Levantine Aurignacian Technology and Subsistence

Originally funded by a dissertation improvement grant from the National Science Foundation, grant no. BCS-0080079, the purpose of this project is to further examine the material remains and subsistence of the Levantine Aurignacian.  Before this project, the Levantine Aurignacian was largely ambiguous, and was the source of some disagreement among various archaeologists in terms of what it represents.  The Levantine Aurignacian was named after the same industry in Europe, which is largely associated with the culture first anatomically modern humans entering into a land inhabited by Neanderthals and eventually replacing this native archaic stock.  The issues of hominid replacement and modernity are missing from the Levantine Aurignacian, as it is found after a local variant of the initial Upper Paleolithic (Ahmarian), and presumably well after Homo sapiens sapiens replaced Archaic humans in this area.

Map of study areas examined in this project.

The purpose of Stage 1 of this project was to examine the stone artifacts from Levantine Aurignacian assemblages excavated at various times in the past, using a detailed methodology to reconstruct the reduction sequence of each assemblage, reveal discrepancies and similarities among the assemblages, address which assemblages should and should not be called 'Levantine Aurignacian', and search for any variables that may have influenced the variability discovered within the sample.

Lithic characteristics of the Levantine Aurignacian, according to the frequency of citations in peer-reviewed articles.

The Levantine Aurignacian is characterized by thick, steep scrapers, particularly nosed and shouldered varieties, carination, a thick flake technology, multifaceted burins, and bone/antler tools.

One of the reasons why this issue remains unresolved is a basic confusion of what the Levantine Aurignacian represents. While some researchers have clearly associated the Levantine Aurignacian with a prehistoric culture, possibly from Western Europe, others have referred to it in more general terms, as a 'tradition'.  It has been difficult to pinpoint the scale of the Levantine Aurignacian because the published assemblages were analyzed with different techniques and present various levels of details. 

To resolve some of this ambiguity, Stage 1 of this project seeks to reconstruct the reduction strategies of the relevant assemblages, using a consistent and detailed method of analysis that will allow direct comparison. With some understanding of the reduction sequences, it is possible to classify the assemblages at the scale of lineage and industry, and then identify potential sources of this variability, such as developmental changes revealed through chronological information, or adaptive responses to environmental and/or demographic stress, as reflected in technological strategies. In short, the groundwork has not yet been laid to allow us to clearly conceive the Levantine Aurignacian. Before addressing broader issues such as the migration or diffusion of early modern human culture, it is necessary to identify the precise nature of the archaeological remains, and how they pattern on a local scale.

Assemblages were sampled from the Mediterranean woodlands (Ksar Akil XIII-VI, Hayonim D, Sefunim 8), the Jordan Valley (Fazael IX and Nahal Ein Gev I), and the Negev Highlands (Ein Aqev, D27A, Arkov, Har Horesha I, G11, and K9A) (Figure 1). This sample encompasses most of the Upper Paleolithic, from ca. 30,000 BP to ca. 20,000 BP. 

Hayonim Cave in the Mediterranean Woodlands,

Galilee Region, Israel

Most of the assemblages in this sample belong to a single complex/lineage, which is characterized broadly as a flake-oriented technology.  While blades and bladelets were produced at some of these assemblages, sometimes in large numbers, the technology, on the whole, is oriented toward relatively thick blanks that are less than twice as long as they are wide. 

While a flake technology is important at most of the sampled assemblages, blade and bladelet production was also present, and was practiced in earnest at a few of the assemblages.  It is necessary to consider carinated items when discussing core technology for the sampled assemblages.  That carination is related to twisted bladelet production is becoming more apparent as this issue is further researched. 

Using the information from various analyses, such as scar pattern complexity, blank profile, and length-width ratios (Williams 2003), some generalizations can be made about the reduction sequences for the sampled assemblages.  Most assemblages have multiple reduction strategies, where flakes were produced with one strategy, and blades and/or bladelets were produced with another strategy.  There are only two assemblages with a single reduction strategy (Fazael IX and Nahal Ein Gev I), which was solely oriented toward flake manufacture.  Of the blade-bladelet producing reduction strategies, one was geared toward the manufacture of incurvate blanks, while the other produced blanks with twisted profiles.

Classificatory scheme for the sampled assemblages.

Project Stage 2 - Developing an Explanatory Framework for the Industrial Variability

With the assemblages set within a classificatory framework, it is now possible to search for what might be influencing the perceived similarities and differences among the assemblages.  The first avenue of inquiry involves potential influence of environmental conditions on the material record.  Lithic technology might be closely related to social entities, yet the resolution of the existing archaeological record during this period is not sufficient to allow conclusions to be drawn about social entities.  The highest resolution this study was able to discern from the lithic artifacts was industrial variability.  Certainly social/cultural issues must be sought at the phase/facies level.  So it is necessary to work with the information at hand.  An attempt is being made to search for broad relationships between technology and the environment. 

Climatic proxies for dated assemblages (calibrated), revealing warm/cold fluctuations (line), and a generalized view of moisture (shading) during the Upper Paleolithic.

Current research is centered on issues of increasing intensification near the end of the Upper Paleolithic in response to deteriorating climate and demographic stressors.  Microlithization seems to be one response to these stressors, and may be reflected in this study.