Exceptional evidence for Palaeolithic art in the Paris Basin: the … · 2016-03-27 · Exceptional...

Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française 2011, tome 108, no 1, p. 27-46

Carole FRITZ and Gilles TOSELLO

Exceptional evidence for Palaeolithic art in the Paris Basin: the engraved pebble from Étiolles (Essonne)*

AbstractThe discovery of an engraved stone on the open-air Magdalenian site of

Étiolles (Essonne) is an exceptional event, as there is very little evidence for Palaeolithic art in the Paris Basin. The stone is a large, hard limestone peb-ble (3 kg), chosen for its suitability for engraving. It had been placed beneath a slab on the edge of hearth D71-1, dated by 14C to 12,315 ± 75 BP.

On the front, a horse in very naturalistic style seems to be lying on its side, the eye shut and mouth open. Two wound signs mark the body. This horse is followed by a composite human of female gender, who appears to menace it. On the back, more roughly drawn, there are two reindeer and a horse. The figures, especially the horses, show graphical particularities whose significance in the northern Magdalenian remains to be assessed. On the basis of two specimens it is difficult to evoke a local “style”. Compa-rison of the Étiolles equids with the rare figures known in the Paris Basin (Cepoy, Pincevent ou Boutigny) is rather inconclusive. Above all, these finds show that horses played an important thematic role in the art of the latest Palaeolithic in the region. The position of the pebble on the edge of the hearth could indicate a relationship with fire, although less clearly so than for other engraved stones, notably from sites in south-western Europe. However, comparisons can be found in the art of southern regions. The Étiolles engravings provide new examples of long-distance analogies, all the more interesting as they occur at a time when the symbolic unity of the Magdalenian is apparently breaking up. Thus at around 12,000 BP, the Aquitaine groups, previously closely linked to their counterparts in the Pyrenees and Cantabria, become more distinctive: their symbolic work (for example stylized female figures) indicates that the orientation of exchange networks shifted from the south-west to the north and east, in other words to the Paris Basin, and the plains of Belgium and Germany. So the discovery at Étiolles, though isolated, could be one of the last signs of the persistence of ancestral links between groups throughout the Magdalenian zone. The graphical symbiosis of human and animal features in the composite crea-ture, together with the choice of prefered game species, guide interpretation towards the sphere of hunting. Paraphrasing C. Lévi-Strauss (1980, p. 93), should one consider that for these men of the past reindeer and horse were not only “good to eat” but also “good to think”?

KeywordsArt, style, symbol, naturalism, Palaeolithic art, Magdalenian, Paris

Basin, Étiolles, horse, reindeer, therianthropomorphic figure, engraving, hearth, ritual, exchange network.

28 Carole FRITZ and Gilles TOSELLO


The hidden pebble

A new sector, under excavation since 1995 and particularly rich, revealed domestic structures, three of which were stratigraphically very close; centred on the same hearth, they are characterized by an identical spatial organisation. They correspond to occupations that are quite close in time, perhaps the same group returning to set up camp on the still visible traces of previous visits. A radiocarbon date of 12,315 ± 75 BP was obtained.

The engraved stone comes from hearth D71-1, the latest. This is a deep hollow dug into the loam, sur-rounded by a double ring of stones. Several limestone slabs forming the outer edge covered the remains. It was precisely under one of them that the engraved stone had been placed (fig. 1). Due to their fineness and the sediment covering them, the engravings were only identified after the stone had been removed, when the surfaces were washed at the excavation base. In addi-tion, the upper side, the only one visible throughout excavation of the hearth, was covered by concretions.

A selected support

About thirty cm long and weighing 3 kg, the block of hard limestone (probably Jurassic) has rounded

INTRODUCTION

The Magdalenians left large numbers of worked flints, animals bones and burnt stones on the sites they frequented in the Paris Basin, notably riverside camps such as Pincevent (Leroi-Gourhan and Brézillon, 1972), Étiolles (Pigeot, 1987 ; Pigeot dir., 2004 ; Olive, 1988) or Verberie (Enloe et David, 1989 ; Au-douze, 1992). Exceptional depositional conditions have preserved living floors, offering prehistorians the chance to obtain unusually high quality data in terms of detailed chronology, diverse activities and even individual identity. Yet these remains have provided very little evidence for aesthetic sense or spiritual life. Any discovery in this field is therefore of considerable interest.

THE ENGRAVED STONE FROM ETIOLLES

Almost thirty years after its discovery, the site of Étiolles (Essonne) produced a major surprise during the summer of 2000. An engraved stone, the first of its kind discovered on the site, can be seen as a fundamen-tal new element for our understanding of the last Magdalenian groups occupying the region.

