ABSTRACT Archeological evidence has demonstrated that Neanderthals utilized mammal bone remains as tools. These findings are geographically widespread, stretching from the Altai Mountains in Central Asia to the Atlantic Ocean. Such an extensive distribution is indicative of a broad pattern of Neanderthal behavior concerning tool use and resource exploitation, although a notable lacuna exists in the archeological record within the Carpathian region that appears as a blank area on the existing map. The main purpose of our study is to address and fill this geographical gap. To this end, we focused on the site of Abri 122/1200 in Romania as a representative case study. The luminescence dating results indicate that the Middle Paleolithic occupation of the cave spans from the Middle Pleistocene (Chibanian) to the Late Pleistocene, approximately from Marine Isotope Stage 7 (MIS 7, around 230 000 years ago) to MIS 3. A crucial aspect of our investigation involved differentiating between taphonomic marks on faunal remains: those resulting from natural processes such as scavenging or environmental factors and those stemming from technological activities like tool production or usewear. Through meticulous analysis, we successfully identified and isolated a consistent set of faunal remains categorized into five distinct typological groups. Our observations reveal that technological interventions on these bones are infrequent; the majority of fragments appear to have been used in their natural state without extensive modification. Fragments show evidence of being used in activities such as the processing of lithic tools, hides, or plant materials, which indicates a more complex utilization pattern than previously assumed. The assemblage from Abri 122/1200 thus exemplifies the importance of re‐evaluating other Middle Paleolithic contexts within the Carpathian region. It highlights the variability, origin, and technological significance of bone production and utilization by Neanderthals, challenging traditional perceptions of their technological capabilities and resourcefulness.
Mărgărit et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: