Back to Don's Maps

Back to Archaeological Sites

Grotte de Fontéchevade

Entrance to Fontéchevade Cave

The Fontéchevade cave is a prehistoric cave located in the commune of Montbron, 27 km east of Angoulême in the Charente department, 5 km from the Dordogne and 11 km from the Haute-Vienne.

It was occupied during the Tayacian (Lower Palaeolithic), Mousterian (Middle Palaeolithic), and Aurignacian (Upper Palaeolithic) periods.

It consists of a U-shaped limestone tunnel measuring about 6 metres wide and 30 metres long.

Photo: Jack ma
Permission: GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version
Proximal source: Wikipedia

Location map Dibble et al. (2006)

Entrance to Fontéchevade Cave.

The cave is located 2 km northwest of the town of Montbron, on the border of the commune of Orgedeuil, at the foot of the hamlet of Fontéchevade. It sits in a small southwest-facing valley containing the Fontéchevade stream, a right-bank tributary of the Tardoire.

It is situated near the Montgaudier cave (1.5 km to the southwest as the crow flies) and the Placard cave (4.8 km to the west). Excavations at the Fontéchevade cave began in 1870 with Paire and Fermond, followed by Durousseau-Dugontier (1902–1910), Vallade (1913–1914), Saint-Perrier (1921), and David, who conducted test pits in the Aurignacian layer in 1933. Germaine Henri-Martin resumed excavations from 1937 to 1955. In 1947, a human skullcap attributed to a pre-Neanderthal individual was unearthed. It is believed to be the oldest human bone found in Charente.

The Fontéchevade cave is a U-shaped tunnel, approximately 30 m long and 6 m wide.

In 1957, Germaine Henri-Martin identified six layers (labeled A through E, plus a clay layer on the cave floor), including an Aurignacian layer (B), a Mousterian layer (C), and a Tayacian layer (E). This Tayacian occupation has been dated to the Riss-Würm interglacial, approximately 150 000 years ago. Recent excavations have revealed a stratigraphy consisting of eight layers.

Photo and text: Dibble et al. (2006)

In 1947, Germaine Henri-Martin (1902 - 1975) unearthed fragments of a frontal and parietal bone, as well as a portion of a skullcap (comprising the frontal bone and parts of the right and left parietal bones) belonging to an elderly individual—indicated by fused sutures—which were attributed to a pre-Neanderthal.

At the time of the discovery, the only other fossils from this same cultural facies with a confirmed date in France came from the Grotte de l'Hyène at the Arcy-sur-Cure site in the Yonne department. Other human remains were discovered: a left fifth metatarsal in 1948, attributed to the Mousterian; and subsequently four teeth and a phalanx, dating to either the Aurignacian or a more recent period.

In August 1947 Henri-Martin unearthed two hominid cranial fossils in this Tayacian layer. The first, called Fontéchevade I, was a small fragment of a frontal bone with the glabella, while the second, called Fontéchevade II, was a partial calotte (frontal and parietal). Fontéchevade I possessed features more like modern humans, while Fontéchevade II possessed more archaic features like those found in Neanderthals. Germaine Henri-Martin's father, Léon Henri-Martin, was a physician and an archaeologist who devoted many years to excavating the Palaeolithic site of La Quina.

Photo and text: https://pressbooks.lib.vt.edu/paleoanthropology/chapter/germainehenri-martin/

Early excavations at Fontéchevade Cave.

Germaine Henri-Martin excavated the site from 1937 to 1954, with intensive work inside the cave proper spanning from 1946 to 1954.

Excavations within the cave proper, where the deposits reach 8.5 metres, began in 1946 and continued until 1954. Publications detailing the results appeared in 1957 and 1958. It is estimated that, in eight years, Henri-Martin may have removed as much as 900 cubic meters of sediment using methods common at that time. Finds were recorded in large geological units. At the top of the sequence Henri-Martin identified thin layers of Aurignacian and Mousterian, but the bulk of the deposits are Tayacian.

Photo and text:https://www.oldstoneage.com/osa/fc/martin_exc/

Fontechevade I

Photo: https://prehistoire-montbron.net/fontechevade-commune-de-montbron/

Fontechevade II: fragment of a cranial vault. ©Paleo Core and OSA

Two fragments of skulls. Fontechevade 2 (or Homo II) is a large fragment of an archaic cranial vault (the upper part of the frontal bone and parts of the left and right parietal bones). The bones are quite thick. The cranial volume is 1350 cm³. Initially, it was mistakenly believed that both findings lacked developed brow ridges and therefore belonged not to Neanderthals but to some pre-sapiens. However, one of the fossils (Homo I) belongs to later deposits (OIS 3) and evidently represents Homo sapiens, while the other has not preserved the area of brow ridges at all, but other characteristics correspond to Neanderthals. Tayacian industry. 200 000 BP.

