UNIT 3 PALAEOLITHIC AND MESOLITHIC

CULTURES*
Structure
3.1 Objectives
3.2 Introduction
3.3 Palaeolithic Cultures
3.3.1 Perspectives on Gender Division of Labour in Palaeolithic Society
3.3.2 Lower Palaeolithic Cultures
3.3.3 Middle Palaeolithic Cultures
3.3.4 Upper Palaeolithic Cultures
3.3.5 Artistic Expressions
3.4 Mesolithic Cultures
3.4.1 Environmental Changes
3.4.2 Microlith Tools
3.4.3 Subsistence Pattern and Social Complexity
3.4.4 Mesolithic Cultures in Europe
3.4.5 Mesolithic Cultures in Scandinavia and Britain
3.4.6 Mesolithic Cultures in Southwest Asia
3.5 Summary
3.6 Key Words
3.7 Answers to Check Your Progress Exercises
3.8 Suggested Readings
3.9 Instructional Video Recommendations

3.1 OBJECTIVES
This Unit looks at the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic cultures in the world context.
After going through this Unit, you would be able to:
z Explain the meaning of the term Palaeolithic and Mesolithic;
z Identify the tool technology associated with these cultures;
z Provide illustrations from the sites associated with these cultures;
z Outline the cultural features of these cultures; and
z Describe the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic cultures as a process of evolution.

3.2 INTRODUCTION
The beginning of the story of humans is connected with cultural evolution. As Ian Hodder
(2016), the British archaeologist opines, human association with tool making and other
material culture contributes to evolutionary changes, both biological and cognitive. In a
similar vein, William Andrefsky Jr. (2009) has stated that the lithic technologies and
how they are designed, produced, recycled and discarded, tell us about the adaptive
strategies of the foragers. Often, the only artefact that survived the vagaries of time and
could provide a peep into the lives of the prehistoric humans are the stone tools. To
50 * Dr. Shatarupa Bhattacharya, Lady Sri Ram College for Women, University of Delhi, New Delhi.
understand importance of such early artefacts, this Unit discusses the various forms of Palaeolithic and
Mesolithic
cultural patterns, from tool culture to art forms, that had emerged in the world, with a
Cultures
focus on Europe and West Asia.
Story of early humans began when they started making changes to their surroundings
and started to interact with their environment. The ability to survive and make tools led
to the beginning of cultural transformations. As you would have learned from Unit 2 of
this course, the genus Homo had appeared around 2.5 million years ago (MYA) and
along with them appeared the stone tools. Tool has been described as a human-made
object used to perform manual work. Tools provide the best evidence for cultural
changes. With the technique of flaking (peeling out small pieces of stone from a larger
one) tools were turned into distinct shapes and could be put to different functions. The
distinctions in shaping and functioning of the tools emerged as a significant marker of
distinction between various cultures. Besides, the adaptive quality was an important
survival technique, which ensured proliferation and development of the early humans.
The story of humans starts from making simple tools for hunting-gathering and then
making innumerable changes, which modified the living conditions of humans.
Historians, anthropologists, archaeologists and physicists have proposed various theories
to understand and explain the human cultural development (History of Humanity, Vol.
I, 1996). C.J. Thomsen for instance, proposed the following three-fold classification of
prehistoric cultures:
a) The early Palaeolithic as representing the food-gathering stage,
b) Later Palaeolithic as the stage of organized hunting and selective collection,
c) Neolithic as the food producing stage.
S. Nilson, on the other hand, formulated four stages of evolution in terms of savage,
huntsmen or nomads, agriculturists and civilization stages. According to Edward Taylor,
human beings had common sense and rational behaviour which led to cultural
development. He mentions three stages of human cultural development as: savagery,
barbarianism, and civilization. American anthropologist, Lewis H. Morgan (in History
of Humanity, Vol. I, 1996) holds social evolution as a result of human societies adapting
to the stress of their environment and classified them into seven stages of development,
starting from lower stage of savagery going through a stage of simple food gathering
and culminating into the stage of civilization when the society developed writing.

3.3 PALAEOLITHIC CULTURE

The term ‘Palaeolithic’ is made up of two Greek words: palaios meaning ‘old’ and
lithos meaning ‘stone’ and is used to indicate ‘old stone age’. The term was coined by
archaeologist John Lubbock in 1865 and is used for the period of prehistory from
around 2.5 million years ago when humans began to make stone tools.
Evolution of humans from Homo habilis to Homo sapien sapien is a long-drawn
process, about which you learnt in Unit 2 in relation to the biological changes. The
changes that led to evolution were not just biological but cultural as well. The cultural
changes had a major role in the development of the early humans. In this context, when
we mention cultural changes, we are not only referring to manufactured stone tools and
how they evolved over a period of time, but also changes in the environment and
accessibility to resources. The latter includes the hunting strategies, methods of
communication, ability to control fire, making and modifying tools, subsistence patterns,
burials, paintings and so on. 51
Evolution of Closely linked to the tools produced is the question about the use of these tools. This is
Humankind invariably linked to the subsistence strategy of the period. Howfar was hunting the basis
of the economy has been an issue of debate among scholars. Can we designate the
early humans as hunters or as hunter-gatherers or as scavengers? And even on the
basis of the evidence found in terms of tools as well as fossil records, can we talk about
a gendered division of labour?