Fig. 1 – Vertical view of the hearth D71-1 before discovery of the engraved pebble. The arrow indicates the limestone slab under which it was located (photo CRPE).Fig. 1 – Vue verticale du foyer D71 avant la découverte du galet gravé. La flèche indique la dalle sous laquelle il se trouvait (cliché CRPE).

Exceptional evidence for Palaeolithic art in the Paris Basin: the engraved pebble from Étiolles (Essonne) 29


edges and two very smooth faces, all showing that it had been displaced by water (Leroi-Gourhan and Brézillon, 1972, p. 323); it therefore has all the charac-teristics of a pebble, even if in everyday language pebbles are smaller and lighter. Its size, shape and regular surface make it an exceptional support in the natural environment of the site. If one compares it to the other stones placed by the Magdalenians around hearth D71, which are irregularly shaped and coarse grained, there is no doubt that this support was chosen because it was particularly suitable for engraving (fig. 2).

The state of preservation is good. Visual and micro-scopic examination shows that the surfaces are neither flaking or crumbling and thus are not in the process of dehydration.

On the first side, which we will conventionally call the front, there is a reddened zone near the left edge. This results from heat and is hardly surprising in view of the position on the site. The small extent of the heated area indicates that the stone had not been directly exposed to fire (or only for a very short time), since it would have been shattered by the heat. There is also a fissure which appears to be stable, at least during the ten years that have passed since the discovery.

The second side, or back, was studded with tiny concretions which caught the light and considerably hampered detection of the engravings. To remedy this, the grains on the lines were removed using thin wooden or plastic spatulas, after slight dampening. This opera-tion was carried out with a microscope. Near the right edge, there are a few wide and shallow marks caused by excavation tools. One must remember here that this side was exposed and that the engraved lines were al-most invisible

Engravings on both sides

On the front, well centred to fill most of the space, one can quite easily identify the left profile of a horse (length 23,8 cm); numerous details show that the artist was an acute observer of nature (fig. 3). At the groin a sheath is discretely indicated, so this is a stallion. The four limbs, long and fine, are drawn in perspective, with the right-hand ones interrupted just before the body, thus highlighting the background for the specta-tor. With the exception of the right foreleg which is stretched out, these floating limbs appear rather inani-mate. The neck, short and powerful, bears a head at

Fig. 2 – Étiolles engraved pebble: the whole front side (photo C. Fritz).Fig. 2 – Galet gravé d’Étiolles : vue d’ensemble du recto (cliché C. Fritz).



Fig. 3 – Étiolles engraved pebble; 1) Drawing of the front side; 2) Selective drawing of the head of the horse with the first version of the mane; 3) Selective drawing of the complete horse and the signs apparently associated (document C. Fritz and G. Tosello).Fig. 3 – Galet gravé d’Étiolles : 1) relevé du recto ; 2) relevé sélectif de la tête du cheval avec la première version de la crinière ; 3) relevé sélec-tif du cheval complet et des signes paraissant associés (document C. Fritz et G. Tosello).



rest and a tousled mane, engraved in three phases: first a series of 14 oblique and vigorous strokes reaching as far as the middle of the back, completed by fine dashes orientated in the same manner as the strokes, and then cut through by 9 short lines at the level of the withers. The ear is hard to distinguish from the mane. Sinuous lines on the body, cheek and muzzle mark differences in the colour of the coat. These lines possibly defined an area that was coloured in, perhaps with red 1 like some Magdalenian rock paintings of horses, for exam-ple at Ekain (fig. 4).

Insofar as the back does not join up with the first version of the mane, one possibility is that the engraver started with an isolated head, before drawing the complete figure. The volume of the shoulder is high-lighted by fine curves; the hocks and hooves are also well detailed, despite the enigmatic shape of the front right and rear left hooves (fig. 5). The right hoof has a protuberance at the front, perhaps due to a technical incident or an over-hasty gesture. The left rear hoof has a pointed first version, inexplicable in anatomical terms, which is then corrected by a normal equid hoof

Fig. 4 – 1) Hypothetical reproduction of the Étiolles engraved horse with a red coloured coat; 2) Engraved horse, painting black and red, from the Basque cave of Ekain (drawing J. Altuna).Fig. 4 – 1) Hypothèse de restitution du cheval avec une robe de couleur rouge ; 2) cheval gravé noir et rouge de la grotte basque d’Ekain (relevé J. Altuna).



(fig. 5.3). On the inner face of the front right hock one notes a discrete representation of the chestnut, a growth typical of horses. This extremely rare detail confirms the concern for fastidious naturalism expressed by this figure (fig. 6).

Short lines evoking a tongue emerge from the open mouth, unless the animal is spitting or panting. The eye is drawn by two converging strokes, as if the eyelid was shut (fig. 7). Two wound signs mark the flank, one of which is prolonged by a curve pointing downwards. A sign of the same type overlies the right foreleg. The spindly limbs give the animal an emaciated look. As a whole, these details suggest that the horse portrayed here is probably expiring, lying on its side, with its eyes shut and mouth open.

Above the horse, a firmly engraved motif is apparent on the edge ; it evokes a roughly made angular sign.

Near the right edge of the pebble, one can see a crea-ture that is at first not easily identifiable (fig. 8). Standing upright, it has a head with a rounded occipital, a prognacious muzzle with carnivore whiskers and a long forked beard. The neck is directly linked to a folded arm, with a clearly marked elbow and a hand with five fingers or claws, wielding a line which cuts through a tapered motif, placed in front of the muzzle. Above the head, there are numerous irregular lines which we have not been able to interpret conclusively, though they could evoke a cap of some sort. The rest of the body is that of a woman with a sagging breast and swollen belly; the lower limb is hardly sketched in at all (fig. 9).

The dominant character of this figure is its ambi-guity, on the borderline between animal and human. The combination of a horse and a composite figure, brandishing an instrument or weapon, is a very unusual feature. There is no graphical link between the two subjects but it is difficult not to associate them in a single scene. So was the horse the victim of the therian-thropomorph following it?

On the back of the pebble, the engravings are much denser than on the front and less easy to decode (fig. 10.1).

Once again we can recognize a horse walking to the left (fig. 10.2). It is less firmly drawn than the other horse, and the engraving so fine that it is difficult to see. The animal is short and stocky with the tail well away from the thigh. A short neck merges into a broad head, with a flattened ear; the mouth is open, the nos-tril shown but not the eye. The four legs are sketched but are not attached to the body and only two appear to have hooves. The right forelimb seems double, but this is probably a correction, placed slightly in front. There is a wound in the centre of the thorax.

Turning the pebble 180 degrees, one can make out the outline of a cervid, whose head reaches the edge of the stone (fig.11.2 and 11.3). This is a left profile in an apparently taut stance, the head stretching forwards. The fetlock and a tuft of hair under the belly complete this image of a male with antlers roughly portrayed by a beam and a massive tine. The indistinctly drawn head has two eyes and a double forehead, as if a second deer was hiding itself; this impression is confirmed and one discovers the drawing of another body, at an angle of 30 degrees with the previous one (fig. 11.4). The head is thrown back in a vigorous attitude suggesting belling. The antlers are shared by both animals and the artist thus seems to have intended to superimpose them closely, trying to merge the outlines, rendering their deciphering more complex; in fact it is sometimes dif-ficult to attribute various details to one or other ani-mal.

Like the horse, these twin cervids are loosely drawn and one can hesitate about the identification of the species: deer or reindeer ? The roughly drawn antlers have a broad tine suggesting a palmate extremity. Des-pite the inconspicuous fetlock, we are thus dealing with reindeer.

Due to the fineness of the engravings and the calcite deposits, the localised superimpositions of lines (which are customarily used to establish the chronology of engravings) provide inconclusive evidence for the sequence of drawing of the three animals. Our hypo-thesis is that the first reindeer described was also the first to be engraved, then the horse, and lastly the se-cond “belling” cervid.

A DISCOVERY THAT OPENS HORIZONS

A number of points can be discussed, and first of all some graphical features.

The two horses resemble one another: the orienta-tion, the extension and position of legs, the open mouth, the identical way of drawing the hooves and tail. If the two horses are superimposed, further similarities emerge: the ears, the position of the wound signs, the near perfect superimposition of tail, back and mane. Such analogies, invoving both attitude and details, could well indicate a single artist, even though the front specimen seems to be the work of a more skilful and steadier hand (fig. 12).

These horses show a forceful pursuit of naturalism, perceptible in many details, some of which are very specific, like the chestnut. This trend is well known in the art of this period, in the plaques from Gön-nersdorf, (fig. 13.4), Andernach, Limeuil, La Madeleine… However, the Étiolles horses have a certain stylistic originality; the emaciated look and extended limbs distinguish them from other Magda-lenian art, where the typical model is round-bellied and rather short-legged (fig. 13.6 to 13.9). We have looked elsewhere for similar equids, without much success, except for a figure from the middle Magda-lenian of La Paloma (Asturias) (fig. 13.3). There are other examples at Limeuil but these are in fact young

Fig. 5 (left) – The hooves of the horses engraved on both sides of the pebble: 1) Hoof of the right foreleg (horse on the front side); 2 and 3) Hooves of the left and right hindlegs (horse on the front side); 4) Hoof of the left foreleg (horse on the back side; photo C. Fritz).Fig. 5 (à gauche) – Extrémités des membres des chevaux : 1) sabot antérieur droit (cheval du recto) ; 2 et 3) sabots posté-rieurs gauche et droit (cheval du recto) ; 4) sabot antérieur gauche du cheval gravé au verso (cliché C. Fritz).



animals or even foals, whose anatomical particularity is precisely to have long legs (Tosello, 2003). The lack of hair on the head (no beard) and body (no tufts beneath the belly or on the legs) is notable, insofar as the Magdalenian archetype is often a horse with a

thick coat. The short-haired equids from Étiolles, perhaps shown in their summer coat, are similar in this respect to contemporary engravings from the Périgord, on blocks at La Madeleine or on calcite at Teyjat.

Fig. 6 – Comparison of the horse engraved on the front side with an anatomical picture of a present-day horse (after Ellenberger, Baum and Dittrich, 1949). Arrows indicate the “chesnut” (torus carpeus) visible on the forelegs.Fig. 6 – Comparaison du cheval gravé au recto avec une planche anatomique d’équidé actuel (d’après Ellenberger, Baum et Dittrich, 1949). Les flèches désignent les châtaignes (torus carpeus) visibles sur les membres antérieurs.



Fig. 7 – Details of the head of the horse on the front side (photo C. Fritz).Fig. 7 – Détails de la tête du cheval du recto (cliché C. Fritz).



The hanging tongue of the front stallion is a detail that is rarely portrayed; the only comparison we have found is a horse’s head from Andernach (Bosinski, 1994; fig. 13.5).

In the Paris basin, a horse’s head engraved on the cortex of a flint flake was reported at Pincevent (Seine-et-Marne) in 1975. The flake refitted with flints from an archaeological layer dating to the Azilian, marking

the very end of the glacial period (Valentin, 1980, p. 90). The minute engraving (46 mm long) does in-clude some details: indications of an eye, beard and mouth (Gaucher, 1996; fig. 14.4). Despite differences, it can be compared to a horse’s head engraved on a schist plaque from Cepoy (Loiret; fig. 14.2), found in a level of similar date previously termed “Hamburgian” (Allain, 1976), recently defined as a transitional facies

Fig. 8 – Selective drawing and photo of the composite creature behind the horse (document C. Fritz and G. Tosello).Fig. 8 – Relevé sélectif et vue rapprochée de la créature composite gravée derrière le cheval (document C. Fritz et G. Tosello).



between the Magdalenian and the Azilian (Valentin, 2008, p. 123).

In the current state of research, there are no rock art sites in the Paris basin of certain Palaeolithic date, the single exception being a horse painted in red on a block of sandstone found in 1954 in a quarry at Boutigny 2 (Essonne; fig. 14.1). The precise conditions of discovery are unknown; it could either be a fragment of wall broken off during quarrying, or a sandstone plaque used as a support for the work. In its present state, the head is missing. There has been some debate over its attribu-tion to the Palaeolithic. As A. Leroi-Gourhan wrote, “the body of the animal is drawn in red ochre by joined points applied as a paste. The trouble is simply that this painting was found in a region for which there are no other references” (Leroi-Gourhan, 1976, p. 10). The technique, general appearance, and details of portrayal

of limbs or tail are all evidence in favour of a Palaeo-lithic date for this painting, which is probably the only preserved trace of rock art in the region.

In the past, a Palaeolithic date has been proposed for engravings and paintings on the sandstones of rock-shelters in the Fontainebleau forest (Nelh, 1984; fig. 14.3). This was the case with an equid en-graved beneath the La Ségognolle shelter in the Trois-Pignons massif at Noisy-sur-École (Seine-et-Marne). Its naturalism, which distinguishes it from other sche-matic engravings in the area (of post-glacial date), could be reminiscent of the “Palaeolithic style”, but basing a chronological attribution simply on the natu-ralist criterion is a risky method, especially when the figure is isolated in time and space 3.

The engraved cervids from Étiolles are scarcely appropriate for in-depth stylistic analysis since details

Fig. 9 – The head, arm and breast of the composite creature (document C. Fritz and G. Tosello).Fig. 9 – Détails de la tête, du bras et du sein de la créature composite (document C. Fritz et G. Tosello).



Fig. 10 – Étiolles engraved pebble: 1) Drawing of the back side (orientated on the horse); 2) Selective drawing of the horse (document C. Fritz and G. Tosello).Fig. 10 – Galet d’Étiolles : 1) relevé du verso (sens de lecture du cheval) ; 2) relevé sélectif du cheval (document C. Fritz et G. Tosello).



Fig. 11 – 1) Drawing of the back side (orientated on the reindeer); 2) Selective drawing of both reindeer; 3 and 4) Propositions for interpreting each reindeer (the antlers are shared by both figures; document C. Fritz and G. Tosello).Fig. 11 – 1) Relevé du verso (sens de lecture des rennes) ; 2) relevé sélectif des deux rennes ; 3 et 4) propositions de lectures de chaque renne (la ramure est commune ; document C. Fritz et G. Tosello).



such as antlers, hooves, or fur are missing. On the other hand, the theme of reindeers associated with horses recalls engraved decorations of the “classic” upper Magdalenian, both on bone and stone, for example the Gourdan and Lortet caves in the Pyrenees, or the La Madeleine and Laugerie-Basse shelters in the Peri-gord.

Although the composite creature has no parallels locally, it fits into the family of fabulous beings en-graved on cave walls in the Perigord (Les Combarelles), Cantabria (Altamira, Hornos de la Peña) or the Pyre-nees (Massat, Marsoulas and especially Les Trois-Frères; fig. 15-2 to 15.4). At the latter site in the Ariège, a “bison-man” considered to be playing a nasal flute, has a tapered object engraved in front of the muzzle, a detail recalling the Étiolles pebble (fig. 15.2).

In portable art, there are therianthropomorphs on stone plaques in the Pyrenees at Isturitz, Enlène, and Espélugues, as well as at Gönnersdorf (Rhineland, Germany) or on bone at Teyjat or Torre (Cantabria, Spain). However, feminization of this type of depiction is exceptional; the closest figure to the one descibed here comes from the middle Magdalenian rock-shelter of La Madeleine (fig. 15.5). Engraved in profile, it has a sort of round muzzle and a thick beard; a breast can clearly be seen under the bent arm. One must also mention the pebble engraving from Tolentino, in Italy,

although this is located outside the Magdalenian cul-ture area (fig. 15.6). The stratigraphic context is not precisely known, but the evidence points to a date for the pebble “in the final phase of the Palaeolithic, bet-ween about 10 and 12 000 years” (Massi et al., 1998, p. 51). A woman’s body is drawn frontally, the arms crossed on the belly. The pubic triangle is deeply in-cised, while the legs are drawn in strokes made with a different instrument; a belt appears to decorate the waist. This feminine body has an animal head, turned towards the right; the species is not clearly identifiable. It is a herbivore, perhaps a doe, but unlike the Étiolles figure, there seems to be no graphical reference to a predator or a threatening attitude.

Fig. 13 (right) – The two Étiolles horses (1 and 2) compared with other Magdalenian horses engraved on plaques – La Paloma (3), Gönnersdorf (4), Andernach (5) – and on cave walls – Les Trois-Frères (6), La Pasiega (7), Niaux (8), Les Combarelles (9) – (drawings I. Barandiaran; G. Bosinski and G. Fischer; G. Bosinski and P. Schiller; H. Breuil).Fig. 13 (à droite) – Les deux chevaux d’Étiolles (1 et 2) compa-rés à des congénères magdaléniens sur plaquettes – La Paloma (3), Gönnersdorf (4), Andernach (5) – et sur parois – les Trois-Frères (6) La Pasiega (7), Niaux (8), les Combarelles (9) – (rele-vés I. Barandiaran ; G. Bosinski et G. Fischer ; G. Bosinski et P. Schiller ; H. Breuil).

Fig. 12 – Superimposition of the horses on the front (white) and the reverse (black).Fig. 12 – Superposition des chevaux du recto (blanc) et verso (noir).



A “STONE WITH A STORY”

The association of a composite human with a horse recalls a scene engraved on bird bone from La Vache cave (Ariège), of similar date, in which a group of schematic characters is placed behind a stallion; a further analogy, the horses have a wound sign in the thorax (fig. 16).

At Étiolles, we have seen that this association creates a narrative relationship between the two actors, even though the intentions remain equivocal. The front horse has an appendage that is hardly anatomical and which evokes a sort of rudimentary “foot”: this well-marked detail seems to transform the otherwise very realistic equid, by giving it a discrete anthropomorphic touch. (fig. 5.3). The link with the opposite side is established by the similar attitudes of the horses, although the equid on the back accompanies reindeer, placed in

inverted manner. Thus the act of engraving is at the same time truly gestural: the artist turns the pebble in his hands, as he gradually adds the drawings. This procedure evokes a story, the progression of a tale in pictures, the thread of which could be followed in the telling.

Fig. 15 (right) – Comparative data for the composite creature engraved on the Étiolles pebble (1). Cave art: 2) Les Trois-Frères (drawings H. Breuil and M. Dauvois); 3) Massat (drawing Cl. Barrière); 4) Altamira (drawing H. Breuil). Portable art: 5) La Madeleine (document G. Tosello); 6) Tolentino (document F. d’ Errico).Fig. 15 (à droite) – Documents de comparaison pour l’être composite gravé sur le galet d’Étiolles (1). Art pariétal : 2) les Trois-Frères (d’après relevés H. Breuil et M. Dauvois) ; 3) Massat (relevé Cl. Barrière) ; 4) Altamira (relevé H. Breuil). Art mobilier : 5) la Madeleine (document G. Tosello) ; 6) Tolen-tino (document F. d’Errico).

Fig. 14 – Horses of various date from the Paris Basin: 1) Boutigny (photo MAN); 2) Cepoy (drawing G. Tosello); 3) Ségognole (drawing M.-A. Garcia); 4) Pincevent (drawing D. Baffier).Fig. 14 – Chevaux du Bassin parisien de datations diverses : 1) Boutigny (cliché MAN) ; 2) Cepoy (relevé G. Tosello) ; 3) La Ségognole (relevé M.-A. Garcia) ; 4) Pincevent (relevé D. Baffier).



Another important fact is the position of the pebble in the ring of stones of a large domestic hearth, where it was intentionally placed (should one say hidden?) Previously, a great deal of evidence of this kind has been found on sites, without detailed information on context (for example at La Madeleine, at Limeuil, at Soucy etc…). Although there is no doubt about depo-sition, the intent is ambiguous: was it abandoned like the other simple limestone blocks or was it placed in this highly symbolic feature to fulfill a function there? And what function? Engraved Magdalenian plaques and pebbles had a close relationship with fire; in fact, many of these stones had been exposed to flames, a common cause of fragmentation. On some open-air sites in the Périgord like Limeuil, it appears that inser-tion in a hearth was an important stage in the cycle of events controlling their function on the site (Tosello, 2003). Reddening, then fragmentation caused by heat, provoke the destruction of supports and images; cer-tain fragments were recuperated and re-engraved, sometimes over and over again (fig. 17). At Étiolles, the pebble is intact but partly reddened; so it was neither exposed for a long time, nor frequently. Ano-ther difference is that engravings on portable supports are generally abundant in occupation layers on open-air sites (Limeuil, Gönnersdorf) or in caves (Bé-deilhac, Enlène…). Isolated objects are exceptional and often come from the spoil of old excavations where they had been overlooked (Marsoulas, Ro-chereil), which is obviously not the case with this pebble.

On the other hand, in the south-west as at Étiolles, the species portrayed are those usually hunted by the Magdalenians, reindeer and horses, marked with wound signs. The female therianthropomorph portrayed in a threatening attitude also evokes hunting. Nevertheless, it would be wrong to consider that the engraved ani-mals are simply images of wounded or dying game. The representation of the hunted animal and its sym-bolic wounds results from the will to kill an effigy, a hypothesis already suggested when the first discoveries were made (Capitan and Bouyssonie, 1924); burning

the support for the engraving until it breaks up is a further stage in the process of disintegration of the image (Fritz and Pinçon, 1989). The subsequent choice of one of the fragments to add a new figure is certainly not innocent: this kind of act indicates a renewal of gestures, a recurrence that possibly reflects a ritual practice. Around the hearth at Étiolles, it seems that the process did reach its “normal” end, the break-up of the block through heat. Or is this anomaly an expres-sion of a different rite?

IN CONCLUSION

The engraved pebble from Étiolles is a discovery of major importance and as such it not only provides much new information but also raises a number of questions.

The figures, notably the horses, present graphical particularities whose importance remains to be assessed in the northern part of the Magdalenian. It is indeed difficult, with two specimens, to envisage a local “style”. Comparison of the Étiolles equids with those from Cépoy, Pincevent (dated a little later) or Boutigny is not really conclusive. Above all, these finds show that the horse played a special thematic role in art at the end of the Palaeolithic in the region.

The position of the pebble on the edge of a hearth possibly indicates a relationship with fire, although this seems less ovious than with other engraved stones, especially finds from sites in south-western Europe. The Étiolles engravings provide new examples of long-distance analogies, which are all the more interesting as they occur in a period when the symbolic unity of the Magdalenian is apparently breaking up. Thus, at around 12,000 BP, the Aquitaine groups, which had previously been closely linked to their counterparts in the Pyrenees and Cantabria, become more distinctive: their symbolic work (for example as seen from stylized female figures) indicates that the orientation of ex-change networks shifted from the south-west to the north and east, in other words to the Paris basin, and the plains of Belgium and Germany (Fritz et al., 2007).

Fig. 16 – Scene engraved on a bird bone from the Upper Magdalenian cave of La Vache (Ariège), showing the association of a wounded stallion with humans (after drawing by S. Rougane).Fig. 16 – Scène gravée sur un tube en os d’oiseau du Magdalénien supérieur de la grotte de la Vache (Ariège) : association d’un étalon blessé et d’humains (d’après relevé S. Rougane).



So the discovery at Étiolles, though isolated, could be one of the last signs of the persistence of ancestral links between groups from one end of the Magdalenian zone to the other.

The graphical symbiosis of human and animal fea-tures in the composite creature, together with the choice

of species that were their prefered game, form evidence that orientates interpretation towards the sphere of hunting; paraphrasing C. Lévi-Strauss (1980, p. 93), should one consider that for these men of the past reindeer and horse were not only “good to eat” but also “good to think”?

Fig. 17 – Scenario of a possible cycle of engraved stones as it might have taken place on some Upper Magdalenian sites: Stage 9 represents the current limit of iconographic interpretation because fragmentation is too advanced (document G. Tosello).Fig. 17 – Scénario d’un cycle de la gravure tel qu’il aurait pu se dérouler sur certains sites du Magdalénien supérieur : le stade 9 constitue celui de la limite de l’interprétation iconographique car le morcellement devient trop réducteur (document G. Tosello).



Acknowledgements: We thank the Étiolles archaeo-logical team, especially M. Christensen, M. Olive, N. Pigeot and Y. Taborin, for letting us study this ex-ceptional work, but also for their patience and efficient cooperation.

We express our gratitude to the conseil général de l’Essonne for facilitating the study of the pebble.

We would like to pay our respects to our friend M.-A. Garcia, who recently passed away. His perspicacity,

criticism and sense of humour largely contributed to the writing of this article.

NOTES

(*) Traduction Michael Ilett.(1) Patches of red ochre surrounded the hearth.(2) Block kept and displayed at the musée d’Archéologie nationale (Saint-Germain-en-Laye).(3) In any case this was the opinion of M.-A. Garcia, who made the cast of this engraving and spent much time studying it.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES

ALLAIN J. (1976) – La fin du Paléolithique supérieur dans le centre de la France, in H. de Lumley dir., La Préhistoire française, t. 2, Paris, Éd. CNRS, p. 1315-1320.

AUDOUZE F. (1992) – L’occupation magdalénienne du Buisson-Campin à Verberie (Oise), in J.-P. Rigaud, H. Laville et B. Vandermeersch dir., Le peuplement magdalénien : paléogéographie physique et humaine, Actes du colloque de Chancelade, Périgueux, 1988, Paris, Éd. CTHS (Documents préhistoriques 2), p. 345-355.

BARANDIARAN MAESTU I. (1973) – Arte mueble del Paleolítico cantábrico, Zaragoza, Éd. Universidad de Zaragoza-Departamento de Ciencias de la Antigüedad (Monografías Arqueológicas 14), 369 p.

BEGOUEN H., BREUIL. H. (1958) – Les cavernes du Volp : Trois-Frères, Tuc d’Audoubert. Paris, Travaux de l’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine, Éd. Arts et Métiers graphiques, 124 p., 115 fig.

BOSINKI G. (1994) – Die Gravierungen des Magdalénien-Fundplatzes Andernach-Martinsberg, Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zen-tralmuseums Mainz, 41, p. 19-58.

BOSINKI G., FISCHER G. (1980) - Mammut- und Pferdedarstellungen von Gönnersdorf: der Magdalénien-Fundplatz Gönnersdorf, Band 5, Wiesbaden, Ed. Franz Steiner, 146 p.

BREUIL H., OBERMAIER H., ALCALDE DEL RIO H, (1913) – La Pasiega à Puente-Viesgo (Santander, Espagne), Monaco, Imprimerie artistique Vve A. Chêne (Institut de paléontologie humaine, « Peintures et gravures murales des cavernes paléolithiques »), 64 p.

CAPITAN L., BOUYSSONIE J. (1924) - Un atelier d’art préhistorique : Limeuil, son gisement à gravures sur pierres de l’âge du Renne, Paris, Éd. Émile Nourry (Institut international d’anthropologie 1), 41 p.

CAPITAN L., BREUIL H., PEYRONY D. (1924) - Les Combarelles aux Eyzies (Dordogne), Paris, Éd. Masson (Archives de l’Institut de paléontologie humaine, 5), 189 p.

CARTAILHAC E., BREUIL H. (1908) - Les peintures et gravures murales des cavernes pyrénéennes : 3. Niaux, L’anthropologie, 19, p. 15-46.

CLOTTES J., DELPORTE H. dir. (2003) – La grotte de la Vache (Ariège), Paris, Éd. CTHS-Réunion des Musées nationaux, 463 p.

ELLENBERGER W., BAUM H., DITTRICH H., (1949) – An Atlas of Anatomy for Artists, New York, Dover Publications, 151 p.

ENLOE J., DAVID F. (1989) – Le remontage des os par individu : le partage du renne chez les Magdaléniens de Pincevent (La Grande-Paroisse, Seine-et-Marne), Bulletin de la Société préhistorique fran-çaise, 86, 9, p. 275-281.

FRITZ C., PINÇON G. (1989) – L’art mobilier paléolithique : valeur d’un instant, de la création à la destruction, in J.-P. Mohen dir., Le temps de la Préhistoire, Dijon-Paris, Éd. Archéologia-Société préhis-torique française, p. 161-163.

FRITZ C., TOSELLO G., SAUVET G. (2007) – Groupes ethniques, territoires, échanges : la notion de « frontière » dans l’art magdalénien, in N. Cazals, J.E. González Urquijo et X. Terradas dir., Frontières naturelles et frontières culturelles dans les Pyrénées préhistoriques, Acte de la table ronde de Tarascon-sur-Ariège, mars 2004, Santander, Éd. PubliCan (Monografias del Instituto de Investigaciones Prehis-tóricas de Cantabria 2), p. 165-181.

GAUCHER G. dir. (1996) – Fouilles de Pincevent, t. 2 Le site et ses occupations récentes, Paris, Éd. Société préhistorique française (Mémoire 23), 236 p.

LEROI-GOURHAN A. (1976) – La peinture pariétale de Boutigny (Essonne), Antiquités nationales, 8, p. 8-10.

LEROI-GOURHAN A., BREZILLON M. (1972) – Fouilles de Pince-vent : essai d’analyse ethnographique d’un habitat magdalénien, Paris, Éd. CNRS (Gallia Préhistoire supplément 7), 345 p.

LEVI-STRAUSS C. (1980) – Le totémisme aujourd’hui, 5e éd., Paris, Presses universitaires de France, 159 p.

MASSI A., COLTORTI M., D’ERRICO F., MUSSI M., ZAMPETTI D. (1998) – La “Venere” di Tolentino e i pionieri della ricerca archeolo-gica, Origini, 21, p. 23-65.

NELH G. (1984) – Abri du Cheval, L’art des cavernes : atlas des grottes ornées paléolithiques françaises, Paris, Éd. Imprimerie nationale (Atlas archéologiques de la France 1), p. 307-308.

OLIVE M. (1988) – Une habitation magdalénienne d’Étiolles : l’unité P15, Paris, Éd. Société préhistorique française (Mémoire 20), 175 p.

PIGEOT N. (1987) – Magdaléniens d’Étiolles :économie de débitage et organisation sociale, Paris, Éd. CNRS (Gallia Préhistoire supplément 25), 168 p.

PIGEOT N. dir. (2004) – Les derniers Magdaléniens d’Étiolles : perspec-tives culturelles et paléohistoriques, Paris, Éd. CNRS (Gallia Préhis-toire supplément 37), 351 p.

SAINT-PERIER de R. (1930) – La grotte d’Isturitz, t. 1 Le Magdalénien de la salle de Saint-Martin, Paris, Masson (Archives de l’Institut de paléontologie humaine 7), 124 p.

TABORIN Y., CHRISTENSEN M., OLIVE M., PIGEOT N., FRITZ C., TOSELLO G. (2001) – De l’art magdalénien figuratif à Étiolles (Essonne, Bassin parisien), Bulletin de la Société préhistorique fran-çaise, 98, 1, p. 125-132.

TOSELLO G. (2003) – Pierres gravées du Périgord magdalénien : art, symboles, territoires, Paris, Éd. CNRS (Gallia Préhistoire supplément 36), 590 p.

VALENTIN B. (2008) – Jalons pour une paléohistoire des derniers chasseurs (XIVe-VIe millénaires avant J.-C.), Paris, Éd. Publications de la Sorbonne (Cahiers archéologiques de Paris 1), 325 p.

Carole FRITZ et Gilles TOSELLOUniversité Toulouse 2-le Mirail

CNRS, Traces UMR 5608, Centre de recherche et d’étude pour l’art préhistorique (CREAP) Cartailhac

Maison de la recherche5, allées Antonio-Machado, 31058 Toulouse cedex

www.creap.fr ; [email protected] ; [email protected]

Exceptional evidence for Palaeolithic art in the Paris Basin: the … · 2016-03-27 · Exceptional...

Documents

Transcript of Exceptional evidence for Palaeolithic art in the Paris Basin: the … · 2016-03-27 · Exceptional...