CHAPTER FIFTY ONE THE USE OF FLINT ARTIFACTS FROM EARLY NEOLITHIC LEVELS AT ATXOSTE (BASQUE COUNTRY): AN INTERPRETATION OF SITE FUNCTION THROUGH USE-WEAR ANALYSES UNAI PERALES BARRÓN,1 JUAN JOSÉ IBÁÑEZ ESTÉVEZ2 AND ALFONSO ALDAY RUIZ3 1
Basque Government fellowship (PHD) University of the Basque Country (UPV-EHU). Department of Geography, Prehistory and Archaeology.
[email protected] 2 IMF-CSIC, Barcelona, Department of Anthropology and Archaeology.
[email protected] 3 University of the Basque Country (UPV-EHU). Department of Geography, Prehistory and Archaeology.
[email protected]
Abstract This paper presents the results of the use-wear analyses on the Early Neolithic flint stone tools from Atxoste (Vírgala Mayor, Álava, Basque Country). With traceology, it was possible to recognize which kinds of tools were used and which activities were performed with them. According to the results, Atxoste can be interpreted as a logistical settlement (hunting-camp), specialized in the acquisition of (wild) animal resources and fully inserted in a complex strategy of exploitation of the territory based on a dense network of different settlements. Other activities
The Use of Flint Artifacts from Early Neolithic Levels
593
related to long-term occupations have also been recognized, including the presence of some evidence of domestication. To sum up, several points essential for the understanding of the transition to the Neolithic in this region are discussed, inserting this settlement within this complex process. Keywords: Use-wear, Neolithic, lithic tools, rock-shelter, hunting-camp
1. Introduction Intensification in archaeological research in recent decades has provided a comprehensive documentary body, supported by a large number of settlements along the Ebro Basin (basically rock-shelters) with proper stratigraphic and chronological contextualization (Montes and Alday 2012). We, therefore, need to understand the functionality of these specific sites in order to comprehend why human groups chose them and what role they could have played within their economic systems. In order to answer these questions, we have carried out use-wear analysis on materials from the Early Neolithic levels at Atxoste (Layers III and IIIb1), which have been dated to 6220±50 BP (GrN-9789) 7043-7218 cal BP (Alday 2009). By studying the manufacture and use of stone tools, we aim to analyze the relationship between tool design, motion and material worked. Furthermore, studying these tools will permit us to comprehend how work was organized in this settlement, and also how economic and social changes took place in this period. We first describe the underlying Neolithization setting and afterwards evaluate the results of the traceological analysis.
2. Atxoste in the regional neolithization context Atxoste is a rock-shelter located at 800 m.a.s.l. (Alday 1996), at the confluence of complementary ecological areas (the inland zone of the valley and mountain areas). The site is part of a dense network together with other neighbouing rock-shelters that are thought to have acted as logistical sites that were occasionally visited, forming a complex strategy of land occupation in the Upper Ebro valley. The occupations were intense throughout the Mesolithic (Barandiarán et al. 2006; Alday 2005a), and some of them remained even when the Neolithic arrived in the region (Alday 2005b). According to the radiochronology (Fig. 51-2), the Neolithic layers of Atxoste were formed around 5360-5000 cal BC. In this period, the expansion of the Neolithic way of life underwent acceleration, and was
594
Chapter Fifty One
definitively established in the area (Alday 2009). Around the last third of the sixth millennium, we find a confusing picture (Fig. 51-1) in which the use of most rock-shelters and caves shows a decline, coinciding with the growth of new settlements associated with domestication: open air villages with dwellings and burial contexts–such as Los Cascajos (García Gazólaz and Sesma 2001) and Paternanbidea (García Gazólaz 2007)–and specialized sites (caves used as livestock sites) like Los Husos II (Fernández Eraso 2010). Ceramic types (cardial and boquique) also became fully consolidated in this stage in the Iberian Peninsula, and they are both present in the Ebro Basin (Alday and Moral 2011). In the Atlantic watershed, data–normally coming from caves–reveal an exploitation of both coastal and inland resources. Although the C14 dates are subsequent to those from the Upper Ebro Valley (Arias 2007), the connection between both areas has been demonstrated through certain parallels in the pottery, lithic industry, and the exploitation of the same types of flint.
Fig.1. Map of cited sites: Atxoste and its neighbouring settlements
The Use of Flint Artifacts from Early Neolithic Levels
595
Fig.2. Radiochronology of Early Neolithic in the Upper Ebro Valley and the Atlantic watershed carried out with Oxcal 4.1 (Bronk Ramsey 2009): Some settlements are distinguished by colours attending to their main (but not exclusive) function. Settlements in white have not specific function.
596
Chapter Fifty One
Therefore, taking into account that this region was densely populated during the Mesolithic, when the transition to the Neolithic took place, the population involved in this process had to face diverse situations. Thus, identifying the functionality of such sites as Atxoste will help us to explain why this type of settlement was still occupied when the Neolithic was consolidating in the region. This will allow us to reach a more accurate picture of this process.
3. Lithic tools and their uses Functional analysis using a stereomicroscope (Nikon SMZ 800) and a metallographic microscope (Olympus BX50) has allowed us to identify a total of 311 stone artefacts within a collection of 5415 flint elements. In consonance with other assemblages in the Ebro Basin, the laminar technology exploited different types of local flint. Some 50% of used tools are blades or bladelets (with or without retouch) used to carry out a wide variety of activities on different materials. The function of different typological groups: As can be observed (Fig. 51-3), the lithic tool-kit is based on two kinds of stone artefacts: large blades used without retouch and geometrics (principally segments with Helwan retouch). The first group represents 40% of the total number of tools and analysis shows that they worked on a large variety of materials–with the special importance of butchering tasks, but also of (dry) hide working, and tasks related to bone/antler, woody materials and even cereals. Geometrics represent 25% of the assemblage, and they were exclusively used for hunting activities (inserted as projectile points or barbs); as has been proposed for other similar assemblages from the Ebro Basin (Domingo 2005), the Cantabrian coastal area (Ibáñez 2001) and the NW of the Iberian Peninsula (Fernández López de Pablo et al. 2008). It is likely that the backed points were also used following the same patterns. Together with these main tools, a low percentage of other typological groups can be recognized. Among them, other uses can be distinguished: the end scrapers were basically used for processing dry hide and osseous materials; the side scrapers show similar percentages of working with dry hides, wood and osseous materials; notches normally performed work on bone/antler; the scarce number of drills exhibit marks of wood and dry hide working; a backed blade was used for processing hide, a denticulate shows traces related to bone working, and, finally, some non-retouched flakes were used for processing woody materials.
The Use of Flint Artifacts from Early Neolithic Levels
597
Fig.3. Lithic tools used in the Early Neolithic levels of Atxoste
We have to emphasize that many tools were used without retouching, (especially blades, flakes and some scrapers and laminar notches); so, the retouch can be interpreted in terms of recycling or preparing the active zones, as has been documented in other Early Neolithic contexts (Gassin 1999). Therefore, most cutting edges were preferentially used for longitudinal actions on medium-soft materials, whereas retouched zones worked with transversal movements on harder materials; as can be observed in other contemporary assemblages (Gibaja et al. 2010).
4. Worked materials Use-wear analysis has recognized different activities performed at the settlement, which permits us to cast some light on the functionality of this kind of rock-shelter (Fig. 51-4). Hunting activities play a key role, as can be deduced from the high percentage of geometric projectiles and the impact traces on them (Fig. 515), around 20%, and also from palaeontological data that indicate a large
598
Chapter Fifty One
number of wild species and a scarce presence of domestic fauna (Alday et al. 2012b). The processing of animal materials involved three possible tasks: a) those related to processing and consuming hunted animals, identified thanks to traces of butchering and fresh hide working observed on blades; b) those linked to dry hide management (which could be associated with skin softening; either for storing, or for manufacturing different objects), carried out with blades (Fig. 51-5), end scrapers, and side scrapers; and c) tasks for repairing or finishing both bone/antler tools and skin elements, carried out with the short (and normally retouched) active zones of blades, notches, denticulates, etc., which leave few use-wear traces. The processing of plants: this must be associated, on the one hand, with the management of woody materials–probably linked to the last steps of the technical processes of the elaboration of wooden objects–carried out with flakes and blades without retouch, drills with wood-boring traces and some scrapers; as have been documented in other studies (Ibáñez et al. 2007; Gibaja et al. 2010). However, in contrast to Mendandia (Alday et al. 2012b), we have no information about plant fibre scraping tools (probably for basketry). On the other hand, harvesting tasks (most probably of domestic cereals) have been identified through three sickle blade fragments. One of them presents the usual harvesting polish, whereas the
Fig.4. Materials worked by the different stone tools
The Use of Flint Artifacts from Early Neolithic Levels
599
other two show microwear with an abrasive component that can be produced by carrying out different tasks (all of them related to the use of straw for a wide range of activities): cutting cereals near the ground; cutting the straw on the ground after the harvest (maybe for storing ears); and also separating the roots from the rest of the stem before threshing (Clemente & Gibaja 1998; González et al. 2000; Gibaja 2002). The traces, which display a longitudinal distribution, connect these sickles with cereal harvesting and processing techniques which have been documented in the NE of the Iberian Peninsula, SW France (Ibáñez et al. 2008), the Ebro Basin (Alday et al. 2012b)–and some points of the Duero Basin (Gibaja et al. 2012). The presence of these elements should be interpreted as an indicator of the existence of farming activities and can also be associated with the presence of a quern-stone and the scarce presence of domestic fauna.
Fig. 5. 1) Use-wear traces for working dry hide with a non-retouched blade (200X). 2) Impact traces in segment with transversal insertion. 3) Impact traces in a segment with oblique insertion.
600
Chapter Fifty One
Finally, knapping tasks (exclusively involving local flints) are abundant in the settlement, and there are also some imported blades–made in coastal flint–which show similar uses to the other tools. Therefore, the data allow us to think that flint tools were manufactured and used within the rock-shelter. It can, thus, be assumed that the use-wear traces observed on their surfaces would represent the different tasks developed inside Atxoste.
5. Conclusions This paper has presented a number of results that can cast light on the functional behaviour of rock-shelters like Atxoste. To be precise, the usewear analyses of stone tools from the Early Neolithic levels suggest a major role for hunting activities and the processing of animal carcasses. The settlement shares some characteristics with other hunting-camps–such as the large percentages of geometrics and blades with butchering traces– (Philibert 1999), which allow us to confirm the initial hypothesis that proposes an occupation (possibly seasonal but not short) of this rockshelter by a small group mainly for acquiring animal resources. However, a variety of complementary tasks–such as dry hide processing, flint knapping–and the presence of elements like a quern and the abundant pottery, could be associated with longer stays. Furthermore, the presence of sickle blades indirectly demonstrates the existence of new domestic items, which are missing in earlier stages. Nevertheless, it is necessary to reflect on the role that these settlements (especially Atxoste) could play during the neolithization process in the region; taking into account that the information supplied by these sites is partial and imbalanced. As can be seen, a significant renovation in the lithic assemblages and the appearance of new elements (pottery, sickle blades, domestic fauna, etc.) are clearly detected within the archaeological record in the transition towards the Neolithic; but, in contrast, some patterns of continuity (such as the occupation of the same rock-shelters with similar functionality as in the previous stages and the exploitation of the same lithic raw materials) are also identified. It can be assumed that these rock-shelters had been acting as logistical settlements–probably connected with other habitats–following the subsistence strategies pursued by communities with a certain degree of economic and social complexity. An exclusive shelter network is thus hardly feasible to ensure the survival of the population. Therefore, it is coherent to think that other more stable settlements–located in different environments–would receive most of the resources acquired in specialized camps, so storage and conservation tasks
The Use of Flint Artifacts from Early Neolithic Levels
601
detected in rock-shelters like Atxoste or Mendandia would respond to these strategies. Accordingly, stable settlements would depend on the specialized ones, so both sites could be occupied at the same time or in different periods during the annual cycle. All in all, we think that it was around the last third of the sixth millennium cal BC when the neolithization process in this area, which had started a few centuries before, became irreversible (Alday 2012). Therefore, although it is likely that the Pre-Neolithic habitat system was now involved in a process of change, the results obtained show that Atxoste was intensely occupied by human groups during the Early Neolithic, as part of a complex strategy of land exploitation that intensifies and adjusts to new times. The specific functionality (linked to the strategic location and good conditions of the settlement) and the abundant procurement of animal resources could explain why visiting this site was worthwhile, even when the Neolithic way of life was being installed throughout the region. Finally, by the end of the sixth millennium, the settlement was abandoned and occasionally visited either to hunt or to carry out a burial in the Chalcolithic period.
Acknowledgements This research is integrated in a project that involves a full study of the settlement and, particularly, within the project HAR2011-26364 “Las comunidades humanas de la Alta Cuenca del Ebro en la transición Pleistoceno – Holoceno”, funded by the Ministry of Science and Innovation of the Spanish government. We also have to thank the Laboratory of Anthropology and Archaeology at IMF – CSIC (Barcelona) and the Laboratory of Prehistory 1.18A at the University of the Basque Country (UPV-EHU) for allowing us to using their installations to carry out our analysis.
References Alday, A., 1996. Abrigo de Atxoste – Puerto de Azáceta (Vírgala Mayor, Arraia – Maeztu): II Campaña de excavaciones. Arkeoikuska: investigación arqueológica, 1996, pp. 35-43 —. 2005a. The transition between last hunter-gatherers and the first farmers in Southwestern Europe: The basque perspective. Journal of Anthropological Research, 61, pp. 469 - 494. —. 2005b. El campamento prehistórico de Mendandia: Ocupaciones mesolíticas y neolíticas entre el 8500 y el 6400 B.P., Diputación Foral
602
Chapter Fifty One
de Álava. —. 2009. El final del Mesolítico y los inicios del Neolítico en la Península Ibérica: cronología y fases. Munibe (Antropologia-Arkeologia), 60, pp. 157-174. Alday, A., Moral, S., 2011. El Dominio de la Cerámica boquique: Discusiones Técnicas y cronoculturales, in Bernabeu, J., Rojo, M. (Eds.), Las Primeras Producciones Cerámicas. El VI milenio AC CAL en la península ibérica, Saguntum, número extraordinario 12, pp. 6580. Alday, A., 2012. The Neolithic in the Iberian Peninsula: an explanation from the perspective of the participation of mesolithic communities. Zephyrus, LXIX, pp. 75-94. Alday, A., Castaños, P., Perales, U., 2012. Quand ils ne vivaient pas seulement de la chasse : preuves de domestication ancienne dans les gisements néolithiques d’Atxoste et de Mendandia (Pays Basque). L誇Anthropologie, 116, pp.127-147. Arias, P., 2007. Neighbours but diverse: social change in north-west Iberia during the transition from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic (5500 – 4000 cal BC). Proceedings of the British Academy, 144, pp. 53-71. Barandiarán, I., Cava, A., Alday, A., 2006. Ocupaciones en altura durante el Tardiglaciar: la Llanada Alavesa y sus estribaciones montañosas. Zona Arqueológica, 7: 1, (Ejemplar dedicado a: miscelánea en homenaje a Victoria Cabrera), pp. 535-550. Bronk Ramsey, C., 2009. Dealing with outliers and offsets in radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon, 51(3): 1023-1045. Clemente, I., Gibaja, J.F., 1998. Working process on cereals: An approach trough micro-wear análisis. Journal of Archaeological Science, 25, pp. 457-464 Domingo, R., 2005b. Análisis funcional de los geométricos y láminas de Mendandia, in: Alday, A. (Ed.), 2005, El campamento prehistórico de Mendandia: Ocupaciones mesolíticas y neolíticas entre el 8500 y el 6400 B.P., Diputación Foral de Álava., pp. 321-334 Fernández - López de Pablo, J., Gibaja, J. F., Palomo, A., 2008. Geométricos y puntas usadas como proyectiles en contextos neolíticos de la fachada mediterránea. IV Congreso del Neolítico Peninsular, 2, pp. 305-312. Fernández Eraso, J., 2010. La actividad pecuaria en la Rioja Alavesa durante la Prehistoria reciente. Cuadernos de Arqueología Universidad de Navarra, 18, pp. 159-171. García Gazólaz, J., 2007. Los enterramientos neolíticos del yacimiento de Paternanbidea (Ibero), in: Hurtado, M.A. et al. (Eds.), La tierra te sea
