Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and ...

Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age Volume IV

Edited by Nicholas J. Conard and Anne Delagnes

Tübingen Publications in Prehistory

Kerns Verlag Tübingen

Table of Contents | Foreword Nicholas J. Conard and Anne Delagnes, Series Editors

Chapter 1

| Advances in the Study of Settlement Dynamics Nicholas J. Conard, Anne Delagnes

Chapter 2

127

| Middle Paleolithic Variability in the Near East as a Reflection of Different Settlement Dynamics: A Comparative Study of Umm el Tlel, Yabrud I (Syria) and Ksar ‘Akil (Lebanon) Marina Pagli

Chapter 9

105

| Changes in Land Use and Occupation Intensity at the Onset of the Middle Paleolithic? A View from Tabun Cave, Israel Amy E. Clark

Chapter 8

77

| Paleolithic Assemblages from the Central Region of the Emirate of Sharjah (UAE) and Implications for Human Settlement Dynamics in Southern Arabia Knut Bretzke

Chapter 7

47

| Développement sur une discontinuité technique dans la séquence Howiesons Poort de l’abri Diepkloof (Afrique du Sud) Guillaume Porraz, Marina Igreja, Pierre-Jean Texier

Chapter 6

27

| Coastal Adaptations and Settlement Systems on the Cape and Horn of Africa during the Middle Stone Age Manuel Will, Andrew W. Kandel, Nicholas J. Conard

Chapter 5

11

| High-Resolution Geoarchaeology and Settlement Dynamics at the Middle Stone Age Sites of Diepkloof and Sibudu, South Africa Christopher E. Miller

Chapter 4

9

| Examples of the Use of Space 77,000 to 62,000 Years Ago at Sibudu, South Africa Lyn Wadley

Chapter 3

7

145

| Middle Paleolithic Settlement on the Iranian Central Plateau Saman Heydari-Guran, Elham Ghasidian, Nicholas J. Conard

171

Chapter 10 | Neanderthals at the Open-Air Site of Bojnice III: The Issue of “Missing” Artifacts Petr Neruda, Ľubomíra Kaminská

205

Chapter 11 | Landscape and Cave Use in the Middle Paleolithic of Bockstein: New Results from the Lithic and Faunal Analysis Berrin Çep, Petra Krönneck

227

Chapter 12 | Neanderthal Behaviors from a Spatio-Temporal Perspective: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Interpret Archaeological Assemblages María Gema Chacón, Amèlia Bargalló, Maria Joana Gabucio, Florent Rivals, Manuel Vaquero

253

Chapter 13 | Middle Paleolithic Population Dynamics: A Question of Scale of Analysis? The Example of the Early Weichselian (MIS 5d-a) in the Paris Basin Héloïse Koehler

295

Chapter 14 | Hunting Camp at the End of the Middle Paleolithic at Havrincourt “Les Bosquets” (Pas-de-Calais, France) Emilie Goval, David Hérisson, Emilie Claud, Jean-Luc Locht, Pierre Antoine, Sylvie Coutard

311

Chapter 15 | Middle Paleolithic Mobility Patterns and Settlement System Variability in the Eastern Cantabrian Region (Iberian Peninsula): A GIS-Based Resource Patching Model Joseba Rios-Garaizar, Alejandro García Moreno

329

Chapter 16 | Insights into Eurasian Middle Paleolithic Settlement Dynamics: The Palimpsest Problem Jorge Machado, Carolina Mallol, Cristo M. Hernández

361

Chapter 17 | Hafting and Site Function in the European Middle Paleolithic Veerle Rots

List of Contributors

383 411

Chapter 10 | Neanderthals at the Open-Air Site of Bojnice III: The Issue of “Missing” Artifacts

Petr Neruda, Ľubomíra Kaminská

Abstract. New analyses of the archaeological material from the travertine site of Bojnice III revealed, among others, that tools made of fine-grained raw materials in layers X, IX, and VIII either are poorly represented or are not recorded at all, although small chips prove that working edges were rejuvenated directly at the site. Through analysis of the taphonomic processes, we concluded that the issue of “missing artifacts” can most likely be explained as a result of exporting final tools at the change of location of the settlement, i.e., the tools were carried as part of the tool kit within residential mobility. These conclusions are consistent with the concept that a high degree of planning depth can be assumed in Neanderthal behaviour. Résumé. De nouvelles analyses du matériel archéologique du site à travertins de Bojnice III revèlent, entre autres, que dans les niveaux X, IX et VIII les outils sur matériaux à grain fin sont soit faiblement représentés soit pas du tout décomptés, alors que de petits éclats démontrent qu’un stade de réaménagement des bords actifs était réalisé directement sur place. A travers l’analyse des processus qui ont pu affecter la taphonomie de l’industrie mise au jour, nous en avons conclu que les “produits manquants” résultent le plus vraisemblablement d’une exportation de produits finis lors du changement de lieu d’implantation, autrement dit ces outils faisaient partie de l’outillage de base transporté dans le cadre d’une mobilité résidentielle. Ces conclusions sont en accord avec l’idée qu’une planification dans le comportement de Néanderthal puisse être proposée. IntroductIon Reconstruction of a certain aspect of early human behaviour is an enormously complex issue, especially due to the static nature and taphonomy of archaeological remains preserved from the Paleolithic. Deciphering the remains and their subsequent utilisation in order to understand the processes behind them is complicated due to several groups of factors that significantly influence how we interpret archaeological Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age, Volume IV, ed. by Nicholas J. Conard and Anne Delagnes. Tübingen Publications in Prehistory. © 2015, Kerns Verlag, Tübingen, ISBN: 978-3-935751-22-3.

