The 'Palaeolithic Prospection in the Inde Valley' Project

66 E&G / Vol. 60 / No. 1 / 2011 / 66–77 / DOI 10.3285/eg.60.1.04 / © Authors / Creative Commons Attribution License

E&G Quaternary Science Journal Volume 60 / Number 1 / 2011 / 66–77 / DOI 10.3285/eg.60.1.04

www.quaternary-science.net

GEOZON SCIENCE MEDIA

ISSN 0424-7116

The ‘Palaeolithic Prospection in the Inde Valley’ Project

Alfred F. Pawlik, Jürgen Thissen

Abstract: Theexcavationof20deep test trenchesofPleistocene layers in thequarry IndenbetweenJülich-KirchbergandLamersdorf in2005and2006waspartof the‘PalaeolithicProspection in the IndeValley’Projectof theFoundation“StiftungArchäologie imRheinischenBraunkohlenrevier”.Theywereaimedatfindingandunearthingancient landscape surfacesandpotentialPalaeo-lithicsettlementstructures.InDecember2005,aMiddlePalaeolithicarchaeological layercorrelatingtotheEemianinterglacialwasdiscovered.This layerwas investigated and excavateduntil September 2006within an areaof 3000sqm.About 700 lithicartefactsandpebblemanuportswerefoundtogetherwithevidentfeaturesofpitsandhearths.Threefallen-treestructuresweresituatedinthecenterofthemajorconcentrationofartefactsandwereprobablypartofthehabitation.

The discovered artefacts showed no signs of re-deposition or secondary transport and still maintained their original surfacestructureandsharpedgewithnoorminorpatination.Theywereverysuitableforthesuccessivemicroscopicuse-wearanalysiswhichdeliveredavarietyofremarkableandoutstandingresults.Variousmicroweartracesandresidueswerefoundonatotalof120stonetoolsoutof136artefactsselectedforanalysis.TheresidueswereidentifiedthroughSEMandEDXasbirchpitch.82toolswereeitherusedashaftedimplimentsandfixedwithbirchpitchontoshaftsorwerebeingusedforsuccessivehafting-and-retoolingactivities.Birchpitchistheoldestsyntheticallyproducedmaterialandiscommonlyassociatedwithmodernhumansin the Upper Palaeolithic. The birch pitch residues found on the Micoquien tools of Inden suggest that hafting technologies,useofadhesivesandmulticomponenttoolmakingalreadyexistedintheMiddlePalaeolithic.Thecomplexactionsinvolvedincomposite-toolmakingindicateclearlymodernhumanbehaviour.

(Prospektion Paläolithikum im Indetal)

Kurzfassung: Im Rahmen des Projektes „Prospektion Paläolithikum im Indetal“ der Stiftung Archäologie im Rheinischen BraunkohlenrevierwurdenindenJahren2005und2006imTagebauIndenzwischenJülich-KirchbergundLamersdorfdiepleistozänenDeckschich-ten mittels 20 Baggertiefschnitten sondiert. Ziel war es, fossile Landoberflächen und mögliche paläolithische Siedlungsplätzezu finden und freizulegen. Im Dezember 2005 konnte in der Ortslage Inden-Altdorf eine mittelpaläolithische Fundschicht ausdemEem-Interglazial entdecktwerden,diebisSeptember2006aufeinerFlächevon3000m²archäologischuntersuchtwerdenkonnte. Es fanden sich 700 Steinartefakte und herbeigebrachte Gerölle, aber auch evidente Grubenbefunde und Feuerstellen.DreiBaumwürfelagenmitteninderHauptartefaktkonzentrationundwarenwohlindasSiedlungsgescheheneingebunden.DieArtefaktoberflächen waren kantenscharf und nicht patiniert, so dass die durchgeführten Gebrauchsspurenanalysen außerge-wöhnlich erfolgreich waren. Auf 120 der insgesamt 136 für die Gebrauchsspurenanalyse ausgewählten Artefakte fanden sichMikrospuren verschiedenartigerTätigkeiten sowie Residuen. Diese konnten mittels Rasterelektronenmikroskopie und energie-dispersiver Röntgenmikroanalyse als Reste von Birkenrindenpech identifiziert werden. 82 Geräte mit Residuen erwiesen sichentwederalsgeschäfteteEinsätze,diemitdiesemPechandenSchäftenbefestigtwurdenoderalsWerkzeugefürdieReparaturvon gebrauchten und mit Pech verklebten Schäftungen, und dem Auswechseln verbrauchter Feuersteineinsätze dienten. Bir-kenrindenpechkannalsältester synthetischhergestellterWerkstoffangesehenwerdenundwird inderRegelmitdemJungpa-läolithikum undmodernenMenschenassoziiert.Die auf denMicoquienArtefakten aus IndenvorgefundenenBirkenpechrestezeigen,daßsowohlSchäftungstechnologien,GebrauchundHerstellungvonKlebstoffalsauchdieAnfertigungvonkomplexen,aus mehreren Komponenten bestehendenGeräten im Mittelpaläolithikum durchaus üblich waren. DerenVorhandensein, nochdazu ineinervergleichsweisehohenAnzahl,kannalsdeutlicherHinweisaufmodernemenschlicheVerhaltensweisengewertetwerden.

Keywords: Micoquian, Eemian, habitation features, microwear analysis, hafting, birch pitch residues, behavioural modernity

Addresses of authors:A. F. Pawlik, University of the Philippines, Archaeological Studies Program, Lithic Studies Laboratory, Palma Hall, Diliman,QuezonCity1101,Philippines.E-Mail:[email protected]; J. Thissen,AmtfürBodendenkmalpflegeimRheinland(ABR),Aus-senstelleTitz,Ehrenstr.14–16,52445Titz-HöllenandUniversitätBonn,InstitutfürVor-undFrühgeschichtlicheArchäologie,Regi-na-Pacis-Weg7,53113Bonn(Germany)

1 Introduction

A sharp-edged, blue-and-white patinated middle palaeo-lithic handaxe found at the open-cast lignite mine Inden(intheareaofGeuenich)urgedoneoftheauthors(JTh)inJuly2004toinspectthislocality(Päffgen&Thissen2005).ThehandaxederivedfromaloesshorizoncorrelatingtotheWeichselianperiodunderwhichafossilsoillayermostlikelycorrelatingtotheEemianperiod(OIS5e128.000–115.000BP)waslocalized.AnearlyPleistoceneMaasterraceiscropping

outbetweentheIndeandWurmvalley,carryinglargequan-tities of flint pebbles from the Dutch-Belgian“Kreideflint”region.WheretheMaasterracewasexposedonthesurfaceduringthePleistocene,Palaeolithicflint-knapperhadanat-tractiveandunlimitedsupplyofrawmaterial.

Severalhand-axesandhalf-finishedproductswerefound,mainlybyF.Schmidt(Aldenhoven),whoisfield-walkinginthisareasincethemid1970s.Thisopensite,closelylocatedto the Maas terrace, was identified as a workshop (“Atel-ier”)of theMicoquienperiod(Thissen2006).Thispromis-

http://www.quaternary-science.net

mailto:[email protected]

67E&G / Vol. 60 / No. 1 / 2011 / 66–77 / DOI 10.3285/eg.60.1.04 / © Authors / Creative Commons Attribution License

ing topographical situation, which archaeologically seemstoindicateafavouredarea,ledtotheproposalofasurveyproject totheFoundation “zur Förderung der Archäolo-gie im Rheinischen Braunkohlenrevier” thatwas grantedinMarch2005.Thegrantincludedthecomprehensivelithicanalysisofthearchaeologicalfinds.Additionaltothemor-phologicalandtechnologicalassessmentofthelithicmate-rials, microscopic use-wear and residue analysis was con-ducted.InapioneeringstudyfortheMiddlePalaeolithicoftheregion,allmodifiedtoolsandselectedunmodifiedpiecesunderwentopticalhighand lowpoweranalysisaswellasresidueanalysisusingscanningelectronmicroscopyanden-ergy-dispersiveX-raymicroprobing.

2 Palaeolithic Prospection in the Inde Valley

2.1 Test excavations at Inden and Altdorf 2005

Several previous surveys of the embankment of the min-ing areas of Garzweiler and Inden were conducted to lo-cateMiddleorUpperPalaeolithicsettlementsbutremainedrather unsuccessful. In 1987 the Mesolithic site Bedburg-Königshoven was found at the Garzweiler mine (Thissen1997),afteraskullandantlerofdeerwerediscoveredinthewalloftheopencastpit.Thearchaeologicallayerwasclosetothesurfacebelowaturflayerinasilted-upmeanderoftheErftriver.

Accordingtoexperience,sitesinloessdepositsorinfos-silsoilsareonlyfoundbywidespreadinvestigationsofthePleistocenelandscape.Hence,theIndeValleyProject(Fig.1)wasexplicitelydesignedtorevealpalaeosurfaceswithheavy

equipment, specifically where the characteristic “Eemiansoil”indicatedanactualfossilsurface.

Amechanicalexcavatorsetupaseriesofdeeptesttrench-es,firstaroundtheareaofIndenin2005onthewestbankoftheriver(WW2005/51)thatwasunderthreatbytheongo-ingandapproachingminingactivities.Thesetrencheswereapp.2.5to4.5metreswide,upto4–6metresdeepandupto75metres long. InAugustandNovember2005sevendeeptesttrenches(DT)wereopenedthere,revealingtheWeichse-lianloessandpossibleEemianlayers.

In the trenches nos. 1 to 5, 14 and 15 (see Fig. 2a andTable 1) different stratified sequences were documented.Coincidentally, the Roman Inde valley road from the Au-gustian period was discovered in the extension ofTrench1.ThePleistocenesedimentsinthetrenchesnos.1,2,4and5aregenerallywellpreserved,butneitherPalaeolithicar-tefacts nor archaeological features could be found. It wasalso not possible to locate the Eemian soil. In the floodedGo/Gr layers of the presumable Eemian period river val-leybrownpatinated siliceswere found, but all unworked.Trenchno.3revealedgravelsfromthemainterraceoftheRhine togetherwithTertiarydeposits.Trenchesno.14andno.15were situated inanerosivechannelunderneath theGeuenichhand-axesite.NoredepositedMiddlePalaeolith-ictoolswerefound.

Four other deep trenches at Altdorf (WW 2005/52) ex-cavatedtoadepthof8.4mturnedouttobemorepromis-ing.Anerodedbrownishredsoil,mostlikelyEemiansedi-ments,and thefirst redepositedartefactsofUpperPalaeo-lithicaswellasMiddlePalaeolithicagewerediscovered.

2.2 Discovery of the Eemian artefact layer

Following the discovery of Eemian soils and nearby old,brownpatinated lithicartefactsatAltdorf,a (last) testex-cavation(WW2005/91)forthissurveyprojectwascarriedout.

InOctober2005,thefirstEemiansoilinsituwasobservedinTrenchno.11.InTrenchno.12,openedattheformercornerofAltdorf’sGartenstrasseandChlodwigstrasse,anEemianBthorizonandtheMaasterracesedimentswerefinallylo-catedindirectcontact.Thiswasthesought-after,potentiallyidealpositionforasettlementofPalaeolithicgroupsduringthe Eemian-Interglacial. There, the Maas gravels were ex-posedbyerosionformingachannelinnorth-easterndirec-tion(“AltdorferTälchen”)intotheIndevalley.Trenchno.13,excavatedinDecember2005deliveredthefirstarchaeologi-calevidence:inaslightlyre-depositedAl-horizonthreenon-patinatedMiddlePalaeolithic artefactsmadeofMaasflintwereuncoveredunderneathaloessdepositofthreemetresthickness (Fig. 3).Basedon thispromising result, the IndeValleyProjectcouldbeextendedforonemoreyeartothor-oughlystudythenewsite.

2.3 Excavation of the Middle Palaeolithic open site Altdorf (WW 124)

In2006theresearchactivitiesfocussedonWW2005/91andWW 2006/74. Systematic probing of the area around theMiddlePalaeolithicfindsatAltdorfstartedinthebeginningofJanuary2006.Initially,theexcavationwasdoneconven-

Fig. 1: Map of Germany with the location of the site Inden-Altdorf.

Abb. 1: Deutschlandkarte mit der Lage des Fundplatzes Inden-Altdorf.


