Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
"Behavioral Modernity"
Author(s): João Zilhão
Source: Journal of Archaeological Research, Vol. 15, No. 1 (March 2007), pp. 1-54
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41053233
Accessed: 16-04-2018 05:17 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41053233?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Archaeological Research
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54
DOI 10.1007/S10814-006-9008-1
João Zilhão
Abstract The earliest known personal ornaments come from the Middle Stone Age of
southern Africa, c. 75,000 years ago, and are associated with anatomically modern hu-
mans. In Europe, such items are not recorded until after 45,000 radiocarbon years ago, in
Neandertal-associated contexts that significantly predate the earliest evidence, archaeolog-
ical or paleontológica!, for the immigration of modern humans; thus, they represent either
independent invention or acquisition of the concept by long-distance diffusion, implying
in both cases comparable levels of cognitive capability and performance. The emergence
of figurative art postdates c. 32,000 radiocarbon years ago, several millennia after the time
of Neandertal/modern human contact. These temporal patterns suggest that the emergence
of "behavioral modernity" was triggered by demographic and social processes and is not a
species-specific phenomenon; a corollary of these conclusions is that the corresponding ge-
netic and cognitive basis must have been present in the genus Homo before the evolutionary
split between the Neandertal and modern human lineages.
Introduction
Over the last quarter century, it has become clear that the ancestry of present-day human
populations can be traced back to African people of the late Middle Pleistocene. In this con-
text, the long-lasting geographical segregation between Neandertals and African "moderns"
and the ultimate replacement of the former by the latter have led many scholars to accept
the notion that the two taxa should be given species status. This view has been challenged
in recent years, especially by the finding of early European modern human fossils bearing
archaic traits, which suggests extensive admixture with Neandertals at the time of contact
(Trinkaus, 2005). This suggestion is consistent with recent genetic studies of the nuclear
J. Zilhão (M)
Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Bristol,
43 Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 1UU, United Kingdom
e-mail: Joao.Zilhao@bristol.ac.uk
±¿ Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
2 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 3
Africa
As shown by different authors (Barham, 2002a, b; Henshilwood et al, 2001; McBrearty and
Brooks, 2000; Villa et al, 2005), many of the innovations traditionally associated with the
European Upper Paleolithic are now known to appear significantly earlier in Africa. This is
the case in particular with bone tools (such as the harpoons from Katanda, Congo, and the
awls from Biombos, South Africa), but it also applies to such features of lithic technology as
the manufacture of geometries (the lunates of the South African Howieson's Poort industry)
and the production of bladelets from prismatic cores (documented in level RSP of the Sibudu
rocksheiter, South Africa). Enough reliable dating evidence is now available to place these
developments before c. 50 ka BP and, in some cases, even before c. 70 ka BP. However,
these innovations did not form a package of co-occurring traits and did not become a stable
feature of human culture once they appeared. Instead, for many thousands of years thereafter,
they were abandoned as piecemeal and suddenly as they were first introduced, and the same
applies to ornaments and abstract markings.
Where the latter are concerned, the key evidence comes from the seaside cave site of
Biombos, southern Cape (d'Errico et al, 2003a, 2005; Henshilwood et al, 2002, 2004). This
site features a sequence where the uppermost MSA level (Ml ) belongs to the Still Bay culture,
characterized by foliate points, and is separated from the surficial Late Stone Age (LSA)
deposits by a thick sterile sand dune. This stratigraphie configuration precludes contamination
from overlying, later occupations as an explanation for the presence of personal ornaments
and decorated pieces of ochre in level Ml , dated to 74.9 ± 3.8 ka BP by optically stimulated
luminescence (OSL), and to 74 ± 5 ka BP by TL (Tribolo et al, 2005). The number of
utilized pieces of ochre is in excess of 8000, and two of them, in the shape of crayons, bear
unequivocal abstract designs (engraved cross-hatched motifs) on one of the facets. Level
Ml also yielded personal ornaments, all perforated shells of the marine mollusk Nassarius
kraussianus (Fig. 1). Forty-one such items have been described so far; all were found in
clusters of 2-17 beads showing similar size, color, wear, and perforation type, suggesting
that each cluster may correspond to a single beadwork item.
In the South African culture-stratigraphic scheme, the Still Bay is replaced by the
Howieson's Poort industry, which Tribolo et al (2005) TL-dated to 56 i 3 ka BP at
Klasies River Mouth (southern Cape) and to 55-65 ka BP at Diepkloof (western Cape).
These results are consistent with the AAR (amino acid racemization) and ESR ages in the
c. 60-70 ka BP interval obtained for the corresponding levels of the Border Cave sequence,
northern Kwazulu-Natal, by Miller et al (1999), Grün and Beaumont (2001), and Grün
et al (2003). The latter also discuss (and reject) the possibility that the securely provenanced
human remains found in this cave - the near complete infant skeleton BC3, and the largely
complete lower jaw BC5 - could represent intrusions of later Pleistocene or even Holocene
age. Indeed, direct ESR dating of an enamel fragment from BC5 yielded a result of 74 i 5 ka
±ì Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
4 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 5
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
6 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
Q Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 7
Asia
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
8 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 9
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
« -H-H-H+l-H-fl-H-H-H-fl-H-H-H-H-tì-H-H-tt-H-H-H-H-tì-H-fl-Hgo
*-* f~y Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ^5 Q Q O C5 O O O O O O O O O O O O O ç«") f')
3 O <N O ^í" t*** O O O *O O O O ^ *O O O *~* C*ì O O O t**- O O O O <^f ^rf-
-^ oc r-
»o es en
J <<<<<<<<OOOSOO££OO£5IOOOOOÄOO
i o
CQ
cecee
o o
C)
o o
CQ
oo o
{Q w CQ
ce
d CQ
e
Cw
e
o
I _-
5
-a -a
ccccccc
-a -a s -a s -a -a
ce
■
G
C
O
•3 S <<<<<<<<<<<88§38<<88<<<3<8<<
O
13
| o
"3 "^ *3 *3 *3 "tí "!S *!3 "3 "3 "^ "w *3 «?* "î3 "ÏÏ "3 *3 "3 "73 "Z3 "S T3 T3 "73 "73 "73 T3
O
I
i
CA
C I SSSa | i i S Si f f
1
ce
1 < 2
« O á 4)
^ S
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
10 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
.s j J J .1 1 1 .§ ^ ^ ^ ^ J .1 1 +
•^ 13 13 'S'b'So^oooO^ BíèB;B!iaSal333&;
u 13 uà 13 Saá^nná §22§u5i2w<<2
o o o o o o ^ o *o "■* o o o
oo O
*c3"ë3
ce
"^ "«S
s c
g g g c3 g g rt c
ccccccs
g
"2 § § § CCCGCCCCC
3
JG
o
i II t
". e S 'ó ^
•i S i f. s 1 1
è sa: ^^^ >>>>^
| s
i 1 1 I
la Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 1 1
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
12 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
IUP-like assemblages are known in the Altaï and other parts of central Asia in association
with dates as early as c. 43 ka 14C BP. Given the arguments in favor of an association of
the Near Eastern IUP with modern humans, it is conceivable that such occurrences represent
a further range extension of the latter into more northern latitudes, but the issue remains
controversial (Krivoshapkin and Brantingham, 2004; Rybin, 2004). Because the directly
dated human material (mandible and postcrania) from Tianyuandong (near Beijing, China)
documents people with a modern anatomy in the Far East c. 35 ka I4C BP (Trinkaus, 2005),
in broad contemporaneity with Ksar 'Akil's "Egbert," it makes sense to assume that the
intervening regions of central Asia and the Altaï also were settled by modern humans at that
time. Conversely, if Neandertals still inhabited the Near East c. 50 ka BP, as suggested by
the Amud data, any spread of modern humans into central Asia via a Near Eastern route can
have occurred only at a later date. In sum, the replacement process must have taken place in
central Asia somewhere between c. 50 and c. 35 ka BP but, as in the Near East, constraining
it with greater precision is impossible at present.
In any case, one can certainly expect modern human groups dispersing out of Africa
to have carried with them the social organization and corresponding sociofacts that their
ancestors had developed. A rather convincing indication that an influx of ultimate African
origin is involved in the East Asian process is provided by the presence of ostrich eggshell
beads in the Mongolian site of Dörölj 1 (Jaubert et al, 2004), dated to c. 32 ka 14C BP.
A clear connection with cultural developments in the Near East also is apparent a few
millennia earlier in sites west of the Urals. For instance, a perforated Colunibella shell,
modern representatives of which are confined to the Mediterranean basin, was recovered
in cultural layer IVb (well dated by AMS on charcoal samples to c. 36.5 ka 14C BP) of
Kostenki 14 (Markina Gora), now situated more than 700 km from the shores of the Black
Sea (Sinitsyn, 2003, 2004). Although the technological and typological features of the lithic
assemblage recovered therein are of a full Upper Paleolithic nature, its cultural affinities
remain unclear, and an isolated tooth is reportedly of modern human affinities. Sinitsyn also
describes an apparently shaped piece of mammoth ivory recovered in this level as "the head
of a female figurine"; he acknowledges, however, that "the surface is covered with traces
of natural damage" and that the object is "an obviously unfinished product broken during
manufacture." Thus, as with the Berekhat Ram figurine, the art may well be "in the eye of
the beholder."
At an even earlier date, bone tools and ornaments are reported by Derevianko and Rybin
(2003) from IUP-like contexts in Denisova cave (layer 1 1) and Kara-Bom (Horizon 5), but
the actual anatomical affinities of the manufacturers of these assemblages are unknown,
and the ornaments (animal tooth pendants and bone beads) are not of the kind seen in the
Near East at that time (when only marine shell beads were in use). Moreover, the exact
stratigraphie provenience of the finds is not devoid of ambiguity. A major discontinuity
separates OIS-3 layer 1 1 of Denisova from the immediately overlying OIS-2 level 9, and
the contact between the two is significantly disturbed. Because the range of ornaments from
level 1 1 is identical to that found in both level 9 and the pockets containing level 9 lithics that
ti Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 13
Europe
As in the Near Eastern, Russian, and central Asian regions reviewed above, the evi-
dence for symbolic artifacts before the Upper Paleolithic in European regions west of the
Russian/Ukrainian plains also is ambiguous. Where the Lower Paleolithic is concerned,
claims have been made that a small ensemble of animal bone remains from the open air site of
Bilzingsleben (Germany), dated to > 300 ka BP, are marked with motifs that carry a symbolic
meaning (Bednarik, 2003b; Mania and Mania, 1988; Meiler, 2003). The markings - groups
of fine strokes whose broadly parallel disposition indicates that they are unlikely to derive
from ordinary utilitarian activities such as butchering or cutting - are clearly anthropic; the
best piece, a percussion tool manufactured from a spall of elephant tibia, bears two groups of
marks, one with 7 strokes and another with 14, forming a suggestive rhythmical arrangement.
However, unlike the ochre pieces from Biombos, it is not evident that these markings were
made to obtain a predesigned graphic composition with a specific even if elusive meaning.
Where the Middle Paleolithic is concerned, two important objects come from the Hungar-
ian open air site of Tata, dated to > 70 ka BP (Moncel, 2003). One is a silicified nummulite
crossed at right angles by engraved lines on both sides, forming " + " motifs fully inscribed
in the object's circular outline (Bednarik, 2003b). The other is an ivory plaque carefully sep-
arated from a mammoth molar, shaped, beveled, and rubbed with red ochre. The edge-wear
polish indicates long-term use, and the overall shape evokes the sacred "churinga" (stones
or wooden boards associated with the wanderings of mythological ancestors) of Australian
Aborigines (Marshack, 1976, 1989). It is not obvious, however, that the engraving on the
nummulite is "decorative," and a utilitarian explanation for the "churinga" (bone tool used
in the framework of ochre-processing tasks?) cannot be excluded either. Representational
status has been claimed for a flint nodule featuring a natural tubular perforation into which a
bone splinter is wedged (Marquet and Lorblanchet, 2003); this "Neandertal face," however,
is most likely an unmodified pierre-figure, and natural process cannot be ruled out as an
explanation for the wedged bone (Pettitt, 2003).
Clear evidence for complex abstract thinking involving graphic modification of objects
in connection with ritual activities comes from the Mousterian graveyard of La Ferrassie in
France (Defleur, 1993; Peyrony, 1934) (Fig. 3). Seven individuals (one fetus, two infants, two
children, and two adults) were buried in the Ferrassie Mousterian levels of this rocksheiter;
ͱ Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
14 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 15
In the wake of the extensive taphonomic critique of the evidence by d'Errico et al. (1998),
Zilhão and d'Errico (1999, 2003a, b), Rigaud (2001), Bordes (2002, 2003), Teyssandier
(2003), and others, suggestions of a long-term contemporaneity between these earliest "tran-
sitional" Upper Paleolithic entities of Europe and the Aurignacian, based on radiocarbon
dates and on patterns of putative interstratification (Bernaldo de Quirós, 1982; Bordes and
Labrot, 1967; Champagne and Espitalié, 1981; Gravina et al, 2005), have now been largely
abandoned (Zilhão et al, 2006). In particular, the most vocal proponent of that notion
has himself recently conceded (Mellars, 2006) all the major points made by Zilhão and
d'Errico (1999, 2003a, b) on the issues of interpretation raised by the application of radio-
carbon to this time range. Once the numerous sources of error are adequately filtered, a
clear picture emerges (Zilhão, 2006a, b, c). (1) The "transitional" technocomplexes either
underlie or predate the earliest occurrences of the Aurignacian anywhere in Europe. (2)
The development of these technocomplexes took place in the interval between c. 45 and c.
35 ka 14C BP, whereas the earliest Aurignacian dates to no more than c. 36.5 ka 14C BP
(Table 2). (3) The slight Chronometrie overlap is an inevitable consequence of the poor
precision of dating techniques and of the fact that the Châtelperronian is almost entirely
±3 Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
16 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
"S 'S 'S 'S 'S *2 'S 'c 'S 'S "S '5 'S "S 'S *c 'c "c "S *c '5
» lili. I i. Il 1 I II II I I Ululili
^^ 3 S ü3 ^^ ^3 <cö <Csf <cö <c^ <c$ <cö ^c^ <c^ <cO ^cQ <cö <cd ^cs <c^ <c3 ^c^ <c3 <ccj <c^
u S 5 5 u uuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuu
o o o o Q Q
So ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
1
rf O' OûOOOOMOOClOmO'-1 O C^VO IT) t^ fO -
CQ g 5 -h -h -H-H-H-tì-H-H-H-H
ü f-« o ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ o ^ ^ ^ ^ Ç ^ ^ ^ ^ O' ^ ^ ^ ^ S
o
3 ^ f-« ^ o -h en »OrfiOOCNCMOOi
c
O J2 AAoS SoNoiniooonîwm« ift»Amo'oSA
en Tt «o m ^o m
i
Q' CK O O^ ON ^^
00 0O »-^ 0O 0O J
8 «o ,3» ^ ¿ js» ¿» =¿
•o
§
co a oo°^^ ^-^tnnoeooo'oooo«yo Sf^osyo^ooo^
<
J ÜÜÜÜ OOOOOOOOOO<OÜ<<OÜÜÜÜ
e
o
co
< 11 1
.2 .2 .2
I
^ £ ££
3 3 S ^^ o> S S
Sì
1 ]| .y .ä à -ê w w w w o
co
Õ 00 00 00
III á * i S ã i •?
i I ¡i. 3 *■* S ^ i^ ?
I co*
co* .<W5
i S1Î O
<W5 O i .3*
UUO UUO ¡1 1 fl .3* V
VC
%± Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 17
ê3o3c3c5c3c3c3c5 s is is 3 d 3 "73
ÖJQ &Q QQ Oû M) 60 Où ÖD Öß ÖO Öß bß 00 Öß ^
•C *C *C E *C 'C *C *C *C "C 'C "C *C "C g
g 3g3g3g33 3 3 Z3 3 3 3 g
ü cu Cu Cu Cu Cu Cu Cu cu cu Cu cu cu cu cu ¡^
O
o O
o «Ö
i
7 7 s.
o
C^ ^^ i¡o
è
^^ ^- ¿|^ ¿^
è o i
^^ f^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ¿^^ rj
o, mvo"*i*7On^|s* ooocrsvo>or^ ^
« -H-H+-H+-H-H-H -H-HHH-H-H-H -g
ü OOOOQOOO OOOOOO S
3 ooo<NQO"too
«5 I0lfì00-^N«^0 h or-^i-mos ^ «5
X IO «O *û >O «5
OC cnmmcncommco en m m en en en o,
P
Ü ON
1I gSS^SS»1?
„|gg§|gg ?.^iü Si se
T"??;^^^ se
J §ddod5oo OOS555 ||
C3 O
ll
•a -s ã 8
g § 1 C
^ E S '-2 'S
fi ce
|ê
00*0
•€ 3 3 3 ej O
S o o o g :s
¿222222o do 2 .1
I lililí g gì 5 If
J2 U*. S D -s*. QJ D -a*. D O I C fi C C r^ ïl ^" ~~* 11 e
J2 S D QJ D D O C C C r^ ^" ~~* e
•3 <
i W) <D O "6 *§
Sí -23
3
ÎÎ i ! ^1
li 8 Sä a 1|
I a I 2 I 11 "S Ji"
ä Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
18 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 19
^ Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
20 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 21
¿Ö Springe
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
22 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 23
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
24 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
26 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 27
±± Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
28 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
Protoaurignacian ornaments
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 29
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
30 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
The c. 40 ka 14C BP levels of Piekary Ila yielded two pieces of ochre with abstract de-
signs reminiscent of the Biombos material (Sitlivy et al., 2004). d'Errico et al. (2003b)
document regular markings in about one third of the 50 bone awls from the Grotte du
Renne's Châtelperronian levels, and in three of the five bird bone tubes from the same levels
(Fig. 7). Given their arrangement and distribution, the only explanation is deliberate decora-
tion. However, as in Africa or Asia, figurative representations are entirely unknown for that
time.
Numerous ochred cryoclastic fragments, including six slabs painted with motifs described
as zoomorphic in one case and anthropomorphic in another, are reported from the Fumane
sequence and have been evoked to support figurative art in a Protoaurignacian context
(Broglio and Gurioli, 2004; Broglio et al, 2002, 2003, 2004; Floss, 2005). However, it
is not clear that the motifs really are figures; they are more suggestive of an extension to
the inhabited space of the symbolic marking of objects with abstract signs documented in
preceding times in both Africa and Europe. More importantly, the painted stones all come
from either the uppermost Aurignacian levels or the immediately overlying collapse (Broglio
and Gurioli, 2004, p. 99); they are Aurignacian II, not Protoaurignacian, as are the dates for
the site's D3-D6 levels from where the slabs reportedly come.
The Austrian site of Strätzing (a.k.a. Galgenberg or Krems-Rehberg) yielded an anthro-
pomorphic statuette carved out of amphibolic schist, the "Galgenberg Venus" (Neugebauer-
Maresch, 1996, 1999). This piece comes from an Evolved Aurignacian context, documented
by the lithic assemblage and a nearby hearth dated to c. 31.8 ka 14C BP. In the Swabian
Alb of Germany, the famous lion-man statue from the cave site of Hohlenstein-Stadel was
recovered in spit 6, dated by four samples to c. 31-32 ka 14C BP (Conard and Bolus, 2003),
in good agreement with the nosed "scrapers" and bone points with a simple base in the
artifact assemblage (Hahn, 1977). The cave site of Vogelherd yielded ten figurines, of which
a felid comes from the backdirt of the 1931 excavations, and the others (a bovid, a horse, two
mammoths, three felids, an anthropomorph, and an unidentified quadruped) from levels IV
and V (Conard, 2003). The associated radiocarbon results (Table 4) cluster in the c. 32-33 ka
l4C BP interval, although some are slightly older and others much younger; this scatter is
easily understandable given the coarse nature of the stratigraphie work performed at the time
(Conard et al, 2004).
Thus, where the chronology of this art form is concerned, the key sites of southwestern
Germany are those excavated with modern techniques, Hohle Fels and Geissenklösterle. In
the former (Conard, 2003), all the art (a lion-man, a bird, and the head of a horse) comes
from levels Ed/base, m, and IV, dated to c. 30-31 ka 14C BP by 11 of 12 AMS dates. In
the latter, all finds come from the uppermost Aurignacian in Archaeological Horizon (AH)
II; Conard et al (2004b) provide ample evidence of a clear horizontal stratigraphy inside
îâ Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 31
_ O O O O O OJ O O
o _ ^ ^ so ^- ~ «-* m so
JQ es es »n c* en . <n oí
I ' ' ' ' ' ¿ ' '
g. »^S^ir4r-^H(>ics|it<Nc^«o^<7c7sû7r^cN«o ^ in r- -* so m
g. Pû -H -fl -H -H + -H -H + -H -H -H + -H + + + -H + + -H +1 + -H -H -H -H
*^ o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
O
1
C/3
<
1 2 2
1 o S "3d 'S ^
1
I + + + ^ 1^1
•I
I I II II ^ I ft i
O
•c
<
§ i =g ill«*
I
O
Lllll-siiili lljliiliji
|
I
i
I
S "o "S "3 "ü "S
á Í2 ^ ^ S
I ^^ ^^ .tí .ts .ti
SOVO so 1 'S ^ 'S 'S
¿ B B B 3
i
|| * & ?1 1111
1 áââiâêeífâ33Eâg3>>>li 111111
en
« 1 JB
1 S ^ §
8 Ä Je
I «
«
.a
CD
äO
ja
Oh
g
iy Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
32 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
<N CO
oooooo o oo oooo o o
cl yotnpj^^Nio^in^^ - cn en r* io o m o »n n *■*
oû
s
-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-flS-H-H -H + + -H îî 2 2 2 2
oooooou^o^oo oooo Ti~nTi-n-noo
o r^o'o'eo»nM^vo©eooo o o oo ^- ° £ ^ & 50 £ 2
« QHHt-iHONOyO^WN ^ N Cl m On O' r^ f» ^ - N
C¿ nmntonNHMnHn co en en m rt^^^t^í-enen
OOOÜÜ
■g H 1 'S 2 2
I ¡¡¡l^llssli Ills 1111111
•o xi
8. &
•S 'S +
te c e3 î3 c3 t3 "3 cd o o 5 o a
s Illaidii fi fi
lini «ili
^ C tí
S H H
73 'S 13 "« "S
i i i i "S
ââsHB
filili e ^ iggiijj
JJ lilis. . >£>££ >>>> >>>>>>>
S
i
^ Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 33
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
34 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 35
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
36 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 37
Independent invention?
Since long-distance diffusion requires that Neandertals had the same cognitive capabilities
as moderns, as a potential explanation for the facts it is not intrinsically superior to the
alternative view of independent invention put forward by d'Errico et al (1998), Zilhão and
d'Errico (1999), Zilhão (2001), and d'Errico (2003). Choosing between the two, therefore,
should be based solely on their respective empirical merits. And although future research
may change the picture, the data currently available are more consistent with independent
invention than with long-distance diffusion.
In fact, one of the most striking features of the record for early ornaments is that in
the IUP of the Near East it is entirely made up of perforated shells, for the most part
marine gastropods. Dentalium tubes are absent from the IUP, and they are not represented
in the subsequent Early Ahmarian either. In contrast, Dentalium tubes are the only securely
documented ornaments in the Uluzzian, where marine gastropods are entirely absent. This
contrast is puzzling because Uluzzian sites have the same coastal location as those from
the Near Eastern IUP, and, if the ornaments had been introduced to their cultural context
through diffusion from the latter, one would expect that the same kinds of objects had been
selected for the purpose. For instance, that some 90% of the shell beads in the IUP levels
of Uçagizli and Ksar 'Akil are Nassarius is a strong argument in favor of the notion that
this technocomplex stands for a cultural tradition of ultimate African origin: The earlier,
south African beads from Biombos are all made from another, nearly identical species of
that genus (Fig. 1 ). That the makers of these ornaments were selecting for a particular shape
and that this similarity of appearance is culturally meaningful are also suggested by the
fact that the other gastropod used at Ksar 'Akil, Colwnbella rustica, is of broadly similar
morphology.
That traditions relating to the choice of ornaments are long-lasting is further indicated by
the fact that in the long Protoaurignacian-to-Epigravettian sequence of the Mochi rocksheiter,
people consistently favored a very narrow range of shell sizes and shapes, "suggesting some
kind of shared aesthetic, yet one that lasted more than 20,000 years" (Stiner, 1999). Thus,
where sites in interior locations are concerned, if the earliest Upper Paleolithic of Europe was
related to diffusion from the Near East, one might further expect that fossil shells of similar
la Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
38 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 39
Conclusion
Shennan's (2001) study of the relation between innovation and demographic growth showed
that the probability that innovations are retained is low when group size is small, because
the probability that their effects are advantageous as opposed to deleterious also is low.
The situation changes markedly when population increases, either through local demo-
graphic growth or through merger between previously isolated groups, and especially so
when long-distance contact is established, because that effectively enlarges the population
on a scale proportional to the square of the distance radius. Since both the archaeological
and the genetic evidence are consistent with significant population increase in Africa once
the cold and arid conditions pertaining throughout OIS-4 came to an end, Shennan con-
cludes that the most parsimonious explanation for the fact that cultural innovations with
occasional precedents became fixed and widespread only after that time is demography, not
cognition.
One does not need to go any further than this model to explain the European patterns.
The increase in the number of sites and the major northward expansion of the human
range document population expansion (and ensuing increased interaction) among OIS -3
Neandertals and suffice to explain why they eventually developed the practice of personal
ornamentation at about the same time it was re-emerging in Africa and expanding into
the Near East. Moreover, it also is clear that Shennan's line of reasoning also provides a
convincing explanation for the emergence of sculpted figurines and rock art in Evolved
Aurignacian times. Although the possession of artistic skills is often portrayed as proof
of the decisive cognitive advantage that gave moderns the edge over Neandertals in their
competition for Europe, the evidence reviewed in the preceding sections shows that figurative
art is as conspicuously lacking from cultural contexts conceivably related to those modern
human pioneers (the Protoaurignacian and the Early Aurignacian) as it is from the cultural
contexts of late Neandertals. Even if widely used, the argument of the cognitive superiority
of "those wonderful Cro-Magnon artists" as sufficient explanation for the demise of the
Neandertals is therefore completely inadequate if not grossly misleading.
The European record suggests that it was not until Evolved Aurignacian times that the
need was felt for systems of social identification/differentiation extending beyond the indi-
vidual to include the landscapes and resources claimed as territory by the different groups
¿3 Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
40 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 41
References cited
Ambert, P., Guendon, J.-L., Galant, Ph., Quinif, Y., Gruneisen, A., Colomer, A., Dainat, D., Beaumes, B.,
and Requirand, Cl. (2005). Attribution des gravures paléolithiques de la grotte d'Aldène (Cesseras,
Hérault) à l'Aurignacien par la datation des remplissages géologiques. Comptes-Rendus Palevol 4: 275-
284.
Ambrose, S. (1998). Chronology of the Later Stone Age and food production in East Africa. Journal of
Archaeological Science 25: 377-392.
Arias, P., and Ontañón, R. (2004). La materia del lenguaje prehistórico. El arte mueble paleolítico de
Cantabria en su contexto, Museo Arqueológico Nacional, Madrid.
Baffier, D. (1999). Les derniers Néandertaliens. Le Châtelperronien. La Maison des Roches. Paris.
Baffier, D., and Feruglio, V. (2005). Les dessins noirs des salles Hillaire et du Crâne, grotte Chauvet - Pont-
d'Arc: chronologie relative. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 102: 149-158.
Bahn, P., and Vertut, J. (1997). Journey Through the Ice Age, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London.
Bailey, S. E., and Hublin, J.-J. (2005). Who made the Early Aurignacian? A reconsideration of the Brassempouy
dental remains. Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d AnthmnoloQÌp de Paris: ns 17: 1-7.
Bailey, S. E., and Hublin, J.-J. (2006). Dental remains from the Grotte du Renne at Arcy-sur-Cure (Yonne).
Journal of Human Evolution 50: 485-508.
Bar-Yosef, O. (2000). The problem of cultural continuity between the Middle and the Upper Paleolithic
central and eastern Europe. In Bar-Yosef, O., and Pilbeam, D. (eds.), The Geography ofNeandertals an
Modern Humans in Europe and the Greater Mediterranean, Peabody Museum Bulletin 8, Cambridge
MA, pp. 107-156.
Bar-Yosef, O. (2004). Eat what is there: Hunting and gathering in the world of Neanderthals and the
neighbours. International Journal of Osteoarchaeolosx 14: 333-342.
Bar-Yosef, O., and Callander, J. (1999). The woman from Tabun: Garrod's doubts in historical perspectiv
Journal of Human Evolution 37: 879-885.
Bar-Yosef, O., and Kuhn, S. (1999). The big deal about blades: Laminar technologies and human evolution
American Anthropologist 101: 322-338.
Bar-Yosef, O., and Svoboda, J. (2003). Discussion. In Svoboda, J., and Bar-Yosef, O. (eds.), Stránská skál
Origins of the Upper Paleolithic in the Brno Basin, Moravia, Czech Republic, American School of
Prehistoric Research Bulletin 47, Cambridge, MA, pp. 173-179.
Bar-Yosef, O., Arnold, M., Mercier, N., Belfer-Cohen, A., Goldberg, P., Housley, R., Laville, H., Meignen, L
Vogel, J. C, and Vandermeersch, B. (1996). The dating of the Upper Paleolithic layers in Kebara Cave
Mt Carmel. Journal of Archaeological Science 23: 297-306.
Barge, H. (1983). Essai sur les parures du Paléolithique supérieur dans le sud de la France. La faune mala
cologique aurignacienne de l'abri Rothschild (Cabrières, Hérault). Bulletin du Musée d'Anthropologie
Préhistorique de Monaco 27: 69-83.
Barham, L. S. (2002a). Backed tools in Middle Pleistocene central Africa and their evolutionary significance.
Journal of Human Evolution 43: 585-603.
iâ Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
42 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
Q Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 43
¿ä Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
44 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
Q Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 45
iä Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
46 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
¿3 Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 47
±3 Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
48 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
Q Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 49
¿2 Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
50 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
¿S Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15:1-54 51
Adams, B. (2002). New radiocarbon dates from Szeleta and Istállós-kõ caves, Hungary. Praehistoria 3:
53-55.
Adams, B., and Ringer, Á. (2004). New C14 dates for the Hungarian Early Upper Palaeolithic. Current
Anthropology 45: 541-551.
Adler, D. S., Bar-Oz, G., Belfer-Cohen, A., and Bar-Yosef, O. (2006). Ahead of the game. Middle and Upper
Palaeolithic hunting behaviors in the southern Caucasus. Current Anthropology 47: 89-1 18.
Ambrose, S. (2001). Paleolithic technology and human evolution. Science 291: 1748-1753.
Antunes, M. T. (ed.). (2000). Últimos Neandertais em Portugal: Evidência, odontológica e outra, Academia
das Ciências, Lisboa.
Bar-Yosef, O. (2002). The Upper Paleolithic revolution. Annual Reviews of Anthropology 31: 363-393.
Bar-Yosef, O., and Zilhão, J. (eds.) (2006). Towards a Definition of the Aurignacian, Trabalhos de Arqueologia
45, Instituto Português de Arqueologia, Lisboa.
Barham, L. (2000). The Middle Stone Age of Zambia, South Central Africa, Western Academic and Specialist
Press, Bristol.
Barham, L., and Robson-Brown, K. (2001 ). Human Roots: Africa and Asia in the Middle Pleistocene, Western
Academic and Specialist Press, Bristol.
Barroso, C. (ed.) (2003). El Pleistoceno Superior de la Cueva del Boquete de Zaf arraya, Junta de Andalucía,
Sevilla.
Böhner, U. (2004). Die mittelpaläolithischen Funde der Schicht E3 der Sesselfelsgrotte. In Züchner, C.
(ed.), Die Sesselfelsgrotte in Neuessing, Landkreis Kelheim, Niederbayern, BRD (http://www.uf.uni-
erlangen.de/projekte/sesselfelsgrotte/sesselfelsgrotte.htm).
Brantingham, P. J., Kuhn, S. L., and Kerry, K. W. (eds.) (2004). The Early Upper Paleolithic Beyond Western
Europe, University of California Press, London.
Clottes, J. (2003). Chauvet Cave: The Art of Earliest Times, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Clottes, J. (2003). Return to Chauvet Cave: Excavating the Birthplace of Art. The First Full Report, Thames
and Hudson, London.
Coolidge, F.L., and Wynn T. (2004). A cognitive and neuropsychological perspective on the Châtelperronian.
Journal of Anthropological Research 60: 55-73.
Corbey, R., and Roebroeks, W. (eds.) (2001). Studying Human Origins: Disciplinary History and Epistemol-
ogy, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam.
Cosgrove, R., and Pike-Tay, A. (2004). The Middle Palaeolithic and Late Pleistocene Tasmania hunting
behaviour: Reconsideration of the attributes of modern human behaviour. International Journal of Os-
teoarchaeology 14: 321-332.
Currat, M., and Excoffier, L. (2004). Modern humans did not admix with Neanderthals during their range
expansion into Europe. PLoS Biology 2: 2264-2274.
d'Errico, F., and Sánchez-Goñi, M. F. (2003). Neandertal extinction and the millennial scale climatic variability
of OIS 3. Quaternary Science Reviews 22: 769-788.
David, F., Connet, N., Girard, M., Lhomme, V, Miskovsky, J.-G, and Roblin-Jouve, A. (2001). Le
Châtelperronien de la grotte du Renne à Arcy-sur-Cure (Yonne): données sédimentologiques et chronos-
tratigraphiques. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 98: 207-230.
Desmond Clark, J., Beyene, Y., Wolde Gabriel, G., Hart, W. K., Renne, P. R., Gilbert, H., Defleur, A.,
Suwa, G., Katoh, S., Ludwig, K. R., Boisserie, J.-R., Asfaw, B., and White, T. D. (2003). Stratigraphie,
chronological and behavioural contexts of Pleistocene Homo sapiens from Middle Awash, Ethiopia.
Nature 423: 747-752.
îâ Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
52 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
^ Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54 53
Schmitz, R. W, and Thissen, J. (2002). Die Geschichte geht weiter, Spektrum, Heidelberg.
^ Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
54 J Archaeol Res (2007) 15: 1-54
±3 Springer
This content downloaded from 192.248.32.72 on Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:17:23 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms