The most ancient ceramics of Baikal Siberia in the context of the traditions of ceramics of East Asia

The physical appearance of the bearers of the early ceramic tradition remains almost totally unknown. Fossil human remains of this time are known very little, and they are poorly studied. Remains of Dzhilinda man, whose burial was excavated at the site of Lower Dzhilinda (Sivakon) at distance of 1280 km away from the Ust-Karenga archaeological complex Vetrov V. M, Zadonin O. V., Ineshin E. M. Mnogosloinoe mestonakhozhdenie Nizh. Dzhilinda (Sivakon) -- 1 v Bambuiskoi kotlovine // Kul'tury i pamiatniki epokhi kamnia i rannego metalla Zabaikal'ia. Novosibirsk, 1993. P. 98-112. (see Fig. 5) help to fill the gap and give clues both for anthropology and for genetics.

Several radiocarbon dates run on the human bone samples from this burial (both conventional and AMS ¹⁴C) produced ages between 7230 ± 40 (GIN-4051) and 7630 ± 30 (Beta-432255). This interval corresponds to the late stage of the ancient pottery ware tradition with stepping comb decoration. Although pottery fragments of the ancient type were not found exactly in the burial, lithic artifacts made of exotic rocks were discovered, which is typical in general for the Early Neolithic burials in Asia.

The same exotic raw materials come from Ust-Karenga where they are present in cultural horizon 7 (combined horizon). These are jasper-like rocks of dark gray to deep black color found in horizons 5 and 6 as well. In addition, a prismatic core made of dark brown jasper was excavated from the burial. Exactly the same jasper was found in various horizons of the Bolshoi Yakor I site (cultural horizon 3B), as well as in the cultural layers of Invalidniy III and Kovrizhka I sites Vetrov V. M. Ritualnyi kompleks v uste r. Karenga (dolina r.Vitim) i nekotorye problemy neolita Vostochnoi Sibiri // Izvesti laboratorii drevnikh tekhnologii. 2008. Iss. 6. P 28-43.. Indirectly, these observations provide some grounds to draw a connection between human fossils unearthed at Low Dzhilinda and population groups that produced ceramics of the most ancient type.

Thanks to the plastic reconstruction of the Dzhilinda man based on the M. M. Gerasimov's method Gerasimov M. M. Vosstanovlenie litsa po cherepu: (sovremennyi i iskopaemyi chelovek). Moscow,

1955. performed by anthropologist D.V. Pezhemsky, the physical appearance together with the results of cranioscopic study allowed D. V. Pezhemsky to suggest South Asian origin of that individual (Fig. 6) Pezhemskii D. V, Rykushina G. V. Chelovek iz Nizhnei Dzhilindy (predvaritel'noe soobshchenie) // Vestnik antropologii. 1998. Iss. 5. P. 115-135.. The genetics study of the bone remains of Dzhilinda Man by the research team led by M. Gotherstrom (Gotherstrom, personal communication: preliminary conclusions reported to the author) enabled to identify Y-chromosome which belongs to Y-chromosome Hg C2b1a.

This demonstrates South Asian origin of this individual seen both in male and female lineages as it is confirmed by the identification of mtDNA haplogroup (C5c) and thus indicates South Asian origin of the bearers of the ancient pottery ware tradition. Replication of the result (i. e., the same direction of the gene flow both in mtDNA and in Y-chromosome) could be interpreted as the evidence of certain isolation of this population group from other inhabitants of the area. The results of the study performed on mitochondrial genome of the Dzhilinda man do not contradict this Kiting G. M., Kashuba N., Yaka R. et al. Investigating Holocene human population history in North Asia using ancient mitogenomes // Scientific Reports, 2018. Vol. 8 (1). P 8969.. It's possible to hypothesize that this group either tended to avoid other inhabitants, or the territory was very scarcely populated.

Additionally, it is found that bone tissues of the Dzhilinda individual contain nitro- gene isotopes in relatively high numbers (d15N = +12,2 %o), which indicates high amount of fish in the diet of the ancient population of the Vitim river basin. This observationis also supported by findings of fish bones in cultural horizon 7 (combined horizon) at Ust-Karenga site complex Stock J. T., Bazaliiskii V. I., Goriunova O. I., Savelev N. A,Weber A. W. Skeletal Morphology, Climatic Adaptation, and Habitual Behavior among Mid-Holocene Cis-Baikal Populations // Prehistoric Hanter-Getherers of the Baikal Region, Siberia: bio archaeological studies of past life ways. Philadelphia, 2010. P. 180-191..

