The adoption of bone tool technology in the Early Upper Palaeolithic of Europe by Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans has been the focus of considerable debate. In particular this debate has focused on the origins of the technology and the possible implications for the extinction of Neanderthals. This dissertation examines the context of element selection for use as raw material to produce bone tools, related to prey species in the Châtelperronian of the Grotte du Renne, Arcy-sur Cure and the Aurignacian of Abri Cellier, Dordogne. Current research indicates that there was little difference in the subsistence organization of Neanderthals and modern humans. As a more nuanced view of Neanderthal behavior emerges from recent studies, it is becoming apparent that differences between the two hominins are a matter of degree rather than absolute difference. The faunal analysis of the two assemblages in this dissertation found that both Neanderthals and modern humans were pursuing a foraging strategy to obtain prime age herbivores for food. Locally available taxa were taken. Carcasses were processed for meat, marrow and fat. Both assemblages show a preference for non-marrow bearing long bones or long bone shaft fragments to make tools. The raw material was chosen with reference to the mechanical properties of the bones, which exhibit elasticity necessary for use as awls or hide scrapers. Raw material was a by-product of the larger subsistence strategy. There is a difference in the use of antler. This is not used by Neanderthals. In the Aurignacian, it appears that the amount of antler represented by the points and tools at Abri Cellier could be obtained as part of a general foraging strategy. The appearance of bone tools in the Early Upper Palaeolithic has been argued as evidence for `modern' behavior. It might be more profitable to view the adoption of this new technology as a response by two different but related populations to particular ecological problems. It could be argued that the archaeological visibility of bone tools reflects an increasing investment in the production of more effective clothing by both Neanderthals and modern humans.

In the last ten years it has become apparent that the radiocarbon dating method can significantly underestimate the age of samples > 25 ka BP because routine pre-treatment protocols may not remove sufficient contaminants. In response, new pre-treatment protocols have been proposed, and two in particular, ultrafiltration of bone collagen and ABOx-SC of charcoal, show promise. This thesis has tested whether these methods effectively remove contaminants without adding carbon in the laboratory. Subsequently it used them, alongside careful selection of humanly modified material and Bayesian statistical analysis, to test the radiocarbon-based chronology of the Iberian Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition. Both protocols were found to effectively remove environmental contaminants, but add small amounts of laboratory-derived carbon. Using known age standards, a correction has been calculated for the ultrafiltration protocol to counter the effect of the laboratory-derived carbon. A similar correction could not be made for the ABOx-SC protocol due to uncertainties in the age of the standards and underlying chemical processes. However, the effect of such contamination did not have a significant effect on the chronologies developed for the sites examined in this thesis. 96 new radiocarbon dates have been obtained from the Iberian Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition. A further 50 dates recovered from the literature and are regarded as reliable. The most alarming finding of this thesis is that routine pre-treatment protocols may cause dates to be underestimated by more than 10 ka ¹⁴C years. The implication of offsets of this magnitude in Iberia is significant: whereas a prolonged survival of Neanderthals south of the Ebro valley has been observed in the published dataset, this study could not replicate such ages. Preservation did not allow the arrival of anatomically modern humans to be dated in the south. However, using typological arguments and the chronology constructed for the north of the Peninsula, it is unlikely that they were present in this region before 38,080 – 36,680 cal BP (95% probability). This implies a temporal gap of at least 4,490 – 12,740 cal years, although it is unclear whether this is due to taphonomic factors or is a real period of abandonment. This pattern contrasts to northern areas of the Peninsula where the Aurignacian appears at 42,330 – 40,980 cal BP, shortly postdating the start of the Châtelperronian and end of the Mousterian. It is hoped that the chronology produced will warn against the use of radiocarbon dates produced using poor pre-treatment protocols and has laid the foundations from which a more accurate and more precise chronology can be built in the future.

