Early Upper Paleolithic in Eastern Europe and Implications for the Dispersal of Modern Humans

Science ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 315 (5809) ◽  
pp. 223-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. V. Anikovich ◽  
A. A. Sinitsyn ◽  
John F. Hoffecker ◽  
Vance T. Holliday ◽  
V. V. Popov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Luminescence Dating ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Northern Eurasia ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Optically Stimulated Luminescence Dating ◽  
Figurative Art ◽  
Early Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Don River

Radiocarbon and optically stimulated luminescence dating and magnetic stratigraphy indicate Upper Paleolithic occupation—probably representing modern humans—at archaeological sites on the Don River in Russia 45,000 to 42,000 years ago. The oldest levels at Kostenki underlie a volcanic ash horizon identified as the Campanian Ignimbrite Y5 tephra that is dated elsewhere to about 40,000 years ago. The occupation layers contain bone and ivory artifacts, including possible figurative art, and fossil shells imported more than 500 kilometers. Thus, modern humans appeared on the central plain of Eastern Europe as early as anywhere else in northern Eurasia.

scholarly journals Split-based points from the Swabian Jura highlight Aurignacian regional signatures

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. e0239865
Author(s):  
Keiko Kitagawa ◽  
Nicholas J. Conard
Keyword(s):  
Life Histories ◽  
Musical Instruments ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Technological Innovations ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Production Sequence ◽  
Adaptive Capabilities ◽  
Figurative Art ◽  
Early Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Early Upper

The systematic use of antlers and other osseous materials by modern humans marks a set of cultural and technological innovations in the early Upper Paleolithic, as is seen most clearly in the Aurignacian. Split-based points, which are one of the most common osseous tools, are present throughout most regions where the Aurignacian is documented. Using results from recent and ongoing excavations at Geißenklösterle, Hohle Fels and Vogelherd, we nearly tripled the sample of split-based points from 31 to 87 specimens, and thereby enhance our understanding of the technological economy surrounding the production of osseous tools. Aurignacian people of the Swabian Jura typically left spit-based points at sites that appear to be base camps rich with numerous examples of personal ornaments, figurative art, symbolic imagery, and musical instruments. The artifact assemblages from SW Germany highlight a production sequence that resembles that of SW France and Cantabria, except for the absence of tongued pieces. Our study documents the life histories of osseous tools and demonstrates templates for manufacture, use, recycling, and discard of these archetypal artifacts from the Aurignacian. The study also underlines the diversified repertoire of modern humans in cultural and technological realms highlighting their adaptive capabilities.

scholarly journals The Use of Ochre and Painting During the Upper Paleolithic of the Swabian Jura in the Context of the Development of Ochre Use in Africa and Europe

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sibylle Wolf ◽  
Nicholas J. Conard ◽  
Harald Floss ◽  
Rimtautas Dapschauskas ◽  
Elizabeth Velliky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Central Europe ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Anatomically Modern Humans

Abstract While the earliest evidence for ochre use is very sparse, the habitual use of ochre by hominins appeared about 140,000 years ago and accompanied them ever since. Here, we present an overview of archaeological sites in southwestern Germany, which yielded remains of ochre. We focus on the artifacts belonging exclusively to anatomically modern humans who were the inhabitants of the cave sites in the Swabian Jura during the Upper Paleolithic. The painted limestones from the Magdalenian layers of Hohle Fels Cave are a particular focus. We present these artifacts in detail and argue that they represent the beginning of a tradition of painting in Central Europe.

scholarly journals Radiocaron Dates and Archaeology of the Late Pleistocene in the Japanese Islands

Radiocarbon ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 477-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akira Ono ◽  
Hiroyuki Sato ◽  
Takashi Tsutsumi ◽  
Yuichiro Kudo
Keyword(s):  
Late Pleistocene ◽  
New World ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Early Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Strongly Connected ◽  
Radiocarbon Chronology ◽  
Japanese Islands ◽  
Late Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Early Upper

We discuss the radiocarbon chronology of Late Pleistocene archaeology in the Japanese islands. In sum, 429 samples from more than 100 archaeological sites were compiled and then divided into three periods and four stages. The Early Upper Paleolithic, characterized by Trapezoid industries, lasted during approximately 34-26 ka. The Late Upper Paleolithic period includes both the backed-blade stage and point-tool stage, the latter appearing chronologically later than the former. This stage covers ~25–15 ka. The Final Upper Paleolithic and Incipient Jomon are distinguished by the appearance of microblade industries and the emergence of pottery at the end of this period. This period covers approximately 14-12 ka. The microblade tradition, in the broadest sense, is strongly connected to the background of peopling of the New World. New data on the transitional stage from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic are also discussed in regards to three archaeological sites. Issues on the application of the 14C calibration to the whole Japanese Upper Paleolithic are critically evaluated.

Early Upper Paleolithic industries of Eastern Europe

1992 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikhail Anikovich
Keyword(s):  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Early Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Early Upper

scholarly journals Earliest occupation of the Central Aegean (Naxos), Greece: Implications for hominin and Homo sapiens’ behavior and dispersals

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. eaax0997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tristan Carter ◽  
Daniel A. Contreras ◽  
Justin Holcomb ◽  
Danica D. Mihailović ◽  
Panagiotis Karkanas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Luminescence Dating ◽  
Middle Pleistocene ◽  
Southeast Europe ◽  
Stratigraphic Sequence ◽  
Early Upper Paleolithic ◽  
History Of ◽  
Alternative Routes ◽  
Early Upper

We present evidence of Middle Pleistocene activity in the central Aegean Basin at the chert extraction and reduction complex of Stelida (Naxos, Greece). Luminescence dating places ~9000 artifacts in a stratigraphic sequence from ~13 to 200 thousand years ago (ka ago). These artifacts include Mousterian products, which arguably provide first evidence for Neanderthals in the region. This dated material attests to a much earlier history of regional exploration than previously believed, opening the possibility of alternative routes into Southeast Europe from Anatolia (and Africa) for (i) hominins, potentially during sea level lowstands (e.g., Marine Isotope Stage 8) permitting terrestrial crossings across the Aegean, and (ii) Homo sapiens of the Early Upper Paleolithic (Aurignacian), conceivably by sea.

Kostenki 1 and the early Upper Paleolithic of Eastern Europe

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 307-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
John F. Hoffecker ◽  
Vance T. Holliday ◽  
M.V. Anikovich ◽  
A.E. Dudin ◽  
N.I. Platonova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Early Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Early Upper

The Sunghir Human Hands

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Trinkaus ◽  
Alexandra P. Buzhilova ◽  
Maria B. Mednikova ◽  
Maria V. Dobrovolskaya
Keyword(s):  
Late Pleistocene ◽  
The Body ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Human Hand ◽  
Late Archaic ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Hand Bones ◽  
Early Upper Paleolithic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right And Left Hands

As the interface between the body and technology, in all of its myriad forms, the skeletal hand morphology of Late Pleistocene humans has received increasing attention since the work of Sarasin (1932) and especially Musgrave (1970, 1971, 1973), as paleoanthropologists have documented a series of contrasts between archaic Homo and recent human hand bones (e.g., Vlček 1975; Trinkaus 1983b; Vandermeersch 1991; Niewoehner et al. 1997; Niewoehner 2001, 2008; Crevecoeur 2008; Lorenzo 2007; Trinkaus in press). However, since there were major changes in human technology between the Middle and Upper Paleolithic, and especially with the Mid Upper Paleolithic (MUP), the comparisons of concern should be between late archaic humans and early modern humans. For the Early Upper Paleolithic, the latter include relatively complete hand remains from Nazlet Khater 2 and scattered hand bones from Tianyuan 1 and Brassempouy (Henry-Gambier et al. 2004; Crevecoeur 2008; Shang and Trinkaus 2010). There are then relatively abundant hand remains from the MUP (Verneau 1906; Matiegka 1938; Mallegni et al. 1999; Sládek et al. 2000; Trinkaus 2006c; Trinkaus et al. 2010, 2014), including some immature ones (Mallegni and Parenti 1973; Sergi et al. 1974; Trinkaus et al. 2002b). Yet few of them have been described in detail. In this context, the Sunghir manual remains are described and select aspects are compared across Late Pleistocene samples (principally features that appear to change with the emergence of modern humans). For these descriptions and comparisons, the Sunghir 1 hand bones are paleontologically well preserved. Of the 54 bones potentially present for Sunghir 1 (not counting pollical sesamoid bones), 49 are known, and none sustained more than minor marginal erosion. The originally missing bones include one pisiform bone and four distal phalanges from the ulnar digits. During and after excavation, the right and left hands were mixed, so that the bones have been sorted based on morphology and (for the ulnar middle and distal phalanges) size.

scholarly journals Genesis of Religion: The Origin of Zoolatry According to the Portable Art of Eastern Europe and Siberia

2020 ◽  
pp. 5-27
Author(s):  
Andrey P. Zabiyako ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Initial Period ◽  
Homo Erectus ◽  
Upper Paleolithic ◽  
Russian Plain ◽  
Human Populations ◽  
Modern Humans ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Different Cultures ◽  
Local Cultures

. Eastern Europe and Siberia are the territories of early settlement of different groups of mankind. On the Russian Plain, the first sites of Modern Humans are dated to about 40 ka BP. In Siberia, the Homo erectus groups appear in the Lower Paleolithic. Later, Denisovans, Neanderthals and Modern Humans (CroMagnons) settled here. Modern Humans penetrate Siberia about 45 ka BP. Local groups of Homo populations have created developed cultures that include a wide range of features of behavioral modernity. For local groups of Modern Humans, the appearance of zoomorphic sculptures in the period of about 34 ka BP, in the initial period of the Upper Paleolithic. During the period of the final of Aurignac and the beginning of Gravette, zoomorphic examples of mobile art became a typical phenomenon. The archaeological context of the location of artefacts and the peculiarities of their appearance in a number of cases indicate that zoomorphic objects were attributes of zoolatry. The discovery of the «lion» sculpture in Denisova Cave suggests that zoolatry existed in the culture of the Denisovans. With an age of at least 45 ka BP, the lion figure from Denisova cave is the oldest zoomorphic sculpture. The presence of zoolatry in geographically and anthropologically different cultures indicates that it is naturally formed at the stage of reaching a certain level of development of human populations and is a regular result of anthropo- and cultural genesis. Zoolatry is a universal phenomenon. Along with the general features, local features are inherent in it. In different local groups, zoolatry has specific features due to natural factors, different adaptation strategies and mental differences (different models of imagination). In different cultures, zoolatry was combined in specific combinations with funeral rituals, hunting magic, gender cults and other forms of religion. In different local cultures, there were specific configurations of forms of religion, in which zoolatry, hunting magic, funeral practices and other forms of religion were combined in a peculiar way. Thus, in different local cultures, the morphology of religion had a different configuration. The study of zoolatry of local groups of the «basal Eurasian» lineage demonstrates the variability of the morphology (internal structure) of religion, even in culturally related and chronologically close communities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document