2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2016.03.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Emergence of a microlithic complex in the Transbaikal Region of southern Siberia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This technological strategy, which incorporated microblades detached from diagnostic wedge-shaped cores, resulted in highly standardized products. Moreover, processing tools found in these LUP assemblages (e.g., scrapers, burins) were typically formal with long use-life histories (Graf 2010(Graf , 2011Kuzmin, Keates, and Shen 2007;Terry, Buvit, and Konstantinov 2016). Though production of osseous materials centered mainly on utilitarian implements, items of personal adornment exist, but other art forms do not (although see Vasil'ev 1983 for an example of a small anthropomorphic human statue from the Maina site in the Saian that may date between 16 and 13 ka).…”
Section: Recolonization Immediately Following the Last Glacial Maximumentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This technological strategy, which incorporated microblades detached from diagnostic wedge-shaped cores, resulted in highly standardized products. Moreover, processing tools found in these LUP assemblages (e.g., scrapers, burins) were typically formal with long use-life histories (Graf 2010(Graf , 2011Kuzmin, Keates, and Shen 2007;Terry, Buvit, and Konstantinov 2016). Though production of osseous materials centered mainly on utilitarian implements, items of personal adornment exist, but other art forms do not (although see Vasil'ev 1983 for an example of a small anthropomorphic human statue from the Maina site in the Saian that may date between 16 and 13 ka).…”
Section: Recolonization Immediately Following the Last Glacial Maximumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Toward the end of the LGM, humans using an LUP adaptive strategy based on standardized formal lithic technology, specialized hunting, and high residential mobility arrived in Siberia from the east, where microblades emerged first during the LGM in Hokkaido (Izuho 2013) but perhaps were conceptually conceived from MUP small blade and flake technologies that were present in Siberia, northern China, and Korea just before the LGM (Derevianko et al 2003;Lee 2015;Lisitsyn 2000;Seong 2011;Terry, Buvit, and Konstantinov 2016;Yi et al 2016). Although so-called microlithic technology has been found in these places at the onset of the LGM, conceptual techniques and cognitive, technological steps used to make these small blades and flakes are different from techniques and steps to produce Yubetsu and other wedge-shaped microblade core types found in LGM and late-glacial contexts associated with the LUP (Gómez Coutouly 2012; Graf 2008Graf , 2010Kobayashi 1970;Nakazawa et al 2005;Takakura 2012;Terry, Buvit, and Konstantinov 2016;Yoshizaki 1961). Despite imperfect resolution of the exact timing and location of its origin, we argue formal, developed microblade technology emerged outside southern Siberia and spread north and west with dispersing human groups at the end of the LGM, continuing the journey into higher latitudes of eastern Siberia as climates ameliorated during the late glacial.…”
Section: Summary Of the Siberian Recordmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the Transbaikal, it was in the form of various microcores (bi-polar, pseudo-wedge-shaped, etc.) from around 32,000 cal bp that show plausible evidence for pressure flaking (Terry et al, 2016). In the Altai, it was end-struck, wedge-shaped cores (Keates, 2007, pp.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The following is a selection of the variability concerning the definition of a microblade:Seong (1998: 245) considers microblades as “small and ‘thin strips’ of rock detached from specially prepared cores by indirect or pressure flaking. They are about 2 mm thick with parallel sides of about 4–7 mm width and 15–50 mm length”.Kuzmin (2007: 115) respectively uses definitions from Bahn (2001: 292) and Darvill (2002: 259) to characterize a microblade as a “small stone blade, typically several centimeters in length, often produced from a conical or wedge-shaped microcore” and a “very small, narrow blade”.Keates (2007) uses Akazawa et al (1980: 74) to define a microblade as a “type of flake whose length is greater than twice its width and whose width is less than 1.2 cm”.Graf (2010: 211) defines “true microblades as exceedingly standardized, measuring roughly 2 mm thick, 15–50 mm long, and 2–7 mm wide with consistently parallel lateral margins and systematically removed from expressly prepared wedge-shaped or tortsovyi microblade cores”.For Terry et al (2016: 90), artifacts will be considered microblades “if they exhibit parallel sides, are <7 mm wide, are <2 mm thick, and are associated with specialized cores exhibiting wedge-shaped cross-sections and blade scars <7 mm wide”.…”
Section: A Closer Look At Microblade Definitionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For Terry et al (2016: 90), artifacts will be considered microblades “if they exhibit parallel sides, are <7 mm wide, are <2 mm thick, and are associated with specialized cores exhibiting wedge-shaped cross-sections and blade scars <7 mm wide”.…”
Section: A Closer Look At Microblade Definitionsmentioning
confidence: 99%