Ufa Archaeological Herald

The paper presents the results of a technological analysis of leaf-shaped bifaces, brought to the final stage of manufacture, and of the production waste from such bifaces, discovered at the Upper Paleolithic sites in the Altai Mountains: Kara-Bom, Tyumechin-4, Ust-Karakol-1, Anui-3, and Denisova Cave. The key aspect of the study was the technical methods of secondary thinning and shaping of bifaces, traceable on artifacts from the pre-final and final stages of manufacture, as well as on shaping flakes. Such research, based on experimental data, opens broad prospects for a detailed study of the techniques, tools, and skills possessed by the bearers of the earliest Upper Paleolithic traditions in the Altai. The results of the artifact analysis were compared with data from experimental modeling. It was established that a unified combination of sequential actions was used in shaping the bifaces: creating a bevel with small scaled retouch using a mineral hammerstone – retracting the striking platform and subsequently forming the knapping zone (platform isolation and releasing) to execute thinning flakes from one of the faces; this was followed by situational secondary thinning to process the narrowest parts and «smooth out» the faces. Within this operational sequence, pressure flaking technique could be employed. The manufacturing sequence was completed by retouching, which could be performed using a light organic instrument via percussion or pressure. Thus, within the manufacturing sequence for leaf-shaped bifaces, pressure flaking could be applied in a limited manner for specific operations dictated by technological necessity: for continuing secondary thinning and at the retouching stage to form the basal and tip parts of the artifact. The morphological variability of the Upper Paleolithic leaf-shaped bifaces considered in this work may be due to raw material specifics and the technical methods adapted to it – specifically, situational knapping, which is confirmed by experimental observations.

Altai Mountains, Initial Upper Paleolithic, leaf-shaped bifaces, experimental modeling, technological analysis, secondary thinning, final shaping, retouching

