paleolithic.pdf

8/10/2019 paleolithic.pdf

1/5

aggsbach.de http://www.aggsbach.de/2014/03/chatelperronian/

by

Katzman

March 1,

2014

The Chtelperronian: a fully developed Leptholithic Industry

The common paradigm:The Chtelperronian industry (Chtelperronian or Castelperronien in French) is

considered to be the very last behavioral testimony of Neanderthals in France and northern Spain. For a few

millennia, Neanderthals switched to systematic blade production, focused on stone knives that could also be used

as projectile points, and in some instances produced domestic bone tools and used black and red pigments as

well as personal ornaments (Soressi and Roussel 2010).

These are three Chtelperronian points (6,3 , 5,4 Fig.1,2,4), and 3,5 (Fig.3) cm long. They were found before
http://www.aggsbach.de/2014/03/chatelperronian/http://www.aggsbach.de/


2/5

Pradel`s important excavations in 1968 at the famous cave Les Cotts. This cave opens on the left bank of the

Gartempe, one kilometer north of the village of Saint-Pierre-de-Maille (Vienne, France). Discovered in the late

19th century, the cave was the subject of numerous excavations throughout the 20th century. The cave Prs-

Rous was discovered in 1878 by A. Jamin and first exploration trenches were opened in 1880 and 1881 by R.

Rochebrune with the permission of the landowner R. Fontenioux. Rochebrune found two archaeological layers: a

Mousterian and Aurignacian. At the same time the grotto was renamed Grotte des Cotts . Thereafter, until

1910, the site was explored by O. Rochebrune, son of R. Rochebrune.

The Grotte des Cotts was classified a historical monument in 1931 and further excavations were stopped until1951 when Louis Pradel made a survey near the entrance of the cave. In 1968, he opened a new trench in front o

the cave and found a succession of Chtelperronian, followed by Protoaurignacian (lentille correzienne)-

Aurignacian I and a Gravettian level (Pradel, 1967). This stratigraphy was confirmed in 1982 by F. Lvque, who

also provided the first C-14 dates. Six archaeological layers were individualized, numbered 1 to 6 from the ground

surface. The Chtelperronian layer had a thickness of 30 cm and was separated from other archaeological

remains by the sterile strata H and I under- and upper-lying the Chtelperronian with a thickness of 35 and 15 cm

respectively.

Layer 6 (I): Mousterian between 32 and 28 k.a. BP

Layer 5 / (G): Chtelperronian; (Prigordien II) between 32-34 k.a. BPLayer and 3+4 (E): (Aurignacian I; (Aurignacien ancien volu ) about 30 k.a. BP

Layer 2 (C): Gravettian; (Prigordien IVa): about 32 k.a. BP

These dates, which were assembled before the advent of AMS and advanced pretreatment procedures were

measured on large bulk samples. Like many other C-14 age determinations of the Chtelperronian they remain

highly problematic.

Renewed excavations were therefore conducted by Soressi

et al. since 2006 and aimed to redate the sequence with the

help of different advances methods, document the siteformation processes and aspects of the Chatelperronian,

Protoaurignacian and Early Aurignacian behavioral repertoire

at a single location.

Talamo et al. recently published calibrated C-14 Dates for the

site and used a Bayesian model ror age calculation :

Mousterianbetween 46-44,Chatelperronianaround 42-40,

Protoaurignacian: a short episode around 39 and early

Aurignacianaround 39-36 k.a. BP roughly coincident with

the onset of the strong cold phase Heinrich 4. These new data

fit perfectly into the long chronology of the Upper Paleolithic

(http://www.aggsbach.de/2014/01/13656/) and are consistent

with the redating of other sites (Grotte du Renne, Grotte

des Fes). They confirm that Chtelperronian and Protoaurignacian do exist in the southern margins of the

Parisian Basin, away from their geographical core area (the Pyrenees and the periphery of the Mediterranean)

and that the Chatelperronian is considerably older than the early C-14 data suggest, with only minimal temporal

overlap between the Chatelperronian and the Protoaurignacian /Aurignacian. Claimed interstratifications between

the Chatelperronian and Aurignacian have been falsified during the last years (Piage, Roc de Combe,

Chatelperron-Grotte des Fes). Stratigraphically the Chatelperronian is always to be found below the

Protoaurignacian and Aurignacian.
http://www.aggsbach.de/2014/01/13656/


3/5

Chtelperronian points show a high degree of variation. The length of such points is

reported to be between 3,5 and 12 cm (mean length of 107 undamaged Chtelperronian

points at Quinay: 5,2 cm). Most items are classified arched backed points with regular

abrupt retouching on one side. Sometimes the retouches are confined to the distal half of

the blade, especially in small items (Fig.3). In some cases the tip shows bilateral

retouches or even inverse retouches on one margin. Several of these points are very

similar to Azilian points. Some of them would labeled as Gravettes in a Gravettian

context, because of their regular and straight back as shown by the first example of this

post (Les Cottes point according to Pradel). Sometimes the back of the curved

examples is relatively thick and the retouches tend to be irregular as demonstrated by the

second point, displayed here. Microtraceology of Chtelperronian points from Grotte du

Renne revealed that they were used as knives and also as projectile tips, which seems

also to be very probable for the different sized points shown here.At Les Cottes the larger

specimens were often made from Turonian flint, while local brown flint was used for the

smaller ones.

In contrast to older observations, the Chtelperronian is a pure Leptolithic industry

without a Mousterian component, consisting of blades from asymmetric blade cores

aimed mainly to produce blanks for Chtelperronian points and bladelets from separate cores, made from smallblocks. Although the end product of bladelet production during the Chtelperronian resembles the bladelets of the

Protoaurignacian, the system of their production is different.

Chtelperronian points, endscrapers, especially semi-circular end-scrapers, and some burins on a break and

borers/becs are always present, although the production of Chtelperronian points is always the focus of lithic

production (up to 70% of the retouched artifacts) . Middle Palaeolithic technological components ( Denticules,

side scrapers), which, by the way, are found in small numbers in many Upper Paleolithic industries,

( http://www.aggsbach.de/2014/01/fallen-out-of-time-anachronistic-tools/ ) , are absent or rare from modern

excavations of Chtelperronian layers.

The first results of a technological study of the Grande Roche at Quinay sequence show that the lithic productionassociated with level Egc (Archaic Castelperronian) must be assigned to the Mousterian of Acheulean Tradition.

Levels Egf to Ejo both yielded a homogeneous fully developed leptolithic system for the production of

Chtelperronian blade blanks and Dufour bladelets. The chaine operatoire and the end products did not

significantly change over time. At another key-site, Saint-Csaire, the Ejop layer (Achaic Castelperronian )

contained two different sub-layers, a Mousterian one Ejop INF, and a Chatelperronian one, Ejop SUP.

The suggestion, that we can follow several substages (early -evolved-late) of the Chtelperronian must be

abandoned regarding the results of the technological reevaluation at Quinay . This also holds true for the early

Chtelperronian at Les Cottes, which was once be regarded as an evolved Perigordian II (in contrast to the

Perigordian I = Chtelperronian at Ferrassie) on purely typological grounds.

A Paradigm that has to be questioned: But who were the

makers of the Chtelperronian-the Neanderthals, the AMHs or

both? In my view, there is no convincing argument to assign

this industry to a single species. In the Levant at 100 k.a.

both species used a similar Mousterian toolkit and there is no

reason why the situation should be different during the EUP

of South/West France.

The Neanderthal remains at St Csaire and from Arcy, as well

as the formal similarity between backed knifes during the MTAand Chtelperronian points are not really convincing

indications for a production of the Chtelperronian by

Neanderthals. Based on stratigraphic evidence, the cultural

continuity from the MTA to the Chtelperronian is weak and
http://www.aggsbach.de/2014/01/fallen-out-of-time-anachronistic-tools/


4/5

the association between Neanderthal remains and Chtelperronian strata at multilayered sites somewhat

ambivalent. Moreover, the presence of an elongated flake core-reduction system in the MTA is not exclusive of thi

technocomplex and exists in other Final Mousterian industries (Denticulate Mousterian, Neronian:

http://www.aggsbach.de/2010/09/the-neronian-in-the-rhone-valley ).

The manageable Top 35 Chtelperronian sites in France and Northern Spain:

1. Abri Bordes-Fitte, Roches dAbilly, Dpartement Indre-et-Loire; France

2. Abri du Chasseur, Fontechevade, Charente; France

3. Bos de Ser, Dpartement Corrze; France

4. Brassempouy, Dpartement Landes; France

5. Chapelle-aux-Saints, Dpartement Corrze; France

6. Chez-Pourr Chez-Comte, Dpartement Corrze; France

7. Combe Capelle, Dpartement Dordogne; France

8. Cueva del Pendo , Basque Country; Spain

9. Cueva Morn, Cantabria; Spain

10. Ekain, Basque Country; Spain

11. El Pendo, Cantabria; Spain

12. Fontenioux, Dpartement Vienne; France

13. Gargas, Dpartement Hautes-Pyrenes; France

14. Gatzarria , Dpartement Pyrnes-Atlantiques; France

15. Grotte de la Chaise ,Vouthon, Charente; France

16. Grotte des Fes, Chtelperron, Dpartement Allier; France

17. Grotte du Renne, Arcy-sur-Cure, Dpartement Yonne; France

18. Grotte du Trou de la Chvre, Bourdeilles, Dpartement Dordogne; France

19. Isturitz, Dpartement Pyrenes-Atlantiques; France

20. La Cote , Dpartement Dordogne; France

21. La Ferrassie (E), Dpartement Dordogne; France

22. La Quina Aval, Dpartement Charente; France

23. Labeko Koba , Basque Country; Spain

24. le Bast, Dpartement Pyrnes-Atlantiques; France

25. Le Moustier, Dpartement Dordogne; France

26. Le Piage, Dpartement Lot; France

27. Le Portel; Loubens; Dpartement Arige; France

28. Les Abeilles, Dpartement Dordogne; France

29. Les Cottes, Dpartement Vienne; France

30. Pair-non-Pair, Dpartement Dordogne; France

31. Quinay, Dpartement Vienne; France

32. Roc de Combe, Dpartement Lot; France

33. Roche-au-Loup, Merry-sur-Yonne, Dpartement Yonne; France

34. Saint-Csaire, Dpartement Charente-Maritime; France

35. Vieille-Grange; Mrigny, Dpartement Indre; France
http://www.aggsbach.de/2010/09/the-neronian-in-the-rhone-valley


5/5

Suggested Readings:

http://www.aggsbach.de/2010/12/chatelperronian-points-from-the-pas-estret-site/

http://leidenuniv.academia.edu/MorganRoussel

http://u-bordeaux1.academia.edu/JBordes
http://u-bordeaux1.academia.edu/JBordeshttp://leidenuniv.academia.edu/MorganRousselhttp://www.aggsbach.de/2010/12/chatelperronian-points-from-the-pas-estret-site/

Documents

paleolithic.pdf