Source: The Conversation – France
Veterinary Dr. Benjamin Drouet is pictured working on a skull complete with teeth found at Peaugres safari park (Ardèche, France) that belonged to a white rhino. Camille Deaujeard, Fourni par l’auteur The RINO project was born from the discovery of unusual marks on rhinoceros teeth recovered from the prehistoric Payre site in France’s Rhône Valley.
The study of fossil rhinoceros teeth from this Middle Palaeolithic site, dating to around 250,000–130,000 years ago, provides unprecedented evidence that Neanderthals used them as tools. Unlike the iconic mammoth, the role of rhinoceros in the subsistence strategies of prehistoric human groups and the relationships they maintained with these animals throughout the Palaeolithic age remain poorly understood.
They served not only as a source of food but also for other purposes, including their rock-art representation in caves, such as the famous paintings in the Chauvet Cave in Ardèche more than 30,000 years ago.
The discovery of unusual marks on rhinoceros teeth from several Palaeolithic sites in southern France raised an intriguing question: could these traces be the result of intentional human activity? The use of bones from large herbivores (including rhinoceros) for retouching and sharpening stone tools is well documented in Europe from the earliest phases of the Palaeolithic period.
Rhinoceros teeth are also common features of Palaeolithic sites across Europe and Asia, yet only a few studies have suggested that prehistoric human groups may have deliberately collected and used them.
Unusual fractures and marks More than 200,000 years ago, at sites such as Payre in south-eastern France and Panxian Dadong, in China, archaeologists recovered hundreds of rhinoceros teeth, some of them displaying recurrent fractures and distinctive surface marks.
These observations prompted researchers to investigate whether the teeth had been used as tools and to examine other rhinoceros-rich assemblages from the same period across Europe. Could this represent a previously unknown Neanderthal behaviour?
This question became the starting point for the RINO project and a recently published study in the Journal of Human Evolution, entitled “Elucidating the use of rhinoceros teeth by Neanderthals: Between experiments and the fossil record”.
The research is the result of an international scientific collaboration. This is the first, in-depth, interdisciplinary investigation of the potential use of rhinoceros teeth by Neanderthals. The study combines the analysis of fossil remains with archaeological experiments carried out on modern rhinoceros teeth, providing a unique opportunity to compare traces produced experimentally with those preserved in the archaeological record.
Map of archaeological sites from the middle paleolithic age and paleontological sites providing rhinoceros remains for the RINO project. Map created with QGIS 3.40.6, essence data from ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute).
D’après Sanz-Royo et coll., 2026, Fourni par l’auteur Rhinoceros teeth possess several morphological characteristics, including their size, weight, ease of handling, flat occlusal surface and resistance to fracture that may have made them particularly suitable for technical uses.
Research approach As part of the RINO project, 12 archaeological sites were selected based on evidence of human activity and the abundance of rhinoceros teeth within their faunal assemblages. To establish a comparative framework capable of distinguishing natural alterations from potentially human-made modifications, we also included dental remains from palaeontological sites in Western Europe and osteological collections of modern rhinoceros.
In total, the study examined 168 rhinoceros teeth from four Pleistocene palaeontological sites: Wasserbillig (Luxembourg), Oetrange (Luxembourg), Cova del Rinoceront (Spain) and Les Plumettes (Saône-et-Loire, France). In addition, 236 teeth from the comparative collection housed in the Gallery of Comparative Anatomy at the National Museum of Natural History (MNHN) in Paris were analysed.
Dental microwear analyses were also carried out on fossil rhinoceros teeth to determine whether the observed marks could have resulted from chewing and feeding activities, rather than from human intervention. This allowed us to identify alterations that may have affected rhinoceros teeth during the animals’ lives.
Experimental archaeology A major component of the project was devoted to experimental archaeology.
By using rhinoceros molars and premolars as percussion tools in controlled experiments conducted by experienced archaeologists, the research team aimed to build a comprehensive reference collection of experimentally produced traces and to identify the potential functions and ‘user-friendliness’ of these tools.
One of the greatest challenges was obtaining modern rhinoceros teeth for the experiments.
After an extensive search and Alexis Lécu’s assistance (veterinarian at the National Museum of Natural History), three zoological parks agreed to provide teeth: Peaugres Zoo (Ardèche), Sigean African Reserve (Aude), and Montpellier Zoo (Hérault).
The tooth extractions were carried out by Benjamin Drouet at Peaugres and Antoine Joris at Sigean. The experiments were conducted on 18 modern rhinoceros teeth. These were used in percussion activities, including stone tool retouching, knapping and anvil use with quartz and flint.
The aim was to document the traces produced by human activity and compare them with those observed in archaeological records. Additionally, a set of experiments aimed to recreate natural processes such as abrasion and sediment compaction that teeth may experience during fossilisation.
Examples of experimental activities reproduced in the study: A) Retouching quartz B) Knapping flint C) Using teeth as an anvil for a piece of quartz. Courtesy of Sanz-Royo & coll., 2026, Fourni par l’auteur Modifications of rhino teeth during archaeological experiments, with 3D reproductions using a confocal microscope.
Courtesy of Sanz-Royo & coll., 2026, Fourni par l’auteur The results revealed that the marks identified at Payre, as well as those observed at two other Neanderthal sites: El Castillo (Spain) and Pech-de-l’Azé II (France), were similar to those produced during archaeological experimentation.
Furthermore, the microwear analysis confirmed that these traces were formed after the death of the animals, since no feeding signals were found in the marks. Conversely, these traces clearly differ from the surface alterations documented in both palaeontological and modern reference collections, as well as from those produced through experimental abrasion and compaction tests.
These experiments were conducted at the Taphonomy Laboratory in Madrid (LeaT laboratory).
Courtesy of Sanz-Royo & coll., 2026, Fourni par l’auteur At the Middle Palaeolithic sites of El Castillo and Pech-de-l’Azé II, we analysed a total of 281 teeth, belonging to the steppe rhinoceros (Stephanorhinus hemitoechus) and Merck’s rhinoceros (Stephanorhinus kirchbergensis).
The latter represents the largest known fossil rhinoceros species in Europe for this period.
Teeth were probably used as percussion tools We can therefore conclude that the traces identified on rhinoceros teeth from these two Middle Palaeolithic sites – El Castillo (Spain) and Pech-de-l’Azé II (France) – are of human origin.
These teeth were likely used by Neanderthals as percussion tools in the manufacture of lithic tools (flint and quartz), playing a role in the chaîne opératoire during the Middle Palaeolithic. Based on the degree of wear observed on the teeth, Neanderthals appear to have a preference for teeth from older rhinoceros.
It is possible that they focused on older animals because they may be easier prey or scavenging opportunities. The flatter dental surfaces of their teeth may also have made them more suitable for use as tools.
Drawing illustrating wear observed on teeth n°2754 and n°8557, courtesy of El Castillo (illustrations by Sophie Guégan).
Courtesy of Sanz-Royo & coll., 2026, Fourni par l’auteur This study broadens our understanding of Neanderthal behaviour, their technical choices, and the diversity of raw materials they collected and used, while also providing new insight into their exploitation of animal resources.
Despite this significant advance in knowledge, the discovery also raises numerous new questions that remain unresolved for the moment: What does this discovery contribute to our understanding of Neanderthals and their relationship with their environment?
What were the strategies for acquiring (hunting, scavenging, trapping) and exploiting rhinoceros by Neanderthals? Were they the same for all rhinoceros species encountered during these periods in Europe? Did their morphological, behavioural, and ecological characteristics, as well as their availability within different habitats, influence these behaviours?
These unprecedented results highlight the importance of this research, which, as noted above, raises many further questions that still need to be explored. At present, it remains unclear whether this was general behaviour or if it was specific to Neanderthal groups in Western Europe.
We think that it is unlikely that the use of rhinoceros teeth as a raw material was a behaviour limited in time and space. This discovery opens new perspectives on the extent, function, and possible symbolic dimension of this practice.
For this reason, a major reassessment of rhinoceros tooth remains from different Palaeolithic sites should be undertaken in light of these new observations. Acknowledgements: We would like to thank the RINO project (Sorbonne University and the National Museum of Natural History) and the IRN TaphEN (CNRS) for their financial support.
We are also grateful to all those who granted access to the archaeological and palaeontological collections, as well as to the laboratories that hosted us.
Finally, we extend our sincere thanks to the Peaugres, Sigean, and Montpellier zoos (France) for providing the rhinoceros teeth used in the experiments, with special thanks to Alexis Lécu, veterinarian at MNHN, for his precious help with this research.
A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries.
Get the newsletter!
Alicia Sanz Royo is affiliated to the University of Aberdeen.
She received funding from Sorbonne Université, the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle IRN Taphen (CNRS), and University of Aberdeen.
Camille Daujeard received funding from Sorbonne Université, the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, and IRN Taphen (CNRS).
Juan Marín Hernando ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.
Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/06/18/did-neanderthals-use-rhinoceros-teeth-as-tools/