Search

The small terrestrial gastropod Vertigo pseudosubstriata Ložek, 1954 is one of the rarest glacial indicator species in the Pleistocene of Central and Eastern Europe. In all, this species has been found at only about 15 sites in Europe. V. pseudosubstriata was initially described as a fossil in Central Europe and was discovered only later alive in Central Asia. With regard to its modern distribution, 25 habitats with V. pseudosubstriata have been examined in Tien Shan and in the central and southern Altai. These findings seem to capture the contemporary distribution of the species and provide information on the boundaries of its ecological requirements. These data are of great significance for the interpretation of the fossil assemblages. Since the few fossil specimens in Europe date from very different glacial periods in the Elsterian, Saalian Complex and Weichselian, it can be concluded that V. pseudosubstriata apparently immigrated in at least three distinct waves. Most of the Pleistocene specimens in eastern Central Europe and Eastern Europe are reported from archaeological sites of the Upper Middle Weichselian (Gravettian), roughly between 33 and 29 ka cal bp. In this paper, we review all reported modern and fossil occurrences and discuss the species' ecological range. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to present the evidence for, and to discuss the aspects of the striking similarities that have been identified between backed bladelets recovered in two geographically distant assemblages, one found in Southern Italy (Paglicci, layer 24 horizon A1) and the other in Eastern Europe (Mira, layer II horizon 2). Both assemblages are dated to around 29–28,000 BP and are taxonomically defined as Early Upper Palaeolithic. Detailed comparison of technical and morphological data is impossible because the Eastern European site does not contain an assemblage that lends itself to statistical analysis. The backed bladelets of type PA24A1, found in Paglicci, layer 24 horizon A1-0, and Mira, layer II horizon 2, have no direct analogies in chronologically close Aurignacian and Gravettian sites, in either Southern or Eastern Europe. Taking into account the similar chronological position of the sites, separated by a distance of ca. 2,500 km, it is concluded that the significant similarity of the backed bladelets is most likely explained not by the convergence of development or by trade, but by the direct migration of a group of modern humans who manufactured such specific microliths. The Paglicci (24A 1) and Mira (II/2) industries generally belong to the Early Upper Palaeolithic, being placed chronologically at the transition between the EUP and MUP, being located morphologically and technologically between the Aurignacian and Gravettian. Despite the scarcity of data, the distinctiveness of the backed implements indicates that the sites belong to the same episode of sociocultural development. The issue of the cultural affiliation of the industry with PA24A1 type bladelets remains unanswered, and the search for analogies, either in Eastern or Southern Europe, needs to be continued. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a discussion of Late and Final Gravettian assemblages from Western Slovakia and Moravia (25,500/24,000 – 22,000 uncal BP). Shouldered points and Kostienki knives have historically been widely used as fossiles directeurs for these assemblages and have been seen as the most reliable features for cultural attribution. Nevertheless, recent studies of lithics, osseous artifacts (from bone, antler and ivory) and subsistence strategies demonstrate significant variability. The main aim of this paper is to discuss the heterogeneity of the "post-Pavlovian" sites, based on studies of selected localities, namely Milovice I, Petřkovice I, Moravany-Lopata II, Moravany-Žakovská and Trenčianske Bohuslavice-Pod Tureckom. Additionally, we propose a description of artifacts which might become new lithic fossiles directeurs (Petřkovice bi-truncated elements). Finally, we discuss the effectiveness of traditional fossiles directeurs in the description of this period and in studying analogies with Eastern Europe [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract, geometric, and also ornamental images which could not be directly decrypted are one of plots of iconic portable art of Eastern Europe. This type of pictorial activity emerges already during the early phase of the Upper Paleolithic simultaneously with figurative art. Development of iconic and ornamental art could be traced in the Russian Plain during the whole Upper Paleolithic epoch. It was mostly widespread during the Middle (25–21,000 BP) and Late (20–12,000 BP) phases of the Upper Paleolithic. Geometric art existed side by side with tradition of realistic engravings of humans and animals during the Gravettian time, and it entirely displaces the latter after the Late Glacial maximum. The article systematizes data about ornamental geometric images of the center of the Russian Plain dealing with regional and chronological peculiarities of this type of art. Basing on the data of technical and morphological analyses the author suggests two criteria for differentiation of ornaments in portable art of the Gravettian and Epigravettian time: 1. Presence/absence of organic combination of geometric and realistic elements in one image; 2. Character and technique of zonal ornamentation of the surface of artefacts with complicated shape. Geometric ornamentation was engraved on the whole surface of artefacts with complicated shape with obligatory preliminary mark-up, and also use of one or several base lines for creation of such images at Epigravettian sites. Elements composing one geometric design could be engraved on artefacts with complex volume during different episodes, and consequently without preliminary preparation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is devoted to the problem of interpretation of Mammoth Bone Dwellings. The author considers the history of the tradition to interpret bone structures as ruins of dwellings. He concludes that this interpretation was formulated a priori. The published data on the taphonomy of faunal remains, as well as on the stratigraphy of archaeological objects belonging to the Anosovo-Mezin bone construction, are analyzed in this paper. Currently available data allow concluding that this type of archaeological structure could not be interpreted as remnants of dwellings. Anosovo-Mezin bone constructions demonstrate the final stage of the very specific tradition that existed in the Palaeolithic of Central and Eastern Europe. There is every reason to believe that these objects were determined by the religious ideas of their creators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nomadism is traditionally considered the unique lifestyle of the European Upper Palaeolithic before the appearance of the settled way of life characterizing the Neolithic. A semi-sedentary intermediate organization based on the economy of the mammoth was nevertheless proposed for the Gravettian and Epigravettian of Central and Eastern Europe. Paradoxically, though the Gravettian is considered to be the first European culture of modern humans, this working hypothesis has not been raised in Western Europe. Indeed, in the unity/diversity debate for the Gravettian phenomenon, the importance of territorial organization is underestimated, given that it is just as important as the lithic and osseous industries. Based on a study of the lithic industry, I explore the possibility that the Gravettian groups occupying Brassempouy (Landes, France) approximately 30,000 BP lived a semi-sedentary lifestyle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mitoc–Malu Galben (Romania) is one of the key-sites for the Upper Palaeolithic in Eastern Europe, with abundant Upper Palaeolithic archaeological layers embedded in a ∼14 meters long loess-palaeosol sequence. The excavations in 1978–1990 yielded rich remains of Aurignacian and Gravettian workshops. From 1992 to 1995, an international collaboration helped better define their stratigraphical position, age, and typological characteristics. Since 2013, our team has conducted new fieldwork focusing on interdisciplinary study of site formation processes and a detailed technological study of the lithic artefacts. These different excavation phases have employed quite substantially different fieldwork methodologies. Here, we explore the impact of the changing excavation methodologies on the comparability of the generated assemblages by analyzing the frequency of bladelets among the elongated blanks as well as the length distribution of elongated blanks. Our preliminary study allows us to suggest that some of the assemblages seem to be influenced by the fieldwork methodology employed by each excavation phase, but more studies are needed to start to understand how the assemblages are biased. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents analyses of Late Middle Paleolithic (LMP) and Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP) material from the East European Plain and Caucasus. Late Middle Paleolithic industries show a highly variable pattern, although they are formally ascribed to a limited number of technocomplexes. Many of the LMP industries, especially in the Crimea, survived to the time of the transition to the Upper Paleolithic, but data suggesting a local origin of EUP are extremely rare. The transition is generally dated between 32/30,000 and 26/24,000 years, while the most crucial changes coincide with the Stillfried B interstadial. Aurignacian (two variants), Gravettian, and “Transitional” industries are recognized in the EUP. The presence of Middle Paleolithic traits in the Aurignacian may indicate acculturation, while the Transitional industries might reflect either acculturation or independent local development of new technologies, raising the possibility of local transformation of some Middle Paleolithic into non-Aurignacian EUP industries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]