combustion structures of archaeological level o and mousterian activity areas with use of fire at...

8/10/2019 Combustion structures of archaeological level O and mousterian activity areas with use of fire at the Abric Roman

1/12

Combustion structures of archaeological level O and mousterian activity areaswith use ofre at the Abric Roman rockshelter (NE Iberian Peninsula)

Josep Vallverd a,b,*, Susana Alonso a, Amlia Bargall a, Ral Bartrol c, Gerard Campeny b,ngel Carrancho d,Isabel Expsito b, Marta Fontanals a, Joana Gabucio a, Bruno Gmez b,

Josep Maria Prats a, Pablo Saudo a, lex Sol a, Jaume Vilalta a, Eudald Carbonell a,b,e

a IPHES, Institut Catal de Paleoecologia Humana i Evoluci Social, C/Escorxador s/n, 43003 Tarragona, SpainbArea de Prehistoria, Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV), Avinguda de Catalunya 35, 43002 Tarragona, SpaincAjuntament de Capellades, C/ Ramon God 9, ES08786 Capellades, Spaind Laboratorio de Paleomagnetismo (Dpto. Fsica), Escuela Politcnica Superior Edicio A1, Avda Cantabria s/n, ES09006 Burgos, Spaine Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology (IVPP), Beijing, China

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:

Available online 23 December 2010

a b s t r a c t

The human use of re generates a cultural sedimentary record that can be used to characterizeprehistoric activity areas. The aim of this paper is to develop a eld guide for recognizing and describingcombustion structures. The use ofre as suggested by the results of ethnoarchaeological and prehistoricarchaeological studies has served as the foundation for the analytical design of the eld observations ofthe combustion structures at the Abric Roman rockshelter.

Flat and concave combustion structure types have been uncovered in archaeological level O. Thesystematic recording of the sedimentary and dimensional attributes of the combustion structures can beused as empirical evidence with which to characterize the use of re. Differences in the use of rerepresent a signicant nding in the cultural repertoires of Neanderthals. Recognizing and recording thespecic organizational patterns of these activity areas, such as re-use in sleeping and resting activityareas, indicate the denitive emergence of home bases in the spatial record of the living oors of thearchaic human groups.

2010 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Characterizing and locating combustion structures and othercultural features is a fundamental requisite for site structureresearch in archaeology (Kent, 1991; Binford, 1996). Combustionstructures of Middle Paleolithic age are scarce in extensive excava-

tions,buttheycanbeavaluablesourceofinformationintheattemptto recognize the organizational properties of the archaeologicalrecord (Binford, 1982, 1996). The abundant sedimentary records ofthe combustion structures in level O of the Abric Roman suggestdifferent uses of re in the Mousterian living oors. The spatialpattern of the combustion structures shows relevant parallels withthat reported in archaeological and ethnoarchaeological studies of

modern foragers (Lumley and Boone, 1976; Yellen, 1977; Fisher andStrickland, 1991; Binford, 1996).

Despite the scarce evidence among the cultural repertories ofarchaic human groups, several features of these combustion struc-tures suggest that they were household spaces. The existence ofdwellings in the Middle Paleolithic is a controversial issue. Critical

perspectives have been based on the absence of activity areas, suchas sleeping and resting areas in the archaeological record. Empiricalevidence of dwellings in archaic archaeological sites is supported byndings related to construction materials, such as the alignment ofstones, mammoth tusks (as in thecase of Moldova) or plant remains(Jelnek,1976; Stapert,1990; Nadel et al., 2004).Soliddwellingshaveonly been accepted in the Upper Paleolithic record (Kolen, 1999;Klein, 2003). The remains of huts from the Early Upper Paleolithic,specically the structures from level IX and X at Grotte du RennedArcy, have been the subject of much criticism due to theirresemblance to the biomechanical centrifugal living structuresofthe Late Middle Paleolithic (Kolen, 1999).

* Corresponding author. IPHES - Institut Catal de Paleoecologia Humana i Evo-luci Social, Plaa Imperial Tarraco 1, 43005 Tarragona, Spain.

E-mail address: [email protected](J. Vallverd).

Contents lists available atScienceDirect

Quaternary International

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m /l o c a t e / q u a i n t

1040-6182/$e see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2010.12.012

Quaternary International 247 (2012) 313e324
mailto:[email protected]://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.elsevier.com/locate/quainthttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2010.12.012http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2010.12.012http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2010.12.012http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2010.12.012http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2010.12.012http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2010.12.012http://www.elsevier.com/locate/quainthttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182mailto:[email protected]


2/12

Field observation and documentation of the sedimentary record

of combustion structures are useful tools in recognizing prehistoricactivity areas. The sedimentary record of the use ofre has beenwidely studied by means of numerous analytical techniquesincluding sedimentary petrography, soil micromorphology, organicgeochemistry, determinations of minerals of plant origin, magneticand luminescent properties and signatures in burned minerals androcks (Bischoff et al., 1984; Courty, 1984; Olive and Taborin, 1989;Piperno and March, 1996; Albert et al., 2000; Goodfrey-Smith andIlani, 2004). Researchers have mainly focused on the preciserecognition of natural and cultural formation processes to discusstheir reliability as empirical evidence of use of re by humangroups. The prehistoric use of re by human archaic groups hasrarely been explored in the framework of site structure research(site size, number of occupants, activity area types, etc.) (Bordes,1975; Rigaud et al., 1995; Meignen et al., 2001; Peretto et al.,2004). Therefore, this paper suggests that the sedimentarysamples of combustion structures can be a source of inconsistenciesbetween analytical results and site structure evidence in order toexplore episodic and processual paradigms in archaeology (Gouldand Watson, 1982; Henry, 2003).

This paper proposes using the sedimentary record observed incombustion structures at Abric Roman as a way to characterizeprehistoric activity areas. The aims are: (1) to provide a eld guidefor describing combustion structures and (2) to promote the bridgebetweeneld and laboratory data. Finally, recognition of prehistoricactivity areas of use ofre can enhance the recognition of areas ofsleeping and resting activities (Vallverd et al., 2010). Identifyingsleeping and resting areas in the archaeological record can be aneffective test to suggest residential units or home bases within

a specic organizational pattern of the living oors (Binford, 1988).

2. Abric Roman de Capellades (Anoia, Barcelona)

The Abric Roman site is located in the town of Capellades(Barcelona) at 280 m above sea level (Fig. 1). The site is a widerockshelter in the northern face of a long cliff carved out bya tectonic fault and the Anoia River. This river cuts through thePrelittoral chain and connects two structural areas of the north-eastern Iberian Peninsula: the Ebro and Valls-Peneds basins.

TheAbricRoman was discovered by AmadorRoman in 1909 andhas since been recognized as a classic Catalan Mousterian andAurignaciansite.Thesedimentarysuccessionconsistsofatleast15m

of well-strati

ed carbonate sediments of

uvial and gravitational

transport with 25 archaeological levels spanning between 70 and

40 ka (Bischoff et al., 1988). The archaeological layers were formedwhen rock fall sedimentary processes were dominant. The uvialdeposits contain a limited ensemble of archaeological remains,suggesting that the rockshelter was at times uninhabitable due todripping waterowing overthe surfaces. Sedimentsof natural originform thick sedimentary successions (dm to m), whereas thearchaeological deposits are comparatively thinner (cm to dm).

Archaeological layer O is comprised of poorly stratied sand andne gravel with a weathered surface. These ne-grained depositsare above a basal succession composed of gravel, blocks andmegablocks that originated from the fall of travertine rocks fromthe cliff above the rockshelter. U-series dates for level O place it ataround 55 ka (Bischoff et al., 1988), a period in human evolution inwhich recontrol is generalized in the archaeological record of thearchaic human groups, suggesting the denitive emergence ofeconomic zoning based on central locations in prehistoric settle-ment systems (Gamble, 1990; Rolland, 1999, 2004).

3. Materials and methods

The combustion structures are located within a thin (40%) and uniform thermal modication of rock frag-ments. Heterogeneous carbonaceous facies are made up of a vari-able charcoal content with unburned and burned sedimentarycomponents.

To document a combustion structure, the eldwork begins bydelimiting the carbonaceous area, which is made up of carbonaceous

and other natural-anthropic facies associations. The observation of

Fig.1. Abric Roman archaeological site, located on the northeastern Iberian Peninsula near the village of Capellades (Barcelona) (a). The Abric Roman has NNE solar orientation and

is located in the northern zone of the cliff called Cinglera del Capell. The cliff containing the archaeological site is marked with a discontinuous circle (b).

J. Vallverd et al. / Quaternary International 247 (2012) 313e324314


3/12

Fig. 2. Combustion structure eld procedures, step by step, in order to determine carbonaceous and combustion activity areas and stratigraphy.1, hatched area with discontinuous

line, carbonaceous activity area. 2, hatched area and continuous line, combustion activity area. 3, empty and continuous line: area of burnt sediments (burnt ground of the

combustion activity area without carbonaceous components). 4, travertine block. 5, z value (depth). 6, burnt sediment. 7, black homogeneous carbonaceous sediment. 8, dark

heterogeneous carbonaceous sediment. 9, sedimentary ground of the combustion structure. A, greatest thickness. B, greatest linear diameter. C, number of bedforms.


