Blades B S
Department of Anthropology, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA.
J Hum Evol. 1999 Jul;37(1):91-120. doi: 10.1006/jhev.1999.0303.
During the past decade the chronology and hominin attributions of the Aurignacian have been revised or called into question. These controversies have coincided with an increased appreciation for the social complexity of Aurignacian culture in the realms of organic technologies and mobiliary and parietal manifestations of symbolic behavior. Lithic raw material procurement and reduction intensity evidence from Aurignacian occupations at the Vézère Valley sites of Abri Pataud, Le Facteur, and La Ferrassie may reflect complex group mobility strategies. The lithic components under consideration were always dominated by cherts available within a few kilometers radius. Assemblages associated with the early Aurignacian have elevated proportions of cherts from distant sources. Lithic retouch data indicate that some early Aurignacian assemblages reflect greater extent and/or intensity of marginal retouch compared with the later Aurignacian. Lithic reduction data, however, reveal evidence of greater core reduction intensity during the later Aurignacian. Flexible strategies of residential mobility, possibly in response to changes in the subsistence environment, may account for some of the variability between early and later Aurignacian assemblages. Similar shifts in raw material procurement were evidently associated with the Middle Paleolithic in southwestern France. However, Aurignacian populations may have acquired most lithic materials by movement directly to sources, while certain non-utilitarian materials were probably obtained via some form of indirect social exchange. This suggested coexistence of direct and indirect procurement mechanisms serves to distinguish Aurignacian assemblages from earlier Middle Paleolithic deposits and emphasizes that socially-directed intensification was one of the fundamental elements of the suite of cultural changes referred to as the Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition.
在过去十年里,奥瑞纳文化期的年代顺序和人类属性已被修正或受到质疑。这些争议恰逢人们对奥瑞纳文化在有机技术、移动性以及象征行为的可移动和壁面表现等领域的社会复杂性有了更多认识。来自韦泽尔河谷阿布里·帕托、勒法克特和拉费拉西等奥瑞纳文化遗址的石器原材料采购和加工强度证据,可能反映了复杂的群体流动策略。所考虑的石器成分一直以几公里半径范围内可获取的燧石为主。与早期奥瑞纳文化相关的组合中,来自远处来源的燧石比例有所提高。石器修整数据表明,与晚期奥瑞纳文化相比,一些早期奥瑞纳文化组合反映出边缘修整的范围和/或强度更大。然而,石器加工数据显示,晚期奥瑞纳文化期间核心加工强度更大。居住流动性的灵活策略,可能是对生存环境变化的回应,这或许可以解释早期和晚期奥瑞纳文化组合之间的一些差异。法国西南部旧石器时代中期显然也出现了类似的原材料采购变化。然而,奥瑞纳文化人群可能通过直接前往产地获取了大部分石器材料,而某些非实用材料可能是通过某种形式的间接社会交换获得的。这种直接和间接采购机制并存的情况,有助于将奥瑞纳文化组合与更早的旧石器时代中期沉积物区分开来,并强调社会导向的强化是被称为旧石器时代中期向晚期过渡的一系列文化变革的基本要素之一。