Technical diversity within the tanged-tool Gravettian: New results from Belgium

Abstract

International audienceLocated at the interface between the Paris and the Rhine Basins and the more northern territories of Europe, Belgium contains several Gravettian occupations, both open-air and in caves. The available documentation is unfortunately limited by the earliness of the excavations conducted at most sites. Stratified records in karstic context, primarily excavated in the 19th century, are particularly affected by this situation. The analysis of Gravettian lithic technological behaviours can, however, rely on two open air sites excavated in the late 20th century which provide more rigorous data: Maisieres-Canal and Station de l'Hermitage. These two sites have been the focus of comparisons that highlight their similarities, both in terms of the lithic industry and location. In fact, the former stands out for the presence of tanged tools, a typological marker which is usually associated with the Early Gravettian of Western Europe. In this article, we present a new study that evidences the differences in the lithic technical systems represented at these sites. After a presentation of the most recent data, we consider the causes that may be responsible for such diversity, highlighting the possible role of the chronological factor, but also of the existence of an original technical tradition in north-western Europe during the appearance and development of the Gravettian. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved

Gravettian cranial morphology and human group affinities during the European Upper Palaeolithic

“…On the one hand, in several Western European areas (e.g. Belgium, Pyrenean South West France, Cantabria North of Spain), typotechonological data do not support the notion of the Gravettian being an “intrusive culture” that would have simply replaced EUP ones 23 – 25 . On the other hand, the genetic history of Western European MUP local populations remains poorly understood.…”

Aux prémices du Gravettien dans le Nord-Ouest européen : étude de la production des pointes lithiques à Maisières-Canal (province de Hainaut, Belgique)

“…De fait, ces pointes ne sont jamais associées à des ensembles archéologiques pouvant être considérés clos et homogènes, aussi seule la documentation de Maisières-Canal autorise actuellement une description du schéma de production des supports servant à la confection de ces pointes. Le schéma laminaire de Maisières-Canal apparaît néanmoins très singulier parmi les industries rapportées aux phases anciennes du Gravettien en France (Digan, 2008 ; Pesesse, Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française 2008a ; Floss et Taller, 2011 ;Surmely et al, 2011) et en Belgique (Touzé, Flas et al, 2016). En Europe centrale, la présence récurrente de nucléus à table large dans le Gravettien ancien mérite d'être signalée, mais plusieurs éléments empêchent cependant tout rapprochement avec l'industrie de Maisières.…”

“…Outside the few, and often isolated discoveries of Maisierian elements across North-Western Europe, these two components of the lithic technical system appear unique with regards to the Early Gravettian. No similarity is evident with industries uncovered at other sub-contemporaneous sites in France (Digan, 2008;Pesesse, 2008a;Floss and Taller, 2011), Belgium (Touzé, Flas et al, 2016) and Central Europe (Moreau, 2010 and2012b). The characterization of blade and point productions at Maisières-Canal thus questions the history of lithic technical systems between the end of the Aurignacian and the (presumably) full development of the Gravettian.…”

Adaptive Trade-offs Towards the Last Glacial Maximum in North-Western Europe: a Multidisciplinary View from Walou Cave

“…A significant behavioural shift from the Aurignacian to the Gravettian concerns the organisation of lithic technological systems, particularly with regard to the production of blades and bladelets (Bodu et al 2013;Flas 2015;Mevel 2013;Moreau 2010Moreau , 2012Touzé 2018). By comparison with the previous Aurignacian, the laminar technology of the Gravettian period is oriented towards regular and elongated, and to some extent straighter blanks (Klaric 2003(Klaric , 2013Lengyel and Chu 2016;Moreau 2010Moreau , 2012Touzé 2018;Touzé et al 2016). This is not to say that Gravettian lithic technological systems do not exhibit any common features with the previous Aurignacian (see 'Lithic Technology') (Moreau 2012;Moreau and Jöris 2013;Pesesse 2010); however, the Gravettian is generally characterised by a higher investment in debitage surface maintenance, partly resulting in increasingly bidirectional laminar blank production methods using two opposed striking platforms (Klaric 2003(Klaric , 2013Lengyel and Chu 2016;Moreau 2010Moreau , 2012Touzé 2018;Touzé et al 2016).…”

“…By comparison with the previous Aurignacian, the laminar technology of the Gravettian period is oriented towards regular and elongated, and to some extent straighter blanks (Klaric 2003(Klaric , 2013Lengyel and Chu 2016;Moreau 2010Moreau , 2012Touzé 2018;Touzé et al 2016). This is not to say that Gravettian lithic technological systems do not exhibit any common features with the previous Aurignacian (see 'Lithic Technology') (Moreau 2012;Moreau and Jöris 2013;Pesesse 2010); however, the Gravettian is generally characterised by a higher investment in debitage surface maintenance, partly resulting in increasingly bidirectional laminar blank production methods using two opposed striking platforms (Klaric 2003(Klaric , 2013Lengyel and Chu 2016;Moreau 2010Moreau , 2012Touzé 2018;Touzé et al 2016). Moreover, it has been claimed that the production of regular blades and bladelets in the Gravettian, together with the manufacture of new artefact forms including standardised backed points and backed bladelets, required an increased reliance on high-quality and, to some extent, more distant raw materials (Féblot-Augustins 1997Floss 1994;Morala and Turq 1991).…”