En Europe occidentale, le passage du Paléolithique moyen au Paléolithique supérieur voit la conjonction de plusieurs évènements majeurs parmi lesquels figure le développement de comportements dits « modernes ». Si la mise en place du Paléolithique supérieur est fréquemment discutée sous l’angle des cultures matérielles, les modalités d’exploitation du gibier ne sont, faute de données suffisantes, que rarement intégrées aux discussions. Dans ce travail, les restes fauniques de quatre gisements du Sud-Ouest de la France fréquemment intégrés dans les discussions sur l’émergence du Paléolithique supérieur (la Quina aval, Roc-de-Combe, les Abeilles, Isturitz) ont été analysés. Le corpus étudié se compose de plus de 37 000 pièces, issues de neuf séries, et documente les périodes du Châtelperronien, du Protoaurignacien et de l’Aurignacien ancien. Ce travail s’est intéressé à décrire les tratégies de chasse (profils de mortalité et saisonnalité discutés en regard de l’éthologie des espèces, modalités de transport du gibier) et les modalités de traitement du gibier (fréquence, localisation et signification des traces de boucherie et des traces techniques). Un changement important dans les modalités d’acquisition du gibier apparaît par rapport au Moustérien, remettant en cause les modèles précédemment avancés sur les stratégies de chasse. L’analyse des stries de découpe identifie, elle, des différences dans les gestes de boucherie par rapport aux phases plus récentes du Paléolithique supérieur. Avec le début du Paléolithique supérieur, l’exploitation de la faune se complexifie : le gibier ne répond plus seulement à des besoins alimentaires, mais également techniques et symboliques. L’analyse intégrée des déchets alimentaires et des pièces d’industrie et de parure montre que la sélection des supports d’industrie influe sur les choix d’acquisition et de traitement du gibier, attestant d’une forte imbrication des sphères alimentaire, technique et symbolique. Ces données, confrontées aux autres marqueurs de la culture matérielle, permettent d’esquisser les contours de plusieurs territoires et de discuter des systèmes de mobilité des groupes humains du début du Paléolithique supérieur. Ce travail offre ainsi une vision renouvelée des comportements de subsistance lors de l’émergence du Paléolithique supérieur. / In Western Europe, several major events occurred during the Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic transition, including the development of modern behavior. The emergence of the Upper Palaeolithic is most of the time discussed through material culture analyses but, due to a persistent lack of data, less often through zooarchaeological studies. The faunal remains studied in this work come from four sites of southwestern France frequently integrated in the debates surrounding the appearance of the Upper Palaeolithic (la Quina aval, Roc-de-Combe, les Abeilles, Isturitz). The corpus is constituted by more than 37,000 artifacts from nine assemblages attributed to the Chatelperronian, Protoaurignacian and Early Aurignacian. This work comprises descriptions of hunting strategies (discussion on mortality profiles and seasonality data, comparision with species ethology) and carcass processing techniques (by analyses of the frequencies, localization and signification of butchering and technical marks). Previous models on predation strategies are challenged by the identification of an important shift in hunting practices between the Mousterian and the Early Upper Palaeolithic. Besides, observation of cut-marks highlights differences in butchery gestures compared to more recent stages of the Upper Palaeolithic. With the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic, faunal exploitation became more complex, with a technical and symbolic utilization of faunal remains. The integrated analysis of alimentary refuses, bone tools and adornments shows that the selection of blanks had influences in acquisition choices and carcasses processing. Dietary, technic and symbolic spheres appear thus strongly interconnected. These data, coupled with the other markers of the material culture, allowed us to propose the definition of distinct territories and to discuss mobility strategies of Early Upper Palaeolithic human groups. This work thus offers a renewed vision of subsistence behavior at the emergence of the Upper Paleolithic.

Ce travail de thèse intitulé « Contribution à la connaissance de l’Aurignacien du Levant : analyse typo-technologique des industries lithiques de la séquence de Yabroud II (Syrie) » consiste en un bilan bibliographique sur l’Aurignacien du Levant et une étude typo-technologique de l’importante séquence de Yabroud II. L’objectif premier de cette recherche est de discuter de la définition de l’Aurignacien du Levant. Cette définition sera établie en tenant compte de ce qui est connu pour l‘Aurignacien d’Europe d’une part, de l’Aurignacien du reste du Levant et de l’Ahmarien d’autre part. Nous nous appuierons pour ce faire sur l’approche typo-technologique des industries lithiques. / This thesis paper entitled: “Contribution to the Knowledge of the Levantine Aurignacian: a Typo-Technological Analysis of the Lithic Industries of the Yabrud II Sequence” consists of a literature review on the Levantine Aurignacian and a typo-technological study of the important Yabrud II sequence. The main objective of this research is to discuss the definition of the Levantine Aurignacian. This definition will be established by examining what is known as the European Aurignacian, on the one hand, and what is known as the Levantine Aurignacian and the Ahmarian, on the other. To do so, we will build on the typo-technological approach of the lithic industries.

Il y a plus d’un siècle que des recherches préhistoriques sont menées sur une vaste zone de l’Asie du Sud-ouest qui s’étend du Levant au Zagros et au Caucase. Le Paléolithique supérieur y est bien représenté dans des sites en grotte mais également de plein air. Les industries lithiques découvertes dans ces gisements ont permis des études typo-technologiques qui n’ont malheureusement pas toujours été accompagnées de datations absolues et de cadre stratigraphique. Dans l’état actuel de nos connaissances, l’Aurignacien semble être la culture du Paléolithique supérieur la mieux représentée dans les chrono-séquences des gisements choisis pour étude. La plupart des recherches paléolithiques en Iran se sont focalisées sur la région du Zagros, c’est pourquoi, afin de combler un no man’s land archéologique, nous avons choisi de travailler sur l’Alborz. Nous nous sommes donc appuyés sur deux sites découverts récemment : Garm Roud (Āmol, Māzandarān), unique site du Paléolithique supérieur en contexte stratigraphique connu dans cette vaste région de l’Iran et daté de 33.878±3300 CalBP et Délazien (Semnān), site de surface qui se situe au Sud de la chaîne de l'Alborz dans le désert central.L'étude typo-technologique de ces deux assemblages nous a permis de pointer des similitudes reconnaissables au niveau des stratégies et des modalités de débitage orientées préférentiellement vers une production lamellaire. Nous avons, a contrario, relevé un certain nombre de dissemblances matérialisées par la présence-absence de certains outils appartenant au fond commun aurignacien. Ces observations confirment ainsi l’attribution de ces ensembles lithiques, notamment celui de Délazian, au Paléolithique supérieur.Enfin, pour terminer notre étude, nous avons comparé les résultats des analyses typo-technologiques des sites iraniens avec celles émanant de sites hors Abortz comme ceux du Levant ou encore, ceux plus éloignés de l’Asie du Sud-ouest. Le constat qui se dégage de notre approche est une évidente hétérogénéité des traditions lithiques à l’Aurignacien qu’il convient d’interpréter en fonction de la nature des sites, des environnements naturels divers et certainement, des gestions différentielles des territoires. / More than a century ago, prehistoric research was carried out over a vast area of south-west Asia extending from the Levant to Zagros and the Caucasus. The Upper Paleolithic is well represented in cave sites but also in the open air. The lithic industries discovered in these deposits have allowed typo-technological studies which unfortunately have not always been accompanied by absolute dates and stratigraphic framework. In the current state of our knowledge, the Aurignacian seems to be the culture of the Upper Paleolithic best represented in the chrono-sequences of the deposits chosen for study.Most Paleolithic research in Iran has focused on the Zagros region, so in order to fill an archaeological no man's land we have chosen to work on the Alborz. We therefore relied on two recently discovered sites: Garm Roud (Āmol, Māzandarān), the only site of the Upper Paleolithic in stratigraphic context known in this vast region of Iran and dated 33.878 ± 3300 CalBP and Délazien (Semnān), site south of the Alborz range in the central desert.The typo-technological study of these two assemblages enabled us to point out recognizable similarities in terms of strategies and debitage modalities oriented preferentially towards lamellar production. On the other hand, we have noted a certain number of dissimilarities materialized by the presence-absence of certain tools belonging to the Aurignacian common fund. These observations thus confirm the attribution of these lithic assemblages, notably that of Delazian, in the Upper Paleolithic.Finally, to conclude our study, we compared the results of typo-technological analyzes of Iranian sites with those from sites outside Alborz such as those of the Levant or those further away from South-West Asia. The conclusion that emerges from our approach is an obvious heterogeneity of the Aurignacian lithic traditions which should be interpreted according to the nature of the sites, the various natural environments and certainly, the differential management of the territories.

The Aurignacian is a contentious time period in paleoanthropology. The myriad social changes which accompany the Upper Paleolithic transition have often become associated with the physical tools which Aurignacian people left behind. One result of this is the current tendency of professionals to use blade technology as an indicator of "modernity," rather than examining how changes accompanying the Upper Paleolithic transition made blades a useful adaptation. Of particular importance is the fact that the adoption of blades coincides with a long distance shift in the system used to procure and transport the lithic raw materials. This suggests that before we can use blades to answer anthropological questions about the Aurignacian, we need to establish the relationship between blade production and the acquisition of exotic raw materials. This dissertation combines an analysis of the lithic collection from the French archaeological site of Abri Cellier with the experimental fracture of lithic raw material samples in order to examine the impact of raw material quality on Aurignacian blade production. The analysis of the assemblage from Abri Cellier demonstrates that Aurignacian blades manufactured on exotic materials were of higher quality than those produced locally. The experimental fracture of raw material samples reveals that the differences in the quality of the exotic and local materials do not sufficiently account for the differences in the quality of the blades produced on them. This implies that the differential transport of high quality final products accounts for the increased quality of exotic blades at Abri Cellier. This research examines a number of new ways to evaluate quality in the archaeological record. More importantly, however, it firmly demonstrates that the acquisition of long distance raw materials was not a prerequisite for blade production in the Perigord. This work will conclude by arguing that blades played a role in increasing the maintainability of a hafted toolkit geared towards meeting the requirements of an increasingly mobile and collaborative Aurignacian population.

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.

La caractérisation des matières premières lithiques est un important moyen d’étude des territoires paléolithiques, permettant d’inférer les modes de déplacement et d’organisation des groupes humains. Le Bassin aquitain est une des provinces archéologiques les mieux documentées d’Europe. Pourtant, certains matériaux depuis longtemps reconnus au sein des collections archéologiques, restent mal identifiés (origine géographique, unicité…). C’est en particulier le cas d’un type de silex dénommé « Grain de mil » par les préhistoriens. Pour combler cette lacune, ce travail s’organise en deux temps :- Une étude pétroarchéologique de ce matériau, axée sur sa caractérisation et la détermination de son origine géographique et géologique. Cette première phase du travail a permis de définir le Grain de mil comme un matériau typique de Charente-Maritime puisque sa formation est liée à l’anticlinal de Jonzac. Elle montre aussi que les critères de sa caractérisation, principalement issus de l’analyse des faciès sédimentaires, peuvent être appliqués lors de l’étude pétro-techno-économique d’une collection archéologique.- Une caractérisation techno-économique des modes de gestion de ce matériau à l’Aurignacien ancien et récent dans les sites nord-aquitains. A l’Aurignacien ancien, les groupes circulent à travers l’ensemble du Bassin aquitain au cours de grands déplacements saisonniers ; il semble que l’exploitation du Grain de mil témoigne d’une faible circulation dans le Nord-ouest du Bassin. A l’Aurignacien récent au contraire, les territoires d’approvisionnements ont centrés sur le Nord du Bassin aquitain mais ouverts à l’Ouest voire au Nord ; le Grain de mil serait alors au coeur de larges réseaux de circulation des groupes. Les moteurs d’évolution des sociétés à l’origine de ces changements de stratégie de déplacement sont ensuite discutés, testant pour cela le rôle des facteurs environnementaux et humains. / Characterising lithic raw materials is an important means of studying palaeolithic territories, allowing modes of mobilityand the organisation of human groups to be deduced. The Aquitaine Basin is one of the best-documented archaeologicalregions of Europe. However, certain materials have long been recognised within archaeological collections without theirgeographic origin or even their uniqueness being clearly demonstrated. This is particularly the case with a specific type offlint, which prehistorians call “Grain de mil”. In order to address these shortcomings, this work was carried in two phases:- a cross-disciplinary study of this material, focusing on its petroarchaeological characterisation and its geographicand geological origins. This initial phase of analysis lead to the definition of Grain de mil flint as a material typical ofthe Charente-Maritime as its formation is tied to the Jonzac anticline. It also shows that criteria for itscharacterisation, which stem mainly from the sedimentological analysis, can be applied to the petro-technoeconomicstudy of an archaeological assemblage.- a techno-economic characterisation of the management of this material during the Early and Late Aurignacian,from northern Aquitaine sites. During the Early Aurignacian, groups move seasonally across the Aquitaine Basin;exploitation of Grain de mil flint seems to indicate little circulation in the north-west of the Basin. In contrast, duringthe Late Aurignacian, provisioning territories centre to the north of the Aquitaine Basin, but open to the west andalso to the north. Grain de mil then appears to be at the heart of large-scale networks of circulations. Finally, theunderlying forces driving these strategic changes in mobility patterns are discussed, evaluating the role of bothenvironmental and human factors.

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal

Négligées ces vingt dernières années, les séries attribuées aux phases récentes de l’Aurignacien ont trop rarement bénéficié d’études modernes, tournées inexorablement vers la recherche du plus ancien Aurignacien et de ses éventuels points de contact avec les dernières sociétés néandertaliennes. De plus, les dernières synthèses et propositions de classification de l’Aurignacien sont fondées sur des données typologiques issues de séries dont l’homogénéité n’a pas toujours été critiquée. La révision taphonomique et techno-économique de séries classiques du Sud-Ouest de la France (Caminade-Est, l’abri Pataud, Roc-de-Combe, Le Flageolet I, La Ferrassie et Combemenue) nous a permis d’entrevoir et d’identifier des variations diachroniques au sein de ce techno-complexe. Sur la base notamment des productions lamellaires, sept phases ont pu être reconnues, renouvelant ainsi notre perception des premières sociétés du Paléolithique supérieur portées par l’Homme moderne. / Neglected past twenty years, the series attributed to recent phases of the Aurignacian have rarely received modern studies, touring relentlessly researching the earliest Aurignacian and its possible contact points with the last Neanderthal societies. In addition, recent proposals for classification and synthesis of the Aurignacian are based on data from typological series whose homogeneity has not always been criticized. Taphonomic and techno-economic revision of classic series from Southwestern France (Caminade-Est, l’abri Pataud, Roc-de-Combe, Le Flageolet I, La Ferrassie et Combemenue) allowed us to foresee and identify diachronic variations in this techno-complex. Based on such bladelets productions, seven phases have been recognized, renewing our perception of the first society of Upper Paleolithic made by modern humans.