long sequence of almost 7 m with small stone artefact assemblages of landscapes than in open landscapes. As a result, the large herds of Mousterian or Charentian character. Faunal remains from more than steppe animals like mammoth, wholly rhino, reindeer and horse 130 species including abundant Rhino and bear remains. The site is disappear where interglacial forests prevail. If ungulate hunting famous for its Neanderthal tooth and a Macaca tooth, both unique for prey decreased during the Eemian, a parallel decrease of human Bavaria. Erroneous U/Th dates from the base of the sequence pro- population might be inferred. Population density of paleolithic voked a misleading age model (Rosendahl et al., 2011) which has humans, however, might have been so low, in relation to ungulate recently been revised, now again arguing for an MIS 5e (Eemian) age biomass, that a possible decrease in available prey might not have for most of the sequence (Reisch, 2014). At Vogelherd cave, the small had any effect on human nutrition. Aurochs and red deer were well “Hohlensohle€ ” assemblage is equally attributed to the Eemian. adapted to woodlands and required hunting strategies focused on multi-species exploitation of single animals of relatively moderate 3.3. Archeological dataset: stone artifacts mobility. Moreover, forest elephant and forest rhino kept large areas free of dense forests and facilitated grazing by other species As for a large part of all Middle Paleolithic archaeology, stone such as horse and giant deer. artifacts are not specific, and it is impossible to attribute any Most surprisingly, humans often exploited elephant and rhino, assemblage to the Eemian period only by typological argument. The as many archaeological sites show (Richter, 2005). It is not clear recurrent centripetal Levallois method is often applied (Untertür- weather elephants were hunted or trapped or just scavenged. At kheim, Lehringen, Rabutz, Taubach), sometimes perhaps the the famous site of Lehringen in Germany, an elephant skeleton was discoid concept (Veltheim-Steinmühle; Wallertheim A: Adler et al., buried at a lake-side together with a 2.4 m long wooden lance and 2003; Adler and Conard 1997), but never the Quina concept of flake 27 stone artifacts of Levallois character (Wenzel, 1998, 194; production. Uthmeier, 2006). Whether humans really hunted elephant, or just In most sites, humans produced all tools on simple blanks, happened to kill this particular animal which had become trapped bifacial technology (surface shaping of tools) is rare. Bifacial tools

Please cite this article in press as: Richter, J., Leave at the height of the party: A critical review of the Middle Paleolithic in Western Central Europe from its beginnings to its rapid decline, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.01.018 8 J. Richter / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e22 occur only in small numbers. Scrapers are common, points are and there is no way to classify any assemblage to the Eemian sometimes present, and notched/denticulated pieces are some- period only by significant attributes. In this sense, the use of cul- times abundant. Generally, denticulate artifact assemblages tend to tural terms as the “Taubachian” is misleading and should be de- occur under mild and temperate climatic conditions (in France nied. The following terms are designed to express the priority of during MIS 5 and 3; see Rolland, 2001, 558) and are connected with the environmental record in classifying Eemian Middle Paleolithic the processing of wood and plants, and possibly bone. Rolland also sites: suggests profligate raw material exploitation with opportunistic, less selective procurement, mostly from local sources. - The Early to mid-Eemian Archeological Stage (E1 to E5) has Presumably, all mentioned factors, and particularly function and been found at lakeside localities and in travertine contexts. opportunistic procurement, evoked a general perception of Eemian During this stage, exploitation (mostly scavenging) of assemblages as small-scale scraper and denticulate industries, Megafauna played an important role, with a special focus on derived from “microlithic” flake production, which were then rhino and elephant, and possibly bear. Single carcass sites labelled “Taubachian” and consequently misunderstood as rem- were common (Gaudzinski-Windheuser and Roebroeks, nants of a common cultural entity (cf. Schafer,€ 1993, 83 and; 2014). Artifact assemblages mirror the fond commun of the Moncel, 2001). The “Taubachian” was since controversially Mousterian with scrapers and denticulated tools, rare bifacial debated, and it turned out that Taubach itself did not display all of tools, the toolkit mostly realized on blanks from Levallois the required attributes. K. Valoch applied the term to the Kulna, concepts of production. Sometimes, the tool edges are layer 11 assemblage (Valoch, 1988) that is very close to Sesselfels- intensively used and reduced. At the end of this phase, dur- grotte U-A08 and U-A09 (Weißmüller, 1995, 225). Kulna, layer 11 ing the Carpinus stage (E5) the megafauna species of rhino dates to the very end of the Eemian or to the earliest Weichselian, and elephant were probably extinct in the central European and the lower layers of Sesselfelsgrotte date to the beginning of the region. Weichselian (cf. Richter, 2006a, 129). - The late Eemian Archeological Stage (E6 to E7; stretching into As a characteristic feature, dimensions of “Taubachian” cores are from late MIS 5e into stage MIS 5d) saw rhino and elephant sometimes very small and the length of flakes averages at only having disappeared from the landscape, and woodland un- 2e3cm(Weißmüller, 1995, 225). This applies not for Taubach and gulates such as red deer and aurochs now dominating among Weimar-Belvederer Allee, which had originally given reason to coin the hunting prey. The toolkit resembles again the Mousterian the term. It is now clear that the latter retained small sizes of ar- fond commun and, again, tools are mostly realized on Levallois tifacts only by secondary modification or reduction, not by pro- blanks. By contrast to the previous stage, blank and core sizes duction of “microlithic” blanks. Consequently, Weißmüller has are generally smaller. Stone artefact production was carried out classified Kulna 11 and Sesselfelsgrotte U-A08/U-A07 as “primary on small raw pieces giving the assemblages a “microlithic microlithic” and Taubach and Weimar-Belvederer Allee as “sec- character”. ondary microlithic”, and therefore as a result of reduction of usual Levallois assemblages. As Taubach and Weimar-Belvederer Allee 4. The early Weichselian Middle Paleolithic are earlier within the Eemian, we may propose that “usual Leval- lois” assemblages prevailed in the first half of MIS 5e, whereas 4.1. Chronological and paleoclimatic overview “Taubachian” attributes tend to occur somewhat later. As a caveat, one should not take mentioned vague technological tendencies as The time span (110,000 to 70,000) between the MIS 5e Inter- properties of cultural entities. “Taubachian” attributes can occur glacial and the MIS 4 first glacial maximum of the Weichselian everywhere in the Middle Paleolithic, with a tendency to concen- Glacial comprises of two cold phases (MIS 5d and MIS 5b) and two trate in the late Eemian and early Weichselian (see below). warm phases (MIS 5c and MIS 5a) according to the marine isotope Bifacial production was generally existent, but uncommon chronology. The warm phases have been conventionally correlated during the Eemian. Only some small bifacial tools come from with the Brorup€ and Odderade vegetational units (Behre and Van Stuttgart-Untertürkheim (Wenzel, 1998, Fig. 20.1), Wallertheim B1 der Plicht, 1992), both interpreted as interstadial occurrences and (Gaudzinski, 1992, 288) and from a later stage, from Kulna, layer 11. both characterized by pine forests extending from the Alps in the A large bifacial scraper from Burgtonna (Wenzel, 1998, Fig. 78) is south to the atlantic coast in the North. According to their strati- exceptional. Another possible example, Inden-Altdorf (Pawlik and graphic position and their estimated duration (well-documented at Thissen, 2011) must await further stratigraphic evaluation. several geological sites; Behre and Van der Plicht, 1992), the Brorup€ vegetational unit would best correlate with GI 23/22 3.4. Human remains (103e88 ka B.P.; Rasmussen et al., 2014) and the Odderade with GI 21 (85e78 ka B.P.; Rasmussen et al., 2014). Within Loess sequences Neanderthal remains have been uncovered from Taubach of Western Central Europe, the Mosbach humic zones would (12e14 years old child) and a single tooth from Hunas. If Ehrings- represent the same interstadials (Kühl and Litt, 2003). The dorf belongs to the Eemian period this would add another promi- Greenland Ice cores display two more Interstadial phases (GI 20 nent Neanderthal fossil (Schafer,€ 2007). and GI 19) predating the temperature minimum of the first glacial maximum (GS 18e19, c. 70e60 ka B.P., during MIS 4). At the present 3.5. Synthesis moment, in Central Europe there is no continental analogue available for GI 20 and GI 19 which might have been short term According to abundant plant and faunal remains preserved in events of only regional importance (for a contrasting opinion see many Eemian sites, the Eemian Middle Paleolithic subdivides into Joris,€ 2003). two phases. These phases are derived from the comparison of the botanical contents of important archaeological sites with the standard paleobotanical sequence of the Eemian. Within the two 4.2. Archeological data phases, tendencies are clearly visible in artifact morphology, settlement patterns and faunal remains. By contrast, none of the Early Weichselian archeological assemblages come from the typological or technological attributes are exclusive to the Eemian, Middle Rhine area, from Bavaria and from Central Germany.

4.2.1. Western and central Germany non-Levallois blades occur together with steeply retouched points The Tonchesberg€ 2B site was found in a humus layer within a reminding the blade and backed point component of Tonchesberg€ Loess sequence on top of a middle Rhine volcano, the Loess accu- 2B (Conard, 1992, 233). The occurrence of burin spalls in Waller- mulation phase radiometrically dated to around 110,000 B.P. and theim D parallels the broadly contemporaneous “microlithic” thus, with all three local humus zones included, belonging to the Levallois assemblages of Sesselfelsgrotte U-A08 and U-A07 where onset of the Weichselian Glacial (MIS 5d; Schmidt et al., 2011) burins are also common (see below). corresponding to GI 25 or/and GI 24 (Rasmussen et al., 2014). The In sum, the lower horizons (Wallertheim A and B) belong faunal remains, with exploitation of two horses along with three probably to the Eemian Interglacial, and the superimposed layers red deer, attest for a steppe and forest environment (see Conard, (Wallertheim C, B, D, E, F) to an unknown period at the onset of the 1992 with previous chronological estimates). Weichselian Glacial (MIS 5d or 5c or later). At Tonchesberg€ 2B, excavation yielded some small blades along In Central Germany, the Neumark-Nord 2/0 site is also best with backed points, which seemed to be unique for the time and placed within the same time span, with its cervid, equid and bison provoked, during the 1990ies, a vivid debate about the technolog- fauna and stone assemblages. The lithic finds are very similar to the ical capacities of Neanderthals (Jones and Mangartz, 1991). Other Neumark-Nord 2/2 artifacts that date to MIS 5e (Van Homelen, technical realizations of blade production tend to occur also 2011, such qualifying former statement of a Micoquian attribution somewhat later during the MIS 5c interstadial in Northwest-Europe for the Neumark-Nord 2/0 assemblage: Laurat, 2003; Laurat and (f.e. Seclin D7-D2, Rocourt, Riencourt-les-Bapaume). Brühl, 2010). As van Hommelens analysis includes the whole Previously, the series of humus zones found in crater fillings of assemblage and not single fossils directeurs, I follow her evaluation the Eifels volcanoes (Tonchesberg,€ Hummerich) were tentatively of the Neumark-Nord sites, particularly since single asymmetric synchronized with the Early Weichselian Interstades 5c and 5a, but bifacial tools can occasionally occur within Interglacial assemblages the revision of the Tonchesberg€ stratigraphy implies now the (for abundant examples see Richter, 2005). placement of all humus zones into a short period within MIS 5d (Schmidt et al., 2011, Fig. 12). Since the chronology of the nearby 4.2.2. Bavaria Hummerich crater filling had been based on correlation with To our present knowledge, only one more site from Germany Tonchesberg,€ the age of the Hummerich Middle Paleolithic as- has delivered a whole sequence of archaeological assemblages semblages has become now an open question once more. Attribu- which are stratigraphically younger than MISA 5e/d and earlier tion into any phase of MIS 5d-a seems as possible as into early MIS than MIS 4: the lower layers of Sesselfelsgrotte. 3. The lithic assemblage displays general Mousterian attributes The Palaeolithic rock shelter site of Sesselfelsgrotte is situated in along with some bifacial tools, but it is too small and uncharac- the valley of the lower Altmühl river (Bavaria), a tributary to the teristic to classify it as a Mousterian or Micoquian/Keilmesser- Danube. The site yielded a unique sequence of 23 Middle Palae- gruppen respectively (Street, 2002, 136 and 144e147). olithic occupations (Table 2) and 6 Upper Palaeolithic occupations. Roughly contemporaneously or later, a minimum number of 59 Field campaigns at the site were carried out from 1964 to 1977 and, Bison priscus were hunted at Wallertheim (Rheinhessen; again, in 1981, directed by G. Freund and collaborators (University Gaudzinski, 1992), thus attesting specialized, mono-specific hunt- of Erlangen; Freund, 1975, 1998). ing which is absent from the preceding Interglacial (MIS 5e) sites, About 7 m of sedimentary deposit were excavated. The layers and which obviously occurred only from MIS 5d onwards, when the consisted mainly of limestone debris from the roof of the shelter climate changed to more cold and more arid conditions. Waller- and from the slope above the cave. Eight occupation units were theim had been excavated in 1927 (Schmidtgen and Wagner, 1929). uncovered from the lower part of the sequence (“Untere It has become a prominent example of mono-specific hunting Schichten”). An early Weichselian date is suggested for these among Neanderthals since re-analysis of the 1927 assemblage has assemblages which are typologically and technologically similar refined previous interpretations by new archeo-zoological methods to contemporaneous western European Mousterian industries (Gaudzinski, 1992). The Wallertheim-1927 find horizon is part of a (Weißmüller, 1995). They can be classified as Mousterian with sequence of brook deposits (“Bachablagerungen II”; Gaudzinski, micro-size tools (“primary microlithic”, assemblages Ses-U-A08 1992, 278) covered by Loess accumulation. The discovery of the and Ses-U-A07), Charentian/Ferrassie type (assemblages Ses-U- Blake paleomagnetic event in underlying sediments (see Brun- A06 and Ses-U-A05), Charentian/Quina type (assemblage Ses-U- nacker in: Bosinski et al., 1983) allowed for attributing the bottom A04), and typical Mousterian (assemblages Ses-U-A03, Ses-U- of the sequence to MIS 5e and the superimposed Wallertheim-1927 A02 and Ses-U-A01). About 10.000 stone artefacts, found in the find layer into the transition from the interglacial to the subsequent lower layers (“Untere Schichten”), were discarded during glacial period, later tentatively identified as MIS 5d (with a question ephemeral occupations. These occupations took place under mark: Gaudzinski, 1992). interstadial conditions (perhaps MIS 5c and 5a) with forest and New excavations (1991e1993) uncovered 6 archeological hori- open landscape. Hunting of horses was an important subsistence zons 60 m away from Wallertheim-1927 (Conard et al., 1995) which activity. Only in the uppermost part of the lower layers (layers 3- has since been correlated with the Wallertheim-C horizon of the West to M1), and quite close to the interface to the first glacial new excavations. Underlying horizons Wallertheim A and B would maximum (MIS 4) of the Weichselian glaciation, does glacial then belong to MIS 5e and, in full accordance with earlier research, fauna like Mammoth occur for the first time. Whereas the earliest Wallertheim C to MIS 5d. As Wallertheim-F has been found to occupations might be regarded as a continuation (if not partial connect with an initial stage of a soil formation process, this layer contemporaries) to micro-sized assemblages of the Eemian was tentatively attributed to MIS 5c following the rule that soil Interglacial, clear archeological parallels to the superimposed formation must match MIS interstadials. Because Wallertheim D assemblages are completely absent from Germany. In sum, Early and E belong to the same sedimentary cycle as Wallertheim F, the Weichselian archaeological sites are quite rare in Germany whole group of horizons has since been attributed to the transition (Fig. 3). between MIS 5d and 5c which must remain a highly speculative It has repeatedly been tried to enrich the poor Early Weichselian assumption of a previous, more optimistic, research phase without record by furnishing MIS 5d-a with additional sites. The Micoquien/ any radiometric or paleomagnetic dating at hand (contra Haesaerts Keilmessergruppen cultural unit has been utilized as such kind of in: Conard et al., 1995). At Wallertheim D, small, thick prismatic furniture, though, at the present moment, claims to place the

