Comments on "human-climate interaction during the Early Upper Paleolithic: testing the hypothesis of an adaptive shift between the Proto-Aurignacian and the Early Aurignacian" by William E. Banks, Francesco d'Errico, João Zilhão

The contribution of integrated 3D model analysis to Protoaurignacian stone tool design

Protoaurignacian foragers relied heavily on the production and use of bladelets. Techno-typological studies of these implements have provided insights into crucial aspects of cultural variability. However, new technologies have seldom been used to quantify patterns of stone tool design. Taking advantage of a new scanning protocol and open-source software, we conduct the first 3D analysis of a Protoaurignacian assemblage, focusing on the selection and modification of blades and bladelets. We study a large dataset of complete blanks and retouched tools from the early Protoaurignacian assemblage at Fumane Cave in northeastern Italy. Our main goal is to validate and refine previous techno-typological considerations employing a 3D geometric morphometrics approach complemented by 2D analysis of cross-section outlines and computation of retouch angle. The encouraging results show the merits of the proposed integrated approach and confirm that bladelets were the main focus of stone knapping at the site. Among modified bladelets, various retouching techniques were applied to achieve specific shape objectives. We suggest that the variability observed among retouched bladelets relates to the design of multi-part artifacts that need to be further explored via renewed experimental and functional studies.

From Neandertals to modern humans: New data on the Uluzzian

Having thrived in Eurasia for 350,000 years Neandertals disappeared from the record around 40,000-37,000 years ago, after modern humans entered Europe. It was a complex process of population interactions that included cultural exchanges and admixture between Neandertals and dispersing groups of modern humans. In Europe Neandertals are always associated with the Mousterian while the Aurignacian is associated with modern humans only. The onset of the Aurignacian is preceded by "transitional" industries which show some similarities with the Mousterian but also contain modern tool forms. Information on these industries is often incomplete or disputed and this is true of the Uluzzian. We present the results of taphonomic, typological and technological analyses of two Uluzzian sites, Grotta La Fabbrica (Tuscany) and the newly discovered site of Colle Rotondo (Latium). Comparisons with Castelcivita and Grotta del Cavallo show that the Uluzzian is a coherent cultural unit lasting about five millennia, replaced by the Protoaurignacian before the eruption of the Campanian Ignimbrite. The lack of skeletal remains at our two sites and the controversy surrounding the stratigraphic position of modern human teeth at Cavallo makes it difficult to reach agreement about authorship of the Uluzzian, for which alternative hypotheses have been proposed. Pending the discovery of DNA or further human remains, these hypotheses can only be evaluated by archaeological arguments, i.e. evidence of continuities and discontinuities between the Uluzzian and the preceding and succeeding culture units in Italy. However, in the context of "transitional" industries with disputed dates for the arrival of modern humans in Europe, and considering the case of the Châtelperronian, an Upper Paleolithic industry made by Neandertals, typo-technology used as an indicator of hominin authorship has limited predictive value. We corroborate previous suggestions that the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transition occurred as steps of rapid changes and geographically uneven rates of spread.

A critical assessment of the Protoaurignacian lithic technology at Fumane Cave and its implications for the definition of the earliest Aurignacian

In the scenario of the spread of the anatomically modern humans (AMHs) into Europe, the techno-complex known as Protoaurignacian is defined by the production of blades and bladelets within a single and continuous stone knapping sequence from the same core as the result of its progressive reduction. However, the growing re-evaluation of some assemblages is revealing that bladelets are frequently obtained from independent reduction sequences, hence discouraging the direct application of the model developed in southwestern France. High-resolution regional signatures are thus needed to reconstruct a more accurate portrait of the AMH colonization dynamic. Northeastern Italy, with the key site of Fumane Cave, is one among the regions of Mediterranean Europe worthy of consideration for reconstructing this colonization process and its cultural dynamics. Within the framework of a critical discussion of the technological definition of the Protoaurignacian and its relationship with contemporaneous industries on a regional and supra-regional scale, we present the results of a detailed analysis of the lithic technology from units A2-A1 based on reduction sequence and attribute analyses. Results show that bladelets are the first goal of production and they do not originate from reduced blade cores but from a broad range of independent and simultaneous core reduction strategies. One implication is that the most commonly used technological trait that is said to define the Protoaurignacian has been over-emphasized and that the Protoaurignacian is technologically consistent across its geographical extent. Additional data based on carinated core technology imply that this techno-complex shares a common technological background with the Early Aurignacian and that no features are restricted to one of the two facies. Furthermore, the major difference between the Protoaurignacian and Early Aurignacian appears to be more typological in nature, with retouched bladelets being less common in the Early Aurignacian.

