Abstract
This chapter reviews the state of the research on the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition following profound paradigm changes in the last three decades. The demise of the Eurocentric paradigm, which saw a linear shift from Neanderthals to moderns and from Middle to Upper Paleolithic lifeways, opened the field to a large number of competing hypotheses about the origins of modern humans and of modern behavior. It is suggested that the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transition is a complex phenomenon that constitutes regional processes. Some of the new models attempting to explain the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transition are a geographic and temporal projection of the Eurocentric thinking about the links between anatomical and behavioral modernity. While some researchers still employ empirical data as the building stones of their models, others strive to come up with theory-driven explanations for the shift from “archaic” to “modern” behavior.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
“The Middle to Upper Paleolithic Transition” is a term that was coined in the good old days when the prehistoric record of Europe was a yardstick of human prehistory. The notion of a linear shift from archaic to modern anatomy, which was inseparably tethered to a change from Middle Paleolithic (“archaic”) to Upper Paleolithic (“modern”) lifeways was elegant and attractive. It had been taken as a given that the cognitive potential for modern behavior evolved with (some would say as a result of) modern anatomy, and its emergence directly led to tangible archaeological evidence of such behavior (e.g., parietal and mobile art or personal ornaments; Mellars, 1996; Noble and Davidson, 1993). Moreover, the notion of a combined biocultural “package” of modernity catered to a sense of “species self-esteem,” as it emphasized the uniqueness of “us” (i.e., Homo sapiens) compared to all those extinct hominins that “had not made it” across the rubicon of modernity. Any different outlook on how modern behavior emerged and evolved had implications that were too difficult to handle conceptually: if one allowed for the existence of latent modern capacities that were not expressed in the material record, or assumed that hominins other than modern Homo sapiens were capable of modern behavior, all bets would be off. Detailed schemes of cultural stages and our understanding of the tempo of behavioral and cultural evolution could become unfounded scenarios (Hovers and Belfer-Cohen, 2006). The strength of the paradigm was such that there was not much of a theoretical framework from which models were derived. The shift from a Neanderthal to an Upper Paleolithic “stage” was perceived as a preordained process of cultural evolution, and the archaeological record—namely the skeletal and archaeological evidence—was deemed pretty much self-explanatory. Modern behavior—i.e., Upper Paleolithic behavior—was simply recognized through a number of traits that were thought to represent its existence accurately and appropriately (Henshilwood and Marean, 2003).
The major challenges to the Eurocentric paradigm came from regional records outside of Europe, as well as the application of new analytical tools. Findings in the Levant from as early as the 1920s have been pivotal in this change. While the discovery of the Tabun C1 Neanderthal skeleton with Mousterian lithics was par for the course within the then-dominant worldview of prehistory, this was not the case with the Skhul skeletal remains, which were found associated with classic Mousterian assemblages despite their Homo sapien-like anatomical features (McCown, 1934; McCown and Keith, 1939). Qafzeh Cave presented a similar dilemma (Tillier, 1999; Vandermeersch, 1981). Based on their anatomy, the Skhul remains were variably classified, first as a “Palestinian variant of Neandertals” (Keith in McCown, 1934), and then as intermediate forms between generalized Neanderthals and the modern humans succeeding them (“Proto Cro-Magnon,” Howell, 1958). Yet the strength of the biocultural paradigm was such that as late as the 1980s, these Levantine caves were widely regarded as providing the clearest evidence for a transitional phase between Neanderthals and modern humans, with a relatively late date for the transition (Howell, 1959; Suzuki and Takai, 1970; Wolpoff, 1996). The postulated transitional phylogenetic status of the hominins was argued to have been reflected in cultural manifestations as well, specifically in the characteristics of lithic assemblages made by these transitional forms (Jelinek, 1982; Watanabe, 1970).
Anatomical studies of Levantine fossils (Rak, 1986, 1990; Vandermeersch, 1981, 1982) argued against anagenetic change, and supported the view that there were two different taxa in the Levantine Middle Paleolithic (e.g., Aiello, 1993; Klein, 1995; Rak, 1993; Vandermeersch, 1982). Additionally, a geochronological database for Levantine Mousterian sites, including those with skeletal remains, has begun expanding since the mid-1980s. This database now indicates that in the Levant modern humans may have antedated, or were to some degree contemporaneous with the Neanderthal-like hominins (Bar-Yosef, 1998; Grün et al., 2005; Rink et al., 2001; Valladas et al., 1999). Moreover, the dates of 120,000–85,000 years ago for Skhul and Qafzeh render these sites contemporaneous with Neanderthals in Europe itself (the dating of Tabun, in which the longest sequence was found, unfortunately remains problematic; Bar-Yosef and Callander, 1999; Grün and Stringer, 2000; Meignen et al., 2001; Mercier and Valladas, 2003). Some level of coexistence between Neanderthals and modern humans can no longer be considered a uniquely Levantine trait. Some Neanderthal groups continued to exist in Europe well after the arrival of Homo sapiens (Higham et al., 2006; Mercier et al., 1991; Schmitz et al., 2002). Still, one telling difference is that there are no known instances in Europe of modern humans that produced Mousterian lithic assemblages, whereas Neanderthals are by and large associated with Mousterian assemblages. In the Levant, both Middle Paleolithic populations produced their lithic assemblages by applying Levallois flaking, and used a comparable range of typological forms. Additionally, faunal residues found at sites with human skeletal remains show that both groups exploited similar faunal species by hunting (Rabinovich and Hovers, 2004; Rabinovich and Tchernov, 1995; Speth and Tchernov, 1998, 2001; Stiner, 2006; Ysehurun et al. 2007). Thus, the Levantine Mousterian record that has been emerging in the last three decades not only refutes the notion of a linear anatomical transition between Neanderthals and moderns, but also severs the conceptual Gordian Knot between a package of “biocultural” modernity on the one hand vs. archaic anatomy and Middle Paleolithic tool types on the other (Hovers, 2006, 2009).