205

finds. The first group is connected with human activity. Owing to the character of the data from Paleolithic sites and the low resolution of our dating methods, we are often unable to decide unequivocally and reliably how often and how long humans stayed in the site, how large were the human groups who created possible structures at the site, and hence to what extent the evidence points to contemporaneous stays. Nevertheless, deciding whether we are looking at a “living floor” or a “palimpsest” is of key importance not only for the analysis of the degree of lithic raw material transformation and a possible reconstruction of the “life” of stone tools (Dibble 1984, 1987a; Eren et al. 2005; Gordon 1993), but also for the reconstruction of an overall model of early human behaviour. The second group of factors is related to the actions of animals, especially carnivores, which often alternated with humans in the caves. The share of these animals in the composition of osteological material and its taphonomy has often been discussed. A classic example may be, for example, the bone “flute” from the site of Divje Babe in Slovenia (d’Errico et al. 1998; Chase and Nowell 1998). There are also geological processes that include both depositional and post-depositional influences. Many times the rate of sedimentation, the movement of finds in the sediment and other phenomena significantly affect the overall character of the find layers, so that only rigorously conducted archaeological research with interdisciplinary analyses can enable us to reveal and correctly interpret at least some of these phenomena (cf., e.g., Malinsky-Buller, Hovers, and Marder 2011; McPherron 2005). However, even when the taphonomy of an archaeological site is relatively clear and we have a great deal of high-quality material, the reconstruction of human behaviour is not easy. Although we can specify the behaviour at a specific site quite easily, it is still much more difficult to determine what took place off-site. Especially in defining the character and scope of mobility, we are confronted with the problem of not being able to unequivocally relate one group of people with more than one archaeological locality. We therefore resort to looking for certain strategies of behaviour; however, rather than describing the life of a certain concrete community we tend to define general habits, whether at the level of egosystem or cultural or biological adaptation. A view “beyond the site” is acquired through the remains of fauna, lithic raw materials, or certain items specific for the studied environments (e.g., manuports). In this respect, observing the distribution of lithic raw materials in relation to technological processes appears to be of critical importance (cf., e.g., Féblot-Augustin 1993, 1997; Moncel and Combier 1990; Neruda 2001; Oliva 2005; Slimak 2008, etc.), as lithic material preserves well, and, in most cases, we are capable of determining in a relatively precise manner the location of raw material outcrops (for Central Europe cf. Přichystal 2009). Through a detailed analysis of an industry we can “supplement” the missing components, that is, the missing artifacts that must have been produced at the site but were not recovered through excavations, or are only poorly represented. However, such an approach is only possible if we consider the excavated archaeological material as resulting from various and often complementary processes. In this respect, the items discovered at a site are more like waste products, and do not provide a precise picture of the entire industry. This concept differs from the traditional Bordes scheme, which regards the discovered tools as final products not to be transformed further (for the Middle Paleolithic cf., e.g., Dibble and McPherron 2006; Dibble and

206

Neruda, Kaminská | Settlement Dynamics IV

Mellars 1992; Dibble and Rolland 1992; Moyer 1998; Moyer and Rolland 2001; Rolland 1996). In reconstructing the life of artifacts, and especially in uncovering the missing components, we can determine more precisely the economic behaviour of Paleolithic populations. Some of the phenomena may be explained as proof of off-site exports (e.g., Roebroeks, Kolen, and Rensink 1988; Uthmeier 2004a). One locality that could provide a significant contribution to the discussion is the multilayer openair site of Bojnice III, where the problem described above is especially tied to highquality fine-grained raw materials (radiolarite, limnosilicite, silicite; cf. erratic “flint”), found within approx. 25 to 50 km of the site (fig. 1a). In several layers we can identify the presence of these raw materials in the shape of small flakes (chips) from the modification of the working edge, though the tools themselves are either missing or significantly under-represented. The work presented here provides an assessment of this phenomenon in the context of the entire industry, and offers possible interpretations. Knowledge base The site of Bojnice III was discovered by V. Ložek in 1964, and later excavated by J. Bárta between 1965 and 1969. To this day only very general work has been published on the site that does not include a more detailed description and analysis of the lithic industry (Bárta 1967). At present the lithic assemblage is undergoing a complex assessment within the grant project “The Neanderthals from the Bojnice Site in the Spatio-Temporal Context of Central Europe” (GAČR 404/09/0499). site and stratigraphy The travertine formation with the superposition of Paleolithic layers is situated in NW Slovakia, on the right bank of the Nitra River, approx. 3 km WWN from the town of Prievidza (fig.1a). The valley opens to the SW (fig. 1b), and its altitude at the place of the locality is 300 m. Specific climatic conditions are influenced by the surrounding mountainous terrain, the height of which exceeds 1000 m asl. A fortified Medieval castle built at the peak of the travertine formation follows its shape; the bottom of the formation thus forms the castle moat (hence the designation Bojnice III, or “hradná priekopa,” meaning “castle moat”). Archaeological finds were recorded in the northern part at the place of the entrance bridge to the castle (fig. 1c). To the east from the bridge, sectors B and A were hived off, with a smaller sector C to the west, in which the archaeological layers petered out. In sectors A and B the base of the travertine formation was captured at the depth of 8 m, where brown clayey sediments of the Last Interglacial started to occur (fig. 2). In the entire thickness of the profile, 11 archaeological layers were differentiated, and locally it was possible to differentiate also sub-layers IXa and IXb (fig. 5). As apparent from the photographic documentation from field work, the individual horizons were defined rather precisely. Their thickness apparently did not exceed 20 cm, more often even less than that (fig. 3). The areas containing finds were mostly of a different colour with a less compact structure than the sterile layers of the firmer travertine. This alternation is related to the development dynamics of the travertine formation. In the periods when the archaeological finds were depositied, there was no water running

Chap. 10 | Neanderthals at the Open-Air Site of Bojnice III

207

through the area in question, though the areas were inundated with mineral water at periodic intervals of varying lengths that caused a relatively speedy covering of archaeological localities. The best recent example of such developments is the travertine formation of Sivá brada near the town Spišské podhradie, where repeated alternations of both travertine accumulation and pedogenetic processes are evident.

Fig. 1. location of the bojnice III site. a) location of the site in relation to distant raw material resources; b) location of the site in the nitra river Valley; c) location of the excavated area; a, b, and c: areas of excavation conducted by bárta.

208


Fig. 2. stratigraphic sequence of the bojnice III site (drawing of the profile and the photo, J. bárta; compilation, P. neruda).

Fig. 3. bojnice III. detail of archaeological layers VIII and IX. layer VIII in the upper part of the photograph shows a minimum vertical spread of artifacts (photo, J. bárta).


