# Spatial analysis of the isotopic signal (δ13C) of palaeolithic charcoal: A suitable tool in chrono-environmental contextualisation of Points Cave (Gard, France)

Benjamin Audiard, Julien Monney, Marco Padovin, Thierry Blasco, Giovanna Battipaglia, Isabelle Théry-Parisot

► To cite this version:

Benjamin Audiard, Julien Monney, Marco Padovin, Thierry Blasco, Giovanna Battipaglia, et al. Spatial analysis of the isotopic signal (δ13C) of palaeolithic charcoal: A suitable tool in chrono-environmental contextualisation of Points Cave (Gard, France). Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 2025, 61, pp.104927. 10.1016/j.jasrep.2024.104927. hal-05089060

HAL Id: hal-05089060

https://hal.science/hal-05089060v1

Submitted on 2 Jun 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

# Spatial analysis of the isotopic signal (δ¹³C) of palaeolithic charcoal: A suitable tool in chrono-environmental contextualisation of Points Cave (Gard, France) ☆

Benjamin Audiard<sup>a,b,*</sup>, Julien Monney<sup>c</sup>, Marco Padovin<sup>d</sup>, Thierry Blasco<sup>e</sup>, Giovanna Battipaglia<sup>f</sup>, Isabelle Théry-Parisot<sup>a</sup>

## ARTICLE INFO

**Keywords:**

Anthracology

Isotope

Paleoenvironment

Sampling method

Ardèche River gorge

Upper Palaeolithic

Southeast France

## ABSTRACT

Wood taxonomic analyses are a useful tool for reconstructing local woody environments. Typically, the palaeoecological relevance of anthracological remains is assessed through the examination of numerous wood charcoal fragments scattered in sediments, which reflect relatively long periods of occupation. Sampling is conducted through sieving or flotation to minimize collection bias, followed by interpretation based on the frequency spectrum of the taxa. However, when applied to Palaeolithic sequences, the limited taxonomic diversity, coupled with occasionally poor preservation of the charcoal, may restrict the interpretations of conventional anthracological approaches. Furthermore, certain chrono-stratigraphic contexts and the potential loss of material during sampling can complicate these studies.

In this article, we propose an alternative and complementary approach for studying charcoal from Points Cave (Upper Palaeolithic, Gard, France). Manual collection of charcoal, with recording of spatial coordinates, was supplemented by systematic sediment sieving. A combined taxonomic and isotopic analysis (δ¹³C) was then applied to the entire corpus. Spatial restitution of the data was subsequently performed.

This original approach enabled us to identify several distinct “isotopic sets”, defining multiple phases of successive occupation under varying climatic and environmental conditions. These chrono-environmental data allowed the targeting of additional radiocarbon dates, which validated this division. While a purely taxonomic analysis would have provided a general overview of forest composition over an extended chronological period, the combination of an adapted protocol and a multiproxy charcoal analysis allowed for an expanded discussion on a finer chronological scale.

## 1. Introduction

To understand prehistoric societies, from the extension of their territories to their ability to adapt to climatic and environmental changes, we need to contextualize the remains of their occupations within a chrono-environmental framework that is as precise as possible. In this respect, charcoal analysis provides a representative picture of past woodland composition in the fuelwood harvesting area surrounding the

site (Badal, 1990; Badal and Heinz, 1991; Chabal, 1992, 1997; Théry-Parisot et al., 2010). However, the relevance of environmental reconstructions depends on the nature of the anthracological assemblages, the rigor of their sampling and the constraints of a quantitative study. Typically, an optimal study consists of a spatial survey of 250 to 400 scattered charcoal fragments from a sufficiently long occupation of the site to allow quantitative interpretation of diachronic variations in taxon frequency. Conversely, studies of charcoal concentrations (short-term

<footnote><sup>a</sup> Université Côte d'Azur, CNRS, CEPAM, UMR 7264, 06300 Nice, France</footnote>

<footnote><sup>b</sup> PREMEDOC-GIUV2015-213, Departament de Prehistòria, Arqueologia i Història Antiga, Universitat de València, Av. Blasco Ibáñez 28, 46010 València, Spain</footnote>

<footnote><sup>c</sup> EDYTE – Université de Savoie, CNRS, Chambéry, France</footnote>

<footnote><sup>d</sup> Dipartimento di Lettere e Filosofia, Università degli Studi di Trento, I-38122 Trento, Italy</footnote>

<footnote><sup>e</sup> Sorbonne Universités, CNRS, Laboratoire d'Océanographie de Villefranche, 06230 Villefranche/mer, France</footnote>

<footnote><sup>f</sup> Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Ambientali, Biologiche e Farmaceutiche dell'Università degli studi della Campania "L. Vanvitelli", Via Vivaldi 43 Caserta, Italy</footnote>

<footnote>* This article is part of a special issue entitled: 'ANTHRACO' published in Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports.</footnote>

<footnote>* Corresponding author at: Université Côte d'Azur, CNRS, CEPAM, UMR 7264, 06300 Nice, France.
E-mail address: benjamin.audiard@cepam.cnrs.fr (B. Audiard).</footnote>
activity), are, at first sight, paleoecologically less representative and should be avoided. Sampling by flotation and/or fine-mesh sieving (1 mm - 500 µm) of the whole sediment should be preferred to manual sampling, which involves: (i) an under-sampling of small charcoal (<2mm) more representative of the rare species present, (ii) a fragmentation that differs from that obtained by flotation/s sieving, which biases the quantitative study of the assemblage (Badal and Heinz, 1991; Chabal, 1997; Théry-Parisot et al., 2010; Kabukcu and Chabal, 2021).

However, the nature of Paleolithic assemblages and the contexts with which they are associated often make it difficult to meet the requirements of quantitative studies. Firstly, the preservation of Pleistocene charcoal is not always optimal, and it is sometimes difficult to obtain the minimum number of samples required for a reliable study of paleovegetation (Théry-Parisot, 2001; Chrzazvez et al., 2014). Moreover, in these contexts, the low taxonomic diversity of woody species could make it difficult to interpret environmental changes. The temporal resolution of interpretations is then limited by the slow dynamics of changes in forest composition (Bazile-Robert 1979; Théry-Parisot, 2001; Vernet, 1992). Finally, for preservation reasons, most charcoal from these periods is generally found in caves/shelters (less susceptible to biochemical degradation and weathering; Chrzazvez et al., 2014; Roebroeks and Villa, 2011). However, the discontinuity of sedimentary inputs, the variable geometry of deposits and their post-depositional evolution can complicate the diachronic reading of the archaeological assemblages associated with these contexts. In this field, the development of spatial analyses of anthracological assemblages (density, fragment size, 'taxonomic index') opens new avenues for understanding formation (e.g. combustion area) and palaeoecological representativeness (Chabal and Heinz, 2021; Kabukcu and Chabal, 2021; Vidal-Matutano, 2017). However, these applications also require significant and diversified assemblages.

In addition to anthracological data, over the last few decades, the development of isotopic analysis (δ¹³C) of charcoal has offered a complementary approach to the study of environmental and climatic changes through time (Fiorentino et al., 2015; Ferrio et al., 2020). Based on the relationship between wood δ¹³C and atmospheric CO₂ uptake (photosynthesis, stomatal conductance; Farquhar et al., 1989; Siegwolf et al., 2022), the isotopic record of charcoal refers, despite the effects of carbonisation, to the environmental conditions that control this absorption (water regime, temperature, etc.; Czimczik et al., 2002; Turney et al., 2006; Ferrio et al., 2006). Recent studies of prehistoric botanical remains in Europe and the Near East have confirmed the potential of this approach to provide robust, high-frequency information, particularly on water availability at the scale of the sites themselves (Aguilera et al., 2009; Audiard et al., 2019, 2021, 2024; Baton et al., 2017; Belli et al., 2024; Caracuta et al., 2021; Masi et al., 2013).

To overcome the difficulties encountered in studying anthracological assemblages of Paleolithic sequences in caves/shelters, and building on previous isotopic studies of prehistoric charcoal, we propose an approach combining anthraco-isotopic (δ¹³C) analysis and spatial reading of the results. This has been tested at the Paleolithic site of Points Cave (Gard, France), thanks to the implementation of an appropriate sampling protocol from the beginning of the excavation. The aim was to define the chrono-environmental framework for the site and, more broadly, the role of the environmental features of the Ardèche River gorges in human settlement in the region.

## 2. Archeological setting

Points Cave (PTS; Aiguèze, Gard, France) is a Palaeolithic rock art cave located along the Ardèche River gorges. Relatively isolated from the other rock art caves in the gorges (7 km north of La Tête-du-Lion and 3 km south of La Baume d'Oulen), it opens onto a wide north-facing porch on the right riverbank, some 300 m below the limestone plateau and 40 m above the river. The cave entrance must have been highly visible and easily accessible to the human groups who frequented the

gorges (Monney, 2012; Monney, 2018; Fig. 1). The cavity is 110 m long, with a right-angle bend about halfway along, giving it the appearance of two perpendicular corridors (Fig. 1; Monney, 2018; Jaillet and Monney, 2018). Although already mentioned in 1993 (Chauvet et al., 1995; Colomer and Galant, 1993), it wasn't until 2011 and the inception of the "Rock Art Caves Dating" project that in-depth interdisciplinary research was undertaken (Monney, 2018). On this occasion, archaeological test pits were carried out in the first half of the cave (before the narrowing of the cave), to refine the chronological understanding of the deposits that make it up. Two of them uncovered Paleolithic sedimentary sequences sufficiently well-preserved for a diachronic study: in sectors GH20-24 and RS12 (Jaillet and Monney, 2018). The work presented here focuses on these two excavations separated by a few meters. Our study's objective was to investigate the chronological evolution of the environment during the Upper Palaeolithic phases of human occupation of Points Cave.

* Sector GH20-24

Sector GH20-24 is an excavation area of about 8 m², with a maximum depth of 1.5 m (square H23). The sequence comprises three main stratigraphic units (SU): reworked surface horizons contemporary with historic occupations (SU R); an archaeological unit concentrating most of the remains (SU 1); and underlying levels that are archaeologically sterile but contain Pleistocene faunal remains (SU 2 to 4). SU 1 shows lateral and horizontal sedimentary facies variations (Fig. 2). The archaeological remains include lithic pieces, fragmentary faunal remains, charcoals, and residues of red coloring matter (Boccaccio, 2018; Chanteraud et al., 2019; Lateur et al., 2019; Monney and Jaillet, 2019). Based on typological elements, the lithic assemblage suggests the presence of multiple occupation phases between the Gravettian and Magdalenian periods (Beauvais et al., forthcoming; Boccaccio, 2018). Cryoturbation phenomena, resulting in geometric deformations, have affected most of the deposits, with the exception of some that are located near the walls. Moreover, in square G22, the collapse of a limestone block protected the Upper Palaeolithic stratigraphy underneath from post-depositional phenomena.

* Sector RS12

Sector RS12 was excavated over an area of 2 m² and to a depth of 60 cm. As with GH20-24, the lower sedimentary phases consist of archaeologically sterile sand deposits from the Ardèche River, which were laid down during MIS 5 (Genuite et al., 2022). Evidence of human presence is solely distributed within SU P1 and its various facies (Figs. 3 & 4). These archaeological remains extend from the Gravettian up to the Magdalenian period. Due to cryoturbation phenomena, geometric deformations of sedimentary horizons are also noticeable. Their impact diminishes with depth and with the proximity of the wall (mechanical support, heat source). Thus, it is minimal in square S12a and S12b which are closer to the rock wall. Finally, the presence of a sterile layer suggests the existence of at least two distinct occupation phases in the lower part of SU 1.

The study of faunal and microfaunal assemblages from Paleolithic sedimentary phases has revealed a cold and rigorous periglacial-like environment in the surroundings of the site (from the gorges to the plateau), with the concomitant presence of ibex (Capra ibex), reindeer (Rangifer tarandus), marmot (Marmota marmota), and snow vole (Microtus nivalis), but also relatively wet areas linked to the proximity of the river, as indicated by the presence of amphibians (Bufo sp.) (Lateur et al., 2019). The pollen spectrum, obtained mainly on a GH20-24 sample, is consistent with these observations (Argant, 2018). It essentially highlights a wet meadow environment (Poaceae, Ranunculaceae, Brassicaceae, Cyperaceae), complemented by rare tree pollens (Pinus, Corylus, Quercus, Alnus, Ulmus, Fraxinus).
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1.** (left) Maps of South-east France with the position of the Ardèche River gorge and its archeologic sites (modified after Monney, 2012), sites cited in the text locality indicated by stars (Orange: contemporary site with anthracological data, Blue: site with comparative $^{13}$C data; CAN-Canalettes, SAL-Salpetrière, COMB-Combette, PTS-Points Cave, OUL-Oulen), (right) map of the cave plan with position of the main test pits sectors (surface excavated: blue, green, orange, red for 2014 to 2017) and the G22 and S12 isotope study squares (bold yellow square).</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 2.** Center cross-section representative of the separation between H20-22 and G20-22 (X = 120; in sector GH20-24). NB: SU1, with elements from the Upper Palaeolithic, can be subdivided into several stratigraphic facies (here two).</figcaption></figure>

# 3. Material and methods

## 3.1. *Sampling and wood charcoal's taxonomic analyses*

In view of the significant post-depositional processes, stratigraphic uncertainties (progressive changes in SU) and the low number of charcoal fragments preserved after sieving, double sampling was carried out

in both sectors. The multi-millimeter-sized charcoal observed during the excavation were collected manually on site after individual georeferencing, followed by systematic sieving of the sediment with water (2 mm mesh). Charcoal analyses were conducted using the classic method of taxonomic identification of the three anatomical planes of wood, under a photonic reflection microscope (50 × to 1000 × magnification) at the CEPAM Laboratory (CNRS-UMR7264/UCA). In addition, the intensity of
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 3. North cross-section of the sector RS12 (Y = -600). NB: SUP1, with elements from the Upper Palaeolithic, is subdivided into several stratigraphic facies.</figcaption></figure>

traces of pre-combustion fungal attack was assessed, ranging from 0 (no attack) to 3 (Henry and Théry-Parisot, 2014; Vidal-Matutano et al., 2020).

## 3.2. Wood charcoal's selection and isotopic analyses

To minimize disturbances caused by cryoturbation phenomena, we focused on the charcoal from the squares where stratigraphy was best preserved due to proximity to the wall and/or the fall of a block sealing the sequence. Thus, all pieces of charcoal identified as *Pinus* type *sylvestris/nigra* (including *mugo* and *uncinata*) in squares G22 and S12a/S12b/S12d\_base were selected for isotopic analysis. Given the better preservation of square G22, charcoals were grouped together by SU according to their stratigraphic position (groups of 1 to 5 charcoal elements) prior to analysis. On the other hand, the charcoal from S12 were analyzed individually, while those from the sieve were grouped together (too small for individual analysis). A selection of two charcoal elements from each stratigraphic level was then analyzed by infrared spectrometry using a PerkinElmer Frontier FTIR spectrometer (CEPAM, UMR764). This analysis revealed negligible exogenous contamination by biological carbon (<10%; Vaiglova et al., 2014). Thus, only decarbonation has been applied to burnt archaeological remains (Aguilera et al., 2012; Audiard et al., 2019, 2021, 2024). Groups or individual charcoal samples were soaked in 1 M HCl for 45 min at 80 °C, then repeatedly rinsed with distilled water until a neutral pH was reached. After drying, 1 to 1.5 mg were placed in a tin capsule, then isotopic analysis was performed with an Elementar Vario Pyrocube coupled to a continuous-flow Isoprime 100 isotope ratio mass spectrometer (EA-IRMS; δ¹³C, %C) at the *Laboratoire d'Océanographie de Villefranche* (LOV, CNRS-UMR7093/SU). The usual internal calibration procedures with standards and blanks were applied, with a caffeine standard (isotopically certified, IAEA-600) calibrated against V-PDB, and a secondary standard calibrated against caffeine (Merck acetanilide, CAS 103–84-4). Standard variability and analyzer error were of the order of 0.1 ‰.

Charcoal analyzed in both test pits showed a similar carbon content (%C), around 60 % (%Cmean = 0.58; SD = 0.05; Fig. A.1) and fluctuate mostly between 49 % and 69 % following a Gaussian distribution with a trend (towards lower values). Considering the microscopic observations, knowledge about the impact of the carbonization process (Audiard et al., 2018; Ferrio et al., 2006; Mouraux et al., 2022) and infrared spectra (signal of O-Si-O bonding and no cellulose left; Tintner et al., 2018; Smidt et al., 2020; du Boisgueheneuc et al., 2023; Fig. A.2), the distributions of ‰ values are thought to represent a combination of: (i) a preferential preservation of charcoal that burned at around 380–450 °C with cellulose elimination (during carbonization and/or oxidation with

leaching), (ii) an underestimation of ‰ due to sediment incrustation (0 to 15 ‰). Thus, considering the similar composition of charcoal preserved and the limited impact that carbonization has on δ¹³C signal (Audiard et al., 2018; 2024; Mouraux et al., 2022), no correction must be applied.

## 3.3. 3D playback and data processing

A 3D projection of taxonomic identifications and isotopic data was then produced using *3D Reshaper* software. Isotopic sets were then constructed based on: (i) stratigraphic attributions, (ii) spatial proximity of charcoal (xyz) and (iii) isotopic values. Charcoal samples were aggregated according to proximity and to avoid deviations from the mean greater than 1 ‰ or 0.5 ‰ in sets comprising individual or grouped charcoal's pieces respectively. Charcoal with extreme values towards the top of the sectors were distinguished and associated together (no clear stratigraphic attribution, possible CO₂ atmospheric effect). A weighted average by the number of charcoals and a standard deviation of the δ¹³C analyses were estimated for each set. Following these observations, a *Pinus* charcoal representative of each isotopic set was sent for radiocarbon dating (UMR 5138 “Archaeometry and Archaeology”, ARTEMIS Program).

Although there remains a risk of asynchronism of some charcoal fragments in the proposed sets, regarding the isotopic distribution in each set (cf. discussion), we postulate that most of the observed isotopic variability refers to inter-individual differences in the sampled populations, as suggested by other archaeological studies (Audiard et al., 2019, 2021, 2024). We therefore applied the method proposed by Audiard et al. (2024), applying sets of “comparative margins” extrapola ted from the inter-individual isotopic variability observed in present-day gymnosperms (Loader et al., 2013; Leavitt, 2010; Table A1). These “comparative margins” represent: (i) the error of the mean δ¹³C if derived from an actual tree population (margins 1 and 2; calculated as “standard deviation” and “2σ confidence interval”, respectively, found in bootstrap resamples of values from 100 *Pinus sylvestris*; Loader et al., 2013); (ii) the hypothetical variability of δ¹³C values if mainly influ enced by interindividual variability (margin 3; 95 ‰ of ≈ 2 ‰ variability in modern populations; Loader et al., 2013; Leavitt, 2010).

Furthermore, given some uncertainties in the chronology, the effect of atmospheric parameters on isotopic values is illustrated only by the predictive models of Hare et al., 2018. This study calculates plant δ¹³C changes from ice core records according to different physiological response models. Here, two models are used: a linear response model in gymnosperms (ci/ca varies linearly with ca; Voelker et al., 2016) and a hyperbolic model (based on different constants from modern growth
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 4. Focus on the west and center cross-sections of S12 square (X = 1300 & Y = -550; sector RS12). NB: SUP1, with elements from the Upper Palaeolithic, is subdivided into several stratigraphic facies.</figcaption></figure>

chamber experiments; Schubert and Jahren, 2012). Moreover, since these models are adjusted to specific hydric conditions of similar latitude and altitude (MAP: mean annual precipitation = 1000 mm, altitude = 840 m, latitude = 50°N; Hare et al., 2018), we readjusted the predictive models according to Points Cave's altitude and latitude, following the approach of Kohn, 2010 (eq. (1) and (2); MAP is therefore not considered here). Deviations between models and site values can then be compared with data from other existing sites or future studies.

$$ \delta^{13}C_{corr} = \delta^{13}C_{Hare-2018} - \delta' \quad (1) $$

Where

$$ \begin{aligned} \delta' &= \delta_{alt} + \delta_{lat} OR \delta' \\ &= (0,00019 \times (840 - \text{altitude})) + (-0,0124 \times 50 - (-0,0124 \times |\text{latitude}|)) \end{aligned} \quad (2) $$
# 4. Results and interpretation

## 4.1. Anatomic analysis and spatial distribution of taxa

Taxonomic data for the Palaeolithic SU are summarized in Table 1 and Fig. 5 (for surface data and facies details, see Table A2 and A3). In addition, 2D projections onto the G22 and RS12 cross-sections are presented in Figs. 6 and 7 respectively (all pieces of charcoal from surface and Palaeolithic SUs). Considering Paleolithic SUs, thanks to the choice of sampling (sub-millimetre to centimetre size) and despite a relative advanced state of alteration, the effort made enabled us to identify at least the clade (Gymnosperm/Angiosperm): 221 charcoal in SU P1 of RS12, 90 charcoal in SU 1 of G22 for 95 fragments of charcoal in the same SU in the rest of sector GH20-24.

A total of 13 woody taxa have been identified throughout the site. Surface facies/SUs are represented by typic Holocene assemblage (Buxus, Quercus, Prunus, Taxus). Conversely, in both sectors studied, the Palaeolithic phase is dominated by Pinus type sylvestris/nigra (including mugo and uncinata), Betula sp. and the Salix/Populus group. The anthracological assemblage is completed by Buxus sp. and Quercus d.f./sp. (up to secondary majority taxa on RS12), then more occasionally by Acer (campestre and platanoides types), a Maloideae, Alnus sp., Juniperus sp. and Taxus baccata. However, regarding the spatial distribution of these identifications, two sets stand out, particularly at RS12 and square G22: (i) a set grouping Pinus/Betula/Salix/Populus/Juniperus and (ii) a set grouping Buxus/Quercus and other rare taxa (Acer/Maloideae/Alnus/Taxus baccata) principally represented in GH20-24 (G22 except). While the first group is commonly found during the glacial phases of the Pleistocene, the second group has a regional development during the interglacial (or interstade quasi-temperate), reappearing mostly during the early Holocene or Tardiglacial at lesser extend (Bazile-Robert, 1979; Delhon et al., 2010; Renault-Miskovsky, 1986). This distinction is made along a linear dip in G22 (x between 60 and 100; y between -155 and -140; Fig. 6) and over the first 10-15 cm of the RS12 sequence along an easterly dip (including a concentration of Quercus/Buxus between -160 and -170 cm, towards x = 1180 cm; associated to a posthole; Fig. 7).

In view of the stratigraphic observations, these two complexes are

<caption>**Table 1**</caption>

Summary of taxonomic identifications by squares, obtained for charcoal from SU with elements of Upper Palaeolithic occupations in part remained (NB1: Charcoal from remained SU near the surface is not considered here; NB2: d.f. for deciduous foliage).

<table><thead><tr><th>Levels</th><th>SU P1 (RS12)</th><th>SU 1 (G22)</th><th>SU 1 (GH20-24, except G22)</th><th>Total Upper Palaeo.</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Identification</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Juniperus sp.</td><td>1</td><td></td><td>1</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Pinus type sylvestris/ nigra</td><td>116</td><td>47</td><td>61</td><td>224</td></tr><tr><td>Betula sp.</td><td>8</td><td>12</td><td>6</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>cf. Salix/Populus sp.</td><td>2</td><td>10</td><td>3</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Populus sp.</td><td>1</td><td>4</td><td></td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Buxus sp.</td><td>25</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>Quercus sp.</td><td>15</td><td></td><td></td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Quercus d.f.</td><td>10</td><td>2</td><td></td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Taxus baccata</td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Acer (type campestre)</td><td>3</td><td></td><td>2</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Acer (type platanoides)</td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Alnus sp.</td><td></td><td></td><td>3</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Maloideae</td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Angiosperm</td><td>13</td><td>7</td><td>11</td><td>31</td></tr><tr><td>Gymnosperm</td><td>25</td><td>6</td><td>3</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td>Undetermined</td><td>38</td><td>12</td><td>19</td><td>69</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Total charcoal</strong></td><td><strong>259</strong></td><td><strong>102</strong></td><td><strong>114</strong></td><td><strong>475</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Burned bones</td><td>3</td><td>2</td><td>9</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Overall Total</strong></td><td><strong>265</strong></td><td><strong>105</strong></td><td><strong>123</strong></td><td><strong>493</strong></td></tr></tbody></table>

interpreted as the result of different phases of occupation. The superior complex, with mesophile taxa and components close to the surface (cf. Table A2 and A3), is interpreted as the result of post-depositional reworking of temperate phases' deposits (Holocene, prehistoric and/or historic occupations) and possibly in part of the Tardiglacial. The pine-dominated assemblage, on the other hand, indicates a colder phase associated with the Gravettian/Solutrean occupations of the cave. This phase remains relatively humid, with the presence of a riparian forest near the Ardèche River. Finally, we note the presence of some Quercus charcoal at depth in RS12 (down to SU P1 – “brown facies”). Although the possibility of contamination cannot be excluded, this observation raises questions about the possible role of the gorges as a refuge (further dating is required). Overall, the environment of this second complex (i) confirms the hypotheses based on the study of the fauna and microfauna, and (ii) suggests that the occupation is contemporary with a cold climatic phase associated with riparian forests (Lateur et al., 2019).

The study of pre-combustion alteration focused on charcoal of Pinus type sylvestris/nigra from SU 1 and P1 (Palaeolithic), a taxa that disappeared from the gorges during the first two millennia of the Holocene (Bartoli and Boissier, 2018). Just over half of the pine charcoal (130/251 charcoals in total) show signs of pre-combustion alteration, with 71/251 fragments of charcoal showing no trace of alteration (“0”) and 50/251 others that could not be studied (Table 2). These alterations remain moderate, however, mostly grade “1” (≈ 40%), occasionally “2” (≈ 10%) and rarely “3” (≈ 3%). These proportions could reflect opportunistic wood harvesting strategies, including a proportion of deadwood (weathered) readily available for collection.

## 4.2. Isotopic data (δ¹³C) from Pinus' charcoal sets and new radiocarbon dates

The isotopic results from square G22 and S12 are respectively summarized and illustrated in the Table 3 and Fig. 8 and in the Table 4 and Fig. 9 (raw data: Tab. A.4; 3D projection models available on request). A total of 9 isotopic groups have been distinguished, of which 4 for G22 and 5 for S12. However, for the “upper-G22” set, an extreme value (too low) was separated from the group for the study of δ¹³C evolution (see “top-G22”). Conversely, for the “middle-S12” set, there are two relatively high values at the base, which could indicate an older climatic phase. However, in the absence of a major time lag, this set was not split. Moreover, these two values follow a layer between the “middle-S12” and the “lower-S12” already suggested by the distribution of lithic material (at the top of the “brown facies”), that could account this time lag. Finally, to conclude, we can note that the “lower-S12” set follows the glacial wedge present in sector RS12.

Given the conditions under which the sets were made (cf. method: low isotopic variation, stratigraphic position), these groups are represented by a relatively low number of charcoal (1 to 25 and 3 to 21 pieces of charcoal for G22 and S12, respectively) and an even lower number of analytical values when charcoals from G22 and those from the sieving of S12 are analysed together (1 to 9 and 3 to 15 analyses, for G22 and S12 respectively). However, the use of manual sampling favoured the preservation of charcoal containing a greater number of rings (seasonal to annual archives) and the acquisition of isotopic values more representative of the low-frequency isotopic record (multi-year to decadal average). Thus, while the within-set variability remains moderate (δ¹³C max < 0.91 ‰ to 1.60 ‰ for G22 and S12, respectively; installation conditions), the standard deviations can be relatively important (standard deviation 0.16 ‰ to 0.64 ‰ and 0.04 ‰ to 0.91 ‰, for G22 and S12 respectively). However, the general analysis of the variability of the isotopic values in relation to the mean of each group to which they belong follows a normal distribution in each sector (Figs. A.3 and A.4). Although this observation does not confirm the normality of the values within each set, it tends to justify the use of the margins of error calculated for the mean δ¹³C (see methods: Margin 2 and 3). However, given the small number of analyses per set, these margins of error
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 5.** Diagram of taxonomic identifications' charcoal from SU with elements of Upper Palaeolithic occupations partially remained: I for RS12-SU P1; II for G22-SU 1; III for GH20-24-SU 1 (NB: Charcoal from remained SU near the surface is not considered here).</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 6.** 2D spatial projection of taxonomic identifications' charcoal from G22, projected on its southern section (NB: This plan does not correspond to that of the eastern cross-section of Fig. 2, but to the southern orthogonal plan at G22).</figcaption></figure>

remain relatively large, although they are probably overestimated (Fig. 10).

All the radiocarbon dates obtained for each of these sets, except for the “middle-S12” set (insufficient material), validated the chronocompatibility of our groupings (Table 5). It emerged that the two test

pits were largely not contemporary, with only one phase of occupation recorded in common, around 17.5–18.2ka cal BP, but corresponding to the summit complex reworked for S12. More generally, the dates confirm that the shelter was used during the initially proposed Gravettian and Solutrean periods. They also indicate occupation during more
Taxinomic distribution on south cross-section RS12

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 7. 2D spatial projection of the taxonomic identifications' charcoal from RS12, projected on its northern section (NB: the coordinates of the charcoal from the sieving correspond to the mean coordinates of the sieved surface).</figcaption></figure>

**Table 2**

Isotopic data obtained for the proposed isotopic groups from analyses of G22 charcoal, with N charcoal, the number of individual fragments of charcoal selected (analysed separately or pooled), and N Analyses, the number of analyses (NB: Average δ¹³C are weighted by the number of charcoal fragments analysed; standard deviations are calculated from analytical data).

<table><thead><tr><th>Proposed sets (G22)</th><th>Ncharcoal</th><th>Nanalyses</th><th>Mean δ¹³C (‰)</th><th>δ¹³C analyses standard deviation (‰)</th><th>δ¹³C max. deviation (‰)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>"top-G22"</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>-26.60</td><td>/</td><td>/</td></tr><tr><td>"upper-G22"</td><td>5</td><td>2</td><td>-24.73</td><td>0.64</td><td>0.91</td></tr><tr><td>"evt. upper-G22"</td><td>5</td><td>3</td><td>-24.26</td><td>0.20</td><td>0.38</td></tr><tr><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>25</td><td>9</td><td>-24.77</td><td>0.16</td><td>0.53</td></tr><tr><td>"lower-G22"</td><td>12</td><td>4</td><td>-24.53</td><td>0.24</td><td>0.53</td></tr></tbody></table>

recent periods contemporary with the Magdalenian which is consistent with radiometric results obtained further in the cave (Richard et al., 2024) and the latest study of the lithic assemblage from GH20-24 (Beauvais et al., forthcoming).

### 4.3. δ¹³C mean evolution at Points Cave and climato-environmental changes in the Ardèche River gorges

The evolution of mean δ¹³C at the site (G22 and S12) remains moderate, with a maximum raw deviation of 1 ‰ (–24.94 ‰ to –23.93 ‰), while some margins of error reach 0.9 ‰ and 1.7 ‰ for margins 1 and 2, respectively. This deviation rises to about 1.2 ‰ or 1.6 ‰ difference with the evolution of Voelker et al. (2016) or Schubert and

**Table 3**

Isotopic data obtained for the proposed isotopic groups from analyses of S12 charcoal, with N charcoal, the number of individual fragments of charcoal selected, and N Analyses, the number of analyses (NB: Average δ¹³C are weighted by the number of charcoal fragments analysed; standard deviations are calculated from analytical data).

<table><thead><tr><th>Proposed sets (S12)</th><th>Ncharcoal</th><th>Nanalyses</th><th>Mean δ¹³C (‰)</th><th>δ¹³C analyses standard deviation (‰)</th><th>δ¹³C max. deviation (‰)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>"top-S12"</td><td>3</td><td>3</td><td>-25.45</td><td>0.91</td><td>1.60</td></tr><tr><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>21</td><td>11</td><td>-24.64</td><td>0.34</td><td>1.01</td></tr><tr><td>"evt. upper-S12"</td><td>12</td><td>6</td><td>-23.93</td><td>0.53</td><td>1.47</td></tr><tr><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>19</td><td>11</td><td>-24.94</td><td>0.56</td><td>1.71</td></tr><tr><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>18</td><td>15</td><td>-24.14</td><td>0.27</td><td>1.10</td></tr></tbody></table>

Jahren (2012) models respectively (Hare et al., 2018). Despite this, most of the error margins remain tight enough to allow a discussion on the evolutions of the mean δ¹³C between sets (Fig. 10). We observe a decrease in mean δ¹³C between the “lower-S12” and “middle-S12” sets of almost 0.8 ‰, with little overlap between the margins (only for margin 2). Even more, if we extract the high values from the “middle-S12” set (uncertain grouping, see set formation), this decrease appears even more marked. We then observe an increase in mean δ¹³C of 1.01 ‰ on a fine sedimentary level, where the isotopic values of charcoal are the highest in the sequence (“event upper-S12” or “evt. upper-S12”; +1.01 ‰), with a non-overlap of margins 2 and 3 with the “middle-S12” set. We then observe a further decrease in mean δ¹³C of around –0.71 ‰ between the “evt. upper-S12” and “upper-S12” sets, with a slight overlap
<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 8.** Projection of isotopic values (a) and proposed isotopic sets (b) for G22 charcoal, in South/East view. Isotopic values (gross values) are represented by a colour grade, from highest to lowest: dark red (dR: -22.5 to -23.0 ‰), red (R: -23.0 to -23.5 ‰), orange (O: -23.5 to -24.0 ‰), yellow (Y: -24.0 to -24.5 ‰), green (G: -24.5 to -25.0 ‰), light blue (IB: -25.0 to -25.5 ‰), dark blue (dB: -25.5 to -26.0 ‰), navy blue (nB: -26.0 to -26.5 ‰). NB: (i) the size of the sphere depends on the number of charcoal fragments associated with it, (ii) the cross-section is set back 30 cm to the east for reading, (iii) the lower isotopic set (mean δ¹³C = 24.53 ‰) is shown in yellow (projection colour code, with J: -24.0 to -24.5 ‰) to accentuate reading. NB2: For the East view, see Fig. A.5.</figcaption></figure>

in the margins (margin 2 only). The mean δ¹³C of the next three sets ("upper-S12", "lower-G22" and "middle-G22") show no clear changes, with evolutions below 0.24 ‰ (overlapping margins). The following sets ("event_upper-G22" or "evt.upper-G22" and "upper-G22") represent too

few charcoal fragments to obtain a sufficiently fine margin of error for a rough interpretation of changes in mean δ¹³C (+0.51 ‰ then -0.47 ‰ respectively). However, changes in atmospheric parameters around 17.5ka cal BP suggest that these two sets are represented by higher mean
<table><caption>**Table 4**
Summary of pre-combustion alteration analysis of charcoal from SU with elements of Upper Palaeolithic occupations.</caption><thead><tr><th>Levels</th><th>SU P1<br>(RS12)</th><th>SU 1<br>(G22)</th><th>SU 1 (GH20/24,<br>except G22)</th><th>Total Upper<br>Palaeo.</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Alteration<br>degree</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0</td><td>15</td><td>24</td><td>32</td><td>71</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>59</td><td>13</td><td>25</td><td>97</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>10</td><td>6</td><td>9</td><td>25</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>5</td><td></td><td>3</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Non-<br>determined</td><td>27</td><td>6</td><td>17</td><td>50</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Total Charcoal</strong></td><td><strong>116</strong></td><td><strong>49</strong></td><td><strong>86</strong></td><td><strong>251</strong></td></tr></tbody></table>

δ¹³C than the previous sets, which reduces the overlap of the proposed error margins. Finally, considering the risk of reworking and the low number of charcoal for the upper sets ("top-S12" and "top-G22"), it remains difficult to discuss isotopic mean evolution. However, a sharp drop in isotopic values can be at least mentioned.

These changes in mean δ¹³C can be interpreted in terms of water stress for the pine wood collected at site scale, or more generally in the environment favourable to its growth (water availability/soil development; Farquhar et al., 1989; Saurer et al., 1995; Siegwolf et al., 2022). The physiological adaptations of plants in the Late Pleistocene (to climate/CO₂ atm) and the multifactorial response of the isotopic signal make it difficult to apply a strict transfer function. However, the literature on archaeological charcoal analyses tends to indicate probable changes of the order of 70 to 200 mm/year of precipitation and/or changes between 0.7 and 2.1 in Ellenberg F or N indices (soil moisture and development), for a 1 ‰ increase in mean δ¹³C (Aguilera et al., 2009; Ferrio et al., 2006; Belli et al., 2024; Caracuta et al., 2021; Audiard et al., 2024).

According to the records obtained at Points Cave, environmental changes between different occupation phases post-LGM were mostly moderate, but sufficient to trigger a visible change in forest cover (e.g. Audiard et al., 2019). It is then possible to link these changes to the past global climatic and environmental changes (Cacho et al., 1999; Dansgaard et al., 1993; Rasmussen et al., 2014; Fletcher and Sanchez-Goni, 2008; Fig. 10). First observations obtained in the older set of S12 ("lower-S12") would therefore indicate a dry climate contemporary with the occupation of the Heinrich 3 event (GS-5.1) or previous dry period (GS-5.2). The sterile layer, between "lower- and middle-S12" set, highlights the absence of data for a large part of the Upper Gravettian (30-24ky cal. BP) and raises questions about the shelter's use during these periods. The "middle-S12" assemblage would indicate a wet episode close to the Dansgaard-Oeschger 2 (GI-2) event in accordance with the presence of Solutrean material in the same levels. The higher isotopic values at the base of the "middle-S12" set (Fig. 9) could then refer to a one-off occupation of the cave during the drier Heinrich 2 (GS-3) event, but the remaining stratigraphic uncertainties do not allow us to confirm this hypothesis. The drier episode observed on S12 ("event.upper-S12") would be contemporary with the LGM (GS-2.1c), while the following levels would show a relatively stable wet phase (GS-2.1b; "upper-S12 to middle-G22") until at least a possible slight aridification attributed to the different phases of the Heinrich 1 event (GS-2.1a; "event.upper & upper-G22"). Lastly, if it remains difficult to give a precise chronological interpretation for the top of the sequences ("top-S12" and "top-G22"), we can suggest the hypothesis that the sharp drop in isotopic values could be consistent with Tardigracial phases favourable to the expansion of the pine forest (also consistent with the models of atmospheric parameters impact). The increase in temperatures in the gorges at the beginning of the Holocene should lead to stress for *Pinus* type *sylvestris/nigra* (increase in δ¹³C; Audiard, 2020).

## 5. Discussion

As with many cave and shelter sites from this period, the taxonomic study of the anthracological assemblage at Points Cave has been limited by reworking and difficulties in stratigraphic attribution, by the poor preservation of charcoal and the low diversity of Pleistocene wood species. The only qualitative information that emerges from anthracological results is the evidence of a cold phase contemporary with Palaeolithic occupation and a more temperate phase associated with Tardigracial/Holocene occupation, with the Ardèche River probably providing a regular supply of moisture.

The choice made here to favour individual piece of charcoal sampling with georeferencing (xyz coordinates), followed by systematic sieve sampling, enabled a spatial study of the assemblage. Not only were the initial anthracological observations confirmed, but it was also possible to study the isotopic evolution of *Pinus* type *sylvestris/nigra*. Several occupation phases were thus defined by the constitution of "isotopic sets" whose relative chronology has been recalibrated by radiocarbon dating. However, the conditions under which these sets were formed necessarily led to charcoal groups that where too few in number to allow a reliable study of mean δ¹³C. Furthermore, although this approach is interesting, there is the possibility of mixing between several climatic phases whose isotopic values are close enough to be confused. This phenomenon will in most cases lead to a weakening of the climate change and will require greater care in the charcoal dating.

The evolution of the δ¹³C signal between successive isotopic assemblages allows a new climatic history to be defined around Points Cave. While some trends suggest occupation during drier pre-LGM phases and possibly during Heinrich 1, most isotopic signals indicate a relatively humid and stable environment, with raw values between -25 and -24.5 ‰. As the evolution of the mean isotopic signal is geographically transposable, a comparison with regional sites is possible (Audiard et al., 2024). The isotopic data for charcoal from the Moustérian sites of *Les Canalettes* (CAN) and *La Combette* (COMB) have therefore been recontextualised spatially and according to the atmospheric parameters (cf. Eqs. (1) and (2)), highlighting an underestimation respectively of 0.8 and 0.9 ‰ on average (the data are adjusted to atmospheric conditions at 73.5ka cal BP for CAN and COMB and 26ka cal BP for PTS; cf. Eq. (3) for CAN, Fig. 10).

$$ \Delta^{13}C_{corr(CAN-PTS)} = (\Delta^{13}C_{corr(CAN-PTS)}_{Voelker2006} + \Delta^{13}C_{corr(CAN-PTS)}_{JS2006})/2 \quad (3) $$

With $\Delta^{13}C_{corr(CAN-PTS)}_{Voelker2006} = [(\delta^{13}C_{corr Voelker2006)}_{CAN} - (\delta^{13}C_{corr Voelker2006)}_{PTS}]$

And $\Delta^{13}C_{corr(CAN-PTS)}_{JS2012} = [(\delta^{13}C_{corr JS2012)}_{CAN} - (\delta^{13}C_{corr Voelker2012)}_{PTS}]$

Most of the values obtained at Points Cave (≈ -25 to -24.5 ‰) are similar to those of the rather cool and relatively humid phases at *Les Canalettes* and *La Combette*, which are also associated with some charcoal fragments from more mesophilic species (e.g. *Quercus* d.f., *Acer* sp.). Furthermore, the highest isotopic values from Points Cave (≈ -24.5 ‰ to -24 ‰) are comparable to those of the drier phases at *Les Canalettes* and *La Combette*, but remain moderate compared to those obtained for the driest phases of these two Middle Paleolithic sites. These observations support the hypothesis that, during the Upper Palaeolithic, the conditions in the gorges were rather mild. The presence of the Ardèche River and the enclosed nature of the gorges would have acted as a "climatic buffer" during the harshest phases of the Pleistocene, unlike the Rhône corridor swept by violent catabatic winds. These conditions would have favoured the establishment of woodland refuges, even certain mesophilic taxa. Generally speaking, the gorges' habitat would therefore have favoured the return of thermophilic organisms (flora and fauna) during less arid periods. This hypothesis is also in agreement with anthracological observations made on layer "d" of *La Baume d'Oulen* (OUL), higher up in the gorges and dated to around 20.2 ± 3 ka BP (24.2
<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 9.** Projection of isotopic values (a) and proposed isotopic sets (b) for S12 charcoal, in West view. Isotopic values (gross values) are represented by a colour scale, from highest to lowest: dark red (dR: -22.5 to -23.0 ‰), red (R: -23.0 to -23.5 ‰), orange (O: -23.5 a -24.0 ‰), yellow (y: -24.0 a -24.5 ‰), green (g: -24.5 to -25.0 ‰), light blue (Bc: -25.0 to -25.5 ‰), dark blue (dB: -25.5 to -26.0 ‰), navy blue (nB: -26.0 to -26.5 ‰). NB: the mean isotopic values of charcoal fragments, from the sieves, are represented by cylinders (stripping thickness), (ii) their sizes depend on the number of associated charcoal. NB2: For the North/West view, see Fig. A.6.</figcaption></figure>

± 5ka cal BP; Bazile-Robert, 1983), although new anthracological study of this complex has not confirmed first observations (Audiard, 2020; possible contamination from higher levels). More regionally, *La Salpetrière* (SAL) site also shows a less rigorous climate at these periods (i2, between 19.5 and 20.5 ka BP, around 23-24ka cal BP), with the appearance of *Quercus* f.p. and *Fraxinus* sp. (fairly open environment still dominated by *Pinus* type *sylvestris/nigra* and thermoresistant riparian vegetation; Bazile-Robert, 1979). However, for Points cave and considering stratigraphic uncertainty, only direct charcoal dating could confirm the possibility of ancient mesophilic taxon (pre-Tardiglacial or Taridiglacial periods).

Furthermore, the relatively constant input of moisture after the LGM is consistent with observations from other Mediterranean and Iberian

sites (Alborán Sea, Padul paleolake, Cova de les Cendres; Fletcher and Sánchez Goñi, 2008; Morcillo-Montalbá et al., 2021; Rodrigo-Gámiz et al., 2022; Audiard et al., 2024). The increase in insolation would have contributed to an influx of moisture from the Mediterranean, although global temperatures would have limited any important forest expansion before the tardiglacial period. Nevertheless, as the data around Herinich 1 at least emphasises, our signal remains directly linked to the remains of human occupation of the cave, and drier events may not have been recorded in the sequences (e.g. absence of remains, occupation further to the front of the cave).

Overall, the relatively mild conditions of the gorges, the presence of numerous caves and the wealth of raw materials in the surrounding area (e.g. Beauvais et al., forthcoming; Chanteraud et al., 2019) must have
<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 10.** Representation of the anthracological and isotopic data obtained at Points Cave, with: (i) charcoal isotopic δ¹³C data (orange diamond: mean δ¹³C; deep green diamond: δ¹³C value of each charcoal group; deep green cross: δ¹³C individual value; vertical dashed orange line: max. Time uncertainty; horizontal dashed orange line: standard deviation (below individual value, not significant); dark green, light green and beige margin: comparative margins 1,2 and 3 respectively, cf. method), (ii) modeling of CO₂ atm and δ¹³C_atm effects from Hare et al., 2018 (cf. Method; dashed red line for the model based on Voelker et al., 2016; dotted blue line for the model based on Schubert and Jahren, 2012), (iii) transposed values and environment of COMB-Combette et CAN-Canalettes, (iv) δ¹⁸O signal from the NGRIP core on the GICC05modelext time scale (Rasmussen et al., 2014; GS-Greenland Stadial, GI-Greenland Interstadial) with corresponding MIS (Marine isotope stages).</figcaption></figure>
<table><caption>**Table 5**
Chronology of isotopic sets from Points Cave.</caption><thead><tr><th colspan="2">Square G22</th><th colspan="2">Square S12</th><th rowspan="2">Chronology of the Occupations</th></tr><tr><th>Isotopic sect</th><th>Radiocarbon dating</th><th>Isotopic sect</th><th>Radiocarbon dating</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>"top-G22"</td><td>/</td><td>"top S12"</td><td>/</td><td>Tardigracial?</td></tr><tr><td>"upper-G22"</td><td>15.2-15.6ka cal BP</td><td></td><td></td><td>Upper Magadalenian (H1 end)</td></tr><tr><td>"evt. upper-G22"</td><td>17.1-17.5ka cal BP</td><td></td><td></td><td>Middle Magadalenian (pre-H1)</td></tr><tr><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>17.8-18.2ka cal BP</td><td>17.5-18.1ka cal BP</td><td></td><td>Middle Magadalenian (post-LGM)</td></tr><tr><td>"lower-G22"</td><td>19.5-19.9ka cal BP</td><td>/</td><td></td><td>Lower Magadalenian (post-LGM)</td></tr><tr><td>/</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>21.0-21.8ka cal BP</td><td></td><td>Final Solutrean /Badegoulian? (post-LGM)</td></tr><tr><td>/</td><td>"evt. upper-S12"</td><td>21.8-22.3ka cal BP</td><td></td><td>Final Solutrean /Badegoulian? (LGM)</td></tr><tr><td>/</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>≈ 23-27.5ka cal BP</td><td></td><td>Solutean/ Gravettian (D/O 2 – H2)</td></tr><tr><td>/</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>30.0-30.9ka cal BP<br>30.3-31.2ka cal BP<br>30.3-31.4ka cal BP</td><td></td><td>Early Gravettian (&gt;30,5 ka cal BP, H3)</td></tr></tbody></table>

enabled the settlement of human in the region. More locally, a climatic gradient between the bottom of the gorges and the harsher plateau must have influenced distinct areas of activity. The diversity of game found in the remains of the cave is certainly the result of complementary hunting between the plateau and the bottom of the gorges (Lateur et al., 2019; Rillardon, 2010). On the other hand, the study of pre-combustion alterations and the low variability of the signal by the assemblages suggest an opportunistic wood harvesting (mainly deadwood) directed towards a single biotope (in the lower zone of the gorges to which Points Cave belongs).

## 6. Conclusions

Our approach at Points Cave, combining manual charcoal sampling and sieving, followed by anatomical and isotopic analyses, has enabled us to provide new chrono-environmental knowledge of the site

occupations during the Upper Palaeolithic, where anthracological analysis alone would have been limited by the complexity of the stratigraphic context. As can be seen in many cave/shelter sites of the period, anthracological assemblages rarely meet the requirements of the diachronic and quantitative analysis method. While our approach undoubtedly has potential, the accepted standards for creating isotopic assemblages limit certain interpretations (too few pieces of charcoal, risk of mixing charcoal from several close climatic phases).

During the harsher periods, the Ardèche River gorges were sheltered from the winds of the Rhône corridor and represented a milder environment, favourable to the development of ecological refuges. In addition, Mediterranean influences have certainly favoured the development of wetter conditions since the post-LGM phase. This environment and the availability of resources/shelters provided ideal conditions for the Gravettian to Magdalenian occupation of Points Cave.

## CRediT authorship contribution statement

**Benjamin Audiard:** Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. **Julien Monney:** Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Resources, Investigation, Funding acquisition. **Marco Padovin:** Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Methodology, Data curation. **Thierry Blasco:** Writing – review & editing, Validation, Resources, Investigation. **Giovanna Battipaglia:** Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Methodology. **Isabelle Théry-Parisot:** Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Resources, Methodology, Investigation, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization.

## Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

## Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the DRAC Occitanie (French Ministry of Culture) and by the research project funding of the Conseil Régional Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur. We would like to thank the FARPA for managing the funding, the municipality of Saint-Martin-d'Ardèche (site owner) for allowing us to carry out research at Points Cave and the Office National des Forêts (ONF) which had been a socio-economic partner in this project. We also thank VEOLIA for their essential financial support concerning the isotopic analysis.

## Annexes.
<figure><img src="image_14.png" /><figcaption>Fig. A1. Data of carbon content obtained from EA-IRMS and interpretations (from both for squares G22 and S12).</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_15.png" /><figcaption>Fig. A2a. FTIR of charcoal from Points cave (manual sampling).</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_16.png" /><figcaption>Fig. A2b. FTIR of charcoal from Points cave (sieving).</figcaption></figure>

Table A1

Details of “comparative margins” extrapolated from the inter-individual isotopic variability observed in present-day gymno-
sperms (Loader et al., 2013; Leavitt, 2010).

<table><caption>Comparative margins = Mean δ<sup>13</sup>C ± Margins</caption><thead><tr><th>Margin 1</th><th>N charcoal analyzed</th><th>Margin 2</th><th>Margin 3</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>± 1.00 (%)</td><td>Extrapoled from "Loader et al., 2013" data below</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>N charcoal indepant</td><td>N Bootstrap replication</td><td>± 2σ (%)</td><td>± 1σ (SD; %)</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>1</td><td>1.01</td><td>0.56</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>2</td><td>0.81</td><td>0.41</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>3</td><td>0.66</td><td>0.33</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>4</td><td>0.58</td><td>0.29</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>5</td><td>0.49</td><td>0.26</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>6</td><td>0.46</td><td>0.23</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>7</td><td>0.43</td><td>0.22</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>8</td><td>0.39</td><td>0.20</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>9</td><td>0.37</td><td>0.19</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>10</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.18</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>11</td><td>0.34</td><td>0.18</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>12</td><td>0.32</td><td>0.17</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>13</td><td>0.31</td><td>0.16</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>14</td><td>0.30</td><td>0.15</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>15</td><td>0.29</td><td>0.15</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>16</td><td>0.28</td><td>0.14</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>17</td><td>0.26</td><td>0.14</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>18</td><td>0.26</td><td>0.13</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>19</td><td>0.26</td><td>0.13</td></tr><tr><td>1.00</td><td>20 ≤</td><td>0.25</td><td>0.13</td></tr></tbody></table>
<caption>**Table A2**</caption>

Details of taxonomic identifications from square G22 (NB1: facies names "yellow" corresponding to "yellow + yellow with granules", "Y2" to "Yellow 2" and "White & gra." To "White with granules"; NB2: All charcoal is considered here; NB3: d.f. for deciduous foliage).

<table><caption>**Table A3**</caption><thead><tr><th>G22</th><th>SU R</th><th>SU 0</th><th>SU 1"Yellow"</th><th>SU 1"Brown + Y2"</th><th>SU 1"Brown 2"</th><th>SU 1"White & gra."</th><th>SU 1"Brown 3"</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Identification</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Pinus</em> type <em>sylvestris/nigra</em></td><td></td><td>1</td><td>5</td><td>20</td><td>19</td><td>1</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td><em>Betula</em> sp.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>10</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>cf. <em>Salix/Populus</em> sp.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>5</td><td>4</td><td>1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Populus</em> sp.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Buxus</em> sp.</td><td>2</td><td>1</td><td></td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Quercus</em> d.f.</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td></td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Prunus</em> (type <em>spinosa</em>)</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Taxus baccata</em></td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Angiosperm</td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td><td>5</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gymnosperm</td><td></td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Undetermined</td><td></td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>9</td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Total charcoal</strong></td><td>5</td><td>6</td><td>8</td><td>57</td><td>32</td><td>3</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Burned bones</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Overall Total</strong></td><td>5</td><td>7</td><td>8</td><td>57</td><td>32</td><td>5</td><td>3</td></tr></tbody></table>

Details of taxonomic identifications from sector RS12 (NB1: All charcoal is considered here; NB2: d.f. for deciduous foliage).

<table><thead><tr><th>RS 12</th><th>P1 "top"</th><th>P1 "grey"</th><th>P1 "yellow"</th><th>P1 "transition"</th><th>P1 "brown"</th><th>P1 "undeter."</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Identification</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Juniperus</em> sp.</td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Pinus</em> type <em>sylvestris/nigra</em></td><td>1</td><td>17</td><td>52</td><td>21</td><td>17</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td><em>Betula</em> sp.</td><td></td><td>3</td><td>3</td><td>1</td><td></td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>cf. <em>Salix/Populus</em> sp.</td><td></td><td></td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Populus</em> sp.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td><em>Buxus</em> sp.</td><td>1</td><td></td><td>23</td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td><em>Quercus</em> sp.</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>5</td><td>7</td><td>1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Quercus</em> d.f.</td><td>1</td><td></td><td>7</td><td>1</td><td></td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td><em>Acer</em> (type <em>campestre</em>)</td><td></td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><em>Acer</em> (type <em>platanoides</em>)</td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Angiosperm</td><td></td><td>1</td><td>10</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gymnosperm</td><td></td><td>3</td><td>5</td><td>7</td><td>9</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Undetermined</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>4</td><td>14</td><td>13</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Total charcoal</strong></td><td>6</td><td>29</td><td>113</td><td>55</td><td>41</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Burned bones</td><td>2</td><td>4</td><td>6</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Overall Total</strong></td><td>11</td><td>34</td><td>124</td><td>56</td><td>41</td><td>15</td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_17.png" /><figcaption>Fig. A3. Graphical representation of the distribution of isotopic deviations from the mean δ¹³C on G22.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_18.png" /><figcaption>Fig. A4. Graphical representation of the distribution of isotopic deviations from the mean δ¹³C on S12.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_19.png" /></figure>

**Fig. A5.** Projection of isotopic values (a) and proposed isotopic sets (b) for G22 charcoal, in East view. Isotopic values are represented by a colour grade, from highest to lowest: dark red (dR: -22.5 to -23.0 ‰), red (R: -23.0 to -23.5 ‰), orange (O: -23.5 to -24.0 ‰), yellow (Y: -24.0 to -24.5 ‰), green (G: -24.5 to -25.0 ‰), light blue (IB: -25.0 to -25.5 ‰), dark (dB: -25.5 to -26.0 ‰), navy blue (nB: -26.0 to -26.5 ‰). NB: (i) the size of the sphere depends on the number of charcoal fragments associated with it, (ii) the cross-section is set back 30 cm to the east for reading, (iii) the lower isotopic set (mean δ¹³C = 24.53 ‰) is shown in yellow (projection colour code, with J: -24.0 to -24.5 ‰) to accentuate reading.
<figure><img src="image_20.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. A6.** Projection of isotopic values (a) and proposed isotopic sets (b) for S12 charcoal, in North/West view. Isotopic values are represented by a colour scale, from highest to lowest: dark red (dR: -22.5 to -23.0 ‰), red (R: -23.0 to -23.5 ‰), orange (O: -23.5 a -24.0 ‰), yellow (y: -24.0 a -24.5 ‰), green (g: -24.5 to -25.0 ‰), light blue (Bc: -25.0 to -25.5 ‰), dark blue (dB: -25.5 to -26.0 ‰), navy blue (nB: -26.0 to -26.5 ‰). NB: (i) the mean isotopic values of charcoal fragments, from the sieves, are represented by cylinders (stripping thickness), (ii) their sizes depend on the number of associated charcoal.</figcaption></figure>

**Table A4**

<table><caption>Isotopic and carbon content data from Points cave (darker color for analyses of grouped charcoal).</caption><thead><tr><th>Square</th><th>Sample</th><th>Set</th><th>Z (cm)</th><th>X (cm)</th><th>Y (cm)</th><th>δ<sup>13</sup>C (‰)</th><th>N charcoal</th><th>%C</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-1615</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-154</td><td>1252</td><td>-492</td><td>-24.76</td><td>1</td><td>56.30</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-1595</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-154</td><td>1258</td><td>-495</td><td>-24.21</td><td>1</td><td>60.09</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.08</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-158.5</td><td>1285</td><td>-509</td><td>-24.54</td><td>1</td><td>60.56</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.01</td><td>"top-S12"</td><td>-150.5</td><td>1290</td><td>-506</td><td>-25.95</td><td>1</td><td>58.37</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.20</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-172.5</td><td>1256</td><td>-544.5</td><td>-24.32</td><td>1</td><td>65.06</td></tr></tbody></table>

(continued on next page)
<table><caption>Table A4 (continued)</caption><thead><tr><th>Square</th><th>Sample</th><th>Set</th><th>Z (cm)</th><th>X (cm)</th><th>Y (cm)</th><th>δ<sup>13</sup>C (‰)</th><th>N charcoal</th><th>%C</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.26</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-179</td><td>1248</td><td>-523</td><td>-23.95</td><td>1</td><td>60.72</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.25</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-178.5</td><td>1254</td><td>-529</td><td>-24.11</td><td>1</td><td>64.07</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.19</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-170.5</td><td>1206</td><td>-504</td><td>-25.46</td><td>1</td><td>56.96</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-17.76</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-168</td><td>1275</td><td>-592</td><td>-23.98</td><td>1</td><td>63.72</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16q</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-174/-176</td><td>1275</td><td>-525</td><td>-24.36</td><td>1</td><td>59.92</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16h</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-162/-164</td><td>1225</td><td>-525</td><td>-25.63</td><td>1</td><td>58.45</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16g</td><td>"event.upper-S12"</td><td>-160/-162</td><td>1275</td><td>-525</td><td>-24.12</td><td>4</td><td>61.73</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16m</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-166/-168</td><td>1275</td><td>-525</td><td>-25.10</td><td>5</td><td>60.65</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16d</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-156/-158</td><td>1225</td><td>-525</td><td>-24.60</td><td>2</td><td>60.85</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16n</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-170/-172</td><td>1250</td><td>-525</td><td>-24.37</td><td>3</td><td>60.12</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16r</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-176/-178</td><td>1225</td><td>-525</td><td>-24.30</td><td>2</td><td>62.38</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16w</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-164/-166</td><td>1250</td><td>-525</td><td>-25.78</td><td>1</td><td>57.30</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16v</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-162/-164</td><td>1250</td><td>-525</td><td>-25.09</td><td>2</td><td>63.99</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16u</td><td>"event.upper-S12"</td><td>-160/-162</td><td>1250</td><td>-525</td><td>-24.83</td><td>2</td><td>62.91</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-17.39</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-160</td><td>1267</td><td>-571</td><td>-23.84</td><td>1</td><td>58.96</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-17.50</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-164</td><td>1276</td><td>-558</td><td>-23.94</td><td>1</td><td>60.19</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.28</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-181</td><td>1251</td><td>-524</td><td>-23.91</td><td>1</td><td>61.69</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-1628</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-163</td><td>1254</td><td>-494</td><td>-24.07</td><td>1</td><td>61.61</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-1616</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-154</td><td>1248</td><td>-496.5</td><td>-25.14</td><td>1</td><td>60.39</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-1626</td><td>"event.upper-S12"</td><td>-157</td><td>1258.5</td><td>-501</td><td>-23.66</td><td>1</td><td>64.69</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-1596</td><td>"top-S12"</td><td>-153</td><td>1268</td><td>-522</td><td>-26.01</td><td>1</td><td>65.24</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-1583</td><td>"top-S12"</td><td>-147</td><td>1277</td><td>-533</td><td>-24.41</td><td>1</td><td>68.78</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-1577</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-154</td><td>1239</td><td>-525</td><td>-24.29</td><td>1</td><td>58.34</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-17.77</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-169.5</td><td>1264</td><td>-563</td><td>-24.31</td><td>1</td><td>57.43</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-17.51</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-165</td><td>1269</td><td>-556</td><td>-23.50</td><td>1</td><td>51.71</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.27</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-180.5</td><td>1221</td><td>-527.5</td><td>-23.92</td><td>1</td><td>56.77</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.13</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-167</td><td>1207</td><td>-527</td><td>-25.27</td><td>1</td><td>52.85</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.16</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-170</td><td>1223</td><td>-519</td><td>-24.25</td><td>1</td><td>59.03</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.11</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-160</td><td>1228</td><td>-520</td><td>-24.85</td><td>1</td><td>58.54</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.24</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-179</td><td>1210.5</td><td>-544.5</td><td>-23.87</td><td>1</td><td>57.18</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.23</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-179</td><td>1207</td><td>-511.5</td><td>-24.13</td><td>1</td><td>53.94</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.04</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-157.5</td><td>1281</td><td>-507</td><td>-25.10</td><td>1</td><td>61.21</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.07</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-162.5</td><td>1275</td><td>-504</td><td>-24.82</td><td>1</td><td>54.44</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.09</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-159</td><td>1228</td><td>-511.5</td><td>-24.55</td><td>1</td><td>54.91</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.03</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-157</td><td>1282</td><td>-510</td><td>-25.22</td><td>1</td><td>54.72</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-16.10</td><td>"event.upper-S12"</td><td>-159.5</td><td>1212</td><td>-505</td><td>-23.59</td><td>1</td><td>60.69</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16i</td><td>"event.upper-S12"</td><td>-160/-162</td><td>1225</td><td>-525</td><td>-23.70</td><td>1</td><td>61.41</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16a</td><td>"event.upper-S12"</td><td>-160/-162</td><td>1225</td><td>-525</td><td>-23.36</td><td>3</td><td>56.39</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16f</td><td>"upper-S12"</td><td>-158/-160</td><td>1225</td><td>-525</td><td>-24.56</td><td>10</td><td>61.69</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16j</td><td>"middle-S12"</td><td>-164/-166</td><td>1225</td><td>-525</td><td>-24.86</td><td>2</td><td>62.25</td></tr><tr><td>S12</td><td>PTS-tamis16s</td><td>"lower-S12"</td><td>-178/-180</td><td>1225</td><td>-525</td><td>-24.61</td><td>3</td><td>60.28</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-1557</td><td>"top-G22"</td><td>-144</td><td>56</td><td>439</td><td>-26.60</td><td>1</td><td>40.18</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-1068</td><td>"upper-G22"</td><td>-147</td><td>55</td><td>463</td><td>-25.46</td><td>1</td><td>60.88</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-J-(1588)</td><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>-154.5</td><td>50</td><td>441.5</td><td>-25.05</td><td>4</td><td>51.72</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-K-(1116)</td><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>-159.5</td><td>82.5</td><td>435.5</td><td>-24.89</td><td>4</td><td>58.29</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-D-(1624)</td><td>"lower-G22"</td><td>-173</td><td>38</td><td>464.5</td><td>-24.86</td><td>2</td><td>56.07</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-1101</td><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>-153</td><td>76</td><td>482</td><td>-24.82</td><td>1</td><td>63.84</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-G-(1572)</td><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>-151</td><td>53.5</td><td>441.5</td><td>-24.79</td><td>2</td><td>49.11</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-1587</td><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>-157</td><td>32</td><td>445</td><td>-24.77</td><td>1</td><td>49.38</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-L-(1103)</td><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>-156.5</td><td>61.5</td><td>451</td><td>-24.74</td><td>5</td><td>57.86</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-E-(1092)</td><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>-154.5</td><td>84</td><td>429.5</td><td>-24.66</td><td>3</td><td>57.30</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-A-(1613)</td><td>"lower-G22"</td><td>-164.75</td><td>67</td><td>431.25</td><td>-24.60</td><td>4</td><td>56.26</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-H-(1083)</td><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>-151</td><td>87.5</td><td>466</td><td>-24.57</td><td>2</td><td>58.85</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-B-(1540)</td><td>"upper-G22"</td><td>-142.5</td><td>50.5</td><td>457.5</td><td>-24.55</td><td>4</td><td>55.31</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-F-(1575)</td><td>"middle-G22"</td><td>-152.5</td><td>51</td><td>448</td><td>-24.52</td><td>3</td><td>50.03</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-C-(1593)</td><td>"lower-G22"</td><td>-162.25</td><td>43.5</td><td>437</td><td>-24.39</td><td>5</td><td>46.77</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-I-(1131)</td><td>"event.upper-G22"</td><td>-148.5</td><td>63.5</td><td>453</td><td>-24.39</td><td>3</td><td>59.80</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-1620</td><td>"lower-G22"</td><td>-169</td><td>51</td><td>424</td><td>-24.33</td><td>1</td><td>52.45</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-1567</td><td>"event.upper-G22"</td><td>-150</td><td>67</td><td>444</td><td>-24.10</td><td>1</td><td>56.56</td></tr><tr><td>G22</td><td>PTS-1565</td><td>"event.upper-G22"</td><td>-148.5</td><td>49</td><td>444</td><td>-24.01</td><td>1</td><td>64.40</td></tr></tbody></table>

## Data availability

Data are contained in the appendices

## References

Aguilera, M., Espinar, C., Ferrio, J.P., Pérez, G., Voltas, J., 2009. A map of autumn precipitation for the third millennium BP in the Eastern Iberian Peninsula from charcoal carbon isotopes. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, Isoscapes: Isotope Mapping and Its applications/Isoscapes 102, 157–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gexplo.2008.11.019.

Aguilera, M., Ferrio, J.P., Pérez, G., Araus, J.L., Voltas, J., 2012. Holocene changes in precipitation seasonality in the western Mediterranean Basin: a multi-species approach using δ13C of archaeobotanical remains. Journal of Quaternary Science 27, 192–202. https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.1533.

Argant, J., 2018. Analyse pollinique de six échantillons issus des fouilles 2013 et 2017. In: Projet Datation Grottes Ornées – Grotte aux Points (Aiguèze). Rapport d'activité 2018, (ed.) J. Monney, pp. 99-106. Montpellier: SRA Occitanie.

Audiard, B., 2020. Le bois, archive des changements climatiques entre mer et montagne du Paleolithique moyen au Mésolithique : composition isotopique (¹³C/¹²C), reconstitutions paléoclimatiques, histoire des forêts et interactions hommes/milieux. In: Préhistoire. Université Côte d'Azur, Nice, p. 594p.

Audiard, B., Blasco, T., Brossier, B., Fiorentino, G., Battipaglia, G., Théry-Parisot, I., 2018. δ¹³C referential in three Pinus species for a first archeological application to
Paleolithic contexts “between intra- and inter-individual variation and carbonization effect”. JAS: Report 20, 775-783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2018.06.029.

Audiard, B., Théry-Pariset, I., Blasco, T., Mologni, C., Texier, P.-J., Battipaglia, G., 2019. Crossing taxonomic and isotopic approaches in charcoal analyses to reveal past climates. New perspectives in Paleobotany from the Paleolithic Neanderthal dwelling-site of La Combette (Vaucluse, France). Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 266, 52-60.

Audiard, B., Théry-Pariset, I., Meignen, L., Blasco, T., Battipaglia, G., 2021. New climatic approaches of the middle Paleolithic sequences: combined methodology of the taxonomic and isotopic charcoal analyses on the Neanderthals settlements “Les Canalettes” (Aveyron, Quaternary International, France).

Audiard, B., Villaverde, V., Zilhão, J., Zapata, J., Angelus, D., Real, C., Roman, D., Badal, E., 2024. Environmental changes in eastern Iberia during the Solutrean: Contribution of isotopic analysis (δ¹³C). Of Charcoal from L'abrigo De La Boja and La Cova De Les Cendres. *Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology* 322.

Badal, E., 1990. Aportaciones de La Antracologla Al Estudlo Del Paisaje Vegetal y Su Evolución En El Cuatemario Reciente En La Costa Mediterranea Del País Valenciano y Andalucía (18.000-3.000 B P.), 321.

Badal, E., Heinz, C., 1991. Méthodes utilisées pour l'étude de sites préhistoriques. In: Waldren, W.H., Ensenyat, J.A., Kennard, R.C. (Eds.), lind Deya International Conference of Prehistory. Oxford Archaeopress, pp. 17-47.

Bartoli, M., Boissier, J.-M., 2018. La forêt au coeur de l'histoire : Étude historique des forêts anciennes du Parc naturel régional des Monts d'Ardèche. Parc des Monts d'Ardèche, Ecosylve, p. 167.

Baton, F., Nguyen Tu, T.T., Derenne, S., Delorme, A., Delarue, F., Dufraisse, A., 2017. Tree-ring δ¹³C of archaeological charcoals as indicator of past climatic seasonality. A case study from the Neolithic settlements of Lake Chalain (Jura, France). Quaternary International 457, 50-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2017.03.015.

Bazile-Robert, E., 1979. Flore et végétation du sud de la France pendant la dernière glaciation d'après l'analyse anthracologique. Université de Sciences techniques du Languedoc de Montpellier, p. 154.

Bazile-Robert, E., 1983. Flore, végétation et climat, d'après l'anthraconanalyse, de 22.500 à 12.500 BP dans le Sud de la France. Rivista Di Scienze Preistoriche 38, 109-116.

Bellì, C., Weinstein-Evron, M., Caracuta, V., Nadel, D., Yeshurun, R., Regev, L., Boaretto, E. & Yaroshevich, A., 2024 A Late Pleistocene Eastern Mediterranean palaeoclimate record based on stable carbon isotopes (Δ¹³C) of archaeological charcoal: New data from the Epipalaeolithic sequence of Ein Qashish South, Israel. *Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports* 57.

Beauvais, P.-A., Kherdouche, A., Fernandes, P., Boccaccio, G., Monney, J., 2024. Pétroarchéologie des silicates et évaluation taphonomique d'un ensemble lithique du Paléolithique supérieur des gorges de l'Ardèche : le cas de la grotte aux Points (Aiguèze. Actes des Séances SPF, Gard) (forthcoming).

Boccaccio, G., 2018. Résultats préliminaires de l'étude de la série lithique de la grotte aux Points: typologie et technologie. Karstologia 72, 37-44.

Cacho, I., Grimalt, J.O., Canals, M., Sierro, F.J., Flores, J.A., Shackleton, N., 1999. Dansgaard-Oeschger and Heinrich event imprints in Alboran Sea paleotemperatures. *Paleoecography* 14, 698-705.

Caracuta, V., Alex, B., Regev, L., Regev, J., Mintz, E., Barzilai, O., Hershkoitz, I., Boaretto, E., 2021. The Marine Isotope Stage 3 landscape around Manot Cave (Israel) and the food habits of anatomically modern humans: New insights from the anthracological record and stable carbon isotope analysis of wild almond (*Amygdalus* sp.). *Journal of Human Evolution* 160, 102868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2020.102868.

Chabal, L., 1992. La représentativité paléo-écologique des charbons de bois archéologiques issus du bois de feu. *Bulletin de la Société Botanique de France*. Actualités Botaniques 139, 213-236.

Chabal, L., 1997. Forêts et sociétés en Languedoc (Néolithique final. L'anthracologie, méthode et paléoécologie. DAF, Antiquité tatdive), p. 49.

Chabal, L., Heinz, C., 2021. Reconstructing the heterogeneity of past woodlands in anthracology using the spatial distribution of charcoals in archaeological layers: Applied to the postglacial occupation of the Aburerail cave (Hérault) in the South of France. Quaternary International 593-594, 19-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2020.10.080.

Chantauder, C., Chalmin, É., Salomon, H., Hœrlé, S., Monney, J., 2019. Relation entre les matières colorantes issues des fouilles et des parois ornées. Karstologia 73, 1-12.

Chauvet, J.-M., Colomar, A., Deschamps, É., Galant, P., Hillaire, C., 1995. Aiguèze : Grotte aux Points. Bilan Scientifique Régional Languedoc-Roussillon 1994, 87.

Chrzažvez, J., Théry-Pariset, I., Fiorucci, G., Terralc, J.-F., Thibaut, B., 2014. Impact of post-depositional processes on charcoal fragmentation and archaeobotanical implications: Experimental approach combining charcoal analysis and biomechanics. Journal of Archaeological Science 44, 30-42.

Colomer, A., Galant, P., 1993. Rapport sur la découverte d'une nouvelle grotte ornée dans les gorges de l'Ardèche (commune d'Aiguèze, Gard). SRA Languedoc-Roussillon, Montpellier.

Czimczik, C.I., Preston, C.M., Schmidt, M.W.I., Werner, R.A., Schulze, E.D., 2002. Effects of charring on mass, organic carbon, and stable carbon isotope composition of wood. Organic Geochemistry 33, 1207-1223.

Dansgaard, W., Johnsen, S.J., Clausen, H.B., Dahl-Jensen, D., Gundestrup, N.S., Hammer, C.U., Hvidberg, C.S., Steffensen, J.P., Sveinbjörnsdóttir, A.E., Jouzel, J., Bond, G., 1993. Evidence for general instability of past climate from a 250-kyr ice-core record. Nature 364, 218-220.

Delhon, C., Thièbault, S., Brochier, J.-L., Berger, J.F., 2010. Dynamiques de végétation au tardiglaciaire et à l'Holocène ancien en moyenne vallée du Rhône d'après les données anthracologiques. Quaternaire 21, 281-293.

du Boisgugeneuc, D., Delarue, F., Daux, V., Nguyen Tu, T.T., Baudin, F., Dufraisse, A., 2023. Impact of carbonization on oak wood δ¹⁸O: A preliminary study. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis 175.

Farquhar, G.D., Ehleringer, J.R., Hubick, K.T., 1989. Carbon isotope discrimination and photosynthesis. Annu. Rev. Plant Phys. 40, 503-537.

Ferrio, J.P., Alonso, N., Lopez, J.B., Araus, J.L., Voltas, J., 2006. Carbon isotope composition of fossil charcoal reveals aridity changes in the NW Mediterranean Basin. Global Change Biology 12, 1253-1266. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01170.x.

Ferrio, J.P., Aguilera, M., Voltas, J., Araus, J.L., 2020. Stable carbon isotopes in archaeological plant remains. In: Montenari, M. (Ed.), Carbon Isotope Stratigraphy. Academic Press, pp. 107-145.

Fiorentino, G., Ferrio, J.P., Bogaard, A., Araus, J.L., Riehl, S., 2015. Stable isotopes in archaeobotanical research. Veget Hist Archaeobot 24, 215-227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00334-014-0492-9.

Fletcher, W.J., Sánchez Goni, M.F., 2008. Orbital- and sub-orbital-scale climate impacts on vegetation of the western Mediterranean basin over the last 48,000 yr. Quaternary Research 70, 451-464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yqres.2008.07.002.

Genuite, K., Voinchet, P., Delannoy, J.-J., Bahain, J.-J., Monney, J., Arnaud, J., Bruxelles, L., Moncel, M.-H., Philippe, A., Pons-Branchu, E., Revil, A., Richard, M., Jaillet, S., 2022. Middle and Late Pleistocene evolution of the Ardeche River archaeological landscapes (France). Quaternary Science Review 297, 107812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2022.107812.

Hare, V.J., Loftus, E., Jeffrey, A., Bronk Ramsey, C., 2018. Atmospheric CO₂ effect on stable carbon isotope composition of terrestrial fossil archives. Nature Communication 9252, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02691-x.

Henry, A., Théry-Pariset, J., 2014. From Evenk campfires to prehistoric hearths: charcoal analysis as a tool for identifying the use of rotten wood as fuel. Journal of Archaeological Science 321-336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2014.09.005.

Jaillet, S., Monney, J., 2018. Analyse 3D des volumes et des remplissages souterrains de la grotte aux Points au temps des fréquentations paléolithiques. Karstologia 72, 27-36.

Kabukcu, C., Chabal, L., 2021. Sampling and quantitative analysis methods in anthracology from archaeological contexts: Achievements and prospects. Quaternary International 593-594, 6-18.

Kohn, M.J., 2010. Carbon isotope compositions of terrestrial C3 plants as indicators of (paleo)ecology and (paleo)climate. PNAS 107, 19691-19695. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1004933107.

Lateur, N., Fourvel, J.-B., Jeannet, M., Philippe, M., 2019. Comportement de subsistance paléolithiques et relations entre l'Homme et les Carnivores à la grotte aux Points. Karstologia 73, 13-24.

Leavitt, S.W., 2010. Tree-ring C-H-O isotope variability and sampling. Science of the Total Environment 408, 5244-5253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.07.057.

Loader, N.J., Young, G.H.F., McCarroll, D., Wilson, R.J.S., 2013. Quantifying uncertainty in isotope dendroclimatology. The Holocene 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/095986313486945.

Masi, A., Sadori, L., Baneschi, I., Siani, A.M., Zanchetta, G., 2013. Stable isotope analysis of archaeological oak charcoal from eastern Anatolia as a marker of mid-Holocene climate change. Plant Biology 15, 83-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1438-8677.2012.00669.x.

Monney, J., 2012. Et si d'un paysage l'on contait passé. Tissu de sens et grottes ornées le long des gorges de l'Ardèche. Collection EDYTEM. Cahiers De Géographie 13, 21-42.

Monney, J., 2018. La Grotte aux Points d'Aiguèze, petite soeur de la grotte Chauvet, et les recherches menées dans le cadre du projet "Datation Grottes Ornées. Karstologia 72, 1-10.

Monney, J., Jaillet, S., 2019. Fréquentations humaines, ornementation parietale et processus naturels : mise en place d'un cadre chronologique pour la grotte aux Points d'Aiguèze. Karstologia 73, 49-62.

Morcillo-Montalbà, L., Rodrigo-Gámiz, M., Martínez-Ruiz, F., Ortega-Huertas, M., Schouten, S., Sinninghe Damsté, J.S., 2021. Rapid Climate Changes in the Westernmost Mediterranean (Alboran Sea) Over the Last 35 kyr: New Insights From Four Lipid Paleothermometers (UK'37, TEXHS66, RI-OH', and LDI). *Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology* 36. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020PA004171.

Mouraux, C., Delarue, F., Bardin, J., Nguyen Tu, T.T., Bellot-Gurlet, L., Paris, C., Coubray, S., Dufraisse, A., 2022. Assessing the carbonisation temperatures recorded by ancient charcoals for δ¹³C-based palaeoclimate reconstruction. Scientific Reports 12, 1-10.

Rasmussen, S.O., Bigler, M., Blockley, S.P., Blunier, T., Buchardt, S.L., Clausen, H.B., Cvijanovic, I., Dahl-Jensen, D., Johnsen, S., Fisher, H., Gkinis, V., Guillevic, M., Hoek, W.Z., Lowe, J.J., Pedro, J.B., Popp, T., Seierstad, I.K., Steffensen, J.P., Svensson, A.M., Vallelonga, P., Vinther, B.M., Walker, M.J., Wheatley, J.J., Winstrup, M., 2014. A stratigraphic framework for abrupt climatic changes during the Last Glacial period based on three synchronized Greenland ice-core records: refining and extending the INTIMATE event stratigraphy. Quaternary Science Reviews 106, 14-28.

Renault-Miskovsky, J., 1986. Relations entre les spectres archéo-polliniques du Sud-Est de la France et les oscillations climatiques entre 125 000 ans et le maximum glaciaire. Bulletin de l'association Française Pour l'étude Du Quaternaire 23, 56-62.

Richard, M., Pons-Branchu, E., Valladas, H., Toffolo, M.B., Dubernet, S., Dapoigny, A., Dumoulin, J.-P., Beauvais, P.-A., Monney, J., 2024. Chronology of Upper Palaeolithic human activities recorded in a stalagmite at Holocène (Aiguèze, Gard, France). *Geoarchaeology* 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.22001.

Rillardon, M., 2010. Environnement et subsistance des derniers chasseurs-ceilleurs dans la basse vallée du Rhône et des marges du pléniglaciaire supérieur (20 ka BP) à
l'optimum climatique (8 ka BP). In: Espace, Cultures, Sociétés. Aix en Provence: Université Aix-Marseille I, p. 1129.

Rodrigo-Gámiz, M., García-Alix, A., Jiménez-Moreno, G., Ramos-Román, M.J., Camuera, J., Toney, J.L., Sachse, D., Scott Anderson, R., Sinninghe Damsté, J.S., 2022. Paleoclimate reconstruction of the last 36 kyr based on branched glycerol dialkyl glycerol tetraethers in the Padul palaeolake record (Sierra Nevada, southern Iberian Peninsula). Quaternary Science Reviews 281, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2022.107434.

Roebroeks, W., Villa, P., 2011. On the earliest evidence for habitual use of fire in Europe. PNAS 108, 5209–5214. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1018116108.

Saurer, M., Siegenthaler, U., Schweingruber, F., 1995. The climate-carbon isotope relationship in tree rings and the significance of site conditions. Tellus 47B, 320–330.

Schubert, B.A., Jahren, A.H., 2012. The effect of atmospheric CO₂ concentration on carbon isotope fractionation in C3 land plants. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 96, 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2012.08.003.

Siegwolf, R.T.W., Brooks, J.R., Roden, J., Saurer, M., 2022. Stable Isotopes in Tree Rings: Inferring physiological, climatic and environmental responses. Springer 775.

Smidt, E., Tintner, J., Nelle, O., Oliveira, R.R., Patzlaff, R., Novotny, E.H., Klemm, S., 2020. Infrared spectroscopy refines chronological assessment, depositional environment and pyrolysis conditions of archeological charcoals. Scientific Reports 10, 12427. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-69445-6.

Théry-Parisot, I., Chabal, L., Chrzavzez, J., 2010. Anthracology and taphonomy, from wood gathering to charcoal analysis. A review of the taphonomic processes modifying charcoal assemblages, in archaeological contexts. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 291, 142–153.

Théry-Parisot, I., 2001. Économie des combustibles au Paléolithique. CNRS éditions.

Tintner, J., Preimesberger, C., Pfeifer, C., Soldo, D., Ottner, F., Wriessnig, K., Rennhofer, H., Lichtenegger, H., Novotny, E.H., Smidt, E., 2018. Impact of Pyrolysis

Temperature on Charcoal Characteristics. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 57, 15613–15619. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.8b04094.

Turney, C.S.M., Wheeler, D., Chivas, A.R., 2006. Carbon isotope fractionation in wood during carbonization. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 70, 960–964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2005.10.031.

Vaiglova, P., Snoeck, C., Nitsch, E., Bogaard, A., Lee-Thorp, J., 2014. Impact of contamination and pre-treatment on stable carbon and nitrogen isotopic composition of charred plant remains. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 28, 2497–2510. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcm.7044.

Vernet, J.-L. (1992) Les charbons de bois, les anciens écosystèmes et le rôle de l’homme. In: Actes du colloque international d’anthracologie, pp. 725. Montpellier: Bulletin de la Société botanique française.

Vidal-Matutano, P., 2017. Firewood and hearths: Middle Palaeolithic woody taxa distribution from El Salt, stratigraphic unit Xb (Eastern Iberia). Quaternary International 457, 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.07.040.

Vidal-Matutano, P., Henry, A., Carrión Marco, Y., Allué, E., 2020. Disentangling human from natural factors: Taphonomical value of microanatomical features on archaeological wood and charcoal assemblages. *journal of Archaeological Science. Reports* 31, 102328.

Voelker, S.L., Brooks, J.R., Meinzer, F.C., Anderson, R., Bader, M.-K.-F., Battipaglia, G., Becklin, K.M., Beerling, D., Bert, D., Betancourt, J.L., Dawson, T.E., Domec, J.-C., Guyette, R.P., Körner, C., Leavitt, S.W., Linder, S., Marshall, J.D., Mildner, M., Ojée, J., Panyushkina, I., Plumpton, H.J., Pregitzer, K.S., Saurer, M., Smith, A.R., Siegwolf, R.T., Stambaugh, M.C., Talhelm, A.F., Tardif, J.C., Van de Water, P.K., Ward, J.K., Wingate, L., 2016. A dynamic leaf gas-exchange strategy is conserved in woody plants under changing ambient CO2: evidence from carbon isotope discrimination in paleo and CO2 enrichment studies. Global Change Biology 22, 889–902. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13102.