Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic human fossils hm Moravia and Bohemia (Czech Republic): some new 14C dates JIfi A. SVOBODA, JOHANNES VAN DER PLICHT & ViTEZSLAV KUZELKA" New radiocarbon dates from four Moravian and Bohemian sites are presented and linked to previous work on the depositional contexts of human fossils at similar sites in the region. Whilst dates from Mladec' confirm its early Upper Palaeolithic age, the chronologies of the other three sites require revision. Key-words: radiocarbon dating, Upper Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, Moravia, Bohemia Introduction In addition to a previous paper on the Traditionally, the territories of Moravia and Bo- depositional context of the human fossils from hemia (Czech Republic) are considered rich in Mladec' and Kon6prusy-Zlatq ktifi (Svoboda human fossils from Upper Pleistocene and Early ZOOO), we focus in this paper on new 14Cdates, Holocene contexts. However, the fossil lists, as obtained recently from four Moravian and Bo- included in the available Catalogues and other hemian sites: MladeC, KonGprusy-Zlaty kiifi, reviews (VlEek 1971; Valoch 1996; Svoboda et Svitavka and Obfistvi, and discuss them in the al. 1996;Jelinek & Orvanova 1999;Wolpoff 1999) chronological framework of the human fossils are constantly being supplemented and modified from Moravia and Bohemia. It appears that the by new discoveries both in the field (MatouSek Mladei: dates confirm the expectations very well, 2000; Svoboda et al. 2000a) and in the collec- whereas dates from the other three sites make tions (Trinkaus et al. 1999; ZOOO), by rediscover- a revision and reclassification of the contexts ing old fossils believed to be lost (Svoboda zoolb; of these human fossils necessary. Drozdova 2001), and by new dates improving both the chronologies and the archaeological contexts New dates from the four Czech sites (Pettitt & Trinkaus 2000). Mladec'I (Central Moravia) We review here 14Cdates for the region, ob- Sites 1-11 from MladeC are characterized by a tained from materials such as bone, charcoal multi-floor karstic system in the Tfesin Hill. It and calcite. The bone samples provide direct is penetrated by vertical fissures and chimneys, dates, whereas charcoal and calcite yield asso- where more than 100 specimens of anatomi- ciated dates. The dates are all shown in TA- cally modern human fossils were found at vari- BLES1 & 2. The samples received the standard ous locations between 1881 and 1922 14Cpretreatment to remove contaminants. Large (Szombathy 1925; Bayer 1925; SmyCka 1922; samples were measured by the conventional Skutill938;Jelinek 1983; Oliva 1993; Wolpoff method (GrN, Groningen; ISGS, Illinois), and 1999).The aim of our present project was the small samples (mg size) by AMS (GrA, reconstruction of the depositional context, as Groningen; OxA, Oxford). For ages beyond it was before removal of sedimentary cave fill- 20,000, there are inconsistencies in published ings, by combining the early reports with evi- 'calibration' records and thus in absolute chro- dence from sediment relicts still present in the nology, so that we use the I4C chronology in cave, using a Surfer programme graphic pres- this text. The measurements are all corrected entation (Svoboda 2000). It appeared that all for isotopic factionation, and are reported in human fossils were related to debris cones ac- BP (Mook & Streurman 1983). cumulated under the chimneys, the largest being * SvobodaJnstitute of Archaeology, ASCR, Department of Paleolithic and Paleoethnology, Bmo-Dolni VGstonice, Czech Republic. [email protected] van der Plicht, Groningen University, Center for Isotope Research, Nijenborgh 4,9747 AG Groningen, Netherlands. Kuielka, National Museum, Department of Anthropology, Vaclavsk6 nbm. 68, 120 00 Prague, Czech Republic. Received 15 October 2001, accepted 31 January 2002, revised 14 April 2002 ANTlQUlTY 76 (2002): 957-62 958 NEWS & NOTES the so-called Chimney of the Dead at site I. The According to Szombathy’s (1925) descrip- majority of the cone deposits are of Middle tion of the locus ‘a’ at MladeC I (Dome of the Pleistocene age; the dating of the anatomically Dead), the human fossils were located directly modern human fossils found in their upper- below the surface calcite layer, and a similar most parts was based primarily on the pres- position was reported by SmyCka (1922) from ence of the MladeC points, i.e. bone projectiles another location of the same debris cone. In considered culturally diagnostic for the Early fact, portions of the calcite are still visible on Upper Palaeolithic in general and the Aurignacian some of the fossils preserved in the Vienna in particular (Albrechtet al. 1972; Svoboda 2001a). Natural History Museum. Since the interval Dating the human bones directly was unsuccessful between our two samples documents a rapid thus far. Through the courtesy of Drs Szilvassy, formation of the series of calcite layers, we may Wolpoff and Frayer, a human rib fragment from conclude that the deposition of human bodies the main cave, chamber D, locus d, associated was either more or less contemporaneous or with MladeC crania 1,2 and 4, was submitted to slightly earlier. We conclude that our two 14C the Oxford Accelerator for dating in 1987 by C. dates of 34,000-35,000 BP provide the mini- Stringer (pers.comm.). Unfortunately it contained mal ages of the fossils; a direct date from the insufficient collagen to produce a radiocarbon human bone is still needed for confirmation. date (R. Housley pers. comm.). Our dating efforts concentrated on site I, Kodprusy-Zlat$ kuYi (Bohemian Karst} Szombathy’s find-spot ‘a’in the so-called Dome The karstic system of the Zlaty kiifi Hill resem- of the Dead. The graphic reconstruction shows bles that at MladeC, being another multi-floor that before removal of the sediments this spot cave site, with skeletal remains of a female in- lay at the foot of the large debris cone under dividual found in one of the deep cavities (the the Chimney of the Dead (Svoboda 2000: fig- Pros’ek Hall) on the surface of a debris cone ure 5). According to Szombathy (1925; Tafel2, under a vertical chimney (Pros’ek 1952; VlCek Abb. 2), his trench, 3 m deep, was sealed at 1957; Kuielka 1997; Svoboda 2000: figures 2- the top by a solid calcite cover (layer 1);just 3). Whereas at MladeC the deposition of hu- below it followed the deposits with Upper man bodies seems to be a repeatedly practiced Pleistocene human and faunal remains (layer act, KonBprusy shows a single event. At both 2), whereas the majority of underlying depos- sites, human bodies were deposited during ter- its (layers 3-7) were sterile. Today, several gen- minal stages of the accumulation of the debris erations of calcite layers are still visible on the cones. This analogy, together with the associ- cave wall adjacent to the find-spot, sealing the ated fauna, led researchers to date the time of top of this sequence. In 1994, an attempt was made deposition at both sites to the Early Upper to date two calcite layers by means of U-series Palaeolithic. Supporting evidence for Kongprusy isotopes, but the samples appeared to be con- was scarce: stratigraphically, the human remains taminated by clay (A. Latham pers. comm.). were deposited on or just below the surface, Two other samples, both from the top cal- the associated lithic artefacts were culturally cite layers and 5 cm apart, were collected re- undiagnostic and the presumed bone projec- cently and dated by I4C. The results obtained tile fragment (MladeC-type) later appeared to from the carbonate are 34,160 (+520-490) BP be just a fragmented bone. In addition, the gla- for the upper sample (GrN-26333) and 34,930 cial fauna from the upper layers of the debris (+520490)BP for the lower sample (GrN-26334). cone might be older than the human fossils. Based on 813 values, the reservoir ages are c. For dating, VK selected a fragment of 4x2 800 years (sample 1) and c. 1200 years (sam- mm size, most probably from the cranial base ple 2). There is one basic assumption here: the of the buried individual. travertine should have been formed in more or Methodically, it is crucial how the date of less streaming, recent (at the time of formation) 12,870+70 BP (GrA-13696), obtained from this water, and not in e.g. fossil age water. human bone, changes our perspective in the In addition, a fragment of animal bone from search for analogies. In fact, the parallels now the Olomouc museum collection was submit- turn from the distant Moravian cave to the lo- ted for 14C dating. Unfortunately, no collagen cal regional archaeological background. The could be extracted from this bone. region of the Bohemian karst has a predomi- NEWS & NOTES 959 nantly Magdalenian occupation. No significant thropologists pointed to the surface fossiliza- Early Upper Palaeolithic site has been proved tion, including its whitish colouration, which before in the vicinity. The nearby site of Hostim, is different from the more fossilized Upper which seems to be a kind of central living-site Palaeolithic specimens. All this information for the Bohemian Magdalenian, is dated to raised considerable doubts as to the age of the 12,420+470 BP (Ly 1108). Another important find. Magdalenian living site, the De'ravB Cave (un- For dating, VK selected a fragment of the dated),opens in marginal rock walls of the same cranial vault, 10x5 mm in size. The result, Zlaty kLiii Hill (Fridrich & SklenBi: 1976; Vencl 1180+50 BP (GrA-13711), confirms the earlier 1995). In this perspective, the Kongprusy hu- doubts about the Pleistocene age of the fossil. man fossil provides the first evidence of mor- Most probably, it is an early medieval pit burial, tuary behaviour that may well be related to the hollowed as deep as the level of the palaeosol Magdalenian settlement system of the Bohe- and later filled with loess.