Catalog of the main human sites in the Stone Age. Upper Paleolithic

25.09.2019

The Sungir site is the oldest human settlement in the Vladimir region. This is not only a monument protected by UNESCO, but also a unique archaeological site that attracts the attention of researchers from all over the world.

common data
Sungir is one of the 3 Upper Paleolithic sites of the Vladimir region known to scientists. The settlement of Sungir is located on the eastern outskirts of Vladimir, not far from the mouth of the stream of the same name, which flows into the Klyazma River. This is one of the northernmost Paleolithic settlements of the Russian Plain. It is attributed to the Kostenkovsko-Seletsky cultural community.

The parking lot was discovered by chance, when developing a new quarry. This happened in 1955. At a depth of 3 meters, the excavator noticed the bones of a large animal. The discovery was immediately reported to archaeologists. Since then and to the present, Sungir has been the object of research by scientists.

During the excavations, more than 4.5 thousand m² of the cultural layer was unearthed, which is equal to half of the estimated area. The age of the site is approximately 24-25 thousand years, although a number of scientists push it back to 36 thousand years.

According to one hypothesis, this site existed for 2-3 millennia. Most likely, it was a seasonal hunting camp. According to experts, the number of people living in the settlement at the same time reached 50 people. This group of people were connected to a larger community. Sungir has much in common with the complex of Stone Age sites known as Kostenki.

archaeological finds

Items

The collection of finds discovered during archaeological excavations exceeds 65 thousand items. These include:

tools for making tools (flint chippers, flakes and cores);

tools (knives, chisels, scrapers, scrapers, piercers, etc.);

weapons (flint tips of darts, spears, "wands");

items made of horn, bone and mammoth tusks (decorations, hoes, animal figurines).

The symbol of the settlement was the so-called "Sungir horse" - a miniature figure of a saiga horse made of mammoth tusk. Archaeologists believe that this is an amulet that ancient people wore as a talisman. According to another hypothesis, the figurine was used exclusively for the burial ritual.

The figurine of the horse is decorated with dots, the number of which on both sides is a multiple of 5, which indicates that the residents of the camp were familiar with the 5-ary counting system. Traces of ocher are preserved on the surface of the amulet, which means that at one time it was painted bright red.

Items found on the territory of the Sungir site are exhibited in the Vladimir-Suzdal Museum-Reserve. Scientists continue to study them, especially since many of the artifacts found were a means of non-verbal language.

Burials

Unique burials brought worldwide fame to the Sungir site. Burials are distinguished by the richness of grave goods and the complexity of the ritual.

First, on a layer of ocher, archaeologists discovered a female skull, a quadrangular stone and a male skeleton. The latter had a pebble pendant on his chest, and jewelry made of mammoth tusk on his hands. Nearby lay a huge number of beads that adorned the man's clothes. The find made it possible to reconstruct the costume of the ancient Sungir. Interestingly, it is in many ways similar to the clothing of modern Arctic peoples.

Then the remains of a headless man were found, next to which were beads, a mammoth tusk ring, reindeer antlers and a mammoth tusk. Scientists determined that the man was about 50 years old. It is worth noting that the average life expectancy of people of the Upper Paleolithic fluctuated around 30 years. Under this burial, 2 children's bones were found. The children were laid in the burial ground in an extended position, with their heads pressed to each other.

What scientists were able to learn about the Sungir people?

The skeletons of the Sungir people have been studied by more than one generation of anthropologists. To date, it has been established that they can be attributed to people of the modern physical type. Some dates indicate that the found burials are several thousand years younger than the settlement.

Beliefs

Based on the analysis of the burials, scientists came to the conclusion that the Sungir people had developed religious beliefs. Most likely, they believed in the existence of an afterlife, performed magical rituals, deified nature, revered ancestors, worshiped the sun, moon and animals.

A human bone filled with ocher was found among the inventory of a child's burial. Paleogenetic studies have shown that it belonged to the great-great-grandfather of the teenagers found nearby. According to scientists, the bone played an important role in a complex funeral ritual. In addition, there is an assumption that the burial of children could be a ritual sacrifice associated with a fertility cult. It is well established that both teenagers were buried at the same time.

Discs made of mammoth tusk with geometric ornaments were found next to the skeletons of children. Similar discs were later found among the Slavs. For example, a 4-sector disk symbolized the Slavic god Khors.

Life

Archaeologists have determined that the Upper Paleolithic people living on the territory of the Sungir settlement were engaged in hunting and gathering. The objects of hunting were: mammoths, lions, bison, reindeer, wild horses, wolves, brown bears, hares, birds and other animals. Women collected wild fruits, roots, shellfish and insects. An analysis of the skeleton of one child showed that he practically did not experience hunger, although he ate mainly invertebrates (caterpillars, beetles).

It is generally accepted that people of the Upper Paleolithic lived mainly in caves. However, during the excavations of Sungir, tent-like dwellings 10-15 m long were discovered. Their walls were wooden and the roofs were animal skins. Each dwelling was equipped with a hearth.

The Sungir people used engraving, carving, drilling, coloring and polishing to make jewelry. Many of the discovered decorations were created specifically for burial, others were worn constantly. The people of the settlement of Sungir wore hats, short fur coats, pants and high boots resembling high fur boots. Scientists came to the conclusion that the listed items of clothing were made of wool and were embroidered with bone beads. They are a bit like the costumes of the Chukchi and Eskimos.

A fallacy debunked 40 years later

For almost half a century, scientists have been confident that the paired burial of children in Sungir includes the remains of adolescents of both sexes. And recently, thanks to genetics, it was possible to find out that a girl from Sungir is actually a boy. In addition to Russian paleontologists, scientists from the University of Copenhagen and Cambridge have participated in recent studies.

Paleogenetic studies have shown that adolescents were cousins to each other, respectively, had similar haplotypes. Both have a Y-chromosomal haplogroup C1a2. Currently, haplogroup C reaches a high concentration in the Buryats, Mongols and Kalmyks.

One of the boys died as a result of a blow to the stomach with a sharp object. The cause of the other child's death is unknown, while a man found nearby was shot dead with an arrow. Moreover, as forensic specialists note, it was a sniper shot.

Paleogenetic studies also proved that closely related marriages were excluded among the Sungir people. According to anthropologists, it was this factor that determined the dominance of the Cro-Magnons.

Sungir continues to be of interest to paleontologists from all over the world. And recent discoveries show that far from all the secrets associated with this ancient site of primitive man have been unraveled.

Sungir is one of the 3 Upper Paleolithic sites of the Vladimir region known to scientists. The settlement of Sungir is located on the eastern outskirts of Vladimir, not far from the mouth of the stream of the same name, which flows into the Klyazma River. This is one of the northernmost Paleolithic settlements of the Russian Plain. It is attributed to the Kostenkovsko-Seletsky cultural community.

archaeological finds

Items

The collection of finds discovered during archaeological excavations exceeds 65 thousand items. These include:

tools for making tools (flint chippers, flakes and cores);
tools (knives, chisels, scrapers, scrapers, piercers, etc.);
weapons (flint tips of darts, spears, "wands");
items made of horn, bone and mammoth tusks (decorations, hoes, animal figurines).

Burials

Unique burials brought worldwide fame to the Sungir site. Burials are distinguished by the richness of grave goods and the complexity of the ritual.

What scientists were able to learn about the Sungir people?

Beliefs

Life

A fallacy debunked 40 years later

For almost half a century, scientists have been confident that the paired burial of children in Sungir includes the remains of adolescents of both sexes. And recently, thanks to genetics, it was possible to find out that the girl from Sungir is actually a boy. In addition to Russian paleontologists, scientists from the University of Copenhagen and Cambridge have participated in recent studies.

Paleolithic hunters preferred to settle on flat or slightly rugged terrain close to water. Therefore, Late Paleolithic settlements should be sought near streams or lakes, at the confluence of rivers, on the plain or gentle slopes of the hills. Since the Late Paleolithic, the terrain has not changed much. Things were different in the Early and Middle Paleolithic. Most of the monuments of this period were found on river terraces and in caves. Finds in open space are much more rare, although we know for sure that already at that time a person preferred to settle in open dwellings, leaving for caves only during periods of sharp cooling. The climate, of course, to a large extent determined the way of life and the type of dwelling of the Paleolithic man. From the life of modern backward peoples inhabiting the tropics, it is known that during dry periods they are quite satisfied with light tents of a short-term nature, protecting them from the scorching rays of the sun or from the hot wind. It is only during the rainy season that they seek shelter from tropical downpours, "inhabiting rock sheds and caves, or raising their dwellings above the ground to avoid being flooded by rainwater.

In open areas without natural rock shelters, Paleolithic hunters built semi-dugouts or dugouts, that is, dwellings with a rigid, often domed frame, deepened into the ground. The difference between the semi-dugout method and the dugout method lies in the degree of deepening into the mainland. In the warm season, especially in the European periglacial region, the most common dwelling was a hut. It was easily portable, had a simple design and fully satisfied the simple requirements of the nomadic lifestyle of hunters. Thus, the dwellings of Paleolithic hunters, and possibly hunting cultures in general, can be divided into three main types: the simplest shelters of various types, hut-like structures, and dwellings of a long-term nature with a rigid skeleton. The simplest shelters served as short-term dwellings in those places where the climate did not require more solid protection from the cold. The use of light yurts in summer and permanent dwellings in winter is known from the recent past of some Siberian peoples or Eskimos. The type of dwelling and its design depended to a large extent on the material available. In Europe, at the edge of a glacier, where wood was a rarity, the frame of a dwelling consisted of mammoth tusks, deer antlers, and long animal bones. historical time are also known in Eastern Siberia, where the jaws and ribs of whales were used for the frame. Even in the last century, there were dugouts, in which the entire structure above the pit was simply covered with earth that protected well from the cold. Even today, the inhabitants of the steppe regions often cover the simplest frame with turf. Perhaps the dwellings of primitive man looked the same way. Paleolithic people also built light shelters and hut-like structures in caves. People usually did not use the entire cave, but with the help of partitions they created personal dwellings for themselves - something like “separate apartments.” Finds of Paleolithic dwellings are rare, but even rarer are finds of entire settlements that allow to study A small settlement of the Gravettian (Pavlovian) time was discovered near the village of Dolni Vestonice in Moravia (its radiocarbon age is about 25,000 years). discovered by S. N. Zamyatnin in 1927 1. on the territory With. Gagarin in Ukraine. The study of the plans and remains of Paleolithic residential sites is hampered by two circumstances: firstly, the nature of the deposits in which the finds lie, and secondly, the old excavation technique adopted in the past. The fact is that previously separate exploratory excavations of a larger or smaller area were carried out, which did not allow revealing the relationship between individual finds. The documentation of old studies was also imperfect, it lacked detailed sketches (drawings) of open areas, which were often replaced by only a sparse verbal description. Only as soon as archaeologists began to lay excavations of a large area, it became possible to better recognize and classify the finds according to their relationships and analogies. The success of research has always largely depended on the stratigraphic conditions, on the nature of the deposits. It is much easier to open a parking lot in the loess, where every detail is. well distinguishable than excavations in scree, so most of the finds of Paleolithic sites come from the loess territories of Central Europe, Ukraine and Siberia.

The oldest find, which can be considered as the remains of a dwelling, was made in East Africa. This is a circular pile of stones discovered by L. S. B. Leakey in the Olduvai Gorge in a layer attributed to the beginning of the Pleistocene. The find, therefore, is about 2 million years old, and if it is really an artificial structure, then only a human predecessor could be its creator Noto Nabilis, the remains of which are found in the same layer. It is quite possible that this is really a building material, which, as a sinker, pressed the lower ends of the branches and skins that form the roof to the ground, and not just a random accumulation of stones - a toy of nature. In the central regions of Ethiopia, about 50 km south of the country's capital, Addis Ababa, French archaeologists have discovered several rich sites on the banks of the Awash River. The most important of them is Garba. In this site with the Oldowan culture, a free rammed space was discovered, suggestive of the adobe field of the simplest dwelling. Along the perimeter of this space, heaps of stones lay, by means of which poles or other elements of a simple structure could be wedged in the pits. Unlike the surrounding space, the rammed "heel" was completely empty: no tools, no bones or stones were found here; most likely it was a place to sleep.

FINDINGS OF HOUSINGS IN WESTERN EUROPE The oldest remains of a dwelling in Europe were discovered by de Lumley on the French Riviera near Nice. The site is called Terra Amata and belongs to the Acheulean culture. Not far from here, in the cave of the Grote du Lazaret, another type of Acheulean dwelling was discovered. In 1957, in layer No. 5, the remains of a hut measuring 11x3.5 m were discovered here. The hut stood inside the cave, not far from the entrance, leaning against the wall, and was recognized by a pile of stone tools and bones that were located exclusively within the residential area . There were very few finds outside the hut. The perimeter of the hut was framed by stones, no doubt brought here by man in order to strengthen its walls. It was the presence of walls that limited the spread of finds outside the dwelling. The skeleton of the hut, apparently, rested on the side wall of the cave, but did not adjoin it. A narrow strip of land stretched along the wall of the cave. containing almost no objects, and this indicates that the stone wall did not simultaneously form the inner wall of the dwelling, but was separated from it by a narrow passage, which protected the hut from seeping water. No postholes or other traces of construction were found, except for seven piles of stones spaced at intervals of 80-120 cm, and there was always free space in the center of the piles. This gives us reason to assume that the stones served to secure wooden stakes or pillars. But if the pillars from these points simply rested against the side wall of the cave, the interior would be too low. In addition, if the support pillars were at an angle to the floor, heaps of stones would also look different. Judging by the orientation of their "craters", the pillars were fixed in them vertically, and ceiling beams were laid horizontally on them, the opposite ends of which rested on a narrow ledge stone wall caves. This ensured the stability of the entire structure. It is possible that the supporting pillars of the skeleton had a fork-shaped fork at the upper end, which included beams from the ceiling.

In one place, the interval between piles of stones was more than usual: apparently, there was an entrance here. The same is evidenced by the scatter of finds of stone tools and bones, which only in this direction went beyond the boundaries of the dwelling. The entrance was oriented inside the cave, so the back wall of the hut was facing the exit from the cave. The entrance was not wide, up to 80 cm. To the east of this place there is another gap in the chain of stones; perhaps there was an emergency exit or a manhole. At the rear wall of the hut, directed towards the exit from the cave, the largest boulders were concentrated: it must be assumed that there was a barrier wall here that protected from wind and bad weather.

The roof of the dwelling was, apparently, made of animal skins, with which the skeleton was covered. It was a practical material that held heat well and protected people from the wind and water dripping from the cave ceiling. The ends of the skins were pressed to the ground with the same stones. According to the location of the found objects, ashes and bones, it can be seen that the interior was divided (perhaps by a partition of hanging skins) into two parts. Immediately behind the entrance there was a vestibule or vestibule, where there was no hearth and where finds of objects are quite rare. The second, larger part was the actual living quarters for the people of that time. It was possible to get into this "room" only through the passage. Inside there were two hearths, but small and, judging by the thin layer of burnt clay, they did not have much economic significance. The main hearth was most likely located at the entrance to the cave. In the penultimate glaciation (Rise) the slopes of the hill around the cave were 80% covered with pine, but the share of pine in the charcoal from the fires did not exceed 40%.Thus, the inhabitants of the cave deliberately selected wood for firewood, being familiar with the differences between different types of wood.

The area around the two inner hearths contained the largest number of finds. On the contrary, in filling the passage room of the hut, i.e. e. canopy, there were fewer finds. In the cultural layer, small shells of marine mollusks were discovered, which were unlikely to be eaten, because they were too small for this. But in a natural way, sea shells could not get into the cave. The only explanation remains: they were accidentally brought here along with bunches of large seaweed. And since shells were found mainly in places where there were few other finds (in the space between the hearths and to the right of the main entrance to the hut, behind the wind screen), it seems most likely that it was here that the “sleeping places” were located, beds lined with dried by the fire with seaweed. It is possible that animal skins were thrown on the seaweed - this is evidenced by the numerous finds of bones of the metacarpus and fingers, which usually remain on the skin taken from the animal. There were no larger bones here. Much more objects were found around these beds.

Lack of light and comparatively a large number of finds lead to think that the hut was used mainly as a place of rest and lodging for the night; apparently, the main life, when the weather allowed, took place on the site at the entrance to the cave. There, the carcasses of dead animals were dismembered and the necessary tools were allocated. The hut gave the hunters a roof over their heads and the illusion of comfort on long winter evenings. Here they could be engaged in the manufacture of tools, as evidenced by the large number of small fragments. Based on the remains of animals found, it is also possible to determine the time of the year in which the primitive hunter used the dwelling most intensively. The bones of mountain goats (caught and eaten at about 5 months of age, kids are born in mid-June) indicate the first months of winter, and the remains of marmots indicate the beginning of spring; it is quite clear that the dwelling was the “winter quarter” of the hunters. The inhabitants left the cave when the weather was warm. Over the past decades, the study of French sites has provided a lot of new interesting data. published only preliminary reports of his findings.Another residential object was discovered in the Devil's Cave (Fouriot du Diable) in France.It has the shape of an irregular quadrangle with main sides 12x7 m. , lined up in a continuous row. A similar row of stones stretched from the east side, and a barrier wall made of stones rose from the south. A rocky canopy forms the western wall. In the southeast corner of the dwelling there was an entrance; the width of the opening is approximately 4.20 m .The whole dwelling was placed under an inclined rock wall, it was enough to rest the tree trunks against the rock and covered with their skins, and the dwelling was ready. The cultural layer, lying directly on the rock, was limited by the contours of the dwelling and a low earthen rampart in front of its entrance; there were no finds outside these limits. In 1945, a site of the Hamburg culture was discovered in Borneck (western Germany). The German scientist Rust found here in the cultural layer a double dwelling of a hut-like type. The stones pressing the skeleton of the dwelling to the ground were arranged in two concentric circles, with the outer circle having a horseshoe shape and located on the windward side. Apparently, the outer tent had a defensive purpose. Separate boulders were scattered around it, which, according to Rust, served to strengthen the belts that stretched the roof of the tent. In the space in front of the dwelling, about 2000 small flakes were found - a typical “workshop” complex. The dimensions of the inner tent were 350 x 250 cm, the outer tent-screen had about 5 m at the base. The age of the find is about 15 thousand years BC. In Bornek traces of three other dwellings of the Ahrensburg culture were found.Unfortunately, two of them almost did not survive.The third, with a diameter of only 2 m, was limited to a circle of medium-sized stones with a gap at the entrance.Several hundred small stone flakes were found in the filling of the primitive hearth Rust estimates the antiquity of the find at 8500 BC and considers it a summer hut. At the Peggenwisch site in northern western Germany, a contour (5 m in diameter) of a horseshoe-shaped dwelling of the time of the Hamburg culture was discovered in front of the entrance. There were boulders on the sides that pressed the straps, and the walls around the edges of the living space were filled with sand.

Another dwelling, open on that same parking lot, is large and complex in design and belongs to the Madeleine culture. The large, pear-shaped part measured 7x4m in plan; it was, apparently, the main living quarters. The entrance to it passed through a vestibule or vestibule lined with stones. The diameter of this utility room is 120 cm. The floor of this vestibule was paved in two layers with stones weighing up to 60 kg, presumably to protect against dampness. Large boulders along the edges of the living space propped up circular sand shaft. A partly paved connecting corridor led to another dwelling, round in plan, 4 m in diameter, the floor of which was not lined with stone. The inventory found dates back to the Madeleine. Rust believes that here we are dealing with a winter dwelling. In the main room, more spacious and equipped with a hearth, about a thousand flakes were found. At another site in western Germany, near Pinneberg, during excavations in the period 1937-1938. Rust discovered the contours of six early and middle Mesolithic huts. Five of them are relatively well preserved. The contours were traced due to the darker color of the soil, which contains a lot of wood ash. Cross section shown. that a ditch 25-40 cm deep was dug along the edges of the residential area of the huts, in the filling of which voids from deeply driven structural pillars about 10 cm thick were preserved. total six pillar holes were found. The pillars that formed the frame of the dwelling were probably intertwined with branches and covered with sod. The internal dimensions of the huts are amazingly small: 250x150 cm. The exit is oriented to the south. Since the pillar holes are vertical, it can be assumed that the walls were also vertical, at least in their lower part. It is unlikely that the branches connected at the top formed a spherical vault; rather, the horizontal structure of the roof rested on vertical supporting pillars. The distance between the individual pillars was approximately 50 cm. The exit passed through a short and narrow vestibule or corridor. No remains of a hearth were found either inside or outside the hut. Hut 1, based on numerous stone tools, is dated to the Second Dryas period. The density of finds increases to the southeast of the dwelling - apparently, here its inhabitants spent most of their time. The second building, of somewhat later origin, has a similar design. Along the outer edge of the circular ditch, four pits from support pillars 30 cm apart were found. The fifth pit was discovered at a low entrance. The thickness of the pillars, judging by the pits, ranged from 5-8 cm, the pillar at the entrance was somewhat thicker than the others. The building is pear-shaped in plan, its dimensions are only 150x200 cm. An arc-shaped trench 150 cm long extends from the widest point of the structure, which is then lost in the sand. Yamok

