Back to Search Start Over

Importance of field data for understanding a potential Mousterian funerary deposit : the case of the Regourdou 1 skeleton (Montignac-sur-Vézère, Dordogne, France)

Authors :
Trenton W. Holliday
Jean-Pierre Texier
Christelle Lahaye
Maxime Pelletier
Aurélien Royer
Asier Gómez-Olivencia
Stéphane Madelaine
Erwan Le Gueut
Emmanuel Discamps
Bruno Maureille
Xavier Muth
Christine Couture-Veschambre
François Lacrampe-Cuyaubère
Alain Turq
Publication Year :
2018
Publisher :
SAMRA, 2018.

Abstract

Aside from the work of Bonifay (see Bonifay et al. 2007 for one of the more recent papers) and various articles following these earlier works (e.g., Binant 1991, Defleur 1993, Maureille et Vandermeersch 2007, Pettitt 2011, see also May 1986 for a more critical analysis), the in situ position of the remains of Regourdou 1 from layer 4 has never actually been discussed on the basis of available data from the salvage operation carried out in October 1957 by E. Bonifay and G. Laplace-Jauretche, under the administrative authority of Francois Bordes, or from the subsequent, more systematic, excavations directed by E. Bonifay between 1961 and 1964. Via the compilation of available information from a number of unpublished documents (Francois Bordes’ field notes, drawings made during the salvage operation, photographs taken in 1957, 1961 and 1962, as well as databases from the 1961 to 1964 excavations), and also a new inventory of human remains (both previously known and recently discovered), it is now possible to more accurately reconstruct the position of the human remains in a Cartesian system. In this, we assume that the concentration of remains uncovered during the salvage operation was in square G2, according to the preliminary systematic excavations carried out in 1961. They also bring to light that while practically no anatomical connections can be demonstrated with any certainty – and despite significant disruptions (all of the hominin remains are spread over 9 squares : G1 to G3, F1 to F3, E1 and E2, D2) – they are mainly positioned in squares G2 and G3 to some degree with respect to the anatomical logic of the human body. We therefore assume that Regourdou 1 was lying flat, with its head to the west – perhaps upon its trunk – close to the wall of the cavity. This result is different from the fetal position hypothesis proposed in Bonifay et al. (2007). Moreover many post-depositional (albeit Pleistocene) disturbances are also evident. We believe that they were likely the result of the utilization and modification of the cavity by brown bears and lagomorphs.Only new excavations at the site, and a better taphonomic understanding of Bonifay’s (1964) layer 4 (in which Regourdou 1 was found), and the exact role of humans in its formation, i.e., their anthropic impact on the layer, will allow us to discuss in more detail the nature of the deposition of the body, and, hopefully, the absence of the skull.

Details

Language :
English
Database :
OpenAIRE
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....2eda812d4c8ce89ab161fe907c8d5596