In sum, the combination of these data does not contradict the assumption that the ancient ceramics tradition in the Vitim basin, whose evidence is found at Ust-Karenga XII, XIV, and XVI localities and in the Chikoy river where it is yielded by several site, namely Studenoe 1 (cultural horizon 8) and Ust-Menza 1 (cultural horizon 8), appears to have been the result of transmitting of knowledge in the south-north direction (see Fig. 2), or it could have been the result of human migration. The possible initial area of distribution of the most ancient pottery can be recognized as the territory limited by Xianrendong -- Yuchanyan -- Baozitou sites in southeast China (see Fig. 1, 2) Sato H., Natsuki D. Human behavioral responses to environmental condition and the emergence of the world's oldest pottery in East and Northeast Asia: An overview. P. 12-28..

Recently, with the expanding of archaeological investigations in the north-eastern Asia, new archaeological sites produced an evidence for the oldest ceramic production. For example, the Krasnaya Gorka site on the Bolshoe Eravninsky Lake on the southeast face of the Vitim Plateau, 390 km from the Ust-Karenga archaeological complex, was discovered Tsydenova N., Andreeva D., Zech W Early pottery in Transbaikal Siberia: New data from Krasnaya Gorka. P. 81-90. and partially investigated (see Fig. 1). According to the published data, ceramics dates to 11 150 ± 50 (AAR-21437) -- 12 010 ± 60 (Poz-68-608). It also has a number of key indicators in shape and size of the vessels, some details of the manufacturing technology, and thus it is very similar to the oldest ceramics of Ust-Karenga, being contemporaneous to it, too. The lithic material of the site has practically the same technical and typological indicators similar to the stone industry of the Ust-Karenga archaeological complex (bifacial techniques in different variants, from bifacial tools to biface core preforms, transversal burins, large side scrapers, microblades) Ineshin E. M., Tetenkin A. V. Chelovek i prirodnaia sreda severa Baikalskoi Sibiri v pozdnem pleistotsene. Mestonakhozhdenie Bol'shoi Yakor' I. P. 85..

These findings show that as scientific research steps forward, the number of archaeological objects with traces of ancient pottery should increase. Assessing the situation with the oldest ceramics in Eastern Asia and the Eurasian continent as a whole, it is necessary to emphasize that its invention and then distribution worldwide greatly expanded the adaptive capabilities of ancient humans. Presumably, it emerged and reached significant heights in the east of Eurasia, and only then reached the Middle East and North Africa. There are no direct data that would allow asserting that the very idea of ceramics, having arisen in the east, then spread to the west. Perhaps, in the Middle East region or in North Africa, the idea of making ceramics was formed independently of the East Asian Center, but the current state of knowledge suggests that the East was, at least, its ancestral home. From there, from the East, and in subsequent epochs, well-known useful innovations spread over the world repeatedly: not only ceramics, but also porcelain, compass, gunpowder, paper, and other technologies.

Conclusions

Several important conclusions based on Ust-karenga materials discussed in the broad context of archaeological, anthropological, genetics and environmental data can be drawn, such as

1. The East Asian center of the origin and development of the oldest ceramics is the oldest center of the origin of ceramic production. Archaeological sites whose contexts contain the oldest pottery ware belong to coastal (e. g., Hummi, Gassia, Goncharka, Gromatu- ha, Osipovka, Chernigovka 1, Ustinovka 3) and to the inland zone (that is, Ust-Karenga XII, XIV, XVI, Ust-Yurmchen VIII, Ust-Menza 1, Studenoe 1, Krasnaya Gorka).

2. The appearance and existence of the oldest ceramics in these zones reflect the specific adaptations of the ancient Asian population necessary for further development of the hunter-gatherer economy, which was expressed in the development of a flexible form of organization of human groups. It can be assumed that their groups were divided into relatively settled groups and moving “harvesters”. The latter carried out the harvesting of food supplies and exotic rocks of stone raw materials in areas adjacent to mountains, still partially covered by mountain-valley glaciers with subalpine plant stations rich in food resources. Food stocks and raw materials, often in the form of various artifacts, were transported to the sites (e. g., jasper, quartz crystal, pumice-stone, graphite, red ochre).

3. Hunting species used by these people were mainly herd animals migrating from winter habitats to summer ones, such as reindeer, red deer, elk, horse, bison, but also arctic fox, hare, ptarmigan, waterfowl, wolf and brown bear. Fish catching also played an important role. Perch, pike, and sturgeon were more common. Presumably, by this time fishing traps of wicker twigs or a bark had already been known.

4. Ceramic vessels, in most cases, served as containers for food storage, but they also were used as cookware to process raw meat. In some cases, ceramic vessels were repaired after they had cracked, by tight stitching the fragments with some organic fibers through drilled holes. Further use of repaired vessels for processes which would involve heating (e. g., cooking) was impossible. This means that in some cases vessels were of high value as its replacement was impossible, for whatever reason. Thus, from the point of view of the activity approach, they denote the stationary, relatively long-term camps of ancient hunters, where the permanent inhabitants were few mobile members of the collectives. In terms of lithic technology, there is no difference between base camps with ceramics (Ust-Karenga XII, XIV and XVI, horizons 3, 4, 5, 6; Ust-Yumurchen-VIII, mountain 4; Studenoe-1, mountains 8-9; Ust-Menza-1, mountains 8) and temporary seasonal sites used by hunting groups sent to harvest, which had no ceramics in their contexts (Bolshoi Yakor I, Kovrizhka II, III, and IV, Invalidniy III). Bifacial technology and production of microblades for insert tools seem to have been the main characteristics of lithic industry of these sites. Bifacial tools (large side scrapers and knives) were at the same time the preforms for end-cores for microblades. This tool kit based on “three in one” principle is easy to carry and gives all necessary options for long-distance travels. Bifacial processing and compact forms of bifacial implements are in this context ideal adaption that perfectly suits hunting on seasonally migrating animal species in the conditions of tundra-steppes and mountain alpinoid tundra-steppes with mosaic taiga forest.

5. Migrating groups of hunter-harvesters transported not only hunting products (fillet parts of animal corpses), but also high-quality lithic raw materials in the form of finished products, such as bifaces or extremely rarely rock nodules. Sources of raw materials were located along the path of movement of groups of hunter-harvesters who exploited the migration routes of large animals. Thus, the pattern of spatial distribution of exotic lithic raw materials in the region becomes a map of seasonal migrations of hunters in the past following migrations of the prey species. Importantly, they had been able to transmit through time the knowledge of the location of high-quality lithic raw materials as well the tradition of ceramic production. Probably, this may indicate genetically homogeneous population.

6. According to the most recent data from paleogenetics and anthropology of the ancient population revealed for the territory of Baikal region of Siberia and Yakutia, the bearers of the tradition of making and using the most ancient ceramics had roots in southern regions of Asia (see Fig. 6). This is also confirmed by anthropological and genetic analysis of Dzhilinda man discovered in the Vitim river basin.

This study, once again, demonstrates that “European” approach to Asian archaeological materials is not really productive and often leads to a deadlock. It seems that the academic community of various scholarly schools in South Korea, China, Russia, and Japan faces the great challenge of developing an adequate nomenclature for describing and understanding the very specific ancient history of the Asian continent.

References

1. Aksenov M. P. Arkheologicheskaia stratigrafiia i posloynoe opisanie inventaia Verkholenskoy Gory 1. Mezolit Verkhnego Priangarya. Pamyatniki Irkutskogo rayona. Irkutsk, IGU, 1980, pp. 45-93. (In Russian) Aksenov M. P. Issledovaniia doneoliticheskikh kompleksov na Verkhney Lene. Baikal'skaia Sibir v drevnosti. Irkutsk, IGPI, 1995, pp. 45-60. (In Russian)

2. Gerasimov M. M. Vosstanovlenie litsa po cherepu: (sovremennyi i iskopaemyi chelovek). Moscow, Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, 1955, 585 p. (In Russian)