Photo and text above: https://dinoera.com/humans-ancestors/homo-ancestors/catalog-of-neanderthal-remains-sites-1-of-4/

FC II was found in situ in Layer E1 2.60 metres below datum and approximately 11 metres in front of the cave’s drip line.

( Note that it seem obvious that the roof of the cave has been steadily retreating over the millenia with cave-ins, burying previous deposits such as FC II which may well have been well within the cave drip line at the time of deposition - Don )

FC II is an incomplete frontal, a complete left parietal, and an incomplete right parietal. The specimen 'is marked by several primitive features including thick cranial bones, pronounced platycephaly, a large bi-asterionic breadth, lack of foramina, and very effaced temporal lines', from page 31 of Trinkaus (1973).

The map shows the find location of FC II. The items marked 'foyers' were thought to be hearths. On further analysis, however, it now seems that they are only manganese stains.

Photo and text: https://www.oldstoneage.com/osa/fc/hominin_II/

Fontéchevade: Hunting or Scavenging?

Fontéchevade (Charente) fauna: location of the bone relative to the animal (drawing by F. Bongni)

Photo and text: Dibble et al. (2006)

No traces of hunting activity are found prior to approximately 450 000 years ago. Like all predators, humans engaged in scavenging to varying degrees, recovering meat from the carcasses of mammals that had died naturally or had been killed and abandoned by carnivores. However, they soon began to hunt, though this did not preclude occasional scavenging. Hunting requires driving and trapping tactics; consequently, prehistoric humans developed a more collective approach. Nevertheless, gathering offered a better ratio of energy expended to food acquired than hunting, which carried greater risk.

Evidence of hunting weapons from the Lower Palaeolithic is scarce. A few fossilised wooden points have survived: one was discovered at Clacton-on-Sea (Great Britain) and two others at Schöningen (Germany). These were likely javelins; their centre of gravity, located near the tip, allowed them to be propelled over long distances. This made it possible to attack prey from afar without risking injury from horns or hooves.

Hunting is also evidenced in the Middle Palaeolithic, as shown by a fragment of a Levallois point embedded in the neck vertebra of a donkey discovered at Umm-el-Tlel in Syria. It was during this period that specialised kill sites — focused on exploiting a single species (such as bison at La Quina in Charente)—began to appear. From then on, prehistoric humans exploited a wider territory, adapting to the natural habitats of the animals they hunted.

Text above: Musée d'Archeologie Nationale et Domaine, St-Germain-en-Laye

A retouched Levallois (Neanderthal) point from Fontéchevade.

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015
Source and text: Original, Musée d'Archeologie Nationale et Domaine, St-Germain-en-Laye

Scraper with scalariform retouch from Fontéchevade.

Scalariform is a term for a specific stone knapping technique where an artisan flakes the edge or surface of a stone tool to produce a stepped, overlapping finish that resembles the scales of a fish. The term derives from the Latin scalaris, resembling a ladder.

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015
Source and text: Original, Musée d'Archeologie Nationale et Domaine, St-Germain-en-Laye and other sources

Recurrent centripetal Levallois core from Fontéchevade.

A recurrent centripetal Levallois core is a type of prepared stone core from the Middle Palaeolithic period (associated with Neanderthals and early modern humans) used to continuously produce multiple ovoid or rectangular flakes from the edges toward the centre.

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015
Source and text: Original, Musée d'Archeologie Nationale et Domaine, St-Germain-en-Laye and other sources

Double side-scraper on a Levallois flake, made by fashioning two distinct retouched working edges (scrapers) along the lateral margins of a predictably shaped, flat flake produced via the Levallois core-reduction technique. From Fontéchevade.

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015
Source and text: Original, Musée d'Archeologie Nationale et Domaine, St-Germain-en-Laye and other sources

Denticulé from Fontéchevade.

In flint knapping and lithic analysis, a denticulé (the French term for a denticulate tool) is a stone flake or blade that features a serrated, toothed, or saw-like cutting edge.

The tool is defined by a specific type of prehistoric engineering and classification:

To create a denticulé, a flint knapper uses a technique called secondary retouch. The knapper creates a series of two or more contiguous (adjacent) notches along the edge of the flint. By striking or pressing small, consecutive indentations right next to each other, the stone left protruding between the notches naturally forms "teeth," just like a modern saw blade.