Genetic studies, which became part of the analytical arsenal of modern human origin research, played a major role in the demise of the old paradigm. While the results are by no means unanimously accepted, they are consensual in pointing toward Africa as the geographical origin for the genetic configuration of extant humans. Multiple lines of genetic and anatomical data currently coalesce in Africa as the place of origin of Homo sapiens. Yet, the mechanisms of its emergence and of its becoming a colonizing species are still being debated. The genetic and fossil data are sometimes interpreted as suggesting the emergence of Homo sapiens from a speciation event in Africa, followed by bottle necks, dispersals, and the subsequent replacement of archaic populations in Eurasia. Such seemingly decisive analyses of modern and fossil human DNA, interpreted as supporting a recent African origin of anatomically modern humans, continue to be challenged on both methodological and interpretive grounds. The data are alternatively viewed as indicating an African origin followed by periods of gene flow. A third view endorses a process of wave-diffusion, including hybridization and assimilation at the wave front. Similarly, the chronological framework for such events and processes is as yet unresolved (see Arcadi, 2006; Bazin et al., 2006; Cann, 2001; Caramelli et al., 2003, 2006; Eswaran, 2002; Eswaran et al., 2005; Green et al., 2006; Harpending et al., 1998; Krings et al., 1997, 2000; Mellars, 2005; McDougall et al., 2005; Noonan et al., 2006; Relethford, 2001; Templeton, 2002; White et al., 2003 for recent discussions).
Things are as confusing on the cultural side. On the African continent itself, various behaviors that are accepted as markers of modernity emerged during the Middle Stone Age, such as composite tool making, the use of symbolic paraphernalia, long-distance raw material transport, and the use of marine food resources (Ambrose and Lorenz, 1990; Botha, 2008; Bouzouggar et al., 2007; d’Errico et al., 2005; Henshilwood et al., 2002; Lombard, 2005; Marean et al., 2007; McBrearty and Brooks, 2000; Watts, 2002; Würz, 1999; to name but a few). Initially, the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transition was “projected” from Europe onto Africa and pushed back in time to accommodate the early dates of Homo sapiens in sub-Saharan Africa (e.g., Mellars, 2006; McBrearty and Brooks, 2000; McBrearty and Tryon, 2006). Not all of the cultural changes, however, evolved continuously, and some disappeared in the later stages of the MSA in order to re-emerge again in the Late Stone Age (Soriano et al., 2007). In the Levant, intentional burials exist among both modern humans and Neanderthals, similar to the European Neanderthals (Belfer-Cohen and Hovers, 1992; Hovers et al., 1995, 2000). Symbolic use of pigments and shells is encountered among the modern populations of the region in the Middle Paleolithic (Bar-Yosef Mayer et al. 2009; Hovers et al., 2003; Taborin, 2003; Vanhaeren et al., 2006), who also used pyrotechnology to obtain the red color of iron ores (Godfrey-Smith and Ilani, 2004). Yet, the earliest Upper Paleolithic cultures in the Levant do not demonstrate any of the traits of a “full-fledged” Upper Paleolithic. In fact, were one to adhere to the trait list, we’d have to argue that Levantine populations did not reach “modernity” prior to the beginning of the Natufian, some 15,000 cal BP (Belfer-Cohen and Hovers, n.d.)! Interestingly, Sahul shows a similar pattern. This continent was first occupied by modern humans ca. 45,000 years ago (O’Connell and Allen, 2004), presumably soon after the major “out of Africa” event through which modern humans spread all over the world. Still, many of the supposed hallmarks of a “symbolic revolution” did not appear until the mid-Holocene, and occur sporadically, if at all, in the archaeologically visible manifestations of the Pleistocene (Brumm and Moore, 2005; Habgood and Franklin, 2008; O’Connell and Allen, 2007).
