Anatomical evidence for the antiquity of human footwear use

Archeological evidence suggests that footwear was in use by at least the middle Upper Paleolithic (Gravettian) in portions of Europe, but the frequency of use and the mechanical protection provided are unclear from these data. A comparative biomechanical analysis of the proximal pedal phalanges of western Eurasian Middle Paleolithic and middle Upper Paleolithic humans, in the context of those of variably shod recent humans, indicates that supportive footwear was rare in the Middle Paleolithic, but that it became frequent by the middle Upper Paleolithic. This interpretation is based principally on the marked reduction in the robusticity of the lesser toes in the context of little or no reduction in overall lower limb locomotor robusticity by the time of the middle Upper Paleolithic.     

Neandertals,early modern humans,and rodeo riders

In 1995 Berger and Trinkaus (J. Archaeol. Sci. 22, 841–852) proposed that the anatomical distribution of Neandertal trauma, with a predominance of upper body lesions, reflected close-quarter ambush hunting as dictated by the available Middle Paleolithic weaponry (the “Rodeo rider” hypothesis). The necessity for mobility among these Late Pleistocene foragers, as a factor possibly reducing the number of preserved lower limb injuries, was considered as an alternative explanation. The accumulating data on Upper Paleolithic injuries and Middle Paleolithic weaponry, considerations of differential skeletal susceptibility of minor trauma, and evidence of interhuman violence, plus the importance of mobility for Late Pleistocene human existence, suggest that hunting injuries may explain only part of the pattern. The purpose of this note is not to resolve to ultimate factors behind the anatomical distribution of traumatic lesions among the Neandertals (or early modern humans). It is 1) to emphasize that there are multiple probable contributing factors other than close-quarter ambush hunting due to the limitations of Middle Paleolithic weaponry, and 2) to open the discussion to alternative interpretations.     

New radiocarbon dating of the transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic in Kebara Cave,Israel

The Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition (MP-UP transition) is considered a major technological and cultural threshold, at the time when modern humans spread “out of Africa”, expanded from the Levant into Europe and possibly into central and northern Asia. The dating of this techno-cultural transition has proved to be extremely difficult because it occurred sometime before 40,000 radiocarbon years before present (¹⁴C years BP), which is close to the end of the effective dating range of radiocarbon. Other dating methods such as Thermoluminescence (TL) or Electron Spin Resonance (ESR) are not sufficiently precise to date the recorded archaeological MP-UP transition in the Levant. Here we report a consistent set of stratified radiocarbon ages on freshly excavated charcoal from Kebara Cave, Mt. Carmel (Israel), that span the late Middle Paleolithic (MP) and Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP) This study applied novel strategies to improve sample preparation techniques and data analysis to obtain high-resolution radiocarbon models. From this study it is proposed that the MP-UP transition for this site can be placed immediately after 45,200 ± 700 ¹⁴C years BP and before 43,600 ± 600 ¹⁴C years BP or from 49/48 to 47/46 radiocarbon calibrated years before present (years Cal BP).     

The Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition in Southeastern Central Europe (Czechoslovakia and Hungary)

Southeastern Central Europe is quite rich in finds of progressive Neandertals from Middle Paleolithic contexts and early modern humans associated with evolved Upper Paleolithic (Aurignacian and Pavlovian). There are no human fossils that can be related to the transitional Middle-Upper Paleolithic units (the Bohunician and the Szeletian); thus, from anthropology we know only that the transitional period began with Neandertals and ended with modern humans. The archaeological record is more complex. The Jankovichian industries of Hungary differ from the mostly non-Levallois Middle Paleolithic of Central Europe in the presence of some Levallois; they seem to be technologically related to the Levallois-Leptolithic Bohunician industries of Moravia, dated to 43,000–38,000 B.P., which are the first transitional Upper Paleolithic unit. The appearance of the Szeletian before 42,000 B.P. in Hungary and at about 39,000 in Moravia represents a technological variation of the transition, although retaining marked local Middle Paleolithic elements. The date of the appearance of the typical Aurignacian, the first culture clearly related to modern humans, is unclear, but it certainly developed after 36,000 B.P. and has several dates between 35,000 and 30,000 B.P.     

