Content uploaded by Jiri Chlachula
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jiri Chlachula on May 24, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/authorsrights
Author's personal copy
The Middle Palaeolithic of the central Trans-Urals: Present evidence
Yuriy B. Serikov
a
, Jiri Chlachula
b
,
c
,
*
a
Department of History, The Nizhniy Tagil’State Academy, Russian Federation
b
Laboratory for Palaeoecology, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, nám. T.G. Masaryka 5555, 762 01 Zlín, Czech Republic
c
Institute of Geoecology and Geoinformation, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Dziegelowa 24, 61-680 Poznan, Poland
article info
Article history:
Available online 28 January 2014
abstract
The Urals and the adjacent regions, located at the easternmost limits of Europe and representing a
geographic borderline with northern Asia/West Siberia, are of key relevance for comprehension of the
culture-historical trajectories and environmental contexts of early peopling to this still marginally
explored montage Russian territory. Complex Quaternary transformations of regional natural settings
due to climate change controlled timing and dynamics of Palaeolithic occupation in the central mountain
zone, foothills and adjoining Fore-Ural and Trans-Ural plains. Following the earliest and still sporadically
mapped presence of the pre-Middle Pleistocene humans in the upper Kama Basin, the first marked
geoarchaeology evidence is linked to the Middle Palaeolithic inhabitation of the Urals foothills and the
mountain inner valleys. The Chusovaya River valley and its tributary valleys, transecting the Central
Ural’s mountain range NEeSW, were the principal corridor for the following Middle and Upper Palae-
olithic migrations into the eastern (Trans-Ural) regions and West Siberia. Except for mountain karst
formations, present Middle Palaeolithic habitat indices come from the eastern Ural foothills, the Leba,
Neiva and Tara River basins, with occupation and workshop sites nearby natural exposures of rocky
outcrops exploited as raw material deposits for lithic industry production. Diagnostic technological at-
tributes of employed Levallois and bifacial stone flaking techniques with corresponding lithic artefact
inventories provide some means for the general pre-Upper Palaeolithic age-assessment of the investi-
gated sites. The limited number of the mapped Middle Palaeolithic loci does not allow evaluation of
spatio-temporal settlement patterns. The present cultural evidence illustrates successful biological and
behavioural adjustments to the Central Urals ecosystems in the framework of Middle/Late Pleistocene
cultural development.
Ó2013 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction: an insight on the Palaeolithic peopling of the
Urals
The Urals, the major mountain system separating the East Eu-
ropean Plains and the West Siberian Lowland, are of principal
importance for understanding timing, conditions, and trajectories
of Pleistocene human expansion into the northern and eastern
territories of the Eurasian continent. Significance of the Ural’s
Palaeolithic studies is accentuated by the strategic geographic po-
sition of this montane belt with a variety of documented palaeo-
ecosystems, having major potential for early human occupation.
The north-central part of the Urals, a key studyarea (Fig. 1), shows a
complex geological history of neotectonic and glacial
palaeogeographic geomorphic modelling and natural trans-
formations governed by Quaternary climate change. Following the
maximum Middle Pleistocene glaciation (MIS 6), expanding from
the Arctic coast over the Polar and Northern Ural mountain ranges
and the adjoining East European and West Siberian Plains
(Mangerud et al., 1999;Svendsen et al., 1999), the North-Central
Ural area remained unglaciated and thus represented a favourable
place for Palaeolithic inhabitation. The adjacent foothills and open
plains were parts of a large periglacial zone linked to the southern
loess regions (Arkhipov, 1989), allowing long-term human settle-
ment in this environmentally vital and biotically productive area
throughout most of the Pleistocene, in contrast to the northern sub-
Arctic Ural territories.
The Urals’Palaeolithic peopling, likely encompassing a time
interval well over 0.5 Ma, is seen as a complex process controlled by
changing palaeoecological conditions responding to the Pleistocene
global climatic variations. The diversity of archaeology records
provides evidence of a long prehistory of human peopling to this
*Corresponding author. Laboratory for Palaeoecology, Tomas Bata University in
Zlin, nám. TGM 5555, 762 01 Zlín, Czech Republic.
E-mail address: Altay@seznam.cz (J. Chlachula).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Quaternary International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint
1040-6182/$ esee front matter Ó2013 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.026
Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273
Author's personal copy
Russian territory (Matyushin, 1979). The earliest presence of
humans is indicated by simple core-and-flake (“pebble-tool”) in-
dustries, representing the most prolific anthropogenic evidence
associated with old Pleistocene alluvial formations (terraces in the
upper Kama and other major river basins) (Matyushin, 1985, 1994;
Pavlov et al., 1995) and persisting as a time-transgressive cultural
inventory well into later times in accordance with the cultural
evidence from the adjoining West Siberian Lowland (Deviatkin
et al., 1992). During the subsequent Middle Pleistocene stages
(MIS 12e6), these most-rudimentary (Lower Palaeolithic) cultural
records were partly replaced by the Middle Palaeolithic traditions
characterized by the Levallois prepared-core stone-flaking and
elaborate bifacial lithic technologies. The Late Pleistocene devel-
opment eventually culminated in formations of the Upper Palae-
olithic blade/micro-blade complexes of the mid/late Last Glacial
Stage (MIS 3e2) (Serikov, 1999, 2000; Chlachula, 2010a; Chlachula
and Serikov, 2012; Kuzmin, 2007). Utilization of non-local (exotic)
lithic raw materials, complementing the local rocks employed in
the expedient stone industries, correlates with this general tech-
nological stone-working progression. This trend corroborates with
the overall cultural evolution, indicating behavioural complexity of
the (pre-)modern humans and their adaptation capabilities to
diverse, including sub-polar, environments (Svendsen and Pavlov,
2003; Pavlov et al., 2004).
The central Trans-Urals, the area east of the main Central Ural
mountain range, the focus of present geoarchaeology studies,
represent a marginally explored region compared to the status of
the Palaeolithic research in the East European Plains as well as in
southwestern Siberia (Pavlov et al., 1995; Velichko et al., 1997a;
Goldina, 2001; Derevianko and Markin, 1992, 1999; Zenin, 2002).
Until the 1990s, the human antiquity of this area was not antici-
pated to pre-date the Last Interglacial (Serikov,1999). Currently, the
evidence of Pleistocene occupation of the central Trans-Ural in-
cludes over 170 open-air and cave sites, about half in situ, and
representing several local cultural complexes (Serikov, 1999, 2000,
2001, 2007a; Chlachula and Serikov, 2011a,b). Most are assigned to
the Mesolithic (w150 sites) or the Upper Palaeolithic (15 sites). The
number of investigated Middle Palaeolithic localities is only eleven.
The palaeogeographic and stratigraphic position of the mapped
occupation locations, as well as the sites’visibility, is
Fig. 1. (A) Geographical location of the territory discussed in the text; (B) Location of the central Trans-Urals study area; (C) Regional distribution of the investigated Middle
Palaeolithic sites in the central Trans-Urals (Sverdlovsk Region) e(1) Galyanskaya; (2e4) Golyy Kamen’Locality (sites Golyy Kamen’shikhan, Golyy Kamen’III, Golyy Kamen’
workshop site); (5) Gorbunovskiy Torfianik eBeregovaya III; (6) Garevaya II; (7e9) Ural’skiye Zori Locality (sites Ural’skiye Zori III, V, Ural’skiye Zori Boloto); (10) Ambarka I; (11)
Prokop’evskaya Salda VI; (12) Nizhnaya Salda Site (a potential Middle Palaeolithic record).
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273262
Author's personal copy
predetermined by past geomorphic processes and biotic shifts in
both the mountain and foothill zones of the central Urals. The area
lacks the extensive aeolian sand and silt (loess) cover deposits,
comparable to those that incorporate deeply buried cultural finds
as well as rich palaeontological records in the East European and
southern Siberian steppe-parklands. At present, long-term Pleis-
tocene occupation localities are absent, and deeply stratified
geological contexts, such as at the Talickogo open-air site (14 m) or
the Gari Upper Palaeolithic site complex (5 m), are rather excep-
tional (Bader, 1960; Serikov, 1999, 2007a).
The best geo-contextually fixed evidence of the Middle Palae-
olithic occupation in the broader Central Urals is linked to the
stratified 5e20 m loess-palaeosol sections in the Upper Kama basin
(Chlachula, 2010a)(Fig. 1B). Some indices of the pre-Upper Palae-
olithic peopling of the central mountain regions come from the
karst cave sites in the Chusovaya River valley transecting the Cen-
tral Urals from east to west, and from the genetically diverse Late
Quaternary formations distributed on the eastern slopes of the
central Ural Mountain range and the adjacent valleys draining the
western margin of the West Siberian Plain (Fig. 1C). The palae-
oenvironmental (geological and biological) proxy data point to the
existence of productive ecosystems from the late Middle Pleisto-
cene and the early Late Pleistocene, particularly in the Last Inter-
glacial Stage (Stefanovskiy, 2001). The geological contexts, with a
variety of cultural materials, indicate several stages of occupation.
The western Ural foothills and the upper Kama basin are the areas
with the highest density of (open-air) Middle Palaeolithic localities,
whereas the occupation sites further east are rather sporadic.
The ongoing investigations on the Middle and Upper Palae-
olithic in the north-central Trans-Urals have provided new infor-
mation on chronology and natural conditions of the initial
colonization of these territories, expanding further into the sub-
polar and eastern regions of northern Eurasia (Serikov, 2001;
Chlachula and Serikov, 2011a,b, 2012). The Pleistocene ecosystem
transformation processes, evolutionary cultural trends and Palae-
olithic behavioural adaptation patterns under specific material-
technological conditions, together with documentation of the
sequenced climatic events stored in geological records, are the
main objectives of present multidisciplinary geoarchaeology
studies. The long-term research focus is on detailing contexts,
chronostratigraphy, and palaeoecology of single occupation sites
and their regional cultural linkage with southern and western areas
of the Urals (e.g., Danukalova and Yakovlev, 2006). This contribu-
tion provides some insights and perceptions on the geomorphic,
environmental and geoarchaeology context of the Middle Palae-
olithic occupation from the central (Trans-)Ural region, represent-
ing one of the most significant geographic areas for mapping early
human movements into the Russian Arctic and West Siberia.
2. Geography and natural conditions of the central Urals and
Trans-Urals
Geographically between Europe and north-central Asia, the
Urals extend from the Arctic coast in the north to the open steppes
of western Kazakhstan in the south over a total distance of 2000 km
(Fig. 1A). The area of the current investigations of the Central Urals
and Trans-Urals (56e59
N) is one of the five physio-geographic
zones linking the southern Urals with the northern sub-Polar and
Polar regions (Fig. 1B). The main mountain chain (Narodnaya Mt.
1895 m asl.) and the adjoining foothills and bordering plains are
characterized by a marked vegetation zonation along the NeS lat-
itudinal geographic transect as well as the altitudinal topographic
gradient, with polar tundra-forest, boreal taiga and open steppe,
respectively, representing the principal biotopes. The Central Ural
massif has the lowest and broadest topographic relief (700e
1300 m asl.) of the entire mountain system, built by smooth and
broad montane ranges separated by intermountain depressions
with EeW oriented fluvial drainages. The (palaeo-)relief configu-
ration played a key role in the Pleistocene human dispersal as well
as faunal migrations. In the west, this central mountain region is
bordered by the adjoining Kama River basin loess plateau.
The Trans-Ural (Zauralye) Region is delimited by the central Ural
mountain range in the west, and the Tobol River in the east,
following a steep (1200e200 m asl.) continental relief gradient
(Fig. 1C). The Sosva/Tavda River basins and the southern part of the
Sverdlovsk Region form the northern and southern limits, respec-
tively, both opening into parkland-steppes. This eastern and topo-
graphically higher Trans-Ural region, with the administrative
centre Nizhniy Tagil’, is formed by small hills (300e400 m asl.)
separated by shallow river valleys (Sosva, Tura, Tagil’, Neiva,
Pyshma), small lakes and bogs along the western limits of the West
Siberian Plain (150e200 m asl.). From a palaeo-geographic point of
view, this research area is characterized by a rather broken
mountain and transient foothill relief associated with the Middle
Palaeolithic (Neanderthal) inhabitation as found in the geographi-
cally closest regions of Central and Eastern Europe and SW Siberia
(e.g., Annisutkin, 1990; Brace, 1979; Derevianko, and Markin, 1992,
1999; Chabaï et al., 1995; Pathou-Matis, 2000; Neruda and Valoch,
2007; Stefaniak and Socha, 2009; Cyrek et al., 2010; Sytnik et al.,
2010). The overall past and present landscape configuration with
karst bedrock locations and surficial mineral deposit outcrops
provided productive environments for the Middle Palaeolithic
occupation, as well as later human settlements of this marginal
geographical territory.
Except for the major continental Middle Pleistocene glaciation
(presumably MIS 6) (Mangerud and Svendsen, 1999), the Central
Urals area was located in the extra-glacial zone during most of the
Late Quaternary. Fossil periglacial landscape forms and cryogenic
features encountered in unconsolidated surficial geological for-
mations attest to permafrost conditions during the Last Glacial. The
modern climate is moderately continental with cold and relatively
dry winters and hot summers, with a dominant seasonal (spring-
fall) precipitation regime. The present MAT fluctuate around þ3
C;
the minimum and maximum temperature range values are 50
C/
þ40
C. Most of the investigated region is covered by mixed boreal
(taiga) forests dominated by birch and pine, with spruce, fir and
larch at the higher topographic elevations.
3. The central Urals and Trans-Urals Middle Palaeolithic
environments
The territory of the broader Urals attests to a complex palae-
ogeographic and ecology development reflecting large-scale land-
scape restructuring by recent orogenic activity, and the Arctic and
mountain Pleistocene glaciations (Arkhipov et al., 1986; Astakhov,
2001; Velichko, 1993; Mangerud et al., 1999; Svendsen et al,
1999; Stefanovskiy, 1997, 2001; Yakhimovich et al., 1987). The
reactivated tectonic uplift at the beginning of the early Middle
Pleistocene (0.73e0.6 Ma) affecting the broader Urals area, accel-
erated the regional relief evolution and shaping of the present
Central Urals drainage system. Late Quaternary climate trends led
to strengthened continentality and contributed to formation of a
semi-arid parkland-steppe zone replacing the former humid
interglacial deciduous woodlands, thus promoting a more open
landscape across larger geographical areas. Fossil faunas of the
Tiraspol Complex from the interglacial (MIS 9) alluvial deposits
document productive ecosystems with rich and diverse biotic re-
sources, able to support the earliest Middle Palaeolithic commu-
nities (Stefanovskiy, 2001; Chlachula, 2010a). A Middle Palaeolithic
presence in the subsequent (MIS 7) interglacial over most of the
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273 263
Author's personal copy
southern and central Ural regions is very likely, indicated by lithic
industries employing Levallois stone flaking. Warm and humid
Middle Pleistocene interglacials with biotic resources of broad-leaf
forests undoubtedly enabled human expansion north and east
along the Ural mountain range through the major valley systems of
the Kama, Pechora, Chusovaya, and Tobol Rivers. The Urals’pro-
nounced topographic diversity predisposed the existence of mosaic
and interacting mountain and foothill ecosystems, representing
potential early human occupation habitats. Surficial-water perco-
lations in limestone formations in the central mountain valleys
contributed to formation of karst cavities and caves used by people
for shelters.
A dramatic global climate cooling, initiating the following glacial
stage (MIS 6), triggered major territorial natural shifts and a biotic
landscape re-shaping over the Urals, with the northern sub-arctic
tundra-steppe zone expanding to the southern areas occupied by
periglacial megafauna (mammoth, woolly rhinoceros, giant elk,
bison and other large animals). This time interval likely correlates
with the maximum expansion of the northern continental ice to the
present Perm eNizhniy Tagil’line (Zemtsov, 1976; Arkhipov et al.,
1986). If people could have survived in the Central Ural and the
Tran-Ural areas when the major Penultimate Glaciation (MIS 6)
reaching the northernmost limits of the this region is unclear,
although the physical endurance of (presumably) the Neanderthals
combined with use of fire could have coped with long-term harsh
climate conditions, as far as the necessary food procurement base
was available. Fossil fauna of the time-equivalent periglacial allu-
vium (25e30 m terrace) documents a cold and arid tundra-steppe
(Stefanovskiy, 1997).
The beginning of the Late Pleistocene is marked by a major
transcontinental warming, best evidenced in the loessepalaeosol
records across the Russian Plains and southern Siberia (Arkhipov
et al., 2000; Little et al., 2002; Chlachula, 2003)aswellasthe
associated floral and faunal biotic records characteristic of southern
parkland steppe (Cheguryaeva and Khvalina, 1961; Velichko et al.,
1992; Bolikhovskaya and Molodkov, 2006). The prominent rise of
mean annual temperature at the very beginning of the interglacial
may have negatively influenced accessibility and occupation
capability of the adjacent plains of West Siberia due to ground
water saturation after permafrost degradation and ice-wastage,
particularly in the formerly glaciated northern regions, thus
impeding free passage of the Middle Palaeolithic people into the
newly opened areas. Increased continentality and high summer
temperature, exceeding present values by 4e5C
, led to expansion
of parkland-steppe in the southern and central Ural regions, facil-
itating new human (Neanderthal/early Homo sapiens?) migrations.
Precipitation increase by w100 mm promoted a northward
expansion of southern taiga along both sides of the Ural Mountains
about 500e700 km beyond the present geographical limits
(Velichko, 1993; Velichko et al., 1992). The Last Interglacial (sensu
lato), particularly its warm climate stages (MIS 5e-c-a), are assumed
to have been the most favourable temporal intervals supporting the
Middle Palaeolithic dispersal across wide geographical places and
fostering human adaptation capabilities as well as a general
development of material culture.
These climatic conditions were disrupted by the onset of the
early Last Glacial stage (MIS 4) geologically manifested by accu-
mulations of wind-born (loessic) sediments on the plains and by
thick periglacial alluvia in the main riverine systems. This envi-
ronmentally rather dramatic change in the north-central Urals and
Trans-Urals coincides with the expanding Arctic glaciations from
the Kara and Barents Sea ice lobes onto the mainland and reaching
the northern Ural limits (Mangerud et al., 1999; Svendsen et al.,
1999) in corroboration with the West Siberian glacigenic records
(Astakhov, 1997) and the appearance of cold-adapted small and
large mammal species in the extra-glacial regions (Bachura and
Kosintsev, 2007). This process caused a major spatial reduction of
the formerly occupied territories and geographic confinement of
the Middle Palaeolithic habitat to the Central-Southern Ural peri-
glacial tundra-steppe zone. Similar scenarios with analogous geo-
and palaeo-environmental conditions are documented over large
regions of southern and eastern Siberia formerly inhabited by
Middle Palaeolithic people (Medvedev et al., 1990; Drozdov et al.,
1999; Chlachula et al., 2003, 2004; Mochanov and Fedoseeva,
2001; Derevianko and Shunkov, 2009).
