Search

Coastal adaptations of Palaeolithic foragers along the north Atlantic seaboard have received renewed attention in the last decade and include growing evidence for exploitation of whale bone by Late Glacial Magdalenian groups to the north of the Pyrenees. Here we present a systematic revision of Magdalenian osseous industries from the Cantabrian region designed to explore whether this phenomenon was more widely shared by hunter-gatherer groups along the Atlantic coast of the northern Iberian Peninsula. Fifty-four whale bone objects were identified from 12 of the 64 sampled sites. Essentially represented by large, finished weapon elements (projectile points), these objects are primarily associated with the middle phase of the Cantabrian Magdalenian, and overlap slightly with the beginning its upper and probably the end of its lower phases. More broadly, the circulation of these objects evinces regular, long-distance (ca. 600 km) communication networks operating on both sides of the current French and Spanish Basque Country between 17.8 and 15 cal ka BP. The structure of this network poses interesting questions concerning potential social and/or economic interactions between Magdalenian groups from the Pyrenees and neighbouring Cantabrian region. We suggest that the use of whale bone by these particularly mobile hunter-gatherer groups for the production of hunting weapons was connected to the longer use-life afforded by the large size of this particular raw material. This choice potentially reflects attempts to offset raw material transport costs by privileging their regular maintenance rather than the replacement of hunting weaponry. This growing body of evidence for the exploitation of marine resources during the Magdalenian further reinforces the Bay of Biscay being the backdrop to the emergence of the first regular, diversified and organized coastal economies at the end of the Last Glaciation.

International audience

International audience; This article proposes a historiographical overview of research carried out on the fracturing of hard animal materials (bone, antler). It covers the observations of fracturing on skeletal remains as early as the 19th century and the identification of its anthropic or taphonomic origins at the beginning of the 20th century. It also looks at the latest research focusing on specific technical and/or alimentary objectives at the beginning of the 21st century. From 2010-2011 the research team 'Ethnologie préhistorique' (UMR 7041, ArScAn) developed a new dynamic relating to the fracturing of hard animal materials within the general programme 'Ressources ani-males: acquisition, transformation et utilisation'. This research benefited from previous studies, with a specific attention to the technical perspective. This article thus focuses on the technical exploitation of bone and antler and the production of potential blanks used for the manufacturing of 'expedient' tools. But inevitably it is necessary to consider the use of bone fracturing for alimentary purposes since it is often thought that bones were primarily fractured to extract the marrow. The different issues regarding the fracturing sensu lato of bone and antler are discussed here (other materials such as shell, wood and ivory are discussed elsewhere in this volume). We do not intend to be exhaustive because the abundance of publications, from the 19th century to the present, is so great that a single book would not be enough.; Le présent article propose un bilan historiographique des recherches sur la fracturation de deux matières dures d'origine animale depuis les premières interrogations concernant sa reconnaissance à partir des restes osseux au xix e siècle, l'identification de son origine anthropique ou taphonomique au début du XXe siècle, jusqu'aux recherches ciblées sur ses objectifs, technique et/ou alimentaire, au début du xxi e siècle. Dans ce but, l'axe de recherche « Ressources animales : acquisition, transformation et utilisation » de l'équipe Ethnologie préhistorique (UMR 7041, ArScAn) a développé, à partir des années 2010-2011, une nouvelle dynamique de recherche sur la fracturation. Les travaux menés ont bénéficié des recherches antérieures, mais en s'inscrivant plus spécifiquement dans une optique très technique. Cet article est ainsi orienté vers l'exploitation technique de l'os et du bois de cervidé et la production de supports potentiels pour des outils dits « peu élaborés ». Mais s'intéresser à cet objectif amène nécessairement à poser la question de la fracturation d'origine alimentaire des os puisqu'on considère souvent qu'ils étaient avant tout cassés dans le but de récupérer la moelle contenue dans les diaphyses. Ce sont les différentes facettes de la fracturation sensu lato de l'os et du bois animal qui sont traitées ici (la coquille, le bois végétal et l'ivoire sont présentés plus loin dans ce volume). Ce bilan ne prétend pas à l'exhaustivité car la profusion des documents est telle, depuis le XIXe siècle jusqu'à nos jours, qu'un seul ouvrage n'y aurait pas suffi.

