2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2020.05.035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Personal ornaments as markers of social behavior, technological development and cultural phenomena in the Siberian early upper Paleolithic

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The data we present herein adds a significant aspect to the symbolic sphere of the Caucasus Palaeolithic societies, furthering our knowledge of late Pleistocene humans in the region. Recent studies have highlighted the importance of ornaments, be they perforated shells, or bone and teeth beads/pendants [ 48 , 144 147 ]. It is now a given that understanding technological behaviors reflected in bone-implements and ornaments manufacture can greatly contribute to the study of the emergence and diffusion of Eurasian UP techno-cultural entities as well as their intra-actions and interactions, locally and globally [ 51 , 52 , 72 , 148 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The data we present herein adds a significant aspect to the symbolic sphere of the Caucasus Palaeolithic societies, furthering our knowledge of late Pleistocene humans in the region. Recent studies have highlighted the importance of ornaments, be they perforated shells, or bone and teeth beads/pendants [ 48 , 144 147 ]. It is now a given that understanding technological behaviors reflected in bone-implements and ornaments manufacture can greatly contribute to the study of the emergence and diffusion of Eurasian UP techno-cultural entities as well as their intra-actions and interactions, locally and globally [ 51 , 52 , 72 , 148 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These first appear in Transbaikalia ca. 42-45 ka (Buvit et al 2015;Graf and Buvit 2017;Lbova 2019), and ca. 40-42 ka in the Tolbor Valley of northern Mongolia (Gladyshev et al 2010(Gladyshev et al , 2012Zwyns et al 2014aZwyns et al , 2014b.…”
Section: The Palaeolithic Recordmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…40-42 ka in the Tolbor Valley of northern Mongolia (Gladyshev et al 2010(Gladyshev et al , 2012Zwyns et al 2014aZwyns et al , 2014b. The ornaments from Upper Cave are most like those from Denisova, and both assemblages include perforated canine teeth of various types of deer and small carnivores, round beads, bone pendants, and perforated shells, none of which are found in south China but are widespread across Mongolia and southern Siberia (see Rybin, 2014;Lbova, 2019).…”
Section: The Palaeolithic Recordmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the most parsimonious interpretation for the presence of the single occurrence of a perforated red deer in the Ordos Plateau relates to social contacts and exchanges over long-distances. The origin of the tooth is perhaps to be found in Caucasus, Southern Siberia or Northeast Asia where similar items are found in the symbolic systems of hunter-gatherers living in these areas since the onset of the Upper Paleolithic (Derevianko and Rybin, 2003;Pitulko et al, 2012;Shunkov et al, 2020;Lbova, 2021;. Such contacts may have also favored the diffusion of microblade technology in Northern China (Keates, 2007;Kuzmin, 2007;Bae, 2010;Elston and Brantingham, 2002;Yi et al, 2016;Wang, 2018;Yue et al, 2021;Zhao et al, 2021) and participated in the intensification of the gene flow between Asian and Siberian populations during this critical period (Yang and Fu, 2018;Sikora et al, 2019).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%