Weapon choice and hunting strategies in the Gravettian of Abri Pataud

peer reviewedProjectile technology and hunting have significantly shaped the evolutionary trajectory of our species and continue to be among the most discussed and debated topics in Palaeolithic archaeology. In this contribution, we use the Gravettian of Abri Pataud (France) as a case study and argue that the examination of hunting equipment against faunal data can help refine our view of the causes of change in weapon technology and the lithic record. Insights gained from such work can also aid in interpreting older assemblages. Gravettian hunters targeted a broad variety of large and small game and may have contributed to megafauna extinctions at least regionally [1]. The evidence for this versatile and at times intense exploitation of fauna co-occurs in the archaeological record with distinct artefact types suggestive of projectile function, including tanged points, Gravette and microgravette points, and fléchettes. However, few studies exist that would reliably confirm the function of these artefacts, and practically none have examined diachronic changes in Gravettian weapon design using lithic functional data. Our knowledge of how projectile design interacted with different hunting strategies and situations is therefore limited. In this contribution, we present the first functional study on projectile material from the Recent Gravettian (c. 24,000 BP) and Final Gravettian (c. 22,000 BP) layers of Abri Pataud. We used low and high magnification use-wear analysis and experimental reference material to reliably identify lithic armatures in the two assemblages. We singled out the artefacts with strongest evidence of projectile use and recorded the attributes of impact damage on them in detail. By comparing these data, we were able to detect changes in weapon preferences from the Recent Gravettian to the Final Gravettian. While it has been previously proposed that the abundant backed bladelets in Final Gravettian assemblages represent the replacement of distally hafted Gravette and microgravette points by composite points [2], we could show that composite points were already in use during the Recent Gravettian occupations and that their dominance in the Final Gravettian therefore represents a shift in weapon preferences that drew on pre-existing technical solutions. We examined these results against recent faunal data [3-4] and observed that prey choice alone does not explain the change in weaponry, as both Recent and Final Gravettian hunters at Pataud focused rather heavily on reindeer. Instead, the preference of composite points appears to be linked to seasonal organisation of hunting activities, motivated by the behaviour of the main prey species in different times of the year, and possibly to other factors having to do with the winter conditions during the Final Gravettian occupations. Our reading of the lithic and faunal data implies that hunting technologies were subject to local changes in environmental conditions and social organisation. The global archaeological record suggests that composite points were used at different times in varying contexts [5], which can be interpreted as fluctuations in weapon preferences according to specific conditions. We therefore propose that large-scale patterns in the prehistoric lithic record should be explained with these particularities in mind. As a consequence, detailed study of individual site contexts with a good level of lithic and organic preservation can help defining the underlying causes of long-term technological change and stability. References: [1] Drucker, D.G., Vercoutère, C., Chiotti, L., Nespoulet, R., Crépin, L., Conard, N.J., Münzel, S.C., Higham, T.F.G., van der Plicht, J., Lázničková-Galetová, M., Bocherens, H., 2015. Tracking possible decline of woolly mammoth during the Gravettian in Dordogne (France) and the Ach Valley (Germany) using multi-isotope tracking (13C,14C,15N,34S,18O). Quaternary International 359, 304–317. [2] Klaric, L., Guillermin, P., Aubry, T., 2009. Des armatures variées et des modes de productions variables. Réflexions à partir de quelques exemples issus du Gravettien d’Europe occidentale (France, Portugal, Allemagne). Gallia Préhistoire 51, 113–154. [3] Cho, T.-S., 1998. Étude archéozoologique de la faune du Périgordien supérieur (couches 2, 3 et 4) de l’abri Pataud (Les Eyzies, Dordogne) : paléoécologie, taphonomie, paléoéconomie. Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle. [4] Crépin, L., 2013. Données archéozoologiques des grands mammifères. In: Nespoulet, R., Chiotti, L., Henry-Gambier, D. (Eds.), Le Gravettien Final de l’abri Pataud (Dordogne, France), Fouilles et Études 2005-2009 (BAR International Series 2458). Oxford: Archaeopress, 63–88. [5] de la Peña, P., Taipale, N., Wadley, L., Rots, V., 2018. A techno-functional perspective on quartz micro-notches in Sibudu’s Howiesons Poort reveals the use of barbs in hunting technology. Journal of Archaeological Science 93, 166–195