During the first half of the Holocene, climatic conditions, anthropogenic conditions and sea levels underwent numerous and significant modifications. To qualify the response of the coastal alluvial vegetation to these changing conditions between the end of the 8th and the 5th millennia, a high-resolution pollen analysis of two sedimentary alluvial sequences (Le Loup and La Cagne basins) was realized. The results, obtained through a multidisciplinary approach, show the precise evolution of the coastal and alluvial ecosystems. The rise in sea level and climatic forcing played a fundamental role in this evolution. While anthropogenic forcing during the Mesolithic was not significant, the Neolithization of the region also contributed to shaping the coastal landscapes. From the first decades of the 6th millennium onwards, the recurrence of the Cerealia pollen type shows the importance of coastal alluvial plains in the production economy of the first Neolithic groups.
To cite this article
Guillon S., 2014 – The Determining Factors of the Coastal Environments during the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic in South-Eastern France: the Contribution of Pollen Data from the Le Loup and La Cagne Plains (Alpes-Maritimes, France), in Henry A., Marquebielle B., Chesnaux L., Michel S. (eds.), Techniques and Territories: New Insights into Mesolithic Cultures, Proceedings of the Round table, November 22-23 2012, Maison de la recherche, Toulouse (France), P@lethnology, 6, 146-152.
The end of the Mesolithic and the transition toward the Neolithic in Switzerland is currently being studied through the technical systems of lithic tool manufacturing at two important sites: Arconciel/La Souche (Fribourg, Switzerland) and Lutter / Abri Saint-Joseph (Alsace, France). The various innovations and/or continuities in the lithic industries of these two sites have been analyzed with the aim of determining the evolution and distribution of lithic manufacturing techniques at the end of the Mesolithic and understanding, within these assemblages, possible influences from the Neolithic sphere.
To cite this article
Bassin L., 2014 – The End of the Mesolithic on the Swiss Plateau and the Northern Jurassian Massif, in Henry A., Marquebielle B., Chesnaux L., Michel S. (eds.), Techniques and Territories: New Insights into Mesolithic Cultures, Proceedings of the Round table, November 22-23 2012, Maison de la recherche, Toulouse (France), P@lethnology, 6, 141-145.
The rock shelter art in the sandstone formations south of Île-de-France is mostly non-figurative. The blunted sandstone and flint objects interpreted as engravers and discovered in the stratigraphic levels of a few decorated caves enable use-wear analyses. A new study of ancient collections renews and refines chrono-cultural attributions in the Mesolithic.
To cite this article
Bénard A., Guéret C., 2014 – The Decorated Mesolithic Rock Shelters South of Île-De-France: Revision of the Archaeological Data and Research Perspectives, in Henry A., Marquebielle B., Chesnaux L., Michel S. (eds.), Techniques and Territories: New Insights into Mesolithic Cultures, Proceedings of the Round table, November 22-23 2012, Maison de la recherche, Toulouse (France), P@lethnology, 6, 137-140.
Numerous absolute dates enable the construction of a detailed chronology of the Mesolithic in Picardie. Here, phases of typological stability are separated by clear breaks. A rapid analysis of diverse elements reveals changes that were more significant than simple modifications of projectile points.
To cite this article
Ducrocq T., 2014 – The Complex Evolution of the Mesolithic in Picardie, in Henry A., Marquebielle B., Chesnaux L., Michel S. (eds.), Techniques and Territories: New Insights into Mesolithic Cultures, Proceedings of the Round table, November 22-23 2012, Maison de la recherche, Toulouse (France), P@lethnology, 6, 89-95.
As an introduction, this short article raises the question of the role of vegetal resources in the dietary economy of the Mesolithic. For many years, this role was seen as a given even if there was no significant archaeological evidence to support it. Meanwhile, during the last decade, reliable observations have led to new discussions and the recording in Western Europe of intensive nuts (mostly hazelnuts) gathering, along with practices associated with storage and differential consumption.
To cite this article
Valdeyron N., 2014 – The Mesolithic, a Green Revolution in the Heart of Forested Europe? First Reflections on this Question, in Henry A., Marquebielle B., Chesnaux L., Michel S. (eds.), Techniques and Territories: New Insights into Mesolithic Cultures, Proceedings of the Round table, November 22-23 2012, Maison de la recherche, Toulouse (France), P@lethnology, 6, 84-88.
At the beginning of the 7th millennium BC, from Tunisia to Scandinavia and the Alps to the Atlantic, the technical baggage of Mesolithic societies underwent profound changes. Flaked artifact styles, tool types, weapon hafting techniques and the volumetric principles of stone flaking were modified by more than simple adjustments to the percussion techniques commonly used, with pressure flaking and indirect percussion replacing direct hard hammer percussion. This division of the Mesolithic in Western Europe has more to do with the technology used to transform lithic raw materials than with tool typology. This observation was in fact not lost to some archaeologists of the last century, such as E. Octobon and J.G.D. Clark, who accorded less importance to punctilious arrowhead classifications than to the general structure of flaked productions, or S.K. Kozlowski who described Mesolithic Europe as being split into two successive typological “trends” (the S and K components). In this article, I first present a summary of the changes observed in the early 7th millennium, as well as the enduring features of Mesolithic material culture. I then examine possible correlations with paleo-environmental and social phenomena to show that for the moment there are no clear links to these factors. While the ultimate goal is to clearly define this vast change in civilization, it is now necessary to work at more restricted spatial and temporal scales to enhance our understanding of this fundamental phenomenon in the history of techniques on the European continent.
To cite this article
Marchand G., 2014 – Titre, in Henry A., Marquebielle B., Chesnaux L., Michel S. (eds.), Beyond the Technological Distinction between the Early and Late Mesolithic, Proceedings of the Round table, November 22-23 2012, Maison de la recherche, Toulouse (France), P@lethnology, 6, 9-22.
Stone or bone, transverse heads or points, barbs, foreshafts, harpoon heads… Projectile weapon elements are found in many forms in prehistoric sites, at least from the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic. These artefacts first attract archaeologists with their great numbers, often dominating proportions in tool assemblages, but they are also interesting due to their clearly dynamic role in prehistoric material culture: the morphology and/or technical characteristics of many of them vary significantly through time and space, thus constituting a useful tool for archaeologists in the construction of chronologies and the definition of cultures. Researchers often integrate these variations with other types of transformations—such as ecological or economic ones—to build interpretative models of the evolution of societies.
To cite this article
Pétillon J.-M., Dias-Meirinho M.-H., Cattelain P., Honegger M., Normand C., Valdeyron N., 2009 – New Light on Palaeolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic Projectile Weapon Elements, in Pétillon J.-M., Dias-Meirinho M.-H., Cattelain P., Honegger M., Normand C., Valdeyron N., Projectile Weapon Elements from the Upper Palaeolithic to the Neolithic, Proceedings of session C83, XVth UISPP World Congress, Lisbon, September 4-9, 2006, P@lethnology, 1, 1-5.
In this paper, I present interpretations of the stigmata of fabrication (observation of retouch methods) and use (observation of impact traces and hafting glue residues) of microliths and hyper-microliths (arrowheads) of the Middle Mesolithic Sauveterrian period. Based on the first results obtained from the sites of Grande Rivoire, Pas de la Charmate (Vercors, Isère) and Sinard (Trièves, Isère), a reconstruction of the hafting modes of these tools is proposed. The results of a first experimental test are also presented.
To cite this article
Chesnaux L., 2009 – Sauveterrian Microliths: Evidence of the Hunting Weapons of the last Hunter-gatherers of the Northern Alps, in Pétillon J.-M., Dias-Meirinho M.-H., Cattelain P., Honegger M., Normand C., Valdeyron N., Projectile Weapon Elements from the Upper Palaeolithic to the Neolithic, Proceedings of session C83, XVth UISPP World Congress, Lisbon, September 4-9, 2006, P@lethnology, 1, 133-146.
We present an analysis of Sauveterrian microlithic backed points from sites located in the Trentino region of the north-eastern Italian Alps: Pradestel, Lago delle Buse & Colbricon. Experimental arrows were produced, hafted and shot into an animal target. The results of this study indicate that these points may have been “ineffective” for the hunting of medium to large-sized prey, such as ibex, red deer, bear, or wild boar. We propose that Sauveterrian microliths can rather be correlated with the hunting of small forest prey such as roe deer, marmot and other animals with thick fur. An alternative hypothesis for the hunting of large game is also proposed.
To cite this article
Grimaldi S., 2009 – Experimental Observations of Early Mesolithic Points in North-East Italy, in Pétillon J.-M., Dias-Meirinho M.-H., Cattelain P., Honegger M., Normand C., Valdeyron N., Projectile Weapon Elements from the Upper Palaeolithic to the Neolithic, Proceedings of session C83, XVth UISPP World Congress, Lisbon, September 4-9, 2006, P@lethnology, 1, 147-160.
In Nubia, lunates (circle segments) are one of the most characteristic tools from the beginning of the Holocene to the end of proto-history, or even later. According to some interpretations, they are generally considered as being arrowhead or sickle blades. Taking into account archaeological examples, very diverse in their context and dating, the present article tries to summarize our knowledge on the question of their function. While previous studies have essentially taken into account the existence of traces or organic residues (gloss or polish, hafting glue, handle or shaft) and less often the context of discovery (tips driven into human bones or embedded in skeletons), they have not, on the other hand, considered the question of impact fractures and the dimensions of lunates. By collecting all these observations, it is possible to differentiate small sized lunates having mainly been used as projectile tips or barbs and bigger pieces meant to fit knives for cutting vegetal materials or sickles. We can however not exclude other uses for some of the lunates, as it is possible that pieces of medium dimensions could have had a functioned as arrowheads or sickle blades. Finally, we can observe a tendency through time toward a reduction in size of the lunates and a greater standardization of the pieces intended to be used as projectiles.
To cite this article
Honegger M., 2009 – Lunate Microliths in the Holocene Industries of Nubia: Multifunctional Tools, Sickle Blades or Weapon Elements?, in Pétillon J.-M., Dias-Meirinho M.-H., Cattelain P., Honegger M., Normand C., Valdeyron N., Projectile Weapon Elements from the Upper Palaeolithic to the Neolithic, Proceedings of session C83, XVth UISPP World Congress, Lisbon, September 4-9, 2006, P@lethnology, 1, 161-173.
Download