The long duration of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age entities could not have occurred without behavioral flexibility and dynamic responses of hominins to the particular challenges of their environments (both social and cultural). Yet these dynamics too often go unrecognized because they did not necessarily evolve toward what eventually became the Upper Paleolithic (Hovers, 1997, 2006; Hovers and Belfer-Cohen, 2006). One can envision Middle Paleolithic hominins (as well as some Upper Paleolithic groups in some regions) existing in an evolutionary “rugged fitness landscape” (Palmer, 1991), with variable peaks of suboptimal fitness values separated by troughs of low-fitness adaptive states. The landscape can thus host several populations in suboptimal conditions. “If … we imagine a very rugged fitness landscape, with many peaks and troughs, then … Middle Paleolithic populations were in fact evolving behaviorally, their fitness was increasing locally, but they happened to be ascending a peak (or more likely several peaks) different from the one that anatomically modern Upper Paleolithic populations eventually climbed” (Kuhn, 2006:118).
To summarize, it has become apparent in the last two decades that biological and cultural changes during the Upper Pleistocene—including those idiomatically described as the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transitions—did not necessarily coincide across time and space, nor did they follow a single, repetitive pattern when they occurred (Bar-Yosef and Pilbeam, 2000; d’Errico et al., 1998; Hovers, 1997, 2009; Hovers and Belfer-Cohen, 2006; McBrearty and Brooks, 2000). Nor should we expect homogeneity of the process. Because the Middle Paleolithic differed from one region to the other, regional historical processes to which it gave rise could hardly be uniform or follow a single path to a single transition. This argument should hold regardless of the specific model of population interactions one chooses to endorse. The “Upper Paleolithic Revolution” is essentially technological and very likely may have had a single region of origin (Bar-Yosef, 2002), but it seems that it was implemented in many different ways.
In the early 21st century, one cannot in good faith talk about A single Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition. They may all be linked to the dispersal of modern humans out of Africa some 50,000 years ago, but they were many and varied—in Europe as much as in other places on the globe. Indeed, the various papers in this section, explicitly (e.g., Olszewski, Riel-Salvatore) or implicitly endorse this changing world view and emphasize regional differences in the “transitions” that they discuss. Practically all the authors recognize that the “Transition” across Europe, as well the specific cases with which each writer deals, are mosaic events rather than many manifestations of a monolithic process.
Archaeologists—perhaps more than researchers in other disciplines of paleoanthropology—need to go back to the drawing board. A scientific revolution has been completed, and the formidable paradigm that served us for many years has been overthrown. We are no longer looking at a process that is simple or elegant. The emerging complexity of the time period between 50,000 to 30,000 years ago requires special attention to theoretical considerations, calling into question the conventional time-stratigraphic units that are used to divide the Upper Pleistocene material record, as emphasized also by Harrold. The very same situation also calls for emphasis on (literally) down-to-earth aspects of the archaeological record. If we are to make sense of the mosaic of behaviors that are encountered globally at the 50,000–30,000 years ago time interval, we should be able to generate theory-motivated research rather than empirically-driven “trait lists” that cannot be tested independently of the archaeological data themselves (Henshilwood and Marean, 2003; Marean and Assefa, 2004). Riel-Salvatore tackles this very issue with regards to Uluzzian lithic technology. While the label “transitional” for the multiple industries at the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition is devoid of any implicit behavioral meaning (Bar-Yosef, 2006a; Kuhn, 2003), the Uluzzian (and other “transitional” industries) is still perceived as evidence for Neanderthal acculturation by moderns. This allows Riel-Salvatore to set a series of questions about specific links between the Uluzzian and the preceding Mousterian, including the geographic space in which the two industries are known, and the similarities in particular technological practices. In other words, the “transitional” status of the industry is not assumed; rather it is examined and tested according to a model of cultural evolution. In this particular case, it is concluded that the Uluzzian represented a distinct behavioral package, detached from the preceding Mousterian. And because it lasted for several thousand years, it cannot be termed a “transitional” industry. To the extent that the Uluzzian is one of the “big three” Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transitional entities in Europe (the others being the Chatelperronian and the Szeletian), this raises interesting questions about the two other industries. Interestingly, the Buhonician, which many workers view as the transitional industry in Europe due to its manifested technological ties with the transitional or very early Upper Paleolithic assemblages of Boker Tachtit in Israel (e.g., Bar-Yosef, 2006b; Tostevin, 2003), is not discussed here. Other contributors to this section do not explore such theoretical questions to the same degree, yet clearly have them on their minds when writing about the situation in Iberia, for example.
On the other hand, the many variants of the newly recognized Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition require that archaeologists be very careful with the raw data that they retrieve. It is all too easy to create new transitional industries where a geological mixture of sediments is not taken into account. Three papers in this section (Adams, Zilhão and to some degree, de Quiros and Maillo) explicitly explore this very topic in their studies of three caves in different regions of Europe. Each of these case studies illustrates how site formation processes, if not monitored properly, introduce stratigraphic artifacts into the record and distort the understanding of time depth and industrial variability.
A number of contributors to this section adopt a holistic approach to the transition, alternating between cultural and biological data sources to support either cultural or biological arguments. The gradual elimination of modern human fossils from the Upper Paleolithic record of Europe is indeed frustrating (Bednarik). Most scholars still maintain that the authors of the Aurignacian are in all likelihood modern humans, but with Neanderthals’ long-term survival in some areas of Europe, the point is that much more difficult to logically defend. Currently, there is no positive proof in the form of skeletal remains as to the identity of the makers of the earliest Upper Paleolithic industries, whereas Neanderthal authorship of “transitional” (i.e., Châtelperronian) assemblages has been claimed (and hotly debated) in only a handful of cases (at Saint Césaire and Arcy-Sur-Cure; Bordes, 2002; d’Errico et al., 1998; Gravina et al., 2005; Mellars and Gravina, 2008; Vandermeersch, 1984; Zilhão and d’Errico, 1999; Zilhão et al., 2008a, b). Neanderthal acculturation is the basic premise of Riel-Salvatore’s null hypothesis that the Uluzzian is a transitional industry, while Harrold’s review runs the gamut of acculturation to various forms of replacement models to fortuity, with the arrival of moderns and the demise of the Neanderthals perceived as unrelated events (Finlayson, 2004). Obviously, lithics and other material remains were made by hominins that belonged to either one or the other taxonomic groups. However, we must bear in mind that links between biological taxonomy and material culture (specifically, lithics) are loose, if they exist at all (Hovers, 2006; Lieberman and Bar-Yosef, 2005); and the two data sets should be handled independently where possible to avoid collapsing the various lines of evidence uncritically.
Research on the transitions from the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic is practically starting anew, particularly in Europe. These are exiting times for workers on these industries who have at their disposal an unprecedented variety of genetic, biomolecular, anatomical and cultural models, and data sets to help streamline their thoughts and works. As noted by Harrold, the influence of the alternative models is already evident in recent studies. The collection of papers in this section reflects the difficulties imposed by a legacy of research history and tradition combined with the intellectual excitement of making new headways in research. “The Middle to Upper Paleolithic Transition” is not a topic that will disappear from center stage anytime soon.
References
Aiello, L. C., 1993, The Fossil Evidence for Modern Human Origins in Africa: A Revised View. American Anthropologist 95: 73–96.
Ambrose, S. and Lorenz, K. G., 1990, Social and Ecological Models for the Middle Stone Age in Southern Africa. In The Emergence of Modern Humans: An Archaeological Perspective, edited by P. Mellars and C. Stringer, pp. 3–33. Cornel University Press, Ithica, New York.
Arcadi, A. C., 2006, Species Resilience in Pleistocene Hominids that Traveled Far and Ate Widely: An Analogy to the Wolf-Like Canids. Journal of Human Evolution 51: 383–394.
Bar-Yosef, O., 2006a, Defining the Aurignacian. In Towards a Definition of the Aurignacian (Trebalhos de Arqueologia 45), edited by O. Bar-Yosef and J. Zilhão, pp. 11–25. Instituto Português de Arqueologia, Lisbon.
Bar-Yosef, O., 2006b, Neandertals and Modern Humans: A Different Interpretation. In When Neandertals and Moderns Met, edited by N. Conard, pp. 467–482. Kern Verlag, Tübingen.
Bar-Yosef, O., 2002, The Upper Paleolithic Revolution. Annual Review of Anthropology 31: 363–393.
Bar-Yosef, O., 1998, The Chronology of the Middle Paleolithic in the Levant. In Neandertals and Modern Humans in Western Asia, edited by T. Akazawa, K. Aoki and O. Bar-Yosef, pp. 39–56. Plenum Press, New York.
Bar-Yosef, O. and Callander J., 1999, The Woman from Tabun: Garrod's Doubts in Historical Perspective. Journal of Human Evolution 37: 879–885.
Bar-Yosef, O. and Pilbeam D. (eds.), 2000, The Geography of Neandertals and Modern Humans in Europe and the Greater Mediterranean. (Peabody Museum Bulletin 8). Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Ma.
Bar-Yosef Mayer, D.E., Vandermeersch, B. and Bar-Yosef O. 2009. Shells and Ochre in Middle Paleolithic Qafzeh Cave, Israel: Indications for Modern Behavior. Journal of Human Evolution 56: 307–314.
Bazin, E., Glemin, S. and Galtier N., 2006, Population Size Does Not Influence Mitochondrial Genetic Diversity in Animals. Science 312: 570–572.
Belfer-Cohen, A. and Hovers E., n.d., “Modernity,” “Working memory” and the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic Transition in the Levant. Current Anthropology.
Belfer-Cohen, A. and Hovers E., 1992, In the Eye of the Beholder: Mousterian and Natufian Burials in the Levant. Current Anthropology 33: 463–471.
Bordes, J.-G., 2002, Chatelperronian/Aurignacian Interstratification at Roc de Comb and Le Piage: Lithic Taphonomy and Archaeological Implications. Journal of Human Evolution 42: A7–A8.
Botha, R., 2008, Prehistoric Shell Beads as a Window on Language Evolution. Language & Communication 28: 197.
Bouzouggar, A., Barton, N., Vanhaeren, M., d'Errico, F., Collcutt, S., Higham, T., Hodge, E., Parfitt, S., Rhodes, E., Schwenninger, J.-L., Stringer, C., Turner, E., Ward, S., Moutmir, A. and Stambouli A., 2007, 82,000-year-old Shell Beads from North Africa and Implications for the Origins of Modern Human Behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 104: 9964–9969.
Brumm, A. and Moore M. W., 2005, Symbolic Revolutions and the Australian Archaeological Record. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 15: 157–175.
Cann, R. L., 2001, Genetic Clues to Dispersal in Human Populations: Retracing the Past from the Present. Science 291: 1742–1748.
Caramelli, D., Lalueza-Fox, C., Condemi, S., Longo, L., Milani, L., Manfredini, A., de Saint Pierre, M., Adoni, F., Lari, M. and Giunti P., 2006, A Highly Divergent mtDNA Sequence in a Neandertal Individual from Italy. Current Biology 16: R630–R632.
Caramelli, D., Lalueza-Fox, C., Vernesi, C., Lari, M., Casoli, A., Mallegni, F., Chiarelli, B., Dunpanloup, I., Bertranpetit, J., Barbujani, G. and Bertorelle G., 2003, Evidence for a Genetic Discontinuity Between Neandertals and 24,000 year-old Anatomically Modern Europeans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 100: 6593–6597.
d’Errico, F., Henshilwood, C., Vanhaeren, M. and van Niekerk. K., 2005, Nassarius kraussianus Shell Beads from Blombos Cave: Evidence for Symbolic Behaviour in the Middle Stone Age. Journal of Human Evolution 48: 3–24.
d'Errico, F., Zilhão, J., Julien, M., Baffier, D. and Pelegrin J., 1998, Neanderthal Acculturation in Western Europe? A Critical Review of the Evidence and its Interpretation. Current Anthropology 39 supplement: S1–S44.
Eswaran, V., 2002, A Diffusion Wave Out of Africa: The Mechanism of the Modern Human Revolution? Current Anthropology 43: 749–774.
Eswaran, V., Harpending, H. and Rogers A. R., 2005, Genomics Refutes an Exclusively African Origin of Humans. Journal of Human Evolution 49: 1–18.
Finlayson, C., 2004, Neanderthals and Modern Humans. An Ecological and Evolutionary Perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Godfrey-Smith, D. I. and Ilani S., 2004, Past Thermal History of Goethite and Hematite Fragments from Qafzeh Cave Deduced from Thermal Activation Characteristics of the 110 Centigrade TL Peak of Enclosed Quartz Grains. Revue d'Archéométrie 28: 185–190.
Gravina, B., Mellars, P. and Ramsey C. B., 2005, Radiocarbon Dating of Interstratified Neandertal and Early Modern Human Occupations at the Chatelperronian Type-site. Nature 438: 51–56.
Green, R. E., Krause, J., Ptak, S. E., Briggs, A. W., Ronan, M. T., Simons, J. F., Du, L., Egholm, M., Rothberg, J. M., Paunovic, M. and Pääbo S., 2006, Analysis of One Million Base-pairs of Neanderthal DNA. Nature 444: 330.
Grün, R. and Stringer, C. 2000. Tabun Revisited: Revised ESR Chronology and New ESR and U-series Analyses of Dental Material from Tabun C1. Journal of Human Evolution 39: 601–612.
Grün R., Stringer, C., McDermott, F., Nathan, R., Porat, N., Robertson, S., Taylor, L., Mortimer, G., Eggins, S. and McCulloch M. 2005, U-series and ESR Analyses of Bones and Teeth Relating to the Human Burials from Skhul. Journal of Human Evolution 49: 316–334.
Habgood, P. J. and Franklin, N. R., 2008, The Revolution that Didn't Arrive: A Review of Pleistocene Sahul. Journal of Human Evolution 55: 187–222.
Henshilwood, C., and Marean, C. W., 2003, The Origin of Modern Human Behavior: Critiques of the Models and Their Test Implications. Current Anthropology 44: 627–651.
Henshilwood C. S., d'Errico, F., Yates, R., Jacobs, Z., Tribolo, C., Duller, G. A. T., Mercier, N., Sealy, J. C., Valladas H., Watts, I. and Wintle A. G., 2002, Emergence of Modern Human Behavior: Middle Stone Age Engravings from South Africa. Science 295: 1278–1280.
Higham T., Ramsey, C. B., Karavanic, I., Smith ,F. H. and Trinkaus E., 2006, Revised Direct Radiocarbon Dating of the Vindija G1 Upper Paleolithic Neandertals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 103: 553–557.
Hovers, E., 2009, Mousterian Lithic Technology in Qafzeh Cave. Oxford University Press, New York.
Hovers, E., 2006, Neandertals and Modern Humans in the Middle Paleolithic of the Levant: What Type of Interaction? In When Neandertals and Moderns Met, edited by N. Conard, pp. 65–86. Kerns Verlag, Tübingen.
