Early Homo sapiens and Upper Paleolithic technology, culture, and art
ã
Copyright Bruce Owen 2000
As we saw last time:
Homo erectus
throughout Africa, Asia, and Europe evolved into, or was replaced by, a fairly variable lot of archaic Homo sapiens that began appearing between about 400,000 and 200,000 BP
by 130,000 BP, the western European archaic sapiens had become distinctly Neanderthal
The archaic sapiens made "Middle Paleolithic" tools, most classically represented by the Mousterian tools of the European Neanderthals
then, modern Homo sapiens evolved, probably first in Africa around 100,000 BP
the archaic sapiens populations either evolved in the same direction, interbred with, or were replaced by modern Homo sapiens
modern Homo sapiens made a different, more complex kind of tools, as well as something entirely new: decorative or symbolic objects and "art"
or at least we think only modern Homo sapiens did this
one reason why the question of ritual in Neanderthal burials is so interesting is that this would be one of the only exceptions to an otherwise purely practical, utilitarian existence for archaic sapiens
this new, much more complex and modern tradition is called the Upper Paleolithic
Upper Paleolithic period is generally dated to about 40,000 or 35,000 BP to about 10,000 BP
we noted last time that this overlaps with the last of the Neanderthals
or more precisely, the last people who made Middle Paleolithic tools
and we wondered about the relationship between them
Upper Paleolithic tools are thought to have been made only by modern Homo sapiens sapiens
with possible exceptions of late European Neanderthals, as discussed last time
Much of the data for this time comes from southwestern France
a fluke of preservation and the history of archaeological research
Innovations of the Upper Paleolithic (based mostly on the extensive European evidence):
widespread use of stone blade technology
flakes at least twice as long as they are wide
many blades can be "peeled" off a single prepared (pre-shaped) core
producing a large amount of cutting edge per pound of stone
this is a refined version of the disk core technique from the Mousterian tradition
but now the core is longer, more a cylinder or truncated cone than a disk
mass-produced blades can be pretty regular in shape
lending themselves to be blanks for further retouching into stereotyped, specific tools
points, burins, knives, drills, scrapers
i.e. the outcome is well controlled and repeatable
at much less effort than the Levallois method, which also aims to produce a flake of predetermined size and shape
the blades were often retouched with pressure flaking
contrast of flaking methods:
percussion
hard and soft hammers
indirect percussion
using a "punch"
pressure flaking
spectacularly well developed in the Solutrian tradition
famous for big, thin, regular points with fine pressure flaking on all surfaces ("Solutrian blades")
the stone tools are extremely well defined, much more than Mousterian ones
that is, they had great control of the final product, and a very clear idea of exactly what it was to look like
so a tool of a particular type and style is consistently the same from site to site, layer to layer, and example to example
As if made according to a blueprint
widespread use of additional materials for tools and artifacts beyond just stone
bone, antler, ivory, wood
this is particularly associated with the Magdalenian style and period
remember that wood, at least, was already in use at Kalambo falls and presumably elsewhere by H. erectus...
so this change is a matter of degree, and may be partially due to better preservation of more recent sites
new tool types
eyed needles
presumably for sewing or stitching hides
harpoons, ropes, nets
oil lamps, torches
composite tools
stone blades and points hafted in wood, bone, antler
again, this is a matter of degree
we know that some Mousterian (Middle Paleolithic) tools were hafted, too; we just don't have direct evidence other than wear on the stone parts
spearthrower (also called atl-atl, using the Aztec term)
illustration and explanation
improves power and range dramatically over simple throwing
historically, Inka soldiers armed with spearthrowers could throw a spear all the way through a Spaniard wearing steel chain mail -- in one side and out the other.
allows good accuracy at long distances
allowed safer, more effective hunting of big game
kill a deer at 50 feet
skewer dangerous large animals from a safe distance
bow and arrow
replaced the spearthrower in some places
more accurate?
since arrows are smaller and lighter than spears, it allows a hunter to carry more projectiles?
