Lower and Middle Paleolithic Research Papers (original) (raw)

Use-wear and residue analyses have come to play a fundamental role in archaeological enquiries into the cultural biographies of past artefacts. Deployed either separately or in conjunction with one another, they have been turned by three generations of researchers into core scientific methods for understanding the behavioural and social interactions of prehistoric communities. In the last few years, a concerted effort has been made to improve and standardise research procedures in the two disciplines through explicit replication strategies, rigorous analytical and experimental protocols, and blind testing. This has ensured a degree of disciplinary maturity that, when successfully contextualised, can be harnessed to reach some of the highest dangling fruits of the interpretative tree and develop new explanatory models for past human behaviour. The session invites specialists in world prehistory to present their inter-and cross-disciplinary research into primate and human archaeology from the Lower Palaeolithic to the Metal Ages. It aims to explore socially contextualised problems, in which use-wear and residue analysis (on any materials and artefacts) are deployed as part of a wider range of integrated research approaches. The papers will discuss broad questions concerning the human past including the making of the mind in both primate and human evolution, technological changes and technological choices, interaction between and within communities of practice, skill, and acculturation (or lack thereof) following technology transfer. A parallel poster session will host contributions with narrower and more method-oriented foci.

- by and +1
- •
- Mesolithic Archaeology, Neolithic Archaeology, Use Wear Analysis, Residue and Use-Wear Analysis

Desde el punto de vista de la tecnología el inicio del Paleolítico medio se caracterizó por la aparición del Modo técnico 3. La aparición de este Modo técnico tuvo lugar en Europa hace alrededor de 300 ka. El paso del Modo 2 al Modo 3 fue un proceso gradual de cambio tecnológico, de manera que la aparición del Modo 3 no implicó la desaparición del Modo 2. Durante el Pleistoceno medio final coexistieron en Europa grupos que practicaban un Modo 3 inicial y grupos que continuaban utilizando una tecnología de Modo 2. El registro arqueológico de los niveles superiores del yacimiento de Gran Dolina puede contribuir a conocer mejor el proceso de transición entre estos dos Modos técnicos. En otros yacimientos europeos, como Orgnac 3 y La Micoque 3, se observa un fenómeno similar. Para algunos investigadores las semejanzas entre el Modo 2 y el Modo 3 a nivel conceptual son más signficativas que las diferencias, y por lo tanto piensan que no es conveniente marcar límites entre estos dos Modos técnicos. En realidad, el Modo 3 no implicó la aparición de grandes innovaciones técnicas, sino que se caracterizó por la mayor utilización de algunos métodos de talla ya identificados en conjuntos del Modo 2. En este sentido, destaca la progresiva generalización de métodos de producción de Bases Positivas con predeterminación de su morfología final. También hay una tendencia hacia una mayor estandarización en el tamaño y la morfología de los artefactos. La novedad tecnológica más significativa a nivel conceptual fue la aparición de los instrumentos compuestos (artefactos enmangados). No obstante, la tecnología lítica de Modo 3 es solamente un aspecto del Paleolítico medio. La tímida aparición de una serie de elementos como el control del fuego, la utilización de un lenguaje articulado, las manifestaciones simbólicas relacionadas con la muerte, señalan un incremento de la complejidad en el comportamiento humano hace entre 400 y 300 ka. En ese momento se gestó el origen el Paleolítico medio. Uno de esos elementos fue el cambio tecnológico que se manifiestó en la transición del Modo 2 al Modo 3. Por lo tanto, este cambio tecnológico es un aspecto que forma parte de un proceso global de creciente complejidad en el comportamiento humano.

- by Yossi Zaidner
- •
- Levant Prehistory, Lithics, Acheulian (Archaeology), Lower Paleolithic

Kniha byla vydána v Praze roku 2005, ISBN:80-86912-04-3 / The book was published in Prague in 2005, ISBN: 80-86912-04-3

- by Leif Steguweit
- •
- Lower and Middle Paleolithic

In the winter of 1909-1910, Palaeolithic material was gathered at the Twydall Chalk Pit, east of Gillingham, Kent, by W.H. Cook and J.R. Killick. Unlike previously reported finds from this site, these were found in the pit and removed from stratified sand that was probably associated with a small river channel. This underlay brickearth and rested directly on Chalk bedrock. The collection has recently been re-identified and reassessed, having passed through the hands of other collectors. The technological characteristics are consistent with Roe's (1968) Group I Acheulean pointed handaxe with cleavers, in which he included Twydall. Recent work (White et al. 2017) has proposed that dated handaxe assemblages belonging to Group I are from deposits belonging to the MIS 8-10 Lynch Hill/Corbets Tey terrace of the Thames or from contemporaneous contexts in other rivers, such as the Medway.

- by Frank Beresford
- •
- Geoarchaeology, Palaeolithic Archaeology, Lithic Technology, Lithics

The Emergence of the Goddess: A Study of Venus in the Paleolithic and Neolithic Era

I have been writing about Paleolithic basket weaving technology for 2 years now. In this article, I attempt to show that there was an intermediate period in the development of the technology when an understanding of structure and constructions based on right angle or opposing fibers occurred. This was the crucial breakthrough that eventually would give humans the power to make an almost unlimited number of items both large and small, such as large boats and large houses made out of reeds. It is my contention that it was this key technology that led to the rise of civilization. In previous articles, I have shown that basket weaving technology could have begun in a rudimentary form 2 million years ago with the creation of random weave basketry. About 6 thousand years ago this culminated in the rise of the Sumerian and the Egyptian civilizations. But somewhere in-between the power of right angle and opposing fiber structure was discovered which then opened the door to this versatile technology. The Lower Paleolithic site at Terra Amata in Nice France provides ample evidence that suggests this transition from random weave basket technology to modern regular basket weaving had occurred by 300 ka with hominins such as Homo erectus. In this article, I list that evidence and argue that it suggests an advanced form of basket weaving had already taken place.

Kajian arkeologi di Lembah Mansuli, Lahad Datu, Sabah Ielah menemukan
dua tapak Paleolitik, iaitu Gua Samang Buat dan tapak terbuka Mansuli. Isu utama
di Gua Samang Buat ialah berapakah kedalaman sedimen di dalamgua ini selepas
ekskavasi empat meter masih belum menemui lantai gua. Manakala isu utama di
tapak terbuka Mansuli ialah interpretasi paleoalamnya yang dikatakan bersekitaran
tasik kuno. Maka, kaedah geoftzik telah digunakan untuk cuba menjawab isu ini.
Penggunaan kaedah geofizik di Lembah Mansuli telah berjaya membantu
mengenalpasti ketebalan sedimen di Gua Samang Buat dan membantu membina
paleoalam untuk Lembah Mammli. Ketebalan sedimen gua di Gua Samang Buat
yang boleh di' ekskavasi ialah 12 m di Gua 1 dan 5 m di Gua 2. Data ini
mencadangkan secara relatifberkemungkinan kita boleh menemui lapisan berusia
138,000 tahun dahulu di Gua Samang Buat berdq~rkan usia 46,000 untuk
kedalaman 4 m. Kajian gwifizik di Lembah Mansuli pula mendedahkan wujud
tasik kuno dan sa/iran sungai kuno di Lembah Mansuli. Malah daripada survei
tersebut, ianya juga mendedahkan kemungkinan wujud dua teres tasik kuno. Modelanomali graviti dan magnet juga turut menghasilkan hentuk tasik.

- by Jeffrey Abdullah
- •
- Palaeogeography, Archaeology, Maritime Archaeology, Earth Sciences

A comprehensive review of evidence of very early palaeoart covering all continents reveals significant misconceptions in the dominant models of ‘art’ origins. The traditional preoccupation with predominantly zoomorphic, figurative traditions of south-western Europe is examined, as well as the closely related concept of an endemic cave art of the Upper Palaeolithic period. The existence of much earlier non-utilitarian traditions is demonstrated, including bead making and pigment use in the Lower Palaeolithic, and the widespread uniformity of Middle Palaeolithic palaeoart traditions is noted. The review of this global Pleistocene evidence suggests that the oldest and symbolically most sophisticated palaeoart is that of Asia rather than Europe.

- by Robert Bednarik and +1
- •
- Archaeology, Prehistoric Archaeology, Rock Art (Archaeology), Palaeolithic Archaeology

ROSSONI-NOTTER E., NOTTER O., SIMONP. et SIMONE S. « Comportements techniques des acheuléens de la grotte d’Aldène (Cesseras, Hérault, France) », Session B10-The interglacialHolsteinian eldorado and the onset of the Middle Palaeolithic (400-300 ka), UISPP, Union Internationale des Sciences Préhistoriques et Protohistoriques, International Union of the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, Unión Internacional de CiencasPrehistoricas y Protohistoricas, 1er au 7 septembre 2014,Burgos (Espagne)

- by Elena Rossoni-Notter and +2
- •
- Prehistoric Archaeology, Mediterranean prehistory, Lithic Technology, Lithics

12 original articles concerning the Paleolithic development of woven-fiber technology and its use in early civilizations. This 300+ page eBook is illustrated with over 250 photographs and pictures. More than 100 years ago Gustave Chauvet wrote that he believed basketry and simple weaving were present in the Upper Paleolithic sites he had studied. Yet it took almost that long to convince experts that this was the case. The discovery of irrefutable evidence in the form of impressions of weaving in clay provided the proof. Now it is also clear that basket-weaving and textile-weaving were not incompatible with the hunter-gatherer Paleolithic lifestyle and did not require the sedentary settled Neolithic way of life as had been assumed. This opens up the idea that basket-weaving or woven-fiber technology as I have called it, could have begun even in the Lower Paleolithic, millions of years ago. In these 8 articles, I outline how basketry could have begun perhaps two million years ago and then how it could have developed until the rise of the great civilizations of Sumer and Egypt which depended on this technology. I include ideas about how to find indirect evidence of basket-weaving in the Paleolithic era.

- by Rick Doble
- •
- Paleoanthropology, Sumerian, Basketry (Archaeology), Weaving Technology

Paleolithic artifacts collected in the course of archaeological and geological surveys at particular islands of the NE Mediterranean have given birth to arguments for seaward Pleistocene dispersals. The consecutive implications for the seafaring abilities of archaic hominins have inevitably provoked an ongoing debate. The total lack of paleoanthropological evidence and, in most cases, the absence of a secure stratigraphic context leaves us with the only other pertinent tool of analysis, the stone tools. Preliminary reports presenting lithic collections from the islands have been published since at least the middle of the previous century, yet a coherent and critical review of the evidence has hitherto not been attempted. In the light of new paleogeographic reconstructions of the Aegean region, the already published collections are in this paper reviewed and evaluated in terms of their classifications and proposed cultural and chronological attributions and discussed in relation to the arguments for or against Pleistocene sea-crossings. Despite the scarcity of the evidence and the many problems associated with their documentation , context or interpretations, the lithic collections do provide specific information regarding the earliest sea-crossings in the region. Based on the available evidence, the majority of the artifacts collected from sites on islands that were most likely insular during parts of the Pleistocene have Middle Paleolithic technological and typological affinities, therefore an association with the Neanderthals is implied and the possible marine routes are proposed. Yet further research is needed in order to better appreciate the Greek Lower Paleolithic record, thus reevaluate the arguments for Lower Paleolithic sea-crossings in the Aegean.

The terms Lower Palaeolithic and Middle Palaeolithic represent research constructs within which cultural evolution and prehistoric hominin behaviours can be studied, with the transition usually understood as marking a watershed in our evolution: an adaptation with a million-year record of success that gives way to something new. The interpretation of the Lower Palaeolithic Acheulian technocomplex is usually understood as a period of cultural stasis that extends over much of Africa and Eurasia, principally associated with Homo erectus. Those innovations that can be observed occur widely separated from one another in space and time. Yet a closer and more detailed examination of the Middle Pleistocene records from East Africa, southern Africa, Europe and the Levant reveals significant variation in cultural repertoires. A kind of paradox emerges, in which an Old World Lower Palaeolithic, apparently lacking an overall dynamic of distinctive and directed change in terms of cumulative variation over time, nevertheless culminates in a transition which sees the universal appearance of the Middle Palaeolithic. The two main hypotheses that have been advanced to explain the global transition, which happens essentially synchronously, appear mutually exclusive and contradictory. One view is that altered climatic-environmental constraints enabled and encouraged an 'Out-of-Africa' dispersal (or dispersals) of a new type of genus Homo. This cultural replacement model has been challenged more recently by the alternative hypothesis of accumulating but unrelated and temporally non-linked regional, and in fact potentially autochthonous, processes. The Levant, by virtue of its position bridging Africa and Eurasia (thus being the region into which any out-of-Africa groups would have had first to disperse into), must be seen as a critical region for assessing the relative merits of these competing hypotheses.

Archaic Homo refers to the human populations or species that were chronologically and anatomically intermediate between Homo erectus and modern Homo sapiens. Archaic Homo can be further subdivided into two chronological groupings, Early and Late Archaics. Anatomically, Archaic Homo exhibit larger braincases than H. erectus as well as greater body mass, among other features. Archaic Homo had controlled and regular use of fire and colonized temperate regions of Eurasia for the first time. In some regions, Archaic Homo populations appear to have directly contributed to the ancestry of modern humans, while the evidence for this in other regions is limited. The overall pattern of evolutionary relationships among Archaic Homo, as elucidated by the available fossil and paleogenomic evidence, indicates that not all archaics and modern humans were reproductively isolated from each other.

Over the last 150 years, the Paleolithic era was divided into the Lower, Middle and Upper Paleolithic. This scheme is an arbitrary research construct that confounds chronological, behavioral, and evolutionary meanings. Transitions between these discrete units, and in particular the Lower/Middle Paleolithic transition, received lesser attention.
At present, the Lower/Middle Paleolithic transition is still depicted as a worldwide change from biface production to Levallois technology, similar to the way it has been perceived in the initial stages of research. Some key questions remain open for further inquiry: What changed technologically and typologically beyond those guide fossils? What is the geographical variation of this global change(s)? Did
changes occur as a result of autochthonous developments in each region or by a diffusion wave (s)? What is the societal process(es) that promoted this evolutionary change?
In this paper, I explore the techno-typological variations (reduction sequences and tool kits) in Europe
north of the Pyrenees and how these traits pattern diachronically and spatially in the interval of MIS 9-7, the period during which the transition between Lower and Middle Paleolithic is suggested to occur. The first step will be to describe the range of behaviors that existed during each MIS. The presentation of those variants will track the decision-making processes within reduction sequences. The technotypological variants will be studied in relation to their relative abundance within each assemblage. Then, I will attempt to estimate if observed changes in those traits resulted from a continuous processes or whether the record constitutes of segmented local histories.

The site of Ficoncella, in northern Latium (Italy), represents a great opportunity to investigate the
modalities of a short occupation in a fluvial context during Lower Palaeolithic. From the results of
radiometric dating, geological study and bio-chronological analyses, it emerged that the human
occupation at the site, an ancient riverbank, occurred 0.5 Ma (MIS 13). This period can be considered as
a key moment in the Lower Palaeolithic, with the first Acheulean, or mode 2 sites in Europe. The lithic
assemblage of Ficoncella, without handaxes, is characterized by an overall small tool size, representing
a very original reduction sequence and tool management. In order to investigate the human behaviour
characterizing the site, we analyse the lithic industries, using a classical technological analysis, combined
with a techno-functional approach and a use-wear analysis. The study of the lithic assemblage of
Ficoncella may contribute to renew our image of the lithic industries without handaxes, too often
ignored.