Hovers, E., 1997, Variability of Lithic Assemblages and Settlement Patterns in the Levantine Middle Paleolithic: Implications for the Development of Human Behavior. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Hovers, E. and Belfer-Cohen A., 2006, “Now you see it, now you don’t” – Modern Human Behavior in the Middle Paleolithic. In Transitions Before the Transition: Evolution and Stability in the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age, edited by E. Hovers and S. L. Kuhn, pp. 295–304. Springer, New York.
Hovers E., Ilani S., Bar-Yosef, O. and Vandermeersch B., 2003, An Early Case of Color Symbolism: Ochre Use by Early Modern Humans in Qafzeh Cave. Current Anthropology 44: 491–522.
Hovers, E., Kimbel, W. H. and Rak Y., 2000, Amud 7 – Still a Burial: Response to Gargett. Journal of Human Evolution 39: 253–260.
Hovers, E., Rak, Y., Lavi, R. and Kimbel W. H., 1995, Hominid Remains from Amud Cave in the Context of the Levantine Middle Paleolithic. Paléorient 21: 47–61.
Howell, F. C., 1959, Upper Pleistocene Stratigraphy and Early Man in the Levant. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 193: 1–65.
Howell, F. C., 1958, Upper Pleistocene Men of the Southwest Asian Mousterian. In Hundert jahre Neanderthaler, edited by G. H. R. von Koenigswald, pp. 185–198. Kemik en zoom, Utrecht.
Jelinek, A., 1982, The Middle Paleolithic in the Southern Levant, With Comments on the Appearance of Modern Homo Sapiens. In The Transition from Lower to Middle Palaeolithic and the Origin of Modern Man, edited by Ronen, pp. 57–104. BAR International Series 151, Oxford.
Klein, R. G., 1995, Anatomy, Behavior, and Modern Human Origins. Journal of World Prehistory 9: 167–198.
Krings, M., Capelli, C., Tschentscher, F., Geisert, H., Meyer, S., von Haeseler, A., Grossschmidt, K., Possner, G., Paunovic, M. and Pääbo, S., 2000, A View of Neandertal Genetic Diversity. Nature Genetics 26: 144–146.
Krings, M., Stone, A., Schmitz, R. W., Kraainitzki, H., Stoneking, M. and Pääbo S., 1997, Neandertal DNA Sequences and the Origin of Modern Humans. Cell 90: 19–30.
Kuhn, S. L., 2006, Trajectories of Change in the Middle Paleolithic of Italy. In Transitions Before the Transition: Evolution and Stability in the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age, edited by E. Hovers and S. L. Kuhn, pp. 109–120. Springer, New York.
Kuhn, S. L., 2003, In What Sense is the Levantine Early Upper Paleolithic a “Transitional” Industry? In the Chronology of the Aurignacian and of the Transitional Technocomplexes: Dating, Stratigraphies, Cultural Implications (Trebalhos de Arqueologia 42), edited by J. Zilhão and F. d’Errico, pp. 61–70. Instituto Português de Arqueologia, Lisbon.
Lieberman, D. E. and Bar-Yosef O., 2005, Apples and Oranges: Morphological Versus Behavioral Transitions in the Pleistocene. In Interpreting the Past: Essays on Human, Primate, and Mammal Evolution in Honor of David Pilbeam, edited by D. E. Lieberman, R. J. Smith and J. Kelley, pp. 275–296. Bril Academic Publishers, Boston.
Lombard, M., 2005, Evidence of Hunting and Hafting during the Middle Stone Age at Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: A Multianalytical a Approach. Journal of Human Evolution 48: 279–300.
Marean, C. W. and Assefa, Z., 2004, The Middle and Upper Pleistocene African Record for the Biological and Behavioral Origins of Modern Humans. In African Archaeology: A Critical Introduction, edited by A. Stahl, pp. 93–129. Blackwell Studies in Global Archaeology. Blackwell, Malden.
Marean. C. W., Bar-Matthews. M., Bernatchez. J., Fisher. E., Goldberg. P., Herries. A. I. R., Jacobs. Z., Jerardino. A., Karkanas. P., Minichillo. T., Nilssen. P. J., Thompson. E., Watts. I. and Williams H. M., 2007, Early Human Use of Marine Resources and Pigment in South Africa During the Middle Pleistocene. Nature 449: 905–908.
McBrearty, S. and Brooks A. S., 2000. The Revolution That Wasn't: A New Interpretation of the Origin of Modern Human Behavior. Journal of Human Evolution 39: 453–563.
McBrearty, S. and Tryon C. A., 2006, From Acheulean to Middle Stone Age in the Kapthurin Formation, Kenya. In Transitions Before the Transition: Evolution and Stability in the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age, edited by E. Hovers and S. L. Kuhn, pp. 257–277. Springer, New York.
McCown, T. D., 1934, The Oldest Complete Skeletons of Man. Bulletin of the American School of Prehistoric Research 10: 13–18.
McCown, T. D. and Keith A., 1939, The Stone Age of Mount Carmel II. Clarendon Press: Oxford.
McDougall, I., Brown, F. H. and Fleagle J. G., 2005, Stratigraphic Placement and Age of Modern Humans from Kibish, Ethiopia. Nature 433: 733–736.
