doi:10.1006/jasc.2000.0599, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on

The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece: The Excavations inKlisoura CaveMargarita KoumouzelisEphory for Palaeolanthropology and Speleology, Athens, GreeceBoleslaw Ginter and Janusz K. KozlowskiInstitute of Archaeology, Jagellonian University, Krako´w, PolandMaciej PawlikowskiUniversity of Mining and Metallurgy, Krako´w, PolandOfer Bar-Yosef*Harvard University, Dept. of Anthropology, Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.Rosa Maria AlbertUniversity of Barcelona, Faculty of Geography and History, Barcelona, SpainMaria Litynska-ZajacInstitute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Science, Krakow, PolandEwa Stworzewicz, Piotr Wojtal, Grzegorz Lipecki, Teresa Tomek andZbigniew M. BochenskiInstitute of Evolution, Systematics and Ecology, Polish Academy of Science, Krako´w, PolandAnna PazdurSilesian Technical University, Radiocarbon Laboratory, Gliwice, Poland(Received 15 March 2000, revised manuscript accepted 13 June 2000)A new Greek sequence of early Upper Palaeolithic, Aurignacian, Epigravettian, and Mesolithic assemblages, whichdiffers from the sequences of Franchthi and Kephalari caves, was uncovered during the excavations in Cave 1 inKlisoura Gorge (Western Peloponnese). This is the first case of Middle Palaeolithic deposits immediately covered by anearly Upper Palaeolithic assemblage. The long Middle Palaeolithic in this site underlies a long sequence of UpperPalaeolithic layers. Most interesting is the Early Upper Palaeolithic industry which contains numerous arched backedblades and other lithics demonstrating morphological affinities to the Italian Uluzzian, a resemblance that raisesquestions concerning the potential makers of this industry. Above it, several Aurignacian levels dated from 24 to 34 ka were exposed. This is the first well-dated sequence of Aurignacian occupations in Greece in which a number ofbasin-like hearth structures were exposed, lined with a clay that had been brought in and specially prepared. TheAurignacian sequence is covered by Epigravettian layers. The unconformity between the Epigravettian and theunderlying Aurignacian corresponds to the Last Glacial Maximum. A Mesolithic layer caps the prehistoric sequence._ 2001 Academic PressKeywords: GREECE, EARLY UPPER PALAEOLITHIC, AURIGNACIAN, EPIGRAVETTIAN,MESOLITHIC.*Author for correspondence.5150305–4403/01/050515+25 $35.00/0 _ 2001 Academic Press

Introduction

The territory of Greece played an important role

in the first spread of Neolithic farmers into

Europe. On the eastern coast of Greece, inThessaly and Argolid, the first Neolithic villagesappeared as a result of maritime navigation fromsouthwest Anatolia through the Aegean Islands(Runnels & Van Andel, 1982; Van Andel & Runnels,1995). This scenario is less probable for the spread ofthe first modern humans, for whom a more convenient,terrestrial route existed; from northwest Anatolia toThrace through the Bosphorus, which, during theInterpleniglacial, was easier to cross as the sea level was50 m below the present (Van Andel & Shackleton,1982; Van Andel & Tzedakis, 1996). Therefore, duringthe colonization of the first modern humans who camefrom the Near East to Europe through the northeasternBalkans, most of Greece was located south ofthe main route from Anatolia to the Danube Basin.Until recently, only sparse information was availableconcerning the transition from the Middle to theUpper Palaeolithic in Greece. The main prehistoricsequences, based on the excavations carried out in the1960s and 1980s in western Greece (mainly in Epirus),lack Interpleniglacial strata, and the Mousterian isdirectly superimposed by the Gravettian and/or theEpigravettian (Bailey & Gamble, 1990). The samesituation exists in Thessaly (Kyparissi-Apostolika,1999). Human remains from the Interpleniglacial arealso absent from the Greek sites, with the exceptionof the skeletal remains from Apidima Cave in thesouthern Peloponnese, which, unfortunately were notpublished fully with their recorded geochronologicaland archaeological context.Currently, the new excavations of a long Middle–Upper Palaeolithic sequence at Klisoura, Cave 1 (easternPeloponnese), provide an important sequence, notonly for understanding the origin of the Upper Palaeolithicin this region, but particularly, in the Europeancontext, as supportive evidence for a second possibleroute in the spread of modern populations intoEurope. This route seems to follow a similar trajectoryto the later diffusion of the Early Neolithic groups withimpresso pottery over the Northern Mediterranean.During Neolithic times, this diffusion began in Greecewith the Presesklo-Magoulitsa cultures—and continuedalong the eastern Adriatic coast to Italy and thewestern Mediterranean countries. This route could alsohave been important during the Middle to UpperPalaeolithic transition, particularly due to the regressionof the Mediterranean Sea, which greatlydiminished the Adriatic Sea, leaving only a shallowgulf during OIS4 and OIS3.Given the environmental conditions around 50–30 ka , one would expect to see cultural evolutionin southern Greece resembling that of the centralMediterranean rather than the northeastern Balkansand Danube Basin. In fact, the sequence of thearchaeological occupations in Klisoura, Cave 1—fromthe Late Mousterian through the Early Upper Palaeolithicwith arched-backed blades, the Aurignacian, andthe Epigravettian—is closer to that of Italy than to the

well-known sequences from the northeastern Balkans.In the latter region, the Mousterian was succeededby the so-called ‘‘transitional industries’’. These werebased on blade technology and considered as stemmingfrom the Levallois tradition, thus resembling the NearEastern Emiran on one hand and the Bohunician inCentral Europe on the other. They were followed by a‘‘Pre-Aurignacian’’ industry or the ‘‘Bachokirian’’, andlater by the typical Aurignacian (Kozlowski, 1992).In the following pages we describe the results of theexcavations at Klisoura Cave 1 and provide detailedinformation concerning each of the uncoveredassemblages.Klisoura Gorge and its CavesKlisoura Gorge, through which flows the BaratiotisRiver, is the main communication route between theArgive Plain and the Berbati valley (Figure 1). Thegorge is 2·5 to 3 km long and up to 500 m wide, andcuts deep into Triassic limestones. Karstic phenomenaare responsible for the formation of a large number ofcaves and rock shelters in this region, 30 of which havebeen recorded (Koumouzelis et al., 1996). Six containlithics and sherds spread on the surface, while othersare filled with well-preserved sediments of unknownage.At the foot of the limestone cliffs, where the valleywidens, the alluvial fans are covered with flowstones ortopped with cemented layers. The youngest of theselayers produced a radiocarbon date from carbonates of22,550_60 (Gd-3792), indicating that the depositionof alluvial cones preceded the Last GlacialMaximum and was probably associated with Interpleniglacialtemperate conditions. The last major phaseof sediment accumulation is represented by the LateGlacial colluvium that also covers the terraces of thelower rock shelters and caves, including the terrace infront of Klisoura Cave 1.Excavation of Cave 1Cave 1 in Klisoura Gorge is located in the immediatevicinity of ‘‘Findspot 201’’, which was discovered duringthe Berbati-Limnes Archaeological Survey in 1988–1990 (Runnels, 1996: figs 5, 8, 9). Mesolithic artifactswere collected on the surface of this site. In 1993, testtrenches were dug in Caves 4 and 7, while systematicexcavations began in the terrace in front of Cave 1 in1994 (Figure 2). These field operations were conductedas a joint project of the Ephory for Palaeoanthropologyand Speleology in Athens and the Institute ofArchaeology of the Jagellonian University in Krako´w,Poland (Koumouzelis et al., 1996).516 M. Koumouzelis et al.The first report, published after two field seasons(1993, 1994), was based on a 1 m deep section of atrench dug at the dripline in Cave 1 (trench A). Thelayers were subdivided into two ensembles: theHolocene (layers 1–6) and the Late Pleistocene (layers6a, 7, 7a, 7b). The upper ensemble contained Mesolithicflake industries, whereas the lower one yieldedAurignacian-type flake industries. In 1995–1996, the

trench was lengthened to 3 m and reached a depth ofabout 2·1 m, allowing the establishment of a detailedstratigraphic sequence. The larger section of the trenchexposed the lenticular nature of numerous layers,which wedge in the direction of the cave entrance, andthe erosional surfaces that modified the top of severallayers. It became necessary to modify the numberingsystem and add Roman numerals to the Arabic numberspreviously used to label layers. In addition, theresults obtained during investigations in 1994 and 1995helped fill the gap observed between the Holocenelayers containing Mesolithic finds and the LatePleistocene layers with Aurignacian objects.Several series of layers are now visible in the exposedstratigraphy in Cave 1 (see Figure 3).(1) Layers 1 and 2 contain the Classical and BronzeAge finds.(2) Layers 3 to 6 contain a Mesolithic industry,discussed in detail in the first report (Koumouzeliset al., 1996).(3) Layers IIa and IIb contain Epigravettian finds,which do not occur in the northern part of thetrench, where a Mesolithic assemblage directlycovers the Late Aurignacian.(4) Layer 6a, III, and III_ are uppermost Aurignacianlayers and contain some microlithic backed bladelets.(5) Layers IIIb, IIIc, 7, 7a, IIIe–IIIg, and IV containa sequence of Upper, Middle and EarlyAurignacian assemblages.(6) Layer V contains an Early Upper Palaeolithicindustry with arched backed blades.Investigations in Cave 1 will be continued, as a longMiddle Palaeolithic sequence has been found belowLayer V. This sequence was identified in 1997, in asmall trial trench.In the following pages, the preliminary results of ourinvestigations are presented, with particular emphasison the Aurignacian layers. As noted above, Cave 1yielded a first-time discovery in Greece—a sequence ofseveral assemblages of this culture, sandwiched betweenEpigravettian and EUP with arched backedblades. Unfortunately, probably due to erosion, thereare two important gaps in this stratigraphy; betweenthe Mesolithic and the Epigravettian (corresponding tothe Final Palaeolithic occupations in Caves 4 and 7 inKlisoura Gorge), and between the Epigravettian andthe Aurignacian (corresponding to the LGM period).Cave SedimentsIn addition to classical methods based on grain sizeand morphology analysis, which have revealed nosignificant change in the profile, the cave sedimentswere investigated using the method of absorptionAlpheiosPeneiosACHAJAPELOPONNESEElaiochoriRiverKlisoura Cave 1KephalariARGOLID

