S B Mcclure

A D , Diez- Castillo

Pascual Benito

Bernabeu Aubán

Basile, M. h , Real- Margalef, C. a , Sanchís-Serra A C , Pérez-Fernández

A I , Orozco-Köhler

A multi-stage Bayesian

Keywords: Radiocarbon dates, Bayesian modeling, Late Mesolithic, Neolithic, Cueva de la Cocina, Eastern Iberia 1. Introduction

établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

validated the preservation of archaeological deposits coinciding with their visit to the area for the exploration of a recent discovery of Levantine rock art at the Cinto de La Ventana and Cinto de las Letras sites [START_REF] Pericot | La cueva de la Cocina (Dos Aguas). Nota preliminar[END_REF]. During four years, 1941[START_REF] Pericot | La Cova del Parpalló (Gandía, Valencia)[END_REF], 1943[START_REF] Pericot | La cueva de la Cocina (Dos Aguas). Nota preliminar[END_REF] his team excavated for a total of 74 days. In all, approximately 60,5 m2 of cultural deposits was removed, confirming the richness of the prehistoric archaeological deposits in a long sequence that included mainly forager occupations but also Neolithic, Chalcolitic and Bronze age levels. Lluís Pericot was a recognized Spanish archaeologist that previously had worked at Cova del Parpalló (Gandia, Valencia) discovering one of the most impressive Upper Paleolithic portable art collections in Europe [START_REF] Pericot | La Cova del Parpalló (Gandía, Valencia)[END_REF]. In 1946 Lluís Pericot published the only paper focused on the primary results at the site of Cocina according to the 1945 campaign, a seminal work which provided evidence about the sequence and chronology, centered between the final Paleolithic and the Holocene times in the region. Consequently, Pericot´s explanation linked the beginning of the human occupations with the Magdalenian, and identified a total of 3 levels that also encompassed the Epipaleolithic and Neolithic periods (Juan-Cabanilles et al., this issue). Furthermore, the discovery of a particular graphic expression episode through the recovery of "35" engraved plaquettes with lineal motifs highlighted the singularity of the site in terms of social and symbolic practices. Concurrently, Pericot mentioned the identification of possible painting traces in the southern wall of the cavity. This assertion triggered the controversy about the chronology of the Holocene graphic expressions sequence in the Mediterranean Iberia that remain until today (including Levantine, Schematic and Macroschematic horizons) [START_REF] García-Puchol | El arte Levantino y el proceso de Neolitización en el arco mediterráneo peninsular: el contexto arqueológico y su significado[END_REF][START_REF] Berrocal | Rock art as an archaeological and social indicator: the neolithization of the Iberian Peninsula[END_REF][START_REF] Mcclure | Neolithic rock art in context: Landscape history and the transition to agriculture in Mediterranean Spain[END_REF][START_REF] Villaverde | Arte rupestre y hábitat en la prehistoria del Riu de les Coves: aproximación a la cronología del arte Levantino a través de la red de caminos óptimos. Del Neolític a l'edat del Bronze en el Mediterrani Occidental. Estudis en homenatge a Bernat Martí Oliver[END_REF][START_REF] Ruiz | Filling the Void: Rock art Continuity Over the Pleistocene-Holocene Boundary in Eastern Iberia[END_REF]López Montalvo et al., in press). Despite the preliminary character of his report, different researchers understood the novelties that Cocina provided in order to organize the archaeological sequence at the regional level, particularly Javier Fortea, who in the 70s was working on his doctoral thesis. As a result, his influential book (1973) presented the bases for systematizing the sequence of the last hunter gatherers in the area. He classified the Holocene sequence in two main technocomplexes: "Microlaminar Epipaleolithic" and "Geometric Epipaleolithic" (he preferred the term Epipaleolithic to Mesolithic). Unlike Pericot, Fortea argued that Cocina had a short chronological sequence. Accordingly, he sorted the Pericot excavation information into four levels including two attributed to the Geometric Epipaleolithic of Tardenoisian tradition. Firstly, he emphasized the impressive richness of the lithic record produced by forager dwellers in the site, reflecting a diachronic succession of levels. These industries are characterized by regular blades and geometric projectiles, trapezes at the beginning, and "Cocina type" triangles subsequently. Since that publication, Cueva de la Cocina became the referential site for the Late Geometric Epipaleolithic in Iberia. Secondly, he centered his interest on the subsequent Neolithic levels and the "transitional process" that he believed was evident in the site. As a consequence, the site was considered the main proof for explaining the acculturation process from foragers to farmers in the Mediterranean Iberia [START_REF] Fortea | Epipaleolítico y neolitización en la zona oriental de la Península Ibérica[END_REF]. This was described in the "dual model", aimed to explain the neolithization process in eastern Iberia (Fortea andMartí, 1984-1985;[START_REF] Fortea | Epipaleolítico y neolitización en la zona oriental de la Península Ibérica[END_REF][START_REF] Bernabeu | Indigenism and migrationism. The neolithisation of the Iberian Peninsula[END_REF]. He began a new fieldwork project at Cueva de la Cocina that involved several excavations between 1974 and 1981. For this purpose, he selected a central area near the north wall of the cave. Unfortunately, only three specific papers were published, two of them related to the sedimentary history of the site [START_REF] García | Estudio sedimentológico de la Cueva de la Cocina, Dos Aguas (Valencia)[END_REF][START_REF] García | Sedimentología y clima en el país valenciano: las cuevas habitadas en el cuaternario reciente[END_REF]. The third one consists of a preliminary summary including new data from the faunal record [START_REF] Fortea | Epipaleolítico y neolitización en la zona oriental de la Península Ibérica[END_REF]. Fueled by this first detailed zooarchaeological approach, the paper pointed to a transitional character of the site relating to the arrival of the Neolithic, including the presence of domesticated sheep or goats in levels with Late Mesolithic stone tools technologies. However, and probably due to the new research challenges attached to his incorporation at the University of Oviedo (northern Iberia) the final results remained unpublished. Based on these pivotal questions about the chronology and nature of hunter-gatherer lifeways as well as the evidence for acculturation of the last hunter-gatherers to farming, we decided to open a new window to the archaeological record of Cueva de la Cocina. Several research projects, started in 2013 until now, have allowed us to build an interdisciplinary research team that involves different Spanish and international institutions. Thanks to this collaborative approach we revisited the archaeological site and organized several archaeological excavations (from 2015-2018) that have provided new data for understanding this impressive prehistoric deposit. Not less important, one of the fundamental objectives has consisted of studying the older record recovered during the excavations from Pericot and Fortea. In fact, it has been a huge challenge considering the magnitude of the entire collection, particularly the access for the first time to the bulk of Pericot's remains. Thanks to this collaborative effort, more than 70,000 lithics, close to 7,000 faunal remains, and 2,000 pottery fragments, among others, have been analyzed and provide the current database. Our interest in Cueva de la Cocina was motivated by several questions. The general issues try to shed light on evolutionary questions from a macroscale approach in regards to the socioecological dynamics of the last hunter gatherers and the models for explaining the subsequent agricultural spread. Specifically, we focus on a) defining the archaeological sequence at Cueva de la Cocina with a new high resolution radiocarbon record; b) exploring cultural transmission processes and scenarios of cultural change from archaeological record; c) building land use behavior and palaeoeconomical patterns in a diachronic view; d) recovering new data about paleoclimate and paleoenvironmental dynamics; and, e) trying to reveal some aspects on social practices and symbolic behavior at the site level and at regional scale.

In this paper we focus on a refined chronocultural sequence as a result of matching data provided by the set of archaeological investigations conducted at the site and the new radiocarbon dates record. To do this we rely on different quality data that we will sort and combine through a methodological approach based on Bayesian modeling and statistical analysis procedures in order to present the best model for characterizing the particularities of this archaeological record.

2. General description Cueva de la Cocina is located in the municipality of Dos Aguas (Valencia province, Eastern Iberia), opened in a pronounced meander of the La Ventana ravine. The site is surrounded by an abrupt landscape forming part of the Southeastern Iberian range, limiting at the North and the West with the cretaceous formations of Sierra de Martes and Sierra del Caballón, to the East with the València plain, and to the South, with the canyon conformed by the Xúquer river before its arrival to the Valencian plain, where it flows into the Mediterranean (Fig. 1). This special situation would explain its continental climate character as it is reflected by the mean temperature, with a maximum in August (31), and a minimum in January, when it can drop to freezing. The annual rainfall fluctuates between 400-550 mm with a maximum in autumn. Recurrently affected by fires, the immediate natural landscape is dominated by a vegetation of shrubs and some residual pines. The cave (20 meters wide by 30 m long) (Fig. 2) was formed by the drainage system of the Barranco de la Ventana until the beginning of the accumulation of sediments that constitute the base of the Holocene deposits [START_REF] García | Estudio sedimentológico de la Cueva de la Cocina, Dos Aguas (Valencia)[END_REF][START_REF] García | Sedimentología y clima en el país valenciano: las cuevas habitadas en el cuaternario reciente[END_REF]. The particular position in regards with the course of the ravine explains sporadic entrances of water and the subsequent silt depositions. This kind of episodes was documented in 1977, when a flash flood reopened a lateral sink at the cavity showing a long sequence of Pleistocene natural deposits. Fumanal's study (1987) points to the process formation of the cavity and the reading of the current natural and archaeological deposit. She highlighted another important trait previously described by Pericot: the cavity offers a sedimentary accumulation in the center, and a pronounced slope from this part to the southern wall, forming a great basin when the Holocene accumulation started to occur. This aspect has been demonstrated by the recent fieldwork conducted affecting the surrounding areas (García Puchol et al., 2018b). The mountainous landscapes around the site and the particular "cul de sac" conformed by the area, currently only accessible through a "stimulating" rural track, are in accordance with the several uses and activities carried out at the site from a long durée perspective, from the Mesolithic to the contemporary period. As an example, a Koran book was hidden in the cavity and discovered in 1821, as documented by the Real Academia de la Historia (1821), and has been linked by some historians with the last episodes of Valencian "moriscos" before the expulsion ordered by Felipe III at the beginning of 17th century. On the other hand, at least from modern times, the cavity has been used as an animal pen. Oral histories also inform us of its use as a refuge during the Spanish Civil War. Natural and anthropogenic factors explain the sedimentary episodes formed by a complex accumulation that must be understood from a taphonomic perspective. From the middle Holocene period, human activities are the most important agent, although it is possible to determine some natural events also affecting the stratigraphy. Of particular importance would be the extraction of manure in modern times for agricultural purposes. Following the site owners' oral communication, we could identify a particular moment of extraction of manure between Pericot's and Fortea's works, although this would be recurrent in previous times. These activities have affected particularly the top of the sequence, from the Neolithic to modern times. Water entrances from the nearby ravine have also sporadically affected and disturbed the sedimentary deposits at different moments. As consequence, focusing on prehistoric levels, we can say in advance that major postdepositional episodes have disrupted the upper stratigraphy at the cavity, particularly the Neolithic and Bronze age levels. The presence of pottery decorative motives belonging to the Early Neolithic (cardial and gradina impressions) confirms the evidence of Early Neolithic, followed by middle Neolithic, Chalcolithic, and Bronze age occupations, covering a period between the last centuries of the 8th to the 4th millennium cal BP. At the bottom, late Mesolithic levels reveals a complete sequence showing different degrees of intensity and activity starting at the first half of the 9th millennium until the middle of the 8th millennium cal BP.

Excavation campaigns, sedimentary data, and radiocarbon record 3.1 Archaeological excavations and material and biological remains

The different seasons carried out at Cueva de la Cocina have yielded unequal documentation regarding archaeological levels. According with the current dataset we can say that Pericot's campaigns encompass the main occupational levels preserved at the site (Table 1). As a result, the bulk of cultural and palaeoeconomical materials correspond to this first fieldwork. This confirms that the majority of anthropic remains was preserved at the Southwestern area of the cavity, reaching at this point its maximum depth (4.5 m) (Fig. 2). In contrast, at the Northeast corner of the 1943 pit the natural sediment appears at 30 cm, indicating a pronounced gradient from the Northeast to the Southwest. Fortea's work was centered in an area of about 25 m2 in the Northern central part, reaching close to 1 m in depth in sector E and in a test pit in the south (sector U). Finally, between 2015 to 2018 our team has been working in a total of 6 sondages, some of them surrounding Pericot's excavation (sondage 1, 2 and 4), and the others (sondages 3, 5, 6 and including sondage 2) around Fortea's sector U.

3. 1.1. Pericot's excavation (19411.1. Pericot's excavation ( , 19421.1. Pericot's excavation ( , 19431.1. Pericot's excavation ( and 1945) ) As aforementioned, Pericot's excavation encompasses the most fertile archaeological deposit (around 60,5 m2 resulting on 116,13 m3 of archaeological sediments). The primary current information comes from the personal journals written by Pericot and collaborators. It is worthy to say that they described, in a veritable meticulous manner for that time, the main characteristics in regards with the minimum archaeological units removed. The area excavated varied between 9 m2 to 1,31 m2, and the layer depth oscillated between 0,15 and 0,30 m. From this information we were able to build the spatial volumes with the goal to better approximate horizontal and vertical values (Fig. 3). We also had access to a small number of sketch plans with some notes in regards with the maximum depths (including a draft of the largest stones), some drawn profiles, and a small number of photographs. Interestingly, the authors also recorded the main archaeological findings including lithics, pottery, ornaments and plaquettes through schematic drawings. At the same time, they also offered a general description pointing to the presence of hearths and the main sedimentary traits. From the 1942 campaign, the depth information accounts for the vertical distance according with the position of the possible painting located between the sectors B and C (1942). At the beginning of their work (1941), the cave was being used as an animal pen and thus was closed by a wall which constituted the first exterior boundary relating to the 1941, 1942 and 1943 sectors. Deposits of dung covering the ground of the cavity offered testimony of this use. Once these seasons finished, Pericot and his team decided to excavate at the exterior part of this stonewall, which was consequently dismantled. A new outer wall that limited the recently opened area from the Southern wall in the North direction (1945 E-I, and 1945 E-IIb and E-IIa) was immediately rebuilt. In regards with 1945 E2b sector, the data is restricted to the first 0.5 m, when a human skeleton of historic chronology was discovered and, at least apparently, caused the stoppage of the dig. A summary of the main archaeological record recovered at Cocina is reflected in Table 2. In brief we can point to two general issues: 1) We have observed a selection factor bias: The most impressive record corresponds with lithic remains, more than 70,000 pieces (materials from cleaning activities or without clear context have not been recorded). They include mainly flint knapped remains but also limestones and quartzite objects. A painstaking recovery of this materials was clearly carried out (including very small items, less than 1 cm). Similarly, Pericot's interest in portable art objects stimulated the recovery of the engraved plaquettes. As for the faunal remains, although there are nearly 4,700 bones recovered, there was clearly a selection biases towards the largest and most identifiable of medium to large mammals and, to a lesser extent, leporids. The terrestrial and marine malacofauna resources recovered consist mainly of the better-preserved remains.

2) A differential preservation factor affects the archaeological sequence: The significant decrease of Neolithic record is observed from the East to the West, in such a way that pottery is concentrated in the sectors close to the Southern cavity wall and in the 1945's excavation. The same can be indicated for other prehistoric materials related to the top of the sequence, such as polished stone axes or domestic animals remains. Conversely, the Mesolithic deposit is better preserved in the wide area excavated by Pericot although a general Northeastern to Southeastern gradient is detected (from 0.3 m depth at the Northeastern corner of 1943 A to the 4,5 m depth in the Southwestern corner of 1945 E-I).

3.1.2. Fortea's excavation Prof. J. Fortea started his excavation project at Cocina in 1974. After his previous study, he decided to explore the central part of the cavity, assuming that the deposit would be better preserved [START_REF] Fortea | Epipaleolítico y neolitización en la zona oriental de la Península Ibérica[END_REF][START_REF] García | Sedimentología y clima en el país valenciano: las cuevas habitadas en el cuaternario reciente[END_REF]. To do this he selected a square area near the Northern wall (sector E). He used a grid that divided the site in square meters, where horizontal and vertical lines were named by letters and numbers, with a 0 crossing point (Fig. 2). The initial area (25 m2) was dug conforming a stepped area (the maximum depth achieved is around 1 m) from the superficial levels to the natural clay deposit. This information confirms the slimming of deposits towards the inner and Northern part of the cavity. The methodology applied was in accordance with modern procedures at the time including systematic record of spatial data for the amount of archaeological remains, and photographical documentation using artificial layers and/or livings floors (Pardo-Gordo et al., 2018). Other exploratory excavations were conducted at the same time. One trench was opened starting from the Pericot's excavation to the central area with the objective to understand the continuity of the deposit towards the interior part of the cave (51 m). A second trench located South of sector A was dug for investigating sedimentary processes. A third test pit was opened affecting the central Southern part of the cavity (sector U), mainly squares A'8' and B'8'. After reviewing Fortea's documentation, available at the Prehistory Museum of Valencia, we have currently detailed the information for sectors A and U. The information about the trenches is restricted to some profile drawing (South trench), so we relied primarily on the summary annotated in the excavation report (Labor del SIP).

The stratigraphical units described by Fortea account for natural and anthropical episodes of different intensity. The top of prehistoric archaeological units corresponds to the G unit, assigned to the Chalcolithic and Bronze age periods. Separated by a natural calcareous crust, he defined the formation of the H living floors (H1 to H4). For him, these deposits were a reflection of the transitional acculturation process revealed by Cocina and confirmed by the presence of cardial pottery fragments. At the bottom, the J archaeological unit is defined as the first Mesolithic episode. The archaeological materials remained unpublished except for a first appraisal of the faunal remains [START_REF] Fortea | Epipaleolítico y neolitización en la zona oriental de la Península Ibérica[END_REF]. In the framework of our current research we analyzed the entire assemblage, first by compiling the spatial information data, on a per object basis, through the documentation in the database created for the project, and then studying in detail the archaeological record. Nearly 10,000 findings (cultural material and biological remains) have been studied. A first paper, published in 2018, focused on the stratigraphic problems revealed after studying the archaeological record (mainly faunal remains and pottery; [START_REF] Pardo-Gordó | Taphonomic processes inconsistent with indigenous Mesolithic acculturation during the transition to the Neolithic in the Western Mediterranean[END_REF]. The results of the statistical analysis applied confirm the taphonomical problems affecting the H level. Consequently we can highlight the following aspects: a) The stratigraphy in this area preserves evidence of Late Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Bronze age periods, some dismantled rests of Early Neolithic occupations and a short deposit formed by Mesolithic occupational episodes, b) The taphonomical problems concern not only natural aspects (mudflow revealing flows episodes), but also anthropic agents (ancient pits that caused percolating problems and mixed record), c) The living floors distinguished by Fortea must in fact be considered artificial constructions for methodological purposes, d) H1 to H4 archaeological units seem to better correspond with a continuous and less intense deposit of different Mesolithic events that encompasses a great part of the chronological development of the hunter-gatherers occupations at the cavity.

The 2015-2018 excavation

Triggered by some intriguing questions concerning Pericot's and Fortea's excavations we revisited the cavity with a new excavation program. In 2014 we performed a threedimensional map of the cave (Fig. 2). The new plan serves as the basis for situating the old excavation sectors with the aim to reconstruct archaeological units for implementing spatial analysis. The metallic grid assembled by Fortea allowed us to extend this same grid to the entire area, in order to plan the new excavation pits. For practical purposes we used coordinates that increase from the North and the South and from the East to the West given Fortea's XYZ 0 point. During the 2015 season we worked in 6 test pits (named 1 to 6) around Pericot's excavation (Fig. 2). At the same time, we emptied the Southern trench dug by Fortea with the goal to obtain a profile between his Southern excavated area and 1941 Pericot's sector. We also tried to find the Northern and Eastern Pericot's profiles, currently blurred both by posterior anthropic refills and timing. The results obtained helped us to offer a new reevaluation of the previous and currently preserved archaeological deposits. The methodology applied included refined spatial registering and digital orthophotographic methods within in a rigorous protocol for recovering fieldwork data [START_REF] Diez-Castillo | Entorno 3D para el análisis y la recreación virtual de las actuaciones arqueológicas en Cueva de la Cocina (Dos Aguas, Valencia)[END_REF]García Puchol et al., 2018b).

Due to the cleaning activities developed in Pericot's area we observed the great dismantling of the remaining archaeological levels. As a consequence, test pits 1 and 4 have rapidly shown (particularly test pit 1) the appearance of natural red clays. After cleaning Fortea's Southern trench we could see in one hand the high degree of disturbance of the upper stratigraphy, and in the other the pronounced slope of natural red clay. The presence of two accumulations of ashes and charcoal at the Northern profile triggered us to open two test pits (2 and 5) with the goal to describe possible preserved prehistoric deposits. While the first (test pit 5) has been revealed as contemporary in chronology, we have proved that the amount of charcoal visible at the test pit 2 corresponds with the rest of a Mesolithic hearth partially preserved. Test pit 3 was open from the top of the current sedimentary deposits close to Fortea's Southern test pit U (Fig. 2). At this point we have excavated more 0.5 m2 from the current surface to the natural deposits, recovering a sequence of a total of 1m depth with remains of Mesolithic, Early Neolithic and posterior accumulations attributed on top to the Bronze age. The stratigraphy seems broadly uniform, without clear shifts from the bottom to the middle segment of the profile (work in progress).

Finally, we focused our work in test pit 4 (5,5 m2). From the first season, the discovery of the based wall corresponding with the old animal pen closure of the cavity predicted good expectations in regards with the potential of preserved archaeological remains. This aspect was confirmed in the next seasons when we excavated Mesolithic deposits (a silty-clay grey level) formed since the natural red clay based in advance, when they were cut by modern human activity. The characteristic cultural material and the radiocarbon dates obtained reveal their adscription to the Late Mesolithic (phase B).

The majority of archaeological remains was mainly concentrated in test pit 4 and includes lithics, faunal remains, mollusks (terrestrial and marine shells), and ornaments, among others. One plaquette with several engraved lines was also recovered (another plaquette was discovered in test pit 1 from a superficial level). Not less important, for the first time the bulk of sediments were water sieved, collecting by flotation charcoal, seeds and fruits remains. The results presented contribute to reconstructing palaeoconomical behavior and paleoenvironmental conditions from vegetation resources. This procedure allows us to obtain a complete record that serves also for comparing with the previous excavation gathering protocols.

Sedimentary analysis and Paleoenvironmental conditions

As it has been previously noted, the first analysis of Cueva de la Cocina sediments was conducted in the 70s by Prof. Pilar Fumanal (1978). The particular conditions behind the formation of sedimentary episodes between the Pleistocene and the Holocene periods are in the base of our current understanding of the archaeological deposits. Pericot already signaled the concentration of archaeological sediments in the Southwestern area of the cavity, at a short distance of the "current level of the ravine". Despite this feature, he excavated also at the exterior area of the closed pen when he reached the deepest archaeological levels.

Through the diaries we know how he annotated the appearance of the natural clay level whenever he advanced in depth. In fact, after we cleaned the Pericot's sector and conducted a test pit in the Northern profile we were able to understand a particular profile draft of his 1943 excavation (Fig. 2). The questions about the situation of the ravine at the entrance of the cavity are also present in Fortea's reflections. The mudflow of 1977 was the starting point to investigate the entire sedimentary sequence exposed as consequence of the drain reopened in the right corner of the entrance. This natural drainage system confirmed the past functioning of the cave [START_REF] García | Sedimentología y clima en el país valenciano: las cuevas habitadas en el cuaternario reciente[END_REF]. This episode flooded the cave during several days and left a3-4 thick silt layer covering. The reading of drain profile allowed to describe close to 4 m of sedimentary levels formed by recurrent Pleistocene floods. The presence of detritus materials from the slopes supports strong episodes of flooding with a high charge capacity (visible in lower levels). At the top of the Pleistocene sequence a stalagmitic concretion was formed (level X: C-468: 27,4662,398 and C-469: 26,7332,181) [START_REF] García | Sedimentología y clima en el país valenciano: las cuevas habitadas en el cuaternario reciente[END_REF]. The documentation of this concretion in the central-Northern area reveals that the basin should have been formed later, probably caused by a drain opened at the Southern wall of the cavity. After a cutting episode in the Pleistocene sedimentation, the Holocene levels were formed. Other flooding episodes have been identified through several means. Three of them were described by Fumanal, one forming the base of the Holocene anthropic sequence (IX sedimentary level), a second affecting Upper/Bronze age and Chalcolithic deposits, and the third corresponding to the 1977 flooding event. While the last episode is described as a slow charge, the others showed a high capacity. From Pericot's excavation we have indirect data that confirm the effect of some flooding episodes. The description of gravel levels at the base of the archaeological stratigraphy could be one of them (maybe linked with the IX level described by Fumanal). Current laboratory work allows us to obtain other evidence from the study of the mollusk record. Despite the bias selection problems associated with the oldest materials, the distribution pattern of a particular species, Melanopsis tricarinata, a mainly aquatic taxon, allows us to hypothesize how its presence was caused by a flooding event affecting at the top of the Mesolithic sequence. Their presence could be directly related with the water entrance and subsequent stagnation, particularly due its vertical concentration in specific locations (Fig. 3). We have realized how this event was identified in the last of Pericot's layers at the interior of the old closed animal pen, in particular, 1941 layer 2, 1942 RS layer 1, and 1943 A and C sectors layer 1. Confirming this assumption, the last layers excavated recently at sector 4 indicate the identification of this kind of event affecting recent Mesolithic episodes. As a consequence, we can confirm that the water of the ravine constitutes one of the natural agents affecting anthropic deposits from the top of the Mesolithic sequence.

In addition, we have analyzed current archaeological test pits by geochemical means [START_REF] Gallello | Analysis of stratigraphical sequences at Cocina Cave (Spain) using rare earth elements geochemistry[END_REF]. The obtained results serve to address several questions concerned with methodological and archaeological purposes. At this point we tested how major and minor elements constitute a good sign for distinguishing anthropogenic and natural factors relating to the new exposed profiles. The interesting results obtained show different signatures between anthropic activities as we could expected according to the domestic activities related to hunter-gatherers (especially in test pit 4), and more blurred Neolithic actions (only tested in current test pit 3). Fumanal's sedimentary analysis had pointed to some major climatic events in regards with the last Wurm episodes. She hypothesized how the unstable postglacial episodes stopped sedimentary deposits after level IX. Since then, anthropogenic levels began at the cave during Holocene times. From Fortea's sector E she noted a specific climatic episode according with an extended concretion on top of H level. She correlated theirs with other similar Subboreal crusts documented in several caves at the region. The wetter conditions associated to the 4.2 event (or Bond 3 event) in Mediterranean regimes could be behind these recurrent episodes. Paleoenvironmental conditions were also approached for the first time through charcoal remains. The identified flora at Cocina is dominated by species from the thermo-Mesomediterranean forest, dominated by Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis) and Holm oak or kermes oak (evergreen Quercus), with the presence of some Prunus and junipers (Juniperus).

The scrub would be composed of heathers (Erica), legumes and rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis). Some thermophilic elements such as mastic (Pistacia lentiscus) and wild olive (Olea europaea) are also present (Carrión-Marco and Pérez-Jordà, this issue).

Radiocarbon dates

In the last few years we conducted several radiocarbon programs. Until now we have published a total of 18 radiocarbon dates (Juan-Cabanilles and [START_REF] Juan-Cabanilles | Rupture et continuité dans la néolithisation du versant méditerranéen de la péninsule Ibérique: mise à l'épreuve du modèle de dualité culturelle[END_REF]Marchand and Perrin., 2017;García-Puchol et al., 2018a[START_REF] García-Puchol | Cocina cave revisited: Bayesian radiocarbon chronology for the last hunter-gatherers and first farmers in Eastern Iberia[END_REF][START_REF] Olalde | The genomic history of the Iberian Peninsula over the past 8000 years[END_REF]. Currently, we have of 40 radiocarbon dates from the different excavation seasons based on a careful sampling protocol (Table 3). The sample selection was managed by an accurate filter of samples considering their nature and the accumulated information data of archaeological levels. All samples come from short lived species, including charcoal remains (Table 3). Whenever possible, we preferred bone samples to plant charcoal due to the absence of domestic seeds preserved in direct relationship with anthropic remains for Neolithic and Bronze age levels. In the case of animal samples, we selected bones with anthropic marks (cuts or fractures) when possible. Only three samples do not meet this criteria, due to low levels of preserved collagen detected in bone samples recovered at the upper layers and the subsequent bias introduced in the resampling. Considering Neolithic levels first, we dated domestic animals identified by Prof. Pérez Ripoll, although they are scarce in the faunal record. From his selection we obtained radiocarbon ages belonging to Chalcolithic and Bronze age periods (excluding some failed attempts affecting 2 domestic samples from Pericot's excavation [START_REF] Pericot | La cueva de la Cocina (Dos Aguas). Nota preliminar[END_REF] E-I layer 4 and Pericot 1942 layer 1 RS). We also dated samples of fruits, such as acorns and, above all, pine cones particularly from upper layers where bone samples were problematic (e.g., Pericot's sectors and 2015-2018 test pits). A coprolite of Ovis/Capra was dated with the aim to determine the age of the use of the cavity as an animal pen. And finally, 5 remains of human bone were dated. The anthropological study effectuated and the radiocarbon results confirms the minimum number of individuals found (5), unfortunately without any clear archaeological context (McClure et al., this issue). Samples were sent to three radiocarbon laboratories: University of California Keck Laboratory (UCIAMS), The Pennsylvania State University's Institutes of Energy and the Environment Radiocarbon Laboratory (PSUAMS), and Beta Analytic. Samples for AMS radiocarbon dating at UCIAMS and PSUAMS were prepared using standard procedures for collagen extraction at The Pennsylvania State University Human Paleoecology and Isotope Geochemistry Laboratory [START_REF] Mcclure | AMS dating of human bone from Cova de la Pastora: new evidence of ritual continuity in the prehistory of eastern Spain[END_REF]2020;[START_REF] Zavodny | Neolithic animal management practices and stable isotope studies in the Adriatic[END_REF][START_REF] Kennett | Archaeogenomic evidence reveals prehistoric matrilineal dynasty[END_REF]. Specifically, dry bone samples (ca. 500mg) were crushed and washed in NanoPure water and demineralized in 0.5N HCL at 5C for several days. Samples were then prepared for collagen extraction using a modified [START_REF] Longin | New method of collagen extraction for radiocarbon dating[END_REF] method with ultrafiltration [START_REF] Brown | Improved collagen extraction by modified Longin method[END_REF][START_REF] Kennett | Archaeogenomic evidence reveals prehistoric matrilineal dynasty[END_REF] and extracted collagen was gelatinized at 110C in 1ml 0.02N HCL for 24 hours, then pipetted into a precleaned 10ml disposable syringe with an attached precleaned 0.45m Millex Durapore polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF) filter and put into a thick-walled culture tube. Samples were hydrolysed in 1.5ml 6N HCL for 24 hours at 110C before being driven through a SPE column with 10ml 6N HCL and dried under UHP N2 gas while being heated at 50C for 12 hours. Samples sent to Beta Analytic, Inc. were treated following their standard protocols.

Methodology

In order to build a refined chronological framework, we have used a multistage approach based on combining Bayesian methods. Differences in the accuracy of archaeological data provided the basis for separating Pericot's and Fortea's fieldwork campaigns (García-Puchol et al., 2018a;[START_REF] Pardo-Gordó | Taphonomic processes inconsistent with indigenous Mesolithic acculturation during the transition to the Neolithic in the Western Mediterranean[END_REF]. Here we correlate the set of archaeological data provided by each campaign and include 2015-2018 fieldwork. To do this, we order each of the archaeological records and then combine the information in a single general proposal. Our new approach introduces Bayesian modelling from a double analytical procedure. First, we will work with Bayesian chronological models applied to the stratigraphic sequence of Pericot's excavation in Cocina. Then, after the most reliable layers have been defined, we use these as prior information to define the rest of the sequence [START_REF] Armero | Bayesian classification for dating archaeological sites via projectile points SORT Stat[END_REF][START_REF] Pardo-Gordó | The chronology of archaeological assemblages based on an automatic Bayesian procedure: Eastern Iberia as study case[END_REF]. The focus on Pericot's sectors stems from the fact that they preserve most of the Mesolithic sequence and a wide segment of the Neolithic evidences.

4.1.Bayesian chronological modeling

Beginning with the Bayesian chronological modelling, the preliminary proposal was published in 2018 based on Pericot's excavation (García-Puchol et al. 2018a). There is a general bias produced by the minimum excavation unit excavated (layers of 15-25 cm) and the pronounced slope observed in E-W direction that affected all Pericot sectors, so we have chosen 1945 E-I and 1941 sectors as the starting point. To do this, we used archaeological units grouped statistically by considering densities of basic types of lithic projectiles and general lithic and pottery records (García Puchol et al., 2018a). We also took into account the radiocarbon dates available at the time from these sectors in addition to a considered Ante Quem date provided by trench 3 that could be related with Early Neolithic occupations at the site.

Here we run new models by introducing new dates that could be directly associated with the archaeological units proposed (Table 4). These new models have been built following similar criteria using Oxcal 4.4 software (Bronk Ramsey, 2009a) and intCal20 curve [START_REF] Reimer | The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0-55 cal kBP)[END_REF]. First, we have modeled stratigraphic models for 1941 and 1945 sectors. All of the models include the outlier model function (t-student at a significance level of 0.05). Once they were detected and evaluated, they were deemed as outliers in the models according to the information available of the date, and modelled again. This is in accordance with the stepping procedure used for Bayesian chronological modelling frameworks. The modelled dates were used in the next round steps as priors. After analyzing the results, we modeled a phase model including both prior dates produced by the stratigraphic models conducted and added the new radiocarbon dates from other sectors that could be more clearly associated with the units considered. Due to the fact that most of them corresponded to Mesolithic contexts, the focus on discussing the subsequent occupational episodes is evaluated here only considering the first Neolithic evidences. From the results we estimated the timing of the units described in a diachronic view. The model is useful to assess the potential presence/absence of a hiatus event between last Mesolithic and early Neolithic occupations. The results will permit a higher accuracy in the explanation of diachronic Mesolithic occupations.

4.2 Predictive Bayesian approach for the 1942 and 1943 sectors A smaller number of radiocarbon dates are available for the 1942 and 1943 Pericot's sectors (close to the half of the excavated area). As a result and in order to avoid in that way the economical and sample destruction cost, we have decided to employ a Bayesian methodological procedure designed initially to get an estimate chronology for dating archaeological collections [START_REF] Armero | Bayesian classification for dating archaeological sites via projectile points SORT Stat[END_REF]Pardo-Gordo et al., 2022). The goal in this case consists of proposing an archaeological sequence for [START_REF] Pericot | La Cova del Parpalló (Gandía, Valencia)[END_REF]1943 sectors based on the posterior probabilities defined by the existing material in such sectors. The work proposed here consists of an intrasite application of the method developed by Armero and colleagues [START_REF] Armero | Bayesian classification for dating archaeological sites via projectile points SORT Stat[END_REF]Pardo-Gordo et al., 2022). Essentially, this method consists of a multinomial-Dirichlet process where the response variable is a multilevel categorical variable (in this case, each potential chronological period is considered a category) and the predictors are the counts of the different artefacts involved. To construct the prior probabilities, we used assemblages from the better-defined layers (1941,1945), which constitute our training set. After the data has been trained, the artefacts present in the sectors 1942 and 1943 were used to develop a prediction for the chronological classification of each of the layers in those sectors. For this work, we have adapted the scripts developed by Pardo-Gordó et al. ( 2022) using R (R Core team, 2022). The count by layer of 1941 and 1945 E-I sectors includes 8 types conformed by the basic geometric projectiles morphologies, bifacial points and pottery (Supplementary material 2). Each one of the layers considered has been approximated from a defined archaeological unit tested through different statistical procedures (García Puchol et al., 2018a). These units correspond to the minimum accurate temporal windows (archaeological subunits) proposed by us from Pericot's 1941 and1945 excavation. In this analysis we exclude A0 due to the scarce cultural material associated. For practical purposes they have been named in the scripts from I to VIII from the bottom to the top of the sequence. Archaeological units I to V include A1, A2, B1, B2, B3 Mesolithic units, VI correspond to the unit C1, and the units VII and VIII group Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Bronze age record. These last units, because we only use detailed typologies for geometric projectiles, cannot be approximated more accurately. The methodological procedure consists of: 1) firstly, to calculate the estimated likelihood from these types by each archaeological unit considered (informative procedure), 2) to calculate for the unknown 1942 and 1943 layers the predicted likelihood to belong to each unit. For the acceptance of results, we selected a threshold of >=25% probability for any single unit. If the results presented bimodal or multimodal distributions, they are rejected and were not considered for temporal assignment function. Taking into account the stratigraphic relationship among layers, we discuss the results including the potential inconsistencies considering a diachronic view.

Results

5.1.Stratigraphical Bayesian chronological modeling

The chronocultural subunits built from the different archaeological fieldwork conducted at Cueva de la Cocina can be understood at the moment as our proposal of the minimum temporal windows. The subunits deemed and the correlation with the different archaeological projects carried out are described in table 4. Taking into account the problems that affect the upper layers of the sequence, the chronological models offer a better evaluation of the Mesolithic evidence. According to the methods described, we have firstly obtained the results for the stratigraphic models applied to 1941 and 1945 E1 campaigns (Table 5 and Supplementary materials 1). For 1941 we modelled the dates according with their stratigraphic order. To do this we added a new date from layer 1. This date, from a bone of Capra pyrenaica (PSU5323, 659025 BP), constitutes the more recent radiocarbon result that we would associate with the last Mesolithic occupations. Some considerations are necessary, starting from the nature of the sample, a cervical vertebrae without anthropic marks and associated to a layer with a few number of artefacts (l40 lithics and 4 pottery fragments).

The assumption of linking it with the last Mesolithic relies on the assumed date related to the Early Neolithic evidence at the cavity, although we could also dismiss it due the lack of anthropic manipulation. The earlier pottery at Cueva de la Cocina would be coincident with the decoration techniques present at the "classic" cardial developed in the last centuries of the 8th millennium cal BP. This aspect is confirmed by the only radiocarbon date that could be associated with these first Neolithic occupational events obtained from a branch of Pinus sp (Beta-426849, 6350+-30 BP). The first rounded model shows a low A-model index (52.5) and an outlier (PSUAMS-4429: 713525 BP). The date corresponds to a fragment of cranial bone from a human individual clearly not associated with the cultural assignment. Deemed as an outlier, we run again the model and the results achieve an acceptable Amodel index (102.2). The model run for 1945 E1 uses the same dates that past attempts initially obtaining a low agreement index (Amodel: 33) affected by an outlier (Beta 267439: 676040 BP), clearly in disagreement with the archaeological context (layer 12). Consequently, we consider it as an outlier and we run the model again. The result obtained offers now an acceptable Amodel (93.4).

The modelled dates obtained from the stratigraphic models have been used as priors to build a new phase model correlating 1941 and 1945 E1 sectors. In addition, we include new radiocarbon dates from other sectors that could be merged with the temporal windows stablished through specific criteria. To do this we choose dates from the archaeological units with presence of cultural material data and/or stratigraphic relationships that easily permits us to determine their belonging to the temporal windows considered. This is the case of a date from a bone of Capra pyrenaica with anthropic fracture from 2015-2018 sector 6 (Beta-512549: 676030 BP, UE 1126) associated to a crescent with abrupt retouch that we assign to subunit B3. UCIAMS-174945 (670535 BP), on Capra pyrenaica without anthropic marks, has also been incorporated to this same temporal. Despite this problematic aspect we consider that the most probable scenario is its relationship with anthropic activities relating to the last Mesolithic episodes (B3). The model is complemented with the dates provided by 2015-2018 sector 4. The radiocarbon dates obtained from pine cones (faunal remains failed repeatedly) show consistency considering their stratigraphic position and cultural material associated, while also being consistent with a date provided at the bottom of the stratigraphy from a Capra pyrenaica bone with anthropic marks. They have been associated to the B2 and B1 temporal windows. In addition, we introduced within the model a date from Fortea's A sector, a Capra pyrenaica bone with anthropic mark from the H4 level (UCIAMS-145197: 771030 BP) that we associated with A0. The general lithic record is scarce, although blade technology is well represented (without geometrics). Finally, we introduce a terminus ante quem (TAQ) through the command (before) based on the unique date that we could associate to the Early Neolithic pottery at the cavity obtained from a branch of Pinus sp (Beta-426849, 635030 BP). This is used as a constraint to the Mesolithic last occupations. The resulting model offers a lower Amodel (57.9) and an outlier date affecting to the modelled date (Prior B2_45_Beta267436) from 1945 E1 campaign. Considering the scarce resolution of the data we run again the model considering it as an outlier. The new model presents an acceptable result (Amodel: 83.5) (Fig. 4).

The modelled dates estimate the duration of each archaeological subunit as a result of the constraints assumed step by step, from sample strategy to the archaeological resolution of a priori information and decision-making. Table 6 and figure 5 show the results by units expressed as modelled dates. The starting date starts at the first centuries of the 9th millennium cal BP (A0: 8850-8380 cal BP), involving units that cover the 9th millennium (A1 and A2) and the first half of the 8th millennium cal BP (B1, B2 and B3). In our proposal, the last subunit considered (B3) would arrive to the half of the 8th millennium cal BP. 5.2.Bayesian approach through informed phases likelihood Figure 6 informs us in a graphical manner of the results obtained by each layer in 1942 season (Supplementary material 3 for 1943 season) about their chronological expectancy expressed as the likelihood to belong to different temporal windows (archaeological units). In a general view, the preliminary check reveals how the results show enough confidence considering a diachronic dimension from the bottom to the top of the sequence. More frequently, the probability up to 25 % is centered only in one temporal interval underpinning the robustness of the analysis conducted and the good diagnostic approximation provided by the selected types. Only in two cases (1943 D layer 1, 1943 A layer 2 and 1943 E layer 4) the results show two separated intervals above the accepted threshold. In other case (1942 B layer 5) there are three intervals above the threshold and, consequently, it is not conclusive. If we evaluate the results by sectors, it is possible to observe similar problems and also particular disruptive aspects. 1942 sector reflects several problems in regards with upper layers for all subsectors (A to D). Layer 1 (RS), is a general layer without minor divisions. The presence of pottery introduced the discussion about the preservation of a neolithic layer, as its temporal window would indicate. The results of dating the human bone recovered (frontal bone) emphasize its character as a palimpsest. From layer 2 it is possible to appreciate the different subdivisions, while we can also observe diverse kinds of parceled problems. The weight of temporal window III (subphase B1), could be another signal of disturbances due the lacking of the last Mesolithic subphases (B2 and B3). This effect also is visible in layer 3, particularly for A, B and C subsectors. The high concentration of "Melanopsis tricarinata" could be related, at least in part, to the degree of inconsistences observed as consequence of the ravine flooding events. From layer 4 in advance (and including 1942 D, layer 3), the adscription provided seems to be more consistent. At this point the general observances help to refer some relevant features. First, we can say that at the Eastern part (subsector A), the natural layer appears before as it is noted in the diaries, although the maximum depth is achieved at layer 7 (of a total of 9). Considering the information from 1941, the basin slope had to be very pronounced. From layer 4 the coherence is largest reflecting the development of the subsequent subphases from temporal window I (A1) to IV (B2). Nevertheless, the two radiocarbon dates available inform us of the general problems persisting mainly caused by the coarse excavation method but also related with the proximity of the wall and the presence of particular accumulation of stone blocks that can be related with specific disturbance episodes. The concluding relevant aspects in regarding the 1943 sector appear more clearly, maybe because Pericot applied a more controlled digging plan and took a great number of pictures by layers, and specially for the profiles, that serve to give a more general view (Fig. 7). From them, we know that the natural clay layer appeared very early from the South and the Northern profiles, preserving the maximum depth to the center and the Southwestern part. We can conclude how the upper sequence is cut off in a gradient that affects particularly subsector A. In this case we observe how the first layer of subsector A could be approached from the results of the B1 subphase. It appeared immediately after cleaning dung remains and the superficial layer. Towards the South, we observe a more complete Mesolithic sequence (subsectors B and C) involving B2, B1, A2 and A1 subphases. The presence of Melanopsis is documented mainly in layer 1 although it is present also in layer 2 (C and D) (Fig. 3). From these layers, the sequence shows quite good consistency from the bottom (subphase A1). Other kind of issues can be noted from subsectors D and E, coinciding with the presence of Neolithic ceramic (subsector E). In accordance, the first layer of 1943 subsector E could be related with subphase VI, coinciding with the presence of pottery. The general description of this assemblage can be assigned to the regional Middle Neolithic (characterized by the presence of "peinada" treatment of surfaces (Molina-Balaguer et al., this issue). Interestingly, the Bayesian estimation reveals a cut off between the subsequent layer, related to the subphase B2. Based on the prior data, at this point we can note a breakup in the Mesolithic sequence. Since then, the likelihood obtained displays their association with the subsequent late Mesolithic subphases. In contrast, the radiocarbon dates from subsector E indicate inconsistences with this attribution and among then. The most ancient one came from a human bone (cranial). Considering the profiles reading we could hypothesize that the pronounced slope of the Northern basin base could affect the sampling selection by layers.

Discusion: Chronostratigraphy and cultural sequence

The result of combining Bayesian modeling and chronocultural data through an accurate revision of archaeological and sedimentary information allows us to propose a renewed archaeological sequence for Cueva de la Cocina. Figure 8 summarizes the correlation between each excavation considering the current dataset. As we can see, the proposal takes into account the revised Pericot's sequence because it reveals the widest and most intensively occupied prehistoric levels from the bottom to the top. On one hand, the analysis carried out for the entire data collection has provided the diagnostic classification of cultural material components, particularly lithic projectiles. On the other, the radiocarbon dates program has introduced the necessary chronological data to approximate temporal windows through Bayesian modeling procedures with the aim to refine the reading of the prehistoric occupations. For a more comprehensive proposal we have used this same nomenclature in regards with general archaeological units considering the 2015-2018 excavation, whereas we have maintained Fortea's names for practical purposes. The recent campaigns along with the top of Fortea's excavations provide the necessary information for drawing a historic sequence until the 20 th century. As result, we have built the minimum archaeological subunits that conform the proposal explained (subunits 1 to 18 from the top to the bottom). Focusing on prehistoric times we can say that the analyses conducted have provided a more accurate reading, particularly in regards with the Mesolithic sequence. We can approximate them from the bottom to the top as follows:

1)

The start of the sequence corresponds with the so-called A0 archaeological unit (unit 18) (8850-8380 cal BP). It has been defined from the data provided by radiocarbon dates from the first archaeological layers (1941/layer 13, Fortea B4/level H4/layer 6). The scarcity of materials recovered here does not currently allow for detailed characterization, although the cultural material can be assigned to the Late Geometric Mesolithic according with the technological blade knapping documented. The presence of macrolithic tools using limestone raw material is also associated to the immediate upper units as was described by Pericot (1945 layers 12 to 16). As a consequence, at the moment we do not have enough elements to disassociate this first ephemeral occupations with the Geometric technocomplex in part due to the small number of lithic remains. This issue is shortly to be explored properly.

2)

The next Archaeological unit A1 (subunit 17) (8475-8230 cal BP) corresponds to the extended development of the blades and trapezes technocomplex, including asymmetric trapezes with concave sides among others, with scarce presence of microburin technique. This archaeological subunit shows, in general, a less intensive presence in the 1945 sector and a high concentration the 1941 dig. This aspect confirms differential activities in a spatial view. Current information reveals the first burial practices at the cavity.

3)

Archaeological unit A2 (subunit 16) (8291-7929 cal BP) also shows differential intensive areas between the different sectors. This phase is also represented in current campaigns (test pit 2). The lithic composition contains a great number of geometric projectiles and the documentation of microburin technique.

4)

Archaeological unit B1 (subunit 15) (8046-7720 cal BP) is characterized by the appearance of "Triangles Cocina Type Triangles", a characteristic projectile of triangular morphology and concave edges, similar to Muge triangles, accompanied in this case by a significant number of trapezes. The buried children remains and the frontal bone belonging to an adult can be attributed to this period. The distribution of engraved plaquettes in Pericot's sectors, together with the plaquette recovered at pit 4 (UE 1409), should confirm the first appearance of this graphic expression in the cave.

5)

Archaeological unit B2 (subunit 14) (7781-7615 cal BP) shows a more general intensive occupation in the cavity as it is deduced from the largest densities recovered of cultural and biological materials. A flooding episode has been detected through the characteristic malacological record that proliferates associated to water presence. This species appears in the uppers layers throughout the Pericot's sector, excluding 1945 campaigns. We can hypothesize its beginning from this moment. This level offers also some particularities that may be point to the remarkable activities conducted in the site in a more extensive social dimension (aggregate site function?). From a cultural diagnostic view, Cocina type triangles, made using microburin technique, dominate the assemblage. The knapping activities were focused on blades made from a wide diversity of flints, reflecting distant raw materials sources (Ramacciotti et al., 2021 and this issue). And not less important, the observed variety in regards to food resources, including now the higher concentration of marine resources like Cerastodema glaucum, would also indicate a greater diversity in landuse dynamics.

6)

Archaeological unit B3 (subunit 13) (7660-7465 cal BP) is identified from a more blurred record, affected by the increase of postdepositional episodes that have eliminated the greater part of upper prehistoric sequence as long at the cavity. New radiocarbon dates contribute to supply a last temporal interval for the last Mesolithic activities at the site (PSU5323, 659025). At an lithic industrial level we hypothesize to its association with a great concentration of circle segments with abrupt retouch.

7)

Archaeological unit C1 (subunit 12) corresponds with the Early Neolithic occupation of the cavity confirmed through the presence of "cardial pottery". Only a charcoal date can be associated with this temporal window (Beta426849: 635030 BP). The appearance of a small number of "cardial" diagnostic decoration is revealing enough. As we noted before, this episode is widely altered. The sampling of domestic animals has revealed their relation with the upper prehistoric sequence of the cavity (Chalcolithic and Bronze age). In addition, the lack of domestic seeds does not support agricultural practices for the inhabitants of Cocina. Consequently, current data are not conclusive in order to characterize economical practices of the events associated with the Early Neolithic potteries, maybe linked with hunting activities. In Fortea's E sector, the crust that covers the layer with these Early Neolithic remains separates it of an upper layer associated to the Chalcolithic and Bronze age indicating the lacking sediments between them. Some early pottery fragments appear concentrated in a supposed hearth structure that we consider a probable Neolithic pit. The analysis undertaken confirms the problems that affect the stratigraphic levels that preserve these kinds of evidence, particularly visible in Fortea sector E.

8)

Archaeological unit C2 (subunit 11) has been identified through the evidences recovered at the entrance of the cavity consisting of a set of pottery remains that share characteristic "peinado" treatment attributed to the Middle Neolithic sequence in the region (Pericot 1945 E-I layers 3 and4 and1943 E layer 1). At the moment we do not dispose of any radiocarbon dates. The only remains of domestic animal (Ovis) recovered in this context (1945 E1 layer 4) failed in the results due to the low level of collagen preserved. 9)

Finally, Archaeological unit D (subunit 10) refers the last prehistoric episodes at the cave that show the unique domestic evidence dated (sheep and cattle). Despite the problems affecting the integrity of the stratigraphy, radiocarbon dates and cultural material support their assignment to the Late Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Bronze Age periods (UCIAMS174145: 442525; UCIAMS: 372520; UCIAMS-174144: 359020) 10)

The upper subunits (from 9 to 1) complete a sequence with important diachronic hiatuses. Some evidences of cultural material allows attribution of occupational episodes to the Iberian Culture (Iron Age), Medieval and Modern times and, finally, contemporary activities (Beta453589: 18030).

Concluding remarks

The socioecological dynamics of the last hunter-gatherers have revealed adaptative evolutionary behaviors that show interesting patterns of resilience. Triggered by the changing environmental conditions, the last Western Mediterranean foragers exhibit driving forces that can be mainly appreciated by shifts in the landuse strategies and consequently in social networks. This reorganization has been demonstrated by the rise of the open-air sites involving the exploitation of aquatic resources from inner lacustrine areas and coastal areas, and through the increasing evidences of burial practices. The demographic changes also took place showing a visible and regionally diverse rise, according with several diagnostic proxies [START_REF] García-Puchol | Timing the Western Mediterranean Last Hunter-Gatherers and First Farmers[END_REF][START_REF] De Pablo | Palaeodemographic modelling supports a population bottleneck during the Pleistocene-Holocene transition in Iberia[END_REF]. These major shifts began around 10.200 cal BP linked to the Notches and Denticulated technocomplexes recognized from that moment in coastal and interior areas at the Mediterranean region and far away [START_REF] Tortosa | Human responses to younger Dryas in the Ebro valley and mediterranean watershed (eastern Spain)[END_REF][START_REF] Perrin | What relations between north Africa and Europe in the Early Holocene?[END_REF]. From the first half of the 9th millennium cal BP, the irruptive appearance of Blades and Trapezes technocomplex is recognized along the Mediterranean region (Marchand and Perrin, 2017). This reordering of the sequence has required a renewed interpretation in contrast with the first proposals described during the 20 th century (Alday, 2006;[START_REF] Utrilla | El Mesolítico geométrico en la Península Ibérica Monografías Arqueológicas 44[END_REF][START_REF] Tortosa | Human responses to younger Dryas in the Ebro valley and mediterranean watershed (eastern Spain)[END_REF]. In this regard, Cocina provides some of the oldest radiocarbon dates for blades and trapezes technocomplexes in the western Mediterranean, adding more questions to the debate of the cultural transmission processes explaining their appearance. Based on the pioneering work conducted at the cave, and applying new methodological procedures, we propose a renewed interpretation of Cueva de la Cocina sequence. The obtained results have exceeded the initial expectations regarding intrasite dynamics and regional evolutionary perspectives. Concerning the first issue, we have presented a more refined view the chronocultural units as a result of a better understanding of natural and anthropogenic agents that affected the formation processes of the palimpsests that usually form archaeological deposits. The richness of the archaeological record of the cave provides new insight into economic behaviors, technological knowledge, and social practices, including burial remains. These last spheres allow us to hypothesize about the remarkable role of Cocina as a microregional social network hub, at least affecting the last Mesolithic phases (Subphase B1 and B2). From that moment, ancient and recent disruptive processes have contributed to remove and largely dismantle the upper prehistoric and historic deposits. Consequently, and considering our current data, it is not possible to identify and characterize a "transitional phase" in Cocina, as was initially defined. Current radiocarbon dates indicate a short time between these occupational events. In parallel, the extended last Mesolithic occupations demonstrate the interaction processes that would act at regional level as the "dual model" had described. The artistic Holocene sequence, and its associated evidence for painting evidences, recognized on the Southern wall of the cavity, will in time be object of a specific discussion (work in progress). In this respect we can say in advance that this issue will be approached considering current evidence and postdepositional processes affecting the accumulation sequence described. Unquestionably, we have confirmed that the engraved plaquette graphic expression is associated with the last Mesolithic episodes [START_REF] López-Montalvo | Mesolithic codes through the lineal engraved plaquettes recovered at Cueva de la Cocina (Dos Aguas, Valencia, Spain)[END_REF]. In conclusion, we would like to point to the recently published results from ancient DNA analysis to remark the role played by last hunter gatherer populations in the spread and consolidation of the Neolithic way of life in the Western Mediterranean, depending on variable regional situations [START_REF] García-Puchol | Timing the Western Mediterranean Last Hunter-Gatherers and First Farmers[END_REF][START_REF] Olalde | A common genetic origin for early farmers from Mediterranean Cardial and Central European LBK cultures[END_REF]2019;[START_REF] Arzelier | Neolithic genomic data from southern France showcase intensified interactions with huntergatherer communities[END_REF][START_REF] Perrin | Potential interactions between Mesolithic hunter-gatherers and Neolithic farmers in the Western Mediterranean: The geochronological data revisited[END_REF]. The Mesolithic sequence of Cueva de la Cocina offers remarkable evidence of the richness of the last foragers regarding social practices and landuse dynamics. Although the data from Cocina does not permit to describe a proper acculturation context, the evidence, particularly temporality, would point to the participation of the last Mesolithic groups in the advance and consolidation of the Neolithic from coastal pioneers bearing the new economic practices and social challenges. 1. Surface and volume data from Pericot's seasons. Table 2. Summary of archaeological remains recovered at the Pericot's fieldwork. Table 3. Table with the current radiocarbon dates from Cueva de la Cocina. The dates have been calibrated using Oxcal 4.4 software (Bronk Ramsey, 2009a) and intCal20 curve [START_REF] Reimer | The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0-55 cal kBP)[END_REF]. Table 4. Data for building Bayesian chronological analysis from 1941 and 1945 E1. Table 5. Bayesian model results. Table 6. Modelled duration dates from general phase modelling results using Oxcal 4.4 software (Bronk Ramsey, 2009a) and intCal20 curve [START_REF] Reimer | The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0-55 cal kBP)[END_REF].

Figure 7 .

 7 Figure 7. 1943 Pericot's pictures (Prehistory Museum of Valencia). Figure 8. Current proposal of Archaeological sequence at Cueva de la Cocina. General correlation by archaeological units and subunits considered.Table captions Table 1. Surface and volume data from Pericot's seasons. Table 2. Summary of archaeological remains recovered at the Pericot's fieldwork. Table 3. Table with the current radiocarbon dates from Cueva de la Cocina. The dates have been calibrated using Oxcal 4.4 software(Bronk Ramsey, 2009a) and intCal20 curve[START_REF] Reimer | The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0-55 cal kBP)[END_REF]. Table4. Data for building Bayesian chronological analysis from 1941 and 1945 E1. Table5. Bayesian model results. Table6. Modelled duration dates from general phase modelling results using Oxcal 4.4 software (Bronk Ramsey, 2009a) and intCal20 curve[START_REF] Reimer | The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0-55 cal kBP)[END_REF].

Figure 8 .

 8 Figure 7. 1943 Pericot's pictures (Prehistory Museum of Valencia). Figure 8. Current proposal of Archaeological sequence at Cueva de la Cocina. General correlation by archaeological units and subunits considered.Table captions Table 1. Surface and volume data from Pericot's seasons. Table 2. Summary of archaeological remains recovered at the Pericot's fieldwork. Table 3. Table with the current radiocarbon dates from Cueva de la Cocina. The dates have been calibrated using Oxcal 4.4 software(Bronk Ramsey, 2009a) and intCal20 curve[START_REF] Reimer | The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0-55 cal kBP)[END_REF]. Table4. Data for building Bayesian chronological analysis from 1941 and 1945 E1. Table5. Bayesian model results. Table6. Modelled duration dates from general phase modelling results using Oxcal 4.4 software (Bronk Ramsey, 2009a) and intCal20 curve[START_REF] Reimer | The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0-55 cal kBP)[END_REF].

Figure 2

 2 Figure 2 Click here to access/download;Figure;Fig_2.eps

  Figure 4Click here to access/download;Figure;Fig_4.eps

Figure 5

 5 Figure 5 Click here to access/download;Figure;Fig_5.eps

Figure 6

 6 Figure 6

Figure 7

 7 Figure 7

Figure 8

 8 Figure 8

Table captions Table

 captions

Table 1

 1 Click here to access/download;Table;Table1.xlsx

	Pericot´s Sectors	m 2	m 3	Max. Depth	Min. Depth
	1941	9	18,45	2,50	1,60
	1941 exp	1,50	3,75	2,50	2,50
	1942 A	1,31	1,37	1,05	1,05
	1942 B	3,15	9,18	3,37	2,46
	1942 C	2,79	8,52	3,37	2,74
	1942 D	5,04	10,68	2,12	2,12
	1943 A	3,75	2,77	1,28	0,2
	1943 B	3,75	4,36	1,28	1,05
	1943 C	3,75	5,23	1,53	1,26
	1943 D	3,75	5,23	1,53	1,26
	1943 E	3,75	5,73	1,53*	1,53
	1945 EI	3,36	15,12	4,5	4,5
	1945 EIIb	9,62	4,81	0,5**	0,5
	1945 EIIa	5,98	20,93	3,90	3,10
	TOT	60,5	116,07

Table 3

 3 Click here to access/download;Table;Table3.xlsx

	δ 13 C	δ 15 N	C:N Reference
	-19.5	4.0	3.25	García Puchol et al . 2018
	-20.3	3.9	3.20	García Puchol et al . 2018
	-20.4	4.2	3.18	García Puchol et al . 2018
	-19.5	3.8	3.22	García Puchol et al . 2018
	-19.0	4.5	3.24	García Puchol et al . 2018
	nd	nd	nd	Juan Cabanilles & García Puchol
	nd	nd	nd	Juan Cabanilles & García Puchol
	nd	nd	nd	Juan Cabanilles & García Puchol
	nd	nd	nd	Juan Cabanilles & García Puchol
	nd	nd	nd	Juan Cabanilles & García Puchol
	nd	nd	nd	Juan Cabanilles & García Puchol
	-25.3			Pardo Gordó et al . 2018
	-22.4	4.2	3.47	Pardo Gordó et al . 2018
	-20.3	4.5	3.41	Pardo Gordó et al . 2018
	-19.2	4.4	3.16	Pardo Gordó et al . 2018
	-20.2	4.8	3.17	Pardo Gordó et al. 2018
	-19.1	4	3.15	Pardo Gordó et al. 2018
	-20.1	4.7	2.9	Unpublished
	-20.2	4.3	2.9	Unpublished
	-20.2	4.4	2.8	Unpublished
	-20.7	3.9	3	Unpublished
	-19.8	3.8	2.9	Unpublished
	-19	4	3.3	Unpublished
	-20.2	4	3.3	Unpublished
	-19.6	4.6	3.3	Unpublished
	-25.7			Unpublished
	-23.3			Unpublished
	-26.4			Unpublished
	-20.1	7.6	3.39	Unpublished
	-20.5	3.1	3.23	Unpublished
	-18.1	8.6	3.3	Unpublished
	-19.3	8.2	3.26	Unpublished
	-18.8	9.3	3.27	Olalde et al . 2019
	-27.9			Unpublished
	-24.3			Unpublished
	-20.7			Unpublished
	-27.8			Unpublished
	-21.9			Unpublished
	-18.2	10.6	3.2	Unpublished
	-18.8	10.8	3.3	Unpublished

Table 4

 4 Click here to access/download;Table;Table4.xlsx

	Model results	Amodel
	Stratigraphic model 1941 All dates	52.5
	Stratigraphic model 1941 Outlier	102.2
	Stratigraphic model 1945 E1 All dates	33
	Stratigraphic model 1945 E1 (outlier)	93.4
	Phase model all dates and priors	57.9
	Phase model (outlier)	83.5

Table 5

 5 Click here to access/download;Table;Table5.xlsx

	Units	From	to	%	C
	A0	8850	8380	95.4	99.7
	A1	8475	8230	95.4	99.9
	A2	8291	7929	95.4	99.8
	B1	8046	7720	95.4	99.8
	B2	7781	7615	95.4	99.9
	B3	7660	7465	95.4	99.9

Table 6

 6 Click here to access/download;Table;Table6.xlsx

In 1941 the first fieldwork campaign at Cueva de la Cocina began under Lluis Pericot's direction, just a year after Salvador Espí (member

Figure 3 Click here to access/download;Figure;Fig_3.tif Sequence Cocina [Amodel:84] Boundary Start A0 [C:97] Phase A0 Prior A01941UCIAMS_147348 [A:95 C:100] R_Date UCIAMS-145197 [A:98 C:100] A0 [C:100] Boundary Transition A0/A1 [C:100] Phase A1 Prior A1_1945_Beta267440 [A:102 C:100] Prior A1_1941_UCIAMS_147347 [A:101 C:100] A1 [C:100] Boundary Transition A1/A2 [C:100] Phase A2 Prior A2_1941_UCIAMS_145195 [A:103 C:100] Prior A2_1945_Beta267438 [A:106 C:100] Prior A2_1941_UCIAMS_145194 [A:105 C:100] A2 [C:100] Boundary Transition A2/B1 [C:100] Phase B1 Prior B1_1945_Beta267437 [A:91 C:100] R_Date Beta512548 [A:93 C:100] R_Date Beta599656 [A:110 C:100] R_Date Beta599657 [A:109 C:100] B1 [C:100] Boundary Transition B1/B2 [C:100] Phase B2 Prior B2_45_Beta267436? [P:0 C:100] Prior B2_1941_UCIAMS_147346 [A:75 C:100] R_Date Beta599654 [A:75 C:100] R_Date Beta599655 [A:115 C:100] B2 [C:100] Boundary Transition B2/B3 [C:100] Phase B3 Prior B3_1945_Beta267435 [A:64 C:100] R_Date Beta512549 [A:109 C:100] R_Date UCIAMS-174945 [A:107 C:100] Prior B3_1941_PSU5323 [A:94 C:100] B3 [C:100] Boundary End B3 [C:99] Before