The beginnings and diversity of Levallois methods in the early Middle Palaeolithic of Central Europe
Introduction
Levallois technology is associated with the development of mobility strategies, profound changes in mentality and social organization (e.g. Hayden, 1993, Davidson, 2002, Wynn and Coolidge, 2004, Eren and Lycett, 2012). Hence, it is not surprising that the issues of the origin of Levallois technology as well as the causes of its diversity attract researchers' special interest. One of the key questions is the number of sources of Levallois' innovation (Tuffreau, 1995, Kozlowski, 2003, White and Ashton, 2003, Hopkinson, 2007 and others). Can we still talk about one source of Levallois technology (so-called monocentric model) (e.g. Foley and Lahr, 1997), or should we assume the involvement of several sources, corresponding to different eco-cultural units (the polycentric model) (e.g. Hublin, 2009).
Another issue concerns the mechanism of the emergence of Levallois innovation. If we assume the monocentric model, the origin should be sought, according to the traditional scheme, within the Acheulean industry, in the process, for example, of the alteration of a handaxe to a core (Copeland, 1995, Tuffreau, 1995, etc.). This concept is based on recognizing a number of similarities between flakes from bifaces' shaping and flakes from the reduction of Levallois cores. Key features are represented by regular flakes' edges and butt configuration as well as the pattern of negatives on the dorsal side. Moreover, the similarities can be seen in the configuration of Levallois cores in relation to the base parts of handaxes (see Copeland, 1995). If we choose the polycentric model, we must take into account a variety of mutations that contained a wide range of predetermined products (White and Ashton, 2003) even outside the Acheulean industry (Kozlowski, 2003).
The next problem is the chronology of the implementation of the Levallois methods. The proponents of the gradual development seek its origin at sites dated to the beginning of the Middle Pleistocene or even earlier (e.g. Copeland and Hours, 1993). Walker and his colleagues believed that the first occurrence of reduction similar to Levallois technology could be dated to the late Early Pleistocene. This idea is based on the redating of finds from Cueva Negra del Estrecho del Río Quípar, Murcia, Spain (Walker et al., 2013). The consequence of this is the assumption of the use of the innovative technology by both Homo heidelbergensis as well as Neanderthals (Endicott et al., 2010). Some researchers believe, however, that the implementation of the Levallois technology happened a little later and that it was a fast process (Foley and Lahr, 2003).
The aim of this paper is to answer a few questions related to the origins and diversity of the Levallois technology in Central Europe (CE). It is essential to answer the question concerning when it was used and what kind of Levallois methods were in use in this part of the continent. Are we dealing here with several patterns used independently, or rather a concept or concepts that allowed for variability and flexibility in the mode of production? A question concerning the potential sources of the Levalloisian in CE was also raised. Were the Acheulean groups of hunters and gatherers its only promoters, or should other sources also be considered?
The author was prompted to undertake this subject by the possibility of the artefacts' reconsideration in natura. Assemblages with greater numbers of artefacts were studied, including finds from the sites of Markkleeberg and Zwochau. Smaller assemblages were also the subject of study, such as those from Kůlna cave (Czech Republic), Biśnik cave (Poland) and Hôrka Ondrej (Slovakia). The aforementioned sites are dated to between MIS8 and MIS6. It is thought that they are connected with appearance of the Levallois technique in Central Europe (Cyrek et al., 2010). Clarifying the chronological data of some sites with evidence of use of the Levallois technology, as well as the recent discovery of new sites contained well preserved clusters of artefacts were very encouraging in this respect. Without doubt, a significant role was played by progress in work on the issue of technologies that has occurred in the last two decades, when attributes of the Levallois, discoidal, Quina and other methods were re-defined (Van Peer, 1991, Van Peer, 1992, Boëda, 1994, Boëda, 1995a, Boëda, 1995b, Peresani, 2003).
This all contributed to the opportunity to present new results. Among other findings, it was concluded that at the oldest CE sites the Levallois technology is diverse, not only due to raw material constraints or the impact of environmental factors, but also to the technical capacity of the system. Studies also suggest that the Levallois technology in CE may have come from different sources. This confirms only partially the validity of the classic idea that Acheulean was the source of the distribution of the Levallois technology. A number of the CE sites with early manifestations of the use of the Levallois technology are located outside the dense Acheulean settlement zone. It is possible that the Levallois technology known from the Vistula basin or Carpathians arrived from the southern or southeastern part of Europe or western Asia. No arguments in favour of the local evolution in CE have been found yet.
