Gravel size matters: Early Middle Palaeolithic artefacts made from local Rhine and Meuse deposits in the central Netherlands

Abstract

The artefact size of the Early Middle Palaeolithic (EMP) assemblages in ice-pushed Rhine–Meuse deposits in the central Netherlands decreases northwestward. This trend correlates to the downstream fining direction of the Rhine–Meuse fluvial system, the source of the rock material, showing that locally available material was used. Furthermore, also in line with the fluvial trend, the gravel and cobble trends indicate that EMP artefacts could be present in the buried part of the ice-pushed ridges in the northern part of the central Netherlands (southwest Flevoland). Based on the gravel and cobble data, combined with the literature study, we argue that the artefacts date to marine isotope stages (MIS) 7–6. The review of published data shows that during the time of deposition of the artefact-bearing layer (early MIS 6), the Rhine–Meuse study area was part of a braidplain located in a slightly incised valley. To the north a polar desert was present.

The Descriptive Analysis of Palaeolithic Stone Tools from Sulawesi, Collected by the Indonesian-Dutch Expedition in 1970

“…Keates and Bartstra (1994) mentioned earlier the fluvial wear of artefacts found in the terrace gravel in the surroundings of Beru. This is a general phenomenon for lithic artefacts found in river sediments, as was also shown for Palaeolithic artefacts found in river deposits in the Netherlands (Biggelaar et al 2016). …”

“…As the latter decreases if found in stream downwards, it is hypothesized that also artefacts at more downstream sites are smaller than at more upwards sites. This was shown by van Biggelaar et al (2016) …”

“…It is suggested that the differences in size of the artefacts is caused by differences in size of available pebbles at both locations. Also in the study of van den Biggelaar (Biggelaar 2016;Alink 2013) it was found for middle Palaeolithic artefacts that assemblages found upstream have a larger size than those downstream. Although it cannot completely be excluded that for the sites Beru and Marale artefact dimensions were biased by preferential surface collection of the artefacts, this is not very likely due to the large number of artefacts and the collection of artefacts at both sites by the same team.…”

Fluvial terrace formation and its impacts on early human settlement in the Hanzhong basin, Qinling Mountains, central China

“…Artifact size and lithology were thus dictated by differences in transported gravel sizes and types (e.g. Van den Biggelaar et al, 2017). In addition, the small-sized stone-tool assemblage excavated from LGS4 (Table 1; Xia et al, 2018) is markedly different from the common Acheulean tool types in and around the QLM, which are characterized by large-sized retouched tools, such as handaxes and choppers (Huang and Qi, 1987).…”