P. Y. Pavlov, Institute of Language, Literature and History Komi Scientific Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences

26 Kommunisticheskaya St., Syktyvkar, 167982, GSP-2, Russia

UDC 903.2

E-mail: pavlov.hist@mail.komisc. ru

Introduction

The article considers the materials of Paleolithic sites located on the territory bounded by 58-68° N and 50-60° e. The region includes the northeastern part of the Russian Plain (the eastern part of the basins of the Northern Dvina (Vychegda River) and Mezen (southern Timan), the Pechora and Upper Kama basins) and the western foothills of the Urals (from the northern part of the Middle to the Polar region) (Fig. 1). A significant length in the meridional direction, a complex relief determine the diversity of its natural conditions. The northern part of the territory is located in the tundra and forest-tundra zone, while the southern part is located in the boreal (taiga) forest zone. The north-east of Europe has a well-developed hydrographic network. Rivers belong to the basins of the Arctic Ocean (Pechora, Vychegda and Mezen) and the inner Aral-Caspian (Kama). The main waterways - the Kama River in the southern part of the region and the Pechora River in the northern part-are among the largest rivers in Europe. In the upper reaches of the Kama River (the central part of Perm Krai), the Kama reservoir was created in the mid-50s of the XX century. The territory adjacent to it is a hilly plain with elevations of 200-300 m above sea level, strongly dissected by river valleys and ravines. In the west it is an elevated part of the Russian plain, in the east-the foothills and western ranges of the Ural mountain country. The Pechora basin is a plain that occupies vast areas between the Urals and Timan. The highest elevations are observed on its eastern edge along the Ural Ridge (over 1500 m above sea level).

Paleolithic research in northeastern Europe has a long history. The first Paleolithic monuments were discovered in the region in the late 1930s. [Talitsky, 1940]. Research continued with varying degrees of intensity during the second half of the last century (see Bader, 1964; Kanivets, 1976; Pavlov, 1996). As a result of stationary and exploratory studies in the early 1990s and early years of the current century, the source base of paleolithic studies in northeastern Europe was significantly expanded both in quantitative and qualitative terms (see Pavlov, 2002). New materials made it possible to significantly correct the previously developed concepts of the development of Paleolithic culture in the region (O. N. Bader, V. I. Kanivets).

Paleogeography of the region in the Middle and Late Pleistocene

The growth and destruction of ice sheets that spread from Scandinavia and from the shelves of the Barents and Kara Seas were crucial for the paleogeography of northeastern Europe during the Pleistocene epoch and significantly influenced human settlement

The work was supported by the program of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences "Adaptation of peoples and cultures to changes in the natural environment, social and technological transformations "(P-21) and a grant from The Wenner Gren Foundation, ICRG41 " Colonization of the Northern World "(2002-2006).

page 33

Figure 1. Location of Paleolithic sites in northeastern Europe.

1-Pymva-Shor I; 2-Mamontova Kurya; 3-Byzovaya; 4 - Medvezhya cave; 5 - Ust-Pozhva; 6, 7-Garchi I; 8-Shirovanovo II; 9-Gorka; 10-Ganichata II; 11-Talitsky's parking lot; 12-Cave Log; 13 - Gornaya Talina; 14-Zaozerye; 15-Spruce Forests II; 16-Stolbovaya Grotto; 17-Bliznetsov Grotto; 18-Bolshoy Glukhoy Grotto; a -Early and Middle Paleolithic monuments, b-Upper.

northern latitudes of the continent. At the time of glaciation maxima in the early and Middle Pleistocene, most of the Russian Plain was covered by extensive ice sheets (Velichko et al., 2003).

The results of recent studies have significantly changed our understanding of the paleogeography of the northern part of the region during the last (Valdai) ice cycle. The climate of this long period was more variable than previously thought. During the early Valdai epoch, significant ice sheets were formed on the shelf of the Barents and Kara Seas and apparently spread on the mainland, within the Pechora Lowland (Svendsen et al., 2003). The ice sheet blocked the flow of northern rivers to the Arctic Ocean, and a system of extensive dammed subglacial lakes formed in northeastern Europe between 90,000 and 80,000 BP (Krinner et al., 2004).

During the Middle Valdai (MIS3), northeastern Europe was completely free of ice sheets (perhaps small mountain glaciers remained in the Urals) [Svendsen et al., 2003]. The natural conditions of this era can be described as moderately cold. The Middle Valdai was one of the most favorable periods for the settlement of the region by ancient man.

In the late Valdai (MIS2), the main ice sheets were formed in Scandinavia and on the Barents Sea shelf. The ice shelf did not extend to the mainland, while the Scandinavian ice sheet reached its maximum development in the north-west of the Russian Plain (Svendsen et al., 2003). There are two distinct periods in the late Valdai. The first one (24,000 - 18,000 BP) was the Pleistocene climatic minimum (LGM) (Velichko et al., 2003). Cryogenic deformations of rocks in the form of large permafrost wedges and thick solifluction horizons were observed everywhere, both in the north and in the south of the region, in the sediments of this period. The first half of the late Valdai was dominated by open spaces of cold arid tundra steppe. The species composition of the flora was very poor, dominated by elements of tundra vegetation, which did not form a continuous cover (Paus, Svendsen, and Matiouchkov, 2003). The almost complete absence of bone remains of large herd ungulates dating from this interval (Kosintsev, 2003) also indicates a significant degradation of the vegetation cover. Thus, the natural and climatic conditions of northeastern Europe in the first half of the Late Valdai were extremely unfavorable for the life of Paleolithic people. Its second half (18,000-13,000 years AGO) was generally characterized by a more temperate climate compared to the previous period. [Spiridonova, 1989].

page 34

2. Stone inventory of Early and Middle Paleolithic sites in northeastern Europe.

1-Spruce forests II; 2-8, 11, 12 - Garches I (lower layer); 9, 10-Cave Log.

The fauna of the Middle and second half of the Late Valdai in northeastern Europe included mammoth, rhinoceros, musk ox, bison, horse, reindeer, brown and cave bear, arctic fox, wolf, and hare (Kuzmina, 1971).

Thus, in the Middle and late Pleistocene, sharp changes in paleogeographic settings repeatedly occurred in northeastern Europe. Relatively short warm intervals were followed by extended periods of harsh climatic conditions. The Middle and second half of the Late Valdai were the most favorable periods for the advance of Paleolithic man to the north-east of Europe.

Early and Middle Paleolithic sites

Early Paleolithic. The location of Yelniki II is located in the upper Kama basin (coordinates: 58°0 'N, 56°45' E). In the sediments of the third terrace of the Sylva River, together with the bones of the trogonterian elephant (Archidiscodon trogonterii Pohl.; determined by V. E. Garutta, ZIN RAS), two artifacts were found - chopping (Fig. 2, 1) and flake. Based on stratigraphic and biostratigraphic data, the monument dates back to the Middle Pleistocene, the first half of which is traditionally attributed to the time of the existence of the trogonterian elephant. The location is probably one of the oldest human sites on the territory of the Russian Plain.

Middle Paleolithic. The Garchi I site is located in the upper Kama basin (59°04 'N, 56°07' E). Stratified artefacts from the lower layer of the monument are associated with deposits of the upper part of the Meza soil complex and, according to OSL dating, are about 100 thousand years old. Stone tools are characterized by an absolute predominance of products with two-sided continuous or partial plano-convex processing - bifacial knives with a platform close to the Kielmessergruppe types (Fig. 2, 2, 4, 5), angular and convergent scrapers (fig. 2, 8, 11, 12), 2, 7) and leaf-shaped bifaces (figs. 2, 3, 6). In the tool kit, the most numerous are bifacial obushkovy plano-convex knives and scrapers, as well as angular scrapers and sharp points. Their secondary processing is characterized by intensive flat-convex retouching, often completely modifying the original blank.

The small but expressive complex of the Cave Log locality (58°10' N, 56°31' E), discovered in 1939 by M. V. Talitsky, has similar characteristics. The collection includes segmental, partially bilateral single-edged longitudinal knife scrapers (Figs. 2, 9), sharp tips (Figs. 2, 10), small flat-convex triangular bifaces, angular and convergent scrapers.

page 35
The stone inventory of the Middle Paleolithic localities of the region has a close similarity with each other and fully corresponds to the typological characteristics of the eastern Mikok industry.

Early and Early Upper Paleolithic sites

Mamontova Kurya is located in the Pechora basin (66 ° 34 'N, 62°25' E). The age of the monument, determined from a series of (7) radiocarbon dates, is 34,000-38,000 years. The site is the oldest evidence of human exploration of the Arctic latitudes of Eurasia (Pavlov, Indrelid, Svendsen, 2001). Mammoth bone remains predominate in faunal materials; reindeer, horse, and wolf are represented by single bones. There is no cultural layer on the monument. The finds are redeposited and occur in alluvial deposits. The small collection consists of five stone objects, including a fragment of a biconvex biface (Figs. 3, 1) and an ornamental mammoth tusk. It is impossible to determine the cultural identity of the monument based on the available material. Chronological analogies can be traced to the most expressive find - an ornamental tusk (Svendsen and Pavlov, 2003). The ornament is made up of rows of paired notches located at an angle to each other. Similar ornaments are known from the oldest Upper Paleolithic sites in Europe (D'Errico et al., 2003).

The composition of faunal remains and the topographical position of the Mammoth Kurya are characteristic of natural accumulations of large mammalian bones - "mammoth cemeteries".

The Zaozerye site is located in the upper Kama basin (58°09 'N, 56°59' E). The following radiocarbon dates (AMS) were obtained for the cultural layer of the monument: 33150 ± 410 (Poz-5075); 33450 ± 420 (Poz-5076); 33720 ± 310/ - 280 (GrA-28191); 35140 ± 390/ - 310 (GrA-28187) [Pavlov, Roebroeks, Svendsen, 2004; Pavlov, 2004]. Faunal materials are absolutely dominated by horse remains. Bones of hare, rhinoceros and reindeer were also found. The remains of three short-term sites of small groups of hunters were identified (Pavlov, 2004). The collection of stone and bone tools includes about 2000 items. The primary cleavage technique is characterized by prismatic nuclei. Among the systematic cleavage chips, plates and plates with a parallel cut dominate. Two technical and morphological groups of items are clearly distinguished in the tool kit. The first one consists of tools on prismatic plates of Upper Paleolithic types. These are points (Fig. 3, 9, 15), incisors on the scrap and side with a retouched area (Fig. 3, 10, 13), plates with a variety of marginal and steep scaly retouching, reminiscent of Aurignacian (Fig. 3, 11, 12). The second group includes products of Mousterian morphology: small flat-convex bifaces of oval shape (Fig. 3, 2, 4), a double-sided obushkovy knife of the Kielmesser type (Fig. 3, 3), scrapers and scrapers on flakes with ventral underflow and (or) reduction of the impact hillock of the workpiece (Fig. 3, 5 - 8, 14). Bone tools and horn products are represented by punctures and the preparation of a horn tip. The ornaments found in the cultural layer of the monument belong to the archaic group (Abramova and Sinitsyn, 2002). These are oval pendants made from Unio shells with two drilled holes and round-shaped beads with one drilled hole made from fossil sea lilies (Pavlov, 2004).

According to the characteristics of stone and bone tools and types of jewelry, Zaozerye has common features with monuments of the early and early Upper Paleolithic period of Eastern Europe.

The upper layer of the Garchi I site belongs to the early Upper Paleolithic (Pavlov and Makarov, 1998). The cultural layer of the monument has a radiocarbon (AMS) date of 28750 ± 795 (TUa-941) [Pavlov and Indrelid, 2000]. Bones of horse (mostly), reindeer and mammoth were found. The remains of two above-ground residential structures have been identified (Pavlov and Makarov, 1998). The collection of stone tools includes about 6000 items. The primary cleavage technique is represented by flat nuclei. A specific method of counter-impact splitting of small flint pebbles is also noted. The collection is characterized by a limited set of weapon categories. More than half are triangular bilaterally machined tips and scrapers. The tips are represented by typical forms for the Kostenkov-Strelet culture with a weak notch in the base and a drawn angle of the base (Fig. 3, 16-18). Most of the scrapers are made of short triangular flakes and have a ventral undercut (Fig. 3, 19, 21, 24, 26). There are single scrapers with a dedicated spike on the edge of the blade, carenoid ones (Fig. 3, 23, 25) and double ones with retouching along the longitudinal edges (Fig. 3, 22). Among incisors, only transversal incisors are typologically expressed; most incisor-chipped products are amorphous. The inventory includes chisels with a high notched blade made from plate blanks; flint tiles with edge double-sided retouching; one elongated point (?) with the base treated with scraper retouching. Products of Mousterian morphology are not numerous. 3, 20) and convex scrapers, sometimes with plano-convex processing of the blades.
page 36

3. Stone inventory of monuments of the early and early Upper Paleolithic period in northeastern Europe.

1-Mamontova Kurya; 2 - 15-Zaozerye; 16-26-Garchi I (upper layer); 27-41-Byzovaya.

