The starting point of this article is a reflection on the possibility of writing a history of humanity, namely our ability to comprehend the past over the long term, in particular through the use of archaeology (in the case of prehistory). The aim here is to provide a broad perspective through a philosophical analysis of the concepts of time and some of its derivatives (events, processes, periods) in the very concrete settings that are archaeological investigations. These temporal aspects are merely another way of thinking about causality and introducing modal questions (possible, impossible, necessary and contingent), about which the epistemology of the field remains somewhat discreet. The same conceptual tools are used to revisit the notion of definition, specifically in the way archaeologists may use it when faced with incomplete situations for which we do not have the input of the agents who produced the remains under study. These individuals are returned to possible worlds and endowed with general dispositions, carrying out actions with an uncertain degree of agency: nothing less than modal propositions that we can attempt to analyse by means of counterfactual reasoning, for example. Bringing the notions of transition or trajectory to the conceptual stage does not provide the expected descriptive peace, since they in turn lead to pronouncements or unspoken statements about the coherence of actions and their determinants. We therefore propose that these temporal and causal notions be evaluated in terms of cognitive costs and benefits, and above all, that they be discussed in the light of the most current philosophical debates. This is followed by a reflection on interdisciplinary prospects (as well as their difficulty) and the need to introduce more conceptuality into the archaeological approach.
The little-known correspondence of & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re (1835-1922) sheds light on the common practices of prehistorians. The letters he exchanged with the archaeologist J. D & eacute;chelette (1862-1914) reveal important information about the composition of & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re's private library, which contained a number of books and brochures by J. D & eacute;chelette. Considering the exchanges of works and dedications between the two scholars also provides a better understanding of the references to & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re's work that can be found in the first volume of D & eacute;chelette's Manuel d'arch & eacute;ologie pr & eacute;historique, celtique et gallo-romaine (1908).
The history of prehistoric archaeology, as it has developed over the last twenty years, has sought to produce a global approach integrating intellectual and institutional aspects, the collective and the personal, even the intimate, in an approach largely informed by the biographical pattern. It has often tended to focus on authors or topics that are coherent with the history of prehistory's constructs, or that can be approached through abundant, structured documentation, even if this means having to deconstruct the image imposed by the studied prehistorian, as in the case of abb & eacute; Breuil. This approach tends to sideline personalities like & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re, who play a significant role in the conduct of research but have no clear real structuring effect on the discipline. In this sense, & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re is undoubtedly much more representative of prehistorians in the transition from the 19th to the 20th century than many of the authors studied so far. Most of & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re's work was carried out between 1869 and the early 1920s, at a time when the discipline was undergoing a profound intellectual and institutional overhaul. He thought like a man of the 20th century, but in many ways he still acted like a man of the 19th. This makes him difficult to understand in the context of a history of human sciences in which the beginning of the 20th century represents a major break. The historical approach then comes to record the author's failures and attempts to explain them, to exemplify them in order to infer, by contrast, the normal course of prehistory as illustrated by the multitude of amateur practitioners of the discipline. Between 1869 and 1875, & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re explored several caves in the Baouss & eacute;-Rouss & eacute; area, near Menton, France. He worked hard to build relationships in both the private and public spheres, to ensure that he had control over the sites, and that his research was funded and promoted. This led him to put forward positive arguments in support of the existence of Palaeolithic burials, fueling the scientific debate and promoting prehistory to a wide audience. But his observations-and particularly the discovery of the Cavillon cave-came at a time when the debate on this issue was winding down. The prehistory of the 1860s, largely informed by ethnographic knowledge, had accepted the ancient existence of burials without problem, but the 1870s were marked by an alignment with the evolutionist thesis, which rejected the hypothesis of the existence of Palaeolithic burials. After 1875, a research program commissioned by Albert I of Monaco continued to explore the Baouss & eacute;-Rouss & eacute; and completed the demonstration begun by & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re. At the beginning of the 20th century, prehistoric research underwent a change of scale, of nature and of intellectual and institutional framework. Prehistorians had to adapt their practices to this shifting landscape and enlist the help of the right networks to make the transition to a new century effective, something & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re seemed to have difficulty doing. In the field of cave art, a similar pattern can be largely observed if we compare & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re's very active participation in the debate on the recognition of palaeolithic cave art against the very marginal place he subsequently occupied in the development of this new field of research. With his observations at La Mouthe cave from 1895 onwards, & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re was part of the group of discoverers of t He set up regular and effective collaborations, which took the form of a communication strategy designed to convince the scientific community. The movement thus launched, supplemented by the discoveries of 1901, culminated in the congress of the Association fran & ccedil;aise pour l'avancement des sciences (FrenchAssociation for the Advancement of Science,AFAS) in Montauban, where the scientific community's support for the theory of cave art was carefully orchestrated. & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re plays a significant role in this instrumentalization: La Mouthe cave plays a large part in the story and memory of the day's excursion during the congress to discover the decorated caves. It celebrates the leadership of French research and the pre-eminence of the V & eacute;z & egrave;re valley as the birthplace of a new field of research. However, it was once again within an international framework that research into cave art was to be developed, as & Eacute;. Cartailhac suggested in his Mea Culpa, and as was being put in place in the programme initiated and funded once again by Albert I of Monaco, which & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re was unable to join. Attempting to define what it means to be a prehistorian at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries means tracing an activity that does not structure the discipline and yet develops entirely in relation to it. It is important to take these authors into account without considering them as secondary figures, or as purely local players. They are more complex to understand for various reasons. The study of these researchers must focus on the way in which they have sought to represent themselves to carve out a place for themselves in a discipline whose development they have not entirely mastered. Two levels of discourse need to be deconstructed: a narrative of justification, which often contributes to the construction of a territorial identity whose coherence is perfectly artificial, and a historiographical discourse for the purpose of legitimisation. This critical approach leads us to clarify the place of these authors to construct a historical discourse that allows a finer apprehension and a more complete understanding of the history of the discipline.
