Search

Menez-Dregan I is a Lower Palaeolithic site situated at Plouhinec, Finistère, in Brittany. It is an ancient marine cave whose roof has gradually collapsed. Layer 4 from the site of Menez-Dregan I is the last occupation of this deposit, at the boundary between the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic. Geological correlations tend to place layer 4 in MIS 9 or 7, although the only TL dating obtained for this level gave an age of 223 ± 23 ka. This study focuses on the lithic industry from the 1991–2004 excavations and was undertaken in order to capture the various types of technical behaviour that could illustrate the transition between the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic. We present the lithic industry of this layer, which simultaneously combines Lower Palaeolithic characteristics, such as large quantities of pebble tools (due to the environment of the site), and the emergence of characteristics that are common to the Middle Palaeolithic, such as standardisation of flake production, or adapting knapping methods to the dimensions of the raw materials (discoid knapping for quartzite, bipolar flaking on an anvil for small flint pebbles). The lithic industry from layer 4 and its three levels (4a, 4b and 4c) has been analysed. Layer 4 of Menez-Dregan I has been attributed to the “Colombanian” on the basis of the composition of its lithic industry: a predominance of cobble tools amongst heavy-duty tools, retouched light-duty tools on flake-supports comprising mostly notches and denticulates, and a knapping method akin to the “SSDA – Clactonian”. The Levallois method is absent, bifaces are absent or extremely rare, and there are few scrapers. The Colombanian proves to be a Lower Palaeolithic industry contemporary with the classic Acheulean, but typologically distinct. However, standardisation of flake production leads us to foresee a change in the lithic industry of layer 4, and highlights a transitional period from the Lower Palaeolithic to the Middle Palaeolithic in the latest occupation of this deposit. This study is a contribution to the documentation of the diversity and variability of Lower and Middle Palaeolithic lithic industries, demonstrating that the large amount of cobble tools in layer 4 is an unchanged component due to environmental constraints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: A distinctive feature of the Palaeolithic of Western France is that most of the sites are along the present coast line and that the archaeological layers are often partially eroded and contained in very residual Pleistocene silty sediments preserved under the beaches. In the absence of radiometric dating, correlations with local deposits and reference to a regional chronostratigraphic scale allow proposal of a geological age. Where direct radiometric or related dating (i.e. OSL) results exist, sedimentological analysis (i.e. “descriptive” sedimentology) can be used either to confirm the dating or to extend the discussion. This paper is based on examples which have been processed over thirty years but that had never been the subject of an overall methodological presentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Résumé Le gisement paléolithique inférieur de Menez-Dregan1 fait l’objet d’une fouille importante et d’un programme interdisciplinaire depuis 1991. Il s’agit d’une ancienne grotte marine dont le toit s’est progressivement effondré. Le remplissage témoigne d’un bilan sédimentaire assez faible, dominé par les dépôts littoraux anciens avec de nombreux hiatus d’érosion. Trois unités stratigraphiques principales séparées par des dépôts littoraux correspondant à des phases d’interruption majeure de la présence humaine, renferment des niveaux d’occupation. Les datations par résonance paramagnétique électronique (RPE) placeraient la première occupation humaine vers le stade 12 ou la fin du 13 (vers 465 000 ans). Les datations RPE obtenues sur la base de la couche 5 situeraient les occupations vers la fin du stade 11 (vers 380 000 ans). Les études géologiques (sédimentologie, corrélations stratigraphiques à courte distance) tendent à confirmer ces datations. Notre connaissance des groupes humains qui se sont succédés à Menez-Dregan repose essentiellement sur les outils lithiques qu’ils y ont abandonnés. L’industrie des niveaux supérieurs (couche 5) correspond à la définition du Colombanien. À côté de nombreux éclats et nucléus, existent des galets aménagés (choppers essentiellement), des galets fracturés et des galets à enlèvements isolés sur des roches variées, quelques hachereaux et de rares bifaces. S’y ajoute un outillage léger dominé par les denticulés et les encoches, et comprenant également des racloirs peu variés typologiquement. Cet outillage « léger » est surtout en silex, mais on y trouve aussi un peu de quartz et de grès lustré. La dernière couche d’occupation (couche 4) pourrait marquer la transition entre le Paléolithique inférieur et le Paléolithique moyen. Si l’on peut parler de faciès régional pour les industries à galets aménagés du littoral sud-armoricain, il est difficile de le distinguer totalement de l’Acheuléen du nord de la France. Ces industries armoricaines pourraient en effet correspondre à des aires d’activités spécialisées, comme cela a été démontré pour certains groupes à galets aménagés attribués au Paléolithique moyen. La notion de cultures, qui pourrait également être mise en avant pour expliquer cette variabilité, doit être abordée avec une extrême prudence, car elle ne serait guère fondée que sur la présence (ou l’absence) d’un seul type d’outil (le biface). The Lower Palaeolithic site of Menez-Dregan I is currently the subject of an important excavation and has been part of a multidisciplinary project since 1991. It is an ancient marine cave whose roof has gradually collapsed and thus partly protected the site from erosion. In Menez-Dregan 1, the sedimentological evidence has been significantly reduced due to multiple episodes of marine erosion in the cave (low sedimentary preservation in terms of sedimentation and erosion process). However, the proximity of a section with a longer sedimentary record (Gwendrez cliff) has allowed for an attempt at correlation between the different deposits by way of a sedimentologic study applied to sandy marker beds (dunes). The resulting new data permitted a more precise chronostratigraphy of this site to be drawn up and contributed to further validation of dating. Three main stratigraphic units show distinct levels of human occupation at the site, separated by coastal deposits. The ESR dates tend to place the first human occupation in MIS 12 or at the end of MIS 13 (around 465,000 years). The ESR dating obtained at the base of layer 5 gave an age of 380,000 years. The geological analysis (sedimentology, stratigraphical correlations at short distance) tends to confirm these dates. The fauna has not preserved due to the acidic environment, leaving only the lithic industry to show how the human groups who settled at the site lived and, it is worth noting, mastered fire lighting, and or control, at a very early date (late MIS 13 or early MIS 12). The lithic industry from the upper levels (layer 5) is likely Colombanian and is composed of numerous flakes and cores alongside a great quantity of cobble tools (mostly choppers), fractured cobbles, and cobbles with isolated removals on various types of rocks, some cleavers and very rare bifaces. Additionally denticulates and notches form the main part of the light duty tools, together with scrapers. These retouched light duty tools are mainly made on flint, but quartz and glossy sandstone were also used. The last level of occupation (layer 4) probably shows the transition between Lower and Middle Palaeolithic. This may represent a regional cobble tool industry of the south armorican shoreline, however, it is still difficult to separate it totally from the classic European Acheulean from Northern France. These armorican lithic industries could indeed correspond with areas of specialised activities, as demonstrated for some Middle Palaeolithic groups with a cobble tools lithic industry. The notion of culture that could be chosen to explain this variability must be treated with caution, because it would only be based on the presence or absence of only one type of tool (the handaxe). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]