209

The chronostratigraphic positions of the finds can be determined mainly on the grounds of analysis of malacofauna (analysed by V.Ložek), which divides the sequence into the basal part, falling within the Late Eemian (archaeological layers XI and X), and the upper part, formed during the Early Weichselian (layers IX to I). The fauna representing the first glacial maximum (MIS 4) was not recovered (fig. 2). The result of the U/Th dating that yielded the date 105,100 (+11,100)/(-9,990) BP also falls within the determined chronostratigraphic framework; unfortunately, it is not clear from the publication from which spot of the profile the sample originates (Hausmann and Brunnacker 1988). Temporally the date would more likely correlate with the basal material from the end of the Last Interglacial and the beginning of the Weichselian. According to both the malacofauna and pieces of charcoal (Ložek 2013; Novák 2013), horizons VIII - X, analysed below, could especially fall within this period. For the time being the radiocarbon dating was not carried out as the osteologic material and the pieces of charcoal originate from the lower third of the profile, thus most likely beyond the reach of this method. The travertine formation was excavated in a stair-like manner, in strips parallel with the castle wall (fig. 4). It was only possible to excavate larger areas of the bottom portions of the site (approximate area of 60 m2), thus explaining why these areas are richer in finds (fig. 5).

Fig. 4. bojnice III. work photograph illustrating the excavations with a gradual lowering of the individual horizons (photo, J. bárta 1966).

210


Fig. 5. bojnice III. detail of layer X (photo, J. bárta).

lIthIc Industry The quantities of finds vary in the individual archaeological horizons, and in many cases the numbers of items do not suffice to enable an adequate representative analysis (cf. Table 1). Only some of the layers contained finds of fine-grained raw materials (radiolarite, silicite cf. erratic “flint,” and limnosilicite), which are of interest within the context of the issue of the “missing artifacts” and the reconstruction of Neanderthal behaviour in Bojnice. For these reasons our attention will be focused on the sequence of layers VIII – X (Table 1). The basic characteristics of the observed layers are very similar in terms of technology, typology, as well as raw materials. The comparison of the raw materials used (inclusive of waste) reveals a dominant representation of quartz; judging by the character of corTable 1. overview of the quantitative representation of lithic artifacts in the individual layers of the bojnice III site (rm – raw material without modification, hs – hammerstones).

Layer

Groups of ﬁnds rm

cores

3

1

II

6

4

III

9

I

blanks

tools

waste

1

1

hs

∑ 6

3

6

27

4

3

4

2

20

48

IV

22

1

1

1

25

V

8

1

1

3

13

VI

3

2

19

24

VII

5

1

2

1

12

VIII

44

7

32

20

821

IX

2

11

24

18

X

44

14

54

39

1

1

5

XI

21 6

930

441

3

499

663

2

816

1

6

∑

2410


211

tex, it comes from the local fluvial sediments of the Nitra River (figs. 1 and 6). Andesite was also obtained from these resources but, in contrast to the nearby site of Bojnice I, it was only rarely used. From the coarser raw materials quartzite was used as well. Raw materials originating from greater distances of 25 to more than 50 km are evidenced in all the three studied layers. These include limnosilicites from the Žiarska kotlina Basin, radiolarites from the region of the Váh River, and undetermined silicites resembling erratic silicites (“flints”) from southern Poland (fig. 1; Přichystal 2013).

Table 2. bojnice III. representation of the main technologic groups of lithic industry in relation to raw materials and size categories in layers X, IX, and VIII. rm + hs – sum of raw materials without modification and hammerstones. coarse-grained materials

technological groups

Metric group (cm) 6.1-8

8.1-10

Metric group (cm)

0.1-2

2.1-4

4.1-6

19

30

4

rm + hs

6

1

cores

1

34

7

1

blanks

1

17

52

1

1

blank fragments

1

250

layer VIII

Fine-grained materials

small chips

379

88

1

666

210

14

2

0

892

0.1-2

2.1-4

4.1-6

6.1-8

8.1-10

layer IX

3

2

10

1

8.1-10

36

38

36

2

0

0

0

0.1-2

2.1-4

4.1-6

6.1-8

8.1-10

blanks

1

blank fragments

2

60

2

1

small chips

48

Fragments

1

303

137

7

1

1

449

0.1-2

2.1-4

4.1-6

6.1-8

8.1-10

layer X

25

22

3

rm + hs

11

2

cores

1

44

6

blanks

16

59

1

38

197

4

278

333

16

1

213

212

6.1-8

cores

169

2

4.1-6

rm + hs

1

32

2.1-4

Fragments

32

134

0.1-2

1

0

50

49

0

1

0

0

0.1-2

2.1-4

4.1-6

6.1-8

8.1-10

0

1

blank fragments

3

small chips

138

Fragments

15

1

156

31

628

188


13

1 0

If we compare the representation of raw materials in the main technological groups (Table 2), it becomes obvious that, in the case of both coarse- and fine-grained raw materials, their maximum numbers are tied mainly to the group of small chips and fragments. The overall small character of the industry is the typical attribute of all layers in Bojnice III. The prevailing part of the collection, including the layers reviewed here (fig. 7), falls within the metric interval of 0.1–4 cm (group A and B, 2 cm division).

Fig. 6. representation of raw materials in layers X, IX, and VIII in bojnice III.

Fig. 7. dimensions of the lithic industry in layers X, IX, and VIII in bojnice III.


213

The smallest group A is mainly represented by chips and tiny waste from the production of blanks (Table 2). The majority of flakes and cores (their remains and fragments included) is preserved in the metric group B (2,1-4 cm). This was apparently one of the main reasons why the industry from Bojnice III was correlated with small-shaped industries from the Slovak travertines (Bárta 1967, 1972; Valoch 1984, 1996). As will be demonstrated below, this characteristic relates to the taphonomy of the industry, or possibly to the form of transformation (cf. Uthmeier 2004b), and it cannot be taken as a culturally significant attribute. From the technological viewpoint, the assemblages from the richest layers VIII, IX, and X are characterized by the reduction of volumetric cores (fig. 8: 1-2; 9: 1-2) in a few modifications of shape, while items with hierarchized areas (sub-discoid cores), with clear striking and exploitation areas, prevail. However, it is difficult to reconstruct the entire process of their reduction as they were mainly preserved in the form of exploited remains and their fragments (Table 3). Therefore we are unable to describe the entire process of reduction with any adequate precision, especially the form, in which the raw material was brought to the site. In sporadic cases we were able to detect the traces of the natural surface of raw materials, which indicate the utilisation of the fluvial sediments of the Nitra and Handlovka Rivers (Bárta 1967). One fragment of a core from layer X also indicates the utilisation of ventral sides of flakes as exploitation areas for chipping of small flakes (cf. Kombewa; fig. 9: 8). However, this technological attribute cannot be quantified more precisely, not even with the utilisation of debitage. The recorded forms of blanks are also in correspondence with the main method of core exploitation. All main categories are represented, i.e., flakes with cortex, partial cortex, without cortex, including side-struck blanks, and pseudo-Levallois flakes. Nevertheless, a great percentage of debitage consists of fragmented flakes, and many of them are taphonomically damaged to such an extent that their further technological characteristics cannot be determined. At any rate, it is obvious also from the analysis of debitage that the Levallois method of blank production was not corroborated in any of the studied assemblages. The percentage of cortex in relation to raw materials corresponds with the overall character of the industry (Table 4). As the material is greatly fragmented it is only possible to analyse a limited quantity of blanks, but even so we can see from the comparison that more cortex on the dorsal sides of flakes was only preserved on coarse raw materials like quartz and quartzite. Fine-grained raw materials (radiolarite, limnosilicite) were virtually exclusively preserved in the forms without cortex, or with only minimum quantities of cortex. In the manufacture of tools, the second technological concept represented by the preparation of bifacial forms we are aware of, e.g., from the Central European Micoqian, was utilised. Unfortunately, as with the cores, this procedure is corroborated by small, significantly reduced items, making a more precise characterization of the processes involved here difficult (fig. 8: 5-7; 9: 5, 7 and 10). At any rate, the presence of this method is important for further evaluation. Apart from the bifacial component with a minimum representation (cf. Table 5) in layer VIII, simple sidescrapers on quartz and denticulates are the most numerous forms. Other types of sidescrapers (transversal, ventral and bifacial) and bifacial implements (reduced forms of bifacial backed knives) are only represented by one item each (fig. 8: 3-7).

214


Fig. 8. bojnice III. selection of the assemblage from layer VIII. 1 discoid core with hierarchical surfaces; 2 unifacial discoid core; 3, 4 sidescrapers; 5 reduced form of a bifacial backed knife; 6, 7 fragments of bifacial implements.


215

Fig. 9. bojnice III. selection of the assemblage from layer X. 1, 2 discoid cores; 3 fragment of a déjéte sidescraper; 4 simple sidescraper; 5 sidescraper with thinned back; 6 déjété sidescraper; 7 fragment of bifacial implement; 8 Kombewa flake; 9 complex sidescraper with prepared and thinned back; 10 small point with bifacially prepared tip.

216


In layer IX the proportion of notches and denticulates decreases, although simple sidescrapers on quartz still dominate. Ventral and bifacial sidescrapers occur sporadically. Fragments of tools and items with local use-wears are most represented. There was no tool manufactured from fine-grained raw material in layer IX. From the typological point of view, layer X has the richest number of finds (fig. 9). In the group of coarse-grained materials simple sidescrapers complemented by a range of complex sidescrapers dominate. Notches and denticulates are poorly represented. Mainly complex sidescrapers (sidescrapers with thinned backs, déjéte and transversal sidescrapers) appear among the tools made of fine-grained raw materials, and a bifacial backed knife is corroborated by one item made of radiolarite. Table 3. bojnice III. representation of the individual stages of core reduction in the layers X, IX and VIII. technological stages of core reduction

layers

Prepared

VIII

sub-discoid core (sparse)

IX

missing

exploited

exhausted

missing

sub-discoid core with hierarchical surfaces sub-discoid core with hierarchical surfaces

missing

discoid core irregular core

X

pre-core (sparse)

sub-discoid core with hierarchical surfaces

missing

nucleus sur enclume Table 4. bojnice III. Percentages of cortex on blanks in relation to the utilised raw materials.

layer

Percentage of cortex on dorsal surface

raw material

100%

coarse-grained r.m. VIII

99-75%

74-50%

49-25%

24-1%

0%

8

3

4

5

13

Fine-grained r.m.

1

n

0

8

3

4

5

14

%

0.0

23.5

8.8

11.8

14.7

41.2

4

3

1

11

coarse-grained r.m. IX

X

Fine-grained r.m.

1

n

0

0

4

3

1

12

%

0.0

0,0

20.0

15.0

5.0

60.0

coarse-grained r.m.

1

5

2

4

Fine-grained r.m.

3

32

2

14

n

1

5

2

4

5

46

%

1.6

7.9

3.2

6.3

7.9

73.0


217

Table 5. bojnice III. types of tools in relation to the representative raw materials. layer

VIII

IX

raw material

tool type

Quartz

limnosilicite radiolarite

∑

single sidescraper

5

5

double sidescraper

1

1

transversal sidescraper

1

1

ventral sidescraper

1

bifacial sidescraper

1

1

truncated ﬂake

1

1

bifacial backed knife

1

1

notch and denticulate

6

fragment and use-wear

1

1

2

6 1

2

single sidescraper

4

4

ventral sidescraper

1

1


1

1


1

1

bifacial backed knife

1

1

fragment and use-wear

7

3

single sidescraper

3

1

double sidescraper

1

pointed sidescraper

10 2

6 1

1

déjété sidescraper

1

transversal sidescraper X

Quarzite

1

ventral sidescraper

1

sidescraper with thinned back

1

1

1

1 1

2 1

1


2


1

1

1

6

4

7

2 2

bifacial backed knife fragment and use-wear

3

3 1

1 17

To resolve the issue of the “missing artifacts” it is necessary to reconstruct the procedures carried out in processing the lithic raw material. According to the analysis above, the collections from the studied layers can be divided into two groups: artifacts made of coarse raw materials (quartz, quartzite and andezite) and fine-grained raw materials (radiolarite, limnosilicite, silicite cf. erratic “flint”). From the preserved finds we may assume that coarse raw materials would have been brought to the site in three basic forms: • • •

218

Non-modified blocks; Prepared cores or non-retouched blanks; Final tools.