4/12

carbonaceous and burned carbonate facies associations identiesa segment of ground as a combustion area. Two contour maps aremade in order to measure the surface areas of: (1) the carbonaceousactivity area; (2) the combustion activity area or the re-use area.Each carbonaceous area is identied with a Roman numeral. Whereevidence of stratication in the combustion structure is found, eachstructure is labeled with a lower case letter in alphabetical order.

Before a combustion structure is excavated is thoroughlydocumented in the eld by means of drawing, sampling and pho-tographing the carbonaceous area. In well preserved structures,

elementary hearths (Bordes, 1992) can often be distinguishedduring the determination of combustion activity areas becausehave a form similar to an experimental hearth. These elementaryhearths help to suggest the direction of the stratigraphic outcropwithin the combustion structure. In order to study the stratigraphyof a combustion structure, the structure must rst be partiallyexcavated. First the carbonaceous material is removed and sampled

to expose the burned or natural ground (Fig. 2). Then the ground isexcavated and sampled to determine its thermal modication.Samples are labeled as carbonaceous, burnt, or natural facies.

Fig. 3. S tructural map of level O.1, combustion areas. 2, carbonaceous areas (Roman numerals). 3. burnt blocks and megablocks. 4, blocks of the occupiedoors. 5, structural blocks

and megablocks. 6, large wood pseudomorph of travertine.

Fig. 4. Photograph of level O.



5/12

Stratigraphic observations include the measure of thickness andthe shape (bedform) of the carbonaceous, homogeneous andheterogeneous (if present), and burnt facies (Fig. 2). The stratig-raphy of a simple combustion activity area contains a facies asso-ciation consisting of carbonaceous, black and homogeneous, andburned sediments. This facies association often has the lenticulargeometry regularly observed in the meridian stratigraphic outcropsof elementary hearths. The longest dimension (cm), number andmaximum thickness are noted in order to characterize the shape ofthe carbonaceous and burned layers (bedforms). Other measure-ments related to combustion structure stratigraphy are slope andthe color comparison of burned and natural ground. The stratig-raphy is drawn and photographed and, along with the descriptionof the lithofacies, the eld documentation of the combustionstructures is complete.

4. Results

The map of the combustion structures in level O shown in Fig. 3contains the eld documentation recorded in 2005. The carbona-ceous areas are drawn in light gray and the combustion areas are

indicated in dark gray. Nineteen combustion structures have beendelimited, four of which are stratied (Fig. 4).

The forms of the combustion structures in level O can bedescribed by typological features regularly detailed in Paleolithicarchaeological studies (Perls, 1976; Beechinng and Gasco, 1989),such as at (n 17) and concave orcuvettes(n 2) (Table 1). Bothmorphologies may or may not feature stones. Flat structures occurin all dimensions of carbonaceous areas, whereas concave shapesare limited to middle-sized carbonaceous areas (Table 1).

Table 1

Dimensional attributes of combustion structures: Sq, square of the site grid system;A, carbonaceous area (m2); S, slope (%); WD, lowest distance of the central point inthe combustion structure to rockshelter wall (m). Bottom graph: cases with theshortest distance between the rockshelter wall and combustion structures.

Combustion structures Sq Type form A (m2) S % WD (m)

I O41 Flat 0.8 9 2.8I a N41 Flat 0.08 17 3

II N42 Flat 1.16 11 4III O45 Flat 0.59 9 5III b O45 Flat 0.35 1 5IV N44 Flat 0.6 15 5.1V M43 Concave 0.08 30 5.5VI M45 Flat 0.24 14 5.9VII L43 Flat 0.57 17 5.6VIII O43 Concave 2.38 14 3,1VIII a O43 Concave 0.6 17 3.7IX O51 Flat 7.24 0 6.6X N47 Flat 2.92 0 7.15XI R42 Flat 1.1 11 1.4XII T47 Flat 2.4 4 1.9XII a U46 Flat 0.15 13 0.4XII b U46 Flat 0.29 8 2.7XIII S50 Flat 0.5 2 2.2XIV S53 Flat 1.6 7 1.58XV S51 Flat 0.6 20 2.3XVI N58 Flat 11.1 18 2.1XVII K43 Flat 0.8 25 7XVIII L42 Flat 0.09 13 5.6XIX M40 Flat 1.3 23 4

Fig. 5. Different sizes of combustion structures. A, an elementary hearth. B, large combustion structure IX. C, combustion structure III that shows a thin, black homogeneous

carbonaceous facies stratied with thick, dark heterogeneous carbonaceous facies showing a sedimentary gure made by a small scale cross-stratication of granules and sand. D,

photograph of combustion structure XIII with a burnt slab above it.

J. Vallverd et al. / Quaternary International 247 (2012) 313e324 317


6/12

The lithostratigraphy of at combustion structures containsa thin, black homogeneous carbonaceous facies, a thicker and darkheterogeneous carbonaceous facies and a red calcarenite facies. Thelithology of the cuvettes consisted of: (1) a thin, black homogeneouscarbonaceous facies; (2) a thick, dark heterogeneous carbonaceousfacies; and (3) a thick, grayish-white calcarenite facies, with scarcecharcoals, and burned gravel and blocks. Concave combustionstructures have a complex morphology due to their constructiontechnique: (1) a dug tail in keeping with those described by Bordes(Sonneville-Bordes, 1989); (2) burned gravel and blocks in the oorlike slab pavement; (3) multilayered thermal modication on the

interior of certain slabs.

4.1. Dimensional attributes

The most common dimension of the carbonaceous areas isapproximately 1 m2 (Table 1). The largest areas range from 3 to11 m2 and their diameters vary between 0.5 and 1.5 m, giving themelongated or rectangular shapes. Rectangular combustion struc-tures (IX, XI, XII, and XVI) are at and have elementary hearths, withor without burnt blocks, and a slope of 0e20% (Fig. 5andTable 1).One dimension related attribute of the combustion structures istheir bimodal distribution of around 2.5 and 5.5 m from the wall ofthe rockshelter (Fig. 3andTable 1). Combustion structures XI, XII,

XIII, XIV, XV and XVI are near the wall of the rockshelter, 2e

3 m

Fig. 6. Density (artifacts/25 cm2) of lithic (a) and faunal (b) remains (gray scale), and the carbonaceous (gray) and combustion (black) activity areas and structural blocks and

megablocks (hatched). Cartography produced during eldwork from 2004 to 2005.



7/12

from it, while the remainders are located 5e6 m away. Anotherdimension related-attributed is the 1 m spacing of the smallcombustion structures XIII, XIV and XV.

Bones and lithic artifacts are accumulated close to the rock-shelter wall and the combustion structures. The combustionstructures located at 6 m from the rockshelter wall are empty orcontain a low density of lithic and bone remains (Fig. 6).

4.2. Stratigraphic features

Lenticular homogeneous carbonaceous facieshave a modal linealdimension of 20 cm. A partial correlation (50%) determines thecarbonaceous area through the number of lenticular layers made upof homogeneous carbonaceous facies as measured during strati-graphic observation. The eld observations that can explain thesepartial correlations are subject to different degrees of archaeologicalvisibility. Low archaeological visibility is present in six combustionstructures, in which the presence of heterogeneous carbonaceousfacies suggests postdepositional modications (Table 2). The lineardimensions of carbonaceous areas are larger than the number oflenticular layers of homogeneous carbonaceous facies. An example

of natural alteration is observed in combustion structure III, in whichheterogeneous carbonaceous facies have small scale cross-strati-cation (Fig. 5C). Nevertheless, an anomaly is observed in the largercombustion structures, for instance in combustion structure IX(Fig.7), where there is a thick reddish facies with dark gray coloring,which seems to be burnt gravelous calcarenite. Several largercombustion structures show scant variation between the naturalground color of the living oor and the color of the reddened burntsediments (Munsell chroma variation< 2/in Table 2) suggesting: (1)low-intensity temperatures according to the modal length ofthe lenticular layers of black homogeneous carbonaceous facies,indicating possible small dimensions of elementary hearths; (2)probable sedimentary homotaxia between burnt sediments andreddened humic sediments in the facies composition of the com-

bustion activity area.

Small and medium-sized combustion structures do not haveheterogeneous carbonaceous facies. Paired numbers of lenticularlayers of burnt and homogeneous carbonaceous facies seem anal-ogous to experimental hearths (Table 2).

One stratigraphic feature visible within large and very largecarbonaceous areas is the distance between combustion activityareas (Gamble, 1990; Fisher and Strickland, 1991). Inside these largecarbonaceous areas IX, X-XI-XII and XVI there are combustion areasspaced at a distance of 1 m apart (Figs. 7, 8 and 9).

5. Discussion

The occupied oors of level O at the Abric Roman rockshelterfeature combustion structures that are well delimited by thepresence of empty adjacent areas and many of them are notstratied. The low number of stratied combustion structurespoints to a large surface area available for the use of re in theoccupied oors. Only the travertine megablock outcrops on thenorthern part of the excavated area separate the zone near the wallfrom the dripline zone. This separation seems to have some effecton the distribution of artifacts, but not on the use ofre (Fig. 3), asthere are activity areas where only the use of re has been

observed, in the combustion structures farthest from the rock-shelter wall.