Table 2 Stratigraphic overview of the Sesselfelsgrotte assemblages (modiﬁed after Richter, 1997 and Street, 2002; Pal. ¼ Paleolithic; M ¼ Mousterian).

earliest part of the Micoquien/Keilmessergruppen into the Early reliably dated into the Early Weichselian, and, to the contrary, a Weichselian still lack any positive evidence (contra Joris,€ 2003; couple of sites are securely dated into MIS 3, the present paper is in Baales, 2012). Some authors (Bosinski, 2002; Joris,€ 2003) tried to favor of the late and short chronology of the Micoquian/Keilmes- place the Micoquien/Keilmessergruppen sites of Konigsaue€ sergruppen, placing it into MIS 3 (see below). Salzgitter-Lebenstedt and Lichtenberg into GI 21, GI 20 and GI 19, but this seems to be premature at a state of research when most of 4.3. Synthesis the environmental and all of the radiometric data from both mentioned sites advocate an early MIS 3 position for them. The Early Weichselian record currently displays three archaeo- Konigsaue€ at the former lake of Aschersleben, had been claimed to logical phases: deliver a full calendar (“Vollgliederung”) of the last glacial, based on the belief that each transgression phase of the former Aschersleben - EW initial archeological phase, middle Rhine group: this is still lake exactly matches one Greenland Stadial/Interstadial cycle unsufficiently known because of the small number of sites (Mania and Toepfer, 1973). Different modes of counting the (Tonchesberg,€ Wallertheim) which can be placed into this sequence of transgressions led Mania to assign the main find layer phase. Coniferous forest was now partially replaced by open Ib with its Micoquien/Keilmessergruppen assemblages to the sec- steppe landscape, allowing for growing ungulate biomass. ond Weichselian interstade (at time of the publication seen as Interglacial multi-species exploitation was replaced by mono- Brorup,€ now as Odderade) and Joris€ to assign the same layer to the specific hunting of steppe fauna such as Bison priscus. Artefact Odderade Interstade or GI 21 (Joris,€ 2003, Fig. 20). Because there is production became heterogenuous, with bifacial and blade not a single Micoquian/Keilmessergruppen site which can be components available.

According to the Sesselfelsgrotte sequence, the Early Weichse- the demanding plant species into their refugia (f.e. trees in riverine lian divides into three stages whose exact position within MIS 5d to locations and higher elevations), now disconnecting the preferable 5a is still debatable: human habitats. This would urge landscapes into a pendulum motion between patchwork (interstadial) and rag (stadial) modes e - EW initial archeological phase, Bavarian variant: micro-sized the latter one probably disconnecting faunal and human habitats assemblages made on Levallois blanks, this phase technologi- into insular rags. cally similar and thus possibly a later continuation of the Late In any case, the MIS 3 patchwork landscape saw the largest Eemian Archeological Phase (MIS 5e, continuing into 5d and extent, within the Weichselian Glacial, of the classic Mammoth 5c?). Horses were a principal hunting prey. This phase is either steppe fauna including wooly Rhino, horse, reindeer, bison, ibex contemporaneous or later than the EW early phase, middle and small mammals such as the lemmings, lagurus and along with Rhine Group mentioned above. particularly cool and arid environments, f.e. dicrostonyx. This kind - EW intermediate phase: assemblages with abundant side- of ecosystem, with its high biomass recharge and productivity, scrapers, made on blanks from the discoidal and from the brought about optimal living conditions for the ungulate fauna Levallois concept, partially with Quina-retouch effectuated on which must have reached a very high population density compared the discoidal blanks. Growing ratio of cervids and ibex. to the previous Weichselian environmental stages. This concerns - EW late phase: Mousterian “fond commun” assemblages with the environment of both, late Neanderthals before 43 (cal.) ka B.P. Levallois production. Mammouth occurs for the ﬁrst time in the early European Homos sapiens, after 43 (cal.) ka B.P. though cli- stratigraphy possibly indicating the interface between MIS 5a matic conditions gained more instability and the pulse of climatic and MIS 4. rhythms accelerated somewhat during the second half of MIS 3 (cf. Behre and Van der Plicht, 1992; Ehlers et al., 2004; Litt et al., 2007; 5. The late Middle Paleolithic Rasmussen et al., 2014).

5.1. Chronological and paleoclimatic overview 5.2. Archeological dataset

The Early Weichselian period is followed by the first glacial The late Middle Paleolithic exclusively consists of MMO maximum (70e60 ka B.P.) of the Weichselian glaciation which is (“Mousterian with a Micoquian Option”) assemblages convention- synchronized with the MIS 4 of the deep-sea record (Litt et al., ally also called Micoquian/Keilmessergruppen. All claims for addi- 2007). The MIS 4 is represented by huge Loess accumulations tional, distinct cultural complexes at this time, different from the with ice-wedge horizons and, in caves, by rock waste layers caused MMO (Mousterian of Kartstein type, Mousterian of Balve IV type, by rapid, temperature-induced weathering. The MIS 4 period is Altmühlian, Szeletian) must be rejected as they all lack integrity almost void of any archaeological sites in central Europe and most and they do not clearly separate from the Micoquian/Keilmesser- probably the human population was very small if any humans gruppen. The problem of lacking integrity of the mentioned cul- survived a long period of glacier extension and permafrost. The tural units has been known for a long time, since Kind (1992) had warming connected with MIS 3 must have seen a considerable clearly addressed it in his detailed statistical analysis of the immigration into and a subsequent growth of human populations southern German database (Kind, 1992: “Mischinventare”). As far in central Europe. At the present state of knowledge it is even most as it concerns MIS 3 Central Europe, all of them now occur as probable that more than 85% of all Middle Paleolithic sites ever subsets of the MMO (Richter, 2014). found in Germany belong to the first half of MIS 3, addressed as the Late Middle Paleolithic period in this paper. The Late Middle 5.2.1. Stratigraphic observations Paleolithic terminates, in Central Europe, by 43 ka B.P. The second During the last two decades it was particularly new information half of MIS 3 comprises the onset of the Upper Paleolithic and the gained from the longest Middle Paleolithic sequence ever excavated Aurignacian, Gravettian cultural units, thus this review will only in Germany, Sesselfelsgrotte (Table 2), that on the one hand, put focus on the first half of MIS 3 in detail. existing knowledge about Late Middle Paleolithic chronology into MIS 3 of the marine chronology matches, in the terrestrial re- question and on the other hand, offered a key to the integrity cord, the so-called Weichselian Inter-Pleniglacial between the first problem. The stratigraphy supports a short and late chronology of glacial maximum and the second Glacial Maximum or LGM, 26 to the Micoquian/Keilmessergruppen and has yielded ample evidence 18 ka (cal.) B.P., of the Weichselian Glaciation. MIS 3 saw huge Loess for the relationship between the Micoquian, the Mousterian and accumulations but with interruptions that allowed for initial soil the Altmuehlian. All three, as they were traditionally defined, formation processes and for extend of interstadial environments belong to one and the same artifact system which I have since such as the steppe vegetation of the Oerel, Glinde and Moershoofd called “MMO” (i.e. the MIS 3 Mousterian with a Micoquian Option). paleobotanical sequences. The triple sequence of early MIS 3 in- The Sesselfelsgrotte record gives an impression into the enor- terstadials was tentatively correlated with GI 18, 17 and 16. Oerel, mous range of contemporaneous variability within each phase of Glinde and Moershoofd shed light on the vegetation in the north- the late Middle Paleolithic. According to the evidence from this ern European plain, but, by contrast, there is only one matching sequence, the vast majority of the whole German Middle Paleolithic interstadial (Samerberg III Interstadial) in the Alpine foreland and belongs to this cultural unit (Fig. 3). Most of the cultural chronology in eastern France (Pile Interstadial). Thus, possibly some of the cold of the late Middle Paleolithic, seems to be represented in the Ses- phases between the GI 18, 17, 16 interstadials did not have any selfelsgrotte record: impact on the vegetation of southern central Europe and correla- The Sesselfelsgotte sequence (Freund, 1998, 85; Freund and tions with the Greenland record must be dealt with great caution. If Reisch, 2014) begins at its bottom with 8 early Weichselian occu- we try to translate the rapid Greenland climatic rhythms, of 1e5ka pations (Weißmüller, 1995) which were described above. A series of each, into the central European landscapes, ameliorations should layers follows upward, containing no archaeological material, but have accelerated the ecological sequence from tundra to steppe abundant rodent remains (layers L,K,I; Van Kolfschoten, 2014). They vegetation thus allowing for large connected grasslands with are dated to the first glacial maximum of the Weichselian glaciation patches of coniferous trees. By contrast, climatic deterioration (MIS 4; Richter et al., 2000; Bohner,€ 2008, 150). The rodent bones should have stopped the ecological succession and caused retreat of (remnants of owl pellets) suggest several subsequent stages of

Please cite this article in press as: Richter, J., Leave at the height of the party: A critical review of the Middle Paleolithic in Western Central Europe from its beginnings to its rapid decline, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.01.018 12 J. Richter / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e22 environmental change from a steppe landscape towards an arctic were then misunderstood as cultural units different in time and tundra landscape (Van Kolfschoten, 2014). At Sesselfelsgrotte this space. period is marked by a thick layer of limestone debris without traces The Sesselfelsgrotte sequence lacks any Aurignacian occupation, of human occupation. This might apply for the whole area of Ger- yielding only a small assemblage of Gravettian character (Bohner,€ many though recently, M. Baales has claimed the “Knochensande” 2008). On top are loessy limestone rubble deposits of the second finds (redeposited assemblages, mostly of MMO character) from glacial maximum of the Weichselian and another two archaeo- Westphalia (cf. Richter, 2006b) as belonging to MIS 4 (Baales, 2012). logical horizons with several late Upper Paleolithic and Late More convincingly, Loess deposits from the Garzweiler Lignite Paleolithic assemblages (Dirian, 2003). To summarize, the G- mine yielded stratified artifacts (without cultural attribution) from Komplex and Layer E3 deliver a detailed record of the Late Middle the latest phase of MIS 4 (Uthmeier et al., 2011). Paleolithic cultural evolution until its very end. At Sesselfelsgrotte, the overlying “G-Komplex” (layers H, G5, The lack of any transitional industries in Southern Germany and G4a, G3, G2, G1; Richter, 1997) yielded 13 Mousterian and/or MMO the immediate onset of the Aurignacian might indicate that the assemblages (Table 2). Some of them were recovered from virtual regional Aurignacian (Keilberg/Bavaria and Geissenklosterle/Sua-€ living floors (in particular the layers G4 and G2 with several fire- bia; Uthmeier, 2004) occurred earlier in southern Germany than in places). 85.000 stone artifacts from the “G-Komplex” go along with central Germany and Poland where the LRJ (see Flas, 2011; abundant prey remains, mainly from mammoth, reindeer and Lincombian-Ranisian-Jerzmanovician-: a so-called transitional in- horse. Men lived in a steppe landscape with some arctic elements, dustry, but in reality rather Upper Paleolithic because of its blade increasing towards the top of the stratigraphic series. The “G- technology) leaf point complex existed at the same time around Komplex” is presumed to be part of a later stage within a post-MIS 4 43e42,000 cal. B.P. and is, at Ranis cave, stratigraphically sand- interstadial close to its interface to the next stadial. wiched between a MMO and an Aurignacian layer (Richter, 2009). It must be stressed that the overall time-depth of the whole G- In any case, present evidence clearly argues against any claims for Komplex with all 13 assemblages would not exceed a few thousand transitional assemblages in Germany (this applies also to the years, as a variety of proxies has indicated. The G-Komplex com- Remagen-Schwalbenberg site which had previously been under- prises of the final part of one interstadial period (which had already stood as an assemblage with Middle Paleolithic technology and begun during the deposition of underlying layers I and H) to the Upper Paleolithic raw material procurement. The upper part of this onset of the following cool oscillation which is documented in the loess sequence including the archaeological assemblage must now upper part of the G-Komplex (see f.e. Rathgeber, 2014; Van be regarded as 10 ka younger than expected; see Klasen et al., 2015; Kolfschoten, 2014; Bottcher,€ 2014; Maul, 2014). for earlier views see: App et al., 1987; Pasda 2000; Bosinski 2008). This would imply contemporaneity with the Oerel or Glinde vegetational occurrences or their southern German equivalent 5.2.2. What is the MMO? (which might include both, since the cold phase between Oerel and If conventional typological classification is applied the problem Glinde may have failed to reach southern Germany resulting into occurs in that most inventories can be attributed equally well to only one interstadial phase) such as Samerberg III which attest different “Micoquian” variants (if classification is derived from open steppe landscapes for this time range. Men were present here bifacial “type tools”), as well as to specific “Mousterian” variants (if at some time between 60.000 and 43.000 cal. B.P. (but probably not classification is based on unifacial tool counts). “Micoquian” and for the whole time span, see above) based on a series of radiometric “Mousterian” turn out to be multiple, interlaced aspects of one and dates. the same technological repertoire, and (as far as it concerns MIS 3) Separated by an archaeological sterile layer (layer F), the “G- not distinct cultural units clearly separated in time and space (Kind, Komplex” is overlain by another late Middle Paleolithic horizon 1992; Richter, 1997). (layer E3; Bohner,€ 2008). Whereas this assemblage would Which parameters are responsible for the main characteristics conventionally run as a Mousterian with a few bifacial artifacts, it is of such stone artifact assemblages? The observation of cyclic raw now interpreted as an Initialinventar (see below) of one MMO land- material procurement patterns revealed four different occupation use cycle. Radiocarbon dates and all kinds of environmental pa- cycles, being also coherent in terms of technology and typology rameters place this assemblage into the chronological neighbor- (Table 2). The cycles start with small assemblages of broad spec- hood of the Early Aurignacian, around 43e42,000 cal. B.P. (Bohner,€ trum raw material procurement (Initialinventare). The cycles end 2008, 151). with mostly larger assemblages (Konsekutivinventare) of more This means that a standard MMO lacking any traces of accul- specialized raw material procurement confined to few resources. turation to the regional Upper Paleolithic marks the very end of Initialinventare might originate from the beginning reconnaissance the Middle Paleolithic (Bohner,€ 2008,148e158). As it has been and exploitation of a region (f.e. the Altmühl valley). Konsekuti- extensively documented by several authors (Richter, 2002; vinventare document a more specialized exploitation of resources Uthmeier, 2004; Bohner,€ 2008) there is no chronological space and might arise from a time when people had already been present left to place any transitional industries between the MMO and the in the region for weeks or months. Aurignacian. And there are no formally or technically transitional The mentioned cycles are also tied together by the technological attributes visible within the latest MMO assemblage: layer E3 of recipes prevailing in each cycle: Characteristic modes of stone Sesselfelsgrotte. To the contrary, the southern German leaf point artifact production (Turq, 1992; Boeda,€ 1994) are: During Cycle 1 assemblages (Altmühlian) appear as a functional variant of the (layer I/H with assemblages Ses-G-A13 to Ses-G-A10) a Quina MMO assemblages. This model applies to the whole of southern method of artifact production (sensu Bourgignon 1992), during Germany as indicated by an extensive analysis of all regional MIS 3 Cycle 2 a Quina and a Levallois method (layer G4 with assemblages sites (Uthmeier, 2004). Thus, the southern German leaf point as- Ses-G-A08 and Ses-G-A09), during Cycle 3 the centripetal- semblages clearly belong to the Middle Paleolithic period, and recurrent Levallois method (layers G3 and G2 with assemblages they are not of transitional nature. On the other hand, growing Ses-G-A07 to Ses-G-A04), and during Cycle 4 the parallel-recurrent intensity of Middle Paleolithic land exploitation with growing Levallois method (layer G2/G1 with assemblages Ses-G-A03 to Ses- differentiation of seasonal site functions were responsible for a G-A01). technological and typological variability of previously unknown At the beginning of the land-use cycles (not at the beginning of quality. This produced seasonal and functional variants which single occupations, as it was often misunderstood: f.e. Joris,€ 2003)

Fig. 5. Three reduction stages of bifacial knives which were previously mistaken as distinct subtypes of bifacial knives (all pieces from Sesselfelsgrotte/G-complex).

Fig. 6. A model of MMO assemblage formation within the Sesselfelsgrotte/G-complex. Camp sites (circles) possibly indicate short term occupations within a system of residential mobility (frequent changes of site locations, small groups, for example one family, perhaps during the summer season). Long duration camp sites (triangles) seem to mirror a logistic system of mobility (larger groups, site locations close to seasonal passage routes of prey animals). Small hunting halts (squares) would then belong to the same logistic system. Note that bifacial tools occur preferably both in camp sites and in short halts. Thus, occurrence of bifacial tools within small assemblages does not contradict the present model (contra Joris,€ 2003).

The MMO-A begins just after the end of the first glacial thus two different chaines operatoires present in the MMO-B (Ses- maximum and, thus, falls within an interstadial complex between selfelsgrotte, upper G-Komplex). 60.000 and approximately 50.000 (cal.) B.P. Stone artifact production is dominated by the Quina concept (MMO-A1) and by other 6. Discussion and conclusion non-Levallois methods (MMO-A2). Larger assemblages contain bifacial tools (conventionally attributed to the Bockstein type of The conventional cultural units of the MIS 3 western central inventories; Bosinski, 1967) such as Micoquian handaxes, simple European Mousterian are now suggested to be parts of one and bifacial backed knives, Halbkeile, Faustkeilblatter.€ the same system. The historic reality can possibly be understood The MMO-B is dated to a late stage of the same interstadial in terms of an early Micoquian and a later Micoquian (MMO), complex and with its latest variant, perhaps, to a subsequent combined lasting not much more than 17.000 years and being interstadial. It is characterized by the exclusive application of part of the latest cultural heritage of Neanderthal man. The later several Levallois methods within the unifacial component. The MMO seems to be the only Central European Middle Paleolithic small assemblages resemble the Denticulate Mousterian (or cultural unit which displays attributes specificoftimeand Kartstein e type inventories), the larger assemblages contain space: the combination of plane-convex/plane-convex Keil- type tools of the Klausennische- and Konigsaue-type€ in- messer, small handaxes and foliates, along with Mousterian ventories (convergent bifacial backed knives, bifacial scrapers, tools based on the Levallois concept and with small endscrapers Halbkeile, Faustkeilblatter€ ), and many “microlithic” elements. and groszaki (flat, circular scrapers) is indicative of the MMO. If The Sesselfelsgrotte occupation cycles 3 and 4 are attributed to all sites with such attributes are mapped, it turns out that about the MMO-B (MMO-B1 with centripetal-recurrent Levallois, 100 sites, more than half of all Middle Paleolithic sites in Ger- MMO-B2 with parallel-recurrent Levallois method). A presum- many, belong to this unit. The map (Fig. 4) shows (1) larger ably later variant MMO-B3 with exclusively parallel-recurrent inventories with at least three combined technological/typo- Levallois method and few bifacial tools is not present in the logical attributes indicative of the MMO as mentioned above, (2) “G-Komplex” of Sesselfelsgrotte, but in Balve-IV. Assemblages of small inventories and single pieces attached to the MMO by the Altmühlian (leaf point industries) may be placed in the stratigraphic means (and not necessarily by typology or tech- same MMO-B3. nology, f.e. Nußloch because of its stratigraphic context within a During MMO-A, bifacial tools and unifacial tools were both Loess sequence or a large number of Westphalian finds because effectuated on the same kind of blanks from the same kind of of their connection to the “Knochensande” stratigraphic com- chaine operatoire (Quina at Sesselfelsgrotte, lower G-Complex), but plex; cf. Baales, 2012) and (3) sites reliably dated by multiple during MMO-B, bifacial tools were made on plaquettes and uni- contextual indicators (f.e. Sesselfelsgrotte, Lichtenberg, Salzgit- facial tools were made on blanks based on the Levallois concept, ter-Lebenstedt).

Theoretically many more sites would add to this number which 1) Early Middle Paleolithic assemblages are very rare in Germany. display only Mousterian (fond commun) attributes but (invisibly) still They come from moraine contexts in Northern Germany, and belong as Initialinventare to the same cultural unit. This means that from Loess sequences in the Middle Rhine area and Central more than 50% of the German Middle Paleolithic occupations Germany. Variability in space and time seems to be large, but happened to occur between c. 60,000 and 43,000 cal. B.P. only to essays to identify chronological patterns turned out as to have rapidly disappear thereafter within less than 1000 years. The German been premature. Three groups of assemblages can be identified: Neanderthals must have disappeared just shortly after having Levallois-plus-blade production combined with bifacial tools, reached the absolute maximum of their demographic evolution. along with a mammoth steppe fauna (Markkleeberg; earlier Adaptational strategies and technological concepts of the Mid- than the MIS 6 glacial maximum), Levallois production with a dle Paleolithic emerged around 300,000 years ago and persisted unifacial, conventional Mousterian toolkit (f.e. Ariendorf, until 40,000 years ago. The Middle Paleolithic covered the whole Rheindahlen B3, MIS 7), Levallois production along with time span of the Neanderthal human lineage and reached as far (Levallois) blade production with a small number of formal tools back as the time of latest Homo heidelbergensis. During the long (exclusively at Rheindahlen B1, MIS 7). The EMPal ended during time of its existence, the Middle Paleolithic had to overcome major MIS 6 which saw the most extensive ice advance of the Qua- climatic and environmental challenges (f.e. glacial maxima around ternary in Central Europe, the Saalian (with Drenthe, c. 150,000 150 and 70e60 ka B.P., but also phases of forest yield with shrinking and Warthe, c. 140,000 B.P.). From 150,000 to 121,000 B.P., the ungulate biomass 240e190 and 130e70 ka B.P.) connected with region must have been abandoned by humans. Resettlement dramatic demographic change among Neanderthal populations occurred not earlier than at the beginnning of the Eemian (Table 3). warming. Seen from the Neanderthal demographic perspective, Immi- 2) Compared to the neighbouring areas, Germany displays a good gration, contraction, dispersal, fragmentation, emigration, regional number of Eemian sites, very often well preserved in travertine extinction of populations and subsequent resettlement must have complexes. Its unique Eemian archeological record is among the occurred several times. On the continental scale we should thus most important contributions of Central Europe to the European expect a colourful patchwork of different technologies and toolkits, Middle Paleolithic Archeology. Many travertine sites yielded emerging and vanishing at different places and times. And this is plant remains linking them to separate phases of the Eemian exactly what we see: Technological and typological phenomena vegetational history. Eemian archeology resolves into two pha- appear and disappear such as their authors would play with a ses: During the first half of the Eemian, humans often settled in bookshelf full of cookery books, taking out a specific recipe book open birch, pine and hornbeam forest landscapes near lakesides from time to time just to put it back after the preparation of the and exploitation of large mammals such as Rhino or their ca- meal: Typological concepts such as asymmetric bifacial tools davers played an important role for nutrition. During the second (Keilmesser) occur at several times and at different places during half of the Eemian, open pine forests expanded. Rhinos and el- the Middle Paleolithic. And technological recipes such as the ephants had disappeared and hunting of red deer and other recurrent centripetal Levallois method occur several times at forest species prevailed. Mousterian assemblages of unspecific different places during the Middle Paleolithic. Middle Paleolithic character prevail during the first phase of the Consequently, it is absolutely not surprising that the majority of Eemian. The small-size Mousterian, elsewhere mistakably called all predictions about the chronological value of selected and the “Taubachian” (though Taubach itself does not belong to this simplified types and technotypes have regularly turned out to be group; Weißmüller, 1995) is restricted to the second Eemian erroneous (see Kind, 1992). For the present time, dating has to rely phase. on radiometry, paleomagnetism, stratigraphy, palynology, paleon- 3) The Early Weichselian Middle Paleolithic occurs as a continu- tology and other scientific disciplines, but not on cultural units ation of the Eemian occupation of Central Europe and the alone. Extensive reviews of the German Middle Paleolithic under- question remains fairly open to which degree the early taken by Bosinski (1967, 2002), Joris€ (2003) have split historical Weichselian cooling phases had impact on human occupation. complexes into fragments: components of one and the same MMO During the onset of cooling (MIS 5d) herd hunting began and were sorted out as “KMG”, “Inventartyp Kartstein”, “Inventartyp steppe species such as bison and horse were preferred. As- Balve IV”, “Micoquien vom Typ Bockstein”, “Micoquien vom Typ semblages display variable Mousterian variants, with occa- Klausennische”, “Micoquien vom Typ Schambach”, “Micoquien sional blades, and do not allow for further classification at the vom Typ Konigsaue€ ”, “Micoquien vom Typ Rorshain€ ” and present stage of research. Environmental sequences show “Altmühlgruppe”. woodland dominance during the interstadial stages 5c and 5a Contrasting Bosinski's and Joris's€ approaches, another recent and fastidious fauna occurs throughout the whole time span study of the NW-European Late Middle Paleolithic in my view (Koenigswald, 1985). The volcano sites in the Middle Rhine area overestimated contemporaneous typological variability and lum- display Loess sequences with early Weichselian steppe soils ped a large sample of assemblages of different ages and heteroge- (some of them still part of MIS 5d). Only one site delivers a neous qualities into typology-based cultural groupings (Ruebens, series of occupations within a later stage than 5d of the Early 2013) following a “fossil directeur” approach. Weichselian: the Sesselfelsgrotte, with eight occupations At the present stage of research we conclude: following each other.

Table 3 Comparison of site counts of the German Middle Paleolithic (see appendices 1e4 for site references).

Archeological period Climate stage Duration (ka) Net durationa (ka) Site count Sites per 1000 years

Early Middle Paleolithic Saalian sensu lato MIS 8-6 300e121 159 45 0.28 Eemian Middle Paleolithic Eemian Interglacial MIS 5e 121e110 11 16 1.45 Early Weichselian Middle Paleolithic Early Weichselian Glacial MIS 5d-a 110e70 40 4 0.10 Late Middle Paleolithic Mid-Weichselian MIS 4-3 70e43 16 94 5.87

a Net Duration (column 4) equals: Duration (column 3) minus phases “void of humans” (cf. Table 1).

4) The following cold stage (first glacial maximum; MIS 4) might Paleolithic of Europe. The revision of lithic assemblages from have been void of human occupation in Central Europe, except Middle Paleolithic sites in Germany resulted in a new under- its latest part. standing of the relationship between techno-typological entities of 5) The late Middle Paleolithic has always attracted interest because artifact assemblages, on the one hand, and the utilization of pre- of its particular Micoquian assemblages which unite the central historic natural landscape, on the other hand. The future aim is to and southeast European Middle Paleolithic (Belgium, Germany, deliver a complete reconstruction of an annual cycle of activities Austria, Hungary, Northern Romania, Slovakia, Tchechia, and mobility within a territory in order to understand the Poland). Whereas the beginning of the Micoquian, now under- composition of assemblages, the structures of sites and their loca- stood as the MMO, is placed into MIS 5a by some researchers tion within the landscape before cultural affiliations can be (“long chronology”), an MIS 5 age for the MMO must now be evaluated. rejected and an early MIS 3 age has to be envisaged. Such short chronology is strongly supported by the Sesselfelsgrotte sequence as well as the notion that the MMO marks the very end Acknowledgements of the regional Middle Paleolithic and that no transitional industries exist in southern and west-central Germany. As more The presented research is part of the CRC 806 “Our Way to than half of all Middle Paleolithic sites in Germany display more Europe”, programme D1, at the Universities of Cologne, Bonn and than one MMO attribute, we argue for a population maximum of RWTH Aachen, financially supported by the DFG (German Research Neanderthals just at the end of the Middle Paleolithic. Foundation). Most of the site data mapped in this paper (particu- 6) The German Neanderthals must have disappeared around larly concerning the end of the Middle Paleolithic) were retrieved 43 (cal.) ka B.P. just shortly after having reached the absolute by Janina Meesenburg M.A. (Kiel), references were checked by Anja maximum of their demographic evolution around 50,000 years Duwe M.A. (Cologne). Figures were prepared by H.H.Schluse, ago. L.Hermsdorff-Knauth and A.Duwe (all Cologne). The author prof- ited essentially from comments by the guest editors and two Finally it has to be mentioned that the present state of research, anonymous reviewers. I would also like to thank all colleagues who unequal preservation issues and varying potential of dating, all contributed to the present state of research by their excavations seriously impact the attributions and site counts presented in this and publications. Though I tried to compile a picture as complete as contribution. Because of their advanced state of research, the Elbe/ possible, I am aware that some regions and time ranges are more Saale province (this concerns mainly Fig. 1) and the Westphalian reliably covered than others, and I would be grateful for any further province (mainly Fig. 4) show much higher site numbers in com- information. parison with neighbouring regions. On the other hand the six mentioned results would even hold when both provinces had been excluded from the analysis. Appendix 1. Early Middle Paleolithic sites in Germany (Fig. 1) Research of the last two decades has considerably changed our notion of the cultural units connected with the late Middle

1 Lüchow-Dannenberg Steguweit, 1998 2 Woltersdorf Weber et al., 1996,14 3 Vahrholz Weber et al., 1996,14 4 Arneburg Weber et al., 1996,14 5 Niegripp Weber et al., 1996,14 6 Gerwisch Weber et al., 1996,14 7 Hundisburg Ertmer, 2011; Weber et al., 1996, 14; Glapa, 1969 8 Magdeburg-Rothensee Weber et al., 1996,14 9 Barleben Weber et al., 1996,14 10 Magdeburg-Salbke Weber et al., 1996,14 11 Biere Weber et al., 1996,14 12 Heyrothsberge Weber et al., 1996,14 13 Magdeburg-Neustadt Weber et al., 1996,14 14 Frohser Berg Weber et al., 1996,14 15 Barby Weber et al., 1996,14 16 Arnum Bosinski, 1967 17 Alfeld Bosinski, 1967 18 Gronau Bosinski, 1967 19 Beulshausen Bosinski, 1967 20 Bielefeld-Lutherstaße Bosinski, 1967 21 Mühlheim Bosinski, 1967 22 Essen-Vogelheim Bosinski, 1967 23 Essen-Werden Bosinski, 1967 24 Rheindahlen Thieme et al., 1981 25 Maastricht-Belvedere Roebroeks, 1989 26 Hochdahl Bosinski, 1974 27 Zwochau Pasda, 1996a, 1996b; Weber et al., 1996,14 28 Wannen Justus, 2000 29 Schweinskopf Schafer,€ 1990a, 1990b 30 Tonchesberg€ 1A Conard, 1992 31 Tonchesberg€ 2A Conard, 1992 32 Karlich€ Jb Bosinski, 1992 33 Ariendorf 2 Turner, 1997 34 Naumburg Toepfer, 1981

(continued )

35 Eythra Weber et al., 1996,14 36 Markkleeberg Weber et al., 1996, 14; Baumann and Mania, 1983 37 Zehmen Grahmann, 1955 38 Leipzig-Wahren Eissmann, 1983 39 Leipzig-Lindenau Eissmann, 1983 40 Leipzig-Leutsch Eissmann, 1983 41 Hunas Groiss et al., 1998 42 Achenheim 15e17, 19e20 Junkmanns, 1991 43 Ried Bosinski, 1967 44 Augsburg-Worleschwang€ Steguweit, 2011, 2008 45 Murg Pasda, 1994

Appendix 2. Eemian Middle Paleolithic sites in Germany (Fig. 2)

1 Lehringen Wenzel, 1998,p.3 2 Veltheim-Steinmühle Wenzel, 1998,p.3 3Grobern€ Weber et al., 1996 4 Neumark-Nord 1 und 2 Gaudzinski-Windheuser and Roebroeks, 2014; Mania et al., 1990 5 Grabschütz Weber et al., 1996 6 Rabutz Weber et al., 1996 7 Burgtonna Wenzel, 1998,p.3 8 Ehringsdorf Weber et al., 1996 9 Weimar-Parktravertin Weber et al., 1996 10 Taubach Weber et al., 1996 11 Wallertheim A Wenzel, 1998,p.3 12 Hangenbieten I Bosinski, 1967; Wernert, 1946/47 13 Stuttgart-Untertürkheim Wenzel, 1998,p.3 14 Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt Wenzel, 1998,p.3 15 Sesselfelsgrotte, Untere Schichten Weißmüller, 1995 16 Vogelherd, Hohlensohle€ Wenzel, 1998,p.3

Appendix 3. Early Weichselian Middle Paleolithic sites (Fig. 3)

1 Neumark-Nord 2/0 Gaudzinski-Windheuser and Roebroeks, 2014; 2Tonchesberg€ 2B Conard 1992 3 Wallertheim C, D Gauszinski, 1992; Adler et al., 2003 4 Sesselsfelsgrotte, lower layers Weißmüller, 1995

Appendix 4. mid-Weichselian Middle Paleolithic sites in Germany (Fig. 4)

1 Lichtenberg Weber et al., 1996; Veil et al., 1994 2 Borgholzhausen-Cleve Neujahrsgruß, 1982,17 3 Bocholt Neujahrsgruß, 1986,19 4 Gescher Neujahrsgruß, 1993,17 5 Garzweiler Uthmeier et al., 2011 6 Rhede Tromnau, 1983; Tangerding, 1984a, 1984b 7 Velen-Ramsdorf, “Die Berge” site Neujahrsgruß, 1994, 26; Günther, 1988a, 1988b, 1980, 1970, 1969 8 Velen, Tecklenborg sand pit Neujahrsgruß, 2006, 95; Neujahrsgruß, 2003, 72; Günther, 1988d 9 Haltern, Stever (river) Bode, 1984, 1970; Günther, 1980 10 Borkenberge (hills) between Haltern and Bode, 1984, 1970; Günther, 1980 Lüdinghausen 11 Velen-Ramsdorf, Knüverdarp site Neujahrsgruß, 1994, 26; Günther, 1988c; Finke, 1983; Neujahrsgruß, 1980,19 12 Halterner Stausee (dam) Neujahrsgruß, 2006, 97; Neujahrsgruß, 1993, 15; Neujahrsgruß, 1985,18 13 Hullerner Stausee (dam) Neujahrsgruß, 1993, 16; Neujahrsgruß, 1985,18 14 Coesfeld-Flamschen (sand pit) Günther, 1988, 68; Richter, 2013 15 Münster-Gittrup Schlosser, 1992,13e24; Eckert, 1985, 348e349. 16 Greven, Schencking lake Neujahrsgruß, 1991,23 (continued on next page)