The purpose of this article is to present archaeoastronomy as a participatory science. It reports on a dialogue between amateurs from the Soci & eacute;t & eacute; Astronomique de Bourgogne (SAB) and professional archaeologists. We will develop the proposed title along its three axes. Is archaeoastronomy a controversial discipline, a science or can it become one, and thus constitute a relevant tool for archaeologists? We will establish that archaeoastronomy is a multi-disciplinary discipline, at the crossroads of two sciences-archaeology and astronomy-and we will show how we practice it in a participatory way, linking the work of SAB amateurs with the feedback of a college of archaeologists. We will be presenting the organization we have set up, the work we have already completed and how it's been received, our experiences and prospects for the emergence of a useful and credible archaeoastronomy that will have acquired its scientific credentials.
The Association for the Research and Development of the Caves of Aze and the Maconnais-Clunisois Region (ARVGAMC) was created in 1958 to primarily develop tourism in the Aze cave. The progressive unblocking of the cave, which was filled with clayey sediments except for the first 60 meters, revealed several archaeological and paleontological sites. Nowadays, 300 meters of the upper gallery, known as the Grotte Prehistorique, have been partly cleared, and access to the lower gallery, called the cave of the river, has been established. After 30 years of private management and active volunteer work, the Aze cave site was purchased by the departmental Administration of Sa & ocirc;ne-et-Loire. An agreement between the Department and the ARVGAMC was signed, allowing the latter to continue the unblocking of the galleries and scientific research. Since 2018, this activity has expanded to the surrounding Region of Aze. The Maconnais Region has been recognized for its prehistoric heritage since the 19th century (Solutre, for example), but archaeological research primarily focused on open-air sites. Early discoveries in caves now necessitate new studies using modern technologies, particularly regarding chronology and palaeoenvironment. Such studies also require the specific equipment and expertise of cavers, who can assist and ensure the safety of scientists during fieldwork and sample collection, especially when hanging on a rope, either underground or on a cliff (Solutre and Vergisson). At least three generations of enthusiastic volunteers have worked in Aze. These individuals are generally passionate about the heritage of South Burgundy and have a love for caves and caving. Consequently, many of them belong to a caving association, particularly the speleo-club Argilon. Their work typically focuses on unblocking cavities filled with sediments. This not only requires teamwork and physical effort but also a genuine ability to solve practical problems. For instance, the evacuation of sediments filling the caves is often accomplished with the help of rails, either on the floor or on the ceiling. For each configuration of the galleries, the rails are adapted by ingenious and resourceful members of the association to efficiently transport filled carts or carriers with hooked baskets. Volunteers can contribute significantly when specialists need to take measurements or collect samples. For example, before electric tomography was conducted above and around Les Furtins cave (Berze-la-Ville), it was necessary to clear the land of all bushes and trees. The participation of several individuals in this demanding task was essential, and during the measurement process, their assistance in planting the electrodes and connecting them resulted in many more tomographic profiles than initially planned. Moreover, this provided an opportunity for interesting discussions between specialists and laypeople. These outdoor activities also serve as opportunities for friendly gatherings that help maintain the motivation of participants. In any case, all of them are driven by curiosity, and communication between specialists and volunteers is crucial. Not only do paleontological or archaeological discoveries need to be handed over to specialists from academia, but many proxies regarding the environment, both past and present, also require attention. In addition to archaeology and palaeontology, several other disciplines are involved: geology, sedimentology, hydrology, climatology, biology, microbiology, etc. The advantage of an associative structure and voluntary work lies in the absence of time constraints for obtaining and publishing results. This allows for deeper investigations, potentially extending beyond the initially defined projects. Interdisciplinary studies of a particular site or region over several decades, such as in the Aze caves, lead to a comprehensive understanding of the settings and a better grasp of the processes at play. Such long-term studies are impossible within academic structures, where research is based on defined projects with specific budgets and limited timeframes for publishing results. Moreover, long-term studies allow for the distribution of expenses, some of which are unavoidable, such as insurance, over several years. Consequently, in the last two decades, about twenty C-14 dates have been obtained, along with more than fifty U/Th dates on speleothems. The latter indicate that in Maconnais, palaeoclimate changes have been recorded over more than 600,000 years. In Les Furtins cave, many dates have been processed, leading to a reconstruction of the cavity's history, including several phases of collapse and the sequence of animal and human occupations. Gradually, the technical and scientific capabilities of the association have become better known, prompting interdisciplinary collaborations. For example, the study of bio-corrosion on the walls of the Grotte Prehistorique in Aze has led to the proposal of a model for understanding why rock art is preserved or not in many caves. The attractiveness of the association is linked to communication through conferences, meetings at various scales, and local press coverage. At a local level, the ARVGAMC and the speleo-club Argilon regularly offer cave visits to the public, providing all necessary safety equipment and offering explanations and commentary throughout the underground journey. On a broader scale, to enhance communication among various types of experience and knowledge, these two associations occasionally organize conferences, such as the International Symposium on Cave Bear and Lion or Histoires de Desob' (Stories of Unblocking Caves). They also actively participated in the International Congress of Speleology held in France in 2022. However, the health of the ARVGAMC, much like many local associations, is fragile. It relies on a few fully committed members. These individuals have the time and capacity to write activity reports, contact administrative officials, apply for subsidies, and launch new projects to maintain regular activity for all members, among other tasks. Communication within the Association is essential and consists of an electronic monthly newsletter reporting the actions of each member, complete with numerous photos. The production of this newsletter is quite time-consuming. It is also distributed to all occasional participants who have agreed to receive it, which may result in new memberships, as the registration fees are less than & euro;15 and are not compulsory. Despite the administrative and scientific network established after several decades of work in Aze and the Region, and despite the agreement signed with the Department, field activities may have to stop at any time. Changes in official regulations, shifts in site ownership, and the movement of officials permitting or prohibiting cave explorations may impact motivation. Nonetheless, many results have been published in local, national, and international journals or in university theses. The enthusiasm and energy of the volunteers, whether working together or supporting academic researchers, lead to interesting results regarding the geological and biological history of cavities in the Maconnais-Clunisois Region, some of which provide insights for understanding broader processes on a larger scale.
This collaborative initiative, developed as part of a doctoral research, aims to reconstruct and understand fishing practices in the northern Aegean Sea during the Bronze Age by combining archaeo-ichthyological studies with the expertise of present-day local fishermen from the Thermaic Gulf (Greece). In order to explore the annual and long-term organization of fishing activities among protohistoric communities, the multidisciplinary methodological approach relies particularly on sclerochronological analysis of fish bone remains to estimate the season of capture. Before applying this method to fish vertebrae from archaeological contexts, a dedicated regional reference collection was established for comparison. Collaboration with traditional fishermen not only enabled the collection of modern specimens for this reference set but also provided practical and ethnological knowledge regarding marine resource management. Although this work is still ongoing, it offers promising prospects for exploring the maritime past of protohistoric populations in the northern Aegean Sea while also strengthening the ties between the two key groups involved, archaeologists and fishermen.
This article draws on the photographic archives of the Soci & eacute;t & eacute; Pr & eacute;historique Fran & ccedil;aise (SPF), a key associative organization in French Prehistory since its founding in 1904. Deposited at the Mus & eacute;um national d'histoire naturelle under an institutional agreement, this previously unexplored collection consists of 3,929 photographic glass plates, film negatives, and prints, with images dating from 1888 to 1928. Since 2023, we have developed an innovative participatory indexing project called "Pr & eacute;histo-Photo". Aligned with the French Charter ofParticipatory Science and Research, this initiative aims to digitize, document, and disseminate these photographic records to a broad audience. We present the methodological approach and choices made in 2024 to ensure the interoperability and accessibility of data on the Calames platform, as well as describing the creation of a Joint Orientation Committee responsible for supervising and validating citizen contributions. By engaging modern citizens and amateur archaeologists in cataloging and interpreting historical images, we seek not only to preserve vulnerable archaeological heritage but also to strengthen public ownership of local cultural heritage. The paper first examines the SPF archive and contextualizes its historical significance. Initially, the SPF's photographic activities were rooted in early citizen science, as members systematically documented archaeological sites, monuments, and research expeditions across France and abroad-long before official archaeological legislation emerged in the 1940s. This rich corpus, capturing the formative years of prehistoric archaeology in France, is invaluable for reconstructing scientific practices and the social networks that supported them. Next, the paper outlines the methodological framework established in 2024 to facilitate the collection's indexing. The data were cataloged using the EAD (Encoded Archival Description) standard, compatible with Calames, the French collective catalog of archives and manuscripts. The process revealed challenges such as incomplete records, varying documentation quality, and the physical state of materials. These methodological choices ensure interoperability, long-term digital preservation, and broader accessibility for the project's participatory phase. The final section details practical steps to ensure collaborative indexing. We discuss forming a mixed oversight committee (CMOS), comprising professional researchers, archivists, and SPF amateur volunteers. The committee oversees crowdsourced metadata standards, validates contributions, and guides digitization and dissemination. A structured plan engages citizens in annotating, contextualizing, and enriching photographic metadata, enhancing both public understanding and scientific research. Additionally, we emphasize the need for an integrated classification plan for the entire SPF archive, including textual and administrative documents alongside photographs. This approach leverages multiple archival sources to fill gaps, correct inaccuracies, and improve contextualization. Combining diverse archival resources with participatory methods represents a significant innovation in archaeological archive management. In conclusion, this project highlights early volunteer-led archaeological practices while actively involving contemporary citizens in heritage awareness. It also addresses broader implications of amateur expertise and volunteerism in contemporary scientific research, particularly in a context of growing public participation in science. Ultimately, this collaborative effort seeks to redefine the citizen-scientist role in archaeology, upholding the ideals of shared knowledge and public benefit embedded in the 1901 French Association Law.
At a time when the recognition of prehistoric cave art was at the heart of debates at the end of the 19th century, & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re set out to prove its authenticity to his colleagues. His discovery of La Mouthe cave in 1895 was a decisive factor in turning the tide. In the course of this article, we have demonstrated the significant role played by this intellectual battle.
For many years, only few institutional researchers were interested in the countless engravings located in the sandstone shelters of the southern & Icirc;le-de-France. Discovered as early as the 1860s, especially in the Fontainebleau massif, these rock engravings form one of the largest concentrations of this type known in Europe. In 1975, the foundation of the "Groupe d'& Eacute;tudes de Recherches et de Sauvegarde de l'Art Rupestre" (GERSAR), a local dynamic association of volunteer researchers, has given decisive boost to researches concerning this very rich rock art heritage. During more than twenty years, its prospecting, inventory and study were almost completely carried out by GERSAR, with supervision from the French Ministry of Culture. From the 2010s onwards, the association was finally assisted by professional researchers. In this paper, we will focus in detail on the relationships developed over the last 9 years through a "Projet Collectif de Recherche" (PCR) concerning the alleged Paleolithic and Mesolithic engravings. We'll begin by describing the genesis of this collaborative project. Then, we'll take a very concrete look at the scientific cooperation between professional researchers and volunteers. From the very beginning of our common work, the latter have not only acted as guides and informants: the way in which each of them has introduced the participants into this vast heritage has greatly influenced the study strategies developed by the PCR. These strategies were intensive when the aim was to study in detail a few shelters which were considered to be emblematic, then they were extensive when we were interested in the broader distribution of engraved shelters across the whole region or in a few selected areas. As part of the PCR, some of the volunteer researchers have developed in-depth personal research projects, for instance on the distribution of sandstone quarries of historic age, as their extension constitutes a bias to be estimated before analyzing the spatial distribution of engraved shelters. Finally, we'll note that the PCR has benefited greatly from the pre-existing network of scientific relations forged by the GERSAR, and has since endeavored to develop it, which is the role of such inter-institutional teams. In addition to these research activities, we share a common responsibility for the preservation of these innumerable engravings, which are as fragile as the sandstone on which they are made. The shelters, which are impossible to guard, are highly threatened by the intense tourist frequentation of the forests in which they are found, which increases the risk of various kinds of irreparable deterioration (graffiti, destructive camping fires, abrasion of the walls by repeated visits, etc.). As a result, the collaboration between volunteers and professionals also involves a form of heritage protection, which consists of educating the general public, by all kinds of means, about the precautions to be taken to avoid damaging these fragile remains. For this purpose, PCR and GERSAR have developed partnerships with local institutions such as the "Office National des For & ecirc;ts" (ONF) and the "Parc Naturel R & eacute;gional du G & acirc;tinais fran & ccedil;ais" (PNRGF). Information for the general public is provided through scientific valorization, such as the co-creation of information boards, as well as educational activities for young people, which are partly carried out by another association, Ark & eacute;oM & eacute;dia. This association has already reached 7,500 children, most of whom live close to the engraved shelters, by organizing school workshops and visits to two shelters that can be entered without risk of damage. At the end of this paper, the question arises as to the nature of all this cross-fertilization (do they fall under the definition of "participatory/collaborative sciences" in the full sense of the term?). We'll also consider the perspectives they open up, as well as their limits in a context where discretion is sometimes the best way to protect sites that are obviously impossible to maintain under close surveillance.