Dee

p tr

ench

(Fea

ture

)m

ASL

Ah/A

pBt

Sedi

men

ts (1

)Se

dim

ents

(2)

Sedi

men

ts (3

)Se

dim

ents

(4)

Inde

n

1 (2

u. 6

)10

7.73

xRo

man

dis

turb

ance

unt

il 1.

6 m

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s un

til 4

mGo

/Gr (

Eem

ian)

unt

il 4.

5 m

Saal

ian

grav

el u

ntil

4.6

m –

B

2 (8

)10

7.76

xx

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s un

til 4

mGo

/Gr (

Eem

ian)

unt

il 4.

5 m

Saa

lian

grav

el u

ntil

4.6

m –

B

3 (9

)10

7.09

xRh

ein-

HT

until

1.5

mTe

rtiä

r unt

il 4.

5 m

– B

4 (1

0)10

7.15

xx

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s un

til 3

.8 m

Go/G

r (Ee

mia

n) u

ntil

4.5

mSa

alia

n gr

avel

unt

il 4.

6 m

– B

5 (1

1)10

8.25

xx

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s un

til 3

.8 m

Go/G

r (Ee

mia

n) u

ntil

4.5

mSa

alia

n gr

avel

unt

il 4.

6 m

– B

14 (1

2)10

4.17

Collu

vium

Allu

vial

loes

s un

til 3

m –

B

15 (2

4)10

4.56

Collu

vium

Allu

vial

loes

s un

til 3

m –

B

Altd

orf

6 (1

4)10

9.53

Hol

ocen

e di

stur

banc

e un

til 0

.8 m

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s un

til 1

.6 m

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s, s

and

and

disl

ocat

ed (?

) Ee

mia

n Bt

unt

il 5.

9 m

Sand

and

gra

vel u

ntil

6.1

m –

B

7 (1

5)11

0.27

xCo

lluvi

umW

eich

selia

n lo

ess

and

sand

unt

il 5.

3 m

Dis

loca

ted

(?) E

emia

n-Bt

unt

il 6.

0 m

Saal

ian

loes

s un

til 6

.4 m

– B

8 (1

6)Co

lluvi

um u

ntil

2.5

m –

B

9 (1

7)11

5.22

xx

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s, g

rave

l and

san

d un

til 2

.7 m

Dis

loca

ted

(?) E

emia

n-Bt

unt

il 3.

5 m

Saal

ian

grav

el u

ntil

3.75

m –

B

10 (1

9)10

7.13

Collu

vium

, rom

an S

tree

t, at

lant

ic

soil

until

2.8

mAl

luvi

al lo

ess

until

3 m

– B

11 (2

1)11

0.78

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s un

til 0

.9 m

Eem

ian-

Bt in

situ

unt

il 1.

8 m

Saal

ian

loes

s un

til 5

.0 m

– B

12 (2

2)11

3.50

xCo

lluvi

umW

eich

selia

n lo

ess

until

1.8

mEe

mia

n-Bt

in s

itu u

ntil

3.4

mM

aas

terr

ace

until

3.6

m –

B

13 (2

3)11

3.29

xW

eich

selia

n lo

ess

until

3 m

Dis

loca

ted

Al-h

oriz

on (E

em)

Eem

ian-

horiz

on in

situ

unt

il 4.

0 m

– B

16 (5

0)11

1.32

xx

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s un

til 5

.60

mEe

mia

n-In

terg

laci

al-C

ompl

ex, O

IS 5

a -

5e

until

7.20

mSa

alia

n lo

ess

until

8.4

m –

B

17 (3

)10

5.60

xCo

lluvi

um u

ntil

1.3

mW

eich

selia

n lo

ess

until

3.3

mW

eich

selia

n lo

ess

and

erod

ed E

emia

n so

il un

til 5

.4 m

Saal

ian

loes

s un

til 5

.6 m

– B

18 (4

)3–

4 m

undo

cum

ente

d, s

urfa

ce

profi

l sec

tion

102.

05 m

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s un

til 0

.6 m

Erod

ed A

l- a

nd B

t-ho

rizon

unt

il 1.

5 m

Go/G

r (Ee

mia

n?) u

ntil

3.15

m –

B

19 (6

)2-

3 m

un

docu

men

ted,

sur

face

pr

ofile

sec

tion

at th

e riv

er b

ank

99.3

0 m

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s un

til 0

.15

mEr

oded

Al-

and

Bt-

horiz

on, u

nder

neat

h Ee

mia

n gl

ey u

ntil

1,05

mSa

alia

n gr

avel

unt

il 1.

25 m

– B

20 (2

)10

2.05

Wei

chse

lian

loes

s un

til 3

.4 m

Gley

unt

il 3.

6 m

Saal

ian

grav

el u

ntil

4.0

m –

B

(– B

: Tre

nch b

ottom

)

Tab.

1: P

alae

olith

ic P

rosp

ectio

n in

the

Inde

Val

ley,

dee

p tr

ench

es 1

–20.

Tab.

1: P

rosp

ektio

n Pa

läol

ithik

um im

Inde

tal,

Bag

gert

iefs

chni

tte 1

–20.


Fig. 2: The position of the trial trenches, sondages and profile sections in a) Inden, b) Altdorf.

Abb. 2: Lage der Baggertiefschnitte, Sondagen und Profilabschnitte in a) Inden, b) Altdorf.

tionallyin1x1munitsusingspadesandtrowels.Allartefactsrecovered insituwere3-Dmeasuredanddocumented.Theexcavated sediments were then sieved. However, only 12smallandunmodifiedartefactswerefoundintheinvestigat-edareaof50squaremetres(Fig.4,Feature23)byateamof2to3excavatorsoveraperiodof12weeks.Thiswasfaroff

theaimoftheprojecttolocalisetheMiddlePalaeolithicsites.Therefore,itbecamenecessarytoadoptmethodsthatcouldhandleexcessiveamountsofsediments.TheEemianhorizoncouldbecarefullymachine-excavatedusingabackhoe.Theeasternslopeseemedtobesuitableforasettlementplace,duetoawiderviewoverthevalleyandtheproximityoftheriver.


Fig. 3: Three flakes from the excavation WW 2005/91.

Abb. 3: Drei Abschläge von der Ausgrabung WW 20095/91.

Fig. 4: General plan of the excavation WW 124 (Altdorf) with the activities WW 2005/91 and WW 2006/74 and the most important finds & features. Key: Excavation area (beige), Artefacts & stones (black dots), Pits (brown), fireplaces (red), concentration of artefacts in the camp (light grey) and Huts/Shelters (light blue).

Abb. 4: Gesamtplan der Ausgrabung WW 124 (Altdorf) mit den Aktivitäten WW 2005/91 und WW 2006/74, und die wichtigsten Funde und Befunde. Le-gende: Grabungsbereiche (beige), Artefakte und Gerölle (schwarze Punkte), Gruben (braun), Brand- u. Feuerstellen (rot), Artefaktkonzentration im Camp (hellgrau) und Hütten/Shelter (hellblau).

InMarch2006,theexcavationofTrenchno.16startedtoin-vestigatetheeasternslope(Fig.4,Feature50).Geologyandstratigraphy of this area were documented in the steppedprofileofFeature70(Fig.5).Furthersoilsamplesandalac-querprofile sectionwere taken from the southernedgeoftheslope(Fig.4and6;Feature125,seeKelsetal.2009).

Only few lithicartefactswere foundwithinFeature50,therefore the trench was extended to the south. Here, thearchaeologicallayerwasunderneathabout6metresofloess.There a first fireplace was discovered (Fig. 4, Feature 65)

whereastheAl-horizonwassittingdirectlyuponaBthori-zon,bothcorrelatingwiththeEemian.Thecharacterofthisfeaturewasnotfullyunderstood,then,alsobecausetheAl-horizionoftheupperslopeshowedlargesectionsofcharcoalspecks. The possibility of forest fires causing the presenceof charcoal rather than anthropogenic activities had to beconsidered.However,attheendofAprilasecondfireplacewasuncovered(seeFeature90),andasignificantconcentra-tionofartefactscameupwithinalongexcavationtrenchinsoutherndirectionbytheendofJuly(seeFeature180).

At the same time, the first evidence of pits being fea-tures was investigated (eg. Fig. 4, Feature 200). They ap-peared as lighter fillings in the reddish-brown Bt-horizon.The spoilheaps were rapidly getting bigger hampering theexcavations. The prolongation of the excavation’s dura-tion permitted the enlargement of the excavated area andthe transferof the spoil to reachthenewareasof interest(Fig.6).

Furthermore, a larger artefact concentration was foundinsidethelastextensionofthediggingstotheeast(westofJülicherstrasse), which at last turned out to be the MiddlePalaeolithiccampwewereseekingfor.From August 10 to 31, 2006, three large round featureswere found beside each other (Feature 240, 300 and 330,Fig. 4), clearly distinguishable from the surrounding red-dish-brownsoilby their light-coloredsedimentfilling (Al-horizon), along with more fireplaces and pits. It becameevident, that these were hollow fallen-tree structures (see


Fig. 5: Geological Stepped Profile Feature Nr. 70; soil samples IN 1–12: M. Kehl; IRSL samples Ind 1–9: Preliminary IRSL ages M. Frechen (drawing by M.Goerke, LVR-ABR).

Abb. 5: Geologisches Stufenprofil Stelle 70, Bodenproben IN 1–12: M. Kehl; IRSL-Proben Ind 1–9: Vorläufige IRSL-Alter M. Frechen (Profilzeichnung M. Goerke, LVR-ABR).

Probe Beschreibung

IN 1 Lösslehm, MBt, rezent verlagertIN 2 Brabant-Löss, in situIN 3 Gebleichter Löss, Eben-Zone (?)IN 4 Gebleichter Löss, Eben-Zone (?)IN 5 Weichsellöss, umgelagert, Keldach-LössIN 6 Weichsellöss, umgelagert, Keldach-LössIN 12 Kaiskorb NassbodenIN 7 Humuszone OIS 5a, in situIN 8 Bleichzone (SwAl), umgelagertIN 9 Bleichzone (SwAl+Bt), umgelagert

IN 10 Eem-Bt (SdBt), umgelagert

IN 11 Eem-Bt (SdBt2), in situ

Sample Description

IN 1 Loess loam, MBt, modern soilIN 2 Brabant-loess, in situIN 3 leached loess, Eben zone (?)IN 4 leached loess, Eben zone (?)IN 5 Weichselian loess, reworkt, Keldach-LoessIN 6 Weichselian loess, reworkt, Keldach-LoessIN 12 Loess, tundra gley paleosoil, Kaiskorb soil (?)IN 7 Loess loam, A horizon, in situ, OIS 5aIN 8 Loess loam, reworked, OIS 5IN 9 Loess loam, reworked (Bt/Eg horizon)

IN 10 Loess loam, dense Btg horizon, reworked, Eemian soil (OIS 5e)

IN 11 Eemian Bt (OIS 5e), in situ

likeunifacial knives,Kostenki- andPradnik-knives,Leval-loisflakesandcores,andalsoUpperPalaeolithicelementslikeburins,scrapers,bladesandblade-cores.Thisinventorycanbefavourablycomparedandcorrelatedwiththenear-by Eemian site Moenchengladbach-Rheindahlen, layer B1(c.125kaBP;Thissen2006).Theirwell-preservedstateandalreadymacroscopicallyvisibleusetracesmadetheAltdorfartefactsverysuitableformicrowearstudy.

3 Microscopic use-wear and residue analysis

In this study, all modified artefacts and selected non-re-touched pieces from Inden-Altdorf were subjected to highand low power microscopic use-wear analysis (Pawlik &Thissen 2008). By March 2009, 120 artefacts out of pres-ently 136 analysed were identified as used (Table 2). 144activities were recognised including scraping, cutting, en-graving, chiselling and combinations of these tasks. Fivetoolswereusedasperforatorsand15projectileimplementswereidentified.Asandstonepebblewasusedasagrinder,perhaps for smoothing a wooden shaft. The assemblagecontains threemoregrindingstonesaswellas twopoten-tial“querns”madeofsandstone.

Kooi1974),whichoriginatedfromuprootedEemiansprucetrees. These shallow rooting trees have been determinedfor thisperiodalongwithpine trees (seeU.Tegtmeier inKelsetal.2009).Pinetrees,however,havedeeprootsandcannotberesponsibletocreatesuchshallowpits.

The chronology as well as the character of the fallen-treepitswereadditionallyconfirmedbymicroscopicanal-ysis (see Kehl, Frechen &Thissen, in preparation). Thefallen-treestructuresappeartobefavorableforhabitation.Theremainingrootplatformcanbeusedasaconstructionelementbythesettlerstobuilda„fallen-treeshelter“.Thisseems evenmoreprobable, since anoval concentrationoflithic artefacts with clear boundaries appeared nearby tothecentralfeatures(Fig.4,greyarea).Itseemsreasonable,that the people of the camp specifically sought out fallentreegroupsneartotheMaasterracetobuildsimpledwell-ingswithlittleeffort.

The excavation campaign WW124 (WW2005/91 andWW2006/74)endedbySeptember2006andtheexcavationareawasdugawaybytheminingoperation.Thearchaeo-logicallyinvestigatedareaofthePalaeolithicsiteinAltdorfwasabout3000m².The lithic assemblage, about 700 unmodified artefacts, re-touched tools and cores includes typical Micoquien forms


Assu

med

con

tact

mat

eria

l / F

unct

ion

Mea

t/Sk

in

proc

essi

ng,

butc

herin

g

Hid

e/Le

athe

r w

orki

ng

Woo

d /

Bone

/ An

tler

Ivor

yPl

ants

Min

eral

Birc

h ta

r pr

oduc

tion

”Haf

ting

and

Reto

olin

g”*

Mul

tiple

m

ater

ials

Hun

ting

Und

eter

m.

No

trac

esTo

tal

Proj

ectil

e im

plem

ent

15**

15

Scra

ping

, Pla

ning

117

13

17

131

Cutt

ing

310

33

120

Scra

ping

&Cu

ttin

g4

21

53

15

Othe

r co

mbi

natio

ns1

1516

Dril

ling,

pe

rfor

atin

g4

15

Goug

e, e

ngra

ving

63

11

11

Chis

el6

32

11

Grin

ding

11

“Pitc

h ca

tche

r”2

2

Und

eter

min

able

12

59

17

No

use

trac

es16

16

Tota

l3

2134

213

42

1720

1513

1616

0

* “H

aftin

g-an

d-Re

tool

ing

(afte

r K

eele

y 19

82):

Repl

acin

g w

orn

and

dam

aged

impl

emen

ts; m

aint

enan

ce a

nd r

ewor

king

of s

hafts

and

fitti

ngs

** 3

pro

ject

ile im

plem

ents

wer

e al

so u

sed

for

cutti

ng a

ctiv

ities

Activity

Tabl

e 2:

Use

-wea

r an

alys

is: R

econ

stru

cted

func

tion

and

assu

med

con

tact

mat

eria

l (13

6 an

alys

ed a

rtef

acts

).

Tabe

lle 2

: Geb

rauch

sspu

rena

naly

se: R

ekon

stru

iert

e Fu

nktio

n un

d an

geno

mm

enes

Kon

takt

mat

eria

l (13

6 un

ters

uchte

Art

efak

te).

An important role for the reconstruction of Palaeo-historic activities and technologies at Altdorf played thedetermination of residues. Besides edge damage and mi-cropolish, residues on stone tool surfaces are wear traceswhose identification can give clues to their former use.Residuesfromtheworkedmaterialsremainsometimes-al-thoughnotfrequently-onthefunctionalpartsofthetools.Approaches to the identification of blood or starch were

extensively discussed by a number of authors (Loy 1983,1991;Fullagar1998;Torrence&Barton2006).Residues not only originate from the contact or workingmaterialbutcanbetheremainsfromthetool’shaftingandhandling. Experimentally created birch pitch and archaeo-logical birch pitch samples from several European UpperPalaeolithic,MesolithicandNeolithic siteshelped to iden-tify these residues in a comparative multi-level analysis


(Pawlik 1995, 1997, 2004; Baales 2002). It combined opti-cal microscopy, SEM and energy-dispersive analysis of X-rays (EDX). The results lead to the identification of theseresiduesastheremainsofbirchpitchusedashaftingmas-tic (Rottländer 1991). More so, since archaeological evi-dence-at leastforEurope-existsonlyforadhesivesderiv-ingfrombirch(Weiner2005:20).

Birchpitchisproducedinaprocesscalleddrydistillation(Sandermann1965;Funke1969;Rottländer1991).Itusu-allyrequirestheuseofair-tightcontainersknownasretorts.Theretortisfilledwithbirchbarkrollsandsetintoacharcoalfire.Duringtheheatingprocess,thehotoxygen-freeatmos-phere inside the retort causes thebark to completely trans-formintoaliquidtar.Whilethisretortdistillationisknowntohavebeenpracticedsincethe10thcenturyAD(Weiner1988)theuseofsuchcontainerscanhardlybeconsideredforpre-historicpitchproduction.EvenfortheNeolithic,thereisare-markableabsenceofretortsoranyfragmentsofretortsinthearchaeologicalrecord(Weiner1992).Thecomparativeanalysisofarchaeologicalpitchandexper-imental replication suggested that prehistoric birch pitchcouldhavebeenmadeby turninganarrowpitwith stonecover into a“retort” (Pawlik 1995, 2004; Palmer 2007). Acigar-shapedrollofbirchbark,similartofindingsfromtheMesolithic (Kind 1997), is lighted at one end and placedwith the burning end ahead into the pit. The smoulderingbarktakesawaytheoxygeninsidethepitandwillcausethebark to“sweatout”pitchdrops.Astoneplacedat thepit’sbottom is helpful to catch the pitch. This pitch is a stickyliquidwhilehotandcanbeappliedimmediately.

Suchresidueswereobservedon82artefacts,onprojectilepointsaswellasworkingtools.Theyappearasblackishdropsandstreaksofresin-typematerialonthebasalarea,e.g.onaunifacialpoint(Fig.7a)orinsomecasescompletelycovertheformerhaftedarealikeonalaterallyhaftedblade(no.455-1;

Fig. 7: a) unifacial point no. 279-4, b) triangular pointed flake no. 470-1, c) pointed flake no. 467-1, d) unilaterally hafted blade 455-1, e) scraper no. 291-1, f) sandstone pebble covered with pitch no. 261-3. Presumed hafted areas are shaded; areas where microphotographs were taken are circled.

Abb. 7: a) Unifaziale Spitze Nr. 279-4, b) dreieckiger, spitz zulaufender Abschlag Nr. 470-1, c) spitz zulaufender Abschlag Nr. 467-1, d) unilateral geschäftete Klinge Nr. 455-1, e) Schaber Nr. 291-1, f) mit Birkenpech be-decktes Sandsteingeröll Nr. 261-3. Mutmaßliche Schäftungsbereiche sind schattiert; photographierte Bereiche sind umrandet.

Fig. 6: The excavation in Altdorf during July 2006. To the right of the profile the colleagues M. Frechen, M. Kehl and M. Goerke, and by the mechanical excava-tor W. Schürmann.

Abb. 6: Die Ausgrabung in Altdorf im Juli 2006. Rechts am Profil die Kollegen M. Frechen, M. Kehl und M. Goerke, und am Hydraulikbagger W. Schürmann.


Fig. 8: a) Birch pitch residues on the bulb of no. 467-1, b) residues on the striking platform of no. 467-1, c) Birch pitch covering the lateral edge of no. 455-1, d) pitch residues associated with hafting wear on no. 470-1, e) residues associated with hafting micropolish on a unifacial point no. 279-4, f) resi-dues and hafting micropolish on a Kostenki-knife fragment no 202-1, g) birch pitch filled hairline fissures on the surface of scraper no. 291-1, h) birch pitch cover on a flat sandstone pebble no. 261-3.

Abb. 8: a) Birkenpechresiduen auf dem Bulbus von Nr. 467-1, b) Residuen auf dem Schlagflächenrest von Nr. 467-1, c) mit Birkenpech bedeckte Lateral-kante von Nr. 455-1, d) Gemeinsam mit Schäftungsgebrauchspuren auftretende Pechresiduen an Nr. 470-1, e) Residuen und Schäftungspolituren auf der unifaziellen Spitze Nr. 279-4, f) Residuen und Schäftungspolituren auf dem Fragment eines Kostenkimessers Nr. 202-1, g) In Haarrisse eingeflossenes Birkenpech auf der Oberfläche des Schabers Nr. 291-1, h) Mit Birkenpech bedecktes flaches Sandsteingeröll Nr. 261-3.


Fig. 9: a, b) SEM image of residues with molten plant tissue frazzles and fibres embedded in an amorphous matrix of solidified pitch on no. 470-1, c) sedi-ment particles in a small clot of solidified pitch on no. 467-1, d and e) EDX analysis of residues from no. 470-1, f) EDX histogram of birch pitch residues from Burgäschisee-Süd, g) EDX histogram of birch pitch residues from Henauhof-Nord II, h) EDX histogram of experimental birch pitch.

Abb. 9: a, b) Rasterelktronmikroskopische Aufnahme der Residuen mit in eine amorphe Matrix aus Pech eingebetteten, angeschmolzenen Pflanzenfasern und -geweberesten auf Nr. 470-1, c) an einem erstarrten Pechklümpchen anhaftende Sedimentpartikel an Nr. 467-1, d , e) EDX-Analyse der Residuen auf Nr. 470-1, f) EDX-Histogramm von Birkenpechresten aus Burgäschisee-Süd, g) EDX-Histogramm von Birkenpechresiduen aus Henauhof-Nord II, h) EDX-Histogramm von experimentell hergestelltem Birkenrindenpech.


Fig.7d).Onartefactsidentifiedasprojectileimplements,e.g.apointedandtriangularshapedflake(no.470-1,Fig.7b),andabladewithtransversetermination(no.467-1,Fig.7c),resi-duesoccurmainlyontheirproximalpartsincludingtheplat-formremnant.Theyappearunderthestereo-microscopeasadriedbrownishblackviscousliquid(Fig.8a-c).Theresiduesareoftenassociatedwithhaftingmicropolishes(Pawlik2004)causedbyminormovementsoftheshaft(Fig.8d–f).Theliq-uidstateofthepitchduringitsapplicationissubstantiatedbyanobservationonascraper(no.291-1,Fig.7e):Here,thema-terialfilledhairlinefissuresintheflintsurfacebeforeitsolidi-fied(Fig.8g).Aflatsandstonepebble(261-3,Fig.7f)isalmostcompletely covered with residues (Fig. 8h) to a maximumthicknessofapproximately100µmsuggestingapotentialusetocatchthehotliquidpitchinsidethepit(Palmer2007).The residues then underwent closer inspection under ascanning electron microscope LEO 1450-VP, Everhart-Thornley SE-Detector and 4-Quadrant BSE-Detector inconnection with an EDX-system OXFORD INCA Energy200PremiumSi(Li)SATW-Detector.TheSEMshowedlay-ers of molten plant tissue frazzles and fibres in an amor-phousmatrixof solidifiedpitch, thus indicating theoriginof the residues (Fig. 9a, b), and embedded sedimentparti-cles in thestickypitch(Fig.9c).Thepresenceofunalteredprimaryplantmatterwithintheamorphousmatrixwasaswella typical featureofexperimentalpitchand theafore-mentionedsamplesfromMesolithicandNeolithiccontexts(Pawlik1995:209–211).FollowingtheSEManalysis,Energy-dispersiveX-rayanaly-siswasundertakentodetecttheelementarycompositionoftheresidues.Thespectrumofelementsacquiredfromsever-alresiduesamplesshowsasignificantpeakforcarbon,veri-fyingtheorganicnatureofthesamples(Fig.9d,e).Varioussubsequentelementsweredetected:Potassium(K),Calcium(Ca),Sulphur(S)aswellasIron(Fe),Manganese(Mn),Alu-minium (Al), Sodium (Na) and Magnesium (Mg). The lat-terelementsverylikelyoriginatefromthesediment.Moresignificant is thepresenceofCa,KandS.Their tracesareshowninconsiderablequantitiesaswellintheEDX-histo-gramsofMesolithicandNeolithicbirchpitch(Fig.9f,g).Al-soexperimentallycreatedpitchindicatedthepresenceofCaandK(Fig.9h),presumablyoriginatingfromtheexposuretofireandashduringprocessinganduse(Pawlik1995:197).

4 Discussion and Conclusion

Modern behavioural patterns and evidence for masteringcomplextechnologieshavebeenrecognizedatac.120kaoldsiteinwesternGermany.Inamulti-levelmicro-wearanal-ysis,residuesonstonetoolsfromInden-Altdorfhavebeenidentified as a pitch produced by the distillation of birchbark.BirchpitchistheoldestknownsyntheticmaterialandwasusedinPrehistoricEuropeasanadhesivetofixstonetools on wooden shafts (Weiner 2005). This kind of com-posite or multicomponent tool making requires planningandtheexecutionofcomplexsequencesofactionandisre-gardedasindicatorformodernhumanbehaviour(Ambrose2010).ItwasuntilnowcommonlyassociatedwithmodernHomo sapiens of the last glacialperiodand theHolocene.ThepitchresiduesfoundontheMicoquientoolsfromInden-Altdorfpredatethisbyfar.TheuseofbirchpitchintheMid-

dlePalaeolithicisfurthermoresupportedfromanotherMi-coquiensiteatKönigsaue(Mania&Toepfer1973;Kolleretal.2001;Grünberg2002).However,onlyatAltdorfap-pearedformerlyhaftedtoolsinhighernumbersandassco-ciated with settlements structures within a stratigraphicalsecuredcontext.

This analysis delivered direct evidence that Micoquienlithic technology featured the use of stone tools as haftedimplementsfixedontowoodenshafts.Thehaftingtracesap-pearednotonlyonprojectilepointsbutonworkingtoolsaswell. The resemblance of their visual appearance and ele-mentaryspectrumwithmuchyoungerNeolithic,MesolithicandUpperPalaeolithic birchpitch is striking. It illustratesthatatInden-Altdorfaverysimilar,ifnotthesame,materialandmethodofpitchproductionwasalreadyinuseduringOIS5e.Anaturalformationoftheresiduescanbeexcludedduetotheirdistributiononthetools,theabsenceofBetulacharcoalatAltdorfandtheproductionmethoditself.Evidencefor theproductionofsyntheticpitchandtheuseofan innovativecomposite tool technology isstilluncom-moninthePalaeolithicrecord.ThediscoverybyBöedaetal. (1996, 2008) of processednatural bitumenon twoarte-factsfromthepenultimateMoustérienlayeratUmmelTleldemonstrated the existence of composite technology to atleast40ka to70kaBP.However, theirproximity toover-lyingTransitional and Aurignacien levels at Umm elTlelleaves open the question of which species of human wasproducingthesepieces.TheKönigsaueevidencepushestheabilitytocreatehaftingmasticbacktomorethan45kytoapp. 80 ky as well; the Inden-Altdorf evidence pushes itbackevenfurther,tothelastinterglacial.Despitethismuchgreaterantiquity,distinguishingthelikelyfabricatorasHo-mo neanderthalensisorHomo sapiens seemsproblematic.

InitialoccupationoftheLevantbyHomo sapiensiscur-rently dated to 130–100 ka BP (Grün et al. 2005). It hastended to be portrayed as an aborted settlement, withgroups either becoming extinct or being forced to re-treat intoAfricabecauseofworsening climatic conditionsc.75kaBP.Modernhumansdonotre-appearintheLevantuntilc.45kaBP(Shea2007)whentheythenmoveintotheEuropeanpeninsula.Oncurrentevidence,wealsoconsiderthe second model and that the hominids connected withthe Inden-Altdorf site were possibly early Homo sapiens(Thissen 2006: 141–171); an interpretation also suggestedbyKolleretal.(2001)fortheKönigsaueAfind.Thesedataare insupportof thepossibility thatmodernhumansmayhave penetrated deeper into the European peninsula thanpreviously thought during their first migration from Af-rica.

Acknowledgements

We thank the Foundation“zur Förderung der Archäologieim Rheinischen Braunkohlenrevier” who financed this re-search.Thankfully,wereceivedsignificantsupportfromtheDirectoroftheTitz-HöllenbranchofficeoftheArchaeologi-calServicesinRheinland(LVR-ABR),Dr.UdoGeilenbrügge,who provided the project with more staff and mechanicalaid.WethankWilhelmSchürmann,thesitesupervisorandDr.HartmutSchulz, SEMLaboratory, InstituteofGeologyandPalaeontology,UniversityofTübingenfortechnicalad-


vice and support, and Alan Brown B.A. (LVR – ABR) fora (first) translationofchapters 1&2.Many thanks toDr.PhilipPiper(UniversityofthePhilippines),Dr.RyanRabett(UniversityofCambridge)andDr.JohnShea(StonyBrookUniversity,NY)forcommentingonearlydraftsofthispaper.

Author contributions

J.Th. directed the excavations at Altdorf, prepared the ex-cavation report and undertook the morphological analysisofthelithicmaterials.A.P.undertooktheHighPowerandLow Power use-wear and residue analysis, SEM analysisandEDXanalysis.

5 References

Ambrose, S.H. (2010): Coevolution of Composite-Tool Technology, Con-structive Memory, and Language. Implications for the Evolution ofModernHumanBehavior.CurrentAnthropologyVol.51,Supplement1:135–147:Chicago.

Baales, M. (2002): Der spätpaläolithische Fundplatz Kettig. RGZM 51:Mainz.

Böeda,E.,Connan,J.,Dessort,D.,Muhesen,S.,Mercier,N.,Valladas,H.&Tisnérat,N. (1996):BitumenasahaftingmaterialonMiddlePal-aeolithicartefacts.Nature380,336338:London.

Boëda,E.,Bonilauri,S.,Connan,J.,Jarvie,D.,Mercier,N.,Tobey,M.,Valladas, H., al Sakhel, H. & Muhesen, S. (2008): Middle Palaeo-lithicbitumenuseatUmmelTlelaround70,000BP.Antiquity82(318):853–861:York.

Fullagar,R.(ed.)(1998):ACloserLook.RecentAustralianStudiesofStoneTools.SydneyUniversityArchaeologicalMethodsSeries6:Sydney.

Funke,H.(1969):Chemisch-analytischeUntersuchungenverschiedenerar-chäologischer Funde. Doctoral thesis, University of Hamburg: Ham-burg.

Grün,R.,Stringer,C.McDermott,F.Nathan,R.,Porat,N.,Robert-son,S.,Taylor,L.,Mortimer,G.,Eggins,S.&McCulloch,M.(2005):U-seriesandESRanalysesofbonesand teeth relating to thehumanburials fromSkhul. JournalofHumanEvolution49,316334:Elsevier,Amsterdam.

Grünberg,J.M.(2002):MiddlePalaeolithicbirch-barkpitch.Antiquity76,1516:Newbury.

Kels,H.,Kehl,M.,Lehmkuhl,F.,Tegtmeier,U.&Thissen,J.(2009):Na-turwissenschaftlicheUntersuchungenzummittelpaläolithischenCampvon Inden-Altdorf. In: Kunow, J. (Hrsg.) Archäologie im Rheinland2008,36–39:Stuttgart.

Keeley,L.H.(1980):ExperimentalDeterminationofStoneToolUses.Uni-versityofChicagoPress:Chicago.

Kind,C.-J.(1997):DieletztenWildbeuter.HenauhofNordIIunddasEnd-mesolithikuminBaden-Württemberg.MaterialheftezurArchäologieinBaden-Württemberg,39:Stuttgart.

Koller,J.,Baumer,U.&Mania,D.(2001):High-TechintheMiddlePalaeo-lithic:Neanderthal-ManufacturedPitchIdentified.EuropeanJournalofArchaeology4,3,385397:Oxford.

Kooi,P.B. (1974):Deorkaanvan13November1972enhetontstanvan‘hoefeijservormige’grondsporen.Helinium14,57:Wetteren.

Loy,T.H.(1983):Prehistoricbloodresidues:detectionontoolsurfacesandtheidentificationofspeciesoforigin.Science220,126971:Washington.

Loy,T.H.(1991): Prehistoricorganicresidues:recentadvancesinidentifica-tion,datingandtheirantiquity.In:W.Wagner&E.Pernicka(eds.),Archaeometry‘90:Proceedingsofthe27thInternationalSymposiumonArchaeometry,Heidelberg,645656:Birkhäuser,Berlin.

Mania,D.&Toepfer,V.(1973):Königsaue.Gliederung,Ökologieundmit-telpaläolithischeFundederletztenEiszeit.VeröffentlichungendesLan-desmuseumsfürVorgeschichteHalle26:Berlin.

McDougal, I.,Brown,F.&Fleagle, J.F. (2005):StratigraphicplacementandageofmodernhumansfromKibish,Ethiopia.Nature433,733–736:London.

Odell, G.H. & Odell-Vereecken, F. (1980):Verifying the Reliability ofLithic UseWear Assessments by“BlindTests”: The Low Power Ap-proach.JournalofFieldArchaeology7,87—120:Boston.

Palmer,F.(2007):DieEntstehungvonBirkenpechineinerFeuerstelleunterpaläolithischenBedingungen.MitteilungenderGesellschaftfürUrge-schichte,16,75—83:Tübingen.

Pawlik,A. (1995):DiemikroskopischeAnalysevonSteingeräten.Experi-mente – Auswertungsmethoden – Artefaktanalyse. UrgeschichtlicheMaterialhefte10.ArchaeologicaVenatoria,245:Tübingen.

Pawlik,A.(1997):FunktionsanalyseanArtefaktenausHenauhofNordII.In:C.-J.Kind,DieletztenWildbeuter.HenauhofNordIIunddasEnd-mesolithikuminBaden-Württemberg.MaterialheftezurArchäologieinBaden-Württemberg,39,150178:Tübingen.

Pawlik,A. (2004): IdentificationofHaftingTracesandResiduesbyScan-ningElectronMicroscopesandEnergy-dispersiveAnalysisofX-rays.In:E.A.Walker,F.Wenban-Smith&F.Healy(eds.),Lithics inAc-tion:papersfromtheconferenceLithicStudiesintheYear2000,OxbowBooks,172183:Oxford.

Päffgen,B.&Thissen,J.(2005):DerFaustkeilvonGeuenich.In:Kunow,J.(Hrsg.)ArchäologieimRheinland2004,3738:Stuttgart.

Pawlik,A.&Thissen,J.(2008):BirkenpechgewinnungundRentierjagdimIndetal. In: Kunow, J. (Hrsg.) Archäologie im Rheinland 2007, 4144:Stuttgart.

Rottländer, R.C.A. (1991): Untersuchungen an der Kittmasse von ge-schäfteten Feuersteinklingen. In: H.T. Waterbolk & W. van Zeist(eds.), Niederwil,eineSiedlungderPfynerKultur.IVHolzartefakteundTextilien.AcademicaHelveticaI/IV,249250,Bern.

Sandermann,W.(1965):Untersuchungenvorgeschichtlicher„Gräberharze“undKitte.TechnischeBeiträgezurArchäologie2,5873:Mainz.

Shea,J.J.2007:BehavioraldifferencesbetweenMiddleandUpperPalaeo-lithicHomo sapiensintheeastMediterraneanLevant.JournalofAn-thropologicalResearch63(4),449488:NewMexico.

Thissen J. (1997): Jäger und Sammler. Paläolithikum und MesolithikumimGebietdesLinkenNiederrhein.Doctoralthesis,UniversityofCo-logne:Köln.

ThissenJ.(2006):DiepaläolithischenFreilandstationenvonRheindahlenimLösszwischenMaasundNiederrhein.In:Kunow,J.(Hrsg.)RheinischeAusgrabungen59.PhilippvonZabern,Mainz.

ThissenJ.(2007):EinCampdesMicoquienimIndetalbeiAltdorf.In:Ku-now,J.(Hrsg.)ArchäologieimRheinland2006,4245:Stuttgart.

Torrence, R. & Barton, H. (eds.), (2006): Ancient Starch Research. LeftCoastPressInc.,California:WalnutCreek.

Weiner,J.(1988):PraktischeVersuchezurHerstellungvonBirkenpech.Ar-chäologischesKorrespondenzblatt18,329–334:Mainz.

Weiner,J.(1992):WosinddieRetorten?ÜberlegungenzurHerstellungvonBirkenpech im Neolithikum. Acta praehistorica et archaeologica 23,1519:Berlin.

Weiner,J.(2005):AnotherWordonPitch.Somecommentsona“StickyIs-sue”fromOldEurope.BulletinofPrimitiveTechnology29,2027:Berlin.

Documents

The 'Palaeolithic Prospection in the Inde Valley' Project