Following the early Last Glacial (MIS 4) maximum, warmer
climate fluctuations mark the beginning of the mid-Last Glacial
Stage (MIS 3; 55e24 ka), with a gradual recession of ice limits in the
Northern Urals and regional permafrost disintegration. The warm
climate trends caused activation of periglacial and gravity-slope/
gelifluction processes in the Trans-Ural area, resulting in massive
accumulations of up to 80 m-thick polygenic colluvia in the foot-
hills, and possibly destroying most of the former open-air Middle
Palaeolithic localities. This may explain the rather sporadic pre-
Upper Palaeolithic cultural occurrences in original buried geolog-
ical contexts. A long-term environmental amelioration fostered
human expansion into the (likely) formerly vacant northern and
polar territories (Svendsen et al., 1999; Pavlov et al., 2004). A sub-
fossil insect points to high-zonality of the central and northern
Urals and West Siberian with tundra-forest and “mammoth steppe”
settings during the Middle Pleniglacial (Zinovyev, 2011). This
moderate interstadial interval brought a regional ecological sta-
bility chronologically marking the culture-historical and biolog-
ical(?) transition of the former Urals’populations into modern
human communities distinguished by blade stone-flaking tech-
nologies. Some mapped occupation loci in the marginal areas
evidently retained the more traditional (“expedient”) stone flaking
techniques likely because of the geographic isolation and/or spe-
cific behavioural adaptation and food-procurement strategies.
From this viewpoint, a clear differentiation between the late Middle
Palaeolithic and these geographically “marginal”Upper Palaeolithic
complexes with non-diagnostic industries including macrolithic
instruments based solely on the formal artefact parameters and the
material employed is difficult.
The Middle Palaeolithic open sites of the early Late Pleistocene
(corresponding to MIS 5e4) are predominantly in distorted
geological contexts, with the most recent ones (MIS 3) covered by
the late Last Glacial loess and sands, overlying the 30e25 m-high
alluvial terraces. Only cave sites in the central Ural valleys offer
better preservation potential, although archaeological strata are
distorted by cryogenic and solifluction activity. Present anthropo-
genic evidence is limited to several cultural horizons strati-
graphically below the
14
C-dated Upper Palaeolithic layers (Serikov,
1997a , 1997b;Chlachula, 2010a). From a palaeo-environmental
viewpoint, these coldest stadial intervals of the early Last Glacial
(MIS 4) correspond to periglacial tundra-steppe in the foothills and
on the plains, and to tundra-forest in the central mountains. The
following interstadial warming promoted expansion of mixed
spruce- pine dominated forests. The corresponding time interval
correlates with the most intensive late Middle/early Upper Palae-
olithic geographic expansion, reaching the northernmost regions of
the Fore-Urals as well as the remote territories of North Siberia
(Pavlov et al., 2001; Mangerud et al., 1999; Pitulko et al., 2004).
The progressing biological and cultural adaptation presumably
enabled reoccupation prior to and again shortly after the LGM. The
Central Urals, forming a free geographic passage connecting the
East European and West Siberian Plains, played the key role in this
evolutionary process. The ecosystems favourable for habitation
likely persisted until the onset of the final (MIS 2) glacial advance
with localized ice-caps confined to the Northern and Polar Urals
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273264
Author's personal copy
(Velichko et al., 1997b). Environmental transformations linked to
this final major Pleistocene glaciation brought a re-establishment
of tundra-steppe and tundra-forest in the Central Ural lowland
and mountain areas, respectively, and a final disappearance of the
Middle Palaeolithic populations.
4. The Middle Palaeolithic Geoarchaeology evidence
Studies on the Middle Palaeolithic occupation of the central Ural
and Trans-Urals are still in their infancy. Compared to the western
side of the Ural Mts. (the Fore-Urals) with site concentrations in the
upper Kama and the Pechora River basins (Pavlov et al., 1995;
Pavlov, 1996; Chlachula, 2010a), the number of the mapped as
well as potential Middle Palaeolithic localities in the Trans-Ural
area is lower due to several factors, including site visibility in the
forested landscape, site preservation potential affected by past
(primarily MIS 4) geomorphic processes, as well as the state of
actual research. Also, the investigated areas lack an extensive loess
cover that provides a solid chronostratigraphical control of the
Middle Palaeolithic sites in the Fore-Ural region. In contrast, the
time-equivalent human occupations in the central mountain val-
leys and the Trans-Ural foothills can be anticipated in cave settings
and in various polygenetic geo-contexts, respectively. The approx-
imate temporal assignment of these locations is based on the
presumed or assigned age of the enclosing geological context
sealing the Palaeolithic records, the evolutionary taxonomy of the
accompanying fossil fauna remains, on formal attributes of arte-
facts (technique, patina, degree of corrosion) and the overall cul-
tural oblique (summary technological and typological
characteristics of stone industries) of the archaeological material,
displaying the characteristic traits of the Middle Palaeolithic
(Levallois and non-Levallois) stone flaking techniques. The archaic
and strongly patinated instruments, pointing to a pre-Upper
Palaeolithic age of the sites discussed below, differ from the
fresh-flaked, non-patinated and more elaborate industries typical
of the local Upper/Final Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of the region.
The general model assumes the initial (and subsequent) Middle
Palaeolithic migrations from the East European Plains and the
southern Urals into the eastern and northern mountain areas,
principally through the Chusovaya River valley cutting NEeSW
through the central mountain range (Fig. 2). Further human
migration into the eastern (Trans-Ural) regions likely occurred
through the local riverine systems (Iset’, Pyshma, Neiva, Tagil’, Salda
and Tura), draining the foothills along the western margin of the
West Siberian Lowland (Serikov, 1997b). The unique geographic
and geomorphology configuration of the Chusovaya valley in the
Central Ural Mountains predisposed a long history of human set-
tlement in this area (Petrin, 1999), representing a strategic natural
gateway for Palaeolithic infiltrations further east into West Siberia
(Petrin, 1986).
The local archaeological record from the investigated cave sites
(15) sealed in karst formations encloses a long cultural record, but
principally associated with the Upper Palaeolithic/Mesolithic oc-
cupations of the late Last Glacial linked to reindeer hunting
(Serikov, 2001). The Chusovaya River valley tributaries (Koiva,
Sylvitsa, Serebryanka) with presumably rich Pleistocene biotic
niches should be the focus of subsequent geoarchaeological
reconnaissance and palaeoenvironmental studies.
Currently, there are 11 investigated pre-Upper Palaeolithic sites
in the central Trans-Ural area (Fig. 1C) (Serikov, 2006). Most of
these sites are found in proximity to rocky raw materials outcrops
used for the lithic industry. Although some sites may be repre-
sented by only a few, but diagnostic stone artefacts, there is
growing evidence of the Middle Palaeolithic in the Trans-Urals,
with both occupation and workshop sites. Four Middle Palae-
olithic sites are located near the exposed bedrock deposits at
Golyy Kamen’Hill (Galyanskaya IeII, Golyy Kamen’3, Golyy
Kamen’“Shikhan”) in the central part of the Trans-Ural region.
Four other sites are found in the upper Tura River valley (Garevaya
II Site, Ural’skiye Zori III, V, Ural’skiye Zori Boloto), and the
remaining single occupations are found in the Leba River valley
(Gobrunovskyy Torfianik eBeregovaya III Site), the Ambarka val-
ley (Ambarka I), and the Salda valley (Prokop’evskaya Salda VI,
Nizhnaya Salda). In terms of the raw material procurement, fine-
grained metamorphic rocks, silicified tuff and andesitic porphyry
tuff (the Golly Kamen Locality and Ambarka Site), and occasionally
isolated quartz/quartzite fluvial cobbles (the Galyanskaya and
Salda Sites), were used. Utilization of exotic material is shown by a
massive and thick-patinated porphyry flake from the Gorbu-
novskiy Torfianik eBeregovaya Site III, the natural origin of which
is in the Chusovaya valley (the Golyy Kamen Mt.) about 100 km
further west. Probably of similar regional lithic provenance are
well-patinated bifacial instruments worked from a dark-grey,
high-quality quartzite found at the Poludenka I Site. An isolated
tool, a side scraper from the Shaitanskoe Ozero Lake Site, primarily
famous as a Neolithic cultural place (Serikov, 2006, 2007b), com-
pletes the list of the Middle Palaeolithic occupation loci marked by
employment of non-indigenous raw materials.
Presently the earliest investigated (open-air) Palaeolithic local-
ities in the Leba and Tura valleys (Galyanskaya and Garevaya II,
resp.) characterized by the Levallois technology and previously
referred as to the Lower Palaeolithic (Serikov, 1999), were re-
classified in respect to formal technological characteristics as
Middle Palaeolithic habitation and workshop sites (Chlachula,
2010a). Other formerly reported pre-Upper Palaeolithic cultural
components, single archaic and strongly patinated tools, were
evidently re-utilised at the Mesolithic sites with more elaborate
and non-weathered lithic inventories (Serikov, 1997a). In general,
the particular morphological and technological attribute variations
of the Central Urals and Trans-Urals Middle/Upper Palaeolithic
stone industries suggest the presence of several local complexes in
the montane and foothill palaeo-ecosystems.
