Many awls in our argument. Bone tool manufacture and use from the Chatelperronian and Aurignacian layers of the Grotte du Renne at Arcy-sur-Cur

A comparative analysis of the bone awls from the Châtelperronian and Aurignacian levels of the Grotte du Renne at Arcy-sur-Cure is conducted with the aim of establishing the cultural affiliation of these tools and identifying distinctive technological and functional features for the two assemblages. The studied material consists of fifty Châtelperronian and nine Aurignacien awls presenting an excellent state of preservation. The largest collection of Châtelperronian awls comes from the lowest (level X) of the three levels attributed to this technocomplex, and the awls from Châtelperronian and Aurignacian horizons show a spatial distribution which is different and coherent with that observed for diagnostic Châtelperronian and Aurignacian finds. This contradicts the hypothesis that the presence of bone tools in the Châtelperronian levels is the result of a reworking of sediments. Awls are, in both assemblages, made out of the limb bones of horse, reindeer and carnivores. Common features in the choice of blanks include the use of naturally pointed bones, such as accessory horse metapodials, shaft fragments derived from limb bones broken for marrow extraction, as well as elongated proximal fragments probably obtained by longitudinally splitting metapodials and radii. Châtelperronian awls show a more diverse repertoire of blank types (e.g. use of carnivore fibulae and of massive epiphyseal fragments obtained by fracture) and variable degrees of shaping than Aurignacian ones. Nine Châtelperronian tools are marked with sets of notches or v-shaped motifs, while only one Aurignacian piece bears a decoration consisting of a set of crosses. Comparative microscopic analyses of archeological and experimental tools indicate that the awls of the Châtelperronian were intensively used and produced hundreds, more likely thousands, of perforations on a variety of soft materials, probably different types of skins. Worn tools were resharpened by rubbing the points on grinding stones and tiny awl fragments were reused until total exhaustion.

[1]  F. Djindjian L’Aurignacien de la grotte du Renne. Les fouilles d’André Leroi-Gourhan à Arcy-sur-Cure (Yonne) , 2003 .

[2]  Iain Davidson,et al.  Tools and language in human evolution , 1993 .

[3]  R. Dennell,et al.  In search of Neanderthals , 1995, Nature.

[4]  P. Mellars The fate of the Neanderthals , 1998, Nature.

[5]  F. d’Errico,et al.  An early bone tool industry from the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave, South Africa: implications for the origins of modern human behaviour, symbolism and language. , 2001, Journal of human evolution.

[6]  A. Brooks,et al.  The revolution that wasn't: a new interpretation of the origin of modern human behavior. , 2000, Journal of human evolution.

[7]  M. Girard,et al.  Le Châtelperronien de la grotte du Renne à Arcy-sur-Cure (Yonne). Données sédimentologiques et chronostratigraphiques , 2001 .

[8]  Robert G. Bednarik,et al.  Creativity in Human Evolution and Prehistory. , 2000 .

[9]  S. Mithen The prehistory of the mind: a search for the origins of art, religion and science , 1999 .

[10]  Mark H. Newcomer,et al.  Study and replication of bone tools from Ksar Akil (Lebanon) , 1974 .

[11]  F. d’Errico,et al.  Neanderthal Acculturation in Western Europe? A Critical Review of the Evidence and Its Interpretation1 , 1998, Current Anthropology.

[12]  Catherine Farizy Behavioral and Cultural Changes at the Middle to Upper Paleolithic Transition in Western Europe , 1994 .

[13]  F. d’Errico The invisible frontier. A multiple species model for the origin of behavioral modernity , 2003 .

[14]  Francesco D'errico,et al.  LA VIE SOCIALE DE L'ART MOBILIER PALÉOLITHIQUE. MANIPULATION, TRANSPORT, SUSPENSION DES OBJETS ON OS, BOIS DE CERVIDÉS, IVOIRE , 1993 .

[15]  F. d’Errico,et al.  Bone and ivory points in the Lower and Middle Paleolithic of Europe. , 2001, Journal of human evolution.

[16]  F. Bordes,et al.  La stratigraphie du gisement de Roc de Combe (Lot) et ses implications , 1967 .

[17]  Despina Liolios Variabilité et caractéristiques du travail des matières osseuses au début de l'Aurignacien : approche technologique et économique , 1999 .

[18]  P F Puech,et al.  Varnish replicas: a new method of study of worked bone surfaces , 1984 .

[19]  P. Mellars The Neanderthal Problem Continued , 1999, Current Anthropology.

[20]  G. Hewes,et al.  The Archaeology of Perception: Traces of Depiction and Language [and Comments and Reply] , 1989, Current Anthropology.

[21]  F. d’Errico,et al.  The Chronology and Taphonomy of the Earliest Aurignacian and Its Implications for the Understanding of Neandertal Extinction , 1999 .

[22]  H. Laville,et al.  Le Piage, site préhistorique du Lot , 1981 .

[23]  F. D’errico,et al.  La nouvelle « bataille aurignacienne ». , 2000 .

[24]  F. d’Errico,et al.  Holes and grooves: the contribution of microscopy and taphonomy to the problem of art origins. , 1997, Journal of human evolution.

[25]  Randall White Visual thinking in the Ice Age , 1989 .

[26]  Jean-Jacques Hublin,et al.  A late Neanderthal associated with Upper Palaeolithic artefacts , 1996, Nature.

[27]  F. d’Errico,et al.  Evidence of termite foraging by Swartkrans early hominids. , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.