Sedimentary facies with homogeneous carbonaceous compo-nents are related to low temperature intensity combustion activityareas (Courty, 1984; Wattez, 1988). Heterogeneous carbonaceousfacies suggest occupational or natural disturbances and comprisethe carbonaceous area of the combustion structures. Grayish-whitecalcarenite sedimentary facies deserve a more detailed analysis inorder to determine their degree of thermal alteration and theirconstructive purpose in concave combustion structures (Bazile andGuillerault, 1987; Berna and Goldberg, 2007). Redder calcarenitefacies characterize the color change caused by the thermal impact(reddening due to rubefaction) in combustion activity areas oversediments rich in organic components (Canti and Linford, 2000).

5.1. Flat combustion structures

The size may depend on the lateral stratication of thecombustion activity areas, an amalgam of elementary hearthsdescribed in the formation process of external hearths (Binford,1988). Studies of other combustion structures, such as thosefound in Kebara cave, suggest a general vertical straticationpattern (Bar-Yosef et al., 1992) or the reuse of combustion struc-tures in locations with space constraints in small occupied sites likeToj Faraj (Henry et al., 1996; Meignen et al., 2001). Hearth reuse hasalso been observed in recent Canoeros dwellings (Legoupil, 1989).According to the amorphous hearths of the Pech de lAz II site, theanalogy with at combustion structures is supported by evidence

of their simple constructive techniques (Sonneville-Bordes, 1989).The stratigraphy ofat combustion structures shows a mode of20 cm for homogeneous carbonaceous lenticular layers. Thismeasurement, which roughly indicates the dimensions of elemen-tary hearths, is also the measurement established for the lowestdiameter range in the Kebara hearths (Bar-Yosef et al., 1992). Thesmall size of these elementary hearths suggests limited consump-tion of wood fuel. The spacing of 1e1.5 m between combustionactivity areas (re-use distances) in larger combustion structureswas also found in the small and medium-sized combustion struc-tures XII, XIII, XIV and XV (Figs. 8 and 9). This distance in re-usereveals an activity area similar to the sleeping or resting activityareas documented in ethnoarchaeological and prehistoric archaeo-logical studies (Binford, 1988; Gamble, 1990; Fisher and Strickland,

1991).

Table 2

Stratigraphic features of the combustion structures. BC, black homogenous carbo-naceous facies. B, burned facies. DC, dark heterogeneous carbonaceous facies. A,highest thickness. B, highest linear diameter. C, number of bedforms. D, Munsellcolor value/chroma variation between burned/natural sediment.

Combustion structure BC B DC

A B C A C D A B C

I 3 20 5 3 7 2/1 e e e

I a 2 10 1 1 1 2/1 e e eII 1 15 3 3 3 4/0 e e eIII 3 15 3 1 1 3/0 e e eIII a 2 25 3 1 3 3/0 e e eIV 2 15 3 4 3 1/0 3 50 4V 1 20 1 2 1 1/0 e e eVI 3 15 3 3 3 3/-1 e e eVII 1 10 4 5 7 4/-1 e e eVIII 7 25 12 6 6 4/0 3 50 3VIII a e e e e e e e e eIX 2 40 16 10 19 4/-1 8 40 1X 3 30 9 7 15 4/2 8 60 1XI 2 25 9 5 10 2/0 2 20 2XII 4 30 15 3 10 e 1 10 1XII a 1 30 1 3 1 e e e eXII b e e e e e e e e eXIII 5 20 5 6 5 3/0 e e e

XIV 1 25 1 3 2 4/0 e e eXV 2 25 1 1 1 3/-1 e e eXVI 4 20 23 7 25 4/1 e e eXVII 2 25 8 6 9 e e e eXVIII e e e e e e e e eXIX 2 20 3 10 3 e e e e



8/12

Fig. 7. A, morphology and stratigraphy ofat combustion structures IX and X. B, AeA0 photograph of the stratigraphy of combustion structure IX. C, oblique view of combustion

structure X and stratigraphy of the IeI0 outcrop. Drawings of combustion structures IX and X and stratigraphic outcrops (bottom). Same vertical and horizontal scale. Erosional

truncation of the combustion activity area is suggested by the abundance of burned-like facies and black homogeneous carbonaceous facies association, e.g. FeF0 stratigraphic

prole. Legend: 1, black homogeneous carbonaceous facies; 2, reddened calcarenite, burned-like, facies; 3, dark heterogeneous carbonaceous facies.



9/12


10/12

Sonneville-Bordes, 1989; Bordes, 1992). This tail in the morphologyof the combustion structures appears to help break the topographiclimitations of the concavity and enhance aeration.

6. Conclusions

The combustion structures of level O suggest various differentuses ofre. Recent reviews of spatial patterns and activity areas ofarchaic human groups suggest dissimilarities between theirbehaviors and those of modern humans. Some construction tech-niques also appear to be exclusive to modern humans ( Karkanaset al., 2004). Signicantly, evidence of combustion structuresdating from the Lower Paleolithic supports differing uses of the rebased on constructive techniques and sedimentary materials(Lumley and Boone, 1976;Perls, 1976; Sonneville-Bordes, 1989).However, Paleolithic archaeology has yielded little newevidence oncombustion structures constructive techniques and sedimentarymaterials use, pointing to the need for further research in this eld

(Mania,1998; Henry, 2003; Peretto et al., 2004; Rolland, 2004; Berna

and Goldberg, 2007). In this respect, this paper constitutes a eldguide for documenting different uses ofre in prehistoric activityareas. This processual paradigm implies the logical identication ofthe natural and cultural transformations of combustion structures.

The approach avoids the application of episodic paleoethnographythrough archaeometry, bioarchaeology, geoarchaeology, or otherdisciplines until the site structure is elucidated. The paucity ofresearch into activity areas in archaeology indicates the vitality ofthe stratigraphic paradigm in Paleolithic archaeology (Julien, 2002).

In level O of the Abric Roman the use ofre occurs in differentintra- and inter-occupational episodes. This is deduced by the evolu-tion of the morphology of the larger at combustion structuresdocumented here. The size of the at carbonaceous areas is linkedwith episodes of natural and occupational disturbances. The concavecombustion structures require further analytical data in order toidentifyspecic purposeactivityareas. Combustionstructures in areasdevoid of artifacts represent a challenge for Paleolithic archaeologyand are of specic potential interest. Several at combustion struc-

tures have certain similarities to sleeping and resting activity areas,

Fig. 9. Photographs ofat combustion structures. A, transversal view of combustion structure XII, note the elementary hearth in the right corner. B, view of carbonaceous area and

the 1-m spacing between two combustion areas within combustion structure XII. C and D, oblique view of combustion area in combustion structure XI when carbonaceous area has

been partially removed. E, stratigraphy of combustion structure XI showing the 1-m spacing between combustion areas.



11/12

consideringthe spacingbetweenre-use or combustion activity areasdistance of 1 m. The expectation is to document more activity areas inupcoming eldwork at the Abric Roman site. The empirical evidenceneeded to identify resting activity areas is proxy data in measuringgroup size. These dimensional attributes of certain activity areas of theuse of the re, such as sleep and rest activity areas in the spatialpatterning of the living oors, may be empirical evidence for therecognition of home bases and residential units among the differentoccupational strategies recorded at the Abric Roman site.

Acknowledgements

Excavations at the Abric Roman have been carried out with thesupport of the Departament de Cultura de la Generalitat de Cata-lunya (Servei dArqueologia i Paleontologia, Departament de Cul-tura i Mitjans de Comunicaci), the Ajuntament de Capellades. TheGeneralitat de Catalunya and the Servei General de la Recercaprogram "De la recerca aplicada a la socialitzaci del coneixement:Els canvis tecno-culturals i paisatgstics durant el Plistoc Superiori lHoloc" (2009 SGR 813) provide nancial support as well as theCatedra Atapuerca predoctoral program grant.

References

Albert, R.M., Weiner, S., Bar-Yosef, O., Meignen, L., 2000. Phytoliths in the middle

palealeolithic deposits of Kebara cave, Mt. Carmel, Israel: a study of the plant

material used for fuel and other purposes. Journal of Archaeological Science 27(10), 931e947.

Bar-Yosef,O.,Vandermeersch,B.,Arensburg,B.,Belfer-Cohen,A.,Goldberg,P.,Laville,H.,Meignen, L., Rak, Y., Speth, J.D., Tchernov, E., Tillier, A.M., Weiner, S., 1992. Theexcavations in Kebara cave, Mt. Carmel. Current Anthropology 33 (5), 497e550.

Bazile, F., Guillerault, P., 1987. Apports de la microscopie Balayage ltude des solsshabitats palolithiques. Hlinium XXVII, 19e31.

Beechinng, A., Gasco, J., 1989. Les foyers de la Prhistoire rcente du Sud de laFrance. In: Olive, M., Taborin, Y. (Eds.), Nature et fonction des foyers pr-historiques. APRAIF, Nemours, pp. 275e292.

Berna, F., Goldberg, P., 2007. Assessing Paleolithic pyrotechnology and associatedhominin behavior in Israel. Israel Journal of Earth Sciences 56, 107 e121.

Binford, L.R., 1982. The archaeology of place. Journal of Anthropological Archae-ology 1 (1), 5e31.

Binford, L.R., 1988. En busca del pasado. Descifrando el registro arqueolgico.

Crtica, Barcelona.Binford, L.R., 1996. Hearth and home: The Spatial Analysis of EthnographicallyDocumented Rock Shelter Occupations as a Template for DistinguishingBetween Human And Hominid Use of Sheltered Space. In: Proceedings of theXIII UISPP Congress. Middle Palaeolithic and Middle Stone Age SettlementSystems. ABACO, Forli, pp. 229e239.

Bischoff, J.L., Ikeya, M., Budinger, F.E., 1984. A TL/ESR study of the hearth feature atthe Calico archaeological site, California. American Antiquity 49 (4), 764e774.

Bischoff, J.L., Juli, R., Mora, R., 1988. Uranium-series dating of the Mousterianoccupation at Abric Romani, Spain. Nature 332, 68e70.

Bordes, F., 1975. Sur la notion de sol d habitat en prhistoire palolithique. Bulletinde la Socit Prehistorique Franaise 72, 139e144.

Bordes, F., 1992. Leons sur le palolithique. Notions de gologie quaternaire.Presses du CNRS, Paris.

Canti, M.G., Linford, N., 2000. The effects of re on archaeological soils and sedi-ments: temperature and colour relationships. Proceedings of the PrehistoricSociety 6, 385e395.

Courty, M.A., 1984. Formation et volution des accumulations cendreuses: approchemicromorphologique. 8e Colloque interrgional sur le Nolithique. Les

Fig. 10. Map and stratigraphy of concave combustion structure VIII in the upper left corner. Same vertical and horizontal scale. This map shows the position of AeA0 and BeB0

proles and CeC0 and DeD0 surfaces. Legend: 1, black homogeneous carbonaceous facies; 2, burned facies; 3, grayish-white heterogeneous calcarenite facies with charcoals and

burned travertine slabs. Upper right corner: A, photograph of double concave combustion structure VII (stratigraphy); B, photograph of combustion structure IV (stratigraphy)

where, in the left central part of the photograph, a travertine block shows multiple layers of thermal modications; there is also an erosional truncation between cultural and

natural sedimentary facies.



12/12

inuences mridionales dans lEst et le Centre-Est de la France au Nolithique:le rle du Massif Central. C.R.E.P.A., Le Puy-en-Velay, pp. 341e353.

Fisher, J.W., Strickland, H.C., 1991. Dwellings and re places: keys to Efe pygmycampsite structure. In: Gamble, C., Boismier, W.A. (Eds.), EthnoarchaeologialApproaches to Mobile Campsites. International Monographs in Prehistory,pp. 215e236. Ann Arbor.

Gamble, C., 1990. El poblamiento paleoltico de Europa. Critica, Barcelona.Goodfrey-Smith, D.I., Ilani, S., 2004. Past thermal history of goethite and hematite

fragments from Qafzeh cave deduced from thermal activation characteristics ofthe 110C TL peak of enclosed quartz grains. Revue DArchomtrie 28,185e190.

Gould, R.A., Watson, P.J., 1982. A dialogue on the meaning and use of analogy in eth-noarchaeological reasoning. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1, 355e381.

Henry, D.O., 2003. Neanderthals in the Levant: Behavioral Organization and theBeginnings of Human Modernity. Continuum, London.

Henry, D.O., Hall, S.A., Hietala, H.J., Demidenko, Y.E., Usik, V.I., Rosen, A.M.,Thomas, P.A.,1996. Middle paleolithic behavioral organization: 1993 excavationof tor faraj, southern Jordan. Journal of Field Archaeology 23, 31e53.

Jelnek, J., 1976. Encyclopdie illustre de lhomme prehistorique. Grund, Paris.Julien, M., 2002. Hacia la interpretacin de los suelos de habitacin. In: Garanger, J.

(Ed.), La prehistoria en el mundo. Akal, Madrid, pp. 195 e220.Karkanas, P., Koumouzelis, M., Kozlowski, J.K., Sitlivy, V., Sobczyk, K., Berna, F.,

Weiner, S., 2004. The earliest evidence for clay hearths: aurignacian features inKlisoura cave 1, southern Greece. Antiquity 78 (301), 516e525.

Kent, S., 1991. The relationship between mobility strategies and site structure. In:Kroll, E.M., Douglas Price, T. (Eds.), The Interpretation of Archaeological SpatialPatterning. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 33e59.