3.3.1 Perspectives on Gender Division of Labour in

Palaeolithic Society
For a very long time the ‘Hunting hypothesis’ was the most accepted theory which
talked about hunting as a way of life and was understood as a male activity. Hunting
was portrayed as the central economic pursuit and it was assumed that men controlled
food provisioning and sharing. It was believed that men were the leaders and ‘in-charge’
of and also dominant over women and children. It was held that women, owing to their
reproductive capabilities, were limited to function as mothers and caretakers which
also restricted their movement beyond the base area. On the other hand, men took
upon the responsibility of hunting, and bringing food to the base –Richard B. Lee and I.
Devore (1968) began with the concept of Man the Hunter, in a symposium, and later
book of the same title. These theories that are based on gender polarization have been
strongly criticized by a set of scholars such as Nancy Tanner, A. Zihlmann (1978) and
others who refute the notion of a gendered division of labour in prehistoric societies.
These scholars understand hunting as opportunistic in nature. According to them, the
crude tools and their functions suggest that hunting was not the main economic activity
of the early humans rather they were scavengers. These scholars question the assumption
that all women were mothers and argue that the notion of child-bearing as basis of
labourdivision is misleading. Many ethnographic studies show that women worked as
tool-makers in early times. For example, Joan Gero (in Kathryn W. Arthur, 2010), a
pioneer in feminist archaeology, argues that women in prehistory must have been tool-
makers for they would have required flakes to carry out a number of tasks. Ethnographic
studies show that women contributed a large share in food production processes in
most foraging societies. Further, in many societies, women went for hunting, alone and
along with men. In a way, foraging challenges the notion of gendered division of labour
in prehistoric societies.
Furthering the arguments of these scholars is the Gathering hypothesis according to
which women played a central role as opposed to men in prehistoric period. This
theory suggests that women used tools to gather and process plant food. They argue
that gathering was an equally important activity and should not be qualified as less
productive ‘women’s work’or equated as being less productive. This hypothesis,
however, accepts the presence of gendered division of labour in the early societies.
Scholars such as A. Zihlman (1978), supposes that the human way of life was not
based on sexual division of labour but on a system where male as well as female collect
and engage in predatory behavioural flexibility which was a major contributing factor to
early hominid survival. In a way both contributed equally in the early society which was
pertinent for their survival.

3.3.2 Lower Palaeolithic Cultures

The palaeolithic culture may be divided into three periods based on the type of tools,
social and economic changes, nature of habitation and a few other criteria. It begins
with the Lower Palaeolithic Culture as we will be discussing in this Sub-section.
Brian Fagan (2014) points out that four criteria have been commonly used to define a
52 ‘human’. First, the brain size that should be more than 600 cubic centimeters. Secondly,
possession of language, which can be identified from the patterns found inside the brain Palaeolithic and
case. Third, having a human-like precision grip and opposable thumb. And lastly, the Mesolithic
Cultures
ability to manufacture tools.
Who were the first tool makers or the first ‘humans’ has been an enigma in prehistory.
The human species named Australopithecus garhi, dated to 2.5 million years ago is
an interesting find in this context. The specie’s brain size was one-third of that of the
early humans and features were ape-like. But bones of deer and antelope, found nearby
the fossils of Australopithecus garhi, had cut marks from stone tools. Although no
tools have been found yet such evidence makes the identity of the first tool-makers
difficult to ascertain. Moreover, evidence suggests that these early human species were
meat eaters and used some sort of stone tools.
The tools made by the Homo habilis were simple and crude tools which were first
found are believed to have existed around 2.5 million years ago. The technology
associated with them is called the Oldowan tool technology, named after Olduvai Gorge
in Tanzania, the place where these tools were first discovered. Chopper-chopping tools
are considered theearliest tools. These were generally made by percussion method (i.e.
striking one object to another), usually hitting a lava cobble with another. The flakes
(small, thin piece of scraped stone), thus produced were long and sharp which were
used to make scrapers and cutting tools to cut or scrape wood, plants, skin and also
meat.
Nicholas Toth (History of Humanity, 1996) has argued that the first tool-makers had
a clear understanding of the potential of the tool, as well as the mechanics of the tool
technology. Tool-making required good hand-eye coordination, ability to recognize
acute angles in stone and mental processing for shaping a tool. The shapes and edges
in a stone thus make it possible to identify if it was prepared as a tool by the early
humans. D. Strout (2011) has shown that even the simple artefact such as the Oldowan
tools, involved a complex method which consisted of careful selection of the raw material,
followed by flake production and then flake detachment. Following this, working on
the percussion method, tools could be produced.

Figure 3.1: Oldowan Stone Chopper

Credit: José-Manuel Benito Álvarez, 2007
Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Oldowan_tradition_chopper.jpg
53
Evolution of The Oldowan technology was the only form of tool technology in use for more than a
Humankind million years. The term ‘knapping’ has been used to describe removal of flakes from
the core and the term ‘debitage’ is referred to indicate the waste material. The earliest
core was simple unipolar (single) core from which one or two flakes were removed.
Later, early humans moved to more complex Levallois technique where flakes of pre-
determined size and shape could be removed. The earliest cores were generally called
the pebble-tools.
The recent research on tool usage shows that the Oldowan tools were not hunting tools
and were useful in chopping or scraping plants and animals. They were mostly used to
process carcasses, for skinning, opening joints and meat and breaking to open bones.
Both at Olduvai Gorge and Koobi Fora (near Lake Turkana in Northern Kenya) large
number of animal bones along with tools concentrated over a small area have been
found. With the presence of other predators, absence of the discovery of fire or
domestication of animals at this stage, the early hominids were mostly dependent on
opportunistic foraging for meat along with gathering plants for their diet which explains
the presence of animal bones along with tools at these sites.
Steven Mithen (1995) believes that the cognitive or learning and understanding ability
of the early humans was important as it was a method of understanding their surroundings.
Social intelligence might have also evolved with these changes that could be seen in
terms of subsistence pattern, tool making etc. Anthropologist Robin Dunbar (in Fagan,
2014) has argued that Homo habilis must have lived in groups, as it was an essential
survival strategy. G. Clarke (in Fagan, 2014) suggests that they probably made some
kind of shelter with branches supported by stone structure. Another development
associated with this period is communication skills. They must have been using grunts
and gestures to communicate. The ability to interact with others would have paved way
for other complex social interactions, which would have further contributed to the increase
in their cognitive abilities.
The coming of the Homo Erectus has been associated with not only biological changes
but also significant changes in the tool technology. These early humans were associated
with the Acheulian tool technology, named after the site named Saint Acheul in France.
This technology involved bifacial tools i.e. flaking was done on both sides and these
tools were thus sharper and better. They were multipurpose tools, which were used for
wood-working, scraping skin as well as butchering animals. Tools such as hand-axes
and the cleavers come into picture for the first time and proved to be very useful as they
could be sharpened multiple times. Evidence of butchery and big-game hunting have
been found at sites such as Boxgrove (West Sussex, England), and Ambrona and
Torralba (Central Spain). At Ambrona and Torralba, crude hand-axes, cleavers,
scrappers and cutting tools have also been found. Evidence indicates that big animals
such as elephants, rhinoceros, bison, deer etc. were dismembered in these sites. Many
scholars believe that these sites represent sophisticated hunting with farsightedness and
planning.
FLAKES

z Flakes are categorized into two groups: by-products and intentional flaking.

z Flakes can be produced as a result of tool working and are part of flake debris.

z Intentional flakes could be produced by methods such as the Clactonian, the Levallois and
the Mousterian, details of which are highlighted further in this Section.

54
 Palaeolithic and
Mesolithic
Cultures

Figure 3.2 : Different sides of an AcheuleanHandaxe. Found at Haute-Garonne France, dated

500 000 and 300 000 BP
Credit: Didier Descouens,2010
Source:https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/Biface_Cintegabelle_
MHNT_PRE_2009.0.201.1_V2.jpg

The most characteristic tool

of the Acheulean technology
was the hand-axe, a tear-
drop shaped tool. Based on
the innovations in tool
technology,the Acheulian
technology can be divided
into early and late phase.
Production of large flakes
called blanks, suitable for
shaping into a hand-axe was
a key innovation of early
Acheulean technology though
in this phase the hand-axes
Figure 3.3 : Clactonian hand axe, dated to about 350,000
were small and symmetrical years BCE and excavated from Rickson’s Farm Pit, in the
tools. The Homo Erectus United Kingdom.
were better hunters and could Credit: Bellroth, 2010
use such hand-axes as Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/
projectiles. Thus, the hand- 6e/Hand-axe-Clactonian.JPG
axe could be used both as a
tool as well as a weapon. Another important tool was the cleaver, which was a large
flake with a straight cutting edge at one end and shows no signs of retouch. These tools
could be reused, re-sharpened and recycled as a flake tool. Wood, antler, and bones
besides stones were used as material for producing these tools. Inclusion of meat in
their diet led to other kinds of social changes, such as group formation and a distinct
tool kit. The tools such as scrapers, cleavers, side-scrapers, bola stones and others
were simple, efficient tools which were produced at this time.
By the later phase of Acheulian technology, tools were produced using prepared core
technique i.e. first, the core was knapped and then flakes were produced to make the
desired tool. A distinct lithic assemblage associated with Lower Palaeolithic technology
is the Clactonian technique, named after the site Clacton-on-Sea, Essex, England. As
per Henry Breuil’s (in M.Y. Ohel, 1978) characterization of these tools, they were
55
Evolution of large, wide and thick flakes, produced by block-on-block method. These were
Humankind considered distinct from the Acheulian tools. However, many recent scholars such as
Ohel and others do not see Clactonian technique as a distinct tool technology but
instead, as constituting part of the flaking process. This method is sometimes understood
as Lower Palaeolithictool culture without the hand axe. Many scholars hold this method
as a precursor to the Levallois technique.
Homo Erectus were the first group to move out of Africa which again reflected their
adaptive quality. They could adapt to harsher climates from the Savanna in East Africa
to Java, Northern Africa, Europe, Asia, etc. They were also associated with the ability
to control fire. Earliest evidence of hearth-like arrangements has been discovered from
Wonderwerk Cave, South Africa, dated 1.8 million years ago. Other sites such as
Swartkrans (South Africa) and Chesowanya (Rift Valley, Kenya) have also shown
frequent use of controlled fire along with ash and bone fragments. Similarly, at Gesher
Benot-Ya’agov in Israel, dated to 790,000 years, charred wood and seeds have been
discovered. In Zhoukoudian Caves in Beijing, China dated to 400,000 years, evidence
of charcoal, burned bone fragments and ash accumulation in hearth indicates that the
hominids used fire. They made flakes from quartz. They also made chopper, scrapers,
awls, crude points and other artefacts.
The subsistence pattern of the Lower Palaeolithic period was based on hunting,
scavenging as well as gathering plant food. They probably by now had better
understanding of the seasons. They lived in large bands and sometimes when there was
abundant plantfood, they lived in smaller bands. This would reflect considerable social
intelligence and flexibility. They had a well developed Broca’s area (region in the frontal
lobe of the dominant hemisphere, usually the left side of the hominid brain with functions
linked to speech production) associated with speech. Therefore, on the basis of this
evidence it is inferred that the hominids might have had the potential for articulate speech.
Development of language gave stimulus to development of brain besides being a means
of communication in addition to gestures and grunts.
The Lower Palaeolithic culture reflects the evolutionary processes from making simple
Oldowan tools to more complex Acheulian tools. Along with the biological changes
which marked the foundation of a human society, transformations could be seen in
terms of the subsistence pattern, control of fire, group formation and language.
Check Your Progress Exercise-1
1) Discuss the subsistence strategies during the Lower Palaeolithic period.
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
2) Write a short note on the Oldowan tool technology.
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
56
 ..................................................................................................................... Palaeolithic and
Mesolithic
..................................................................................................................... Cultures

.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
3) What are the cultural changes associated with the Homo Erectus?
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................

3.3.3 Middle Palaeolithic Cultures

The Middle Palaeolithic period (c. 78,000 to 128,000 Years Ago) was based on a new
tool technology, newer forms of subsistence strategy as well as another specie of the
hominids, the Neanderthals. The Neanderthals were associated with a distinct tool kit
i.e. the Mousterian tools. The Mousterian tools were made with two prominent methods:
the Levallois method and the Disk core technique. In these techniques, the core is
prepared and then flakes of pre-determined shape and size are removed. Thus, the
tools are much sharper as well as smaller in size. The core gradually becomes smaller
and the flat disk can be used for points and scrapers.
The Levallois technique is understood as a method of reduction i.e. knapping to produce
large flakes, generally oval in shape, and with acute-angled, sharp, usable edges. Most
importantly, this method was used to predetermine the shape of the end-product before
their removal from the core. This method was used to produce a variety of flakes, such
as sub-circular flakes, blades, blade-like flakes, etc.

Figure 3.4 : Levallois point found from Beuzeville in France

Credit: Didier Descouens, 2010
Source:https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Pointe_levallois_Beuzeville_
MHNT_PRE.2009.0.203.2.fond.jpg 57
Evolution of
Humankind

Figure 3.5 : Levallois Technique

Credit: Jose-Manuel Benito Alvarez
Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Levallois-Nucleo_reiterativo.png

By this period composite tools were being produced. Cultural variability is reflected in
the Mousterian tool, named after the site Le Moustier, southwest France. These were
mostly flake tools, of which most common were scraping tools, burins and spear points,
besides hand-axes, notched flakes which were used for stripping meat, etc. For example,
a spear was produced by combining a point and shaft held together with a binding
material. This assisted Neanderthals to hunt better. There is great variability in Mousterian
technique which has been a matter of debate among scholars. According to P. Bordes
(1961), the variability reflected different time-periods, and variable climate or seasons.
Lewis and Sally Binford (1966) hold that the tool variability represents different tasks
done by the Neanderthals although these tasks remain unclear. The artefacts such as
stone spear points were not multipurpose and they were used for specific purposes.
Neanderthals occupied large territories on a seasonal round i.e. they came back to
same location year after year. They knew their local environment well and planned their
migrations accordingly. They lived in bands in caves and rock shelters. They were good
hunters and hunted large animals such as mammoths (an extinct species of elephants),
reindeers, wild horses besides birds and fishes.
Another very important complexity associated with the Neanderthals was their religious
beliefs. Many scholars believe that the Neanderthals buried their dead. Burials have
been discovered from rock shelters and caves as well as in open air sites. Single burials
were more common and contained flints tools and food/charred meat. Such burials
have been found in Shanidar Caves in Zagros mountains, Iraq. Another site is La Chapelle-
aux Saints in France which has provided evidence of a burial with bison leg on the
chest, bone tools and other debris. Many scholars believe that these are circumstantial
and not intentional burials. La Ferrassie, a rock shelter in Les Eyzies in France has
yielded remains of two adults, and four children buried close together in a camp site.
However, Fagan (2014) says that although the Neanderthals buried their dead but to
associate it with afterlife can be questioned.
58
The Middle Palaeolithic period saw changes not only in terms of better tools and complex Palaeolithic and
hunting strategies but also in terms of social and environmental adaptive strategies. Mesolithic
Cultures
Besides we have evidence of some rituals in terms of burial practices which makes
early humans different from other animals.
Check Your Progress Exercise-2
1) How would you differentiate between the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic period?
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
2) Discuss the Neanderthals and their culture.
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................

3.3.4 Upper Palaeolithic Cultures

The first fully evolved human specie is known as the Cro-Magnons, named after a rock
shelter in Les Eyzies in southwestern France. They settled in southeastern and central
Europe around 40,000 years ago and had entered southwestern France by 35,000-
40,000 years ago. The tool technology of the Upper Palaeolithic period was called the
Blade technology. The Cro-Magnons made sharp long parallel side blanks which could
be used to produce a wide spectrum of artefacts for a range of activities from hunting,
butchering, processing skin, woodwork or cloth manufacturing, among others. The
blade tools were effective tools such as the scrapers, awls, knives, eyed-needles burins,
etc. The tools were made of bones, stones as well as ivory. Flint, chert or obsidian
were also commonly used for the production of tools. They refined the burin, which
was an engraving tool and contributed in efficient antler and bone working. The technique
used for bone and antlers was called the groove and splinter technique.
The economy of the period was based on gathering and hunting which included fishing.
The Cro-Magnons of western and central Europe developed more elaborate and
sophisticated hunting cultures. These cultures not only differed in terms of tools but also
in terms of social and religious life. The Cro-Magnons of these regions migrated towards
the river valleys. They not only hunted big animals but also smaller animals such as
rabbits, wolves, birds etc. besides gathering plant food. As Fagan has pointed out, they
mostly lived in small groups subsisting on range of games and stored food and would
have come together in larger groups during spring, summer and early fall when reindeer
were abundant. In winters they would diverge into smaller groups again.
Some Upper Palaeolithic Cultures
One of the prominent cultures of the Upper Palaeolithic period is the Chatelperronian 59
Evolution of culture which was dominant in Western Europe and is dated to around 35,000-30,000
Humankind BP. This culture was known for making blades. Most common tools were side-scrapers,
denticulate implements (stone tools containing one or more edges), points, besides
burins, knives, chisels etc. The characteristic tool of this culture was the Chatelperronian
knives made from a blade with one cutting end while the opposite edge was curved or
blunted. People of this culture also made bone tools. They had well organized dwelling
structures. Mostly, there were circular dwellings with calcerous blocks (i.e. soil with
more calcium carbonate) around hearth with postholes or mammoth tusks stuck into
the ground.
Another important culture of this period is the Leaf-shaped Point Culture. This culture
was found around the same time as the earlier culture in some sites in Britain and
Russia. Like the Chatelperronians, people of this culture also made knives but they
were formed in the shape of a leaf, from which the culture derives its name. One of the
important sites of this culture was Les Cottés, France. This culture was considered
important as it is held to have led to the formation of Gravettian complexes (the last of
the Upper Palaeolithic archaeological industry) in central Europe.
However, preceding Gravettian Culture was the Aurignacian Culture which can be
dated to around 40,000 BP in West Asia. It is believed to be the culture of the Cro-
Magnon man. The tool culture is represented by beaked burins, keeled scrapers, end
scrapers besides many varieties of bone tools. The culture also provides evidence of
ornaments such as pendants, ivory beads, drop-shaped pendants and rings besides
perforated teeth. Moreover, ivory figures have been found in caves of Swabian Jura,
Germany, which generally depict animal forms in round. Rock shelters at other sites
have also been found with engravings representing animals and humans. At Les Eyzies,
Dordogne, France a group burial was found in a Cro-Magnon shelter.
The Gravettian Culture, dated from 27,000-22,000 BP, is known for thin blades which
are called the Gravettian points. People also used barbs and flat leaf-shaped darts.
Other tools such as scoops, picks, pickaxe were used for making dwelling structures.
They used both bones and antlers as raw material. Round dwellings were found with
tombs and open areas for making figurines. This shows that these would have been
permanent dwelling places, which included both natural shelters and open-air spaces.
The Gravettians were particularly known for the ‘Venus figurines’. These were female
figurines with broad hips, pendulant breasts and prominent posteriors. The limbs were
mostly broken, and these figurines had no facial features. In DolníVstonice, Moravia,
Czech Republic, the figurines were made of soft stones, ivory or terracotta. In Moravia
as well as Ukraine, besides female figurines, figurines of animals such as rhino and
mammoth were also found. These figurines are presumed to have been used for cultic
or religious practices.
The Solutrian Culture dated to around 20,000-15,000 BP found mostly in France and
Spain, may have come from the earlier Gravettain Culture. This culture produced various
kinds of points, barbs, needles and eyed-needles from bones. They had sub-circular
dwelling structures and provide evidence of cave paintings and engravings. The bas-
relief carved on the blocksat Solutrian sites represent potbellied, short-limbed animals.
This culture declined soon and gave way to the Magdalenian Culture in Western Europe.
The Magdalenian Culture dated from around 18,000-8,000 BP. The culture is known
for building complex settlements. People of this culture also made composite tools such
as the microlith projectiles, bows, harpoons and bladelets. This culture is also known
for its artistic accomplishment especially the Cave art, which is discussed in the next
60 Sub-section.
But before we move onto that, it is important to recall that the Upper Palaeolithic Palaeolithic and
period was represented by regional variations in terms of tools used, dwelling structures, Mesolithic
Cultures
hunting strategies, etc. The development of the Upper Palaeolithic cultures was further
marked by their artistic activities to which we now turn.

3.3.5 Artistic Expressions

By 48,000 years ago, Europeans started making ornaments such as beads, pendants,
perforated teeth etc. besides making figures on cave walls. There are two major varieties
of pre-historic art:mobilier and parietal. Decorations or art work executed on a movable
object or one that can be moved from one place to another is called art mobilier or
home art. Ones that are found in cave walls and ceilings is called cave art or parietal art.
Moreover, prehistoric art comes in various forms such as engravings, paintings, bas-
relief etc. and all these forms of art can be witnessed as early as the Upper Palaeolithic
times. Another important form of artistic expression was flutting, which were zig-zag
marks made on the cave walls. Scholars believed that these were made by children but
supported by adults as these have been found at considerable height on the walls. It is
assumed that these were assigned to children based on the mere simplicity of such art
forms. Although scholars also believe that such art forms must have held some ritual
purposes as well.
The paintings show the cognitive ability and greater emotional power of the prehistoric
humans thus were understood as a way of communication. It was believed that they
represent symbolic meanings which is difficult to comprehend. It represents a deeper
understanding of their social, spiritual and natural worlds into a single continuum (Fagan,
2014).
Palaeolithic art was executed on stone, bone, antlers, wood, clay and ivory. The art
includes depiction of Venus figurines, ornaments such as pendants and beads and musical
instruments such as flute, found in Germany. The Magdalenians also decorated harpoons,
spears and other artefacts with naturalistic engravings. Stephen Mithen (1995) holds
that as a result of higher cognitive ability there have been two major consequences, first
complex social relationships and second development of visual symbolism, i.e.
development of art as a means of communication and expression.
Rock Art
Most famous Upper Palaeolithiccave art is found in sites such as Lascoux (south west
France), Les Cambarelles (Les Eyzies de Tayac, Dordogne, France), Altamira
(Cantabria, Spain) and Grotte de Chauvet, France. The cave art from these sites usually
depict animal motifs, human figures andanthromorphic (such as human-animal forms)
figures. They also represent abstract and non-naturalistic signs, generally called tectiforms.
Such art was made on murals or painted over the natural shape of the rock wall. The
engravings and the bas-relief were also repeated in clay and stone slabs found near and
around the cave sites. The painting was done with pigments prepared by grinding naturally
occurringochres, mineral oxides etc. with fat and blood of animals and other materials
such as urine, water etc. Black, red and occasionally yellow pigments were mixed or
used separately to draw outlines. In Grotte de Chauvet, France, dated to around
30,000 BCE, more than three hundred paintings have been found. The paintings give
an effect of movement which was achieved by depicting over lapping heads of animals
in motion.
The Magdalenian site of Lascaux in South West France dated to around 16,000 BCE
in its painting depicts wild horses, bulls, reindeer, and other animals. The colours used
61
Evolution of for these paintings were derived from the minerals and most common was hematite i.e.
Humankind red. Besides this, manganese, natural earth and charcoal, both natural and burnt mixed
in blood or animal marrow or fat were also used as colouring agents. Early humans
used feathers, twigs and hair as brush, besides using their fingers. They mostly made
paintings on the natural surface of the rock. They generally preferred plain and smooth
surface but again that was not the sole criteria in choosing a surface as they also made
figures at a height, on ceilings and deep inside the caves. The bodies of the animals
were generally left blank and the pictures range in sizes from small to very large ones.

Figure 3.6 : Altamira Cave Painting

Credit: Museo de Altamira y D. Rodriguez, 2010
Source:https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/9_Bisonte_Magdaleniense_
polícromo.jpg

Scholars do not have a unanimous opinion for the existence of these art forms. Some
scholars believe that these art forms represent ritualistic belief. Others argue that they
were made for aesthetic purpose. While a few scholars associate the Palaeolithic cave
art with magic or sorcery. Scholars such as Gordon Childe have argued that these were
not amateurish work rather they were well made and that these early societies must
have specialists who made such paintings. This brings us to the question as to why a
society based on subsistence economy spent time and energy in making these paintings
in difficult to reach caves. H. Breuil (in Fagan, 2014) has stated that the hunter-gatherers
performed rituals in these caves and such practices were to ensure success of hunt. In
fact, some experts like Lewis-Williams and Dowson (in E. Palacio-Perez, 2013) argue
that cave art was involved with shamanistic rituals and the animal figures were images of
spirit creatures or life force for the shamans. In contrast to these ideas, many scholars
believe that the cave arts simply represented the world of the early humans. They were
also explained as sympathetic magic oftotemism by Ucko and Rosenfeld (in E. Palacio-
Perez, 2013). Thus, interpretations of Palaeolithic art vary from pure aesthetics to a
functional view.
Check Your Progress Exercise-3
1) Write a note on the Upper Palaeolithic cultures in Europe.
.....................................................................................................................
62
 ..................................................................................................................... Palaeolithic and
Mesolithic
..................................................................................................................... Cultures

.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
2) Evaluate the Rock art and how does that represent the complexity of the Upper
Palaeolithic period.
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................

3.4 MESOLITHIC CULTURES

The term Mesolithic means Middle Stone Age. It is generally understood as a prelude
to Neolithic. This period is recognized in terms of marked reduction in tool size and
striking climatic changes. It witnessed the end of the Ice age and beginning of a warmer
period and then again a colder phase later. The warmer period led to increase in sea
levels. Coasts, estuaries and lakes became highly productive and aquatic resources
therefore were well utilized (Fagan, 2014). These changes had an impact on vegetation
as well as the animals found, for example woolly mammoths disappeared and deer
became more common. Plant food such as nuts became more prevalent. Increase in
food would have contributed to an increase in population.

3.4.1 Environmental Changes

Major changes were seen with the Holocene epoch, a geological division which started
from around 13,700 BP. The climatic fluctuations and changes could be noticed in
terms of the end of Palaeolitic phases and beginning of new small tools, called microliths,
changing hunting strategies with introduction of bows and arrows besides intensive
gathering (as will be discussed in this Sub-section). The climate was becoming dry and
arid and along with it there were changes in the flora and fauna in this region. Population
had also increased and led to two kinds of changes. Firstly, change in the use of tools
and secondly a change in the utilization of the available food resources.
Mesolithic gained recognition as a distinct cultural phase with the discovery of Mas
d’Azil, a cave site near France. In this site, the Mesolithic tools were found over the
Magdaenian tools of the Upper Palaeolithic period and with this discovery, a separate
phase was identified in Europe. The Mesolithic period has been often defined as the
culture between Palaeolithic and Neolithic.
D. Price (1991) holds that Mesolithic is not exclusively associated either with utilization
of microlithic tool or with the exploitation of forest or coasts nor with the domestication
of dog. It can be defined as a post-glacial period prior to the introduction of agriculture.
Clark also holds that the Mesolithic period was essentially a prelude to the fundamental
changes in the development of culture rather than in being the dead end.

63
Evolution of 3.4.2 Microlith Tools
Humankind
The tools that are associated with this period are called the microlith tools. These were
small in size, sharp and very useful. This period also saw development in terms of better
composite tools and weapons. The Microliths were generally made in geometric forms,
such as triangular and trapezoidal but they were also made in non-geometric forms
such as the lunates and others. The blade technology of the earlier period was further
modified in this period and various backed-bladelets have been found. The period is
also associated with the use of bows and arrows which must have made the Mesolithic
humans better hunters. The period is moreover marked by increasing localization of
artefacts and the formation of new cultures as will be discussed in the next Sub-section.

Figure 3.7 : Microlith Tools

Credit: York Museums Trust, Ellie Cox, 2018
Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Microlith_%2C_Mesolithic_%
28FindID_628327%29.jpg

Fishing was commonly practiced during this period as can be seen from the tool kit
which now included barbs, harpoons, spears etc. which were specialized tools used for
fishing. Tools were made of stone, bone and wood. Other tools such as knives, axes,
spearheads, blades, chisels, wooden arrowheads etc. have also been found from this
period. The bladelets were made with pressure flaking technique and thus the tools
were more regular in design with parallel edges. By this period, humans could produce
well-shaped projectile points in some parts of Europe.

3.4.3 Subsistence Pattern and Social Complexity

The Mesolithic economy was based on hunting, gathering and fishing. The Mesolithic
humans lived in groups in semi-permanent or permanent settlements near river banks.
Star Carr in England is an important Mesolithic site dated to around 9500 BP. There is
evidence that, by this period, humans had domesticated or befriended dog. Though the
Mesolithic economy does not show any marked change from the preceding Upper
Palaeolithic economy.

64 Fagan (2014: 292) mentions that the Mesolithic was a period of broad variation in
economic and social life with intensification of food gathering strategies in uncertain Palaeolithic and
climatic conditions. The ability to adapt to newer circumstances was seen from the Mesolithic
Cultures
Upper Palaeolithic period. It became more relevant during the Mesolithic period. These
strategies involved new tools which were useful in hunting aquatic resources such as
sea mammals and fishes. According to Binford (in Fagan, 2014), during the Mesolithic
period, humans settled around the river valley due to the availability of fishes. The
availability of water resources allowed the societies to become sedentary and capable
to handle the increase in population. C. Gamble (in Fagan, 2014) on the other hand,
holds that the shift to river valleys was the result of an increase in population that led to
shortage of food and thus aquatic resources was the last resort. Fishing was labour
intensive and not as nutritious as food resources on land. David Yesner (in Fagan,
2014) takes a different perspective and argues that with changing environment, population
pressure, and food shortage shifting to aquatic resources was the ‘optimal strategy’ for
early humans.

3.4.4 Mesolithic Cultures in Europe

The Mesolithic in Europe is represented by different cultures as result of variation in
climatic changes and newer food collection and hunting strategies as well as different
tool cultures. The Azilian, Sauveterrian, early Tardenoisean, Asturian and Larnian were
most prominent in western Europe while the Maglemosian, Kitchen-Midden, and
Campignianwere prominent in northern Europe. In the Mesolithic culture of Western
Europe importance of shellfish can be noticed. Trapezoidal microlith was found in large
numbers in many of the sites (Gabel, 1958).
The northern European cultures from around 10,000 BP are characterized by the tool
technology of bows and arrows, domestication of dog, use of canoes (a narrow water-
rowing vessel), and other sea going crafts besides a range of fishing tools such as nets,
hooks, traps etc. (Price, 1991). Tools such as axes, celts (long and thin tools made of
stone), projectiles (made of bone, wood, antler and stone) also appeared in the northern
Europe towards the end of Mesolithic period around 6000 BP. Europe, especially
northern Europe, witnessed changing sea levels as a result of melting of glacial ice. This
led to an increase in aquatic resources which were well utilized during this period.

3.4.5 Mesolithic Cultures in Scandinavia and Britain

The Mesolithic period in Scandinavia and Britain is characterized by well-marked
population pressure and permanent settlement. The coastal villages have revealed mixed
economy based on the exploitation of marine as well as forest resources. By the later
period, after around 4000 BP, they had begun pottery making. The Mesolithic culture
here has three sub-divisions, Maglemose, Kongemose, and Ertebolle periods.
The Maglemosean culture (c. 9500-7700 BP) is characterized by river valley settlements
with hunting and foraging economy. Most of the sites were summer lakeshore
settlements. Evidence suggests dependence on marine resources as lot of fish bones
have been found. The people of this culture mostly lived in small huts which occasionally
had prepared floors. For example, Ulkestrup in Denmark where huts have been found
with bark and wood floors (Fagan, 2014).
Like the Maglemosean, the Kongemoseculture (c.7700-6600 BP) also developed near
river banks. Segebro, near north-west Swedish coast, is a prominent site of this culture.
This site is characterized by rhombic arrowheads. Hunting was the mainstay of the
economy. The Kongemose culture was succeeded by the Ertebolle culture.
The Ertebolle culture (c. 6600-5300 BP) had an elaborate tool technology with bone, 65
Evolution of antler and wood tools. The economy was based on hunting. Fishing was also an important
Humankind
activity as fish was an integral part of their diet. They buried their dead in cemeteries
and placed the body in various positions. Sometimes dog was buried with the human
corpse. The burials show some kind of social differentiation. Cemeteries found in Zealand
(Denmark’s largest island) and Scania (southernmost province of Sweden) show increase
in social and ritual complexity. Excavations of the cemeteries in Skateholm, south Scania
has 40 graves with variable body placements and several interments (burials) of dog.
The tools from Ertebolle culture include axes, trapezes, scrapers, perforated antlers
etc. Some cooking pots were also found. The sites also revealed evidence of year
round occupation of coastal and inland sites. They had diverse subsistence base with
evidence of shell middens and faunal remains.

3.4.6 Mesolithic Cultures in Southwest Asia

Southwest Asia has been a fascinating area specially for the growth of domestication of
plants and animals. It is the region which became the cradle of food production. The
beginning can be traced from the Mesolithic period with the emergence of the Mushabian
and the Kebaran culture which was followed by the Natufian culture. The Mushabian
culture emerged around c.14,000-12,800 BP in eastern Mediterranean region. This
culture is characterized by small geometric microliths. The Kebaran culture (c.13,500-
11,500 BP) is marked by removing of bladelets from the core. The bladelets were
microliths ranging from 4-7 milimetre which were variedly shaped. The economy was
based on the practice of hunting and gathering. By c.13,000 BP, southwest Asia saw
environmental and vegetational changes. Ground stone tools (one of the feature of
Neolithic culture) such as pestles and mortars and other implements were found.
The Natufian culture, c.12,500-10,200 BP in Levant, has revealed evidence for the
beginning of agriculture. It is therefore seen as the period of transition between the
Mesolithic and Neolithic phases. This culture was marked by a sedentary lifestyle with
village settlements. The culture was defined by microliths, burins, borers, scrapers,
blades, knives and picks. Later arrowheads were found. Along with that, querns, pestles,
pounders and other ground stone tools and stone vessels were also found. Evidence of
fish-hooks, and nets reflects the importance of fish in the human diet of this culture.
However, the people of this culture were still hunters and gathers and evidence reveals
that they hunted animals such as gazelles, deer, wild goat etc.
Based on their explorations, archaeologists, Anna Belfer-Cohen andOferBar-Yosef
(1989) argue that sedentarism can be observed by the early Natufian culture with many
sites found throughout Levant. According to them, it was a culturally complex hunter-
gatherer society with dwellings, underground storage, graves, flint artefacts, stone and
bone artefacts. The evidences show a distinction between ‘base camps’ and ‘seasonal
camps’ (Belfer-Cohen, 1989:473-74). The change in settlement pattern ranging from
sedentary and semi-sedentary base brought change in Levant (Belfer-Cohen, 1989: 474).
Check Your Progress Exercise-4
1) What are the important features of the Mesolithic Culture?
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
66
 ..................................................................................................................... Palaeolithic and
Mesolithic
2) What is the tool technology associated with the Mesolithic period? Cultures

.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
3) Discuss the Mesolithic Cultures found in Europe.
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
4) Discuss the importance of the Natufian culture in Southwest Asia as a period of
transition.
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................

3.5 SUMMARY
The Palaeolithic and the Mesolithic period were periods of major transformations and
provided the foundation for evolution of the human society. Alongside biological changes,
the early humans were making great cultural modifications. From making simple Oldowan
tools they reached the stage where they began to produce fine blades. From scavenging
they evolved as expert hunters as well as gatherers. From adapting to environmental
changes, to adjusting to newer circumstances, early humans paved their way for
transformation from a simple hunting-gathering-scavenging society to food producing
economies. The changes that we observe in this period in terms of tool technology,
society, economy, religion as well as culture paved the way for development of humans
to the next stage.

3.6 KEY WORDS

Flakes : small and thin pieces of scraped stone used for
making tools.
Knapping : the process of removal of flakes from the core
of a stone.
Mesolithic : literally meaning the middle stone age, it refers to
67
Evolution of the period of human prehistory between
Humankind Palaeolithic and the Neolithic periods.
Microlith : small stone tools.
Palaeolithic : period of prehistory marked by the development
of stone tools and therefore called the Old Stone
Age.

3.7 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

EXERCISES
Check Your Progress Exercise-1
1) Mention hunting-gathering and scavenging economies. Also mention tools used
and their functions. See Sub-section 3.3.2
2) Mention simple tools such as chopperchopping tools and how useful they were as
hunting tools. See Sub-section 3.3.2
3) Changes associated with Homo Erectus pertaining to tools, control of fire, language
etc. See Sub-section 3.3.2
Check Your Progress Exercise-2
1) Differentiate in terms of tools, their age, their types, useand function, economic
activity, societal changes as well as burials. See Sub-sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.3
2) Mention the Mousterian tool technology, hunting strategies, various sites, and
burials. See Sub-sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.3
Check Your Progress Exercise-3
1) Mention the cultures found in Europe along with details about their tools and
subsistence strategies. See Sub-section 3.3.4
2) Mention details of the rock paintings: their subject matter, colour, choice of stone,
themes etc. Also discuss various interpretations to these activities. See Sub-section
3.3.5
Check Your Progress Exercise-4
1) Mention features in terms of food procurement, changes in tools, subsistence
economy etc. See Section 3.4. and Sub-sections 3.4.1, 3.4.2 and 3.4.3
2) Refer to microlith tools: their variety and use. See Sub-section 3.4.2
3) Mention both the central European and north European cultures. See Sub-section
3.4.4
4) Mention importance of Natufian as period of transition along with the feature of
the culture. See Sub-section 3.4.6

3.8 SUGGESTED READINGS

Andrefsky Jr. William, 2009. ‘The Analysis of stone Procurement, Production and
Maintenance’, Journal of Archaeological Research, Vol. 17(1):65-103.
Arthur, Kathryn W., 2010. ‘Feminine Knowledge and Skill Reconsidered: Women
and Flaked Stone Tools’, American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol,112(2): 228-
243.
68
Belfer-Cohen,Anna andOfer Bar-Yosef, 1989. ‘The Origins of Sedentism and Farming Palaeolithic and
Communities in the Levant’, Journal of Prehistory, Vol. 3(4):447-498. Mesolithic
Cultures
Binford, Lewis R. and Sally R. Binford. 1966. ‘A Preliminary Analysis of Functional
Variability in the Mousterian of Levallois Facies’, American Anthropologist, 68 (2):238-
295.
Bordes, François.1961.‘Mousterian Cultures in France’, Science, New Series, 134
(3482): 803-810.
Childe, V. Gordon. 1956 [1942]. What Happened in History, Harmondsworth :
Peregrine Books.
Childe, V. Gordon.1945. ‘Directional Changes in Funerary Practices During 50,000
Years’, Man, 45: 13-19.
Fagan, Brian M.,and Nadia Durrani, 2014. People of the Earth: An Introduction to
World Prehistory,14th edition. New York: Routledge.
Fagan, Brian M., 2002. World Prehistory A Brief Introduction.Fifth Edition. New
Jersey: Prentice–Hall.
Gabel, W.C., 1958. ‘The Mesolithic Continuum in Western Europe’, American
Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 60(4): 658-667.
Hodder, Ian, 2016. Studies in Human-Thing Entanglement. Open Access license
from Creative Commons Attribution.
Laet, S.J. de (ed.), A. H. Dani, J. L. Lorenzo Gieysztor and R. B. Nunoo (co-eds.).
1996. History of Humanity, Volume 1: Prehistory and the Beginnings of
Civilization. UNESCO. London: Routledge.
Lee, Richard B. and I. Devore (ed.). 1968. Man the Hunter. New York: Aldine De
Gruyter.
Mithen, Stephen, 1995. ‘Palaeolithic Archaeology and the Evolution of Mind’, Journal
of Archaeological Research, Vol. 3(4): 305-332.
Ohel, Milla Y. 1978. “Clactonian Flaking” and Primary Flaking: Some Initial
Observations’, Lithic Technologies, 7 (1): 23-28.
Palacio-Perez, E., 2013. ‘The Origins of the Concept of ‘Palaeolithic Art’: Theoritical
Roots of an Idea’, Journal of Archaelogical Methods and Theory, Vol. 20(4):682-
714.
Price, Douglas, 1991. ‘The Mesolithic of Northern Europe’, Annual Review of
Anthropology. Vol. 20: 211-233.
Sandgathe, Dennis M. 2004. ‘Alternative Interpretations of the Levallois Reduction
Technique’, Lithic Technology, 29 (2):147-159.
Stout, Dietrich. 2011.‘Stone Toolmaking and the Evolution of Human Culture and
Cognition’, Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 366 (1567):1050-1059.
Tanner, Nancy and Adrienne Zihlman.1976, ‘Women in Evolution. Part I: Innovation
and Selection in Human Origins’. Signs. 1 (3): 585-608.
Wenke, Robert and Olszewski, Deborah I. 2006 (1980).Patterns in Prehistory:
Humankind’s First Three Million Years. Fifth Edition. New York: Oxford University
Press. 69
Evolution of Zihlam.Adrienne L. 1978.‘Women in Evolution, Part II: Subsistence and Social
Humankind Organization among Early Hominids’, Signs, 4 (1): 4-20.
PDF:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2949307.pdf?refreqid=search%3Af915cb64622b05
eda2bd630f15cf13ea
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41492314.pdf?refreqid=search%3Af9d917
af0f4d7cdaf506748db9444eed

3.9 INSTRUCTIONAL VIDEO

RECOMMENDATIONS
History Documentary - Stories from the Stone Age: The Human Adventure
https://in.video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=spigot-nt-gcmac&p=prehistoric+
tool+bbc+documentary#id=2&vid=9ce7c690f5fdd1c32adb23b72f71a334&action=click
Why Prehistoric Women Had Super-Strong Bones
https://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/171129-strong-prehistoric-women-vin-spd
Mystery of Life in the Paleolithic Age
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx9cuROQWlM

70