scholarly journals Pleistocene sediment DNA reveals hominin and faunal turnovers at Denisova Cave

Nature ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena I. Zavala ◽  
Zenobia Jacobs ◽  
Benjamin Vernot ◽  
Michael V. Shunkov ◽  
Maxim B. Kozlikin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Contact Zone ◽  
Stone Tools ◽  
Environmental Context ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Middle Palaeolithic ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Mt Dna ◽  
Southern Siberia ◽  
Sediment Samples ◽  
Pleistocene Sediment

AbstractDenisova Cave in southern Siberia is the type locality of the Denisovans, an archaic hominin group who were related to Neanderthals1–4. The dozen hominin remains recovered from the deposits also include Neanderthals5,6 and the child of a Neanderthal and a Denisovan7, which suggests that Denisova Cave was a contact zone between these archaic hominins. However, uncertainties persist about the order in which these groups appeared at the site, the timing and environmental context of hominin occupation, and the association of particular hominin groups with archaeological assemblages5,8–11. Here we report the analysis of DNA from 728 sediment samples that were collected in a grid-like manner from layers dating to the Pleistocene epoch. We retrieved ancient faunal and hominin mitochondrial (mt)DNA from 685 and 175 samples, respectively. The earliest evidence for hominin mtDNA is of Denisovans, and is associated with early Middle Palaeolithic stone tools that were deposited approximately 250,000 to 170,000 years ago; Neanderthal mtDNA first appears towards the end of this period. We detect a turnover in the mtDNA of Denisovans that coincides with changes in the composition of faunal mtDNA, and evidence that Denisovans and Neanderthals occupied the site repeatedly—possibly until, or after, the onset of the Initial Upper Palaeolithic at least 45,000 years ago, when modern human mtDNA is first recorded in the sediments.

scholarly journals Elongation as a factor in artefacts of humans and other animals: an Acheulean example in comparative context

2013 ◽  
Vol 368 (1630) ◽  
pp. 20130114 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. A. J. Gowlett
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Stone Tools ◽  
Capuchin Monkeys ◽  
Middle Palaeolithic ◽  
Archaeological Record ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Satisfactory Outcome ◽  
New Caledonian Crows ◽  
Selection For ◽  
Individual Variables

Elongation is a commonly found feature in artefacts made and used by humans and other animals and can be analysed in comparative study. Whether made for use in hand or beak, the artefacts have some common properties of length, breadth, thickness and balance point, and elongation can be studied as a factor relating to construction or use of a long axis. In human artefacts, elongation can be traced through the archaeological record, for example in stone blades of the Upper Palaeolithic (traditionally regarded as more sophisticated than earlier artefacts), and in earlier blades of the Middle Palaeolithic. It is now recognized that elongation extends to earlier Palaeolithic artefacts, being found in the repertoire of both Neanderthals and more archaic humans. Artefacts used by non-human animals, including chimpanzees, capuchin monkeys and New Caledonian crows show selection for diameter and length, and consistent interventions of modification. Both chimpanzees and capuchins trim side branches from stems, and appropriate lengths of stave are selected or cut. In human artefacts, occasional organic finds show elongation back to about 0.5 million years. A record of elongation achieved in stone tools survives to at least 1.75 Ma (million years ago) in the Acheulean tradition. Throughout this tradition, some Acheulean handaxes are highly elongated, usually found with others that are less elongated. Finds from the million-year-old site of Kilombe and Kenya are given as an example. These findings argue that the elongation need not be integral to a design, but that artefacts may be the outcome of adjustments to individual variables. Such individual adjustments are seen in animal artefacts. In the case of a handaxe, the maker must balance the adjustments to achieve a satisfactory outcome in the artefact as a whole. It is argued that the need to make decisions about individual variables within multivariate objects provides an essential continuity across artefacts made by different species.

Tool Standardization in the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic: a Closer Look (with comments)

2001 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Marks ◽  
Harold J. Hietala ◽  
John K. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Stone Tools ◽  
Middle Palaeolithic ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Three Samples ◽  
Metric Traits

It has been postulated that one difference between Neanderthals and anatomically modern people lies in a ‘clearer mental template’ of flaked stone tools on the part of modern people. This is thought to have been manifested in greater tool standardization during the Upper Palaeolithic than in the Middle Palaeolithic. Testing of this hypothesis, using three samples of a characteristic Upper Palaeolithic tool class — burins — from one Middle Palaeolithic and two Upper Palaeolithic assemblages, reveals that they are equally standardized for both metric and non-metric traits. Further consideration suggests that most Palaeolithic flaked stone tools are poorly suited to test notions of standardization, although some tool attributes may be well suited when considered in specific adaptive contexts.

scholarly journals Eastern Europe’s “Transitional Industry”?: Deconstructing the Early Streletskian

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Dinnis ◽  
A. Bessudnov ◽  
N. Reynolds ◽  
T. Devièse ◽  
A. Dudin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Modern Human ◽  
East European Plain ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
East European ◽  
Archaeological Material ◽  
Younger Age ◽  
Layer V ◽  
Precise Relationship ◽  
Early Upper

AbstractThe Streletskian is central to understanding the onset of the Upper Palaeolithic on the East European Plain. Early Streletskian assemblages are frequently seen as marking the Neanderthal-anatomically modern human (AMH) anthropological transition, as well as the Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic archaeological transition. The age of key Streletskian assemblages, however, remains unclear, and there are outstanding questions over how they relate to Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic facies. The three oldest Streletskian layers—Kostenki 1 Layer V, Kostenki 6 and Kostenki 12 Layer III—were excavated by A. N. Rogachev in the mid-20th century. Here, we re-examine these layers in light of problems noted during Rogachev’s campaigns and later excavations. Layer V in the northern part of Kostenki 1 is the most likely assemblage to be unmixed. A new radiocarbon date of 35,100 ± 500 BP (OxA- X-2717-21) for this assemblage agrees with Rogachev’s stratigraphic interpretation and contradicts later claims of a younger age. More ancient radiocarbon dates for Kostenki 1 Layer V are from areas lacking diagnostic Streletskian points. The Kostenki 6 assemblage’s stratigraphic context is extremely poor, but new radiocarbon dates are consistent with Rogachev’s view that the archaeological material was deposited prior to the CI tephra (i.e. >34.3 ka BP). Multiple lines of evidence indicate that Kostenki 12 Layer III contains material of different ages. Despite some uncertainty over the precise relationship between the dated sample and diagnostic lithic material, Kostenki 1 Layer V (North) therefore currently provides the best age estimate for an early Streletskian context. This age is younger than fully Upper Palaeolithic assemblages elsewhere at Kostenki. Other “Streletskian” assemblages and Streletskian points from younger contexts at Kostenki are briefly reviewed, with possible explanations for their chronostratigraphic distribution considered. We caution that the cultural taxon Streletskian should not be applied to assemblages based simply on the presence of bifacially worked artefacts.

scholarly journals Initial Upper Palaeolithic humans in Europe had recent Neanderthal ancestry

Nature ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 592 (7853) ◽  
pp. 253-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mateja Hajdinjak ◽  
Fabrizio Mafessoni ◽  
Laurits Skov ◽  
Benjamin Vernot ◽  
Alexander Hübner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Family History ◽  
East Asia ◽  
Late Pleistocene ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Human Migration ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Genome Wide ◽  
Genome Wide Data

AbstractModern humans appeared in Europe by at least 45,000 years ago1–5, but the extent of their interactions with Neanderthals, who disappeared by about 40,000 years ago6, and their relationship to the broader expansion of modern humans outside Africa are poorly understood. Here we present genome-wide data from three individuals dated to between 45,930 and 42,580 years ago from Bacho Kiro Cave, Bulgaria1,2. They are the earliest Late Pleistocene modern humans known to have been recovered in Europe so far, and were found in association with an Initial Upper Palaeolithic artefact assemblage. Unlike two previously studied individuals of similar ages from Romania7 and Siberia8 who did not contribute detectably to later populations, these individuals are more closely related to present-day and ancient populations in East Asia and the Americas than to later west Eurasian populations. This indicates that they belonged to a modern human migration into Europe that was not previously known from the genetic record, and provides evidence that there was at least some continuity between the earliest modern humans in Europe and later people in Eurasia. Moreover, we find that all three individuals had Neanderthal ancestors a few generations back in their family history, confirming that the first European modern humans mixed with Neanderthals and suggesting that such mixing could have been common.

scholarly journals A Middle Palaeolithic Site at Lynford Quarry, Mundford, Norfolk: Interim Statement

2003 ◽  
Vol 69 ◽  
pp. 315-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
W.A. Boismier ◽  
Danielle C. Schreve ◽  
Mark J. White ◽  
D.A. Robertson ◽  
A.J. Stuart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stone Tools ◽  
Middle Palaeolithic ◽  
Stratigraphic Sequence ◽  
International Importance ◽  
Initial Results ◽  
English Heritage

In late February and early March 2002, an archaeological watching brief at Lynford Quarry, Mundford, Norfolk revealed a palaeochannel with a dark organic fill containing in situ mammoth remains and associated Mousterian stone tools and debitage buried under 2–3 m of bedded sands and gravels. Well-preserved in situ Middle Palaeolithic open air sites are very unusal in Europe and exceedingly rare within a British context. As such, the site was identified as being of national and international importance, and was subsequently excavated by the Norfolk Archaeological Unit with funding provided by English Heritage through the Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund.This report presents some of the initial results of the excavation. It sets out how the site was excavated, outlines the stratigraphic sequence for the site, and presents some provisional findings of the excavation based on the results of the assessment work carried out by project specialists and Norfolk Archaeological Unit staff.

Dating Shuidonggou and the Upper Palaeolithic blade industry in North China

Antiquity ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 75 (290) ◽  
pp. 706-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
David B. Madsen ◽  
Li Jingzen ◽  
P. Jeffrey Brantingham ◽  
Gao Xing ◽  
Robert G. Elston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
North China ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Southern Siberia

Shuidonggou is unique within the Chinese Palaeolithic sequence and its assemblage is reminiscent of Upper Palaeolithic core-and-blade technologies in Mongolia and southern Siberia. Limited chronological controls have prevented evaluation of this technology in both the Chinese and greater Eurasian Palaeolithic. Dating of recently discovered hearths at Locality 2 places Shuidonggou firmly at 29,000–24,000 BP, and suggests the spread of the Eurasian large blade technology was primarily from north to south. The concurrent production of small microblade-like bipolar bladelets at the site may also presage the development of a microlithic industry.

Cognitive Changes and the Emergence of Modern Humans in Europe

1991 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Mellars
Keyword(s):  
Stone Tools ◽  
Significant Shift ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Cognitive Changes

Explicitly symbolic behaviour is usually seen as the hallmark of the behavioural transition from the Middle to the Upper Palaeolithic in Europe. It is suggested here that this new symbolic component is reflected not only in art and personal ornamentation, but also in the design and form of stone tools, and perhaps also in features such as the organization of living structures. All these new features could be argued to reflect the emergence of typically Upper Palaeolithic ‘culture’ and technology. Whether these features can be correlated directly with the transition from archaic to modern skeletal forms remains more problematic; and whether the changes need reflect any significant shift in the neurological capacities for behaviour and cognition is equally controversial.

Preliminary Report on Stone Age Reconnaissance in north-eastern Iran

1964 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 382-399 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. B. M. McBurney
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Report ◽  
British Museum ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Climatic Data ◽  
Middle Palaeolithic ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Upper Pleistocene ◽  
Eastern Iran ◽  
North Eastern ◽  
The One

The following is a preliminary report on the results achieved during approximately six weeks' archaeological fieldwork in north-eastern Iran in July and August 1963. The primary objective was to explore the area for traces of the local Upper Pleistocene cultural sequence, and in particular to establish if possible the date and character of the local Upper Palaeolithic. In the event no traces of Upper Palaeolithic were obtained. However, a start was made towards defining the problem by the discovery of two well-stratified deposits, the one yielding a Middle Palaeolithic (Mousterian) industry with distinctive regional affinities, and the other an early Post-glacial Mesolithic industry. Reliable samples were obtained for defining the statistical properties of both, together with carbon samples, traces of vertebrate fauna, and some other climatic data.Representative collections were lodged with the Musée Iran Bastan at Teheran; and the expedition's share is to be offered in part to the Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology in Cambridge and in part to the British Museum. The expedition was financed mainly by a grant from the British Academy, supplemented by further grants from the Crowther-Beynon Fund and the British Museum.

scholarly journals NEW PERSPECTIVES ON THE LION MAN FIGURINE OF HOHLENSTEIN-STADEL CAVE (SOUTHWESTERN GERMANY)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Wolf ◽  
N. Ebinger-Rist ◽  
C.-J. Kind ◽  
K. Wehrberger
Keyword(s):  
Middle Palaeolithic ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Upper Palaeolithic ◽  
Stratigraphic Sequence ◽  
Western Germany ◽  
The Right

In the Hohlenstein-Stadel Cave in 1939 excavators uncovered nearly 200 mammoth ivory fragments, which were refitted as a therianthrope figurine with the head and torso of a cave lion but with the legs of a human being. It was thus named the Lion Man. During recent excavations in the Stadel Cave between 2008 and 2013, a stratigraphic sequence was discovered that extended from the Middle Palaeolithic to the Aurignacian. It became clear that the location of the Lion Man during the excavations of 1939 corresponded to layer Au of the recent 2008-2013 excavations part of the excavation back dirt from 1939 was also uncovered. Here, 575 fragments of mammoth ivory were found that partially belonged to the Lion Man figurine that was carved from a complete tusk. In 2012/2013 the Lion Man was therefore newly restored. The figure was completed to the greatest possible extent. It became apparent that the Lion Man represents a male. We also obtained new perpectives on the position and the sinistral ornamentation of the figurine. The snout, the back and the right side were refitted and the Lion Man also gained volume due to the refitted pieces. New insight underlines the intentional deposition of the formerly complete figurine during the Aurignacian. Wehrberger, K. (Ed.) (2013). The Return of the Lion Man. History Myth Magic. Ostfildern: Jan Thorbecke Verlag. Kind, C.-J., Ebinger-Rist, N., Wolf, S., Beutelspacher, T., Wehrberger, K. (2014). The Smile of the Lion Man. Recent Excavations in Stadel Cave (BadenWrttemberg, south-western Germany) and the Restoration of the Famous Upper Palaeolithic Figurine. Quartr, 61, 129145

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document