 All right, I'm going to be presenting today on intracite spatial analysis of seven open-air, middle caliphic sites in France. All of these sites just had lithics preserved, they're open-air sites, there weren't any bones or other material preserved, so that's why I'm really focusing on lithics here. So one of the things to know about France is that here's a geologic map just to show that there are some areas that are rich in limestone deposits where it's very, very rich in chirp sources. And in these areas, you can find a lot of open-air sites with a lot of material napping debris. So that's characterized, something just to keep in mind in the seven sites that I'll talk about today. And so here's the distribution of some middle caliphic open-air sites in France. Those in boxes are the sites that I studied in my analysis. And then I just included some others. And as you can see, they kind of match with these areas where we have up in the northern part of France a lot of limestone and a lot of chirp deposits and then the same in kind of the southwest part of France. And so this, the sites I analyzed were Betancourt, Poirnois, Villière-Adame, L'Affoie-Lis, François, Tainclouet, and Le Prisais. And all of these sites were excavated by INRAC, the Institut Nationale de Fraîche d'Archéologie Profétique. And so these were excavated prior to construction projects. And so they were excavated at very large scales and really in their entirety. So this is just one example. Betancourt in the north of France and L'Affoie-Lis deposits. So it's a very, very large scale excavation. We're talking about a hundredth of square meters. Here's another excavation, Poirnois. Also excavated at a very large scale. So they're really perfect sites to study intracite spatial analysis. And the sites in general, they really, there's quite a variation in terms of the density and the types of sites. So here's one extreme, L'Ado-Lis-de-Cantelouet, where it's actually situated on a, where the raw materials are coming out of the ground and it's just extremely dense. So there's a lot of complete nodules and a lot of reduction debris and very, very dense. But then on the other side of the spectrum, we have a site like L'Affoie-Lis, which is situated on a floodplain and it's very low density, has excellent preservation. There's in fact, host holes that were preserved and this kind of non-pedogenic, organic layer that's interpreted as a kind of bedding or mat. So it's really very exceptional preservations for the middle phyllolyphic. And you can see some activity to the centers of lithic napping. So those are kind of the extremes that I'm working with. Here I have plotted, I have put together all seven sites of the site maps. So all the dots are the lithics that were all piece plotted. And then I put them on the satin spatial on the same scale. So you can see L'Aquali, which is a very small site, Contre-Louet and Vossouille. These are both of the sites situated on raw material sources where it's extremely, extremely dense. And then some of the other sites like Lucrisse, Gatancourt, Fresnois, these are all the sites up in the north of France, Las Deposits. Oh, I'm sorry, I'm going to go down. Lucrisse is down south. But they're very large sites, not quite as dense. So the challenge here was I wanted to create a way of looking at these seven sites that I could compare them. I could compare these very small sites, such as L'Aquali, the distribution of lithics at that site to sites such as Villière-Adame, which you can see is very huge, or a site like Chancre-Lossouille or Contre-Louet where they're extremely, extremely dense. And I was also, most of this material was collect, this material was documented by the Inaquac reach researchers and they also did all the lithic analysis. So I wanted to make use of this just amazing data that they kind of try to bring together French and American traditions or French and North American traditions of lithic analysis. And then of course, because it's France, I also had really amazing refitting data. So I had all of these sites were subject to refit analysis. So I had that kind of level of that data set as well. So the first technique it came up with was to do something that a lot of other people have done with intracite spatial analysis. And that's just simply to make density maps to kind of look at the distribution of lithic pieces. And so this is just an example from one site, Betancourt. So I used ArcGIS to create a density map of the distribution of lithics. And then I wanted to segregate the high, the very dense, the areas very high density from the medium density areas to the low density areas. So instead of comparing high density areas to one another, like you might do in the pursuit of activity areas or something like that, I figured that this was probably the result of the same activity, lithic mapping. And so I just wanted to convert, okay, let's see what technical categories are in the high density areas, the middle and then the low density areas. And so I did this kind of analysis and I used contours. So these contours are just based on the density map to segregate these areas. And so I'll just go over the results of this one analysis. I just used these two sites just to kind of show you two examples, but it was the same at all the sites. This is Le Prisay and here's Breinois. So what I found, looking at the technological categories, I looked at, I grouped them. So you know, the French have done a really wonderful Chez-Naparatois approach to look at all the different technological categories, but I grouped them in just larger categories such as core maintenance plates. Well, of course, I kept Le Valois plates. Most of these sites a lot of were Le Valois or Discoidal Reduction or Debris, all the smaller pieces smaller than three centimeters. And so I tried to look and I compared, okay, what's overrepresented, underrepresented in each of these density areas? And then I used confidence intervals to see if they were statistically significant. And so when you look at the high density areas, well, they were overrepresented in things like the napping degrees, all those small pieces. Also things like cortical plates, core maintenance plates. So all of this debris that you would associate with napping. And then, but because these areas were such high in density, although they were overrepresented in these category, there were still a lot of usable legs, a lot of Le Valois, a lot of non-cortical pieces also in these high density areas. Now in the middle density areas, these are hypotheses to be hypothesized to be areas where you might see more mixing. So you might see intentional displacement of objects from where they were napped, but also a lot of things that were moved through trampling, through geological processes and other phenomenon like that. And so here we do see a mixture of napping debris and things like Le Valois, but then also products such as Le Valois Flakes or tools, non-cortical plates. So you see a mix of these two things in the middle density areas. And then in the low density parts of the site, we see overrepresentation of tools, retouch pieces, when we see overrepresentation of non-cortical flake, Le Valois Flakes blades. So this is kind of what you would expect as you look at the napping in one spatial location and then the movement of these lithics out to other parts of the site. But I wanted to also make use of that other data set, the refitting data set, which is really a, which would provide kind of what, whereas when you're looking at all the lithics together, you're seeing also a lot of noise. So when I'm looking at just a scale of the refitted artifacts, so all these pieces I know were at one spatial, one spatial location because they were in the same nodule together. And then I want to look at the spread of how these pieces spread out from one another because when I was plotting the refitting sets looking at the spatial patterning, I saw the same pattern over and over again, which was that there is always a few, the most were clustered in a small spatial area. A few were several meters away and then one or two was moved across the site. And so I wanted to find a way to kind of quantify this pattern I saw over and over again. So I decided to kind of do some measurements on the scale of each refitted group, refitting set. And so first I would measure, I would find the lithics that were closest together and I would met an all that were within one meter of one another, that would be in refitting group one, those that were between two and three meters of group one, that's group two. And then those lithics that were moved more than three meters away from group two, were putting group three. And so I chose these numbers just because it seemed like they captured that pattern the best. Also group one, this is one meter is kind of what a lot of experimental napping has shown that when you're napping, it usually stays within one meter of the napper. And so that's why I chose that for group one and then I just tried to look at what would capture this pattern the best in terms of the other groups. But either way, I measured this at the scale of each refitting set. And so in the end, because I had quite a lot of refitted material, I could look at some kind of robots pattern and the results from this analysis really mimicked what I saw at the scale of the assemblage of the whole. So when I looked in group one, so all these pieces fit tightly that were located tight together. Well, we see a lot of core reduction degrees, cortical flakes, core maintenance flakes, small pieces. There weren't as many debris places refitted just because it's very difficult to refit but in places where they were present. Of course, in the same thing with this group two, just like in the density contour analysis, we see a mixture of core reduction debris but also these products or these intentional pieces. And then finally in group three, we see these pieces that were moved intentionally across the site. So we've retouched pieces, lavala flakes and non-cortical flakes. So this is kind of matching what we see at the, from the other analysis. So I made this kind of schematic here just this little animation just to kind of illustrate what we're seeing here because together these two analyses are really documenting the formation of the site structure. So we have the introduction of a nodule to the site. It's reduced in one location and then some lipids are moved away from a multitude of processes, some intentional, some unintentional movements of geological. And then we see this happening again and again with different nodules. And then of course we also have the introduction of some lipids that were not mapped on site. And so we have with the refitting analysis, I have it documented on the level of each of these cores of each of these nodules. So you can see with each different color but then the density contour analysis maps the same kind of process but a little bit with a little more noise at the scale of the site. So together these can be two very powerful analyses that are looking at two different scales. And you can see that they really, like I said, they really document the formation of the site structure in these sites, especially these sites that are really focused on lipid napping. So they're really forming a lot of lipid napping is occurring in particular spatial locations where you find very, very dense debris. A majority is a core reduction debris but you're also getting a lot of usable blanks. They're opening a new core before they need to. There's still a lot of nice Livalva lakes and stuff like that being left in place. But these are areas where they're not really, they're not getting an economic push to use all of the available nice blanks because there is raw materials right there. So yeah, that kind of got into this but they can be considered raw material workshops but other activities are taking place there. So there is all this napping taking place but from each site there have been useware analyses and they found that there's a lot of other activities in terms of butchering, hide working, wood processing. And we can kind of just suppose that these activities are likely taking place on site because lipids are moving across site likely in some cases to be utilized there. Now of course in a lot of these sites lipids are also being removed from the site but certainly some activities are taking place at the site as well. And so this is the case of all the sites even those that are situated directly on those super dense sites right on lipid raw material on the source of the raw material. So yeah, like what I said they don't really need to economize raw materials there are plenty available but that doesn't mean they're not using really these well-established and operatoires that we know, you know the lavala method we know from a lot of different studies that it really does economize raw materials. So probably it's other things, you know like custom culture that is prompting them to use these extremely highly organized methods of core production. Well, I'm out of time but the main point is that together you can use these two methods to kind of look at site formation and to really understand about how lipids are being produced and utilized at archeological sites. So thank you very much.