17 Greven-Bockholt Schlosser, 1992,13e24 18 Horstel-Riesenbeck,€ Lage (parish), Lager Berg site Adrian, 1982, pl. 171, 68 19 Borgholzhausen-Holtfeld, Nollheide site Adrian, 1982 20 Steinheim-Rolfzen, Hohlenberg Neujahrsgruß, 1991, 21; Günther, 1986a, 360 21 Schloss Holte-Stukenbrock, Stukenbrock, FW site Adrian, 1982, pl. 231ff 22 Lippstadt and Wadersloh Bosinski, 1967, pl. 42, 2; Baales 2012 23 Bielefeld-Sennestadt, Markengrund site Adrian, 1954, Fig. 9a 24 Bielefeld-Lutterstraße Adrian, 1954, Figs. 5e7 25 Bielefeld-Gadderbaum Adrian, 1954, Fig. 8 26 Warendorf and Harsewinkel-Greffen Neujahrsgruß, 1992, 26; Baales 2012 27 Halle-Hesseln Neujahrsgruß, 2006, 77; Neujahrsgruß, 2003, 57; Adrian, 1982, pl. 162, 1 28 Minden, railway station Neujahrsgruß, 1990,22 29 Detmold-Heidenoldendorf Adrian, 1982, pl. 172e173 30 Detmold-Meiersfeld and -Nienhagen Neujahrsgruß, 1996, 26; Adrian, 1982, Taf. 170, 1 31 Salzkotten-Oberntudorf and Paderborn-Sande (sand Baales 2012 pits) 32 Nieheim Neujahrsgruß, 1999,63 33 Borgentreich-Natingen Adrian, 1982, pl. 299, 2,3 34 Willebadessen-Peckelsheim Adrian, 1982, pl. 315, 1 35 Porta Westfalica-Costedt Adrian, 1982 36 Petershagen, Weser (river gravels) Neujahrsgruß, 1989,19 37 Petershagen-Heimsen Günther, 1988,31 38 Petershagen-Windheim Günther, 1986b, 411; Günther, 1988,32 39 Lage-Horste,€ Stapelage (parish) Adrian, 1954, pl. 9a 40 Hannover-Dohren€ Bosinski, 1967, 102 41 Salzgitter-Lebenstedt Pastoors, 2001; Gaudzinski, 1998, 163e220; Tode, 1982 42 Rethen Bosinski, 1967, 102 43 Konigsaue€ A, B, C Mania and Toepfer, 1973 44 Bottrop Bosinski, 1982 45 Rhein-Herne-Kanal, near Bottrop Günther, 1988,62 46 Buer-Erle Bosinski, 1982, Fig. 38; Brandt 1940, Taf. 20, 1e8 47 Rhein-Herne-Kanal, near Herne Kahrs, 1928,61e68; 1927, 301e305; 1925,93e95; 1912, 2; 48 Herne Bosinski, 1982 49 Kogelstein Bottcher€ et al., 2001 50 Menden, Feldhofhohle€ I Bosinski, 1967, 115; 1984; Rothe, 1983,95e111; Günther, 1988,71e72 51 Bielefeld, Johannistal Günther, 1988, 54, 56e57; Adrian, 1982,74 52 Senden-Huxburgsheide Neujahrsgruß, 1993,34 € 53 Ostertalhohle€ Günther, 1988, 90, 93 54 Albersloh and Sendenhorst Neujahrsgruß, 1991, 24; Baales 2012 55 Calle-Meschede Neujahrsgruß, 1994,26 56 Ruhr near Meschede Neujahrsgruß, 1997, 33; Neujahrsgruß, 1996,27 57 Volkringhauser Hohle€ Bosinski, 1984, 381; Günter, 1961, 273; Brandt, 1960 58 Burschenhohle€ Andree, 1928, pl. 26, 6, 7 59 Grürmannshohle€ Andree, 1932, pl. 25, 26 60 Balver Hohle€ II, III, IIIa, IV Günther, 1964; Neujahrsgruß, 2006, 53; Neujahrsgruß, 2005, 42; Neujahrsgruß, 2004, 42; Neujahrsgruß, 2003,40 61 Martinshohle€ Andree, 1939, 330 62 Honnetal€ near Balve Neujahrsgruß, 1998,p.42e43 63 Buhlen IIIb, IIIb2 Joris,€ 2001 64 Desenberg Desenberg I: Bosinski, 1967, Taf. 162, 5; Desenberg II: Adrian, 1982, Taf. 320 65 Kirchberg Bosinski, 1967, 128 66 Maden 1, 2 Bosinski, 1967, 129 67 Fritzlar 1e6 Bosinski, 1967, 125e126 68 Neandertal Schmitz, 2006 69 Buchenloch Bosinski, 1967, 134 70 Reutersruh Luttrop and Bosinski, 1971 71 Rorshain€ Luttrop and Bosinski, 1967 72 Münzenberg-Goldberg Bosinski, 1967, 130 73 Treis Fiedler, 1994 74 Kirtorf -Wahlen Fiedler, 1994; Fiedler et al., 1979/80 75 Wittlingen Burkert et al., 1992 76 Kosten€ Zotz, 1959 77 Schney Bosinski, 1967, 171 78 Kronach 1e3 Zotz and Freund, 1973 79 Happurg, Hohler Fels Bosinski, 1967, 161 80 Kleinheppach Bosinski, 1967, 145 81 Heidenschmiede Bosinski, 1967 82 Bockstein III, IV Wetzel and Bosinski 1969; Bosinski 1967, 146e149 83 Große Grotte Wagner, 1983 84 Vogelherd Bosinski, 1967, 149, 150 85 Schambach, Hohler Stein Bosinski, 1967 86 Mauern I, II Bosinski, 1967, 165e166; Zotz, 1955 87 Breitenfurter Hohle€ Bosinski, 1967, 155e156; 88 Hohler Stein Bosinski, 1967, 154e155 89 Klausennische, Untere Klause, Mittlere Klause Bosinski, 1967, 157e160 90 Sesselfelsgrotte, layers E3, G1-G4, G4a, G5 Richter, 1997; Bohner€ 2008 91 Nussloch Loess sequence Kind, 1998 92 Schulerloch and Schulerloch shelter Bosinski, 1967, 156, 157; Bohner,€ 2008 93 Halle-Petersberg Schafer€ 1993 94 Oppurg-Gamsenberg Schafer€ 1993

References Bourguignon, L., 1992. Analyse du processus operatoire des coups de tranchet lat- eraux dans l'industrie mousterienne de l'Abri du Musee (Les Eyzies-de-Tayac, Dordogne). Paleo 4, 69e89. Adam, K.D., 1954. Die zeitliche Stellung der Urmenschen-Fundschicht von Stein- Boyle, K., 1998. The Middle Palaeolithic Geography of Southern France. Resources heim an der Murr innerhalb des Pleistozans.€ Eiszeitalter und Gegenwart. and Site Location. BAR International Series, p. 723. Quaternary Science Journal 4/5 (1), 18e21. Brandt, K., 1940. Die Mittelsteinzeit am Nordrande des Ruhrgebietes, vol. 4. Quel- Adler, D.S., Conard, N.J., 1997. Analysis of the lithic artifacts from Wallertheim D. In: lenschriften zur westdeutschen Vor- und Frühgeschichte, Bonn. Conard, N.J., Kandel, A.W. (Eds.), Reports for the Second Wallertheim Workshop. Brandt, K., 1960. Die Volkringhauser Hohle,€ ein wenig bekannter altsteinzeitlicher Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte Tübingen, pp. 1e13. Fundplatz in Westfalen. In: Steinzeitfragen der alten und neuen Welt. Fest- Adler, D.S., Prindiville, T.J., Conard, N.J., 2003. Patterns of spatial organization and schrift für Lothar Zotz, Bonn, pp. 83e90. land use during the eemian Interglacial in the Rhineland: new data from Brewer, S., Guiot, J., Sanchez-Go ni,~ M.F., Klotz, S., 2008. The climate in Europe during Wallertheim, Germany. Eurasian Prehistory 1 (2), 25e78. the Eemian: a multi-method approach using pollen data. Quaternary Science Adrian, W., 1954. Beitrage€ zur Steinzeitforschung in Ostwestfalen. Teil I. Bericht des Reviews 27, 2303e2315. Naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins für Bielefeld und Umgegend 13, 9e94. Brühl, E., Laurat, Th, 2010. The Middle Palaeolithic at the Geisel Valley e Recent Adrian, W., 1982. Die Altsteinzeit in Ostwestfalen und Lippe. Monographien zur Excavations at the Fossil Lake Neumark-Nord 2 (Sachsen-Anhalt, Germany). Urgeschichte, Fundamenta A/8. Koln/Wien€ . Acta Universitatis Wratislavensis No. 3207, Studia Archeologiczne XLI, Wrocław. Andree, J., 1928. Das Palaolithikum€ der Hohlen€ des Honnetales€ in Westfalen. Burkert, W., Cep, B., Kind, C.-J., Pasda, C., Schrantz, M., Simon, U., 1992. Wittlingen, Mannus-Bibliothek 42, Leipzig. eine mittelpalaolithische€ Freilandfundstelle bei Bad Urach, vol. 17. Fundber, Andree, J., 1932. Beitrage€ zur Kenntnis des norddeutschen Palaolithikums€ und Baden-Württemberg, pp. 1e110. Mesolithikums. Mannus-Bibliothek 52, Leipzig. Chabai, V.P., Marks, A.E., Monigal, K., 2004. The Middle Paleolithic and Early Upper Andree, J., 1939. Der eiszeitliche Mensch in Deutschland und seine Kulturen. Paleolithic of Eastern Crimea, vol. 3. ERAUL 104, Liege . Stuttgart. Chlachula, J.N.I., Drozdov, N.D., Ovodov, N.D., 2003. Last interglacial peopling of App, V., Campen, I., Dombek, G., Hahn, J., 1987. Eine altsteinzeitliche Fundstelle auf Siberia: the middle Palaeolithic site of Ust'-Izhul, the upper Yenisei area. Boreas dem Schwalbenberg bei Remagen, Kreis Ahrweiler (Vorbericht). In: 32, 506e520. Wegner, H.-H. (Ed.), Berichte zur Archaologie€ an Mittelrhein und Mosel, vol. 1, Cofﬂet, L., 2005. Palaomagnetische€ Untersuchungen im Rheinischen Loss.€ Heinrich- pp. 85e102. Heine-Universitat,€ Düsseldorf (PhD thesis). Baales, M., 2012. Late Middle Palaeolithic artefacts and archaeostratigraphical Conard, N.J., 1992. Tonchesberg€ and its Position in the Paleolithic Prehistory of dating of the bone gravels (Knochenkiese) in Central Westphalia and the Northern Europe. Monographien des RGZM 20, Mainz. Ruhrgebiet (Germany). In: Niekus, M.J.L.T., Barton, N., Street, M., Terberger, T. Conard, N.J., Preuss, J., Langohr, R., Haesaerts, P., van Kolfschoten, Th, Becze- (Eds.), A Mind Set on Flint: Studies in Honour of Dick Stapert. Part 1-the Lower Deak, J., Rebholz, A., 1995. New geological research in the middle Paleolithic & Middle Palaeolithic. Groningen Archaeological Studies, vol. 16, pp. 119e139. locality of Wallertheim in Rheinhessen. Archaologisches€ Korrespondenzblatt Baumann, W., Mania, D., 1983. In: Toepfer, V., Eissmann, L. (Eds.), Die 25, 1e14. palaolithischen€ Neufunde von Markkleeberg bei Leipzig. Mit Beitragen€ von. Dirian, A., 2003. Sesselfelsgrotte V. Das spate€ Jungpalaolithikum€ und Veroffentlichungen€ des Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte Dresden 16, Berlin. Spatpal€ aolithikum€ der oberen Schichten der Sesselfelsgrotte. Kulturfolge und Behre, K.E., Van der Plicht, J., 1992. Towards an absolute chronology for the last Hohlennutzung€ im Spatglazial.€ Forschungsprojekt “Das Palaolithikum€ und glacial period in Europe: radiocarbon dates from Oerel, northern Germany. Mesolithikum des Unteren Altmühltals II”, Teil V. Saarbrücken. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 1, 111e117. Eckert, J., 1985. Münster-Gittrup. Ausgrabungen und Funde in Westfalen-Lippe 3, Bode, A., 1970. Fundplatze€ des Mittelpalaolithikums€ im Gebiet von Haltern (West- 348e349. falen). Mit einem geologischen Beitrag von P. Siegfried, Münster. In: Frühe Ehlers, J., Eissmann, L., Lippstreu, L., Stephan, H.-J., Wansa, S., 2004. Pleistocene Menschheit und Umwelt (Rust-Festschrift). Monographien zur Urgeschichte, glaciations of North Germany. In: Ehlers, J., Gibbard, P.L. (Eds.), Quaternary Fundamenta A/2. Koln/Wien,€ pp. 119e130. Glaciations e Extent and Chronology, Part I: Europe. Developments in Qua- Bode, A., 1984. Spuren der Kultur der mittleren Altsteinzeit im Raum Haltern ternary Science, vol. 2a, pp. 135e146. (Westfalen) und der unteren Stever. Haltern. Eissmann, L., 1983. Die Quartargeologie€ des Raumes Markkleeberg südlich von Boeda,€ E., 1994. Le concept Levallois: variabilite des methodes. Monographie du Leipzig. In: Baumann, W., Mania, D. (Eds.), Die palaolithischen€ Neufunde von CRA, vol. 9. CNRS Editions, Paris. Markkleeberg bei Leipzig. Berlin, pp. 37e48. Bohner,€ U., 2008. Sesselfelsgrotte IV. Die Schicht E3 der Sesselfelsgrotte und die Eissmann, L., 1994. Grundzüge der Quartargeologie€ Mitteldeutschlands (Sachsen, Funde aus dem Abri I am Schulerloch. Spate€ Mousterien-Inventare und ihr Sachsen-Anhalt, Südbrandenburg, Thüringen). Altenburger Natur- Verhaltnis€ zum Micoquien. Forschungsprojekt “Das Palaolithikum€ und Meso- wissenschaftliche Forschungen 7, 55e135. lithikum des Unteren Altmühltals II” Teil IV. Stuttgart. Ertmer, S., 2011. Die Parkkiesgrube Hundisburg e Steinwerkzeuge des frühen Bosinski, G., 1967. Die mittelpalaolithischen€ Funde im westlichen Mitteleuropa. Neandertalers in den Schottern der Beber. Jahresschrift der Museen des Land- Monographien zur Urgeschichte, Fundamenta A/4. Koln/Graz€ . kreises Borde€ 51, 13e38. Bosinski, G., 1974. Hochdahl. In: Altsteinzeitliche Fundplatze€ des Rheinlandes, vol. Fiedler, L., 1994. Alt- und mittelsteinzeitliche Funde in Hessen. Führer zur Hessi- 49. Kunst und Altertum am Rhein, p. 21. schen Vor- und Frühgeschichte 2, Stuttgart. Bosinski, G., 1982. In: Brunnacker, K., Günther, K., Lanser, P., Schumacher, E., Fiedler, L., Quehl, H., Schlemmer, H., 1979/1980. Steinzeitliche Funde vom Tromnau, G., Urban, B., Veil, St. (Eds.), Das Eiszeitalter im Ruhrland. Mit Palaolithikum€ aus Wahlen, Gemeinde Kirtorf, Vogelsbergkreis. Fundberichte Beitragen€ von. Ruhrland-Museum Essen 2. aus Hessen 19/20, 11e43. Bosinski, G., 1984. Palaolithische€ Funde in den Hohlen€ Nordrhein-Westfalens. Finke, W., 1983. Velen-Ramsdorf. Ausgrabung und Funde in Westfalen-Lippe 1, Kolner€ Geographische Arbeiten 45, 371e398. p. 286. Bosinski, G., 1992. Eiszeitjager€ im Neuwieder Becken. Archaologie€ des Eiszeitalters Flas, D., 2011. The middle to upper Paleolithic transition in northern Europe: the am Mittelrhein, third ed. Archaologie€ an Mittelrhein und Mosel 1. Lincombian-Ranisian-Jerzmanowician and the issue of acculturation of the last Bosinski, G., 2002. El paleolitico medio en Europa central. The Middle Palaeolithic in Neanderthals. World Archaeology 43 (4), 5499e5514. Central Europe. Zephyrus 53e54 (2000e2001), 79e142 (in Spanish). Freund, G., 1975. Zum Stand der Ausgrabungen in der Sesselfelsgrotte im Unteren Bosinski, G., 2008. Urgeschichte am Rhein. Tübinger Monographien zur Urge- Altmühltal. In: Ausgrabungen in Deutschland. Monographien des RGZM I/1, schichte. Kerns Verlag, Tübingen. Mainz, pp. 25e41. Bosinski, G., Richter, J., 1997. Palaolithikum€ und Mesolithikum. Geschichtlicher Atlas Freund, G., 1998. Sesselfelsgrotte I. Grabungsverlauf und Stratigraphie. Saarbrücken. der Rheinlande II/1. Koln€ . Freund, G., Reisch, L. (Eds.), 2014. Sesselfelsgrotte VI Naturwissenschaftliche Bosinski, G., Brunnacker, K., Schütrumpf, R., Rottlander,€ R., 1966. Der palaolithische€ Untersuchungen. Wirbeltierfauna 1. Forschungsprojekt “Das Palaolithikum€ und Fundplatz Rheindahlen, Ziegelei Dreesen- Westwand. Bonner Jahrbuch 166, Mesolithikum des Unteren Altmühltals”. Saarbrücken. 318e360. Gaudzinski, S., 1992. Wisentjager€ in Wallertheim. Zur Taphonomie einer mittel- Bosinski, G., Brunnacker, K., Turner, E., 1983. Ein Siedlungsbefund des Frühen Mit- palaolithischen€ Fundstelle in Rheinhessen. Jahrbuch RGZM 39, Mainz, telpalaolithikums€ von Ariendorf, Kr. Neuwied. Archaologisches€ Korres- pp. 245e423. pondenzblatt 13, 157e169. Gaudzinski, S., 1998. Knochen und Knochengerate€ der mittelpalaolithischen€ Fund- Bottcher,€ R., 2014. Fische, Amphibien und Reptilien aus dem Jungpleistozan€ der stelle Salzgitter-Lebenstedt (Deutschland). Jahrbuch des RGZM 45, Mainz, Sesselfelsgrotte (Neuessing, Niederbayern). In: Freund, G., Reisch, L. (Eds.), pp. 163e220. Sesselfelsgrotte VI. Naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen. Wirbeltierfauna 1. Gaudzinski-Windheuser, S., Roebroeks, W., 2011. On Neanderthal subsistence in last Forschungsprojekt “Das Palaolithikum€ und Mesolithikum des Unteren Alt- interglacial forrested environments in northern Europe. In: Conard, N., mühltals”, pp. 141e195. Richter, J. (Eds.), Neanderthal Lifeways, Subsistence and Technology. Springer, Bottcher,€ R., Çep, B., Kind, C.-J., Morike,€ D., Pawlik, A., Rahle,€ W., Steppan, K., Dordrecht, pp. 61e71. Torke, R., Torke, W., Ziegler, R., 2001. Kogelstein. Eine mittelpalaolithische€ Gaudzinski-Windheuser, S., Roebroeks, W., 2014. Multidisciplinary Studies of the Fundstelle bei Schelklingen e Schmiechen, vol. 24. Fundber, Baden-Württem- Middle Palaeolithic Record from Neumark-Nord (Germany). Landesamtes für berg, pp. 7e176. Denkmalpﬂege Sachsen-Anhalt 1/69, Halle. Bottger,€ T., Junge, F.W., Knetsch, S., Novenko, E.Y., Velichko, A.A., 2004. Gaudzinski-Windheuser, S., Kindler, L., Pop, E., Roebroeks, W., Smith, G., 2013. The Klimavariabilitat€ an Warmzeit-Kaltzeit-Übergangen,€ abgeleitet aus limnischen Eemian interglacial lake-landscape at Neumark-Nord (Germany) and its po- Sedimentfolgen in Zentral- und Osteuropa. Sachsische€ Akademie der Wissen- tential for our knowledge of hominin subsistence strategies. Quaternary In- schaften, Leipzig (unpubl. manuscript, www-available). ternational. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.07.023.

Geyh, M.A., Müller, H., 2005. Numerical 230Th/U dating and a palynological re- Lewis, S.G., Ashton, N.M., Jacobi, R.M., 2011. Testing human presence during the Last view of the Hoklsteinian/Hoxnian interglacial. Quat. Sci. Rev 24, 1861e1872. Interglacial (MIS 5e): a review of the British evidence. In: Ashton, N.M., Oxford. Lewis, S.G., Stringer, C.B. (Eds.), The Ancient Human Occupation of Britain. Gibbard, P.L., Cohen, K.M., 2011. 2008. Global Chronostratigraphical Correlation Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 125e164. Table for the Last 2.7 Million Years. Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy, Litt, T., Behre, K.E., Meyer, K.-D., Stephan, H.-J., Wansa, S., 2007. Stratigraphische Cambridge. Begriffe für das Quartar€ des Norddeutschen Vereisungsgebietes. Eiszeitalter Glapa, H., 1969. Die Hundisburger Schotter und ihre Deckschichten. Hallesches und Gegenwart 56, 7e65. Jahrbuch für Mitteldeutsche Erdgeschichte 11, 79e101. Locht, J.L., Goval, E., Antoine, P., Coutard, S., Auguste, P., Paris, C., Herisson, D., 2014. Grahmann, R., 1955. The lower palaeolithic site of Markkleeberg and other com- Palaeoenvironments and prehistoric interactions in northern France from the parable localities near Leipzig. Transactions of the American Philosophical So- Eemian Interglacial to the end of the Weichselian Middle Pleniglacial. In: ciety, N. S 45, 609e687. Foulds, F.W.F., Drinlall, H.C., Perri, A.R., Glinnick, D.T.G., Walker, J.W.P. (Eds.), Groiss, J. Th, Kaulich, B., Reisch, L., 1998. Zum Stand der Ausgrabungen in der Where Wild Things Are. Recent Advances in Palaeolithic and Mesolithic mittelpleistozanen€ Hohlenruine€ von Hunas. Das archaologische€ Jahr in Bayern Research. Oxbow Press, Durham, pp. 70e78. 1997, 25e28. Luttrop, A., Bosinski, G., 1967. Rorshain,€ Kreis Ziegenhain. Fundberichte aus Hessen Günter, K., 1961. Vorgeschichtliche Funde aus westfalischen€ Hohlen.€ Jahresheft für 7, Wiesbaden, pp. 13e18. Karst- und Hohlenkunde€ 2, 261e283. Luttrop, A., Bosinski, G., 1971. Der altsteinzeitliche Fundplatz Reutersruh bei Zie- Günther, K., 1964. Die altsteinzeitlichen Funde der Balver Hohle.€ Bodenaltertümer genhain in Hessen. Monographien zur Urgeschichte, Fundamenta A/6. Koln/€ Westfalen, Band. 8, Münster. Wien. Günther, K., 1969. Das alteste€ Steinwerkzeug: Faustkeil aus der Eiszeit, vol. 23. Mallick, R., Frank, N.A., 2002. A new technique for precise Uranium-series dating of Westfalenspiegel 18/10. Travertine micro-samples. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 66 (24), Günther, K., 1970. Ramsdorf. Westfalische€ Forschungen 1969/70 (22), 98. 4261e4272. Günther, K., 1980. Alt- und Mittelsteinzeit im Bereich der Westfalischen€ Bucht. In: Mania, D., 1997. Altpalaolithikum€ und frühes Mittelpalaolithikum€ im Elb-Saale- Führer zu vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Denkmalern,€ vol. 45, pp. 52e66. Mainz. Gebiet. In: Fiedler, L. (Ed.), Archaologie€ der altesten€ Kultur in Deutschland. Günther, K., 1986a. Steinheim-Rolfzen. Fundchronik 1984, Regierungsbezirk Det- Materialien zu Vor- und Frühgeschichte von Hessen 18, Wiesbaden, mold. Ausgrabungen und Funde in Westfalen-Lippe 4. pp. 86e194. Günther, K., 1986b. Petershagen-Windheim. Fundchronik 1984, Regierungsbezirk Mania, D., 2000. Stratigraphy and palaeolithic of the middle and upper pleistocene Detmold. Ausgrabungen und Funde in Westfalen-Lippe 4. in the Saale-Elbe- Region. In: Ronen, A., Weinstein-Evron, M. (Eds.), Toward Günther, K., 1988a. Velen-Ramsdorf, Kreis Borken. Alt- und mittelsteinzeitliche Modern Humans. The Yabroudian and Micoquian, 400e50 k-years Ago, vol. 850. Fundplatze€ in Westfalen, vol. 98. Veroffentlichung€ des Westfalischen€ Museums BAR International Series, pp. 25e49. € für Archaologie,€ Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe, Münster. Mania, D., Toepfer, V., 1973. Konigsaue.€ Gliederung, Okologie und mittelpalaolithi- Günther, K., 1988b. Velen I. Alt- und mittelsteinzeitliche Fundplatze€ in Westfalen. sche Funde der letzten Eiszeit. Monographie des Landesmuseums für Vorge- Veroffentlichung€ des Westfalischen€ Museums für Archaologie,€ Land- schichte in Halle, vol. 26. schaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe, Münster, pp. 98e99. Mania, D., Thomae, M., Litt, T., Weber, T., 1990. Neumark- Grobern.€ Beitrage€ zur Jagd Günther, K., 1988c. Velen II. Alt- und mittelsteinzeitliche Fundplatze€ in Westfalen, des mittelpalaolithischen Menschen, vol. 43. Monographie des Landesmuseums vol. 100. Veroffentlichung€ des Westfalischen€ Museums für Archaologie,€ Land- für Vorgeschichte Halle. schaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe, Münster. Maul, L. Ch, 2014. Leporid remains of the Sesselfelsgrotte (Neuessing, lower Bava- Günther, K., 1988d. Alt- und mittelsteinzeitliche Fundplatze€ in Westfalen, vol. 98. ria). In: Freund, G., Reisch, L. (Eds.), Sesselfelsgrotte VI. Naturwissenschaftliche Veroffentlichung€ des Westfalischen€ Museums für Archaologie,€ Land- Untersuchungen. Wirbeltierfauna 1. Forschungsprojekt “Das Palaolithikum€ und schaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe, Münster, pp. 104e105. Mesolithikum des Unteren Altmühltals”, pp. 119e140. Hublin, J.-J., 1984. The fossil man from Salzgitter Lebenstedt (FRG) and its place in Moncel, M.-H., 2001. Microlithic Middle Palaeolithic assemblages in central Europe human evolution during the Pleistocene in Europe. Zeitschrift für Morphologie and elephant remains. In: Cavarretta, G., Giola, P., Mussi, M., Palombo, M.R. und Anthropologie 75 (1), 45e56. (Eds.), The World of Elephants. Proceeding of the 1st International Congress Ikinger, E.-M., 2002. Zur formenkundlich-chronologischen Stellung der Rhein- Roma. Roma, pp. 314e317. dahlener Funde: Micoquien, Rheindahlien, MTA? In: Schirmer, W. (Ed.), Losse€ Monnier, J.-L., Cliquet, D., Hallegouet, B., Van Vliet-Lanoe, B., Molines, N., 2002. und Boden€ in Rheindahlen. GeoArchaeoRhein 5, Münster, pp. 79e138. Stratigraphie, paleoenvironnement et occupations humaines durant le dernier Jones, B.-D., Mangartz, F., 1991. Neue Ergebnisse zur Entstehung des modernen interglaciaire dans l'ouest de la France (Massif Armoricain). Comparaison avec Menschen. Archaologische€ Informationen 14/2, 176e194. l'interglaciare prec edent. In: Le Dernier Interglaciaire et les occupations Joris,€ O., 1992. Pradniktechnik im Micoquien der Balver Hohle.€ In: Archaologisches€ humaines du Paleolithique moyen, 8. Publication du CERP, pp. 115e140. Korrespondenzblatt, Jahrgang, vol. 22, pp. 1e12. Müller-Beck, H., 1956. Das Obere Altpalaolithikum€ in Süddeutschland. Ein Versuch Joris,€ O., 2001. Der spatmittelpal€ aolithische€ Fundplatz Buhlen (Grabungen zur altesten€ Geschichte des Menschen, Hamburg. 1966e69). Stratigraphie, Steinartefakte und Fauna des Oberen Fundplatzes. Neujahrsgruß, 1980. Neujahrsgruß des Westfalischen€ Landesmuseum für Vor- und Univers. Forsch. Prahist.€ Arch. 73, Bonn. Frühgeschichte. Münster, und Altertumskommission für Westfalen. Joris,€ O., 2003. Zur chronostratigraphischen Stellung der spatmittelpal€ aolithischen€ Neujahrsgruß, 1982. Neujahrsgruß des Westfalischen€ Museum für Archaologie/€ Keilmessergruppen. Der Versuch einer kulturgeographischen Abgrenzung einer Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege. Münster, und Altertumskommission für mittelpalaolithischen€ Formengruppe in ihrem europaischen€ Kontext, 84. Westfalen. Bericht der Romisch-Germanischen€ Kommission, pp. 49e153. Neujahrsgruß, 1985. Jahresbericht für 1984. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ Junkmanns, J., 1991. Die Steinartefakte aus Achenheim in der Sammlung Paul Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für Wernert. Archaologisches€ Korrespondenzblatt 21, 1e16. Westfalen. Justus, A., 2000. Der mittelpalaolithische€ Fundplatz “In den Wannen”, Kreis Mayen- Neujahrsgruß, 1986. Jahresbericht für 1985. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ Koblenz. Jahrbuch des RGZM 47, Mainz, pp. 155e300. Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für Kahrs, E., 1925. Palaolithische€ Funde aus dem Diluvium des Emschertales. Westfalen. Prahistorische€ Zeitschrift 16, Berlin. Neujahrsgruß, 1989. Jahresbericht für 1988. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ Kahrs, E., 1928. Das Diluvium des Emscher-Gebietes und seine palaolithischen€ Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für Kulturreste. Tag.-Ber. D. Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Koln,€ Leipzig. Westfalen. Kind, C.-J., 1992. Bemerkungen zur Differenzierung des süddeutschen Mittel- Neujahrsgruß, 1990. Jahresbericht für 1989. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ palaolithikums.€ Archaologisches€ Korrespondenzblatt 22, 151e159. Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für Kind, C.-J., 1998. Eine neue mittelpalaolithische€ Freiland-Fundstelle bei Nußloch Westfalen. (Rhein-Neckar-Kreis). Archaologische€ Ausgrabungen Baden-Württemberg Neujahrsgruß, 1991. Jahresbericht für 1990. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ 1998e1999, 23e26. Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für Klasen, N., Fischer, P., Lehmkuhl, F., Hilgers, A., 2015. Luminescence dating of loess Westfalen. deposits from the Remagen-Schwalbenberg site, western Germany. Geo- Neujahrsgruß, 1992. Jahresbericht für 1991. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ chronometria 42, 67e77. Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für Klostermann, J., Thissen, J., 1995. Die stratigraphische Stellung des Loßpro€ fils von Westfalen. Monchengladbach-Rheindahlen€ (Niederrhein). Eiszeitalter und Gegenwart 45, Neujahrsgruß, 1993. Jahresbericht für 1992. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ 42e58. Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für Koenigswald, W., 1985. Die Kleinsauger€ aus der Allactaga-Fauna von der Villa Westfalen. Seckendorff in Stuttgart- Bad Cannstatt aus dem frühen letzten Glazial. Neujahrsgruß, 1994. Jahresbericht für 1993. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ Stuttgarter Beitrage€ zur Naturkunde, serie B: Geologie und Palaontologie.€ Staatl. Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für Museum für Naturkunde, Stuttgart. Westfalen. Kühl, N., Litt, T., 2003. Quantitative time series reconstruction of Eemian temper- Neujahrsgruß, 1996. Jahresbericht für 1995. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ ature at three European sites using pollen data. Vegetation history and Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für archaeobotany 12, 205e214. Westfalen. Laurat, Th., 2003. Bifaziale Gerate€ im Altpalaolithikum€ Mitteldeutschlands. In: Neujahrsgruß, 1997. Jahresbericht für 1996. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ Meller, H. (Ed.), Erkenntnisjager.€ Kultur und Umwelt des frühen Menschen, vol. Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für 2. Festschrift für Dietrich Mania, Halle, pp. 357e372. Westfalen.