4.1. The Leba River basin
The principal pre-Upper Palaeolithic open-air occupation site
complex is found at Golyy Kamen’Hill in the Leba River basin in the
outskirts of Nizhniy Tagil’(Fig. 1C). The hill (374 m asl.) forms a
prominent circular topographic elevation 150 m above the
Fig. 2. The Chusovaya River valley with numerous karst cave sites occupied by the
Pleistocene-age people served as the major early human migration corridor through
the Urals geographically linking the East European and the West Siberian Plains.
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273 265
Author's personal copy
surrounding terrain with a diameter of about 8.5 km. The rocky top
of the hill is built by 10e15 m of exposed silicified tuff (Fig. 3). To the
south and SW, the mountain is flanked by the Leba River at a dis-
tance of 1.1 km, a left tributary of the Tagil’River. To the NW, Golyy
Kamen’Hill is bordered by the Galyanskij Torfianik (a turf site), a
former (Pleistocene) drained lake. The strategic location of the lo-
cality, with availability of the local rocky deposits, was the main
factor attracting Palaeolithic occupation. The cultural records are
found scattered and shallowly buried at several places near the
bedrock exposures.
4.1.1. Galyanskaya Site
Following the first diagnostic stone tools finds at the Galyan-
skaya Site, identified in 1954, the present lithic industry originated
from several discrete spatial concentrations on the slope of Golyy
Kamen’Hill about 30e40 m above the Leba River floodplain (Fig. 4).
Identically strongly patinated humanly worked lithics, presumably
Middle Palaeolithic, were found in a stratified geological context of
slope deposits 0.7 m below the present surface (Fig. 5). The
assembled collection (117 pcs) includes cores and core pre-forms,
partly retouched flakes, side-scrapers, bifaces, Levallois blades,
and points (Fig. 6). The stone artefacts and tools are characterized
by a 1e2 mm-thick and uniform dark brown or dark green patina
on two specific kinds of raw material (quartz-permineralized/
silicified tuff and andesitic porphyry tuff, respectively) that is
absent on the more recent (Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic) in-
struments made from the same raw material. In respect to the
formal characteristics (stone tool typology and a differential surfi-
cial wind-abrasion degree), the broader locality includes several
chronologically diverse cultural complexes around the local out-
crops, with the earliest one formerly assigned to the Lower Palae-
olithic (Serikov, 2000).
A Middle Pleistocene age of the sites, with the macrolithic
bifacial stone tools (Fig. 7:2) previously referred to as the Acheulian,
has been re-evaluated as likely of (early) Late Pleistocene
(Chlachula, 2010a). A nearby workshop site is documented at Golyy
Kamen’positioned on an elevated plateau at the Nizhniy Tagil’city
periphery with evidence of exploitation of greyish-green silicified
tuffs from the local bedrock exposures. The location was clearly
repeatedly used by Palaeolithic and possibly Mesolithic people as
indicated by the differential surface weathering and the progress-
ing technological diversity of the stone industries. These are scat-
tered on the present surface or partly buried within the slope
deposits below the exposed and readily accessible geological for-
mation (Serikov, 1999). Utilization of other lithic raw materials is
documented by jasper and quartz flakes made on cobbles from local
river alluvia. The employed Levallois technique of stone flaking is
manifested by centrically prepared and two-platform nuclei, and
the associated Levallois points and side-scrapers (Fig. 6:7e10)
characteristic of the Middle Palaeolithic tradition.
4.1.2. Golyy Kamen’Hill locality
The Golyy Kamen’Hill Site, interpreted as a Middle Palaeolithic
workshop, is found on the southern slope of Golyy Kamen’Hill
about 30 m above the Leba River (Fig. 3). The site was exposed in
1993 after intensive rains and subsequent landslides caused
erosion on the slopes of Golyy Kamen’Hill to a depth of 0.5e0.8 m.
The erosion exposed a number of “archaic”artefacts formally
identical (in terms of the stone tool typology and the surficial
patination) with the lithic collections from the Galyanskaya Site
located 1.5 km north. The contextual sub-surface position of the
Fig. 4. Galyanskaya Site. A NE view of the Middle Palaeolithic occupation site.
Fig. 5. Galynskaya Site stratigraphy with Middle Palaeolithic stone industry buried in
colluvial slope deposits overlain by a thin cover of aeolian sediments and present soil.
Fig. 3. The Golyy Kamen’Hill. Exposed silicified tuff outcrops on top of the hill were
used as a lithic raw material extraction place and a Palaeolithic workshop site.
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273266
Author's personal copy
lithic record of the Golyy Kamen’silicified tuffs corresponds to
that from the previously indentified buried cultural horizon
(Fig. 5). The lithic industry variety includes flakes, some retaining
the original rock cortex, partly prepared nuclei/cores, and large
bifacially-worked tools. Several lithics show signs of secondary
working and re-use, often encountered at other Trans-Ural Late
Pleistocene occupation localities. Another Middle Palaeolithic site
(Golyy Kamen’III) with equally deeply patinated flakes (2) was
discovered on the southern slope of Golyy Kamen’Hill, 1 km
below its top on the 10 m terrace of the Leba River. Finally, archaic
lithic industry occurrences are also associated with the very top of
the hill (“shikhan”site) with artefacts made from both silicified
tuffs and andesitic porphyry tuffs found in the local bedrock
outcrops.
Fig. 6. Galyanskaya Site. The Middle Palaeolithic stone industry: a laterally retouched flake/core fragment (1), two-platform core with prepared platforms (2), one-platform flake
core (3, 5), a reutilized core (4), discoidal core/scraper (6), the Levallois flakes (7, 9), side-scraper (8), bilaterally retouched/utilized flake (10) (silicified tuff).
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273 267
Author's personal copy
4.1.3. Gorbunovskiy Torfianik eBeregovaya III site
The multi-layer Beregovaya III Site is located on the NE bank of
the Gorbunovskiy Torfianik (turf) site 5 m above the present Leba
River level, about 8 km NW of the Golyy Kamen’Hill. The mapped
occupation area includes over 500 m
2
with the original cultural
horizon sealed 40 cm below the surface in slope deposits. A
controlled excavation (1985) delivered a small set (12pcs) of simply
worked, archaic tools analogous to the Middle Palaeolithic stone
tool assemblage from the Galyanskaya Locality. The technological
and typological uniformity of both collections, characterized by
crude and massive unmodified flakes, partly prepared Levallois
cores and large bifaces, suggests a chronologically-corresponding
Pleistocene tradition associated with exploitation of the local
geological rock deposits, and likely retaining similar adaptation
strategies eloquently manifested by the “archaic”tool inventories.
Apart from coarse flakes, the site collection included three crude
and 13e16 cm long bifaces produced in a uniform technical manner
on compact greenish fine-grained sandstone (Fig. 8).
4.2. The upper Tura and Neiva River basin
The upper Tura River valley (the Kushvinsk District, Sverdlovsk
Region) is the second principal geographic loci with a concentration
of mapped occupation sites associated with the Palaeolithic
peopling of the Central Trans-Ural territory. The cultural records are
found in shallow geological contexts, in places exposed by erosion,
and mixed, in some places, with later (Mesolithic) cultural com-
plexes at the evidently re-occupied localities.
4.2.1. Garevaya II Site
The Garevaya II Site is located on the right bank of the Tura River
close to the confluence with its tributary Blizhnaya Garevka, 6 km
NW of Kushva town. This open-air Middle Palaeolithic occupation
site is positioned on a flat rocky rampart 6 m above the river. The
spatial extent of the habitation area, delimited by the lithic industry
distribution, includes a total of w400 m
2
, of which 120 m
2
were
excavated. The Middle Palaeolithic artefacts were found about 30e
40 cm below the present surface in brownish colluvial silt and clay
deposits overlying limestone bedrock (Fig. 9). The cultural records
includes an assemblage of 36 worked and weathered lithic pieces
covered by a thick patina (absent on the Mesolithic site component
accounting >1000 stone artefacts) and displaying rather archaic
technological features suggesting an earlier (pre-)Upper Palae-
olithic tradition. The porphyry tuff-made stone artefacts (Fig. 10),
are represented by coarse and thick flakes (14 pcs), occasionally
marginally side-retouched (2 pcs), elongated flakes/blades (6 pcs)
and nuclei (14), including the typical Levallois forms. Due to the
strategic position of the site, a subsequent re-occupation is indi-
cated by a re-utilization of some of the Palaeolithic tools by the
Mesolithic people.
4.2.2. Ambarka I site
The multi-layer site Ambarka I, manifesting a Late Pleistocene to
early Holocene settlement, shares typical traits with the other pre-
Upper Palaeolithic sites from the investigated Trans-Ural area. The
site is found on the right bank of the Ambarka stream at its
confluence with the Neiva River about 1.5 km NE of Murzinka
village (northern Sverdlovsk Region). The geomorphological and
geological position on a bedrock rampart 9 m above the river level
is analogous to the above discussed sites sealed by colluvial clays.
Among the dominant Mesolithic artifacts (w1500 pcs), an inten-
sively weathered and strongly patinated discoidal core made from a
grey-greenish porphyry tuff was identified (Fig. 11:1), manifesting
the characteristic Middle Palaeolithic stone-flaking technology
Fig. 7. Poludenka Site (1) and Galyanskaya Site (2). Middle Palaeolithic bifacial tools
(silicified tuff). (lithic industry illustrations by Yu.B. Serikov).