• Anikovich, M.V., Bredley, B.A., Girya, E.Yu., 1998, “Technological analysis of arrowheads of the Streletsky archaeological culture”, Archaeological news, no. 5, pp. 42–54. (In Russ.)
• Belousova, N.E., 2018, Stone industries of the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic of the Altai Mountains. Dissertation… Candidate of Historical Sciences. Novosibirsk, 199 p. (In Russ.)
• Belousova, N.E., Mikhienko, V.A., Kozlikin, M.B., Vishnevsky, A.V., Shunkov, M.V., 2021, “Upper Palaeolithic Bifacial Points from Denisova Cave”, Problems of Archaeology, Ethnography, Anthropology of Siberia and Neighboring Territories, vol. XXVII, pp. 51–56. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17746/2658-6193.2021.27.0051-0056
• Belousova, N.E., Rodionov, A.M., Vishnevskiy, A.V., Fedorchenko, A.Yu., Mikhienko, V.A., Seletskiy, M.V., 2022, “Initial and Early Upper Palaeolithic «Thin» Leaf-shaped Bifaces: Technology, Shaping and Stone Raw Material”, Stratum plus, no. 1, pp. 329–353. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.55086/sp221329353
• Belousova, N.E., Rybin, E.P., Fedorchenko, A.Yu., Kulik, N.A., 2019, “Initial Upper Paleolithic Leaf-Shaped Biface from the Kara-Bom Site: Technology, Function, and Context”, Problems of Archaeology, Ethnography, Anthropology of Siberia and Neighboring Territories, vol. XXV, pp. 36–43. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17746/2658-6193.2019.25.036-043
• Veselsky, A.P, 2009, “The reconstruction of the Micoquian bifacial tools production”, The top issues of the Eastern European prehistoric archaeology, Donbass, Donetsk, pp. 89–110. (Archaeological Almanac, no. 20) (In Russ.)
• Vishnevsky, A.V., Belousova, N.Е., Fedorchenko, A.Y., Mikhienko, V.A., Kozlikin, M.B., Shunkov, M.V., 2024, “Rocks and Their Sources in the Upper Paleolithic of the Altai: Relevance to Bifacial Technologies”, Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 59–74. https://doi.org/10.17746/2658-6193.2023.29.0090-0096
• Girya, E.Yu., 1997, Technological analysis of stone industries. The method of micro-macroanalysis of ancient tools. Akadem Print, Saint Petersburg, 198 p. (In Russ.)
• Girya, E.Yu., Nekhoroshev, P.E., 1993, “Some technological criteria of the stone age periodization”, Russian Archaeology, no. 4, pp. 5–24.
• Derevianko, A.P., Volkov, P.V., Petrin, V.T., 2002, The Origin of Microplate Knapping Technique: (Experience of Experimental Research and Technological Analysis of the materials of the Kara-Bom Site). IAET SO RAN, Novosibirsk, 170 p. (in Russ.)
• Derevianko, A.P., Glinskii, S.V., Dergacheva, M.I., Dupal, T.A., Efremov, S.A., Zenin, A.N., Krivoshapkin, A.I., Kulikov, O.A., Malaeva, E.M., Markin, S.V., Nikolaev, S.V., Nokhrina, T.I., Petrin, V.T., Pozdniakov, A.A., Popova, S.M., Rybin, E.P., Simonov, Yu.G., Fedeneva, I.N., Chevalkov, L.M., Shun’kov, M.V., 1998, The problems of paleoecology, geology of the paleolithic of the Altai. IAET SO RAN, Novosibirsk, 312 p. (In Russ.)
• Derevianko, A.P., Grichan, Yu.V., Dergachev, M.I., Zenin, A.N., Laukhin, S.A., Levkovskaya, G.M., Maloletko, A.M., Markin, S.V., Molodin, V.I., Ovodov, N.D., Petrin, V.T., Shunkov, M.V., 1990, Archaeology and paleoecology of the Palaeolithic of Gorny Altai. IIFF SO AN SSSR, Novosibirsk, 158 p. (In Russ.)
• Derevianko, A.P., Shunkov, M.V., 2002, “Middle paleolithic industries with foliate bifaces in Gorny Altai”, Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia, no. 1 (9), pp. 16–41. (In Russ.)
• Derevianko, A.P., Shunkov, M.V., Agadjanian, A.K., Baryshnikov, G.F., Malayeva, E.M., Ulianov, V.A., Kulik, N.A., Postnov, A.V., Anoikin, A.A., 2003, Paleoenvironment and Paleolithic human occupation of Gorny Altai. IAET SO RAN, Novosibirsk, 448 p. (In Russ.)
• Kolobova, K.A., 2006, Techniques of Stone Tool Formation in the Paleolithic Industries of the Altai Mountains. IAET SO RAN, Novosibirsk, 136 p. (In Russ.)
• Mikhienko, V.A., Belousova, N.E., Rodionov, A.M., Fedorchenko, A.Yu., 2023a, “Waste from Manufacturing Thin Bifacial Points of the Initial Upper Palaeolithic of the Altai: Experimental Data”, Problems of Archaeology, Ethnography, Anthropology of Siberia and Neighboring Territories, vol. XXIX, pp. 226–233. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17746/2658-6193.2023.29.0226-0233
• Mikhienko, V.А., Belousova, N.Е., Rodionov, А.М., Kharitonov, R.М., Fedorchenko, A.Yu., 2023b, “Problems of identification of debris from production of bifaces in the Early and Initial Upper Palaeolithic assemblages: (based on materials from Altai)”, Kazakhstan Archeology, no. 4 (22), pp. 176–196. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.52967/akz2023.4.22.176.196
• Otcherednoy, А.K., 2023, “Scar-pattern analysis and laws of form making”, Transactions of Institute for the History of Material Culture RAS, no. 29, pp. 26–36. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31600/2310-6557-2023-29-26-36
• Postnov, A.V., Anoikin, A.A., Kulik, N.A., 2000, “Criteria for the Selection of Raw Materials in Palaeolithic Industries of the Anui River Basin (Gorny Altai)”, Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia, no. 3 (3), pp. 18–30. (In Russ.)
• Rodionov, A.M., Mikhienko, V.A., Belousova, N.E., Fedorchenko, A.Yu., 2023, “Technological and Physical Aspects of Experimental Manufacturing Thin Bifaces of the Initial Upper Palaeolithic in the Altai”, Problems of Archaeology, Ethnography, Anthropology of Siberia and Neighboring Territories, vol. XXIX, pp. 280–285. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17746/2658-6193.2023.29.0280-0285
• Rudenko, S.I., 1960, “The Ust'-Kanskaia Paleolithic Cave Site, Siberia”, Palaeolithic and Neolithic of the USSR, Nauka, Moscow, Leningrad, pp. 104–125. (MIA, no. 79) (In Russ.)
• Slavinskiy, V.S., 2007, “Industries of the Early Upper Palaeolithic habitation levels at the Ust-Karakol site (materials of the excavation in 1986)”, Northern Asia in the Anthropogene: Human, Paleotechnologies, Geoecology, Ethnology and Anthropology, vol. 2, Ottisk, Irkutsk, pp. 197–214. (In Russ.)
• Whittaker, J.C., laev S.N., Alaeva T.V., 2004, Flintknapping: Making and Understanding Stone Tools. Ottisk, Irkutsk, 312 p. (In Russ.)
• Kharevich, A.V., Kolobova, K.A., Tyugashev, I.E., Kharevich, V.M., Chistyakov, P.V., Markin, S.V., Derevianko, A.P., 2025, “Biface Trimming Elements as Indicators of Tool Rejuvenation Intensity: The Case of Sibiryachikha, Altai”, Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 41–51. (In Russ.)  https://doi.org/10.17746/1563-0110.2025.53.4.041-051
• Shalagina, A.V., Kharevich, V.M., Maury, S., Baumann, M., Krivoshapkin, A.I., Kolobova, K.A., 2020, “Reconstruction of the bifacial technological sequence in Chagyrskaya cave assemblage”, Siberian historical research, no. 3, pp. 130–152. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17223/2312461X/29/9
• Callahan, E., 1979, “The basics of biface knapping in the eastern fluted point tradition a manual for flintknappers and lithic analysis”, Archaeology of Eastern North America, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–180.
• Rybin, E.P, 2014, “Tools, beads, and migrations: Specific cultural traits in the Initial Upper Paleolithic of southern Siberia and Central Asia”, Quaternary International, vol. 347, pp. 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2014.04.031
• Wiśniewski, A, Chłoń, M., Weiss, M., Pyżewicz, K., Migal, W., 2020, “On Making of Micoquian Bifacial Backed Tools at Pietraszyn 49a, SW Poland”, Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology, vol. 3, pp. 856–888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41982-020-00069-y