The recent elaboration and rapid expansion of aDNA, paleoproteomics, and related fields have propelled a profound "biomolecular turn" in archaeology and fundamentally changed the topology of... Show moreThe recent elaboration and rapid expansion of aDNA, paleoproteomics, and related fields have propelled a profound "biomolecular turn" in archaeology and fundamentally changed the topology of archaeological knowledge production. Such a transformation of the archaeological research landscape is not without consequence for long-standing research practices in the field, such as lithic analysis. This special issue derives from the session Old Stones, New Eyes? organized by the authors at the UISPP World Congress in Paris in 2018, which aimed to explore the future of lithic studies. An underlying theme of our session was the felt need to respond to the increasing marginalization of lithic research in terms of its capacity to (1) contribute to the grand narratives of early human evolution and (2) better articulate the role and significance of lithic studies in interdisciplinary human origins research. In this editorial, we briefly outline some of the questions and challenges raised by the biomolecular turn and advocate for a more self-conscious and reflexive stance among lithic experts. We argue that lithic studies fulfill all necessary requirements to act as a basic science for human origins research and that its role and status depends less on technological advances, such as, e.g., improved computing facilities, novel analytical software, or automated shape capture technologies, than on continuous work on the conceptual and methodological foundations of inquiry. We finally draw attention to the unique capability of lithic studies to shed light on the human technological condition and illustrate this potential by introducing and briefly discussing the papers included in this issue. Show less
Jaouen, K.; Richards, M.P.; Le Cabec, A.; Welker, F.; Rendu, W.; Hublin, J.-J.; ... ; Talamo, S. 2019
Isotope and archeological analyses of Paleolithic food webs have suggested that Neandertal subsistence relied mainly on the consumption of large herbivores. This conclusion was primarily based on... Show moreIsotope and archeological analyses of Paleolithic food webs have suggested that Neandertal subsistence relied mainly on the consumption of large herbivores. This conclusion was primarily based on elevated nitrogen isotope ratios in Neandertal bone collagen and has been significantly debated. This discussion relies on the observation that similar high nitrogen isotopes values could also be the result of the consumption of mammoths, young animals, putrid meat, cooked food, freshwater fish, carnivores, or mushrooms. Recently, compound-specific C and N isotope analyses of bone collagen amino acids have been demonstrated to add significantly more information about trophic levels and aquatic food consumption. We undertook single amino acid C and N isotope analysis on two Neandertals, which were characterized by exceptionally high N isotope ratios in their bulk bone or tooth collagen. We report here both C and N isotope ratios on single amino acids of collagen samples for these two Neandertals and associated fauna. The samples come from two sites dating to the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition period (Les Cottés and Grotte du Renne, France). Our results reinforce the interpretation of Neandertal dietary adaptations as successful top-level carnivores, even after the arrival of modern humans in Europe. They also demonstrate that high δ15N values of bone collagen can solely be explained by mammal meat consumption, as supported by archeological and zooarcheological evidence, without necessarily invoking explanations including the processing of food (cooking, fermenting), the consumption of mammoths or young mammals, or additional (freshwater fish, mushrooms) dietary protein sources. Show less
The ability to control fire is a pivotal trait of human culture and likely influenced both the physical and cultural development of our evolutionary lineage. We know fire fundamentally changed our... Show moreThe ability to control fire is a pivotal trait of human culture and likely influenced both the physical and cultural development of our evolutionary lineage. We know fire fundamentally changed our relationship with the world by making previously uninhabitable climates tolerable, inedible foods palatable and more nutritious, and providing a focal point around which complex social relationships could develop. It remains uncertain, however, when and in what manner fire became an integral part of the technological repertoire of our early ancestors. This gap in our knowledge prevents a full understanding of how fire affected our physical form and cultural lifeways. The long and drawn out process by which fire progressed from simply being a close companion in the natural environment to becoming a resource xploited opportunistically by hominins eventually led to greater control of fire. At this point, fire was largely ‘tamed’ through careful maintenance and transported from place to place. Ultimately, likely through a combination of serendipity and experimentation, humans discovered that they could make fire for themselves whenever and wherever they liked, providing a profound new freedom to control their environment, cook their food and produce new materials at will.This article provides an overview of the current state of our understanding of fire use, and more specifically, fire-making in the Paleolithic. There is currently much debate in the field surrounding this issue, and it is stressed herein that the only way to definitively infer any one hominin group could make fire is to identify the tools they used to do so. Therefore, much attention is paid to how archaeologists have attempted to identify fire-making tools in the archaeological record, primarily using experimental archaeology coupled with microwear analysis. Through these efforts, it appears stone-on-stone percussive fire-making using flint and pyrite was a skill first practiced by at least some groups of late Neanderthals, though its origins could be much older. Conversely, preservational problems associated with the wood-on-wood friction fire-making make it extremely difficult to assess the antiquity of this method. Lingering questions regarding early fire-making innovations and possible avenues for future research are discussed. Show less
