Europe classic dating emmanuelle chriqui who is she dating

The principal objective of this article is to present the first ever radiocarbon dates done on the Vasconian Mousterian, Proto-Aurignacian and Classic Aurignacian layers of this site. Consequently, at this stage of our own analysis, we cannot exclude the hypothesis that the Cjn1 assemblage could be, at least in part, a mix of Proto-Aurignacian assemblage Cjn2 and Classic Aurignacian assemblage Cbf.It is thus a key site for assessing the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition as well as the techno-typological and chronological relationship between Aurignacian industries. Blade-bladelet blanks thus dominate among the tools, representing 72.5 % of the transformed blanks (74 of 102, not including core tools such as carinated end-scrapers and burins).As such, we decided to date animal bone samples by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) radiocarbon method (with ultrafiltration) from the Classic Aurignacian (Cbf), Proto-Aurignacian (Cjn2) and Vasconian Mousterian (Cjr) layers. The rest of the tools were made on non-standardized blanks obtained from the shaping and maintenance phases of blade-bladelet production.This article presents the site, the selection and dating methodology and discusses the results within the larger western European Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition context, particularly that of the Pyrenean region. Although the assemblages from archaeological layers Cjn2 and Cjn1 both display Proto-Aurignacian characteristics, the Cjn1 assemblage is, in certain respects, more aligned with the Classic Aurignacian.The critical importance of stratigraphy integrity assessments of museum collections of sites excavated before the benefit of geoarchaeological analyses is emphasized here, especially when considering chronometric dating. It is for this reason that Laplace had described and viewed it as a Proto-Aurignacian transitioning towards the Classic Aurignacian. There are only 5 Dufour bladelets out of 50 tools on blades/bladelets and out of 92 tools in total (tabl. Splintered pieces and carinated end-scrapers are well represented (28 % of the tools compared with 2.6 % in Cjn2) and retouch is much more frequently scaled and invasive, thus resembling Aurignacian retouch which is very rare or absent in Proto-Aurignacian assemblages. An initial examination of the Classic Aurignacian assemblage of archaeological layer Cbf revealed that the types of flints used were overall the same as those used in Proto-Aurignacian assemblage Cjn2, but in reverse proportion.The site of Gatzarria (Pyrenean France) was excavated in the 1960s and 1970s by Georges Laplace. It is the richer of two superposed Proto-Aurignacian layers, containing 1737 flint pieces in the sampled set (see below for what is meant by ‘sampled set’).



After detailed evaluation of the stratigraphy of the site based on lithic analyses, projections, as well as refits of the Laplace excavation collection, we determined the most appropriate squares from which to sample and bones to select. Among the retouched blades and bladelets, Dufour bladelets (sub-type Dufour) are the most prevalent (37 out of 74 retouched blades/bladelets) (fig. These are also the most standardized elements in the assemblage in terms of size and morphology, with thickness ranging from 1-2.5 mm and width from 3.5-9 mm.

The results are stratigraphically coherent, with an overlap in chronometric dates between the two early stratified Aurignacian industries : Classic Aurignacian 34 250 ± 550 and 34 400 ± 550 14C BP; Proto-Aurignacian : 36 300 ± 700 and 33 800 ± 550 14C BP. Black squares indicate Proto-Aurignacian or Classic Aurignacian sites, while white squares denote Vasconian sites ; some sites contain both, as shown by split black-white squares. Most of them are broken, with the longest being 32.5 mm.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>