Search

Le site du Centre mobilisateur 10, situe au sud-est de l’agglomeration de Lannemezan (Hautes-Pyrenees) et autrefois connu sous le nom de l’Arsenal, a fait l’objet en 2016 d’une fouille preventive realisee par le bureau d’etudes Eveha, sous la responsabilite de V. Ropiot. D’un point de vue geographique, entre la Bigorre et le Comminges, ce secteur occupe une position d’interface sur un plateau de formation fluvio-glaciaire, qui culmine a 600 m d’altitude en piemont des Pyrenees, et qui constitue une vaste etendue comprenant des landes, des tourbieres, des prairies et quelques bois. La fouille, en plus du degagement complet d’un tumulus circulaire dote d’un enclos de galets, principal objet de cette intervention, a permis la mise au jour de dix structures archeologiques, dont un monument megalithique de conception singuliere, compose d’une dalle monolithe entouree d’une bordure de galets, recouvrant une chambre enfouie au sein d’une vaste fosse oblongue, comportant une entree frontale comprise egalement dans l’excavation.Les autres structures sont six foyers a galets chauffes, deux trous de poteaux isoles et une fosse contenant du mobilier du Bronze moyen, pillee ou fortement remaniee mais vraisemblablement de nature cultuelle. Le tout se developpe principalement dans la partie centrale de la zone prescrite, autour du tumulus, et vers l’est pour ce qui est des foyers, dont deux ont ete amenages dans sa couronne. Ces vestiges s’echelonnent sur une periode comprise entre 3700 et 1400 av. n.e., l’occupation etant centree sur le Neolithique final. Ils forment un ensemble funeraire monumental jusque-la inedit dans les Hautes-Pyrenees.

Post-firing treatments, produced by the interaction of an organic material with the hot surface of a ceramic, are frequently described in ethnographic literature, but have rarely been identified in archaeological ceramic assemblages. In order to address this question, this paper describes a methodology that combines macro- and microscopic observation and molecular analysis. The study of experimental ceramic vessels provided diagnostic tools to identify the type of substances, their liquid or solid state, and their mode of application and attested that the post-firing treatments do not completely waterproof the ceramics. The difficulty to observe macro- and microscopic evidence of post-firing treatments when pots are fired in reducing atmosphere suggests that these processes are probably underestimated in archaeological assemblages. Furthermore, the identification of molecular thermal transformation markers, such as ketones, calls into question their classical interpretation as markers for the cooking of fatty content. This pioneering work highlights the complexity of studying post-firing treatments, which leave small traces that are easily missed or misinterpreted. In order to address this issue, we propose a multi-analytical approach, which can serve as a basis for future studies to explore the full diversity of post-firing treatments mentioned in ethnoarchaeological literature.

Plant resins, tars and organic fossil substances provide valuable insights into the ecological, environmental and cultural contexts of ancient societies. Their study offers evidence of past know-how, production systems, socio-economic networks and mobility. In this paper, we present new data from 16 sites located in the North-West Mediterranean that provide new insights into the exploitation of these substances for their adhesive and hydrophobic properties throughout the Neolithic (6000-2500 cal BCE). The substances investigated are discussed in the light of their molecular composition, their uses and manufacturing processes. Spatial analyses were also performed to elucidate raw material procurement strategies. This study considerably increases the body of data available from the Mediterranean and tells a diachronic story of adhesive production and use throughout the Neolithic, highlighting the variability and complexity of production systems and supply networks at different spatial scales. While most adhesive and hydrophobic substances were probably collected locally, birch bark tar was very likely transported across long distances to reach Mediterranean coastal sites. Birch bark tar exploitation intensified in South-Eastern France during the Middle Neolithic, while the Late Neolithic is characterised by a diversification of the substances employed and their range of uses: bitumen, birch bark tar (pure or mixed with Pinaceae resin, beeswax and possibly fat/oil) were important materials that were used for a variety of purposes. Pure Pinaceae exudates were exclusively employed for waterproofing pottery. We also highlight the standardisation of birch bark tar production for adhesive manufacture observed in Provence during the first part of the 4th millennium cal. BCE., The authors thank the French National Research Agency (ANR) for the funding of the project Exsudarch (2010-2014, M. Regert dir.) which allowed extensive diachronic interdisciplinary investigations on plant exudates and tars as well as researching the biogeography of plant raw materials. We are also grateful to the Academy 5 of the IDEXJEDI from UCA (Université Côte d’Azur), to the MSHS sud-est, to the CNRS-INEE and to the CEPAM for funding the research project ARCHEOPLANTES (2018-2020, M. Regert dir.). The results presented here were obtained during the PhD of Maxime Rageot, funded by the PACA Region, the CNRS and the Université Côte d’Azur; may they find here the expression of our sincere thanks. We are grateful to Nolan Ferar for proofreading the article. Finally, we would like to thank the two reviewers for their constructive suggestions which helped to improve the quality of this article.

International audience; In the framework of the reassessment of the Neolithic Square-Mouthed Pottery series from locus P8, Lare 2 cave (Saint-Benoit, Alpes-de-Haute-Provence, South-eastern France), two sherds were identified as possible replicas or importations of fine painted ware (i.e. figulina) from Serra d'Alto contexts (Southern Italy). Combining geological and chemical methods (thin section analysis, microprobe, XR diffraction, XR fluorescence and Scanning Electron Microscopy), a transdisciplinary study was designed for the characterization of the archaeological ceramics and the identification of the clay resources used in their manufacture.The results allow the authors to discount production using a local clay resource. Instead, they support the hypothesis that pottery was traded over a distance of 1200 km, from southern Italy to the Alps. This new data highlights the demand for the products of the Serra d'Alto workshops, which mastered kiln production, as well as the spatial extension and the intensity of intercultural networks during the Early/Middle 5th millennium BCE, a time of increasing social complexity in Europe.

International audience; Birch bark tar, the oldest adhesive known in Europe, was widely used during Prehistory. This material, produced by the dry distillation of birch bark, has been identified in various spheres of activities and provides valuable information on the know-how and technical and territorial systems of past societies. This biomaterial can also provide evidence on socioeconomic networks and mobility. However, very little is known about the production systems of birch bark tar during Prehistory, including the Neolithic period. The lack of findings in the archaeological record necessitates the development of an approach that combines experimental archaeology and biomolecular chemistry. We present here (1) the results of experiments in which different birch bark tar production systems were tested and (2) the molecular signatures of the birch bark tars produced according to different processes based on the use of ceramic vessels. The key role of bark quality is highlighted for the first time. This study also details direct archaeological inference of the experimental results obtained: a total of 23 samples from the site of Nice-Giribaldi (France, second part of the fifth century BCE) was investigated. Different categories of birch bark tars were identified during Neolithic in the south of France, providing evidence for the existence of complex manufacturing systems and procurement networks.

This paper, through the study of a large ceramic corpus including 12,600 diagnostic elements and more than 2,500 complete profiles, supported by radiocarbon dating analysis, defines a new chronology for the Chassey culture in Provence. The consistency of most important cave deposits and assemblages has been taken in account. These data bases have been described using a multi-parameter grid, taking into account aspects regarding technology (clay source selection and processing practice, construction, surface finishing techniques and thermal treatments), morphology (pottery shapes, handles and types of appendices, decoration) and function (volume and inventory of preserved waste). Experimental approaches were used with regard to surface treatments, since such treatments were particularly developed during this period. These experimental approaches participated in the creation of typologies which allowed us to compare the elements of the corpus. If we decide to include the “ Recent Neolithic” in which the Chassey culture tradition is relatively strong, at least six stages, covering a period from 4250 to 3300 cal. BC were identified by means of statistical analysis. Horizon A corresponds to deep pits 3 and 7 of the Nice-Giribaldi site (4250-4050 cal. BC). The pottery assemblages show the development of the typical Chassey package : pots with multi-perforated cordons or “ Pan-pipes”, spoons with flat handles, plates with a complex scratched decoration and “ vases-supports”, whether decorated or not. Very few sites can be linked to this early stage. Posterior to the Early Chassey period (horizon A, 4250-4050 cal. BC), five major periods have been highlighted among the Classical and Late Chassey assemblages. The number of sites seems to have increased. Horizon B, illustrated by Caucade (Nice) can be dated to between 4050 and 3950 cal. BC. Horizon C groups Fontbrégoua levels 19-24, Les Terres Longues, Claparouse and L’Héritière (stage B). It can be dated to between 3950-3800 cal. BC. Horizon D, dated to between 3800 and 3650 cal. BC, has been divided into two sub-groups, with very close radiocarbon dates. Horizon E corresponds to the previously defined Recent Neolithic. It could be dated to between 3650 and 3350 cal. BC. The Chassey culture tradition still appears but assemblage structures show important changes. The trend of pottery assemblage structures shows gradual changes at different levels : pottery shapes, handle and appendix types, construction and surface finishing techniques (in particular, patina finishing techniques increase). This trend is very close to that proposed for lithic production techniques : conical core shapes with faceted platforms during horizon B and maybe continuing in C, the appearance of mixed styles during horizon C, the development of flat cores with oblique platforms during horizon D1 and the development, during horizon D2, of lever pressure for knapping large blades. In the north-western Mediterranean context, these data allow, on the one hand, to link the main stages of the Southern Chassey Culture and, on the other, to apprehend the various dynamic trend evolutions of the Provençal Chassey culture. The subsequent distribution of characteristics isolated in Provence suggested modifications within regional tropisms, which led to a separation of the Provence and Languedoc areas. In fact, during the Early Chassey series and the first stage of the Late Chassey culture, the trend observed in Provence is extremely close to that observed in Languedoc. On the other hand, the last period reveals impressive reciprocal influences with the Middle Rhone valley and, northwards, with the “ Burgundian Middle Neolithic” (NMB), Cortaillod and Lagozza assemblages. Nevertheless, the Provence Chassey culture retains various specificities. Moreover, the ceramics assemblage shows, during the same stage, the constitution of local styles which are distinguished in particular by productions of carinated cups or bowls, extremely varied both morphologically and technically. This research leads to serious reconsideration of the Provençal styles which result from the syncretism of several interfluences and long-lived local traditions., À travers l’étude statistique d’un corpus céramique important, appuyée par une analyse raisonnée des datations 14C, cet article définit une nouvelle chronologie du Chasséen de Provence. Si toutefois on décide d’y inclure le «Néolithique récent » dans lequel la tradition chasséenne est relativement forte, au moins six étapes, qui couvrent une période allant de 4250 à 3300 av. J.-C., ont été isolées. La remise en contexte de ces données à l’échelle de la Méditerranée nord-occidentale permet d’une part de proposer une articulation entre les principaux horizons de l’aire méridionale et d’autre part d’aborder une discussion sur les différentes tendances de l’évolution des dynamiques culturelles provençales. Pendant le Chasséen ancien et les premières étapes du Chasséen récent, les styles provençaux semblent extrêmement liés au Languedoc. En revanche, les dernières étapes témoignent de solides interactions avec le Néolithique moyen bourguignon (NMB), le Lagozza et le Cortaillod, alors que les relations avec le domaine languedocien s’amenuisent. L’étude a aussi montré la constitution de styles locaux qui se distinguent notamment par des productions de coupes ou de jattes carénées. Ils soulignent en outre le rôle majeur de sphères d’influence plus restreintes dans la constitution des assemblages céramiques. Par-delà ces variations chronologiques et géographiques, ce travail aborde la question de variabilité des assemblages céramiques selon le statut des sites. Ce travail amène ainsi un renouvellement profond des connaissances sur le Chasséen provençal dont la construction identitaire fondamentalement complexe résulte d’un syncrétisme entre plusieurs focales d’interfluences (à l’échelle du complexe, à l’échelle régionale et enfin à une échelle plus locale) et le poids de traditions locales relativement vivaces., Lepère Cédric. Chronologie des productions céramiques et dynamiques culturelles du Chasséen de Provence. In: Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, tome 109, n°3, 2012. pp. 513-545.