In archaeology, as in many fields of knowledge, there is a growing number of participatory projects, defined as "forms of scientific knowledge production in which non-professional scientists actively and deliberately participate" (Houllier and Merilhou-Goudard, 2016). The two main objectives of these researches are in one hand producing scientific knowledge (through the collection, analysis, or enrichment of data), and in a second hand promoting learning and civic engagement, whether on the study subject, the scientific method, or more broadly on the research or Heritage preservation process. The first symposium held on March 14-15th 2024 was organized by the French Prehistoric Society as part of its S & eacute;ances, in partnership with the Culture Ministry's Archaeology Department. It aimed to highlight as many participatory initiatives as possible in the field of both research and promotion of archaeological Heritage, whether in the Prehistoric or Historic times. Beyond this overview, it aimed to bring together the experiences of the various stakeholders, to identify potential obstacles, and to highlight opportunities. Ultimately, the goal is also to help Institutions in promoting participatory archaeology and better integrating it into their strategies. This introduction specifies the organizational conditions of the meeting, and attempts a cross-analysis of the case studies presented in this volume. It appears that existing projects, very often initiated by non-profit organizations, are more numerous and diverse than one might imagine, and eventually, the sample gathered here is therefore not necessarily representative of this proliferation. However, a few guidelines are outlined in a perspective of completing the National mapping and making it more visible, but also of stimulating interactions between the numerous actors involved, and contributing to the development of this innovative and promising field of research..
Faced with global warming, our societies are increasingly preoccupied with the question of how to overcome the difficulties caused by rapid changes in their environments. Although these questions have never been asked on such a short and global scale, they are probably not new on the scale of human history. Our species has indeed developed unique behavioural strategies enabling it to considerably expand its original ecological niche. These are our cultural adaptations. Nevertheless, the chronological and geographical diversity of these adaptations does not seem to be explained solely by environmental factors, which would be an external constraint upon human groups; the relationship between humans and the rest of the world is also profoundly cultural. In this context, how can we characterise the interplay between cultural traditions and changing environments? Is it possible to identify several scales of co-evolution between culture and environment? To explore these questions, I propose to integrate eco-cultural niche modelling (abbreviated to ECNM) into the traditional methods used by prehistorians so as to create a methodological framework that closely links cultural data and the environment. This approach enables us to identify the environments associated with the geographical distribution of a specific prehistoric cultural tradition (i.e., its eco-cultural niche). Thus, by comparing niches associated with different traditions, it is possible to draw parallels between environmental dynamics and cultural dynamics of change/stasis. In this article, I review the theoretical foundations of this approach in ecology and archaeology, while proposing avenues for further reflection to expand the interpretative framework of ECNM. Secondly, I propose to apply this approach to an Upper Palaeolithic European technical trajectory: the appearance, spread and disappearance of the Rayssian during the Gravettian period. This original regional lithic technical tradition has often been interpreted as a cultural response by populations to a new environment, but this hypothesis has never been examined concretely in the literature. I therefore applied the ECNM approach to this question by comparing the eco-cultural niche associated with the Rayssian with that of the Noaillian (which preceded it) and the Late Gravettian (which succeeded it). The geographical distribution of these archaeological units was estimated on the basis of a critical review of the literature, incorporating collection studies, in order to guarantee the quality of the datasets used for the subsequent niche models. Climate data were obtained from published and verified simulations from the HadCM3 model for the periods corresponding to the transitions between the Noaillian and Rayssian, and between the Rayssian and recent Gravettian, according to the latest chronological model (Banks et al., 2024). This information was used to create models of ellipsoid niches in environmental space, thereby allowing us to characterise the ecological dynamics associated with the cultural dynamics observed. A statistical randomisation test was used to compare volumes in order to verify the significance of their comparison. The results of this analysis highlight the role of climatic variability in the trajectory of the Rayssian, enabling us to propose a coherent interpretative model integrating cultural and ecological data. On the one hand, they help to relate the appearance and spread of the Rayssian to an ecological specialisation and a shift towards reindeer hunting. Its disappearance at the onset of the Late Gravettian during GI4 is accompanied by a significant niche shift towards more extensive ecological environments, together with the occupation of new territories in northern France and western Germany. This new model clarifies the mechanisms involved in the Rayssian development, as well as highlights new avenues of archaeological study.
