19 Middle Palaeolithic Culture of Europe

D. K. Bhattacharya

It is a short transitional stage between Lower and Upper Palaeolithic. It is characterized by the emergence of a large number of specialized flake tool types. In some instances such Lower Palaeolithic types as handaxes and cleavers as well as chopper and chopping tools are also found to continue along with the flake tools. In Europe this cultural phase occurs approximately between 150,000- 50,000 B.C. Since there is no clear cut break observed between Lower and Middle Palaeolithic this kind of date estimation needs to be treated as merely tentative.

Originally Mousterian was identified as the only tradition of Middle Palaeolithic in Western Europe. In 1950 Prof. Francois Bordes of France used multivariate statistics to demonstrate that there is a great deal of heterogeneity within Mousterian. He identified 4 different Mousterian traditions and named them as Mousterian of Charentian tradition, Typical Mousterian, Mousterian of Acheulian Tradition and Mousterian of Denticulate Tradition. These traditions show concentration of different tool types so that they create separate clusters. In brief, the charentions show a concentration of side scrapers besides notches and denticulates. Typical Mousterian is characterised by fine symmetrical points. Mousterian of Acheulian traditions is characterized by the presence of numerous small cordate handaxes. Mousterian of Denticulate tradition is characterised by the presence of numerous notches and denticulates. In 1960 Bordes excavated a cave site called Combe Grenal and described 64 different cultural horizons. The tools from each of these phases were subjected to multivariate analysis and it was found that the four traditions do not occur in any sequence. That is, Charentian may occur several times and so can the others, but Mousterian of Acheulian tradition forms the youngest layer and is not repeated. Based on this, Bordes concluded that these four traditions of Mousterian are parallely surviving. It is only then that they could come back in the succession several times. Prof. L.R. Binford strongly objected to the possibility of four different traditions surviving parallely in a narrow valley for several thousand years without changing or inter-mixing. He constructed a similar statistics with a functional load provided to some of the types and concluded that these four traditions are but only a single tradition differing in their tool kits due to different climatic adaptation. Mousterian tools in general show very fine working and includes beautiful isosceles triangle shaped points which are often referred to as Mousterian point. In addition to these Levalloise technique is very frequently used. Henceforth we can refer to any assemblage which has the above characteristics as Mousteroid in character.

Gorham’s cave in Spain yielded a perfectly Mousteroid industry but there were some diminutive cleavers also found in it. Bordes felt this is a continuity of Torralba in Lower Palaeolithic which had showed a predominance of cleavers, and hence named it as Vasconian. He meant that this should be counted as a separate Mediterranean development and should not be bracketed with French Mousterian. Once we cross the channel we see that England does not have a separate or isolated development of Mousterian. Infact at many sites one can see handaxes continuing till the end of Middle Palaeolithic. Pinhole is a cave in Derbyshire district which shows Mousterian occurring in three different layers and are identified as Mousterian 1, 2 and 3. Both handaxes and some flakes described as Clactonian in Britain and Tayacian in France have been recorded. These are immediately followed by a layer which is identified as Proto-Solutrean. To sum up, Western Europe show absolutely no homogeneity in as far as its Middle Palaeolithic cultural phase is concerned. England does show a Mousteroid development but its continuing with handaxes and clactonian flakes makes it appear quite different from French Mousterian. The developments in Spain also indicate a continuity of local characters.

Central Europe: The Lower Palaeolithic in this zone was characterised by the near absence of handaxes and cleavers and also levalloise flakes. During Middle Palaeolithic, surprisingly handaxes and handaxe like core tools appear in this zone while it had disappeared in France. Bockstein is a cluster of five rock shelters near Stuttgart in Germany. These were excavated by Boisinski in 1969. A total of 2791 tools are described from one of these caves. These include quite a few elongated handaxes which have been identified as Micoquian in type. Flake tools include side scrapers, knives, and points. Some of these show the tendency of bifacial retouching which seem to be closer in their technique to the Blattspitzen or thin points. The entire industry shows no inclination to use levalloise technique. Way up in the north near Hannover Lehringen is another Middle Palaeolithic site of Central Europe. Nearly 25 flint tools are described from this site. In average they measure about 7cm in length and are mostly prepared by levalloise technique. In some cases these are worked thin by complete bifacial retouches. Besides the stone tools, Lehringen is well known for having yielded a 2.5 meter long wooden lance made of Yew wood. Salzitter-Lebenstedt is another open air site near the same region. The Middle Palaeolithic, here, has a radio-carbon date of 48,300 +_ 7000 B.P. About 200 finished stone tools were described from the site. Handaxes as big as 24 cm in length and 10.5 cm in breadth form one of the specialties of the site. The entire flake industry along with these handaxes is clearly Mousteroid in their typo-technological characteristics. Thus, we see that in Central Europe the above two sites compare very well with the Pin Hole of Middle Palaeolithic of Britain.

Mauer caves are situated near Munich and these yielded a rather late Middle Palaeolithic (Würm I/ II interstadial). Mauer I or the oldest layer shows a typically Mousteriod industry characterised by side scrapers, knives and points. Some of these points compare with typical Mousterian points of France. Mauer II, which overlies Mauer I represents a large number of 5 to 12 cm long, 2-4 cm broad points which are never exceeding 1 cm in thickness. These are mostly prepared by percussion technique with a remarkable skill of controlling or damping the blows is evident. These have been called Blattspitzen which in English means Leaf points. Besides these usual Middle Palaeolithic side scrapers, knives and borers have also been found. Another cave site near Munich has been excavated recently by Giesela Freund. The site is called Sesselfelsgrotte and it presents a completely new evidence in the form of tools which are 3 cm to 0.5 cm in length. Freund calls this industry Pygmalithen or pygmy tools. Tata in Hungary is another Central European Middle Palaeolithic site. There is also a carbon date available for the implementiferous layer. It is recorded as 50,000 +_ 2,500 years. A total of 2,318 tools and 23 apparently retouched bone pieces are described form the site. The average size of the tools does not exceed 3cm, though there are some which measure upto 8cm. The industry is basically pebble based and have side scrapers, knives, as also some blades and cores shaped as handaxes. A small circular bone with a flat surface is of special significance. It is 21 mm in diameter and bears an engraved + sign on one of its surfaces. In the above we have briefly covered the minimum details of 6 Middle Palaeolithic sites of Central Europe and it becomes amply clear that this region shows a complete heterogeneity in this period. While Bockstein shows appearance of handaxe but absence of levalloise technique. The northern latitude sites which must have been penetrated for the first time show handaxes along with levalloise flakes. The eastern sites of Mauer and Sesselfelsgrotte are both diverse between themselves. Looking at Tata it appears that a diminutive tendency observed during Lower Palaeolithic (Verteszollos) continues during the Middle Palaeolithic as well in this region. Sesselfelsgrotte cannot be an independent development. It is influenced by a general diminutive tendency observed over a larger region including Hungary in the north and sites in Balkans in the south.

Balkans

This south eastern extension of Europe provides a peculiar climate of being broadly Mediterranean but also includes the cold wind currents of the Slowenian Mountains. Crvena Stijena is a rock shelter in the Slowenian Mountains. Here 12 meter deposit has been excavated and this shows Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic and Bronze Age sequence. The lowest layer on the basis of faunal and floral evidence have been attributed to WÜrm- I period (70,000 to 80,000 B.C). The Middle Palaeolithic tools measure 2-4 cm in length and constitute side scrapers, points and both unretouched and retouched blades. As we move further south we come across two important Middle Palaeolithic sites in Greece. Kokkinopilos is a stretch of open air site in the valley of Louros. The red soil or terra rosa within which the tools have been found is compared with a site called Hua Fteah in Libya and on the basis of this comparability the site is dated to a period earlier than 35,000 B.C. The industry is totally Mousteroid in character. Besides good levalloise points, end scrapers, burins and knives, there are 4 bifacially worked leaf points or blattspitzen. Asprochaliko is a rock shelter a few kilometers north of Kokkinopilos. That is, Asprochaliko is closer to Crvena Stijena than Kokkinopilos. The Middle Palaeolithic here is generally without levalloise technique. The tools types include side scrapers some discoids and points. The technique overall seems to be much cruder than Kokkinopilos. Further more, here no blattspitz have been recorded. Some of the tool measuring between 6-2.5 cm. have been called micro Mousterian. To sum up, Crvena Stijena and Asprochaliko seem to be closer to each other but Kokkinopilos presents a completely new and de-luxe Mousteriod features, which have not been recorded in the entire Central Europe and Balkans, which form the intervening area separating French sites from this area.

East Europe

This presents an area which must have been the main habitat of such shaggy mammals as woolly rhinoceros and woolly mammoths. Generally speaking as cold as Central Europe this landmass maintains fine pasture land and big rivers.

Molodova

It is a rich open air primary site on the terrace of the river Dniestr. This area has yielded several Palaeolithic sites of which Molodova I and Molodova V (approximately 1 km. apart) are well excavated and are well known for their successions. The Middle Palaeolithic industry at Molodova I is recorded from cultural layers 4 and 5 at Molodova-V from cultural layers 11 and 12. The radio carbon date obained for Moldova I horizon 4 is 44,000 B.P and for Molodova V horizon is 11 45,000 B.P Ground plan of huts measuring 10×7 meters with several fire hearths in them presents the general cultural features. The tools described are again perfectly Mousteroid in character. Naturally backed knives, large number of simple convex side scrapers retouched levalloise points (Mousterian points), notches and denticulates are the usual tool types. Most of these tools are 8-10 cm in length and compare very well with French Mousterian. Along with these few bifacially worked pieces are also recorded. This is overlaid with a few layers of Upper Palaeolithic.

Several points appear when Middle Palaeolithic of whole of Europe is considered together. The first and foremost of this is the fact that one can observe extreme heterogeneity emerging during this period. It is true that Lower Palaeolithic also showed 2 distinct special zones. That is, the western zone taking to Biface technology and the rest of Europe was not showing any inclination to adopt the Acheulian techniques. However, both west and central area had shown a pre- Mindel Mode I sub stratum. The table is turned in Middle Palaeolithic in the sense that this non-handaxe zone of Central Europe starts making handaxes when others in Europe has taken up the making of a variety of flake tool types. Another important feature of this zone is the appearance of those thin leaf points which are named blattspitzen. Tata, Sesselfelsgrotte and Crvena Stijena show a special zone of pygmy tools. It will appear that this trend has been continuous in this zone from Lower Pleistocene time (Vertesszollos).

Finally the emergence of a perfectly shaped Mousteroid industry at the cul-de-sac of Greece is difficult to explain unless we accept that whereever levalloise technique acted as the ladder through which Lower Palaeolithic entered Middle Palaeolithic, it created a Mousteroid industry. Further, it has to be also accepted that levalloise technique must have evolved separately at more than one place in Europe. Otherwise one cannot explain the rich Mousteroid development in such far flung areas as Molodova, Kokkinopilos and Salzgitter Levbenstedt. Finally it must also be recorded that Middle Paloeolithic in most of the sites shows a continuous occupation entering Upper Palaeolithic and going upto early Holocene. There are only few sites in places like Pinhole cave where Lower Palaeolithic and other younger cultures continue as continuous development. Most of the other sites are conspicuous as being without evidence of Lower Palaeolithic underlying Middle Palaeolithic. As far as chronology goes most of the Central European, Balkan and East European Middle Palaeolithic seem to occur considerably later than in West Europe.

References and Suggested readings

• Palaeolithic Europe. Netherland: Humanities press. Bhattacharya, D.K. (1977).
• People of the Earth: An Introduction to World Prehistory. New Jersey: Pearson Education. Fagan B. M. (2004).
• Frameworks for dating Fossil man.London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Oakley, K.P. (1966).
• The Explanation of culture change: Models in prehistory. London. Duckworth. Renfrew, C. (ed.). (1973).
• Man the Hunter. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Lee, R.B and I. Devore (Eds.).( 1977).
• An Introduction to Prehistoric Archaeology. New York: Hold, Rinehart and Winston, INC. Hole, H. and R.F. Heizer. (1969)