THE UPPER PALEOLITHIC SITE KORMAN’ 9

Abstract

Near the village of Korman’ (Sokyryany district, Chernivtsi region, Ukraine) several Palaeolithic sites are known. In the 1960s and 70s, O. P. Chernysh conducted archaeological studies of the site Korman’ IV. In 2012 the new Palaeolithic site named as Korman’ 9 was discovered by the Dniester Palaeolithic expedition of the IA NASU. A preliminary fieldwork season was conducted in 2013. The main research focused on the chronostratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental study of the site. In the approximately 4 metres thick Quaternary deposits (dating to the late Pleniglacial), three Upper Paleolithic levels were observed.
 The main raw materials used by late Pelistocene humans were local Turonian and Cenomanian flint. The faunal remains in all levels are dominated by reindeer.
 In level I two fireplaces were recorded. One about 1 m in diameter has a layer of burnt loess at its bottom with a thickness of about 10 cm. The collection of 932 lithic artifacts comprises cores, tools, blanks, chips, and chunks. The primary knapping is characterized by parallel uni- and bi-directional blade, bladelet and microblade production. The tools (n = 92) are dominated by backed bladelets / microblades (n = 69). There is a single endscraper, and the few burins are represented by dihedral burins (n = 2), one bruin on a a break and one on a truncation. Other tools represented are bilaterally retouched points, borer, combination tool and retouched pieces. Additionally, in level I, the following personal ornaments were found: one pendant of amber, one pendant of fox tooth, one pendant of a perforated shell and three shell beads.
 Level II. A collection of 20 flint artifacts is presented exclusively by the products of primary flaking.
 In level III, a small number of flint artifacts (n = 67) were recovered, including two cores, one endscraper, and three retouched pieces.
 The lithic industry of level I, according to the technical-typological characteristic and chronostratigraphic position, can be attributed to the Epi-Gravettian technocomplex.
 It is possible, that the collection of level II also belongs to the same technocomplex, but due to the small number of finds, the authors refrain from concrete conclusions. Collection of level III on the base of morphological features can be attributed to the Gravettian technocomplex and is currently undated.