Abstract
Territory of Mongolia is situated in the center of Asia, a crossroad of the potential migration routes, that connect different Eurasian macroregions. Here an example of earliest appearance and longterm existence of small blade and microblade production has been found. Beyond that, the industries, that appeared within limited area of the Middle Selenga Basin in the late MIS3 — early MIS2, contained the earliest for Northern and Central Asia geometric and non-geometric microliths. They have been found in the sediments of Kharganyn Gol 5 and Tolbor-4, — 16 and –21. They end up in LGM — post- LGM which cause depopulation in the region and following changes in the human groups, occupying this territory. An understanding of the character, causes and specifics of such early appearance of the microblade and bladelet production, and especially geometric microliths, impose the arrangement and definition of the terminology, associated with microlithic assemblages in Asia. This is due to the fact that in the archaeological definitions of both processes and the desired forms of artifacts associated with the production and use of microliths, there are significant discrepancies that complicate the understanding of the described phenomena. The article provides an overview of the research terminology of microlithization processes, and also determines the position of the microlithic complexes of Mongolia in the Upper Paleolithic system of the eastern part of Asia. Keywords: Mongolia, East Asia, Upper Paleolithic, lithic industries, microlithic technology
Highlights
The early origin of pressure microblade production in Asia has always been a controversial issue
The industries, that appeared within limited area of the Middle Selenga Basin in the late MIS3 — early MIS2, contained the earliest for Northern and Central Asia geometric and non-geometric microliths
Found early cores for pressure microblade production are the weak evidence of micropressure technique, as well as early appearance of percussion microblade production does not prove its connection with later pressure technology
Summary
The early origin of pressure microblade production in Asia has always been a controversial issue. Talking about microblade technology in northeast Asia, where, the common limit for microblades width is 6 mm, we usually mean pressure technique of this type of blank production, highly standardized, resulted from narrow set of microblade core types and appeared during or after LGM at the continental part of northeastern Asia, and cannot be comparable to percussive bladelets and microliths directly. It is a clear example of intricate terminology that we use describing the processes of the small laminar blank production. These tools have specific advantages: standardized shape, transportability, availability to be replaced in composite tools and possible usage as the inserts of projectile weapon, that may play significant role in reconstruction of paleoecological conditions
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Teoriya i praktika arkheologicheskikh issledovaniy
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
