Eurasian Prehistory, 5 (2): 77–87.

THE TRANSITION FROM THE MIDDLE TO THE UPPER

PALEOLITHIC IN THE SOUTHERN BALKANS:
THE EVIDENCE FROM THE LAKONIS I CAVE, GREECE
Paraskevi Elefanti1, Eleni Panagopoulou2 and Panagiotis Karkanas3
1
Royal Holloway, University of London, Department of Geography, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, UK;
Paraskevi.elefanti@rhul.ac.uk
2
Ephoreia of Palaeoanthropology and Speleology, Athens, Greece; elenipanagopoulou@yahoo.com
3
Ephoreia of Palaeoanthropology and Speleology, Athens, Greece; pkarkanas@hua.gr

Abstract
Current models of interaction between Neandertals and modern humans, and the nature and timing of the Middle to
Upper Paleolithic transition in western Eurasia suggest a complex, regionally-differentiated process. The lack of diagnos-
tic fossil remains and associated lithic industries limit the extent to which the transition can be modeled, whether a result of
overlap, acculturation or independent invention, or quite possibly a combination of all three. Fossil remains in southeast-
ern Europe tend to be fragmentary, isolated, and poorly dated.
This paper presents evidence from Greece where excavations at the recently discovered cave site of Lakonis have re-
vealed a continuous stratigraphic sequence dated to between 120 ka and 43 ka BP. During the last glacial the site would
have consisted of a series of small caves overlooking a large open plain; however, with erosion and sea level rise, its roof
has been lost and it is now at the water’s edge. The majority of deposits are dominated by Middle Paleolithic assemblages
associated with a series of overlapping hearth structures. Above this, however, the uppermost unit produced a lithic assem-
blage with clear mixed Middle and Upper Paleolithic affinities. On this basis it has been defined as transitional with the
presence of either or both modern humans and Neandertals suggested. Support for the latter was found during the 2002
field season when a well-preserved Neandertal molar was discovered in the uppermost unit. Both the lithics and the tooth
are relevant to the current debate concerning Neandertal and modern human interaction, and suggest that in this area, the
makers of this transitional assemblage were Neandertals.

dence and refinements in dating methods accumu-

INTRODUCTION
Human settlement history in Europe during
the period spanning the transition from the Mid-
dle to the Upper Paleolithic is one of the most de-
bated topics in Paleolithic archaeology (Mellars,
1996; Zilh±o and d’Errico, 2003; van Andel and
Davies, 2003; Brantingham et al., 2004; Straus,
2005; Conard, 2006). Issues pertinent to this de-
bate include hominin associations with late Mous-
terian and early Upper Paleolithic cultural mani-
festations, the origin of the Initial Upper Paleo-
lithic and the Aurignacian, and the possibilities
for contact between Neandertals and anatomically
modern humans (Smith et al., 2005). As new evi-
late, the complexity of this phase becomes in-
creasingly apparent, primarily as a result of the
immense cultural and demographic diversity
characterising the period (Kuhn, 2004), as well as
of the lack of sufficient records of anatomical hu-
man remains (Smith et al., 2005), which allow us
only a fragmentary idea of the identity of the mak-
ers of these cultures.
It has been repeatedly argued that Neander-
tals and modern humans did coexist in parts of
Europe (van Andel et al., 2003; Conard, 2006),
and therefore a range of possible cultural relation-
ships and contacts are likely to have been devel-
oped between them (Straus, 2005). The extent of
78 P. Elefanti et al.
Fig. 1. View of Lakonis I cave from the sea
these relationships is likely to have been variable.
A recent review of the dating evidence suggests
that the duration of coexistence was shorter and
more limited than previously thought, as “little”
as a couple of thousand years in some places
(Mellars, 2006). This implies that any cultural or
genetic interaction between the two groups would
have been limited (Delson and Harvati, 2006).
It is within this context of modern human-
Neandertal interaction in Europe, that this paper
presents new evidence from the Lakonis I cave in
southern Greece. The site has yielded an uninter-
rupted stratigraphic sequence spanning the Mid-
dle to Early Upper Paleolithic. The uppermost
part of the site’s sequence, Unit Ia, has yielded
dates between ca. 48 ka cal BP (44 ka 14C BP) and
42 ka cal BP (38 ka 14C BP) and comprises a stra-
tigraphically intact, but industrially mixed hori-
zon with elements reminiscent of both periods.
On these grounds, this layer has been interpreted
as an Initial Upper Paleolithic cultural manifesta-
tion (Panagopoulou et al., 2004). The presence in
this stratigraphic unit of a well-preserved Nean-
dertal tooth (Harvati et al., 2003), one of the very
few in the human fossil record of southeastern
Europe for this period (Trinkaus et al., 2006),
provides an insight into the manufacturers of the
industry. Continuation of the research program at
Lakonis I cave, including dating refinements and
post-excavation study will provide more data that
will allow hypotheses and scenarios about the
evolutionary history of Neandertals and modern
humans in this part of Europe to be further as-
sessed.
THE SITE
Lakonis I is located on the eastern coast of the
Mani peninsula, in the south-east Peloponnese,
which is the southernmost edge of the Greek
 Transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic
mainland (Figure 1). It is in an intensively karstic
environment that allowed for the preservation of
many caves and rockshelters, often with Pleisto-
cene archaeological and fossil-bearing deposits
(Darlas and de Lumley, 2004; Pitsios and Liebha-
ber, 1995). Lakonis I is an east-facing collapsed
cave with a floor area of about 250 m², which
forms part of a larger karstic complex consisting
of another four caves, some of which have yielded
evidence of human presence during the late Upper
Paleolithic (Panagopoulou et al., 2004). Excava-
tions at the site have been conducted since 1999
under the auspices of the Greek Ephoreia of Pa-
leoanthropology and Speleology, with the contri-
bution of local and foreign research institutions.
The cave is currently a littoral site, although
during the time of its occupation which coincided
with the sea level regression of MIS 4 and 3, it
would have been well placed at the edge of a
coastal plain extending out into what is today the
northern part of the Lakonic Gulf. This coastal en-
vironment would have consisted of a mosaic of
habitats including grass and parkland, dense
woodland, lagoons and marshes, all providing
plentiful food resources for both prey and preda-
tors. The fauna from the site consists mainly of
cervids, as well as Sus and Bos cf. primigenius,
and testifies to the presence of a diverse ecologi-
cal setting around the cave (Panagopoulou et al.,
2004). The presence of a currently submerged
fresh-water spring immediately below the site
suggests that drinking water would have been eas-
ily available. This, in conjunction with the prox-
imity of good quality lithic raw materials cur-
rently found within a short distance of the site as
both primary and secondary deposits highlight the
optimal settlement position that Lakonis I once
occupied in the local landscape.
STRATIGRAPHY OF THE SITE
Lakonis I preserves a stratigraphic sequence
of approximately 7 m in the form of a steeply in-
clined wave-eroded remnant, which is strongly-
cemented as a result of post-depositional calcite
precipitation. The sequence consists of five layers
which have been designated from the top down as
Units I to V. The lowermost layer, Unit V, is a
beach conglomerate and archaeologically sterile.
It is preserved in limited areas of the site at an av-
79
erage height of 2.5 m and is associated with a
costal environment very similar to the present
one. It is directly overlain by travertine forma-
tions, suggesting that sedimentation began soon
after the onset of MIS 5 regression. Overlying this
layer is Unit IV, a bone breccia with lithic arti-
facts and charcoal fragments in a reddish clayey
matrix cemented by calcite, which extends as a
continuous unit along the southern and eastern ar-
eas of the cave. The bone breccia gives way in the
central part of the sequence to a crudely-stratified
stony layer, Unit III, which consists of angular
roofspall cemented in a reddish brown sandy clay
matrix. It is separated from the overlying Unit II
by large boulders derived from a roof collapse
episode. Unit II is characterised by a reddish-
brown sandy clay matrix rich in angular marble
fragments. Finally, the uppermost part of the se-
quence is sealed by Unit I, which consists of two
superimposed hearth complexes, called Ia and Ib.
The thickness of the lower complex (Ib), which is
associated with a terminal Middle Paleolithic oc-
cupation, is about 50 cm, while the upper complex
(Ia), attributed on the basis of its technological af-
finities to the Initial Upper Paleolithic, has a pre-
served thickness of about 30 cm. The multi-
sequence burnt layers consist of heavily-cemen-
ted superimposed white, gray, black and grayish
brown layers, each of which is a few centimeters
thick. The two hearth complexes are separated by
a ca. 15 cm thick layer whose character is not as
yet fully understood, but most probably repre-
sents the detritus from accumulated hearth clea-
routs of the lower subunits (Panagopoulou et al.,
2004).
CHRONOLOGY OF THE SITE
The beach rock underlying the cultural se-
quence (Unit V) has been preliminarily dated by
OSL to the Last Interglacial (N. Mercier and H.
Valladas, pers. comm.), although further treat-
ment is required to refine the chronology. In addi-
tion, the speleothems capping the beachrock were
dated by U-Series/TIMS to the same time interval
(M. Bar-Matthews, pers. comm.), confirming pre-
vious age determinations and suggesting that
site’s initial occupation started sometime after
130–120 ka BPTL & -series (Panagopoulou et al.,
2004). Dating of the uppermost part of the se-
80 P. Elefanti et al.

Fig. 2. Northern profile of Trench A (Unit Ia) showing the location of the tooth below a gray ashy layer (white
circle) and the location of the dated sample (LC 146)

quence, Unit Ia and Ib, was based on charcoal ma-
terial taken by the bottom charcoal layers of
well-defined combustion zones (Figures 2–3).
The three dates from the upper complex (Unit Ia),
48,060 ± 2560 cal BP (44,500 ± 2330 14C BP,
RTT 3846), 42,600 ± 720 cal BP (38,240 ± 1160
14
C BP, RTT 3847) and 46,190 ± 1750 cal BP
(42,800 ± 1700 14C BP, RTT 4601), are statisti-
cally not different from those of the lower com-
plex (Unit Ib), 43,490 ± 770 cal BP (39,640 ±
1000 14C BP, RTT 3525), 46,740 ± 1920 cal BP
(43,335 ± 1800 14C BP, RTT 3844) and 46,560 ±
1890 cal BP (43,150 ± 1790 14C BP, RTT 3845)
(Table1).
There is a growing consensus about the limi-
tations and errors of radiocarbon calibration be-
tween 50 and 30 thousand years ago, due to sig-
nificant 14C fluctuations in the atmosphere and the
effects of this on our understanding of the evolu-
tionary and cultural development of hominins
around this time (Conard and Bolus, 2003; van
Andel et al., 2003; Giaccio et al., 2006; Weniger,
2006; Mellars, 2006). Refinements in dating tech-
niques are expected to improve chronological res-
olution, while the use of complementary dating
methods such as TL and tephrochronology will
provide a more solid chronological framework for
the site. Greece is located within the tephra fallout
zone of the Campanian Ignimbrite eruption dated
to approximately 40,000 years ago (Giaccio et al.,
2006); therefore, we are optimistic that future
analysis of tephra samples from the site will
provide an additional temporal marker for the
Unit I horizon.

Fig. 3. Southern profile of Trench A (Unit Ia) showing overlapping gray and black burnt layers and the location
of the dated samples (LC 142 and LC 143)
 Transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic 81

Table 1
Lakonis I cave radiocarbon dates. Calibrated dates were obtained by using Cal Pal 2007 Hulu

Unit Sample Laboratory code Technique Material 14C BP cal BP

Ib LC143 RT3525 Conv. Charcoal 39,640±1000 43,490±770
Ib LC145 RTT 3844 AMS Charcoal 43,335±1800 46,740±1920
Ib LC144 RTT 3845 AMS Charcoal 43,150±1790 46,560±1890
Ia LC143 RTT3846 AMS Charcoal 44,500±2330 48,060±2560
Ia LC142 RTT 3847 AMS Charcoal 38,240±1160 42,600±720
Ia LC146 RTT4601 AMS Charcoal 42,800±1700 46,190±1750

INITIAL UPPER PALAEOLITHIC IUP LITHIC ASSEMBLAGE AT

PRESENCE AT LAKONIS I LAKONIS I
On the basis of technological criteria, Unit Ib Until finer chronological resolution is avail-
has been attributed to the Middle Paleolithic and able from Lakonis I, our main method in estab-
Unit Ia to a more mixed tradition or complex of lishing cultural differences between Unit Ia and
traditions combining elements of both the Middle the underlying deposits remains the study of the
and Upper Paleolithic. On this basis Unit Ia was lithic collection. In the following discussion the
designated a transitional (sensu Kuhn, 2003) Ini- main technological and morphological character-
tial Upper Paleolithic (IUP) occupational phase of istics of Unit Ia are presented, which suggest that
the site (Panagopoulou et al., 2004), which places although it contains elements characteristic of
the site at the heart of discussions regarding the both the Middle and Upper Paleolithic, there is a
bio-cultural traits of the Middle to Upper Paleoli- predominance of those associated with the Upper
thic transition. Paleolithic. Ongoing comparative study of the
In order to establish the stratigraphic integrity lithic collection from the complete stratigraphic
of this Unit and to rule out the possibility of it be- sequence of the site should isolate more clearly
ing a palimpsest resulting from post-depositional any evolutionary changes in the lithic technology
mixing of both units, three different lines of evi- of the two cultural phases.
dence have been pursued, including micromor- The lithic assemblage from Unit Ia was re-
phological, taphonomic and contextual data. The covered during the 2000 to 2003 field seasons and
latter two include evidence in the form of four derives from only six quarter-meter squares exca-
cervid sesamoids (foot bones) which were found vated to a depth of 30 cm. Analysis of the assem-
in articulation in the same stratigraphic context, as blage recovered during subsequent seasons is
well as a number of refits and conjoins which well underway. In total the assemblage amounts
were excavated in close proximity within the to 6,917 pieces (Table 2), of which those larger
same 50 x 50 cm square by 5 cm thick spit. This is
consistent with the results of the micromorpholo-
gical analysis which suggests that the unit is in- Table 2
tact. The analysis has identified only very mini- IUP Lakonis I: Main lithic categories
mal post-depositional disturbance of Unit Ia, with
N %
consolidation prior to being covered by the over-
Unworked raw materials 2 0.03
lying layers. This conclusion is further supported
by the intact condition of the upper contact of the Cores 28 0.5
ashy layers, the fact that wood ashes retain fragile Debitage >20mm 589 8.4
pseudomorphs of original plant structures, and the Debitage 20-10mm 872 12.6
presence of only very minimal root disturbance. Tools (any size) 147 2.1
Moderate microfauna activity is observed, but not Chips ?10mm 1,968 28.4
to the degree that would obliterate the original Debris (any size) 3,311 47.8
macrostructure of the sequence. Total 6,917 100
82 P. Elefanti et al.

Fig. 4. Lakonis I Initial Upper Paleolithic assemblage. 1) Refit: Prismatic core with core tablet; 2) Prismatic
core/tournant; 3) Change of orientation core; 4) Bladelet core on Levallois flake; 5) Core tablet; 6) Crested blade;
7) “Elongated” point; 8–9) Retouched bladelets; 10) Carinated scraper/core; 11) Nosed scraper; 12) Bifacial tool;
13) Mousterian point; 14) Aurignacian blade with truncation. Drawings by D. Pakogiannaki

than 20 mm or with secondary retouch (n = 766)
were selected for detailed study. Attributes stud-
ied included raw material, blank morphology, tool
type, fragmentation and dimensions.
Lithic production at the site was based pred
continuedominantly on the use of silicified volca-
nic rock of varying quality (77%). Such materials
are currently found within a radius of up to 10 km
from the site, and occur as primary outcrops;
however collection from derived river gravel de-
posits closer to the site is also a distinct possibil-
ity. The second most common rock type in use
(13%) was white-to-pinkish-grey or yellow wa-
ter-rolled quartz pebbles, followed by fine-grai-
ned black and grey flint (3.7%), and very rare
schist and limestone (1%). There appears to have
been no significant shift in the use of non-flint
rock types between Unit Ia and what was in use
during the Middle Paleolithic. Conversely, the use
of flint, although in low quantities overall, almost
 Transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic 83

Table 3 Table 3 continued

IUP Lakonis I: Core reduction sequence
Tool fragments 2 1.4
Cores (n = 28) n % Tool per debitage category (n = 147)
Core on blank (flake or blade) 12 42.8 Tools on flakes non-Levallois 75 51
Change of orientation 11 39.3 Tools on blades non-Lavallois 16 10.9
Two opposed platform 3 10.7 Tools on Levallois flakes 28 19
Prismatic/subprismatic 2 7.1 Tools on Lavallois blades 4 2.7
Technical pieces D 20 mm (n = 105) n % Tools on bladelets 12 8.2
Core tablets 28 27 Cores 6 4.1
Crested blanks 5 4.8 Chunk/indeterminate blanks 6 4.1
Rejuvenation and plunging blanks 38 36.2 * Tools made on cores and debris/chunk ( n = 10) were ex-
Débordant blanks 29 27.6 cluded
Pseudo-Levallois blanks 1 0.9
"Burin spall" like technical pieces 4 3.8 doubles in Unit Ia. This shift may suggest an in-
Blank categories including unretouched D creased emphasis on the use of finer-grained
20 mm and retouched pieces of any size* n % rocks better suited to blade/bladelet production.
(n = 726) As opposed to the other rock types used, flint
Flakes 557 77 originates from areas further inland although the
Blades 62 8.5 actual source remains unknown. The increase in
Bladelets (W 30 mm in length) 52 7.2 its frequency may suggest more extensive use of
Levallois points 6 0.8 the landscape.
Indeterminate blanks 49 6.7 The variety of core forms, technical pieces
Levallois vs. prismatic production based and blank characteristics indicate that more than
on retouched pieces D 20 mm and re-
touched pieces of any size*
one method of blank production was employed in
(n = 726) Unit Ia, with Levallois and prismatic (laminar
Artifacts related to Levallois production 112 15.4 volumetric) being the most prominent. Traces of
Artifacts related to prismatic production 507 70 discoidal core-working in the form of short, thick
Bladelets 52 7.2 pseudo-Levallois and Kombewa flakes also occur
Other blanks i.e., Kombewa, PSL 6 0.8 in small percentages (Table 3). The Levallois re-
Blank indeterminate 49 7.2 duction sequence (n = 29, 28% of technical
Tool index (all sizes) (n = 147)
pieces; n = 112, 16% of debitage and tools) ap-
Sidescrapers 37 25.5
pears to have been primarily geared towards the
Bifacial tools (including scrapers) 6 4.1
production of flakes and blades from recurrent
Endscrapers 5 3.4
uni- and bi-directional cores, as suggested by dor-
sal scar patterns and occasional refits. The ab-
Carinated scrapers 3 2.1
sence of actual Levallois cores is incommensurate
Nosed scrapers 1 0.7
with the rest of the assemblage, which points to
Retouched flakes 43 29.6
continuing use of Levallois at the site. Assuming
Retouched blades 8 5.4
that this is not simply sampling error, it may sug-
Retouched bladelets 10 6.8
gest that cores were undergoing several cycles of
Burins 13 8.8
reduction with a concomitant change of their mor-
Elongated Levallois points 2 1.4
phology. Moreover, the possibility of Levallois
Mousterian points 2 1.4
cores being removed from the site as curated
Notches/Denticulates 3 2.1
pieces has also to be considered. Nevertheless, all
Truncations 3 2.1
the elements typically associated with Levallois
Borers 1 0.7 core reduction including débordants, enlèvements
Aurignacian blades 1 0.7 II blanks, etc. are present (Table 3).
Composite tools (notch/scraper) 1 0.7 The most striking feature of the laminar volu-
Resharpening pieces 6 4.1 metric core reduction sequence in Unit Ia is the
84 P. Elefanti et al.
increasing emphasis on bladelet manufacture
through two conceptually distinct chaînes opéra-
toires. The first encompassed the use of different
types of cores, exploited volumetrically around
most of their periphery or flaked with the semi-ro-
tating method removing blanks from their thick-
ness. Cores of this type could be classified in
terms of their shape into ones with two opposed
platforms, “change of orientation cores” (i.e.,
specimens with more than two platforms, one of
which being at a right angle to the main axis of
percussion), and small sized prismatic cores (Ta-
ble 3, Figure 4). Their use life was maintained
through frequent striking platform and flaking
surface rejuvenation, as indicated by the range of
technical pieces identified, including core tablets,
crested blades and rejuvenation/plunging blanks.
The latter often retained distal remnants of the op-
posed striking platform which they set out to re-
move. The second bladelet production sequence
was based on the use of blanks, occasionally of
Levallois morphology, as cores for the detach-
ment of bladelets and small flakes. In this process,
as suggested by several refits and conjoins, the
striking platform and dorsal ridges were used as
guides for removals without further modification
of the blank’s geometry.
The small core sample attributed to the IUP
does not allow us to determine if the above – es-
sentially different – volumetric concepts were ap-
plied simultaneously on nodules of different sizes
and shapes depending on the desired end product,
or sequentially as part of the same reduction con-
tinuum. Judging by the presence of technical
pieces of variable sizes, the variety of core forms,
the number of striking platforms and the presence
of occasional core refits, it seems likely that raw
materials underwent several cycles of exploitation
prior to discard, suggesting that the two basic re-
duction sequences were not strictly separated.
This is better exemplified by the presence in the
assemblage of bladelets produced on Levallois
blanks.
The mixed character of Unit Ia is further em-
phasized by the range of tools present (Table 3,
Figure 4). Mousterian and retouched Levallois
points, often with thinned proximal ends, as well
as a range of side scrapers (single, double, trans-
verse, déjeté and Quina) and notches/denticulates
represent a relatively small part (32%, n = 46 out
of 147) of the tool inventory, and are all consid-
ered distinctive of the Middle Paleolithic. The
Levallois points resemble those from other transi-
tional sites including Üçaðýzlý in Turkey and
Umm el Tlel in Syria (Kuhn, 2004). Despite their
similarities to Middle Paleolithic tool morpholo-
gies, it seems that these artifacts originated in the
context of prismatic core reduction, judging by
their bi-directional scar patterns, platform charac-
teristics and rectilinear profiles. The bifacial com-
ponent of the assemblage bears affinities to the
Bohunician of Central Europe which is dated to
between 43–35 ka 14C BP (Svoboda, 2004).
The most numerous category of artifacts with
secondary modification is blanks with linear re-
touch (flakes, blades bladelets), which together
with burins comprise 51% (n = 74) of the identi-
fied tools. Endscrapers, truncations and tool
markers of the Aurignacian, such as carinated and
nosed scrapers as well as Aurignacian blades, are
present but rare. The few carinated scrapers pres-
ent in the assemblage are not related to the pro-
duction of bladelets since the latter do not exhibit
the characteristic curved profile. Dufour bladelets
or tools made on organic materials are totally ab-
sent from the assemblage. The majority of tools
were fashioned on blanks from prismatic core re-
duction (62%, n = 91), with Levallois blanks pres-
ent at a relatively low frequency (22%, n = 32).
Laminar elements in the form of blades and blade-
lets constitute approximately 20% of tool blanks.
In all, analysis of the IUP tool sample of
Lakonis I suggests that Upper Paleolithic type
tools constitute approximately two thirds of the
assemblage and that the required blanks including
elongated blanks, points, blades and bladelets
could be obtained by using a number of strategies,
but with a marked reliance on those characteristic
of the Upper Paleolithic.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The cave of Lakonis I in southern Greece has
yielded a long Middle Paleolithic sequence with
its uppermost unit containing a transitional, Initial
Upper Paleolithic assemblage associated with a
Neandertal tooth. Evidence for occupation post-
dating this period has not been recovered at the
site, and therefore we are unable to estimate the
duration of the transitional period and whether it
 Transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic
evolved into a phase more characteristic of the
Upper Paleolithic. Further excavation at the site
combined with analysis of the lithic collection at
finer stratigraphic resolution is planned, along
with new dates in order to improve our under-
standing of the chronology of the upper Unit Ia in
particular. At the moment 14C dates for the Initial
Upper Paleolithic occupation fall within the same
chronological range with those from the terminal
Middle Paleolithic deposits at the site, and are
close to the limits of the method.
Part of the difficulty in drawing conclusions
about the evolutionary status of Initial Upper
Paleolithic assemblages is related to typological
classificatory systems, which are poor analytical
tools for investigating what are continuous and
gradual evolutionary processes (Kuhn, 2003). It is
becoming increasingly clear that in addition to
lithics, emphasis should be placed on other forms
of behavior, for instance land use and food pro-
curement strategies, which will provide a clearer
picture of the character of the transition. At Lako-
nis, a multidisciplinary approach is being applied
that aims to develop an understanding of the role
of the site within the southern Balkans region in
general. One element of this has been strontium
isotope analysis which has been applied to
Neandertal tooth enamel (Richards et al., 2008).
The results indicate that the enamel was formed in
the vicinity of radiogenic volcanic rocks, as op-
posed to local limestone found around the cave.
The closest potential location of rocks of this type
is 20 km inland to the north, and probably reflects
the minimum scale of Neandertal mobility in the
area.
A key question in regard to Initial Upper
Paleolithic technology of western Eurasia con-
cerns their makers. Some suggest that the assem-
blages reflect a degree of acculturation on the part
of Neandertals under the influence of modern hu-
mans (Hublin et al., 1996). Others suggest that
they represent an incipient Aurignacian (Otte and
Kozlowski, 2003; Bar-Yosef, 2006), while some
have suggested that Neandertals independently
developed cultural traits similar to those of mod-
ern humans (Zilh±o and d’Errico, 2003). Even
though our data cannot at present support any of
the above hypotheses and should of course be cor-
related with data from other sites, the presence at
Lakonis of an uninterrupted cultural sequence
85
spanning the transition from the Middle to the
Upper Paleolithic makes the site especially rele-
vant to the understanding of the internal dynamics
of the period. Furthermore, the presence of the
Neandertal tooth (Harvati et al., 2003), in direct
association with an Initial Upper Paleolithic as-
semblage is suggestive of its manufacturers.
Compared to other parts of western Eurasia,
Paleolithic sites in Greece are rare, let alone those
that have been excavated and dated. This limits
the extent to which the evidence from Lakonis I
can be placed within a regional context. However
at Klisoura cave in southern Greece, we have both
Middle and Early Upper Paleolithic occupational
horizons preserved, the latter dated to ca. 40 ka
14
C BP (Koumouzelis et al., 2001). Furthermore,
a range of late Middle Paleolithic and early Upper
Paleolithic open-air sites, estimated on the basis
of lithic material to fall between 44 and 28 ka 14C
BP, have been identified on the mainland (Run-
nels and van Andel, 1993), while open air sites
with Aurignacian affinities have also been re-
ported from other parts of Greece (Darlas, 1999;
Runnels et al., 2003). This admittedly fragmen-
tary record points to human presence in Greece
during the Middle and early Upper Paleolithic.
Further excavations at Lakonis, along with new
dates and comparative analysis will shed light on
the role of the site within the region in terms of
cultural developments during the transition from
the Middle to Upper Paleolithic.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to Daniel Adler, Olaf Jöris and
William Davies for their constructive comments on
earlier drafts of the paper. Research at Lakonis I Cave
is made possible through generous grants from the
Greek Ministry of Culture, the Wenner-Gren Founda-
tion for Anthropological Research, the Institute for the
Aegean Prehistory (INSTAP), the L. S. B. Leakey
Foundation (EP) and the Dr. M. Aylin Cotton Founda-
tion (PE).
REFERENCES
BRANTINGHAM P. J., KUHN S .L., KERRY K. W.
(eds.). 2004. The Early Upper Paleolithic beyond
Western Europe. Berkeley, University of California
Press.
CONARD N .J. (ed.). 2006. When Neanderthals and
Modern Humans Met. Tübingen Publications in Pre-
history. Tübingen, Kerns Verlag.
86 P. Elefanti et al.
CONARD N. J., BOLUS M. 2003. Radiocarbon Dating
the appearance of Modern Humans and timing of
cultural innovations in Europe: New results and new
challenges. Journal of Human Evolution 44, 331–
371.
DARLAS A. 1999. Palaeolithic research in Western
Achaia. In: G. N. Bailey, E. Adam, E. Panagopou-
lou, C. PerlÀs, K. Zachos (eds.), The Palaeolithic
Archaeology of Greece and Adjacent Areas. Pro-
ceedings of the ICOPAG Conference, Ioannina,
September 1994. British School at Athens Studies 3.
London: British School at Athens, 303–310.
DARLAS A., DE LUMLEY H. 2004. La Grotte de
Kalamakia (Areolopis, Grece). Sa contribution ´ la
connaissance du Paleolithique Mouen de GrÀce. In:
Ph. Van Peer, P. Semal, D. Bonjean (eds.), Le
Paleolithique Moyen. Sessions Generales et posters.
Actes du XIVeme Congres UISPP, Université de
LiÀge. Belgique, 2–8 Septembre 2001. Oxford: Brit-
ish Archaeological Reports. International Series
1239, 255–234.
DELSON E., HARVATI K. 2006. Return of the last
Neanderthal. Nature 443, 762–763.
GIACCIO B., HAJDAS I., PERESANI M., FEDELE
F. G., ISAIA R. 2006. The Campanian Ignimbrite
Tephra and its relevance for the timing of the Mid-
dle to Upper Palaeolithic shift. In: N.J. Conard (ed.)
When Neanderthals and Modern Humans Met.
Tübingen Publications in Prehistory. Tübingen,
Kerns Verlag, 343–375.
HARVATI K., PANAGOPOULOU E., KARKANAS
P. 2003. First Neanderthal Remains from Greece:
The evidence from Lakonia. Journal of Human Evo-
lution 45, 465–473.
HUBLIN J., SPOOR F., BRAUN M., ZONNEVELD
F., CONDEMI S. 1996. A Late Neanderthal Associ-
ated with Upper Paleolithic Artifacts. Nature 381,
224–226.
KOUMOUZELIS M., GINTER B., KOZLOWSKI J.,
PAWLIKOWSKI M., BAR-YOSEF O., ALBERT
R.-M., LITYNSKA-ZAJAC M., STWORZEWICZ
E., WOJTAL P., LIPECKI G., TOMEK T.,
BOCHENSKI Z., PAZDUR A. 2001. The Early Up-
per Palaeolithic in Greece: The excavations in
Klisoura Cave. Journal of Archaeological Science
28, 515–539.
KUHN S. L. 2003. In what sense is the Levantine Up-
per Paleolithic a “transitional” industry? In: J.
Zilh±o and F. d’Errico (eds.) The Chronology of the
Aurignacian and of the Transitional Technocom-
plexes. Dating, Stratigraphies, Cultural Implica-
tions. Proceedings of Symposium 6.1 of the XIVth
Congress of the UISPP (University of LiÀge, Bel-
gium, September 2–8, 2001). Lisbon, Trabalhos de
Arqueologia, 61–69.
KUHN S. L. 2004. The Early Upper Paleolithic and the
origins of Modern Human behaviour. In: P.
Brantigham, S. L. Kuhn, K. W. Kerry (eds.) The
Early Upper Paleolithic Beyond Eastern Europe.
Berkeley, University of California Press, 242–248.
MELLARS P. 1996. The Neanderthal Legacy. An Ar-
chaeological Perspective of Western Europe.
Princeton, Princeton University Press.
MELLARS P. 2006. A new radiocarbon revolution and
the dispersal of Modern Humans in Eurasia. Nature
439, 931–935.
PANAGOPOULOU E., KARKANAS T., TSARTSI-
DOU G., KOTJABOPOULOU E., HARVATI K.,
NTINOU M. 2004. Late Pleistocene archaeological
and fossil human evidence from Lakonis Cave,
Southern Greece. Journal of Field Archaeology 29,
323–349.
PITSIOS T., LIEBHABER B. 2005. Research con-
ducted in Apidima and the surrounding region 1/N
Taenarios Man. Acta Anthropologica (Athens) 1,
175–179.
RICHARDS M., HARVATI K., GRIMES V., SMITH
C., SMITH T., HUBLIN J-J., KARKANAS, P.,
PANAGOPOULOU E. 2008. Strontium isotope evi-
dence of Neanderthal mobility at the site of Lakonis,
Greece using laser-ablation PIMMS. Journal of Ar-
chaeological Science 35, 1251–1256.
RUNNELS C., VAN ANDEL T. J. H. 1993. The
Lower and Middle Paleolithic of Thessaly, Greece.
Journal of Field Archaeology 20, 299–317.
RUNNELS C., KARIMALI E., CULLEN B. 2003.
Early Upper Palaeolithic Spilaion: An artifact-rich
surface site. In: J. Wiseman, K. Zachos (eds.) Land-
scape Archaeology in Southern Epirus, Greece I.
American School of Classical Studies at Athens,
Hesperia Supplement 32, 135–156.
SMITH F. H., JANKOVIÆ I., KARAVANIÆ I. 2005.
The assimilation model, Modern Human origins in
Europe, and the extinction of Neandertals. In: L. G.
Straus (ed.) Armagedon or Entente? The Demise of
the European Neandertals in Isotope Stage 3. Qua-
ternary International 137, 7–19.
STRAUS L. G. (ed.). 2005. Armagedon or entente?
The demise of the European Neandertals in Isotope
Stage 3. Quaternary International 137.
SVOBODA J. A. 2004 Continuities, discontinuities,
and interactions in Early Upper Palaeolithic tech-
nologies: A view from the Middle Danube. In: P.
Brantigham, S. L. Kuhn, K. W. Kerry (eds.) The
Early Upper Paleolithic Beyond Western Europe.
Berkeley, University of California Press, 30–40.‚
TRINKAUS E., ZILH‚O J., ROUGIER H.,
RODRIGO R., MILOTA S., GHERASE M.,
SARCINA L., MOLDOVAN O., BALTEAN I.O.,
CODREA V., BAILEY S.R., FRANCISCUS R.G.,
 Transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic
DE LEÓN M.P., ZOLLIKOFER C.P.E. 2006. The
Peºtura cu Oase and Early Modern Humans in
Southeastern Europe. In: N.J. Conard (ed.). When
Neanderthals and Modern Humans Met. Tübingen
Publications in Prehistory. Tübingen, Kerns Verlag,
145–164.
ZILH‚O J., D’ERRICO F. (eds.). 2003. The Chronol-
ogy of the Aurignacian and of the Transitional
technocomplexes. Dating, stratigraphies, Cultural
implications. Proceedings of Symposium 6.1 of the
XIVth Congress of the UISPP (University of LiÀge,
Belgium, September 2–8, 2001). Lisbon, Trabalhos
de Arqueologia.
VAN ANDEL T. J. H., DAVIES W. (eds.). 2003.
Neanderthals and Modern Humans in the European
Landscape during the Last Glaciation. McDonald
87
Institute Monographs. Cambridge, McDonald Insti-
tute for Archaeological Research.
VAN ANDEL T. J. H., DAVIES W., WENINGER B.
2003. The human presence in Europe during the last
Glacial period I: Human immigrations and changing
climate. In: T. J. H., van Andel, W. Davies (eds.)
Neanderthals and Modern Humans in the European
Landscape During the Last Glaciation. McDonald
Institute Monographs. Cambridge, McDonald Insti-
tute for Archaeological Research, 31–56.
WENIGER G.-CH. 2006. Neanderthals and Early
Moderns-Human contacts on the borderline of ar-
chaeological visibility. In: N.J. Conard (ed.) When
Neanderthals and Modern Humans Met. Tübingen
Publications in Prehistory. Tübingen, Kerns Verlag,
21–32.