Journal of Archaeological Science (2001) 28, 127–141
doi:10.1006/jasc.1999.0545, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on
From Lithics to Spatial and Social Organization: Interpreting
the Lithic Distribution and Raw Material Composition at the
Final Palaeolithic Site of Kettig (Central Rhineland, Germany)
Michael Baales*
Forschungsbereich Altsteinzeit, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz, Schloss Monrepos,
D-56567 Neuwied, Germany
(Received 10 October 1999, revised manuscript accepted 8 December 1999)
During the Final Palaeolithic Federmessergruppen period, a wide range of siliceous raw materials was used in the
Central Rhineland (Germany). Beside materials from the immediate region, exogenous resources such as flint from up
to 100 km away in the Meuse drainage area and the moraines of the Saalian glaciation were exploited. At Kettig, the
spatial distribution of different lithic raw materials and analysis of several categories of burnt finds allow the
characterization of the settled area in space and time. While adequate, good-quality raw material was available in
the Central Rhineland, the regular use of exogenous raw materials at Central Rhineland sites also demonstrates the
necessity of maintaining regular social contacts with other groups in neighbouring regions.
2001 Academic Press
Keywords: FINAL PALAEOLITHIC, FEDERMESSERGRUPPEN, SPATIAL ANALYSIS, RAW MATERIAL
ECONOMY, SOCIAL CONTACTS, WESTERN GERMANY.
Introduction
the end of the late glacial Allerød interstadial c. 12·9 ky
cal- in what is today the Laacher See caldera (Street
et al., 1994; Jöris & Weninger, 2000). The massive
Plinian eruption covered the late glacial Central
Rhineland landscape (Ikinger, 1996) with layers of ash
and pumice (Laacher See tephra=LST), often several
metres thick (van den Bogaard & Schmincke, 1985),
and so protected archaeological sites from erosion and
destruction. Pumice quarrying, which began in the
middle of the 19th century and has been carried out on
an industrial scale since the Second World War, has
repeatedly uncovered well-preserved sites, especially of
Allerød age.
The conserving effect of the volcanic sediments has
protected not only sites of human settlement but also
numerous botanical localities with preserved trees,
imprints of leaves in ash layers of the LST, etc. All this
allows us to draw a very detailed picture of the
vegetation and environment of the final Allerød
(Baales & Street, 1996; Baales et al., 1998a; Street &
Baales, 1997). Generally, the Central Rhineland was a
lightly forested region with aspen, birch, willow near
the rivers and some pine on higher, drier grounds. The
regular presence of horse at Allerød sites may also
indicate more open areas, perhaps at higher elevations
surrounding the Neuwied Basin.
The first archaeological investigation beneath
the LST was carried out in 1883 by Hermann
Schaaffhausen at the Martinsberg in Andernach. More
recent excavations have been carried out there in the
A
t Kettig, in the Neuwied Basin (Central
Rhineland, Western Germany), it was possible
to investigate a Final Palaeolithic Federmessergruppen site which is of importance for two major
reasons. One of these is given by artefacts of red deer
antler of types previously unknown for the Federmessergruppen; the other is the possibility of a detailed
spatial analysis of the site, which gives new insights
into the internal organization and division of a
relatively large habitation area of the period some
13·2 ky cal-.
Furthermore, the overall spectrum of lithic raw
material observed at Federmessergruppen sites in the
Central Rhineland permits a final statement of general
importance for human behaviour. While materials
suitable for producing lithic tools were available in the
region, an important amount of material was brought
to the sites from exogenous sources up to 100 km
and more distant. This is interpreted as reflecting
regular social contacts with people in neighbouring
regions, which were of great importance for small
hunter–gatherer groups in a largely uninhabited
landscape.
During the Pleistocene, the Central Rhineland and,
in particular, the Neuwied Basin to the northwest of
Koblenz, was repeatedly the scene of major volcanic
eruptions. The most recent eruption occurred towards
*E-mail: [email protected]
127
0305–4403/01/020217+15 $35.00/0
2001 Academic Press
128
M. Baales
Table 1. The Allerød fauna from Kettig (without molluscs identified by
Mania)
Species
Perissodactyla
Horse
Artiodactyla
Large bovid (aurochs?)
Chamois?
Red deer
Roe deer
Carnivora
Bear
Wolf
Red fox
Weasel
Marten
Rodentia
Beaver
Yellow-necked
field-mouse
Large Pleistocene mole
Common hamster
Bank vole
Water vole
Root vole
Field vole
Voles
Voles
Insectivora
Common shrew
Pygmy shrew
Water shrew
Chiroptera
Noctule
Aves
Tit
Pisces
Pike
Cyprinids
NISP
Equus sp.
Bos primigenius?
Rupicapra rupicapra
Cervus elaphus
Capreolus capreolus
MNI
17
3
17
1
259
24
2
1
8
3
Ursus arctos
Canis lupus
Vulpes vulpes
Mustela nivalis
Martes sp.
5
2
1
22 1 (2?)
1
1
6
1
Castor fiber
29
2
3
6
1
120
40
9
8
22
83
1
2
1
18
6
5
3
14
—
32
2
1
11
1
1
Nyctalus sp.
3
1
Parus sp.
1
1
5
>100
1
—
Apodemus flavicollis
Talpa europaea magna
Cricetus cricetus
Clethrionomys glareolus
Arvicola terrestris
Microtus oeconomus
Microtus agrestis
Microtus arvalis/agrestis
Microtus sp.
Sorex ex. gr. araneus
Sorex cf. minutus
Neomys fodiens
Esox lucius
Leuciscus sp.
Identifications: Baales (1998) and Kalthoff (1998) and Krey (in
Baales, in press). NISP: Number of identified specimen; MNI:
Minimum number of individuals. The animals certainly exploited by
man are red and roe deer, horse, a large bovid (aurochs?), a caprid (if
identification is correct) and beaver. Possibly exploited were brown
bear, wolf, red fox, weasel, marten and the fishes, which are only
represented by pharyngeal teeth.
1980s and from 1994 to 1996 (Baales & Street, 1998).
Further important late glacial sites have been discovered since, especially during the second half of the
20th century, among them the well-known Late Upper
Palaeolithic Magdalenian site (c. 15·5 ky cal-) of
Gönnersdorf (see Bosinski et al., 1995). Particularly
important are four major (late) Allerød settlements
of the Final Palaeolithic Federmessergruppen
(Schwabedissen, 1954) (Figure 1). Urbar, discovered in
1966, lies to the northeast of Koblenz (Baales et al.,
1998b). At Andernach-Martinsberg, an extensive Federmessergruppen horizon (Veil, 1982; Stapert & Street,
1997) overlies a Magdalenian settlement equivalent
to Gönnersdorf. Niederbieber, a suburb of Neuwied,
covers an area of some 10,000 m2 and is the largest site
known from this period in the Central Rhineland
(Bolus, 1992; Baales, 1998; Baales & Street, 1998).
Kettig (District Mayen-Koblenz), which is the subject
of this paper, lies south of the Rhine and was investigated over an area of 242 m2 during 6 months
following its discovery in April 1993 (Figure 2).
The Kettig Site
During the Allerød, the Kettig site occupied a promontory of land (the Rhine middle terrace) raised somewhat above the banks of the Rhine. A channel at the
foot of the promontory was either permanently waterfilled or at least occasionally flooded. A west–east
oriented trial trench established that archaeological
material was located not only on the promontory itself,
but also extended downslope into the Rhine valleybottom (see Figure 4). There is one conventional
14
C-date for the site of 11·31450  (Hd-18123; B.
Kromer, pers. comm., Heidelberg), carried out on
bulked bones of red deer size. The data was calibrated
(‘‘converted’’ following Jöris & Weninger, 2000) to
c. 13·2 ky cal-.
Unique to Kettig are two artefacts of red deer antler.
One of these is a barbed point which morphologically
and technologically resembles Magdalenian specimens
but is defined by J. Tinnes (in Baales, in press) as
an independent ‘‘Kettig type’’. The other artefact is an
antler hammer (percuteur), a form of tool otherwise
unknown from a Federmessergruppen context. Despite
the protective covering of LST, Final Palaeolithic
artefacts of organic materials have only been rarely
found in the Central Rhineland (Baales, 1994, 1997,
1999; Bolus, 1992; Baales & Street, 1996). This
is a striking difference to the preceding Upper
Magdalenian dated at Gönnersdorf and Andernach to
around 15·5 ky cal-.
The list of large mammal species is dominated by red
deer (Cervus elaphus), which is represented by a minimum of eight individuals. The remains of other large
mammal species are much less common and represent
fewer individuals (Table 1).
A number of remains of red and roe deer, especially
teeth (particularly the analysis of the cement structure
of a red deer tooth by Kierdorf [in Baales, in press])
allowed the identification of the season of occupation
of the site as late summer or early autumn.
The Kettig lithic assemblage is typical of the
Rhineland Allerød sites. It is dominated by more than
100 short end scrapers, followed by projectile points
(including both classic Federmesser points, other types
of backed pieces and simple microliths), burins, truncated and laterally retouched pieces, borers and splintered pieces (pièces esquillées). The spectrum of raw
materials is generally similar to that of other Central
Rhineland sites and is particularly close to that from
Andernach-Martinsberg (Figure 3; see Floss, 1994).
The assemblage is made not only of regionally available materials, such as Tertiary limno-quartzite and
From Lithics to Spatial and Social Organization 129
N
BROH
L
300
11
INE
1
9
100
12
M
NE
TT
E
40
0
200
Koblenz
4
100
300
8
5
6
0
OS
EL
LE
50
0
10
RH
13
100
400
0
200
km
Neuwied
0
20
0
0
WIE
2
30
10
D
200 00
1
Laacher
See
20 300
0
3
200
300
3 km
7
Figure 1. Location of Central Rhineland (Neuwied Basin) Federmessergruppen sites. Settlement (large ): 1—Kettig; 2—AndernachMartinsberg; 3—Niederbieber; 4—Urbar. Isolated hearth (only two were associated with artefacts, ): 5—Bassenheim; 6—Kobern; 7—Polch;
8—Ochtendung; 9—Meisenheim 3; 10—Nickenich. Single finds (): 11—Miesenheim 2; 12—Thür. Human skeleton (): 13—Weissenthurm
(see Baales & Street, 1996).
Figure 2. Kettig. View of the site from the south. In the background, the Mülheim-Kärlich nuclear power plant (some 1·6 km distant) marks
the south bank of the Rhine at the present day.
130
M. Baales
Percentage present
1279
40
9173
931
9112
30
4558
20
245
10 193
8
0
VT
64
KS
7 0
TQ
VK
337
57
0 17
870
0 1
0 2
0 1
0 1
0 2
0 33
KOO
F
F
KA
Baltic/
W. Euro
Tétange
(Meuse)
Local Eifel
+
“Meuse egg”
LIM
Q
VTO
A/J
?
CH
Material
Figure 3. Lithic raw material composition of the Kettig assemblage in comparison with the Federmessergruppen assemblage from
Andernach-Martinsberg (1980s excavations). Leaving aside several smaller categories of material, only siliceous slate is distinctly more common
at the Kettig site (numbers above the bars indicate numbers of artefacts). VT: siliceous tuff; KS: siliceous slate; TQ: Tertiary limno-quartzite;
VK: siliceous chalk; CH: chalcedony; F: flint; KOO: siliceous oolite; KA: carneol; LIM: limonite; Q: quartz; VTO: siliceous clay stone;
A/J: agate/jasper; ?: unidentified. Andernach (), N=2·793; Kettig ( ), N=24·098.
siliceous slate (Kieselschiefer or lydite), but also
includes chalcedony from Bonn-Muffendorf, some
40 km to the north (Floss, 1992), and large quantities
of several types of Cretaceous flint, particularly from
the Meuse region c. 100 km to the northwest of the
site (see Baales & Street, 1996). Spatial plotting of
the different raw material clusters provides a range
of information on the occupation history of the
settlement.
Joining the Dots? Site Formation at Kettig
Shown by the Lithic Artefacts
Plotting lithic artefacts at a Stone Age site commonly
reveals horizontal clusters, generally interpreted as
material left over by the settlement process (mainly in
the form of waste products or débitage). At Kettig, the
conserving effect of pumice of the LST resting above
the find horizon has preserved such evidence for the
activities of the Federmessergruppen inhabitants in a
more or less undisturbed condition. Although mapping
lithic artefacts is one of the basic methods used in the
reconstruction of occupational histories of Palaeolithic
and Mesolithic sites, there is almost no consensus as to
how to do this or of how to represent them on a map,
a problem discussed in detail by Cziesla (1990). Here I
follow Cziesla’s proposal in using an ‘‘equidistance’’
level for interpreting artefact distributions, and the
following maps are based on this procedure.
A ‘‘equidistance’’ plot of the distribution of the
entire flaked stone assemblage (Figure 4(a)) shows a
major dense concentration of artefacts at the southwest
of the site. Further concentrations with fewer artefacts
can be recognized at the northeast, and a still smaller
accumulation is also visible to the northwest. In con-
trast, the rest of the site presents an undifferentiated
picture. This is due to the fact that any smaller
concentrations present are ‘‘swallowed up’’ by the
disproportionally large number of artefacts of the
southwestern concentration.
In order to obtain a better resolution for potentially
smaller lithic concentrations, a second plot was produced (Figure 4(b)) by dividing the site into several
independent sectors (areas A–F) and using the ‘‘equidistance method’’ independently for each of these. The
densest concentration to the southwest (area E) and
the northeastern part of the site characterized by three
distinct concentrations (area B) are again clearly visible. In contrast with Figure 4(a), several previously
invisible concentrations of artefacts now appear. To
the south (area D), a smaller concentration is visible,
which ‘‘fades out’’ to the northeast and was unfortunately partially destroyed by LST quarrying. A further
loose scatter of finds to the west (area F) shows no
clear structuring and is recognizable by only a restricted number of artefacts. It is noticeable that the
densest concentration of this area lies at the boundary
to area E. This is an unusual distribution which is
repeated by other categories of material (e.g. burins,
burned artefacts). Another small concentration with a
few retouched forms is found down the eastern slope of
the promontory (area C), a situation hard to interpret
due to limited excavation in this area. The interpretation of the northernmost part of the site (area A) is
now particularly clear and a major concentration
of artefacts can be recognized. Unfortunately, the
southern margin of this area was truncated by
quarrying.
Figure 4(b) characterizes Kettig as a site comprising
various small concentrations of greatly varying density.
From Lithics to Spatial and Social Organization 131
Promontory edge
N
Kettig
“Im Rauental”
0
3m
One equidistance
1–73
74–146
147–219
220–292
293–365
>365
(a)
26/21
All lithic artefacts
A
B
C
D
F
Variable equidistances
E
26/21
A–35
B–73
C–20
D–4
E–56
F–12
(b)
Figure 4. Kettig. Distribution of all lithic artefacts for (a) the entire site with an ‘‘equidistance’’ of N=73 and for (b) the artificial sub-areas
(A–F) with variable ‘‘equidistances’’.
Plotting the artefacts by different size groups (e.g.
<1 cm or 1–4 cm) merely mirrors the results for the
overall distributions and will not be presented here. In
contrast, plotting the different raw materials produces
more interesting results and allows an interpretation of
the development of individual artefact accumulations.
132
M. Baales
A plot of the artefacts of Tertiary quartzite (Figure
5(a)) shows that the densest concentration is at the
southwest of the excavation (cf. the densest concentration of all artefacts, Figure 4(b), area E). The
majority of the Tertiary quartzite comprises very small
chips (<1 cm). In contrast with this situation, the
pronounced concentration at the north of the site
shown by the plot of all materials (area A in Figure
4(b)) disappears completely in Figure 5(a), since
this concentration consists mainly of artefacts of
siliceous slate (Figure 5(b)). Further artefacts of siliceous slate are found particularly to the northeast
(area B) and, much less commonly, at the southwest
(area E) of the site. Siliceous slate occurs only rarely
in the eastern test trench, where Tertiary quartzite
dominates again.
Two clear concentrations of West European flint
(Figure 5(c)) are present at the northeast of the site
(area B). The most extensive of these overlaps with that
of the siliceous slate at this position. Two smaller
concentrations are visible to the south, one in the area
of the overall densest concentration of artefacts (area
E) and another to the west of this in area F. The
majority of finds in the latter concentration are small,
normally fire-cracked chips. They probably represent
the remains of only a limited number of artefacts which
were burnt elsewhere and dumped at this location
where no other traces of fire were found.
A translucent type of flint can only be described as
either of Baltic or Tétange type. Both materials appear
very similar, although their respective source would be
c. 100 km to the north in Saalian moraines or at a
lesser distance in the region west of Kettig. This flint
shows a very specific distribution pattern (Figure 6(a)),
with two clear scatters at the northeast (area B), well
outside the concentration of West European flint (see
Figure 5(c)).
The distribution of chalcedony artefacts (Figure
6(c)) is also very distinct and reveals a dense accumulation again at the northeast of the site (area B),
unfortunately partially disturbed by quarrying activities before the discovery of the site. Further single
artefacts of chalcedony are scattered to the west and
south, but the bulk of the chalcedony lies at the same
location as the small northeastern concentration of
West European flint (see Figure 5(c)) and peripheral to
the accumulation of Baltic/Tétange flint to the north
(Figure 6(a)).
In summary, several, mostly distinct concentrations
of different lithic raw materials could be observed at
Kettig. Such dense scatters of débitage at Stone Age
settlements are generally attributed to two primary
types of activities. Firstly, they can mark the actual
sites of knapping activities, i.e. the locations at which
nodules were worked. A second possibility is that they
represent sites (‘‘dumps’’) at which material worked
elsewhere was discarded or deposited.
Knapping locations are suggested as the explanation
for the concentrations of artefacts in the north and
northeastern parts of the site (areas A to D). These
locations are mostly represented by single raw materials (especially areas A, C, D and some spots in B)
and, furthermore, are situated in area B close to the
hearth(s) discussed below.
The very dense concentration of lithics in area E is
clearly separated from the hearth(s) in area B. Following Behm (1983), the pronounced concentration of
this material and the close spatial clustering speak
clearly for an interpretation as a ‘‘secondary dump’’.
Although a hypothetical knapping episode at this
location cannot be ruled out (or recognized), the
subsequent use of area E as a ‘‘dump’’ where lithic
waste was discarded can be definitely recognized. This
interpretation is supported by subsequent, more
detailed spatial analyses of individual nodules of the
raw materials.
The variable characteristics of the broad raw
material types allow the identification of specific units
(‘‘nodules’’) which can be subjected to a further stage
of analysis. Three examples are given here for Tertiary
quartzite. The main occurrence of a dense—in structure and colour—homogeneous, grey quartzite (Figure
7(a)) is in area B and the dense, southwestern concentration (area E). A few crested blades in area B identify
the knapping area of this material, although a core of
this ‘‘nodule’’ was not found. The presence of this
distinct Tertiary quartzite in the dense concentration of
area E shows that some waste, particularly flakes and
chips, produced at the knapping spot near a hearth at
the northeast of the site (area B) was subsequently
dumped several metres away to the southwest.
A yellow–grey Tertiary quartzite with large yellow
inclusions and a coarse, off-white weathered cortex
shows a totally different situation (Figure 7(b)). The
material is concentrated at the south of the site (area
D) and practically absent from the adjacent dump
(area E). The presence of two cores allows the location
to be interpreted as a small knapping area at which low
intensity, primary flaking activities took place. This
area lies some distance away from the main, northeastern occupied area with the hearth(s) (area B) and it was
therefore not ‘‘cleaned up’’ or significantly disturbed
by subsequent human activities.
A third situation is represented by a variety of brown
quartzite with yellow flecks and water-rolled cortex.
This material is concentrated at the very east of the site
(Figure 7(c)) and the artefacts include a roughly prepared and still viable core with a refitting flake, which
was nevertheless discarded. It is believed that the
knapping of the brown quartzite was one of the last
activities carried out at Kettig, and artefacts were
found clustered tightly together, rather than dispersed,
since the site was deserted shortly afterwards. Only a
single scraper of this material was found in the eastern
trench some distance from the concentration. This
distribution parallels that of the chalcedony (Figure
6(b)), which is therefore also associated with the
last phase of site activity, an interpretation further
From Lithics to Spatial and Social Organization 133
N
Kettig
“Im Rauental”
0
3m
Tertiary quartzite
26/21
1–38
39–76
77–114
115–152
153–190
>190
(a)
Siliceous slate
26/21
1–32
33–64
65–96
97–128
129–160
>160
(b)
West European (“Meuse”) flint
26/21
1–56
57–112
113–168
169–224
225–280
>280
(c)
Figure 5. Kettig. Distribution of all lithic artefacts of Tertiary quartzite, siliceous slate and West European (‘‘Meuse’’) flint.
134
M. Baales
N
Kettig
“Im Rauental”
0
3m
Flint of Baltic/Tétange type
1–12
13–24
25–36
37–48
49–60
>60
(a)
Chalcedony
1–6
7–12
13–18
19–24
25–30
>30
(b)
Figure 6. Kettig. Distribution of all lithic artefacts of Baltic (Erratic)/Tétange type flint and chalcedony.
supported by the concentrated accumulation of this
material.
Refitting
Although only a small amount of lithic material could
be refitted, analysis of the conjoining lines provides
some further interesting information on the settlement
history and activities which took place at Kettig.
One hundred and twenty-two of the total of 24,098
artefacts (3,834 artefacts >1 cm) were refitted, a proportion of only 0·5% (3·18%). They form 55 refitting
complexes and provide a total of 67 conjoining lines
which were plotted following the system of Cziesla
(1986, 1990). This gives a total of 40 sequential refits
(Aufeinanderpassungen), 21 breakage refits (Aneinanderpassungen), five modification refits (Anpassungen)
and one thermal refit (Einpassung eines Hitzeaussprunges). The sequential refits thus dominate. (This
applies to all raw materials.)
The 65 plotted conjoining lines are mainly concentrated in two areas (Figure 8). The majority (37 lines)
lies to the northeast (area B), while 18 are found to the
southwest, mainly linked to the dump (area E). The
two areas are connected by a c. 7·5 m long sequential
refit of Tertiary quartzite, conjoining a small bladelet
fragment at the southwest with a long and thick blade
at the northeast (Figure 8(a)). This is representative
for the transportation of material knapped at the
From Lithics to Spatial and Social Organization 135
N
Kettig
“Im Rauental”
0
3m
Cb
Cb
Cb
Cb
(a)
Homogeneous grey Tertiary quartzite
Ct
C
C
(b)
Yellow–grey Tertiary quartzite
C
S
S
S
(c)
Brown Tertiary quartzite with
water-rolled cortex
Figure 7. Kettig. Distribution of the larger artefacts of three raw material units (‘‘nodules’’) of Tertiary quartzite. C: core; Ct: core tablet;
Cb: crested blade; S: end scraper.
136
M. Baales
2
1
2
a
a
2
3
Figure 8. Kettig. Refitting lines of conjoining lithic artefacts. ,
modification refit; – – < – –, thermal refit.
northeast to the dump at the southwest of the site. A
conjoining line from the southwest dump extends some
8·25 m to the northwest, an area in which only a
few long conjoins were recognized, and is difficult to
interpret.
The northeast of the site (area B) is interpreted as the
main area of site activity (as shown in more detail in
the following chapter), not least due to the types of
conjoins found here. While 20 of the 37 lines (54·05%)
represent sequential refits (knapping), a further 17
(45·95%) are due to breaks, which suggests that subsequent human settlement activities at area B, especially
‘‘trampling’’, also influenced the artefacts by breaking
lithics lying on the surface.
The situation at the southwestern part of the site
(area E) is different. The 12 (66·66%) sequential refits
represent the disposal of series of knapped waste at the
dump. Only two of the 18 conjoining lines (11·11%) are
due to breaks, suggesting that, once deposited at this
part of the site, the artefacts were not subsequently
greatly modified as a result of human activities such as
trampling.
The Question of Hearths
Unlike at the Federmessergruppen site of Niederbieber
(Bolus, 1992), it was not possible to identify hearths at
Kettig as small areas of recognizably burned sediment.
Nevertheless, it was already possible during excavation
to observe two concentrations with numerous burnt
1
4
m2 find; <—1, sequential refit; — · —2, breakage refit; · · < · ·3,
bone splinters and lithic artefacts at the northeast of
the site (area B). The plot of white, calcined bone
splinters (representing the burning of bones at high
temperatures: Figure 9) shows that most of this
material lies at the northeast of the site, with its major
distribution in square 47/42. Most burnt fragments of
mammal teeth as fire-cracked artefacts lie in the same
area. Plotting the centres of distribution of the burnt
bone, tooth and artefacts, and also of thermally altered
porphyry, quartz and quartzite confirms the location
of a hearth at this part of the site (Figure 10).
A few metres to the southwest of this heart is a
second, less clearly defined accumulation of burnt
material (Figure 10). Although many calcined bone
fragments are present (Figure 9), they are here less
concentrated than in the hearth and form a more
diffuse satter. The same is true for burnt tooth fragments, while burnt artefacts were very uncommon.
This situation might have two different explanations:
(1) It is possible that a fire burned here (not necessarily for long time) at the beginning of the occupation of the Kettig site, before the hearth in
square 47/42 was in use and the remains of the
earlier hearth were dispersed and distorted by
later activities on the site. In this hypothesis, the
unburned material found at this part of the site
(especially lithic artefacts) would have been subsequently deposited when the older hearth was no
longer in use.
From Lithics to Spatial and Social Organization 137
N
Kettig
“Im Rauental”
0
3m
Calcined bone splinters
1–102
103–204
205–306
307–408
409–510
>510
Figure 9. Kettig. Distribution of calcined bone splinters.
N
Kettig
“Im Rauental”
0
3m
Burnt lithic artefacts
Calcined bone splinters
Thermally altered quartzite cobbles, etc.
Thermally altered quartz and porphyry
Hearth (square 47/42)
Hearth/dump of burnt materials?
Figure 10. Kettig. Distribution of different burnt materials (lithic artefacts, calcined bone splinters, thermally altered cobbles of Devonian
quartzite, quartz, porphyry, etc.).
(2) Alternatively, this area contains only material
intentionally cleared out (cleaning, maintenance)
from the hearth in square 47/42, only a few metres
to the northeast, which would have been in use
during the entire settlement process at Kettig.
It is difficult to decide which hypothesis is correct,
but to the author, the first one appears more plausible.
Another category of burnt material is provided by
numerous fragments of quartz cobbles shattered by
their repeated use as pot-boilers (Batchelor, 1979;
Dittmann, 1990). Thermally altered quartz is particularly common in the same area as the majority of the
burnt lithic artefacts. At the northeast of the site, they
can be interpreted as the waste from the final episodes
of water-heating activity around the hearth in
138
M. Baales
square 47/42 (see Figure 10). Other, more restricted
concentrations of burnt quartz fragments to the south
(e.g. in area E, which is otherwise characterized as a
dump for lithic artefacts) can be interpreted as due to
similarly discarding ‘‘exhausted’’ quartz fragments left
over from earlier episodes of boiling using the hearth(s)
at the northeast of the site.
Interlude—Locating the Tent? The ‘‘Ring and
Sector’’ Method at Kettig
The question whether the hearth identified in square
47/42 was within or outside a dwelling structure can be
investigated by application of the ‘‘ring and sector’’
method developed by Stapert (1992). This analysis was
performed earlier in Central Rhineland Federmessergruppen contexts at Niederbieber (Bolus, 1992; Stapert,
1992), with negative results, and for two hearths at
Andernach-Martinsberg (Stapert & Street, 1997),
where, as at Kettig, no evident tent structures could be
recognized. The analysis at Andernach showed that
one hearth was inside a tent of some 4 m in diameter.
At Kettig the ‘‘ring and sector’’ analysis of the cores
and retouched artefacts (tools), with the centre of the
hearth in square 47/42 and using distance increments of
0·5 m, shows that it is not possible to recognize a ‘‘wall
effect’’, showing that this hearth was not located inside
a tent.
Furthermore, the analysis did demonstrate that various categories of tools behave in different ways. End
scrapers tend to be found closer to the hearth than
projectile points, a feature already described for
Niederbieber Area I by Stapert (1992: 83). As an explanation, Stapert suggests that, unlike the scrapers at the
somewhat older Upper Palaeolithic sites, their location
at Federmessergruppen sites does not reflect the spot of
their use. Rather, the end scrapers were removed
from their hafts (‘‘hafting and re-tooling’’) by softening
their adhesive in a fire and discarded in the ‘‘drop
zone’’ close to the hearth. They would also be relatively
frequently burned, a situation clearly substantiated at
Kettig around the hearth at square 47/42.
While the interpretation seems plausible for hearth
47/42, the absence of adhesives on a sample of five
scrapers from Kettig investigated microscopically
(although traces of adhesive were found on all five
investigated projectile points; see Pawlik [in Baales, in
press; Baales, 1999]) and the overall diffuse distribution
of scrapers, in more or less similar frequencies
across the entire site, might speak against its general
applicability.
Occupation Division at Kettig
On the evidence of the flaked stone artefacts and, to a
limited extent, on the basis of the other discussed
materials, at least two phases can be identified during
the occupation of the Kettig site:
(1) In the area of the hearth in square 47/42, certain
raw materials used for stone tool production are
found in relatively discrete concentrations.
Among these are a small but dense concentration
of Tertiary quartzite artefacts directly to the
southeast of the hearth and the vast majority of
the artefacts of Baltic/Tétange flint. These artefacts are demonstrably the result of tool production around the hearth. Since the material is still
very clearly concentrated (i.e. has not been dispersed by a long subsequent period of human
activity) and contains numerous fire-cracked
specimens, it is suggested that it represents a
younger phase of the occupation of the site while
this hearth was in use.
Although concentrations of artefacts of chalcedony and a particular type of brown Tertiary
quartzite somewhat to the southeast are located
close to the area of greatest human activity
around the hearth, they are not dispersed, and it is
believed that these raw materials also belong to
the younger phase of settlement.
(2) Concentrations of artefacts of West European
flint and siliceous slate cover a larger, diffuse area
to the south of the hearth in square 47/42 (Figure
5(b)). They are believed to derive primarily from
an older phase of settlement, possibly centred
around an associated hearth, and to have been
dispersed by ‘‘trampling’’, etc. during the entire
succeeding phase of occupation.
The absence of artefacts of Baltic/Tétange flint,
brown Tertiary quartzite and chalcedony (assigned to
the younger occupation phase) in area E suggests that
the dump site reconstructed here should be associated
with earlier settlement activities. Burnt quartz fragments found at the dump can most probably be
attributed to early stone boiling events. The knapping areas of siliceous slate, and those of Tertiary
quartzite on the periphery of the site (e.g. Figure 7(b),
(c)), probably also represent the older phase of
occupation.
Summary of the Spatial Analysis and some
General Remarks on the Raw Material
Economy
This paper could only give a brief summary of certain
aspects of the Federmessergruppen site of Kettig, the
full analysis of which will be presented in the final
publication (Baales, in press). The main emphasis was
laid on the possibilities of using lithic artefact distributions for the recognition of internal site spatial
organization and fine chronological division of occupation phases. It was possible to differentiate several
discrete knapping areas of lithic artefacts, some of
which clearly relate to a hearth, and a ‘‘dump’’ where
numerous lithic artefacts knapped elsewhere on the site
were discarded.
From Lithics to Spatial and Social Organization 139
Percentage present
1279
50
X
10 042
9112
40
948
30
4563
20
71
0
250
245
10
337
881
20
40
60
> 60– c.100
up to 1
Raw material resource distance (km)
Figure 11. Raw materials classed by their source. Kettig in comparison with Andernach-Martinsberg (Federmessergruppen assemblage
of the 1980s excavations). , with Baltic/Tétange flint. Andernach
(), N=2·793; Kettig ( ), N=24·098.
Site history at Kettig can be divided into two successive phases of occupation (which are, however, closely
linked), the younger of which is represented by series of
artefacts still located at the place where they were
knapped, while the older stage is demonstrated by raw
materials found either more diffusely across the site
due to their dispersal by subsequent human activity or
in a secondary dump. Apart from these insights into
the spatial organization of a large Final Palaeolithic
settlement in the Central Rhineland, analysis of the
different lithic raw materials at Kettig allows some
conclusions of a more general nature.
Final Palaeolithic Federmessergruppen sites in the
Central Rhineland show a striking use of exogenous
raw materials (Figure 11) for manufacturing all kinds
of tools, even though good quality raw material was
present locally. ‘‘Exogenous’’, as used here, means
raw materials (cretaceous flint) obtained from sources
some 80 km (and more) distant, especially those
located in the Meuse drainage area (Belgium and
The Netherlands) to the northwest, or from moraines
of the Saalian glaciation to the north. The introduction of flint into the Central Rhineland can be
observed from the early Middle Palaeolithic onwards
and is particularly pronounced for the Upper Palaeolithic Magdalenian and for the Final Palaeolithic
Federmessergruppen (Floss, 1994; Baales & Street,
1996).
Seasonal information for both the Magdalenian and
the Federmessergruppen sites in the Central Rhineland
shows the availability of large game animals as a food
resource on a year-round basis. This implies that
hunter–gatherers at both periods (separated by some
2 ky) were potentially able to remain all year round
in the Neuwied Basin and its vicinity (Baales &
Street, 1996, 1998). In this case, we need to ask why
did people change location and transport exogenous
materials?
It is very probable that the reason for this mobility
was the necessity of maintaining regular social contacts
with other hunter–gatherers in neighbouring regions.
The need for such social interaction is made clear by a
recent study of European population density during
different pre- and protohistoric periods (Zimmermann,
1996). Data presented by Vencl (1991), based on
Federmessergruppen site density in Eastern Central Europe, suggest that the population of Central
Europe comprised some 0·02–0·03 individuals/km2
(Zimmermann, 1996: 58), only a tenth of a thousand of
the recent value. This is, of course, only an estimate,
but seems to be supported by data from sub-recent
hunter–gatherer societies. Even without a detailed
study, one can find in Pfizenmayer (1926: 248) a notice
that North Siberian reindeer hunters at the beginning
of the 20th century showed a population density of
some 0·04 individuals/km2 (close to the data discussed
here for the Federmessergruppen), although even
smaller values are known (cf. Weniger, 1982: 153,
207).
In order to survive in such a sparsely inhabited
Late Glacial landscape, the small hunter–gatherer
groups needed regular contact with other groups.
These social networks allowed hunter–gatherers to
interact with other similar, local hunter–gatherer
units, creating a form of higher-level ‘‘group identity’’. Knowledge of and intermarriage between different local groups would in turn have provided a
form of ‘‘insurance’’ in times of local subsistence
crisis by temporarily making available regions
occupied by other (now ‘‘related’’) people, and also
have made it possible to avoid inbreeding of the
‘‘own’’ local group. Although established for social
reasons, once in existence, the networks also
enabled the exchange and diffusion of knowledge of
new technological innovations and thus incidentally
led to the development of archaeologically recognizable inter-regional technocomplexes (e.g. the
Federmessergruppen).
In this model, lithic raw material curation and
transportation was simply a by-product of the movements initiated by highly necessary regular social
contacts between the Central Rhineland Federmessergruppen groups with others in neighbouring regions of
Northwestern Europe. All Federmessergruppen sites
in the Neuwied Basin have produced artefacts of
cretaceous flint from the Meuse catchment area to
the northwest. Although no Central Rhineland raw
materials have yet been found on contemporary sites in
Belgium or The Netherlands, a few Dutch sites of the
preceding Magdalenian have produced small numbers
of Tertiary quartzite artefacts (often backed bladelets)
presumed to have a Central Rhineland origin (Arts &
Deeben, 1987: 55 f) and brought in by people from the
south.
Whereas the Federmessergruppen contacts between
the Central Rhineland and the northwest have long
been known, the recent recognition of Niederbieber
of several nodules of Muschelkalkhornstein (Triassic
chert; H. Löhr, pers. comm.) provides new evidence
140
M. Baales
for contact on a similar scale to the region around
Saarbrücken, almost 200 km to the southwest.
Acknowledgements
My thanks are specially due to the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft in Bonn-Bad Godesberg, which
made possible the analysis of the Kettig site within the
framework of a DFG Priority Programme Wandel der
Geo-Biosphäre während der letzten 15.000 Jahre. A first
draft of this paper, intended as a contribution to this
research programme, was presented in 1995 at the
‘‘Analithic’’ meeting in Groningen, The Netherlands
(Dr D. Stapert). Finally, many thanks to my colleague
Dr M. Street, Neuwied-Monrepos, for discussion and
improvement of the text and for many fruitful past
(and future) debates, and two unknown JAS referees
for their useful, critical comments on the first draft of
the paper.
References
Arts, N. & Deeben, J. (1987). On the northwestern border of
Late Magadalenian territory: ecology and archaeology of early
Late Glacial band societies in northwestern Europe. In (J. M.
Burdukiewicz & M. Kobusiewicz, Eds) Late Glacial Europe.
Culture and Environment. Prace Komisji Archeologiczej 5.
Wroclaw: Zaklad Narodowy im. Ossolinskich-Wydawnictwo,
pp. 25–66.
Baales, M. (1994). Kettig (Kr. Mayen-Koblenz). Ein spätpaläolithischer Siedlungsplatz unter dem Bims des Laacher See-Vulkans
im Neuwieder Becken. Ein Vorbericht. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 24, 241–254.
Baales, M. (1997). Kettig (Neuwied Basin, Central Rhine Valley,
Germany): A Federmessergruppen site yielding organic artefacts.
In (J.-P. Fagnart & A. Thévenin, Eds) Le tardiglaciaire en Europe
du Nord-Ouest. Actes du 119e Congrès national des sociétés
historiques et scientifiques, Amiens 1994. Paris: CTHS, pp. 579–
588.
Baales, M. (1998). Zur Fortführung der Ausgrabungen auf
dem spätpaläolithischen Siedlungsareal von Niederbieber (Stadt
Neuwied). Ein Arbeitsbericht. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt
28, 339–356.
Baales, M. (1999). Neue Untersuchungen zum Spätpaläolithikum
des Neuwieder Beckens: Einige Aspekte des FedermesserFundsplatzes Kettig, Kr. Mayen-Koblenz. In (E. Cziesla, T.
Kersting & S. Pratsch, Eds) Den Bogen spannen . . . Festschrift
für Bernhard Gramsch zum 65. Geburtstag. Beiträge zur Ur- und
Frühgeschichte Mitteleuropas 20. Weissbach: Beier & Beran,
pp. 55–66.
Baales, M. (in press). Kettig (Kr. Mayen-Koblenz)—Ein Siedlungsplatz der Allerød-Zeit im Neuwieder Becken. Mainz: RömischGermanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz.
Baales, M. & Street, M. (1996). Hunter–gatherer behaviour in a
changing late glacial landscape: Allerød archaeology in the Central
Rhineland, Germany. Journal of Anthropological Research 52,
281–316.
Baales, M. & Street, M. (1998). Late Palaeolithic backed-point
assemblages in the northern Rheineland: current research and
changing views. Notae Praehistoricae 18, 77–92.
Baales, M., Bittmann, F. & Kromer, B. (1998a). Verkohlte Bäume
im Trass der Laacher See-Tephra bei Kruft (Neuwieder Becken).
Ein Beitrag zur Datierung des Laacher See-Ereignisses und
zur Vegetation der Allerød-Zeit am Mittelrhein. Archäologisches
Korrespondenzblatt 28, 191–204.
Baales, M., Mewis, S. U. & Street, M. (1998b). Der FedermesserFundplatz Urbar bei Koblenz (Kreis Mayen-Koblenz). Jahrbuch
des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 43 (1996),
241–279.
Batchelor, D. (1979). The use of quartz and quartzite as cooking
stones. In (G. Bosinski, Ed.) Die Ausgrabungen in Gönnersdorf
1968–1976 und die Siedlungsbefunde der Grabung 1968. Der
Magdalénien-Fundplatz Gönnersdorf 3. Wiesbaden: Franz
Steiner, pp. 154–165.
Behm, J. A. (1983). Flake concentrations: distinguishing between
flint working activity areas and secondary deposits. Lithic technology 12, 9–16.
Bogaard, P. van den & Schmincke, H.-U. (1985). Laacher See
Tephra—a widespread isochronous late quarternary tephra layer
in Central and Northern Europe. Geological Society of America,
Bulletin 96, 1554–1571.
Bolus, M. (1992). Die Siedlungsbefunde des späteiszeitlichen Fundplatzes Niederbieber (Stadt Neuwied). Monographien des
Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 22. Mainz & Bonn:
Dr. Habelt.
Bosinski, G., Street, M. & Baales, M. (Eds) (1995). The Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of the Rhineland. In (W. Schirmer,
Ed.) Quaternary Field Trips in Central Europe 15, Vol. 2. 14th
INQUA-congress. Berlin, Munich: Dfr Friedrich Pfeil, pp. 829–
999.
Cziesla, E. (1986). U
} ber das Zusammenpassen geschlagener Steinartefakte. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 16, 251–265.
Czeisla, E. (1990). Siedlungsdynamik auf steinzeitlichen Fundplätzen.
Methodische Aspekte zur Analyse latenter Strukturen. Studies in
Modern Archaeology 2. Bonn: Holos.
Dittmann, A. (1990). Das Kochen mit Steinen. Sonderschriften des
Froebenius Instituts 9. Frankfurt/Main & Wiesbaden: Froebenius.
Floss, H. (1992). Bonn-Muffendorf und die Chalcedone des Rheinlandes. Natürliche Vorkommen und paläolithische Nutzung.
Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 36 (1989),
159–177.
Floss, H. (1994). Rohmaterialversorgung im Paläolithikum des
Mittelrheingebietes. Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen
Zentralmuseums 21. Mainz & Bonn: Dr Habelt.
Ikinger, A. (1996). Bodentypen unter Laacher See-Tephra im
Mittelrheinischen Becken und ihre Deutung. Mainzer geowissenschaftliche Mitteilungen 25, 223–284.
Jöris, O. & Weninger, B. (2000). Radiocarbon-calibration and absolute chronology of the Late Glacial. In (B. Valentin, P. Bodu & M.
Christensen, Eds) L’Europe centrale et septentrionale au Tardiglaciaire. Confrontation es modèles régionaux de peuplement.
Colloquium Nemours 1997 Memoires du Musee de prehistoire
d’Ile-de-France 7. Nemours: A.P.R.A.I.F., pp. 19–54.
Kalthoff, D. C. (1998). Die Kleinsäuger (Mammalia) der Fundstelle
Kettig (Rheinland-Pfalz, Deutschland) im Rahmen der
allerødzeitlichen Säugetierfauna Mittel- und Süddeutschlands.
Paläontologische Zeitschrift 72, 407–424.
Pfizenmayer, E. W. (1926). Mammautleichen und Urwaldmenschen in
Nordost-Sibirien. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus.
Schwabedissen, H. (1954). Die Federmesser-Gruppen des nordwesteuropäischen Flachlandes. Zur Ausbreitung des Spät-Magdalénien.
Offa-Bücher 9. Neumünster: Wachholtz.
Stapert, D. (1992). Rings and sectors: intrasite spatial analysis of
Stone Age Sites. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Groningen.
Stapert, D. & Street, M. (1997). High resolution or optimum
resolution? Spatial analysis of the Federmesser site at Andernach,
Germany. World Archaeology 29, 172–194.
Street, M. & Baales, M. (1997). Les groupes à Federmesser de
l’Allerød en Rhénanie centrale (Allemagne). Bulletin de la Société
Préhistorique Française 94, 373–386.
Street, M., Baales, M. & Weninger, B. (1994). Absolute Chronologie des späten Paläolithikums und Frühmesolithikums im
nördlichen Rheinland. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 24,
1–28.
From Lithics to Spatial and Social Organization 141
Veil, S. (1982). Der späteiszeitliche Fundplatz AndernachMartinsberg. Germania 60, 391–424.
Vencl, S. (1991). On the importance of spatio-temporal differences in
the intensity of Palaeolithic and Mesolithic settlement in Central
Europe. Antiquity 65, 308–317.
Weniger, G.-C. (1982). Wildbeuter und ihre Umwelt. Ein Beitrag zum
Magdalénien Südwestdeutschlands aus ökologischer und ethno-
archäologischer Sicht. Archaeologica Venatoria 5. Tübingen:
Archaeologica Venatoria.
Zimmermann, A. (1996). Zur Bevölkerungsdichte in der Urgefschichte Mitteleuropas. In (I. Campen, J. Hahn & M. Uerpmann,
Eds) Spuren der Jagd—Die Jagd nach Spuren. Festschrift H.
Müller-Beck. Tübinger Monographien zur Urgeschichte 11.
Tübingen: Mo Vince, pp. 49–61.