http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=526 Entrées d’index fr 0 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=3856 Cet article traite des questions de l’acquisition et de la gestion des matières première animales en Europe au cours du Paléolithique moyen et supérieur. En premier, est abordée la question de la disponibilité de l’ivoire de mammouth et des bois de cervidés. En effet, il est impossible de séparer certaines activités humaines de leur contexte général. L’accès aux gîtes de matières premières, ainsi que la localisation des sites paléolithiques (spécialisés ou non), et l’utilisation de divers outils forment un système paléobiogéographique dans lequel les territoires humains sont intégrés. Ensuite, les modes d’acquisition et de traitement du mammouth sont discutés en parallèle avec l’utilisation de l’ivoire. Différents aspects ont été examinés : la préservation de l’ivoire dans les grottes et les sites de plein air ; les les divers modes d’acquisition possible de l’ivoire ; les fonctions des sites; le statut culturel du mammouth et de l’ivoire ; la technologie de l’ivoire. Selon nos premiers résultats, il apparaît qu’au Gravettien, en Europe centrale, l’acquisition du mammouth dans un but alimentaire n’était pas systématiquement liée à la recherche d’ivoire et d’os à des fins techniques. Ces matières dures animales étaient probablement en partie collectées dans des gîtes fossiles. En outre, les conditions climatiques rigoureuses de cette époque ont sans doute contribué à la bonne conservation de ces matériaux. À l’inverse, au Magdalénien, le climat, plus modéré, aurait entraîné une préservation moindre des ossements de mammouth. Une faible disponibilité de matière première serait donc la cause de la faible présence d’artefacts en ivoire dans les sites magdaléniens. Il semble que les objets en ivoire découverts au sein des gisements moraves proviendraient alors de réseaux de circulation de matières premières. Des questions similaires se posent au sujet du renne et des bois. À la lumière de nos résultats, il apparaît que, quelle que soit la période considérée ; il existait une grande diversité des comportements : stock de matières premières ; rejet de matériaux non utilisés ; acquisition de rennes pour leur viande et utilisation des bois de massacre… Ces réflexions prouvent que les analyses des restes fauniques, des matières premières, et des objets façonnés par l’Homme doivent être menées conjointement et replacées dans leurs contextes paléoécologique et archéologique. Cette approche est nécessaire pour retracer les modes de subsistance (s.l.) au Paléolithique. This paper develops issues about the acquisition and the management of animal raw materials in Europe during Middle and Upper Palaeolithic. First, we deal with the availability of mammoth ivory and reindeer antlers. Actually, one cannot separate some human activities from their general context. We consider the the access to the deposits of raw materials, the location of the Palaeolithic sites (specialised or not), and the use of diverse tools make up a palaeobiogeographical system in which human territories are included. Next topic of this discussion is about mammoth acquisition and processing in parallel with ivory manufacturing and use. Then, different issues are examined ; ivory preservation in caves and open air sites ; the various possible ways of ivory acquisition ; the function of the sites ; the cultural status of mammoth and ivory ; ivory technology. According to the first results, during Gravettian, in Central Europe, acquisition of mammoth for food was not systematically correlated with procurement of mammoth ivory and bones for technical purposes. Thus, mammoth ivory and bones were probably partly collected within fossil deposits. Because of very cold conditions in Central Europe, these materials were well preserved. Conversely, during Magdalenian, the environmental conditions were warmer, and it seems that ivory and bones were less preserved. So, it could be an explanation of the low presence of mammoth remains and ivory artifacts in Magdalenian sites. Finally, ivory objects from Moravian Magdalenian sites could have come from a raw material network. Similar questionings occur for reindeer and antlers. Whatever the period under consideration, it seems that there is a great diversity of behaviours : stock of raw materials ; dumping of unused materials ; acquisition of reindeer essentially for food and use of antlers when animals had some. These thinkings confirm that the analyse of faunal remains, raw material, and human-made artifacts must be jointly carried out, and placed in their palaeoecological and archaeological backgrounds. This approach is necessary in order to reconstruct Palaeolithic subsistence (s.l.) patterns. Tue, 27 May 2025 14:35:18 +0200 Tue, 27 May 2025 14:35:26 +0200 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=3856 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=3445 Recent approaches on ancient artifacts collections and very recent discoveries enable a detailed discussion (repertory, typology, technology, radiocarbon dates etc.) on the relative rare evidence of portable art - decorated and so-called non utilitarian objects - in the Romanian Upper Paleolithic (Aurignacian and Eastern Gravettian, about 30-13 kyr BP). The artifacts were discovered in 10 open air and cave sites especially from Moldavia and Transylvania. Most of the pieces (15) are attributed to the Eastern Gravettian and 4 belong to the Aurignacian. The types identified are: spear points in bone and roe-deer antler; bâtons percés worked in wolf and horse long bones or in roe-deer antler; decorated horse metapod; lithic objects in quartzite and graphite as well as bone and antler pieces having linear engraved decoration or notches; decorated roe-deer antler harpoon; ivory mammoth tusk fragment; fossil mollusks of Congeria species. Some artifacts are of significant importance for the phenomenon of art and of prehistoric technology in these regions; in this point of view we have to mention the fragment of bone discovered in 1998 with the engraved image of an animal's foot from Piatra Neamt, Neamt County. Another exceptional artifact is the fragment of mammoth tusk from Lespezi, Bacau County, dated at around 18 kyr showing the debitage traces on the proximal part that prove the using of notching and grooving technique and probably of transverse sawing with fiber; this should be the oldest situation of use of such a technique solution in this part of Europe. Taking into account the extreme rarity of ivory artifacts in the Upper Paleolithic of Romania it is probably that the provenance of the objects can be found in the near territories of Central and Eastern Europe (Czech Republic, Ukraine, Republic of Moldavia, Russia) where the manufacture and use of such artifacts was common in that epoch. The study contributes essentially to the definition in actual terms of typology and technology of oldest portable art objects from Romania as material expression of first spiritual manifestations of hunter-gatherer communities and allowed to integrate the data of the phenomenon in the South-East and Central European context. Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:34:49 +0200 Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:34:56 +0200 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=3445 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=521 The general analysis of material culture of the Early Upper Paleolithic site of Sungir is complicated and hotly disputes. Personal ornaments and portable art objects – beads, pendants, zoomorphic figurines, engravings – have been the subject of study. However, in-depth study of all the giant complex (more than 15,000 items) of these objects was not provided. The first results of a new comprehensive study of personal ornaments and decorated objects allow re-evaluate the value of this material to characterize the relationship of different parts of site, as well as burials. The solution of this problem is particularly helped the identification of individual techniques of manufacture of beads certain types. New evidence of ornamental decoration on ivory objects, including all the figurines, found in the result of work with a collection from O.N. Bader excavations. Results of the study of ornament manufacturing techniques and principles of its location revealed some typical cultural characteristics Sungir. Certain influence on the technique of manufacturing certain types of Sungirian pendants had a cultural traditions Initial Upper Paleolithic of the Russian Plain (eg., Kostenki XVII/2). Aurignacian features in personal ornaments and ornament patterns are similar both in the rare materials of the Russian Plain (Kostenki I/3), and in the materials from Central and Western Europe. Using personal ornaments on the burial suits are similar to the materials of the early Gravettian of Moravia (the problem of the influence direction has not been studied). This is a complex mosaic of cultural influences in the Sungir materials provides a new look at the cultural and historical processes (including migration of people and ideas) that took place in Europe in the Early Upper Paleolithic. Tue, 26 Nov 2024 13:08:09 +0100 Tue, 26 Nov 2024 13:08:16 +0100 http://popups.lib.uliege.be/3041-5527/index.php?id=521