Funded by

Austrian ScienceFoundation

Dieter Schäfer and Project TeamWorking Group High Mountain Archaeology

and Quaternary EcologyInstitut for Geology and Paleontology

Univ. Innsbruck

The 'Mesolithic Project Ullafelsen‘ in the Tyrolean Alps - possibilities and restrictions

Copenhagen, May 31 2013

_main focuses Mesolithic research in Tyrol

(A) relationship man/environment (espec. late Glacial / earlyHolocene)(B) geoscientific / climatic background for human settlement(C) Are there ‚marker levels‘ in the regional stratigraphy?(D) Are there evidences for human manipulations on their former livingfloor? (E) tree line – usage pattern by mesolithic groups(F) transalpine pathes / communications(G) identification of used resources (lithics, organics…) (H) comment about some keysites

…from time to time: notices about some restrictions / problems…

Meteorology / PaleoclimatologyE. Schlosser (Inst. for Meteorology and Geophysic, Univ. Innsbruck)

Soil Science / Sedimentology / MikromorphologyC. Geitner (Geograph. Inst., Univ. Innsbruck) (A)D. Tscherko (Botan. Inst., Univ. Stuttgart-Hohenheim) (D)R. Traidl (Bayer. Geolog. Landesamt Außenstelle Marktredwitz) (D)S. Bussemer (Univ. Greifswald) (D)J. Waroszewski (Univ. Wroclaw) (PL)O.Ehrmann (Creglingen) (D)B. Machalett (Geogr. Inst., Univ. Berlin; Bentley Coll. Massachusetts) (D, USA)

Glaciology / late Glacial to early Holocene valley formationH. Kerschner (Geograph. Inst., Univ. Innsbruck) (A)

Botany / Paleobotany / Charcoal analysisI. Kemmer (Weilheim) (D)K. Oeggl (Botan. Inst., Univ. Innsbruck) (A)W. Schoch (Laboratory for Quat. timber, Langnau (CH)

Chert analyses / Mikropalaeontology / mineralogical analysesR. Tessadri (Institut for Mineralogy and Petrography, Univ. Innsbruck) (A)G. Niedermayr (Nature Hist. Museum Vienna) (A)S. Bertola (Working Group High Mountain Archaeology, Geolog. Inst., Univ. Innsbruck) (I, A)

CartographyK. Heinrich (Inst. for Mountain Reserach – Man and Environment, Austr. Acad. of Science Vienna) (A)

Archaeology incl. use wear analysesF. Fontana (Univ. Ferrara) (A)C.-J. Kind (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege Baden Württemberg) (D)K. u. N. Kompatscher (Bozen) (I)A. Pawlik (Univ. Manila/Philippinen) (PH) J. Ullmann, S. Bertola, D. Schäfer, C. Scharf

(Working Group High Mountain Archaeology, Geolog. Inst., Univ. Innsbruck) (A)

Ötztal/Stubai cristalline complex- mostly metamorphic rocks

(Para- and Orthogneisses)

(A, B) geoscientific and climatic background for human settlement

Nittel 2011

- high geomorphological / pedogenetic diversity

- excellent water resources- no cave formations- no bone preservation

(A, B) geoscientific and climatic background for human settlement

Fotscher valley (= Ullafelsen area)

diversified landscape – rich of pasture biomass - with protective function (2200…2500 m a.s.l.) (here: ice decay landscape on high plateaus directly west of Ullafelsen site)

(A, B) geoscientific and climatic background for human settlement

Younger Dryas (=Egesen) double moraine

late Würmian end moraines and glacier extensions in the inner Fotscher valley (Kerschner 2011)

(A, B) geoscientific and climatic background for human settlement

(A, B) geoscientific and climatic background for human settlement

(Geitner / Schäfer 2010)

Ullafelsen (1869 m)Fotscher valley

- well protected against rock slides- excellent water resources

- good microclimate

(A, B) geoscientific and climatic background for human settlement

1 arch. excavation 1994-2004 – 25 sqm, ca. 8000 artef.

2-4 soil science trenchesUllafelsen plateau

(A, B) geoscientific and climatic background for human settlement

LL

fireplace 4 (angular view)(9350 ± 40 BP)

‚light layer‘ (LL, gray, silty, fine sandy)= mesolithic living floor

fireplace 2 (ground view)(8660 ± 50 BP)

Detail cross profile square B8

LL

LL(C) Are there ‚marker levels‘ in the regional stratigraphy?

(A, B) geoscientific and climatic background for human settlement

Actual Synthesis sedimentological / pedological processes (Ullafelsen / inner Fotscher valley

Bölling / AllerödOlder Dryas Younger Dryas Holocene

Geitner et al 2011 (modif.)

(A) (B) man/environment - sedimentation – climatic background(C) Are there ‚marker levels‘ in the regional stratigraphy?

LL LL

(D) Are there evidences for human manipulations on their former living floor?

central part of fireplace 3 (square C6c)

angular view (from S to N)

(D) Are there evidences for human manipulations on their former living floor?

central part of fireplace 3 (square C6c)

remaining LL (depression situation!)

covered by LL-/charcoal mixture

thick charcoal layer(large pieces!)

A

C

B

(D) Are there evidences for human manipulations on their former living floor?

… 20 cm north … (square C7a)

(D) Are there evidences for human manipulations on their former living floor?

sampling charcoalbelow C!

B

C LL-/charcoal-mixturecover can be induced

onlyby human activity

… 20 cm north … (square C7a)

(D) Are there evidences for human manipulations on their former living floor?

…directly neighboured: northeast edge of fireplace 3 (diagonal trench) (square C7a)

angular view (from SW to NE)

anthropogenically caused feature- ?levelling - ?clearing - ?smooting

(D) Are there evidences for human manipulations on their former living floor?

directly neighboured to fireplace 3 (NE part square C6 [C6d]) [extensive disturbed F8]

angular view (from W to E)

remaining LL, partly withoverlyingcharcoal

(F8)

probable exhausted material for cover fireplace 3

(D) Are there evidences for human manipulations on their former living floor?

(G) (at least)…for the production of tar from birch bark for adhesive purposesYES!

* N=113 artefacts withresidues

* many tar remains (singlefind spots + evidence ofwater screening)

Mikrophotos A. Pawlik

Restriction # 1 // respective tar remains

A) Problem:Missing knowledge about the (possible) occurence of tar during the first years ofthe project

B) Consequence:Distribution map has not the same validity for all excav. squares

C) Outlook:Further analyses of stored soil samples are possible (support welcome!)

* Our luck: The most fireplaces were found in the second half of the project…

(A) (B) man/environment – climatic background(E) tree line – usage pattern by mesolithic groups

Ullafelsen, different plant species distribution in the charcoals ofthe fireplaces F1-F3

Ullafelsen around 8.500 BP

Ullafelsen around 9.500 BP

Oeggl / Schoch 2011

during fireplace 3

during fireplace 1

(A) (B) man/environment – climatic background(E) tree line – usage pattern by mesolithic groups

C14 evidencefor mesolithicsettlement

Ullafelsen, AMS data / dominating during the Preboreal

Ullafelsen around 8.500 BPduring fireplace 1

Ullafelsen around 9.500 BPduring fireplace 3

(A) (B) man/environment – climatic background(E) tree line – usage pattern by mesolithic groups

Expiring settlementat Ullafelsen during early Boreal – probable reasons:

- degrading hunting strategic situation (more dense vegetation=declining watching possibilities for hunters)

- Ibex follow the rising treeline and therefore also the humans(analogue osteological analyses of mesolithic sites in N-Italy, Fedele 1981, Lanzinger 1991)

- tree line=valuable resource, high diversity of plant species and habitat (Oeggl 1997)

(A) (B) man/environment – climatic background(E) tree line – usage pattern by mesolithic groups

Beta-314828_AL6-1 8250 ± 40 BP - cal BC 7450 to 7390 AND Cal BC 7380 to 7140KIA21993_FSH1-Holzkohleprobe I 7980 ± 40 BP - cal BC 7056 - 6749 KIA21991_FSH1-Holzkohleprobe III 7420 ± 40 BP - cal BC 6397 - 6214 KIA21992_FSH1-Holzkohleprobe II 6455 ± 35 BP - cal BC 5479 - 5360

8 km ssw from Ullafelsen: Oberbergtal sites around 2150 m (250..300 m higher):

Mesolithic sites here start with the expiring use of the Ullafelsen

Kompatscher / Kompatscher 2011

Kompatscher / Kompatscher 2011

(F) transalpine pathes / communications

No surprise: alpine mesolithic routes take course at the early Holocene tree line

(dense site numer!

examples from N Italianroutes)

(F) transalpine pathes / communications

Kompatscher / Kompatscher 2011

Surrounding of Ullafelsen

andtransalpine mesolithic routes to Italywith regard to

- evident and different probabilities fortheir courses,

- occurence of the nearestrock crystal occurence

with probable hunting / gathering ground

based on the route model of Kompatscher(at last: Kompatscher / Kompatscher 2011)

(G) used resources (lithics, organics…) – few examples Ullafelsen

Radiolarite from theTyrolean limestone Alps (Ruhpolding Formation [Upper Jurassic])

Chert from the N ItalianValle di Non(Scaglia variegataFormation [MiddleCretacous])

Refitting J. Ullmann

(G) used resources (lithics, organics…) Ullafelsen

Hornstone from the South Franconian Alb, Bavaria (Plattenkalk-Formation ofUpper Jura)

(G) used resources (lithics, organics…) Ullafelsen

Rock crystal(Central Alpine Penninikum)

(G) used resources (lithics, organics…) Ullafelsen

Metamorphic quartz (quartzite) of centralalpine gneiss occurences (local)

(G) Sources for used resources / old mesolithic techno-cultural groups Ullafelsen

Beuronien

Sauveterien

Restriction # 2 // respective metamorphic quartz

A) Problem:- Use of local metamorphic quartz was not expected during the firstyears of the project (natural pieces are dominating in the ground)

- difficult fracture mechanic (arteficial versus natural character)

B) Consequences:

- Underestimation of this material – no real knowledge of percentages usedduring the local Mesolithic

- in the meantime: more sensibility helped to find a new site with a dominance ofthis material

(G) used resources (lithics, organics…) - as * finds and * results of use wear analyses

Ullafelsen

The only one bone sample (?rib fragm., B5-376)

Analysis A. Pawlik, 2011

Hematite samples

Restriction # 3 // respective excavation strategy Ullafelsen

A) Starting point:- very (!) restricted time windows for working under (often) extreme conditions- necessity to work under protected, but very limited tent space- necessity to open/re-open not too expanded excavation planes (preservation

problem (pasture…), not always coninuous field work possible…)- necessity to open new excavation squares with traditional ‚chessboard

method‘ to have more control profiles

B) Problem- limited extension of exposed planes in the same time- context of complex features was not always clear during the course of field work

(e.g. disturbed, heavy influenced fireplaces, planes….)

C) Consequences:- rather small excavated area (‚only‘ 25 sqm)- very time consuming documentation (drawings, foto, video interviews…)- very time consuming / expensive data processing / data mining- growing integration of specialists (with often more complex becoming aspects)

(H) Ullafelsen – Kaseralmschrofen – Oberbergtal – Schleimssattel – Pasill-Alm = key sites for actual + further Mesolithic research in alpine regions of Austria

Kaseralmschrofen

Schleimssattel 3c

Pasillalm Krimpenbachsee

_background / main results mesolithic project work in Tyrol

good tradition in - landscape and climate history (Patzelt, Fliri)- Glaciology (Heuberger, Kerschner, Reitner, van Husen, Patzelt….) - Paleobotany (Bortenschlager / Oeggl / Kofler / Wahlmüller…)- analyses of microfossils in cherts and mesozoic stratigraphy (Brandner, Mostler,

Resch)good availability of technical analyse equipment (Mineral./ Geolog. / Bot. Institute) no good editing of recent geological mapsno tradition to search alpine pre-neolithic sites in Austria

___ consequences: to connect the things …. __that means after 20 years:

good empirical experiences / where and how to search in alpine landscapewe have a number of mesolithics sites which allow insights to- regional stratigraphy- Mesolithic chronology- intrasite differentiation (anthrop. manipulations, use wear …)- raw material availability, procurement and courses of transalpine routes- first ideas about relationship Beuronien / Sauveterienwe have learned about our own restrictions / limits

Thank you for your attention!

Erik: All the best for your next exciting period of your life!!