Typological studies applied on the osseous industry developed slowly in France following the pioneering work of H. Camps-Fabrer and the technological renewal that F. Billamboz and D. Stordeur brought to this field in the 1970e1980s. This field has been thriving since the 2000s. Technology represents part of a systemic approach where each component of a technical system is analysed as to its purpose, its structure and its connection to other components of the socioeconomic system. Nevertheless, technology is not an end in itself. Any technological observation must be considered in its sociological and palaeohistorical context in order to understand, not only the activities that took place during the occupation of a site, but more broadly to translate these data into "a realistic story of human behaviours". That is why reducing osseous technology to analysis of technical stigmata alone oversimplifies the potentials of this approach. We will illustrate this topic using Aurignacian and Gravettian examples from a few key French and Spanish sites. By showing technical and conceptual differences in the manufacturing of osseous projectile points (e.g. split-based points) in assemblages usually considered homogeneous, we can infer the existence of different techno-typological traditions and discuss if they are e or not e representative of different cultural traditions. Various technical details such as splitting base preparation by scraping, are significant indicators allowing discussion of whether there was diffusion of ideas and/or human groups from one side of the Pyrenees to the other at the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic.