http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=228 Publications de Auteurs François Djindjian fr 0 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=3492 Un essai d'intégration de l'art pariétal et mobilier dans le contexte économique et climatique du peuplement paléolithique supérieur européen, a permis d'élaborer plusieurs nouvelles propositions sur l'explication des variabilités de l'art paléolithique. L'étude des bestiaires figurés conduit à les considérer comme des représentations d'une connaissance taxinomique et éthologique des zoocénoses rencontrées, sous deux formes : une connaissance locale et une connaissance distante, emportée ou rapportée à l'occasion des déplacements des chasseurs paléolithiques. Il est donc logique que les bestiaires figurés dans les grottes ornées ou dans l'art mobilier des habitats ne correspondent pas aux vestiges osseux de faune des sites d'habitat qui ne représentent que la faune locale chassée. Les zoocénoses animales possèdent en Europe occidentale une grande variabilité régionale, chronologique et climatique, qui permet de faire apparaître une correspondance, à un instant, dans une région et sous un climat donnés, entre le bestiaire représenté dans l'art paléolithique et les espèces animales des zoocénoses mémorisées par les chasseurs paléolithiques. Plusieurs modèles différents de bestiaire ont été ainsi mis en évidence. A l'Aurignacien et au Gravettien, un modèle dominant mammouth/rhinocéros/ félin/ours est présent dans la vallée du Rhône, la moitié nord de la France, de l'Europe centrale et orientale, tandis qu'en Aquitaine, un modèle dominant mammouth/cheval/bovinés/cervidés est présent. Au Solutréo-Badegoulien, un modèle unique dominant cheval/aurochs/cerf/biche/bouquetin correspond à la zoocénose de Méditerranée occidentale. Au Magdalénien moyen et supérieur, dans la zone franco-cantabrique, trois modèles cohabitent avec leurs variantes et définissent autant de territoires au Magdalénien moyen et supérieur: - un modèle A à dominante cheval/bison, avec les variantes A1 à bouquetin, A2 à mammouth/rhinocéros et A3 à renne, - un modèle B à dominante cheval/renne, avec les variantes B1 à bouquetin et B2 à mammouth/rhinocéros, - un modèle C tardif, à dominante cheval/bison-aurochs/cerf-biche. L'analyse de la variabilité spatiale du bestiaire figuré dans les grottes ornées conduit enfin à proposer l'hypothèse que la topographie de la grotte ornée représente en réduction le territoire de déplacement des chasseurs et le bestiaire qui y est figuré, une représentation de la faune vue dans ce territoire: les compositions centrales représenteraient les grands espaces ouverts de chaque zoocénose, les pourtours représenteraient les zones excentrées en latitude ou en altitude par rapport aux espaces ouverts, et les zones de fond-diverticule-passage symbolisent les grottes, fréquentées par les faunes de caverne et l'homme. Cette organisation spatiale n'est pas unique, ainsi que l'a proposé A. Leroi-Gourhan mais est multiple, fonction des modèles de bestiaires propres à chaque culture. An attempt of integration of cave and portable palaeolithic art in the economic and climatic context of Upper Palaeolithic peopling of Europe has allowed elaborating several new conclusions about the explanation of palaeolithic art variability. The study of the represented bestiary involves considering them as figures of a taxonomic and ethologic knowledge of met zoocenoses under two ways: a local knowledge and a distant knowledge, taken away or brought back during movements of palaeolithic hunters. It is then logic that the bestiary represented by cave or portable art is not equivalent to the bone finds of palaeolithic sites which are sampling only a local hunted fauna. Zoocenoses are showing in Western Europe a large regional, chronological and climatic variability, which allows seeing at a time, in a region and under a climate, a correspondence between the represented bestiary and the animal species from zoocenoses seen and memorized by palaeolithic hunters. Several different models of bestiary have then been discovered. During Aurignacian and Gravettian, a main model mammoth/rhinoceros/feline/bear is existing in the Rhone valley and the half-north of France, central and eastern Europe, while a main model mammoth/horse/bovine/cervid is existing in Aquitaine. During Solutreo-Badegoulian, a unique main model horse/aurochs/deer & doe/ibex is corresponding to the western Mediterranean area. During middle and upper Magdalenian, in the franco-cantabrian area, three models are coexisting with variants. They are defining several Magdalenian territories: - model A, based on a horse/bison dominant and variant A1 with ibex, variant A2 with mammoth/rhinoceros and variant A3 with reindeer, - model B, based on a horse/reindeer dominant, and variant B1 with ibex and B2 with mammoth/rhinoceros, - model C, based on a horse/bison/aurochs/reddeer and doe dominant. Finally, the analysis of the spatial variability of the bestiary represented in caves allows proposing the following hypothesis: the topography of a painted cave is a scale model of the territory of movements of hunters, and the represented bestiary is a sample of the fauna met by hunters. Inside the cave, the central place is the open space of each zoocenose, the periphery is the off-centred areas in latitude and altitude, and the bottom is the cave itself. Such a spatial organization is not unique, as Leroi-Gourhan said, but is multiple depending on the bestiary models of each palaeolithic culture. Wed, 16 Apr 2025 09:33:06 +0200 Wed, 16 Apr 2025 09:33:23 +0200 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=3492 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=2895 La révision des corrélations entre «styles» et «cultures», dans leur contexte chronologique et paléo-environnemental et selon les territoires de peuplement, permet de proposer une nouvelle périodisation de l'art paléolithique en sept stades, en remplacement des deux périodes de H. Breuil et des quatre styles de A. Leroi-Gourhan. L'épanouissement de l'art pariétal et mobilier semble lié à des moments privilégiés du peuplement européen au Paléolithique supérieur mais dans des territoires de peuplement qui fluctuent dans le temps et dans l'espace selon les variations climatiques du dernier pléniglaciaire. L'émergence de l'art figuratif paléolithique semble se développer à une phase évoluée de l'Aurignacien, plus en relation avec le succès du système aurignacien qu'avec l'arrivée de l'homme moderne. The re-examination of relationships between «styles» and «cultures», considered in their chronological and palaeoenvironmental context and according to population territories, permits the proposal of new system of seven phases of Palaeolithic art, replacing the two styles of H. Breuil and the four styles of A. Leroi-Gourhan. The development of parietal and mobile art seems to be associated with limes favourable for European peopling during the Upper Palaeolithic, but in territories that vary in time and space according to the climatic variations of the Last Pleniglacial. The emergence of figurative Palaeolithic art occurs during a Late phase of the Aurignacian, associated more with the success of the Aurignacian system than with the arrival of the modern humans. Thu, 27 Feb 2025 14:00:52 +0100 Thu, 27 Feb 2025 14:01:04 +0100 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=2895 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=1436 Les fouilles effectuées sous 1e direction de l’un de nous (H.D.), à la Ferrassie, de 1968 a 1973, ont 1ivré une masse importante d’observations et de matériels, les unes et les autres du plus grand intérêt. L’ensemble de cette information a été mis en œuvre de la façon suivante : 1. Étude tenant du milieu, entreprise au Laboratoire de Géologie du Quaternaire et d’Anthropologie de Bordeaux (directeur : F. Bordes) ; elle porte sur la sédimentologie (H. Laville), sur la faune (F. Delpech) et sur les pollens (M.M. Paquereau). 2. Étude des vestiges humains recueillis dans les formations moustériennes, réalisée par J. L. Heim, du Département d’Anthropologie du Musée de l’Homme. 3. Étude archéologique ; elle a été répartie comme suit : a. Périgordien supérieur : H. Delporte et A. Tuffreau (Delporte et Tuffreau, 1973). b. Aurignacien : H. Delporte et G. Mazière. c. Castelperronien et Moustérien: A. Tuffreau. En outre, des traitements informatiques, appliqués à ces différents ensembles archéologiques. sont effectués au Laboratoire de Statistique mathématique de Paris VI par F. Djindjian. Les présentes notes ne font qu’exposer quelques-uns des aspects de l’état présent des travaux. Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:41:34 +0100 Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:41:43 +0100 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=1436 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=353 The accumulation of data on the activity of Palaeolithic human groups networks (source of raw materials, location of sites, Hunt seasonal, etc.) allows gradually to highlight strategies for the territory occupation of which the main parameters are the mobility, the territory area, the food resource management and the seasonality of activities in the annual cycle.  Local Opportunistic strategy. The area of the territory is limited (less than 1000 km2). Mobility is low. Hunting is opportunistic. The settlement is permanent in a rockshelter. If there is exhaustion of the food resources, the group must abandon its settlement and emigrated in another region. Contacts between human groups are limited. Such a strategy is adopted by the Mousterian groups during the OIS 4 and begins to change with groups of transition MP/UP industries. It is taken up during the maximum ice age from 21 000 BP at the time of the abandonment of the occupation of the middle Europe by Gravettian groups and their refuge to the Mediterranean regions (see below the seasonal mobility strategy). Extended planned strategy. The area of the territory is large (30 000 to 100 000 km2). Mobility is high. There is a specialization of the travels and of the site locations : distant sources of raw materials, specialized hunting, seasonal sites, bivouac, art caves, within a recognized territory where movements are common. Contacts between human groups of the same network are numerous (meeting points) promoting exchanges and standardization of material culture. Camp-sites are seasonal. The food resource management is specializing in hunting the herds of large migrant mammals (reindeer, bison) or horses. This strategy marks the success of the network organization of the human groups during the upper Palaeolithic period (Aurignacian, Gravettian, Magdalenian). Semi-sedentary strategy. The residential camp-sites are occupied about ten months in the year. The territory is large (30 000 to 100 000 km2). There is a mammoth based food resource through accumulations of animals, of natural or hunted origins, which are found systematically nearby sites, as a food supply, fuels, building materials for the dwellings and raw material for the manufacture of tools and weapons. Technical inventions without future are noted : terracotta figurines, polishing. Art is developed. Food is stored in pits dug in permafrost near the dwellings. This strategy is known in only three short and specific episodes in the history of the European upper Palaeolithic : Pavlovian (around 27 000 BP in Moravia), Eastern Gravettian (24 000 – 21 000 BP in Central and Eastern Europe), Mezinian (Upper and middle Dnepr basin around 15 000 to 14 000 BP). Seasonal mobility strategy. The territory is open to an uninhabited North where the human groups organize summer raids. The residential camps are located in the southern regions during half part of the year. Movements are carried out on several hundred kilometers during summer for specialized hunting (reindeer) and for the supply of good quality flint. The territories of refuge are less extended and partitioned (Solutrean in sub-Cantabrian and sub-Pyrenean regions, Adriatic Epigravettian, Epigravettian of the Black Sea). This strategy corresponds to the short time of the maximum ice age climate amelioration (Late Solutrean and Late Badegoulian in Western Europe, Sagvarian in Central Europe and Molodovian in Eastern Europe). Restricted Planned strategy. The territories are limited (1.000 to 10.000 km2). The human groups are located in specialized camp-sites. The diversification of food is pushed to its maximum (opportunistic hunting, specialized hunting of altitude with the conquest of the altitude, fishing, shellfish collecting). The supply of raw material is local in the territory and depends on the quality of outcrops that are found. Art is little developed. This strategy concerns the Epipaleolithic groups and is continuing during the Holocene. Fri, 22 Nov 2024 13:59:37 +0100 Fri, 22 Nov 2024 13:59:45 +0100 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=353 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=226 The long-term excavations of the LUP settlement of Gontsy (Ukraine), with its mammoth bone huts and associated with a mammoth bone bed, has allowed to reconstitute quite all the pieces of the puzzle of this type of settlements and the major role of the economy of mammoth in the Mezinian peopling of the middle and upper Dnepr basin (Ukraine and Russia). The settlements are generally sharing the same geomorphology of the location on a promontory cut by ravines on the slope of a river valley. The dwelling area is organized around mammoth bone huts, numerous pits around each hut, large working areas with hearths, dumping areas, butchering area for small and medium mammals and the existence of a mammoth bone bed, which has been largely exploited during the occupation of the settlement. The landscape analysis, using the information from the mapping, the functions and the seasonality of the settlements, is characterizing a particular system based on the economy of mammoth, limited to a short period between 15 000 and 14 000 BP at the beginning of the climatic change ending the last ice age. The network connections are supported by the raw material procurement on outcrops, particularly the flint and the shells, but also the amber, demonstrating the long distance travelling of the hunter-gatherer groups, both for the yearly discovery of the next settlement and during the annual cycle for various seasonal procurement. Wed, 20 Nov 2024 15:37:07 +0100 Wed, 20 Nov 2024 15:37:15 +0100 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=226