in other places, both remained in use into historical times
presumably each used for certain purposes
domesticated dog
for hunting?
art and decoration (we'll look at this more later)
personal ornaments (necklaces, pendants, etc.)
figurines
cave art ("mural" art)
Upper Paleolithic people populated most of the remaining land in the world
North and South America
Australia
we'll look at this more later, too
it is commonly suggested that Upper Paleolithic people adapted to a wider range of different environments
although archaic sapiens lived from the savannas of sub-saharan Africa to glaciated Europe to tropical forested Southeast Asia, which seems pretty varied already
it is also often suggested that the varied tools and symbolic behaviors of the Upper Paleolithic reflect a major change in the human brain
this would be some sort of organizational change, rather than just size
some connect the change with the origins of language
the theory that Fagan keeps citing about "separate intelligences" and the breaking down of the barriers between them is highly metaphorical and not very convincing to me. It is not a widely accepted and used model.
Klasies River Mouth, South Africa: probably among the oldest modern Homo sapiens yet found
* presentation by Caroline Carpoff
excavations found both Homo sapiens fossils and lots of stone tools
well dated to around 100,000 BP
Electron spin resonance dating on associated mammal teeth gave 90,000 BP
the fragmentary human fossils of several individuals are robust but pretty "modern"
one mandible has a clear chin (a modern sapiens trait)
crania appear relatively modern
the tools are similar in concept to Mousterian tools, but many are made from long flakes, or blades
this is an Upper Paleolithic technique
yet the date is 60,000 years before the European Upper Paleolithic!
Katanda, northern Zaire
barbed spearpoints made from splinters of large mammal bone
ground and carved
a technology usually associated with the Upper Paleolithic in Europe
but dates by a variety of methods fall between 75,000 and 180,000 BP!
the dating is not secure, but several different methods fell in this range
if correct, this would be even clearer evidence than Klasies River Mouth that the Upper Paleolithic and whatever cognitive changes it required appeared first in Africa, and later spread to the rest of the world
Various different tool styles within the Upper Paleolithic
This stylistic variation is new; Middle Paleolithic tools are much more uniform over space and time
some of the different styles are sequential, some overlap in time
maybe indicates increasingly distinct social boundaries between groups, like different languages?
analogous to ethnic groups?
or is it just that we don't have the data to detect it earlier?
visible because of increasing sophistication of stoneworking techniques that makes stylistic variation possible?
styles or traditions in France (the dates vary a bit from Fagan; I consulted several sources, and they all differ on the details...):
Chatelperonnian, 36,000 - 33,000 BP
basically Mousterian, but using blades (like Klasies River Mouth)
possibly made by late Neanderthals
the one case (St. Cesaire) where the tools and human bones were found together, the bones were Neanderthal
Maybe Neanderthals adopted some features of the Upper Paleolithic tools made by modern H. sapiens?
Aurignacian 35,000 to 29,000 BP
Perigordian 35,000- 32,000 BP (Fagan calls this "Gravettian", as opposed to "East Gravettian")
Solutrian 22,000 to 18,000 BP
included a heat-treating technique to improve the flaking qualities of flint
included big, thin, beautifully made blades
too fragile for much use, these were probably show pieces, decorative in their own right
Magdalenian (the latest style in the Upper Paleolithic) 18,000 to 11,000 BP
involved a lot more implements carved from bone and antler
styles or traditions in central and eastern Europe:
Gravettian (similar to Perigordian) 27,000 to 21,000 BP
Cro-Magnon
an ordinary modern H.s.s. found in Upper Paleolithic context in France
Dolni Vestonice
Eastern Europeans: woolly mammoth hunters
large area with dwellings, mammoth bones, artifacts
quite a contrast to western European cave sites
site buried and preserved under windblown dust as glaciers retreated, forming deep deposits of loess
dated around 25,000 BP (middle of the Upper Paleolithic)
environment: tundra, i.e. few trees
herds of mammoth, horses, deer
a campsite on a spit by a bog
* presentation by Leah Simons
bones of at least 100 mammoths piled up in one big area outside the camp
tools and broken bones indicate a butchery and hide preparation area
sorted piles of bones in the camp area
for construction?
fuel ???
some piles had fires built on top...?
structures
of mammoth bone, wood, rocks, dirt
one large structure (30 x 50 feet, "half a tennis court"), presumably unroofed
with 5 hearths
wall posts covered by hides?
several smaller, roofed
semi-subterranean (i.e. partially dug into the ground)
mammoth bone framework and roof?
one or two hearths
open (summer) and closed (winter) structures suggest year-round occupation (maybe)
central open area with very large hearth
ivory figurine found in the ashes -- what might this odd location mean?
20 foot diameter structure outside the camp
semisubterranean with windbreak or walls
hollow, cut bird bones (whistles?)
central hearth with domed clay structure over it
surrounding ashy soil contained over 2300 fragments of clay figurines that had been baked, presumably in the "oven"
this is 15,000 years before use of pottery (intentionally fired clay)
what can we make of the figurines and their odd contexts?
ivory figurine in ashes of big hearth
broken pieces of fired clay figurines scattered around a hearth/oven
maybe the clay ones, at least, were made intentionally to explode in the fire
in some sort of ritual (divining, curing, offering, sorcery...?)
we should be careful about using our ideas about "art" for artifacts from the Paleolithic...
other artifacts
Gravettian stone tools made from narrow blades
mammoth bone and mammoth ivory tools
awls, needles
knives, points
digging tools
ornaments
pendants, necklaces, etc
from carved bone, ivory, shell
unidentifiable carved items and baked clay items possibly ritual?
exchange or travel indicated by shell from 100s of km away, from Mediterranean Sea
two ivory carvings of faces with similar asymmetry
left eye and left corner of mouth droop
claim that burial of female with red ocher and a point showed partial paralysis of left side of face...
what might this suggest about society and the nature of decoration/art?
Portable art
proliferation of decorated objects after 35,000 BP, i.e. Upper Paleolithic, with modern H.s. in Europe
using the "new" Upper Paleolithic materials: wood, bone, ivory, antler
and to a lesser extent stone
portable "art" objects include
beads, pendants, perforated teeth used for necklaces
carved or engraved decoration on otherwise utilitarian items, like spearthrowers and arrow shaft straighteners
figurines
some 80% (i.e. most) Paleolithic art is from the Magdalenian, that is, the latest part of the Upper Paleolithic, after about 18,000 BP
but early examples, like the lion-headed figure from Stadel Cave, Germany (pg. 139) date back to 30,000 BP -- early Upper Paleolithic
"Venus" figurines
* presentation by Lyric Smith
made of ivory, wood, soft carvable stone, and unbaked clay
also carved as reliefs on cave walls
for a relatively short period around 25,000 BP
mostly 25,000 to 23,000 BP, a few earlier and later
what were they for / what did they mean?
generally said to relate to fertility
although some suggest that they might have something to do with plain old sex
recent suggestion that they contain distortions that would result from the perspective a woman has in looking at her own body, hence made by women, not men
remember the odd contexts for figurines at Dolni Vestonice
use of these objects could be very far from our modern intuition and assumptions
portable art is more common at large sites than at small ones
are we surprised? why not?
suggests that art was associated with activities carried out when foragers congregated in larger groups
perhaps due to marriages, initiations, trading, etc.
Cave art
Upper Paleolithic mural art mostly from France and Spain
some in South Africa and Australia
why not elsewhere?
mural art also at mouths of caves and on cliff faces, but not preserved as in deep caves [how do we know?]
caves
not living areas
how do we know?
only visited briefly
evidently revisited occasionally over very long periods (thousands of years)
so some of the visitors would be rediscovering something ancient and forgotten, and sometimes adding to it
paintings:
vast majority of paintings are animals
only a few humans
engravings
animals
and humans
some seem to be people wearing animal skins
ceremonies? dancers?
hand paintings
made by blowing pigment, probably through a tube, at the hand pressed against the wall
negative stencil image
clearly made from real hands, not artistic representations
hence interest in apparently missing fingers
they could be just folded under...
do we believe that many people lacked so many fingers?
207 of 217 at Gargas?
or are the mutilated ones more represented?
paintings
generally outlined
generally profile
often on ceilings or high walls where scaffolding would have been necessary
Lascaux has "sockets" in a wall to support a wooden scaffolding!
associated artifacts
rope
pine torches
stone bowls used as lamps (over 150 fragments from Lascaux)
quality of paintings suggests specialist painters
carefully planned and executed
often using contours of cave walls
not casual
although possibly done rapidly, based on replication experiments
usually single animals, not scenes
often overlap earlier paintings
repainting the same image
or doing a completely different one
this can be recognized by identifying several different paint mixtures used for the same color on a single part of a wall
suggestion that the act of painting was more important than the result
* presentation by Jaime Hawkins
Lascaux
Lascaux: "lah SKO", according to my dictionary; I don't speak French
in the Dordogne region of southwestern France
limestone plateau cut by rivers
leaving limestone cliffs with shallow and deep caves
occupied by Paleolithic people
many entrances collapsed and hidden
over 200 caves known
found in 1940 by some kids out playing with their dog
closed in 1963 to protect the paintings
over 600 paintings
over 1500 engravings
most decorated of all known caves
mostly dates to 17,000 BP (Magdalenian period; last period in Upper Paleolithic)
dates by association of pigments with floor layers containing artifacts
paints were mineral pigments in cave water
applied with chewed stick or wads of fur or hair
colors include black, yellow, red, some white
different animals in different sections of the cave
giant bulls (16 feet long) on ceiling of main chamber
bison, deer, horses, wild cattle, etc.
large prey animals in main galleries
carnivores and misc. in restricted areas
but only one reindeer, even though bones in butchery sites indicate that it was the primary prey animal in this region
lifelike, with specific features like spring molting shown
sometimes pregnant or with meaty areas exaggerated
some shown with fletched spears approaching
otherwise we would have no info on fletching!
non-representational designs include
rows of dots
cross-hatched boxes
scene (?) with speared bison, man-like figure, possible spearthrower, and bird staff (or ??)
what does this mean??
interpretations
pregnant animals refer to fertility (?)
or are they preferred prey?
exaggerated meaty parts indicate relationship to hunting for food?
settings for rituals such as initiation rites?
footprints (!) indicate that children as well as adults entered
Chauvet
just found in 1995
5 times the size of Lascaux
dated to 32,000 BP, the oldest yet (long before Magdalenian)
Cosquer
found by divers in 1992
underwater entrance (now)
with footprints, lamps, torches, hearths
paintings include shore birds, seals
18,500 BP (Magdalenian)
Symbols and notation
Alexander Marshack
microscopic study of engraved bones
claims to be able to distinguish different tools
and that many of the objects were made by multiple tools, presumably used at different times
others argue that the variation in marks could be from tools breaking during use (a common occurrence on fine pointed stone tools), shifting the tool in the hand, using a different point of the same tool, etc.
also argue that his categorization of marks is not as unambiguous as he claims; others categorize and count the marks differently
if Marshak's interpretation is right, how does he explain someone carving a few marks on an object, waiting, and then later carving more when a different tool was at hand?
maybe this indicates keeping tallies of things
maybe kills?
maybe days?
Marshack sees seasons indicated in a two-sided bone knife from La Vache
La Vache bone, 14,000 BP
a horse and horse head, with lines maybe indicating spears or plants
made in sets with four different tools -- at different times?
the other side has a bison head in autumn rut ("in heat"), four possible pine branches, etc.
the bone was used as a flaking tool
then rows of marks were added
also in sets made by different tools
some sort of tallying system?
Marshack finds groups of 30 and 31 marks frequently; also 7
do NOT think that these refer to days of months and weeks
these are historical conventions, not related to astronomical patterns
Abri Blanchard bone
sequence of dots Marshack thinks record phases of the moon