Chasse, habitats et rythme des déplacements : réflexions à partir des campements magdaléniens de Champréveyres et Monruz (Neuchâtel, Suisse)

Abstract

The two Magdalenian open-air sites Champréveyres and Monruz, on the northern shore of Lake Neuchâtel, were occupied during the warm season, predominantly during the spring and early summer. The diverse faunal assemblages include the horse as the dominant species, which yielded 70 and 90 % of the weight of acquired animals, respectively. Due to their behavioural adaptation as animals with long fleeing distances, horses cannot be hunted close to an actively occupied site. Horse hunts must therefore have taken place at a relatively long distance from base camps and, in addition, could be carried out only from some kind of ambush or hunting hide. Since the weight of a horse precludes transport as a whole, and the skeletal representation indicates that entire horses were present on the site, the most plausible conclusion is that camps were relocated to a successful horse-hunting site. While consuming the horses and possibly preparing them for later use, other activities were performed, including the hunting of other, smaller species. After a mean duration of from one to a few weeks, the camp was relocated to a subsequent horse-hunting site, at a distance of some kilometres. The number of burning cycles in the hearths as well as the amount and types of lithic material corroborate these conclusions. Since horse-hunting sites need to meet specific, strategic characteristics, the number of reoccupations of the main horizons (6 for Champréveyres, 20 for Monruz) is easily explicable.

Human and non‐human taphonomic effects on faunal remains from the Late Upper Paleolithic: A case study from the Stránská skála IV site, Czech Republic

“…In Switzerland, on the banks of Neuchâtel Lake, two sites represent another strategy in horse exploitation. The Monruz and Hauterive‐Champréveyres sites, which are dominated by horses, yielded evidence of extensive carcass processing (Müller, Leesch, Bullinger, Cattin, & Plumettaz, ). Unlike at SSIV, other related activities have been described.…”

Deglacial landscapes and the Late Upper Palaeolithic of Switzerland

“…The three specimens that had previously been dated (two reindeer, one Bos/Bison) were also re-dated to ensure methodological consistency between laboratories. Magdalenian activity at the sites date to the later part of GS-2.1a and were focused primarily on the exploitation of horse, together with a broad spectrum of smaller mammals, birds and fish, particularly in spring and summer (Müller et al, 2006;Müller, 2013). Three horse bones from these assemblages have previously been radiocarbon dated, producing age determinations between 15,874-15,349 cal.…”

A new look at an old dog: Bonn-Oberkassel reconsidered

“…Photograph credited to Jürgen Vogel, Artwork credited to Martin Pütz, LVR-LandesMuseum Bonn. from around 14.5e15 kya cal BP, from Spain: Eralla (Altuna et al, 1984); Switzerland: Kesserloch, Hauterive-Champr eveyres, and Monruz Morel et al, 1997;Napierala and Uerpmann, 2012); France: Montespan, Le Closeau, Le Morin, Pont d'Ambon and Saint Thibaud de Couze (Boudadi-Maligne et al, 2012;C el erier, 1994;C el erier et al, 1999;Pionnier-Capitan et al, 2011);and Germany (Verworn et al, 1919;. The dating of this dog grouping falls at the beginning of a long period of rapid climatic and environmental change (Greenland Interstadial 1-GI1) during which the open mammoth steppe biotope of the Late Pleistocene gave way to more wooded conditions and ultimate replacement by the fully forested conditions of the mid-Holocene (Street and Joris, 2015).…”

“…Ancient gray wolves are the likely ancestors of the domestic dog. The domestic dog first was described with reasonable certainty from the Magdalenian (Botigu e et al, 2016;Boudadi-Maligne et al, 2012;Boudadi-Maligne and Escarguel, 2014;C el erier, 1994;Crockford, 2006;Druzhkova et al, 2013;Horard-Herbin et al, 2014;Larson et al, 2012;Morey, 2010;Morey and Jeger, 2015;Müller, 2005;Napierala and Uerpmann, 2012;Perri, 2016;Pionnier-Capitan, 2010;Pionnier-Capitan et al, 2011;Thalmann et al, 2013). Earlier Pleistocene dogs have been reported from the Aurignacian (Camar os et al, 2016;Germonpr e et al, 2009Germonpr e et al, , 2012Germonpr e et al, , 2015Germonpr e et al, , 2017Ovodov et al, 2011;Pidoplichko, 1969;Sablin and Khlopachev, 2002) but their classification is contentious (e.g., Crockford and Kuzmin, 2012;Boudadi-Maligne and Escarguel, 2014;Drake et al, 2015;Frantz et al, 2016;Morey and Jeger, 2015;Napierala and Uerpmann, 2012;Perri, 2016).…”