- by Roxane Rocca and +5
- •
- Lithic Technology, Lithics, Acheulian (Archaeology), Lower Paleolithic

We have all asked ourselves when art first appeared; when humans first drew, painted, engraved, or sculpted forms in order to transmit concepts and ideas different from their formal materiality. It is not easy to answer that question because the information is based on archaeological evidence (with the limitations that this implies in terms of the object and the contextualization of its chronology and use) and modern conditioning factors about the understanding of the objects. The first consideration is obvious: what is art? To discuss this would be to enter an unending debate. To avoid that, as it is not the objective of this book, it is preferable to express our position directly. Art is a tangible creation through which the author, either an individual or a representative of a society, potentially transmits an idea or concept which goes (or may go) beyond formal materialization; a “formal vehicle” that a person or a group endows with a particular meaning. Therefore, it is a formal constructed graphic language, perceived and understood by the members of the human group that created it and which may also possess a potential meaning beyond the “precise moment” of its creation and thus possess a sense of timelessness. It should also be added that art is not necessarily associated with beauty. The current state of discussion of this topic in our discipline has demonstrated that aspect of beauty forms part of the “vehicle” of the meaning that the forms generate in the observer and interpreter of the graphic creation. This is to say that with a greater perception of beauty (something that pleases the eye and, by extension, the “spirit” of the observer), there is great ease of comprehension and/or acceptance of
the message. The study of the origins of art, or graphic languages, is not simple as we do not possess all the evidence that would enable a precise conclusion. However, archaeology, with the material evidence that has reached us and which it has succeeded in discovering, is endeavoring to seek the origins. It is a constant and intense search in which scientific debate is not out of place.

- by Marcos García-Diez and +1
- •
- Prehistoric Archaeology, Art History, Languages and Linguistics, Rock Art (Archaeology)

For the first time is presented a complete panorama of the current knowledge on the grottoes of Monte Gallo, an area of extraordinary importance for the prehistoric settlement in the area of Palermo. Through a careful cataloguing, which includes references to topographical, morphological aspects, accompanied by graphic and photographic documentation, even historical, and archaeological data, often unpublished, we have got a picture of great interest, which, together with the studies, already published, on Monte Pellegrino and on the other grottoes of the mountains of Palermo, allow us to have a tool for a complete study of the knowledge of the Prehistory of one of the most interesting and rich in rock stretches of the northern coast of Sicily.

A new paleolithic site that stands out as an exceptional Acheulean island site, between Europe and Asia.

- by Kévin Di Modica and +1
- •
- Paleoanthropology, Palaeolithic Archaeology, Quaternary Geology, Paleolithic Europe

L'articolo, contenuto negli Atti delle Giornate in ricordo di Mario Dini, contiene la comunicazione e lo studio preliminare di un'industria paleolitica recuperata da Mario Dini nell'agosto del 2011 ad Arsina, sulle colline a nord di Lucca. Questi territori, ancora inesplorati, presentano infatti un buon potenziale archeologico, soprattutto per la frequentazione preistorica.

- by Silvio Fioravanti and +1
- •
- Lithic Technology, Lower Paleolithic, Upper Paleolithic, Lower and Middle Paleolithic

Al-Kharj is located in the central part of the Arabian Peninsula thus providing a new point of reference for regional and intraregional comparisons with other sites known in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman and the United Arab Emirates. Given the dearth of Palaeolithic sites in the area surrounding the city of al-Kharj, the results presented here greatly expand our knowledge concerning prehistoric occupations and population dispersal across the central portion of Saudi Arabia.

- by Remy Crassard and +1
- •
- Archaeology, Near Eastern Archaeology, Prehistoric Archaeology, Geology
- by Laura Morabito
- •
- Paleolithic Europe, Lower and Middle Paleolithic
- by Jeff Rose and +1
- •
- Palaeolithic Archaeology, Out Of Africa (Palaeolithic Archaeology), Lower Paleolithic, Lower and Middle Paleolithic
- by Jean-Marie Le Tensorer
- •
- Syria, Lower and Middle Paleolithic, Middle-East Prehistory
- by Dieter Schaefer
- •
- Glacial Geology, Palaeolithic Archaeology, Quaternary Geology, Last Interglacial