The cultural change from the Aurignacian to the Gravettian in the light of variable strategies of residential mobility. Comparative techno-economic analyses of lithic assemblages

公元前32至27 ka之间的时间段见证了人类进化史上强烈的社会经济转变，这大致与从奥里尼诺人到格拉韦特人的文化变迁不谋而合。这一时期见证了旧石器时代晚期考古记录的一系列重要的小说特征。特别是，格拉韦特人巨大的、大量使用的露天定居点，以及欧洲第一批明确的旧石器时代晚期墓葬的出现，第一次证明了居住稳定性的提高。此外，Gravettian的石材技术似乎对原材料的质量提出了更高的限制，因此有理由将更多的石材原材料运输到100公里以上的距离。后者被解释为与之前的时期相比，格拉韦特人的流动性水平更高。因此，格拉韦特人似乎对应于一个高度流动的狩猎-采集者的时期，他们有时采用临时封闭主义的特征。然而，格拉韦特人的狩猎采集者实际上比他们的前辈更具机动性的程度仍然很难评估。此外，由于Aurignacian晚期的考古记录受到侵蚀间歇期的影响，只能将少数可靠的年代确定为这一时期的遗址，从而阻碍了对Aurignacian晚期到Gravettian文化转变的整体情况的准确评估。我的研究项目旨在通过对选定的岩屑组合进行技术经济分析，首次对Aurignacian晚期和Gravettian早期进行系统的比较。这项调查的依据是这样一种假设，即在32至27 ka BP之间发生的深远的社会经济变化的原因的一个重要关键是居民流动模式和场地占用强度的变化，而这反过来又反映在原材料供应和使用的战略中。为了验证这一假设，我的分析旨在系统地重建和比较奥里尼亚奇晚期和格拉韦特早期的技术组织和原材料经济。我之前的调查表明，在奥里尼亚西晚期，住宅流动性下降和原材料选择性增加已经成为突出的问题。在我以前成果的基础上，将对弗里德里希斯多夫-塞尔贝格(2010-2011年发掘)和层状/克雷姆斯-雷贝格(1988-1991年活动)晚期奥里尼亚期组合进行分析和评价。研究的目的是考察当前关于从奥里尼亚期到格拉韦特期文化变迁的文化史模型的有效性，并最终为解释旧石器时代晚期岩屑组合的可变性提供新的线索。

The time period between 32 and 27 ka BP witnessed a strong socio-economic shift in human evolutionary history, which roughly coincides with the cultural change from the Aurignacian to the Gravettian. This period witnessed a series of important novel features characteristic for the Upper Palaeolithic archaeological record as a whole. Especially, the extremely large, intensively used open-air settlements of the Gravettian, alongside the appearance of the first unambiguous Upper Palaeolithic burials in Europe, attest for the first time to patterns of increased residential stability. Furthermore, the lithic technology of the Gravettian seems to have placed higher constraints on the quality of raw materials, thus justifying the transport of increased quantities of lithic raw materials over distances of 100 km and more. The latter has been interpreted in terms of higher mobility levels in the Gravettian compared to preceding time periods. Thus, the Gravettian seems to correspond to a time period of highly mobile hunter-gatherers, which at times adopted features of temporary sedentism. However, to which degree the hunter-gatherers of the Gravettian were actually more mobile than their predecessors remains difficult to assess. In addition, as the archaeological record of the late Aurignacian has been affected by erosional hiatuses, only a few reliably dated sites can be assigned to this time period, thus hampering an accurate assessment of the overall picture of the cultural shift from the Aurignacian to the Gravettian.My research project aims to present the first systematic comparison of the late Aurignacian and early Gravettian by means of techno-economic analyses of selected lithic assemblages. The investigation is based on the hypothesis that an important key to the causes of the far-reaching socio-economic changes occurring between 32 and 27 ka BP is to be found in changing patterns of residential mobility and intensity of site occupation, which in turn are reflected in strategies of raw material provisioning and use. In order to verify this hypothesis, my analyses aim to systematically reconstruct and compare the technological organization and raw material economy during the late Aurignacian and the early Gravettian. My previous investigations show that decreased residential mobility and increased raw material selectivity already come to the fore in the late Aurignacian. Building on my previous results, the late Aurignacian assemblages of Friedrichsdorf-Seulberg (excavations 2010-2011) and Stratzing/Krems-Rehberg (campaigns 1988-1991) will be analysed and evaluated. The research objective is to scrutinize the validity of the current cultural-historical models with regard to the cultural change from the Aurignacian to the Gravettian and, ultimately, to shed new light on the interpretation of Upper Palaeolithic lithic assemblage variability.