Fig. 8. Gorbunovskiy Torfianik (Beregovaya III Site). Bifacial stone tools (silicified tuff).
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273268
Author's personal copy
attributes and suggesting some temporal asynchroneity with and a
strange element in the dominant Mesolithic cultural record.
4.2.3. Ural’skiye Zori Locality
The Ural’skiye Zori Locality represents a complex of three open
occupation sites (Ural’skiye Zori III, V, Ural’skiye Zori Boloto) located
on the right bank of the Tura River (Fig.1C). The Ural’skie Zori Site III
is situated on a slope platform 13 m above the river about 3 km
downstream of the Garevaya II Site. The mapped habitation area is
w400 m
2
,104m
2
of which were excavated. Similarly as at Garevaya,
the cultural horizon was embedded in brownish silts of 30e40 cm
below the present surface. An analogous geological stratigraphy
context was documented at Site V, with a mapped habitation area of
500 m
2
and 120 m
2
excavated. The Middle Palaeolithic finds (6 pcs)
include coarse, wind-abraded, thick-patinated and partly retouched
flakes, and nuclei made on the local porphyry tuff (Fig. 11:2e4). The
patterned geomorphic distribution of the Palaeolithic settlement
locations corroborates their strategic positions and availability of
lithic raw material resources. The lithic records with typical Middle
Palaeolithic stone flaking attributes and a strong patina varies
radically from the non-patinated and typologically and technologi-
cally differing Mesolithic artefacts.
4.3. The Salda River basin
4.3.1. Prokop’evskaya Salda VI site
An isolated find originated from the Prokop’evskaya Salda VI, an
open site on the left bank of the Saldy River (Krasnoural’skiy
Fig. 9. Garevaya Site II stratigraphy. Position of the Middle Palaeolithic artefacts sealed
in brownish colluvial silt and clay deposits overlying limestone bedrock.
Fig. 10. The Middle Palaeolithic stone industry from the Tura valley (Garevaya II Site):
retouched flake (1), one-platform core (2), an elongated unmodified Levallois flake (3)
(porphyry tuff).
Fig. 11. The Middle Palaeolithic stone industry from the Tura valley: Ambarka Site I ea
Levallois core (1); Ural’skiye Zori Boloto Site eunmodified flake (2), transverse side-
scraper (3), bifacial core (4) (porphyry tuff).
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273 269
Author's personal copy
District). The lithic instrument is represented by a meticulously
worked 16 9 cm-large biface made from a quartz cobble. This tool,
unique in the central Urals, was evidently secondarily buried in a
gravelly river alluvium, but with signs of a minor surficial abrasion
and post-depositional damage. Its culture-chronological classifi-
cation as Middle Palaeolithic is based on the technological criteria
of performed bifacial stone flaking unparallel in the later (Upper
Palaeolithic and Mesolithic) cultural complexes.
4.3.2. Nizhnaya Salda Site
A rather unique bifacial tool made on a strongly patinated grey-
greenish porphyry tuff comes from the Nizhnaya Salda Site, 35 km
NE of Nizhnyo Tagil’, found buried in a stratified geo-context in
slope deposits 0.5e0.7 m below the present surface. Very extraor-
dinary is the size of this instrument (26.5 cm) (Fig 12). The form
displays some similarities with the Middle Palaeolithic (the late
Acheulian) European and the Near Eastern traditions, characterized
by well-fashioned bifacial tools. The Nizhnaya Salda specimen is
without any direct (including chronologically later) analogues in
the broader Ural and adjacent areas. Due to the lack of dating
control, the assignment of this tool as of the Middle Palaeolithic
(sensu lato) is tentative. The specific technological processing of this
particular find also shows some affinities with the later (MIS 5e4)
Middle Palaeolithic (Mousterian/Micoquian) milieu (e.g., Valoch,
1988). Despite the absence of any accompanying cultural mate-
rial, this artefact documents a very high level of mastery of the
bifacial stone flaking technique.
5. Chronology of the cultural records
In respect to the geo-contextual and spatial site configuration as
well as the diagnostic technological characteristics with application
of the Levallois technique, a late Middle/an early Late Pleistocene
chronological assignment of the Trans-Ural Palaeolithic complexes
is most likely. This age is supported by thick patination of the
worked lithics absent on artefact inventories from the later (Upper
Palaeolithic/Mesolithic) localities from buried as well as surface
contexts. Thick patina on the lithics found in geological positions
with similar geochemical conditions, in congruence with the
archaic oblique of stone tools, is an age proxy indicator separating
the pre- and post Upper Palaeolithic assemblages, parallel to the
cultural evidence from the neighboring regions. Because of the
scarcity of higher-quality rocks, there are certain indices of raw
material shortage in the post-Middle Palaeolithic cultural com-
plexes, best exemplified at the local Mesolithic localities with
predominant micro-lithic stone components.
The shallow geological contexts of the mapped archaeological
horizons at most of the Pleistocene Trans-Ural sites situated in
active slope settings or exposed on the present surface hinder exact
chronological assessment. The absence of numerical dates from the
investigated sites reflects the state of research, but technological
parameters of stone industries provide some means of general time
assessment of evolutionary stages. The Galyanskaya Site delivered
the most representative Middle Palaeolithic regional assemblage,
although the other sites display equally diagnostic pre-Upper
Palaeolithic tool forms. Stone industries with the analogously
applied Levallois stone-flaking techniques and characteristic arte-
fact/tool inventories are known from the well-stratified occupation
sites from the neighboring regions of the Volga Basin in the west
(e.g., the early Late Pleistocene Mousterian site Sukhaya Mechetka/
Stalingradskaya) (Zamiyatnin, 1961), in the southern Ural foothills
(the late Middle Palaeolithic site Bogdanovka) (Shirokov, 1989;
Shirokov et al., 2011), as well as in SW Siberia (the Gorno Altai
cave complexes) (Derevianko and Markin, 1992, 1999; Derevianko,
2010). A close formal similarity to the Galyanskaya Locality collec-
tions (scrapers, bifaces, cores, thick flakes) (Petrin and Serikov,
1988,p.27e36) can be found in the lithic collection from the
Mysovoy (Urta Tyibe) Site on the Karabalakty Lake shore in Bash-
kiria, southern Urals (Matyushin, 1973). There, over 50 strongly
patinated archaic tool forms represented by unifacial and bifacial
choppers, cleavers, massive scrapers, crude bifacies and Levallois
nuclei were assigned to the Acheulian/Mousterian Complex (Bader
and Matyushin, 1973). Indices of progressive blade-extraction
based stone-flaking techniques that are encountered at the Upper
Palaeolithic Urals sites (Scherbakova, 1994) are missing at in the
central Tran-Ural lithic assemblages.
A close morphological and technological comparison and the
overall formal character of the stone industries provide support for
the Middle Palaeolithic age assessment of the central Trans-Urals
findings. Specifically, the bifacial stone tools as well as the side-
scraper components occur uniformly at all the sites. Equally and
most diagnostic are the Levallois cores and the appertaining de-
tached lithic forms (the Levallois blades and flakes) encountered in
the Trans-Ural sites and the complexes from the adjoining southern
(SW/SE) regions. The cultural collections include principally large,
crude flakes with low-angle detaching platforms, an element not
observed in the Final Pleistocene cultural inventories. These most
representative technological attributes and typological forms are
absent in the subsequent stages of the Central Urals’Upper and
Final Palaeolithic cultural development. The shared lithic charac-
teristics indicate a certain technological uniformity of the Middle
Palaeolithic complexes distributed across wide geographic regions
from Eastern Europe across the Urals far east into Siberia
(Matyushin, 1985; Chlachula, 2011).
6. The Middle Palaeolithic occupation pattern and raw
material exploitation
The above summary of the Trans-Ural sites shows an apparent
topographic location pattern. Five sites around the Golyy Kamen’
Hill are situated on smooth slopes near the geological raw material
outcrops, with larger and non-elaborated lithic inventories
Fig. 12. Nizhnaya Salda Site. A Middle Palaeolithic (?) bifacial tool (a spear-point?)
(porphyry tuff).
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273270
Author's personal copy
generally characteristic of workshop sites. A similar interpretation
can be suggested for the second group of sites in the Tura-Neiva
River valleys, positioned on prominent elevations above the
fluvial streams, and with nearby availability of rock resources
(silicified tuff, porphyry tuff). Due to the Middle Palaeolithic sites’
geomorphic positions on elevated or sloping terrains, most of these
locations are disturbed by past geological (primarily gravity-flow)
processes. Preservation of the original occupation locations seems
to be impeded by past geomorphic actions destroying most of the
pre-Mesolithic habitation places. Similarly as in the other Urals
regions, the local Middle Palaeolithic people used locally available
lithic raw material resources, although the quality of these is
mediocre compared to those found and employed in the southern
Urals (jasper) and the central Fore-Urals (quartzite, and quarztose
sandstone). Rhyolitic tuffs, however, were also used at the Middle
Palaeolithic sites Bogdanovka, southern Urals, as well as the pre-
dominant and high quality jasper (Shirokov, 1991).
The situation with the identification of the Middle Palaeolithic
cultural inventories found without a discrete and datable geological
context is complicated by the fact that an archaic oblique of lithic
implements, displaying some bifacial flaking, may also be
encountered at other open-air Trans-Ural sites in diverse settings
distributed on the eastern flanks of the Central Urals. Their crude
appearance may also reflect a time-transgressive nature of the
expedient stone industries, pre-determined by the flaking proper-
ties of the employed raw materials of generally mediocre quality
(sandstone and siltstone at the Gorbunovskiy Torfianik sites;
quartzite siltstone at the Golyy Kamen sites). However, in contrast
to the Central Urals’complexes interpreted as Middle Palaeolithic,
the more recent (Upper Palaeolithic and later prehistoric) cultural
inventories lack patina and are accompanied by more progressive
forms with absence of the Levallois technique as documented at 15
Upper Palaeolithic and >150 Mesolithic sites. A re-utilization of
some of the Palaeolithic instruments found at the clearly re-
occupied locations is evident at some of these final Pleistocene e
early Holocene locations (Golyy Kamen’, Beregovaya III, Garevaya II,
Ambarka I), as well as the Neolithic/Iron Age settlements (Shai-
tanskoe Ozero). Secondary use of some of these surface-discarded/
exposed Middle Palaeolithic implements, particularly if made from
high-quality rocks, may reflect local shortage or may have even had
some spiritual meaning. The main high-quality mineral and rock
deposits (quartzite, jasper, chalcedony and others) exploited by
early people for stone industry production are located in the
southern Ural area. The occurrence of these superior lithic raw
materials in the territory of the Central Trans-Urals is extremely
rare, which may explain casual Palaeolithic re-utilisation in later
times.
7. Early human adaptations to the Tran-Urals and West
Siberian environments
The present distribution of the metamorphic rocks predomi-
nantly used for the stone industry production in the Central Trans-
Urals also provides some insights into the mobility range of the
local pre-modern people. Exposed and readily accessible local
bedrock exposures clearly played a strategic role for occupation
site establishment, in addition to natural resources provided by
the mosaic of Urals’foothill and central mountain valley environ-
ments. A Middle Palaeolithic extraction of lithic raw materials
from the surface-exposed geological bedrock deposits of a diverse
quality is well documented at the Central European as well as the
Altai sites, among others (e.g., Chlachula, 1992; 2001, 2010b; Oliva,
2000; Neruda and Nerudová, 2009; Cyrek et al., 2010), providing
certain perceptions of the Neanderthal/early H. sapiens economy
and natural adaptation strategies that can have some general
parallels in the Trans-Ural region. Physiogeographically, the central
Ural mountain region and the adjoining foothills indicate a high
mobility of the Middle Palaeolithic people, as shown by the raw
material diversity employed for stone tool production, including
some more exotic non-local rocks, such as chalcedony or jasper
principally originating from the southern Ural areas. Although
these minerals and rocks were subjected to transport from the
original outcrop, the loci or means of exchange are unknown at the
present time.
The Middle Palaeolithic occupation further east of the central
Urals along the adjacent West Siberian Plains has not yet been
definitely demonstrated (Zenin, 2002), although there is an over-
whelming evidence of pre-Last Interglacial Middle Palaeolithic
inhabitation in the regions further east, in Central and East Siberia
(Medvedev et al., 1990; Mochanov and Fedoseeva, 2001;
Derevianko and Shunkov, 2009; Chlachula, 2011). The low-lying
topographic area of the West Siberian Plain (Tavda and Sosva Ba-
sins) along the north-central Urals (Fig. 1AeB) has evidence of a
Final Pleistocene open-air inhabitation, referred to as the Sosva
River Upper Palaeolithic Complex, likely preceding the Last Glacial
Maximum (Chlachula and Serikov, 2011). Antiquity of human ad-
aptations to these marginal geographical, yet biotically opulent
places is unclear. The contextual data from the investigated local-
ities point to mosaic open water-saturated settings with
meandering rivers, ox-bow lakes, small ponds and low-elevated
hills of the periglacial West Siberian steppe interspersed by the
eastern Ural foothill ecosystems. The very rich palaeontological
records from these sites associated with undifferentiated Upper
Palaeolithic stone industries sealed in cryogenically distorted
colluvial overbank deposits with quantities of Pleistocene mega-
fauna fossil remains indicate major geoarchaeology and taphonomy
research potential (Serikov, 2007a). In terms of food-procurement,
the local occupation sites illustrate behavioural association of both
natural and cultural components of a former periglacial landscape
frequented by humans presumably before the LGM (21 ka BP) and
possibly during the Middle Palaeolithic. The practice of anthropo-
genic scavenging on likely seasonally frozen animal remains of
naturally deceased or hunted large Pleistocene mammals (largely
mammoth) is explicitly documented at the Middle Palaeolithic sites
in southern Siberia (Chlachula et al., 2003). Inhabitation of this
lowland Tran-Ural region by pre-Upper Palaeolithic humans based
on exploitation of rich biotic resources of parkland-steppe is
therefore very likely.
8. Conclusion
The central Ural and Trans-Ural areas are of major significance
for documenting cultural adaptations to the north Eurasian Pleis-
tocene natural environments and mapping the early human
dispersal into the sub-Arctic regions of NE Europe and West Siberia.
Geo-contexts of the investigated archaeological sites and Quater-
nary sections point to the pronounced environmental dynamics
and landscape transformations triggered by past climate change.
The glacialeinterglacial cycles affected spatial dispersal of people
from the southeastern regions of the European continent and
possibly from SW Siberia as well. Although still rather sporadic, the
initial Middle Palaeolithic (Neanderthal?/early H. sapiens) occupa-
tion of these territories is assumed to date to the (late) Middle
Pleistocene, as archaeologically manifested by expedient core-and-
flake industries encountered in large quantities on the western
(Fore-Urals) plains. A major pre-modern cultural expansion on the
frontiers of Europe and north-central Asia is assumed during the
Last Interglacial (130e74 ka) in a natural context of mixed forests
and parkland-steppes that represented the dominant Urals’Middle
Palaeolithic occupation ecosystems in the mountain regions and on
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273 271
Author's personal copy
the adjoining western and eastern plains, respectively. The Chu-
sovaya canyon-shaped valley and tributary mountain valleys cut-
ting through the central mountain range provided the most
favourable Middle and Late Palaeolithic habitats as well as the
principal migration corridor. Mosaic biotopes are anticipated in the
open valleys with karst limestone formations, showing evidence of
multilayer cave site occupations. Most of the present Trans-Ural
open sites are found in patterned positions near local rocky out-
crops used for lithic industry production by employing the Levallois
and bifacial stone flaking techniques suggesting specific natural
adaptation strategies. Apart from the biotically rich central
montane and the eastern foothill regions, a gradual human infil-
tration into the neighbouring West Siberian Plain is assumed prior
to the Last Glacial. The absence of thick and chronologically
determinant sedimentary (loessepalaeosol) formations such as
those in the Kama and Pechora Basins in the areas west of the Urals
incorporating rich Middle Palaeolithic and associated fossil fauna
records may account for the limited number of the discovered
Pleistocene occupation sites in the Trans-Ural region. This, in
conjunction with dynamic palaeo-geomorphic processes, control-
ling early site preservation, represent the main constrains for
documentation of the pre-Upper Palaeolithic peopling in the Urals’
central mountain regions and the eastern foothills. The climate
trends causing activation of periglacial and gravity-slope/
gelifluction processes are seen as a limiting factor in preservation
of the former open-air Middle Palaeolithic localities. Despite this,
because of the unique geomorphologic configuration and palaeo-
environmental conditions, the Central Urals and Trans-Urals terri-
tory is of major potential for future Palaeolithic research.
Acknowledgements
The Quaternary and geoarchaeology studies in the Central Ural
area were supported the National Geographic Society and the
Nizhniy Tagil’State University. The authors thank Prof. Nicolas
Rolland (University of Victoria, B.C.) and two anonymous reviewers
for comments and review suggestions to this paper.
References
Annisutkin, N.K., 1990. Le Moustéríen du Sud-Ouest de l ’USSR. L’Anthropologie
(Paris) 94 (4), 713e738.
Arkhipov, S.A., 1989. Chronostratigraphy of Pleistocene Siberia. Geologia i Geofizika
89 (56), 13e22 (in Russian).
Arkhipov, S.A., Bespaly, V.G., Faustova, M.A., Glushkova, O.Yu., Isaeva, L.L.,
Velichko, A.A., 1986. Ice-sheet reconstructions. Quaternary Science Reviews 5,
475e482.
Arkhipov, S.A., Gnibidenko, Z.N., Shelkoplyas, V.N., 2000. Correlation and paleo-
magnetism of glacial and loessepaleosol sequences on the West Siberian Plain.
Quaternary International 68e71, 13e27.
Astakhov, V., 1997. Late glacial events in the central Russian Arctic. Quaternary
International 41/42, 17e25.
Astakhov, V., 2001. The stratigraphic framework for the Upper Pleistocene of the
glaciated Russian Arctic: changing paradigms. Global and Planetary Change 31,
283e295.
Bachura, O., Kosintsev, P., 2007. Pleistocene and Holocene small- and large-mammal
faunas from the Northern Urals. Quaternary International 160, 121e128.
Bader, O.N., Matyushin, G.N., 1973. A new Middle Palaeolithic monument in
southern Ural. Soviet Archaeology 4, 135e142 (in Russian).
Bader, O.N., 1960. Fundamental stages of ethno-cultural history and palae-
ogeography of the Ural. MIA 79. Moskva. (in Russian).
Bolikhovskaya, N.S., Molodkov, A.N., 2006. East European loessepalaeosol
sequence: palynology, stratigraphy and correlation. Quaternary International
149, 24e36.
Brace, C.L., 1979. Krapina, “Classic”Neaderthals, and the evolution of the European
face. Journal of Human Evolution 8 (5), 527e550.
Chabaï, V., Marks, A.E., Yevtushenko, A., 1995. Views of the Crimea Middle Palae-
olithic Past and Present. In: Liège, Prehistorie Européenne 7, pp. 59e80.
Cheguryaeva, A.A., Khvalina, N.Ya, 1961. Vegetation Characteristics in the Stalingrad
Region During the Middle Palaeolithic, vol. 82. KSIA, Moskva (in Russian).
Chlachula, J., 1992. Une industrie calcaire du paléolithique moyen en Moravie
(République tchéque). Anthropologie (Brno) XXX (3), 241e267.
Chlachula, J., 2001. Pleistocene climates, natural environments and palaeolithic
occupation of the Altai area, West Central Siberia. In: Prokopenko, A., Catto, N.,
Chlachula, J. (Eds.), Lake Baikal and the Surrounding Regions. Quaternary
International 80e81, pp. 69e92.
Chlachula, J., 2003. The Siberian loess record and its significance for recon-
struction of the Pleistocene climate change in north-central Asia. In:
Derbyshire, E. (Ed.), Dust Indicators and Records of Terrestrial and Marine
Palaeoenvironments (DIRTMAP), Quaternary Science Reviews 22 (18e19),
pp. 1879e1906.
Chlachula, J., 2010a. Environmental context and human adaptation of Palaeolithic
peopling of the Central Urals. In: C hlachula, J., Catto, N. (Eds.), Eurasian
Perspective s of Environmental Archaeology, Quaternary International 220,
pp. 47e63.
Chlachula, J., 2010b. Pleistocene climate change, natural environments and Palae-
olithic peopling of East Kazakhstan. In Eurasian Perspectives of Environmental
Archaeology. In: Chlachula, J., Catto, N. (Eds.). Quaternary International 220,
pp. 64e87.
Chlachula, J., 2011. Climate history and early peopling of Siberia (Chapter 22). In:
Dar, Imran Ahmad, Dar, Mithas Ahmad (Eds.), Earth and Environmental Science.
InTech Open Science Publications, Rijeka, pp. 495e538, 630 pp.
Chlachula, J., Drozdov, N.I., Ovodov, N.D., 2003. Last interglacial peopling of Siberia:
the Middle Palaeolithic Site Ust’-Izhul’, the Upper Yenisei area. Boreas 32, 506e
520.
Chlachula, J., Medvedev, G.I., Vorobyova, G.I., 2004. Palaeolithic occupation in the
context of the Pleistocene climate change in the Angara region, Central Siberia.
Anthropozoikum 25, 31e49.
Chlachula, J., Serikov, Yu, 2011a. Last glacial ecology and geoarchaeology of the
Trans-Ural area: the Sosva River Upper Palaeolithic complex, West Siberia.
Boreas 40 (1), 146e160.
Chlachula, J., Serikov, Yu.B., 2011b. Contextual geology and GIS studies of the Late
Pleistocene inhabitation of the central Trans-Urals, West Siberia. In: Metody
Geoinformacijne v Badaniach Archeologicnych. VI. Sympozjum Archeologii
Srodowiskowej, Poznan-Ostrów Lednicki (19e21.05.2011). Poster.
Chlachula, J., Serikov, Yu.B., 2012. The Middle palaeolithic occupation of central
Urals. In: Abstracts, International Conference Proceedings “European Middle
Palaeolithic During MIS 8eMIS 3. Cultures, Environment, Chronology.”Wol-
brom, Poland (25e28.09.2012). Nicolaus Copernicus University Press, Toru
n,
pp. 80e82.
Cyrek, K., Socha, P., Stefaniak, K., Madeyska, T., Grabowska, J.-M., Sudol, M.,
Czy
zewski, L., 2010. Palaeolithic of Biṥnik Cave (Southern Poland) within the
environmental background. In: Chlachula, J., Catto, N. (Eds.), Climate Dynamics
and Prehistoric Occupation: Eurasian Perspectives on Environmental Archae-
ology, Quaternary International 220, pp. 5e30.
Danukalova, G., Yakovlev, A., 2006. A review of biostratigraphical investigations of
palaeolithic localities in the Southern Urals region. Quaternary International
149, 37e43.
Derevianko, A.P., 2010. Three scenarios of the Middle to upper Paleolithic transition:
scenario 1: the Middle to Upper Paleolithic Transition in Northern Asia.
Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 38 (3), 2e32.
Derevianko, A.P., Markin, S.V., 1992. The Mousterian of Gorno Altai. Nauka, Novo-
sibirsk, p. 224 (in Russian).
Derevianko, A.P., Markin, S.V.,1999. The Middle and Upper Palaeolithic of the Altai.
In: Chlachula, J., Kemp, R.A., Tyrá
cek, J. (Eds.), Quaternary of Siberia. Quaternary
Geology, Palaeogeography and Palaeolithic Archaeology, Anthropozoikum 23,
pp. 157e166 .
Derevianko, A.P., Shunkov, M.V., 2009. Development of early human culture in
northern Asia. Paleontological Journal 43 (8), 881e889.
Deviatkin, E.V., Dodonov, A.E., Ranov, V.A., Khatib, K., Ns’er, K., 1992. Geology of the
Lower Palaeolithic of Western Siberia. In: Palaeoecology of Early Human Set-
tlement in North Asia and America. Abstracts of the International Symposium
Krasnoyarsk 1992. Zodiak, Novosibirsk, pp. 63e65 (in Russian).
Drozdov, N.I., Chlachula, J., Chekha, V.P., 1999. Pleistocene environments and
Palaeolithic occupation of the Northern Minusinsk Basin, southern Krasnoyarsk
Region. In: Chlachula, J., Kemp, R.A., Tyracek, J. (Eds.), Quaternary of Siberia.
Quaternary Geology, Palaeogeography and Palaeolithic Archaeology, Anthro-
pozoikum 23, pp. 141e155.
Goldina, R.D., 2001. Initial peopling of the Urals by early people. In: Archaeology and
Etnography of Central Ural Region. Perm State University, Berezniki, pp. 37e64
(in Russian).
Kuzmin, Ya.V., 2007. Chronological framework of the Siberian Palaeolithic: recent
achievements and future directions. Radiocarbon 49 (2), 757e766.
Little, E.C., Lian, O.B., Velichko, A.A., Morozova, T.D., Nechaev, V.P., Dlussky, K.G.,
Rutter, N.W., 2002. Quaternary stratigraphy and optical dating of loess from the
East European Plain (Russia). Quaternary Science Review 21, 1745e1762 .
Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.I., Astakhov, V.I., 1999. Age and extent of the Barents and
Kara Sea ice-sheets in northern Russia. Boreas 28 (1), 46e80.
Matyushin, G.N., 1973. Multi-layer Occupation Mysovoye at Karabalakty Lake in
Southern Ural. In: Korotkye Soobscheniya Instituta Arkheologii (Short News of
Institute of Archaeology), vol. 136, pp. 67e76 (in Russian).
Matyushin, G.N., 1979. Some Questions on the Earliest Peopling of the Ural and
Siberia. In: Korotkye Soobscheniya Instituta Arkheologii (Short News of Insti-
tute of Archaeology), vol. 157, pp. 36e43 (in Russian).
Matyushin, G.N., 1985. Geology, Periodization and Chronology of the Stone Age, vol.
181. KSIA, Moskva, pp. 36e42 (in Russian).
Matyushin, G.N., 1994. Stone Age of the Southern Urals. Nauka, Moskva (in Russian).
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273272
Author's personal copy
Medvedev, G.I., Saveliev, N.A., Svinin, V.V., 1990. Stratigraphy, Palaeogeography and
Archaeology of Southern Central Siberia. AN SSSR, Siberian Branch, Irkutsk, 164
pp. (in Russian).
Mochanov, Yu.A., Fedoseeva, S.A., 2001. Neosphere and archaeology. Nauka i
Tekhnika v Yakutii 2001 (1), 28e33 (in Russian).
Neruda, P., Valoch, K., 2007. Palaeolithic People and the Moravian Caves. In: Scripta
Fac. Sci. Nat. Univ. Masaryk. Brun., Geology, vol. 35, pp. 65e76.
Neruda, P., Nerudová, Z. (Eds.), 2009. Moravský Krumlov IV evícevrstevná lokalita
ze st
redního a po
cátku mladého paleolitu na Morav
e (Moravský Krumlov IV eA
Multilayer Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic Site in Moravia). ANTHROPOS
Studies in Anthropology, Palaeoethnology, Palaeontology and Quaternary Ge-
ology, vol. 29. /N.S. 21/, 2009, Brno.
Oliva, M., 2000. Le Paléolithique moyen en Moravie: les industries lithiques et leurs
matières premières. In: Ronen, A., Weinstein-Evron, M. (Eds.), Toward Modern
Humans, Yabrudian and Micoquian, BAR International Series, vol. 850, pp. 61e
76. Oxford.
Pathou-Mathis, M., 2000. Neanderthal subsistence behaviours in Europe. Interna-
tional Journal of Ostearchaeology 10, 379e395.
Pavlov, P.Yu, 1996. Palaeolithic Monuments of the North-Eastern European Part of
Russia. Ural Department RAS, Syktyvkar, 194 pp. (in Russian).