International audience; This article proposes a historiographical overview of research carried out on the fracturing of hard animal materials (bone, antler). It covers the observations of fracturing on skeletal remains as early as the 19th century and the identification of its anthropic or taphonomic origins at the beginning of the 20th century. It also looks at the latest research focusing on specific technical and/or alimentary objectives at the beginning of the 21st century. From 2010-2011 the research team 'Ethnologie préhistorique' (UMR 7041, ArScAn) developed a new dynamic relating to the fracturing of hard animal materials within the general programme 'Ressources ani-males: acquisition, transformation et utilisation'. This research benefited from previous studies, with a specific attention to the technical perspective. This article thus focuses on the technical exploitation of bone and antler and the production of potential blanks used for the manufacturing of 'expedient' tools. But inevitably it is necessary to consider the use of bone fracturing for alimentary purposes since it is often thought that bones were primarily fractured to extract the marrow. The different issues regarding the fracturing sensu lato of bone and antler are discussed here (other materials such as shell, wood and ivory are discussed elsewhere in this volume). We do not intend to be exhaustive because the abundance of publications, from the 19th century to the present, is so great that a single book would not be enough.; Le présent article propose un bilan historiographique des recherches sur la fracturation de deux matières dures d'origine animale depuis les premières interrogations concernant sa reconnaissance à partir des restes osseux au xix e siècle, l'identification de son origine anthropique ou taphonomique au début du XXe siècle, jusqu'aux recherches ciblées sur ses objectifs, technique et/ou alimentaire, au début du xxi e siècle. Dans ce but, l'axe de recherche « Ressources animales : acquisition, transformation et utilisation » de l'équipe Ethnologie préhistorique (UMR 7041, ArScAn) a développé, à partir des années 2010-2011, une nouvelle dynamique de recherche sur la fracturation. Les travaux menés ont bénéficié des recherches antérieures, mais en s'inscrivant plus spécifiquement dans une optique très technique. Cet article est ainsi orienté vers l'exploitation technique de l'os et du bois de cervidé et la production de supports potentiels pour des outils dits « peu élaborés ». Mais s'intéresser à cet objectif amène nécessairement à poser la question de la fracturation d'origine alimentaire des os puisqu'on considère souvent qu'ils étaient avant tout cassés dans le but de récupérer la moelle contenue dans les diaphyses. Ce sont les différentes facettes de la fracturation sensu lato de l'os et du bois animal qui sont traitées ici (la coquille, le bois végétal et l'ivoire sont présentés plus loin dans ce volume). Ce bilan ne prétend pas à l'exhaustivité car la profusion des documents est telle, depuis le XIXe siècle jusqu'à nos jours, qu'un seul ouvrage n'y aurait pas suffi.

National audience; Pointes de projectile, têtes de harpon, préhampes, crochets de propulseur... Au Paléolithique récent, les armes en matières osseuses sont une part essentielle de l'équipement des chasseurs-collecteurs ouest-européens. Il est aujourd'hui possible de proposer, pour la seconde moitié du Paléolithique récent (de -23000 à -11000), une histoire continue de cette lignée technique. Évolution des procédés de fabrication, des modes d'emmanchement, des techniques de lancer : cette conférence propose un panorama des connaissances actuelles sur le sujet. Elle montre comment la technologie de l'armement osseux évolue vers une diversité et une complexité croissantes, qui culmine vers -16000 ; puis comment elle se spécialise ensuite dans la production d'un seul type d'objet, les pointes barbelées, accompagnant le changement de mode de vie qui marque alors les populations européennes.

Technological analysis of paleolithic bone industries is a still relatively young discipline. Weapplied this method to the material from two sites: the Rond-du-Barry (Haute-Loire) whichdelivered a long sequence from ancient Badegoulian to upper Magdalenian ; and Rochereil(Dordogne) which delivered an assemblage attributed to upper Magdalenian.In a synchronic perspective, the technological analysis allowed to defi ne the modalitiesof exploitation of antler in these sites for every period, from ancient Badegoulien to upperMagdalenian, and then to replace them in the general context of these chrono-cultural groupssuch as they are known at the moment.In a diachronic perspective, we analyze, in their technological aspect, the changes thatoccurred in antlerworking between the Badegoulian and the Magdalenian, which are aboveall characterized by the abandonment of the debitage by direct percussion and the groove andsplinter technique. Finally we discuss the role and the status of these two sites in their localand regional context., L’analyse technologique des industries osseuses paléolithiques est une discipline encorerelativement jeune. Nous avons appliqué cette méthode d’analyse à deux assemblages : celuide la grotte du Rond-du-Barry (Haute-Loire) qui a livré une longue séquence allant duBadegoulien ancien au Magdalénien supérieur ; et celui de la grotte de Rochereil (Dordogne)qui a livré un ensemble attribué au Magdalénien supérieur.Dans une perspective synchronique, l’analyse technologique a permis de défi nir les modalitésd’exploitation des bois de cervidés dans ces gisements pour chaque période envisagée duBadegoulien ancien jusqu’au Magdalénien supérieur, pour les replacer dans le contexte généralde ces groupes chrono-culturels tels qu’ils sont connus à l’heure actuelle.Dans une perspective diachronique, nous analysons dans leur aspect technologique leschangements qui sont intervenus dans le travail des bois de cervidés entre le Badegoulien etle Magdalénien, changements qui se caractérisent avant tout par l’abandon du débitage parpercussion directe et le retour au débitage par double rainurage. Enfi n nous discutons du rôleet du statut qu’ont pu détenir ces deux gisements dans leur contexte local et régional.

Bone retouchers are the most ancient osseous tools of the European Palaeolithic. They are very frequent on Mousterian sites and persist throughout the Upper Palaeolithic. Several functional analyses have been devoted to them and the most commonly accepted hypothesis proposed is their use for lithic tool retouching by percussion. However, this hypothesis is based mainly on studies of Mousterian pieces while few functional analyses have been undertaken on Upper Palaeolithic bone retouchers. The persistent presence of these “ ad hoc” tools makes their study important. This article presents the results of a techno-functional analysis devoted to the Early Aurignacian bone retouchers from Abri Castanet at Sergeac (Dordogne), northern and southern sectors (layer A and US 131 and below), Grotte des Hyènes at Brassempouy (Landes, complex 2) and Gatzarria at Suhare (Pyrénées-Atlantiques, layer cbcf). These unworked bone tools, including many specimens identified a posteriori among faunal remains, represent a significant part of the studied assemblages’ osseous equipment. There are two categories of retouchers : those on raw bone fragments and those on technical objects. The former, most numerous, are mainly long bone shaft fragments recovered after food operations and used just as they were, without modification. The latter correspond to the use of finished objects like smoothers and awls as well as manufacturing by-products. They bear diagnostic traces of utilisation in the form of linear, deep, short depressions, v-shaped in cross section. These depressions are similar to those that have been described in previous work involving microscopic observation and are compatible with use for lithic tool retouching by percussion. However, unlike Middle Palaeolithic retouchers, where the depressions are perpendicular to the main axis of the piece, Early Aurignacian depressions are often vertical (in combination or not with horizontal ones). This is a characteristic feature of Upper Palaeolithic retouchers related to their positions during use. The vertical depressions imply that the main axis of the retoucher is oriented parallel to the lithic edge during use. Quite obviously, this change in the functioning of retouchers must be linked to changes in flint-knapping processes. To understand this relationship, we explored the effects of changing the orientation of retouchers. One notable difference is their curvature in the transverse and longitudinal axes. The latter is clearly more pronounced than the former, meaning that the retouchers offer a greater overall surface area when used in a parallel orientation. We hypothesized that this orientation was preferred to increase the active surface of retouchers for the retouching of blade products. Indeed, during the Early Aurignacian, the manufacture of blade tools, scrapers in particular, often involved retouching very convex and narrow ends. Orienting the retoucher parallel to the lithic edge would have been a technical solution to compensate for the decrease in the active surface presented by the strong convexity of blade ends. However, within the Early Aurignacian lithic industry, blade ends are not the only items to show strong convexity : the fronts of carinated and nosed scrapers also display them. The use of retouchers in bladelet knapping has not so far been considered, but constitutes a second hypothesis that could explain the particular orientation of Early Aurignacian retouchers during use. T hese two assumptions have been tested by experimental replication. Results show that bone retouchers are effective tools for both blade retouching and bladelet knapping, provided that the weight of the retoucher is adjusted to suit the type of lithic product. In addition, lithic and bone tools produced experimentally fall within the range of variation observed in the archaeological assemblages studied. Finally, although this has not always been necessary, experimentation confirms the usefulness of parallel retoucher orientation to adapt the active surface areas to strong lithic convexity. To date, strong convexity of lithic products is the main factor likely to explain the change in retoucher orientation that occurred at least as early as the Early Aurignacian. Thus, retouchers of this period attest to the duration of an ancient technical process, involving the use of bone for stone knapping. Specimens bearing vertical depressions thus illustrate the adaptation of the retouchers to “ new” lithic technologies. The important role played by retouchers in retouching Mousterian tools and their number within the assemblages studied leave little doubt as to their use in retouching Upper Palaeolithic blade products. However, it is still difficult to determine whether they were in fact used in bladelet knapping. The traces of utilisation on experimental retouchers are quite similar to those on specimens used in blade retouching. An expanded experimental program and analysis of the bone tools with high magnification should facilitate the assessment of morphometric changes in use-wear traces based on activity. In addition, a comparison of technical and functional characteristics of archaeological and experimental lithic products should help clarify the array of hammers used during the Aurignacian., Les retouchoirs en os représentent le plus ancien outillage en matières dures animales du Paléolithique européen. Ils se rencontrent très fréquemment au sein des ensembles moustériens et perdurent tout au long du Paléolithique supérieur. Plusieurs études fonctionnelles leur ont été consacrées et l’hypothèse la plus communément admise est celle de leur emploi dans la retouche de tranchants lithiques. Cette hypothèse repose toutefois principalement sur l’étude de pièces moustériennes alors que les exemplaires du Paléolithique supérieur, en particulier ceux de l’Aurignacien ancien, présentent des caractéristiques légèrement différentes. À partir de l’étude de plusieurs séries de l’Aurignacien ancien (l’abri Castanet en Dordogne, la grotte des Hyènes dans les Landes et la grotte Gatzarria dans les Pyrénées-Atlantiques) et d’une reconstitution expérimentale, nous montrons que les retouchoirs de cette période témoignent d’une évolution de leur mode de fonctionnement, liée aux changements opérés dans le domaine lithique. Nous envisageons également la possibilité de leur emploi dans le débitage lamellaire., Tartar Elise. Réflexion autour de la fonction des retouchoirs en os de l’Aurignacien ancien. In: Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, tome 109, n°1, 2012. pp. 69-83.

This article focuses on the evolutions of the hunting equipment of the Magdalenian culture, from 20,000 to 14,000 cal. BP, in a geographic area encompassing the southwest of France and the north of Spain. Our perception of the Magdalenian hunting kit has been recently renewed by several technological analyses and experimental work. With the succession of Lower, Middle and Upper Magdalenian, the manufacture and use of lithic and osseous weapon tips undergo several technological and economical changes. Flexible, adaptive technical solutions alternate with more rigid technological systems marked by stricter requirements in raw materials. These different choices imply varying degrees of group territoriality - which are in turn reflected in the more or less broad circulation of certain types of weapon tips., Russian abstract not available.

International audience; Recent reexamination of osseous material from the Magdalenian layers of the Isturitz cave (Pyrénées-Atlantiques, France) by the author and F. Poplin has shown that several artifacts once considered to be made of antler have now been identified deriving from cetacean bone, most probably whale bone. These artifacts demonstrate the existence of technical exploitation of whale bone, proving that the now submerged seashore was also a place where Paleolithic people gathered specific materials for producing weapons and tools.