3. Demonterova E. I., Ivanov A. V., Ineshin E. M., Teten'kin A. V. K voprosu o mobil'nosti drevnego naseleniia severa Baikal'skoi Sibiri v kontse pleystotsena. Stratum plus, 2014, no. 1, pp. 165-180. (In Russian) Derevianko A. P., Volkov P. V, Li K. Selemdzhinskaia pozdnepaleoliticheskaia kul'tura. Novosibirsk, IAET SO RAN, 1998, 335 p. (In Russian)

4. Hommel P. N., Schwenninger J.-L., Ineshin E. M., Vetrov V. M. Testing times: an evaluation of the radiocarbon chronology for early ceramic vessel production at Ust'-Karenga. Izvestiia laboratorii drevnikh tekhnologiy, 2017, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 31-46.

5. Ineshin E. M. Dinamika razvitiia lednikovykh obstanovok i zaselenie chelovekom Baikalo-Patomskogo nagoria v pleistotsene -- rannem golotsene. Izvestiia laboratorii drevnikh tekhnologii. Iss. 1. Irkutsk, Izdatel'stvo IrGTU, 2003, pp. 50-57. (In Russian)

6. Ineshin E. M., Teten'kin A. V. Chelovek i prirodnaia sreda severa Baykalskoy Sibiri v pozdnem pleystotsene.

7. Mestonakhozhdenie Bolshoy Yakor I. Novosibirsk, Nauka, 2010, 270 p. (In Russian)

8. Jordan P., Gibbs K., Hommel P., Piezonka H., Silva, F., Steele, J. Modelling the diffusion of pottery technologies across Afro-Eurasia: emerging insights and future research. Antiquity, 2016, vol. 90, iss. 351, pp. 590-603.

9. Kilin G. M., Kashuba N., Yaka R., Sumer A. P., Yuncu E., Shergin D., Ivanov G., Kichigin D., Pestereva K., Volkov D., Mandryka P., Kharinskii A., Tishkin A., Ineshin E., Kovychev E., Stepanov A., Alekseev A., Fedoseeva S., Some M., Jakobsson M., Krzewinska M., Stora J., Gotherstrom A. Investigating Holocene human population history in North Asia using ancient mitogenomes. Scientific Reports, 2018, vol. 8 (1), pp. 8969.

10. Konstantinov M. V. Kamennyi vek vostochnogo regiona Baikal'skoi Azii. Ulan-Ude; Chita, Institut obshchestvennykh nauk BNTS SO RAN, 1994, 163 p. (In Russian)

11. Konstantinov M. V. “I opyt, syn oshibok trudnykh” (problemy opredeleniia vozrasta drevnikh poselenii Zabaikal'ia). Drevnee Zabaikal'e: kul'tura i priroda. Ed. by M. V. Konstantinov. Chita, 2009, pp. 35-42. (In Russian)

12. Kulchitsky A. A., Skovitina T. M., Ufimtsev G. F. Plotinnye ozera v dnishchakh riftov Vostochnoi Sibiri: svidetel'stva iz proshlogo i veroyatnost' v budushchem. Geografiia i prirodnye resursy, 1997, no. 1, pp. 61-65. (In Russian)

13. Kuzmin Y. V. The origins of pottery in East Asia and neighboring regions: An analysis based on radiocarbon data. Quaternary International. 2017, vol. 441B, pp. 29-35.

14. Kuzmin Y. V. Proiskhozhdenie keramiki v Evrazii: sovremennoe sostoianie voprosa. Rossiiskii arkheologicheskii ezhegodnik, 2013, no. 3, pp. 8-26. (In Russian)

15. Kuzmin Y., Vetrov V. The earliest Neolithic complex in Siberia: the Ust-Karenga 12 site and its significance for the Neolithization process in Eurasia. Documenta Praehistorica, 2007, no. 24, pp. 9-20.

16. Margold M., Jansson K. N. Glacial geomorphology and glacial lakes of central Transbaikalia, Siberia, Russia. Journal of Maps, 2011, vol. 7 (1), pp. 18-30.

17. Medvedev G. I. Khoziaistvennyi uklad mezoliticheskogo naseleniia Ust'-Beloy Priangar'ia. Mezolit Verkhnego Priangar'ia. Irkutsk, Irkutsk State University Publishing House, 1971, pp. 111-126. (In Russian)

18. Mochanov Y. A. Drevneishie etapy zaseleniia chelovekom Severo-Vostochnoy Azii. Novosibirsk, Nauka, 1977, 264 p. (In Russian)

19. Myl'nikova L. N., Nesterov S. P. Fiziko-khimicheskoe issledovanie keramiki pamiatnika Kosanni: k probleme proiskhozhdeniia goncharstva. Neolit i neolitizatsiia basseina Iaponskogo moria: chelovek i istoricheskii landshaft: Materialy mezhdunarodnoi arkheologicheskoi konferentsii, posviashchennoi 100-letiiu so dnia rozhdeniia A. P Okladnikova. Vladivostok, Dal'nevostochnyi Universitet, 2008, pp. 161-165. (In Russian)

20. Pezhemskiy D. V., Rykushina G. V Chelovek iz Nizhney Dzhilindy (predvaritel'noe soobshchenie). Vestnik antropologii, 1998, iss. 5, pp. 115-135. (In Russian)

21. Razgildeeva I. I., Kunikita D., Yanshina O. V. Novye dannye o vozraste drevneyshikh keramicheskikh kompleksov zapadnogo Zabaykal'ia. Eurasia in Cenozoic Era. Stratigraphy, paleoecology, cultures, 2013, iss. 2, pp. 168-178. (In Russian)

22. Sato H., Natsuki D. Human behavioral responses to environmental condition and the emergence of the worlds oldest pottery in East and Northeast Asia: An overview. Quaternary International, 2017, vol. 441, pp. 12-28.

23. Stock J. T., Bazaliiskii V. I., Goriunova O. I., Savel'ev N. A., Weber A. W. Skeletal Morphology, Climatic Adaptation, and Habitual Behavior among Mid-Holocene Cis-Baikal Populations. Prehistoric Hanter- Getherers of the Baikal Region, Siberia: bioarchaeological studies of past life ways. Philadelphia, 2010, pp. 180-191.

24. Tsydenova N., Andreeva D., Zech W. Early pottery in Transbaikal Siberia: New data from Krasnaya Gorka. Quaternary International, 2017, vol. 441, pp. 81-90.

25. Wu X., Zhang C., Goldberg P., Cohen D., Pan Y., Arpin T., Bar-Yosef O. Early Pottery at 20,000 Years Ago in Xianrendong Cave, China. Science, 2012, vol. 336, iss. 6089, pp. 1696-1700.

26. Vetrov V. M. Drevneishie sledy keramicheskogo proizvodstva v Vostochnoi Azii. Antropogen. Paleontropologiya, geoarkheologiia, etnologiia Azii. Ed. by G. I. Medvedev. Irkutsk, Ottisk, 2008, pp. 2834. (In Russian)

27. Vetrov V. M. Ritual'nyi kompleks v uste r. Karenga (dolina r. Vitim) i nekotorye problemy neolita Vostochnoi Sibiri. Izvestiia laboratorii drevnikh tekhnologii, 2008, iss. 6, pp. 28-43. (In Russian)

28. Vetrov V. M., Ineshin E. M., Revenko A. G., Sekerin A. P. Artefakty iz ekzoticheskikh vidov syr'ia na arkheologicheskikh pamiatnikakh Vitimskogo basseina. Baikalskaia Sibir v drevnosti, 2000, iss. 2, part 1, pp. 98-117. (In Russian)

29. Vetrov V. M., Zadonin O. V, Ineshin E. M. Mnogosloinoe mestonakhozhdenie Nizh. Dzhilinda (Sivakon) -- 1 v Bambuyskoy kotlovina. Kul'tury i pamyatniki epokhi kamnia i rannego metalla Zabaykal'ia. Novosibirsk, Nauka, 1993, pp. 98-112. (In Russian)

30. Zinovev A. A. Na puti k sverkhobshchestvu. Moscow, Tsentrpoligraf, 2000, 260 p. (In Russian)

31. Zhushchikhovskaya I. S. Drevneishaia keramika: puti tekhnologicheskoi innovatsii. Vestnik DVO RAN. Arkheologiia, 2011, no. 1, pp. 101-110. (In Russian).

Размещено на Allbest.ru