The transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic on the Middle Danube is characterized by the presence of two transitional technocomplexes-Bogunice and Selet-as well as the early appearance of Aurignacian. In this region, the Bohunitsa industry lacks a local predecessor and looks like an imported one. The technology and typology of Bogunice are characterized by a combination of Middle and Upper Paleolithic components. Although the Bohunice sites are mainly concentrated in the Brno area, collections of stone tools that have the same technological features of Bohunice and belong to the same chronological period have been identified both in neighboring regions and in areas far to the east of Moravia. A preliminary comparison of these materials demonstrates a high degree of similarity, which may indicate migrations that are hypothetically associated with the settlement of a modern physical type of person.

Keywords: bogunice, Bogunice technology, Levallois technology, Middle Danube, Moravia.

Introduction

The term "bogunice" comes from the name of the western suburb of Brno, where this particular industry was first discovered (Valoch, 1976; Oliva, 1981; Svoboda, 1990). It is characterized by the use of a technology described as a combination of the Middle Paleolithic Levallois technique and the Upper Paleolithic method of nuclear cleavage with a selected rib (Svoboda and Skrdla, 1995; Skrdla, 2003b). The bogunice technology is closer to the three-dimensional cleavage variants than the classical Levallois technique and is aimed at mass production of Levallois points, in which the plates were a byproduct [Skrdla, 2003b; Skrdla and Rychtafikova, 2012].

The highest concentration of Bogunica monuments is recorded in the area of Brno (Moravia) on an area of 100 km2. Two groups of stratified sites are located here: Bogunice and Stranska Skala; Lishen, Podoli, and Tvarozhna; and sites with surface artefacts (Svoboda, Lozek, and Vlcek, 1996). In addition, three more zones of concentration of sites with surface occurrence of artefacts have been identified in Moravia: the areas of Lower Moravia.

Bobravy [Skrdla, Rychtafikova, Nejman, and Kuca, 2011], Prosteeva [Svoboda, 1980], and Mogelno [Skrdla et al., 2012]. Separate sites have also been reported that demonstrate advanced Levallois technology; these sites are located in neighboring regions and include Gradsko in Bohemia (Neruda and Neradova, 2000), Nizhni Grabovec in Eastern Slovakia (Kaminska et al., 2009), and Dzierzyslaw I in Poland (Foltyn and Kozlowski, 2003) (Fig. 1).

On a larger scale, Bohunice fits into a complex of similar industries called the Emiran-Bohunice complex (Svoboda, 2001, p. 35). These industries are represented in the Middle East (Boker Takhtit in Israel, Ksar Akil in Lebanon, and Yuchagizli in Turkey), the Balkans (Temnata), Ukraine (Kulichivka), the Altai (Kara-Bom), and Northern China (Shuidungou) [Derevyanko, Petrin, and Rybin, 2000; Svoboda, 2001; Svoboda, 2004; Bar-Yosef and Svoboda, 2003] (Fig.

Geographically, Moravia is a key point at the intersection of routes connecting the south and north, east and west of Europe (Schwabedissen, 1943). In fact, this area may have been a contact zone between the last Neanderthals and migrating human populations.-

page 2

Figure 1. Location of parking lots in Moravia and surrounding regions.

1-Brno basin: Bohunice, Stranska Skala, Lishen, Podoli, Tvarozhna; 2-Bobrava district: Orzehov, Zheleshice, Dolni Kounice; 3-Mogelno district: Mogelno, Lhanice; 4 - Ondratice/Zhelech district; 5-Popovice; 6-Divaki; 7-Gradsko; 8-Dzierzyslaw; 9-Bakers; 10-Stein; 11-Nizhni Grabovets; 12-Kulichivka.

Fig. 2. Location of the considered parking lots.

M - Moravian (see Fig. 1); L - Levantine (Boker-Takhtit, Ksar-Akil, Yuchagizli).

1-Gradsko; 2-Stein; 3-Pekary; 4-Nizhni Grabovets; 5-Temnata; 6-Kulichivka; 7-Kara-Bom; 8 - Shuidungou

centuries of modern anatomical type (Hoffecker, 2009; Mtiller et al., 2011; Brandtmoller et al., 2012). Thus, the study of technological connections between the above-mentioned industries makes it possible to reconstruct the distribution of technological markers associated, probably, with the first appearance of Homo sapiens in these regions.

Technological definition of the Bogunica industry in Moravia

Methods of stone utilization at the Bogunitsky sites were based on the use of local rocks, the share of raw materials from remote sources was no more than 10 % (Pfichystal, Svoboda, Skrdla, 2003). Siliceous rock originating from limestone outcrops on Stranska Skala Mountain, on the eastern border of the Brno Archaeological Region, was the main material for making tools in the area. The share of this raw material in industrial complexes decreases in proportion to the increase in the distance from its source. Other stone material that could be found in the local pebbles was also used. These are the Moravian siliceous rock of the Jurassic period (also called Krumlovskaya, since it was widespread in the Krumlovsky forest area), Cretaceous spongolite siliceous rock, products of weathering of silicified rocks, quartz and orthoquartzite (the latter was used in the Prosteyev area). Raw materials brought to the Bogunica sites in Moravia from remote sources included radiol-

page 3
rhite, probably from the White Carpathian region, erratic flint from fluvioglacial deposits of Northern Moravia or Southern Poland. One item from the Tvarozhna X site is made of siliceous material of Limnic origin, possibly imported from Central Slovakia or Northern Hungary (Skrdla et al., 2009). The methods of utilization of raw stone, which are characteristic of the Bogunitsky industry, based on the developed Levallois technology, were used for all types of stone found in the parking lots.

At the beginning of the research, the Bogunitsky technology was defined as a combination of the Levallois technique and the Upper Paleolithic method of prismatic nucleus utilization. Later, an analysis of reconstructed nuclei from the Stranska Skala site, where both techniques were used in the process of splitting the same core, led to the conclusion that this is a conceptual mixture of Levallois and Upper Paleolithic technologies [Skrdla, 2003a, b]. All restored nuclei (currently 14 copies). - completely and quite a large number - partially) demonstrate a focus on the production of Levallois points (or their series), which were the main type of cleavage-billet [Ibid.; Skrdla and Rychtafikova, 2012]. The plates removed during cleavage to form the working front of the nucleus were (in technological terms) a secondary product. However, they, like flakes (including Le Valloise), were often used as blanks for making tools.

Based on the analysis of reconstructed nuclei from the Stranska Skala site, the features of the Bogunitsa technology can be characterized as follows. Blocks of stone raw materials in the form of nodules or prismatic blocks were formed into a nucleus by creating a frontal rib, for which a series of flakes was removed in the first case, and a natural rib was used in the second. One or two impact pads were formed on the blanks. Nuclear cleavage began with the removal of the rib plate. Then, often using both opposite sites of the core, a series of edge (debordant) plates was chipped to give the working front a triangular shape. The next step was to obtain one or two Levallois points, and in many cases the impact pad was re-issued after each withdrawal. As a result, the working front became wide, losing the triangular shape and distal bulge necessary for the further production of Levallois points. To prepare the front for the next series of shots, it was necessary to narrow it by chipping several plates. Thus, in this cleavage process, two stages are distinguished:

1) giving the front a triangular shape and narrowing it; 2) production of Levallois points. In this sequence, utilization continued until the final depletion of the nucleus. In order to better control the point of impact, the plate and tip pads were facetted. The prevailing scheme for cutting dorsal surfaces was a bi-longitudinal or bi-longitudinal opposing system of chip negatives (Skrdla, 2003b, table 7.1).

The role of bifacial technology and its relation to Levallois technology in the Bohunice industries remain unclear; at the moment, it is known only at the eponymous sites of Brno-Bohunice (for a detailed discussion, see [Tostevin and Skrdla, 2006]). The technology of record production is not recorded on the Bogunica monuments of Moravia.

A detailed technological description based on reconstructed nuclei from Stransk Skala (Skrdla, 2003a, b; Skrdla and Rychtarikova, 2012) makes it possible to determine the characteristic features of the Bogunitsa technology. They can be used as clear criteria for assigning a particular complex to bogunitsa. The most important features are the presence of elongated Levallois chips (plates and cusps), careful faceting of convex shock pads, bipedal and bipedal opposite dorsal faceting of chips, the presence of costal plates and bipedal nuclei.

The typological spectrum of bogunice is a combination of Middle and Upper Paleolithic tools (Fig. 3). The former include various scrapers, points, toothed and notched products. The predominant type of cusps is non - retouched Levallois (often elongated) (Figure 4). In addition, there are retouched Levallois, Mousterian, Chatelperron, and Kinson types (Svoboda, 1987, 2003b). Another important type of tool of this category, found only in the deposits of the Bogunice site, is bifasily retouched leaf-shaped points.

The Upper Paleolithic tool kit mainly consists of end scrapers made on various types of workpieces (flakes and plates), and a few incisors, often designed with a single chip. Some end scrapers have a high working edge, thus resembling Aurignacian shapes, but none of them can be defined as carenoid. Also, no carenoid incisors were detected. It is important to note that in some cases Upper Paleolithic tools were made from Levallois points (see [Skrdla and Tostevin, 2005, fig. 12, 13, 14]).

Sedimentation conditions at the Bogunitsky sites did not contribute to the preservation of organic materials. Very little was discovered during the excavation

page 4

3. Tools from Brno-Bohunice.

the number of bones. Other identified objects are ochre and specific objects that were probably used as jewelry, such as fossilized sea shells from the Lishen site and flat pebbles from Bohunice. Yellow and red ochre from local tertiary marine deposits were found on the Stranska Skala monument (Pfichystal, Svoboda, and Skrdla, 2003). Another type of red dye was discovered during the excavation of the Bohunice site in 2002, it is a product of weathering of rocks with a significant admixture of silicates (oral report by A. Przyhistal).

Currently, the most outstanding find is a fossilized sea shell (Ancilla sp.) from the 2010 excavations of the Lishen site (Skrdla, Matejec, Tostevin et al., 2011). Although the surface of the shell shows signs of strong smoothing due to pedogenetic processes, the specific shape of the fragment of its spiral part suggests that this object could have been used as part of decoration, similar to what was revealed in other contexts, for example, in the Yuchagizli cave in Turkey (Kuhn, Stiner, Gulec, 1999) or in the Uluzzi layers The Grotto del Cavallo in Italy (Benazzi et al., 2011). Another important find obtained during the Bohunice excavations in 2002 is a flat pebble made of Devonian limestone, which could have been picked up in the ter shingle area.-

page 5

4. Levallois artefacts from the Brno-Bohunice and Stranska Skala sites.

on the Svratka River, located under the parking lot. Unfortunately, the surface of the pebbles was exposed to severe weathering, and any traces of anthropogenic impact on it can not be found.

Geography of the Emiran-Bohunitsa industries

Based on the previously identified characteristics of bogunice in Eurasia, a number of industries containing similar elements have been identified. The comparative analysis is based on our own morphological studies and publications. It does not show the Levantine complexes and those Asian sites that I was not able to study personally. To more accurately determine the degree of technological similarity of the industry, a more detailed study is required based on the repair of nuclei and attributive analysis of collections.

Moravia. The geographical center of the Bogunica islands in Moravia (and in Europe in general) is the area around Brno, where more than half of the famous Moravian sites are located. The outcrops of a specific siliceous rock are located on the limestone cliff Stranska Skala. This is a stone raw material

page 6
It was the main Bohunicki industry of the Brno Archaeological region. In addition, it was transported to other microregions where similar industries were found: the Prosteyev region (Svoboda, 1980), the Lower Bobrava region (Skrdla, Rychtafikova, Nejman, Kuca, 2011), and Mogelno region (Skrdla et al., 2012). Outside of these microregions, there are only a few Levallois products that resemble those of Bogunice (Popovice, Divaki, Rzheznovice).

In the Brno archaeological region, groups of stratified sites were found on Stranska Skala Mountain (see references: [Stranska Skala..., 2003]) and in Bohunica (see references: [Valoch, 1976; Skrdla and Tostevin, 2005]). Separate stratified sites have recently been excavated in the Lishen site area (Skrdla, Matejec, Tostevin et al., 2011) and Tvarozhna site (Skrdla et al., 2009), 7 km east of Stranska Skala. In addition, several sites with surface artefacts are located along the eastern border of the Brno Archaeological region, including Slatina-Podstranska (Valoch, 1974), Zhidenice-Bila Gora (Nerudova, 2006), and Lishen (at least five sites found in fields near Chtvrte, Grube-Podsedku, and Zaremem (Oliva, 1985] and Podoli nad Vygonem (unpublished)).

One stratified site (Orzhekhov IV (Skrdla, Rychtafikova, Nejman, and Kuca, 2011)) is known south-east of Brno, in the area of the Bobrava River (Fig.

5. Levallois artefacts from the sites of Orzhekhov IV (1-5), Gradsko (6-11), Tvarozhna X (12-16), Nizhni Grabovets (17-25), and Kulichivka (26-32).

page 7
and at least two sites with surface occurrence of artefacts (Zheleshice II (Freising, 1933) and Orzhekhov I (Nerudova, 1999)). Bogunice traditions spread along the Jihlava River (Dolni Kounice-18 [Oliva, 1989]) and through the Kounice Gate to the Mogelno area, where three sites are located: Mogelno-Boleniska, Lhance I and II [Oliva, 1986; Skrdla et al, 2012]. Prosteeva district is located to the north-east of Brno. One group of stratified sites was found here (Zhelech/Ondratice I) is surrounded by several sites with surface artefacts (Svoboda, 1980; Skrdla and Mlejnek, 2010; Mlejnek et al., 2011; Mlejnek, 2011).

Bohemia. One isolated location of the Bogunica industry was identified in the Kokorzhin sandstone outcrops near the Laba River valley in Central Bohemia, north of Melnik (Figures 5, 6-11) (Vend, 1977; Nerada and Nerudova, 2000; Svoboda, 2004). A vast Czech-Moravian upland separates this monument from Moravia. Found in an erosional gully, this object was partially excavated. There are no radiometric dates. The material obtained during the excavations was redeposited and probably mixed with artifacts from the supposed Late Aurignacian complex. Although the finds are highly fragmented, we can note the presence of Levalloisian chips, including elongated ones. The unary areas are convex and faceted, and some artefacts bear traces of bipedal faceting of the dorsal surfaces. Also, signs of bipedal cleavage can be traced on the nuclei, the preparation of the rib on the working front can be detected by costal chips. The most common stone raw materials are erratic flint, brought from the north (minimum distance of 20 km), and local basalt (glossy tephrite). There are several fragments of radiolarite, probably delivered from the territory of Slovakia. Raw materials from Moravia have not been identified in this complex. Levallois technology can be traced to all types of raw materials.

Slovakia. A narrow passage connects the East Slovak Lowland with the Presova region. A group of sites with surface artefacts (Nizhni Grabovets) is located here on an elevated position relative to the river's edge. Ondava has a strategic position [Kaminska et al., 2000]. Morphological analysis of the artefacts revealed several episodes of settlement, starting from the Middle Paleolithic and ending with the Epipaleolithic [Ibid.]. The Levallois part of the collection was analyzed in detail (Figures 5, 17-25). The authors describe elongated Levallois billets with convex faceted impact pads chipped from bipolar Levallois cores [Kaminska et al., 2009]. The repair of two artefacts indicates the mass production of Levallois billets [Kaminska et al., 2000, fig. 2, 24, 3, 3]. Levallois ' technique was based on the splitting of silicified mudstones (the outcrops are located no further than 25-30 km from the site), black menilitic siliceous rock (the source is no further than 50-60 km away), and radiolarite (the nearest outcrops are 70 km away). However, the collected materials include tools of the Middle Paleolithic types: various scrapers, retouched points, often made from rare varieties of stone raw materials (Svichekhov flint, radiolarite, Polish or Volyn flint, silicified sandstone, black menilite). The belonging of these finds to the Levallois part of the collection remains questionable due to their surface occurrence. The same can be said about individual artifacts made of andesite, which is characteristic of the area of the Korolevo site in Ukraine. Unfortunately, exploration pits laid at the Nizhni Grabovets monument in 1998 did not resolve the homogeneity/heterogeneity dilemma of the complex (Kaminska et al., 2000). Thus, only the Levallois part of the collection can be attributed as the Bogunitskaya part (Kaminska et al., 2009).

Poland. The site of Dzierzyslaw I is located on a hill, within the Hlubczyce plateau in Upper Silesia, near the present-day Czech-Polish border. Materials from E. Foltyn's excavations (Foltyn and Kozlowski, 2003), stored in the Opole Silesia Museum in Opole, were reanalyzed. The collection consists of individual raw materials without significant traces of recycling, flakes, rare plates, nuclei and tools. The stone material is erratic flint from local fluvial-glacial deposits. The nuclei are mostly prismatic, with traces of unidirectional removal, and Levallois, bearing negatives of centripetal chips. Separate rib plates indicate the preparation of the central rib on the nucleus. The drum pads are not very carefully facetted (often designed with multiple beats). In many cases, they are not convex, but straight. Dorsal cleavage surfaces show widespread use of unidirectional cleavage. There are no elongated Levallois cleavages (plates and points) with bipolarly faceted dorsal surfaces and carefully designed convex faceted impact pads. Important in typological terms, Jerzmanowice-type points have the appearance of rough leaf-shaped ones. It can be assumed that they were either not fully decorated, or they are Middle-palaeological items. Thus, this complex has no typological and technological features that make it possible to define it as Bogunitsky. Most likely, it has a Middle Paleolithic character.

page 8
Another parking lot with elongated Levallois billets is Pekary II in the Cracow area. Materials from the excavations of V. Moravski (layers 7a, b, c) were recently studied and dated (Valladas et al., 2003; Sitlivy and Zi§ba, 2006). The formation of these layers spanned a period of 53.0-38.5 Ka BP (TL-dates, weighted averages with a confidence level of 1.5 [Valladas et al., 2003, p. 66]), which is comparable to the dates for Bogunice (compare: [Richter, Tostevin, Skrdla, 2008; Richter et al., 2009]). While the materials of the lower layer (7c) are characterized by abundant Levallois elements and bi-longitudinal reduction, the complex of the upper layer (7a) has a more lamellar character with few Levallois elements and bi-longitudinal splitting that has retained its role [Sitlivy and Zieba, 2006, p. 398].

Some Levallois artefacts were found during recent excavations of the upper part of the Late Middle Paleolithic layers in the Stein Cave near Czestochowa. This monument is known for the remains of Neanderthal bones (Urbanowski et al., 2010). At least four elongated Levallois cusps stand out from the general background of the Late Middle Paleolithic industry. They are characterized by an opposite dorsal surface cut and convex faceted impact pads (oral report by M. Urbanovsky, 2012).

Bulgaria. Temnata Cave is located in a limestone cliff overlooking the Iskar River, near the village of Karlukovo in Northern Bulgaria. The complex, which shows signs of a developed Levalloisian technology, dates from 50-45 KA BP. It was discovered in the TD-II sector, layer VI of this cave (Ginter at al., 1996; Sitlivy and Zieba, 2006; Tsanova, 2012). Nuclei from this complex demonstrate the use of bipedal cleavage, some of them were cleaved using a frontal rib. However, Levallois points and other blanks with faceted impact pads are rare here.

Ukraine. Kulichivka parking lot is located on the hill of the same name, rising above the Ikva River, on the outskirts of Kremenets, Ternopil region. In the vicinity of the site, there are outcrops of raw stone that were very important in ancient times , such as nodules of high-quality Turonian flint (Meignen et al., 2004). This raw material in prehistoric times was very widespread on the territory of Western Ukraine (oral report by A. Sytnyk). In 1968-1988, V. Savich collected an impressive collection of stone artefacts at the edge of a Cretaceous quarry in loess and clay deposits disturbed by solifluction (Sytnyk and Koropeckyj, 2010; Meignen et al., 2004). The findings from layers 4 and 3 show the characteristic features of the developed Levallois technology: convex faceted impact pads, elongated chips (plates and points) with bipedal rims on the dorsals, and bipedal nuclei (Figs. 5, 26-32). The presence of rib plates marks the use of the frontal rib technique. All the artifacts were made from local dark flint. Layer 3 differs from the underlying layer 4 by a smaller number of Levallois points and a larger number of plates and end scrapers, often designed on long, massive plates treated with steep (but not carenoid) retouching. Many authors have drawn attention to the similarity between artefacts from the lower layers of Kulichivka and the Bogunitsa industries (Demidenko and Usik, 1993; Svoboda and Skrdla, 1995; Meignen et al., 2004; Sytnyk and Koropeckyj, 2010). The only available radiocarbon date of 31,000 BP is much later than the generally accepted one for Bogunice (Meignen et al., 2004). Unfortunately, there are no reconstructed cleavage sequences for the complex from the lower layers of Kulichivka. Carrying out the repair procedure can give useful results, since this complex originates from a workshop located in the immediate vicinity of the raw material outlets.

Altai. The multi-layered monument Kara-Bom is located in the Altai Mountains at an altitude of more than 1000 m above sea level (Derevyanko, Petrin, and Rybin, 2000). It is located at the foot of a cliff next to an active spring. The source of high-quality stone raw materials (effusions) is located in the nearby pebbles. Layers 6 and 5, radiocarbon dated between 50-37 Ka BP, contained a developed Levalloisian industry, reflecting the transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic [Ibid.]. It is characterized by the production of elongated chips with convex impact pads removed from bipedal nuclei (Figs. 6, 8-12). In contrast to the sites in the western part of Eurasia, an expressive component of the operational chain of nuclear disposal is recorded here - the production of plates/microplates. Recently, it was studied in detail by N. Zwyns, who presented the entire reduction sequence [Zwyns et al., 2012, fig. 14]. Similar incisor nuclei for the production of plates made from massive Levallois flakes were reconstructed by P. Volkman based on the collection from layer 1 of the Boker-Takhtit site (see [Skrdla, 2003a, fig. lie]).

China. The Shuidonggou group of sites (localities 1-12) is located on the bank of the Pogranichnaya River (a tributary of the Yellow River) in the transition zone between the Maowusu Desert and the loess plateau in Northern China (Pei et al., 2012, p. 3614). Archaeological materials obtained during the excavation of fine sand deposits made it possible to distinguish several episodes of settlement from

page 9

6. Levallois artefacts from the sites of Boker-Takhtit (1-7) and Kara - Bom (8-12).

From the Paleolithic to the Neolithic (Shuidonggou..., 2011). Svoboda noticed that some of this industry is similar to the levalloaleptolytic industry (2001). Collections from localities 1 and 9 contain Levallois artefacts and bipolar nuclei [Shuidonggou..., 2011, p. 55, 76]. These complexes are approximately 30 thousand years old (Shuidonggou..., 2011; Pei et al., 2012). Detailed technological analysis and comparison with nearby sites (in particular, Kara-Bom) are important directions in future research of this industry.

Chronological framework of the Bogunitsky industry

The Bogunitsa assemblages originating from the eponymous site zone were dated by the 14 C, TLIRSL, and OSL methods (see references: [Richter, Tostevin, and Skrdla, 2008; Richter et al., 2009; Nejman et al., 2011]), and from the Stranska Skala region by the 14 C and OSL methods [Svoboda, 2003a; Nejman et al., 2011], from Orzhekhov IV (unpublished), Zhelech/Ondratice - 14 C [Skrdla, Mlejnek, 2010]. The radiocarbon dates calibrated using the CalPal curve (Weninger, Joris, and Danzeglocke, 2007) are in the range between 48 and 40 Ka BP, and the weighted average value based on the results of thermoluminescent dating of 11 artefacts from the 2002 Bohunice site is 48.2 ±1.9 Ka BP, which corresponds to some OSL dates (60-40 Ka BP).In general, luminescent dates are consistently older than radiocarbon dates.

In Moravia, bohunice, as well as another local key industry of the transition period from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic (selet), apparently suddenly disappears ca. 40 thousand hp This point is correlated with the Campanian ignimbrite (Hoffecker et al., 2008; Lowe et al., 2012), although Moravia was not directly affected by volcanic ash; as well as with the subsequent Heinrich climate event 4, which could negatively affect human settlement in Eastern Europe and eastern Central Europe.

Most of the considered sites with the Bogunitsky complexes belong to the same chronological interval (50-40 thousand years AGO). The later date for Kulichivka cannot be correlated with the materials from layer 4.Thus, the only young dates, about 30 thousand years ago, belong to the most remote site of Shuidungou.

Conclusion

The fundamental question is: why was Moravia so densely populated by the bearers of the Bogunica traditions, while in neighboring territories similar industries were found only in isolated localities? It is also important to determine the extent to which the Bogunice core in Moravia was connected to neighboring sites.

The cooling during the Heinrich 5 event (50 Ka BP) is comparable to the coldest period of MIS-4, when the intensity of Neanderthal migrations was significantly reduced (Hublin and Roebroeks, 2009; Muller et al., 2011). During this period, both Neanderthals and modern anatomical humans were located in the most suitable refugia for life, being ready for a new expansion, which resumed during the milder and relatively long Greenlandic interstadial12. This hypothesis can be supported by relatively early TL dates for the Brno-Bohunice site [Richter, Tostevin, Skrdla, 2008; Richter et al., 2009; Hoffecker, 2009; Muller et al., 2011; Hublin, 2012].

In contrast to the situation in the territories of Ukraine or the Altai, where the Levallouamustia region is represented in the Middle Paleolithic, the Bogunitsa industry in Moravia has no local predecessors and looks like it was introduced (Svoboda and Skrdla, 1995). Based on dates that coincide with the time of Homo sapiens ' appearance in northern latitudes, bogunice is considered to be part of the widespread distribution in the Levant, Europe, and Asia.

page 10
The technocomplex can be considered as the first candidate reflecting the settlement of Europe by a modern physical type of person [Svoboda. 2001; Skrdla, 2003a, b; Richter, Tostevin, Skrdla, 2008; Richter et al., 2009; Hoffecker, 2009; Muller et al., 2011; Hublin, 2012]. The key position of Moravia in the system of geomorphologically determined paths, the position within the periglacial zone between the Fennoscandian and Alpine ice sheets, and the low snow cover during MIS-3 (Brandtmoller et al., 2012) suggest that during the last glaciation this area was convenient for possible new immigrants to settle in.

Analysis of the distribution of raw materials in order to determine possible contacts between the inhabitants of the Bogunitsky sites showed that during the period under review, the exchange/delivery systems were probably limited in territorial terms. The distance between the parking lots could reach several hundred kilometers. The following cases of delivery of raw materials from remote sources were identified: silicified rocks of Limnic origin from Central Slovakia or Northern Hungary (Tvarozhna), radiolarite from Slovakia (found at several sites), erratic flint from Poland (Moravian sites); also in Bohemia, radiolarite was found at the Gradsko site, the likely place of origin of which could be Slovakia [Pfichystal, Svoboda, and Skrdla, 2003; Skrdla et al., 2009]. Probably, the rare occurrence of stone material from remote sources can be explained by the fact that the Bogunitsky sites, as a rule, were located near raw material outlets, so there was no need for bringing stone. The study of the distribution of siliceous raw materials originating from exposed limestones on Stranska Skala showed that the proportion of this stone in the complexes is inversely proportional to the distance from its source. However, for a more accurate reconstruction of the raw material delivery systems, additional petrographic analyses are required. Another area of future research should be the comparison of cleavage sequences of nuclei, especially those reconstructed as a result of repair (see the comparison of Boker-Takhtit and Stranska Skala [Skrdla, 2003a, b]). However, although it is promising, it was not possible to restore sufficiently long operational chains of splitting at all parking lots, and additional research is required to achieve a satisfactory result (for example, at Kulichivka).

The discovery and excavation of new stratified sites, analysis of new industrial complexes, an increase in the number of absolute dates, and new data on environmental conditions are necessary to determine the degree of homogeneity/heterogeneity of the Bogunitsky technocomplex, as well as to test hypotheses about the interaction of modern anatomical humans and Neanderthals in the region under consideration.

Acknowledgements

The research in Moravia was supported by the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic (grant N 800010801). I thank A. P. Derevyanko for allowing me to conduct a comparative analysis of a part of the collection from the Kara-Bom monument stored in the Denisova Cave stationary camp; Gao Xing for discussing new materials from Shuidonggou and providing me with a new monograph on this site; A. Sytnik for the opportunity to study materials from the lower layers of Kulichivka stored at the Institute of Archeology in Lviv; E. Foltyn and the museum curators for allowing me to work with the collection from Dzierzyslaw I in the Opole Silesian Museum in Opole; M. Urbanovsky for the opportunity to study materials from the Stein Cave stored at the University of Szczecin. I am grateful to P. Jans and P. Nikolaevu (figs. 1, 2) and L. Dvorzhakova (Figs. 3 - 5) for their help in preparing the drawings for this article.

List of literature

Derevyanko, A. P., Petrin, V. T., and Rybin, E. P., Character of the transition from the Mousterian to the Late Paleolithic in the Altai (based on the materials of the Kara-Bom site), in Archeology, Ethnography, and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2000. - N 2. - p. 33-52.

Svoboda, I. O., On the transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic in Northern Eurasia, in Archeology, Ethnography and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2001. - N 4. - p. 30-37.

Bar-Yosef O., Svoboda J.A. Discussion // Stranska skala: Origins of the Upper Paleolithic in the Brno Basin, Moravia, Czech Republic / eds. J.A. Svoboda, O. Bar-Yosef. - Cambridge: Harvard University press, 2003. - P. 173 - 179. - (American School of Prehistoric Research Bui; Vol. 47).

Benazzi S., Douka, K., Fornai C., Bauer C.C., Kullmer O., Svoboda J., Pap I., Mallegni E, Bayle P., Coquerelle M., Condemi S., Ronchitelli A., Harvati K., Weber G.W. Early dispersal of modern humans in Europe and implications for Neanderthal behavior//Nature. - 2011. - Vol. 479. - P. 525 - 528.

Brandtmoller M., Pastoors A., Weninger B., Weniger G.-C. The repeated replacement model - Rapid climate change and population dynamics in Late Pleistocene Europe // Quaternary International. - 2012. - Vol. 247. - P. 38-49.

Demidenko Y.E., Usik V.I. The problem of changes in Levallois technique during the technological transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic // Paleorient. - 1993. - Vol. 19 (2). - P. 5 - 15.

Foltyn E., Kozlowski J.K. The lower level of the site of Dzierzyslaw I, Opole voivodship (Silesia, Poland) and the problem of the Bohunician // Eurasian Prehistory. - 2003. - Vol. 1(2). - P. 79 - 116.

page 11
Freising H. Schollschitz, eine neue Eiszeitjagerstation in Mahren // Deutsch-mahr. - schles. Heimat. - 1933. - Bd. 7/8. - S. 197 - 198.

Ginter B., Kozlowski J.K., Laville H., Sirakov N., Hedges R.E.M. Transition in the Balkans: News from the Temnata Cave, Bulgaria // The Last Neanderthals - The First Anatomically Modern Humans: Cultural change and human evolution: the crisis at 40 KA BP / eds. E. Carbonell, M. Vaquero. - Tarragona: University Roviral Virgili, 1996. - P. 170 - 200.

Hoffecker J.F. The spread of modern humans in Europe // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. - 2009. - Vol. 106 (38). - P. 16040 - 16045.

Hoffecker J.F., Holliday V.T., Anikovich M.V., Popov V.V., Levkovskaya G.M, Pospelova G.A., Forman S.L., Giaccio B., Lisitsyn S.N. From the Bay of Naples to the River Don: the Campanian Ignimbrite eruption and the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition in Eastern Europe // J. of Human Evolution. - 2008. - Vol. 55. - P. 858 - 870.

Hublin J. - J. The earliest modern human colonization of Europe // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. - 2012. - Vol. 109(34). - P. 13471 - 13472.

Hublin J. - J., Roebroeks W. Ebb and flow or regional extinctions? On the character of Neandertal occupation of northern environments // Comptes Rendus - Palevol. - 2009. - Vol. 8,N5. - P. 503 - 509.

Kaminska L., Kozlowski J.K, Kazior B., Pawlikowski M., Sobczyk K. Long term stability of raw materials procurement systems in the Middle and Upper Paleolithic of Eastern Slovakia: a case study of the Topla/Ondava river valleys // Praehistoria. - 2000. - Vol. 1. - P. 63 - 81.

Kaminska L., Skrdla P., Kozlowski J.K., Tomaskova S. Nizny Hrabovec: A site with evolved Levallois technology in Eastern Slovakia // Eurasian Prehistory. - 2009. - Vol. 6 (1/2). - P. 57 - 64.

Kuhn S.L., Stiner M. C., Gulec E. Initial Upper Paleolithic in south-central Turkey and its regional context: a preliminary report//Antiquity. - 1999. - Vol. 73. - P. 505 - 517.

Lowe J., Barton N., Blockley S., Ramsey C.B., Cullen V.L, Davies W., Gamble C., Grant K., Hardiman M., Housley R., Lane Ch.S., Lee S., Lewis M., MacLeod A., Menzies M., Miil-ler W, Pollard M., Price C., Roberts A.P., Rohling E. J., Sa-tow C., Smith V.C., Stringer C. B., Tomlinson E.L., White D., Albert P., Arienzo L, Barker G., Boric D., Carandente A., Civetta L, Ferrier C., Guadelli J. - L, Karkanas P., Koumouzelis M., Muller U.C., Orsi G., Pross J., Rosi M., Shalamanov-Korobar L, Sirakov N., Tzedakis P. C. Volcanic ash layers illuminate the resilience of Neanderthals and early modern humans to natural hazards // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. - 2012. - Vol. 109 (34). - P. 13532 - 13537.

Meignen L., Geneste J.M., Koulakovskaia L., Sytnik A. Koulichivka and Its Place in the Mddle-Upper Paleolithic Transition in Eastern Europe // The Early Upper Paleolithic beyond Western Europe / eds. P.J. Brantingham, S.L. Kuhn, K.W. Kerry. - Berkeley; Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2004. - P. 30^19.

Mlejnek O. Revize povrchovych paleolitickych lokalit v okoliBrodkuuProstejova//ActaFF ZCU - 2011. - N4(11). - P 129 - 150.

Mlejnek O., Skrdla P., Tostevin G., Pfichystal A., Novak J. Zelec (k. u. Zelec na Hane, okr. Prostejov) // Pfehled vyzkumu. - 2011. - N52. - S. 151 - 154.

Muller U.C., Pross J., Tzedakis P.C., Gamble C., Kotthoff U., Schmiedl G., Wulf S., Christanis K. The role of climate in the spread of modern humans into Europe // Quaternary Science Reviews. - 2011. - N30. - P. 273 - 279.

Nejman L, Rhodes E., Skrdla P., Tostevin G., Neruda P., Nerudova Z., Valoch K., Oliva M., Kaminska L, Svoboda J., Griin R. Chronological Review of the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic Transition in the Czech Republic and Slovakia: New Optically Stimulated Luminescence results // Archaeometry. - 2011. - Vol. 53 (5). - P. 1044 - 1066.

Neruda P., Nerudova Z. The Upper Palaeolithic Levallois industry from Hradsko (Dep. Melnik, Czech republic) // Anthropologic. - 2000. - Vol. 38 (3). - P. 271 - 282.

Nerudova Z. Ofechov I a II: K problemu existence leval-loiskeho konceptu v szeletienu // Pravek NR. - 1999. - N9. - S. 19-40.

Nerudova Z. Casne mladopaleoliticka industrie z Bile Hory (Brno-Zidenice) a Podstranske (Brno-Slatina) // Acta Mus. Moraviae, Sci. soc. - 2006. - N 91. - P. 65 - 88.

Oliva M. Die Bohunicien-Station bei Podoli (Bez.: Brno-Land) und ihre Stellung im beginnenden Jungpalaolithikum // Acta Mus. Moraviae, Sci. soc. - 1981. - N 66. - P. 7^15.

Oliva M. Pfispevek k lokalizaci paleolitickych nalezu v okoli Brna-Lisne (okr. Brno-mesto, Brno venkov) // Pfehled vyzkumu 1983. - 1985. - S. 19 - 21.

Oliva M. Starsi doba kamenna - paleolit // Kostufik P., Kovarnik J., Mefinsky Z., Oliva M. Pravek Tfebicska. - Brno: Muzejni a vlastivedna spolecnost v Brne a Zapadomoravske muzeum v Tfebici, 1986. - S. 31 - 56.

Oliva M. Katalog nalezu z obdobi paleolitu // Belcredi L. et al. Archeologicke lokality a nalezy okresu Brno-venkov. - Brno: MZM, 1989. - S. 12 - 31.

Pei S., Gao X., Wang H., Kuman K., Bae C.J., Chen E, Guan Y., Zhang G., Peng E., Li X. The Shuidonggo site complex: new excavtions and implications for the earliest Late Paleolitihic in North China // J. of Archaeological Science. - 2012. - Vol. 39. - P. 3610 - 3626.

Pfichystal A., Svoboda J.A., Skrdla P. Lithic Raw Materials Used by Humans at Stranska skala // Stranska skala: Origins of the Upper Paleolithic in the Brno Basin, Moravia, Czech Republic / eds. JA. Svoboda, O. Bar-Yosef - Cambridge: Harvard University press, 2003. - P. 59 - 64. - (American School of Prehistoric Research Bull.; N 47).

Richter D., Tostevin G., Skrdla P. Bohunician technology and thermoluminiscence dating of the type locality of Brno-Bohunice (Czech Republic) // J. of Human Evolution. - 2008. - Vol. 55. - P. 871 - 885.

Richter D., Tostevin G., Skrdla P., Davies W. New radiometric ages for the Early Upper Palaeolithic type locality of Brno-Bohunice (Czech Republic): comparison of TL, OSL, IRSL and 14C dating results // J. of Archaeological Science. - 2009. - Vol. 36. - P. 708 - 720.

Schwabedissen H. Stand und Augaben der Alt- und Mittelsteinzeitforschung im mahrischen Raum // Zeitschrift des Mahrischen Landesmuseums. N. F. - 1943. - Bd. 3. - S. 1 - 31.

Shuidonggou: Connecting the Past to the Present / eds. X. Gao, H. Wang, J. He. - Beijing: Science press, 2011. - 159 p.

Sitlivy V., Zieba A. Eastern and Central Europe before 30 kyr BP: Mousterian, Levallois & Blade industries // The 70000 years since the Last Interglacial: The Palaeolithic sites of Crimea /

page 12
eds. V. Chabai, J. Richter, T. Uthmeier. - Simferopol; Cologne: Shlyakh, 2006. - Vol. II. - P. 361-419.

Stranska skala: Origins of the Upper Paleolithic in the Brno Basin, Moravia, Czech Republic / eds. J.A. Svoboda, O. Bar-Yosef - Cambridge: Harvard University press, 2003. - 218 p. - (American School of Prehistoric Research Bull.; N 47).

Svoboda J. Kfemencova industrie z Ondratic: K Problemu Pocatku Mladeho Paleolitu. - Praha: Academia, 1980. - 109 s. - (Studie AU CSAVVBrne; Roc. IX, c. 1).

Svoboda J. Stranska skala: Bohunicky typ v brnenske kotline. - Praha: Academia, 1987. - 116 s. - (Studie AU CSAV v Brne; Roc. XIV, c. 1).

Svoboda J. The Bohunician // J.K. Kozlowski. Les feuilles de pierre / Liege: Universite de Liege, 1990. - P. 199 - 211. - (ERAUL; N 42).

Svoboda J.A. Chronostratigraphic Background, Environment, and Formation of the Archaeological Layers // Stranska skala: Origins of the Upper Paleolithic in the Brno Basin, Moravia, Czech Republic / eds. J.A. Svoboda, O. Bar-Yosef - Cambridge: Harvard University press, 2003a. - P. 15 - 26. - (American School of Prehistoric Research Bull.; N 47).

Svoboda J.A. Bohunician and Aurignacian Typology at Stranska skala // Stranska skala: Origins of the Upper Paleolithic in the Brno Basin, Moravia, Czech Republic / eds. J.A. Svoboda, O. Bar-Yosef. - Cambridge: Harvard University press, 2003b. - P. 153 - 165. - (American School of Prehistoric Research Bull.; N47).

Svoboda J.A. Continuities, Discontinuities, and Interactions in Early Upper Paleolithic Technologies: A View from the Middle Danube // The Early Upper Paleolithic beyond Western Europe / eds. P.J. Brantingham, SL. Kuhn, K.W. Kerry. - Berkeley; Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2004. - P. 30-49.

Svoboda J., Lozek V., Vlcek E. Hunters between East and West: the Paleolithic of Moravia - N.Y; L.: Plenum, 1996. - 307 p.

Svoboda J., Skrdla P. The Bohunician technology // The definition and interpretation of Levallois technology / eds. O. Bar-Yosef, H. Dibble. - Madison: Prehistory Press, 1995. - P. 429-438. - (Monographs in World Archaeology; N 23).

Sytnyk O., Koropeckyj R. Paleolitychna stojanka Kulychivka: kul'turnyj schar IV // Materialy i doslidzhennja z arkheolohii Prykarpattja i Volyni. - 2010. - N 14. - S. 16 - 75.

Skrdla P. Comparison of Boker Tachtit and Stranska skala MP/UP Transitional Industries // J. of the Israel Prehistoric Society. - 2003a. - Vol. 33. - P. 33 - 69.

Skrdla P. Bohunician Technology: The refitting Approach // Stranska skala: Origins of the Upper Paleolithic in the Brno Basin, Moravia, Czech Republic / eds. J.A. Svoboda, O. Bar-Yosef. - Cambridge: University Press, 2003b. - P. 119 - 151. - (American School of Prehistoric Research Bull.; N 47).

Skrdla P., Matejec P., Tostevin G., Rychtafikova T., Hladilova S. Brno (k. u. Lisen, okr. Brno-mesto) // Pfehled vyzkumu. - 2011. - N52 (1). - S. 140 - 143.

Skrdla P., Mlejnek O. Zelec (k. u. Zelec na Hane, okr. Pro-stejov) // Pfehled vyzkumu. - 2010. - N 51. - P. 296 - 301.

Skrdla P., Rychtafikova T. Levallois Point or Blade - Which Blank was the Target Artifact of the Bohunician Technology? // Flakes not Blades: T he Role of Flake Productionat the Onset of the Upper Paleaeolithic in Europe / eds. A. Pastoors, M. Peresani. - Mettmann: Neanderthal Museum, 2012. - P. 199 - 214. - (Wissenschaftliche Schriften des Neanderthal Museum; Bd. 5).

Skrdla P., Rychtafikova T., Nejman L., Kuca M. Revize paleolitickeho osidleni na dolnim toku Bobravy: Hledani novych stratifikovanych EUP lokalit s podporou GPS a dat z dalkoveho pruzkumu Zeme // Pfehled vyzkumu. - 2011. - N52(1). - S. 9 - 36.

Skrdla P., Tostevin G. Brno - Bohunice: Analyza materialu z vyzkumu v roce 2002 // Pfehled vyzkumu. - 2005. - N 46. - S. 35 - 61.

Skrdla P., Tostevin G., Nyvlt D., Lisa L., Mlejnek O., Pfichystal A., Richter D. Tvarozna-Za skolou: The results of 2008 excavation season // Pfehled vyzkumu. - 2009. - N 50. - S. 11 - 24.

Skrdla P., Vokacova J, Knotek P., Rychtafikova T. Mohelensky mikroregion na pocatku mladeho paleolitu // Pfehled vyzkumu. - 2012. - N 53. - S. 9 - 39.

Tostevin G.B., Skrdla P. New Excavations at Bohunice and the Question of the Uniqueness of the Type-site for the Bohunician Industrial Type // Anthropologic (Brno). - 2006. - Vol. 44. - P. 31-48.

Tsanova T.R A diachronic view of ake production from the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic in the eastern Balkans // Flakes not Blades: The Role of Flake Productionat the Onset of the Upper Paleaeolithic in Europe / eds. A. Pastoors, M. Peresani. - Mettmann: Neanderthal Museum, 2012. - P. 75 - 98. - (Wissenschaftliche Schriften des Neanderthal Museum; Bd. 5).

Urbanowski M., Socha P., Dobrowski P., Nowaczewska W., Sadakierska-Chudy A., Dobosz T., Stefaniak K., Nadachowski A. The first Neanderthal tooth found North of the Carpathian Mountains // Naturwissenschaften. - 2010. - Bd. 97(4). - S. 411-415.

Valladas H., Mercier N., Escutenaire C., Kalicki T., Kozlowski J., Sitlivy V., Sobczyk K., Zieba A. Dating the Late Middle Palaeolithic technologies and transition to the Upper Palaeolithic in southern Poland // Eurasian Prehistory. - 2003. - Vol. 1(1). - P. 57 - 82.

Valoch K. Podstranska, eine Oberflachenstation des Auri-gnacien in Brno-Zidenice // Casopis Moravskeho muzea, Sci. soc. - 1974. - N59. - S. 5-42.

Valoch K. Die altsteinzeitliche Fundstelle in Brno-Bohunice. - Praha: Academia, 1976. - 120 s. - (Studie AU CSAV v Brne; Roc. IV, с. 1).

Vend S. Aurignacke osidleni v Hradsku, okr. Melnik //Ar-cheologicke rozhledy. - 1977. - N29 (1). - S. 3-44, 115 - 117.

Weninger B., Joris O., Danzeglocke U. CalPal-2007. Cologne Radiocarbon Calibration & Palaeoclimate Research Package. - URL: http://www.calpal.de/

Zwyns N., Rybin E.P., Hublin J. - J., Derevianko A.P. Burin-core technology and laminar reduction sequences in the initial Upper Paleolithic from Kara-Bom (Gorny-Altai, Siberia) // Quaternary International. - 2012. - Vol. 259. - P. 33^17.

The article was submitted to the editorial Board on 24.12.12, in the final version-on 25.04.13.

page 13

Permanent link to this publication: