Search

International audience; As micromammals are highly sensitive to changes in their habitat, variations in species representation are often used to reconstruct local environmental conditions. However, taphonomic aspects of micromammals are often overlooked, despite the fact that they can provide important information for our understanding of archaeological sites. La Roche-à-Pierrot, Saint-Césaire, is a major archaeological site for our understanding of the Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic transition in Western Europe. Clearly documenting site formation processes, the post-depositional reworking of deposits and the sequence of human occupations is fundamental for providing a secure archaeostratigraphic context of the site. The exceptionally large accumulation of micromammals from recently excavated stratigraphic units at the site makes it possible to track variations in the density of micromammals across the stratigraphic sequence. The taphonomic analysis of micromammals demonstrates these variations are not related to a change in the main accumulation agent or post-depositional phenomena. A negative correlation between small mammal remains and archaeological material suggests that peaks in micromammal densities can potentially be correlated with periods when the site was abandoned or when human occupation was less intense, and therefore provide new data for interpreting the Saint-Césaire stratigraphic sequence.

International audience; Neanderthal material culture patterning in Western Europe has been primarily approached from retouched stone tools and associated flake production methods. While considerable effort has been devoted over the past decade to better characterize Middle Palaeolithic lithic techno-complexes (LTCs) in this region, the extent to which they reflect cultural groups still remains unclear. In this respect, integrating other forms of archaeological evidence could provide valuable insights on the cultural significance of late Middle Palaeolithic industrial variability. The site of Combe-Grenal (Dordogne, France) has yielded consistent evidence of mineral pigment use throughout the upper part of the sequence. Here we explore whether mineral pigments might be embedded with an indexical meaning and if changes in pigment exploitation potentially reflect cultural changes. We combined a microscopic use-wear approach with SEM-EDS, pXRF, and XRD analyses of 73 pigment fragments from layers 26 to 11 in order to reconstruct the different stages of their acquisition and use (provenance, selection, processing, function). Our results show manganese oxides to have been used in the lower layers of the Quina LTC, while red and/or yellow iron oxide pieces were employed during the Discoid and Discoid/Levallois LTCs. This decrease in manganese oxide use correlates with a change in lithic technology and may represent some form of cultural change.

International audience; The exploitation of osseous materials is one of the main innovations associated with the advent of the Upper Paleolithic in Europe. The concept of the Aurignacian, as defined by Abbé Breuil, was used for a long time as a strong argument in favor of a cognitive revolution: its “sudden” appearance was linked to the rapid and systematic diffusion of the Aurignacian culture and the widespread distribution of split-based points in Europe, and upheld the idea of a clear biological and conceptual rupture with the Middle Paleolithic. Since then, several factors have contributed to undermining this model. Renewed studies of Aurignacian osseous technology in Western Europe contribute to the ongoing redefinition of the mechanisms behind the construction of the Upper Paleolithic in Europe.Early Aurignacian osseous production was by no means limited to split-based points, and involved a wide variety of activities. The production of the different materials was already well structured and centered around three main spheres: reindeer antlers were mainly used for weapons, bone for the fabrication of domes- tic equipment and ivory was mostly reserved for ornaments.Although osseous technology was identified in some “transitional” groups, it spread and was durably integrated into techno-economical systems during the Aurignacian. It developed gradually in Europe and based on currently available knowledge, appears to have emerged in the Protoaurignacian societies of Western Europe. The emergence of this new technical domain seems to result from the transfer of wood working techniques to osseous materials, undoubtedly partly linked to a sudden shift in environmental conditions in Europe around 40 000 BP. The evolution of osseous production during the course of the first phases of the Aurignacian provides evidence of profound techno-economic changes, which, backed up by data from lithic studies, reveals powerful sociological changes during the transition between the Middle and Upper Paleolithic.

The rich record of Aurignacian graphic arts from sites in the Vezere Valley of SW France holds a key place in our understanding of systems of representation in the European Early Upper Paleolithic. One of the main sites yielding representational objects is Abri Cellier, which has long been on the short-list of major art-bearing sites attributed to the European Aurignacian. Collie's 1927 excavations yielded 15 engraved and/or pierced limestone blocks that have served as a key point of reference for the study of Aurignacian art in SW France. As part of a broader re-excavation of key Aurignacian sites in the Vezere Valley, we returned to Abri Cellier in 2014, with detailed archives in hand, in the hopes of finding intact deposits that would allow a better understanding of the archaeological sequence at the site and its relationship to other Aurignacian sites in the so-called "classic zone." While disappointingly little is left of the site, the 2014 season allowed the addition of 16 new engraved, painted or pierced blocks to the 15 already known from the 1927 excavations. We present here a brief history of excavations at the site, a stratigraphic analysis, an overview of archaeological materials recovered, a series of 14C ultrafiltration dates, a brief discussion of the peculiar characteristics of Aurignacian block art in SW France, a detailed analysis of the engraved surfaces of the blocks discovered in 1927 and in 2014 and finally a comparison of the newly-revised Cellier block assemblage with those from other Aurignacian sites in the Vezere.

International audience; We can trace the beginnings of our knowledge of early Upper Paleolithic (Aurignacian) use of fire to the pioneering 1910–1911 excavations at Abri Blanchard undertaken by Louis Didon and Marcel Castanet. At Blanchard, the excavators recognized and described fire structures that correspond in many ways to features excavated more re- cently in Western and Central Europe. Here, we address the issue of heat and light management in the early Upper Paleolithic, demonstrating a pattern that builds on these early excavations but that is refined through our recent field operations. Topics to be discussed include (1) recently excavated fire structures that suggest complex fire man- agement and use, (2) the seemingly massive use of bone as fuel in most early Aurignacian sites, and (3) the anchoring of skin structures for purposes of heat retention with fireplaces behind animal-skin walls. Furthermore, new data on activities around fireplaces make it possible to infer social and organizational aspects of fire structures within Au- rignacian living spaces. The vast majority of early Aurignacian occupations, most of them now dated to between 33,000 and 32,000 BP (uncalibrated), occurred on a previously unoccupied bedrock platform into which the occupants dug their fire features.

International audience; This article proposes a historiographical overview of research carried out on the fracturing of hard animal materials (bone, antler). It covers the observations of fracturing on skeletal remains as early as the 19th century and the identification of its anthropic or taphonomic origins at the beginning of the 20th century. It also looks at the latest research focusing on specific technical and/or alimentary objectives at the beginning of the 21st century. From 2010-2011 the research team 'Ethnologie préhistorique' (UMR 7041, ArScAn) developed a new dynamic relating to the fracturing of hard animal materials within the general programme 'Ressources ani-males: acquisition, transformation et utilisation'. This research benefited from previous studies, with a specific attention to the technical perspective. This article thus focuses on the technical exploitation of bone and antler and the production of potential blanks used for the manufacturing of 'expedient' tools. But inevitably it is necessary to consider the use of bone fracturing for alimentary purposes since it is often thought that bones were primarily fractured to extract the marrow. The different issues regarding the fracturing sensu lato of bone and antler are discussed here (other materials such as shell, wood and ivory are discussed elsewhere in this volume). We do not intend to be exhaustive because the abundance of publications, from the 19th century to the present, is so great that a single book would not be enough.; Le présent article propose un bilan historiographique des recherches sur la fracturation de deux matières dures d'origine animale depuis les premières interrogations concernant sa reconnaissance à partir des restes osseux au xix e siècle, l'identification de son origine anthropique ou taphonomique au début du XXe siècle, jusqu'aux recherches ciblées sur ses objectifs, technique et/ou alimentaire, au début du xxi e siècle. Dans ce but, l'axe de recherche « Ressources animales : acquisition, transformation et utilisation » de l'équipe Ethnologie préhistorique (UMR 7041, ArScAn) a développé, à partir des années 2010-2011, une nouvelle dynamique de recherche sur la fracturation. Les travaux menés ont bénéficié des recherches antérieures, mais en s'inscrivant plus spécifiquement dans une optique très technique. Cet article est ainsi orienté vers l'exploitation technique de l'os et du bois de cervidé et la production de supports potentiels pour des outils dits « peu élaborés ». Mais s'intéresser à cet objectif amène nécessairement à poser la question de la fracturation d'origine alimentaire des os puisqu'on considère souvent qu'ils étaient avant tout cassés dans le but de récupérer la moelle contenue dans les diaphyses. Ce sont les différentes facettes de la fracturation sensu lato de l'os et du bois animal qui sont traitées ici (la coquille, le bois végétal et l'ivoire sont présentés plus loin dans ce volume). Ce bilan ne prétend pas à l'exhaustivité car la profusion des documents est telle, depuis le XIXe siècle jusqu'à nos jours, qu'un seul ouvrage n'y aurait pas suffi.

En 1910, M. Castanet sous la direction de L. Didon entamait les fouilles de l’abri Blanchard (Sergeac, Dordogne). Deux niveaux archéologiques séparés par une couche stérile seront individualisés et attribués à l’Aurignacien moyen sensu H. Breuil (soit Aurignacien I à pointe à base fendue). L’abri Blanchard fait partie des deux ou trois sites ayant livré les plus riches ensembles en matières osseuses pour cette période. Il recèle un important potentiel informatif pour notre connaissance des premières sociétés du Paléolithique supérieur. Mais depuis plus de 50 ans, de sérieux doutes pèsent sur l’attribution chronoculturelle faite par L. Didon, plusieurs auteurs ayant émis l’hypothèse que le niveau supérieur reflète une occupation aurignacienne plus récente. Malheureusement, les fouilles ont été réalisées selon des préoccupations et des pratiques dont découle un matériel archéologique incomplet et sans précision stratigraphique et spatiale. De plus, L. Didon rassembla le matériel des deux niveaux et le vendit par lots à des acquéreurs français et étrangers. Par conséquent, aucune étude d’ensemble n’a jamais pu être entreprise sur le matériel. Parmi ces lots, ceux envoyés aux États-Unis sont les plus méconnus. Au nombre de quatre, ils sont conservés à l’American Museum of Natural History (New York), au Wilson Museum (Castine, Maine), au Field Museum of Natural History (Chicago, Illinois) et au Logan Museum of Anthropology (Beloit, Wisconsin). Parce que l’industrie en matières osseuses y est particulièrement bien représentée, nous avons entrepris d’en mener une analyse approfondie. Cette étude nous a permis de relever la présence de matériel rapportable à l’Aurignacien ancien et récent. En outre, une récente opération de terrain a mis au jour un lambeau de couche, apportant la preuve incontestable de la présence d’Aurignacien récent dans l’abri. La position ainsi que la composition sédimentaire et archéologique du niveau permettent toutefois d’affirmer que ce dernier est en position secondaire. L’étude des collections a mis en lumière le caractère encore très lacunaire de nos connaissances sur l’Aurignacien récent. Il importe de reprendre l’étude des séries et d’engager de nouvelles fouilles afin de tenter de mieux caractériser les industries et reconstituer la chronologie et l’évolution interne de l’Aurignacien du sud-ouest français. In 1910, Marcel Castanet began excavations at abri Blanchard (Sergeac, Dordogne) under the direction of Louis Didon. Two archaeological layers, separated by a sterile one, were recognized and attributed to the Middle Aurignacian (sensu Breuil), today widely known as Aurignacian I with split-based points. Even today, abri Blanchard remains one of the richest sites for this period in terms of osseous artifacts. In theory, the Blanchard assemblage retains considerable potential to contribute to our knowledge of the first societies of the Upper Paleolithic. Nevertheless, for more than 50 years, serious doubts have been raised about L. Didon’s chronocultural attribution, several authors having hypothesized that the upper level reflects a more recent Aurignacian occupation. Unfortunately, Didon and Castanet’s excavations were carried out according to the concerns and practices of another time, resulting in incomplete archaeological assemblages without precise stratigraphic and spatial context. To make matters worse, L. Didon mixed the artifacts from the two levels and sold them in batches to several French and foreign buyers. This fact has made it logistically difficult to undertake a comprehensive study of this important material. Of those parts of the collection that were dispersed by L. Didon, the four sent to the United States and now curated at the American Museum of Natural History (New York), the Wilson Museum (Castine, Maine), the Field Museum of Natural History (Chicago, Illinois) and the Logan Museum of Anthropology (Beloit, Wisconsin), are the most overlooked. Osseous artifacts being well represented in these collections, we have undertaken a thorough analysis, in part to try to infer a chronocultural attribution. This study has allowed us to identify artifacts attributable to the Early and Later Aurignacian. Importantly, a recent field operation at Blanchard has led to the discovery of a fragment of a layer, providing clear evidence of Late Aurignacian in the shelter. However, the position and the sedimentary and archaeological composition of the layer suggest a derived or secondary context. Above all, the analysis of the Blanchard material has highlighted our profound lack of knowledge concerning the Late Aurignacian. It points out the necessity to prioritize the study of other older collections and undertake new excavations in an attempt to better characterize the archaeological material and to reconstruct the chronology and evolution of the Aurignacian in SW France.

International audience

International audience; In 1910, Marcel Castanet began excavations at abri Blanchard (Sergeac, Dordogne) under the direction of Louis Didon. Two archaeological layers, separated by a sterile one, were recognized and attributed to the Middle Aurignacian (sensu Breuil), today widely known as Aurignacian I with split-based points. Even today, abri Blanchard remains one of the richest sites for this period in terms of osseous artifacts. In theory, the Blanchard assemblage retains considerable potential to contribute to our knowledge of the first societies of the Upper Paleolithic. Nevertheless, for more than 50 years, serious doubts have been raised about L. Didon's chronocultural attribution, several authors having hypothesized that the upper level reflects a more recent Aurignacian occupation. Unfortunately, Didon and Castanet's excavations were carried out according to the concerns and practices of another time, resulting in incomplete archaeological assemblages without precise stratigraphic and spatial context. To make matters worse, L. Didon mixed the artifacts from the two levels and sold them in batches to several French and foreign buyers. This fact has made it logistically difficult to undertake a comprehensive study of this important material. Of those parts of the collection that were dispersed by L. Didon, the four sent to the United States and now curated at the American Museum of Natural History (New York), the Wilson Museum (Castine, Maine), the Field Museum of Natural History (Chicago, Illinois) and the Logan Museum of Anthropology (Beloit, Wisconsin), are the most overlooked. Osseous artifacts being well represented in these collections, we have undertaken a thorough analysis, in part to try to infer a chronocultural attribution. This study has allowed us to identify artifacts attributable to the Early and Later Aurignacian. Importantly, a recent field operation at Blanchard has led to the discovery of a fragment of a layer, providing clear evidence of Late Aurignacian in the shelter. However, the position and the sedimentary and archaeological composition of the layer suggest a derived or secondary context. Above all, the analysis of the Blanchard material has highlighted our profound lack of knowledge concerning the Late Aurignacian. It points out the necessity to prioritize the study of other older collections and undertake new excavations in an attempt to better characterize the archaeological material and to reconstruct the chronology and evolution of the Aurignacian in SW France.; En 1910, M. Castanet sous la direction de L. Didon entamait les fouilles de l'abri Blanchard (Sergeac, Dordogne). Deux niveaux archéologiques séparés par une couche stérile seront individualisés et attribués à l'Aurignacien moyen sensu H. Breuil (soit Aurignacien I à pointe à base fendue). L'abri Blanchard fait partie des deux ou trois sites ayant livré les plus riches ensembles en matières osseuses pour cette période. Il recèle un important potentiel informatif pour notre connaissance des premières sociétés du Paléolithique supérieur. Mais depuis plus de 50 ans, de sérieux doutes pèsent sur l'attribution chronoculturelle faite par L. Didon, plusieurs auteurs ayant émis l'hypothèse que le niveau supérieur reflète une occupation aurignacienne plus récente. Malheureusement, les fouilles ont été réalisées selon des préoccupations et des pratiques dont découle un matériel archéologique incomplet et sans précision stratigraphique et spatiale. De plus, L. Didon rassembla le matériel des deux niveaux et le vendit par lots à des acquéreurs français et étrangers. Par conséquent, aucune étude d'ensemble n'a jamais pu être entreprise sur le matériel. Parmi ces lots, ceux envoyés aux États-Unis sont les plus méconnus. Au nombre de quatre, ils sont conservés à l'American Museum of Natural History (New York), au Wilson Museum (Castine, Maine), au Field Museum of Natural History (Chicago, Illinois) et au Logan Museum of Anthropology (Beloit, Wisconsin). Parce que l'industrie en matières osseuses y est particulièrement bien représentée, nous avons entrepris d'en mener une analyse approfondie. Cette étude nous a permis de relever la présence de matériel rapportable à l'Aurignacien ancien et récent. En outre, une récente opération de terrain a mis au jour un lambeau de couche, apportant la preuve incontestable de la présence d'Aurignacien récent dans l'abri. La position ainsi que la composition sédimentaire et archéologique du niveau permettent toutefois d'affirmer que ce dernier est en position secondaire. L'étude des collections a mis en lumière le caractère encore très lacunaire de nos connaissances sur l'Aurignacien récent. Il importe de reprendre l'étude des séries et d'engager de nouvelles fouilles afin de tenter de mieux caractériser les industries et reconstituer la chronologie et l'évolution interne de l'Aurignacien du sud-ouest français. Mots-clés : Abri Blanchard, Aurignacien ancien, Aurignacien récent, sondages, industrie en matières osseuses, pointes à base massive, grattoirs à museau, burins, lamelles Dufour sous-type Roc-de-Combe. Abstract: Which Aurignacians were at Abri Blanchard (sergeac, Dordogne, France)? Data from bone and antler artifacts in American collections and from new field operations. In 1910, Marcel Castanet began excavations at abri Blanchard (Sergeac, Dordogne) under the direction of Louis Didon. Two archaeological layers, separated by a sterile one, were recognized and attributed to the Middle Aurignacian (sensu Breuil), today widely known as Aurignacian I with split-based points. Even today, abri Blanchard remains one of the richest sites for this period in terms of osseous artifacts. In theory, the Blanchard assemblage retains considerable potential to contribute to our knowledge of the first societies of the Upper (1) UMR 7041, ArScAn-Ethnologie

In this paper we report on the discovery in 2007 in archaeological context, of part of the engraved and ocher-stained undersurface of the rockshelter ceiling from Abri Castanet, Commune de Sergeac, Dordogne. The engraved/painted undersurface of the massive roof-collapse block, weighing more than a ton, was in direct contact with the surface of the early Aurignacian archaeological layer onto which it had fallen. A series of six molecular filtration dates on faunal bone from the rock surface are internally coherent and yield a mean age estimate of 32,400 radiocarbon years BP. The clearest engraving observable on the newly discovered ceiling fragment fits morphologically into the category of vulvar images, many examples of which were recovered during excavations at the beginning of the 20th century at Abri Castanet and the adjacent site of Abri Blanchard. This new discovery from Castanet provides an age estimate for those earlier finds, all of which were located within a few meters of the image described here.

En 2007, un fragment de voûte ornée a été découvert, sur le site de l’abri Castanet (commune de Sergeac, Dordogne) lors des opérations archéologiques ce qui n’était plus arrivé depuis 1912 (fouilles de M. Castanet pour L. Didon). La face profondément gravée et peinte de ce bloc d’effondrement, pesant plus d’une tonne, était en contact direct avec la couche archéologique aurignacienne. Une série de six datations par 14C AMS (par filtration moléculaire), réalisée sur des vestiges osseux de faune en contact avec le sommet du niveau d’occupation, donne des résultats cohérents dont la moyenne est de 32 400 BP. Parmi les tracés visibles, sur la surface du bloc, la figure la plus évidente est celle d’une vulve. Cette thématique a été mise en évidence de façon récurrente au cours des fouilles du XXe siècle sur le site de Castanet et sur celui voisin de Blanchard. La découverte de ce bloc et sa datation permettent de recadrer chronologiquement ceux retrouvés à quelques mètres au cours des fouilles anciennes et d’aborder ces manifestations du vallon de Castel-Merle sous un nouvel angle. Here, we report on the discovery in 2007, in perfect archaeological context, of part of the engraved and ocre-stained undersurface of the rockshelter ceiling from Abri Castanet, Commune de Sergeac, Dordogne. The engraved/painted undersurface of the massive roof-collapse block, weighing more than a ton, was in direct contact with the surface of the early Aurignacian archaeological layer onto which it had fallen. A series of six molecular filtration dates on faunal bone from that surface are internally coherent and yield a mean age estimate of 32400 radiocarbon years BP. The clearest engraving observable on the newly discovered ceiling fragment fits morphologically into the category of vulvar images, many examples of which were recovered during excavations at the beginning of the 20th century at Abri Castanet and the adjacent site of Abri Blanchard. This new discovery from Castanet surely provides an age estimate for those earlier finds, all of which were located within a few meters of the image described here.

International audience; Hunting is one of the areas of human activity that sees the most significant changes in the period from 40 000e35 000 BP in Europe. In this respect, the Aurignacian technocomplex shows technical innovations , notably with the fabrication of split-based points (SBP) in antler and the mass production of bladelets, arguably to serve as weapon armatures. Yet, little experiment work has been dedicated to this question. To begin to fill this gap, we have designed an experimental program devoted to testing and assessing the design, manufacture and use of Aurignacian weaponry. In this paper, we present the very first stage of this project, focused on the fabrication of SBP's and particularly the question of the creation of the basal splits, an issue much-debated since the 1920's. From our replicative experiments and comparisons with the rich collections from Abris Castanet and Blan-chard, we conclude that the incision, flexion and cleavage procedure (IFC) applied to SBP's combines the techniques proposed by previous authors. The use of the IFC procedure has been identified in at least 23 sites in SW Europe. Importantly, because this procedure is rigidly conditioned by the physical and mechanical properties of antler, it is unlikely that another technical solution was possible to create the basal splits.

Bone retouchers are the most ancient osseous tools of the European Palaeolithic. They are very frequent on Mousterian sites and persist throughout the Upper Palaeolithic. Several functional analyses have been devoted to them and the most commonly accepted hypothesis proposed is their use for lithic tool retouching by percussion. However, this hypothesis is based mainly on studies of Mousterian pieces while few functional analyses have been undertaken on Upper Palaeolithic bone retouchers. The persistent presence of these “ ad hoc” tools makes their study important. This article presents the results of a techno-functional analysis devoted to the Early Aurignacian bone retouchers from Abri Castanet at Sergeac (Dordogne), northern and southern sectors (layer A and US 131 and below), Grotte des Hyènes at Brassempouy (Landes, complex 2) and Gatzarria at Suhare (Pyrénées-Atlantiques, layer cbcf). These unworked bone tools, including many specimens identified a posteriori among faunal remains, represent a significant part of the studied assemblages’ osseous equipment. There are two categories of retouchers : those on raw bone fragments and those on technical objects. The former, most numerous, are mainly long bone shaft fragments recovered after food operations and used just as they were, without modification. The latter correspond to the use of finished objects like smoothers and awls as well as manufacturing by-products. They bear diagnostic traces of utilisation in the form of linear, deep, short depressions, v-shaped in cross section. These depressions are similar to those that have been described in previous work involving microscopic observation and are compatible with use for lithic tool retouching by percussion. However, unlike Middle Palaeolithic retouchers, where the depressions are perpendicular to the main axis of the piece, Early Aurignacian depressions are often vertical (in combination or not with horizontal ones). This is a characteristic feature of Upper Palaeolithic retouchers related to their positions during use. The vertical depressions imply that the main axis of the retoucher is oriented parallel to the lithic edge during use. Quite obviously, this change in the functioning of retouchers must be linked to changes in flint-knapping processes. To understand this relationship, we explored the effects of changing the orientation of retouchers. One notable difference is their curvature in the transverse and longitudinal axes. The latter is clearly more pronounced than the former, meaning that the retouchers offer a greater overall surface area when used in a parallel orientation. We hypothesized that this orientation was preferred to increase the active surface of retouchers for the retouching of blade products. Indeed, during the Early Aurignacian, the manufacture of blade tools, scrapers in particular, often involved retouching very convex and narrow ends. Orienting the retoucher parallel to the lithic edge would have been a technical solution to compensate for the decrease in the active surface presented by the strong convexity of blade ends. However, within the Early Aurignacian lithic industry, blade ends are not the only items to show strong convexity : the fronts of carinated and nosed scrapers also display them. The use of retouchers in bladelet knapping has not so far been considered, but constitutes a second hypothesis that could explain the particular orientation of Early Aurignacian retouchers during use. T hese two assumptions have been tested by experimental replication. Results show that bone retouchers are effective tools for both blade retouching and bladelet knapping, provided that the weight of the retoucher is adjusted to suit the type of lithic product. In addition, lithic and bone tools produced experimentally fall within the range of variation observed in the archaeological assemblages studied. Finally, although this has not always been necessary, experimentation confirms the usefulness of parallel retoucher orientation to adapt the active surface areas to strong lithic convexity. To date, strong convexity of lithic products is the main factor likely to explain the change in retoucher orientation that occurred at least as early as the Early Aurignacian. Thus, retouchers of this period attest to the duration of an ancient technical process, involving the use of bone for stone knapping. Specimens bearing vertical depressions thus illustrate the adaptation of the retouchers to “ new” lithic technologies. The important role played by retouchers in retouching Mousterian tools and their number within the assemblages studied leave little doubt as to their use in retouching Upper Palaeolithic blade products. However, it is still difficult to determine whether they were in fact used in bladelet knapping. The traces of utilisation on experimental retouchers are quite similar to those on specimens used in blade retouching. An expanded experimental program and analysis of the bone tools with high magnification should facilitate the assessment of morphometric changes in use-wear traces based on activity. In addition, a comparison of technical and functional characteristics of archaeological and experimental lithic products should help clarify the array of hammers used during the Aurignacian., Les retouchoirs en os représentent le plus ancien outillage en matières dures animales du Paléolithique européen. Ils se rencontrent très fréquemment au sein des ensembles moustériens et perdurent tout au long du Paléolithique supérieur. Plusieurs études fonctionnelles leur ont été consacrées et l’hypothèse la plus communément admise est celle de leur emploi dans la retouche de tranchants lithiques. Cette hypothèse repose toutefois principalement sur l’étude de pièces moustériennes alors que les exemplaires du Paléolithique supérieur, en particulier ceux de l’Aurignacien ancien, présentent des caractéristiques légèrement différentes. À partir de l’étude de plusieurs séries de l’Aurignacien ancien (l’abri Castanet en Dordogne, la grotte des Hyènes dans les Landes et la grotte Gatzarria dans les Pyrénées-Atlantiques) et d’une reconstitution expérimentale, nous montrons que les retouchoirs de cette période témoignent d’une évolution de leur mode de fonctionnement, liée aux changements opérés dans le domaine lithique. Nous envisageons également la possibilité de leur emploi dans le débitage lamellaire., Tartar Elise. Réflexion autour de la fonction des retouchoirs en os de l’Aurignacien ancien. In: Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, tome 109, n°1, 2012. pp. 69-83.

First excavated during the 1960's, Le Piage is a key site for the Early Upper Palaeolithic in southwestern France. A recent analysis of the classic lithic assemblages led us to modify two aspects of the published stratigraphic sequence: first, there is no interstratification of Chatelperronian and Aurignacian levels, and second, between the Chatelperronian and Early Aurignacian there exists an industry comparable to the Protoaurignacian as it is defined in the Mediterranean and Pyrenean regions. From 2004 to 2006, we undertook new excavations at Le Piage in order to complete our data concerning these results. This first three-year research program has considerably modified our understanding of the site. This paper integrates the results of this program within the general research theme of the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition and presents some of the results of these first three excavation seasons.; Fouillé dans les années soixante, le Piage est un gisement de référence pour le Paléolithique supérieur ancien du sud-ouest de la France. L'analyse récente des séries lithiques a conduit à réviser l'interprétation de sa séquence archéostratigraphique sur deux points : absence d'interstratification Aurignacien/Châtelperronien/Aurignacien ; présence, entre le Châtelperronien et l'Aurignacien ancien, d'une industrie attribuable au Proto-Aurignacien tel qu'il est défini sur le pourtour méditerranéen et les Pyrénées. Afin de valider ces récentes interprétations et de les préciser avec de nouvelles observations et données de terrain, une reprise des fouilles a débuté au Piage en 2004. Les investigations en cours ont permis de considérablement modifier la vision jusqu'alors traditionnellement admise de ce site. Cet article vise à replacer cette reprise de fouilles dans sa problématique générale, la transition du Paléolithique moyen au Paléolithique supérieur, en rappelant la place singulière du Piage dans ces débats. Il expose ensuite quelques-uns des principaux résultats obtenus à l'issue des trois premières campagnes de terrain 2004-2006.

National audience; L'Aurignacien est associé à une série d'innovations majeures qui caractérisent, plus largement, l'ensemble du Paléolithique supérieur. Cela concerne notamment l'avènement de manifestations artistiques (mobiles ou pariétales), le développement de la parure et d'un équipement en matières dures animales. Notre propos a pour ambition de réfléchir à la façon dont peuvent être abordées certaines des manifestations socio-économiques susceptibles d'accompagner ce profond phénomène d'évolution culturelle. En l'occurrence, concentrant notre travail sur les productions lithiques et osseuses de plusieurs ensembles appartenant à l'Aurignacien ancien des Pyrénées et du Jura souabe, nous cherchons à discuter de la pertinence et de la valeur de la partition, entre équipement domestique et équipement de chasse. Avec l'Aurignacien, il semble que ces deux grands registres d'activités reposent sur la mise en œuvre de chaînes opératoires différentes, faisant appel à des concepts techniques spécifiques. Ils sont en outre intégrés à des stratégies économiques où chacun d'entre-eux tient une place propre, en particulier dans le domaine de l'industrie osseuse. Il serait toutefois trop simple de considérer que cette distinction, effective sur certains plans, recoupe de façon claire une quelconque hiérarchie en termes d'investissement technique et économique.