DOCSLIB.ORG

Thesis Ttrupp6

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Thesis Ttrupp6 Looking for the Individual: An Examination of Personal Adornment in the European Upper Palaeolithic by Tamara Lynn Trupp B.A., University of Manitoba, 2003 A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTERS OF ARTS in the Department of Anthropology © Tamara Trupp 2007 University of Victoria All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without the permission of the author. ii Supervisory Committee Looking for the Individual: An Examination of Personal Adornment in the European Upper Palaeolithic by Tamara Lynn Trupp B.A., University of Manitoba, 2003 Dr. April Nowell, (Department of Anthropology, University of Victoria) Supervisor Dr. Yin Lam, (Department of Anthropology, University of Victoria) Departmental Member Dr. Hulya Demirdirek, (Department of Anthropology, University of Victoria) Departmental Member Dr. Michael Bisson, (Department of Anthropology, Mcgill University) External Examiner iii Supervisory Committee Dr. April Nowell, (Department of Anthropology, University of Victoria) Supervisor Dr. Yin Lam, (Department of Anthropology, University of Victoria) Departmental Member Dr. Hulya Demirdirek, (Department of Anthropology, University of Victoria) Departmental Member Dr. Michael Bisson, (Department of Anthropology, Mcgill University) External Examiner Abstract A new focus in Palaeolithic archaeology is to look at the possibility of the individual as a unit of analysis in the prehistoric record. This involves looking at the Palaeolithic actor as more than just an invisible entity that had a minor role in the production of long term patterns. The Palaeolithic individual was a ‘lived life’, with all aspects of agency, identity, and decision-making abilities. One area that is potentially illuminating for the examination of the individual is personal adornment, as this can lead to an understanding of the body and identity and the role of material culture in social life and self-making. A catalogue of Upper Palaeolithic sites in Europe and Siberia with evidence of items of personal adornment was recorded. From this information, patterns and sites that potentially show the individual are discussed through the categories of body, identity, and material culture. iv Table of Contents Supervisory Committee ………………..………………………..……………………….ii Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………….iii Table of Contents …………………………..……………..……………………………..iv List of Tables ………………………………………….………………………………...vii List of Figures ………………………………...………..………………………………..ix Acknowledgments ……………………………...…………..…………………………….x Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1. Introduction………..………………………….....………………………………..1 1.2. Outline of Chapters………………………………...……..………………………2 Chapter 2: The Individual and Related Topics 2.1. Introduction………………………………..……………..……………………….6 2.2. Introduction to the Individual………..…………………………………………...6 2.2.1. Should We Look for the Individual in the Archaeological Record?..……...8 2.2.2. Examples of Previous Attempts to Include the Individual………….…….10 2.3. Introduction to Behavioural Modernity…………………...………….................12 2.3.1. What is Behavioural Modernity? ……………………………..…………..13 2.3.2. The Trait List…………………………………………..………….............13 2.3.3. The Pace of the Emergence of Modern Behaviours……..………………..15 2.3.4. The Social Basis of Behavioural Modernity………………………………17 2.3.5. Personal Adornment and Behavioural Modernity……………………...…18 2.4. Material Culture and Personal Adornment...……………..……………………..19 2.4.1. Craft as Art…………………………………………..…………………….20 2.4.2. Uses of Personal Adornment……………………………………………...21 2.5. Introduction to Style…...……………………..…………………………………23 2.5.1. Defining Style…………………………………………..…………............24 2.5.2. Stylistic Variation………………………………………….……………...25 2.6. Body and Identity…………………………………………..……………….......26 2.6.1. Some Views of the Body………………………………………………….27 2.6.2. Body as Lived Experience………………………………………………...28 2.6.3. The Connection between Body and Identity………………………………29 2.6.4. Individual Identity and the Body………………………………………….29 2.6.5. Social Identity and the Body……………………………………………....30 2.6.6. The Individual and Body and Identity…………………………………….30 2.7. Conclusion…………………………………………..…………………………..31 Chapter 3: Personal Adornment Background 3.1. Introduction…………………………………………..………………….............34 3.2. Materials…………………………………………..………………….................35 3.2.1. Teeth…………………………………………..…………………………..35 3.2.2. Bone…………………………………………..…………………………...35 3.2.3. Shells…………………………………………..…………………………..36 3.2.4. Ivory…………………………………………..…………………………...36 v 3.2.5. Bone and Antler…………………………………………..……………….37 3.2.6. Stone…………………………………………..…………………………..37 3.3. Qualities of Materials……………………………………………………………38 3.3.1. Hardness…………………………………………………………………...38 3.3.2. Colour……………………………………………………………………..38 3.3.3. Sheen/Luster………………………………………………………………39 3.3.4. Texture…………………………………………………………………….39 3.3.5. Size and Shape…………………………………………………………….39 3.4. Availability- exotic vs. local………………………………………….................40 3.4.1. Shell……………………………………………………………………….41 3.4.2. Stone………………………………………………………………………42 3.4.3. Ivory, Bone, and Teeth……………………………………………………42 3.5. Techniques……………………………………………………………...............43 3.5.1. Preparation…………………………………………………………..........43 3.5.2. Perforation………………………………………………………………..44 3.5.3. Segmenting………………………………………………………….........46 3.5.4. Enhancements…………………………………………………………….47 3.5.5. Replication/Imitation…………………………..…………………………49 3.5.6. Standardization………………………….………………………………..50 3.6. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………51 Chapter 4: Geographical and Temporal Background 4.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………...................52 4.2. Geographical Background………………………………………………………53 4.2.1. Western Europe……………………………………………………………53 4.2.2. Central Europe…………………………………………………………….54 4.2.3. Eastern Europe and Siberia…………………………………………..........55 4.3. Time Periods/Cultural Entities Background…………………………………….55 4.4. Transitional Industries…………………………………………………………..57 4.4.1. Western Europe…………………………………………………...............57 4.4.2. Central Europe ………………………………………………...………….58 4.4.3. Eastern Europe ……………………...……………………..……………...59 4.5. Upper Palaeolithic Industries…………………………………………................59 4.5.1. Aurignacian (40,000-28,000 years BP) …………………………………..59 4.5.2. Gravettian (28,000-22,000 years BP) …………………………………….61 4.5.3. Solutrean (22,000-18,000 years BP) ……………………………………...62 4.5.4. Epigravettian (21,000- 10,000 years BP) …………………………………62 4.5.5. Magdalenian (18,000-11,000 years BP) ………………………………….63 4.6. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………64 Chapter 5: Methods, Analysis, and Results 5.1. Introduction……………………………………………………….......................65 5.2. Limitations………………………………………………………........................65 5.2.1. Availability………………………………………….………….................66 5.2.2. Excavation Bias and Taphonomic Consideration…………………………67 5.3. Description of Catalogue………………………..………………………………67 vi 5.3.1. Basic Site Information…………………………………………………….68 5.3.2. Archaeological Culture…………………………………………................68 5.3.3. Artifact Information……………………………………………………….71 5.4. Analysis of Body, Identity, and Actions through Personal Adornment………...72 5.5. Body…………………………………………..…………………………………72 5.5.1. General Discussion…………………………………..………………........73 5.5.2. Basic Patterns in Burials……………………………………..……………74 5.5.3. Who is Buried? ………………………………………………..………….77 5.5.4. Grave Goods……………………………………..……………………......81 5.5.5. Time and Labour…………………………………..………………………82 5.6. Identity…………………………………………..………………………………84 5.6.1. General Discussion…………………………………..………………........84 5.6.2. Ivory……………………………………………………………….………85 5.6.3. Shells……………………………….……………………………………...87 5.6.4. Bone and Stone…………………………………..…………………..........89 5.6.5. Teeth………………………………..