This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attachedcopy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial researchand education use, including for instruction at the authors institution

and sharing with colleagues.

Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling orlicensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party

websites are prohibited.

In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of thearticle (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website orinstitutional repository. Authors requiring further information

regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies areencouraged to visit:

http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

Author's personal copy

Chronostratigraphic context of the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition: Recentdata from Belgium

Stéphane Pirson a,b,*, Damien Flas c, Grégory Abrams d, Dominique Bonjean d, Mona Court-Picon b,e,Kévin Di Modica d,f,g, Christelle Draily h, Freddy Damblon b, Paul Haesaerts b, Rebecca Miller f,Hélène Rougier i, j, Michel Toussaint a, Patrick Semal b

a Service public de Wallonie, DGO4, Direction de l’Archéologie, rue des Brigades d’Irlande 1, B-5100 Jambes, BelgiumbDepartment of Palaeontology, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, rue Vautier 29, B-1000 Brussels, BelgiumcChargé de recherches FNRS, University of Liège, Quai Roosevelt 1B, B-4000 Liège, BelgiumdCentre de recherches de la grotte Scladina, asbl Archéologie Andennaise, rue Fond des Vaux 339d, B-5300 Sclayn, BelgiumeDepartment of Geology and Soil Sciences, Ghent University, Krijgslaan 281/S8 (WE13), B-9000 Ghent, BelgiumfUniversity of Liège, Service de Préhistoire, 7, place du XX août, bât. A1, 4000 Liège, BelgiumgDépartement de Préhistoire, Museum national d’Histoire naturelle, rue René Panhard 1, F-75013 Paris, Franceh Service de l’Archéologie en province de Luxembourg, Service public de Wallonie, 22 rue des Martyrs, B-6700 Arlon, BelgiumiDepartment of Anthropology, California State University Northridge, 18111 Nordhoff St., Northridge, CA 91330-8244, USAjUMR 5199 PACEA, Anthropologie des Populations Passées et Présentes, Université Bordeaux 1, avenue des Facultés, 33405 Talence, France

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Available online 5 April 2011

a b s t r a c t

The chronological and palaeoenvironmental context for the industries identified in Europe during theMiddle to Upper Palaeolithic transition (MUPT) is not accurately known. This situation is mainly due toinsufficient knowledge of the context of the archaeological data, much of which comes from old exca-vations. Any major progress in the understanding of the MUPT can only be achieved with the study oflong sedimentary sequences providing a semi-continuous record and situating archaeological remains ina reliable palaeoenvironmental and chronological framework. Strict attention must also be paid tostratigraphic control and site formation processes.

Interdisciplinary studies undertaken over the last ten years in Belgium contribute to research on theMUPT. Belgium plays an important role due to its specific geological context that includes many caves,a well-developed loess cover which acts as a reference sequence for the Upper Pleistocene and thepresence of tephras. This enables detailed reconstruction of climatic change and more accurate chrono-logical control in cave sequences; initial results from new fieldwork on long sequences are presented here(Walou and Scladina Caves as well as the open-air site of Maisières-Canal). Combined with results of recentanalyses on old material (mainly from the Spy and Trou de l’Abîme collections), they enable establishmentof a reliable and more accurate chronostratigraphic framework for the archaeological assemblages andprovide new data on the humans responsible for them. Thus, around 45,000 BP, a Mousterian industry wasmade by Neandertals in Trou de l’Abîme. Around 40,000e38,000 BP, Belgium was still occupied byNeandertals associated with a typical Middle Palaeolithic as shown in Walou. The Spy Neandertals haverecently been directly dated by 14C to 36,000 BP, but the techniques of the early excavations prevent clearidentification of the associated industry; still, the 14C results are more coherent with the Lincombian-Ranisian-Jerzmanowician (LRJ) chronology than the Mousterian, both of which are identified at Spy. Theearliest convincing age for the Belgian Aurignacian is about 32,000e33,000 BP (Maisières-Canal and Spy).

� 2011 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

* Corresponding author. Service public de Wallonie, DGO4, Direction de l’Archéologie, rue des Brigades d’Irlande 1, B-5100 Jambes, Belgium.E-mail addresses: stephane.pirson@spw.wallonie.be, stef.pirson@skynet.be (S. Pirson), dflas@ulg.ac.be (D. Flas), gregoryabrams@yahoo.fr (G. Abrams), Scladina@swing.be

(D. Bonjean), Mona.CourtPicon@Ugent.be (M. Court-Picon), kevin_dimodica@yahoo.fr (K. Di Modica), christelle.draily@spw.wallonie.be (C. Draily), Freddy.Damblon@naturalsciences.be (F. Damblon), Paul.Haesaerts@naturalsciences.be (P. Haesaerts), rmiller@ulg.ac.be (R. Miller), helene.rougier@csun.edu (H. Rougier), m.toussaint@spw.wallonie.be (M. Toussaint), Patrick.Semal@naturalsciences.be (P. Semal).

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/quaint

1040-6182/$ e see front matter � 2011 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2011.03.035

Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e94

Author's personal copy

1. Introduction

The Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition (MUPT), from50,000 to 30,000 BP1, is one of the major research issues in Euro-pean prehistory (e.g., Van Andel and Davies, 2003; Conard, 2006). Itis closely linked with the arrival of anatomically modern humans aswell as the disappearance of Neandertals. At the same time, majorcultural changes connected to the Middle to Upper Palaeolithictransition have been documented. During this 50,000e30,000 BPperiod, a rather large number of techno-cultures has been identi-fied in Europe on the basis of the archaeological record: theMousterian (Late Middle Palaeolithic), the (Proto-)Aurignacian(Early Upper Palaeolithic) as well as several “transitional” tech-nocomplexes including the Châtelperronian in France, the Uluzzianin Italy, the Lincombian-Ranisian-Jerzmanowician (LRJ) in North-west Europe, the Bohunician and Szeletian in Central Europe, andthe Strelestskayan in Eastern Europe.

However, the chronological and cultural relationships betweenthe many industries identified in Europe for this period are notaccurately known; the climatic impact on cultural and biologicalchange is also poorly documented. This situation is mainly due toinsufficient knowledge of the precise context of the archaeologicaldata, which has come primarily from excavations in the 19thcentury and the first part of the 20th century. More recent exca-vations also lack a certain degree of precision due to the rarity ofdetailed stratigraphic surveys and poor understanding of thenature and importance of taphonomic processes, due to thecomplexity of sedimentary dynamics and diagenesis, especially incave entrance sequences (Ferrier, 2002; Texier et al., 2004;Goldberg and Sherwood, 2006; Pirson, 2007). Moreover, thechronological framework is difficult to verify with precision,especially since the sedimentary sequences are often compactedand discontinuous. Most of the time, chronology is based entirelyon radiocarbon dates. This lack of accuracy in the stratigraphic,taphonomic, climatic and chronological contexts of the archaeo-logical data linked with the MUPT has generated much controversy(e.g., Gravina et al., 2005 vs Zilhão et al., 2006).

In Belgium, many Palaeolithic sites are known, including severalAurignacian and Mousterian sites as well as three caves wheresome lithic artefacts have been described in recent decades as“transitional”. However, as elsewhere in Europe,most of the datasetcomes from old excavations, leading to a lack of control of thecontextual data. Over the last ten years, new results have beenobtained in Belgium for the 50,000e30,000 BP period through newfieldwork on long sequences allowing the study of archaeologicalmaterial in a reliable palaeoenvironmental and chronostratigraphicframework. At the same time, interesting results have beenobtained from the reexamination of old collections. This paper aimsat integrating for the first time all of the data from these newstudies, including results from palaeoanthropology, archaeologyand chronology, in order to present a summary of the currentstate of research on the MUPT in Belgium, focusing on thechronostratigraphy.

2. Regional setting

2.1. Geological background

Despite its small size, Belgium has a rich geology, encompassingvarious lithologies from the Early Palaeozoic to the Holocene. Pre-Quaternary rocks outcropping in Belgium can be divided broadlyinto two large areas (Robaszynski and Dupuis, 1983; Pirson et al.,

2008a). The northern part of the country mainly contains Ceno-zoic deposits consisting of predominantly marine and unconsoli-dated sediments, while consolidated Palaeozoic rocks dominateover large areas in southern Belgium. These Palaeozoic rocksunderwent strong deformations at the end of the Carboniferous.Palaeozoic limestones are well-developed, leading to the formationof many caves which were occupied during prehistory (Fig. 1).

Quaternary sediments are mainly of continental origin inBelgium (e.g., Paepe and Vanhoorne, 1976; Haesaerts, 1984;Gullentops et al., 2001; Pirson et al., 2009a). Pleistocene alluvialdeposits are locally well-preserved; the best-studied alluvialterraces are those of the Meuse River and the Schelde Basin,although their chronology remains rather inaccurate. Duringseveral particularly cold and dry climatic phases, aeolian depositscovered the region; in Middle Belgium, a thick silt cover settleddown (loess), sometimes reaching 15 m in thickness. The syntheticloess sequence is well-known and is, at present, the most completein Belgium for the Upper Pleistocene climatic changes which arerecorded by a series of sedimentological and pedological markers(Haesaerts, 2004; Pirson et al., 2009a). Pleistocene cave depositsare also well-represented, recording periods of time that areusually not preserved in the region because of the erosive dynamicdominating in a continental environment (Pirson, 2007). Anotherfeature of the Quaternary geology of Belgium is the presence ofvolcanic minerals in the sedimentary sequences, providing valuableisochronous markers. In the Upper Pleistocene of Belgium, fourtephras are known (Juvigné, 1999). They are linked to the proximityof the Eifel volcanic fields (Germany).

2.2. Archaeological background: state of the art before 2000

Belgium played a major role during the 19th century in thedevelopment of the disciplines of prehistory and palae-oanthropology (Otte, 1979; Cahen and Haesaerts, 1984; Cauweet al., 2001; Toussaint and Pirson, 2007). The numerous caves ofSouthern Belgium have yielded many rich Middle and UpperPalaeolithic assemblages.

Prior to the 1970s, no transitional industry had been recognisedin Belgium, leaf-points on blades (¼Jerzmanowice points) beingconsidered indicative of a “Protosolutrean” (Eloy, 1956; Smith,1966) or as part of the Aurignacian (Otte, 1977, 1979). Initially,only the assemblage from Trou de l’Abîme at Couvin was consid-ered “transitional” (Otte, 1979). It was after this that the Jerzma-nowice points at Spy and Goyet were recognized as belonging toa technocomplex distinct from the Aurignacian (Otte, 1978, 1981;Fig. 2). Their similarities with assemblages from Great Britain(Campbell, 1980; Jacobi, 1980, 1990), Germany and Poland wereemphasized (Otte, 1978, 1981) and they were included within theLincombian-Ranisian-Jerzmanowician (Koz1owski, 1983; Desbrosseand Koz1owski,1988). Recognition of the LRJ is, however, not simplegiven the problems inherent in most of the sites concerned, and inparticular at Spy and Goyet. These were both 19th century exca-vations that yielded mixed lithic assemblages and lacked preciseand reliable stratigraphic information. The same problem existedfor the Trou de l’Abîme at Couvin until modern excavations wereundertaken in themid-1980s. However, at the time, the inadequacybetween the radiocarbon dates obtained and the chronostrati-graphic framework deduced from the study of the fauna leavesinterpretation of Couvin assemblage unresolved, still considered tobe either transitional (Ulrix-Closset et al., 1988) or more simply asa Mousterianwith leaf-points with “evolved” characteristics (Ulrix-Closset, 1990).

Of course, the other cultural phases encompassing this “transi-tion” period are relevant in discussions about the MUPT. On onehand, many Mousterian occupations have been discovered in1 All the 14C dates mentionned in this paper are uncalibrated 14C ages.

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e94 79

Author's personal copy

Belgium, generally positioned in the first half of the Middle Plen-iglacial (Ulrix-Closset, 1975, 1990) and on the other hand, Aurigna-cian occupations are also common in the Meuse Basin (Otte, 1979;Dewez et al., 1993; Straus and Otte, 1996; Djindjian et al., 1999).But again for these periods, most of the data derives from oldexcavations, without accurate contextual data. The chronology isbased almost uniquely on 14C dates without reliable chronost-ratigraphic context andwith little palaeoenvironmental data. Beforethe recent studies, the youngest convincing dates for the regionalLate Middle Palaeolithic were from Trou du Diable (46,000 BP;Toussaint, 1988), Scladina layer 1A (>36,000e50,000 BP; Otte et al.,1998a), Walou Cave (>42,000 BP; Dewez et al., 1993) and TrouAl’Wesse (41,100 � 2300 BP; Otte et al., 1998b). For the Auri-gnacian, aside from the debate concerning the early age andnature of the assemblage from the 1991 to 1992 excavations ofTrou Magrite stratum 3 (Otte and Straus, 1995; Straus, 1999;Zilhão and d’Errico, 2003), the oldest convincing date known atthe end of the 20th century was from Walou Cave (c. 30,000 BP;Dewez et al., 1993).

2.3. Palaeoanthropological background

At least eight sites in Belgium have yielded Upper Pleistocenehuman remains, all attributed to Neandertals (see Toussaint andPirson, 2006). Some of these finds are too old to be included inthe MUPT question, i.e., the Scladina and La Naulette fossils. Noaccurate chronological information is as yet available for the Engis 2juvenile calvaria, the Fonds-de-Forêt femur and the Neandertalremains from Goyet discovered in the 19th century but onlyrecently identified (Semal et al., 2005). The fossils from the threeremaining sites have been recently reanalysed, and will be pre-sented in this paper as they can now be positioned within the50,000e30,000 BP time span: a single tooth from Trou de l’Abîme,found in 1984 in association with the archaeological lithic materialfrequently interpreted as transitional; another single toothfrom Walou Cave, identified in 1999 from a layer containing

a Mousterian assemblage; and the Spy remains, classically attrib-uted to the Mousterian.

3. Material and methods

During the period 2000e2010, much progress has been made inBelgium in several research fields: archaeology, palae-oanthropology and contextual analyses. Such progress, made in theframework of doctoral research, research projects and new inter-disciplinary excavations, can be split into two groups. The first dealswith the reexamination of collections gathered prior to 2000,during either 19th or 20th centuries. The second group concernsnew fieldwork and associated laboratory analyses.

3.1. Re-examination of collections

Two research projects focusing on old collections have beencarried out during the 2000e2010 period. They aim at examiningmaterial from two major Belgian Palaeolithic sites where a transi-tional industry has been documented: Spy and Goyet. The multi-disciplinary study of the Spy collections took place from 2003 to2009. After a reappraisal of the 1886 Neandertal remains conservedat the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences (RBINS),a complete re-analysis of the institutional and private collectionscoming from excavations and amateur explorations was under-taken (Rougier et al., 2004). Bones and teeth were selected on thebasis of anthropological, archaeological or palaeontological studies.These unvarnished samples were submitted for direct AMS radio-carbon dating (Semal et al., 2009). More recently, in October 2008,the Goyet research project was initiated, using the same approachas that used and validated for the Spy collections. This projectfocuses on the collections from the “troisième caverne” of Goyetexcavated in the 19th century (Rougier et al., 2009).

In parallel to these research projects, a doctoral dissertation inarchaeology focused on the reexamination of the Lincombian-Ranisian-Jerzmanowician (LRJ) complex (Flas, 2006). This study

Fig. 1. Location map of the sites mentionned in the text. 1. Spy Cave; 2. Goyet Caves; 3. Trou de l’Abîme; 4. Walou Cave; 5. Scladina Cave; 6. Maisières-Canal.

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e9480

Author's personal copy

confirmed the existence, during the transition period betweenMiddle and Upper Palaeolithic, of a technocomplex called theLincombian-Ranisian-Jerzmanowician, characterized by the pres-ence of leaf-pointsmade on blades, found across the North-western

European Plain from Wales to Poland. The three archaeologicalcollections from Belgiumwhere “transitional” industries have beenreported were taken into account. LRJ assemblages are present inonly two Belgian caves: Spy and Goyet, where these artefacts were

Fig. 2. Lincombian-Ranisian-Jerzmanowician: “Jerzmanowice points” fromSpy Cave (after Flas, 2008; no 1 drawnbyD. Flas; no 2 byA.-M.Wittek; no 3 and 4 redrawn after Otte,1979).

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e94 81

Author's personal copy

mixed with Mousterian and Aurignacian assemblages during earlyexcavations. But the question of the LRJ origin and development isalso related to another Belgian site: Trou de l’Abîme in Couvin,yielding an assemblage that has been sometimes presented as“transitional”. Moreover, in order to compare the blade productiontechnology of the LRJ with the Aurignacian, this study was also

based on some Aurignacian assemblages, including that recentlydiscovered at Maisières-Canal (x3.2).

Finally, the human tooth found in 1984 at Trou de l’Abîme wasrecently reexamined, as well as the contextual data from late 19thcentury, early 20th century and 1980s excavations (Pirson et al.,2009b; Toussaint et al., 2010).

Table 1Radiocarbon ages from the sites mentioned in the text.

Sites Date Lab.number

Material dated Reference Layer Archaeology

Spy 32,830 þ200/�190 BP

GrA-32619 Flat and triangular spearpointfragment, likely a split-basepoint (bone)

Semal et al., 2009 “second niveauossifère”

Aurignacian

36,250 � 500 BP OxA-10560 Neandertal vertebra (Spy 737a) Toussaint and Pirson, 2006 uncertain uncertain36,350 þ310/�280 BP

GrA-32626 Neandertal left I1 (Spy 92b) Semal et al., 2009 uncertain uncertain

35,810 þ260/�240 BP

GrA-32623 Neandertal right M3 withmaxillary bone (Spy 94a)

Semal et al., 2009 uncertain uncertain

Trou deI’Abîme

46,820 � 3290 BP Lv 1559 Set of bone fragments Cattelain et al., 1986 II Mousterian44,500 þ1100/�800 BP

GrA-40444 Horse (Equus sp.), tooth Toussaint et al., 2010 II Mousterian

WalouCave

9450 � 270 BP Lv-1583 Fragments of undet. smallmammals

Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) A-6 none

9990 � 160 BP Lv-1556 Undet. long bone Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) B-1 Federmesser13,030 � 140 BP Lv-1582 Horse (Equus sp.), bone Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) B-4 Magdalenian13,120 � 190 BP Lv-1593 Set of bone fragments Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) B-4 Magdalenian21,230 � 650 BP Lv-1581 Bear (Ursus sp.), bone Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) B-5 none22,800 � 400 BP Lv-1651 Red dear (Cervus elaphus),

antlerGilot in Dewez et al. (1993) B-5 Gravettian

24,500 � 580 BP Lv-1837 Set of bone fragments Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) B-5? Gravettian25,860 � 450 BP Lv-1867 Set of bone fragments Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) B-5? Gravettian30,460 � 700 BP Lv-1557 Horse (Equus sp.), scapula Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) C0-C5A none29,800 � 760 BP Lv-1587 Undet. charcoal fragments Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) CI-1 Aurignacian29,470 � 640 BP Lv-1592 Set of bone fragments Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) CI-1 Aurignacian28,010 � 340 BP GrN-22769 Humates (alcali extract) Draily, 1998 CI-1 Aurignacian27,760 � 780/710 BP GrN-22904 Humates (fraction >300 mm) Draily, 1998 CI-1 Aurignacian33,830 � 1790 BP Lv-1641 Undet. ribs Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) CI-2 à CI-5 none35,380 � 1870 BP Lv-1642 Set of bone fragments Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) CI-6 (Mousterian)>42,000 BP Lv-1838 Set of bone fragments Gilot in Dewez et al. (1993) CI-8 Mousterian

ScladinaCave

43,150 þ950/�700 BP GrA-32581 Hyena (Crocuta spelaea),canine

Pirson, 2007; Pirson et al.,2008b

1B-GRH none

40,210 þ400/�350 BP GrA-32635 Bear (Ursus spelaeus), molar Pirson, 2007; Pirson et al.,2008b

1A-GK none

37,300 þ370/�320 BP GrA-32633 Rhinoceros, molar Pirson, 2007; Pirson et al.,2008b

T-GV (Mousterian)

Maisières-Canal

27,965 � 260 BP GrN-5523 Humates Haesaerts and de Heinzelin,1979

H Gravettian

30,780 � 400 BP GrN-5690 Humates Haesaerts and de Heinzelin,1979

D none

28,120 þ1020/�900 BP GrA-9273 Reindeer (Rangifer tarandus),bone

Miller et al., 2004 H Gravettian

28,240 � 300 BP GrN-23292 Mammoth (Mammuthusprimigenius), bone

Miller et al., 2004 H Gravettian

28,290 � 150 BP OxA-17946 Mammoth (Mammuthusprimigenius), tusk

Jacobi et al., 2010 H Gravettian

28,780 � 170 BP OxA-17947 Mammoth (Mammuthusprimigenius), tusk

Jacobi et al., 2010 H Gravettian

29,060 � 170 BP OxA-17962 Mammoth (Mammuthusprimigenius), ivoryartefact

Jacobi et al., 2010 H Gravettian

27,950 � 170 BP OxA-18007 Reindeer (Rangifer tarandus),cut radius-ulna

Jacobi et al., 2010 H Gravettian

28,150 � 160 BP OxA-18009 Mammoth (Mammuthusprimigenius), gnawed carpal

Jacobi et al., 2010 H Gravettian

28,370 � 170 BP OxA-18008 Mammoth (Mammuthusprimigenius), cut rib

Jacobi et al., 2010 secondary position Gravettian

28,650 � 200 BP OxA-18010 Reindeer (Rangifer tarandus),cut radius

Jacobi et al., 2010 secondary position Gravettian

28,540 � 180 BP OxA-18011 cf. Reindeer (Rangifer tarandus),cut femur

Jacobi et al., 2010 secondary position Gravettian

27,780 � 160 BP OxA-18012 Arctic hare (Lepus timidus),scraped tibia

Jacobi et al., 2010 secondary position Gravettian

28,240 � 150 BP OxA-18013 Bear (Ursus cf. arctos),cut tibia

Jacobi et al., 2010 secondary position Gravettian

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e9482

Author's personal copy

3.2. New fieldwork

Three archaeological sites with long sedimentary sequencesincluding the 50,000e30,000 BP period have undergone newinterdisciplinary fieldwork over the last ten years in Belgium,including detailed stratigraphic documentation. The first two sitesare in karstic context. New excavations took place in Walou Cavefrom 1996 to 2004 while Scladina Cave has been almost continu-ously excavated since 1978; their stratigraphy and context havebeen carefully studied during the 2000s, leading to major revision(Pirson et al., 2006, 2008b). The third site, Maisières-Canal, is anopen-air site in loessic context, with a Gravettian occupationexcavated in 1966e1967; new fieldwork from 2000 to 2002 led tothe discovery of the first open-air Aurignacian site and the earliestAurignacian material found in reliable stratigraphic context inBelgium (Miller et al., 2004).

New fieldwork also involved a doctoral dissertation in geologydealing with stratigraphy, sedimentology, palaeoenvironment andchronostratigraphy in cave entrance sequences from Belgium(Pirson, 2007). The accessible sites yielding very long sedimentarysequences were analysed: Walou and Scladina Caves. The objectivewas to better understand the sedimentary dynamics of thesedeposits and to test their potential as recorders of Quaternaryclimatic variation. Strong attention has been paid to stratigraphythrough the recording of numerous sections, taking into accountthe important lithological and geometric lateral variation andleading to the construction of a stratigraphic sequence as completeas possible. Palaeoenvironmental reconstructions focused onpedosedimentological markers, with external control by all theother available disciplines in order to check the reliability of thesignal recorded in the sediments. As far as chronostratigraphy isconcerned, 14C dates have not been the only element of chrono-logical control, contrary to what is generally done in archaeologicalsites: their signification has been reinforced by other independentdisciplines that give a reliable chronological framework to thearchaeological and palaeoanthropological data.

Other sites were also excavated in the 2000e2010 period, butlack any reliable lithostratigraphic, chronostratigraphic and palae-oenvironmental framework (e.g., Tiène desMaulins) or have not yetreached the relevant part of the stratigraphic sequence dealingwith the 50,000e30,000 BP period (e.g., Trou Al’Wesse and Trou del’Abîme).

4. Recent data from Belgium (2000e2010)

All of the new data from Belgium dealing with the50,000e30,000 BP period are summarized in this section. Thesenew results are presented site by site, split into the same twogroups discussed above (x3): reexamination of old collections, i.e.,gathered from fieldwork prior to 2000, and results from newfieldwork during the last ten years.

4.1. Re-examination of old collections

4.1.1. SpySpy Cave is one of the richest prehistoric sites in Belgium. It is

also probably the most famous since the discovery of Neandertalremains in 1886, which led to the acceptance of a human taxonanatomically different from modern humans (e.g., Toussaint andPirson, 2006). The site was first explored by several amateurarchaeologists (see list in Rougier et al., 2004). In 1885, geologist M.Lohest and archaeologist M. De Puydt began an excavationcampaign that led in 1886 to the discovery of Neandertal remainsassociated with extinct animal remains and lithic material instratigraphic context (De Puydt and Lohest, 1887; Fraipont and

Lohest, 1887). Additional excavation campaigns were conductedby different Belgian institutions between 1903 and 1981 (see Ulrix-Closset, 1975; Otte, 1979; Toussaint and Pirson, 2006). Manyamateur collectors also dug throughout the site. These numerousworks led to the removal of the remaining in situ deposits in thecave, preventing any contextual studies from new fieldwork.

De Puydt and Lohest (1887) identified three “niveaux ossifères”(fauna-bearing levels), apparently synonymous with archaeologicaloccupation. But late 20th century typological studies identified atleast seven Palaeolithic cultural assemblages at Spy (Ulrix-Closset,1975; Otte, 1979; Dewez, 1987) suggesting mixing of differentassemblages during the old excavations. The palaeoenvironmentaldata of the Spy sequence, only available through the macrofauna, istherefore difficult to interpret. Subsequent excavations did notyield any supplementary data on the context of the human fossils.

The Neandertal remains were found at the top of the deepest(third) “niveau ossifère”, and were classically associated witha Quina-type Charentian (Bordes, 1959; Ulrix-Closset, 1975).However, recent studies indicated that a true Quina-type Char-entian (sensu Bourguignon, 1997) is not represented at Spy(Jungels, 2006; Jungels et al., 2006). In addition, a high degree ofimprecision in the field data prevents making a reliable linkbetween the Neandertal remains and any of the technocomplexesidentified so far in the Spy collections. The two Mousterian pointsand other artefacts found next to the skeletal remains are difficultto interpret, due to the hypothesis of a burial context and thepossible intrusive character of the bones in the third “niveau ossi-fère”. Possible association with the overlying second “niveau ossi-fère”, which yielded a late Mousterian industry (Ulrix-Closset,1975), a transitional industry (LRJ; Flas, 2006) as well as a richAurignacian industry (Otte, 1979), cannot be rejected.

In the framework of the “Spy project”, focusing on the reas-sessment of all the Spy collections, abundant human remains(Neandertals and Anatomically Modern Humans) were discoveredamong the unsorted fauna (Rougier et al., 2004; Semal et al., 2009;Crevecoeur et al., 2010). At least 24 new remains have been iden-tified as Neandertals. Some of them definitely refit with the twoadult Neandertals Spy I and Spy II from the original 1886 collection.Besides, six can be attributed to an immature individual, designatedas Spy VI (Crevecoeur et al., 2010). In addition to the palae-oanthropological study, new radiocarbon dates were obtained(Semal et al., 2009; Crevecoeur et al., 2010). Several were directlyobtained on Neandertal teeth and bones recently found among theunsorted fauna, i.e., remains that were not contaminated byvarnish. It has been possible to refit two teeth to each of the adultNeandertals Spy I and II (a left I1, Spy 92b: 36,350 þ310/�280 BP,and a right M3 with maxillary bone, Spy 94a: 35,810 þ260/�240 BP; Table 1). These dates around 36,000 BP are close to thedate obtained on a fragmentary human vertebra (Spy 737a;Toussaint, in press) discovered on the slope below Spy Cave(36,250 � 500 BP; Toussaint and Pirson, 2006). Other dates onNeandertal remains range between 34,000 and 31,000 BP; there aregrounds to suspect contamination of the samples (see Semal et al.,2009). The dates on Spy Neandertals (c. 36,000 BP) are the youngestever directly obtained for Neandertals on several individuals andfrom two independent laboratories. They are closer to the knownchronological range of the LRJ (Flas, 2006; Jacobi, 2007) than to theknown chronological range of late Mousterian from North-westernEurope. Nevertheless, direct association between LRJ artefacts andthe Neandertals cannot be demonstrated at Spy due to the poorexcavation conditions.

From an archaeological point of view, the re-analysis of Spycollections has enabled detailed revision, integrating currentquestions about “transitional industries” and the Aurignacian (Flas,2008, in press; Flas et al., in press). The LRJ complex is well-

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e94 83

Author's personal copy

represented in the “second niveau ossifère”, where it is mixed withboth Mousterian and Aurignacian assemblages. Typologically, 25artefacts could, however, be attributed with certainty to thiscomplex (Jerzmanowice points and tools made on recycled pointfragments; Fig. 2), making this occupation relatively important forthe LRJ, given that this complex is primarily known from smallassemblages and isolated artefacts. The Jerzmanowice points fromSpy demonstrate the same blade production technology (inmajority on cores with two opposing striking platforms) as thatseen in the other LRJ assemblages in Great Britain (Jacobi, 2007)and Poland, a blade technology that differs from that seen duringthe Aurignacian (Flas, 2008).

The Aurignacian assemblage at Spy is particularly rich (Otte,1979). The recent revision of most of the collection (Flas et al., inpress), taking into account the carinated elements as bladeletcores (Le Brun-Ricalens et al., 2005), indicates that several phasesof the Aurignacian are probably represented, in comparison withthe chrono-cultural sequences in the Aquitaine (Chiotti, 2003;Bordes, 2006). A small component similar to the Early Aurigna-cian (carinated endscrapers, Dufour bladelets of medium size,split-base bone points) and several components of the Late Auri-gnacian (nosed endscrapers dominant, but also busked andVachons burins) can thus be isolated. A new date obtained ona flat and triangular spearpoint fragment, likely a split-base point,found in the faunal collection, and therefore not varnished, couldrepresent the Early Aurignacian component (32,830 þ 200/�190 BP; Semal et al., 2009).

4.1.2. Goyet CavesThe Goyet site comprises a vast karstic network including

several caves and a rock shelter. The classical Goyet Caves were firstexcavated from 1868 onwards by the geologist E. Dupont (1872). Hediscovered one of the richest palaeolithic assemblages fromBelgium (e.g., Ulrix-Closset, 1975; Otte, 1979). Several other exca-vations, either by professionals or amateurs, followed up Dupont’swork (see Toussaint et al., 1998a). As in the case of Spy Cave,excavation methods were far from exemplary and the stratigraphyis poorly documented. Late 20th century studies of the lithicmaterial demonstrated the presence of several Palaeolithicassemblages, mainly Mousterian (Ulrix-Closset, 1975; see also DiModica, 2009), Aurignacian (Otte, 1979), Gravettian (Otte, 1979)andMagdalenian (Dewez, 1987), as well as a “transitional” industry(Otte, 1981). Recent AMS dates indicate that the material fromGoyet covers at least the time span from 42,000 to 10,000 BP(Germonpré, 2009). Dupont (1872) and Hamy (1873) mentionedthe discovery of human remains in various layers of the “Troisièmecaverne” of Goyet. Only a few bones are mentioned in the Catalogueof Fossil Hominids (Twiesselmann, 1971) and are attributed to theLate Upper Palaeolithic.

In 2004, among the human remains recovered from Dupont’sexcavations conserved at the RBINS, a mandibular body fragmentand an isolated incisor were identified as Neandertal specimens(Semal et al., 2005; Rougier et al., 2009). Following this discovery,an interdisciplinary research program centered on Goyet’s “Troi-sième caverne” collections started in 2008. Its aim is to reassess thepalaeoanthropological collections from the cave and to sort outthe faunal collections from Dupont’s excavations to check for thepresence of human remains among them.

The “transitional” industry has also been recently reexamined(Flas, 2008). There are only a few artefacts that can be clearly attrib-uted to the LRJ (6 pieces, including 4 Jerzmanowice points and 2endscrapers on bladeswith invasive ventral retouch). The Aurignacianis rich, but likely corresponds to a mix of several occupation phases(presence of split-base bone point, nosed endscrapers, busked burins,Vachons burins; Otte, 1979) and has not yet been radiocarbon dated.

4.1.3. Trou de l’AbîmeThe “Trou de l’Abîme” (Couvin, Belgium) was first excavated in

1887 and in 1902, but the material from these early researchesappears to have been since lost (see Toussaint et al., 2010). In 1905,A. de Loë opened five trenches but only one yielded in situ depositsas well as sediments reworked from the preceding excavations; thelithic material mainly comes from these reworked sediments.Therefore, no reliable contextual data can be obtained from theseearlier excavations. According to Otte (1979), these artefactscorrespond to a transitional phase between the Middle and UpperPalaeolithic technocomplexes, given the presence of tools with flatbifacial retouch (leaf-points and scrapers) and some elements oflaminar blank production.

In 1984e1987, new archaeological research was undertaken bythe “Centre d’études et de Documentation archéologiques” and thedepartment of Prehistory of the University of Liège (Cattelain et al.,1986; Ulrix-Closset et al., 1988). Three test pits were excavated butonly one (trench A) yielded a rather short Pleistocene stratigraphy(Fig. 3). In this trench, in 1984, a crown of a human deciduous lowerright second molar was found at the bottom of layer II, associatedwith abundant lithic artefacts and micro and macrofauna. This wasthe first find of a Pleistocene human remain in Belgium duringa modern multidisciplinary excavation programme. The archaeo-logical material recovered in 1984e1987, attributed to the sameoccupation as the lithic material of 1905, was again interpreted asa transitional facies (Cattelain et al., 1986; Ulrix-Closset et al., 1988;Otte, 1990). In this context, the study of the human tooth was ofparticular interest due to its associationwith a possible transitionalindustry, and thereforewas a key fossil in the question of theMUPT,in the same way as the Saint-Césaire and Arcy-sur-Cure fossils(d’Errico et al., 1998). However, in subsequent years, the taxonomicinterpretation of the fossil remained difficult (Tillier, 1990).

Fig. 3. Trou de l’Abîme (Couvin). Stratigraphic sequence of test pit A, with the locationof the Neandertal deciduous molar (star) in Mousterian layer II. Redrawn after Ulrix-Closset et al., 1988.

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e9484

Author's personal copy

Fig. 4. Walou Cave: the new stratigraphic sequence with the 13 climatic amelioration phases deduced from the pedosedimentary data (see Pirson et al., 2006, 2011; Pirson, 2007;Draily et al., 2011). Most of the data from cycles A and B are from Dewez et al. (1993). Climatic am. phases: climatic amelioration phases. Min.: mineralogical ratio (green

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e94 85

Author's personal copy

The recent reappraisal of the artefacts confirms the Mousteriannature of this assemblage (Flas, 2006, 2008; Pirson et al., 2009b;Toussaint et al., 2010), as already proposed by Ulrix-Closset(1990) who described it as a particular Mousterian with “evolved”features. Considering only the collection coming from the 1980sexcavations, the assemblage contains only Middle Palaeolithic tools(mainly side-scrapers), some of them on bifacial pieces, and showsa technology compatible with the Mousterian (flake production,hard hammer percussion). The 1905 collection has no precisestratigraphic origin and thus it cannot be certain that it is homog-enous or whether it corresponds or not to the assemblage found inthe 1980s. However, taking the 1905 collection into consideration,the industry contains a bifacial leaf-point fragment that is ofinterest to compare with Late Mousterian assemblages, like theBlattspitzengruppe in Germany (Bosinski, 2001), but it still does notcorrespond to a transitional industry like the LRJ, which clearlypossesses a different tool-kit and blank production technology(Flas, 2008).

The Couvin human dm2 has also been described recently(Toussaint et al., 2010). Recent progress made in the morphologicalstudy of Neandertal teeth (e.g., Bailey and Hublin, 2006) allowedthe taxinomic attribution of this tooth. According to occlusalmorphology and enamel thickness, the Couvin dm2 belongs toa Neandertal individual (Toussaint et al., 2010).

In the framework of the study of the tooth, a new interpretationof the stratigraphic data from the 1980s excavation campaigns wasproposed (Pirson et al., 2009b; Toussaint et al., 2010), based onrecent progress in the understanding of cave entrance strati-graphic sequences in Belgium as well as on the comparisonbetween these sequences and those from the Belgian loess belt(Pirson et al., 2006, 2008b; Pirson, 2007). Layer III e above layer IIat the base of which the tooth was found e may correspond to aninterstadial palaeosol of brown soil type. The interstadial nature ofunit III is further suggested by the small mammal content (Cordy inCattelain et al., 1986) and by the presence of Sus scrofa (Pirsonet al., 2009b; Toussaint et al., 2010). Currently, the more recentpalaeosol of this type known in Belgium in the regional loessicreference sequence is “Les Vaux” Soil, documented at Harmignies(Haesaerts and Van Vliet, 1974) and Remicourt (Haesaerts et al.,1997) in the Weichselian middle pleniglacial. As far as its faciesand stratigraphic position are concerned, the ‘‘Les Vaux’’ Soilexhibits close similarities with the Bohunice Soil in Moravia andthe Willendorf Interstadial in Austria (Valoch, 1976; Haesaerts andTeyssandier, 2003). These pedological markers represent a singleinterstadial event dated between c. 42,000 and c. 40,000 BP in theMiddle Danube Basin. In addition, similar pedological horizonshave been recorded at two other cave sequences (Walou andScladina, see x4.2), where multidisciplinary studies confirm the42,000e40,000 BP interval. If the hypothesis that the palaeosol ofunit III at “Trou de l’Abîme” is a brown soil is verified, comparisonwith the Belgian loess sequence and with the regional cave recordswould suggest that this unit is at the youngest equivalent with the“Les Vaux” Soil. Consequently, the archaeological occupation oflayer II and the associated human tooth would be older than42,000e40,000 BP. This is supported by the two 14C dates that arein strict association with the tooth and with the archaeologicalmaterial of layer II: the first was obtained in the 1980s on a setof bone fragments and is therefore subject to caution

(46,820 � 3290 BP; Cattelain et al., 1986), but was recentlyconfirmed by an AMS date on a single horse tooth (44,500 þ 1100/�800 BP; Toussaint et al., 2010).

4.2. New excavations

4.2.1. Walou CaveThis site was discovered in the 1960s and subsequently visited

by speleologists and amateur archaeologists (Draily in Pirson et al.,2011). The cave was then the subject of two multidisciplinaryarchaeological excavations: first from 1985 to 1990 (Dewez et al.,1993; Dewez, 2008) and then from 1996 to 2004 (Draily,2011; Draily et al., 2011; Pirson et al., 2011). During the1985e1990 excavation, four major sedimentary units were identi-fied and a detailed stratigraphic recording of the upper half of thesequence was completed on the main section of the site (Collcutt inDewez et al., 1993). But easy access to the lower half of the sequencewas impossible until the 1996e2004 campaign, when a thoroughexamination of many standing sections could be undertaken(Pirson et al., 2006, 2011; Pirson, 2007). The integration of both setsof stratigraphic data resulted in the definition of a 12 m sequencedivided into ten sedimentary cycles including more than 40 layers(Fig. 4). Several layers yielded archaeological material, mainlyMousterian, Aurignacian and Gravettian artefacts (Fig. 4; Dewezet al., 1993; Draily, 2011). In 1999, a human tooth recovered in1997 was identified fromMousterian layer CI-8 (Draily et al., 1999).

Field geological studies highlighted a number of clear climaticsignals, particularly those recorded by pedological and sedimentaryprocesses (e.g., in situ or reworked palaeosols, cryoturbations, meltwater gullies, loessdeposition; Pirson, 2007). The significanceof thesesignals is reinforced by palynological, anthracological, palae-ozoological andmagnetic susceptibility data (Pirson et al., 2006, 2011;Pirson, 2007; Draily et al., 2011). The chronostratigraphic frameworkis also particularly coherent, as a result of tephrostratigraphy (iden-tification of the Rocourt and Laacher See Tephras, respectively c.75,000 and 11,000 BP) and the excellent correlation with the loesssequences ofMiddle Belgium (Pirson et al., 2006, 2011; Pirson, 2007);this framework is further supportedby radiocarbon, TL andESRdates.The Walou sequence spans from the late Saalian to the Holocene,including the Eemian, early glacial, lower, middle and upper plen-iglacial, as well as the Late Glacial (Fig. 4). It is therefore the mostcomplete and best documentedUpper Pleistocene sequence availableof all the Belgian caves.

The part of the sequence dealing with the 50,000e30,000 BPperiod is rich and focuses on cycles CII and CI. Layer CI-8 is therichest Mousterian layer and the unit in which the human toothwas found. The lithic industry is typical Mousterian, with unifacialdebitage and an important production of backed flakes. The arte-facts comprise various types of scrapers, some backed knives anda few denticulates (Draily, 2011). The human tooth found in layerCI-8 is a first lower left premolar, exhibiting features which areusually seen as characteristic of Neandertal P3 (Bailey and Hublin,2006). The palaeoenvironmental conditions associated with layerCI-8 are stadial as attested by sedimentary dynamics, magneticsusceptibility and palynology (Pirson et al., 2006, 2011; Pirson,2007; Draily et al., 2011). The Mousterian material from layer CI-8has been slightly reworked by solifluction and, at least locally,through runoff processes (Pirson, 2007; Pirson et al., 2011). Given

hornblende þ garnet/zircon þ rutile) from the silt fraction. GHb: green hornblende content (%) from heavy minerals of the silt fraction (see Pirson, 2007). Palynology: synthesis ofthe palynological record (see Damblon and Court-Picon in Draily et al., 2011). Anthraco.: anthracology (see Damblon in Draily et al., 2011). Archaeo./Anthropo.: archaeologicalassemblages identified in the sequence (see Draily, 2011) and position of the Neandertal tooth. Dates: the dates mentioned are uncalibrated 14C dates (see Draily et al., 2011), excepttwo ESR/UeTh dates on animal teeth (Pirouelle in Draily et al., 2011) and four TL dates on burnt limestone for which the mean is given here (Debenham in Draily et al., 2011).Chronostratigraphy: chronostratigraphic interpretation based on all the available disciplines (see Pirson et al., 2006; Pirson, 2007). MIS: proposed correlation with the marineoxygen isotopic stages.

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e9486

Author's personal copy

its facies and the associated secondary carbonate, the underlyingCII-1 palaeosol could be the equivalent of the “Les Vaux” Soilobserved in regional loess sequences from the Weichselian middlepleniglacial and situated around 42,000 and 40,000 BP (see x4.1.3).This correlation is fully compatible with the stratigraphic positionof the CII-1 horizon at Walou (Pirson et al., 2006, 2011; Pirson,2007). The available ESR/UeTh dates obtained from underlyinglayer CII-4 (45 � 7 and 50 � 7 ka BP; Pirouelle in Draily et al., 2011)and the 14C date (Table 1; Fig. 4) obtained from overlying unit CI-6(35,380 � 1870 BP) reinforce this hypothesis. The date obtainedfrom CI-8 (>42,000 BP) does not contradict this scheme as it isa date at the limit of the radiocarbon method that was obtained inthe 1980s on a set of different bones (Draily et al., 2011). Assumingthat the correlation of CII-1 with “Les Vaux” Soil is valid, it providesa terminus post-quem for the Neandertal tooth and the associatedMiddle Palaeolithic material, which would be younger than40,000 BP. According to the terminus ante-quem provided by theradiocarbon dates of layers above CI-8, the tooth can reasonably bepositioned between c. 40,000 and 36,000 BP, and more probablybetween 40,000 and 38,000 BP given its stratigraphic position,immediately above the CII-1 palaeosol. New radiocarbon datesfrom the units bracketing layer CI-8 are in progress in Groningenand Oxford, with and without ultrafiltration. They should help torefine the chronological background. At any rate, the WalouNeandertal tooth already stands as the Upper Pleistocene humanfossil from Belgium with the most reliable context, both fromchronostratigraphic and archaeological points of view.

Humiferous horizon CI-1 yielded an Aurignacian assemblage(Dewez et al., 1993; Draily, 2011). The lithic industry is character-ized by numerous burins including some carinated and buskedones. Besides the lithic assemblage, bone artefacts, includingmassive-base points and perforated teeth, were also found. TheCI-1 horizon points to interstadial conditions, as attested by thehumiferous nature of the unit and the presence of small speleo-thems as well as by palynology, small and large mammals andmagnetic susceptibility (Pirson et al., 2006, 2011; Pirson, 2007). Thetwo reliable 14C dates available so far from humiferous horizon CI-1point to an age of c. 30,000 BP (29,800 � 760 BP and29,470 � 640 BP; Dewez et al., 1993; Draily et al., 2011), suggestinga correlation with humiferous palaeosol MD recognized in Mai-sières-Canal and correlated with the Denekamp I interstadialdefined in The Netherlands (see x4.2.3). One of the dates wasobtained on charcoal fragments described as coming from hearthwaste (Dewez et al., 1993), suggesting a direct relationship with theAurignacian settlement.

Between CI-8 and CI-1, layer CI-6 yielded some Mousterianartefacts but given the sedimentary dynamics, they could havecome from the reworking of layer CI-8. Layers CI-5 to CI-2 con-tained some nondiagnostic artefacts.

4.2.2. Scladina CaveSince 1978, Scladina Cave has been excavated under the scien-

tific authority of the University of Liège. Multidisciplinaryresearches have mainly concerned archaeology, archaeozoology,study of large and small mammals, palynology, stratigraphy andsedimentology (e.g., Otte, 1992; Otte et al., 1998a,b). Two mainMousterian assemblages have been identified, in units 1A and 5(Otte et al., 1998a,b), while small assemblages of lithic artefacts,mainly Mousterian, have been recovered from several layersthroughout the whole sequence (Di Modica and Bonjean, 2004). Upto now, around 18,000 artefacts have been recovered. Neandertalremains have been discovered in the cave, most of them in units4A-CHE and 4A-POC and belonging to a c. 8 year old Neandertalchild (Toussaint et al., 1998b; Pirson, 2007; Smith et al., 2007); ithas been directly dated to 127þ46/�32 ka by gamma spectrometry.

Recently, in the framework of doctoral research, a completerevision of the stratigraphic sequence has been proposed and newgeological, palynological and anthracological analyses wereundertaken (Pirson, 2007; Pirson et al., 2008b). The chronostrati-graphic framework of the Scladina sequence has also been recon-sidered, integrating results from climatostratigraphy, dates andcomparison with the loess reference sequence through pedologicaland lithological markers as well as heavy mineralogy from the siltfraction. The sequence covers a large part of the Upper Pleistocene,mainly from OIS 5 to OIS 3 (Fig. 5). New palaeoenvironmentalresults from the Scladina Cave sequence indicate very goodconcordance between palynology, anthracology and geology andsuggest the existence of at least seven well-documented climaticamelioration phases. In addition, these new results are also in goodagreement with the available data from the literature (Pirson et al.,2008b).

The part of the sequence concerned with the period50,000e30,000 BP is about 4 m thick. It includes Mousterianmaterial coming from what was known as “layer 1A” before therecent stratigraphic revision (Loodts in Otte et al., 1998a,b; Moncelin Otte et al., 1998a,b). This revision combined with ongoingexcavations showed that the artefacts in fact come from severaldistinct layers (Pirson, 2007; Pirson et al., 2008b; Bonjean et al.,2009; Fig. 5). These layers are distributed on top of “unit 1A”(mainly in layer 1A-GL) and in overlying unit T (e.g., layers T-JVand T-GV). Some of these layers are sometimes separated by post-depositional processes (frost episode and secondary carbonatecementation). The archaeological material, showing typical MiddlePalaeolithic behaviour, is mainly composed by unstandardisedscrapers and retouched flakes. The artefacts are in secondaryposition: they have been redeposited by wash and debris flowprocesses. The lithic material probably belongs to a singleassemblage according to interstratigraphic refits, and is associatedwith burned bones (Bonjean et al., 2009). Some artefacts fromlayer T-GV have different raw material characteristics andtaphonomy. They could correspond to a distinct lithic assemblagethat would represent the youngest Middle Palaeolithic occupationof the cave (Bonjean et al., 2009), but this has yet to be betterdocumented.

Stratigraphic correlations between the new excavated sectorand the classical area of the cave entrance suggest that thearchaeological material is situated above what has been describedas a brown soil on the cave terrace, immediately below what iscurrently known as unit 1A (Haesaerts, 1992). The correlation with“Les Vaux” Soil, compatible with the stratigraphic position of thispart of the sequence in the new chronostratigraphic scheme, wasrecently reinforced (Pirson et al., 2008b; Fig. 5 and Table 1) bya set of new 14C dates obtained in underlying layer 1B-GRH(43,150 þ950/�700 BP) and overlying layers 1A-GK (40,210 þ400/�350 BP) and T-GV (37,300 þ400/�300 BP). Despite thesecondary position of the Mousterian material, it is possible toposition the human occupation(s) in the stratigraphic sequence:given the morphology of the cave and the sedimentary dynamics,the absence of artefacts in layer 1A-GK indicates that the Mous-terian assemblages of units 1A and T were made after the depo-sition of 1A-GK. Therefore, the Middle Palaeolithic occupation(s)occurred between the deposition of 1A-GK and the reworking ofthe artefacts in the different layers of units 1A and T. Given theavailable 14C dates, this places the archaeological materialbetween 40,000 and 37,000 BP. Other dates are planned in orderto refine this situation.

4.2.3. Maisières-CanalIn 1966e1967, an important stratigraphic sequence was ana-

lysed at Maisières-Canal, exposed during construction of part of

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e94 87

Author's personal copy

Fig. 5. Scladina Cave. Stratigraphic sequence with a synthesis of the palaeoenvironmental and chronostratigraphical data (after Pirson et al., 2008b). “Dates”: synthesis of all thereliable dates available for Scladina sequence (for details, see Pirson et al., 2008b). “Chronostratigraphy”: attempt in the chronostratigraphic interpretation of the Scladina sequencebased upon all the available disciplines. “OIS”: suggestion of correlation with the marine oxygen isotope stages.

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e9488

Author's personal copy

the Canal du Centre, east of the city of Mons. This sequencecovers the second half of the Weichselian to the Early Holocene,and includes loess, colluvium and alluvial deposits preserved onthe border of an alluvial plain (de Heinzelin, 1973; Haesaerts,1974; Haesaerts and de Heinzelin, 1979). A rich Gravettianassemblage including lithics and bone tools was recovered fromUnit MH, a humiferous horizon present at the excavation siteopened at the bottom of the canal. It corresponds to an inter-stadial palaeosol identified as the “Maisières interstadial”, whichyielded a 14C age of 27,965 BP on humates (Fig. 6; Table 1).Underlying this horizon, another humiferous horizon (Unit MD)was dated to 30,780 BP, again on humates, and correlated withthe Denekamp interstadial defined in The Netherlands (Vogel andvan der Hammen, 1967).

From 2000 to 2002, the University of Liège (ULg) undertook newexcavations on the canal bank at Maisières-Canal, in a zone calledthe “Atelier de Taille de la Berge Nord-Est”where a small Gravettianlithic assemblage was recovered by J. de Heinzelin. These newexcavations led to the discovery of an Aurignacian workshop at thebase of a humiferous horizon (Unit NBD; Miller et al., 2004). The

lithic concentration corresponds to a small-scale occupation, likelyunique and short-term (less than 3000 lithic artefacts), but well-preserved and probably only slightly reworked, as suggested bythe stratigraphic context, the numerous technological refits and thestudy of artefact orientations and dips (Haesaerts, 2004; Miller,2004). New 14C dates were also obtained on bones from Unit MH(28,120 and 28,240 BP: Haesaerts, 2004; Haesaerts and Damblon,2004). The age of c. 28,000 BP for the Maisières interstadial(Greenland interstadial 5, or GI 5; Haesaerts, 2004) and theGravettian occupation was recently further validated thanks to tennew AMS dates using ultrafiltration of collagen (Jacobi et al., 2010).These results validate the age of c. 28,000 BP obtained on humatesfrom Unit MH in the 1970s, and therefore also validate the age of30,780 BP previously obtained on humates for underlying Unit MD.

The stratigraphic position of humiferous horizon NBD in theMaisières sequence, below interstadial Unit MD, indicates that theNBD horizon is older than 30,780 BP. Comparison with the newclimatic and chronological sequence proposed by van der Hammen(1995) for the fluviatile deposits of Eastern Netherlands suggeststhe correlation of Unit MD with the Denekamp I interstadial (GI 7;

Fig. 6. Maisières-Canal. Stratigraphic sequence, with the location of the Gravettian and Aurignacian assemblages. Redrawn after Haesaerts, 2004. Graphic symbols: see Fig. 4.

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e94 89

Author's personal copy

Haesaerts, 2004). Therefore, underlying Unit NBD can be reason-ably correlated with the Huneborg II interstadial (GI 8), estimatedbetween c. 33,300 and 32,000 BP in the sequence from TheNetherlands, keeping in mind that it could also be older. Whateverthe case, this assemblage thus corresponds up to now to one of theoldest reliably dated Aurignacian occupations in Belgium (Flas,2008). It is also, at present, the only regional open-air Aurigna-cian site in stratigraphic context. No 14C dates for this stratigraphicunit were possible since no datable material was found during theULg excavation.

The assemblage, mainly composed of reduction waste, corre-sponds to a reduction workshop located very near a good qualityflint source. Bladelet production also took place and a few “tools”are also present, including burins and Dufour bladelets. Among theburins, six are busked burins, three are dihedral and one is cari-nated. Technological analysis of these “burins” and refitting ofbladelet removals and by-products confirms their nature as bla-delet cores, as has been proposed for several Late Aurignacian sitesand other Upper Palaeolithic industries (e.g., Le Brun-Ricalens et al.,2005; Flas et al., 2006).

5. Conclusions and prospects

The recent reexamination of old collections from Belgian cavesled to interesting results. The study of the archaeological materialin the three sites where “transitional” industries had beendescribed (i.e., Spy, Goyet and Trou de l’Abîme) confirmed theexistence of LRJ artefacts in Spy and Goyet collections, while itshowed that the Trou de l’Abîme material was Mousterian and nottransitional. Due to recent advances in palaeoanthropology, theNeandertal nature of the human tooth found at Trou de l’Abîme in1984 was demonstrated. In addition, the reexamination of the Troude l’Abîme contextual data from the 1980s excavation led to posi-tioning both the Neandertal tooth and the Mousterian materialaround 45,000 BP. Finally, the study of the Spy faunal collections ledto recovery of new unvarnished Neandertal specimens that wereused for direct radiocarbon dating, in addition to the unvarnishedvertebra recently found on the slope of the cave. A set of three datesgrouped around 36,000 BP and coming from two different labora-tories are now available on two Neandertal individuals (Spy I andSpy II), giving the youngest reliable dates directly obtained so far onNeandertals in North-western Europe.

However, because of the lack of accurate contextual data eitherdue to the antiquity of the excavations (Spy and Goyet) or to thesmall area excavated (Trou de l’Abîme), conclusive detailed inter-pretations of these results remain delicate. This is true both forexternal control of the dates and for their link with other disci-plines. The relationship between the 36,000 BP Neandertals andthe archaeological material in Spy is a good example of the limits ofsuch reexamination of old collections.

On the other hand, results from new fieldwork led to a securechronostratigraphic framework, even if it is not as yet entirelyaccurate in the present state of research. In Walou, Middle andUpper Palaeolithic assemblages have been precisely positioned ina long sedimentary sequence with good chronostratigraphiccontrol, covering the entire Upper Pleistocene. Aurignacian mate-rial has been recovered from an interstadial horizon dated toc. 30,000 BP, while the most recent Mousterian layer of thesequence, associated with a human tooth recently described asNeandertal, is situated around 40,000e38,000 BP. In Scladina, themost recent Mousterian assemblages are also well positioned ina long sequence with good chronostratigraphic framework. Corre-lations with the loess reference sequence and new 14C dates led topositioning the archaeological material between 40,000 and37,000 BP. Finally, in Maisières-Canal, an Aurignacianworkshop has

been discovered in a humiferous horizon. Its position belowanother interstadial unit dated to 30,780 BP and the correlationwith regional sequences indicate that the age of the archaeologicalbearing unit can be, at the youngest, positioned between c. 33,000and 32,000 BP.

The combination of the new results obtained from 2000 to 2010,both from new fieldwork and reexamination of old collections, israther positive. This has led to a better control of the chro-nostratigraphic framework of the archaeological assemblagesfound in the 50,000e30,000 BP period and of the relationshipbetween these assemblages and the type of hominid that madethem. By integrating these new results and the data obtained priorto 2000, the following synthesis can be proposed.

Around 45,000 BP, the area was still occupied by Neandertalsproducing a Middle Palaeolithic industry, as observed at Trou del’Abîme. The youngest known Late Middle Palaeolithic is from twosites, Walou and Scladina Caves, where the Mousterian is datedbetween 40,000 and 37,000 BP at Scladina (units 1A and T) andbetween 40,000 and 38,000 BP in layer CI-8 atWalou. The presenceof a Neandertal tooth in layer CI-8 in Walou indicates that thispopulation was still producing the Mousterian in the region at thattime.

Since the reexamination of the Trou de l’Abîme archaeologicalmaterial and its attribution to a Mousterian industry, there are onlytwo sites that have yielded transitional industries: Spy and Goyet.They both contain LRJ assemblages, but since they were excavatedin the 19th century, no chronological or palaeoenvironmental dataare available. Similar LRJ assemblages have been dated between38,000 and 30,000 BP in Polish and British sites, even if one couldquestion the reliability of the youngest dates (Jacobi, 2007; Flas,2008). Given this chronological range for the LRJ and that of theLate Mousterian in North-western Europe (Flas, 2008), the newradiocarbon dates obtained on the Spy Neandertals, around36,000 BP, suggest that this transitional industry, well-attested atthe site, could have been made by Neandertals. Such an associationbetween Neandertals and LRJ has already been proposed on thebasis of cultural roots of LRJ in the local late Middle Palaeolithic(e.g., Otte, 1990). However, because of the many uncertaintiessurrounding their discovery and context, the idea that the Nean-dertal remains from Spy are associated with the LRJ assemblage isunverifiable and will therefore remain a hypothesis.

A very early age (around 40,000e38,000 BP) has been proposedfor two Meuse River Basin Aurignacian assemblages: Trou Magrite(Otte and Straus, 1995) and Tiène des Maulins (Groenen, 2005).However, in both cases, the association between the dated samplesand the assemblages is questionable (Flas, 2006, 2008). The earliestreliable ages available for the Belgian Aurignacian is fromMaisières-Canal using climatostratigraphic correlations (c. 32,000e33,000 BP,possibly older) and from the Spy spearpoint fragment, likely a split-base point (32,830þ 200/�190 BP; GrA-32619). As there is only onesingle date from Spy, deprived of any reliable context, caution isadvisable. At any rate, data from Maisières confirm that at leastaround 32,000 Aurignacian populations were present in the region.The radiocarbon date from Spy is one of the earliest reliablenumerical dates obtained so far for the Aurignacian in North-western Europe. It is coherent with what is known about theappearance of this complex in the region (Flas, 2004, 2008).

Very few other reliable dates are available in Belgium for thelater Aurignacian. The dates fromWalou Cave (c. 30,000 BP; Dewezet al., 1993) are noted. Other dates more recent than 30,000 BP alsoexist, but appear to be less reliable (Flas, 2005). At present, nohuman remains have been found in association with the Aurigna-cian in Belgium.

Any major progress in the questions concerning the MUPT willrequire that the following criteria be met: new excavations, with

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e9490

Author's personal copy

interdisciplinary study of long sedimentary sequences presentinga semi-continuous record and abundant archaeological material,including careful stratigraphic analysis and evaluation of the sedi-mentary dynamics, within a reliable palaeoenvironmental andchronological framework, in order to directly verify all of thepossible parameters. This kind of sequence is rare and has onlybeen documented in loessic environments (e.g., Haesaerts et al.,2005). It is usually lacking for cave records because stratigraphicsequences are discontinuous and compacted (e.g., Campy andChaline, 1993). However, recent work on Walou and Scladinacaves has shown that Belgium stands apart with an exceptionalsituation in Europe thanks to the presence of loess in the geologicalenvironment nearby an area rich in caves (Pirson et al., 2006;Pirson, 2007). The caves guarantee the presence of high qualityarchaeological and palaeoanthropological material whereas thepresence of loess in karstic fill contributes to:

� the thickening of the sedimentary records and leads to a betterrecording of the succession of sedimentary and post-sedimentary events;

� a direct record of the palaeoenvironmental fluctuations in thesediments due to sedimentological and pedological markers, asfor the open-air loess sequences. This is supported by theexcellent convergence between palaeoenvironmental dataobtained from pedosedimentological studies and other inde-pendent disciplines such as palaeobotany (palynology andanthracology), palaeozoology (macrofauna and microfauna)and magnetic susceptibility. The thickening of the sequencesand the specific grain-size (abundance of silt of loessic origin)allow a very reliable palynological record.

� a good chronostratigraphic control thanks to the combination ofthe correlation with the well-known loess reference sequenceof Middle Belgium through lithological, pedological andmineralogical characteristics and the presence of tephras, inaddition to data given by more classical methods such asdifferent dating methods. The importance of a good control ofthe radiocarbon dates, e.g., through climatostratigraphy,tephras and sequence of numerous dates from through theentire stratigraphy and providing a coherent chronologicaltrend is worth mentioning here.

Therefore, future research dealing with the MUPT in Belgiumshould focus on new fieldwork, taking into account all the above-mentioned criteria. This is the objective of a new interdisciplinaryresearch project, which began in January 2009 at the RBINS. It aimsat developing a palaeoenvironmental and chronostratigraphicreference sequence for the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transitionin Belgium through the geological analysis of several archaeologicalcave sites currently being excavated. One of the innovations isbased on the integration of detailed geological analyses intoarchaeological fieldwork, enabling, among others, the developmentof an excavationmethod adapted to the complex stratigraphies thatcharacterize cave deposits, in order to better control lateral changesand sedimentary dynamics. One of the key site is Scladina Cave: therecent opening (end of 2007) of a new sector concerning the50,000e30,000 BP period and rich in Mousterian remains offers anexceptional opportunity to build a detailed sequence for this periodand to accurately position the archaeological material. The mainobjectives are to better understand the stratigraphic record, tobetter document the sedimentary dynamics and to refine thechronostratigraphic position of the Late Mousterian, notablythrough the climatostratigraphic approach and new radiocarbondates. Detailed analyses of lithic and faunal material through refitsand study of taphonomical parameters should lead to betterunderstanding of this reworked industry.

Trou Al’Wesse is another site presenting a potentially inter-esting sequence for the MUPT. Upcoming field seasons on the caveentrance, excavated since 2003, will be concentrating on thePleistocene sequence, which includes strata related to the50,000e30,000 BP period. New excavations combined withdetailed stratigraphic records should help to clarify the globalchronostratigraphic framework and the nature of the associatedlithic and faunal assemblages. It is worth mentioning here that newdates from the Trou Al’Wesse Aurignacian layer are actually inprogress.

Since September 2009, a new excavation program started atTrou de l’Abîme, with an interdisciplinary team from the Universityof Liège, the Service public de Wallonie and the Musée du Malgré-Tout. A third field seasonwill take place in 2011. This project shouldhelp to better understand the stratigraphy of the site, the sedi-mentary dynamics and the palaeoenvironment, as well as to betterdocument the Mousterian archaeological assemblage.

In the laboratory, new dates from Walou Cave are actually inprogress at Groningen and Oxford; they should lead to refinementof the chronostratigraphic background of this exceptional site, andmore specifically of the chronology of the Late Mousterian and theassociated Neandertal tooth, as well as testing the existing twodates available from the Aurignacian layer. As far as old collectionsare concerned, the “Goyet project”, focusing on the reexaminationof the collections containing Mousterian, LRJ and Aurignacianassemblages as well as Neandertal remains, aims at findinguntreated material for radiocarbon dating, in a similar way as forthe Spy project, keeping in mind the limits of this approach whendeprived of any stratigraphic context.

In addition to new studies on caves, a detailed stratigraphicsurvey coupled with mineralogical analyses is planned on the loesssequences of Middle Belgium, in order to refine the referencesequence. Due to the presence of loess in Belgian cave entrancesequences, the correlation of these sequences with Central Euro-pean loess sequences and the Greenland ice reference sequence isalso planned in the framework of the “MUPT project”. The first stephas been the recently published correlation between 1) an inte-grated high-resolution climatic sequence from the Eurasian loessbelt well-dated by radiocarbon between 13,000 and 42,500 BP and2) the Greenland ice climatic signals (Haesaerts et al., 2009). Thiscorrelation allows atmospheric-derived 14C dates derived fromsedimentary sequences yielding reliable palaeoenvironmentalsignal to be positioned with precision with regard to the Greenlandclimatic sequence. In the long run, given the high potential ofsequences from Belgium, the integration of all the results and thedetailed correlation with the sequences from Eurasian loess andGreenland ice should help to improve knowledge of the chrono-logical and cultural relationships between the technocomplexesidentified for the 50,000e30,000 BP period as well as to evaluatethe climatic impact on the cultural and biological changes related tothe MUPT.

Acknowledgements

The authorswish to thank J. Eloy (AWEM)and J.-F. Lemaire (SPW)for their technical assistance, as well as I. Jadin (RBINS), J.-L. Schütz(Musée Curtius), L. Paquay and N. Cauwe (RMAH) and P. Cattelain(CEDARC) for access to the Spy, Goyet and Couvin collections. PS andHR are grateful to I. Crevecoeur (RBINS), A. Hauzeur (RBINS),C. Jungels (RBINS) andM. Germonpré (RBINS) for their participationto the Spy collections reassessment. The Spy dating program wasfunded by the FRS-FNRS through a grant to A. Hauzeur (RBINS). DBand RM are grateful toM. Ottewho initiated fieldwork and researchin Scladina andMaisières-Canal. M. Otte also provided unpublishedinformation to DF.

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e94 91

Author's personal copy

We are grateful to Belgian Science Policy that funded the SpyAction 1 project (RBINS, MO/36/012), the doctoral studies of DF andSP (Action 2 projects) and the running MUPT Action 1 project(RBINS, MO/36/021). We are also grateful to the institutions thatfunded the TNT (The Neanderthal Tools, IST 6th framework) andMARS (IST project I2/2F/212, Belgian Science Policy) projects thathelped us to perform a multidisciplinary research on the Spy Cavecollections. The Goyet collections reassessment program is fundedby the Wenner-Gren Foundation (Gr. 7837 to HR). The 1996e2004excavations at Walou Cave conducted by CD and the 2000e2002excavations at Maisières-Canal conducted by RM were supportedby funding from the Service public de Wallonie.

References

Bailey, S.E., Hublin, J.-J., 2006. Dental remains from the Grotte du Renne at Arcy-sur-Cure (Yonne). Journal of Human Evolution 50, 485e508.

Bonjean, D., Abrams, G., Di Modica, K., Otte, M., 2009. La microstratigraphie, une cléde lecture des remaniements sédimentaires successifs. Le cas de l’industriemoustérienne 1A de Scladina. Notae Praehistoricae 29, 139e147.

Bordes, F., 1959. Le contexte archéologique des Hommes du Moustier et de Spy.L’Anthropologie 63, 154e157.

Bordes, J.-G., 2006. News from the West: a reevaluation of the classical Aurigna-cian sequence of the Périgord. In: Bar-Yosef, O., Zilhão, J. (Eds.), Towardsa Definition of the Aurignacian. Trabalhos de Arqueologia. vol. 45, pp. 145e169.Lisboa.

Bosinski, G., 2001. El Paleolítico medio en Europa central. Zephyrus 53e54, 79e142.Bourguignon, L., 1997. Le Moustérien de type Quina: Nouvelle définition d’une

entité technique. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Paris X, Nanterre,France.

Cahen, D., Haesaerts, P. (Eds.), 1984. Peuples chasseurs de la Belgique préhistoriquedans leur cadre naturel. Patrimoine de l’Institut royal des Sciences naturelles deBelgique, Bruxelles.

Campbell, J.B., 1980. Les problèmes des subdivisions du Paléolithique supérieurbritannique dans son cadre européen. Bulletin de la Société Royale Belged’Anthropologie et de Préhistoire 91, 39e77.

Campy, M., Chaline, J., 1993. Missing records and depositional breaks in French latePleistocene cave sediments. Quaternary Research 40, 318e331.

Cattelain, P., Otte, M., Ulrix-Closset, M., 1986. Les cavernes de l’Abîme à Couvin.Notae Praehistoricae 6, 15e28.

Cauwe, N., Hauzeur, A., Van Berg, P.-L. (Eds.), 2001. Préhistoire en Belgique.Anthropologica et Praehistorica, 112.

Chiotti, L., 2003. Les productions lamellaires dans l’Aurignacien de l’abri Pataud, LesEyzies-de-Tayac (Dordogne). Gallia Préhistoire 45, 113e156.

Conard, N.J. (Ed.), 2006. When Neanderthals and Modern Humans Met. KernsVerslag, Tübingen.

Crevecoeur, I., Bayle, P., Rougier, H., Maureille, B., Higham, T., van der Plicht, J., DeClerck, N., Semal, P., 2010. The Spy VI child: a newly discovered Neandertalinfant. Journal of Human Evolution 59 (6), 641e656.

de Heinzelin, J., 1973. L’industrie du site paléolithique de Maisières-Canal, vol. 171.Mémoires de l’Institut royal des Sciences naturelles de Belgique, Bruxelles.

d’Errico, F., Zilhão, J., Baffier, D., Julien, M., Pélegrin, J., 1998. Neandertal accultura-tion in Western Europe? A critical review of the evidence and its interpretation.Current Anthropology 39, S1eS44 (supplement).

De Puydt, M., Lohest, M., 1887. L’homme contemporain du Mammouth à Spy(Namur). Annales de la Fédération archéologique et historique de Belgique 2,205e240.

Desbrosse, R., Koz1owski, J.K., 1988. Hommes et climats à l’âge du mammouth. LePaléolithique supérieur d’Eurasie centrale, Masson, Paris.

Dewez, M., 1987. Le Paléolithique Supérieur Récent dans les Grottes de Belgique.Institut supérieur d’Archéologie et d’Histoire de l’Art, Université catholique deLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve.

Dewez, M., Collcutt, S.N., Cordy, J.-M., Gilot, E., Groessens-Van Dyck, M.-C., Heim, J.,Kozlowski, S., Sachse-Kozlowska, E., Lacroix, D., Simonet, P., 1993. Recherches àla grotte Walou à Trooz (province de Liège, Belgique), premier rapport defouille. Société wallonne de palethnologie, Liège. Mémoire 7.

Dewez, M. (Ed.), 2008. Recherches à la grotte Walou à Trooz (Belgique). Secondrapport de fouille. BAR International Series 1789.

Di Modica, K., 2009. Les grottes de la terrasse de Goyet. In: Di Modica, K., Jungels, C.(Eds.), Paléolithique moyen en Wallonie. La collection Louis Eloy. Collections duPatrimoine culturel de la Communauté française, vol. 2. Service du Patrimoineculturel, Bruxelles, pp. 159e172.

Di Modica, K., Bonjean, D., 2004. Scladina (Sclayn, province de Namur): ensembleslithiques moustériens méconnus. Notae Praehistoricae 24, 5e8.

Djindjian, F., Koslowski, J., Otte, M., 1999. Le paléolithique supérieur en Europe.Armand Colin, Paris.

Draily, C., 1998. Campagnes de fouilles 1996e1998 à la grotte Walou à Trooz. NotaePraehistoricae 18, 25e32.

Draily, C., 2011. La grotte Walou: fouilles 1996e2004. vol. 3. L’archéologie. Etudes etdocuments e Archéologie, 22, Namur.

Draily, C., Pirson, S., Toussaint, M. (Eds.), 2011. La grotte Walou: fouilles 1996e2004.vol. 2. Les sciences de la vie et les datations. Etudes et document e Archéologie,21, Namur.

Draily, C., Yernaux, G., Cordy, J.-M., Toussaint, M., 1999. Découverte d’une denthumaine dans une couche moustérienne de la grotte Walou à Trooz (fouille1997). Notae Praehistoricae 19, 29e38.

Dupont, E., 1872. L’homme pendant les Ages de la Pierre dans les environs deDinant-sur-Meuse. Muquardt, Bruxelles.

Eloy, L., 1956. Le Proto-Solutréen dans le bassin de la Meuse en Belgique. Bulletin dela Société Préhistorique Française 53, 532e539.

Ferrier, C., 2002. Les dépôts d’entrée de grotte. In: Miskovsky, J.-C. (Ed.), Géologie dela Préhistoire. Association pour l’étude de l’environnement géologique de lapréhistoire, Paris.

Flas, D., 2004. L’atelier de débitage de Maisières dans le contexte de l’Aurignaciendu Nord-Ouest de l’Europe. In: Miller, R., Haesaerts, P., Otte, M. (Eds.),L’atelier de taille aurignacien de Maisières-Canal (Belgique), vol. 110. Etudeset Recherches archéologiques de l’Université de Liège, Liège, pp. 113e120.

Flas, D., 2005. Nouvelles datations de deux ensembles aurignaciens du bassinmosan. Anthropologica et Praehistorica 116, 233e236.

Flas, D., 2006. La transition du Paléolithique moyen au supérieur dans la plaineseptentrionale de l’Europe. Les problématiques du Licombien-Ranisien-Jerzmanowicien. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Liège.

Flas, D., 2008. La transition du Paléolithique moyen au supérieur dans la plaineseptentrionale de l’Europe. Anthropologica et Praehistorica 119 (Bruxelles).

Flas, D., in press. Jerzmanowice points from Spy and the issue of the Lincombian-Ranisian-Jerzmanowician. In: Rougier, H., Semal, P. (Eds.), Spy Cave. State of125 Years of pluridisciplinary research on the Betche-aux-Rotches from Spy(Jemeppe-sur-Sambre, Province of Namur, Belgium). Royal Belgian Institute ofNatural Sciences and NESPOS Society, Brussels.

Flas, D., Miller, R., Jacobs, B., 2006. Les “burins” de l’atelier de débitage aurignacien deMaisières-Canal (Province du Hainaut, Belgique). In: de Araujo Igreja, M., Bracco,J.-P., Le Brun-Ricalens, F. (Eds.), Burins préhistoriques: formes, fonctionnements,fonctions, vol. 2. Musée National d’Histoire et d’Art, Luxembourg, pp. 55e74. Actesdu colloque d’Aix-en-Provence (3e5 mars 2003). ArchéoLogiques.

Flas, D., Tartar, É., Bordes, J.-G., Le Brun-Ricalens, F., Zwyns, N., in press. New lookson the Aurignacian from Spy: lithic assemblage, osseous artefacts and chro-nocultural sequence. In: Rougier, H., Semal, P. (Eds.), Spy Cave. State of 125 Yearsof pluridisciplinary research on the Betche-aux-Rotches from Spy (Jemeppe-sur-Sambre, Province of Namur, Belgium). Royal Belgian Institute of NaturalSciences and NESPOS Society, Brussels.

Fraipont, J., Lohest, M., 1887. La race humaine de Néanderthal ou de Canstadt enBelgique. Recherches ethnographiques sur des ossements humains découvertsdans les dépôts quaternaires d’une grotte à Spy et détermination de leur âgegéologique. Archives de Biologie 7, 587e757. Gand.

Germonpré, M., 2009. La faune pléistocène de Goyet. In: Di Modica, K., Jungels, C.(Eds.), Paléolithique moyen en Wallonie. La collection Louis Eloy. Collections duPatrimoine culturel de la Communauté française, vol. 2. Service du Patrimoineculturel, Bruxelles, pp. 169e170.

Goldberg, P., Sherwood, S.C., 2006. Deciphering human prehistory through the geo-archeological study of cave sediments. Evolutionary Anthropology 15, 20e36.

Gravina, B., Mellars, P., Bronk Ramsey, C., 2005. Radiocarbon dating of interstratifiedNeanderthal and early modern human occupations at the Chatelperroniantype-site. Nature 483, 51e56.

Groenen, M., 2005. Interprétation des datations absolues aurignaciennes et mous-tériennes pour la grotte-abri du Tiène des Maulins. Notae Praehistoricae 25, 71e79.

Gullentops, F., Bogemans, F., De Moor, G., Paulissen, E., Pissart, A., 2001. Quaternarylithostratigraphic units (Belgium). In: Bultynck, P., Dejonghe, L. (Eds.), Guide toa Revised Lithostratigraphic Scale of Belgium. Geologica Belgica, vol. 4/1-2.Bruxelles, pp. 153e164.

Haesaerts, P., 1974. Séquence paléoclimatique du Pléistocène supérieur du bassinde la Haine (Belgique). Annales de la Société géologique de Belgique 97,105e137.

Haesaerts, P., 1984. Aspects de l’évolution du paysage et de l’environnement enBelgique au Quaternaire. In: Cahen, D., Haesaerts, P. (Eds.), Peuples chasseurs dela Belgique préhistorique dans leur cadre naturel. Patrimoine de l’Institut royaldes Sciences naturelles de Belgique, Bruxelles, pp. 27e39.

Haesaerts, P., 1992. Les dépôts pléistocènes de la terrasse de la grotte Scladina àSclayn (province de Namur, Belgique). In: Otte, M. (Ed.), Recherches aux grottesde Sclayn. volume 1: Le contexte, vol. 27. Etudes et Recherches archéologiquesde l’Université de Liège, Liège, pp. 33e55.

Haesaerts, P., 2004. Maisières-Canal (2000e2002): cadre stratigraphique. In:Miller, R., Haesaerts, P., Otte, M. (Eds.), L’atelier de taille aurignacien de Mai-sières-Canal (Belgique), vol. 110. Etudes et Recherches archéologiques del’Université de Liège, Liège, pp. 13e26.

Haesaerts, P., Borziak, I., Chekha, V.P., Chirica, V., Damblon, F., Drozdov, N.I.,Orlova, L.A., Pirson, S., van der Plicht, J., 2009. Climatic signature and radio-carbon chronology of Middle and Late pleniglacial loess from Eurasia:comparison with the marine and Greenland records. Radiocarbon 51, 301e318.

Haesaerts, P., Chekha, V.P., Damblon, F., Drozdov, N.I., Orlova, L.A., van der Plicht, J.,2005. The loess-palaeosol succession of Kurtak (Yenisei basin, Siberia): a refer-ence record for the Karga Stage (MIS 3). Quaternaire 16, 3e24.

Haesaerts, P., Damblon, F., 2004. Maisières-Canal: les dates radiocarbone. In:Miller, R., Haesaerts, P., Otte, M. (Eds.), L’atelier de taille aurignacien de Mai-sières-Canal (Belgique), vol. 110. Etudes et Recherches archéologiques del’Université de Liège, Liège, pp. 27e28.

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e9492

Author's personal copy

Haesaerts, P., de Heinzelin, J., 1979. Le site paléolithique de Maisières-Canal.Dissertationes Archaeologicae Gandenses, vol. 19 (De Tempel, Brugge).

Haesaerts, P., Mestdagh, H., Bosquet, D., 1997. La séquence loessique de Remicourt(Hesbaye, Belgique). Notae Praehistoricae 17, 45e52.

Haesaerts, P., Teyssandier, N., 2003. The early upper Paleolithic occupations ofWillendorf II (Lower Austria): a contribution to the chronostratigraphic andcultural context of the beginning of the upper Paleolithic in central Europe. In:Zilhão, J., d’Errico, F. (Eds.), The Chronology of the Aurignacian and of theTransitional Technocomplexes. Dating, Stratigraphies, Cultural Implications, vol.33. Trabalhos de Arqueologia, Lisbon, pp. 133e151.

Haesaerts, P., Van Vliet, B., 1974. Compte rendu de l’excursion du 25 mai 1974consacrée à la stratigraphie des limons aux environs de Mons. Annales de laSociété géologique de Belgique 97, 547e560.

Hamy, E.-T., 1873. Sur quelques ossements humains découverts dans la troisièmecaverne de Goyet, près Namèche (Belgique). Bulletins de la Société d’An-thropologie de Paris 8, 425e435.

Jacobi, R.M., 1980. The upper palaeolithic of Britain with special reference to Wales.In: Taylor, J.A. (Ed.), Culture and Environment in Prehistoric Wales. BAR BritishSeries 76, Oxford, pp. 15e100.

Jacobi, R.M., 1990. Leaf-points and the British early upper palaeolithic. In:Koz1owski, J.K. (Ed.), Feuilles de pierre. Les industries à pointes foliacées duPaléolithique supérieur européen. Actes du colloque de Cracovie (1989),vol. 42. Etudes et Recherches archéologiques de l’Université de Liège, Liège,pp. 271e289.

Jacobi, R., 2007. A collection of early upper palaeolithic artefacts from Beedings,near Pulborough, west Sussex and the context of similar finds from British Isles.Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 73, 229e325.

Jacobi, R., Higham, T.F.G., Haesaerts, P., Jadin, I., Basell, L., 2010. Radiocarbon chro-nology for the early Gravettian of northern Europe: new AMS determinationsfor Maisières-canal, Belgium. Antiquity 84, 26e40.

Jungels, C., 2006. Spy (province de Namur, Belgique). Etude technologique dumatériel paléolithique moyen de la collection Rucquoy et réflexions sur lesconcepts de débitage à la lumière des résultats. Anthropologica et Praehistorica117, 35e80.

Jungels, C., Hauzeur, A., Pirson, P., 2006. Réexamen du matériel archéologique de lagrotte de Spy: les pointes moustériennes et les pointes pseudo-Levallois. NotaePraehistoricae 26, 65e90.

Juvigné, E., 1999. Téphrostratigraphie du Quaternaire en Belgique. Geologica Belgica2, 73e87.

Koz1owski, J.K., 1983. Le Paléolithique en Pologne. L’Anthropologie 87, 49e82.Le Brun-Ricalens, F., Bordes, J.-G., Bon, F. (Eds.), 2005, Productions lamellaires

attribuées à l’Aurignacien. Chaînes opératoires et perspectives technocultur-elles, vol. 1. Musée National d’Histoire et d’Art, Luxembourg Proceedings of the14th UISPP Congress (Liège, 2e8 septembre 2001). ArchéoLogiques.

Miller, R., 2004. Intégrité et répartition spatiale de l’ensemble aurignacien. In:Miller, R., Haesaerts, P., Otte, M. (Eds.), L’atelier de taille aurignacien de Mai-sières-Canal (Belgique), vol. 110. Etudes et Recherches archéologiques del’Université de Liège, Liège, pp. 49e56.

Miller, R., Haesaerts, P., Otte, M. (Dir.), 2004. L’atelier de taille aurignacien deMaisières-Canal (Belgique). Etudes et Recherches archéologiques de l’Universitéde Liège, vol. 110. Liège.

Otte, M., 1977. Données générales sur le Paléolithique supérieur ancien en Belgique.L’Anthropologie 81, 235e272.

Otte,M.,1978. Compte-rendudeW.Hülle,Die IlsenhöhleunterBurgRanis/Thüringen,Stuttgart, 1977. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 75, 133e134.

Otte, M., 1979. Le paléolithique supérieur ancien en Belgique. Monographiesd’Archéologie Nationale, vol. 5. Musées Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire, Bruxelles.

Otte, M., 1981. Les industries à pointes foliacées et à pointes pédonculées dans leNord-Ouest européen. Archeologia Interregionalis 1, 95e116.

Otte, M., 1990. From the middle to the upper palaeolithic: the nature of the tran-sition. In: Mellars, P. (Ed.), The Emergence of Modern Humans. An Archaeo-logical Perspective. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 438e456.

Otte, M. (Ed.), 1992, Recherches aux grottes de Sclayn. volume 1: Le contexte, vol.27. Etudes et Recherches archéologiques de l’Université de Liège, Liège.

Otte, M., Collin, F., Miller, R., Engesser, K., 1998b. Nouvelles datations du TrouAl’Wesse dans son contexte régional. Notae Praehistoricae 18, 45e50.

Otte, M., Patou-Mathis, M., Bonjean, D. (Eds.), 1998a, Recherches aux grottes deSclayn. Volume 2: L’Archéologie, vol. 79. Etudes et Recherches archéologiquesde l’Université de Liège, Liège.

Otte, M., Straus, L.G. (Eds.), 1995, Le Trou Magrite: fouilles 1991e1992. Résurrectiond’un Site Classique en Wallonie, vol. 69. Etudes et Recherches archéologiques del’Université de Liège, Liège.

Paepe, R., Vanhoorne, R., 1976. Mémoires pour servir à l’Explication des CartesGéologiques et Minières de la Belgique. The Quaternary of Belgium and ItsRelationship to the Stratigraphical Legend of the Geological Map, vol. 18. ServiceGéologique de Belgique, Bruxelles.

Pirson, S., 2007. Contribution à l’étude des dépôts d’entrée de grotte en Belgique auPléistocène supérieur. Stratigraphie, sédimentogenèse et paléoenvironnement.Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Liège.

Pirson, S., Cattelain, P., El Zaatari, S., Flas, D., Letourneux, C., Miller, R.,Olejniczak, A.J., Otte, M., Toussaint, M., 2009b. Le “Trou de l’Abîme” à Couvin.Bilan des recherches de laboratoire avant la reprise de nouvelles fouilles enseptembre 2009. Notae Praehistoricae 29, 59e75.

Pirson, S., Court-Picon, M., Haesaerts, P., Bonjean, D., Damblon, F., 2008b. Memoirsof the Geological Survey of Belgium. New Data on Geology, Anthracology and

Palynology from the Scladina Cave Pleistocene Sequence: Preliminary Results,vol. 55. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Bruxelles, pp. 71e93.

Pirson, S., Draily, C., Toussaint, M. (Eds.), 2011. La grotte Walou: fouilles 1996e2004.Volume 1: les sciences de la terre. Etudes et document e Archéologie, vol. 20,Namur.

Pirson, S., Haesaerts, P., Court-Picon, M., Damblon, F., Toussaint, M., Debenham, N.C.,Draily, C., 2006. Belgian cave entrance and rock-shelter sequences as palae-oenvironmental data recorders: the example of Walou cave. Geologica Belgica9, 275e286.

Pirson, S., Haesaerts, P., Di Modica, K., 2009a. Cadre chronostratigraphique desprincipaux gisements du Paléolithique moyen du bassin de la Haine: un état dela question. In: Di Modica, K., Jungels, C. (Eds.), Paléolithique moyen en Wal-lonie. La collection Louis Eloy, vol. 2. Collections du Patrimoine culturel de laCommunauté française, pp. 58e77.

Pirson, S., Spagna, P., Baele, J.-M., Damblon, F., Gerrienne, P., Vanbrabant, Y., Yans, J.,2008a. An overview of the geology of Belgium. In: Damblon, F., Pirson, S.,Gerrienne, P. (Eds.), Hautrage (Lower Cretaceous) and Sclayn (Upper Pleisto-cene). Field Trip Guidebook. Charcoal and Microcharcoal: Continental andMarine Records, vol. 55. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Bruxelles,pp. 5e25. IVth International Meeting of Anthracology, Brussels (8e13September 2008). Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Belgium.

Robaszynski, F., Dupuis, C. (Eds.), 1983. Belgique. Guides géologiques régionaux.Masson, Paris.

Rougier, H., Crevecoeur, I., Fiers, E., Hauzeur, A., Germonpré, M., Maureille, B.,Semal, P., 2004. Collections de la Grotte de Spy: (re)découvertes et inventaireanthropologique. Notae Praehistoricae 24, 181e190.

Rougier, H., Crevecoeur, I., Semal, P., Toussaint, M., 2009. Des Néandertaliens dans laTroisième caverne de Goyet. In: Di Modica, K., Jungels, C. (Eds.), PaléolithiquemoyenenWallonie. La collection Louis Eloy. Collections duPatrimoineculturel dela Communauté française, vol. 2. Service du Patrimoine culturel, Bruxelles, p.173.

Semal, P., Rougier, H., Crevecoeur, I., Jungels, C., Flas, D., Hauzeur, A., Maureille, B.,Germonpré, M., Bocherens, H., Pirson, S., Cammaert, L., De Clerck, N.,Hambucken, A., Higham, T., Toussaint, M., van der Plicht, J., 2009. New data onthe late Neandertals: direct dating of the Belgian Spy fossils. American Journalof Physical Anthropology 138, 421e428.

Semal, P., Toussaint, M., Maureille, B., Rougier, H., Crevecoeur, I., Balzeau, A.,Bouchneb, L., Louryan, S., De Clerck, N., Rausin, L., 2005. Numérisation des resteshumains néandertaliens belges: préservation patrimoniale et exploitation sci-entifique. Notae Praehistoricae 25, 25e38.

Smith, P., 1966. Le Solutréen en France, vol. 5. Institut de Préhistoire de l’Universitéde Bordeaux, Delmas, Bordeaux.

Smith, T.M., Toussaint, M., Reid, D.J., Olejniczak, A.J., Hublin, J.-J., 2007. Rapid dentaldevelopment in a Middle Paleolithic Belgian Neanderthal. Proceedings of theNational Academy of Sciences of the USA 104, 20220e20225.

Straus, L.G.,1999. The Neanderthal problemContinued. Current Anthropology 40, 352e355.Straus, L.G., Otte, M., 1996. The Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition at the local

level: the Case of Le Trou Magrite (Namur Province, Belgium). In:Carbonell, E., Vaquero, M. (Eds.), The Last Neandertals. The First AnatomicallyModern Humans: A Tale about the Human Diversity. Cultural Change andHuman Evolution: The Crisis at 40 ka BP. Universita Rovira i Virgili, Tarragone,pp. 157e167.

Texier, J.-P., Kervazo, B., Lenoble, A., Nespoulet, R., 2004. Sédimentogenèse des sitespréhistoriques du Périgord. Fieldtrip Guidebook of the AGSO-ASF (23e24/04/2004). Association des sédimentologistes français, Paris.

Tillier, A.-M., 1990. Néanderthaliens et origine de l’Homme moderne en Europe:quelques réflexions sur la controverse. In: Paléolithique moyen récent etPaléolithique supérieur ancien en Europe, vol. 3. Mémoires du Musée de Pré-histoire d’Ile-de-France, Paris, pp. 21e24.

Toussaint, M., 1988. Fouilles 1978e1981 au Trou du Diable à Hastière-Lavaux,province de Namur, Belgique. Helinium 28, 35e43.

Toussaint, M., in press. The Spy Neandertals spine remains (the sacrum and onelumbar vertebra). In: Rougier, H., Semal, P., (Eds.), Spy Cave. State of 125 Years ofpluridisciplinary research on the Betche-aux-Rotches from Spy (Jemeppe-sur-Sambre, Province of Namur, Belgium). Royal Belgian Institute of NaturalSciences and NESPOS Society, Brussels.

Toussaint, M., Becker, A., Lacroix, P., 1998a. Recherches 1997e1998 aux grottes deGoyet, à Gesves, province de Namur. Notae Praehistoricae 18, 33e44.

Toussaint, M., Olejniczak, A.J., El Zaatari, S., Cattelain, P., Flas, D., Letourneux, C.,Pirson, S., 2010. The Neandertal lower right deciduous second molar from the“Trou de l’Abîme” at Couvin, Belgium. Journal of Human Evolution 58, 56e67.

Toussaint, M., Otte, M., Bonjean, D., Bocherens, H., Falguère, C., Yokoyama, Y., 1998b.Les restes humains néandertaliens immatures de la couche 4A de la grotteScladina (Andenne, Belgique). Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Sciences deParis 326, 737e742.

Toussaint, M., Pirson, S., 2006. Neandertal studies in Belgium: 2000e2005. Peri-odicum Biologorum 108, 373e387.

Toussaint, M., Pirson, S., 2007. Aperçu historique des recherches concernantl’homme préhistorique dans le karst belge aux XIXe et XXe siècles: archéologie,géologie, paléoanthropologie, paléontologie, datations. In: Evin, J. (Ed.), Unsiècle de construction du discours scientifique en préhistoire, vol. 2. Sociétépréhistorique française, Paris, pp. 117e142. Proceedings of the 26th Congrèspréhistorique de France (Avignon, 21e25 septembre 2004).

Twiesselmann, F., 1971. Belgium. In: Oakley, K.P., Campbell, B.G., Molleson, T.I. (Eds.),Catalogue of Fossil Hominids e Part 2: Europe. Trustees of the British Museum(Natural History), London, pp. 5e13.

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e94 93

Author's personal copy

Ulrix-Closset, M., 1975. Le Paléolithique moyen dans le bassin mosan en Belgique.Universa, Wetteren.

Ulrix-Closset, M., 1990. Le paléolithique moyen récent en Belgique. In: Paléolithiquemoyen récent et Paléolithique supérieur ancien en Europe. Colloque interna-tional de Nemours (9e11 mai 1988), vol. 3. Mémoires du Musée de Préhistoired’Ile-de-France, Paris, pp. 135e143.

Ulrix-Closset, M., Otte, M., Cattelain, P., 1988. Le “Trou de l’Abîme” à Couvin(Province de Namur, Belgique). In: L’Homme de Néandertal, vol. 8, La muta-tion, vol. 35. Etudes et Recherches archéologiques de l’Université de Liège,Liège, pp. 225e239.

Valoch, K., 1976. Die altsteinzeitliche Fundstelle in Brno-Bohunice, vol. 4. StudieArcheologickeho ustavu Ceskoslovenske Akademie ved v Brne, Brno.

Van Andel, T.H., Davies, W. (Eds.), 2003. Neanderthals and Modern Humans in theEuropean Landscape During the Last Glaciation. McDonald Institute Mono-graphs, Cambridge.

van der Hammen, T., 1995. The Dinkel valley revisited: Pleniglacial stratigraphy ofthe eastern Netherlands and global climatic change. In: Herngreen, G.F.W., Vander Valk, L. (Eds.), Neogene and Quaternary geology of North-West Europe.Contributions on the occasion of Waldo H. Zagwijn’s retirement, vol. 52.Mededelingen Rijks Geologische Dienst, Haarlem, pp. 343e355.

Vogel, J., van der Hammen, T., 1967. The Denekamp and Paudorf interstadials.Geologie en Mijnbouw 46, 188e194.

Zilhão, J., d’Errico, F. (Eds.), 2003, The Chronology of the Aurignacian and of theTransitional Technocomplexes. Dating, Stratigraphies, Cultural Implications,vol. 33. Trabalhos de Arqueologia, Lisboa Proceedings of Symposium 6.1 of the14th Congress of the UISPP (University of Liège, Belgium, September 2e8, 2001).

Zilhão, J., d’Errico, F., Bordes, J.-G., Lenoble, A., Texier, J.-P., Rigaud, J.-P., 2006.Analysis of Aurignacian interstratification at the Chatelperronian-type site andimplications for the behavioral modernity of Neandertals. Proceedings of theNational Academy of Sciences of the USA 103, 12643e12648.

S. Pirson et al. / Quaternary International 259 (2012) 78e9494