<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Auteurs : Vadim Stepanchuk</title>
    <link>https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=174</link>
    <description>Publications de Auteurs Vadim Stepanchuk</description>
    <language>fr</language>
    <ttl>0</ttl>
    <item>
      <title>Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition in Eastern Europe : taxonomical issues</title>
      <link>https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=588</link>
      <description>The debates on understanding of Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition in Eastern Europe are on the spot now. Nevertheless, not much attention is being paid to taxonomy as a key tool of data analysis. The proposed taxonomical approach challenges the ternary schema, which consists of such interrelated taxons as &quot;technocomplex&quot;, &quot;industry&quot;, and &quot;type of industry&quot;. A wide sample of archaeological data has been analyzed in terms of various comparative strategies. The Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition in Eastern Europe has been understood as a nonlinear/multidimensional process. Its archaeological interface points to the notion of two &quot;lines of development&quot; termed as transitional and early Upper Palaeolithic industries, in which technological and typological variability has been documented.The group of transitional industries appears within two technocomplexes: the Epimicoquian and the Levallois‑Mousterian of Tabun D tradition. The first comprises several industries with a distinctive combination of Micoquian and Upper Palaeolithic traits and rooted the Middle Palaeolithic Micoquian. The second is distinguished by a particular technology providing Levallois recurrent bipolar reduction and volumetric reduction within the same knapping context. The industries which belong to this technocomplex are geographically diverse: Kremenician (western Volhynia), Bohunician (Central Europe), Temnata cave I, VI (Balkans), Levallois‑Mousterian of Tabun D and Emiran (Near East). The consideration tentatively assumes that the bearers of this tradition, presumably anatomically modern humans, came to inhabit part of Europe. Three technocomplexes have been described within the Early Upper Palaeolithic line of development: the Aurignacian, the Archaic Gravettian, and the Epimicoquian. Each of them is represented by a number of industries which have been spread throughout the different territorial groups. </description>
      <pubDate>mar., 12 mai 2026 15:36:49 +0200</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>mar., 12 mai 2026 15:36:55 +0200</lastBuildDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=588</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Kremenician, a Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transitional industry in the Western Ukraine</title>
      <link>https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=587</link>
      <description>This paper is devoted to the study of lithic typology and technology of the West Ukrainian Middle to Upper Palaeolithic Transitional site Kulychivka. The site was excavated by V.P. Savchuk between the years 1968‑1987. Discussed in the paper is the lithic assemblage from the III‑d cultural layer of the lower‑most one recovered during the 1979 field campaign. A limited series of artifacts discovered during subsequent years of investigation of the site is also involved for comparison. Kulychivka typology comprises component Upper Palaeolithic types, where scrapers, followed by retouched blades, burins, etc., are characteristic. Typical Levallois points add originality of the assemblage. Kulychivka technology involves two modes of exploitation of raw materials, namely flat (Levallois) and volumetric (parallel or prismatic); knapping on narrow lateral face. Both modes are characterized by specific traits; though rare, there are examples of combination of the two. The original appearance of the Kulychivka assemblage allows to define a distinct Kremenician industry. The closest analogy of Kremenician of Western Ukraine is represented by the Moravian Bohunician. Regional Middle Palaeolithic records show no clear and doubtless forerunners of Kremenician.This paper discusses typological and technological aspects of the Kulychivka industry. It is mainly based on analysis of the assemblage of the III‑d (lower) Upper Palaeolithic layer from the excavations by V.P. Savchuk in 1979 conducted on an area of ca. 108 square meters. Additional extra materials coming from later V.P. Savchuk field campaigns were also used, but are represented in the present paper more briefly. According to the excavator, the area excavated in 1979 yielded the hearth (250 × 160 × 614 centimeters) and two concentrations of finds, one of which - oval in shape, 4 × 2,5 m in area - yielded up to 78 % of flints (Savchuk, 1979). The lithic series of the III‑d layer of Kulychivka from the Depository of Ternopil Museum of Local Studies consists of 6408 pieces and were analyzed by the present authors. Additionally, the data on ca. 600 technologically meaningful artifacts from the Lviv Archaeological Institute were also involved. </description>
      <pubDate>mar., 12 mai 2026 15:34:26 +0200</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>mar., 12 mai 2026 15:34:33 +0200</lastBuildDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=587</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The chaines operatoires of Levallois site Pronyatyn, Western Ukraine</title>
      <link>https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=471</link>
      <description>The Middle Palaeolithic Levallois site of Provadnyi geologically dated to Amersfoort is situated in south-west of Volyno‑Podolian upland at the right bank of the river Seret, left tributary of Middle Dniester, 6 km north from Ternopil city, West Ukraine. The site was discovered and investigated between 1977 and 1985. Assemblage includes c. 6000 lithics. The technological analysis allowed to elucidate highly complex system of different core reduction strategies, which were applied at the site. The overwhelming majority of knapped products were obtained through the exploitation of flat cores, although the idea of volume was also known and time to time was applied. Three specific forms of pre-cores can be distinguished, each of which adds specificity to modes of further reduction: careful curation of pre-cores by removal by different methods of preparation of striking platform zone (trimming, faceting) and of maintaining of flaking surface convexity (different debordants) was conducted during each stage of core reduction. There is evidence of a variety of recurrent methods, frequently regarded as Levallois, namely centripetal, uni- and bipolar, corner etc. Classical Levallois technique oriented to obtainment of a single removal through pre-core-one cycle is also represented. “Ideal blank” approach allows to define the desirable blank as bladey flake/short blade of Levallois appearance. The most specific features of Provadnyi technology are consist in frequent application of trimming technique during striking platform preparation and in acquaintance with volumetric mode of raw materials exploitation, resulted, among other, in particular type of pre-cores. </description>
      <pubDate>mar., 12 mai 2026 11:32:44 +0200</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>mar., 12 mai 2026 11:32:50 +0200</lastBuildDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=471</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Étude sur les méthodes de production lithique en Crimée occidentale (Ukraine)</title>
      <link>https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=364</link>
      <description>L’industrie lithique à biface (« Para‑Micoquien ») de la dernière phase du Paléolithique moyen se caractérise par l’association d’un schéma opératoire de façonnage et un débitage Levallois. Deux méthodes ont été utilisées pour produire des supports allongés transformés en outils à bords convergents. La difficulté technologique pour l’acquisition des produits laminaires standardisés résultant de la méthode de débitage Levallois à lame peut nous amener à considérer la présence de la technique bifaciale à bord convergent. The lithic industry with a biface tool (“para‑Micoquien”) in the final Middle Paleolithic period is characterized by an association of “schema opératoire” of producing tools (“façonnage”) and of Levallois primary flaking (“débitage Levallois”). Two methods were organized to produce a blade component which were transformed to convergent edged tools. The technological problem to obtain elongated and standardized artifacts by the method of Levallois primary blade making may explain a very reason of the presence of “façonnage” in the industry Para‑Micoquien. </description>
      <pubDate>mar., 12 mai 2026 10:51:40 +0200</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>mar., 12 mai 2026 10:51:46 +0200</lastBuildDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=364</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Buran-Kaya III and Skalistiy rockshelter : two new dated Late Pleistocene sites in the Crimea</title>
      <link>https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=289</link>
      <pubDate>mar., 12 mai 2026 09:57:35 +0200</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>mar., 12 mai 2026 16:48:35 +0200</lastBuildDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=289</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Kiik-Koba, lower layer type industries in the Crimea</title>
      <link>https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=173</link>
      <description>Until recent times the &quot;tayacoid&quot; industrie of the Eem-aged lower layer of the cave site Kiik-Koba investigated by G.A. Bonch-Osmolovskiy in the years 1924-1926 was the unique one for the Crimean Middle Palaeolithic. Several new sites with similar inventory has been discovered during the last decade on the territory of the peninsula. These are Kabazi II, IV-th layer, Zaskaya and Krasnyj Mayak 1. All the enumerated Crimean sites have produced similar inventories as to their main technological and typological characteristics, namely : highly pronounced trend to microlithism, absence of Levallois debitage, low indices of Fl and lam prevalence of sidescrapers among flake tools, presence of certain number of bifacially worked forms, &quot;irregular&quot; character of flake tool preparing due to the wide use of alternate and ventral retouch, frequently non-modifying and marginal, as well as slightly denticulate retouch. Similar industries are known also on the territory of the European part of the former USSR and characterised by the same age and almost the same technology and typology. These are Betovo (Desna river, Russia), Velikyi Glybochk (Seret river, Ukraine), Mersynja, Vykhvatintsy, Starye Duruitory (Moldova). The spatial distribution of these sites points in the searching for analogies on the territories of the Central Europe, and it is really possible to found the strikingly close techno-typological affinities with the so called Taubachian of the Eemian age in this area. The term Taubachian seems to be more appropriate for the moment for the purposes of definition of the East European inventories under discussion. There are also certain differences both between Central and Eastern European inventories and between the inventories within the latter. These can probably lead to distinguishing of different facies of the Taubachian in the future.  Nevertheless, the main features are still stable and common : the connection with Neanderthal people, the same geochronological position, generally the same technological and typological characteristics, including fascinating trend to microlithism and to the manufacture of non-standardised flake tools. This evidence can be engaged as sign of specific way of human adaptation during temperate episode of the last interglacial. </description>
      <pubDate>lun., 11 mai 2026 16:30:16 +0200</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>lun., 11 mai 2026 16:30:21 +0200</lastBuildDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://popups.uliege.be/3041-5535/index.php?id=173</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>