FranchthiBOEOTIASeîdiATHENSAegean SeaMELOSFigure 1. Index map.The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 517spectroscopy in infra-red radiation. The objective ofthe examination was to determine the proportion ofautogenic (calcite [factor 1] and aragonite [factor 2]),allogenic (quartz and pieces of flints that do not occurin local limestones [factor 3], and clay minerals [factor4]) and anthropogenic minerals (apatite [factor 5] andnitrates [factor 6]). Analysis of 45 samples obtainedfrom the cave sediments was carried out by Todd A.Surovell from the Department of Anthropology of theUniversity of Arizona in Tucson. The Fourier transforminfra-red spectroscopic (FTIR) analysis was performedwith aMiddle Prospect–IR. The proportions ofthe absorption bands’ intensity have been described ascoefficients: the coefficient of factors 1 to 3 describesthe proportion of calcite crystallization to the intensityof detritic material (size of quartz absorption band)washed into the cave; the coefficient of factors 1 to 5refers to the proportion of calcite crystallization in thecave (size of the calcite absorption band) to the intensityof human occupation of the cave; the coefficient offactors 3+4 to 5 describes the intensity of the detriticmaterial washed into the cave (the sum of the size ofabsorption bands of clay materials and quartz) inrelation to the intensity of human occupation (the sizeof apatite absorption band). The calculated coefficientvalues are presented as a diagram in Figure 4.The coefficient of factors 1 to 3 indicates that withthe exception of layer VII, possibly layer V and thefloor of layer IV (Early Upper Palaeolithic), and oflayer 5 (Mesolithic), calcite crystallization predominatesover the washing in of allochthonous detriticmaterial throughout the cave’s occupation. Calcitecrystallization reaches its maximum value in layer IIIg.This can be interpreted as an indication of relativelyhumid and warm conditions during the formation ofthe whole profile. The higher ratio of quartz and clayminerals in the lower portion of sediments indicatesan increase in washing in, due to greater rainfall. Thelowest proportion of carbonate crystallization toanthropogenic indices was recorded in the Early UpperC6 mN114.22

A 114.16

? ?114113.17

B112.91113

R2111110109110.11109.84113112

0Figure 2. Map of Klisoura Cave l with location of trench A.518 M. Koumouzelis et al.Palaeolithic layers (VII, floor of layer IV), in theAurignacian levels in the floor of layer IIIe_, at theboundary of IIIe_ and IIIe, in the top of III_ and inthe Mesolithic (layer 5).The smallest values for washed in clay minerals andquartz in relation to the anthropogenic indices wererecorded at the boundary of layers IIIe_ and IIIe, inlayer IIIc, in the top of III_ and in layer 5. On the basisB4 B3 B2 B12166a100150IIIfVIIIIIf IIIfIVIIIcIIb IIbIIaIIIIII'IIIbIIIeIIIe'IVVVIIFigure 3. Stratigraphic section of trench A (Western Wall).05Ratio carbonates(calcite):quartzFactor: 1/3VIIVIV lowerIV upperIIIg lowerIIIg upperIIIéIIIéH172IIIe/éH5IIIeIIIdIIIcIIIbIII'III'IIIIIIIIIIIa6IIIéIIbIIdRatio carbonates(calcite):apatite(anthropic) 1/5Ratio quartz + clay minerals:apatite3 + 4/54 6 2 4 6 8 2 4 6 8

MesolithicHiatus Epigravettian/MesolithicEpigravettianHiatus Aurignacian/EpigravettianLate AurignacianEUP (with arched blades)AURIGNACIANFigure 4. Coefficients based on mineralogical characteristics of sediments (FTIR-method).The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 519of the above data, it can be said that the most intensivehuman occupation occurs at the beginning of theUpper Palaeolithic under conditions of more intensiveslope wash (layers VII–bottom IV). Other episodes ofintensive human occupation occurred in the MiddleAurignacian (layers IIIe_, IIIe), and particularly at theboundary Upper/Uppermost Aurignacian (III, III_)and in the Mesolithic (layer 5). The cultural hiatusesbetween the Uppermost Aurignacian and the Epigravettian(III/IIb) and between the Epigravettian andthe Mesolithic (IIa/6, 5) are not marked by a drop inanthropogenic indices. These hiatuses are marked onlyby a slight increase in calcite crystallization and agreater importance of the sedimentation of quartz andclay minerals in relation to apatite. Because similaroscillations also exist during the Aurignacian, it islikely that they correspond to sedimentation breaks orerosional events.Radiocarbon and Stable Isotope AnalysisLaboratory methodsRadiocarbon age determinations were carried out inGliwice Radiocarbon Laboratory (see Table 1 andFigure 5) using the total carbonate and organic matterpresent in samples. The 14C activity measurementswere performed with proportional counters filled withCO2. Samples were treated with 8% HCl and evolvingCO2 was trapped. The remainder–small fragments oforganic matter in solution–was washed, dried, andcombusted to CO2. Both CO2 products were purifiedand stored for at least four weeks to allow for completeRn-222 decay. Measurements of stable carbon andoxygen isotope ratios (_13C and _18O) were made at theUMCS Mass Spectrometry Laboratory in Lublin. Theresults are listed in Table 2.Evaluation of radiocarbon dataIn only six samples was the amount of organic fractionsufficient to allow radiocarbon concentration measurements.In four organic fractions the weight ofpure carbon was c. 1·5 g (see Table 1, dating results:Gd-10201 240_110 , Gd-10562 32,400_600 ,Gd-10714 >31,100 , Gd-10715 >30,800 ), and therange of the radiocarbon dates not too wide (two‘‘open’’ data for c. 30,000 ). The weight of purecarbon in two samples was c. 0·3 g. Results of radiocarbondating of these samples have relativelyhigh margins of error (Gd-9688 22,500_1000 andGd-9889 28,900_3,000 ).The conventional radiocarbon dates of carbonatefractions listed in Table 1 are ‘‘apparent ages’’,which obviously do not correspond to true ages.Theoretical considerations, based on the geochemicalprocesses involved in the formation of secondary carbonate

(Salomons & Mook, 1986), and numerousTable 1. Klisoura Cave 1—radiocarbon datesLayer HearthSampleno.Years on carbonatefraction_13C[‰PDB]Sampleno.Years on organicfraction andshells*_13C[‰PDB]Mesolithic (6) Gd-10685 9150_220 _17·0Interface IIa/IIb Epigravettian Gd-3872 14,280_ 90 _17·0Interface 6/III Gd-3791 16,130_ 40 _22·8III—Uppermost Aurignacian 10a Gd-3881 17,220_ 60 _22·88III—Uppermost Aurignacian 5 Gd-7641 19,400_100 _22·88III—Uppermost Aurignacian 11 Gd-3877 21,720_ 90 _20·06a—Uppermost Aurignacian Gd-7994 *23,800_ 400 _9·82Gd-7996 *27,200_ 500 _10·07IIIb—Upper Aurignacian Gd-10701 15,490_410 _21·88IIIc—Upper Aurignacian Gd-12036 13,400_140 _22·887a—Upper Aurignacian 5 Gd-11193 24,220_190 _22·88Gd-10258 20,060_200 _23·83IIIe top—Middle Aurignacian Gd-12035 26,230_140 _26·40IIIe—Middle Aurignacian 17 Gd-3878 25,770_130 _23·83IIIe—Middle Aurignacian 18 Gd-3879 26,770_150 _22·0IIIg—Lower Aurignacian 14a Gd-7882 28,270_340 _23·83Gd-11300 26,950_220 _21·92 Gd-7893 31,400_1000 _25·0Gd-7883 27,410_290 _21·92IIIg/IIIe_—Lower Aurignacian 23 Gd-7880 25,480_230 _22·68 Gd-7892 34,700_1600 _25·0IV—Lower Aurignacian 27 Gd-10567 29,950_460 _22·68 Gd-10562 32,400_ 600 _25IV—Lower Aurignacian 31 Gd-7879 21,330_150 22·68Gd-12034 17,280_190 _14·66 Gd-9688 22,500_1000 _25V—Early Upper Palaeolithic Gd-7878 17,430_100 _21·87V—Early Upper Palaeolithic 42 Gd-12037 26,250_310 _18·71 Gd-10714 >31,100 _25V—Early Upper Palaeolithic 53 Gd-12027 27,100_600 _16·64 Gd-10715 >30,800 _25520 M. Koumouzelis et al.experimental data (Pazdur, 1988; Pazdur et al., 1995)lead to the conclusion that all carbonates are depletedin radiocarbon with respect to the contemporary biosphereat the moment of sedimentation. Because ofthis, the radiocarbon age of the carbonate fraction (TC)in the sample is older than its true age (T). Thediscrepancy between TC and T is the so-called reservoirage TR. The most frequently observed values of TR forfresh-water carbonates range from c. 500 years toc. 5500 years (Pazdur, 1988). The actual observed valueof TR of a certain sediment is determined by thechemistry of the system, and within a well defined class14C age of carbonate fractions(s)Stratigraphic unitVIVIIIe, gIIb, c, 7aIII, 6a6-IIa, IIb10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000Age in Radiocarbon Years BP

(s)14C age of organic fractionsFigure 5. Radiocarbon dates on carbonate and organic fractions, by stratigraphic unit. See text for details of relevant units. Note: (S)=dates

from landsnails.Table 2. Results of stable isotopes analysis in carbonate fraction of the samples from KLC1 . . ./97 seriesSample Depth [m]_13C[‰PDB]_18O[‰PDB] LayerKLC1/S1 1·23_0·03 23·21_0·03 12·23_0·09 IIIe, hearth 17aKLC1/S2 1·03_0·03 23·83_0·04 14·08_0·08 IIIe_, hearth 14aKLC1/S3 1·23_0·03 21·92_0·03 11·75_0·09 IIIg, hearth 22KLC1/S4 1·38_0·03 21·99_0·05 11·72_0·07 IIIg bottom, hearth 23KLC1/S5 1·58_0·03 22·68_0·05 14·00_0·09 IIIg, hearth 27KLC1/S6 1·63_0·03 22·90_0·04 12·89_0·12 IV bottom, hearth 47KLC1/S7 1·73_0·03 21·87_0·05 12·20_0·09 V, hearth 43KLC1/S8 2·18_0·03 20·14_0·04 9·06_0·10 VIII, hearth 57KLC1/S9 2·23_0·03 19·79_0·06 9·29_0·07 IX, flowstoneKLC1/S10 2·38_0·03 20·57_0·08 11·68_0·06 IXa, flowstoneKLC1/SA 0·33_0·03 17·00_0·04 8·51_0·04 IIaKLC1/SB 0·83_0·03 21·88_0·03 11·44_0·06 IIIbKLC1/SC 0·78_0·03 22·88_0·02 12·88_0·06 IIIcKLC1/SD 0·93_0·03 26·40_0·03 15·99_0·08 IIIe topKLC1/1(S) 0·88_0·03 9·82_0·05 0·46_0·09 6a, sq.D1KLC1/2(S) 1·03_0·03 10·07_0·03 0·84_0·05 6a, sq. A1KLC1/3 1·58_0·03 14·66_0·02 4·54_0·05 IV, hearth 31KLC1/4 1·78_0·03 18·71_0·04 8·83_0·08 V, hearth 42KLC1/5 1·83_0·03 16·44_0·03 5·84_0·03 V, hearth 53(S)=Terrestrial shell.The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 521of carbonate sediments, such as calcareous tufas orlake sediments, there are relatively wide ranges ofvariation of TR.Information about the magnitude of reservoir agecan sometimes be obtained through comparison oforganic and carbonate fraction radiocarbon ages, if itis assumed that the age of the organic fraction (TO)determines the time of the carbonate deposition. Inthese cases, the age of the carbonate fraction mustbe older than the organic fraction age. For all radiocarbondata from Klisoura Cave 1, the relationshipbetween TC and TO determined in the same samples isthe opposite: the ages of the organic fraction are olderthan those of the carbonates deposited (see Table 1).We can explain this relationship if we assume thatorganic matter from different layers was cemented bycarbonates some time later, after the deposition of theorganic matter.An analysis of the stable isotopes 13C and 18Oreveals information on the reservoir age of the carbonatesunder investigation. The sedimentological studiesindicate that carbonate deposition took place in stagnantwater reservoirs, using CO2 from the decompositionof the organic matter. The stable carbon isotopeanalysis produces the expected low in carbonate _13Cvalues; in many cases they are lower than _22‰versus PDB (a standard). Correlation between _13Cand the depth of the layers is not observed. Thecorrelation coefficient of _13C for results listed in Table2 is r=0·06. Apart from this, we observe strong correlationbetween _13C and _18O (r=0·89), which indicatesthe kinetic fractionation of isotopes during sedimentation.As the result of the above observations, wecan say that the secondary cementation processes oforganic matter were carried out relatively fast, undersimilar geochemical conditions, throughout the sedimentation

history. In conclusion, we can expect aconstant value of reservoir age TR for all dated carbonatesamples, with the value of TR probably no greaterthan 2000 years and probably no less than 500 years.These values are characteristic for the sedimentation ofcarbonates in stagnant water (Pazdur, 1988). Thismeans that the results of the radiocarbon dating ofcarbonate fractions listed in Table 1 are too old bybetween 500 to 2000 years. Measurement results placethe carbonate fraction radiocarbon ages TC in therange between 29,950_460 (Gd-10567) and6230_30 (Gd-3790). After correcting this data forthe reservoir effect TR=2000 years, we can say thatsecondary cementation processes took place betweenc. 28,000 and 4000 in radiocarbon time scale, i.e.several thousands years later than the period of organicmatter deposition.The radiocarbon dating results for organic andcarbonate matter are verified on the basis of the 14Cdating of mollusc shells (Gd-7994, 23800_400 andGd-7996, 27,200_500 ), but with the same limitationas for different carbonates. The reservoir effectfor this sample from Klisoura Cave 1 is difficult toestimate. Recent AMS dating of freshwater shells fromlakes, carried out by Zhou et al. (1999), gave TR valuesbetween c. 1000 and 1400 years, which is in agreementwith the values observed previously. After correction,if we take 1300 years as the reservoir effect, the agesof the above samples are given as c. 22,500 and26,000 . However, other TR values for investigatedshells should also be taken into account.The Archaeological SequenceThe Mesolithic and Late PalaeolithicThe Mesolithic layers (3 to 6) are characterized by thepresence of flake industries with a relatively low ratioof geometric microliths. It is likely that Layers 5 to 3represent the late phase of the Mesolithic and correspondchronologically to phase VIII at Franchthi(Perle`s, 1987).Layers IIa and IIb, uncovered in 1995, yielded LatePalaeolithic blade industries, representing the Epigravettiantradition. The retouched pieces are predominantlyuni- and bilateral thick and short blades withsemi-steep retouch, often converging to a pointed tip.These specimens co-occur with fairly short blade andflake end-scrapers, frequently with lateral retouch. Thediagnostic forms are the microgravettes and doublebacked micropoints, usually with flat ventral retouch atthe proximal and distal ends (Figures 6 and 7).The industry of layers IIa and IIb is unquestionablyEpigravettian and may be placed chronologically duringthe hiatus between phase III and phase IV atFranchthi Cave (Perle`s, 1987). This industry has noparallels in western Greece. It differs from both theshouldered point industries that may have persisteduntil about 13,400_210 at Kastritsa Cave (Adam,1989; Bailey et al., 1983a), as well as from the industrieswith small backed blades and the microburintechnique at sites such as Klithi (Adam, 1989; Bailey

et al., 1983b, 1984, 1986). On the other hand, analogouselements such as microgravettes and doublebacked points with ventral retouch can be seen inthe Epigravettian industries on the Italian coast of theIonian and Adriatic Seas (Bisi et al., 1983).The Aurignacian unitsThe Aurignacian occupational horizons exposed so farconsist of obviously anthropogenic deposits, includingbasin-like hearths filled with ashes, shells, crushedbones, and artifacts. The Aurignacian levels havetentatively been sub-divided into four units:(1) the uppermost unit comprising layer III, III_ and6a, with some microlithic backed bladelets(2) the upper unit, comprising layers IIIb, IIIc, 7a(together with hearth 5), IIId, IIIe, and 7b;(3) the middle unit, comprising a series of hearthsfrom the northern section of trench A (hearths 15to 18) and layers IIIe and IIIf; and522 M. Koumouzelis et al.(4) the lower unit, comprising layer IIIg and IV andhearths 19–29, 38–46.The uppermost Aurignacian unitIn 1994, hearths were identified immediately below theEpigravettian blade industries in Layers 6a and III.Investigation of the lithic industry from these levelsreveals a significant frequency of blade products incomparison with the Aurignacian levels below. Bladesand bladelets, the majority of which range in size from1·5 to 2·8 cm, the largest being 4·6 cm, are narrowerand thinner than the specimens in the Epigravettianlayers. These blanks were transformed into fine backedbladelets, often with concave blunted backs, sometimesdouble-backed, occasionally with transversal retouchin the form of microlithic rectangles. Rarely, microgravettesand retouched pointed blades are also present(Figure 7).The particular character of the ‘‘transitional’’ levelsis the co-occurrence of backed implements and nosedand carinated scrapers on flakes accompanied byogival, and blade end-scrapers. The number ofsplintered pieces (pie`ces esquille´es) is considerable.Two bone points, one of which is fairly short andsingle-beveled, should also be mentioned. They resemblepoints occurring in the Aurignacian layers, buttheir cross-sections are more asymmetrical.The co-occurrence of Aurignacian scrapers and finebacked implements has previously been recorded inKephalari Cave (upper part of layer E), situated onthe western side of the Argos Bay. Unfortunately, thelayers containing these finds are not dated (Hahn,1984).Obviously, as always in the case of inventoriescontaining elements from two different technocomplexes,the possibility must be considered that artifactsbecame intermixed due to trampling or the slow rate ofFigure 6. Upper Epigravettian (layer IIa): 1, Gravette point; 2, retouched blade; 4, 5, 7, 8, pointed retouched blades; 3, 6, end-scrapers.The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 523deposition. Even when the excavation is undertakenextremely carefully, these potential explanations

should not be ignored. However, in this case, thehomogeneity of the ‘‘transitional phase’’ inventory issupported by the study of the technological featuresof the bladelets. Although clearly detached fromcarinated cores, some of the bladelets had steepretouch that is different from the Dufour or Kremstype bladelets characteristic of Aurignacian assemblages.At the same time, these particular forms ofbacked bladelets do not occur in the Epigravettianlayers (IIa and IIb) above. We therefore conclude thatthe origin of the industry is in the local Aurignaciantradition.In addition, viewing the assemblage of KephalariCave in the context of the undisturbed hearths inKlisoura Cave 1 suggests that the Klisoura industryis not simply a mixture of backed bladelets withAurignacian flake implements, but rather a real‘‘transitional phase’’.The upper Aurignacian unitThe upper portion of the Aurignacian layers is anaccumulation of alternating clay-loam sediments witha low frequency of limestone debris (e.g., IIIb), loamysediments with a large anthropogenic component (IIIc,7a, 7b), and flat hearths that consist of a black ashylens overlying burnt clay (e.g., hearth 5).Layer IIIc, corresponding to layer 7 in the excavationsof 1994, yielded a round stone structure,measuring about 1·5 m in diameter, built fromwater-rounded limestone cobbles, several of whichexhibited a surface weathering that indicates thatthey were brought from the river bank. A pavement ofsmall limestone debris surrounded the structure.Numerous fragmented bones and a small quantity offlakes and lithic waste were found inside this feature.Although its exact function is unknown, the content ofthis structure suggests that bone marrow had beenextracted within.Figure 7. Lower Epigravettian (layer IIb): 1, microgravette point; 2, backed blade; 4, 5, 6, retouched (and pointed) blades; 3, 6, 8, end-scrapers.524 M. Koumouzelis et al.The lithic industries of the upper Aurignacian unitare fairly homogeneous. The general structure of majortechnological groups is exemplified by the assemblagesof layer 7a, hearth 5 and layer 7b. Core frequencies are0·5 to 1·7%, flakes 23·2 to 38·0%, blades and bladelets1·3 to 1·7%, chips 30·3 to 58·2%, and small shatteredfragments are 13·2 to 25·2% (Table 3). These percentagesdemonstrate that the entire production processtook place on the site. Furthermore, they show that themost important method of production was the manufacturingof flakes from flake cores and splinteredpieces. Only a few blades and bladelets were producedand those were rarely retouched.As was emphasized in the first report (Koumouzeliset al., 1996), all the raw materials exploited wereobtained from exposures and surfaces within a radiusof 3–4 km of the site. These include radiolarites fromlimestone formations and flints in silicified sandstones.The best-represented type of radiolarite (R1) accountsfor 29·3 to 44·8% of the raw material used in the

assemblage, and the most popular flint (F2) accountsfor 31·1 to 44·4% of the total. Geological formations inwhich the R6–R8 radiolarites or types of the F6–F9flint, which occur with a frequency not exceeding 0·5%,are found, have not been identified within the vicinityof the site. In addition, chalcedony, which forms 5·6%of layer 7a, is among the raw materials that cannot beconsidered strictly local.End-scrapers dominate in the Upper Aurignacianunit. In some levels, the number of splintered piecesequals (e.g., layer IIIb) or even exceeds (e.g., in layer7a) that of end-scrapers. In the end-scraper group, thepredominant forms are steep scrapers on thick flakes,or plaquettes. There are also steep scrapers with lateralretouch and steep and carinated end-scrapers with twoor more fronts. In layers IIIc and IIId there are steepflake scrapers that are almost discoidal (three specimens).In addition, there are end-scrapers (or cores?) ofthe rabot type, i.e., with either narrow flaking fronts orbroad, fan-like fronts (Figure 8).Splintered pieces are particularly numerous, especiallyin layers IIIb, 7a, and 7b. The pieces are small in size(usually about 2·0 by 1·5–2·0 cm), made on plaquettes,flakes, or cores. In hearth 5, the splintered pieces representthe final phase of reduction of microlithic singleplatformcores with a narrow flaking surface. This maymean that some of the splintered pieces functioned ascores for the manufacture of microlithic flakes. Thereare also thin splintered pieces, in the shape of prisms,with fairly regular micro-blade scars. On the other hand,the presence of splintered pieces on flakes, with retouchextending over a small surface, suggests that thistechnique was connected to the use of flakes as chisels.Fragments of bone points include two specimens inlayer 7, one in layer IIIb, three in layer IIIc, onespecimen in layer 7b, and one in IIIe. The points withoval cross-sections, reaching 10 cm in length,have pointed, or less often, single-beveled bases. Aperforated animal tooth was discovered in layer IIIb.Almost all the layers contained marine shells, frequentlyperforated. They are small in size (5 to 15 mm)and have been identified as Umbonium, Columbella,Cypraea, and Turitella shells. It is noteworthy that theyfrequently occur near the hearths.The middle Aurignacian unitThe middle unit of the Aurignacian sequence encompassesa complex of hearths (numbered 15–18) in thenorthern part of the excavation. The hearths have abasin-like shape and intersect one another. The complexof hearths is covered by layer IIIe, essentiallyclayey deposits with a small component of limestonedebris. Layer IIIf is darker in colour, possibly due to ahigher content of organic material.The complex of hearths yielded carinated scrapersmade on chunks and thick flakes, as well as severalblades with marginal retouch, side-scrapers, andnotched tools. Asymmetrical, nosed, double, and discoidalend-scrapers, mostly on flakes with steep fronts,occurred in the assemblage of layer IIIe. End-scrapers

on microlithic cores for bladelets are also present. Tinybladelets and single-platform cores for bladelets arenumerous. The bladelets, as with those described inthe former unit, have no retouch. The proportion ofsplintered pieces decreases, while single examplesof burins and composite burin end-scraper specimensappear.The dominance of end-scrapers persists. In the endscrapergroup, regular carinated items that could havealso been used for bladelet production are most numerous.Individual subdiscoidal end-scrapers, notchedtools, side-scrapers, retouched flakes and two bec-liketools also occur (Figure 9).The selection of raw materials present in the middleAurignacian unit is similar to that in the upper unit.Type R1 radiolarite is the dominant nodule used fortool production.Two fragments of bone points, oval in cross-section,with missing bases, were found with the stone artifacts,in addition to small marine shells.The lower Aurignacian unitThe lower unit of the sequence consists of hearth 14a,located in layer IIIg, hearth 19, located at the interfaceof layer IIIf and IV, and hearth 23 between layersIIIg/IIIe_. As mentioned above, layer IV is a clayey,dark brown sediment containing fine and mediumsizedlimestone fragments, with strongly weatheredsurfaces and rounded edges. Hearths 25–29 and 38–46are located in layer IV. The sedimentological characteristicssuggest that warmer and wetter climaticconditions prevailed. This assertion needs supportiveevidence.End-scrapers, dihedral burins, retouched flakes andsplintered pieces were found; carenoid or steep endscrapers,sometimes with broad fronts, predominate.The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 525Table 3. Major technological groups in Upper Aurignacian layersDepth Layer HearthCoresBlades,bladelets Flakes ToolsSplinterpieces ChipsChunks,fragmentsBonetoolsNo % No % No % No % No % No % No % No % Total60–80 7a 5 0·5 16 1·7 218 23·2 6 0·6 23 2·5 546 58·2 124 13·2 — — 93865–90 7b 9 1·7 7 1·3 197 38·0 6 1·2 19 3·7 157 30·3 121 23·3 2 0·4 51890–105 5 12 1·3 14 1·6 284 31·7 11 1·2 17 1·9 333 37·1 226 25·2 — — 897Table 4. Raw material structure in Upper Aurignacian layersLayer DepthRadiolarites Flints OthersR1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R9 RB F1a F1b F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 FB S Ch Q O Z Sl Total7a 60–80 335 1 2 5 2 — — — 58 144 292 3 2 2 — — — 2 27 1 53 9 — — — 9387b 65–90 151 4 1 3 — 3 2 3 54 34 229 9 — 5 2 2 2 3 5 — — 4 — — — 516h. 5 90–105 399 6 15 1 3 1 — 1 35 62 257 9 1 14 11 6 — — 58 — 5 3 1 1 1 890S—serpentinite; Ch—chalcedony; Q—quartz; O—obsidian; Z—metamorphic rock; Sl—silicified limestone.526 M. Koumouzelis et al.Table 5. Number of Identified Specimens and Minimal Numbers of Individuals (NISP/MNI) of mammals from Pleistocene layers of Klisoura CaveLayerDama damaFallow deer

CervuselaphusRed deerCapracf. ibexIbexRupicaprarupicapraChamois Bos/BisonSus scrofaWild boarEquus hydruntinusEuropean wild assLepuseuropaeusHareCanislupusWolfVulpesvulpesFoxCrocutaspelaeaCave hyenaFelissilvestrisWild catPantherapardusLeopardPanthera(leo spelaea)Cave lionMartescf. martesPine martenMustelasp.SciurusvulgarisSquirrelErinaceusconcolorHedgehog TotalII a 6/1 6II b 1 6/1 2/1 8/1 63/5 2/1 82III 2/1 2/1 1 1 6/1 12III‘ 36/2 366a 30/2 4/1 1 1 177/10 3/2 6/3 4/1 227III a 5/1 3/1 8III b 172/3 1 1 47/3 5/1 1 7/6 1 235III c 280 2/1 1 6 83 2/1 2 491Struct. 95/9 2/1 17/5 1/1III d 1 1III e 248/5 1 5/1 2/1 1 1 53/7 6/3 1 2/1 1 1 7/2 5/1 334III e_ 92/3 1 1 2/1 33/2 4/1 9/1 1 1 6/2 150III f 1 1III g 79/5 8/1 1 1 17/5 1 1 3/2 111III g/IV 4/1 1 5IV 6/1 1 4/2 8/1 16/2 30/2 1 2/1 1 69V 1 1 4/1 6Total 1011/32 2 29/8 9/4 11/3 7/6 41/12 575/45 1 13/6 1 19/5 4/3 2/1 3/3 1 31/16 14/6 1774

The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 527The specimens are made on flakes or chunks,accompanied by increasing numbers of blades andbladelets.In general, changes throughout the Aurignaciansequence are minor. A higher frequency of blades andbladelets is noted in the lower part of the sequence, anda considerable increase of the splintered pieces in theupper part. Throughout the sequence, steep, carinated,and nosed end-scrapers from which bladelets wereremoved occur together with special cores for bladelets.The overall frequency of bladelets is generallylow (in the upper part of the sequence it accounts for1·3 to 1·7% of the inventory, and when calculatedwithout the shattered fragments they amount to 2·1%).Bladelets with marginal or abrupt retouch, present inthe ‘‘transitional’’ layers (III), were not found in theAurignacian levels.Aurignacian structured hearthsSeveral of the hearths uncovered in the Aurignacianlayers merit particular description and comment. Thesebasin-like features were discovered in the middle

and lower part of the Aurignacian sequence, withinlithostratigraphic units IIIe, IIIe_, IIIg and IV. Someformed reddish rings surrounding a filling of ashes,charcoal, bones, and carbonates. The basin-likehearths were sunk in the ground to a depth of 10 to20 cm into the cave sediments. Some of the hearths (forexample, numbers 18, 22, 22a, 23, 25, 26, 29, 38 and 41)are interstratified, frequently intersecting one another;this indicates a low sedimentation rate.Mineralogical analysis of the reddish clay lining thehearths has shown that this material is not the sameas the cave sediments, but is burnt clay with a richmineralogical composition. Besides components suchas thermally transformed clay minerals (mainly potassiumaluminosilicate—illite), quartz and carbonate fragments,there are also small quantities of dolomite.Microscopic examinations of the structure of theseclays have shown that the walls of the basin-likedepressions were lined with specially prepared daub,containing clay brought from outside, tempered boneand plant tissue (chaff). An X-ray examination of thethermally altered clay minerals indicates that this daubwas fired at about 600–650_C. The EDX method hasestablished that some of the clays used for lining thestructure in the floor contain rock fragments withaluminosilicates originating from quartzfeldspar gneisswith a higher content of titanium, iron and manganese.These sorts of rocks do not occur in the immediatevicinity of the cave, but were identified at a distance ofabout 1–3 km.The possibility should not be excluded that thehearths are not the only instances in which basin-like,clay-lined structures were lined with daub, but thatthey may have served as a prototype for ceramiccontainers. It is worth mentioning that hearth 18yielded starches typical of seed grasses found in phytoliths,which suggests that the structures were used forroasting grains of wild grasses.The Early Upper Palaeolithic with arched backed bladesBelow the Aurignacian, in layer V, an industry occursthat contrasts with the Aurignacian in layer IV in termsof technology, as it shows a much higher frequency ofblades. This can be seen in the general inventorystructure where, of the total of approximately 2800artifacts, around 130 (4·6%) are blades and 370 flakes(12·8%). Thus, the ratio of blades to flakes is1:2·7—much higher even than in the UppermostAurignacian units. The most numerous groups arechips and small flakes (about 1500 specimens, i.e. 52%).There are 132 tools (4·6%) represented by splinteredpieces which make up the largest group (41 specimens),followed by arched backed blades (21 specimens;Figure 12: 1–12) and an equal number of sidescrapers—often small—(10 specimens) and retouchedblades (10 specimens). Burins and perforators areextremely rare (one specimen of each). The presence ofmicrolithic shapes such as a trapeze (Figure 12: 13–15),a microlithic truncation resembling Zonhoven (Taute1968: 182–185: fig. 45) points (Figure 12: 14, 16) and a

Krukowski microburin is of particular interest.In comparison with the Aurignacian layers, thedistinct quantitative ascendancy of R1 radiolarite(58%) and the radiolarite group in general (10 types)over flints (14 types) is characteristic. Types of radiolaritesand flints occur that are not known fromyounger layers. The deposit areas of these types havenot so far been identified. Again, a tendency towardsusing higher quality raw materials (including R1 radiolarite,represented by types with better cleavage thanradiolarite categories in the Aurignacian layers) whichlend themselves more readily to blade production isalso typical. Bone artifacts do not occur, but more thana dozen Dentalium shells were found. A flat hearth witha larger diameter than those in the Aurignacian levelswas uncovered in layer V.Mousterian layersBelow layer V, several Mousterian occupations wereexcavated during the 1997 season. Mousterian artifactsoccurred in layers VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, and XI, with atotal thickness of c. 0·7 m. Due to the limited areaexcavated in 1997, it is yet premature to providedetailed information on the lithic assemblages of theselayers. The common reduction sequences are discoidaland multi-directional; only in the lowermost layer isthere evidence for the use of the Levallois recurrentreduction method, as witnessed by the scar pattern onthe flakes. These assemblages are rich in side-scrapers,generally small in size, made on relatively thick flakesshowing analogies to the ‘‘Micromousterian’’ layers ofAsprochaliko Cave in Epirus (Papaconstantinou, 1988;Papaconstantinou & Vassilopoulou, 1997). The overall528 M. Koumouzelis et al.Figure 8. Uppermost Aurignacian unit (layer III): 1–11, end-scrapers; 12–14, retouched and pointed blades; 15, 16, backed blades; 17–21,backed bladelets; 22, 23, microretouched bladelets.The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 529Figure 9. Upper Aurignacian: 1–10, end-scrapers; 11, denticulated blade; 12, 13, splintered pieces; 14, 15, cores; 16, perforated tooth; 17, 18,bone points.530 M. Koumouzelis et al.Figure 10. Middle Aurignacian: 1–14, 16, 17, 19, end-scrapers; 15, burin; 18, burin plus end-scraper; 20, 21, pointed retouched blades; 22, bonepoint.The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 531thickness of the Mousterian layers in Cave 1, asindicated by drillings, surpasses 3·0 m and is thereforethicker than the Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithicdeposits.Plant Macroremains and PhytolithsThe upper part of the Aurignacian sequence containedfruit and seeds that had been burned or mineralized.The preserved, burnt macroremains are classified asfollows: Caryopsis grass, Graminae indet.; the fruit ofPolygonum sp., of the Polygonaceae family; severalseeds of Goose-foot, Chenopodium sp., members of theChenopodiaceae family; Spurrey, Spergula sp.; andMelandrium sp., Silene sp. from the Caryophyllaceafamily. The fruits include Echium sp. and Lithospermumsp., family Boraginaceae, and Traxacum sp.,family Compositae. These plants indicate the prevailing

dry and open habitats. Fruits of Lithospermumwere identified at Franchthi Cave, in the levels dated to21–22 ka (Perle`s, 1995).The charcoals have not yet been identified. In theupper part of the Aurignacian layers, calcium oxalatephytoliths, usually derived from trees and shrubs, havebeen identified in the hearth sediments. Most of thesephytoliths belong to the Fagaceae family. However, thelimits of the taxa, as defined by the phytolith identifications,are not identical to those of the detailed specieslist of macroremains or pollen grains. Hence, conclusionsconcerning the arboreal species that grew aroundCave 1 can be drawn only after the anthracologicalanalysis is completed.The presence of silica phytoliths in the hearthsconfirms that roots or stems and grass leaves were usedto start the fire. Only hearth 13 contained more inflorescenceparts, the presence of which indicates that thefire was constructed in the spring or autumn. Taxonomicidentification using phytoliths has establishedthe presence of grasses belonging to the Festucoidsubfamily, thereby adding to the list of grasses thatgrew around Cave 1.The important presence of starches, characteristic ofseed grasses and suggesting the use of this family aspart of the diet are found only in hearth 18. Hence, theresults of the phytolith analysis indicate that thishearth may have served a function different from thatof the others.Faunal RemainsBird remainsA total of 121 avian bones, belonging to at least fivetaxa, all represented in the present day Greek avifauna(Lambert, 1957), were found in the Aurignacian asfollows: layer III_, 13 bones; layer 6a, 95 bones; layerIIIc, five bones; layer IIIe, five bones; layer IV, twobones; layer V, one bone. Most of the bones (72) wereremnants of Rock Partridges (Alectoris graeca).Twenty-two other, badly damaged, fragments determinedas ‘‘Galliformes’’ probably also belonged toRock Partridges. Twenty fragments were attributed toGreat Bustards (Otis tarda). The other three taxa,including an owl from the genus Asio, the Jackdaw(Corvus monedula)—both from layer III_, and theCrow (Corvus corone)—layer 6a, were represented bysingle bones. The four remaining fragments wereindeterminable.Although the composition of species is probablyincomplete, it indicates a mosaic habitat includingopen areas (O. tarda) with rocky ground and low scrub(A. graeca), adjoining sparse woods or at least clumpsof trees and rocks (C. monedula, C. corone).Some of the bones of the Rock Partridges and GreatBustards show distinct traces of burning, which, togetherwith the absence of signs of digestion particularto animal predators (Andrews, 1990; Bochenski &Tomek, 1997), allow the remains to be attributed tohuman activities. This is not surprising, as GreatBustards and Rock Partridges—relatively large and

slow-flying birds—were hunted for meat in historicaltimes and the latter species is eaten today. It is moresurprising that the two fragments of an owl and aJackdaw also show traces of burning.Despite the preliminary nature of this report, wenote that Rock Partridge bones predominated amongstavian finds in at least one Pleistocene site in Greece(Reisch, 1976), and that all the taxa found in KlisouraCave have also been reported from other Greek sites ofsimilar age (Bachmayer et al., 1989; Mourer-Chauvire´,1981; Weesie, 1988).MolluscaThe 1239 gastropod shells (or their identifiable fragments)found, belong to four or five species of terrestrialsnails and to several marine species. A fewunidentifiable fragments of bivalves, most likely representingmarine species and over a dozen fragments oftwo species of Dentalium (Scaphopoda), have also beenfound.The Holocene and Late Glacial molluscan assemblagefrom layers I through IIb is relatively sparse,although it contains fragments of several terrestrialspecies. Rumina decollata, Lindholmiola cf. spectabilisand some Zonitidae have been found, as well as themarine species Cypraea sp. and Turitella sp., whichwere not found in the older deposits.Most of the collected specimens come from theAurignacian layers and 919 shells belong to thelandsnail Helix figulina, which was not found inthe Holocene layers. The other terrestrial species—Lindholmiola cf. Spectabilis, found in the upper part oflayer III, is represented by a single specimen.Helix figulina is most numerous (572 specimens) inlayer 6a. This species has been found mostly in SEEurope, living on grassy slopes with strong insolation,up to 1000 m a.s.l. The shells of adult specimens make532 M. Koumouzelis et al.up a considerably minor fraction. Such a great accumulationof H. figulina shells may suggest that thesnails were eaten for food (as is still the case today insome regions of Greece), however, the dominance ofjuvenile specimens, less useful for food, is remarkable.Moreover, the majority of H. figulina shells, inparticular the aperture, is well preserved.Marine shells of relatively small size, 5–15 mm,occasionally up to 20 mm, are particularly numerous inlayer IV. In this layer, apart from the 23 specimens ofH. figulina, 242 shells, belonging to 9 genera of marinespecies were found. Unfortunately, their poor preservationprecludes specific assignment. The followinggenera are represented: Columbella, Cerithium, Nassarius,Cyclope, Clanculus, Calliostoma, Cancellaria,Naticarius, and Neritina.It is noteworthy that almost all the marine specimenshave an irregular hole on the body whorl, near the edgeof the aperture. In several specimens, there is also avery regular hole of smaller size, probably made by apredatory marine snail of genus Natica. The presenceof marine shells in prehistoric archaeological depositsis often connected with their use as adornments or

amulets. In this light, the holes suggest that the shellswere pierced so that they could be strung intonecklaces or bracelets.Layer V contains over a dozen fragments of twospecies of Dentalium and some fragments of H. figulinashells.Mammalian faunaIn total, 1774 complete and partial bones, belonging to18 species of mammal, were recovered during the1994–1997 excavations. The majority of the bones andteeth belong to herbivores, including hares. Carnivores,other rodents, and insectivores are representedrarely. Most of the identified bones belong to fallowdeer (56%) and hare (Lepus europaeus 32%), and werefound in nearly every layer. The majority of theremains of many of the species were discovered in layer6a (dated to about 24,500 ) and layers IIIb to IIIg(Upper Aurignacian). In these layers, the remains offallow deer and hare clearly predominate.Layer IIIc produced the largest number of fallowdeer bones and teeth (NISP=95) (Table 1), many ofwhich, along with those of hare (NISP=17) wereuncovered in the rounded structure described above.The most frequently occurring bones were the fragmentsof mandibles, phalanxes, metacarpals, metatarsals,isolated teeth, carpal and tarsal bones. Limbbones were represented mainly by proximal or distalepiphyses. The breakage of phalanxes and limb boneshafts suggests the process of marrow extraction. Ribsand vertebrae were found only sporadically.The Klisoura herbivore bones show none of thegnawing marks typical of carnivores. Instead, 25% ofthe identifiable bones bear traces of burning. Somebones, which were still covered by flesh when they wereburned, have brown patches, others were calcined. Thewhite colour of the bones suggests that they weresubjected to intense heat at the temperature of acampfire, about 600_C (Lyman, 1994). The surfaces ofthe bones show no cut marks.The traces of burning, the presence of a complete butnot intact skeleton of a fallow deer, and the type ofdamage on the bones all suggest that the remains arethose of animals that had been hunted. In addition, it ispossible that squirrels were also hunted for their skins.A small number of bone tools, including a polishedantler fragment (layer III_) and a perforator made fromthe right ulna of a fallow deer (layer IIIe_) were found.Franchthi cave is the nearest Upper Palaeolithic siteto Klisoura, situated approximately 30 km to thesoutheast. No fallow deer remains have been discoveredin the Late Gravettian layers (c. 22 ka ) at thissite (Payne, 1975). However, in 1995, Hubbard (Payne,pers. comm.) recorded the presence of fallow deerremains in the Franchthi basal (interstadial) deposits.The apparent absence of this species at Franchthimight be attributable to the very small number ofmammal remains, which includes only 49 bones infaunal phase A (Payne, 1975). It may also, however,reflect environmental changes on the Peloponnese

about 20 ka . It is unfortunate that a hiatus in thestratigraphical record at Klisoura Cave between 22·5and 26 ka makes it impossible to confirm theabsence of fallow deer on the Peloponnese during thisperiod. It should be noted that the remains of fallowdeer have been recorded (Bailey et al., 1984) atAsprochaliko in Epirus in the Upper Palaeolithiclayers, which correspond to layers 6a-IIIe_ at Klisoura.The presence of fallow deer at Klisoura could beexplained by the milder climatic conditions enjoyed bya coastal region, in addition to a wider variety of plantsand shrubs than can be found near Franchthi. Fallowdeer tend to inhabit plains and slightly rugged or hillyareas where grassy clearings and undergrowth give wayto deciduous woods. A more detailed reconstruction ofthe immediate environment of Klisoura Cave 1 couldbe carried out based on the microvertebrates. Unfortunately,with the exception of squirrels, no rodentremains were found in the water-sieved samples fromthe excavation.All the species found at the Klisoura cave site havepreviously been recorded in the Upper Pleistocene ofthe Balkans (Bachmayer et al., 1989; Kowalski, 1982;Malez, 1986; Melentis, 1965, 1966; Symeonidis,Bachmayer & Zapfe, 1980; Tsoukala, 1991).Cave 1 Industries in Regional ContextThe sequence in Cave 1 at Klisoura Gorge ends withMesolithic assemblages that show analogies to those ofFranchthi Cave. Unfortunately, the single date fromthe carbonates in the lowest Mesolithic layer (6):9150_220, precludes us from establishing a moreThe Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 533precise chronology. Unquestionably, an erosionalphase separates the Mesolithic from the Epigravettianin layers IIa–IIb. Occupations filling this gap werefound in neighbouring caves 4 and 7.The Epigravettian layers correspond to the post-LGM period, but the date of 14,280_90 obtained onthe carbonates should be treated as the minimum ageof the Epigravettian. The true temporal range of thisEpigravettian corresponds to the stratigraphical gapbetween lithic phases III and IV in Franchthi Cave, theperiod dated from 21,480_1270 to 12,540_180 years (Perle`s, 1987).As the top of the Aurignacian sequence yielded thedates obtained from snails (Gd-7994 and Gd-7996)which, after correcting for the reservoir effect, correspondto the period between c. 22·5 and 26·0 ka , itmay be possible to assume that the second stratigraphicalgap corresponds to the LGM in this region (22·5–16–18 ka ).The dating of the Aurignacian sequence is based onland snails for the top of the sequence (Gd-7994 andGd-7996), and on organic fractions for the lowerportion of the sequence (Gd-7892, Gd-7893 and Gd-10342), and places its range from 22·5 to 32·4 ka (Table 1).Runnels (1995: 714) stated that ‘‘the Aurignacian isextremely rare in Greece’’. Aurignacian carinated endscrapers

were recorded at around or before 30 ka inthe lower layers of Franchthi Cave, phase lithique I(Perle`s, 1987). Unfortunately, information on theAurignacian from Kephalari Cave is less precise,though a short report by J. Hahn (1984) suggests thatAurignacian end-scrapers in that cave occur togetherwith backed implements. Even less is known about thesite of Arvenitsa, near Nafplion, which has beenquoted by Perle`s (1995) as being Aurignacian. However,the finds displayed in the Museum at Nafplioncast doubt on the accuracy of such an attribution.The best published open-air site with Aurignacianfinds is Elaiochori 2, located near Patras in the westernPeloponnese, known from the excavations by Darlas(1989). Unfortunately, as it is a surface site, it neitherassures the homogeneity of the assemblage norindicates its date. Typologically, the artifacts fromElaiochori 2 resemble the Aurignacian from KlisouraCave 1. End-scrapers dominate (27·2%) the inventoryof retouched elements, followed by denticulated andnotched pieces (19·1%). Among the former are nosedand atypical nucle´iforme specimens on flakes (Darlas,1989, fig. 7: 7–15), as well as carinated-nosed items(Darlas, 1989, fig. 8: 1–6). Moreover, core scrapers ofthe rabot type are present (Darlas, 1989, fig. 8: 8, 9).Unfortunately, the Aurignacian finds are mixed withMousterian artifacts (Darlas, 1989, fig. 10) as well as afew backed pieces (Darlas, 1989, fig. 9: 11–12).In addition, a few thick scrapers were retrieved fromthe red sand layers in the region of Amalias, Kastron,and Retunia in the western Peloponnese (Leroi-Gourhan, 1964). Mousterian artifacts also occur in thesame levels. However, at Amalias and Retuni, in theboundary zone between the red sands and the overlyinggrey sands, carinated end-scrapers occur togetherwith backed implements. The backed pieces have beenattributed to the Mesolithic with no sound geologicalbasis (Chavaillon et al., 1967). In light of the abovereview, we may surmize that Klisoura Cave 1 is the firstmulti-layer Aurignacian sequence, radiometricallydated, to be discovered in Greece.Placing the Klisoura Cave 1 Aurignacian in thewider context of the Balkan Upper Palaeolithic isdifficult, as the region reveals a geographic complexityin the distribution of the various types of assemblage.Industries with backed pieces developed as early as30 to 26 ka in much of this region. In the north, theyare affiliated with typical Gravettian, similar to theindustries of the Danube basin, whereas in northwestGreece they are simple backed bladelet industries.Thus, it seems that the Aurignacian vanished frommost of the Balkans between 30 to 28 ka . The latestAurignacian level (perhaps with some intrusions ofbacked elements) was discovered in the well-exploredsequence of Temnata Cave in Bulgaria (Ginter &Kozlowski, 1992). It dates to the period 31 to 29 ka .In Bacho Kiro Cave, the Aurignacian assemblageswere excavated from level 6a/7 (Kozlowski, 1982),dated to 29,150_950 (Ly-1102) and followed by levels

4b and 4a. Level 4b is attributed to the same, warmerepisode (Krinides II), whereas level 4a is placed atthe next cold episode, i.e. after about 27/25 ka . Acharacteristic feature of the youngest Aurignacianassemblages at Bacho Kiro Cave (allowing for thevery small series of artifacts), is a decrease in thefrequency of blades and blade tools and a preponderanceof simple end-scrapers with lateral retouch andhigh scrapers on flakes and chunks. The tendenciesobserved in Bacho Kiro Cave, although on a smallsample, exhibit a change towards an increase in thefrequencies of end-scrapers and a shift in the flakingtechnique.The only Aurignacian assemblages in the Balkansdated later than 25 ka and possibly contemporaneouswith those of Klisoura Cave 1, were uncoveredin Sandalia Cave II near Pula in Croatia (Malez, 1978:258–260). Layer e at this site is particularly interesting,as its date of 23,540_180 (GrN-5013) fits very wellbetween the date of 21,740_450 (GrN-4877) for theGravettian layer c and a date of 25,340_170 (GrN-5015) for the Aurignacian layer f. Malez (1978, pl.26:8–13) published only a small selection of finds fromlayer e, including short flake end-scrapers with lateralretouch, carinated and nosed end-scrapers on chunks,and a few side-scrapers. When these artifacts arecompared with the finds from layer f, the inference maybe drawn that blade tools decrease in number,especially Aurignacian retouched blades. Taking intoconsideration, however, that there is a lack ofavailability of all the necessary information, it isdifficult to determine the tendencies in the Aurignacian534 M. Koumouzelis et al.technological and morphological changes inSandalia II.The beginning of the Aurignacian sequence inKlisoura Cave 1 is contemporaneous with the classicalphase of the Balkan Aurignacian, represented by theindustries with Mladec type split-base points. In BachoKiro and Temnata caves, long sequences of theEarly Aurignacian occur below the classical BalkanAurignacian, which so far have no parallels in Greece.Much of the Italian Aurignacian differs from theAurignacian in Greece described here. In cavesequences, the layers dated at from 36 to 32 ka revealedthe so-called Proto-Aurignacian, with its characteristiclarge proportion of bladelets with marginal retouchesof Dufour or Krems type. This proportion couldsometimes be as much as 50% of the tool inventory.Such bladelets were not only the product of shapingcarinated end-scrapers; they were accompanied by fewend-scrapers and burins but relatively numerous sidescrapersand denticulates. In the Castelcivita Cave(Gambassini, 1997) the Proto-Aurignacian showsinternal variability: lower level 8 (31/32 ka) containedslender Dufour type bladelets whereas in upper level 6(also about 31 ka ) they were replaced by Muralovkatype ‘‘micropoints’’, the proportion of which is alsovery high (44%). Only after the Proto-Aurignacian

with micro-retouched bladelets does the typicalAurignacian appear—the earliest on the Liguriancoast (Riparo Mochi layer F—c. 32 ka), and later insouthern Italy (e.g. Cala Cave layers 13–10 dated at29·8–26·8 ka —Benini, Boscato & Gambassini,1997). It is the industries from southern Italy that theAurignacian from Cave 1 at Klisoura resembles mostclosely. These southern Italian industries containedonly a few micro-retouched bladelets (0·3 to 0·8%), butthe proportion of end-scrapers and splintered piecesFigure 11. Lower Aurignacian: 1–8, 10–12, end-scrapers; 9, core.The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 535(up to 40% combined) were high. The similarity of thegeneral quantitative structure is further emphasized bythe similarity of tool morphology, especially of endscrapers(e.g. from the Cala Cave—Benini, Boscata &Gambassini, 1997, fig. 8).ConclusionsThe sequence in Klisoura Cave 1, in conjunction withthe sequences from Franchthi and Kephalari Cavesenable us to obtain a more complete picture of culturalevolution in the Late Pleistocene and Early Holoceneof the eastern Peloponnese. The picture would be morecomplete if the data on the chronology and the industriesfrom Kephalari Cave were more precise. Thesequences in Cave 1 at Klisoura (layers 3–6) and atFranchthi (Lithic phases VII–IX) end with Mesolithiclayers. Below these, the Late Glacial Epigravettianoccurs at Franchthi (Lithic phases IV–VI) and atKephalari (layers C1–C3, D1) corresponding to ahiatus in Cave 1 at Klisoura. At Franchthi, the hiatusbetween lithic phases III and IV (i.e. between 21 and12 ka) is filled by the Epigravettian layers in Cave 1(layers IIa, IIb) and perhaps the Epigravettian layers inKephalari Cave (D2, D3). On the other hand, in CaveFigure 12. EUP with arched backed blades: 1–12, arched backed blades; 13–16, microlithic truncations (13–15 double).536 M. Koumouzelis et al.1 there are no layers that correspond to the LGM andthe period directly preceding the LGM. Such layersare recorded in Franchthi Cave (Lithic phases IIand III—22–21 ka ) and possibly also in KephalariCave (layer D4), where the Mediterranean Gravettianis present. The later Interpleniglacial and the transitionto the LGM (32·4–22·5 ka) are best representedin Cave 1, where a sequence of Aurignacian levelsoccurs; our knowledge of this period is much poorerat Franchthi (Lithic phase I is the only possibleAurignacian occupational episode) and at Kephalari(where layers E, F1, F2 contain mixed elements of boththe Aurignacian and the EUP arched backed bladesindustries). Finally, below the Aurignacian sequence atCave 1 there is a well-marked level with an EUP archedbacked blades industry (layer V) and a several metrethick series of unexcavated Middle Palaeolithic layers.The Middle Palaeolithic is also present at Kephalari(layer G) but it is not present in Franchthi Cave.In comparison with the caves at Franchthi andKephalari, Cave 1 displays a different composition offauna dominated by fallow deer and hare, but with a

smaller proportion of Equus hydruntinus and ibex. AtFranchthi, on the other hand, the layers that directlyprecede the LGM demonstrate an increase in thefrequency of horse and cervids, while the Late Glaciallayers are dominated by bovids, caprids and fewercervids and horses. In Kephalari Cave, hare and birdsconstitute a fairly large proportion throughout thewhole sequence, whereas Equus hydruntinus, wild boarand caprids are dominant in the Gravettian and Epigravettianlayers. The differences we have describedcould be the effect of the particular paleogeographicalconditions in every region. It is more likely however,that they are caused by the fact that sediments correspondingto the LGM are absent in Cave 1. AtFranchthi, on the other hand, there are no data onfaunal remains from the end of the Interpleniglacial,while at Kephalari the layers with the EUP industriesdo not contain fauna. In Cave 1, the upper portion ofthe Aurignacian sequence contains an accumulationof shells, mainly Helix figulina, which at Franchthiis abundant only in lithic phase V (about 11 ka ;Perle`s, 1995), and at Kephalari in the Late Glacial(layer C3).A special feature of the Aurignacian sequence inCave 1 is the presence of plant macroremains in theUpper Aurignacian. Among these are several speciesthat could have been used for food (for exampleChenopodium, Polygonum) and/or for production ofdyes (Lithospermum). In addition, in the middle portionof the Aurignacian sequence, some hearths couldhave served for roasting grains of certain Graminae, asthey contained phytoliths of starches of seed grasses.The basin-like, clay-lined hearths are the oldestexample of clay preparation and firing; the occurrenceof such hearths in the Lower and Middle Aurignacian(32·4–28 ka ) places their chronology beforethe central European Gravettian with its ceramictechnology, dated at about 28 to 26 ka (Vandiveret al., 1990).The most important result of the excavation was thediscovery of Early Upper Palaeolithic layer V, with anarched backed blade industry and microliths sandwichedbetween the Aurignacian (layer IV) and theMousterian (layer VI). This industry shows some analogiesto the Italian Uluzzian, mostly in the morphologyof arched backed blades, as well as in the relativefrequency of splintered pieces, which in some Uluzziansites constitute more than half of the retouched pieces(e.g., Castelcivita` layers rsa_ and rpi; Cavallo EII–I; LaFabricca 2; Gambassini, 1997). The differences areparticularly expressed in the reduction sequences andthe role of microliths in the Klisoura assemblage.Noteworthy is the presence of Dentalium shells usedas personal adornments in Klisoura layer V and thedominant blade production in this Early UpperPalaeolithic unit. The latter played a minor role insubsequent Aurignacian assemblages. If we take intoaccount only the open-ended dates from layer V,they could be considered as similar to the 34–33 Ka

established for the Uluzzian in Castelcivita`(Gambassini, 1997) and Cavallo caves (Palma diCesnola, 1993). However, the new AMS measurementfor layer V (H. Valladas, pers. comm.) of 40·2 ka years, if supported by the TL dates of burnt flint, wouldindicate that this Early Upper Palaeolithic archedbacked blade industry is much older than all ofthe dated Uluzzian sites in Italy, and will be contemporarywith many Mousterian occupations in Italy,Montenegro (Crvena Stijena layer XII; Basler, 1975),Bulgaria (Samuilitsa, unit 5; Sirakov, 1983), andThessaly (Theopetra 3·6–4·2 m; Kyparissi-Apostolika,1999; Peneios layer IV; Runnels & Van Andel, 1993,etc.). At the same time, layer V would be roughlysynchronous with the ‘‘Pre-Aurignacian Bachokirian’’(Bacho-Kiro layer 11/IV–I; Temnata layer 4C–A) inthe Bulgarian caves (Kozlowski, 1999). Such an earlychronological position for the Early Upper Palaeolithicfrom Klisoura raises the possibility of the spread ofthe ‘‘Upper Palaeolithic package’’ independent of theAurignacian, through the northern Mediterraneanzone.AcknowledgementsWe express gratitude to the Polish Committee forScientific Research for the support of grant 0914, andto the American Schools of Prehistoric Research at thePeabody Museum, Harvard University for financialsupport for the, 1996 season. We would like to thankProf. K Kowalski who examined the squirrel material,Prof. B. Rzebik-Kowalska for examining insectivoraremains and Prof. A. Forsten who looked at the equidmaterial. Particular thanks must go to Mrs BarbaraKazior, and Dr Krzysztof Sobczyk of the Institute ofArchaeology, Jagellonian University, Krako´w, PolandThe Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece 537and Dr. Malgorzata Kaczanowska of the ArchaeologicalMuseum, Krako´w-Nowa Huta, Poland, who participatedin the excavations and worked on the analysisof the finds. In addition, we would like to thankthree anonymous reviewers for their comments. Wewould like to thank J. Dickinson for editorialassistance. Finally, all shortcomings of this paper arethe responsibility of the authors.ReferencesAdam, E. (1989). A Technological and Typological Analysis of UpperPalaeolithic Stone Industries of Epirus, Northwestern Greece. BARInternational Series 512. Oxford: Tempus Reparatum.Andrews, P. (1990). Owls, Caves and Fossils. London: NaturalHistory Museum Publications, p 231.Bachmayer, V., Malez, V., Symeonidis, N., Theodorou, G. & Zapfe,H. (1989). Die Ausgrabung in der Ho¨ hle von Vraona (Attika) imJahre 1985. Sitzungsberichte, O} sterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften,Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Klasse, Abteilung I197(5–10), 287–307.Bailey, G. (1995). The Balkans in prehistory: the Palaeolithic archaeologyof Greece and adjacent areas. Antiquity 69, 19–24.Bailey, G. N. & Gamble, C. S. (1990). The Balkans at 18000 B.P.: theview from Epirus. In (C. S. Gamble & O. Soffer, Eds) The Worldat 18,000 Years. London: Unwin and Hyman, pp. 148–167.Bailey, G. N., Carter, P. L., Gamble, C. S. & Higgs, H. P. (1983a).Asprochaliko and Kastritsa: further investigations of Palaeolithicsettlement and economy in Epirus (Northwest Greece). Proceedingsof the Prehistoric Society 49, 15–42.

Bailey, G. N., Carter, P. L., Gamble, C. S. & Higgs, H. P. (1983b).Epirus revisited: Seasonality and inter-site variation in theUpper Palaeolithic of Northwest Greece. In (G. N. Bailey, Ed.)Hunter-Gatherer Economy in Prehistory. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, pp. 64–78.Bailey, G. N., Carter, P. L., Gamble, C. S., Higgs, H. P. & Roubet,C. (1984). Palaeolithic investigations in Epirus: the results of thefirst season’s excavations at Klithi, 1983. Annual of the BritishSchool of Archaeology at Athens 79, 7–22.Bailey, G. N., Gamble, C. S., Higgs, H. P., Roubet, C., Sturdy, D. S.& Webley, D. P. (1986). Palaeolithic investigations at Klithi:preliminary results of the 1984–1985 field season. Annuals of theBritish School of Archaeology at Athens 81, 7–35.Basler, D. (1975). Crvena Stijena, zbornik radova. Niksic: Zajednicahulturnih Ustanova.Benini, A., Boscato, P. & Gambassini, P. (1997). Grotta della Cala(Salerno): industrie litiche e faune uluzziane e aurignaziane.Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche 48, 37–94.Bisi, F., Broglio, A., Guereschi, A. & Radomill, A. M. (1983).L’Epigravettien e´volue´ et final de la zone haute et moyenneadriatique. Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche 38, 229–266.Bochenski, Z. M. & Tomek, T. (1997). Preservation of bird bones:erosion versus digestion by owls. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology7, 372–387.Chavaillon, J., Chavaillon, N. & Hours, F. (1967). Industries paleolithiquesde l’Elide. I. Region d’Amalias. Bulletien de CorrespondanceHellenique 88, 1–8.Darlas, A. (1989). I Oriniakia Lithotechnia tou Elaiochoriou Achaias.Athens: Archaiologike Efemeris.Dani, A. & Gambassini, P. (1977). L’industria uluzziana di SanRomano (Pisa). Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche 32, 133–163.Djindjian, F. (1993). Les origines du peuplement aurignacien enEurope. In (L. Ba´nesz, I. Cheben, L. Kaminska´ & V. Pavu´kova´,Eds) Aurignacien en Europe et en Proche Orient. Bratislava:UISPP, pp. 136–154.Gambassini, P. (Ed.) (1997). Il Paleolitico di Castelcivita—Culture eAmbiente. Napoli: Electa.Ginter, B. & Kozlowski, J. K. (1992). The archaeological sequence.In (J. K. Kozlowski, H. Laville & B. Ginter, Eds) Temnata Cave.Excavations in Karlukovo Karst Area, Bulgaria, vol. 1 part 1.Krako´w: Jagellonian University Press, pp. 289–294.Hahn, J. (1984). Su¨deurope und Nordafrika. Mu¨nchen: NeueForschungen zur Altsteinzeit.Hubbard, R. N. L. B. (1995). Fallow deer in prehistoric Greece andthe analogy between faunal spectra and pollen analyses. Antiquity69, 527–38.Kyparissi-Apostolika, N. (1999). The Palaeolithic deposits ofTheopetra Cave in Thessaly (Greece). In (G. N. Bailey, E. Adam,E. Panagopoulou, C. Perle`s & K. Zachos, Eds) The Palaeolithic ofGreece and Adjacent Areas. London: The British School at Athens,pp. 232–239.Koumouzelis, M., Kozlowski, J. K., Nowak, M., Sobczyk, K.,Kaczanowska, M., Pawlikowski, M. & Pazdur, A. (1996). Prehistoricsettlement in the Klisoura Gorge, Argolid, Greece(excavation 1993, 1994). Pre´histoire Europe´enne 8, 143–173.Kowalski, K. (1982). Animal remains. General remarks. In (J. K.Kozlowski, Ed.) Excavation in Bacho Kiro Cave (Bulgaria). FinalReport. Warszawa: Pansowowe Wydawnictowo Naukowe,pp. 66–73.Kozlowski, J. K. (Ed.) (1982). Excavation in the Bacho Kiro Cave(Bulgaria). Final Report. Warszawa: Pansowowe WydawnictowoNaukowe.Kozlowski, J. K. (1992). The Balkans in the Middle and UpperPalaeolithic: the gate to Europe or a cul-de-sac? Proceedings of thePrehistoric Society 58, 1–20.Kozlowski, J. K. (1999). The Evolution of the Balkan Aurignacian.In (S. Davies & R. Charles, Eds) Dorothy Garrod and the Progressof the Palaeolithic. Oxford: Oxbow Books, pp. 97–117.Lambert, A. (1957). A specific checklist of the birds of Greece. Ibis99, 43–68.Lyman, R. L. (1994). Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.Malez, M. (1978). Papers delivered at the conference ‘‘Krapina earlyman and hominid evolution’’ in Krapina 17 September 1976. Zagreb:Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti.

Malez, M. (1986). Die quarta¨ren Vertebraten-Faunen in der SFRJugoslawien. Quarta¨rpaleontologie 6, 101–117.Melentis, J. (1965). Studien u¨ber fossile vertebraten Griechenlands.Annals Geologiques de Pays Helleniques 16, 363–472.Melentis, J. (1966). Studien u¨ber fossile Vertebraten Griechenlands;16 Die pleistoza¨ne Sa¨ugetierfauna das Bekens von Haliakmon(Griech.). Annals Geologiques de Pays Helleniques 17, 247–266.Mourer-Chauvire´, C. (1981). Les oiseaux de la grotte de Kitsos(Attique, Gre`ce). In (N. Lambert, Ed.) La grotte pre´historique deKitsos (Attique). Paris: Editions A.D.P.F., et Ecole Franc¸aised’Athe`nes, t. II, pp. 595–606.Palma de Cesnola, A. (1989). L’Uluzzian—facies italien du Leptolithiquearchaı¨que. L’Anthropologie 93, 783–812.Palma di Cesnola, A. (1993). Il Paleolitico Superiore in Italia.Firenze: Garlatti e Razzai.Papaconstantinou, V. (1988). Micromouste´rien. Les ide´es et lespierres. Asprochaliko (Gre`ce) et le proble`me des industries microlithiquesdu Mouste`rien. The`se de doctorat, Universite´ ParisX-Nanterre.Papaconstantinou, V. & Vassilopoulou, D. (1997). The MiddlePaleolithic industries of Epirus. In (G. N. Bailey, Ed.)Klithi—Palaeolithic settlement and Quaternary landscapes inNorthwest Greece, vol. II. Cambridge: McDonald Institute ofArchaeology, pp. 459–480.Payne, S. (1975). Faunal change at Franchthi Cave from 20000 B.C. to3000 B.C. Amsterdam: North–Holland Publications.Pazdur, A. (1988). The relation between carbon isotope compositionand apparent age of fresh-water tufaceous sediments. Radiocarbon30, 7–18.Pazdur, A., Pazdur, M. F., Goslar, T., Wicik, B. & Arnold, M.(1994). Radiocarbon chronology of Late Glacial and Holocenesedimentation and water-level changes in the area of the GosciazLake basin. Radiocarbon 36, 187–202.538 M. Koumouzelis et al.Pazdur, M. F., Bluszcz, A., Pazdur, A. & Morawiecka, I. (1995).Radiocarbon and Thermoluminescence studies of the Karst PipeSystems in SW England and S Wales. Radiocarbon 37, 11–117.Perle`s, C. (1983). Industries a` lamelles a` bord abattu du Pale´olithiquesupe´rieur en Gre`ce. Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche 38, 401–417.Perle`s, C. (1987). Les Industries Lithiques Taille´es de Franchthi(Argolide, Gre`ce). Tome I: Presentation Ge´ne´ral et IndustriesPale´olithiques. Excavations at Franchthi Cave, Greece, fasc. 3.Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Perle`s, C. (1995). La transition Ple´istocene/Holoce`ne et le proble`medu Me´solithique en Gre`ce. In (V. Villaverde Bonilla, Ed.) Losltimos Cazadores – Transformaciones Culturales y Econo´micasDurante el Tardiglaciar y el Inicio del Holoceno en el AumbitoMediterra´neo. Alicante: Instituto de Cultura ‘‘Juan Gil-Albert’’,pp. 179–209.Reisch, L. (1976). Beobachtungen an Vogelknochen aus dem Spa¨tpleistozo¨n der Ho¨ hle von Kephalari (Argolis, Griechenlands).Archa¨ologisches Korrespondenzblatt 6, 261–265.Ronchitelli, A. (1982). Segnalazione di una industria uluzziana aTarnola (Avelino). Rasegna di Archeologia 3, 33–39.Runnels, C. (1995). The Stone Age of Greece from Paleolithic to theadvent of the Neolithic. Journal of American Archaeology 99,699–728.Runnels, C. (1995). The Palaeolithic and Mesolithic remains. In(B. Wells & C. Runnels, Eds) The Berbari-Limenes ArchaeologicalSurvey 1988–1990. Stockholm: Svenska Institutet Athen, pp. 23–35.Runnels, C. & Van Andel, T. H. (1988). Trade and origins of agriculturein the Eastern Mediterranean. Journal of MediterraneanArchaeology 1, 83–109.Runnels, C. & Van Andel, T. H. (1993). The Lower and the MiddlePaleolithic of Thessaly, Greece. Journal of Field Archaeology 20,299–317.Salomons, W. & Mook, W. G. (1986). Isotope Geochemistry ofcarbonates in the weathering zone. In (P. Frith & J. C. Fontes,Eds) Handbook of Environmental Isotope Geochemistry, Volume 2,The Terrestrial Environment, B. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 239–269.Sirakov, N. (1983). Reconstruction of the Middle Palaeolithic flintassemblages from the Cave of Samuilitsa (Northern Bulgaria) and

their taxonomic position seen against the Palaeolithic of Europe.Folia Quaternaria 55, 1–158.Symeonidis, N., Bachmayer, F. & Zapfe, H. (1980). Ergebnisseweiterer Grabungen in der Ho¨ hle von Vraona (Attika, Griechenlands).Annals Geologiques de Pays Helleniques 30, 291–299.Tsoukala, E. S. (1991). Contribution to the study of the Pleistocenefauna of large mammals (Carnivora, Perissodactyla, Artiodactyla)from Petralona Cave (Chalkidiki, N. Greece). Preliminaryreport. Comptes rendus de l’Academie des sciences. Serie II 312,331–336.Tsoukala, E. S. (1992). The Pleistocene large mammals from theArios Georgios cave, Kilkis (Macedonia, N. Greece). Geobios 25,415–433.Taute, W. (1968). Die Stielspitzengruppen im Nordlichen Mitteleuropa:Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Spaten Altsteinzeit. Ko¨ ln:Fundamenta.Van Andel, T. H. & Runnels, C. (1995). The earliest farmers inEurope. Antiquity 69, 481–500.Van Andel, T. H. & Shackleton, J. (1982). Late Palaeolithic andMesolithic Coastlines of Greece and the Aegean. Journal of FieldArchaeology 9, 445–454.Van Andel, T. H. & Tzedakis, P. C. (1996). Paleolithic landscapes ofEurope and environs, 150,000–25,000 years ago—an overview.Quaternary Science Reviews 15, 481–500.Vandiver, P., Soffer, O., Klı´ma, B. & Svoboda, J. (1990). Venusesand wolverines: The origins of ceramic technology c. 26,000 B.P.In (W. D. Kingery, Ed.) The Changing Roles of Ceramics inSociety. Westerville, OH: American Ceramic Society, pp. 13–81.Weesie, P. D. M. (1988). The quaternary avifauna of Crete, Greece.Palaeovertebrata 18, 1–94.Zhou, W., Head, M. J., Wang, F., Donahue, D. J. & Jull, A. J. T.(1999). The reliability of AMS radiocarbon dating of shells fromChina. Radiocarbon 41, 17–24