(Re)occupation: Following a Magdalenian group through three successive occupations at Étiolles

Spatial patterning of Middle Palaeolithic lithic assemblages at the Abri du Maras, Southeast France: Combining GIS analysis and 3D palaeotopographic reconstructions

“…The palaeotopographic reconstructions for the two levels do not show significant differences (a decreasing slope from northwest to southeast for both levels), and the inter-level variation of the spatial organisation was probably dictated by the social organisation or cultural choices of Neanderthal groups, such as types of activities, and not by a change in soil topography. Interlevel variations have already been observed for Middle and Upper Palaeolithic sites (e.g., Anderson and Burke, 2008;Caron-Laviolette et al, 2018;. A recent study on butchery tradition indicates that different marrow extraction methods occurred between levels 4.1 and 4.2 (Vettese et al, 2022), suggesting that the shelter was used by distinct groups with their own tradition and perhaps different group compositions or structures (more or less specialized Neanderthals).…”

Down to the Rivers: A Geophysical Investigation at Étiolles (France) to Reconstruct the Magdalenian Occupation

“…The thickness of the sterile layers between the Magdalenian levels varies, making it difficult to determine how regular these occupations were. The D71 units, excavated in the 1990s and the 2000s in Locus 2, provide exceptional evidence of a short lapse of time between each occupation [21]. A thin layer of sterile silts separates three levels, indicating at least one flooding event between each occupation, and yet the Magdalenians settled at the exact same spot each time, reusing the same central fire structure and organizing their activities around it (Figure 2b).…”

“…It is not known whether it contained flowing water or was dry at the time the site was occupied. [27]): (c) selected calibrated radiocarbon dates of different levels at Étiolles-Les Coudray compared to group calibration of radiocarbon dates for the regional Magdalenian and NGRIP oxygen isotope curve (blue: cold and dry climate, red: warm and moist climate; [21] Figure 2).…”

“…Étiolles has also always been interpreted as a habitat site located very close to a flint source privileged for understanding in great detail the concepts of Magdalenian knapping techniques [22]. Archaeological evidence at Étiolles-Les Coudray displays the usage of circles of stones (of about 1.0-1.5 m diameter) circling the hearths [21,23], sometimes also recycled from one occupation to the next [21].…”

Is a spatial investigation possible without long-distance refit/conjoin? Application to the MIS 11 lithic assemblage of levels E and J from La Cansaladeta site (Tarragona, Spain)

“…The importance of refitting analysis has already been tested, in terms of archaeostratigraphy and the site formation studies, as it provides crucial information about the integrity of an assemblage, the types and degree of post-depositional processes affecting it, and in the end, its temporal resolution (Ashton 2004;Bargalló et al 2016;Deschamps and Zilhão 2018;Hofman 1986;Villa 1982). Undoubtedly, in terms of the social organization of the Paleolithic human groups, spatial interrogation with refitting method has been applied to several sites, being the most famous some Magdalenian settlements as the well-known sites in the Paris basin such as Verberie (Audouze 1988;Audouze and Enloe 1997;Audouze et al 1981), Pincevent (Karlin and Julien 2019;Leroi-Gourhan and Brézillon 1966), and Étiolles (Caron-Laviolette et al 2018;Olive 1988;Olive et al 2019;Pigeot 1987). According to the perception of spatial analysts and refitters, this method and high-resolution sites have always been thought they complete each other.…”