After the refusal by the scientific community of the Palaeolithic age of Altamira's paintings (Cantabria, Spain), & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re (1835-1922) intervenes decisively in 1896 on the question of the authenticity of cave art, thanks to the discoveries he made in the cave of La Mouthe (Dordogne). F. Daleau (1845-1927) reached the same conclusions for the engravings of the cave of Pair-non-Pair (Gironde), which he has been excavating since 1881. Both will have a decisive influence at the AFAS congress of Montauban in 1902, during which cave art will be accepted once and for all. The texts left by these discoverers allow to better understand the principles underlying their demonstrations. To convince the commission of experts who came to visit the cave of La Mouthe, & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re insists primarily on the fact that the entrance corridor was sealed by sedimentary breccia, on the intact quaternary hearths or on the archaeological contents of the levels he excavates. He also demonstrates, to the commission members who came to assess the discovery, that concretions fill almost entirely the corridor and that the stalagmitic floor seals the quaternary levels. The archaeologist analyses thus the deposits conditions, but also the physical characteristics of the cave. F. Daleau is also interested in the archaeological context, but for him sedimentary levels are not intended to allow the identification of cultural facies, but rather the materialisation of floor levels. As a matter of fact, while F. Daleau is building his approach on an archaeology based on the status and function of the document, & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re is associating his work with the skills of specialists from various disciplines. On the epistemological level, the approaches of these two great pioneers appear to be entirely distinct. If F. Daleau aims to establish a palethnography in accordance with the principles of Natural History, & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re focuses rather on building a palethnology based on positive facts. In terms of method, F. Daleau is founding a prehistoric archaeology focused on the document itself and its taphonomic history, while & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re, by incorporating specialists' skills to validate his archaeological findings, proposes paths of analysis close in their principle to those of archaeometry.
& Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re certainly embodies the phantom figure of the tutelary predecessors of the magisterium that Abb & eacute; Breuil exercised on parietal art for more than half a century. While & Eacute;. Piette (born in 1827) and & Eacute;. Cartailhac (born in 1845) act him as guides and masters of the young seminarian, in contradiction with each other, between 1897 (Breuil's first prehistoric initiatory journey) and 1906 (date of Piette's death), & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re (born in 1835), co-funder of the French Prehistoric Society in 1904, seems to be invisible precursor of the self-legend of the futur "Pope of prehistory".
& Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re, one of the archaeologists of a prehistory under construction, marked the history and development of prehistoric archaeology in his own way. Through his research and his institutional commitment, he distinguished himself, in particular within the emerging Soci & eacute;t & eacute; Pr & eacute;historique de France (SPF) as its first president and in the organization of the first two Congr & egrave;s pr & eacute;historique France. The exchanges of letters with G. and A. de Mortillet shape the contours of a character with singular accents while allowing to identify the institutional commitments of this singular doctor passionate about Prehistory; however leaving naturally a veiled part of the character. Questions of a general nature in archaeology and concerns about various exchanges for scientific and editorial purposes concerning the work undertaken in the caves of Baouss & eacute;-Rouss & eacute; (Italy) are addressed through correspondence with G. de Mortillet. Selected elements from the corpus of epistolary exchanges with A. de Mortillet propose to outline roughly certain attitudes within the Soci & eacute;t & eacute; Pr & eacute;historique de France and in the organization of the first two prehistoric congresses of France. The effects of the discovery at La Mouthe (Dordogne) in the scientific community are also outlined. A handwritten document relating to the placement by the State of part of the collection gathered by the Parisian prehistorian is presented at the end of the article. Using cross-archival elements, this article describes a field of experience in which knowledge is both transmitted and transformed. It enlightens the articulations of the knowledge issued from the archeological field with respect to the power of institutions through small touches. The discussion approaches the reliefs that are beginning to emerge both in the distribution of tasks and in the postures adopted for a 20(th) century archaeology. & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re took part dialectically into the debates while working on the sites in order to confirm his place as a prehistorian. He confronted methodically the archaeological excavations while revealing methodically by his works witnesses of primary importance about the past of Man. His research in the north of Italy and in the south-west of France, in Dordogne, brought him to the forefront of discussions about the practices of human groups from the past without getting the attention he expected in return. Despite his publications, his roles within the SPF and the congresses, he did not get a perfect integration among his colleagues. His personality was certainly a decisive element leading to a distancing of the body constituted by the figures of the community of scholars. His procrastination and some of his positions were responsible for the veil that enveloped his precious commitment. The reflection is based on the Mortillet heritage (Nachla ss Mortillet) of the Universitat des Saarlandes-Saarbrucken-Dudweiler, as well as occasionally on documents contained in the archives of the Soci & eacute;t & eacute; Pr & eacute;historique de France classified in the Mus & eacute;um National d'Histoire Naturelle of Paris. To a lesser extent, other documentary sources are used. A step is suggested to better understand the role and personality of & Eacute;mile Val & egrave;re Rivi & egrave;re in the prehistoric archaeology environment of the late 19(th )and early 20(th) centuries. Throughout the study of the various letters and archival documents appear character traits, certain anecdotes as well as strategic and scientific choices. These elements were part of the original carreer path of the Parisian archaeologist. The spectacular expansion of science in the late 19th and early 20th centuries led to the emergence in prehistoric archaeology of a dynamism that enabled the creation of tools for studying the world and for gaining knowledge in the field of the past of man. Discursive logic was associated with personal ambitions linked to the consolidation of the institutional framework of the young discipline.
Based on his publications and a number of archives, this article analyzes the way & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re defines and presents himself as a researcher. This self-representation is contrasted with the viewpoints of his contemporaries to highlight a series of contrasts and tensions. & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re embodies a polygraph who is increasingly at odds with the imperatives of specialization within prehistory, so much so that the credibility of his work is undermined. Well-connected to the major Parisian institutions, he is poorly integrated into the local networks of amateurs working in the field. This positioning and lack of legitimacy contributed to the many polemics that punctuated the prehistorian's career.
The 1902 AFAS congress in Montauban was a founding event in the recognition of prehistoric cave art. Along with Fontde-Gaume and Les Combarelles, La Mouthe played a decisive role in demonstrating the authenticity of these frescoes. & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re, a pioneer in the field, see his interpretations joined by neo-converts such as Cartailhac. There's every reason to believe that he will soon be considered one of the leaders in a field destined to become crucial among prehistorians. Three years later, the same protagonists met again, this time in P & eacute;rigueux, for the first congress of the newly-created Soci & eacute;t & eacute; Pr & eacute;historique de France, presided by & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re himself. But nothing turns out as expected. The opposition between the two men exploded, as & Eacute;. Cartailhac had meanwhile participate of a new generation leaded by H. Breuil who give a second wind to his career. & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re, on the other hand, by aligning himself with people who, like A. de Mortillet, took little or no interest in cave art, or even continued to contest it, found himself in a paradoxical position, hindering the reception of his own research and limiting its posterity.
The MURUS program, Murailles romaines & agrave;l'Unesco et Soci & eacute;t & eacute;s, winner in 2022 of the call for proposals "Enjeux soci & eacute;taux" of the MSH Ange-Gu & eacute;pin de Nantes, aims to analyze the ways in which late Roman fortifications are appropriated, in the light of the broadening of the notion of heritage, now perceived as a heritage appropriated by all. The participatory approach is the methodological foundation of the project, which aims to involve local residents by collecting private documents, memories, perceptions and current practices, and to co-construct with them projects for the enhancement and governance of the Unesco heritage. It relies mainly on participatory workshops, implemented in Lugo and Le Mans, and to come in Rome, which have made it possible to collect local practices, draw a sensitive cartography and envisage the enclosure of the future. Faced with the difficulty of getting people involved in the Le Mans workshops, the researchers revised their initial hypothesis of local enthusiasm for the bid. Nevertheless, despite the difficulties encountered by the researchers, the results obtained encourage a more detailed re-reading of the inhabitants' appropriation of their archaeological heritage, and enable the development of new knowledges about Roman fortifications today.
The mus & eacute;e des Antiquit & eacute;s nationales de Saint-Germain-en-Laye, inaugurated by Emperor Napoleon III in 1867, does not yet present the material from the excavations led by & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re in the 1870s and 1880s. But at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, collections related to the research of this pioneer of Prehistory entered the museum. They follow very different paths, ranging from donations by the Ministry of Public Instruction to sales by the Catholic Institute of Paris or by the discoverer himself. Very quickly integrated into the rooms dedicated to ancient prehistory, as evidenced by the first guides and catalogs of the museum, their history makes it possible to track the progress of ideas relating to the cognitive abilities of men of the Palaeolithic, especially in the field of funeral rites and artistic productions. The three human skeletons from the Balzi Rossi caves in Grimaldi (Liguria, Italy), acquired by the museum in 1932, show two prehistorics burials, that of an adult and that of two children. Thinking on the physical appearance of our distant ancestors, on their clothing and adornment elements, can, moreover, be carried by these two sets, which are still essential to the current museography of the gallery of the Paleolithic. Regarding the research work conducted by & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re in the caves of P & eacute;rigord, the lamp from the cave of La Mouthe, bought from the prehistorian himself in 1905, is undoubtedly the most striking object that entered the National Archaeology Museum. It is not only the first lamp identified as such, but also that which, by its form and decor, serves as a model for establishing a type. Proof of the existence of lamps and the possibility of lighting in caves also contributes to the recognition of the existence of Paleolithic parietal art. The archaeological material from the excavations of & Eacute;. Rivi & egrave;re preserved at the National Archaeology Museum also offers the opportunity to follow the museographic evolution of the establishment. Finally, it illustrates the life of the museum's Palaeolithic collections, which have been regularly examined and analyzed by researchers and students in prehistoric archaeology for many decades.
The issues related to the knowledge and management of archaeological heritage by rural municipalities often raise questions. In this context, the feeling of estrangement from the actors of archaeology does not favor the appropriation of these questions by the inhabitants and the municipal teams. The challenge is nevertheless considerable since each communal territory has remains in elevation and/or unknown archaeological sites whose integrity is also regularly undermined by human activities or natural phenomena. This rural archaeological heritage, often ignored by the scientific community, actually arouses great interest on the part of local actors (elected officials, associations, inhabitants) who frequently wish to engage in a process of study and enhancement of these sites. The implemen tation of these projects requires, however, the creation of synergies associating with local wills scientific and operational expertise and financial support from territorial authorities and institutional partners. Since 2020, more than a dozen heritage study and development projects directly supported and financed by rural municipalities have already been launched in the central Pyrenees (Haute-Garonne/Hautes-Pyr & eacute;n & eacute;es). These various archaeological operations which are part of a diachronic research program led by C. Venco (researcher associated with the laboratory TRACES UMR 5608) aim at the scientific documentation of protohistoric, antic, medieval and modern sites with a view to their development on a territorial scale. This research is carried out, alongside professionals and students, with the municipal teams and residents who are involved in the different stages of the project and thus benefit from training in archaeology methods and heritage protection. This collective dynamic is on the way to sustainability thanks to the constitution of a solid network of local elected officials at the territorial level and allows from today a direct reappropriation by the municipalities and the inhabitants of their archaeological heritage which is undoubtedly the best guarantor of the future conservation of these sites.
The Archaeological Research Group of Tournus ("Groupe de recherche arch & eacute;ologique de Tournus", GRAT) is a section of an association established in 1968, coinciding with the commencement of work on the A6 motorway in Sa & ocirc;ne-et-Loire (Burgundy, France). This period marked a growing awareness of the damage caused by large-scale regional development projects. The group managed to endure the professionalization of archaeological research, which saw the creation of the French Association for National Archaeological Excavations ("Association pour les fouilles arch & eacute;ologiques nationales", AFAN) and later the National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research ("Institut national de recherches arch & eacute;ologiques pr & eacute;ventives", INRAP). While in Sa & ocirc;ne-et-Loire fourteen out of twenty-three archaeological associations have ceased their activities, notably due to a lack of membership renewal, the GRAT is currently experiencing a resurgence. The data accumulated over the years provided a privileged field of study for researchers from diverse backgrounds, and the association has established strong connections with skateholders in preventive archaeology over time. The group is composed of around ten volunteers from the Tournus region whose age, experience in archaeology, degree of participation in activities and socio-professional status are very varied (employees, retirees or students). After outlining the major milestones in the group's development, this article provides an overview of the various initiatives undertaken in a participative approach to complete the archaeological map of a 500 km2 area centered on Tournus and the Sa & ocirc;ne valley. These efforts have primarily relied on field-walking operations each year since 1993, encompassing a range of activities such as systematic field-walking, archaeological monitoring of construction projects, inventorying collections and participation in research programs. Thanks to three decades of survey (detailed through 1,200 intervention sheets), the initial objective has been largely achieved by reporting all types of information using a diachronic and multi-source approach. Interventions on construction projects that escape preventive archaeology constitute one of the singularities of this work. The numerous field sections examined and sampled during these interventions have supplemented the data from the soil surface and contributed to the constitution of the chronostratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental framework of the study area. The activities carried out never required a call for volunteers, who came forward spontaneously. Several isolated prospectors were gradually integrated into a collaborative archaeological approach. The GRAT's involvement in local cultural and educational life, along with the maintenance of a network of informants, prospectors, and researchers, has proven to be essential for the development and sustainability of these activities. Equally important is the dissemination of results to the public. A large number of initiatives to raise awareness of the archaeological heritage were organised for schools and the public. However, the sharing of site location data carries the risk of encouraging illegal archaeological activities, as evidenced by the rise in unauthorized metal detectorists in recent years. The evolution of the GRAT is therefore an example of a successful transition during the period of professionalization of archaeology, largely thanks to the field-walking operation. This operation makes it possible to participate and train volunteers throughout the year, unlike scheduled excavations. Encouraging the archaeological monitoring of construction projects undoubtedly constitutes a next step in research into the past occupation of a territory, in addition to soil surface survey and preventive archaeology.