Pavlov, P.Yu., Denisov, V.P., Melnichuk, A.F., 1995. Palaeolithic sites with quartzite
inventory in the upper Kama region. In: Materials on Archaeology of the Eu-
ropean North-East, vol. 13Komi Science Central of the Ural Branch RAS, Syk-
tyvkar, pp. 5e25 (in Russian).
Pavlov, P., Svendsen, J.I., Indrelid, S., 2001. Human presence in the European Arctic
nearly 40,000 years ago. Nature 413, 64e67.
Pavlov, P., Roebroeks, W., Svendsen, J.I., 2004. The Pleistocene colonization of
northeastern Europe. A report of recent research. Journal of Human Evolution
47, 3e17.
Petrin, V.T., 1986. Palaeolithic Sites of West Siberian Lowland. Siberian Branch RAS,
Novosibirsk, 142 pp. (in Russian).
Petrin, V.T., 1999. On separation of the Ural Palaeolithic centre. In: Proceedings of
the XIV Urals Archaeological Meeting, Chelyabinsk, pp. 36e38 (in Russian).
Petrin, V.T., Serikov, Yu.B., 1988. The Palaeolithic complex of the eastern slope of
Central Urals. In: Vasilevskiy, R.C., Mazin, A.I. (Eds.), Stone and Paleometal Age
of the Asian Part of the USSR. Nauka, SB Academy of USSR, pp. 27e36 (in
Russian).
Pitulko, V.V., Nikolsky, P.A., Girya, E.Yu., Basilyan, A.E., Tumskoy, V.E., Koulakov, S.A.,
Astakhov, S.N., Pavlova, E.Yu., Anisimov, M.A., 2004. The Yana RHS Site: humans
in the arctic before the Last Glacial Maximum. Science 303, 52e56.
Scherbakova, T.I., 1994. Materials of the Upper Palaeolithic Site Talickogo (Ostrov-
skoy). Urals Branch RAS, Ekaterinburg, 96 pp. (in Russian).
Serikov, Yu.B., 1997a. New data on the Palaeolithic of Central Urals. Russian
Archaeology 1997 (3), 120e125 (in Russian).
Serikov, Yu.B., 1997b. Palaeolithic caves of the Chusovaya River and problems of
early human peopling of Central Trans-Ural. In: The Cave Palaeolithic of the
Ural. Proceedings of the International Conference (9e15 September 1997). RAS,
Ufa, pp. 23e25 (in Russian).
Serikov, Yu.B., 1999. Palaeolithic of the Central Trans-Urals. Nizhniy Tagil University
Press, Nizhniy Tagil, 152 pp. (in Russian).
Serikov, Yu.B., 2000. Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of the Central Transurals. Nizhniy
Tagil University Press, Nizhniy Tagil, 431 pp. (in Russian).
Serikov, Yu.B., 2001. The Cave Palaeolithic of the Chusovaya River valley and
problems of the initial peopling of the Central Urals. In: Problems of Prehistoric
Culture. Gilem Press, Ufa, pp. 117e135 (in Russian).
Serikov, Yu.B., 2006. New Early Palaeolithic findings on the territory of the Central
Trans-Ural area. In: Materials of the VItheVIIth Regional Archaeological Con-
ferences, Perm, vol. 4, pp. 20e24, 172e174. (in Russian).
Serikov, Yu.B., 2007a. The Palaeolithic Occupation Site Gari and Some Problems of
the Ural Palaeolithic. Nizhniy Tagil University Press, Nizhniy Tagil, p. 137 (in
Russian).
Serikov, Yu.B., 2007b. Rock cultic places of Shantanskoye Lake. In: Problems of
archaeology of the Ural and West Siberia. Kurganskiy University Press, Kurgan,
pp. 42e49 (in Russian).
Shirokov, V.N., 1989. On Discovery of Two Palaeolithic Monuments. Syktyvkar. In:
Archaeological Discoveries of the Ural and Volga Regions, pp. 162e165 (in
Russian).
Shirokov, V.N., 1991. Bogdanovka palaeolithic site on the Ural River. In: Chro-
nostratigraphy of Palaeolithic of Northern, Central and Eastern Asia and
America. Proceedings of the International Conference. SB RAS, Novosibirsk (in
Russian).
Shirokov, V.N., Volkov, R.B., Kosintsev, P.A., Lokteva, E.G., 2011. Palaeolithic site
Bogdanovka (southern Urals). Russian Archaeology 1, 11e125 (in Russian).
Stefaniak, K., Socha, P. (Eds.), 2009. Karst of the Czestochowa Upland and of the
Eastern Sudetes. University of Silesia, Faculty of Earth Sciences, Sosnowiec &
University Wroclaw, Zoological Institute, p. 535.
Stefanovskiy, V.V., 1997. Stratigraphy of Quaternary deposits of the Urals. In:
Stratigraphic Scheme of the Urals (Mesozoic, Cenozoic). Nauka, Ekaterinburg,
pp. 97e139 (in Russian).
Stefanovskiy, V.V., 2001. Palaeography of the eastern slope of the Urals and Trans-
Urals during the Quaternary period. In: Quaternary of the Urals. Perm State
University Press, Perm, pp. 210e221 (in Russian).
Svendsen, I.G., Astakhov, V.I., Bolshiyanov, D.Y., Demidov, I., Dowdeswell, J.A.,
Gataullin, V., Hjort, Ch., Hubberten, H.W., Larsen, E., Mangerud, J., Melles, M.,
Moeller, P., Saarnisto, M., Siegert, M.J., 1999. Maximum extent of the Eurasian
ice sheets in the Barents and Kara Sea region during the Weichselian. Boreas28,
234e242.
Svendsen, I.G., Pavlov, P.Yu, 2003. Mammontova Kurya: an enigmatic, nearly 40 00 0
years old Paleolithic site in the Russian Arctic. In: Zilhao, J., d’Errico, F. (Eds.),
Chronology of the Aurignacian and the Transitional Technologies, Dating Stra-
tigraphies, Cultural Implications, Trabalhos de Arquelogia 33, pp. 109e120.
Sytnik, O., Bogucki, A.B., Lanczont, M., Madeyska, T., 2010. The Dniesterian Mous-
terian from the Velykyi Glybochok site related to palaeoenvironmental changes.
In: Chlachula, J., Catto, N. (Eds.), Climate Dynamics and Prehistoric Occupation:
Eurasian Perspectives on Environmental Archaeology, Quaternary International
220, pp. 31e46.
Valoch, K. (Ed.), 1988. Die Erforschung der K
ulna-Höhle 1961e1976. Mit Beiträgen
von J. Jelínek, W. G. Mook, R. Musil, E. Opravil, L. Seitl, L. Smolíková, H. Svo-
bodová, Z. Weber. Anthropos 24, N. S. 16. Moravian Museum, Brno, p. 318.
Velichko, A.A. (Ed.), 1993. Evolution of Landscapes and Climates of Northern Eur-
asia. Late PleistoceneeHolocene. Elements of Prognosis. 1. Regional Palae-
ogeography. RAN, Institute of Geography, Nauka, Moskva, p. 102 (in Russian).
Velichko, A.A., Gribchenko, Yu.N., Kurenkova, E..I., 1997a. Georchaeology of the
palaeolithic in the east European plain. In: Chlachula, J. (Ed.), Geoarchaeology of
the Pleistocene, Special Volume, Anthropologie XXXV/2, pp. 215e235.
Velichko, A.A., Grichuk, V.P., Gurtovaya, E.E., Zelikson, E.M., Borisova, O.K.,
Barash, M.S., 1992. Climates during the last interglacial. In: Frenzel, B., Péczi, M.,
Velichko, A.A. (Eds.), Atlas of Paleoclimates and Paleoenvironments of the
Northern Hemisphere, Late PleistoceneeHolocene. Geographical Institute,
Hungarian Academy of Sciences and Gustav Fisher Verlag, Budapest, Stuttgart,
pp. 86e89.
Velichko, A.A., Kononov, Yu.M., Faustova, M., 1997b. The last glaciation of the Earth:
size and volume of ice-sheets. Quaternary International 41/42, 43e51.
Yakhimovich, V.L., Nemkova, V.K., Sidnev, A.V., 1987. Pleistocene of the Fore-Urals.
Nauka, Moskva, 113 pp. (in Russian).
Zamiyatnin, S.N., 1961. Stalingradskaya Palaeolithic Site, vol. 82. K SIA eKorotkye
Soobscheniya Instituta Arkheologii (Short News of Institute of Archaeology),
pp. 5e35 (in Russian).
Zemtsov, A.A., 1976. Geomorphology of the West-Siberian Plain. Tomsk University
Press, Tomsk, 343 pp. (in Russian).
Zenin, V.N., 2002. Principal stages of peopling of the West-Siberian Plain by the
Palaeolithic man. Archaeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia 4
(12), 22e44. SB RAS Novosibirsk (in Russian).
Zinovyev, E., 2011. Sub-fossil beetle assemblages associated with the “mammoth
fauna”in the Late Pleistocene localities of the Ural Mountains and West Siberia.
In: Kotze, D.J., Assmann, T., Nooridjk, J., Turin, H., Vermeulen, R. (Eds.), Carabid
Beetles as Bioindicators, Biogeographica, Ecological and Environmental Studies,
ZooKeys 100, pp. 149e169 .
Y.B. Serikov, J. Chlachula / Quaternary International 326-327 (2014) 261e273 273