In the Bordesian classification system (the standard archaeological framework developed by François Bordes): • A single isolated indentation on a flint edge is called a notch (encoche). • When multiple notches are intentionally aligned right next to each other on the same edge, it is classified as a denticulé. • They can vary from microdenticulates (very fine, tiny teeth) to macrodenticulates (large, deep teeth).

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015
Source and text: Original, Musée d'Archeologie Nationale et Domaine, St-Germain-en-Laye and other sources

Denticulé from Fontéchevade.

Referred to as Fontéchevade: Gros éclat avec retouches by Henri-Martin (1949)

Photo (left): Don Hitchcock 2015
Photo (right): Henri-Martin (1949)
Source and text: Original, Musée d'Archeologie Nationale et Domaine, St-Germain-en-Laye

An éclat utilisé (used stone flake) such as this is a basic, disposable stone tool from archaeology made from a piece of fractured stone (such as flint) that features a natural sharp edge without further shaping or retouching.

Used primarily for scraping or cutting soft materials like fish, hide, meat, or working with harder materials like wood and bone. It is unretouched, meaning the maker did not shape or chip the edges into a formal tool type like a scraper or arrowhead. Archaeologists identify them by looking for microscopic wear, tiny chips, or edge damage (micro-enlèvements and esquilles continués) caused by the friction of cutting or scraping. It is a quick, expedient, and multi-functional tool discarded soon after completing a task.

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015
Source and text: Original, Musée d'Archeologie Nationale et Domaine, St-Germain-en-Laye and other sources

Galet retouché from Fontéchevade.

In flint knapping and lithic analysis, a galet retouché (retouched pebble) refers to a water-worn pebble or cobble that has been intentionally modified along its edge(s) through secondary flaking.

Rather than using the entire stone as a raw material core to strike off large flakes, prehistoric knappers targeted a localised edge of the pebble to reshape it.

The base of the tool is a galet — a smooth, river-rolled, or marine cobble retaining its natural, weathered outer crust (cortex).

The edge is modified by removing small, controlled flakes (retouché). This was usually accomplished through direct percussion using a hard hammerstone.

Depending on the steepness and shape of the retouched edge, these quick, opportunistic tools were frequently used as heavy-duty scraping, chopping, or butchering implements. Alternatively, some sturdy pebbles were retouched at the ends to purposefully shape them into percussors (soft/hard hammers) or anvils for stone knapping activities.

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015
Source and text: Original, Musée d'Archeologie Nationale et Domaine, St-Germain-en-Laye and other sources

The Tayacian from Fontéchevade.

Sagittal (longitudinal) section of Fontéchevade, indicating levels defined by Henri-Martin.

Photo and text: Dibble et al. (2006)

Plan view of Fontéchevale showing locations of excavation units defined for recent excavation.

Photo and text: Dibble et al. (2006)

Drawing of Main Profile indicating levels defined in the 1998 excavation of the North Section.

Photo and text: Dibble et al. (2006)

Schematic longitudinal section of Fontécheade after GHM excavations, indicating the location of the natural chimney at the back of the cave.

Photo and text: Dibble et al. (2006)

Plan and cross section of the excavations of Germaine Henri-Martin.

Source and text: Bulletin de l'Association française pour l'Étude du Quaternaire, 1965
Proximate Source: https://prehistoire-montbron.net/fontechevade-commune-de-montbron/

Cross section across the valley of Fontécheade near the grotte, which is marked by cross hatching.

Synoptic table of the various phases of the infilling of the Fonechevade cave

Source and text: Henri-Martin (1965)

Synoptic (general, comprehensive) table of the various phases of the infilling of the Fontéchevade cave.

Source and text: Henri-Martin (1965)
Translated by Don Hitchcock

References

1. Dibble et al. , 2006: Taphonomy and the concept of Palaeolithic cultures: The case of the Tayacian from Fontéchevade PaleoAnthropology 2006, 1−21. Copyright © 2006 Paleoanthropology Society. All rights reserved.
2. Henri-Martin G., 1949: L'industrie tayacienne de Fontéchevade Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française , Année 1949 46-9-10 pp. 353-363
3. Henri-Martin G., 1965: La grotte de Fontéchevade Persée, Quaternaire, Année 1965, 2-3-4 pp 211 - 216
4. Trinkaus E., 1973: A Reconsideration of the Fontéchevade Fossils American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 1973, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 1–40, Page 39.

Back to Don's Maps

Back to Archaeological Sites

Back to Egypt Index Page