Neujahrsgruß, 1998. Jahresbericht für 1993. Westf€alisches Museum für Arch- congres prehistorique de France e Bordeaux-Les Eyzies, 31 mai-5 juin 2010. aologie/Amt€ für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für Bull. Soc. Preh. Francaise, pp. 195e205. Westfalen. Richter, D., Mauz, B., Bohner,€ U., Weismüller, W., Wagner, G.A., Freund, G., Rink, W.J., Neujahrsgruß, 1999. Jahresbericht für 1998. Westfalisches€ Museum für Archaologie/€ Richter, J., 2000. Luminescence dating of the middle/upper Palaeolithic sites Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für ‘Sesselfelsgrotte’ and ‘Abri I Schulerloch’, Altmühltal, Bavaria. In: Orschiedt, J., Westfalen. Weniger, C. (Eds.), Neanderthals and Modern Humans e Discussing the Tran- Neujahrsgruß, 2003. Jahresbericht für 2002. Westfalisches€ Museum für Arch- sition. Central and Eastern Europe from 50.000e30.000 B.P. Wissenschaftliche aologie/Amt€ für Bodendenkmalpflege, Münster, und Altertumskommission für Schriften des Neanderthal Museums, vol. 2. Neanderthal Museum, Mettmann, Westfalen. pp. 30e41. Neujahrsgruß, 2004. Jahresbericht für 2003. Westfalisches€ Museum für Arch- Roebroeks, W., 1989. From Find Scatters to Early Hominid Behavior: a Study of aologie,€ Landesmuseum und Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Alter- Middle Palaeolithic Riverside Settlements at Maastricht-Belvedere. Analecta tumskommission für Westfalen. Praehistorica Leidensia 21, The Netherlands. Neujahrsgruß, 2005. Jahresbericht für 2004. Westfalisches€ Museum für Arch- Rolland, N., 2001. Determinants of middle Palaeolithic settlement organization: a aologie,€ Landesmuseum und Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Alter- review of evidence, based on the record from western Europe. In: Conard, N. tumskommission für Westfalen. (Ed.), Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Palaeolithic and Middle Stone Age, Neujahrsgruß, 2006. Jahresbericht für 2005. Westfalisches€ Museum für Arch- pp. 545e572. aologie,€ Landesmuseum und Amt für Bodendenkmalpflege, Alter- Rosendahl, W., Ambros, D., Hilpert, B., Hambach, U., Alt, K.W., Knipping, M., tumskommission für Westfalen. Reisch, L., Kaulich, B., 2011. Nenderthals und Monkeys in the Würmian of Pasda, C., 1994. Murg-Kalvarienberg: Eine mittelpalaolitische€ Fundstelle am Central Europe: the Middle Paleolithic Site of Hunas, Southern Germany. In: Hochrhein. Archaologisches€ Korrespondenzblatt 24, 117e135. Conard, N.J., Richter, J. (Eds.), Neanderthal Lifeways, Subsistence and Technol- Pasda, C., 1996a. Silexverarbeitung am Rohmaterialvorkommen im Mittelpleistozan.€ ogy: One Hundred Fifty Years of Neanderthal Study, Vertebrate Paleobiology Ergebnisse einer Rettungsgrabung in Zwochau (Lkr. Delitzsch), vol. 38. Arbeits- and Paleoanthropology, vol. 19, pp. 15e23 part 4. und Forschungsberichte zur Sachsischen€ Bodendenkmalpflege, pp. 13e55. Rothe, D., 1983. Ur- und Frühgeschichtliche Funde in südwestfalischen€ Hohlen.€ Pasda, C., 1996b. Rohknolle, Vollkern oder Abschlag? Strategien der Rohmater- Beitrage€ zur Karst- und Hohlenforschung€ in Westfalen. Karst und Hohle€ 1982/ ialnutzung im Mittelpalaolithikum€ von Zwochau (Leipziger Tieflandsbucht), 83, München. vol. 26. Archaologisches€ Korrespondenzblatt, pp. 1e12. Ruebens, K., 2013. Regional behaviour among late Neanderthal groups in Western Pasda, C., 2000. The Schwalbenberg near Remagen: late Middle Palaeolithic arte- Europe: a comparative assessment of late Middle Palaeolithic bifacial tool facts at the end of the middle Würmian. In: Orschiedt, J., Weniger, G.-C. (Eds.), variability. Journal of Human Evolution 65 (4), 341e362. October 2013. Neanderthals and Modern Humans e Discussing the Transition: Central and Schafer,€ J., 1990a. Der altsteinzeitliche Fundplatz auf dem Vulkan Schweinskopf- Eastern Europe from 50.000e30.000 BP, vol. 2. Wissenschaftliche Schriften des Karmelenberg (Dissertation an der Universitat€ zu Koln)€ . Neanderthal Museums, pp. 112e122. Schafer,€ J., 1990b. Conjoining artefacts and consideration of raw material, their Pastoors, A., 2001. Die mittelpalaolithische€ Freilandstation von Salzgitter-Leben- application at the Middle Palaeolithic site of the Schweinskopf-Karmelenberg. stedt. Genese der Fundstelle und Systematik der Steinbearbeitung. Salzgitter In: Cziesla, E., Eickhoff, S., Arts, N., Winter, D. (Eds.), The Big Puzzle, Forschungen 3, Braunschweig. pp. 83e100. Pawlik, A.E., Thissen, J., 2011. The ‘Palaeolithic Prospection in the Inde Valley’ Schafer,€ D., 1993. Grundzüge der technologischen Entwicklung und Klassifikation Project. Eiszeitalter und Gegenwart. Quaternary Science Journal 60 (1), 66e77. vor-jungpalaolithischer€ Steinartefakte in Mitteleuropa, vol. 74. Berichte der Preusser, F., Drescher-Schneider, R., Fiebig, M., Schlüter, C., 2005. Re-interpretation Romisch€ Germanischen Kommission, pp. 49e193. of the Meikirch pollen record, Swiss Alpine foreland, and implications for Schafer,€ D., 2007. Palaotechnik,€ das Pleistozan€ von Weimar-Ehringsdorf und der middle Pleistocene chronostratigraphy. Journal of Quaternary Science 20, wissenschaftliche Erkenntnisprozess. In: Terra Praehistorica. Festschrift für K.- 607e620. D. Jager.€ Langenweissbach, pp. 176e201. Rasmussen, S.O., Bigler, M., Blockley, S.P., Blunier, T., Buchardt, S.L., Clausen, H.B., Schafer,€ J., Laurat, T., Kegler, J., 2003. Bericht zu den Ausgrabungen an dem alt- Cvijanovic, I., Dahl-Jensen, D., Johnsen, S.J., Fischer, H., Gkinis, V., Guillevic, M., steinzeitlichen Fundplatz Markkleeberg 1999e2001. Arbeits- und For- Hoek, W.Z., Lowe, J., Pedro, J.B., Popp, T., Seierstad, I.K., Steffensen, J.P., schungsberichte zur sachsischen€ Bodendenkmalpflege 45. Landesamt für Svensson, A.M., Vallelonga, P., Vinther, B.M., Walker, M.J.C., Wheatley, J.J., Archaologie,€ Dresden, pp. 13e47. Winstrup, M., 2014. A stratigraphic framework for abrupt climatic changes Schirmer, W. (Ed.), 2002. Losse€ und Boden€ in Rheindahlen. GeoArchaeoRhein 5, during the Last Glacial period based on three synchronized Greenland ice-core Münster. records: refining and extending the INTIMATE event stratigraphy. Quaternary Schlosser, M., 1992. Greven-Bockholt und Münster- Gittrup, zwei Fundplatze€ des Science Reviews 106, 14e28. Micoquien in der Westfalischen€ Tiefebene, vol. 8. Ausgrabungen und Funde in Rathgeber, Th., 2006. Fossile Menschenreste aus der Sesselfelsgrotte im unteren Westfalen-Lippe, pp. 13e24. Altmühltal (Bayern, Bundesrepublik Deutschland). In: Quartar,€ vol. 53/54. Schmidt, E.D., Frechen, M., Murray, A.S., Tsukamoto, S., Bittmann, F., 2011. Lumi- Rathgeber, Th., 2014. Zur technischen Aufbereitung des Faunenmaterials und nescence chronology of the loess record from the Tonchesberg€ section: a Übersicht über die jungpleistozanen€ Großsaugerfaunen€ der Sesselfelsgrotte comparison of using quartz and feldspar as dosimeter to extend the age range (Neuessing, Niederbayern). In: Freund, G., Reisch, L. (Eds.), Sesselfelsgrotte VI. beyond the Eemian. Quaternary International 234, 10e22. Naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen. Wirbeltierfauna 1. Forschungsprojekt Schmidtgen, O., Wagner, W., 1929. Eine altpalaolithische€ Fundstelle bei Wallertheim “Das Palaolithikum€ und Mesolithikum des Unteren Altmühltals”, pp. 13e26. in Rheinhessen, vol. 11. Notizblatt des Vereins für Erdkunde und der hessischen Reisch, L., 2014. Einige Vorbemerkungen zum Stand der Forschung. In: Freund, G., Landesanstalt zu Darmstadt, pp. 307e325. Reisch, L. (Eds.), Sesselfelsgrotte VI. Naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen. Schmitz, R.W., 2006. Neandertal 1856e2006, vol. 58. Rheinische Ausgrabungen, Wirbeltierfauna 1. Forschungsprojekt “Das Palaolithikum€ und Mesolithikum Mainz, p. 380. des Unteren Altmühltals”, pp. 11e12. Serangeli, J., Bohner,€ U., 2012. Die Artefakte von Schoningen€ und deren zeitliche Richter, J., 1997. Der G-Schichten-Komplex der Sesselfelsgrotte. Zum Verstandnis€ Einordnung. In: Behre, K.-E. (Ed.), Die chronologische Einordnung der des Micoquien. Forschungsprojekt “Das Palaolithikum€ und Mesolithikum des palaolithischen€ Fundstellen von Schoningen,€ pp. 23e38. Unteren Altmühltals II”, Teil III. Saarbrücken. Serangeli, J., Conard, N.J., 2015. The behavioral and cultural stratigraphic contexts of Richter, J., 2002. Die 14C-Daten aus der Sesselfelsgrotte und die Zeitstellung des the lithic assemblages from Schoningen.€ Journal of Human Evolution 89, Micoquien/M.M.O. Germania 80/1, 1e22. 287e297. Richter, J., 2005. Hasty foragers: the Crimea island and Europe during the last Shackleton, N.J., Sanchez-Go ni,~ M.F., Paillerc, D., Lancelotd, Y., 2003. Marine Isotope interglacial. In: Chabai, V., Richter, J., Uthmeier, Th (Eds.), Kabazi II: Last Inter- Substage 5e and the Eemian Interglacial. Global and Planetary Change 36, glacial Occupation, Environment and Subsistence. Palaeolithic Sites of Crimea 1, 151e155. Simferopol e Cologne, pp. 275e286. Sier, M.J., Peeters, J., Dekkers, M.J., Pares, J.M., Chang, L., Busschers, F.S., Cohen, K.M., Richter, J., 2006a. Neanderthals in their landscape. In: Demarsin, B., Otte, M. (Eds.), Wallinga, J., Bunnik, F.P.M., Roebroeks, W., 2015. The Blake Event recorded near Neanderthals in Europe. ERAUL 117 & ATVATVCA 2, Liege e Tongeren, the Eemian type locality e a diachronic onset of the Eemian in Europe. Qua- pp. 51e66. ternary Geochronology 28. Richter, J., 2006b. In: Horn, G.D. (Ed.), Das Palaolithikum€ in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Steguweit, L., 1998. Neue Untersuchungen am mittelpleistozanen€ Flintinventar von Neandertaler þ Co, Mainz, pp. 93e116. Lüchow-Dannenberg, vol. 49. Die Kunde, pp. 1e40. Richter, J., 2009. The role of leaf points in the Late Middle Palaeolithic of Germany. Steguweit, L., 2008. Ein Faustkeil von Worleschwang€ (Gde. Zusmarshausen, Lkr. Praehistoria (Miskolc) 9e10, 99e114, 2008e2009. Augsburg), vol. 2. Archaologie€ in Bayerisch-Schwaben, pp. 18e22. Richter, J., 2011. When did the Middle Paleolithic begin? In: Conard, N.J., Richter, J. Steguweit, L., 2011. Neue palaolithische€ Funde aus Bayern. In: Chytracek, M., Gruber, (Eds.), Neanderthal Lifeways, Subsistence and Technology. One Hundred Fifty H., Michalek, J., Sandner, R., Schmotz, K. (eds.). Archaologische€ Arbeitsge- Years of Neanderthal Study. Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology meinschaft Ostbayern/West- und Südbohmen/Ober€ osterreich.€ 20. Treffen, 23. Series. Springer e Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, New York, pp. 7e14. bis 26. Juni 2010 in Eschenbach i. d. OPf. Fines Transire 20. Rahden/Westf, Richter, J., 2013. Mittelpalaolithische€ Funde aus Coesfeld-Stevede. In: Baales, M., 43e52. Pollmann, H.O., Stapel, B. (Eds.), Westfalen in der Alt- und Mittelsteinzeit. Street, M., 2002. Plaidter Hummerich. An Early Weichselian Middle Palaeolithic Site Münster. in the Central Rhineland, vol. 45. Monographien des RGZM, Germany. Richter, J., 2014. L'impact environnemental sur la formation des assemblages lith- Street, M., Terberger, T., Orschiedt, J., 2006. A critical review of the German Paleo- iques unifaciaux et bifaciaux «micoquiens» M.M.O. d'Europe centrale. In: XXVIIe lithic hominin record. Journal of Human Evolution 51/6, 551e579.

Tangerding, M., 1984a. Das Tal der Bocholter Aa, geologisch und archaologisch€ Van Kolfschoten, Th., Gibbard, Ph.L. (Eds.), 2000. The Eemian e local sequences, betrachtet. Unser Bocholt 35, 41e48. global perspectives. Geologie en Mijnbouw. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences, Tangerding, M., 1984b. Der Mammutknochenfaustkeil aus dem Bocholter Aatal. In: vol. 79. Unsere Heimat. Jahrbuch des Kreises Borken 1984, pp. 211e212. Veil, St, Breest, K., Ho€fle, H.-C., Meyer, H.-H., Plisson, H., Urban-Küttel, B., Thieme, H., 1999. Altpalaolithische€ Holzgerate€ aus Schoningen,€ Lkr. Helmstedt. In: Wagner, G.A., Zoller,€ L., 1994. Ein mittelpalaolithischer€ Fundplatz aus der Bedeutsame Funde zur Kulturentwicklung des frühen Menschen. Germania, Weichsel-Kaltzeit bei Lichtenberg. Landkreis Lüchow-Dannenberg. Zwi- vol. 77, pp. 451e487. schenbericht über die archaologischen€ und geowissenschaftlichen Untersu- Thieme, H. (Ed.), 2007. Die Schoninger€ Speere. Mensch und Jagd vor 400000 Jahren. chungen 1987e1992. In: Germania, vol. 72, pp. 1e65. Ausstellungskatalog, Stuttgart. Voormolen, B., 2008. Ancient Hunters, Modern Butchers: Schoningen€ 13II e 4, a Kill Thieme, H., Brunnacker, K., Juvigne, E., 1981. Petrographische und urgeschichtliche e Butchery Site Dating from the Northwest European Lower Palaeolithic (Ph.D. Untersuchungen im Loßpro€ fil von Rheindahlen/Niederrheinische Bucht. Leiden 2008). Quartar€ 31/32, 41e67. Wagner, E., 1983. Das Mittelpalaolithikum€ der Großen Grotte bei Blaubeuren. (Alb- Tode, A., 1982. Der altsteinzeitliche Fundplatz Salzgitter-Lebenstedt. Teil 1. Arch- Donau-Kreis). Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte von aologischer€ Teil. Monographien zur Urgeschichte, Fundamenta A/11,1. Koln/€ Baden-Württemberg, 16, Stuttgart. Wien. Weber, Th., Litt, Th., Schafer,€ D., 1996. Neue Untersuchungen zum alteren€ Toepfer, V., 1981. Das Acheuleen auf dem Boden der Deutschen Demokratischen Palaolithikum€ in Mitteldeutschland. In: Ostritz, S., Einicke, R. (Eds.), Terra & Republik. Anthropologie 19, Brno, pp. 55e57. Praehistoria, Festschrift für Klaus-Dieter Jager.€ Beitrage€ zur Ur- und Frühge- Tromnau, G., 1983. Ein Mammutknochen-Faustkeil aus Rhede/Kreis Borken schichte Mitteleuropas 9. Wilkau-Hasslau, pp. 13e39. (Westfalen). Archaologisches€ Korrespondenzblatt 13, 287e289. Weißmüller, W., 1995. Sesselfelsgrotte II: die Silexartefakte der unteren Schichten Turner, E., 1997. Ariendorf. Quaternary Deposits and Palaeolithic Excavations in the der Sesselfelsgrotte: ein Beitrag zum Problem des Mousterien. Forschung- Karl Schneider Gravel Pit. Jahrbuch des RGZM 44, Mainz, pp. 3e191. sprojekt “Das Palaolithikum€ und Mesolithikum des Unteren Altmühltals II”. Teil Turq, A., 1992. Raw material and technological studies of the Quina Mousterian in II, Saarbrücken. the Perigord. In: Dibble, H., Mellars, P. (Eds.), The Middle Palaeolithic: Adap- Wenzel, S., 1998. Die Funde aus dem Travertin von Stuttgart-Untertürkheim und die tation, Behaviour and Variability. University Museum Monographs 78, Archaologie€ der letzten Warmzeit in Mitteleuropa. Universitatsforschungen€ zur Pennsylvania. Prahistorischen€ Archaologie€ 52, Bonn, p. 272. Uthmeier, Th, 2004. Micoquien, Aurignacien und Gravettien in Bayern. Eine Wernert, P., 1946/47. Le de doublement de Ia Moyenne Terrasse du Rhin entre regionale Studie zum Übergang vom Mittel-zum Jungpalaolithikum.€ Arch- Strasbourg et Bale. La Geologie des Terrains Recents dans l'ouest de I'Europe. aologische€ Berichte 18. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ur- und Frühgeschichte, Bonn. Session Extraordinaire des Societes Belges de Geologie, pp. 383e396, 19e26. Uthmeier, Th, 2006. Triumph über die Natur? Zum Bild vom Neandertaler als Sept. 1946. Bruxelles 1947. Elefantenjager.€ Archaologische€ Informationen 29, 17e34. Wetzel, R., Bosinski, G., 1969. Die Bocksteinschmiede im Lonetal (Markung Ram- Uthmeier, Th, Kels, H., Schirmer, W., Bohner,€ U., 2011. Neanderthals in the cold: mingen, Kr. Ulm). Veroffentlichungen€ des Staatlichen Amtes für Denkmalpflege middle Palaeolithic sites from the open-cast mine of Garzweiler, Northrhine- Stuttgart A/15, 2, Stuttgart, pp. 15e20. Westfalia (Germany). In: Conard, N.J., Richter, J. (Eds.), Neanderthal Lifeways, Zagwijn, W.H., 1961. Vegetation, climate and radiocarbon datings in the late Pleis- Subsistence and Technology, pp. 25e42. tocene of the Netherlands. Part I. Eemian and early Weichselian. Med. Geol. Valoch, K., 1988. Die Erforschung der Kulna-Hohle€ 1971e1976. Anthropos, vol. 24. Sticht. 14, 15e45. Moravske Muzeum, Brno. Zagwijn, W.H., Pape, R., 1968. Die Stratigraphie der weichselzeitlichen Ablager- Von Berg, A., Condemi, S., Frechen, M., 2000. Die Schadelkalotte€ des Neanderthalers ungen der Niederlande und Belgiens. Eiszeitalter und Gegenwart 19, von Ochtendung/Osteifel e Archaologie,€ Palaoanthropologie€ und Geologie. 129e146. Eiszeitalter und Gegenwart 50, Hannover, pp. 56e68. Ziegler, R., 2012. Homo steinheimensis, Steppenelefant & Co. In: Steinheim, Stadt Van Homelen, K., 2011. Different Times, Different Decisions? Lithic Artefacts from (Ed.), Ein Kurzführer durch das Urmensch-Museum in Steinheim an der Murr. Eemian Neumark-Nord 2/0 and Weichselian Neumark-Nord 2/2 (Saxony- Zotz, L.F., 1951. Altsteinzeitkunde Mitteleuropas. Stuttgart. Anhalt, Germany) Analyzed and Compared (Master thesis Archaeology). Leiden Zotz, L.F., Freund, G., 1973. Die mittelpalaolithische€ Gerollger€ ateindustrie€ aus der University. Faculty of Archaeology. Available (Jan 1, 2015) at: http://www. Umgebung von Kronach in Oberfranken. Materialhefte zur bayerischen Vor- academia.edu/874793/. geschichte 27, Kallmünz. Van Kolfschoten, Th., 2014. The smaller mammals from the Late Pleistocene Zotz, L.F., 1955. Das Palaolithikum€ in den Weinberghohlen€ bei Mauern. Quartar-€ sequence of the Sesselfelsgrotte. In: Freund, G., Reisch, L. (Eds.), Sesselfelsgrotte Bibliothek 2, Bonn. VI. Naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen. Wirbeltierfauna 1. Forschung- Zotz, L.F., 1959. Kosten,€ ein Werkplatz des Praesolutreenin Oberfranken. Quartar-€ sprojekt “Das Palaolithikum€ und Mesolithikum des Unteren Altmühltals”, Bibliothek 3, Bonn. pp. 27e118.