The application of biometry and LA-ICP-MS to provenance isolated bones: a study of hominin remains from Oumm Qatafa Cave,Judean Desert

Three hominin phalanges were recently identified in old faunal collections attributed to the Late Acheulean (Layer D2) dated to ca. 213 Kya, from Oumm Qatafa Cave (Judean Desert), a site excavated in 1928–1949. In terms of general appearance (colour, patina and adhering sediment), these specimens resembled the fauna with which they were found, but the likelihood of stratigraphic problems especially in old excavations, the presence of 4th millennium b.c. burials in the topmost Layer A at the site and the absence of any mention of Late Acheulean hominin remains in publications relating to the site prompted us to verify that the phalanges were indeed in situ. Osteometric examination showed the phalanges to be indistinguishable from those of Middle Paleolithic Levantine anatomically modern humans (AMHS) as well as Upper Paleolithic and recent populations, thus contributing little to the resolution of their provenance. To further investigate this issue, we compared the elemental composition of the phalanges to that of fauna from the same and overlying archaeological layers using non-destructive laser ablation–inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS). The results showed a close resemblance in elemental composition between the phalanges and fauna from Layer D2, implying that they are in situ. This would indicate either an early occurrence of AMHS in the region or the presence of an ancestral archaic Homo. We propose that LA-ICP-MS offers a useful minimally invasive method for provenancing isolated human and faunal remains.     

The origins of lithic projectile point technology: evidence from Africa,the Levant,and Europe

Projectile weaponry is a human cultural universal, but its origins and antiquity remain poorly understood. Stone- and bone-tipped projectile weapons have long been treated as emergent features of the "Upper Paleolithic" behavioral revolution. Recently it has been proposed that projectile technology was in widespread use among Homo sapiens populations in Africa during Middle Stone Age (MSA) times. One obstacle to researching the origins of projectile point technology is that the criteria archaeologists employ for recognizing plausible and implausible stone projectile points are largely subjective (overall tool shape, microwear traces). Tip cross-sectional area (TCSA) is a ballistically significant dimension that works well at discriminating North American stone projectile points (spearthrower dart tips and arrowheads) from spear points. This paper compares the TCSA values of ethnographic North American stone projectile points to hypothetical Middle and Upper Paleolithic stone projectile points from Africa, the Levant, and Europe. The results of this comparison do not support the hypothesis of widespread use of stone-tipped projectiles in Africa, the Levant, or Europe prior to 40 Ka. In the New World and in Australia, where we have the richest ethnographic record of stone projectile point use, these implements are largely employed in big-game hunting and in warfare. One or both of these factors may have played a role in the widespread adoption of stone projectile point technology after 40 Ka.     

The Middle Paleolithic of the East Mediterranean Levant

This paper reviews recent developments in geochronology, archaeology, and behavioral interpretations of the Middle Paleolithic Period (ca. 47–250 Kyr) in the East Mediterranean Levant. Neandertals and early modern humans both occupied the Levant during this period. Both these hominids are associated with the Levantine Mousterian stone tool industry and similar sets of faunal remains. The Levant has long been seen as preserving evidence for the origin of modern humans out of Neandertal ancestors. Recent radiometric dates for Levantine Middle Paleolithic contexts challenge this hypothesis. Instead, they suggest the evolutionary relationships between these hominids were far more complicated. Proposed models for Neandertal and early modern human coevolutionary relationships are examined. Intense competition between Neandertals and early modern humans for a narrow human niche may be the context out of which the Upper Paleolithic behavioral revolution arose.     

Radiocarbon Chronology of the Siberian Paleolithic

We have compiled 462 C-14 determinations for 120 Paleolithic and Mesolithic sites from Siberia and the Russian Far East. The Mousterian sites are dated to ca. 46,000–28,500 BP. The Middle–Upper Paleolithic transition dates to ca. 43,300–28,500 BP. Although there are a few earlier sites, most of the Upper Paleolithic sites are dated to the time interval between ca. 34,000 BP and 10,000 BP. The earlier Upper Paleolithic stage is characterized by macroblade technology and is radiocarbon-dated to ca. 34,000–20,000 BP. The earliest microblade technology occurs in the late stage of the Upper Paleolithic, dated to ca. 23,000–20,000 BP, but the majority of microblade sites is dated to ca. 20,000–11,000 BP. The Final Paleolithic (Mesolithic) sites date to ca. 12,000–6000 BP. At ca. 13,000–11,000 BP, the earliest Neolithic appeared in both the Russian Far East (Amur River basin) and the Transbaikal. The Paleolithic–Neolithic transition occurred ca. 13,000–6000 BP.     

New evidence for Upper Palaeolithic small domestic dogs in South-Western Europe

Osteoarchaeology and genetics agree that the earliest dog domestications took place during the Upper Palaeolithic. However, they partially disagree about the process of domestication. The former indicated multiple origins, when some of the results of the latter suggested that dogs mainly came from a Chinese centre of domestication. In this study, we describe and discuss new evidence for Late Glacial small dogs in the South-West (Pont d’Ambon and Montespan) and North of France (Le Closeau). Special attention was paid to the possibility of miss-identification between small early dogs and dholes (Cuon alpinus), a middle-sized Canidae, the size of which can be similar to early small dogs. Detailed analyses of the archaeological contexts alongside that of taphonomy, morphoscopy, morphometry and pathology, identified 49 small canid remains from the three sites. They allowed us to exclude the presence of dholes and to conclude that they were all small Upper Paleolithic dogs. These, together with other more sparse discoveries, confirmed the presence of Western European Upper Paleolithic Small (WEUPS) dogs from, at least, the Middle Magdalenian to the end of the Epipaleolithic (i.e. 15,000–11,500 cal BP). As they are contemporaneous with the much larger Russian Upper Paleolithic dogs, they plea for several Euro-Asian origins for Late Palaeolithic dogs.     

The Upper Paleolithic of Northern Asia: Achievements,problems, and perspectives. II. Central and Eastern Siberia

Earlier scholars believed that the Upper Paleolithic of Central and Eastern Siberia appeared very late. However, modern research has shown that not only was there a local Middle Paleolithic, but also there was a very early series of sites in Central Siberia which show both Middle and early Upper Paleolithic traits. These are called the Makarovo horizon and may be 70,000–50,000 years old; features derived from this horizon can be dated to about 30,000 B.P. and can be seen in the early D'uktai culture. The true early Upper Paleolithic is relatively homogeneous in Central and Eastern Siberia and includes artwork. The local Upper Paleolithic reached its florescence in the culture of Mal'ta and Bur'et', which developed out of local antecedents and which is here reinterpreted in light of recent research (including the artwork, structures, and burials). The final stages of the Upper Paleolithic show considerable variability, perhaps including some exotic traits.     

Blade technology and tool forms in the Middle Stone Age of South Africa: the Howiesons Poort and post-Howiesons Poort at Rose Cottage Cave

