The Experts below are selected from a list of 21735 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jeandenis Vigne - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
new evidence for upper Palaeolithic small domestic dogs in south western europe
Journal of Archaeological Science, 2011Co-Authors: Maud Pionniercapitan, Celine Bemilli, Pierre Bodu, Guy Celerier, Jeangeorges Ferrie, Philippe Fosse, Michel Garcia, Jeandenis VigneAbstract:Abstract Osteoarchaeology and genetics agree that the earliest dog domestications took place during the Upper Palaeolithic. However, they partially disagree about the process of domestication. The former indicated multiple origins, when some of the results of the latter suggested that dogs mainly came from a Chinese centre of domestication. In this study, we describe and discuss new evidence for Late Glacial small dogs in the South-West (Pont d’Ambon and Montespan) and North of France (Le Closeau). Special attention was paid to the possibility of miss-identification between small early dogs and dholes ( Cuon alpinus ), a middle-sized Canidae, the size of which can be similar to early small dogs. Detailed analyses of the archaeological contexts alongside that of taphonomy, morphoscopy, morphometry and pathology, identified 49 small canid remains from the three sites. They allowed us to exclude the presence of dholes and to conclude that they were all small Upper Paleolithic dogs. These, together with other more sparse discoveries, confirmed the presence of Western European Upper Paleolithic Small (WEUPS) dogs from, at least, the Middle Magdalenian to the end of the Epipaleolithic (i.e. 15,000–11,500 cal BP). As they are contemporaneous with the much larger Russian Upper Paleolithic dogs, they plea for several Euro-Asian origins for Late Palaeolithic dogs.
-
New evidence for Upper Palaeolithic small domestic dogs in South-Western Europe
Journal of Archaeological Science, 2011Co-Authors: Maud Pionnier, Celine Bemilli, Pierre Bodu, Guy Celerier, Jeangeorges Ferrie, Philippe Fosse, Michel Garcia, Jeandenis VigneAbstract:Osteoarchaeology and genetics agree that the earliest dog domestications took place during the Upper Palaeolithic. However, they partially disagree about the process of domestication. The former indicated multiple origins, when some of the results of the latter suggested that dogs mainly came from a Chinese centre of domestication. In this study, we describe and discuss new evidence for Late Glacial small dogs in the South-West (Pont d'Ambon and Montespan) and North of France (Le Closeau). Special attention was paid to the possibility of miss-identification between small early dogs and dholes (Cuon alpinus), a middle-sized Canidae, the size of which can be similar to early small dogs. Detailed analyses of the archaeological contexts alongside that of taphonomy, morphoscopy, morphometry and pathology, identified 49 small canid remains from the three sites. They allowed us to exclude the presence of dholes and to conclude that they were all small Upper Paleolithic dogs. These, together with other more sparse discoveries, confirmed the presence of Western European Upper Paleolithic Small (WEUPS) dogs from, at least, the Middle Magdalenian to the end of the Epipaleolithic (i.e. 15,000-11,500 cal BP). As they are contemporaneous with the much larger Russian Upper Paleolithic dogs, they plea for several Euro-Asian origins for Late Palaeolithic dogs. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
James Blinkhorn - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the gateway to the oriental zone environmental change and Palaeolithic behaviour in the thar desert
Quaternary International, 2020Co-Authors: James BlinkhornAbstract:Abstract The global distribution of modern humans is unparalleled amongst other terrestrial fauna and explaining how we have become so uniquely successful is a topic of major debate in palaeoanthropology. Examining how past populations engaged and adapted to new ecologies, rather than just when and where they first appear in the fossil record, can best be rooted in broader studies of biogeography that explicitly recognize key thresholds between major ecozones. In this paper, focus is placed on the Thar Desert, marking the boundary between the Saharo-Arabian desert belt to the west and the monsoonal Oriental zone to the east as an example of such a boundary. The goal of this study is to provide a broad synthesis of available evidence from the region, aiming to clearly communicate the nature of the existing Palaeolithic record and to identify tension and contradiction within it as foci for future research. Following review of modern ecology and palaeoenvironmental archives from the region, a quantitative analysis of the Palaeolithic record of the Thar Desert is presented. Hierarchical clustering is used to evaluate the extent to which typological constellations within stone tool assemblages reflect the top level terminology used to group Palaeolithic behaviour, revealing six broad clusters of assemblages and three clusters of artefact types. A more detailed appraisal of dated and stratified assemblages highlights rare patterns of exclusion between Acheulean, Middle Palaeolithic and Late Palaeolithic assemblages alongside more prominent proportional differences in assemblage composition. These results are discussed in the broader context of key behavioural changes in Palaeolithic South Asia and the expansion of modern humans.
-
Middle Palaeolithic point technologies in the Thar Desert, India
Quaternary International, 2015Co-Authors: James Blinkhorn, Hema Achyuthan, P. AjithprasadAbstract:Abstract Point technologies form a key component of Middle Palaeolithic and Middle Stone Age industries across the Old World. However, only limited attention has been paid to the appearance of point technologies in the South Asian context. Two recent studies have indicated that the lack of Indian point technologies that are analogous to those known from the African Middle Stone Age and Arabian Middle Palaeolithic presents the basis to reject models for modern human dispersals into India associated with Middle Palaeolithic technologies. This study examines the role point technologies play in the Middle Palaeolithic record of the Thar Desert and situates them within the wider context of South Asia and adjacent regions to the west. A synthesis of existing evidence indicates that points form a key component of Middle Palaeolithic industries in the Thar Desert. New descriptions of Middle Palaeolithic artefacts from the Thar Desert highlight the repeated presence of debitage and faconnage approaches which suggest the use of specific reduction strategies in point production, rather than opportunistic or expedient methods. These results are placed in the wider context of the role points have played in Middle Palaeolithic reduction strategies within South Asia. Given the presence of point technologies in the Thar Desert that are comparable with contemporaneous technologies in North Africa and Arabia, we suggest that Middle Palaeolithic dispersal models cannot be rejected on the basis of their absence.
Maud Pionniercapitan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
new evidence for upper Palaeolithic small domestic dogs in south western europe
Journal of Archaeological Science, 2011Co-Authors: Maud Pionniercapitan, Celine Bemilli, Pierre Bodu, Guy Celerier, Jeangeorges Ferrie, Philippe Fosse, Michel Garcia, Jeandenis VigneAbstract:Abstract Osteoarchaeology and genetics agree that the earliest dog domestications took place during the Upper Palaeolithic. However, they partially disagree about the process of domestication. The former indicated multiple origins, when some of the results of the latter suggested that dogs mainly came from a Chinese centre of domestication. In this study, we describe and discuss new evidence for Late Glacial small dogs in the South-West (Pont d’Ambon and Montespan) and North of France (Le Closeau). Special attention was paid to the possibility of miss-identification between small early dogs and dholes ( Cuon alpinus ), a middle-sized Canidae, the size of which can be similar to early small dogs. Detailed analyses of the archaeological contexts alongside that of taphonomy, morphoscopy, morphometry and pathology, identified 49 small canid remains from the three sites. They allowed us to exclude the presence of dholes and to conclude that they were all small Upper Paleolithic dogs. These, together with other more sparse discoveries, confirmed the presence of Western European Upper Paleolithic Small (WEUPS) dogs from, at least, the Middle Magdalenian to the end of the Epipaleolithic (i.e. 15,000–11,500 cal BP). As they are contemporaneous with the much larger Russian Upper Paleolithic dogs, they plea for several Euro-Asian origins for Late Palaeolithic dogs.
Philippe Fosse - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
new evidence for upper Palaeolithic small domestic dogs in south western europe
Journal of Archaeological Science, 2011Co-Authors: Maud Pionniercapitan, Celine Bemilli, Pierre Bodu, Guy Celerier, Jeangeorges Ferrie, Philippe Fosse, Michel Garcia, Jeandenis VigneAbstract:Abstract Osteoarchaeology and genetics agree that the earliest dog domestications took place during the Upper Palaeolithic. However, they partially disagree about the process of domestication. The former indicated multiple origins, when some of the results of the latter suggested that dogs mainly came from a Chinese centre of domestication. In this study, we describe and discuss new evidence for Late Glacial small dogs in the South-West (Pont d’Ambon and Montespan) and North of France (Le Closeau). Special attention was paid to the possibility of miss-identification between small early dogs and dholes ( Cuon alpinus ), a middle-sized Canidae, the size of which can be similar to early small dogs. Detailed analyses of the archaeological contexts alongside that of taphonomy, morphoscopy, morphometry and pathology, identified 49 small canid remains from the three sites. They allowed us to exclude the presence of dholes and to conclude that they were all small Upper Paleolithic dogs. These, together with other more sparse discoveries, confirmed the presence of Western European Upper Paleolithic Small (WEUPS) dogs from, at least, the Middle Magdalenian to the end of the Epipaleolithic (i.e. 15,000–11,500 cal BP). As they are contemporaneous with the much larger Russian Upper Paleolithic dogs, they plea for several Euro-Asian origins for Late Palaeolithic dogs.
-
New evidence for Upper Palaeolithic small domestic dogs in South-Western Europe
Journal of Archaeological Science, 2011Co-Authors: Maud Pionnier, Celine Bemilli, Pierre Bodu, Guy Celerier, Jeangeorges Ferrie, Philippe Fosse, Michel Garcia, Jeandenis VigneAbstract:Osteoarchaeology and genetics agree that the earliest dog domestications took place during the Upper Palaeolithic. However, they partially disagree about the process of domestication. The former indicated multiple origins, when some of the results of the latter suggested that dogs mainly came from a Chinese centre of domestication. In this study, we describe and discuss new evidence for Late Glacial small dogs in the South-West (Pont d'Ambon and Montespan) and North of France (Le Closeau). Special attention was paid to the possibility of miss-identification between small early dogs and dholes (Cuon alpinus), a middle-sized Canidae, the size of which can be similar to early small dogs. Detailed analyses of the archaeological contexts alongside that of taphonomy, morphoscopy, morphometry and pathology, identified 49 small canid remains from the three sites. They allowed us to exclude the presence of dholes and to conclude that they were all small Upper Paleolithic dogs. These, together with other more sparse discoveries, confirmed the presence of Western European Upper Paleolithic Small (WEUPS) dogs from, at least, the Middle Magdalenian to the end of the Epipaleolithic (i.e. 15,000-11,500 cal BP). As they are contemporaneous with the much larger Russian Upper Paleolithic dogs, they plea for several Euro-Asian origins for Late Palaeolithic dogs. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Jeangeorges Ferrie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
new evidence for upper Palaeolithic small domestic dogs in south western europe
Journal of Archaeological Science, 2011Co-Authors: Maud Pionniercapitan, Celine Bemilli, Pierre Bodu, Guy Celerier, Jeangeorges Ferrie, Philippe Fosse, Michel Garcia, Jeandenis VigneAbstract:Abstract Osteoarchaeology and genetics agree that the earliest dog domestications took place during the Upper Palaeolithic. However, they partially disagree about the process of domestication. The former indicated multiple origins, when some of the results of the latter suggested that dogs mainly came from a Chinese centre of domestication. In this study, we describe and discuss new evidence for Late Glacial small dogs in the South-West (Pont d’Ambon and Montespan) and North of France (Le Closeau). Special attention was paid to the possibility of miss-identification between small early dogs and dholes ( Cuon alpinus ), a middle-sized Canidae, the size of which can be similar to early small dogs. Detailed analyses of the archaeological contexts alongside that of taphonomy, morphoscopy, morphometry and pathology, identified 49 small canid remains from the three sites. They allowed us to exclude the presence of dholes and to conclude that they were all small Upper Paleolithic dogs. These, together with other more sparse discoveries, confirmed the presence of Western European Upper Paleolithic Small (WEUPS) dogs from, at least, the Middle Magdalenian to the end of the Epipaleolithic (i.e. 15,000–11,500 cal BP). As they are contemporaneous with the much larger Russian Upper Paleolithic dogs, they plea for several Euro-Asian origins for Late Palaeolithic dogs.
-
New evidence for Upper Palaeolithic small domestic dogs in South-Western Europe
Journal of Archaeological Science, 2011Co-Authors: Maud Pionnier, Celine Bemilli, Pierre Bodu, Guy Celerier, Jeangeorges Ferrie, Philippe Fosse, Michel Garcia, Jeandenis VigneAbstract:Osteoarchaeology and genetics agree that the earliest dog domestications took place during the Upper Palaeolithic. However, they partially disagree about the process of domestication. The former indicated multiple origins, when some of the results of the latter suggested that dogs mainly came from a Chinese centre of domestication. In this study, we describe and discuss new evidence for Late Glacial small dogs in the South-West (Pont d'Ambon and Montespan) and North of France (Le Closeau). Special attention was paid to the possibility of miss-identification between small early dogs and dholes (Cuon alpinus), a middle-sized Canidae, the size of which can be similar to early small dogs. Detailed analyses of the archaeological contexts alongside that of taphonomy, morphoscopy, morphometry and pathology, identified 49 small canid remains from the three sites. They allowed us to exclude the presence of dholes and to conclude that they were all small Upper Paleolithic dogs. These, together with other more sparse discoveries, confirmed the presence of Western European Upper Paleolithic Small (WEUPS) dogs from, at least, the Middle Magdalenian to the end of the Epipaleolithic (i.e. 15,000-11,500 cal BP). As they are contemporaneous with the much larger Russian Upper Paleolithic dogs, they plea for several Euro-Asian origins for Late Palaeolithic dogs. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