Representation of cortex on the debitage (Table 4) and the comparison of the dimensions of cores and blanks most likely indicate that coarse raw materials were brought to the site in modified forms with a varying degree of reduction. Either the initial cores were created, or their initial exploitation was started off-site, probably on outcrops. It also cannot be ruled out that these raw materials might have been brought to the site even in the form of final products. Even less can be said about the distribution of finds made of fine raw materials, as these were mainly recovered in the form of chips from the retouching of tools, and only sporadically as tools, while only in layer X were they found in such significant quantities that we can make a closer characterization. By a comparison of certain parameters (e.g., the proportion of cores, cortex on blanks, non-retouched blanks and dimensions), we can thus deduce that final tools were brought to the locality to be reutilised/rejuvenated directly on the site, as chips are said to represent the group of static objects left at the place of detachment (Weißmüller 1995). At the same time it seems that the final or reutilised tools made of fine-grained raw materials were further used beyond the area excavated by J. Bárta. It is exactly the interpretation of this phenomenon that probably counts among the most interesting issues relating to the Bojnice III assemblages. dIscussIon The basic characteristic of the Bojnice III collections is the incompleteness of the chaîne opératoire; essentially this may be interpreted according to two main factors: • •

geological processes that caused post-depositional changes on the site (N-Transforms, cf. Uthmeier 2004a, 2004b), anthropic impacts (C-Transforms, cf. Uthmeier 2004a, 2004b); however, these may include two possible alternatives: transfer of the finds within the site, or export of the finds beyond the locality.

With regard to the first factor, the method of excavations and especially the preserved field documentation do not make the use of modern analytical means possible. Nevertheless, it is evident from the preserved materials that the thickness of the individual horizons was not great, and in the instance of layer VIII it apparently did not exceed 10 cm (cf. fig. 3). It follows that the vertical distribution of finds was rather minimal. The question of the horizontal motion of artifacts, which might occur in relation to the dynamics of forming of the travertine formation, is more complex. It is obvious that in the place of discovery of the lithic industry periods of sedimentation had to take turns with relatively quiet periods. Sedimentation of travertine had to proceed at the time when mineral water was running over the place of discovery. The water could theoretically be one of the causes of displacement of the artifacts. Current observations at the outflows of mineral water show, however, that the items, which fall on the area of precipitated carbonate, are repositioned minimally, as they become cemented relatively quickly. If in the instance of the studied area we dealing with a secondary deposition of the finds transferred from elsewhere, it would probably mean that items from various places of the site of discovery were recovered, and this would eliminate functional differences among the partial locations on the site; however, this


219

is not corroborated by the lithic analysis. The second argument, which would more likely reveal an in situ location of the studied industry, is the presence of bone retouchers that correlate with a high representation of chips. Moreover, the proportion of chips would probably be higher if water screening of cultural horizons had been carried out during the excavations. If we assume that chips and small flakes, produced in the forming and rejuvenation of tools, are static objects that remain in place where these processes were carried out (Weißmüller 1995), we may conclude that the issue of “missing artifacts” is more likely hidden at the level of the Neanderthal behaviour on this site (C-Transforms). Within this concept it is necessary to analyse two options that might be relevant: • •

The tools manufactured from these materials could lay somewhere on site but were not recovered through excavation; The tools were carried away from the site (export of tools).

The first option is possible, as the excavation area was not large, and it can be correctly assumed that the size of the locality is larger, extending below the present fortified castle. However, in such a case, the absence of tools and the presence of chips would suggest hiving of zones with various functions, so that tools, for example, were manufactured/reutilized in places other than where they were used. Such behaviour was evidenced, for example, in the Micoquian layer 7a in Kůlna Cave (Neruda, Lázničková-Galetová and Dreslerová 2011); unfortunately, a similarly oriented spatial analysis cannot be carried out within the Bojnice station. The difference between the localities rests in the fact that in the place of manufacture in Kůlna, blanks were detached to be retouched and then used at another place (a preserved chaîne opératorie from the extraction of blanks through to the making of a tool). In the case of the Bojnice site, the blanks from radiolarite or other fine-grained raw materials would have to be detached at another place within the site, and then carried to the place where the excavations were carried out to be formed or resharpened (preserved chips and retouchers made of hard animal material), and consequently again brought to another place within the same locality. Such a complicated chaîne opératoire does not seem probable. Processing of coarse-grained raw materials was analogous to the situation found in Kůlna Cave, as the raw material in Bojnice was processed in a more complex manner, but the chaîne opératorie is, at any rate, incomplete (cf. the composition of cores and the absence of large flakes). Although the recovered quartz and quartzite chips prove retouching of tools took place at the site, their representation within the assemblage is by no means significant (the tools are rather fragmentary). Thus, in the case of coarse-grained raw materials as well, we are dealing with a kind of a negative selection as the target products were not preserved in Bojnice III (large flakes or tools made on them). The second variant falling within the C-Transforms category explains the phenomenon according to import and export of tools among the individual sites (base camps). From our perspective this explanation appears to be the most probable, especially when considering the technological composition of the assemblage. Obviously fine-grained raw materials were brought to the site already in a transformed shape, most often in the form of tools (in various stages of reduction), were resharpened on the site, and consequently exported when the location of the settlement was changed.

220


This kind of behaviour was discovered, for example, at the Crimean Buran-Kaya III site, level B1 (Uthmeier 2004a), Plaidt-Hummerich in the Neuwied Basin in Western Germany (Bosinski et al. 1986), or the site of Maastricht-Belvédère “J” (Roebroeks, Kolen, and de Loecker 1987). This phenomenon is well correlated with the observation that the degree of transformation is often related with the distance from the resource (Geneste 1985; Roebroeks, Kolen, and Rensink 1988; Uthmeier 2004a). The interpretation that takes into account the import of already finished tools may also rely on the form, in which we have—in exceptional instances (layer X)—discovered the distant types of raw materials (radiolarite, limnosilicite and silicitie cf. erratic “flint”). Complex types of sidescrapers are mainly represented; reduced forms of bifacial backed knives are rare. All these tools show a high degree of reduction of the original blank, either a flake or a bifacial form, which may not only be in relation with the reduction/rejuvenation of the original tool, but also with the fact that especially bifacial forms may also be used as cores. For this reason bifacial forms of tools and sidescrapers are usually considered the most suitable for the transfer of raw material to a greater distance, for example, during relocations of settlements (e.g., Geneste 1985; Hayden 1976; Keeley 1980). In Europe, this phenomenon was often observed, as in the above-mentioned site of Maastricht-Belvédère J (Roebroeks, Kolen, and de Loecker 1987) or Plaidt-Hummerich (Bosinski et al. 1986), or in layers 9 and 10 in Marillac, Charente (Meignen 1988). In the Moravian material this effect is clearly seen in the Taubachian assemblage from layer 11 in Kůlna Cave, where raw materials from the greatest distance are corroborated also by bifacial items (Neruda 2001), the shapes of which are reminiscent of small, more robust “leaf” points, though the finds do not bear signs of working edge modification, and thus are closer to cores. If this is the case, it has to be taken into account that some tools belong to the category of tools with a long use-life. This assumption is also well correlated with the analyses described above. The Micoquian bifacial tools from Kůlna Cave, which showed a more marked reduction of the cutting edge (a more open angle), had a palimpsest of use-wears on their surfaces; this is proof of long-term utilisation. It is perhaps significant that the particular piece, on which these signs were prominent, was moreover manufactured from a special, coloured silicite matter (Neruda, Lázničková-Galetová, and Dreslerová 2011; Neruda, Nerudová, and Šajnerová-Dušková 2010). The palimpsests of use-wears were similarly recorded, for example, on handaxes from Grotte XVI in France (Soressi and Hays 2003). At any rate, if we explain the issue of artifacts “missing” from the Bojnice III site as an anthropic impact (C-Transforms) due to inter-site transfer (export) of artifacts, this implies important aspects of Neanderthal behaviour. Neanderthals apparently distinguished both the quality of raw material and the morphology of the tools, utilising suitable items for a longer period of time (cf. Dibble 1987b). If we take into consideration that, for example, radiolarites are found at a distance of more than 50 km from the Bojnice site (fig. 1), then we can assume that, when moving at greater distances, Neanderthals used high-quality raw material in a planned manner. The distance and the significance of imports would then suggest mobility within a relatively large territory. If this interpretation is correct, at least the layers X, IX, and VIII in view in Bojnice III would correspond with the notion that some aspects of behaviour were planned as early as the Middle Paleolithic; hence, the classic conception upheld especially by L. Binford (Binford 1979, 1982), and until now long accepted, that curation


221

economy is an expression of anatomically modern humans, has to be rejected. Obviously this does not mean that proof of curation in Middle Paleolithic collections automatically implies an “always fully determined optimal and detailed planning and anticipation” (Roebroeks, Kolen, and Rensink 1988); but the information above definitely demonstrates that Neanderthal behaviour was much more complex than it seemed to be up to now. A kind of “side effect” of the interpretations described above for the Bojnice assemblages is also a clearer understanding of the significance of the individual techno-typological components for cultural classification. The original emphasis on the small dimensions of the industry and the dominant representation of simple sidescrapers have led researchers to consider analogies as concerns other travertine sites (Bárta 1967, 1972), many of which are usually connected with Taubachian (Valoch 1984, 1996). We assume that the overall habitus of industries discovered in layers X, IX, and VIII does not reflect a specific type of tool kit but is an outcome of the process of reduction of the industry (according to the concept by Dibble 1984, 1987b) and the planning depth of Neanderthals (C-Transforms). In other words, in the instance of the Bojnice III station we are dealing with a kind of a negative selection represented primarily by greatly reduced forms of cores and waste products from the manufacture of tools. The small dimensions of the assemblage, which implied a resemblance with the Central European Taubachian, are in fact a secondary feature, and we have to rely on other indicia that suggest an alternative classification. The technology of blank production is characterised by an absence of the Levallois method, which is a phenomenon typical for the Middle Paleolithic in Moravia (Neruda 2005, 2009; Neruda and Nerudová 2009). Applying the volumetric discoid method (Boëda 1995), which is characteristic for both the Central European Taubachian and Micoquian, prevails. The presence of complex sidescrapers of the type with modification on both sides of the semi-product (natural plate, blank, etc.) and the occurrence of bifacial backed knives, albeit captured in a substantially reduced form, are more important for cultural classification. The combination of these characteristics is typical for the Micoquian. If we do not consider the presence of para-burin striking on bifacial backed knives as only a culturally determining element, or fossile directeur (so far it is unclear how the application of this technological finesse varied during the reutilization of the bifacial knife), the discovered industry can most likely be related with the Central European Micoquian sensu lato (for this issue, see, e.g., Neruda 2009, 2011). conclusIon Through the assessment of the data from the site we are able to reconstruct certain specific behaviours of Neanderthals that may contribute to a greater understanding of their way of life (fig. 10). Firstly, we may presume that the group(s) of Neanderthals, who utilised the travertine formation in Bojnice, was (were) coming to the site already with final tools made from high-quality raw materials (radiolarites, silicites cf. erratic “flint,” and limnosilicite). As the tools manufactured from these raw materials feature attributes of marked reductions, we may assume these raw materials were not brought to the studied site as a result of premeditated expeditions to obtain a specific raw material, but as a part of a tool kit the Neanderthals carried with them when moving

222


Fig. 10. Model of the neanderthal raw material strategies within the bojnice III site.

the entire settlement (on the issue of a connection between the reduced forms and mobility, cf., e.g., Bamforth 2003; Bamforth and Becker 2000; Becker 1999; Geneste 1985; Rasic 2008). At any rate, it is obvious from the analysis of the chipped material that a further reduction of final tools made of high-quality raw materials was carried out directly on the site. New tools were primarily produced from the local raw materials from the fluvial sediments, i.e., quartzite and quartz. As opposed to limnosilicite and radiolarite, processing of these raw materials is corroborated from the initial forms with cortex through to the waste, although evidence of an advanced phase of reduction of the raw materials prevails. During their stay(s) at the Bojnice travertine formation the Neanderthals utilised local resources, both as regards food and the lithic raw materials. Evidence of premeditated expeditions to obtain raw materials organized within one stage of settlement of the Bojnice travertine site was not recorded in the collection so far, or we have so far been unable to interpret this correctly. Apparently after the exploitation of the surrounding resources the entire group of Neanderthals moved to a new location. It seems that the tools made of high-quality raw materials were again carried away as part of their equipment. The transported tool kit was probably also supplemented by the tools made of coarse-grained materials, as complex tools made of these raw materials were not preserved in adequate numbers either, and are fragmented as well. The model described above is repeated at least in three layers, and it is unlikely all of them were connected with the habits of one group of hunters. After all, the implied model of residential mobility was relatively common during the last Interglacial and


223

at the beginning of the Weichselian. More likely a reaction to ecosystem conditions than a matter of cultural selection, the behavioural model could be economically advantageous for a small group. acKnowledgMents This work was supported by grants from the Czech Science Foundation (404/09/0499) under the title of “The Neanderthals from the Bojnice Site in the Spatio-Temporal Context of Central Europe.” Our thanks go to researchers at the Upper Nitra Museum in Prievidza for lending us the specialized materials for study. We also thank P. Dresler for processing the GIS maps, and to A. Přichystal for the petrographic analysis of selected items from the chipped industry.

lIterature bamforth, d. b. 2003. rethinking the role of bifacial technology in Paleoindian adaptations on the great Plains. In Multiple approaches to the study of bifacial technologies, ed. by M. soressi and h. l. dibble, pp. 209-28. university Museum Monographs 115. Philadelphia: university of Pennsylvania Museum of archaeology and anthropology. bamforth, d. b., and M. becker. 2000. core/biface ratios, Mobility, reffiting, and artifact uselives: a Paleoindian example. Plains anthropologist 45: 273-90. bárta, J. 1967. stratigraphische Übersicht der paläolithischen Funde in der westslowakei. Quartär 18: 57-80. 1972. Pravek bojníc. od staršej doby kamennej po dobu slovanskú. bratislava: obzor n. p. becker, M. 1999. reconstructing Prehistoric hunter-gatherer Mobility Patterns and the Implications for the shift to sedentism: a Perspective from the near east. Ph.d. thesis, university of colorado, boulder. binford, l. r. 1979. organization and Formation Processes: looking at curated technologies. Journal of anthropological research 35: 25573. 1982. reply to r. white’s “rethinking the Middle/upper Paleolithic transition.” current anthropology 23: 177-81.

224

boëda, e. 1995. caractéristiques techniques des chaînes opératoires lithiques des niveaux micoquiens de Külna (tchécoslovaquie). Paléo supplément: 57-72. bosinski, g., K. Kröger, J. schäfer, and e. turner. 1986. altsteinzeitliche siedlungsplätze auf den osteifel-Vulkanen. Jahrbuch des römisch-germanischen Zentralmuseums 33: 97-130. chase, P. g., and a. nowell. 1998. taphonomy of a suggested Middle Paleolithic bone Flute from slovenia. current anthropology 39 (4): 549-53. d’errico, F., P. Villa, a. c. Pinto llona, and I. rosa ruiz. 1998. a Middle Palaeolithic origin of Music? using cave-bear bone accumulations to assess the divje babe I bone ‘Flute’. antiquity 72 (275): 65-79. dibble, h. l. 1984. Interpreting typological Variation of Middle Paleolithic scrapers - Function, style, or sequence of reduction. Journal of Field archaeology 11 (4): 431-36. 1987a. comparaisons des séquences de réduction des outils moustériens de la France et du Proche-orient. l’anthropologie 91 (1): 189-96. 1987b. the Interpretation of Middle Paleolithic scraper Morphology. american antiquity 52 (1): 109-17. dibble, h. l., and s. P. McPherron. 2006. the Missing Mousterian. current anthropology 47 (5): 777-803.


dibble, h. l., and P. Mellars, eds. 1992. the Middle Paleolithic: adaptation, behaviour, and Variability. university Museum Monograph 78, universiry Museum symposium series 4. Philadelphia: university of Pennsylvania. dibble, h. l., and n. rolland. 1992. on assemblage Variability in the Middle Paleolithic of western europe. In the Middle Paleolithic: adaptation, behaviour and Variability, ed. by h. l. dibble and P. Mellars, pp. 1-28. university Museum Monograph 78, universiry Museum symposium series 4. Philadelphia: university of Pennsylvania.

Moravské zemské muzeum - archeologický ústav saV. Malinsky-buller, a., e. hovers, and o. Marder. 2011. Making time: ‘living Floors’, ‘Palimpsests’ and site Formation Processes - a Perspective from the open-air lower Paleolithic site of revadim Quarry, Israel. Journal of anthropological archaeology 30 (2): 89-101. McPherron, s. J. P. 2005. artifact orientations and site Formation Processes from total station Proveniences. Journal of archaeological science 32 (7): 1003-14.

eren, M. I., M. dominguez-rodrigo, s. l. Kuhn, d. s. adler, d. s., I. le, and o. bar-yosef. 2005. defining and Measuring reduction in unifacial stone tools. Journal of archaeological science 32 (8): 1190-201.

Meignen, l. 1988. un exemple de comportement technologique differential selon les matières premières: Marillac, couches 9 et 10. In l’homme de néandertal, Vol. 4, la technique, ed. by M. otte, pp. 71-79. liège: eraul.

Féblot-augustin, J. 1993. Mobility strategies in the late Middle Palaeolithic of central europe and western europe - elements of stability and Variability. Journal of anthropological archaeology 12 (3): 211-65.

Moncel, M.-h., and J. combier. 1990. l’exploitation de l’espace au Pléistocène moyen. bulletin de la société Préhistorique Française: 299-313.

1997. la circulation des matières premières au Paléolithique. synthèse des données perspectives comportementales, ed. by M. otte. liège: eraul 75. geneste, J.-M. 1985. analyse lithique d’industries moustériennes du Périgord: une approche technologique du comportement des groupes humains au Paléolithique moyen, université de bordeaux I, bordeaux. gordon, d. 1993. Mousterian tool selection, reduction, and discard at ghar, Israel. Journal of Field archaeology 20: 105-218. hausmann, r., and K. brunnacker. 1988. u-series dating of Middle european travertines. In l’homme de néandertal . Vol. 1, la chronologie., ed. by M. otte, pp. 47-51. liège: eraul 28. hayden, b. 1976. curation, old and new. In Primitive art and technology, ed. by J. s. raymond, b. loveseth, c. arnold and g. reardon, pp. 47-59. calgary: university of calgary Press. Keeley, l. h. 1980. experimental determination of stone tool uses. a Microwear analysis. chicago: university of chicago Press. ložek, V. 2013. Fossil Mollusca at bojnice. In neanderthals at bojnice in the context of central europe, ed. by P. neruda and Ľ. Kaminská, pp. 188-90. anthropos - studies in anthropology, Palaeoethnology, Palaeontology and Quaternary geology Vol. 36, n.s. 28. brno - nitra:

Moyer, c. 1998. the structure of Middle Palaeolithic Variability: a Multivariate assessment. Ma thesis, university of Victoria, canada. Moyer, c., and n. rolland. 2001. understanding the Middle Palaeolithic assemblage typology. antiquity 75 (287): 39-43. neruda, P. 2001. la distribution des matières premières au taubachien à la grotte Kůlna. In Préhistoire et approche expérimentale, pp. 349-62. Préhistoires 5. Montagnac. 2005. technologie micoquienu v jeskyni Kůlně. Micoquian technology from Kůlna cave (sloup, south Moravia). acta Musei Moraviae, scientiae sociales 90: 23-78. 2009. archeologie středopaleolitického souvrství 1-3 v Moravském Krumlově IV. In Moravský Krumlov IV - vícevrstevná lokalita ze středního a počátku mladého paleolitu na Moravě, ed. by P. neruda and Z. nerudová, pp. 99-144. anthropos. studies in anthropology, Paleoethnology, Palaeontology and Quaternary geology 29 (n.s. 21). brno: Moravské zemské muzeum. 2011. střední paleolit v Moravských jeskyních. Middle Palaeolithic in Moravian caves. dissertationes archaeologicae brunenses/Pragensesque 8. brno: Masarykova univerzita. neruda, P., M. lázničková-galetová, and g. dreslerová. 2011. retušéry a kosti s rýhami z jeskyně Kůlny v Moravském krasu. Interdisciplinární analýza tvrdých živočišných materiálů ze středopaleolitických horizontů, anthropos.


225

studies in anthropology, Paleoethnology, Palaeontology and Quaternary geology 33 (n.s. 25). brno: Moravské zemské muzeum. neruda, P., and Z. nerudová. 2009. Postavení lokality Moravský Krumlov IV v kontextu střední evropy. In Moravský Krumlov IV - vícevrstevná lokalita ze středního a počátku mladého paleolitu na Moravě , ed. by P. neruda and Z. nerudová, pp. 178-213. anthropos. studies in anthropology, Paleoethnology, Palaeontology and Quaternary geology 29 (n.s. 21). brno: Moravské zemské muzeum. neruda, P., Z. nerudová, and a. Šajnerová-dušková. 2010. trasologická analýza micoquienských bifaciálních nástrojů z jeskyně Kůlny. acta Musei Moraviae, scientiae sociales 95 (1): 3-15. novák, J. 2013. anthracological analysis of bojnice I and III samples. In neanderthals at bojnice in the context of central europe, ed. by P. neruda and Ľ. Kaminská, pp. 191-92, anthropos - studies in anthropology, Palaeoethnology, Palaeontology and Quaternary geology Vol. 36, n.s. 28. brno – nitra: Moravské zemské muzeum – archeologický ústav saV. oliva, M. 2005. l’exploitation du paysage et des ressources lithiques au Paléolithique en république tchèque. In comportements des hommes du Paléolithique moyen et supérieur en europe: territoires et milieux, ed. by d. Vialou, J. renault-Miskovsky and M. PatouMathis, pp. 107-20. liège: eraul 111. Přichystal, a. 2009. Kamenné suroviny v pravěku východní části střední evropy. brno: Masarykova univerzita. 2013. lithic raw Material base of the Middle Palaeolithic settlement in bojnice. In neanderthals at bojnice in the context of central europe, ed. by P. neruda and Ľ. Kaminská, pp. 182-87, anthropos - studies in anthropology, Palaeoethnology, Palaeontology and Quaternary geology Vol. 36, n.s. 28. brno - nitra: Moravské zemské muzeum - archeologický ústav saV. rasic, J. t. 2008. Paleoalaskan adaptive strategies Viewed from northwestern alaska. Phd thesis, washington state university, washington. roebroeks, w., J. Kolen, and d. de loecker. 1987. an early weichselian site at Maastrichtbelvédère (site J). analecta Praehistorica leidensia 20: 1-9.

226

roebroeks, w., J. Kolen, and e. rensink. 1988. Planning depth, anticipation and organization of Middle Paleolithic technology: the “archaic natives” Meet eve’s descendants. helinium 28 (1): 17-34. rolland, n. 1996. Middle Palaeolithic settlement systems and Mousterian complex assemblage type Variability. In Middle Palaeolithic and Middle stone age settlement systems, ed. by n. J. conard and F. wendorf, pp. 293-98. Proceedings of the XIII congress 6. Forli: a.b.a.c.o. slimak, l. 2008. circulations de matériaux très exotiques au Paléolithique moyen, une notion de détail. bulletin de la société préhistorique française 105 (2): 267-81. soressi, M., and M. a. hays. 2003. Manufacture, transport, and use of Mousterian bifaces: a case study from the Périgord (France). In Multiple approaches to the study of bifacial technologies, ed. by M. soressi and h. l. dibble, pp. 125-47. university Museum Monographs 115. Philadelphia: university of Pennsylvania. uthmeier, t. 2004a. Planning depth and saiga hunting: on-site and off-site activities of late neadertals in level b1 of buran-Kaya III. In the Middle Paleolithic and early upper Paleolithic of eastern crimea, ed. by V. P. chabai, K. Monigal and a. e. Marks, pp. 193-231. liège: eraul 104. 2004b. transformation analysis and the reconstruction of on-site and off-site activities: Methodological remarks. In the Middle Paleolithic and early upper Paleolithic of eastern crimea, ed. by V. P. chabai, K. Monigal and a. e. Marks, pp. 175-91. liège: eraul 104. Valoch, K. 1984. le taubachien, sa géochronologie, paléoécologie et paléoethnologie. l’anthropologie 88 (2): 192-208. 1996. le Paléolithique en tchéquie et en slovaquie, Préhistoire d’europe. grenoble: Jérôme Millon. weißmüller, w. 1995. sesselfelsgrotte II. die silexartefakte der unteren schichten der sesselfelsgrotte. ein beitrag zum Problem des Moustérien, Quartär-bibliothek 6. saarbrücken: saarbrücker druckerei und Verlag.
