Metin I. Eren , Fernando Diez-Martin , Antonio Tarriño , Heather Smith , Briggs Buchanan , G. Logan Miller , Matthew Boulanger , Sergei Slobodin
{"title":"Toolstone characterization, description, morphometrics, and microwear of a lithic sample from Uptar, Magadan Oblast, Northeastern Siberia, Russia","authors":"Metin I. Eren , Fernando Diez-Martin , Antonio Tarriño , Heather Smith , Briggs Buchanan , G. Logan Miller , Matthew Boulanger , Sergei Slobodin","doi":"10.1016/j.ara.2023.100465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span><span>The peopling process of North and South America started in Northeast Asia and was a cultural evolutionary event. An evolutionary approach to archaeology, however, begins with detailed description of assemblages. The Uptar site, Russia, played a prominent role in debates about New World colonization, due to the presence of a “fluted” bifacially flaked stone lanceolate. However, in recent years, Uptar has received less attention. We were given the opportunity to study a sample of the Uptar lithic assemblage, and here we compiled descriptions based on thin-sections for mineralogical and textural analyses; X-ray diffraction (XRD) for mineralogical identification; X-ray fluorescence (XRF) for geochemical analysis; computerized axial micro-tomography (MicroCT) for micro-textural analysis; technological descriptions; morphometric analysis of its bifaces; and microwear. At a very basic level, our reexamination of this Uptar lithic sample suggests that the site was potentially a re-tooling site, whereby used or broken tools were discarded and new tools were manufactured. We found little evidence of microblade technology in our sample. Our results also suggest that fluted-point technology continues to be absent in Northeast Asia, and that the precise relationship of Uptar to North American </span>Late Pleistocene and </span>Early Holocene cultures remains unknown. Most importantly, our report provides descriptive data that can be used by others in future comparative and meta analyses.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51847,"journal":{"name":"Archaeological Research in Asia","volume":"35 ","pages":"Article 100465"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeological Research in Asia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352226723000375","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The peopling process of North and South America started in Northeast Asia and was a cultural evolutionary event. An evolutionary approach to archaeology, however, begins with detailed description of assemblages. The Uptar site, Russia, played a prominent role in debates about New World colonization, due to the presence of a “fluted” bifacially flaked stone lanceolate. However, in recent years, Uptar has received less attention. We were given the opportunity to study a sample of the Uptar lithic assemblage, and here we compiled descriptions based on thin-sections for mineralogical and textural analyses; X-ray diffraction (XRD) for mineralogical identification; X-ray fluorescence (XRF) for geochemical analysis; computerized axial micro-tomography (MicroCT) for micro-textural analysis; technological descriptions; morphometric analysis of its bifaces; and microwear. At a very basic level, our reexamination of this Uptar lithic sample suggests that the site was potentially a re-tooling site, whereby used or broken tools were discarded and new tools were manufactured. We found little evidence of microblade technology in our sample. Our results also suggest that fluted-point technology continues to be absent in Northeast Asia, and that the precise relationship of Uptar to North American Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene cultures remains unknown. Most importantly, our report provides descriptive data that can be used by others in future comparative and meta analyses.
期刊介绍:
Archaeological Research in Asia presents high quality scholarly research conducted in between the Bosporus and the Pacific on a broad range of archaeological subjects of importance to audiences across Asia and around the world. The journal covers the traditional components of archaeology: placing events and patterns in time and space; analysis of past lifeways; and explanations for cultural processes and change. To this end, the publication will highlight theoretical and methodological advances in studying the past, present new data, and detail patterns that reshape our understanding of it. Archaeological Research in Asia publishes work on the full temporal range of archaeological inquiry from the earliest human presence in Asia with a special emphasis on time periods under-represented in other venues. Journal contributions are of three kinds: articles, case reports and short communications. Full length articles should present synthetic treatments, novel analyses, or theoretical approaches to unresolved issues. Case reports present basic data on subjects that are of broad interest because they represent key sites, sequences, and subjects that figure prominently, or should figure prominently, in how scholars both inside and outside Asia understand the archaeology of cultural and biological change through time. Short communications present new findings (e.g., radiocarbon dates) that are important to the extent that they reaffirm or change the way scholars in Asia and around the world think about Asian cultural or biological history.