Demic and cultural diffusion in prehistoric Europe in the age of ancient genomes

Ancient genomes can help us detect prehistoric migrations, population contractions, and admixture among populations. Knowing the dynamics of demography is invaluable for understanding culture change in prehistory, particularly the roles played by demic and cultural diffusion in transformations of material cultures. Prehistoric Europe is a region where ancient genome analyses can help illuminate the interplay between demography and culture change. In Europe, there is more archeological evidence, in terms of detailed studies, radiometric dates, and explanatory hypotheses that can be evaluated, than in any other region of the world. Here I show some important ways that ancient genomes have given us insights into population movements in European prehistory. I also propose that studies might be increasingly focused on specific questions of culture change, for example in evaluating the makers of "transitional" industries as well as the origins of the Gravettian and spread of the Magdalenian. I also discuss genomic evidence supporting the large role that demic expansion has played in the Neolithization of Europe and the formation of the European population during the Bronze Age.

Paleolithic subsistence strategies and changes in site use at Klissoura Cave 1 (Peloponnese, Greece)

Klissoura Cave 1 in southern Greece preserves a long archaeological sequence that spans roughly 90,000 years and includes Middle Paleolithic, Uluzzian, Upper Paleolithic, and Mesolithic deposits. The site provides a unique opportunity to examine diachronic change and shifts in the intensity of site use across the Late Pleistocene. There is an overall picture of the intensified use of faunal resources at the site, evidenced by a shift from large to small game, and to small fast-moving taxa in particular. This trend is independent of climatic change and fluctuations in site use, and most likely reflects a broader, regional growth of hominin populations. At the same time, multiple lines of evidence (e.g., input of artifacts and features, sedimentation mechanisms, and intensification of faunal resources) indicate that the intensity of site use changed, with a sharp increase from the Middle Paleolithic to Aurignacian. This allows us to address a fundamental issue in the study of human evolution: differences in population size and site use between Neandertals and modern humans. At Klissoura Cave 1, the increase in occupation intensity might be related to population growth or larger group size, but it might also be due to changes in season of site use, more favorable environmental conditions at the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic, and/or changes in the composition of people occupying the site. These explanations are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and indeed the data support a combination of factors. Ascribing the increase in occupation intensity to larger Upper Paleolithic populations more broadly is difficult, particularly because there is little consensus on this topic elsewhere in Eurasia. The data are complicated and vary greatly between sites and regions. This makes Klissoura Cave 1, as the only currently available case study in southeastern Europe, a critical example in understanding the range of variation in demography and site use across the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition.

Greater than the sum of its parts? Modelling population contact and interaction of cultural repertoires

Evidence for interactions between populations plays a prominent role in the reconstruction of historical and prehistoric human dynamics; these interactions are usually interpreted to reflect cultural practices or demographic processes. The sharp increase in long-distance transportation of lithic material between the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic, for example, is seen as a manifestation of the cultural revolution that defined the transition between these epochs. Here, we propose that population interaction is not only a reflection of cultural change but also a potential driver of it. We explore the possible effects of inter-population migration on cultural evolution when migrating individuals possess core technological knowledge from their original population. Using a computational framework of cultural evolution that incorporates realistic aspects of human innovation processes, we show that migration can lead to a range of outcomes, including punctuated but transient increases in cultural complexity, an increase of cultural complexity to an elevated steady state and the emergence of a positive feedback loop that drives ongoing acceleration in cultural accumulation. Our findings suggest that population contact may have played a crucial role in the evolution of hominin cultures and propose explanations for observations of Palaeolithic cultural change whose interpretations have been hotly debated.

High-precision 14C and 40Ar/39Ar dating of the Campanian Ignimbrite (Y-5) reconciles the time-scales of climatic-cultural processes at 40 ka

The Late Pleistocene Campanian Ignimbrite (CI) super-eruption (Southern Italy) is the largest known volcanic event in the Mediterranean area. The CI tephra is widely dispersed through western Eurasia and occurs in close stratigraphic association with significant palaeoclimatic and Palaeolithic cultural events. Here we present new high-precision ¹⁴C (34.29 ± 0.09 ¹⁴C kyr BP, 1σ) and ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar (39.85 ± 0.14 ka, 95% confidence level) dating results for the age of the CI eruption, which substantially improve upon or augment previous age determinations and permit fuller exploitation of the chronological potential of the CI tephra marker. These results provide a robust pair of ¹⁴C and ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar ages for refining both the radiocarbon calibration curve and the Late Pleistocene time-scale at ca. 40 ka. In addition, these new age constraints provide compelling chronological evidence for the significance of the combined influence of the CI eruption and Heinrich Event 4 on European climate and potentially evolutionary processes of the Early Upper Palaeolithic.

Variability in Early Ahmarian lithic technology and its implications for the model of a Levantine origin of the Protoaurignacian

This paper re-examines lithic technological variability of the Early Ahmarian, one of the early Upper Palaeolithic cultural entities in the Levant, which has often been regarded as a precursor of the Protoaurignacian (the early Upper Palaeolithic in Europe) in arguments for the occurrence of a cultural spread in association with the dispersal of Homo sapiens from the Levant to Europe. Using quantitative data on several lithic techno-typological attributes, we demonstrate that there is a significant degree of variability in the Early Ahmarian between the northern and southern Levant, as previously pointed out by several researchers. In addition, we suggest that the technology similar to the southern Early Ahmarian also existed in the northern Levant, i.e., the Ksar Akil Phase 4 group (the KA 4 group), by introducing new Upper Palaeolithic assemblages from Wadi Kharar 16R, inland Syria. We then review currently available stratigraphic records and radiocarbon dates (including a new date from Wadi Kharar 16R), with special attention to their methodological background. As a result, we propose alternative chronological scenarios, including one that postulates that the southern Early Ahmarian and the KA 4 group appeared later than the northern Early Ahmarian with little or no overlap. On the basis of the alternative scenarios of chronological/geographical patterns of the Early Ahmarian variability, we propose four possible relationships between the Protoaurignacian and the Early Ahmarian, including a new scenario that the appearance of the Protoaurignacian preceded those of similar technological entities in the Levant, i.e., the southern Early Ahmarian and the KA 4 group. If the last hypothesis is substantiated, it requires us to reconsider the model of a Levantine origin of the Protoaurignacian and its palaeoanthropological implications.

On the local Mousterian origin of the Châtelperronian: Integrating typo-technological, chronostratigraphic and contextual data

Across Europe the period 45-40 ka (thousands of years ago) is associated with several technological changes, including the emergence of the Châtelperronian technocomplex in France and northern Spain. The Châtelperronian, stratigraphically located between the Mousterian and Aurignacian, is characterized by Upper Palaeolithic features, such as volumetric blade reduction, curved backed blades, end-scrapers, bladelets, bone tools and ornaments. Concurrently, repeated, though debated, associations with Neanderthal remains and Mousterian elements suggest a local technological development. Following recent critiques and cumulating technological studies, this paper provides data-driven contextualisations of the Châtelperronian and late Mousterian archaeological records and a primary comparative assessment of a major linking element, backed knives, to re-assess the origin of the Châtelperronian. The results demonstrate the challenging nature of the 50-35 ka record, with many interpretive problems caused by poorly recorded excavations, resulting in only 25 well-contextualised assemblages from the claimed 143 Châtelperronian find spots. These 25 assemblages facilitate more detailed chronostratigraphic and typo-technological assessments and show that the Châtelperronian has a homogenous set of technologies and tools. A similar evaluation of the late Mousterian indicates a wide-ranging late Neanderthal skill set, commonly including laminar blank production and backing. Further, conceptual similarities were noted both in blank selection and edge modification between Mousterian and Châtelperronian backed knives, alongside their near-absence in other, contemporaneous technocomplexes. A Europe-wide contextualisation shows that while the current coarse-grained record still allows for several potential scenarios, the data throughout this paper point towards a most parsimonious model of a Châtelperronian made by Neanderthals, with roots in the late Middle Palaeolithic technological skill set. However, this change seems triggered by early arrivals of modern humans either indirectly, through stimulus diffusion, or directly, after ca. 42 ka. Fully testing this model requires an ongoing focus on site formation and assemblage integrity, alongside in-depth analyses of recently excavated assemblages and existing collections.

Analysis of Site Formation and Assemblage Integrity Does Not Support Attribution of the Uluzzian to Modern Humans at Grotta del Cavallo

Based on the morphology of two deciduous molars and radiocarbon ages from layers D and E of the Grotta del Cavallo (Lecce, Italy), assigned to the Uluzzian, it has been proposed that modern humans were the makers of this Early Upper Paleolithic culture and that this finding considerably weakens the case for an independent emergence of symbolism among western European Neandertals. Reappraisal of the new dating evidence, of the finds curated in the Taranto Antiquities depot, and of coeval publications detailing the site’s 1963–66 excavations shows that (a) Protoaurignacian, Aurignacian and Early Epigravettian lithics exist in the assemblages from layers D and E, (b) even though it contains both inherited and intrusive items, the formation of layer D began during Protoaurignacian times, and (c) the composition of the extant Cavallo assemblages is influenced in a non-negligible manner by the post-hoc assignment of items to stratigraphic units distinct from that of original discovery. In addition, a major disturbance feature affected the 1960s excavation trench down to Mousterian layer F, this feature went unrecognized until 1964, the human remains assigned to the Uluzzian were discovered that year and/or the previous year, and there are contradictions between field reports and the primary anthropological description of the remains as to their morphology and level of provenience. Given these major contextual uncertainties, the Cavallo teeth cannot be used to establish the authorship of the Uluzzian. Since this technocomplex’s start date is ca. 45,000 calendar years ago, a number of Neandertal fossils are dated to this period, and the oldest diagnostic European modern human fossil is the <41,400 year-old Oase 1 mandible, Neandertal authorship of the Uluzzian remains the parsimonious reading of the evidence.

Reassessing the Aurignacian of Slovenia: techno-economic behaviour and direct dating of osseous projectile points

The Palaeolithic of southern Central Europe has a long history of archaeological research. Particularly, the presence of numerous osseous projectile points in many early Upper Palaeolithic (EUP) assemblages in this region has attracted the attention of the international research community. However, the scarcity of properly identified and well-dated Aurignacian contexts represents an obstacle for investigation of the nature and timing of the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition. In this context, the question of whether Neandertals made Aurignacian osseous projectile points, either on their own or as a consequence of cultural interaction with anatomically modern humans (AMH), still remains an open issue. Here we reassess the EUP record of Slovenia by evaluating the Aurignacian character of the assemblages from Potočka zijalka, Mokriška jama and Divje babe I in the light of their suggested roots in the local Mousterian. We provide a comprehensive description of the lithic industry from Potočka zijalka, which represents one of the rare EUP assemblages of southern Central Europe with a representative number of lithic artefacts to be analysed from the perspective of lithic technology and raw material economy. Our re-analysis of the Slovenian assemblages is backed by a series of 11 new ultrafiltered collagen 14C dates obtained directly on associated osseous projectile points from the studied assemblages. The Aurignacian of Potočka zijalka underlines the remarkable consistency of the Early Aurignacian with low typo-technological variability across Europe, resulting from a marked dependence on transported toolkits and raw material conservation. The new radiocarbon determinations for the Aurignacian of Slovenia appear to post-date the 34-32 ka BP (thousands of years before present) threshold for the last Neandertals in the region. Although not falsified, the hypothesis of Aurignacian bone tools in southern Central Europe as a product of late Neandertals is not supported by our re-examination of the EUP record of Slovenia.