Klein, R.G., 2003. Whither the Neanderthals? Science 299, 1525e1527.Kolen, J., 1999. Hominids without homes: on the nature of the middle palaeolithic

settlement in Europe. In: Roebroeks, W., Gamble, C. (Eds.), The Middle Palae-olithic Occupation of Europe. University of Leiden, Leiden, pp. 139e175.

Legoupil, D., 1989. Le feu chez les indiens "canoeros" (nomades marins) de Pata-gonie: un exemple ethno-archaeologique. In: Olive, M., Taborin, Y. (Eds.), Natureet fonction des foyers prhistoriques. APRAIF, Nemours, pp. 123e127.

Leroi-Gourhan, A., Brzillon, M., 1983. Fouilles de Pincevent. Essai d analyse eth-nographique dun habitat magdalnien (la section 36). CNRS, Paris.

Lumley, H.d., Boone, Y., 1976. Les structures d habitat au Palolithique moyen. In:Lumley, H.d (Ed.), La Prhistoire Franaise. CNRS, Paris, pp. 644 e655.

Mania, D., 1998. El paleoltico inferior en la regin de Elbe-Saale. El yacimineto deBilzingsleben. In: Carbonell, E., Bermdez de Castro, J.M., Arsuaga, J.L.,Rodrguez, X.P. (Eds.), The First Europeans: Recent Discoveries and CurrentDebate, pp. 137e149. Burgos.

Meignen, L., Bar-Yosef, O., Goldberg, P., Weiner, S., 2001. Le feu au Palolithiquemoyen: recherches sur les structures de combustion et le statut des foyers.Lexemple du Proche-Orient. Palorient 26 (2), 9e22.

Nadel, D., Weiss, E., Simchoni, O., Tsatskin, A., Danin, A., Lislev, M., 2004. Stone agehut in Israel yields worlds oldest evidence of bedding. Proceedings of theNational Academy of Sciences 101 (17), 6821e6826.

Olive, M., Taborin, Y., 1989. Nature et fonction des foyers prhistoriques. APRAIF,Nemours.

Peretto, C., Biagi,P.,Boschian, G.,Broglio, A., 2004. Living-oorsandstructuresfromthelower paleolithic to the bronze age in Italy. Collegium Antropologicum 28 (1),

63e88.Perls, C., 1976. Le feu. In: Lumley, H.d (Ed.), La Prhistorie Franaise. CNRS, Paris,pp. 679e683.

Piperno, M., March, R., 1996. The Study of Human Behaviour in Relation to Fire inArchaeology: New Data and Methodologies for Understanding Prehistoric FireStructures. In: XIII International Congress of Prehistoric and ProtohistoricSciences. ABACO, Forl-Italia. 11e107.

Rigaud,J.P., Simek, J.,Ge, T.,1995.Mousterian resfrom GrotteXVI. Antiquity69 (266),902e912.

Rolland, N., 1999. The middle palaeolithic as development stage: evidence fromtechnology, subsistence, settlement systems and himinid socio-ecology. In:Ullrich, H. (Ed.), Hominid Evolution. Lifestyles and Survival Strategies. EditionArchaea, Gelsenkirchen/Schwelm, pp. 315e334.

Rolland, N., 2004. Was the emergence of home bases and domestic re a punctu-ated event? a review of the middle pleistocene record in Eurasia. AsianPerspectives 43 (2), 248e280.

Sonneville-Bordes, D.,1989. Foyers palolithiques en Prigord. In: Olive,M., Taborin, Y.(Eds.),Natureetfonctiondesfoyersprhistoriques.APRAIF,Nemours,pp.225 e237.

Stapert, D., 1990. Middle palaeolithic dwellings: fact or ction? some applications ofthe ring and sector method. Palaeohistoria 32, 1e19.

Vallverd, J., 2002. Micromorfologa de las facies sedimentarias de la coleccin dereferencia de la Sierra de Atapuerca y del nivel J del Abric Roman. Implicacionesgeoarqueolgicas y paleoetnogrcas. Ph. D. Thesis. Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

Vallverd,J., Vaquero,M., Cceres, I., Allu, E., Rosell, J., Saladi, P., Chacn, G.,Oll, A.,Canals, A., Sala, R., Courty, M.A., Carbonell, E., 2010. Sleeping activity area withinthe site structure of archaic human groups. Evidence from Abric Roman level Ncombustion activity areas. Current Anthropology 51 (1), 137e145.

Wattez, J.,1988. Contribution la connaissance des foyers prhistoriques par ltudedes cendres. Bulletin de la Socit Prhistorique Franaise85 (10e12), 352e366.

Yellen, J.E., 1977. Archaeological Approaches to the Present: Models for Recon-structing the Past. Academic Press, New York.


combustion structures of archaeological level o and mousterian activity areas with use of fire at...

Documents