Considering the chronology of the emergence of the Levallois technology in Europe, two periods can be distinguished. The first period is characterized by the incidental appearance of signs of the small-scale use of predetermined methods in different places. The second period, which begins either in MIS8, or even in MIS7 and 6, is characterized by the rapid and widespread of the technology in question in various forms. The slightly later appearance of the Levallois technology in CE probably results from the fact that this area was not visited as often as the other territories because of its proximity to the glacial centres.
In this article, data from sites excavated both systematically and temporarily in the eastern part of Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic were considered (Table 1; Fig. 1). Some have been dated by means of radiometric methods or conventional stratigraphy to the end of the Middle Pleistocene, covering MIS8–MIS6. In the study of artefacts' assemblages, the commonly used methodology of the technical attributes of Levallois products and waste descriptions were applied, which resulted from the experiments of different authors and my own.
Section snippets
Concepts of the beginnings of the Levallois technology in Europe
An essential part for a discussion on the emergence of the Levallois technology is an answer to the question of how and where it established. Because this subject has been raised by at least 4 generations of archaeologists, it is currently difficult to ignore the older concepts, especially as some of their elements are still valid.
In the first period, which ended in the 1980s and 1990s with the introduction of the technological paradigm (Chazan, 1997), the sources of the Levallois technology as
Materials and methods
The analysis is based on data obtained from sites located between the Elbe River basin and the Vistula River basin (10°28′ E−20°23′ E). The southern border is formed by the Carpathians and the Bohemian Massive (Fig. 1). In this vast area, remains with traces of the Levallois technology are known from open-air sites located in river valleys (e.g. Ehringsdorf, Markkleeberg, Zwochau, Hôrka-Ondrej or Racibórz Studzienna 2) as well as from cave sites (e.g. Biśnik Cave and Kůlna Cave)(see Table 1).
Geographical and chronological data
The chronology of the beginnings of the Levallois technology at the end of the Middle Pleistocene in CE is based on a combination of numerical dating (OSL, 230Th, 234Th, Th/U, TL, U Series) with biostratigraphical and stratigraphical data (e.g. till sequences)(Fig. 2).
Discussion
Returning to the issue of the causes of the methods' variation in CE, several questions have to be asked. For the distribution of the complex core reduction methods, the diversity of raw material quality and the size as well as the reduction system dynamics is of great importance. The widespread use of the Levallois technology is also strongly linked with the propagation of mental patterns; hence, the issue of cultural diversity must also be addressed at this point. When discussing this issue,
Conclusions
The Levallois methods that developed in CE in the late Middle Pleistocene are very similar to the schemes described for this period in other areas of Europe. Their origin is currently not clear, but the fact that in CE the predetermined technologies could have been implemented from both Acheulean centres as well as from areas where flake and pebble tools industries dominated should be taken into account.
As in other areas, the distribution of Levallois technology in CE was dependent on the
Acknowledgements
This project would not have been possible without financial support, for which I would like to thank the Foundation for Polish Science. For a great deal of help, which allowed for the technological study on assemblages or selected parts of them, I would like to thank the following people: Uwe Reuter (Landesamt für Archäologie mit Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte in Dresden) and Judith Schachtmann (Brandenburgisches Landesamt für Denkmalpflege), Zdenka Nerudová and Petr Neruda (Moravské Zemské
References (159)
- et al.
U-series analyses of the lower travertine at Ehringsdorf, DDR
Quaternary Research
(1986) - et al.
Raw material quality and prepared core technologies in Northeast Asia
Journal of Archaeological Science
(2000) Redefining Levallois
Journal of Human Evolution
(1997)- et al.
Palaeolithic of Biśnik Cave (Southern Poland) within the environmental background
Quaternary International
(2010) - et al.
Hominin variability, climatic instability and population demography in Middle Pleistocene Europe
Quaternary Science Reviews
(2011) Quaternary geology of eastern Germany (Saxony, Saxon-Anhalt, South Brandenburg, Thüringia), type area of Elsterian and Saalian stages in Europe
Quaternary Science Reviews
(2002)- et al.
Using genetic evidence to evaluate four palaeoanthropological hypotheses for the timing of Neanderthal and modern human origins
Journal of Human Evolution
(2010) - et al.
The earliest settlement of Germany: is there anything out there?
Quaternary International
(2010) The cultural capacities of Neandertals: a review and re-evaluation
Journal of Human Evolution
(1993)- et al.