It has been suggested that between 80 and 35 ka the Middle Stone Age record of South Africa reveals episodes of inventiveness and innovation, punctuated by apparent returns to more conventional technologies. One such episode is the Howiesons Poort (HP). The appearance of a range of small geometric forms, apparently used as insets in multi-component tools, has been considered as evidence of improved hunting weapons, with possible social and symbolic connotations. On the basis of evidence such as backed tool production, small blade technology, the occurrence of typical end-scrapers and burins similar to those encountered in the European Upper Paleolithic, long-distance transport of fine-grained raw materials, and non-lithic novelties, the HP is associated with increased levels of technological efficiency and with behavioral innovations that could have allowed the expansion of African populations to other regions. Yet our knowledge of HP technology and tool production is limited to the analysis of Klasies River Main site by Singer and Wymer and Sarah Wurz, and a few preliminary reports from other sites. This is why we present here a detailed technological and typological analysis of several HP and post-HP assemblages from the well-excavated, well-dated and well-stratified site of Rose Cottage. Our analysis shows: (a) that the HP blade production was a real technical innovation, but was not based on indirect percussion, as often suggested; (b) that blade production was based on the use of marginal percussion which does not occur in the blade production of the Eurasian Middle Paleolithic; (c) that the tool kit was dominated by backed pieces, but not all can be considered as hunting weapons; (d) that neither end-scrapers nor burins are typical of this industry and are no more an antecedent to the European Upper Paleolithic than the end-scrapers and burins of the Middle Paleolithic; (e) that patterns of raw material procurement do not conform to models based on evidence from Klasies; (f) that diachronic changes within the Rose Cottage sequence indicate slow, gradual abandonment of the technological style of the HP; (g) that the post-HP assemblages are of MSA character and are typologically and technologically quite similar to the European Middle Paleolithic; (h) that the lack of persistence of the HP innovations is in need of an explanation. The HP is not a monolithic entity. Implications for the symbolic interpretations of the HP phenomenon are discussed.     

Early Upper Paleolithic industries of Eastern Europe

Early Upper Paleolithic sites are known in various parts of Eastern Europe, but the two main concentrations of them are the Prut-Dniester basin and the middle Don. The flint industries are divided into archaeological cultures (cultural traditions), of which some show clear archaic features (Kostenki-Streletsian, Gorodtsovian, Brynzenian, etc.), while others have no Mousteroid characteristics (Spitsynian, Telmanian, etc.). Both types of culture coexisted throughout the Early Upper Paleolithic. In some cases, it is possible to trace genetic links between archaeological cultures and to follow the transition between the Middle and the Upper Paleolithic. The radiocarbon age of the oldest Upper Paleolithic sites in the Russian Plain is about 40,000 B.P., but some sites may be older. The Early Upper Paleolithic ended about 24,000–23,000 B.P. In the Crimea, the Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition appears to have taken place at about 20,000–18,000 B.P.     

Three Scenarios Of The Middle To Upper Paleolithic Transition The Middle to Upper Paleolithic Transition in Africa and the Early Peopling of Eurasia by Anatomically Modern Humans

Previous papers of this cycle describe the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition in Eurasia and in the Sino-Malayan zone. Archaeological evidence from Africa however, suggests a completely different model of the transition. Despite the variability of Paleolithic industries in Africa, the maintenance of the Middle Paleolithic strategy of core reduction constitutes a common trend. The transitional industries in North and East Africa are characterized by Aterian points and backed geometric implements.     

History,Chronology and Techno-Typology of the Upper Paleolithic Sequence in the Shuidonggou Area,Northern China

The timing and behavioral markers of the Upper Paleolithic in different parts of the world are of great importance to research on modern human dispersals. The pattern of behavioral developments in the Upper Paleolithic in northern China differs in important ways from the patterns observed in West Eurasia, Africa, and South Asia. Shuidonggou (SDG), a cluster of Paleolithic sites in northern China, contains several of the most important Upper Paleolithic sites in the region. Various localities yield evidence of three major cultural components dated by ¹⁴C, uranium-series, and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) methods to between roughly 46 ka and 10 ka. The oldest component, blade assemblages with western Eurasian early Upper Paleolithic characteristics, appears to be intrusive from Siberia and/or Mongolia, beginning at least 41 ka (e.g., SDG 1 and SDG 9). Advanced core and flake assemblages may mark the appearance of an indigenous Late Paleolithic of North China beginning at around 33 ka (e.g., SDG 2 and SDG 8). Finally, around 10.5 ka, microblade technology arrived in the area (SDG 12), although we are not sure of its origins at present. Other typical Upper Paleolithic cultural remains, such as bone tools and body decorations, have been found at various localities in the SDG area as well (e.g., ostrich eggshell beads from SDG 2, 7, and 8). Information from this cluster of occupations increases our understanding of cultural variability, adaptation, and demographic dynamics of modern humans in Late Pleistocene northern Asia.

     

New Archaeological Books and Journals

Abstract

As part of a research program aimed at clarifying the date of the Middle Paleolithic in Greece and its relationship with contemporary industries in the Balkans, a survey of the Larisa area of Thessaly for Paleolithic remains was undertaken in 1987. The results of this survey are reported, along with a reinterpretation of the available evidence in Greece for the date of the Middle Paleolithic. The banks and terrace system of the Peneios River were systematically searched along with those parts of Thessaly with deposits old enough to contain prehistoric artifacts. In 1987, we discovered 32 find spots and collected211 lithic artifacts. The lithic artifacts are Middle and Upper Paleolithic types, and are dated by their association with the fluviatile deposits exposed by downcutting of the river. Radiometric dates for the fluviatile deposits indicate an age of 45–27 KYA (thousands of years ago) for the Paleolithic finds. Other dates for the Middle Paleolithic in Greece are on the same order. The Thessalian Paleolithic industry is a Levallois-Mousterian facies with bifacial leafpoints, side Scrapers, Mousterian points, denticulates, andAurignacian-type end scrapers, burins, retouched Blades, and bifacial leafpoints with rounded bases. The Thessalian industry with its mixture of Middle and Upper Paleolithic types, is similar to other assemblages in Greece. The Greek Levallois-Mousterian resembles the Szeletian of Hungary and is of approximately the same age. It was perhaps produced by late Neanderthals in contact with an anatomically-modern human population. Late Upper Paleolithic Epigravettian and Mesolithic industries were not identified in Thessaly and are rare in Greece. Some areas may have been uninhabited or little used until 9 KYA when the first Neolithic settlements appear in Thessaly.     

The Bohunician in Moravia and Adjoining Regions

The Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition in the Middle Danube area is characterized by the presence of two transitional technocomplexes, the Bohunician and the Szeletian, together with the early appearance of the Aurignacian. The Bohunician lacks a local predecessor and seems to be intrusive to the area. Both the Bohunician typology and technology combine Middle and the Upper Paleolithic components. Although the Bohunician sites are mostly concentrated within the Brno basin, collections with characteristic traces of Bohunician technology have been documented during the same interval in surrounding areas, as well as far to the south and east. A preliminary comparison of the sites indicates a high degree of similarity among assemblages and may represent the same expansion event hypothetically associated with anatomically modern humans.     

Epipaleolithic/early Neolithic settlements at Qinghai Lake,western China

Transitions from terminal Pleistocene Upper Paleolithic foraging to Holocene Neolithic farming and pastoralist economic orientations in the northern Tibetan Plateau are examined from the perspective of Epipaleolithic sites located near Qinghai Lake, Qinghai Province, western China. Jiangxigou 2 is an artifact-rich, multicomponent midden site with the main period of occupation dating ca. 9000–5000 cal yr BP, containing abundant flaked stone artifacts including a substantial proportion of microlithic tools, abundant faunal remains including gazelle, deer, and sheep, and a small number of ceramics, including the oldest known on the Tibetan Plateau. Heimahe 3, on the other hand, is a brief hunter's camp dating ca. 8450 cal yr BP, with evident affinities to late Upper Paleolithic camps in the same region that date several thousand years older. The two distinctively different sites are probably nodes within a single Epipaleolithic foraging system that developed on the margins of the high Tibetan Plateau during the early Holocene, and that served as a basis for colonization of the high-altitude Plateau at that time. Jiangxigou 2 appears to be connected to early Neolithic agricultural settlements along the upper Yellow River (Huang He) drainage during the middle Holocene, and may provide insights into forager–agriculturalist interactions that lead to the development of pastoralist systems in the region.     

Levantine Perspectives on the Middle to Upper Paleolithic “Transition”

This article presents a synthesis of the presently available data concerning the processes and meaning of the technical changes in lithic productions across the Middle Paleolithic/Upper Paleolithic boundary in the Levant. As a “corridor” between Africa and Eurasia, this area is of first importance in the discussion of Modern Human origins. The results of several new field projects (especially concerning the Initial Upper Paleolithic), the recent lithic technological studies (based on the chaîne opératoire concept) as well as radiometric dating were used here to discuss the rhythms and processes of technical changes at the onset of the Upper Paleolithic, examining carefully the lithic repertoire from the Late Middle Paleolithic through the Initial Upper Paleolithic from Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, and Israel. This paper puts forward the idea that the emergence of Upper Paleolithic technical characteristics did not occur following a single process, even in the same region (here the Levant), but most probably followed a “mosaic” pattern. However taking into account the data presently available, the main basic scenario for the onset of the Upper Paleolithic in this region would have been the generalization of new technical traits that would have emerged within certain local Late Middle Paleolithic and the following Initial Upper Paleolithic groups. If a diffusion phenomenon should be considered, as claimed by many scholars, the available information suggests that it has functioned more as a stimulus rather than the simplistic scenario of a catastrophic wave of population and the resulting acculturation.     

Hafted armatures and multi-component tool design at the Micoquian site of Inden-Altdorf,Germany

Excavation of the Micoquian site Inden-Altdorf (Weisweiler-124) near the former German capital Bonn in western Germany has revealed the first valid open-site habitation features with hut-like structures and associated hearths for the Middle Palaeolithic in Central Europe. It has been dated to the Eemian interglacial (OIS 5e), a warm interglacial between 128 and 115 ka BP. Various wear traces and especially organic residues have been detected on a large number of stone tools using microscopic use-wear analysis of lithics recovered from the site. A multi-level analysis developed through an experimental framework and archaeological study using optical light microscopes, scanning electron microscopes and energy-dispersive X-ray microprobes identified the adhering residues as birch pitch. Birch pitch is the oldest synthetically produced material and was used as an adhesive to attach lithic implements to wooden shafts. While such hafting technology is commonly associated with modern humans in the Upper Palaeolithic, the birch pitch residues found on the Micoquian tools of Inden-Altdorf suggest that hafting technologies and the frequent use of multi-component tools already existed in the Middle Palaeolithic, c. 120 ka BP in central Europe.     

A radiocarbon chronology for the complete Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transitional sequence of Les Cottés (France)

The Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition is the key period for our understanding of Neanderthal and modern human interactions in Europe. The site of Les Cottés in south-west France is one of the rare sites with a complete and well defined sequence covering this transition period. We undertook an extensive radiocarbon dating program on mammal bone which allows us to propose a chronological framework of five distinct phases dating from the Mousterian to the Early Aurignacian at this site. We found that the Mousterian and Châtelperronian industries are separated from the overlying Protoaurignacian by a gap of approximately 1000 calendar years. Based on a comparison with Upper Paleolithic sites in Europe we see an overlap in the ages of Châtelperronian industries and Aurignacian lithic assemblages, which are usually associated with Anatomical Modern Humans, which is consistent with an acculturation at distance model for these late Neanderthals. The Proto and Early Aurignacian appear contemporaneous indicating that this transition was rapid in this region. Anatomically Modern Humans are present at the site of Les Cottés at least at 39,500 cal BP roughly coincident with the onset of the cold phase Heinrich 4.