The transition from the Late Paleolithic to the Initial Neolithic in the Baikal region: Technological aspects of the stone industries

Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint

The transition from the Late Paleolithic to the Initial Neolithic in the Baikal region: Technological aspects of the stone industries Natalia Tsydenova a, *, Henny Piezonka b a

Laboratory of Archaeology, Institute of Mongolian, Buddhist and Tibetan Studies, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, 6 Sakhyanovoi st., 670047 Ulan-Ude, Republic of Buryatia, Russian Federation b Historical Institute, Department of Pre- and Protohistory, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt University Greifswald, Hans-Fallada-Strasse 1, 17487 Greifswald, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Available online 30 September 2014

The area east of Lake Baikal in Siberia is one of a small number of regions in Eurasia where pottery was already used in the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene from the 12th millennium cal BC onwards. Here, the adoption of pottery by hunteregatherer communities marks the end of the Late Paleolithic and the beginning of the Initial Neolithic. The cultural environment in which pottery emerged can indicate whether the ceramic innovation arrived as part of a wider complex of new technologies and cultural characteristics, or whether it was incorporated into an already-existing cultural sphere. The paper investigates the development of lithic technology as one part of material culture at the PleistoceneeHolocene transition, concentrating on the primary reduction techniques. The study is based on data and material from the Krasnaya Gorka site, as well as published data from other sites of the Late Paleolithic and the Initial Neolithic. The comparative technological and typological analysis of the assemblages of the PleistoceneeHolocene transition reveals a continuity of lithic techniques, which is in accordance with the general tendency in most of North-East Asia. During the later stages of the Initial Neolithic, an innovation took place which is characterized by a further rationalization of the Yubetsu reduction technique, eventually leading to the microprismatic technique. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Baikal region Late Paleolithic Initial Neolithic Lithic technologies Early pottery

1. Introduction The emergence of pottery in Northern Eurasia represents one of the most debated fields in Stone Age archaeology. According to current data, pottery technology was first used by Paleolithic hunteregatherers in Southern China at the time of the Last Glacial Maximum around 18,000 cal BP (Wu et al., 2012). Over the following millennia, the new technology became known among forager communities in the Russian Amur region, Japan, Korea, Transbaikalia and the Northern parts of Indochina (Vetrov, 1985; Bellwood, 1986; Lapshina, 2000; Kuzmin et al., 2000; Jall et al., 2001; Kuzmin, 2006; Boaretto et al., 2009; Elston et al., 2011; Sato et al., 2011; Derevyanko, 2012). The ceramic innovation marks a terminological divide of the scientific community. Whereas in the Russian academic tradition, the introduction of pottery is seen as the main defining marker of the onset of the Neolithic period, irrespective of prevailing

* Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] greifswald.de (H. Piezonka).

(N.

Tsydenova),

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.07.070 1040-6182/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

piezonkah@uni-

economy and lifestyle (Oshibkina, 2006), in Central and Western Europe and Western Asia a different definition of the Neolithic is preferred which connects the beginning of the Neolithic to the introduction of food-producing economy and associated cultural, social and ideological changes such as sedentism and the development of complex societies (Scharl, 2004). In our paper, we follow the Russian terminology, as it is most commonly applied to the archaeological discussion of this region. The dynamics of introduction and dispersal of the ceramic innovation is the subject of an ongoing scientific debate (see e.g. Hartz and Piezonka, 2013). While some authors favor an independent invention in several parts of Eastern Asia (Kuzmin, 2013), others suggest a dispersal of the new technology from early centers in China and the Russian Far East to neighboring communities, thus spreading over considerable distances and eventually also triggering the introduction of ceramics in Eastern Europe and the Near East (Gibbs and Jordan, 2013). With regard to this debate, the cultural environment in which early pottery appeared is of special importance. It delineates the context in which pottery was first adopted as a technological innovation, indicating whether the ceramic innovation arrived as part of a wider complex of new technologies and cultural

102

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

Fig. 1. Late Paleolithic and Initial Neolithic sites in Transbaikalia.

characteristics and was maybe even associated with population movements, or whether it was incorporated into an alreadyexisting cultural sphere. The study of the cultural context also sheds light on the question whether the ceramic technology itself triggered changes in the economic and social behaviors of populations. In our study, we investigate the transition from the Late Paleolithic, aceramic complexes to the Initial Neolithic complexes with early pottery in the area east of Lake Baikal in Siberia, one of the few regions in Eurasia where pottery was used in the Late Pleistocene. As stone artifacts are the most important archaeological source preserved on the sites of this period, we concentrate on the development of the lithic technology. The main technological characteristic to be analyzed is the primary reduction which is generally regarded as the foremost culture-defining factor for the Paleolithic. 2. The Baikal region at the PleistoceneeHolocene transition The Baikal region covers a large geographical part of southern Siberia around the watershed area of Lake Baikal. The region west of

Lake Baikal is called Cisbaikalia and the region east of the lake, Transbaikalia. Transbaikalia is subdivided by the Yablonevyi ridge into a western and an eastern part. For a long time it was thought that in most parts of the Baikal region, the appearance of pottery was connected to the beginning of the Atlantic episode (Ivashina, 1979; Konstantinov, 1994). An exception was the evidence for early pottery use around 11,000 cal BC from the Ust'-Karenga complex in Northern Transbaikalia (Vetrov, 1985; Kuzmin and Vetrov, 2007). The early onset of the Initial Neolithic in various other parts of Transbaikalia around or just after the PleistoceneeHolocene transition has been recognized only recently (McKenzie, 2009), and new data on pottery food crusts from Studenoe 1 and Ust'-Menza 1 suggest an even earlier introduction of the ceramic technology in the first half of the 12th millennium cal BC (see Table 2). On the western side of Lake Baikal, the earliest pottery complexes are much later and stem from the 7th millennium cal BC (Goryunova et al., 2011; Nomokonova et al., 2013). It is therefore in Transbaikalia that the Initial Neolithic sites and their Late Paleolithic predecessors are located that are regarded and compared in this article (Fig. 1). In our paper, we discuss archaeological sites of the Selenga river valley, the Chikoi river

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

basin and the Vitim river basin and Vitim plateau. A special focus lies on the material from Krasnaya Gorka which is at the moment the most thoroughly studied complex in this region. 3. Chronostratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental background Chronologically the paper deals with the transition between the Late Pleistocene and the Early Holocene. It covers the climatic periods of the Allerød, the Younger Dryas, the Preboreal and the Boreal from c. 12,000 cal BC to c. 7000 cal BC (Fig. 2). The immense global climate changes that occurred during the PleistoceneeHolocene transition must have had an impact on the contemporary prehistoric cultures in the Baikal region. Information on the paleoenvironment of this period in Transbaikalia is reconstructed on the basis of paleontological and palynological data. Paleontological research is primarily based on the study of small mammals, which are particularly good markers of environmental changes in this region. The data stems both from paleontological assemblages (Erbajeva et al., 2011) and from archaeological sites of the PleistoceneeHolocene transition such as Studenoe 2, ArshanKhunduy, Ust'-Kyakhta-3 and -7, and Bol'shoi Yakor' (Khenzykhenova, 2008). Several pollen spectra in the Baikal region also illustrate the climatic changes of the PleistoceneeHolocene transition (Buvit and Terry, 2011; Bezrukova et al., 2012). The climate of the Late Pleistocene was cold and dry. In the Late Glacial inhabitants of meadow and forest environments were spread over the region. Stratigraphic and palynological data indicate that the pre-Holocene territory of western and southwestern Transbaikalia was characterized by cold steppes occupied by

103

xerophytic vegetation (Bazarov et al., 1982). According to palynological data from peat bogs and lacustrine sediments and also from Lake Baikal and Lake Kotokel bottom sediments, the PleistoceneeHolocene transition took place around 9700e9500 cal BC. The Early Holocene is characterized by a climate change leading to warmer and more humid conditions, which is reflected in the pollen records by the extension of dark coniferous trees (Bezrukova et al., 2012). In the Early Holocene, woodlands invaded the steppes, and coniferous trees and broad-leaved trees such as Mongolian oak, Siberian linden and elm expanded (Bazarova, 1985). Representatives of the Late Pleistocene megafauna e mammoth, woolly rhinoceros, bison, spiral-horned antelope, gazelle and argali e disappeared from the Lake Baikal basin, and the formation of the modern fauna began (Kalmykov, 2001). During the Holocene, steppes were invaded by woodlands which led to the complete displacement of some rodent species to the south. For example, the present range of moles extends much further to the south in southeastern Transbaikalia. The habitat of the steppe lemming and of Brandt's vole also shifted from western Transbaikalia towards the south and west (Erbajeva, 1970; Erbajeva et al., 2011). In contrast, forest fauna of small mammals such as wood lemming, chipmunk and shrew became wider-spread with the beginning of the Holocene, while beaver, forest and water voles continued relatively unchanged from the Late Pleistocene to Holocene (Khenzykhenova, 2008). 4. Methods and materials The technical and typological analysis of stone artifacts is the main instrument for the comparison of Late Paleolithic and Initial

Fig. 2. Chronostratigraphy of the Late Glacial to Early Holocene according to Greenland Ice core data (NGRIP project, after Rasmussen et al., 2006; Vinther et al., 2006) with important Late Paleolithic and Initial Neolithic sites in Transbaikalia.

104

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

Krasnaya Gorka, a site investigated by one of the authors (N. Ts.). All other late Paleolithic and Initial Neolithic materials are discussed on the basis of the published information. Unfortunately, this information is in many cases very brief and limited and does not allow for a judgment of amounts and ratios of artifact classes. Sites for which the respective publications do not give information concrete on reduction techniques beyond a general characteristic of materials were not able to be considered in the discussion. The numerical chronology is based on radiocarbon dates that exist for most of the sites (Tables 1 and 2). Many of the dates, however, are regarded as problematic concerning their stratigraphical or contextual association, some are contradictory, and for the dates that were received directly from charred crusts on pottery there is also a danger of too old ages due to a freshwater reservoir effect, if the respective vessels were used for processing aquatic resources such as fish meat (Hartz et al., 2012).

Neolithic archaeological complexes. The method that most reliably enables the reconstruction of primary reduction techniques is the refitting method. However, this method cannot always be applied due to the size and composition of the assemblages. In cases where it cannot be used, the researcher must morphologically and typologically analyse the entire set of artifacts including preforms (precores), cores, technical debris and debitage in order to reconstruct the reduction process (Nekhoroshev, 1999). In the case of our main assemblage of Krasnaya Gorka, the primary reduction technique was reconstructed by the second method. The question of cultural continuity from the aceramic Late Paleolithic to the pottery-bearing Initial Neolithic is addressed on the basis of comparative analysis of the reduction technique of lithic assemblages from sites of both periods. Archaeological sites of the Initial Neolithic are still rare on the territory of Transbaikalia. The main focus of our study therefore lies on the materials of

Table 1 Radiocarbon dates of Late Paleolithic sites. Dates have been calibrated using OxCal v4.2.3 (Bronk Ramsey, 2009) and the IntCal13 atmospheric curve (Reimer et al., 2013). Site

Context

Material

Lab. no.

14

Vitim River basin Kovrijka I Kovrijka I Kovrijka II Kovrijka II Kovrijka III Kovrijka III Kovrijka III Kovrijka III Kovrijka IV Avdeikha Avdeikha Bol'shoi Yakor' 1

Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer ? ? Layer

3A

Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal ? ? Charcoal

Bol'shoi Yakor' 1

Layer 3V

Charcoal

Bol'shoi Yakor' 1 Bol'shoi Yakor' 1

Layer 4 Layer 4A

Charcoal Charcoal

Bol'shoi Yakor' 1

Layer 4B

Charcoal

Bol'shoi Yakor' 1

Layer 5, hearth 1 » Layer 5, hearth 2 »

Charcoal »

Bol'shoi Yakor' 1

Layer Layer » Layer » Layer

Bone charcoal »

GIN-9003 SOAN-4245 SOAN-5277 SOAN-4543 SOAN-7027 SOAN-7964 SOAN-7029 SOAN-7966 SOAN-7294 GIN-1022 IM-236 IMSOAN-920 GIN-9003 GIN-6459 GIN-6460 GIN-6461 LE-4173A IMSOAN-920 GIN-6462 GIN-6464a GIN-7713 SOAN-7565 GIN-7712 GIN-7711 GIN-8473 GIN-8472 GIN-6425 GIN-7416 LE-4172 IMSOAN-1026 GIN-7716 LE-4172A GIN-7714 GIN-6466 GIN-6467 GIN-6468 GIN-8470

2800 6095 8180 11,190 8135 10,400 10,940 11,050 7940 12,900 15,200 10,100 11,750 12,080 12,000 11,740 10,070 10,320 11,770 11,970 12,530 11,285 15,900 17,840 12,700 12,050 12,380 11,620 10,400 14,260 11,100 12,400 11,800 12,330 12,380 12,630 12,700

± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±

SOAN-3091 SOAN-3092 GIN-N84-93a GIN-N84-93b SOAN-3093 SOAN-4121 GIN-5788 GIN-5787 GIN-6121 SOAN-3468 SOAN-3467

11,680 11,500 12,100 12,230 11,375 27,380 9700 11,230 11,630 11,630 11,240

± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±

1 1 3 5 2, 2, 2, 2, 5

hearth upper lower lower

6 6, hearth 4 6, hearth 1 6, hearth 3

Bol'shoi Yakor' 1

Layer 7

Bol'shoi Yakor' 1 Bol'shoi Yakor' 1 Selenga River valley Ust'-Kyakhta 17 Ust'-Kyakhta 17 Ust'-Kyakhta 17 Ust'-Kyakhta 17 Ust'-Kyakhta 17 Ust'-Kyakhta 16 Oshurkovo

Layer 8 Layer 9, hearth 1

Mukhor-Tala 7 Mukhor-Tala 7 Chikoi River basin

Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer

3 5 5 5 6 2 3

Lithological layer 3 Lithological layer 3

Charcoal Bone Bone Charcoal Bone Bone Bone Bone Bone Bone Charcoal » Charcoal Charcoal

C age (BP)

Calibrated date (cal BC)

Reference

140 135 130 390 120 200 150 210 205 300 300 100 190 220 250 140 540 150 120 170 90 140 270 290 90 120 200 450 650 650 400 150 180 250 250 230 140

1409e593 5338e4707 7523e6805 12,046e10,206 7477e6712 10,764e9462 11,158e10,674 11,380e10,650 7451e6439 14,301e12,294 17,167e15,827 10,099e9338 12,101e11,265 12,916e11,515 12,901e11,378 11,988e11,334 11,051e8314 10,671e9463 11,899e11,377 12,372e11,482 13,191e12,326 11,471e10,881 17,937e16,706 20,389e18,922 13,473e12,756 12,256e11,630 13,230e11,887 13,053e10,751 11,649e8346 16,998e13,666 11,985e10,059 13,168e12,082 12,125e11,336 13,330e11,776 13,368e11,801 13,745e12,156 13,657e12,449

Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Mochanov 2007; Teten'kin, 2010 Mochanov 2007; Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010

155 100 80 100 110 85 700 80 140 300 360

11,884e11,221 11,548e11,182 12,203e11,803 12,721e11,861 11,492e11,109 29,461e29,116 11,081e7567 11,330e10,957 11,806e11,244 12,290e10,854 12,022e10,473

Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010

Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010

Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010 Tashak, 2005 Tashak, 2005 Tashak, 2005; Buvit and Terry, 2011 Tashak, 2005; Buvit and Terry, 2011 Tashak, 2005 Tashak, 2005 Konstantinov, 1994

Lbova et al., 2000 Lbova et al., 2000

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

105

Table 1 (continued ) Site Studenoe Studenoe Studenoe Studenoe Studenoe

1 1 1 1 1

Context

Material

Lab. no.

14

Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer

Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal »

SOAN-1650 SOAN-1651 SOAN-1652 SOAN-1653 SOAN-1655 SOAN-1654 GIN-2925 GIN-2931 GIN-2931a GIN-2930 LE-2062 GIN-2932 SOAN-1656 GIN-2933 GIN-2934 GIN-2934a GIN-2935 LE-2061 GIN-6129 GIN-2947 GIN-6133 GIN-6139 GIN-2938 IEMEJ-199 AA-26739 AA-26653 AA-26655 AA-26657 GIN-5459

12,550 12,510 12,510 10,755 11,395 10,975 12,300 14,900 11,340 11,660 12,290 11,340 11,630 6030 12,140 12,130 12,110 13,430 2100 12,800 18,550 12,330 11,030 11,314 18,830 17,885 17,225 17,165 10,380

GIN-5503

11,350 ± 250

11,760e10,784

Konstantinov, 1994

GIN-7161

11,820 ± 120

12,019e11,479

Konstantinov, 1994

GIN-6116 GIN-5478 GIN-6117 GIN-5465 GIN-5464 GIN-5464

14,830 15,400 16,900 16,980 17,190 17,600

16,962e15,138 17,686e15,847 19,831e17,306 18,925e18,135 19,134e18,474 19,975e18,676

Konstantinov, 1994 Konstantinov, 1994

10 11 a,b 12 a,b 13/1 14

Studenoe 1

Layer 15

Charcoal »

Studenoe 1

Layer 16

Studenoe 1

Layer 17

Charcoal » Charcoal »

Studenoe 1

Layer 18/1

Charcoal »

Studenoe 1 Studenoe 1

Layer 18/2 Layer 19/1

Studenoe 1

Layer 19/4

Studenoe 2 Studenoe 2 Studenoe 2 Studenoe 2 Ust'-Menza 1

Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer

Ust'-Menza 1

Layer 13

Ust'-Menza 1

Layer 14

Ust'-Menza 2 Ust'-Menza 2

Layer 11 Layer 17

Charcoal Charcoal » Charcoal » Bone Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal » Charcoal » Charcoal » ? ?

Ust'-Menza 2 Ust'-Menza 2

Layer 20 Layer 21

? ?

4/5 4/5, hearth 1 4/5, hearth 2 5, hearth 1 11

C age (BP) ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±

± ± ± ± ± ±

280 80 175 140 100 135 700 2000 180 400 130 200 50 400 150 150 150 150 100 400 35 60 380 160 300 120 115 115 250

390 400 500 150 120 250

Calibrated date (cal BC)

Reference

13,769e11,909 13,158e12,326 13,340e12,135 11,065e10,441 11,483e11,127 11,146e10,736 14,721e10,946 23,049e11,476 11,595e10,860 12,868e10,781 12,975e11,891 11,613e10,837 11,623e11,400 5726e4055 12,753e11,660 12,717e11,651 12,666e11,629 14,687e13,788 381e73 14,455e11,916 20,586e20,379 12,753e12,131 11,807e10,032 11,512e10,873 21,546e20,122 20,042e19,346 19,163e18,526 19,089e18,454 10,769e9398

Konstantinov, Konstantinov, Konstantinov, Konstantinov, Konstantinov,

1994 1994 1994 1994 1994

Konstantinov, 1994

Konstantinov, 1994 Konstantinov, 1994

Konstantinov, 1994

Konstantinov, 1994 Konstantinov, 1994 Konstantinov, 1994 Goebel et al., 2000 Goebel et al., 2000 Goebel et al., 2000 Goebel et al., 2000 Konstantinov, 1994

Konstantinov, 1994 Konstantinov, 1994

Table 2 Radiocarbon dates of Initial Neolithic sites Dates have been calibrated using OxCal v4.2.3 (Bronk Ramsey, 2009) and the IntCal13 atmospheric curve (Reimer et al., 2013). Site Vitim River basin Ust'-Karenga XII Ust'-Karenga XII Ust'-Karenga XII Ust'-Karenga XII Ust'-Karenga XII Ust'-Karenga XII Ust'-Karenga XII Ust'-Karenga XII Selenga River valley Ust'-Kyakhta 3 Chikoi River basin Studenoe 1 Studenoe 1 Studenoe 1 Studenoe 1 Studenoe 1 Studenoe 1 Studenoe 1 Studenoe 1 Studenoe 1 Ust'-Menza 1 Ust-Menza 1 Yeravnoe Lake system Krasnaya Gorka

Context

Material

Lab. no.

14

Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer

Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Organic temper Organic temper Charcoal Organic temper Organic temper

AA-60210 AA-60202 GIN-8066 AA-38101 AA-60667 GIN-8067 AA-21378 AA-38101

12,180 12,170 11,240 11,070 10,870 10,750 10,600 11,065

7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

in pottery in pottery in pottery in pottery

C age (BP) ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±

Calibrated date (cal BC)

Reference

60 70 180 70 70 60 110 70

12,296e11,886 12,302e11,845 11,473e10,798 11,130e10,819 10,982e10,726 10,794e10,633 10,777e10,206 11,126e10,816

Kuzmin and Vetrov, 2007 Kuzmin and Vetrov, 2007 Kuzmin et al., 2000 Kuzmin and Keally, 2001 Kuzmin and Vetrov, 2007 Kuzmin et al., 2000 Kuzmin and Vetrov, 2007 Vetrov, 2008

11,597e11,188

Kuzmin and Orlova, 2000

11,097e10,451 10,017e8353 10,905e9319 11,594e11,330 11,608e11,356 11,773e11,497 20,452e18,534 11,608e11,356 12,075e11,628 7951e7597 11,608e11,356

Konstantinov, 1994 Konstantinov, 1994 Konstantinov, 1994 Razgil'deyeva et al., 2013 Razgil'deyeva et al., 2013 Razgil'deyeva et al., 2013 Konstantinov, 1994 Razgil'deyeva et al., 2013 Razgil'deyeva et al., 2013 Kuzmin and Orlova, 2000 Razgil'deyeva et al., 2013

7541e7188

Hartz et al., 2012

Layer 1 (?)

Bone

SOAN-1552

11,505 ± 100

Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer Layer

Charcoal Humates Humates Charred residue Charred residue Charred residue Charcoal Charred residue Charred residue Plant remains Charred residue

GIN-4577 GIN-5492 GIN-5493 MTC-16734 MTC-16735 MTC-16736 GIN-5494 MTC-16737 TKa-15554 SOAN-3080 MTC-16738

10,780 9690 10,450 11,570 11,600 11,730 17,700 11,600 11,960 8715 11,600

6 7 7b 8 8 8 9 9g 9g 5 8

Trench 1, layer 2

on pottery on pottery on pottery on pottery on pottery on pottery

Charred residue on pottery

KIA 42073

± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±

150 250 300 60 60 60 400 60 80 60 60

8345 ± 66

106

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

5. Lithic technologies of the Late Paleolithic 5.1. Vitim River basin At the very north of the Baikal region there are several wellstudied Late Paleolithic complexes on the lower course of the Vitim River: Bol'shoi Yakor' 1, the Kovrizhka complexes IeIV, Invalidnyi III, and Avdeikha. A series of numerical dates exists for them (Table 1). The bifacial technique represented at the multilayered site of Bol'shoi Yakor' 1 (cultural layers 3A-12) is similar to the Yubetsu style of the Dyuktai tradition (Vasil'evsky et al., 1982; Mochanov, 2007), a technique recorded in complexes of the period 13,800e9500 cal BC (Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010). The Yubetsu technique is a technique to produce microblades that was named after a site on Hokkaido in Japan. It is more sophisticated than its predecessors because the raw material was used more effectively. A characteristic feature is ski-like spalls that stem from lateral edge removals. Along with this tradition, there is also a blade debitage from a technological process aimed mainly at obtaining flakes. The tool complex consists of a set of scraper-bifaces, microblades, blades, and transversal burins. Bone artifacts are also well preserved at this site, including hoops with preserved microblades, points, a small tip-sided spear, and needles. The researchers regard the lithic complexes of Kovrizhka IIeIV and Avdeikha as a variant of this type of industry (Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010; Teten'kin, 2010). Along with bifacial preforms, flake preforms can also be found in these potteryless complexes of the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene. Triangular preforms as well as lateral underworking of striking platforms of wedge-shaped cores and microprismatic cores are also present. There are only a few bifaces, boat-shaped and ski-like spalls (Teten'kin, 2010). This coexistence of different traditions in the same area has been explained from the point of view of the action system approach. In such a scenario, the Bol'shoi Yakor' 1 complexes are recognized as the remnants of short-stay hunting sites, where the biface was both a tool and at the same time a potential preform for the production of microblades in the case of lack of time or unsuitable conditions to search for raw materials (Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010). 5.2. Selenga River valley In the central part of Western Transbaikalia, a complex of aceramic sites dating to the PleistoceneeHolocene transition is represented by Mukhor Tala 1, 2 (layer 1), 3 (layer 1), 5 and 7 in the Uda River basin, a right tributary of the Selenga River. The lithic artifacts include bifacial and unifacial preforms, wedge-shaped cores, crested and ski-like spalls and have been identified as belonging to the Yubetsu technique (Lbova et al., 2000). According to the published figures, the cores had lateral underworking of the striking platform which would distinguish them from common Yubetsu characteristics (Lbova et al., 2000, pp. 100e102, fig. 2 - 1.2 3 - 1, 2). The tool set is represented by microblades, scrapers, borers of various modifications, knives, notched and adze-like implements. Numerical dates obtained on the samples from the excavation trench wall at Mukhor-Tala 7 (Table 1), and the relative chronology place these complexes between 15,000e10,000 and 7000e5000 cal BC. In the southern parts of Transbaikalia, two traditions of the Late Paleolithic, the “Selenga” and “Chikoi” industries (Fig. 3), have been defined by V. I. Tashak. The “Selenga” industry is in its essence a microblade technology. It is found mainly in the south of the region and has been illustrated by the materials from the sites in the outskirts of Ust'-Kyakhta village in the south of Western

Transbaikalia (Tashak, 2005). The basic preform for wedge-shaped cores is a flat core or a flake which has also served as a foundation for singling out the “Selenga” technique based on the absence of bifaces, crested and ski-like spalls (Tashak, 2000). Points on blades the working tip of which are formed on the proximal end are characteristic for this industry, as well as transversal and medial burins. Microblades did not undergo any special retouching, and mostly their medial parts were used. Bone implements are represented by whole-cut hooks, needles, points, a fragment of a doubleslotted knife base and a harpoon fragment. There are small eggshell beads. Based on the relative and numerical dating, the complexes stem from the period between 29,000 and 12,000e11,000 cal BC (Tashak, 2005) (Table 1). An early stage of the tradition is characterized by the reshaping of depleted flat cores into wedge-shaped cores (Ust'-Kyakhta 16). Later, spalls and double-sided chipped pebbles were used as cores (Ust'-Kyakhta 17). The crest of an artifact was formed by double-sided chipping of one side of oblong pebbles, a technology similar to the preparation of the flat core with spalled striking platform (Tashak, 2005). 5.3. Chikoi river basin The “Chikoi” industry was first singled out on the materials of the Arshan-Khunduy site and received its name from the location in the Chikoi River valley. No cultural horizons have been found on this site, and all artifacts stem from surface collections. Because of the presence of bifaces, wedge-shaped cores, boat-shaped and skilike spalls, this industry has been identified as bifacial. In general, the complex is characterized by a large number of microblades, transversal burins, including those on ski-like spalls, and by underworking of the striking platform mostly by ski-like and occasionally by lateral spalls. Tashak (2005) regards the absence of microprismatic cores as an indication of an early chronological setting of the site not later than 20,000 cal BC. There are no numerical dates for this complex yet. The technology of the Late Paleolithic materials of multilayered sites in the Chikoi River valley e Studenoe 2 (layers 4, 5) and Ust'Menza 2 (layers 17e24) e has been regarded as a “Chikoi”-like industry (Antonova, 2012). At the same time, there is a convergence of the lithic technology at Studenoe 1 (layers 10e19) with the “Selenga” industry. The assemblage is characterized by the absence of bifaces, ski-like and crested spalls and lateral underworking of striking platforms (Tashak, 2000). The investigators V.I. Tashak and Y.Y. Antonova came to the conclusion that there is the development of a specific “Studenoe” industry from the Yubetsu-like tradition at an early stage (c. 20,000e16,000 cal BC) to an industry similar to the “Selenga” industry at a later time (12,000e9500 cal BC). But M.V. Konstantinov, the author who distinguished this “Studenoe” culture on the basis of Studenoe 1e2, Ust'-Menza 1e2, Altan and some other sites, did not give an exact description of the core reduction technology and only pointed out that the Late PaleolithiceEarly Neolithic complexes are characterized by wedgeshaped cores. He also suggested that the knapping technology did not change from the late Pleistocene to the early Holocene (Konstantinov, 1994; Goebel et al., 2000). At the moment, an independent judgment on these questions is not possible on the basis of the sparse published information. 6. Lithic technologies at the Initial Neolithic sites 6.1. Vitim River basin The Initial Neolithic of the Transbaikalia in Siberia was first outlined on the basis of the sites of the Ust'-Karenga complexes of the Vitim river valley, where the earliest Neolithic cultural layer 7 of

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

107

Fig. 3. Characteristic of the “Chikoi” and “Selenga” lithic industries.

Ust'-Karenga XII has been radiocarbon dated to 11,000e9500 cal BC (Aksyonov et al., 2000; Kuzmin and Vetrov, 2007; Vetrov, 2008) (Table 2). The associated lithic assemblage is acknowledged to be archaic. It includes bifaces, wedge-shaped cores, and pointed scrapers. Another marker of the particularly old age of the Ust'Karenga monuments is seen in the occurrence of transversal burins similar to the “araya”-type burins described in Japanese materials (Vasil'evsky et al., 1982). The accompanying pottery consists of pointed-bottomed vessels that are decorated on the exterior surface with “stepping comb” impressions; on the inside, there are horizontal furrows left by repeated brushing with tuffs of grass. The color of the vessels is mostly light brown. Based on the data from the Ust'-Karenga sites, the core reduction sequence was reconstructed by Vetrov (1995). He defined several variants and types of cores. The majority belongs to wedgeshaped examples, the preforms for which are bifacially chipped pebbles of small size. This reduction strategy still preserves features of the bifacial technology on the basis of the Yubetsu tradition,

because there are longitudinal ski-like spalls from the underworking of the striking platform, although these existed alongside with lateral, frontal, and even circular underworking. The shape of the preforms, according to the illustrations, is substantially different from bifaces. Microprismatic cores are regarded as products of the same utilization sequence in which they represent the final stage. Flat cores with parallel blade negatives have been noted in the complexes (Vetrov, 1995). 6.2. Selenga River valley Very early pottery also came to light at Ust'-Kyakhta 3 in the Selenga River valley in the southern part of Transbaikalia (Table 2). Unfortunately, the excavation results have so far only been published in preliminary form. A few fragments of a small pottery vessel with thin walls and a slightly everted rim were found in cultural layer 1 along with wedge-shaped cores, blades, scrapers, eggshell beads, and some bone artifacts (Aseev, 2003, pp. 37e38,

108

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

figs. 9, 11). The ceramic fragments are dark brown and do not bear any ornament, although a slight polish on the outside and wisp impressions on the inside was noted. The paste is tempered with sand and crushed eggshells (Aseev, 2003). No details have been published of the lithic core reduction technology and its products; the brief descriptions do not allow any definite conclusions. However, Levallois methods of core reduction form a stage of making wedge-shaped cores (Aseev, 2003). The association of the radiocarbon date in the 12th millennium cal BC with the pottery-bearing context is not entirely clear (Kuzmin and Orlova, 2000; Gibbs and Jordan, 2013). Highly interesting, although still somewhat problematic at the moment, are materials from sites at the lower course of the Selenga River which have been associated with the Initial Neolithic: the settlement of Kibalino (layer 2) located on the Selenga River not far from Ulan-Ude (Ivashina, 1993) and the Abaikino site a little further northeast (Lbova et al., 2003). Their assemblages are characterized by a combination of wedge-shaped cores and pottery without ornaments. Problems in the interpretation of Kibalino result from a lack of numerical dates and the very limited published information, while the information from Abaikino is restricted to a few finds. Nonetheless it is possible that these two sites have great potential for future research into the PaleolithiceNeolithic transition. 6.3. Chikoi River basin Pottery was found in cultural layers 8e9 at Studenoe 1 and in cultural layers 5e8 at Ust'-Menza 1, two multi-layered sites in the Chikoi River basin in south-western Transbaikalia (Konstantinov, 1994). The pottery encompasses both thin- and thick-walled specimen, it is mostly dark brown and has a loose texture; tempering materials include sand and plant fibers. Most fragments bear thin string impressions on the outside, and some cone-shaped attachments are also present. The form of the vessels was probably open without any inversion of the mouth region, with straight, evenly cut edges or slightly everted rims. In one case, there are round spatula impressions on the edge (Konstantinov, 1994). Stone artifacts include wedge-shaped cores, angular and transversal burins, blade inserts, round and pointed scrapers, and choppers. Bone tools are represented by fragments of a double-slotted bone knife handle and points. The earliest date obtained for layer 9 at Studenoe 1 (GIN-5494, 17,700 ± 400 BP, 20,452e18,534 cal BC) sticks out of the general chronostratigraphic sequence and is thought to be too old by the excavation director (Konstantinov, 1994) (Table 2). Several new radiocarbon dates on charred crusts adhering to pottery from layers 8 and 9 place the early ceramic phase at this site in the 12th millennium cal BC, thus suggesting a slightly older onset here than further north at Ust'-Karenga. The chronology of the early pottery-bearing layers 5e8 at Ust'-Menza 1 is also still subject to debate. A radiocarbon date on charred crust from pottery places layer 8 into the very early time frame of 11,608e11,356 cal BC (MTC16738, 11,600 ± 60 BP). While layers 6 and 5 have been associated by Konstantinov with the Middle and Late Neolithic, respectively, a radiocarbon date from layer 5 indicates a chronological position in the first half of the 8th millennium cal BC (SOAN-3080, 8715 ± 60 BP, 7951e7597 cal BC). Judging from the published illustrations of finds, the radiocarbon dating of layers 5 and 8 does not contradict the spectrum of the artifacts. There are transversal and lateral burins on blades and blade-like flakes, pointed scrapers on blades and a chopper (Konstantinov, 1994, figs. 67e68). No special research has so far been devoted to the reconstruction of the core reduction sequences for the lithic complexes of the layers 8, 9 of Studenoe 1 and layers 5e8 of Ust'-Menza 1. Wedgeshaped cores with lateral underworking of the striking platform and microprismatic cores as well as a lack of artifacts on bifaces are

characteristic for the industry of these layers. However, single preforms depicted in the publications (Konstantinov, 1994, fig. 521) suggest the presence of a bifacial tradition in the preparation of preforms preparing. Ski-like spalls are not mentioned. The selection of spalls and flakes including cores for preforms is more common. 6.4. Krasnaya Gorka: a key site at the Yeravnoe Lake system In this context, the information received from Krasnaya Gorka is of special interest. The site is situated in the northeast of the region near the large lakes of the Yeravnoe system. Located 6 m above the water line, it occupies the fringe of a v-shaped spur framing the northern shore of Lake Bol'shoe Yeravnoe. The stratigraphic situation revealed by the excavations at the site is:

Lithological layers 1 Soddy soil cultural layer 2 Dark chestnut sandy loam. The layer is thick and packed and occasionally powdery in its upper part. It differs from the underlying one by large amount of minor rock pieces and is separated from it by a layer of rock pieces. The color is almost black, and much darker than that of the underlying layer. 3 Chestnut sandy loam with a lesser amount of rock pieces 4 Light brown sandy loam. The texture is looser than that of the overlying layer. Is filled with large rock pieces. 5 Yellow gravel layer which switches to rock foundation at the northern and southern walls.

Thickness, m 0.05 0.15e0.25

0.15e0.25 0.15e0.40 >0.15

The materials associated with the Initial Neolithic were found in the bottom layer of light brown sandy loam (lithological layer 4 ¼ cultural layer 2). Altogether they encompass 710 artifacts. There is a small quantity of bone remnants, which are represented mostly by minor fragments (11 samples). The stone artifacts of this cultural horizon have an archaic, Paleolithic appearance. The raw material was mostly flint common in Paleolithic Age. Along with these flint artifacts, there are also artifacts made of multicolored rocks e various jasperoids, transparent and colored chalcedonies, but they are fewer. Stone artifacts are represented by wedge-shaped cores (Fig. 4, 1,3,4), microprismatic cores (Fig. 4, 2) and a prismatic core (Fig. 4, 6), preforms (Fig. 4, 5,7e9), spalls from the preparation of the striking platform (6 samples) (Fig. 4, 10e12), burin spalls (3 samples) (Fig. 4, 13,14), transversal burins of blades and blade-like flakes (11 samples) (Fig. 4, 15e21), microblade inserts (48 samples) (Fig. 4, 22e26), bifaces (5 samples) (Fig. 4, 27,28), scrapers on flakes and spalls (35 samples) (Fig. 4, 29,30), knifes on blades or blade-like flakes (17 samples) (Fig. 4, 31), a point on a small blade (1 sample), drawing knifes (2 samples) and others. Perhaps, the utilization of microblade inserts without, in the majority of cases, any secondary retouching ought to be considered as an early occurrence. Only 8 (15%) out of 54 microblade inserts show an intentional edge retouch, and another 46 (85%) have slight traces of use wear. Pottery from the same context places this material in the Neolithic (Fig. 5). It is archaic in appearance with its brown color and rough paste tempered with sand and plant fibers. Altogether there are 60 small smooth unornamented fragments. One fragment stems from the mouth of a thin vessel ornamented with oblique notches (Fig. 5, 2). Another sherd shows impressions probably made with cord (Fig. 5, 5). A radiocarbon date of 7541e7188 cal BC (KIA-42073, 8345 ± 66 BP) was gained from charred food residue on one of the pottery fragments (Table 2; Fig. 5, 7), thus placing the assemblage into a phase of the Initial Neolithic of Transbaikalia.

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

109

Fig. 4. Stone artifacts from Krasnaya Gorka.

Core reduction products allow reconstruction of the technological process on the basis of preform and core morphotypologial features. Altogether, there are 19 cores and 12 preforms present in the complex. Five of the pieces stem from surface

collections, but including them into this set of artifacts seems reasonable due to their typological proximity to the complex under review. The 19 cores are represented by:

110

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

Fig. 5. Ceramics from Krasnaya Gorka.

1 Wedge-shaped cores e 14 samples. Raw material: gray flint (9 samples), dusty-beige jasper-like flint (1 sample), brown jasperoid (1 sample), green jasperoid (1 sample), pinkish jasperoid flint (1 sample), wine red jasperoid (1 sample). 2. Microprismatic cores e 4 samples. All of them have a comb or its remains on the back. Raw material: tawny jasperoid (2 samples), chalcedony (2 samples). 3. Prismatic core e 1 sample of light gray flint. As a result of length sorting of the wedge-shaped and microprismatic cores, the smallest dimensions were measured on two samples of reddish brown jasperoid microprismatic cores and two samples of chalcedony microprismatic cores (0.9e1.5 cm). This indicates that the more flexible jasperoid and chalcedony cores could be used up almost completely due to this property. In most cases, the height exceeds the length. The opposite relation is uncommon, represented by only three samples. Core

height varies from 2.5 to 3.5 cm. As for thickness, microprismatic cores have the smallest values while wedge-shaped cores have the maximum values. Apparently, the core's original size and thickness depended from the raw nodule's original size and thickness. The prismatic core with its special parameters (height e 7 cm) is typologically separate. However, it has some similarities with wedge-shaped cores, namely the crest evidence; the crest is undermined with small spalls from the edge to the lateral sides. During the utilization process, the striking platform of all cores was maintained by underworking front side and laterals. There are twelve wedge-shaped core preforms: 1. Wedge-shaped core preforms e 4 samples; 2. Roughly underworked bifacial preforms e 3 samples; 3. Wedge-shaped preforms with one flat and another prominent lateral e 2 samples; 4. Wedge-shaped preforms with one flat lateral and preserved primary scum e 2 samples;

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

5. Shapeless preform e 1 sample. The raw material for making these preforms included gray flint (7 samples), light-beige (1 sample), tawny (2 samples), brown (1 sample) and dark bordeaux (1 sample) jasperoids. The length of almost all the preforms slightly exceeds the height. This is especially typical of bifacial samples. Height was standardized in the phase of making preforms, within the limits of 3 cm whereas the thickness limits were less than 2 cm. In two cases where the raw nodule thickness was minimal the height of the preforms exceeded the length. The proportions of the future core were thus already defined on the preform. Core reduction products (cores and their preforms, technical spalls) from Krasnaya Gorka (cultural layer 2) allow logical reconstruction of the reduction process of cores and their preforms, in three basic ways (Fig. 6). Variant 1: The raw nodule was shaped into a wedge by preliminary bifacial undermining. In the absence of crested ski-like and keel-shaped spalls (Fig. 4, 10e12) and if the wedge-shaped preforms were available, there was bifacial (but rough) (Fig. 4, 3) undermining (though there are tools thoroughly made from bifaces in the collection). The retouch of the striking platform was executed from the butt and lateral sides. Variant 2: The stone nodules, commonly small, were given a wedge-like shape by pretreatment of the striking platform by taking off a longitudinal spall, followed by lateral undermining. Then, blade removal was carried out from the butt, and further striking platform retouching was done from the front and the lateral sides. Variant 3: By single-sided preparing a convex face was created on the stone nodule, whereas the other side remained flat: 1) surface with primary crust; 2) surface flattened by underworking. After that, the preform obtained was used for microblade spalling from the butt. The striking platform was retouched by spalls from the front or lateral sides. 7. Discussion The comparison of various archeological sites from the PleistoceneeHolocene transition in Transbaikalia has shown that certain lithic artifacts of the Initial Neolithic pottery-bearing sites are largely similar to the Paleolithic aceramic complexes. These include wedge-shaped

111

cores, biface blades, and transversal burins. Primary use of inserts made from microblades without secondary reprocessing is considered to be another sign of archaism in the Initial Neolithic complexes. For example, at Krasnaya Gorka the percentage of microblades used without retouch is 79.2%. Closest to this industry in technical and typological characteristics are the Late Paleolithic complexes of Avdeikha and Kovrizhka III (layers 1, 2), where core preparation involves lateral underworking of striking platforms and the use of spalls as preforms (Teten'kin, 2010, pp.107e108, figs. 23e24). The attempted reconstruction of the variants of core reduction revealed that all the variations in the Krasnaya Gorka material reflect one strategy of core reduction aimed at a distinctive “rationalization” of the Yubetsu technique. The common feature of all the three variations of core reduction distinguished at Krasnaya Gorka is that a rational preform shape was chosen which is close to the wedge-shaped core. This way of preparing a core preform which is specified at the stage of wedge shape formation stays typical also for later complexes of the Early to Developed Neolithic, and even for the initial stages of the Bronze Age in the Baikal region (Tsydenova and Ivashina, 2002). We are dealing with an original technique that had not existed in the older complexes of the Initial Neolithic. The technology of Krasnaya Gorka is thus more innovative than those of Kovrizhka III (layers 1, 2) and the Ust'-Karenga sites. The absence of ski-like spalls, front and lateral underworking of striking platforms at Krasnaya Gorka is similar to the “Selenga” technique. In this case, however, it is probably dictated not by an influence of the “Selenga” technique, but by an attempt to maintain the height of cores for a more complete utilization, that is, sparing reduction. This rationalization of the Yubetsu reduction technique eventually led to the microprismatic technique. In general, such a reorientation was probably defined by the transition to new higher-quality colored raw materials such as jasperoids and chalcedonies and their comparatively small size. The choice of new raw materials by the inhabitants of the Krasnaya Gorka site was evidently defined by the abundance and proximity to the large deposits along the Tuldun River. However, the occurrence and development of such a rationalized way of core utilization did not mean a complete loss of the old skills, as is confirmed by its coexistence with the Yubetsu technique on the Kovrizhka IV (layers 4, 5) and Invalidnoye III (layer 1) sites of the lower Vitim River up to c. 5000 cal BC (Ineshin and Teten'kin, 2010). 8. Conclusions In the Baikal region, a technological continuity between the lithic complexes of the aceramic Late Paleolithic and the pottery-

Fig. 6. Scheme of core reduction variants at Krasnaya Gorka.

112

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113

producing Initial Neolithic can be demonstrated. The origins of the Initial Neolithic stone technology are most likely to be found in the Late Paleolithic industries with Yubetsu technique, a late development of the Dyuktai bifacial tradition. Continuity from Final Paleolithic complexes to Neolithic complexes with early pottery has also been traced on the lithic materials of adjacent areas of northeast Asia such as the Russian Far East and Korea (Derevyanko et al., 1998; Buvit and Terry, 2011; Derevyanko, 2012). The technological bases of their stone industries are the Yubetsu and Khoroku techniques (Vasil'evsky et al., 1982), both belonging to the Dyuktai tradition (Derevyanko et al., 1998; Lapshina, 2000; Derevyanko, 2012; Shevkomud and Yanshina, 2012). In this context, the examined materials from Baikal Siberia are in accordance with a general tendency in the development of hunteregatherer societies of the transitional period from Pleistocene to Holocene in continental northeast Asia. The lithic technology of the early pottery-bearing complexes of the Ust'-Karenga sites from around 11,000 cal BC still retains a bifacial basis and thus represents a version of the Dyuktai tradition. As in the potteryless complexes of Avdeikha and Kovrizhka III (layer 2), the preforms are flakes or bifacially chipped pebbles, not carefully prepared bifaces. Striking platforms have undergone not only ski-like spalling, but also lateral underworking. A similar streamlined core reduction technology is likely to have been used also by the people of the Initial Neolithic cultural layers of Studenoe 1 (layers 8, 9), although there is no ski-like spall underworking of the striking platforms, and the preforms are bifacially chipped nodules. A further development of this strategy is observed on the materials of cultural layer 2 of Krasnaya Gorka which represent a younger phase of the Initial Neolithic. There are wedge-shaped preforms, and the striking platforms are maintained by underworking front side and laterals. Thus the innovation is expressed in the rationalization of the Yubetsu stone knapping technique, which eventually led to the development of the microprismatic technique. Recent numerical dates suggest that in the south of the Baikal region, very early pottery appeared in the 12th millennium cal BC in the complexes of another, “Selenga” industry at Ust'-Kyakhta 3 that is not based on Yubetsu traditions but on the flat core reduction technique. However, this assumption is preliminary and requires further research. Thus it is possible that two lines of cultural development will be distinguished in the Initial Neolithic, as has been done for the Late Paleolithic. Besides the question of continuity in primary reduction technology, the study of Initial Neolithic complexes is also of interest concerning the development of the microblade technology from Paleolithic to Neolithic times. Here, more work needs to be done to draw a clearer picture of this important technology that had a wide impact in the Northern Hemisphere from Alaska across Eurasia, ultimately also reaching European Russia and the Baltic region in the Younger Dryas and early Boreal (Hartz et al., 2010). The comparatively well-studied materials from Krasnaya Gorka represent one variant or step in the development of the stone industry and, at the same time, in the development of the early ceramic traditions of the Baikal region. The continuation of the investigation of Krasnaya Gorka in the future and field work on other sites of the period in question will help to further determine the various chronological phases within the Initial Neolithic. According to a single radiocarbon date and also supported by the typological observations in the lithic assemblage and by geostratigraphical data, Krasnaya Gorka is associated with a later phase of the Initial Neolithic in the Boreal period. Most other Initial Neolithic sites that are known in Transbaikalia (Ust'-Karenga XII, layer 7; Studenoe 1, layers 8e9, Ust'-Menza, layer 8, and Ust'Kyakhta, layer 2) are older and have been in use already at the end of the Glacial period during the Allered interstadial phase, a first warmer period in the Late Pleistocene. One of the main tasks for

future research is to radiocarbon date series of samples from secure and archaeologically as well as paleoenvironmentally significant contexts in order to develop a better, more reliable and detailed picture of the cultural processes and their environmental background that characterize the transition from the Late Paleolithic to the Neolithic, ceramic period. An open question is the problem whether the adoption of the ceramic technology in Transbaikalia was linked to climatic oscillations that characterize the end of the Glacial period and thus could represent a result of human adaptation to the environmental changes. Judging from the existing radiocarbon dates, the introduction of pottery does not coincide with the stark climatic deterioration of the Younger Dryas but had taken place already hundreds of years before (Buvit and Terry, 2011). To follow up these questions it is necessary to connect archaeological research closely to paleontological, palynological, and geomorphological studies. Similar studies in Japan have demonstrated a change in adaptation strategies of the hunteregatherer communities at the turn from Pleistocene to Holocene which is linked to the appearance of the first ceramic complexes (Sato et al., 2011). A comparable situation is also observed on broadly synchronous settlements in the Far East where the first pottery-bearing complexes date to about 12,000e11,000 cal BC (Khummi, Goncharka1, Osipovka and others) (Lapshina, 2000; Shevkomud and Yanshina, 2012). Here, the earliest ceramics appeared also in complexes with a Late Pleistocene Yubetsu-like lithic tradition. Spore-pollen spectra of the layers with early pottery reflect a warming and humidization of the climate which caused the spreading of broad-leaved trees. The various pottery types from the Initial Neolithic sites in Transbaikalia (undecorated ware, ceramics with comb stamp ornaments, pottery with net/cord impressions etc.) must be analysed typologically and technologically in order to determine their chronological range and their connections to or, possibly, also independence from the early ceramic traditions of neighboring regions. An integrated research approach combining archaeological studies of lithics, pottery and other artifacts in their contexts with paleoenvironmental investigations and a reliable numerical chronology hopefully will enable us in the near future to draw a more detailed picture of the cultural processes and the people involved in them that took place at the PaleolithiceNeolithic transition in Inner Asia at the end of the Ice Age. Acknowledgements We are grateful to our colleague Dr. S. Hartz (Schleswig, Germany) who organized the 14C dating of the Krasnaya Gorka pottery. Also we would like to thank the Gerda Henkel Foundation for the financial support of our investigations (grant AZ 18/ZA/13). Two anonymous reviews helped to improve the paper with their valuable comments. References Antonova, Y.Y., 2012. “Selenga” industry at the final stage of the Paleolithic of Western Transbaikalia (to the question of cross-cultural integrations. In: Ancient Cultures of Mongolia and Baikalian Siberia. Ulaanbaatar, 1e6 (in Russian). Aksyonov, M.P., Vetrov, V.M., Ineshin, Ye.M., Tetenkin, A.B., 2000. History and some results of the archaeological investigations in Vitim river basin (Vitimian plateau and Baikal-Patomsk table-land). In: Baikalskaya Sibir’ v drevnosti (Baikalian Siberia in Antiquity), 2. Irkutsk, pp. 4e35 (in Russian). Aseev, I.V., 2003. The South-eastern Siberia in the Stone and Metal Epoch. Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, 208 p. (in Russian). Bazarov, D.B., Konstantinov, M.V., Imetkhenov, A.B., Bazarova, L.D., Savinova, V.V., 1982. Geology and Culture of the Ancient Settlements of Western Transbaikalia. Nauka, Novosibirsk, 163 p. (in Russian).

N. Tsydenova, H. Piezonka / Quaternary International 355 (2015) 101e113 Bazarova, L.D., 1985. The Paleogeographic Reconstructions of the Ancient Environment of South-western Transbaikalia (on the Materials of Archaeological Sites) (Ph.D. thesis), Irkutsk (in Russian). Bellwood, P., 1986. Man's Conquest of the Pacific: the Prehistory of Southeast Asia and Oceania. Nauka, Moskow, 523 p. (in Russian). Bezrukova, E.V., Letunova, P.P., Kulagina, N.V., Sharova, O.G., 2012. History of Lake Baikal environment in Late Pleistocene and Holocene (on the pollen records examples from wetland ecosystems). In: Eurasia in the Cenozoic. Stratigraphy, Paleoecology, Cultures. Irkutsk, pp. 36e48 (in Russian). Boaretto, E., Wu, X., Yuan, J., Bar-Yosef, O., Chu, V., Pan, Y., Liu, K., Cohen, D., Jiao, T., Li, S., Gu, H., Goldberg, P., Weiner, S., 2009. Radiocarbon dating of charcoal and bone collagen associated with early pottery at Yuchanyan Cave, Hunan Province, China. Proceedings, National Academy of Science USA 106, 9595e9600. Bronk Ramsey, C., 2009. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon 51, 337e360. Buvit, I., Terry, K., 2011. The twilight of Paleolithic Siberia: humans and their environments east of Lake Baikal at the late-glacial/Holocene transition. Quaternary International 242, 379e400. Derevyanko, A.P., Volkov, P.V., Hongjeon, Li, 1998. Selemginskaya Late Paleolithic Culture. NovosibirskSiberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, 336 p. (in Russian). Derevyanko, A.P., 2012. Microblade industries of the Northern Asia and China. In: Korean Archaeology in 21th Century. Seoul, pp. 681e784 (in Russian). Elston, R.G., Dong, G., Zhang, D., 2011. Late Pleistocene intensification technologies in Northern China. Quaternary International 242, 401e415. Erbajeva, M.A., 1970. History of Lagomorph and Rodent Faunas in Anthropogene of Selenga Midland. Nauka, Moscow, 132 p. (in Russian). Erbajeva, M.A., Khenzykhenova, F.I., Alexeeva, N.V., 2011. Late Pleistocene and Holocene environmental peculiarity of the Baikal region, based on mammal associations and deposits. Quaternary International 237, 39e44. Gibbs, K., Jordan, P., 2013. Bridging the boreal forest Siberian archaeology and emergence of pottery among prehistoric hunter-gatherers of northern Eurasia. Sibirica 12, 1e38. Goebel, T., Waters, M.R., Buvit, I., Konstantinov, M.V., Konstantinov, A.V., 2000. Studenoe-1 and the origins of the microblade technologies in Transbaikal, Siberia. Antiquity 74, 567e575. Goryunova, O.I., Novikov, A.G., Weber, A.V., 2011. The early Neolithic ceramic in Pribaikalie (on the materials of multilayered site Sagan-Zaba II). In: The III (XIX) Transactions of Russian Archaeological Congress, vol. I, pp. 125e127. St.Petersburg-Moscow-Great Novgorod (in Russian). Hartz, S., Terberger, T., Zhilin, M., 2010. New AMS-dates for the Upper Volga Mesolithic €r 57, 155e169. and the origin of microblade technology in Europe. Quarta Hartz, S., Kostyleva, E., Piezonka, H., Terberger, T., Tsydenova, N., Zhilin, M.G., 2012. Hunter-gatherer pottery and charred residue dating: new results on early ceramics in the north Eurasian forest zone. In: Proceedings of the 6th Radiocarbon and Archaeology Symposium, Held in Paphos, Cyprus, 10e15 April 2011. e Tucson (Arizona, USA). Radiocarbon, vol. 54, pp. 1033e1048. Hartz, S., Piezonka, H., 2013. North Eurasian hunter-gatherer ceramics as an archaeological source: reply to Kuzmin (2013). Radiocarbon 55, 205. Ivashina, L.G., 1979. Neolithic and Eneolithic of the Forest-steppe Zone of Buryatia. Nauka, Novosibirsk, 155 p. (in Russian). Ivashina, L.G., 1993. About the Early Neolith of western Transbaikalia. In: Cultures and Sites of the Stone and Early Metal Epochs of Transbaikalia. Nauka, Novosibirsk, pp. 81e88 (in Russian). Ineshin, Ye.M., Teten'kin, A.V., 2010. Human and Environment in the North of Baikalian Siberia in Late Pleistocene. Archaeological site Bol'shoi Yakor' I. Novosibirsk, (in Russian). Jall, E.J.T., Boorr, J.S., Derevyanko, A.P., Kuzmin, Y.V., Shevkomud, I.Y., 2001. The radiouglerod chronology of the Paleolithic e Neolithic transition in Priamur'e (Russian Far East). In: Derevyanko, A.P., Medvedev, G.I. (Eds.), International Symposium, the Modern Problems of Eurasian Paleolithic Studies. Novosibirsk, pp. 140e142 (in Russian). Kalmykov, N.P., 2001. Mammals and Paleogeography of the Lake Baikal Basin (PlioceneeHolocene). Ulan-Ude, 112 p. (in Russian). Khenzykhenova, F.I., 2008. Paleoenvironments of Paleolithic humans in the Baikal region. Quaternary International 179, 53e57. Konstantinov, M.V., 1994. The Stone Age of the Eastern Region of Baikal Asia. UlanUde-Chita, (in Russian). Kuzmin, Y.V., Vetrov, V.M., Jall, E.J.T., O'Malli, J.M., 2000. The radiouglerod dating of the ceramic of ust'-karengskaya culture of Upper Vitim river basin and chronology of the Initial Neolith in Eastern Asia. In: Baikalian Siberia in Antiquity, 2. Irkutsk, pp. 181e188 (in Russian). Kuzmin, Y.V., Orlova, L.A., 2000. The Neolithization of Siberia and the Russian Far East: radiocarbon evidence. Antiquity 74, 356e364. Kuzmin, Y.V., Keally, C.T., 2001. Radiocarbon chronology of the earliest Neolithic sites in East Asia. Radiocarbon 43, 1121e1128. Kuzmin, Y.V., 2006. Chronology of the earliest pottery in East Asia: progress and pitfalls. Antiquity 80, 362e371. Kuzmin, Y.V., Vetrov, V.M., 2007. The earliest Neolithic complex in Siberia: the Ust' Karenga 12 site and its significance for the Neolithization process in Eurasia. Documenta Praehistorica XXXIV, 9e20. Kuzmin, Y.V., 2013. The patterns of Neolithization in the North Eurasian forest zone: a comment on Hartz et al. (2012). Radiocarbon 55, 201e203.

113

Lapshina, Z.S., 2000. Late Pleistocene-Holocene antiquities on Amur river. In: Baikalian Siberia in Antiquity, 2. Irkutsk, pp. 181e188 (in Russian). Lbova, L.V., Bazarov, B.A., Buyerachni, E.V., 2000. Technique-typological and morphological characteristics of Mukhor-Tala industrial complexes. In: The Stone Age of Southern Siberia and Mongolia: Theoretical Problems and New Discoveries. Ulan-Ude, pp. 99e111 (in Russian). Lbova, L.V., Rezanov, I.N., Kalmykov, N.P., Kolomiec, V.L., Dergacheva, M.I., Fedeneva, I.K., Bashukivich, N.V., Volkov, P.V., Savinova, V.V., Bazarov, B.A., 2003. Environment and human in Neopleistocene (Western Transbaikalia and Southeastern Pribaikal'e). Ulan-Ude, (in Russian). McKenzie, H.G., 2009. Review of early hunter-gatherer pottery in Eastern Siberia. In: Jordan, P., Zvelebil, M. (Eds.), Ceramics Before Farming: the Dispersal of Pottery Among Prehistoric Eurasian Hunter-Gatherers. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, pp. 167e208. Mochanov, Yu.A., 2007. Dyuktai Bifacial Tradition of North Asia Paleolithic (Its Definition and Research History). Yakutsk, (in Russian). Nekhoroshev, P.Ye., 1999. The Technological Method of the Study of the Middle Paleolithic Primary Flaking Strategies. Publishing House “Evropeiskiy dom”, St. Petersburg (in Russian). Nomokonova, T., Losey, R.J., Goryunova, O.I., Weber, A.W., 2013. A freshwater old carbon offset in Lake Baikal, Siberia and problems with the radiocarbon dating of archaeological sediments: evidence from the Sagan-Zaba II site. Quaternary International 290e291, 110e125. Oshibkina, S.V., 2006. To the question of the Neolithic revolution and the Neolithization of the forest zone of Eurasia. In: Koryakova, L.N., Pavlov, P.Y., Shirokov, V.N., Shorin, A.A. (Eds.), II Northern Archaeological Congress. Papers. September 24e30. Charoid, Khanty-Mansiisk, Ekaterinburg, pp. 262e279. Rasmussen, S.O., Andersen, K.K., Svensson, A.M., Steffensen, J.P., Vinther, B.M., Clausen, H.B., Siggaard-Andersen, M.-L., Johnsen, S.J., Larsen, L.B., Dahl€thlisberger, R., Fischer, H., Goto-Azuma, K., Jensen, D., Bigler, M., Ro Hansson, M.E., Ruth, U., 2006. A new Greenland ice core chronology for the last glacial termination. Journal of Geophysical Research 111, D06102. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006079. Razgil'deyeva, I.I., Kunichita, D., Yanshina, O.V., 2013. New data about age of most ancient ceramic complexes of Western Transbaikalia. In: Medvedev, G.I. (Ed.), Eurasia in the Cenozoic. Stratigraphy, Palaeoecology, Culture. Irkutsk State University, Irkutsk, pp. 168e178 (in Russian). Reimer, Paula J., Bard, Edouard, Bayliss, Alex, Beck, J Warren, Blackwell, Paul G., Ramsey, Christopher Bronk, Buck, Caitlin E., Cheng, Hai, Edwards, R Lawrence, Friedrich, Michael, Grootes, Pieter M., Guilderson, Thomas P., , Christine, Heaton, Timothy J., Haflidason, Haflidi, Hajdas, Irka, Hatte Hoffmann, Dirk L., Hogg, Alan G., Hughen, Konrad A., Kaiser, K Felix, Kromer, Bernd, Manning, Sturt W., Niu, Mu, Reimer, Ron W., Richards, David A., Scott, E Marian, Southon, John R., Staff, Richard A., Turney, Christian S.M., van der Plicht, Johannes, 2013. IntCal13 and Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0e50,000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon 55, 1869e1887. Sato, H., Izuho, M., Morisaki, K., 2011. Human cultures and environmental changes in the Pleistocene e Holocene transition in the Japanese Archipelago. Quaternary International 237, 93e102. Scharl, S., 2004. Die Neolithisierung Europas. Ausgew€ ahlte Modelle und Hypothesen. Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH, Rahden. Shevkomud, I.Ya., Yanshina, O.V., 2012. The Initial Neolithic in Priamur'e: Goncharka-1 settlement. Russian Academy of Sciences, St.-Petersburg, 270 p. (in Russian). Tashak, V.I., 2000. The wedge-shaped cores of Western Transbaikalia in Late Paleolithic and Mesolithic. In: The Stone Age of Southern Siberia and Mongolia: Theoretical Problems and New Discoveries. Ulan-Ude, pp. 59e73 (in Russian). Tashak, V.I., 2005. The Paleolithic and Mesolithic Sites of Ust'-Kyakhta. Ulan-Ude, (in Russian). Teten'kin, A.V., 2010. The results of group of archaeological sites Kovrizhka on Lower Vitim (1995-2009). In: Reports of the Laboratory of Ancient Technologies. Irkutsk, pp. 64e134 (in Russian with English summary). Tsydenova, N.V., Ivashina, L.G., 2002. The archaeological material of the Neolith and Early Bronze age near Mukhanskiye lakes. In: The World of Central Asia. Archaeology. Ethnology, vol. I, pp. 74e80. Ulan-Ude. Vasil'evsky, R.S., Lavrov, Ye.L., Chan, Su Bu, 1982. The Stone Age Cultures of Northern Japan. Nauka, Novosibirsk, 207 p. (in Russian). Vetrov, V.M., 1985. The pottery of ust'-karengskaya culture on Vitim. In: The Ancient Transbaikalia and His Cultural Connections. Nauka, Novosibirsk, pp. 123e130 (in Russian). Vetrov, V.M., 1995. The burins and cores of ust'-karengskaya archaeological culture. In: Baikalian Siberia in Antiquity. Irkutsk, pp. 30e44 (in Russian). Vetrov, V.M., 2008. The incipient data of ceramic producing in East Asia. In: Medvedev, G.I. (Ed.), Anthropogen. Paleoanthropology, Geoarchaeology, Ethnology of Asia. Irkutsk, pp. 28e34 (in Russian). Vinther, B.M., Clausen, H.B., Johnsen, S.J., Rasmussen, S.O., Andersen, K.K., Buchardt, S.L., Dahl-Jensen, D., Seierstad, I.K., Siggaard-Andersen, M.-L., Steffensen, J.P., Svensson, A.M., Olsen, J., Heinemeier, J., 2006. A synchronized dating of three Greenland ice cores throughout the Holocene. Journal of Geophysical Research 111, D13102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006921. Wu, Xiaohong, Zhang, Chi, Goldberg, Paul, Cohen, David, Pan, Yan, Arpin, Trina, BarYosef, Ofer, 2012. Early pottery at 20000 years ago in Xianrendong Cave, China. Science 336, 1696e1700.