Upper Palaeolithic boundary

Recent re-examination of the osseous material assemblage from Andernach-Martinsberg, Central Rhineland, has resulted in the identification of an implement manufactured from cetacean bone (probably whale). Argued to be the proximal half of a foreshaft, this artefact is not only one of few such projectile elements to be identified in Magdalenian deposits in northern Europe, but also demonstrates that the exploitation of marine raw materials for use in manufacturing projectile elements is not restricted to southern France, instead extending to at least inland Germany. Additionally, in conjunction with the appearance of marine molluscs and engravings of seals at Andernach, it can now be forcefully argued that this region formed part of an inland-coastal network during the Late Magdalenian and allows us for the first time to suggest that we can identify the movements of individuals transporting valued marine sourced raw materials and their personal experiences across this vast region.

Systematic surveys conducted in the Dhofar Governorate of Oman have produced over 300 surface sites, as well as excavation of in situ archaeological deposits. A number of these assemblages have been classified as part of the Nejd Leptolithic Tradition (NLT). This study describes a selection of these assemblages from sites distributed across the southern and central Najd plateau in Dhofar, including both surface scatters and stratified rock shelters. The NLT is broadly characterized by the reduction of blades struck from single-platform cores with flat flaking surfaces, in conjunction with the façonnage manufacture of bifacial implements. Based on technological analysis and artefact conjoins, we distinguish three separate core reduction strategies within the NLT. Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dates from three in situ assemblages allow us to begin to define temporal variability within this technological continuum.

Initial Upper Palaeolithic industries of South Siberia and Central Asia are dated to 35,000—50,000 14C years BP. They have been identified in Russian Altai, Eastern Kazakhstan, Transbaikalia, Mongolia, Dzungaria and Ordos in the north of China. This paper deals with the materials from Mountain Altai (Kara-Bom and Ust-Karakol 1), Eastern Kazakhstan (Ushbulak-1) and Northern Mongolia (Tolbor 4). The traceological analysis and the stydy of core platform morphologies have shown that the technology of large blade production included a combination of several methods of fracture zone preparation. The preparation of striking platforms and flaking surfaces was done by means of consequtive overhang removal and/or reverse plarform reduction and picketage. This technique is characteristic of the Initial Upper Palaeolithic industries of South Siberia and Central Asia and can be regarded as a feature specific for this cultural unity.

This paper is devoted to results of the excavation of multilayer Paleolithic site Tolbor-21 in Northern Mongolia. Site
is located in the right tributary of Selenga River, in Ikh-Tulberiin-Gol River valley. Site was found at 2010 and tested
by test, pits and test trench in 2011 and 2014. a result of exploring works the presence offour cultural horizons with
archaeological remains was previously revealed. The first, cultural horizon is associated with Late Upper Paleolithic. The
second cultural horizon is presented by flake industry offinal stage of Early Upper Paleolithic. The third cultural horizon
contains Initial Upper Paleolithic blade industry and has 14Cdetermination by 39,000 BP. The archeologically sterile
layer separate the third cultural horizon from fourth (which is associated with most, early stage of Upper Paleolithic or
with Middle Paleolithic) and it. was dated approximately 45,000 years ago by radiocarbon analyses. Thereby, the rich
lithic assemblages of this site have the one of the earliest, absolute chronological determination among Upper Paleolithic
complexes of Northern Central Asia.
Keywords: Initial Upper Paleolithic, multilayer site, deluvial sediments, stone tools, radiocarbon dating.

"""The territory of the Southern Poland marks the northern border of the
Szeletian settlement. Within the territory of Poland, the Szeletian settlement
is noted in three regions: Silesia, Krakow-Czestochowa Jurassic Highland
Chain, and the Carpathians (Kozłowski, 2000). A single leaf point interpreted
as Szeletian was also found in the east of Poland (fig. 1).
The few Szeletian sites known from the excavations within the Polish
territory indicated that the settlement was short-term and not intense. The
exception is Dzier· zysław site, interpreted as a base camp (J. K. Kozłowski,
2000; Fajer et al., 2005). Thus, Lubotyń 11 site in the SE part of the Głubczyce Plateau that has
been being examined by us since 2006 merits more attention as this place
is the richest Szeletian site found so far in Poland and also one of the best
preserved within the whole area occupied by this culture. It is one of the
very few that allow us not only to analyse archaeological materials but its
environmental context as well.
The camp in Lubotyń is a very typical example of a Palaeolithic site
localisation taking advantage of all terrain features: situated along the
route linking the south and north, an excellent vantage point – lying on the
top of the highest elevation in the area – and rich flint outcrops in the direct
vicinity of the site (fig. 2). A loess bed, in which the relics were deposited,
protected the site and contributed to preservation of an occupation level of
the camp and charcoals.
The site occupies the top part of a moraine hill (309.8 m), connected
with the Oder glaciation, built of gravel and sand formations intersected
by frost wedges. The flint raw materials were obtained from these outcrops.
In the loess bed, in some part of the excavated area a black layer very sated
with charcoals was found, being the remnants of the occupation level of
the camp. At least two hearths were identified in the layer. This layer and
the loess covering it constitute the main source of artefacts (Bobak et al.,
in press; fig. 3 and 4).
More than 5,000 flint objects come from the previous excavations. Artefacts
(approximately 3,300) constitute an overwhelming majority.
Almost all artefacts are made of flint found in the direct vicinity of the
site or at the site. There are a few items made of other raw materials – a
quartzite core, a quartzite flake and a single radiolarite flake – most probably
of the southern origin.
The structure of the inventory is typical for a basic site: core frequency
(66 items) is less than 3%; the tools constitute a bit more than 6%
(184 items); debitage dominates, with a very distinct predominance of flakes
over blades.
Regular flake cores dominate (42 items together with initial cores) or
flake-blade cores (8 items). The proportion of blade cores is relatively high
(18 items; fig. 5). The forms without preparation or with very limited
preparation dominate. There are few discoidal cores (9 items) and one
Levallois core.
The group of tools consists of tools typical for Szeletian units (fig. 6).
The tools made mainly from flakes, rarely from blades or from non-industrial
pieces, include mostly non-characteristic flakes or bits, more rarely retouched
flakes (50 and 12 respectively). Among the other types of tools,
end-scrapers dominate (18 items). The next group of tools are side-scrapers
(15 items), notched tools (10 items) and denticulate tools (7 items), a single
splintered pieces, one atypical perforator and a raclette. There are no
burins.
The special group of tools are leaf points. There are only nine of them
in the tool group, together with fragments and unfinished forms. It is difficult
to determine points form. Most of them are preserved fragmentally.
The points preserved intact have round bases.
Bifacial retouch (partial) is a feature characteristic for the group, also
on the other tools, mainly side-scrapers, retouched blades and flakes, as
well as on end-scrapers.
No bone remains were found in the previously surveyed area. However,
we possess some paleobotanical data coming from the palynological
analysis and results of the analysis of wood macroremains. The data show
a very interesting picture. Among the few pollens, there is mainly birch
(Betula), much less often pine (Pinus) and one alder pollen (Alnus). Shrubs
are represented by a single dwarf birch pollen (Betula nana type), seabuckthorn
(Hippophae) and juniper (Juniperus). All charcoals belong to
pine (Pinus). We can talk about an environment of forest-tundra type, characteristic
of the Hengelo interstadial in Poland (Bobak et al., in press).
Radiocarbon dates coming from samples taken from both hearts confirm
generally such age (fig. 7). But they cannot be unambiguously interpreted.
Nouvelles données sur le Szélétien en Pologne 487
Mémoire LVI de la Société préhistorique française
So far, three dates within the range from 44000 ±3000 BP to 35100
±800 BP come from the site. Two later dates (38000 ±1800 BP and 35000
±800 BP) fit adequately into the Szeletian period, the dating 44000
±3000 BP is too early. It might simply be wrong, which is suggested by a
very wide range of standard error (3,000 years).
Undoubtedly, the site in Lubotyń should be considered as one of the most
important Szeletian sites in Central Europe taking into account archaeological
and environmental data.
The camp in Lubotyń is not the only site newly discovered in this region.
In the vicinity two other sites have been revealed, at the moment known
only from the surface surveys. At these sites, strong prerequisites indicating
the presence of evidence of the Szeletian settlement were found. These include
two sites in Pilszcz – sites 63 and 64 (Bobak and Połtowicz-Bobak,
2009). In each small flint assemblage, one point (or its semiproduct) has
been found indicating with high probability its Szeletian origin (fig. 8). The
accompanying artefacts are less characteristic, although some materials,
in particular from site 63, have some technological and typological features
that could be characteristic of assemblages from the beginning of the Upper
Palaeolithic. It cannot be excluded that the surface site Dzier·zysław 79,
previously interpreted by one of us as Aurignacian (Połtowicz, 2003 and
2006), should be attributed to the Szeletian culture (fig. 8).
All the sites mentioned above are clustered in a very small and exceptionally
important region, in the southern part of the Głubczyce Plateau. This
region constitutes a direct foreground of the Moravian Gate, a lowland
between the Carpathians and the Sudeten constituting the Oder Valley.
During the Palaeolithic, the Gate was an important point linking the Southern
Poland, mainly Silesia, with Moravia.
Five Szeletian sites, mentioned above, are concentrated in the area less
than 5 sq km. They were all were situated in a very similar geomorphologic
environment: on exposed hills ensuring an excellent observation of the
surrounding areas. The localisation indicates clearly their preferences in
choosing the places to settle up their camps and also suggests that the
settlement strategy was well-considered.
The presence of this small but very significant concentration of sites
appears to mark another important centre of the Szeletian settlement in
Central Europe directly linked with the Moravia and confirms the importance
of the Moravian Gate as the route linking Moravia and Silesia.
Lubotyń site proves that the point was not sporadic and short-term expeditions
to the north, but that here we (also?) deal with a more long-term,
apparently multiple, process of settlement of these people. The presence of
other sites suggests the intensive penetration of these areas."""

The territory of the Southern Poland marks the northern border of the Szeletian settlement. Within the territory of Poland, the Szeletian settlement is noted in three regions: Silesia, Krakow-Czestochowa Jurassic Highland Chain, and the Carpathians (Kozłowski, 2000). A single leaf point interpreted as Szeletian was also found in the east of Poland (fig. 1). The few Szeletian sites known from