Abstract

The object of this article is to study the Maizy site (Aisne) with a view to characterising the fauna of the Michelsberg culture. This fauna is unknown in the Picardie region. A second objective is to contribute to the general issue of the Early Chalcolithic period. Further, the specific characteristics of the faunal remains according to various types of sites are emphasised. The sample studied includes 4000 bones of which 40 % have been identified. Consequently, a list of each species and its respective proportions has been established. Noticeable diferences were observed in the composition of domestic animals and wild game compared to the Chasséen of the Oise region. The differences can be explained either by environnemental stresses due to the elevation of the Chasséen sites, or by cultural stresses. In each case, the type of fauna is different. The distinction could be resolved by a study of a Michelsberg site situated on the plateaus of the Aisne region. The Berry-au-Bac (Epi-Rössen site, Aisne) fauna are very similar to the Maizy site in spite of the different nature of the sites. An environmental approach has been attempted by a biotic typing of the birds. A palynological and geomorphological analysis should be associated with This. Butchering cut marks have been examined along with the anatomical representations of the skeletal remains. They enable us to determine that wild animals were brought back whole to the site. Another research project was done to study the bone tools. This was to complete the faunal picture and, at the same time, determine selection of species by the bone tools used. This research adds new elements to the knowledge of the bone artefacts of the Michelsberg period. A special analysis of the remains has been done in order to bring to light a possible settlement within the enclosure. Curiously, similarities have been found in the distribution of archeological material in the Maizy and Bazoches (Aisne) sites. Once the excavation is finished, the Bazoches site will be the subject of an in depth analysis by the URA 1 2 team. The absence of structures within the enclosure could be explained in terms of temporary habitation. While several clues indicate more intense activities between spring and fall, this conclusion remains to be confirmed by more precise analysis.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.