The demise of Neanderthals and their interaction with dispersing anatomically modern human populations remain some of the most contentious issues in palaeoanthropology. The Châtelperronian, now generally recognized as the first genuine Upper Palaeolithic industry in Western Europe and commonly attributed to the Neanderthals, plays a pivotal role in these debates. The Neanderthal authorship of this techno-complex is based on reported associations of Neanderthal skeletal material with Châtelperronian assemblages at only two sites, La Roche-à-Pierrot (Saint-Césaire) and the Grotte du Renne (Arcy-sur-Cure). The reliability of such an association has, however, been the subject of heated controversy. Here we present a detailed taphonomic, spatial and typo-technological reassessment of the level (EJOP sup) containing the Neanderthal skeletal material at Saint-Césaire. Our assessment of a new larger sample of lithic artifacts, combined with a systematic refitting program and spatial projections of diagnostic artifacts, produced no reliable evidence for a Neanderthal-Châtelperronian association at the site. These results significantly impact current models concerning the Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic transition in Western Europe and force a critical reappraisal of who exactly were the makers of the Châtelperronian.

Under the Magdatis project a new evolutionary model has been proposed for the Middle and Upper Magdalenian based on a review of several lithic assemblages from southwest France. The Lower Magdalenian is not addressed in this article. Single lithic assemblages and stratigraphic sequences have been compared according to several parameters: the origin of the siliceous raw materials, the interconnection between domestic tool production and hunting armatures, and the typo-technology of the microliths. Alongside the new techno-economic data, the geographical distribution of certain practices and particular artefacts in southwest France has led to a discussion of the cultural geography of the different phases of the Magdalenian between 19,000 and 14,000 cal BP. The Early Middle Magdalenian covers an extensive European cultural territory, demonstrating social interactions over vast distances both in the circulation of raw materials and in the distribution of certain morphotypes of lithic armament. The Late Middle Magdalenian appears to correspond to a phase of population contraction in which cultural emulation is observed among lithic tool kits in the socioeconomic value placed on large blades. The Early Upper Magdalenian coincides with the renewed settlement of the north Aquitaine plains. Among the technological innovations observed is the development of lithic points on small blades, leading to a first geographical division of the southwest (Aquitaine Basin versus Pyrenees). Finally, the Late Upper Magdalenian confirms this evolution of lithic equipment with new developments in lithic armaments in parallel with some easing off of the technical constraints associated with blade production. This period thus coincides with the progressive dilution of Magdalenian norms. With these four phases of the Middle and Upper Magdalenian, it is possible to gain a clearer understanding of the sequence of technical and economic changes observed in an environment in recomposition. At the same time, population fluctuations over these five millennia can be associated with developing phenomena of regionalism, particularly in the southwest of France.

Chert alteration in Paleolithic contexts, generally known as "patina" by prehistorians, has long been recognized. Originally, different types of "patina" were defined as "white patina", "glossy patina", or "porcelain-like patina", all of which involved changes in the color and/or roughness of the initial raw material. Alteration degrees are used in many research fields like taphonomy, petroarchaeology or usewear analysis; however most of these studies are still based on qualitative descriptions using a wide range of terms that bring about confusion. In this paper, we present first the results of an inter-observer's blind-test where color and roughness are described at macroscopic scale. Secondly, we use quantitative methods to compare archaeological and experimental altered silicifications: light spectrometry and confocal microscopy are used to quantify color and roughness. We show here how macroscopic qualitative descriptions could lead to confusion because of the lack of calibration and the number of terms used differently by each one. We demonstrated the efficiency of quantitative methods as light spectrometry and confocal microscopy that will significantly enhance studies of surface alteration in terms of taphonomy, use-wear analyses, and petroarchaeology issues as well as interdisciplinary discussions.