The monument belongs to the Kostenkov-Strelet culture of the early Upper Paleolithic period of Eastern Europe. Judging by the peculiarities of the distribution of the cultural layer and the composition of stone tools, it is a repeatedly visited hunting camp with a full production cycle for making stone tools.

Byzovaya is one of the northernmost sites of the early Upper Paleolithic in Europe; it is located on the Middle Pechora (65°01 'N, 57°25' E) [Kanivets,

page 37
1976]. The age of the monument, determined from a large series (24) of radiocarbon dates, is approx. 29 thousand years old (Pavlov, 2002). Among the faunal remains, the absolute majority (97.7 %) belongs to the mammoth. Bones of animals of other species (reindeer, horse, wolf, brown bear, musk ox) are isolated. The collection of stone tools includes 278 items. The primary cleavage technique is characterized by three-dimensional (Fig. 3, 34) and planar cleavage nuclei. Two technical and morphological groups are clearly distinguished in the tool kit: Mousterian and Upper Paleolithic. The first one is represented by plano - convex bifaces, including Kielmesser segmented knives (Fig. 3, 27, 28, 32) and various scrapers (Fig. 3, 29); the second one is represented by end scrapers on flakes and lamellar blanks (Fig. 3, 35, 37, 39, 41), karenoid and 3, 36, 38), chisel-shaped tools (Fig. 3, 40), points (Fig. 3, 33), thin leaf-shaped bilaterally processed tips (Fig. 3, 30, 31). Several items made from reindeer antler were found in the parking lot, including a Lingbi-type hoe.

Based on the basic characteristics of the stone inventory structure (a combination of the Upper Paleolithic and Mousterian groups) Byzovaya has similarities with the earlier Zaozerye monument, and in some types of stone tools - with the simultaneous Garchi I site. A number of features of the stone inventory, the composition of faunal remains, and the topographical position allow us to interpret the monument as a short-term parking lot in the "mammoth cemetery" [Ibid.].

The Bliznitsov Grotto probably belongs to the early Upper Paleolithic (Shcherbakova, 2001). The collection of the monument (approx. 300 copies) is characterized by the predominance of volumetric splitting techniques. High-shaped scrapers made of massive flint fragments and end scrapers on plates were found. The cultural identity of the monument is unclear.

Late and Final Paleolithic sites

Late Paleolithic. Five Late Paleolithic sites (Talitsky, Ganichata II, Shirovanovo II, Medvezhya Cave, and Bolshoy Glukhoy Grotto)are currently known in northeastern Europe [Pavlov, 1996; Shcherbakova, 1994; Makarov, 2002], which relate to the chronological interval of 19,000-16,000 years AGO. After the discovery of sites of the early Upper Paleolithic period in the region, which sharply differ from the Late Paleolithic in terms of technical and typological parameters of stone and bone tools, the characteristic features of this group of monuments became more prominent. They are as follows. The source of raw materials was mainly alluvial pebbles. The primary treatment was based on volume and plane splitting. The nuclei are prismatic (Fig. 4, 1), flattened - prismatic with longitudinal-transverse cleavage, conical and end-shaped; secondary nuclei were used for the manufacture of plates and microplates. The technique of undergrowth of the cornice of the impact platform of prismatic nuclei is characteristic. Large complexes necessarily have flat nuclei (Fig. 4, 2). The leading type of chipping is plates with a length of 3 - 5 cm with an irregular cut, there are also large plates and microplates. Flakes and plates were used as blanks in approximately equal proportions. A special feature of secondary processing is the widespread use of various kinds of spikes and protrusions in the design of tools.

The tool kit includes end scrapers on elongated flakes, plates and their fragments, including high-shaped ones (Fig. 4, 3 - 7, 9 - 11), small rounded scrapers on flakes (fig. 4, 8), lateral, transverse and angular incisors (Fig. 4, 12 -15), chisel-shaped tools (Fig. 4, 16), plates with a blunted back (Fig. 4, 17), with edge retouching (Fig. 4, 18, 19), truncated plates (Fig. 4, 20), awl-shaped and toothed products (Fig. 4, 21). The inventory must include pebble tools-choppers and choppers. Large unifaces and scrapers with straight convex and concave blades are also typical (Figs. 4, 22, 23). Bone inventory is relatively poor. Two - sided and one-sided insert tips and products with grooves, in some cases made of mammoth tusk, are crucial (Figs. 4, 24). Scrapers made from fragments of large tubular bones were found on some monuments. Jewelry is represented by bone beads-penetrations and shell pendants. Ornamental items were found - bone plates and slate tiles with applied longitudinal and transverse lines forming a rhombic grid. A unique flint figurine of a mammoth found at the Shirovanovo II parking lot is among them.

The final Paleolithic. The final Paleolithic in the region includes Pym Shor I, Gornaya Talitsa, Stolbovoy Grotto, and the third layer of Bolshoy Glukhoy Grotto, Ust-Pozhva, and Gorka (Pavlov and Melnichuk, 1987; Shcherbakova, 2001; Makarov, 1997). They date from the Late Glacial and Early Holocene periods (11,000-9,500 (?) BP).

Pebble material was used as raw material. The primary treatment was based on volume and plane splitting. The nuclei are prismatic, one-and two-site (figs. 4, 25, 26), and meet-

page 38

4. Stone and bone inventory of Late and Final Paleolithic sites in northeastern Europe.

2, 17 -1 , Ganichata II; 3 - 16, 18, 19, 21 - 23 - Shirovanovo II (after Makarov, 2001); 20, 24 - Medvezhya Cave; 25, 26, 34, 44, 45 - Gornaya Talitsa; 27-33, 36-38, 46-Ust-Pozhva (by: [Makarov, 1997]); 35, 39 - 43 - Gorka (based on [Makarov, 2001]).

there are conical, end and flattened-prismatic nuclei, much less often - flat nuclei. Among systematic cleavage chips, plates with a non-parallel cut are dominant; plates and microplates have a regular cut; plates removed from planar cleavage nuclei are present in a small number. Guns were made mainly from plates; at the same time, in the inventory

page 39
the share of products made from flakes and natural billets is quite significant. The tool set is represented by end scrapers on plates, rounded ones on flakes and natural blanks (figs. 4, 27-31), incisors (side, corner, middle) (figs. 4, 36-38), awl-shaped and beak-shaped products (Fig. 4, 32, 33, 44), truncated plates (fig. 4, 39, 40, 42, 43, 45), plates with a blunted back and with a blunted back and truncated ends, beveled points, chisel-shaped tools (Fig. 4, 34), scrapers (Fig. 4, 41), pebble tools-choppers and quartzite axes with interception 4, 46). 4, 35) and root-less arrowheads on plates with ventral retouching are isolated. A sandstone tile with an engraved image of an elk's head was found at the Gornaya Talitsa site (Pavlov and Melnichuk, 1987).

Thus, the composition of raw materials, the technique of primary splitting, the set of categories of tools, and individual types of products show similarities between the late and Late Paleolithic complexes of northeastern Europe. At the same time, there are some differences in the collections of monuments of the final Paleolithic. The main feature is the presence of plates with a blunted back and treated ends, high trapezoids, beveled points, rootless tips with ventral retouching and axes with interception.

Late Paleolithic monuments with identical structural characteristics of stone inventory complexes are widely distributed throughout the Ural region: on the Middle Kama River, on the eastern and western slopes of the Northern, Middle and Southern Urals. These include Drachevo (Melnichuk and Pavlov, 1985), Bobylek Grotto (Volokitin and Shirokov, 1997), Kulyurttamak (Nekhoroshoe and Girya, 2004), Baislantash Caves (Kotov, 2004), Kapova (Shchelinsky, 1997), Ignatievskaya (Petrin, 1992), and Gari site (Serikov, 2000). Researchers of these monuments note the similarity of their stone and bone inventory with the materials of the sites of the Upper Kama basin and emphasize their intermediate cultural and chronological position between the Late Paleolithic (Talitsky, Shirovanovo II) and Late Paleolithic (Gornaya Talitsa) complexes of northeastern Europe (Nekhoroshev and Girya, 2004; Kotov, 2004; Shchelinsky, 1997; Petrin, 1997). 1992].

Thus, in the stone inventory of almost all Late and Late Paleolithic sites in northeastern Europe and the Urals, the general principles of raw material selection, nuclear cleavage, and tool production can be traced. A close similarity is also observed in the typology of stone and bone tools. Certain differences in the stone inventory of sites are insignificant and can easily be explained by functional variability and the degree of study of specific monuments.

Discussion of materials

As a result of research conducted in the north-east of Europe in the late 90s of the XX century and the beginning of the current century, a number of important discoveries were made. For the first time in the region, Early Paleolithic sites were identified, the presence of archaeological sites of the Mousterian era was confirmed and their age was determined, monuments of the early and early Upper Paleolithic were found, and new data on the late and Final Paleolithic were obtained. All this allowed us to draw a number of conclusions about the main stages of development of the Paleolithic culture in the north-east of Europe.

The only location of the Early Paleolithic of Yelniki II yielded isolated artefacts that have not been studied permanently, and therefore it is clearly premature to draw any conclusions about the appearance of regional Early Paleolithic sites.

Monuments of the Mousterian era - the lower layer of the Garchi I site and the Cave Log site-have significant similarities in stone inventory characteristics with those of Eastern Europe's Mikok. In the tool sets of the Eastern European mycoc, there are always two-sided symmetrical and asymmetric points and scoops, often with edges; simple and convergent scoops, often with various ventral refinements. The technological basis of this industry is flake splitting and plano - convex two-sided processing of tools (Chabai, 2004). According to the typological parameters, the stone inventory of the Middle Paleolithic localities of the north-east of Europe fully fits into the given characteristic. These localities probably mark the northeastern boundary of the range of the East European mycocene at the early (?) stage of its existence.

Four sites in northeastern Europe belong to the Early and early Upper Paleolithic period (38,000-28,000 years AGO). The oldest sites in this group are the sites of Mamontov Kurya (38,000 - 34,000 years ago) and Zaozerye (35,000 - 33,000 years ago). In Mamontovaya Kurya, artifacts are extremely small, so it is impossible to determine the cultural affiliation of the monument.

The age of the Zaozerye site, the features of stone and bone tools, and the types of jewelry allow us to confidently attribute it to the Early Upper Paleolithic period (Sinitsyn, 2003; Vishnyatski and Nehoroshev, 2004). This stone industry, despite a number of differences in the typology of the tool set, is close to the complexes of the early and early Upper Paleolithic of Eastern Europe. Its most important feature is the presence of two-sided products with plano-convex processing, which have analogues in the materials of Mousterian monuments of Eastern European Mycoc. At the same time for parking inventory

page 40
such defining features of Upper Paleolithic plants are characteristic as volumetric primary splitting aimed at obtaining large plates, large plates with steep scaly retouching, double-pointed points on massive plates, incisors with a retouched platform and high-shaped scrapers. The Zaozerye site is one of the earliest Upper Paleolithic sites in Eastern Europe, where a homogeneous industry combines Mousterian and Upper Paleolithic technologies.

In the center of the Russian Plain, the early stages of the Upper Paleolithic include sites of the ancient chronological group (36,000 - 32,000 BC) of the Kostenkovsko-Borshchevsky district on the upper Don. These are Kostenki XVII (layer II) and XIV (layer IVb) (Synitsyn, 2003), and the oldest monuments of the Kostenkov-Strelet culture are Kostenki XII (layer III) and XI (layer V) (Anikovich, 1997; Sinitsyn, 2003). The stone inventory of the second layer of Kostenok XVII is completely devoid of any archaic features. The industry is characterized by the technique of volumetric splitting. Products with secondary processing are represented by end scrapers on plates with non-brushed edges and a few elongated scrapers of high shape. The main part of the collection consists of lateral oblique incisors. There are chisel-shaped tools and points. Microplates and plates with a blunted back are presented. The Upper Paleolithic group of stone tools of the Zaozerye site has some similarities with this industry. However, it is, in my opinion, largely concerned with technology; the typological shape of the industry is different, and it is impossible to combine them into any cultural grouping.

For a small collection of stone tools from layer IVB of the Kostenki XIV site (age from 14 to 32-36 thousand years) [Sinitsyn, 2002] is also characterized by the lamellar technique of primary cleavage with the use of bulk, flat, end, and radial cleavage nuclei. The typological composition is determined by a combination of scrapers, dihedral incisors, chisel-shaped tools and bilaterally processed products of oval and sub-triangular shape [Ibid.]. The types of tools characteristic of Zaozerye are also absent, with the exception of oval bifaces, which still have a different morphology. It should be noted that the stone inventory from layer IVb Kostenok XIV is not numerous and, possibly, later with the replenishment of the collection, the similarity of these sites may increase.

The monuments under consideration are united by one very important feature - the presence of jewelry. In terms of manufacturing technique, the products from the second layer of Kostenok XVII are most similar to Zaozersk ones. Single-sided taper drilling was used in both parking lots. Pendants made of belemnite, flattened pebbles, fossilized shells, corals, and arctic fox tusks are widely represented in the bones of the 17th century (Paleolit..., 1982). If here the decorations retain the natural outlines of the workpiece, then in the Zaozerye parking lot, the pendants and beads were specially given an oval or rounded shape. This involves a more complex manufacturing process. First, a blank of the desired configuration was prepared, and then the product itself was made. The types of jewelry are also different. In the parking lot of Kostenki XVII, all suspensions have one hole, and in Zaozerye there are also two located in a row.

The use of fossil shells as ornaments is noted for layer IVb Kostenok XIV. However, they were not processed; holes were made in them, rather than drilled, as at the Zaozerye site (Sinitsyn, 2002).

There is less similarity with the oldest monuments of the Kostenkov-Strelet culture of the Upper Don. It is expressed only in the presence of objects of Mousterian morphology with flat-convex retouching. The technical and typological composition of the collections varies. The Zaozerye site is particularly distinguished from these monuments by its well-developed plate technology, the absence of biface tips, the presence of jewelry, bone and horn tools.

Thus, the Zaozerye site has no direct analogues among the monuments of the same age in the center of the Russian Plain and can be distinguished as a special cultural type.

In the north-east of Europe, the complex of the much later Byzovaya site has common features with the Zaozersk industry (Pavlov, 2004). First of all, they are manifested in the same structure of stone tools, consisting of two technical and morphological groups of products - Mousterian and Upper Paleolithic. The first one is represented by Kielmesser knives and scrapers, the second one is represented by tools on plates: scrapers, incisors and points. The proximity between the monuments can also be traced in the strategy of exploitation of raw materials. Both sites are marked by the widespread use of flint from indigenous deposits located at a fairly significant distance (up to 60 km at the Byzovaya site) from them.

The Garchi I (Upper layer) and Byzovaya sites belong to the end of the Early Upper Paleolithic (29,000 - 28,000 BP) in the region. Garchi I, without a doubt, represents the Kostenkov-Strelet culture. Numerous stone tools (over 5 thousand copies) allow us to determine the position of the monument in the system of its periodization, developed by M. V. Anikovich [1991]. There are three chronological stages in the development of this culture: early-36,000-32,000 BP (layer III of Kostenok XII and Kostenki VI), middle - 32,000 - 28,000 (in Kostenki is represented by materials of layer V of Kostenok I and a small collection-

page 41
mi from layer V of Kostenok XI and layer Ia of Kostenok XII) and the final one - 27,000-25,000 BP (Sungir, Biryuchya Balka). Chronologically, the Garchi I site belongs to the middle stage. According to M. V. Anikovich, its industry is typologically closest to the complex of layer V Kostenok I, which corresponds to the chronology of monuments [Ibid.]. In general, I agree with this opinion, but I would like to note a number of important features of the collection from the Garchi I site, which do not fully fit into the typological characteristics of the middle stage of the Kostenkov-Strelet culture.

In the technique of primary processing on the monument, along with the planar splitting typical for this culture, a special technique for obtaining standardized blanks is distinguished - counter-impact splitting of rounded flint pebbles, which is completely unknown on other Kostenkov-Streletsky monuments. This specificity, however, can be explained by the peculiarities of the raw material base of the parking lot.

The gun set from the Garchi I monument shows a combination of types typical of all three chronological stages of the Kostenkov-Strelet culture. With early stage complexes (Kostenki XII, layer III) this industry is brought together by the presence of such rare products as massive chisels with a transverse notched blade, points with a base treated with scraper retouching, and flint tiles with a straight blade decorated with double - sided retouching; middle (Kostenki I, layer V)- some types of tips and the presence of transversal incisors in their collections; later (Sungir) - some types of tips and the presence of transversal incisors in their collections. elongated triangular shape with a straight base tips, small rounded scrapers. The predominant types of products at the Garchi I site are typical of the middle and final stages of development of the Kostenkov-Strelet culture.

Garchi I is significantly distinguished from the monuments of the Kostenkov group by the presence of "Aurignacian" scrapers - carenoid; double with retouching along the longitudinal edges; with a spike at the corner of the blade. Similar tools are presented in the collection of Sungir and Byzovaya sites.

The collection of the Pechora monument of the early Upper Paleolithic Byzovaya is distinguished by a significant originality both in the composition and typological characteristics of stone tools. The primary cleavage technique is characterized by bulk and flat cleavage nuclei. In the tool kit, two technical and morphological groups of products are clearly distinguished-Mousterian and Upper Paleolithic. The first one is represented by flat-convex bifaces, including butt-shaped segmental knives of the Kielmesser type, and various scrapers, including classic ones of the Kina type. The closest analogs of these Mousterian tools are found in the materials of monuments of the Staroselskaya facies of the Crimean Mikok tradition (Staroselye, Kabazi II, etc.) (Chabai, 2004): segmental knives with a butt, asymmetric sub-triangular bifaces, and sub-trapezoidal three-edged scrapers with a uniform treatment. The Upper Paleolithic group is represented by end scrapers on lamellar blanks, carenoid and pointed scrapers, angular incisors on plates, large chisel-shaped tools, points, and thin leaf-shaped bilaterally processed tips.

As already noted, the basic characteristics of the structure of stone tools - a combination of Mousterian and Upper Paleolithic groups of products - Bizovaya has similarities with the earlier Zaozerye site. At the same time, some types of tools find analogies in the materials of the Kostenkov-Strelet culture. These are flint tiles with double-sided retouching, a two-pointed plano-convex point and large knives of a semi-lunar shape with a convex, bilaterally processed blade. There is also a similarity with the monuments of the late stage of the Kostenkov-Strelet culture, especially with the Sungir site. Similar to Sungir scrapers on short plate blanks with a straight blade. Both sites feature Lingbi-type horn hoes (Bader, 1978). In the stone inventory of the Byzovaya site, there are also typical "Aurignacian" tools - karenoid and pointed scrapers, large chisel-shaped products. Their presence in combination with the types of tools characteristic of the Kostenkov-Strelet culture brings the Bizova complex closer to the Garchi I industry. However, despite the noted similarity, it is illegal to refer this site to the number of monuments of the Kostenkov-Strelet culture.K. in its inventory there are no such types of products that define this culture, such as triangular, bilaterally processed tips and sub-triangular scrapers with ventral retouching. In general, the industry of the Byzovaya parking lot is unique and can be separated into a separate cultural unit, but taking into account the specific type of monument, this conclusion needs additional justification.

The small collection of the Gemini grotto does not allow for a full-fledged comparative analysis.

Thus, the early and early Upper Paleolithic of northeastern Europe is characterized by industries that combine the characteristics of the Mousterian and Upper Paleolithic traditions. Researchers have repeatedly suggested that the Mousterian and Mycocene communities of Eastern Europe are involved in the genesis of the Upper Paleolithic cultures of this region (Anikovich and Rogachev, 1984; Anikovich, 2006; Koen and Stepanchuk, 2001; Vishnyatski and Nehoroshev, 2004). Parking materials

page 42
The northern regions of Eastern Europe are an additional argument in favor of this hypothesis.

Late Paleolithic sites in northeastern Europe date back to the second half of the Late Valdai (19,000-16,000 BP). These sites include Talitsky, Shirovanovo II, Medvezhya Cave, and Ganichata P. Their materials show the greatest similarity to the Middle stage complexes (from 27-24 to 18-17 thousand BP) of the Late Paleolithic of Siberia. This stage is characterized by the emergence of the microplate industry (Vasil'ev, 2000; Lisitsyn and Svezhentsev, 1997; Zenin, 2002). Geographically, the Early Spartan sites of this cultural and chronological group located in Western Siberia are closest to the Late Paleolithic sites of Northeastern Europe: Shestakovo (levels 24-17), Achinskaya, Tomskaya, and Evalga (Lisitsyn and Svezhentsev, 1997; Derevyanko et al., 2000; Zenin, 2002). All of them have common features in the stone inventory, which are clearly recorded in the splitting technique and the combination of the main categories of tools. The collections include planar, prismatic, and end-face nuclei of small sizes. The main billet was plates with a length of 2 - 5 cm. Among the products with secondary processing, there are plates with edge retouching, including: forming recesses; truncated plates; end scrapers on plates and lamellar flakes, including high-shaped ones, and rounded ones on flakes; chisel-shaped products; pebble tools (Lisitsyn and Svezhentsev, 1997; Zenin, 2002; Akimova, 2006). Differences between the complexes are noted in the details of the secondary finishing of tools and their typological diversity.

As already noted, the Late Paleolithic rocks of northeastern Europe are also characterized by prismatic, flattened-prismatic with longitudinal-transverse cleavage, and flat cores. The leading type of chipping is plates with a length of 3 - 5 cm. Flakes and plates were used as blanks in approximately equal proportions. The tool kit includes end scrapers on elongated flakes, plates and fragments of plates, including high-shaped ones; small rounded scrapers on flakes; side, transverse and angular incisors; chisel-shaped tools; plates with recesses formed by edge retouching; with a blunted back; truncated; pebble tools. The presence of such a type of products as plates with retouching applied from the back on the site of the impact pad is indicative (see Figs. 4, 20). According to V. N. Zenin (2002), such a design method is quite specific for the Siberian Paleolithic and occurs at a number of locations of the "Maltese" circle.

Thus, despite a number of differences, the main one being the large number (up to 20% of the tool set) and typological diversity of incisors at sites in north-eastern Europe, similarities in the complexes prevail. It can be assumed that after obtaining additional data, the Late Paleolithic industries of the north-east of Europe will be included in the circle of Siberian small-plate ones. V. N. Zenin also notes a significant similarity between the microindustrial complexes of Western Siberia and the Urals in the chronological interval 25(27) - 18(16) thousand years AGO [Ibid.].

Probably, at the end of the Late Valdai, the Ural regional culture was formed on the basis of Late Paleolithic complexes (Talitsky, Shirovanovo II, Medvezhya Cave, Gari). It can include such sites as the Bolshoy Glukhoy grottoes, Bobylek, Kulyurttamak, Baislantash, Kapova and Ignatievskaya caves. Their age is 13-15 thousand years. The final stage of the culture's existence is characterized by the monuments Gornaya Talitsa, Stolbovoy Grotto, Ust-Pozhva II-VI, Gorka, Pymva-Shor I and the third cultural layer of the Bolshoy Glukhoy grotto. They probably belong to the Late Glacial and Early Holocene (11,000-9,500 (?) BP).

Conclusion

The data obtained in the course of many years of research allow us to identify the features of the development of the Paleolithic culture in the north-east of Europe. The region is marked by a "cluster" distribution of Paleolithic sites typical of the Eurasian Paleolithic (Sinitsyn and Praslov, 1997). The main area of concentration of localities (from Early to Late Paleolithic) is a rather limited section of the upper Kama Valley from the mouth of the Inva River to the lower reaches of its major tributary, the Chusovaya River. This distribution is probably largely due to the natural and geographical conditions of this section of the hilly-rugged strip of the western slope of the Ural Mountains. Here, in a relatively small area, vast plains, hilly foothills and low mountains intersected by valleys of large rivers are combined. The mosaic of landscapes created particularly attractive conditions for a variety of herbivorous animal species and, consequently, for primitive hunters. It should be emphasized that during the periods of sharp climate changes characteristic of the Middle and late Pleistocene, the diversity of biotopes should have ensured the preservation of relatively favorable conditions, at least in part of this territory.

The Paleolithic period of northeastern Europe is represented by monuments of probably all chronological divisions of this epoch. At present, it is established that the first sites in the south of the region, in the Upper Kama basin, appeared in the Middle Pleistocene. In the extreme northeast, in the Pechora basin, the earliest

page 43
Paleolithic sites date back to the second half of the Late Pleistocene, the Middle Valdai.

The periodization of the Upper Paleolithic in northeastern Europe has one special feature: in this territory, monuments of the initial and early (38,000 - 28,000 BP), late and final (18,000 - 9,500 BP) Paleolithic have been identified, while sites of the Middle pore (27,000 - 20,000 BP) have not yet been found. Thus, the development of the Upper Paleolithic culture in northeastern Europe was probably intermittent, which is undoubtedly due to the geographical location of the region near the center of the Late Valdai glaciation.

The most important feature is also the distinct differences between the Early Upper Paleolithic and Late Paleolithic industries. The former are characterized by the presence of two technical and morphological groups of products-Mousterian and Upper Paleolithic. Culturally, these industries are similar to those of the same age in the center of the Russian Plain. The Late and Late Paleolithic sites (19000-9500 (?) years ago) have different cultural features. In the second half of the Late Valdai period in northeastern Europe and the Urals, industries probably close to the Early Sarganian small - plate rocks of Western Siberia became widespread. On their basis, at the end of the late Valdai, the first regional Paleolithic culture was formed - the Ural one, which existed in the region until the early Holocene.

Materials from Paleolithic sites indicate that the north-east of Europe in the Upper Paleolithic was inhabited by those primitive groups whose life support system was based on non-specialized hunting of large herd ungulates and was characterized by high population mobility. A specific method of adaptation to the natural and climatic conditions of the north of the region is reflected in the emergence of a special type of Paleolithic sites - on natural burials of large mammals ("mammoth cemeteries") - unknown outside the subarctic zone of Eurasia. It is significant that they existed in the north-east of Europe, in Western and Eastern Siberia (Derevyanko et al., 2000; Zenin, 2002) throughout the Upper Paleolithic, which is obviously related to the peculiarities of the natural environment of the subarctic latitudes of the continent.

List of literature

Abramova Z. A., Sinitsyn A. A. Iskusstvo v kontekste problemy periodizatsii verkhnego paleolita Kostenok [Art in the context of the problem of periodization of the Upper Paleolithic of Kostenok]. St. Petersburg: IIMK RAS, 2002, pp. 167-177.

Akimova E. V." Srednyaya stagiya "pozdnogo paleolita v prieniseyskoi Sibiri [The "Middle Stage" of the Late Paleolithic in Yenisei Siberia]. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 2006, vol. 1, pp. 94-96.

Anikovich M. V. Rannaya pora verkhnego paleolita Vostochnoi Evropy: Avtoref. dis. ... d-ra ist. nauk [Early time of the Upper Paleolithic of Eastern Europe. - SPb., 1991. - 40 p.

Anikovich M. V. Problema stanovleniya verkhnepaleoliticheskoi kul'tury i cheloveka sovremennogo vida v svete dannykh po paleolitu Vostochnoi Evropy [The problem of formation of the Upper Paleolithic culture and a modern-day human in the light of data on the Paleolithic of Eastern Europe]. Chelovek populates the planet Earth: Global settlement of Hominids, Moscow: Nauka, 1997, pp. 143-155.

Anikovich M. V. Novye dannye o stanovlenii verkhnego paleolita na territorii Vostochnoi Evropy [New data on the formation of the Upper Paleolithic in Eastern Europe]. Novosibirsk: Publishing House of IAET SB RAS, 2006, vol. 1, pp. 97-99.

Rogachev A. N. Anikovich M. V., Late Paleolithic of the Russian Plain and Crimea / / Paleolithic of the USSR. - Moscow: Nauka, 1984. - pp. 162-271. - (Archeology of the USSR).

Bader O. N. Paleolith of the Urals and settlement of the North, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1964, 14 p.

Bader O. N. Sungir-Upper Paleolithic site. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1978, 254 p. (in Russian)

Volokitin A.V., Shirokov V. N. Verkhnepaleoliticheskaya stoyanka v grote Bobylek (Srednyj Ural) [Upper Paleolithic site in the Bobylek grotto (Srednyj Ural)]. Yekaterinburg: Institute of History and Archeology. Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1997, pp. 8-15.

Derevyanko, A. P., Zenin, V. N., Leshchinsky, S. V., and Mashchenko, E. N., Features of mammoth bone accumulation near the Shestakovo site in Western Siberia, in Archeology, Ethnography, and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2000. - N 3 (3). - p. 42-55.

Zenin V. N. Osnovnye etapy osvoeniya Zapadnoy Sibiri paleoliticheskim chelovek [The main stages of development of Western Siberia by Paleolithic man]. - 2002. - N 4 (12). - p. 22-44.

Kanivets V. I. Paleolith of the extreme North-East of Europe. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1976, 94 p. (in Russian)

Stepanchuk, V. M. Koen, V. Yu., Transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic in Eastern Europe: Problems of taxonomy and chronostratigraphy, Vita antiqua. - Kiev, 2001. - N 3/4. - p. 78-107.

Kosintsev P. A. Large mammals of the Urals in the Pleistocene and Holocene / / Quaternary Paleozoology in the Urals. Yekaterinburg: Publishing House Yekaterinburg, State University, 2003, pp. 55-72.

Kotov V. G. Studies of the Paleolithic layer in the Bayslantash cave (Akbutinskaya): Preliminary results. archeol. to lead. - 2004. - Issue 5. - p. 36-55.

Kuzmina I. E. Formirovanie teriofauna Severnogo Urala v pozdnem antropogene [Formation of theriofauna of the Northern Urals in the late anthropogene].

Svezhentsev Yu. S. Lisitsyn N. F., Radiocarbon chronology of the Upper Paleolithic of Northern Asia / / Radiocarbon chronology of the Paleolithic of Eastern Europe and Northern Asia: Problems and Prospects. St. Petersburg: IIMK RAS, 1997, pp. 67-108.

Makarov, E. Yu., The Final Paleolithic of the Kama Region in the light of new data, in Komi-Permyaks and the Finno-Ugric World. Subbotina-Permyak Publ., 1997, pp. 102-117.

Makarov E. Yu. Paleolit Priuralya - itogi i perspektivy [Paleolithic of the Urals: results and prospects]. Oborinskie chteniya: Mat-ly arkheol. konf. - Perm, 2002, pp. 3-9.

Melnichuk A. F., Pavlov N. Yu. New Paleolithic location in the Middle Kama region.-

page 44
key monuments of the Northern Urals. - Syktyvkar: IYALI Komi phil. AN SSSR, 1985. - p. 7-14. - (MAESV; issue 9).

Nekhoroshoe P. E., Girya E. Yu. Some results of studies of the Upper Paleolithic site Kulyurt-Tamak (Southern Urals). archeol. to lead. - 2004. - Issue 5. - p. 12-35.

Paleolithic monuments of the North-east of the European part of Russia. Syktyvkar: IYALI Komi Scientific Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1996. 200 p.

Pavlov P. Yu. Ancient stages of settlement of the North of Eurasia: North-East of Europe in the Paleolithic era // Northern Archaeological Congress, September 9-14, 2002, Khanty-Mansiysk: Dokl. Yekaterinburg; Khanty-Mansiysk: Akademkniga Publ., 2002, pp. 192-209.

Pavlov P. Y. Early Upper Paleolithic period in the North-East of Europe (based on the materials of the Zaozerye site). Syktyvkar, 2004, 36 p. (Scientific report / Komi Scientific Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; issue 467).

Pavlov P. Yu., Makarov E. Yu. Garchi I - pamyatnik kostenkovsko-streletskoy kul'tury na severo-vostoke Evropy [Garchi I-a monument to the Kostenkov-Strelet culture in the North-East of Europe]. Syktyvkar: IYALI Komi Scientific Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1998, pp. 4-17. (MAESV; issue 15).

Pavlov P. Yu., Melnichuk A. F. Gornaya Talitsa site on the Chusovaya River and the problem of the early Mesolithic of the Upper Kama Region. Pamyatniki drevnoi istorii Udmurtii [Monuments of the Ancient History of Udmurtia]. - Ustinov: Scientific Research Institute at Sov. min. Удмурт. ASSR, 1987, pp. 5-17.

Paleolith of the Kostenkovsko-Borshchevsky district on the Don, Nauka Publ., 1982, 283 p.

Petrin V. T. Paleolithic sanctuary in the Ignatievskaya cave in the Southern Urals. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1992, 205 p. (in Russian)

Serikov Yu. B. Paleolithic and Mesolithic of the Middle Trans-Urals. - Nizhny Tagil: Nizhnetag State Pedagogical University. un-t Publ., 2000, 271 p. (in Russian)

Sinitsyn, A. A., Lower cultural layers of Kostenok-14 (Markina Gora) (excavations in 1998-2001), Osobennosti razvitiya verkhnego paleolita Vostochnoi Evropy. St. Petersburg: IIMK RAS, 2002, pp. 219-236.

Sinitsyn A. A., Praslov N. D. Radiocarbon chronology of the Paleolithic of Eastern Europe and Northern Asia: Problems and prospects. St. Petersburg: IIMK RAS, 1997, 141 p. (in Russian)

Spiridonova E. A. Osnovnye etapy razvitiya rastitelnogo pokrova pozdnego pleistocene vnelednikovoi zony Vostochnoi Evropy [The main stages of development of the Late Pleistocene vegetation cover of the extraglacial zone of Eastern Europe]. Problemy kul'turnoi adaptatsii v epokhu verkhnego paleolita, Moscow: Nauka, 1989, pp. 40-43.

Talitsky, M. V., Paleolithic site on the Chusovaya River, Byul. Commissions for the Study of the Quaternary period. - 1940. - N 6/7. - P. 136-140.

Chabay V. P. The Middle Paleolithic of the Crimea. Simferopol: Shlyakh Publ., 2004, 321 p. (in Russian)

Shchelinsky V. E. Paleogeographic environment and archaeological complex of the Upper Paleolithic sanctuary of Shulgan-Tash (Kapovoy). - Ufa: Institute of Historical Languages. and lit. UNC RAS, 1997, pp. 29-38.

Shcherbakova T. P. Materials of the Upper Paleolithic site of Talitsky (Ostrovskaya). Yekaterinburg: Institute of History and Archeology. Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1994, 64 p.

Shcherbakova, T. P., Stone inventory of the Stolbovoi and Bliznytsovoi grottoes against the background of Paleolithic sites in the Urals, Problemy pervobytnoi kul'tury. Ufa: Gilem Publ., 2001, pp. 156-169.

D'Errico F., Julien M., Liolios D., Vanhaeren M., Baffler D. Many awls in our arguments. Bone Tool manufacture and use in the Chatelperronian and Aurignacien Pevels of the Grotte du Renne at Arcy-sur-Cure // The Chronology of the Aurignacian and the Transitional Technocomplexes: Dating, Stratigraphies, Cultural Implications / Eds. J. Zilhao, F. D'Errico. - Lisboa: Institute Portugues de Arqueologia, 2003. - P. 247 - 272. - (Trabalhos de Archaeologia: N 33).

Krinner G., Mangerud J., Jakobsson M., Crucifix M., Ritz C., Svendsen J. -I. Enhanced ice sheet growth in Eurasia owing to adjacent ice-dammed lakes // Nature. - 2004. - Vol. 427. - P. 429 - 431.

Paus A., Svendsen J. -I., Matiouchkov A. Pate Weichselian (Valdaian) and Holocene vegetation and environmental history of the northern Timan Ridge, European Arctic Russia // Quaternary Science Reviews. - 2003. - Vol. 22. - P. 2285 - 2302.

Pavlov P., Indrelid S. Human Occupation in Northeastern Europe during the period 35000 - 18000 // Hunters of the Golden Age: The Mid Upper Palaeolithic of Eurasia 30000 - 20000 BP / Eds. W. Roebroeks et al. - Leiden: Leiden University, 2000. - P. 165 - 172.

Pavlov P., Indrelid S., Svendsen J. -I. Human Presence in the European Arctic nearly 40,000 years ago // Nature. - 2001. - Vol. 413. - P. 64 - 67.

Pavlov P., Roebroeks W., Svendsen J. -I. The Pleistocene Colonization of Northeastern Europe: A Report on Recent Research // Journal of Human Evolution. - 2004. - Vol. 47, N 1/2. - P. 3 - 17.

Sinitsyn A. The most ancient sites of Kostenki in the context of the Initial Upper Palaeolithic of Northern Eurasia // The Chronology of the Aurignacian and of the Transitional Technocomplexes: Dating, Stratigraphies, Cultural Implications/Eds. J. Zilhao, F. D'Errico - Lisboa: Institute Portugues de Arqueologia, 2003. - P. 89 - 108. - (Trabalhos de Arqueologia; N 33).

Svendsen J. -I., Gataullin V., Mangerud J., Polyak L. The glacial history of the Barents and Kara Sea region // Quaternary Glaciations: Extent and Chronology / Eds. J. Ehlers, P. Gibbard. -Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2003. - Vol. 1: Europe. - P. 234 - 311.

Svendsen J. -I., Pavlov P. Mamontovaya Kurya - An Enigmatic, Nearly 40,000 Years Old Palaeolithic Site in the Russian Arctic // The Chronology of the Aurignacian and of the Transitional Technocomplexes: Dating, Stratigraphies, Cultural Implications / Eds. J. Zilhao, F. D'Errico. - Lisboa: Institute Portugues de Arqueologia, 2003. - P. 109 - 122. - (Trabalhos de Arqueologia; N 33).

Vasil'ev S. The Siberian Mosaic: Upper Palaeolithic adaptations and change before the Past Glacial Maximum // Hunters of the Golden Age: The Mid Upper Palaeolithic of Eurasia 30000 - 20000 BP / Eds. W. Roebroeks et al. - Leiden: Leiden University, 2000. - P. 173 - 196.

Velichko A., Faustova M., Gribchenko Yu., Pisareva V., Sudakova N. Glaciations of the East European Plain - distribution and chronology // Quaternary Glaciations: Extent and Chronology / Eds. J. Ehlers, P. P. Gibbard. - Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2003. - Vol. 1: Europe. - P. 377 - 354.

Vishnyatski L., Nehoroshev P. The Beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic on the Russian Plain // The Early Upper Palaeolithic beyond Western Europe / Eds. P. J. Brantingham, S. P. Kuhn, K. W. Kerry. - Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004. - P. 80 - 96.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 27.03.07.

page 45

Permanent link to this publication: