The consequences for the Neanderthal population in Western Europe upon the arrival of anatomically modern humans in the Upper Palaeolithic, is a matter of intense debate within the field of...Show moreThe consequences for the Neanderthal population in Western Europe upon the arrival of anatomically modern humans in the Upper Palaeolithic, is a matter of intense debate within the field of prehistoric archaeology. The fact that our species is the only one to survive, has traditionally been explained by a supposed cognitive superiority inherent to anatomically modern humans. However, recent studies have refuted most of the proclaimed differences between the species, leaving the reason behind the Neanderthal disappearance even more peculiar. One way to address this issue, is through the study of behavioural differences between the species. By mapping differences and compare the results, we may potentially discern behavioural patterns or cognitive abilities indicating a difference great enough to explain the notable success of our species. In this study, a micro-wear analysis of three multi-functional flint tools, distinct for Upper Palaeolithic assemblages (hence anatomically modern humans) was performed. The tools originate from the final stage of the Early Aurignacian occupation of Les Cottés, France, a site that has been occupied by both Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans. The continuous stratigraphical sequence of the site makes it suitable for behavioural comparisons between the two populations within the same context. By understanding the function/s of the tools, tasks performed at the site can be inferred. As a consequence, information about behavioural and cognitive aspects of the manufacturers of the artefacts can be indicated. The results can later be used for behavioural comparisons between anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals, in an attempt to define eventual cognitive or behavioural differences. In order to strengthen any claims of performed tasks, the results from the micro-wear analysis were compared with results derived from the faunal and lithic assemblages of the same context. The results corroborated each other, consequently contributing to our knowledge about certain behavioural aspects of anatomically modern humans from this period.Show less
The Early Aurignacian is essentially characterised by the manufacture of Aurignacian retouched blades, strangled blades, carinated and nosed scrapers and/or end-scrapers and split-based points,...Show moreThe Early Aurignacian is essentially characterised by the manufacture of Aurignacian retouched blades, strangled blades, carinated and nosed scrapers and/or end-scrapers and split-based points, amongst other materials. Both the last artefact and strangled blades are well-established type fossils for this Upper Palaeolithic industry. An apparent absence of strangled blades from the archaeological record in Eurasia is shown by the lack of research into this particular topic. In this sense, the main discussion of this thesis centres on possible explanations for this phenomenon. For instance, were strangled blades less fabricated than other types of Aurignacian blades, or have they simply been less studied by researchers? Perhaps their small numbers makes it appear that they are absent when in reality they are not. Additionally, could it be that their production is restricted to certain geographical areas in Eurasia? This thesis consists of a comparative study of 39 Eurasian Early Aurignacian sites, complemented by a case study that focuses on the Early Aurignacian blade assemblage of Les Cottés, a Middle and Upper Palaeolithic site located in France. This last study represents a physical examination of such industry in order to better help the analysis of those 39 sites. This comparative approach highlights a clear low number of sites with strangled blades, since only ten of them have yielded such artefacts. It also highlights a clear concentration of sites in the French region of Aquitaine, along with other sites within the country and the adjacent Spanish Cantabrian region. This phenomenon is verified both in the group with and the group without strangled blades. However, this may be due to an increased interest in this particular area of Europe, since it appears that the east has been less studied. Moreover, the fact that strangled blades are included in large lithic assemblages, and the fact that there is a lack of studies on them may have quickly induced this picture of absence. It seems that these artefacts only appear to be absence from these archaeological records.Show less
