scholarly journals Palaeoenvironmental changes during the Middle and Early Upper-Paleolithic in the UpperTysa Depression, Ukraine (the Sokyrnytsya and Ruban’ sites)

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 275-291
Author(s):  
N. P. Gerasimenko ◽  
L. Kulakovska ◽  
V. Usik ◽  
O. Votiakova

The aim of the study is the reconstruction of palaeoenvironments of the Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic in the Upper-Tysa Depression, related to short-period Upper Pleistocene changes. Stratigraphical, palaeopedological, pollen and archaeological methodologies have been applied in the study of several excavations at the Sokyrnytsya 1 and Ruban’ sites. Intense translocation processes (during formation of Luvisols and Albic Luvisols) during Late Pleistocene warm phases and Holocene, frequently transformed the material of underlying cold-phase non-soil sediments. The last are revealed in the lower horizons of palaeosols by their pollen assemblages, indicative of a periglacial climate, and by the levels with cryoturbations. The pollen succession of the last interglacial is found in the well-developed Kaydaky Luvisol. The presence of beech growing during the second half of the interglacial is a special feature of Transcarpathia. Above, two interstadials and two stadials are revealed in the early glacial. At Sokyrnytsya 1, Middle Palaeolithic first appeared at the very end of the last interglacial (when boreal forests dominated), and it is traced through sediments of the early glacial interstadials. The small collections of artefacts and the absence of specialized features on them do not allow them to be assigned to a specified technological-typological complex. During the interstadials of the early glacial (‘pl1’ and ‘pl3’), Luvisols and Cambisols developed beneath woodland, dominated by pine, but with admixture of deciduous trees, under a south-boreal climate. The cultural level at Ruban’, located in the transitional horizon from the late Pryluky soil to the Uday loess unit, is related to the Quina-type industry. Its analogues are quite common in Western Europe, but up to now have not been known to the east of the Carpathians. At that time, broad-leaved trees disappeared; the climate became cooler and drier. The presence of dry seasons is indicated by a level with abundant Fe-Mn concretions. At Sokyrnytsya 1, the Early Upper Palaeolithic non-Aurignacian cultural level is found in the Vytachiv unit (Middle Pleniglacial, around 38 - 39 ka BP). It is characterized by a technological-typological complex which has its analogue only in Eastern Europe (Kostenki XIV). In Vytachiv times, woodland, dominated by small-leaved trees,alternated with open landscapes of forbs and sedges. The climate was transitional from south-boreal to boreal. The Upper Palaeolithic level, which also is not related to a distinctive culture, is located above the level of the Bug (Late Pleniglacial), cryoturbations which deeply dissect the Vytachiv unit. The presence of both West European and East European archaeological industries and the exceptional palaeoenvironmental features of the studied area demonstrate its importance in the European context.

Author(s):  
Arturo de LOMBERA-HERMIDA ◽  
Xose-Pedro RODRÍGUEZ-ÁLVAREZ ◽  
Alicia AMEIJENDA IGLESIAS ◽  
Mikel DÍAZ RODRÍGUEZ ◽  
undefined Iván REY-RODRÍGUEZ ◽  
...  

Iberia, a natural cul-de-sac peninsula, plays a major role in the study of the Neanderthals demise and its eventual relationship with the spread of Anatomically Modern Humans (AMH) in Europe. The site of Cova Eirós (Galicia, Spain), located in NW Iberia, contains Middle and Upper Palaeolithic levels, based on the cultural remains recovered at the site. No human remains directly associated with those levels were discovered yet. The available radiocarbon dates from the levels 2 (c. 35 ka cal BP, Early Upper Paleolithic) and 3 (c. 41 ka cal BP, Late Middle Paleolithic), point to a late survival of Neanderthal groups in North Iberia and to a relative quick arrival of the AMH, c. 35-36 ka cal BP, with respect to other territories of the Iberian Peninsula. The archaeological record shows clear differences between the Middle and the Upper Palaeolithic occupations, regarding raw-material acquisition, lithic technology and subsistence strategies. The location of Cova Eirós in the westernmost margin of the Cantabrian Rim and in the Atlantic Façade, makes this site a key place to understand the spread of the first AMH and the progressive demise of Neanderthal populations.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Dinnis ◽  
A. Bessudnov ◽  
N. Reynolds ◽  
T. Devièse ◽  
A. Dudin ◽  
...  

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document