Ebb and flow or regional extinctions? On the character of Neandertal occupation of northern environments
Palevol
(2009)
Early Paleolithic of Korolevo site (Transcarpathia, Ukraine)
Quaternary International
A new technique for precise uranium-series dating of travertine micro-samples
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta
La stratigraphie et le Paléolithique du complexe saalien dans la région de la Saale et de l'Elbe
L'Anthropologie (Paris)
New advances in French prehistory
Antiquity
Mittelpaläolithische kleinförmige Industrie aus den Travertinfundstellen der Zips
Slovenská Archeológia
The chaîne opératoire approach in Middle Paleolithic archaeology
Current Anthropology
Slovensko v staršej a strednej dobe kamennej
Altsteinzeitliche Rastplätze im Travertingebiet von Taubach
Die mittelpaläolithischen Steinartefakte der Sammlung F. Mann im Naturkundemuseum Leipzig
Veröffentlichungen Naturkundemuseum Leipzig
New sequence of EUP leaf point industries in southern Poland
Préhistoire Européenne
Le concept laminaire: Rupture et filiation avec le concept Levallois
Le débitage discoïde et le débitage Levallois récurrent centripète
Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française
Le concept Levallois: variabilité des méthodes
Levallois: a volumetric construction, methods, a technique
Caractéristiques techniques des chaînes opératoires lithiques des niveaux micoquiens de Külna (Tchécoslovaquie)
Identification de chaînes opératoires lithiques du Paléolithique ancien et moyen
Paléo
Principes d'une méthode d’étude des techniques de débitage et de la typologie du Paléolithique ancien et moyen
L'Anthropologie (Paris)
Mousterian cultures in France
Science
Typologie du Paléolithique ancien et moyen
Physical evolution and technological evolution in man: a parallelism
World Archaeology
Le débitage Levallois et ses variantes
Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française
Die Mittelpaläolithischen Funde im Westlichen Mitteleuropa
The transition Lower/Middle Palaeolithic in northwest Germany
El Paleolítico Medio en Europa Central
Zephyrus: Revista de prehistoria y arqueología
Eine neue mittelpaläolithische Fundschicht in Rheindahlen
Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt
Palaeolithic industries from the beginning of the Rissian to the beginning of the Wurmian glaciation
Man
Études de stratigraphie paléolithique dans le nord de la France, la Belgique et l'Angleterre
L'Anthropologie (Paris)
The archaeology of the warm period between the Drenthe and Warte Glacials in Poland
World Prehistory in New Perspective
Culture traditions and environment of early man
Current Anthropology
Are Levallois flakes in the Levantine Acheulian the result of biface preparation?
The Middle Orontes: Palaeolithic flint industries
Middle Paleolithic Pre-Vistulian flint assemblages from Biśnik Cave
The finished artefact fallacy: Acheulean hand-axes and language origins
Variability within uniformity: three levels of variability within the Levallois system
Blade production during the Middle Paleolithic in Northwestern Europe
Diversity of lithic production system during the Middle Palaeolithic in France
A refitter's paradise: on the conjoining of artefacts at Maastricht-Belvédère (The Netherlands)
Biache Saint-Vaast, Level IIA: a comparison of analytical approaches
Palynologické studium sedimentů šošůvské části Sloupsko-Šošůvských jeskyní a spodní časti opĕrného profilu v jeskyni Kůlna. Acta Musei Moraviae
Scientiae Geologicae
Cited by (31)
Evidence of Levallois strategies on cores at Guanyindong cave, Southwest China during the Late Middle Pleistocene
2023, Journal of Archaeological Science: ReportsNeanderthal technological variability: A wide-ranging geographical perspective on the final Middle Palaeolithic
2022, Updating Neanderthals: Understanding Behavioural Complexity in the Late Middle PalaeolithicAcheulean variability in Western Europe: The case of Menez-Dregan I (Plouhinec, Finistère, France)
2022, Journal of Human EvolutionThe oldest phases of the Levallois method and the beginnings of the Middle Palaeolithic at the northern foreland of the Carpathians
2021, Quaternary InternationalCitation Excerpt :The search for the beginnings of the Levallois method outside the Acheulean tradition in this part of Europe, which would be independent of the Western European origin, has already been presented in the literature on the subject (Gladilin and Sitlivy, 1990; Kozłowski, 2003; 2006). A. Wiśniewski (2012, 2014) has also voiced his opinion and presented arguments which confirm in part the local origin of the Levallois method. After its advent in OIS 9 (1 phase), the method may have been disseminated during MIS 8–7 (2 phase).