……………………………………..91 5.6.6. Unique Materials…………………………………..………………………96 5.6.7. Unique Forms………………………………..…………………………….98 5.6.8. Style…………………………………..…………………………………...99 5.7. Actions…………………………………………..……………………………..100 5.7.1. Workshops and Craftsmanship…………………………………………..101 5.7.2. Time and Labour……………………………………………………........104 5.7.3. Individual Actions………………………………….…………………….105 5.8. Conclusion……………………………………..………………………………107 Chapter 6: Conclusion 6.1. Discussion...………………………………..…………………………………..110 6.2. Is the Individual There?……………………………………..…………………112 6.3. Further Research………………………………………..……………………...113 6.4. Final Conclusion………………………………………..……………………...114 Literature Cited …………………………………………..…………………………...116 Appendices Appendix A: Site Catalogue…………………………………..………………..135 Appendix B: Transitional and Dateless Sites…………………………………...163 Appendix C: Aurignacian Sites…………………………………..…………….165 Appendix D: Gravettian Sites…………………………………………………..172 Appendix E: Solutrean Sites…………………………………..………………..180 Appendix F: Epigravettian Sites…………………………………..……………182 Appendix G: Magdalenian Sites…………………………………..……………185 vii List of Tables Table 1: Table of the cultural entities within the Upper Palaeolithic in Europe………....56 Table 2: Table of the total number of sites sorted by archaeological culture (N/A signifies that it is not an applicable industry to the area, / signifies that there are no recorded sites in that country or industry)………………………….68 Table 3: Number of sites that have burials with ornaments as grave goods (Number in parantheses is the total number of sites, N/A signifies that it is not an applicable industry to the area, / signifies no recorded sites in that time period, 0 signifies that there are no recorded sites with burials).…...…………...75 Table 4: Number of sites that specify ivory as a medium for personal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hidden Images in Atxurra Cave (Northern Spain) a New Proposal for Visibility Analyses of Palaeolithic Rock Art in Subterranean
    Quaternary International 566-567 (2020) 163–170 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint Hidden images in Atxurra Cave (Northern Spain): A new proposal for visibility analyses of Palaeolithic rock art in subterranean environments T Iñaki Intxaurbea,d, Olivia Riverob,Ma Ángeles Medina-Alcaidec, Martín Arriolabengoad, Joseba Ríos-Garaizare, Sergio Salazarb, Juan Francisco Ruiz-Lópezf, Paula Ortega-Martínezg, ∗ Diego Garatea, a Instituto Internacional de Investigaciones Prehistóricas de Cantabria (IIIPC, Gobierno de Cantabria, Universidad de Cantabria, Santander). Edificio Interfacultativo, Avda. Los Castros s/n, 39005, Santander, Spain b Dpto. Prehistoria, Historia Antigua y Arqueología, Universidad de Salamanca, 37008, Salamanca, Spain c Dpto. Historia, Facultad de Letras, Universidad de Córdoba, 14071, Córdoba, Spain d Dpto. Mineralogía y Petrología. Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea/Universidad del País Vasco, 48940, Leioa, Spain e Archaeology Program, Centro Nacional de Investigación sobre la Evolución Humana (CENIEH), Paseo Sierra de Atapuerca 3, 09002, Burgos, Spain f Dpto. de Historia. Universidad de Castilla – La Mancha, 16001, Cuenca, Spain g Independent Researcher ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Visibility has been the subject of study in Palaeolithic rock art research ever since the discovery of Altamira Cave Cave art in 1879. Nevertheless, until now, the different approaches have been based on subjective assessments, due to Viewshed computational limitations for a more objective methodology. Nowadays, cutting-edge technologies such as GIS Archaeological context allow us to address spatial studies in caves and overcome their geomorphologically complex and closed char- Cave geomorphology acteristics. Here we describe an innovative methodology that uses computing tools available to any researcher to GIS study the viewsheds of the graphic units in decorated caves.
    [Show full text]
  • Adorning the Dead a Bio-Archaeological Analysis of Ochre Application to Gravettian Burials
    Adorning the Dead A Bio-Archaeological Analysis of Ochre Application to Gravettian Burials Sierra McKinney; University of Victoria ©2016 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 2 Theoretical Orientation ...................................................................................................................... 4 Literature Review ................................................................................................................................. 5 History of Ochre Use: ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Gravettian Burials and the Archaeology Record: .................................................................................. 6 Methods of Ochre Application ...................................................................................................................... 8 Established Gravettian Regional Variation: ......................................................................................... 11 Material and Methodology ............................................................................................................... 14 Burial Database .............................................................................................................................................. 14 GIS Analysis .....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin and Spread of Modern Humans 1. Modern
    THE ORIGIN AND SPREAD OF MODERN HUMANS • Modern Humans • The Advent of Behavioral Modernity • Advances in Technology • Glacial Retreat • Cave Art • The Settling of Australia • Settling the Americas • The Peopling of the Pacific 1. MODERN HUMANS Anatomically modern humans (AMHs) evolved from an archaic Homo sapiens African ancestor • Eventually AMHs spread to other areas, including western Europe, where they replaced, or Interbred with, Neandertals Out of Africa II • Accumulating to support African origin for AMHs • White and Asfaw: finds near village of Herto are generally anatomically modern • Leakey: Omo Kibish remains from 195,000 B.P. appear to be earliest AMH fossils yet found • Sites in South Africa of early African AMHs 1 • Anatomically modern specimens, including skull found at Skhūl, date to 100,000 B.P. • Early AMHs in Western Europe often referred to as Cro Magnons, after earliest fossil find of an anatomically modern human in France • AMHs may have inhabited Middle East before the Neandertals GENETIC EVIDENCE FOR OUT OF AFRICA II • Researchers from Berkeley generated a computerized model of Homo evolution • Based upon the average rate of mutation in known samples of mtDNA • Only the mother contributes mtDNA • Everyone alive today has mtDNA that descends from a woman (dubbed Eve) who lived in sub-Saharan Africa around 200,000 years ago GENETIC EVIDENCE FOR OUT OF AFRICA II • In 1997, mtDNA extracted showed that the Neandertals differed significantly from modern humans • 27 differences between modern humans and Neandertal •
    [Show full text]
  • The Janus-Faced Dilemma of Rock Art Heritage
    The Janus-faced dilemma of rock art heritage management in Europe: a double dialectic process between conservation and public outreach, transmission and exclusion Mélanie Duval, Christophe Gauchon To cite this version: Mélanie Duval, Christophe Gauchon. The Janus-faced dilemma of rock art heritage management in Europe: a double dialectic process between conservation and public outreach, transmission and exclusion. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, Taylor & Francis, In press, 10.1080/13505033.2020.1860329. hal-03078965 HAL Id: hal-03078965 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03078965 Submitted on 21 Feb 2021 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Duval Mélanie, Gauchon Christophe, 2021. The Janus-faced dilemma of rock art heritage management in Europe: a double dialectic process between conservation and public outreach, transmission and exclusion, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, doi.org/10.1080/13505033.2020.1860329 Authors: Mélanie Duval and Christophe Gauchon Mélanie Duval: *Université Grenoble Alpes (UGA), Université Savoie Mont Blanc (USMB), CNRS, Environnements, Dynamics and Territories of Mountains (EDYTEM), Chambéry, France; * Rock Art Research Institute GAES, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. Christophe Gauchon: *Université Grenoble Alpes (UGA), Université Savoie Mont Blanc (USMB), CNRS, Environnements, Dynamics and Territories of Mountains (EDYTEM), Chambéry, France.
    [Show full text]
  • Nasal Floor Variation Among Eastern Eurasian Pleistocene Homo Xiu-Jie WU1, Scott D
    ANTHROPOLOGICAL SCIENCE Vol. 120(3), 217–226, 2012 Nasal floor variation among eastern Eurasian Pleistocene Homo Xiu-Jie WU1, Scott D. MADDUX2, Lei PAN1,3, Erik TRINKAUS4* 1Key Laboratory of Evolutionary Systematics of Vertebrates, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100044, People’s Republic of China 2Department of Pathology and Anatomical Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65212, USA 3Graduate University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People’s Republic of China 4Department of Anthropology, Washington University, St Louis, MO 63130, USA Received 28 March 2012; accepted 9 July 2012 Abstract A bi-level nasal floor, although present in most Pleistocene and recent human samples, reaches its highest frequency among the western Eurasian Neandertals and has been considered a fea- ture distinctive of them. Early modern humans, in contrast, tend to feature a level (or sloping) nasal floor. Sufficiently intact maxillae are rare among eastern Eurasian Pleistocene humans, but several fos- sils provide nasal floor configurations. The available eastern Eurasian Late Pleistocene early modern humans have predominantly level nasal floors, similar to western early modern humans. Of the four observable eastern Eurasian archaic Homo maxillae (Sangiran 4, Chaoxian 1, Xujiayao 1, and Chang- yang 1), three have the bi-level pattern and the fourth is scored as bi-level/sloping. It therefore appears that bi-level nasal floors were common among Pleistocene archaic humans, and a high frequency of them is not distinctive of the Neandertals. Key words: noses, maxilla, Asia, palate, Neandertal Introduction dominate with the bi-level configuration being present in ≤10% in all but a sub-Saharan African “Bantu” sample In his descriptions of the Shanidar Neandertal crania, (Table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Bibliography Many books were read and researched in the compilation of Binford, L. R, 1983, Working at Archaeology. Academic Press, The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology: New York. Binford, L. R, and Binford, S. R (eds.), 1968, New Perspectives in American Museum of Natural History, 1993, The First Humans. Archaeology. Aldine, Chicago. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Braidwood, R 1.,1960, Archaeologists and What They Do. Franklin American Museum of Natural History, 1993, People of the Stone Watts, New York. Age. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Branigan, Keith (ed.), 1982, The Atlas ofArchaeology. St. Martin's, American Museum of Natural History, 1994, New World and Pacific New York. Civilizations. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Bray, w., and Tump, D., 1972, Penguin Dictionary ofArchaeology. American Museum of Natural History, 1994, Old World Civiliza­ Penguin, New York. tions. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Brennan, L., 1973, Beginner's Guide to Archaeology. Stackpole Ashmore, w., and Sharer, R. J., 1988, Discovering Our Past: A Brief Books, Harrisburg, PA. Introduction to Archaeology. Mayfield, Mountain View, CA. Broderick, M., and Morton, A. A., 1924, A Concise Dictionary of Atkinson, R J. C., 1985, Field Archaeology, 2d ed. Hyperion, New Egyptian Archaeology. Ares Publishers, Chicago. York. Brothwell, D., 1963, Digging Up Bones: The Excavation, Treatment Bacon, E. (ed.), 1976, The Great Archaeologists. Bobbs-Merrill, and Study ofHuman Skeletal Remains. British Museum, London. New York. Brothwell, D., and Higgs, E. (eds.), 1969, Science in Archaeology, Bahn, P., 1993, Collins Dictionary of Archaeology. ABC-CLIO, 2d ed. Thames and Hudson, London. Santa Barbara, CA. Budge, E. A. Wallis, 1929, The Rosetta Stone. Dover, New York. Bahn, P.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of American Archeologists in the Study of the European Upper Paleolithic Lawrence G
    PaleoAnthropology, October 2004 The Role of American Archeologists in the Study of the European Upper Paleolithic Lawrence G. Straus, Editor BAR International Series 1048. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2002. Pp. 83 (paperback). ISBN 1-84171-429-1 Reviewed by Marta Camps Human Origins Laboratory, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution This volume stems from a colloquium organized within the XIV UISPP Congress in Liège (Belgium), in 2001. It was quite clear to those who attended that the subject was not only an interesting and important one, but far richer than the short session could accommodate. Fortunately—particularly after notable absences among the scheduled speakers—this volume was successfully compiled and stands as a good, reliable source of information for scholars working on the European Upper Paleolithic or on the historiography of this research topic. Before commenting on the individual papers, I think it is necessary to highlight the originality of its focus, which is seldom a subject of study in itself. At first, it may look like the recollection of personal anecdotes, from American researchers who work in Europe and Europeans who are working with American colleagues in joint projects, but it soon becomes obvious that it is much more than just “their personal stories.” The way in which we understand the European Paleolithic at present has been shaped in part by many of the events, differences, and combinations of the two perspectives that the contributions mentioned below portray. Straus offers an extremely detailed account of the historical development of American participation in European projects since the late 19th century. At that time, the purpose of American visits was not only the collection of material, but also to train young workers.
    [Show full text]
  • Štýřice III (Koněvova St. Or Vídeňská St.) – an Epigravettian Site in Brno (Czech Republic)
    Volume V ● Issue 1/2014 ● Pages 7–18 INTERDISCIPLINARIA ARCHAEOLOGICA NATURAL SCIENCES IN ARCHAEOLOGY homepage: http://www.iansa.eu V/1/2014 Štýřice III (Koněvova St. or Vídeňská St.) – an Epigravettian Site in Brno (Czech Republic) Zdeňka Nerudováa*, Petr Nerudaa aAnthropos Institute, Moravian Museum, Zelný trh 6, Brno 659 37, Czech Republic ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT: Article history: The paper summarises the results of Palaeolithic research in Vídeňská (former Koněvova) Street in the Received: 1 August 2014 city of Brno. After the first small-scale excavations carried by K. Valoch in 1972, primarily rescue ex- Accepted: 16 September 2014 cavations in recent years (2009–2014) have revealed the extent and intensity of the Palaeolithic settle- ment. The specific features of the locality are represented by imported raw materials, a high frequency Key words: of burins compared to other tools and a predominance of Mammuthus primigenius among the faunal Moravia remains. The settlement was earlier classified as Epigravettian which is confirmed by new radiocarbon Svratka River dating. Based on the knowledge obtained in the immediate neighbourhood of the locality, it became Epigravettian apparent that this convenient area near the river repeatedly attracted people to build settlements in these subsistence strategies places, in all probability specialised groups of hunters. Despite the climatically unfavourable final part of the LGT period (after a definition by Markova et al. 2013), within which the settlement at Brno- -Štýřice III falls based on radiocarbon dating and malacofauna, we can take into consideration a denser settlement strategy than is usually assumed in the broader context of the Middle Danube Region.
    [Show full text]
  • Abstracts of Reports and Posters
    Abstracts of Reports and Posters Amira Adaileh The Magdalenian site of Bad Kösen-Lengefeld The open air site of Bad Kösen-Lengefeld is located in Sachsen-Anhalt, Eastern Germany. It was discov- ered in the mid 1950´s in the immediate vicinity of the famous Magdalenian site of Saaleck. Since that time, archaeologists collected over 2000 lithic artifacts during systematical surveys. The technological and typological analyses of the lithic artifacts confirmed the assignment of Bad Kösen-Lengefeld to a late Magdalenian. Furthermore, the investigation of the surface collections brought forward information about the character of this camp site, the duration of its occupation and the pattern of raw material procure- ment. The fact that Bad Kösen-Lengefeld is located in a region with more than 100 Magdalenian sites fostered a comparison of the lithic inventory with other Magdalenian assemblages. Thus, allowing to spec- ify the position of the Lengefeld collection within the chorological context of the Magdalenian in Eastern Germany. Jehanne Affolter, Ludovic Mevel Raw material circulation in northern french alps and Jura during lateglacial interstadial : method, new data and paleohistoric implication Since fifteen years the study of the characterization and origin of flint resources used by Magdalenian and Azilian groups in northern French Alps and Jura have received significant research work. Diverse and well distributed spatially, some of these resources were used and disseminated throughout the late Upper Paleolithic. Which changes do we observe during the Magdalenian then for the Azilian? The results of petrographic analysis and techno-economic analysis to several archaeological sites allow us to assess dia- chronic changes in economic behavior of these people and discuss the significance of these results.
    [Show full text]
  • The Aurignacian Viewed from Africa
    Aurignacian Genius: Art, Technology and Society of the First Modern Humans in Europe Proceedings of the International Symposium, April 08-10 2013, New York University THE AURIGNACIAN VIEWED FROM AFRICA Christian A. TRYON Introduction 20 The African archeological record of 43-28 ka as a comparison 21 A - The Aurignacian has no direct equivalent in Africa 21 B - Archaic hominins persist in Africa through much of the Late Pleistocene 24 C - High modification symbolic artifacts in Africa and Eurasia 24 Conclusions 26 Acknowledgements 26 References cited 27 To cite this article Tryon C. A. , 2015 - The Aurignacian Viewed from Africa, in White R., Bourrillon R. (eds.) with the collaboration of Bon F., Aurignacian Genius: Art, Technology and Society of the First Modern Humans in Europe, Proceedings of the International Symposium, April 08-10 2013, New York University, P@lethnology, 7, 19-33. http://www.palethnologie.org 19 P@lethnology | 2015 | 19-33 Aurignacian Genius: Art, Technology and Society of the First Modern Humans in Europe Proceedings of the International Symposium, April 08-10 2013, New York University THE AURIGNACIAN VIEWED FROM AFRICA Christian A. TRYON Abstract The Aurignacian technocomplex in Eurasia, dated to ~43-28 ka, has no direct archeological taxonomic equivalent in Africa during the same time interval, which may reflect differences in inter-group communication or differences in archeological definitions currently in use. Extinct hominin taxa are present in both Eurasia and Africa during this interval, but the African archeological record has played little role in discussions of the demographic expansion of Homo sapiens, unlike the Aurignacian. Sites in Eurasia and Africa by 42 ka show the earliest examples of personal ornaments that result from extensive modification of raw materials, a greater investment of time that may reflect increased their use in increasingly diverse and complex social networks.
    [Show full text]
  • A B S T Ra C T S O F T H E O Ra L and Poster Presentations
    Abstracts of the oral and poster presentations (in alphabetic order) see Addenda, p. 271 11th ICAZ International Conference. Paris, 23-28 August 2010 81 82 11th ICAZ International Conference. Paris, 23-28 August 2010 ABRAMS Grégory1, BONJEAN ABUHELALEH Bellal1, AL NAHAR Maysoon2, Dominique1, Di Modica Kévin1 & PATOU- BERRUTI Gabriele Luigi Francesco, MATHIS Marylène2 CANCELLIERI Emanuele1 & THUN 1, Centre de recherches de la grotte Scladina, 339D Rue Fond des Vaux, 5300 Andenne, HOHENSTEIN Ursula1 Belgique, [email protected]; [email protected] ; [email protected] 2, Institut de Paléontologie Humaine, Département Préhistoire du Muséum National d’Histoire 1, Department of Biology and Evolution, University of Ferrara, Corso Ercole I d’Este 32, Ferrara Naturelle, 1 Rue René Panhard, 75013 Paris, France, [email protected] (FE: 44100), Italy, [email protected] 2, Department of Archaeology, University of Jordan. Amman 11942 Jordan, maysnahar@gmail. com Les os brûlés de l’ensemble sédimentaire 1A de Scladina (Andenne, Belgique) : apports naturels ou restes de foyer Study of Bone artefacts and use techniques from the Neo- néandertalien ? lithic Jordanian site; Tell Abu Suwwan (PPNB-PN) L’ensemble sédimentaire 1A de la grotte Scladina, daté par 14C entre In this paper we would like to present the experimental study car- 40 et 37.000 B.P., recèle les traces d’une occupation par les Néan- ried out in order to reproduce the bone artifacts coming from the dertaliens qui contient environ 3.500 artefacts lithiques ainsi que Neolithic site Tell Abu Suwwan-Jordan. This experimental project plusieurs milliers de restes fauniques, attribués majoritairement au aims to complete the archaeozoological analysis of the bone arti- Cheval pour les herbivores.
    [Show full text]
  • The Many Faces of the Gravettian
    THE MANY FACES OF THE GRAVETTIAN Abstract The Gravettian phenomenon (ca 34,000 to 24,000 years ago) is a complex biocultural adaptation to cold and arid glacial conditions, evidence of the remarkable adaptive flexibility of anatomically modern humans. The Gravettian is spread across Europe from Portugal to the Urals. Why does the Gravettian matter? With the focus on the ‘origins’ of modern humans, we have almost forgotten the evolutionary patterns in later Homo sapiens. The many faces of the Gravettian form a rich source of information on modern human evolution and the social and cultural adaptations developed during the Upper Paleolithic of Europe. The session aims to address this issue and discuss current research in terms of: 1 theoretical frameworks 2 proxies for behavioural variability 3 fieldwork circumstances (especially sampling strategies and scientific methods) Explanation What do we mean by the “many faces” of the Gravettian? Regional diversity in (lithic) tools seems to be one of the hallmarks of the Gravettian, when compared to the relative uniformity of the Early and Late Aurignacian. Font Robert points, Noaillian, Rayssian, Late Gravettian, Pavlovian, Willendorf-Kostienkian, Sagvarian, Kašovian, Epigravettian are just a few of the labels used to try and categorise this diversity in Europe. The “many faces” refer to the mosaic character of the Gravettian. A better understanding of this regional diversity comes with another sense of “many faces”, namely the exploration of the full spectrum of behaviors and activities, cultural remains and material signatures. Since the 1990s, lithic analysis has moved beyond form, faunal analysis has moved beyond species determination, site analysis has moved beyond age and cultural attribution: the integration of all data is used to reconstruct the full range of activities and practices leading to the archaeological record and brings the Gravettian mosaic to full scope.
    [Show full text]