from the pillars on it was not found. Perhaps this is the foundation of a barrier wall that protected the hut and the platform in front of the entrance from gusts of wind. However, this is contradicted by the fact that neither in the first nor in the second hut was found anything that would indicate the frequent presence of people here. There was also no hearth either inside or outside hut II. Hut III, measuring 150 x 250 cm, stood somewhat aside. It has the same pear-shaped layout as hut II; along its outer edge, there are also pits from pillars in an arc. The side entrance opens to the southeast.
The fifth and sixth huts partially overlap each other. These two dwellings are younger and more spacious than huts 1, II and III; their dimensions are 240x300 cm. No traces of structural foundations have been preserved here, but in form they are similar to the structures described above. The trench along the perimeter of the dwellings is not as deep as that of huts 1, II, and III, and has different depths in equal places. On the whole, it can be said that the Early and Middle Melithic dwellings from Pinneberg were small in size, without hearths, in terms of an irregular oval-pear shape. In 1921-1922. in the vicinity of Mainz in the loess, at a depth of 270 cm, heaps of stones were found, grouped around one or two hearths. The distance between the heaps varied from 50 to 100 cm. One hearth was placed in a bowl-shaped depression 20-30 cm wide, filled with limestone the size of a fist, burnt bone fragments and ash. Another hearth 70 cm in diameter is also made in a circle with stones, but does not have a recess. E. Nib (1924) also found here a platform with densely compacted soil, approximately 180x60 cm in size. At the edges, this platform was framed by an earth embankment approximately 5 cm high. No traces of poles or other structural elements were found. Many broken bones and stone tools were found around the heaps of stones. Neeb attributed this site to the late Aurignacian. Today it is already obvious that he discovered a residential object, which, unfortunately, with the help of the then methods could not be recognized and fixed as it deserved. In 1964, studies began on the recently discovered Magdalen hunters' camp at Pensevan near Montreau, on the banks of the River Seine, in France. Leroy-Gourhan, in collaboration with Bresilon, discovered the remains of a residential facility here. An analysis of animal bones, carried out using the latest achievements of science, showed that the dwelling was used by people in summer and autumn. The dwelling was built without a pit, but its contours are well fixed by the different density of finds. The division of the entire site into three sections was clearly traced, each of which had a hearth, an empty strip with no finds or with a minimum of them, an arcuate strip of finds (bone and stone tools and fragments), workplace and finally the entrance. In front of two of the three hearths were large boulders, presumably for sitting. A strict accounting and description of all the finds and a study of the relationships between them made it possible to state with certainty that there are three hut-like dwellings located in a chain, connected by passages and covered with bark or, more likely, with animal skins. Judging by the area of the beds, from 10 to 15 people lived here. The skeleton of the dwelling, obviously, was composed of poles converging into a cone. The discovery in Pensevan allowed us to get an idea of what the short-term huts looked like, which were built in Madeleine by deer hunters in Western Europe. This residential complex is much older than the finds of Late Paleolithic dwellings on the territory of the former Czechoslovakia and the USSR.

Paleolithic(Stone Age) is a historical period of cultural (technological) formation of a person, in “absolute” figures of evolutionary chronology lasting from 2.6 million years ago to 5-10 thousand years ago, and in relation to the relative geochronological scale approximately coinciding with the Pleistocene epoch. In terms of supporters of the biblical Creation, the Paleolithic is not a period of formation, but rather a period of restoration of mankind after a global catastrophe, the terms of which are much shorter than those accepted in the evolutionary version.

Conventionally, the Paleolithic is divided into three periods - lower (early), middle and upper (late). Proponents of evolutionary anthropogenesis sometimes divide the early Paleolithic into two periods, including the so-called Olduvai period as the initial stage. This is due to the fact that the technology for creating the first most primitive tools, according to the evolutionary hypothesis, does not belong to man, but to his hypothetical evolutionary predecessor, the role of which, until recently, was played by a representative of the monkey taxon Au.(H.) habilis. We do not consider this option due to the lack of evidence in its favor and the presence of direct evidence that all tools, including the earliest and most primitive Olduvai, were made by members of the human race. Homo(which means Homo ergaster/erectus , Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens). Moreover, today's paleoanthropology is much more cautious about its old thesis about the relationship between the level of instrumental technologies and the stages of evolutionary anthropogenesis.

In this list, any artificially processed stones are considered as evidence of human activity - even if the direct remains Homo are not available nearby. The following list was created based on materials from the site. OriginsNet.org(corrected and added taking into account new finds and dates), and generally uses materials from official scientific sources. In order to show the reader the complexity of the real historical picture, the so-called anomalous finds in the form of anthropological remains or artifacts have been added to the official "combed" row. In the list, for convenience of classification, officially accepted dates are used, regardless of whether they reflect the real picture.

– Middle East and Caucasus

– Africa

– East Asia (Pakistan, India, China)

– Southeast Asia (Indonesia, Australia)

- Russia Siberia)

– Europe

- South America

Early Paleolithic (Early Paleolithic)

The period officially marked by the appearance Homo ergaster and Homo erectus, as well as the invention of instrumental technology, called Acheulean. In reality, the picture is much more dramatic - in history, traces of a higher level of guns, and, apparently, traces of Homo sapiens

Kanapoi, Kenya, 4.5 million years – KP 271, Homo sapiens (?) Fragment of the humerus, anatomically indistinguishable from that of modern man, formally attributed Au. anamensis[link] .

laetoli, Kenya, 3.6–3.8 Ma - petrified footprints in volcanic ash, anatomically close to footprints Homo sapiens , are formally assigned Au. afarensis or an unknown creature with a humanoid foot anatomy [link] .

Kastenedolo, Italy, 3–4 Ma - fragments of the skeletons of several individuals Homo sapiens , were found in reliably Pliocene layers in the period 1860–1880. (G. Ragazzoni) with an undisturbed structure, which excludes the possibility of a later burial. After numerous years of attempts to discredit the finds by representatives of official science, these finds are not mentioned in the scientific press [link] .

Savona, Italy, 3–4 Ma - fragments of the skeleton Homo sapiens , discovered in the 1850s in Pliocene strata. The blue clay of the enclosing layer filled the bone cavities, and the overlying layer of quartzite sand was not disturbed, which excludes the possibility of a late burial. Official anthropology is also silent about this find [link] .

Yuanmou Basin, China, 3 million years“In the eastern sector of South Asia, the most numerous traces of the most ancient Paleolithic are known in China. [...] In Yuanmou... several stone tools were collected, the layers are dated 3 Ma (Olsen, 1997)” (Lauhin, 2005). Here, in layers 700 thousand years old (or 1.8 million years; see below), teeth were found Homo erectus (Drobyshevsky, 2004) and traces of the use of fire aged 1.2–1.3 million years (Gowlett, 1994).

Olmo, Italy, 2–4 Ma – a skullcap of almost modern morphology, discovered in 1863 near Tuscany in Italy, while digging a trench when laying a railway, at a depth of more than 15 meters, in a layer belonging to the late Pliocene - early Pleistocene. In this case, too, it is unlikely that we can talk about a late burial, since the find was made in deposits formed by an ancient lake, and the skull was filled with blue clay, which makes up the entire deposit. The find is sometimes mentioned in the official scientific literature on the rights of the Upper Pleistocene, having an age of no more than 50-60 thousand years. The radiocarbon analysis, which is unsuitable in this case, and the subjective assessment “by morphology”, are taken into account, and the geological evidence is ignored.

Makapansgat, Northern Transvaal, 2.6–3.3 Ma - the famous South African cave, in the deposits of which in 1936 numerous traces of the use of fire were discovered in the form of layers of soot and ash. Due to the fact that the researcher R. Dart tried to attribute the use of fire to Australopithecus (Dart, 1948), the very existence of such traces was sharply criticized and forgotten. To this day, official anthropology still hesitates to attribute such early use of fire to any of the "hominids". And although a pebble culture, by definition belonging to humans, was found in the same deposits, traces of fire are still interpreted as soil oxidation, either as traces of natural fires, or as bat droppings (Oakley, 1954; Drobyshevsky, 2004).

Yiron Israel, 2.5–2.8 Ma – here, in clays under basalt, whose age according to Ka/Ar is 2.51 Ma, lenses of pebbles occur. In one of the lenses, 30 m below the base of the basalt, artifacts were repeatedly collected - stone tools. For clays above artifacts, a date of 2800 ± 700 thousand years (RTL-717) was obtained, which confirms the exceptional antiquity of the site (Lauhin et al., 2005).

Kada Gona, Ethiopia, 2.4–2.6 Ma - pebble tools made from pre-selected raw materials, as well as tool marks on animal bones. It is clear that finds of this age in the evolutionary community cause serious difficulties in terms of identifying their manufacturer.

Marimar Argentina, South America, 2–3 Ma– Numerous stone tools, flint points, hunting bolo balls, traces of fires, burnt slag (Amegino, 1912, 1921 after Cremo and Thompson, 1999). The anomaly of the find lies in the fact that, according to modern ideas, the first people in America appeared no earlier than several tens of thousands of years ago. Numerous attempts to discredit the finds, additional studies and commissions from competent specialists of that time (Boule, Romero, Bohmann, etc.) could not refute the discovery of Amegino, but for today's official science, the Miramar finds are a default figure [link] .

foxhall, England, 2.5 or more million years - jaw, anatomically close to Homo sapiens , found in 1855 (R. Collyer) in the Upper Pliocene layer; as well as 2–2.5 Ma – stone tools, traces of fire (R. Collyer, 1867, J.R. Moir, 1927 after Cremo and Thompson, 1999). Leading the scholars of that time (Lyell, Huxley, Owen, Busk, etc.), having studied the jaw, did not accept the find as a matter of principle. They did not go to the place where the find(s) were discovered. The jaw itself disappeared after a while [link].

Red Crag, England, 2.0–2.5 Ma - drilled shark teeth (E. Charlesworth, 1872; references here are from Cremo and Thompson, 1999), a carved shell depicting a stylized human face (H. Stopes, c. 1912), numerous bone tools (JR Moir, c. 1912) [link] .

Bouri, ethopia, 2.5 million years- traces of tools on the bones of animals.

Omo, Shungura, Ethiopia:

• segment D, 2.4–2.5 Ma – Homo sp. indet. (i.e. genus Homo, species not identified. The found remains theoretically may not belong to a true person (since such a formal classification of the remains according to the old tradition can also apply to “ Homo» /Au. habilis), but stone tools in any case mark the presence of true Homo).

• section E, 2.3–2.4 Ma - stone tools and Homo sp. indet.

Lokalalei 1, 2C, West Turkana, Kenya, 2.34 million years- Stone tools.

Kada Hadar, Ethiopia, 2.2–2.33 Ma - stone tools and Homo sp. indet.

Senge 5, Zaire, 2.0–2.3 Ma - stone tools with double-sided processing.

Renzidong, China, 2.0–2.5 Ma - Numerous stone tools. The presence of stone tools outside Africa (Israel, China, Pakistan, Georgia, etc.) during the period of simultaneous and even earlier existence than Au. habilis, refutes the evolutionary thesis about habilis-toolmaker, as well as about the origin from him Homo erectus (ergaster). It also poses serious problems for the hypothesis of the African origin of mankind [link] .

Pabbi Hills, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, 1.9–2.5 Ma – stone tools, more than 350 items.

Riwat, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, 1.9 million years or more - stone tools.

Xiaochangliang, Nihewan Basin, north China, 1.9–2.0 Ma or more (old dating - 1.36-1.7 million years) - stone tools, including scrapers, awls, etc.

Longgupo, China, 1.78–1.96 Ma – stone tools, jaw fragment Homo ergaster (?) [link] .

Koobi Fora, East Turkana, Kenya. The total thickness of the Koobi Fora deposits is 650 m. The rich fauna indicates the existence here in antiquity of all possible types of landscape, including both forest and savannah.

• site KBS , 1.88–3.18 Ma – Homo ergaster (ER 1593, 2598, 3228, 3734) etc., as well as stone tools. Two femurs ER 1481 (with fragments a-d) and ER 1472 were also found here, which, in their anatomy, are closest to Homo sapiens . "Old dating of this group of finds: 2.7-3 million, new 1.6-3.18 million.", - writes S. Drobyshevsky. In this case, the KBS tuff is a marker for the human remains found under it, whose age is too old from the point of view. evolutionism is unacceptable. Drobyshevsky himself believes that the most probable age of the finds is 1.89–1.95 million years (Drobyshevsky, 2004), however, it seems that in this case the average figure was taken taking into account the Australopithecus/Habilis skull ER 1470 found here, older than Homo ergaster, according to evolutionism, simply should not be; [link 1 and

• site Okote , 1,6 –2,42 million years - Homo ergaster ER 1593(skull fragment), ER 2598 (occipital bone fragment), ER 1476 (tibia fragment of modern morphology), ER 1823 (femur fragment), ER 3733 (most complete Homo ergaster skull), ER 3883 (skull fragment), ER 1466 (skull fragment), ER 3892 (skull fragment), ER 820 and ER 992 (mandibles from different individuals in which the shape of the alveolar arch is almost identical to the modern one), ER 730 (mandible with some kind of chin protrusion!), ER 1507 (lower jaw), ER 819 (massive lower jaw), ER 731 (grucile lower jaw with signs of severe periodontal disease), ER 803 at (dated 1.53 million years, parts of the skeleton of one individual), ER 1808 (fragments adult female skeleton, all bones deformed due to severe hypervitaminosis), ER 1809 (femur fragment, 1.6–1.77 million years) and ER 737 (femur fragment, 1.5 million years);

• site Chari Karari , order 1.5 million years- a developed industry for the production of stone tools, controlled use of fire; tools bear traces of butchering the soft tissues of animals, plants, peeling tree bark, and sawing trees (Keeley and Toth 1981).

Olduvai, Tanzania. It is located in the southeastern part of the Serengeti plateau, near the Ngorongoro volcanic crater. The locality is a gorge several tens of kilometers long, cutting through a thickness of lacustrine and continental sediments about a hundred meters thick, crossed by many layers of volcanic tuffs and ash. The geological strata are composed of five main layers, of which the lower two contain the remains of Australopithecus and Homo. First layer, lying on basaltic lava, has a thickness of about 12 m at the site of hominid finds, the fauna of the layer is archaic, more than half of the mammalian species are extinct. Habitats were patchy, ranging from open steppes and swamps to riverine forest-steppes and copses, there was no dense tree cover at Olduvai, habitats were more open than at Koobi Fora, the climate was colder and drier than at present, temperature and humidity decreased towards the end the time of formation of the first layer. Bottom part second layer close to the upper part of the first layer in terms of fauna and archaeological context; the climate was relatively humid. The locality at the time of the formation of the second layer was a grassy forest-steppe (Drobyshevsky, 2002).

• Olduvai Horizon I, 1.75–2.0 Ma (the level where it was found Au. habilis OH 7, in the "first toolmaker" evolutionary scenario), found: Olduvai tools, bolo hunting throwing stones, a bone tool (presumably polished for leather processing), stone circular structures to strengthen the perimeter of the dwelling, and a stone with artificial ornamentation and engraving , known as the "head of a baboon" (M. Leakey, 1971). Despite the fact that Louis Leakey tried to connect the remains of habilis with tools found nearby, a number of tools, stone buildings and a work of art from the 1st horizon do not match the possibilities. Au. habilis.

• lower level of horizon II, 1.6–1.75 Ma - Olduvai tools of the most advanced technology ("advanced Olduvai").

Sterkfontein, South Africa, horizon 5: 1.7–2.0 Ma – Homo ergaster Stw 80, stone tools, traces of the use of fire, processed animal bones (Loy, 1998); tools made from animal horns for digging up termite mounds; Paranthropus skull with traces of damage from a stone tool; in horizon 6 ages more than 2 million years – Homo ergaster Stw 84, which, according to definable features, can even be attributed to Homo sapiens(Drobyshevsky, 2004).

Swartkrans, South Africa, 1.2–2.0 Ma – in layers 1–3: turned animal horns for digging up termite mounds; in layers 1 and 2: Homo ergaster SK 80 (upper jaw), SK 846 (fragment of the skull), SK 847 (fragment of the facial part of the skull), SK 74 (lower jaw), SK 15 (lower jaw), SK 45 (fragment of the lower jaw), etc. in the layer 3 dated 1.5 million years 270 animal bones were found, burned at a temperature of 400–800°C, which corresponds to a hearth flame (Bower, 1998; Brian, 2004).

Erqel Ahmar, Israel, 1.78-1.96 million years - pebble tools.

Karahatch, Armenia, > 1.8–1.94 Ma - Early Acheulean tools. The finds made by the Russian-Armenian expedition led by S.A. Aslanyan, are not inferior in age or even precede the appearance of the earliest Acheulean in Africa. For the evolutionary model, they raise new questions - both about the time and place of the origin of the actual acheulean, and about the fact of the existence of a technologically advanced Homo erectus outside of Africa.

Chilhac I France, 1.8 million years and plot Chilhac III – 1.5 million years– on both – stone tools of the Olduvai type.

Diring Yuriah (Deering Yuriah), Siberia, Russia, 2.9–1.8 Ma–260,000 years - a site 480 km from the Arctic Circle with numerous Olduvai-type tools made of quartzite pebbles, opened in 1982. The author of the discovery, Yuri Mochanov, provides convincing arguments in favor of the age of Deering-Yuryakh at least 1.8 million years, which is comparable to the earliest African sites, but most scientists do not accept this date because of its extraordinary nature. Based on thermoluminescent analysis of quartzite samples, American researchers (M. Waters et al, 1997) gave a date of 260–370,000 years, which in any case is anomalous from the point of view of existing views on human history. In the same year, the Americans Huntley and Richards (1997) in the journal Ancient TL criticized the dating of the Waters group, concluding that Deering's age is much older. And in 2002, in a specialized laboratory of Moscow State University, O. Kulikov's group conducted a new analysis of more modern method RTL by getting the age of Deering order artifacts 2.9 million years, which poses a serious challenge to the so-called. African model of the origin of mankind.

Ulalinka (Ulalinka), Siberia, Russia, 2.3–1.8 Ma or 1.5 million years according to TL-analysis (old dating - 700 thousand years and more) - tools from quartzite pebbles. Choppers predominate, there are side-scrapers, points, cores with a spout (Okladnikov and Ragozin, 1982; Klyagin, 1996).

Xihoudu, Ruicheng county, China, 1.6–1.8 Ma - stones with traces of processing, cut bones and traces of the use of fire.

Dmanisi, Georgia, 1.77 million years – Homo ergaster D2700, D2280, D2282 etc., the industry of production of stone tools. Altruistic relationships within the group - on the example of caring for a helpless old man (D3444).

Ain Hanech and El Kherba, Algeria- OK. 1.8 million years- Olduvai type guns.

Peninj, West Natron, Tanzania, 1.4–1.7 million years - tools of the Olduvai and Acheulean types; traces of working with wood - sharpening the sharp ends of sticks, cutting bushes for the construction of dwellings; while the tools are used at a considerable distance from the home (Dominguez-Rodrigo et al., 2001). The site is one of the earliest examples of the pattern-making strategy of Acheulean bifaces (symmetrical double-sided axes).

Melka Konture, Eritrea:

Gombore I (Gombore I) 1.6-1.7 million years – Homo ergaster (Homo sapiens?) IB-7594, distal fragment of the humerus. Pebble tools of the Olduvai type have been found in sediments containing Pleistocene fauna. Interestingly, the artifacts were concentrated on an elevated earthen platform 2.4 m in diameter (Gowlett, 1993), which was probably the foundation of a dwelling; there are also indications of the use of fire in Melka Kontur (Drobyshevsky, 2004). [link]

• local location Garba IV (Garba IV), 1.4-1.5 million years – Homo ergaster IV, the right half of the lower jaw, which belonged to a child aged 3 to 5 years.

Mojokerto, Java, 1.81 million years(by Ar/Ar)/ – 1.1 million years (paleomagnetic analysis) - skull Homo erectus (1–MJ 1 ). The maximum date is 2.3 million years (Gulotta, 1995).

Sangiran, Java, 1.66 million years(by Ar/Ar)/ –1,1 (paleomagnetic analysis) - the remains of more than 40 individuals Homo erectus (the most famous – skull of Sangiran-17).

Nihewan, Nord China, 1.66 million years- Stone tools. A number of researchers note their similarity with 1.77 million years ago. summer guns Homo erectus found in Dmanisi (Georgia), although in reality they are closer to the Acheulean culture. This "misrecognition" is associated with the commonplace stamp of paleoanthropologists, which says: "there was no ashel in China."

Nariokotome III, West Turkana, Kenya, 1.6 million years - Homo ergaster WT 15000. Paleontological materials make it possible to reconstruct forested and edaphic steppes, as well as damp swampy lowlands covered with waterlogged vegetation (Reed 1997). An almost complete skeleton of a teenager was found here H. ergaster, dubbed Turkana Boy. [link]

Ubeidiya, Israel, lower horizons 1.6 million years – Homo ergaster , Olduvai tools of the most advanced technology, in the upper layers of age 1.4 million years- one of the earliest examples of the Acheulean culture, bifaces (tools with symmetrical bilateral processing). It is worth paying attention to this early Middle Eastern Acheulean, which is actually simultaneous with the African one.

Orce Ravine Spain, Andalusia. Locations are located along the shores of the ancient lake. Rich faunal remains include both large animals (southern elephant, fossil hippopotamus, Etruscan rhinoceros, bear) and small ones.

Barranco Leon BL5. The locality of Barranco León is dated by fauna and paleomagnetic method to the same time as Fuentinueva 3, 1.07–1.78 Ma, or even 1.6–1.8 Ma (Oms et al., 2000). More than 60 artifacts of the Olduvai type and the developed Olduvai were found here, as well as a fragment of a molar BL5-0 Homo sp. indet.

Venta Micena , 1.07–1.78 Ma. The location is open, lacustrine deposits form here 7 layers, in the 3rd of which the remains of hominids were found Homo sp. indet.(Gibert et Palmqvist, 1995). Found: VM-0 (fragment of the skull, 1.6-1.65 million years), VM 1960 and VM 3961 (fragments of the humerus, 1.2-1.4 million years) (Gibert et Palmqvist, 1995). Although all three finds can be questioned as belonging to humans, stone tools were also found along with them.

Fuente Nueva fn3, 1.07–1.78 million years, most likely 1.4 million years (Drobyshevsky, 2004) - the third locality of hominids in Orsa, unlike the two previous ones, is located in a karst cave. Here were found: a fragment of the humerus CV-1 and a phalanx CV-2, identified as belonging to Homo sp. indet.(Palmqvist et al., 1996; Gibert et al., 1999). However, about 100 artifacts were found here, classified as products of the developed Aldovan (Navarro et al., 1997).

Konso-Gardula, south africa, 1.4-1.9 million years – Homo ergaster (KGA10-1, lower jaw), early Acheulean stone tools.

Gadeb, Ethiopia, 1.4 million years- controlled use of fire.

Azikh (Azykh), foothills of Karabakh, Azerbaijan, 1.5 million years– the cave has 10 layers belonging to different stages of the Lower and Middle Paleolithic. In the lowest layers (1.5–1.8(?) Ma) a pebble culture reminiscent of the Olduvai culture was found - more than 300 stone artifacts, incl. choppers, choppings, side-scrapers, gigantolites - rough tools weighing 3-5 kg, etc. Below the 6th layer, the remains of large fires, at least 700 thousand years old, were found. Fragment of a jaw found in the Middle Acheulean Homo heidelbergensis (the so-called "Azykhanthropus", 350-400 thousand years), and in the Mousterian - a cache of Neanderthals with skulls of cave bears, which, as expected, had a cult significance.

Kozarnika, bulgaria, 1.2–1.4 Ma - symbols carved on a stone tool.

Lantien, China, 1.15 million years - Homo erectus (RA 1051-6).

Hazorea, Esdraelon, Israel, 1.3–1.5 million years– found 5 fragments of skulls from 5 individuals, formally assigned to Homo erectus(Hazorea 1-5). The upper cultural layer contains tools from the early Acheulean to the present; the layer in which the human remains were found is synchronous with the II layer of Olduvai. The problem is that the skull fragments of Hazorea 1 and 3 are morphologically archaic Homo sapiens (comparable to, but much older than, Swanscombe and Fonteshevad), so they are sometimes referred to as "progressive paleoanthropes" in the literature.

Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania:

• Upper and middle part of layer II 1.3–1.5 million years - Homo erectus OH 9 (cranial box, dating varies from 360 thousand years to 1.48 million years, with the most probable limit of 0.9-1 million years (Pilbeam, 1975) or 1.3-1.5 million years .—paleomagnetic and 40Ar/39Ar methods (Tamrat et al., 1995), the layer contains steppe fauna - giant herbivores and horses, in the same layer were found tools of the most developed Oldowan - cleavers and hand axes (early Acheulean?).

• Bed III, 0.8–1.2 Ma , Homo erectus OH 34(fragments of the femur and tibia), OH 51 (lower jaw), tools of the developed Oldowan (or early Acheulean) - cleavers and hand axes.

• Bed IV, 0.8–1.2 Ma , Homo erectus OH 28(pelvic and femur bones) , OH 22 (lower jaw), OH 12 (skull fragment), Middle Acheulean tools. It is believed that some levels of layer IV were deposited in the Lower Pleistocene, and their dating – from 370 to 780 thousand years (McBrearty et Brooks, 2000). Stone tools are diagnosed as Acheulean and "Middle Stone Age". Finds come from these layers Homo erectus OH 2, OH 11, OH 20 and OH 23. These are fragments of the upper and lower jaws, as well as a femur (Day, 1971; Leakey, 1971).

Olorgesailie, Kenya, sections 1-5, 950.000–1.0 Ma and plots 9-14, 500.000–750.000 years – ashel tools.

Le Vallonet France, 0.99–1.07 Ma - Stone tools.

Soleihac France, Jaramillo 900–970.000 years- Stone tools.

bose, China, 803.000±3000 years- tools for which there is an evolutionary formulation "similar to Acheulean bifaces", because it is believed that there was no Acheulean in East Asia.

Joub Jannine II Israel , 800–900.000 years, ashelian tools.

Evron Quarry Israel, 600,000 years–1 million years , ashelian tools.

Gesher Benot Ya "aqov Israel, 780.000 years - Homo erectus (2 fragments of two femurs), Acheulean implements.

Latamne, Syria, 500.000 to 700.000 years . ashel tools.

Sierra de Atapuerca Spain. Many artifacts and anthropological remains have been found here in huge caves. The most ancient of the caves is Gran Dolina. In it, out of 11 levels, 7 are rich in fossils, and from the last, layer TD 6 contains stone tools of the Olduvai appearance (about 200) and the remains of more than 80 people, some of which have almost modern anatomy (fragments of the skull ATD6-15 and ATD6-69) [link ] . The find received a new taxonomic name Homo antecessor. Some evolutionary scientists consider this form to be ancestral to two lines - sapient and Neanderthal, others - only to Neanderthal. A problem for evolutionary anthropology is the fact that Atapuerca people are more sapiens than even later African forms.

• Gran Dolina (TD 6), 780.000–990.000 years - Homo antecessor , stone tools.

• Gran Dolina (TD 4), 750.000–1.6 million years - Stone tools.

Isernia la Pineta, Italy:

780.000–990.000 years - Stone tools.

500.000–800.000 years - Stone tools.

Dorn-Durkheim, Germany, DD31, more 800.000 years- Stone tools.

Ceprano, Italy, 800–900.000 years - Homo erectus (Ceprano-1). Along with the finds from Atapuerca, he is one of the first known Europeans.

Flores, Indonesia , 840.000 years - stone tools of the Acheulean type. The presence on the Indonesian island of traces of human presence in the early Pleistocene means that at that time a person (presumably Homo erectus) was an experienced navigator.

Yuanmou Basin, China, 700,000 years (1.8 million years?), two incisors Homo erectus [link] . “... The Danawu site ... is a small hill, the numerous layers of which are inverted so that the older fauna is in the upper layers, and the young one is in the lower ones (Liu et Ding, 1984). [...] The dating of the layer containing the remains of hominids has not been reliably determined. On the basis of paleomagnetic studies and analysis of the fauna, dates of 500-600 thousand years ago were assumed. (Liu et Ding, 1984), 700 thousand years old or 1.8 million liters. (Pan et al., 1991), 1.7 mln. (Qian, 1985) and others. It is currently shown that hominids lived here no later than 780 thousand and no earlier than 1.1 million years ago. (Hyodo et al., 2002)" (Drobyshevsky, 2004). However, it is worth recalling that stone tools were found in layers dating back to 3 million years (see above, Laukhin, 2005). Also, according to J. Gaulett (Gowlett, 1994), traces of the use of fire 1.2-1.3 million years ago were found here.

Karama (Karama), Anui river valley, Altai, Russia, 550–800.000 years – large pebbles with an unevenly chipped sharp edge were found in the red-colored sediments of the Lower Pleistocene, which served as primitive stone tools - side-scrapers, choppers and choppers, constituting the pebble-type industry characteristic of the Early Paleolithic.

Misovaya (Cape)(Urta-Tube), South Ural, Russia, 700.000. years - a multi-layered settlement of the Acheulean and Mousterian cultures. The Early Paleolithic includes traces of a dwelling in a rocky crevice. Pebble choppers and Acheulean bifaces were found at the bottom of the dwelling (G. Matyushin, 1959, 1961). Numerous microliths and composite (wood plus stone) tools belong to the latest period (10-12 thousand years).

Nanjing, Tangshan Cave, China, 580.000 or 620.000 years – Homo erectus .

Bodo, Ethiopia, 550–640.000 years– Late Acheulean tools; Homo heidelbergensis ; The dating of the Bodo layers was carried out repeatedly and gave figures from 70–125 thousand years ago. (Conroy et al., 1978) up to 500–740 thous. (McBrearty and Brooks, 2000). The accepted date today is 640 thousand years. (Clark et al., 1994). A variety of tools have been found at Bodo, classified as Acheulean or Oldowan and Levallois. Found: 2 fragments of skulls (Bodo 1 and Bodo 2) and a fragment of the humerus.

Ndutu, Tanzania, from 200 before 900.000 years (600.000?) – Homo heidelbergensis (Ndutu 1 ); ashel tools.

Mauer, Germany, 500–700.000 years , Homo heidelbergensis; tools from the Oldowan to the developed Acheulean.

Kent's Cavern, Devonshire, England, 500–660.000 years - Acheulean tools, Abbeville bifaces (“Abbeville culture” is an archaeological culture of the early (lower) Paleolithic in Europe, named after the city of Abbeville, France; the old name is Shellic culture).

Abbeville, Somme River, France, level III, 600.000 years- Acheulean, Abbeville bifaces.

Fordwich, Kent, England, Cromerian, 600.000 years- Acheul tools, Abbeville bifaces.

boxgrove, Cromerian, England, 474–528.000 years old, Homo heidelbergensis ; ashel tools.

Fontana Ranuccio, Italy, layer 10, K-Ar analysis 458.000±5700 years - Acheulean bifaces.

Zhoukoudian, China, plots 2-4: 400–500.000 years - Homo erectus (the so-called Sinanthropus), plots 5-10: 500–800.000 years - Homo erectus [link] .

Daraki Chattan Cave, India, 400–500.000 years– engraving; more than 500 cup-shaped depressions on the rock surface made of quartzite (Kumar, 2003).

Auditorium Cave, India, 400–500.000 years – petroglyphs (cup-shaped depression and winding line) on the surface of a quartzite boulder (Bednarik, 2002).

Sima de los Huesos, Atapuerca, Spain, 350–500.000 years - Homo heidelbergensis ; the first known intentional burial, the remains of more than 30 people (the most famous specimen is Atapuerca 5 ), a stone tool is embedded in the burial, which has not a practical, but an aesthetic value.

Chichibu, north of Tokyo, Japan, 500.000 years- the remains of two huts and 30 stone tools of the Acheulean culture.

Swanscombe, Kent, England, 500,000 years - Homo heidelbergensis ; Middle Gravels section, 360–400.000 - Acheulean tools; the Upper Loam site is a stone hand ax of a high artistic level.

Caune de l'Arago, Tautavel, France, 320–470.000 years old, Homo heidelbergensis , the remains of at least 60 people (the most famous of which – so-called Tautavel man, Arago XXI), as well as microliths and large pebble tools.

Terra Amata Nice, France, 400.000 years- hut, hearth, ashel tools, 73 pieces of hematite (mineral) paint.

Bilzingsleben, Germany, 320–412.000 years old, Homo erectus , the remains of three huts, a paved area 9 m 2 , traces of the use of fire, geometric patterns on bone plates, microliths, a wooden spear, large pebble tools.

Tan Tan, Morocco, 300–500.000 years– tools of the middle Acheulean, a female stone figurine made of quartzite, the so-called. "Venus from Morocco".

Ambrona Upper Level and Torralba, Spain, 300–400.000 years - Ashel tools.

Tabun Cave, Israel, lowest layer E, dater. ESR (electron spin resonance method) and U-series (uranium series) – 387.000 thousand years or TL (thermoluminescent) 340.000 thousand years - Acheulean-Dzhabrud tools ("Dzhabrud" layers - Mousterian layers, distinguished mainly by the abundance of the so-called angular side-scrapers). Human remains were found in the upper layer C (see below).

Hoxne, England, lower AAR level: 300–350.000 years- a sharpened stone hand axe.

Furze Platt, Stoke Newington, Cuxton, Baker's Farm sites, England, 300–350.000 years- large sharpened hand cleavers (cleavers) made of stone.

Wolvercote Channel, England, Hoxnian, 300–350.000 years - sharpened stone axes with a convex profile in plan.

Gaily Hill, England, not less than 330 thousand years- fragment of a skeleton Homo sapiens , found in 1888 in the suburbs of London, at a depth of 2.5 m, in undisturbed deposits of the Holstein Formation. The instance is included in the so-called group. anomalous European finds, including also specimens of Moulin Quignon, Clichy, La Denise and Ipswich (see below). It is curious that these finds, if they are classified as archaic sapiens, according to modern paleoanthropological criteria, may well be considered as corresponding to the official scheme, however, once withdrawn from scientific consideration, they continue to “traditionally” remain default figures [link]

Moulin Quignon, Abbeville, France – at least 330 thousand years , Homo sapiens - an anatomically modern jaw, found in 1863 near the city of Abbeville in France, in sandstone of the same Holstein formation. [link]

Clichy, France, not less than 330 thousand years- fragment of a skeleton Homo sapiens , found in 1868 in the Clichy quarry in Paris, equal in age to the two previous mentioned finds. [link]

La Denise, France - skull fragments Homo sapiens , found in the 1840s between two volcanic deposits, Upper Pleistocene and Pliocene, i.e. the find has an age ranging from several thousand/tens of thousand years to 2 million years. [link]

Ipswich, East England, 330–600 thousand years - fragment of a skeleton Homo sapiens , found in 1911 in Ice Age deposits. [link]

Repolusthohle, Austria, 300.000 years- an ornament made of a wolf's tooth with a drilled hole.

Isimila, Tanzania, 260.000 years, Late Acheulean tools in Africa.

Berekhat Ram Israel, 230.000–470.000 years – late Acheulean tools, female figurine.

hungsi valley, India, 200–300.000 or >350.000 years - ashel, red ocher.

Yabrud I, Oumm Qatafa, Levant, 200.000 years- the end of the ashel = so-called. "Acheulean-Jabrud" style of tools.

Qesem Cave Israel, Users 200.000–382.000 years - "Acheulean-Jabrud" style of tools.

Holon Israel, 200.000 years- tools of the late Acheulean.

Hamburg–Wittenbergen, Germany, 190–250.000 years the art of the Paleolithic.

Kalambo Falls, Zambia, OK. 180.000 years(U-series) - late Acheulean.

Cys-la-Comune, Aisne, France, 70.000–126.000 years - late ashelian.

Middle Paleolithic (Middle Paleolithic)

The period of the Middle Paleolithic ("Middle Paleolithic" or MR ) in evolutionary anthropology is associated with the appearance Homo sapiens archaic (Homo heidelbergensis) and a new type of instrumental range more high technology(in Europe, the tool culture of the Middle Paleolithic (Mousterian) is also associated with Homo neanderthalensis). The Middle Paleolithic of Africa stands out in a separate category and is called the "Middle Stone Age" ("Middle Stone Age" or MSA ), and representatives of the African archaic sapiens ( or Homo heidelbergensis) that are associated with that culture are sometimes called H. rhodesiensis or H. helmei

Ethiopia, Central Kenya, 400.000–120.000 years – MSA-tools.

Elandsfontein, Saldhania, South Africa, OK. 350,000 years - Homo heidelbergensis (Hopefield 1).

Eyasi, Tanzania, more 130.000 years – Homo heidelbergensis , tools of the Sangoen type (the so-called. "Sangoen bifaces" - extremely elongated, in the form of a dagger or a long tip, the peaks of the tool; the base is practically absent, the section is rhomboid, triangular, in the form of a parallelogram or biconvex; name by the name of Sango Bay, Uganda), blades, pikes.

Capthurin Formation, Kenya, OK. 280.000 years- tools of the African Middle Paleolithic (hereinafter MSA), blades; 75 pieces of red ocher.

Guomde, Kenya, Chari Form., 270–300.000 years - Homo heidelbergensis .

Malewa Gorge, Kenya, 240.000 years– MSA-tools.

Valsequillo Mexico, South America, 250.000 years- guns of the Aurignacian type. The find is considered anomalous, since the appearance of people in America dates back to a period no earlier than 50 thousand years ago [link]

La Cotte de St. Brelade France, 238.000 years- Tools of the Middle Paleolithic of non-African regions, hereinafter referred to as MR technology.

Maastricht–Belvedere, Netherlands, 238.000 years- MP guns.

Gademotta, Ethiopia, c . 235.000 ±5000 years- MSA, blades.

Bir Tarfawi and Bir Sahara East, Egypt, OK. 230.000 years– MSA-tools.

Weimar–Ehringsdorf, Germany , 200–230.000 years- "early" Homo neanderthalensis , MP guns.

Various MPs sites in Levant, 210 –24 0.000 years- MP guns.

Kabwe Broken Hill, Zambia. 200.000 years - Sangoen tools; 30.000–300.000 years (?) – skull and skeletal fragments of an archaic Homo sapiens (3 individuals), the stratigraphic position of which is unclear, as well as the connection of the found tools with them. Based on the "archaic" morphology, as well as on the basis of the interests of solving the problem of missing African forms in the Middle Pleistocene, the age of the BH-1 skull is today attributed to 150-300 thousand years.

twin rivers, Zambia, over 200.000 years- "Lupemban" MSA - tools, 300 variants of various mineral dyes (hematite (red iron ore), specularite, etc.).

Omo Kibish I, Ethiopia, around or 200.000 years – Homo sapiens (Omo I). After the original dating of 130 thousand years (1967) was refined by new methods (2005), Omo I is considered one of the first anatomically modern humans. It is interesting that another skull found nearby (and also dated in 2005 to 200 thousand years old) has pronounced features Homo erectus (Omo II), which may indicate a joint temporary and territorial residence H. sapiens and H. erectus. On the other hand, the aging of human age poses new problems for evolutionary anthropogenesis. – why anatomically modern man did not show his intellectual abilities? And this despite the fact that Homo erectus, according to a recognized point of view, was a navigator more than 800 thousand years ago.

Kalambo Falls, Zambia, U-series: 180.000 years- "Lupemban" MSA - guns, red ocher.

Border Cave, South Africa, > 195.000 years, upper limit on Ox7 238.000 years– MSA-tools.

Vertesszollos, Hungary, 185 –350.000 years- so-called. "Buda"-industry, - Homo heidelbergensis with features Homo erectus.

Bau de l'Aubesier France, 170.000–190.000 years - Homo heidelbergensis , an example of caring for the helpless individuals of his community.

Florisbad, South Africa, 160.000 years (?) – Homo sapiens (Florisbad), MSA - guns.

Herto, Ethiopia, Ar/Ar 154–160.000 years - Homo sapiens idaltu ; final Acheulean culture and MSA; the skulls bear traces of posthumous scalping (perhaps for ritual purposes).

Singa, Sudan, 130–190.000 years - Homo heidelbergensis ; MSA (?).

Dali, China, 150.000 – early Homo sapiens , MP guns.

La Chaise France, 151.000 years - " early » Homo neanderthalensis ; MP guns.

Krapina Croatia, 130.000 years– burial Homo neanderthalensis . It is believed that since that time people began to bury their dead, based on the formed ideas about the afterlife. Evolutionary anthropologists (A. Marshak, 1975 and others) believe that the population Neanderthal and Cro magnon since that time was between 1 and 10 million people, that is, in 100 thousand years, our predecessors had to bury about 4 billion bodies with related artifacts. A significant part of the burials of these 4 billion should have been preserved. However, only a few thousand have been found.

Ngaloba, Laetoli, Tanzania, 90 –150,000 years – Homo sapiens (LH 18, LH 29). MSA guns

Jebel Irhoud, Morocco, 90–125.000 or 105–190.000 years – Homo heidelbergensis ; guns MSA (type "Levallois-Mousterian").

Haua Fteah, Libya, > 90 or >130,000 years - Homo heidelbergensis ; MSA (Levallois-Mousterian).

Abdur, Eritrea, 125.000±7000 years– MSA tools, bifacial hand axes, flakes and blades of the so-called. "intermediate" industry, active development of the coastal zone.

La Chaise France, 126.000 years– classic Homo neanderthalensis ; MP guns.

Tabun, Israel, layer C – Homo neanderthalensis (Tabun 1 and 2), 50–122.000 years old.

Bukit Jawa, Langgong, Perak, Malaysia, over 100,000 years old - MP guns.

Dakleh Oasis, Egypt, 90–160.000 years old- MP ("Aterian") guns.

Mugharet el Aiya, Morocco, 65–90.000 years old - Homo heidelbergensis , MSA presumably aterian.

El Guetta, Libya, 65–90,000 years or 130–140,000 years – MSA (atarian).

Dederiyeh Cave, Syria, level 8, OK. 50–70.000 years - Homo neanderthalensis , MP tools similar to the “Tabun B” type, burial of an infant with a sandstone slab and triangular flint placed on the chest.

Kebara Cave Israel, TL 60.000±4000, ESR 62.000±8000 – Homo neanderthalensis graves, MP tools, animal bones with engraved symbols, lines and patterns.

Ngandong, Indonesia, Solo-River, 53.000–27.000 years - Homo erectus (at least 14 individuals, the finds are represented by skull caps and femurs). Mousterian and azil tools are represented by small rough flakes of chalcedony, plates, a stone ball, as well as bone tools: a knife with a polished edge, a harpoon and a pointed tool made of deer antler.

Shanidar, Iraq, 50.600 years - classical Homo neanderthalensis , Mousterian guns.

La Chapelle France, 56–47.000 years old - classical Homo neanderthalensis .

Le Moustier, 55.800 - Mousterian tools, 40.300 years - classical Homo neanderthalensis .

Skhul Israel, 9 0–120.000 years - Homo sapiens .

Qafzeh, Israel, levels XVII-XXIV, 90–120.000 , the accepted average age 97.000 years±3000 – Homo sapiens , MP tools, ritual burials, joint burial of an adult woman and a child; engraving of lines with a triangular ornament, use of red ocher.

Staroselye (Staroselye), Crimea, Ukraine, 40–80.000 years old- culture "Micoquian" MP, tools equipped with a handle, devices for throwing a stone projectile and a wooden spear. It is worth noting that the remains of a child 1.5-2 years old belong to an undoubted Homo sapiens . Paleontologist V.P. Alekseev writes: “The only convincing exception (from the rule that European sapiens are not older than 40 thousand years. – A.M.) is made in 1953 by A.A. Formozov found in Staroselye near Bakhchisaray (Crimea). In general, the modern appearance of a baby discovered in the Mousterian layer at the age of about one and a half years does not raise the slightest doubt, although Ya.Ya. Roginsky rightly noted several primitive signs on the skull: moderate development of the chin protrusion, developed frontal tubercles, and large teeth. The dating of this find in absolute terms is unclear, but the inventory found with it shows that it is much older than the Upper Paleolithic sites with bone remains of modern humans. This fact firmly establishes the synchronism of the most ancient forms of modern man and the later groups of paleoanthropes, their coexistence over a fairly significant period of time ”(V.P. Alekseev, "The Formation of Humanity")

Upper Paleolithic (Upper Paleolithic)

The era of the Upper Paleolithic is officially considered the time of the appearance in history of anatomically modern man, Homo sapiens (modern), which had its own culture, distinguished from others by the production of fine works of art and high instrumental technology. For Africa, this period is classified as "Late Stone Age"("Later Stone Age", or, further, LSA).

Hoedjies Punt, South Africa, 71–300.000 years - Homo sapiens ; M.S.A.

Tongtianyan Cave, Guangxi, south China, 111–139.000 or 153.000 years– Liujiang-hominid, anatomically modern , bone awls and other bone tools, organized fishing, bone engraving and coloring of engraved parts; the most famous find is beads made of drilled shells with traces of ocher.LM 1.3 50,000 years- human footprints.

Boker Tachtit Israel, from 33.105±4100 to 45.000 years – IUP.

Kostenki (Kostenki), Voronezh region, Russia, 45–52.000 years old – H. sapiens. The village of Kostenki is the richest place in Russia where the sites of the Upper Paleolithic era are concentrated (over 60 sites are located on the territory of about 10 km 2). Here dwellings made of mammoth bones were discovered and explored, numerous works of art were found, including world-famous female figurines - the so-called "Paleolithic Venuses". In 1984, the oldest, IV cultural layer was discovered here, perhaps today being the most ancient monument of the Upper Paleolithic in Europe.

Ucagizh, Turkey, c. 41.000 years– IUP.

Border Cave, South Africa, 39.000±3000 years- early LSA guns.

Bohunician, Moravia, from 36.000 to 43.000 years – IUP.

El Castillo Cave, Spain, 40.000±2000 years- Aurignac tools.

Mladec, CZ, 40,000 years - H. sapiens and Aurignac tools.

Mamontova Kurya (Mamontova Kurya), R. Usa, Siberia, Russia, 40.000 years- stone tools, stone arrowheads, mammoth tusk, covered with a primitive pattern. The presence of an Upper Paleolithic site at 66 degrees north latitude, beyond the Arctic Circle, contradicts today's ideas, according to which 20-15 thousand years ago the north of Eurasia up to the Carpathians and the Dnieper region was completely covered with continental ice and no life here was basically impossible . The same applies to the other three sites listed below.

Makarovo-4 (Makarovo-4), R. Lena, Siberia, Russia, more 39.000 years – IUP.

Bereleh (Bereleh), R. Indigirka, Siberia, Russia, 30.000 years- discovered in 1970, is considered one of the most anomalous Siberian sites of the late Paleolithic (located just south of 71 ° N).

Yana (Yana), mouth of the Yana River, Siberia, OK. 30 thousand years- opened in 2004 by V.V. Pitulko, the northernmost Late Paleolithic site in the world. It is located 120 km from the mouth of the Yana River, north of 71° N, beyond the Arctic Circle. The archaeological material is homogeneous: it is a well-marked pebble industry; a variety of side-scrapers, flake cores, rough choppers and choppings processed on both sides, and a rich bone industry are presented. “It is not clear whether the Yan culture is the result of local development or whether its appearance was caused by the penetration of populations from Transbaikalia and southern Siberia into the northeast of Asia. All these objects are associated with the spread of a genetically unified wave of the Caucasoid (Caucasoid) population, which moved 40–50 thousand years ago in the latitudinal and then in the meridional directions” (Lauhin, 2007).

See also reconstruction), in the other - a boy 12–14 years old (Sungir-2, see reconstruction) and girls 9–10 years old (Sungir-3), lying with their heads to each other. On the boy's head, as well as the man's, beads and pendants with fox fangs were found, with which, apparently, the hat was decorated. The girl's head may have been covered with a loose hood-type headdress adorned with beads. A ring made of mammoth tusk was found on the boy's crown, a pendant in the form of a horse was found on his chest, and a mammoth figurine was found under his left shoulder. In the burial of a girl and a boy, unusual objects were preserved - three discs (plates) made of mammoth tusk several centimeters in diameter, which have four or eight slots. Wands, darts and spears made of mammoth tusks, flint tips were also found. The largest spear from a single piece of tusk reaches 2.4 m. To make such a weapon, it was necessary to have the technique of straightening the tusks. Beads also required special production methods. Decorations on the upper and lower clothing, bracelets (under the knees and above the feet), as well as solid rings on the fingers are no less impressive than the sheer number of mammoth tusk beads - about 10 thousand. ( "In the world of science", 03.2006).

Rose Cottage Cave, South Africa, 26.000 years– microlytic MSA.

Pech Merle Cave France, 24.700 years- wall painting "Spotted horses".

Cougnac Cave France, 23.000 or 25.000 years - Wall painting "Deers".

Lascaux Cave, 17.000 years- wall cave painting, early Madeleine. 14C dating showed her age at 2,200 years. Since this was not consistent with the theory of the deep antiquity of the drawings, radiocarbon dates were rejected with the note that they only reflect the fact that the cave was relatively recently inhabited. However, the drawings, after 15,000 years of fumigation with smoke from campfires, could hardly have looked so bright.

Altamira Cave, Spain, 13.000–15.000 years (by 14 C) - the most significant Paleolithic wall painting in terms of artistic wealth (Middle Madeleine). It was opened in 1869, but only in 1879 was a huge multicolored painting on the ceiling of the side hall noticed. This fresco depicts a herd of bison and other animals (the length of the figures is up to 2.25 m) of the Upper Paleolithic fauna. The subsequent drama was determined by the dogmatic ideas of evolutionism about the "meaninglessness" of glacial prehistory. At the World Archaeological Congress of 1880 in Lisbon, under the leadership of E. Cartagliaca with the support of G. De Mortiller, the painting of Altamira, without any discussion, was considered a remake and even a deliberate falsification, allegedly performed to discredit evolutionary science. “Rehabilitation” and, moreover, “the cult of Altamira” date back to the beginning of the 20th century.

Niaux Cave France, 13.000–13.800 years – wall cave painting, medium madeleine.

Le Portel Cave France, 12.000 years– wall cave painting, late Madeleine.

Flores, Indonesia, Liang Bua, 12.000–18.000 years – in the Ling Bua cave in 2004–2005. found the remains of 9 people of an unusually miniature shape, as well as perfect stone tools musterian type (M. Morwood et al, 2004). The best preserved individual Lb1, Homo floresiensis ("last" Homo erectus ); woman 30 years old, height 90 cm [link] .

Materials used

2. Alekseev V.P., The formation of humanity Political literature, M., 1984;

3. Drobyshevsky S.V., Predecessors. Ancestors? Part I and II.- Moscow-Chita, 2002;

4. Drobyshevsky S.V., Predecessors. Ancestors? Part III: Archanthropes. Part IV: Hominids transitioning from archanthropes to paleoanthropes. - M.: Editorial URSS, 2004;

5. Drobyshevsky S.V., Predecessors. Ancestors? Part V: Paleoanthropes. - M.: KomKniga, 2006;

6. Zubov A.A., Paleoanthropological ancestry of man. Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology RAS - M., 2004;

7. Klyagin N.V., The origin of civilization (socio-philosophical aspect), CSP of the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences. - M., 1996.

8. Kremo M., Thompson R., Unknown history of mankind, "Philosophical book", M., 1999;

9. Laukhin S.A., On the ways of settling North Asia by Paleolithic man. Online publication on the website of IPOS SB RAS, 2005;

10. Laukhin S.A., The northernmost site of the Late Paleolithic people. Priroda, 2007, No. 8;

11. Mochanov Yu. A., Fedoseeva S. A. Archeology, the Paleolithic of Northeast Asia, the extratropical ancestral home of mankind and the earliest stages of human settlement in America. - Yakutsk, 2002;

12. Okladnikov A.P., Ragozin L.A. Riddle of Ulalinka. Soviet Ethnography, 1982, No. 6, pp. 115–125;

13. Shunkov M.V. golden ratio Anuya. Science first hand. 2005. No. 1(4). Page 56–64;

14 Bower B., Ancient human ancestors got all fired up – earliest evidence of fire use uncovered in South African cave. Science News, Dec 10, 1988;

14. Gowlett, John A. J., Ascent to Civilization: the Archeology of Early Humans. McGraw-Hill, London/New York, 1994;

15. Huntley D. J., Richards M. P. The age of the Diring Yariakh archaeological site// Ancient TL. 1997. V. 15. No. 2–3. P. 48–49;

16. Leakey, M. (1971). Olduvai Gorge Vol. 3. Cambridge: At the University Press: pl. eighteen; pp. 84, 269;

17. Oakley K.P. Evidence of fire is South African Cave Deposits // Nature, 1954, V. 174, p.261-262.

18. Waters M., Forman S., Pierson G. Diring-Yariakh: A lower paleolithic site in Central Siberia. Science, Vol. 275, Feb. 28, 1997;

The latest discovery of the Mousterian man in the North Caucasus was the discovery by archaeologist L.V. Golovanova in Mezmaiskaya cave in 1993, the skeleton of a child at the turn of birth. The skull and skeleton were reconstructed by G.P. Romanova, who suggested that the Mezmay belonged to the circle of Neanderthal forms. Our own analysis revealed features in the long bones of the skeleton, similar to those of the Near Asian Mousterian sapiens.

I.V. Ovchinikov analyzed the mtDNA from the Mezmaian rib and found that, firstly, it is a Neanderthal, and secondly, the mtDNA sequence from the Mezmaian Neanderthal, after phylogenetic analysis, forms one group with the mtDNA of the German Neanderthal (Neander), equidistant on the phylogenetic tree from the mtDNA of all modern humans. The analysis showed that the mtDNA divergence of western (Germanic) and eastern (Caucasian) Neanderthals occurred 151,000 - 352,000 years ago. The analysis performed did not reveal any traces of the transfer of Neanderthal mtDNA to modern humans. We can assume that Neanderthals died out without passing on their mtDNA type (Ovchinnikov et al., 2009).

In the upper Mousterian layer monastic cave(Gupskoe gorge, Maikop area) individual teeth were discovered, which differ in a number of archaic features (Belyaeva et al., 1992).

Fossil tooth from the Middle Paleolithic site of the cave was studied Matuzka(North-Western Caucasus). A unique archaeological site of the Middle Paleolithic era allows you to get a variety of information about the life of Neanderthals from 130 to 35 thousand years ago. One of the oldest finds is a fragment of the upper right lateral incisor from the Early Würmian layer 56 of the Matuzka cave. Signs of the structure typical of the Neanderthal are noted. (Golovanova et al., 2006).

Romankovo. In 1957, S.K. Nakelsky on the Paleolithic parking lot of ancient man, discovered during the construction of the Dneprodzerzhinsk hydroelectric power station, a human femur was found. It is synchronous with fossil fauna and Late Mousterian tools. According to E.N. Khrisanfova (1965), this bone belonged to a paleoanthropist. The Romankovsky hominid differs from the European Neanderthals in a set of features. It is assumed that Romankovets belongs to the “ancient group” of paleoanthropes, evolving in a sapiens direction (similar to Krapina, Ehringsdorf, Skhul), which are currently designated as archaic sapiens.

Horn. A molar tooth of a paleoanthrope was found at the Rozhok site in the Sea of Azov, on the northern coast of the Taganrog Bay, near the city of Taganrog. The parking lot was surveyed by N.D. Praslov. The tooth was extracted from the Mousterian layer, which apparently dates from one of the early interstadials within the Wurm. In the morphology of the tooth, along with archaic features, sapiens are distinguished.

Jruchula. The first upper permanent molar was found in the hearth, in the Mousterian layer of the Dzhruchula cave (Western Georgia). The authors of the description (Gabunia, et al.) came to the conclusion that by the significant size of the crown, by the features of the relief of the chewing surface, and by the sign of taurodontism, the tooth is Neanderthal.

In the cave Bronze(Georgia) in layer 11 was found the upper left first molar of a child 12-13 years old. A number of features indicate the proximity of this hominid to Neanderthals. Its cultural accompaniment is attributed to the early and late Mousterian (Gabunia et al., 1961).

Also, a paleoanthrop tooth was found in layer 3a of the cave in the Lower Cretaceous limestones on the left bank of the river. Tskhaltsiteli(Western Georgia) (Nioradze, 1982).

Akhshtyrskaya cave. The monument is located in the canyon of the river. Mzymta, within the Sochi district of the Krasnodar Territory. The second upper left molar and three bones of the foot were found here. The morphology of the tooth is characterized by a combination of archaic and sapient features, which allowed A.A. Zubov to attribute the find to the number of fossil neoanthropes that appeared in the Mousterian. V.P. Lyubin noted that the confinement of the find to the Mousterian is not indisputable (Lyubin, 1989).

Barakay. Archaeologists V.P. Lyubin and P.U. Autlev discovered the lower jaw and teeth of a fossil man in the Barakai cave in the North Caucasus (Neanderthals of the Gupsky Gorge, 1994). The individual age of the hominid according to the state of the dental system can be estimated at 2-3 years. The jaw lacks a chin protrusion, while the chin triangle is more prominent than in the Teshik-Tash and Zaskalnaya VI Neanderthals. The mass of the body is great. Its dimensions exceed those that are found in modern children of a similar age. In comparison with modern children, the Barakayev's external relief is less developed, while the internal one is stronger. The complexes of descriptive features are different in Neanderthal children Teshik-Tash, Zaskalnaya VI and Barakai. Statistical calculations have shown that the Barakavian hominid, in terms of the combination of craniometric and cranioscopic features, is more inclined towards paleoanthropes. Western Europe than to the Middle Eastern or Western Asian variants of the Mousterians. This result also confirms the idea of the possibility of isolating constituent elements among the Neanderthal population that lived on the territory of the former USSR.

The totality of known archaeological and paleoanthropological materials confirms the hypothesis that the Western Caucasus is one of the main routes for the settlement of ancient mankind (Lyubin, 1989). in favor of a possible miscegenation of paleoanthropes and neoanthropes in the evolution of the genus No mo evidence of the discovery of Neanderthaloid features in the morphological status of fossil neoanthropes. A special place in this aspect, according to M.F. Nesturkh, is occupied by skull covers with features of a transitional type, discovered on the territory of the former USSR.

Of greater interest are the Pleistocene finds of Altai. In 1984, teeth and parts of the postcranial skeleton of hominids from the end of the Middle Pleistocene-Upper Pleistocene were found in the Northwestern Altai. The finds were deposited in layers 22(1) Denisova cave and 2,3,7- Okladnikov caves. For the 22(1) layer, the dates are determined: 171+43 thousand years, and 224+45 thousand years; . That. the inhabitants of Denisova Cave were (approximately) contemporaries of people from Steinheim in Europe, Letoli 18 in Africa, Chaoxiang in China. The inhabitants of the Okladnikova cave lived at a time when the process of replacing Neanderthals with sapiens was taking place in Europe. Note that the stone tools of the 22nd layer of the Denisova Cave belong to the Late Acheulian, and the layers 20-12 in the Okladnikov Cave belong to the Mousterian. According to the metric indicators and some morphological features, the proximity of the Altai finds with the Mousterian odontological samples from Central Asia (Shpakova, Derevyanno) is determined. The study shows that the connections of the region under consideration were mainly oriented to the west, although it would seem that contact with the neighboring Chinese region is possible, where the Chaosyan population existed at the same time as the population of Denisova Cave. It is rather difficult to determine the physical type of the inhabitants of both caves from the available materials. According to A.A. Zubov (2004), the Okladnikov cave was inhabited by “sapient Mousterians”, probably having similar features with similar groups in Eastern Europe and, perhaps, Western and Central Asia. The people from the Denisova Cave most likely had a type that was transitional between the Heidelberg and modern species. Neanderthals were unlikely to have traveled so far to the east (Zubov, 2004).

The anthropological materials of the Denisova Cave are represented by two odontological specimens from the collection of 1984. According to E.G. Shlakova, in the deposits of horizon 22.1, the left lower second primary molar of a child of 7-8 years old was found, and in the deposits of layer 12 - the left upper medial incisor of an adult. This material is extremely importance in the study of the sequence of settlement of the territory of the Altai Mountains by representatives of the genus Homo. Therefore, tooth samples from the Denisova Cave were examined by several specialists. Based on the combination of metric indicators and descriptive features of teeth, E.G. Shpakova found that, despite some archaic features, the odontological material of the Denisova Cave most likely belongs to representatives of a fossil human of a modern physical type - early Homo sapiens sapiens.

In 2008, a fossilized phalanx of a finger, presumably a child, was found in Denisova Cave. From the found phalanx, it was possible to extract mitochondrial DNA, the difference between which and the DNA of modern humans was 385 nucleotides (in Neanderthals, the difference is 202 nucleotides). Thus, we can say that the remains belong to a hominid Homo altaiensis, representing a special branch in human development, who lived about 40 thousand years ago (Krause, 2010).

Podkumskaya the cranial lid was discovered in 1918 near the Podkumok River in the city of Pyatigorsk and described by Professor M.A. Gremyatsky (1922). The researcher singled out a complex of Neanderthal features, generally referring this object to the morphological type of modern man (Gremyatsky, 1948).

Skhodnenskaya the skull cap was discovered in 1936 near Moscow, on the banks of the Skhodnya River. It belonged to a modern human with a number of Neanderthal features (Bader, 1936). Apparently, it can be considered that the Skhodna skullcap, like the Podkuma skullcap, demonstrates a morphological transition to the Neoanthrope (Gremyatsky, 1949). And in a later work (Gremyatsky, 1952), this author included the Skhodna skullcap in the Podkumok-Bryuks-Skhodnya group, which, in general, occupies an intermediate position between modern and Neanderthal types, and geographically widespread in the territory of Central and Eastern Europe . In a certain sense, these forms make it possible to represent the later stages of the morphological evolution of hominids.

Khvalynskaya the skull cap was found in 1927 near the city of Khvalynsk on Khoroshensky Island, but was not studied in detail (Bader, 1940). Later work (Bader, 1952) included an analysis of the circumstances of the find (cranial cover and femur), and also contains the assumption that it can be associated with the latest complex of mammoth fauna, and in terms of archaeological periodization, with the time interval between the Late Mousterian and the Late Paleolithic. M.A. Gremyatsky (1952) concluded that the skull fragment belonged to the modern human type with some Neanderthal features. In evolutionary terms, the object is close to the Podkuma lid and the Skhodna fragment.

A completely unusual aspect of the study of the Skhodna cranium is revealed to us in the work of O.N. Bader (1952). It lies in the fact that we are dealing, apparently , with the only case of displaying the remains of a certain “outer cover” (headdress) on the outer surface of a fossil skull presumed Late Paleolithic age. Perhaps this is due to the preparation and use of threads from plant fibers and wool in the Paleolithic.