The chronology of the Mesolithic, Neolithic, Aeneolithic, and Bronze Age sites in the Trans-Urals (Russia) was studied, and a framework for previously established cultural complexes is suggested ...based on 153 radiocarbon dates. In this new chronological model, the Mesolithic is dated to ~10,000–6500 cal BC; the Neolithic complexes exist at ~6500–3800 cal BC; the Aeneolithic is dated to ~4300–2800 cal BC; the Early Bronze Age spans ~2500–2100 cal BC; and the Late Bronze Age can be preliminary assigned to ~1600–1100 cal BC.
New paleodietary data were obtained after the discovery and excavation in 2015–2017 of the Cherepakha 13 site in the southern part of Primorye (Maritime) Province in far eastern Russia. The site is ...located near the coast of Ussuri Bay (Sea of Japan) and belongs to the Yankovsky cultural complex of the Early Iron Age 14C-dated to ca. 3000 BP (ca. 1200 cal BC). The stable isotope composition of the bone collagen for 11 humans and 30 animals was determined. For humans, the following values (with±1 sigma) were yielded: δ13C=–10.2±0.8‰; and δ15N=+12.4±0.3‰. The majority of terrestrial animals show the usual isotopic signals: δ13C=–19.4 ÷ –23.3‰; and δ15N=+4.6÷+6.6‰ (for wolves, up to +10.1‰); dogs, however, have an isotopic composition similar to humans: δ13C= –11.7±1.2‰; and δ15N=+12.4±0.4‰. Marine mammals have common values for pinnipeds: δ13C=–13.7 ÷ –14.6‰; and δ15N=+17.4 ÷ +18.0‰. The main food resources for the population of Cherepakha 13 site were (1) marine mollusks, fish, and mammals; and (2) terrestrial mammals; and possibly C4 plants (domesticated millets).
Here I present a critical evaluation of the analysis conducted by Graf Graf, K.E., 2009. “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly”: Evaluating the radiocarbon chronology of the middle and late Upper ...Paleolithic in the Enisei River valley, south-central Siberia. Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 694–707 of the Paleolithic radiocarbon (
14C) dataset for the Upper Paleolithic sites in the Yenisei River basin of Central Siberia. Graf applied a rating system to the corpus of existing
14C data for the region, and announced some new
14C dates. The results obtained, however, are highly biased due to several factors, including prejudice concerning the higher accuracy of the AMS technique in
14C dating and that
14C dates from the same cultural component should overlap with plus–minus two sigmas; ambiguities with the subdivision of the Lateglacial period; artificially high sample selection criteria; incomplete factual material; and unjustifiable and misleading statements on the
14C dating of fossil bones and the issue of Last Glacial Maximum human presence in Siberia. As a result, the conclusions made by Graf Graf, K.E., 2009. “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly”: Evaluating the radiocarbon chronology of the middle and late Upper Paleolithic in the Enisei River valley, south-central Siberia. Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 694–707 are unconvincing. New analysis is necessary in order to improve the quality of treatment of the original data for the Upper Paleolithic
14C chronology in the Yenisei River basin.
Since the 1990s, a characteristic obsidian geochemistry has linked widespread archaeological assemblages spanning the Russian Far East, Korean Peninsula, and Northeast China. Referred to as PNK1, the ...source of this material has yet to be identified. As a contribution to solving this enduring puzzle, we report here analyses of a commercial specimen of obsidian exported from Chongjin in DPR (North) Korea. A combination of Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA) and PotassiumArgon dating enable us to compare this piece with a large obsidian database for Northeast Asia. We find that the “Chongjin sample” is identical to PNK1 lithics from archaeological collections. While the exact source of the “Chongjin sample” remains unknown, we can more confidently locate the primary source for PNK1 lithics in DPR Korea. Based on an exhaustive literature review of the geology and geochemistry of volcanic glasses and other volcanic rocks in the northern part of the Korean Peninsula, and drawing on our own unpublished data, we suggest that the PNK1 source is most likely located south of Paektusan Volcano. This corroborates the existing evidence for the long-range transport of the material.
The Khayrgas Cave in Yakutia (eastern Siberia) is one of the most important Upper Paleolithic sites in northern Asia, and has been the subject of extensive 14C dating and study of mammal bones. The ...upper part of the cave sequence (Layers 2–4) dates to the Holocene (~4100–8200 BP), and the lower part (Layers 5–7) to the Late Pleistocene (~13,100–21,500 BP). In Layers 2–4, only extant animal species are known; ecologically they belong to a forest-type ecosystem. In Layers 5–7, several extinct species were identified, and the environment at that time corresponded to open and semi-open ecosystems. The Khayrgas Cave provides rare but reliable evidence of human occupation in the deep continental region of eastern Siberia at the Last Glacial Maximum, ~20,700–21,500 BP.
The article introduces new paleoanthropological materials from the Mayak burial ground near Sidelkino village in the Samara region into scientific discourse. The materials were obtained as a result ...of excavations in 1995 and only recently was it possible to date them. As a result of AMS analysis fulfilled by the authors, human remains from two burials were dated back to the Early Mesolithic. The analysis was carried out taking into account the influence of the “reservoir effect.Despite the rather poor preservation of individuals from the two described burials, the authors carried out an osteological analysis of an adult male from the second burial. He turned out to be quite tall, with elongated legs, shortened forearms, saber-shaped tibia and relatively massive bones of the lower limbs. In burial 3, the remains of an adult woman and a child of 7–10 years old were found. Comparing the osteological indicators of the man from the second burial with materials from the same burial ground of excavations in 2002, the authors came to the conclusion that the people whose remains were found on the hill Mayak in 1995 and in 2002 probably belong to the same population. Similar morphological characteristics are proof of this.
PDF
