Julien Marie-Anne, Hardy Bruce, Stahlschmidt Mareike C, Urban Brigitte, Serangeli Jordi, Conard Nicholas J
Centre for the Archaeology of Human Origins, Archaeology Department, University of Southampton, Avenue Campus, Southampton SO17 1BF, UK; Unité Histoire Naturelle de l'Homme Préhistorique (UMR 7194), Sorbonne Universités, Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, CNRS, 1 rue René Panhard, 75013 Paris, France; Institute for Archaeological Sciences, University of Tübingen, Rümelinstr. 23, 72070 Tübingen, Germany.
Department of Anthropology, Palme House, Kenyon College, Gambier, OH 43022, USA.
J Hum Evol. 2015 Dec;89:264-86. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2015.10.006. Epub 2015 Dec 1.
Although preservation of Paleolithic faunal assemblages from open-air settings is often poor, the Lower Paleolithic sites of Schöningen provide exceptionally well-preserved mammalian faunal material for investigating hominin/animal relationships. Pleistocene fossil assemblages, however, usually reflect a complex taphonomic history in which natural and anthropogenic processes are often superimposed. A number of examples of osseous finds that resemble tools were recently discovered in the MIS 9 deposits of Schöningen 12 II. Non-anthropogenic agents are known to produce surface modifications mimicking human artifacts and the identification of osseous remains used and/or deliberately modified by ancient hominins is often controversial in such old contexts. Multiple lines of evidence are thus useful for distinguishing between osseous artifacts and "eco-facts". In this paper, the recognition of the use of bone for different technological purposes by late Middle Pleistocene hominins is addressed through a multi-proxy study combining geoarcheology, bone taphonomy, zooarcheology, and use-wear analysis. This allowed the identification of the processes and agents responsible for the formation and modification of the different bone assemblages of Schöningen 12 II. Our analysis points to different types of bones having been likely used as tools. These results expand the diversity of the organic technological repertoire of the Middle Pleistocene hominins, making Schöningen 12 II a remarkable new source of information on osseous technology long before the Upper Paleolithic, the period traditionally viewed as the start of the systematic use of bone tools. Together with other observations of bone tools documented during the Lower and Middle Paleolithic, the results from Schöningen show that archeologists may have underestimated the diversity and importance of osseous technology among archaic hominins.
尽管露天环境下旧石器时代动物群组合的保存情况通常较差,但舍宁根的旧石器时代早期遗址提供了保存异常完好的哺乳动物群材料,用于研究古人类与动物的关系。然而,更新世化石组合通常反映了一个复杂的埋藏学历史,其中自然和人为过程常常相互叠加。最近在舍宁根12 II遗址的海洋同位素阶段9沉积层中发现了一些类似工具的骨质发现物。已知非人为因素会产生模仿人类手工艺品的表面特征,在如此古老的背景下,识别古代古人类使用和/或故意改造的骨骼遗骸往往存在争议。因此,多条证据线有助于区分骨质人工制品和“生态实物”。在本文中,通过结合地质考古学、骨骼埋藏学、动物考古学和使用磨损分析的多指标研究,探讨了中更新世晚期古人类对骨骼用于不同技术目的的认识。这使得能够识别出对舍宁根12 II遗址不同骨骼组合的形成和改造负责的过程和因素。我们的分析表明,不同类型的骨头可能被用作工具。这些结果扩展了中更新世古人类有机技术储备的多样性,使舍宁根12 II成为旧石器时代晚期之前关于骨质技术的一个重要新信息来源,而旧石器时代晚期传统上被视为系统使用骨制工具的开始时期。与旧石器时代早期和中期记录的其他骨制工具观察结果一起,舍宁根的研究结果表明,考古学家可能低估了古代古人类中骨质技术的多样性和重要性。