A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe

Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint

A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe R. Bourrillon*, R. White, E. Tartar, L. Chiotti, R. Mensan, A. Clark, J.-C. Castel, C. Cretin,
se, D.J. Comeskey T. Higham, A. Morala, S. Ranlett, M. Sisk, T. Devie Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, RLAHA, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3QY, UK

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 8 May 2016 Received in revised form 23 September 2016 Accepted 29 September 2016 Available online xxx

In the excitement of the widely publicized new finds of Aurignacian art from Chauvet, from the Swabian Jura and from as far afield as Pestera Coliboaia in Romania, it has almost been forgotten that a rich corpus of Aurignacian wall painting, engraving and bas-relief sculpture had been recognized and studied before z e
re Valley of SW France. Scientific knowledge of the chronological and cultural World War I in the Ve context of that early-discovered graphic record has been limited by the crude archaeological methods of that pioneering era, and the loss and dispersal of many of the works discovered. In 2011, we launched new excavations and a re-analysis of one of the key sites for such early discoveries, the collapsed rock shelter of Abri Blanchard. In 2012, we discovered in situ a limestone slab engraved with a complex composition combining an aurochs and dozens of aligned punctuations. This new find, recovered by modern methods and dated by molecular filtration and Hydroxyproline 14C, provides new information on the context and dating of Aurignacian graphic imagery in SW France and its relationship to that of other regions. The support is not a fragment of collapsed shelter ceiling and is situated in the midst of quotidian occupational debris. The image shows significant technical and thematic similarities to Chauvet that are reinforced by our reanalysis of engraved slabs from the older excavations at Blanchard. The aligned punctuations find their counterparts at Chauvet, in the south German sites and on several other objects from Blanchard and surrounding Aurignacian sites. In sum, we argue that dispersing Aurignacian groups show a broad commonality in graphic expression against which a certain number of more regionalized characteristics stand out, a pattern that fits well with social geography models that focus on the material construction of identity at regional, group and individual levels. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Aurignacian art Abri Blanchard Origins and dispersal of modern humans Upper Paleolithic art Origins of art

1. Introduction Scientific understanding of the origins and early evolution of graphic and plastic imagery underwent a revolution in the 1990's and 2000's with the discovery and dating of Aurignacian images and representational objects. This new body of work amplifies both the research sample available and the previously restricted view of symbolic expressions attributed to the early Upper Paleolithic (Leroi-Gourhan, 1965). Well-dated discoveries include the wall

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (R. Bourrillon).

images from the Grotte Chauvet in SE France (Clottes, 2001), part of the decorated ceiling from Abri Castanet in SW France (White et al., 2012), new ivory sculptures from Hohle Fels and Vogelherd in SW Germany (Conard, 2003), painted limestone slabs from Fumane in Northern Italy (Broglio and Gurioli, 2004) and black outline drawings of animals from Pestera Coliboaia in Romania (Besesek et al., 2010; Clottes et al., 2011). The attribution of already known
ne works to the Aurignacian, such as those in the Grotte d'Alde ma et al., 2012) and (Ambert et al., 2005), Baume-Latrone (Aze Altxerri B (Garate et al., 2014a,b; Ruiz-Redondo et al., 2016) adds to the impressive corpus of Aurignacian graphic works and debates surrounding the chronology of early Upper Paleolithic graphic ~ on and Utrilla, representation (Ochoa and Garcia-Diez, 2014; Ontan

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063 1040-6182/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

2

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

2015; Pike et al., 2016, in press).1 In the justifiable excitement of the widely publicized new finds from Chauvet and from the Swabian Jura it has almost been forgotten that a large corpus of Aurignacian wall painting, engraving and bas-relief sculpture had been recognized and stud ze
re Valley of SW France (Delluc ied before World War I in the Ve and Delluc, 1978, 1981). This “neglect” is in part a result of the fact that scientific knowledge of the chronological and cultural context of that early-discovered symbolic record has been limited by the crude archaeological methods and anecdotal descriptions of that pioneering era as well as the loss and dispersal of many of the works discovered (White, 1992a, b; 2002). ze
re Valley, Otto In May 1909, at the site of Fongal in the Ve Hauser would be the first to discover engraved and otherwise modified limestone blocks of Aurignacian age2 (Peyrony, 1941). Although he would see in these figures the crude forms of animals, we can now recognize classic Aurignacian “vulvar” imagery. Shortly thereafter, in early 1910, Marcel Castanet reported finding “heartlike” images on limestone blocks from the rich Aurignacian site of Abri Blanchard (Didon, 1911), just 3 km from Hauser's diggings at Fongal. Presented with images of one of these engraved forms, the  Breuil would declare it to represent a “pudendum muliebre” abbe (letter from Breuil to Didon dated January 25, 1911, in Delluc, Delluc, 1978) in other words a female vulva. Although several more discoveries of Aurignacian engraved blocks were made in the period between 1912 and 1927, Abri Cellier (when 7 modified blocks were discovered by an American team at Peyrony, 1946), discoveries of this sort would soon dry up. The only blocks to be found subsequently were those recorded by Movius's team at Abri Pataud (painted vault fragments and gouged ring) (Brooks, 1979; Delluc and Delluc, 2004). We report here on a major new find of Aurignacian art from the classic site of Abri Blanchard, located on the east side of the vallon de Castel-Merle just outside the village of Sergeac, in the
ze
re Valley of SW France. Last excavated historically-important Ve from 1910 to 1912 by hotel owner and amateur archaeologist Louis Didon, the Abri Blanchard yielded to Didon's workman, Castanet, several limestone blocks bearing engraved “vulvar” and animal images assigned with considerable uncertainty to the site's two identified stratigraphic units. In 2011e2012, new excavations by our team over an area of several square meters yielded a significant Aurignacian record in situ. These newly excavated archaeological units contained a large engraved slab bearing a complex animal image presented below. The excavation of this new sector of Abri Blanchard and the meticulous extraction of this limestone slab provide precious new contextual and chronological data on Aurignacian art from the  ze
re. Excavations documented the direct association between Ve the engraving and in situ artifacts typical of a classic living site: lithic implements and debitage (including dozens of refits and conjoins), osseous weapons and implements, fauna and personal ornaments. A series of four AMS dates were obtained from bone samples in the immediate proximity (Fig. 16) of the slab. Seemingly too recent on archaeological grounds, two of the four dated samples were re-dated by the same laboratory using the Hydroxyproline (Hyp) method, which excludes possible groundwater

1 ~ on While there has been some debate as to the age of some works (see Ontan and Utrilla, 2015 in press), our position is that, contra Pettitt (2008), the Chauvet paintings are as old as their 14C dates indicate (Clottes and Geneste, 2007; Valladas et al., 2004) and, that claims for pre-40,000 year-old dates in Spanish caves (Pike et al., 2012) are methodologically unsustainable (Pons-Branchu et al., 2014). 2 The Aurignacian age of the Fongal blocks is clearly indicated in a letter containing a stratigraphic profile of the site sent by Hauser to the museum in Jena and dated January 21, 1912.

contamination. The resulting Hyp dates in the vicinity of 33 000 BP are more consistent with expectations (see below, Fig. 17; Table 3).

2. Abri Blanchard: history of research Abri Blanchard is a partially collapsed rock shelter situated in the Vallon de Castel-Merle about 9 km downstream from ze
re Valley of the Department of Montignac-Lascaux in the Ve Dordogne (SW France) (Fig. 1). Tested in 1868 by Reverdit,3 then excavated by Castanet from 1910 to 1912 under the directorship of Didon, Abri Blanchard is recognized as a major site for our understanding of the Aurignacian in Europe. The size of the site (ca. 20 m long and 6.5 m wide), the several thousand artifacts that it yielded (including virtually every bone, antler, ivory and stone artifact class known for the Aurignacian) and its proximity to the Abri Castanet (Fig. 2) make it relevant and important to larger questions surrounding Aurignacian systematics. Reverdit's initial work and hence the discovery of the site was almost certainly prompted by the large-scale construction in the mid-19th century of agricultural terraces that intruded into the naturally sloping talus. Castanet notes having found a certain number of engraved slabs in the retaining walls of the terraces themselves, suggesting a borrowing of large elements from the upper levels of the archaeological deposit on the terrace proximate to the cliff face. Didon identified two archaeological units (Fig. 3) that he attributed to the Middle Aurignacian (sensu Breuil, 1912), broadly known today as the Early Aurignacian or Aurignacian I. The two units (layers B and D) were separated by a sterile layer containing roof collapse blocks from the ancient shelter ceiling (Didon, 1911). The uppermost archaeological layer (D) was capped by a yellow boulis”(E) containing large roof collapse blocks. “e According to archival sources as well as the detailed publications of Didon (1911, 1912), the lower unit (B) rested directly on a friable bedrock into which the Aurignacians had excavated four fire features. Nearly fifty years after the excavation, Sonneville Bordes (1960) re-analysis of a portion of the lithic collections raised the possibility that the upper level (D) could be attributed to a more recent phase of the Aurignacian, a subject to which we will return below. This key Aurignacian site, excavated by a single workman in the course of a few months, was among the most prolific in all of Europe, yielding to Didon (1911): - an abundant fauna dominated by reindeer with some bovids (bos/bison) and equids; - ca. 1500 (Didon, 1911) retouched lithic tools (end scrapers on retouched blades, Aurignacian blades, burins); - an unparalleled osseous industry (bone, antler and ivory) with more than 200 split-based points (including fragments); - ca. 350 personal ornaments in a variety of raw materials (ivory, bone, antler, talc, animal teeth, marine shells), many from distant sources (the Mediterranean and Atlantic littorals, the high Pyrenees); - 14 kg of mineral pigments and abrasives (see White, 2007) varying from large raw chunks to shaped “crayons”; Approximately 40 limestone blocks or roof fragments engraved or painted with “vulvar” or animal subjects, or bearing gouged rings (“anneaux”) (Delluc and Delluc, 1978; Mensan et al., 2012; White et al., 2012; Bourrillon, 2013).

3 While Reverdit (1878, 1882) never states in publication that he excavated on this side of the valley, Castanet claims to have recognized Reverdit's excavation during his work in 1910e1912. 4 All images and illustrations are those of the authors except where noted.

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

3

Fig. 1. Geographic location of Abri Blanchard and other sites mentioned (Map, N. Maumont, CNP).4

Fig. 2. Abri Blanchard in relation to other Aurignacian sites in the Vallon de CastelMerle (J. O'hara).

Although levels B and D were clearly distinguished by Castanet during the excavation, Didon did not keep the material from the two levels separate. Rather, he combined all the material and published that combined assemblage without stratigraphic distinction (Didon, 1911). Nevertheless, the published stratigraphic section at Abri Blanchard resembles closely that published by Peyrony for the Abri Castanet, situated on the same limestone terrace 50 m to the south. At Abri Castanet, Peyrony recognized an Aurignacian I layer situated on the bedrock as well as an upper, Aurignacian II layer (Peyrony, 1935). The Didon collections from Abri Blanchard show strong similarities to the Abri Castanet assemblage. In comparing the cumulative frequency graphs for the two sites, de Sonneville-Bordes observed that the two assemblages were practically identical (Sonneville-Bordes, 1960:105), an observation confirmed by technological and morphometric analysis (Chiotti et al., 2015). Based on her study of the osseous industry curated at the Mus ee d'Arch eologie Nationale, the Mus ee de l'Homme and the Institut de Pal eontologie Humaine (Paris),Leroy-Prost observed that, as at Abri Castanet, Abri Blanchard exhibits two consecutive periods of occupation attributable respectively to the Early and Middle

Fig. 3. The stratigraphy of Abri Blanchard published in 1911 by L. Didon.

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

4

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

Aurignacian (Leroy-Prost, 1979: 351). She documented, within the osseous assemblage, and in association with a typical Aurignacian I lithic industry, several losenge-shaped points that are the classic Aurignacian II index fossil. Our recent analysis of Abri Blanchard collections curated in the US has confirmed the mixed nature of the osseous industry (Tartar et al., 2014). In sum, the different analyses of Abri Blanchard materials converge in arguing for the existence of both an Early and a later Aurignacian level (Tartar et al., 2014). 3. Blocks and slabs found by Didon and Castanet In the Dordogne region, there are 9 rock shelter sites yielding, in varying quantity, Aurignacian representations on limestone supports (Fig. 4) (Bourrillon and White, 2015; White et al., in preparation). Abri Blanchard holds a dominant place within this site sample, having yielded more than 26% of the 147 works inventoried to date. While supposed “vulva” are often the focus of ze
re, Abri Blandiscussions of Aurignacian imagery from the Ve chard actually shows great diversity in represented subjects, including several animal figures (Table 1). While identifiable subjects are common to other sites in the region (ex. Abri Castanet) and more broadly across Europe (eg. Grotte Chauvet, Vogelherd), the predominant technique of representation e point-percussion e is exclusive to the Dordogne (Delluc, Delluc, 1991; Bourrillon and White, 2015). The supports for these representations are relatively soft limestone surfaces (Coniacian, which is 6 on the Mohs hardness scale), engraved or painted by Aurignacians on free-standing blocks as well as on ceilings and walls (Fig. 5). All of these surfaces, some of which are fractured due to ceiling collapse subsequent to Aurignacian occupation, are found within or between Aurignacian layers (White et al., 2012). Given the fast pace and pick-and-shovel nature of Castanet's excavations, and the very real difficulty of detecting engravings in real time on sediment-covered slabs of limestone, a loss of exact provenience for most engravings is not surprising. While some modified blocks were recognized by Castanet in real time and

Table 1 Inventory of represented subjects on the engraved blocks from Abri Blanchard. Rings (“anneaux”) Cupmarks Deep depressions Vulvas

14 2 2 8

Signs Foot/hoof prints Felids Horses

4 8 2 4

Ibex Zoomorphs Imaginary beings

1 2 1

assigned to layer during excavation, the vast majority were found some considerable time (often weeks or even months) after, during the process of sorting and washing blocks that he had set aside for further examination. In his regular written reports to Didon, Castanet was often unable to assign blocks to a given layer. While we have located 38 modified blocks, Castanet's archives suggest that roughly twice that number were recovered. Only one block was securely attributed to stratum. Our block no. 10 (Fig. 5), engraved with “vulvar” images, came from the top of layer D, the uppermost Aurignacian layer. It was accompanied by other blocks bearing “anneaux” and one with representations of animal pawprints, although we have not located the latter in existing collections, perhaps because their descriptions by Castanet are not sufficiently precise to allow us to identify them among the large number of blocks before us. It is worth pointing out that a certain number of blocks have engravings that are truncated by fractures, either ancient or induced during excavation. The conjoining fragments are missing, apparently having gone unidentified by Castanet during the process of post-excavation washing and examination. Ironically our spatial data on the modified blocks from Abri Blanchard is much better than our stratigraphic data. This is because Castanet's archives are sufficiently detailed to allow us to construct a calendar of his excavations so as to know where in the site he was excavating at any given time. This allows us to assign objects to numbered trenches for which we know the location and orientation. We can observe a strong concentration of engraved blocks at the northern extremity of the shelter with“anneaux” and decorated blocks in direct archaeological association with a wide range of quotidian activities. This is precisely the sector in which the newly discovered engraving of an aurochs was found in 2012. 4. The engraved slab found in 2012 The discovery of the block was made in two steps during field operations on July 9 and 10, 2012. Already broken in situ, it showed a clear longitudinal fracture line, having probably been weakened by the gouging (by the Aurignacians) of a deep depression near the middle of the engraved surface (Fig. 6). During the extraction of the first fragment of the block, the punctuations were recognized on the downward-facing surface. Situated in the center of sector 4/5 just beyond the northern limit of the Didon excavations and 1.5 m from the cliff face, the block sat with its engraved surface downward in direct association with a dense and diverse array of artifacts (eg. retouch flakes, fauna, pierced fox tooth, osseous industry). 4.1. Archaeological context

 ze
re (n ¼ 147 Fig. 4. Distribution by site of engraved Aurignacian blocks in the Ve blocs). (Note that for Abri Cellier, the count includes unpublished examples recovered during our 2014 excavations [White et al., in preparation]).

4.1.1. Field operation In 2011, after previously recognizing intact deposits at Abri Blanchard in the course of a wider investigation of the paleotopography of the vallon de Castel-Merle, we began test excavations to evaluate the scientific importance of what remained (Fig. 7). These excavations, in combination with archives left by Castanet, allowed us to identify the limits of the latter's trenches, the digging of which had nearly emptied the rock-shelter at the beginning of the 20th century.

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

5

Fig. 5. Abri Blanchard, examples of engraved and painted blocks. A. Bloc no. 5, imaginary animal and lower legs of horse oriented in opposite directions; B. Bloc no. 10, female  B&G Delluc; C. Bloc no. 11 & 12 lower part of a horse Muse e d'Art et d'Arche ologie du Pe rigord; D. Unpublished block, “anneau” Museum of Natural History of New “vulvae” (cliche York; E. Unpublished block, lower extremities of horse Field Museum of Chicago).

In January 1910 Castanet began excavating intermittently, beginning at the northern extremity of the Blanchard shelter. He writes to Didon (letter dated March 14, 2010, copy in possession of R. White) that in this the upper level is heavily carbonated and as “hard as cement.” Our excavations identified the contours of this sagittal trench dug early in the excavations. The backdirt was placed to the north, covering the intact deposits that we would ultimately excavate in 2011e2012. From there, Castanet would move progressively southward where digging was much easier, leaving behind a small patch of heavily cemented sediments adhering to the obliquely inclining bedrock at the northern end of the shelter (our sector 1).

The archaeological material contained within this residual layer is attributable to a recent phase of the Aurignacian (Peyrony's Aurignacian II) (cf. Chiotti et al., 2015; Tartar et al., 2014). The position of this layer on a step in the bedrock, as well as its sedimentary and archaeological structure, suggest that it was deposited by gravity, affected by post-depositional phenomena, and that it is in secondary position. The technological and typological contents of this layer lead us to think that it is probably a relic of the upper archaeological level described by Castanet. It is entirely possible that the intrusive nature of the upper part of the sequence at Abri Blanchard was not appreciated during the early excavations and that Didon, who visited the site only occasionally, published an

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

6

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

exclusively Aurignacian, spans all size fractions and displays no evidence of sorting by water action. In spite of the postdepositional processes, in particular water percolation, this layer is clearly in primary position. The archaeological level discovered in sector 4/5 was intact over a surface of 8 m2 and reached 40 cm in maximum thickness. 4.2. Archaeological assemblage of sector 4/5

Fig. 6. Limestone slab engraved with image of an aurochs, discovered in situ at Abri e National de la Pre histoire). Blanchard in 2012 (Photo P. Jugie, Muse

“idealized” stratigraphy. To the north, beyond these deposits in secondary position, Castanet also left behind an intact, concreted layer situated directly on bedrock (our sector 4/5). It is in this sector that the new engraved block was recovered. 4.1.2. Stratigraphy of sector 4/5 The stratigraphy encountered in sector 4/5 was composed of three different types of deposits: on top, backdirt from the Castanet excavation, below that, brown sediment containing historic and protohistoric artifacts and at the base, the Paleolithic level itself (Fig. 8). The first layer was composed of backdirt evacuated from Castanet's first sagittal trench (in 1910) immediately to the South. It covered a brown organic soil, apparently disturbed by 19th Century terrace agriculture and containing a small number of metal, bone and ceramic objects that are diagnostically and exclusively GalloRoman in age (identification by L. Hautefeuille, personal communication)5. Under this humic layer, no more recent material was observed. At the base of the sequence, the highly concreted Paleolithic level sits directly in contact with the bedrock. The sedimentary matrix of this deposit consists of yellow sand from the limestone decomposition with a heavy degree of carbonate containing some small limestone plaquettes, clay and silt. The base of the deposit is calcified and adheres to the underlying bedrock. Many artifacts are actually stuck to the bedrock. The new engraved block was discovered well-buried within this matrix, engraved face downward, surrounded by dense concentrations of artifacts and limestone plaquettes. While the carbonate-rich matrix attests to water saturation, the archaeological material associated with the engraved block,

5 These typical Gallo-Roman remains (ceramics, metal, oyster shells) almost certainly derive from the Gallo-Roman villa identified on the promontory at the top of the cliff face above Blanchard (Sarradet, 1965).

4.2.1. Lithic assemblage Sector 4/5 existed over only 8 square meters, but yielded a remarkable total of 2566 lithic artifacts. Debitage (including cores) is abundantly represented and there is an extraordinarily high percentage of lithic refits (45 refits or 8.7% of all objects longer than 15 mm), attesting to the archaeological integrity of the deposit. The 2566 break down into 43.2% bladelets (N ¼ 965), 31.1% flakes, 12.5% blades. The 112 retouched tools (4.5% of the assemblage) found surrounding the 2012 block are characteristically Early Aurignacian in character, dominated by retouched blades (26 with continuous retouch and 7 with partial or discontinuous retouch), followed by scrapers (18 “flat” scrapers and 7 carinate scrapers). Not a single
museau) is present. The metrics of the nosed scraper (grattoir a carinate scraper fronts are statistically indistinguishable from those recovered by us from the Early Aurignacian at Abri Castanet (Chiotti et al., 2015) but they are wider than those from the more recent Aurignacian of sector 1 (25.9 mm versus 17 mm). Seven splintered
ces esquille es), six burins and six pointed blades or becs pieces (pie make up the rest of the tool assemblage. Not a single Aurignacian burin is present. There is a total of ten retouched bladelets of various types, including three Dufour bladelets of the Roc de Combe variant made on small bladelets extracted from carinate scrapers (curved and twisted for the more complete specimen). In addition to these pieces, four bladelets show intensive use traces in the form of microflaking (Fig. 9). Beyond the archaeological integrity of the deposit, the high percentage of lithic refits attest the in situ knapping of flakes and blades, and in particular large blades (more than 15 cm long). The presence of all the stages of bladelets production from carinate scrapers also attest the in situ knapping of bladelets. In sum, in spite of the small surface preserved, sector 4/5 has yielded an assemblage sufficiently abundant to allow a viable statistical analysis. The typo-technological analysis reveals a homogeneous assemblage attributable to the Early Aurignacian as at Abri Castanet. Refitting confirms that sector 4/5 was a locus for the production of large blades (even in semi-exotic Bergerac flint) as well as flakes. Three tools in particular are worth noting in the context of the engraved block. The first, identified as a pick (J11A-341), is constructed on a block of heavily patinated Senonian flint, probably a core or core fragment (Fig. 10). A robust point was created by scalar removals on two faces, the third remaining unworked. The extremity of the point shows a small number of lamellar removals but, importantly, shows heavy use traces in the form of microflaking and strong polish on all the crests converging to form the point. Extreme blunting on two other tools from sector 4/5 suggest possible limestone working (Fig. 10). We base this hypothesis on the fact that these are precisely the kinds of objects used by us in our percussion/engraving experiments and the damage observed on these archaeological specimens is consistent with that on our experimental tools. A microwear analysis of these pieces is now necessary to confirm this hypothesis. 4.2.2. Fauna (NISP ¼ 831) Five taxa were represented in the sector 4/5 fauna, presented here in decreasing order of abundance: reindeer, horse, bison/

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

7

Fig. 7. 2012 excavation plan of Abri Blanchard showing location of new block and the spatial relationship between Didon's excavations and our own.

aurochs, wolf and fox (Table 2). Reindeer dominates, representing at least 86% of NISP. Since it is the only species identified in its size class and since we presume that all mid-sized herbivores are reindeer, the percentage rises to 96%. As at Abri Castanet

(reindeer ¼ 92% NISP), the reindeer was overwhelmingly the basis of animal subsistence for the Aurignacians of sector 4/5. Both at Abri Blanchard and at Abri Castanet, the role of large herbivores is extremely limited, although their very presence implies occasional

Fig. 8. A. Marcel Castanet's backdirt, B. Intact humic layer, C. Intact archaeological layer in place.

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

8

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

Fig. 9. Abri Blanchard sector 4/5 retouched and used bladelets. a: L11A-8-T62; b: K11C-69-T106; c: I10C-40-T65; d: K11B-105-T86; e: K11A-139-T98; f: K11C-193-T81; g: K11C-183T92. a-c ¼ Dufour bladelets of the Roc de Combe variant; d-g ¼ bladelets with microflaking.

hunting of bison/aurochs and horse. Red deer is absent and there is but one identifiable element of wolf (a canine) and two of fox (two canines, one of which is pierced for suspension). Overall, the faunal material recovered from sector 4/5 reflects human processing and species proportions very similar to those of the Early Aurignacian at Abri Castanet. 4.2.3. Osseous industry and ornaments The excavations undertaken at Abri Blanchard sector 4/5 yielded 12 osseous objects in bone and antler, 1 ivory bead, a pierced animal tooth (the previously mentioned perforated fox tooth) and three unworked plaques of ivory (Fig. 11). Unfortunately, these artifacts are not sufficiently characteristic typologically or technologically to allow precise chrono-cultural assignment. The osseous industry, dominated by bone, includes awls, retouchers, an intermediate tool, a small rod as well as an antler blank and fragments. While the splitting-and-wedging readable on the antler blanks and on one of the awls are consistent with the Aurignacian, it is impossible to be more precise. However, it is noteworthy that the pieces (especially the awls and the intermediate tool) are entirely within the range of osseous artifacts from Didon's excavations at Abri Blanchard and those recovered at Abri Castanet (Northern and Southern sectors) assigned with certainty to the Early Aurignacian. Regarding ornaments, one can say little about the pierced fox canine, except that the taxon and perforation technique (bifacial gouging) are consistent with those found during the previous excavations. The bilobate bead is also consistent with those found by Didon, who also recovered unfinished beads of this type (probably toggles). Several of these, including rough-outs were found in the Early Aurignacian backdirt at La Souquette just 100 m across the vallon from Abri Blanchard. It is worth observing that this particular example is slightly larger and more globular than most other Aurignacian examples. No examples of this bead type were found in the recent Abri Castanet excavations. Unfortunately, we have no well-controlled stratigraphic referents elsewhere for these bilobate

beads that might inform us as to their chronostratigraphic position within the Aurignacian. In conclusion, despite its small preserved surface, sector 4/5 has yielded an assemblage that is sufficient to allow a viable quantitative analysis. Refitting and conjoining data underline the fact that we are dealing with a single, homogeneous, and quite undisturbed archaeological layer; unstratified from bottom to top. The concreted aspect of the layer, directly on the bedrock also attests the primary position of the deposit. Typologically the assemblage associated with the engraved block is very similar to the Early Aurignacian assemblage excavated by us at Abri Castanet situated 50 m to the South and well dated to 32 400 BP (White et al., 2012). Although they are very small, the osseous and ornament assemblages from the 2011e2012 excavations are also consistent with those found during the previous excavations and those found in our recent, well-controlled excavations at Abri Castanet. In both cases, the Early Aurignacian level was situated directly on bedrock. In sum, from a lithic perspective, the 2011e2012 excavations at Abri Blanchard have yielded, two assemblages, each from a different and distinct sector, which are sufficient quantitatively to allow cultural/chronological characterization of their contents. Sector 1 is attributable to a Recent Aurignacian while sector 4/5 contains Early Aurignacian. Happily, in spite of low resolution excavations at the beginning of the 20th century, we can now confirm the presence at Abri Blanchard of a Recent Aurignacian level, separate and distinct from that containing the engraved slab described here. The block-bearing deposit, directly on bedrock, is likely a remnant of the Didon's Aurignacian I layer B. 5. Graphic and technical analysis of the engraved slab 5.1. Materials and methods Our study of the decorated surface involved the following procedures: photographic coverage of the surface of each constituent

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

9

Fig. 10. Abri Blanchard sector 4/5 pieces with strong polish. a: BL12-J11A-341, pic; b: BL12-J11B-102, retouched blade; c: BL12-H11D-1, end-scraper/point on retouched blade.

Table 2 Inventory of the sector 4/5 fauna identified during the 2012 excavations at Blanchard. NISP Bison or Horse size Bison Horse Reindeer or Horse size Reindeer size ungulates (medium) Red deer or Reindeer Reindeer Medium or small ungulates Small mammal (wolf or chamois size) Wolf Fox Fœtus of mammal TOTAL

15 3 2 43 417 1 151 27 1 1 1 3 831

block; creation of a photo mosaic reuniting all constituent surfaces of the block; tracing on transparent plastic film of all of the graphic elements visible on the photographs; high resolution photogrammetry of the surface so as to obtain a 3D image of the block and to

undertake precise measurements; microtopographic study of the engraved surface of the block and of the imprint of the engraved motif in the archaeological level beneath; experimental replication of Aurignacian engravings, anneaux, and cup marks; and radiometric dating by traditional AMS 14C methods and ultrafiltration, accompanied by Bayesian modeling and calibration of the 14C estimates obtained.

5.2. Results of the study Castanet's archives for Abri Blanchard and Abri Castanet reveal that the vast majority of modified blocks were found within or between archaeological layers, with their engraved or painted surfaces facing downward. There are two possible explanations for this, one taphonomic, the other cultural. For certain blocks, our recent work has shown that they are roof-collapse fragments which explains the downward orientation of the engraved surface (White et al., 2012). Other engraved blocks were originally free-standing, even portable. In these cases, the absence of high energy taphonomic process (Mensan et al., 2012; Chiotti et al., 2015) implies that

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

10

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

Fig. 11. Osseous industry, Blanchard 2012: 1. Awl, 2.Distal fragment of awl, 3.Rod, 4.Awl or awl blank 5.Intermediate tool on a split rib, 6.Retoucher, 7.Reindeer antler “baguette”.

it was the Aurignacians themselves who turned the engraved surfaces downward. Apart from being split by a longitudinal fracture, the engraved surface shows quite good surface preservation, with few concretions or other alterations (Fig. 12). Separation along natural bedding planes within the limestone has resulted in notable disaggregation of the interior of the block and of the face opposite the engraving. This same separation of limestone layer was seen on other blocks found in sector 4/5.

Finally, it is worth observing that the spatial placement of the image on the prepared surface is not random as is shown by the perfect framing of the animal, with the lower limbs poised on one edge of the slab as if it were the ground surface. This framing and the rounded appearance of the edges of the block, imply that the surface was not engraved while part of the shelter ceiling. In other words, the slab was either moved into the site for engraving or was a previously fallen ceiling block that was engraved at some later date during the course of the occupation.

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

11

Fig. 12. A. Limestone block engraved with an aurochs and with a gouged depression. B. Details of the engraving of the rear legs and the horn (Photos P. Jugie, MNP and R. Bourrillon).

This slab of Coniacian limestone (44  50  8 cm), used as support for the engraving was worked on one face only (Fig. 13). Three graphic elements are distinguishable:- an aurochs (44  15 cm) in right profile view, - series of aligned, similarly-sized punctuations (n ¼ 72) (ranging from 0,5 to 1 cm in diameter), - a large and deep cup-mark (4 cm in diameter and 2 cm deep) in the center of the animal's body which may have weakened the slab leading to its eventual transverse fracture6. The aurochs shows a marked sway back, pronounced withers and a forward projected, curved horn. Particular care was taken in the rendering of the cervico-dorsal line where a manipulation of the angle of the engraved line creates the impression of bas-relief. The size of the head is small in relation to that of the body and the finely engraved muzzle is somewhat elongated. The limbs are represented on the same plane and are not in perspective. The abdominal line terminates with what seems to be the sexual organ. The tail, rendered explicitly in a raised position, stands in contrast to the absence of details such as ears and eyes. The back- and neck-line of the animal, as well as its tail, horn, head and chest are rendered using shallow, uniform point-

6 A distinction is recognized between « punctuations » whose diameter does not exceed 1.5 cms and “cup-marks,” which are larger and shallower.

percussion with the individual impacts fully overlapping so as to be nearly invisible to the naked eye. In contrast, the other graphic elements (limbs, abdomen and hindquarters) are constructed of linear arrangements of small punctuations, subsequently connected by the application of a tool point to form a full continuous line. While series of small punctuations were used to construct the lines that form a part of the outline of the animal, they are not restricted to that context. They also occur independently on the prepared surface of the slab, notably behind the animal and beneath its chest and face. Based on macroscopic and microscopic examination of the prepared and engraved areas of the surface, the superposition of technical traces and numerous replicative experiments 7, we have reconstructed the operational sequence for the execution of the aurochs as follows: (1) preparation of the slab's surface, (2) creation of the deep cup-mark, (3) creation of the isolated and aligned punctuations, (4) engraving of the back-line and the transformation of the aligned punctuations to form the limbs, the hindquarters and the abdomen.

7 Experiments on techniques used to create Aurignacian limestone engravings were carried out by R. Bourrillon between 2011 and 2013 in collaboration with  (flintknapper) and some authors of the present article (ET, CC, LC, Florent Le Mene RW) in the context of the project “Aurignacian Genius,” financed by the Partner University Fund.

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

12

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

Fig. 13. Rendering of the engraved block. A. with all details; B. selective rendering separating the animal figure and the punctuations.

In front of the chest and beneath the muzzle, as well as along the right hand margin of the prepared surface, short, parallel marks, also done by point-percussion, remain enigmatic. Lines were roughed out using rapid-fire direct percussion along a linear axis. In the lower center of the engraved surface, a tunnel-like depression was created by point-percussion leaving numerous tool impact marks that are still visible. Already well known for the Aurignacian in this region, the function and/or meaning of these depressions remains puzzling. The animal figure, executed after the creation of the deep depression, was constructed so as to integrate this feature, which seems to have an important role in the overall graphic construct. The technique employed to create the alignments of visibly separate punctuations, is seen in many Aurignacian engravings (Fig. 14). First recognized by Peyrony (Morin-Jean, 1933) and later by Delluc and Delluc (1978: 220), it is what we refer to as a powerturn. It involves the application under hand pressure of a moreor-less acute tool point such as those in Fig. 10a. In a unified, continuous gesture, the point is rotated unidirectionally through an arc of 90e130 thus deepening the shallow depression created by the initial engagement of the tool point with the target material. The comma-like stigmata left by such a technique are clearly visible on the Abri Blanchard mammoth-tooth plaque originally studied by Marshack (ex. 1972) and on a fish-like ivory pendant from the same site as well as on ivory pendants from La Souquette often interpreted as marine shell facsimiles (Fig. 15). 6. Radiometric dates Four 14C-AMS accelerator dates (Oxford) were obtained on nonburned mammal-bone fragments sampled in the same layer, and in immediate horizontal and vertical proximity to the slab (Fig. 16; Table 3). The 14C results showed a bimodal distribution that is difficult to understand given the archaeological and sedimentary integrity of the deposit. Moreover the dates seem too young for an Early Aurignacian assemblage that is in almost all respects

indistinguishable from the well-dated archaeological assemblage from the nearby Abri Castanet (White et al., 2012). Younger than expected radiocarbon dates might result from the influence of the site geochemistry. There is ground water percolation from surface deposits, as attested to by the highly carbonate matrix is a possibility. The major variables used to determine problems with AMS dates of bone collagen suggested nothing out of the expected ranges but these are often not particularly sensitive to contaminants. Percolation can carry groundwater rich in the bicarbonate ion and also humic substances up and down a sedimentary profile, and chemical cross linking between collagen and humic molecules can occur, and these bonds can sometimes prove difficult to break. In order to test this contamination scenario we applied the ORAU amino acid dating method (see Marom et al., 2010) to the three previously dated samples that had good collagen yields. We isolated the amino acid hydroxyproline (Hyp) using High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) with an approach based on that previously outlined by Nalawade-Chavan et al. (2013). This amino acid essentially acts as a biomarker for collagen. Dating only hydroxyproline allows us to effectively exclude all other site derived contaminants. The results are shown in Table 3. One sample (OxA-27178) failed due to purely technical reasons having nothing to do with the sample itself. The two remaining successful AMS-Hyp dates were corrected for the background C related to the HPLC instrument using the algorithm outlined in Nalawade-Chavan et al. (2013). The C:N atomic ratios are consistent with hydroxyproline. The Ash Bend bone sample is one of the standards used in the ORAU for this purpose (see Brock et al., 2010). It is estimated to be ~70e80 ka BP. It was prepared and dated under the same conditions as the Abri Blanchard samples. The two Hyp dates are statistically significantly older than the previously ultrafiltered collagen measurements, suggesting that the initial determinations were affected by an exogenous contamination perhaps cross-linked to the collagen that could not be removed by the usual ORAU procedures. The calibrated results

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

13

Fig. 14. Examples of aligned punctuations on Aurignacian blocks. 1&2.Abri Blanchard; 3. La Ferrassie; 4. Abri Castanet; 5. Abri Cellier (unpublished).

(Fig. 17), when compared tentatively against the NGRIP oxygen isotope record, seems to support the site being occupied at or around Greenland Interstadial 8, rather than towards the younger ages that were strongly implied by the initial set of results. As a point of comparison, as with the previously published dates for parietal engravings at Abri Castanet (White et al., 2012), these dates fit comfortably within the range of dates obtained for the lowest archaeological horizon (Vb) at Hohlefels (Conard, 2009). 7. Discussion: wider implications and comparisons In the early phases of the French Upper Paleolithic, the Aurignacians sometimes inhabited (Chiotti et al., 2003) limestone terraces sheltered by overhangs created by differential erosion due to frost action. In those contexts, they developed a tradition of graphic expression on shelter ceilings and on free standing limestone blocks and slabs. The latter were semi-mobile, transportable over a few meters at most (Fig. 14). Among the known sites, techniques (point-percussion, red/black painting) as well as subjects (horses, ibex, felids, male and female sexual organs, animal prints, etc (Bourrillon and White, 2014) are similar. Of nine art-bearing rock shelter sites attributed to the Aurignacian (cf. Fig. 4), only Abri Castanet, Abri Blanchard, La Ferrassie

and Abri Pataud have yielded 14C dates for the archaeological levels containing such works (Delibrias et al., 1987; Higham et al., 2011; White et al., 2012). For these four sites, only a handful of blocks from La Ferrassie and one from Abri Blanchard can be assigned to the late Aurignacian; the others are all Early Aurignacian. There are at present too few radiometric dates to allow us to put forth arguments concerning stylistic changes between the Early and Late Aurignacian. The assignment of the 2012 engraved block from Abri Blanchard to the Early Aurignacian is evident on contextual and stratigraphic grounds. Moreover, formal and stylistic comparison with previously discovered Aurignacian representations, in SW France and elsewhere show this graphic composition to be right at home. In ze
re addition to the point-percussion technique typical of the Ve Aurignacian (even if it occurs in a much more limited way throughout the Upper Paleolithic), the absence of details within the contours of the animal, the single horn (in absolute profile view rather than twisted perspective), the non-perspective presentation of the four limbs and the long, thin muzzle are common characteristics of Aurignacian figurative representation. rigord, AuriIn terms of subject-matter, even if rare in the Pe gnacian images of aurochs are known and also documented in other regions (e.g., grotte Chauvet). Aligned punctuations are

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

14

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

um d’Histoire Naturelle de Toulouse); 3 & 5. La Souquette; 2, Fig. 15. Examples of aligned punctuations on Aurignacian portable objects and ornaments. 1. Tuto-de-Camalhot (Muse e d’Arche ologie National, Paris); 12.Geissenklosterle (Württember4, 7, 10 & 13.Abri Blanchard; 6.Abri Castanet; 8 & 11.Vogelherd (photos J. Liptak, H. Floss); 9.Abri Lartet (Muse €t Tübingen). gisches Landesmuseum Stuttgart, Universita

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

15

Fig. 16. Profile view through the engraved block showing location of the dated samples.

Table 3 Uncalibrated molecular filtration dates and their corresponding calibrations.8 Bottom: New hydroxyproline determinations from the Abri Blanchard site. Ash Bend is a standard beyond background-aged bone used to quantify the correction blanks for the HPLC dated samples. C:N atomic ratios for hydroxyproline should be 5.0. Vol (mL) is the volume of mobile phase and the graphite size is the amount of graphite produced from the combustion of the amino acids. OxA-X- no.

Location

OxA-27176 OxA-27177 OxA-27178 OxA-X-2494-15

Blanchard Blanchard Blanchard Blanchard

I11D104 I11D129 I11D106 I11D103

Taxon

C

Age

reindeer bone reindeer bone mid-sized mammal bone reindeer bone

d13C¼19.44 d13C¼19.30 d13C¼20.05 d13C¼18.94

29,540 31,250 31,030 28,970

± ± ± ±

330 400 400 320

BP BP BP BP

OxA-X- no.

Vol (mL)

Graphite size (mg)

C:N ratio

AMS F14C

±

Corrected age

Ash Bend std OxA-X-2669-54a OxA-X-2669-55b

36 45 36

2.285 2.1251 2.1878

5.0 5.1 5.1

0.01647 0.01538

0.00068 0.00065

>50,100 33420 ± 350 33960 ± 360

Notes: a This is a repeat of OxA-27176 (29540 ± 330 BP). b This is a repeat of OxA-27177 (31250 ± 400 BP).

Fig. 17. Radiocarbon determinations of bone from Abri Blanchard with results compared tentatively against the NGRIP d18O record (see Andersen et al., 2006; Svensson et al., 2008). Red outline determinations are the two single amino acid determinations of hydroxyproline and repeat measurements of initial ultrafiltered gelatin determinations (in black outline) of the same bones. The figure was prepared using OxCal 4.2 (Bronk Ramsey, 2009) and the INTCAL13 calibration curve (Reimer et al., 2013).

 ze
re Aurignacian (see below) but their assowidespread in the Ve ciation here with an animal image is exceptional. Such alignments of punctuations are found on blocks and slabs,

on more portable engravings some of them functional objects, and on ornaments ranging from large pendants to smaller beads (Figs. 14 and 15). We have counted 14 Aurignacian objects with such

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

16

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

Table 4 Number of representations with aligned punctuations (portable objects, blocks and ornaments) by site. Portable and block supports Dordogne Castanet Blanchard Ferrassie Lartet Souquette  ne es Pyre Tuto de Camalhot Jura-Souabe €sterle Geissenklo Vogelherd

1 2 2 1 1

Personal ornaments

5

1 1

1 4

aligned punctuations in the Dordogne and Swabian record, making them far from rare (Table 4) 9. Whether in isolation or in association with other figures, the number of punctuations per object is highly variable (from a few to more than a hundred). They have in common their patterned arrangement on the surfaces concerned. In another era, Marshack saw in these arrangements a system of lunar notation (Marshack, 1972). However, our experiments reveal that these were done with a single tool in a single sitting, not at all coherent with day-by-day recording of external events (White, 1982). Moreover, the virtually microscopic scale of many of these alignments renders inter-punctuation variability, essential to the notation hypothesis, invisible to the naked eye. The importance of these alignments of punctuations, whether or not associated with other graphic elements, is their strong presence in two Early Aurignacian regions key10 to our understanding of the regional (territorial?) aspects of this archaeologz e
re Valley and the Swabian Jura. Such ical “culture”: the Ve specific graphic similarities between distant Aurignacian site clusters: Abri Blanchard, Abri Castanet, La Souquette, Abri Lartet/ €rle and Hohle Poisson on one hand and Vogelherd, Geißenkloste Fels on the other, raises the question of the contemporaneity and/ or socioeconomic relationship of these regional groupings across the European landscape.11 Whatever the true chronological relationship, what interests us here is what seems to be a mode of expression common to the Early Aurignacian sequences in these two key regions. This commonality serves to unite two quite different modes or techniques of representation: pecked engraving on limestone surfaces in the Dordogne and miniature ivory sculpture in Swabia (cf. Fig. 15 no.8, 11e12; White et al., 2012; Floss, 2007). If we bring the Grotte Chauvet into the comparison, we can posit additional inter-regional linkages in representational techniques and subjects. One of the Chauvet rhinoceroses is constructed of aligned punctuations, raising the very real possibility of an

8 Sample OxA-X2494-15 had a low collagen level (4.8 mg and 0,7%wt), which is slightly under the laboratory ideal (5 mg et 1% wt). 9 Only some of the sites listed in Fig. 15 are dated by 14C with respect to the layers containing punctuated pieces: Castanet (Dordogne; White et al., 2012):
ge; Average of 32,400 BP, 14C-AMS by ultrafiltration; Tuto-de-Camalhot (Arie Delibrias et al., 1987): 35,140 ± 660 and 32,180 ± 570 BP; Geïssenklosterle (Germany; Higham et al., 2012): layer II between 35,700 ± 650 and 33,000 ± 500 BP, 14C-AMS by ultrafiltration; Vogelherd (Germany; Conard and Bolus, 2003): layer IV 30,730 ± 750 BP, 14C-AMS; layer V Average of 31,900 ± 1100 BP, 14C-AMS. 10 This theme does not re-emerge until the Middle Magdalenian, and then almost exclusively on lissoirs (Brassempouy, Isturitz, Laugerie-Basse, Campalou, Lortet; Rivero, 2010) and mainly in the South of France. 11
ge) (Ve zian and There is, in addition, a pendant from Tuto-de-Camalhot (Arie zian, 1966). Ve

Fig. 18. Grotte Chauvet, pointillist rhinoceros, created with the palm of the hand (photo J. Clottes).

equivalence between power-turned punctuations and painted dots (Fig. 18).12 The idea of graphic convergence among the three regions is reinforced by our recent recognition13 of an engraved felid in the Chauvet style on a limestone block from Abri Blanchard (Didon excavations 1910e1912) (Fig. 19). The representation of a felid, until  ze
re at La Ferrassie, is an interesting link now only seen in the Ve between Chauvet and Abri Blanchard. Moreover, the technique of creating the cat's muzzle in three loops is strikingly similar, creating a common thread linking the two sites. The discovery of the new block with an engraved aurochs in archaeological context, in the midst of everyday living-site activities, raises another question, that of the relationship between symbolic practices and quotidian activities. According to Marcel Castanet's archives, the engraved blocks from Abri Blanchard were consistently found in zones of intense occupation and were thus not isolated from the quotidian. In addition, the fact of a long-term seasonal occupation where the full range of everyday activities is abundantly represented is very similar to sites like Vogelherd and €sterle (Floss, 2007). Geißenklo ze
re Another characteristic of the limestone slabs from the Ve would seem to distinguish them from expressive forms in the
che; that of their visibility. In the Ve  ze
re, Swabian Jura and the Arde decorated surfaces, by their size, by their positioning on the ground or on shelter walls and ceilings, and also by the techniques used to create them (point-percussion, application of red and black pigments were a highly visible part of everyday life (even though they were destined to remain on site). Caution is required here however, as many of the engraved surfaces were positioned downward and therefore not visible. If this fact derives from a purposeful removal of imagery from the everyday experience, then the more mobile of the slabs may be seen as similar to the purposely-buried context of the Vogelherd figurines. Given the fixed position of some of the images on shelter ceilings, as we have demonstrated at Castanet-Sud, it is perhaps more prudent to imagine multiple contexts. Even in cave contexts such as Chauvet, we can question whether images were really disconnected from everyday existence. The presence of several fireplaces, faunal remains and the lithic artifacts recovered during soundings do not necessarily translate into a separation between the “profane” and the “sacred” (Clottes and

12 Contrary to the power-turned alignments of punctuations which are absent outside of Aurignacian contexts, linear arrangements of painted dots exist well beyond the Aurignacian (e.g., the “dotted” Gravettian horses from Pech-Merle (Lot) or the spotted Magdalenian bison from Marsoulas, Haute-Garonne). 13 This felid head, rediscovered in 2009 by R. White and R. Bourrillon during the re-study of the old collections, is from Castanet's excavations (1910e1912), had apparently been seen earlier by Gilles Tosello (personal communication).

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

17

Fig. 19. Stylistic and thematic similarities between Abri Blanchard and Grotte Chauvet (Chauvet image by Carole Fritz).

Geneste, 2007), especially when we know that the Chauvet paintings were not far from the original entry. The boundary that we often draw between the ritual and symbolic (religion and art) on one hand, and the quotidian on the other, is a modern imposition (White, 2000). For most contemporary hunter-gatherers, a category “art” is non-existent and expressive acts are continuous with everyday tasks (Carpenter, 1973). We might even go so far as to imagine that the expressive potential of a locality might justify its very choice as a place to live. As Godelier (2007) suggested, politico-religious factors had a key role in such choices. It appears then, that Aurignacian groups, in the few thousand years following their arrival in Europe, show a broad commonality in graphic expression against which a certain number of more regionalized characteristics stand out. This regional diversity is not a trivial matter and seems to find an echo in personal ornaments (Bolus and Conard, 2001; White, 1992a,b,c; Wolf and Conard, 2015; Vanhaeren and d'Errico, 2006). Regional environmental differences may well have something to do with this variability (Banks et al., 2013). While it is possible that these regional variants in Aurignacian representation map onto the numerous “transitional industries” present across the European landscape prior to the ^telperronien, Uluzzien, Bohuni“arrival” of the Aurignacian (Cha cien, etc.), it is just as likely that they emerged afterwards in the course of modern human dispersal from the East (Kozlowski, 2005; Bar Yosef, 2006; Slimak et al., 2006; Teyssandier, 2007; Conard and Bolus, 2008; Le Brun Ricalens et al., 2009; Tsanova et al., 2012; etc.). According to that view, this pattern of regional variability conforms to the kind of social geography models, which focus on the material construction of identity at regional, group and individual levels

(Wobst, 1977; Conkey, 1990) expressed in portable art, osseous industries and even lithic technology (Bon, 2009; Floss, 2007; Tartar et al., 2006; Tartar, 2015). Acknowledgements The excavations and experimental program undertaken at Abri Blanchard were funded by a three-year grant from the Partner University Fund and the Andrew Mellon Foundation through a Franco- American collaborative exchange between UMI 3199
s, CNRS-NYU & UMR 5608-TRACES, U. of Toulouse 2-Jean Jaure entitled “Aurignacian Genius: Art, daily life and social identity of the first modern humans of Europe”. Additional funding was received from the Direction r egional des affaires culturelles d’Aquitaine (DRAC-Aquitaine), the L.S.B. Leakey Foundation, UMI 3199CNRS-NYU (Center for International Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences) and the Institute for Ice Age Studies. The authors wish to thank the site owners, the Castanet-Daumas family, as well as Nathalie Fourment and Dany Barraud of the Service r egional de l'arch eologie d'Aquitaine for their enthusiastic support of our  work at Blanchard. This article is dedicated to the memory of Rene Castanet. The radiocarbon dating was supported by the “PalaeoChron” project via the European Research Council (grant number 324139). References Ambert, P., Guedon, J.-L., Galant, P., Quinif, Y., Gruneisen, A., Colomer, A., Dainat, D., olithiques de la Beaumes, B., Requirand, C., 2005. Attribution des gravures pale
ne (Cesseras, He rault)
grotte de l’Alde a l’Aurignacien par la datation des ologiques. Comptes Rendus Palevol 4 (3), 275e284. remplissages ge

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

18

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19

Andersen, K.K., Svensson, A., Johnsen, S.J., Rasmussen, S.O., Bigler, M., Rothlisberger, R., Ruth, U., Siggaard-Andersen, M.-L., Steffensen, J.P., DahlJensen, D., Vinther, B.M., Clausen, H.B., 2006. The Greenland ice core chronology 2005, 15e42 ka. Part 1: constructing the time scale. Quat. Sci. Rev. 25 (23e24), 3246e3257. ma, M., Ge ly, B., Bourrillon, R., Galant, P., 2012. L'art pale olithique de la Baume Aze le ments de datation. Int. Newsl. Rock Art 64, Latrone (France, Gard) : nouveaux e 6e12. Banks, W.E., d'Errico, F., Zihlao, J., 2013. Human-climate interaction during the early upper paleolithic: testing the hypothesis of an adaptive shift between the proto-aurignacian and the early aurignacian. J. Hum. Evol. 64 (1), 39e55. ologique de la re volution du Pale olithique Bar Yosef, O., 2006. Le cadre arche rieur. In: Naissance de la pense e symbolique et du language. Presses unisupe
ne, 214, Paris, pp. 3e23. versitaires de France, Dioge ly, B., 2010. De couverte d’une nouvelle grotte Besesek, M., Radu, V.A., Lascu, V.T., Ge e pale olithique (Pestera Coliboaia), Roumanie, de partement du Bihor. Int. orne Newsl. Rock Art 57, 8e11. Bolus, M., Conard, N.J., 2001. The late middle paleolithic and earliest upper Paleolithic in central Europe and their relevance for the out of Africa hypothesis. Quat. Int. 75, 29e40.  histoire. La fabrique de l’homme. Editions Bon, F., 2009. Pre du Seuil. l’Univers historique, Paris.  aurignacien des abris-sous-roche de Dordogne. Bourrillon, R., 2013. L'art fragmente ma, M. (Dir.), Arts rupestres, des re cits mille naires. Les. dossiers In: aze ologie 358, 14e15. d'Arche Bourrillon, R., White, R., 2014. Les abris aurignaciens de Blanchard et Castanet (Vallon de Castel-Merle, Dordogne, France). In Grimpret, M. (Dir.), Dictionnaire . Robert Laffont 217e219. des sanctuaires de l’humanite Bourrillon, R., White, R., 2015. Pratiques symboliques aurignaciennes en abri-souse de la Ve ze
re : a
la recherche d’une identite  ? In: White, R., roche dans la valle Bourrillon, R. (Eds.), (Dir.) with the Collaboration of Bon, F., Aurignacian Genius: Art, Technology and Society of the First Modern Humans in Europe, Proceedings of the Symposium Aurignacian Genius. New York University, New York, pp. 118e137, 2013. P@lethnologie 7. olithique supe rieur et leur Signification. In: Breuil, H., 1912. Les Subdivisions du Pale
s International d'Anthropologie et d'Arche ologie Pre historiques I, XIVe Congre pp. 165e238. Brock, F., Higham, T.F.G., Ditchfield, P., Bronk Ramsey, C., 2010. Current pretreatment methods for AMS radiocarbon dating at the oxford radiocarbon accelerator unit (ORAU). Radiocarbon 52 (1), 103e112. Broglio, A., Gurioli, F., 2004. The symbolic behaviour of the first modern humans: , the Fumane Cave evidence (Venetian Pre-Alps). In: Otte, M. (Ed.), La spiritualite  de Lie
ge, actes du colloque de la commission 8 de l’UISPP. Universite
ge. pp. 97e102. ERAUL 106, Lie Bronk Ramsey, C., 2009. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon 51 (1), 337e360. Brooks, A.S., 1979. The Significance of Variability in Paleolithic Assemblages: an Aurignacian Example from Southwestern France. Thesis of Department of Anthropology. Harvard University, Cambridge (MA). Carpenter, E., 1973. Eskimo Realities. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New-York, Chicago, San Francisco. Chiotti, L., Cretin, C., Morala, A., 2015. Les industries lithiques des abris Blanchard et es issues des fouilles 2005-2012. Castanet (Dordogne, France) : nouvelles donne In: White, R., Bourrillon, R. (Eds.), (Dir.) with the Collaboration of Bon, F., Aurignacian Genius: Art, Technology and Society of the First Modern Humans in Europe, Proceedings of the Symposium Aurignacian Genius. New York University, New York, pp. 76e97, 2013. P@lethnologie 7.
re, C., 2003. Comportements techniques et de Chiotti, L., Patou-Mathis, M., Vercoute
l’aurignacien ancien : la couche 11 de l’abri Pataud (Dordogne). subsistance a histoire 45, 157e203. Gall. Pre  (Dir.) Clottes, J., 2001. La grotte Chauvet. L’art des origines, Editions du Seuil, collection. Arts rupestres, Paris. ly, B., Ghemis, C., Kaltnecker, E., Lascu, V.T., Moreau, C., Philippe, M., Clottes, J., Ge
s ancien en Roumanie. Les dates de Prud’homme, F., Valladas, H., 2011. Un art tre Coliboaia. Int. Newsl. Rock Art 61, 1e3. ologique et la chronologie de la Clottes, J., Geneste, J.-M., 2007. Le contexte arche grotte Chauvet. In: Floss, H., Rouquerol, N. (Eds.), Les chemins de l’Aurignacien €nge der Kunst in Europa, Colloque en Europe e Das Aurignacien und die Anfa  e-forum d’Auriinternational, Aurignac 2005, pp. 363e378. Editions du Muse gnac, cahier 4, Aurignac. Conard, N.J., 2003. Palaeolithic ivory sculptures from southwestern Germany and the origins of figurative art. Nature 426, 830e832. Conard, N.J., 2009. A female figurine from the basal Aurignacian of Hohle Fels Cave in southwestern Germany. Nature 459, 248e252. Conard, N.J., Bolus, M., 2003. Radiocarbon dating the appearance of modern humans and timing cultural innovations in Europe: new results and new challenges. J. Hum. Evol. 44 (3), 331e371. Conard, N.J., Bolus, M., 2008. Radiocarbon dating the late middle paleolithic and the aurignacian of the Swabian Jura. J. Hum. Evol. 55 (5), 886e897. tablissement de ge ographies sociales. In: Conkey, M., 1990. L’art mobilier et l’e olithique : Les voies de la recherche, Clottes, J. (Ed.), L’art des objets au pale Colloque Foix-le Mas d’Azil, Novembre 1987. Actes des colloques de la Direction du Patrimoine, Clamecy, t.2, pp. 163e172.  Delibrias, G., Guillier, M.-T., Evin, J., Chevallier, J., 1987. Sommaire des datations 14C histoire en France. Dates effectue es de 1979 a
fin 1984. Bull. concernant la pre

hist. Fr. 84 (7), 207e223. Soc. Pre Delluc, B., Delluc, G., 1978. Les manifestations graphiques aurignaciennes sur suphistoire 21, 213e438. port rocheux des environs des Eyzies (Dordogne). Gall. Pre Delluc, B., Delluc, G., 1981. La dispersion des objets de l'abri Blanchard (Sergeac, tudes de recherches pre historiques des Eyzies 30, Dordogne). Bull. Soc. d'e 77e95.  tal archaïque en Aquitaine (Editions Delluc, B., Delluc, G., 1991. L’art parie du CNRS, ment
hist., XXVIII, Paris). Supple a Gallia Pre
l’abri Pataud (Les Eyzies-de-Tayac, Dordogne). In: Delluc, B., Delluc, G., 2004. L’art a olithique supe rieur dans son contexte naturel : Lejeune, M. (Ed.), L’art du Pale
me congre
s de l’UISPP. Universite  de Lie
ge, actes du colloque 8.2 du XIVe
ge. pp. 87e94. ERAUL 107, Lie ologique du Didon, L., 1911. L'Abri Blanchard des Roches. Bull. Soc. Hist. Arche rigord 87, 246-261 and321e345. Pe Didon, L., 1912. L’abri Blanchard des Roches (Commune de Sergeac), Gisement ologique Aurignacien moyen. Extrait du Bulletin de la Soc. Historique et Arche rigord 1911. L'Anthropologie 01-12, 448. du Pe Floss, H., 2007. L’art mobilier aurignacien du Jura souabe et sa place dans l’art olithique. In: Floss, H., Rouquerol, N. (Eds.), Les chemins de l’Aurignacien en pale €nge der Kunst in Europa, Colloque inEurope e Das Aurignacien und die Anfa  e-forum d’Aurignac, ternational, Aurignac 2005, pp. 295e316. Editions du Muse cahier 4, Aurignac. Garate, D., Rivero, O., Ruiz-Redondo, A., Rios-Garaizar, J., 2014a. discussion: by Blanca ochoa and marcos García-Díez. Quat. Int. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.quaint.2014.11.067. Garate, D., Rivero, O., Ruiz-Redondo, A., Rios-Garaizar, J., 2014b. At the crossroad: a new approach to the Upper Paleolithic art in the Western Pyrenees. Quat. Int. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.05.054. te s humaines. Ce que nous apprend Godelier, M., 2007. Au fondement des socie l’anthropologie. Albin Michel, Paris. Higham, T., Jacobi, R., Basell, L., Bronk Ramsey, C., Chiotti, L., Nespoulet, L., 2011. Precision dating of the Palaeolithic: a new radiocarbon chronology for the Abri Pataud (France), a key Aurignacian sequence. J. Hum. Evol. 61, 549e563. Higham, T., Basell, L., Jacobi, R., Wood, R., Bronk Ramsey, C., Conard, N.J., 2012. Testing models for the beginnings of the Aurignacian and the advent of figu€ sterle. J. Hum. rative art and music : the radiocarbon chronology of Geissenklo Evol. 62 (6), 664e676.
res migrations humaines et les premie
res e tapes Kozlowski, J.K., 2005. Les premie risation. du peuplement de l’Europe. In: Cultures, communications, nume
ne, 211, Paris, pp. 9e25. Presses universitaires de France, Dioge Le Brun-Ricalens, F., Bordes, J.-G., Eizenberg, L., 2009. A crossed-glance between southern European and Middle-Near Eastern early Upper Palaeolithic lithic technocomplexes. Existing models, new perspectives. In: Camps, M., Szmidt, C. (Eds.), The Mediterranean from 50000 to 25000 BP: Turning and New Directions. Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 11e33. histoire de l'art occidental. Mazenod, Paris. Leroi-Gourhan, A., 1965. Pre gional de classifiLeroy-Prost, C., 1979. L’industrie osseuse aurignacienne. Essai re rigord (suite). Gall. pre hist 22, 205e370. cation : poitou, Charente, Pe Marshack, A., 1972. The Roots of Civilization. Thames & Hudson, London.
re, P., Chiotti, L., Sisk, M., Mensan, R., Bourrillon, R., Cretin, C., White, R., Garde couverte d'art parie tal in Clark, A., Higham, T., Tartar, E., 2012. Une nouvelle de situ
a l'abri Castanet (Dordogne, France): contexte et datation. Paleo 23, 171e188. historiques (Librairie Renouard - Henri Laurens). Morin-Jean, 1933. Les artistes pre Nalawade-Chavan, S., McCullagh, J., Hedges, R., Bonsall, C., Boroneant, A., Bronk Ramsey, C., Higham, T.F.G., 2013. Compound-specific radiocarbon dating of essential and nonessential amino acids: towards determination of dietary reservoir effects in humans. Radiocarbon 55 (2). Ochoa, B., García-Diez, M., 2014. Chronology of western Pyrenean Paleolithic cave art: a critical examination. Quat. Int. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.quaint.2014.07.015. ~ on, R., Utrilla, P., 2015. The chronology of Palaeolithic cave art: new data, new Ontan debates. Preface to the volume. Quat. Int. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.quaint.2015.10.048. Pettitt, P., 2008. Art and the middle-to-upper paleolithic transition in Europe: comments on the archaeological arguments for an early upper paleolithic antiquity of the grotte Chauvet art. J. Hum. Evol. 55 (5), 908e917. Pike, A., Hoffmann, D., Pettitt, P., García-Diez, M., Zilhao, J., 2015. Dating Palaeolithic cave art: why U-Th is the way to go. Quat. Int. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.quaint.2015.12.013. Peyrony, D., 1935. Le gisement de Castanet, vallon de Castelmerle, commune de hist. Fr. 32, 418e443. Sergeac (Dordogne). Bull. Soc. Pre historique de Fongal. Bull. Soc. Hist. Arche ologique du Peyrony, D., 1941. Station pre rigord. Fr. 166e175. Pe historique de l’abri du Cellier, au Ruth, commune Peyrony, D., 1946. Le gisement pre de Tursac (Dordogne). Gallia 4, 294e301. Pike, A.W.G., Hoffmann, D.L., García-Diez, M., Pettitt, P.B., Alcolea, J., De Balbín, R., Gonz alez Sainz, C., De Las Heras, C., Lasheras, J.A., Montes, R., Zilhao, J., 2012. Useries dating of paleolithic art in 11 caves in Spain. Science 336, 1409e1413. Pons-Branchu, E., Bourrillon, R., Conkey, W.M., Fontugne, M., Fritz, C., Garate, D., Rivero, O., Sauvet, G., Tosello, G., Valladas, H., White, R., 2014. Uranium-series dating of carbonate formations overlying Paleolithic art: interest and limitahist. Fr. 111 (2), 211e224. tions. Bull. Soc. Pre Reimer, P.J., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J.W., Blackwell, P.G., Bronk Ramsey, C.,

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063

R. Bourrillon et al. / Quaternary International xxx (2016) 1e19 , C., Heaton, T.J., Grootes, P.M., Guilderson, T.P., Haflidason, H., Hajdas, I., Hatte Hoffmann, D.L., Hogg, A.G., Hughen, K.A., Kaiser, K.F., Kromer, B., Manning, S.W., Niu, Mu, Reimer, R.W., Richards, D.A., Scott, E.M., Southon, J.R., Staff, R.A., Turney, C.S.M., Van Der Plicht, J., 2013. IntCal13 and Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0e50,000 Years cal BP. Radiocarbon 55 (4), 1869e1887. historiques dans le canton de Reverdit, A., 1878. Stations et traces des temps pre ze
re. Bull. Soc. Hist. Arche ologique du Pe rigord 5, 384e419. Montignac-sur-Ve Reverdit, A., 1882. Station des Roches, commune de Sergeac (Durand, Fillous et Lagarde, Toulouse). Rivero, O., 2010. La movilidad de los grupos humanos en el Magdaleniense de la  n Canta brica y los Pirineos. Una visio  n a trave s del arte (The
se, UniRegio versidad de Salamanca). Ruiz-Redondo, A., Gonzalez-Sainz, C., Garate-Maidagan, D., 2016. Back to the past: Symbolism and archaeology in Altxerri B (Gipuzkoa, Northern Spain). Quat. Int. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2015.07.013. couvertes de vestiges gallo-romaines a
Castel-Merle. Bull. de Sarradet, M., 1965. De  te  Hist. Arche ologique du Pe rigord 92, 170e172. la Socie Slimak, L., Pesesse, D., Giraud, Y., 2006. Reconnaissance d’une installation du Proe du Rho ^ne. Implications sur nos connaissances contoaurignacien en valle diterrane enne. Comptes cernant les premiers hommes modernes en France me Rendus Palevol 5 (7), 909e917. olithique supe rieur en Pe rigord. Delmas, de Sonneville-Bordes, D., 1960. Le Pale Bordeaux. Svensson, A., Andersen, K.K., Bigler, M., Clausen, H.B., Dahl-Jensen, D., Davies, S.M., €thlisberger, R., Johnsen, S.J., Muscheler, R., Parrenin, F., Rasmussen, S.O., Ro Seierstad, I., Steffensen, J.P., Vinther, B.M., 2008. A 60 000 year Greenland stratigraphic ice core chronology. Clim. Past 4, 47e58. Tartar, E., 2015. Aurignacian osseous technology: a review of past beliefs and curent knowledge (with data from French sites). In: White, R., Bourrillon, R., (Dir.) (Eds.), With the collaboration of Bon, F., Aurignacian Genius: art, Technology and Society of the First Modern Humans in Europe, Proceedings of the Symposium Aurignacian Genius. New York University, New York, pp. 34e55, 2013. P@lethnologie 7.  Tartar, E., Teyssandier, N., Bon, F., Liolios, D., 2006. Equipement de chasse, quipement domestique : une distinction efficace ? Re flexion sur la notion e d’investissement technique dans les industries aurignaciennes. In: Astruc, L., a, V., Milcent, P.-Y., Philibert, S., (Dirs.) (Eds.), Normes techniques et Bon, F., Le  des outillages pre - et protohistoriques. pratiques sociales : de la simplicite ADPCA, Antibes, pp. 107e118. Tartar, E., White, R., Chiotti, L., Cretin, C., Mensan, R., 2014. Quel(s) Aurignacien(s)
a es des collections d'industrie l'abri Blanchard (Sergeac, Dordogne) ? Donne  es aux Etats-Unis osseuse conserve et retour sur le terrain. Paleo 25, 309e331. mergence du Pale olithique supe rieur en Europe : mutaTeyssandier, N., 2007. L'e volution. Paleo 19, 367e390. tions culturelles et rythmes d'e Tsanova, T., Zwyns, N., Eizenberg, L., Teyssandier, N., Le Brun-Ricalens, F., Otte, M., nominateur commun : re  fle xion sur la variabilite  des 2012. Le plus petit de olithique supe rieur ancien d’Eurasie. Un bilan ensembles lamellaires du Pale autour des exemples de Kozarnika (Est des Blakans) et Yafteh (Zagros central).

19

L’Anthropologie 116, 469e509. e la mieux Valladas, H., Clottes, J., Geneste, J.-M., 2004. Chauvet est la grotte orne e au monde. Dossier pour la Sci. 42, 82e87. date Vanhaeren, M., D'Errico, F., 2006. Aurignacian ethnolinguistic geography of Europe revealed by personal ornaments. J. Archaeol. Sci. 33 (8), 1105e1128. zian, J., Ve zian, J., 1966. Les gisements de la grotte de Saint-Jean-de-Verges, Ve
ge. Gall. Pre histoire 9 (1), 93e130. Arie White, R., 1982. The manipulation of burins in incision and notation. Can. J. Anthropol. Revue Can. d'Anthropologie 2 (2), 129e135. White, R., 1992a. Bone, antler and ivory objects from Abri Blanchard at the Logan museum of anthropology. In: White, R., Breitborde, L.B. (Eds.), French Palaeolithic Collections in the Logan Museum of Anthropology Logan Museum Bulletin, pp. 97e120, 1(2), Beloit (WI). White, R., 1992b. Beyond art: toward an understanding of the origins of material sentation in Europe. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 21, 537-564. repre White, R., 1992c. The Earliest Images. Ice Age « Art » in Europe in: Expedition. Vol. 34, n 3, 17 fig. rie, Paris. N 4, White, R., 2000. Un Big Bang Socio-culturel in. La Recherche Hors-Se pp. 10e11. White, R., 2002. Observations technologiques sur les objets de parure in B.  LeroiSchmider. In: L'Aurignacien de la grotte de Renne: Les fouilles d'Andre
Arcy-sur-Cure (Yonne), XXXIVe Supple ment a
Gallia Pre histoire, Gourhan a pp. 257e266. White, R., 2007. Systems of personal ornamentation in the early upper palaeolithic: methodological challenges and new observations. In: Mellars, Paul, Boyle, Katie, Bar-Yosef, Ofer, Stringer, Chris (Eds.), Rethinking the Human Revolution: New Behavioural and Biological Perspectives on the Origin and Dispersal of Modern Humans. Cambridge, UK. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, pp. 287e302 (McDonald Institute Monographs). White, R., Mensan, R., Bourrillon, R., Cretin, C., Higham, T., Clark, A., Sisk, M.,
re, P., Goldberg, P., Pelegrin, J., Valladas, H., Tisnerat-Laborde, N., Tartar, E., Garde de Sanoit, J., Chambellan, C., Chiotti, L., 2012. Context and dating of Aurignacian “vulvar” representations: new evidence from Abri Castanet, France. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109, 8450e8455. White, R., Bourrillon,R., Mensan, R., Clark, A., Chiotti, L., Higham, T., Ranlett, S., Tartar, E., Morala, A., Soulier, M-C., A classic Aurignacian site revisited: history, context and dating of newly discovered engraved blocks from Abri Cellier. (in preparation). Wobst, M., 1977. Stylistic behavior and information exchange.in Cleland. In: C.E. (Ed.), Papers for the Director: Research Essays in Honor of James B. Griffin. Museum of Anthropology of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Anthropological Papers 61, pp. 317e342. Wolf, S., Conard, N.J., 2015. Aurignacian personal ornaments of the Swabian Jura. In: White, R., Bourrillon, R. (Eds.), (Dir.) with the Collaboration of Bon, F., Aurignacian Genius: Art, Technology and Society of the First Modern Humans in Europe, Proceedings of the Symposium Aurignacian Genius. New York University, New York, pp. 330e344, 2013. P@lethnologie 7.

Please cite this article in press as: Bourrillon, R., et al., A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe, Quaternary International (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063