8/11/2019 Aggsbach.de-denominating Lamelles During the Early
Paleolithic in SWAsia Examples From Kebara Israel
2/3
a f usif orm appearance and direct, bilateral semi abrupt
retouches on both ends and are mostly
weakly curved, the El Wad category is more diversif ied. El Wad
points may be described as f lat blades o r
bladelets, pointed by f ine, semi abrupt or abrupt retouch on
the dorsal surf ace at only the distal end. A
f usif orm appearance may be present or not . The retouch may
extend continuously or discontinuously along
only one or along both margins of the blade/bladelet. The blanks
have an almost perf ect shape f or an
armature and of ten needed only minimal modif ications o r were
used without any retouch (the lazy
Ahmarians). The po ints may be st raight or even curved or
twisted (no te that the latter at tribute in the
European terminology are reserved f or the Duf our category).
The Abu Halka variant at Ksar Akil has been
defined by Azoury as having an inverse retouch on the proximal
end.
While El Wad Points are common during the Ahmarian between 43-20
k.a. cal BP, they are rare, but not
absent during the short episode of the Levantine Aurignacian at
Kebara and Ksar Akil at ca 36-32 k.a. BP
(http://www.aggsbach.de/2010/09/aurignacian-in-the-southern-levant/
). Early dates for the Ahmarian around
45-40 k.a. cal BP have been published f rom Kebara layer IIIa,
IIIb, and IVb and IV/V, Qaf zeh level 9 and Boker
A and Stratum 17 at Ksar Akil. Other dates are younger: azl,
layer B is dated between 28 and 33 k.a. BP
and at Qseimeh I, dates on ost rich samples give an age o f
circa 34 k.a. BP. At the sites of Lagama IIID, VII
and VIII, Qadesh Barnea 601B and 501, Abu Noshra I and Abu
Noshra II, most of the dates range between
36 and 30 k.a. BP.
The main typological categories of the Aurignacian toolkit
in the Zagrosshow, together with a clear abundance of
bladelet tools, primarily Arjeneh points. These are
defined as bladelets with a nearly rectilinear section, with
short direct retouch limited to the edges to produce a
f usif orm contour, very similar to t he original Font -Yves
points. At Yafteh cave, bladelets were obtained in
dif f erent ways: f rom bladelet cores, f rom ake edges and
f rom the proximal ends o f carinated burins. Classic
Dufour bladelets are also present. The toolkit also
includes Aurignacian blades, sometimes po inted,numerous burins
of dif f erent types, endscrapers on
blades and splintered pieces. In addition to bladelet too
ls,
tools unique to the Aurignacian carinated endscrapers
and burins are also present. The calibrated C-14 dates,
using Bayesian statist ics, show a s ingle chronological
signal, between 37 and 39 cal BP near the Heinrich 4
event. In addition radiometric ages from Yafteh overlap
some of the Early Ahmarian dates at Kebara and Ksar Akil.
Based on these data Ot te recently proposed: Based on the
available archeological and chronologicaldataset, the f ollowing
hypothesis is proposed. It is generally accepted t hat Ahmarian and
Levantine
Aurignacian are dist inct technocomplexes. From a phylogenetic
point of view, Yaf teh could then be seen as
a hypothetical taxonomic unit between technological traditions
derived from the Early Ahmarian and the
Levantine Aurignacian.
During the Protoaurignacian of S-Europe, Bladelets were produced
from pyramidal / prismatic cores,
which were also used for blade production. Several sub-types of
lamelles have been described: Firstly,
Large Lamelles Duf our (subtype Duf our) with s traight o r only
slightly curved prof ile. If tipped and alternately
retouched they are also called Krems Point (o ther researchers
subsume the Krems Point category under
the St Yves points with alternately retouches) and secondly,
large St. Yves Points, often with invasive
retouches. The tools of the classic Aurignacien ancient are
absent.
The Mediterranean Protoaurignacian (at Castelcivita) and
Uluzzian
(at Castelcivita and Cavallo) and similar are f ound below
the
Campanian Ignimbrite (CI) Y-5 tephra and are t herefore older
than 39
http://www.aggsbach.de/2010/09/aurignacian-in-the-southern-levant/
8/11/2019 Aggsbach.de-denominating Lamelles During the Early
Paleolithic in SWAsia Examples From Kebara Israel
3/3
k.a. cal BP. These data are affirmed by the fact that
pretreated-AMS
dated-C-14 samples at of the Protoaurignacian in Italy situate
this
techno complex at ca. 41-40 k.a. cal BP.
Last but not least, there are analogies to t he EUP of the
Levant and
S-Europa, coming f rom the Don-area: Kostenki 14(Markina
Gora)
The oldest cultural level at this site contains a small
lithic
assemblage (n=340) with no cores and very f ew too ls (ca
1%);
however, among these to ols are highly characteristic
Dufourbladelets similar to examples f rom the Protoaurignacian. The
anchor
f or the early upper Paleolithic Kos tenki chronology is again
the Y5
tephra. The lowest EUP at Kos tenki is immediately before
and
incorporated within the Y5 tephra and therefore ro ughly
coincident
with the Italian Protoaurignacian.
It is f ascinating to see the rapid development o f bladelet t
echnologies over such a vast area almost at the
same time (http://www.aggsbach.de/2014/01/13656/). The important
quest ions: monocentric or po lycentric
origin-and if monocentric origin: where did it happen?, and: why
did it happen?-have to be resolved in the
future..
http://www.aggsbach.de/2014/01/13656/