Meignen, L., Bar-Yosef, O. Mercier, N., Valladas, H., Goldberg, P. and Vandermeerch B., 2001, Apport des datations au problème de l'origin des hommes modernes au Proche-Orient. I, Datation, edited by J.-N. Barrandon, P. Guibert and V. Michel, pp. 295–313. XXI reconctres internationales d'archéologie et d'histoire d'Antibes. Editions APDCA, Antibes.
Mellars, P., 2006, Why Did Modern Human Populations Disperse from Africa ca. 60,000 Years Ago? A New Model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science U.S.A. 103: 9381–9386.
Mellars, P., 2005, The Impossible Coincidence. A Single-Species Model for the Origin of Modern Human behavior in Europe. Evolutionary Anthropology 14: 12–17.
Mellars, P., 1996, The Mousterian Legacy: An Archaeological Perspective from Western Europe. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Mellars, P. and Gravina B., 2008, Châtelperron: Theoretical Agendas, Archaeological Facts, and Diversionary Smoke-Screens. PaleoAntrhopology 2008: 43–64.
Mercier, N. and Valladas H., 2003, Reassessment of TL Age Eestimates of Burnt Flints from the Paleolithic Site of Tabun Cave, Israel. Journal of Human Evolution 45: 401–409.
Mercier, N., Valladas, H., Joron, H. L., Reyss, J. L., Leveque, F. and Vandermeersch B. 1991. Thermoluminescence Dating of the Late Nenaderthal Remains from Saint-Cesaire. Nature 351: 737–739.
Noble, W. and Davidson I., 1993, Tracing the Emergence of Modern Human Behavior: Methodological Pitfalls and a Theoretical Path. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 12: 121–149.
Noonan, J. P., Coop, G., Kudaravalli, S., Smith, D., Krause, J., Alessi, J., Chen, F., Platt, D., Pääbo, S., Pritchard, J. K. and Rubin E. M., 2006, Sequencing and Analysis of Neanderthal Genomic DNA. Science 314: 1113–1118.
O'Connell, J.F. and Allen, J., 2007, Pre-LGM Sahul (Pleistocene Australia-New Guinea) and the Archaeology of Early Modern Humans. In Rethinking the Human Revolution, edited by P. Mellars, K. Boyle, O. Bar-Yosef and C. Stringer, pp. 395–410. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge, CA.
O'Connell, J. F. and Allen J., 2004, Dating theColonization of Sahul (Pleistocene Australia-New Guinea): A Review of Recent Research. Journal of Archaeological Science 31: 835–853.
Palmer, R. 1991. Optimization on Rugged Fitness Landscapes. In Molecular Evolution in Rugged Fitness Landscapes, edited by E. Perelson and S. Kaufman, pp. 3–25. Addison, Redwood City.
Rabinovich, R. and Hovers E., 2004, Faunal Assemblages from Amud Cave: Preliminary Results and Interpretations. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 14: 287–306.
Rabinovich, R. and Tchernov E., 1995, Chronological, Paleoecological and Taphonomical Aspects of the Middle Paleolithic Site of Qafzeh, Israel. In Archaeozoology of the Near East: Proceedings of the Second Symposium of the Archaeozoology of Southwestern Asia and Adjacent Areas, edited by H. Buitenhuis and H.-P. Uerpmann, pp. 5–44. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden.
Rak, Y., 1993, Morphological Variation in Homo Neanderthalensis and Homo Sapiens in the Levant: a Biogeographical Model. In Species, Species Concept and Primate Evolution, edited by W. H. Kimbel and L .B. Martin, pp. 523–536. Plenum Press, New York.
Rak, Y., 1990, On the Differences Between Two Pelvises of Mousterian Context from Qafzeh and Kebara Caves, Israel. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 81: 323–332.
Rak, Y., 1986, The Neanderthal: A New Look at an Old Face. Journal of Human Evolution 15: 151–164.
Relethford J. H., 2001, Genetics and the Search for Modern Human Origins. Wiley-Liss, New York.
Rink, W. J., Schwarcz, H. P., Lee, H. K., Rees-Jones, J., Rabinovich, R. and Hovers E., 2001, Electron Spin Resonance (ESR) and Thermal Ionization Mass Spectrometric (TIMS) 230Th/234U Dating of Teeth in Middle Palaeolithic Layers at Amud Cave, Israel. Geoarchaeology 16: 701–717.
Schmitz, R. W., Serre, D., Bonani, G., Feine, S., Hilligruber, F., Krainitzki, H., Paäbo S. and Smith F. H., 2002, The Neandertal Type-site Revisited: Interdisciplinary Investigations of Skeletal Remains from the Neander Valley, Germany. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science U.S.A. 99: 13342–13347.
Soriano, S., Villa, P. and Wadley L., 2007, Blade Technology and Tool Forms in the Middle Stone Age of South Africa: The Howeisons Poort and Post-Howeisons Poort at Rose Cottage Cave. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 681–703.
Speth, J. D. and Tchernov, E., 2001, Neandertal Hunting and Meat Processing in the Near East: Evidence from Kebara Cave (Israel). In Meat-Eating and Human Evolution, edited by C. B. Stanford and H. T. Bunn, pp. 52–72. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Speth, J. D. and Tchernov, E., 1998, The Role of Hunting and Scavenging in Neanderthal Procurement Strategies: New Evidence from Kebara Cave (Israel). In Neanderthals and Modern Humans in West Asia, edited by T. Akazawa., K. Aoki and O. Bar-Yosef, pp. 223–239. Plenum Press, New York.
Stiner, M. C., 2006, Middle Paleolithic Subsistence Ecology in the Mediterranean Region. In Transitions Before the Transition: Evolution and Stability in the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age, edited by E. Hovers and S. L. Kuhn, pp. 213–231. Springer, New York.
Suzuki, H. and F. Takai, 1970, The Amud Man and his Cave Site. University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo.
Taborin, Y., 2003, La mer et les prémiers hommes modernes. In Échanges et Diffusion dans la préhistoire Méditerranéenne, edited by B. Vandermeersch, pp. 113–122. Éditions du Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques, Paris.
Templeton, A. R., 2002, Out of Africa Again and Again. Nature 416: 45–51.
Tillier, A.-M., 1999, Les Enfants moustériens de Qafzeh: interprétation phylogénétique et paléoauxologique. Éditions du CNRS, Paris.
Tostevin, G. B., 2003, A Quest for Antecedents: a Comparison of the Terminal Middle Palaeolithic and Early Upper Palaeolithic of the Levant. In More Than Meets the Eye: Studies on Upper Palaoelithic Diversity in the Near East, edited by A. N. Goring-Morris and A. Belfer-Cohen, pp. 54–66. Oxbow, Oxford.
Valladas, H., Mercier, N., Hovers, E., Frojet L., Joron, J. L., Kimbel, W. H. and Rak, Y., 1999, TL Dates for the Neandertal Site of Amud Cave, Israel. Journal of Archaeological Science 26: 259–268.
Vandermeersch, B., 1984, The Discovery of the Neanderthal Skeleton of Saint-Césaire. Bulletins et Mémoires de la Societé d'Anthropologie de Paris 11: 191–196.
Vandermeersch, B., 1982, The First Homo Sapiens in the Near East. In The Transition from Lower to Middle Paleolithic and the Origin of Modern Man, edited by A. Ronen, pp. 297–299. BAR International Series 151, Oxford.
Vandermeersch, B., 1981, Les Hommes Fossiles de Qafzeh (Israël). Cahiers de Paléontologie. Éditions du CNRS, Paris.
Vanhaeren, M., d'Errico, F., Stringer, C., James, S. L., Todd, J. A. and Mienis H. K., 2006, Middle Paleolithic Shell Beads in Israel and Algeria. Science 312: 1785–1788.
Watanabe, H., 1970, A palaeolithic industry from the Amud Cave. In The Amud Man and His Cave Site, edited by H. Suzuki and F. Takai, pp. 77–114. Tokyo University Press, Tokyo.
Watts, I., 2002, Ochre in the Middle Stone Age of Southern Africa: Ritualized Display or Hide Preservative? South African Archaeological Bulletin 57: 1–14.
White, T. D., Asfaw, B., DeGusta, D., Gilbert, H., Richards, G. D., Suwa, G. and Howell F. C., 2003, Pleistocene Homo Sapiens from Middle Awash, Ethiopia. Nature 423: 742–747.
Wolpoff, M. H., 1996, Human Evolution (1996–1997 edition). College Custom Series. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Würz, S., 1999, The Howiesons Poort Backed Artefacts from Klasies River: An Argument for Symbolic Behaivour. South African Archaeological Bulletin 54: 38–50.
Yeshurun, R., Bar-Oz, G., and Weinstein-Evron, M. 2007, Modern Hunting Behavior in the Early Middle Paleolithic: Faunal Remains from Misliya Cave, Mount Carmel, Israel. Journal of Human Evolution 53: 656–677.
Zilhão, J. and d'Errico F., 1999, The Chronology and Taphonomy of the Earliest Aurignacian and Its Implications for the Understanding of Neandertal Extinction. Journal of World Prehistory 13: 1–68.
Zilhão, J., d'Errico, F., Bordes, J.-G., Lenoble, A., Texier, J.-P. and Rigaud J.-P., 2008a, Grotte des Fées (Châtelperron): History of Research, Stratigraphy, Dating, and Archaeology of the Châtelperronean Type-Site. PaleoAntrhopology 2008: 1–42.
Zilhão, J., d'Errico, F., Bordes, J.-G., Lenoble, A., Texier, J.-P. and Rigaud J.-P., 2008b, Like Hobbes' Chimney Birds. PaleoAntrhopology 2008: 65–67.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hovers, E. (2009). DISCUSSION 4: The Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic Transition: What News?. In: Camps, M., Chauhan, P. (eds) Sourcebook of Paleolithic Transitions. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-76487-0_30
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-76487-0_30
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-76478-8
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-76487-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)