The Use of Flint Artifacts from Early Neolithic Levels
603
leve. Arqueología de la muerte en Navarra, Pamplona, Dto. De Cultura y Turismo, Institución Príncipe de Viana, pp. 59-65. García Gazólaz, J., Sesma, J., 2001. Los Cascajos (Los Arcos, Navarra). Intervenciones 1996-1999. Trabajos de Prehistoria Navarra, 15, pp. 199-206. Gassin, B., 1999. La structure fonctionelle des industries lithiques du complexe Chasseén en Provence. XXVI Congrés préhistorique de France. Le Néolithique du Nord-Ouest méditerranéen. Carcassonne, septembre 1994, pp. 119-128. Gibaja, J.F., Cortés, M., Simón, M.D., 2010. La función del utillaje neolítico: el ejemplo de la cueva de Nerja (Málaga). SPAL, 19, pp. 97110. —. 2002. Las hoces neolíticas del noroeste de la Península Ibérica. Préhistoires Méditerraneénnes, 10-11, pp. 83-96. Gibaja, J.F., Estremera, M.S., Ibáñez, J.J., Perales, U., 2012. Instrumentos líticos tallados del asentamiento neolítico de La Vaquera (Segovia) empleados en actividades agrícolas, Zephyrus, LXX, julio-diciembre 2012, pp. 33-47 González, J.E., Ibáñez, J.J., Peña, L., Gavilán, B., Vera, J.C., 2000. El aprovechamiento de los recursos vegetales en los niveles neolíticos del yacimiento de los Murciélagos (Zuheros, Córdoba). Estudio arqueobotánico y de la función del utillaje. Complutum, 11, pp. 171189. Ibáñez, J. J., 2001a. La función de los útiles de sílex en el yacimiento de Pico Ramos (Muskiz , Bizkaia). Isturitz, 11, pp. 245-257. Ibáñez, J.J., González, J.E., Rodríguez, A., 2007. The evolution of technology during the PPN in the Middle Euphrates : A view from usewear analysis of lithic tools, in: Binder, D., Briois, F. (Eds.), Systémes techniques et communautés de Néolithique précéramique au ProcheOrient, pp. 153-165. Ibáñez, J.J., Clemente, I., Gassin, B., Gibaja, J.F., González, J.E., Márquez, B., Philibert, S., Rodríguez, A., 2008. Harvesting technology Turing the Neolithic in South-West Europe, in: Longo, L., Skakun, N. (Eds.), Prehistoric Technology 40 years later, Semenov Simposium, BAR International Series, 2008, pp. 183-195. Montes, L., Alday, A., 2012. Enredados en la malla neolítica de la cuenca del río Ebro. Redes, continuidades y cambios, in M. Borrell, F. Borrell, J. Bosch, X. Clop, & M. Molist (Eds.), Xarxes al Neolític. Circulació i intercanvi de matéries, productes i idees a la Mediterránia occidental (VII-III mil.lenni aC) pp. 51-60. Philibert, S., 1999. Modalités d´occupation des habitats et territoires
604
Chapter Fifty One
mésolithiques par l´analyse tracéologique des industries lithiques: l´example de quatre sites saisonniers. In: L´Europe des derniers chasseurs, 5, Colloque international UISPP, septembre 1995, pp. 145155
