The paper presents a brief history of studying materials from the Late Middle - early Upper Paleolithic period from the Vindia Cave. Alternative interpretations of this phenomenon from various points of view (archaeological, paleoanthropological, and genetic) in the context of other continental and Mediterranean (Adriatic) sites are highlighted. Minor differences are noted between the transition industries of Vindia and the complexes of the Eastern Adriatic. Alternative explanations and new data from recent excavations allow us to discuss the principles of interaction between Neanderthals and early Homo Sapiens in Central Europe and the Adriatic.

Key words: Neanderthals, modern humans, Middle Paleolithic, Upper Paleolithic, Vindia, Croatia.

Introduction

Paleolithic sites in Croatia are mainly located in two geographical regions: continental and Adriatic. The most famous ones (Krapina, Vindija, Velika Pecina) are located inside the continent in the north-west of Croatia. The sites of this region, known as the Croatian Zagorje, are geographically and ecologically different from those of the Mediterranean, located far to the south on the Adriatic coast or adjacent areas (Figure 1). While the highest mountains in northwestern Croatia reach approximately 1000 m, the Denarids (southeastern spurs of the Alps, which stretch from north-west to south-east along the coast) exceed 2000 m and also have a very steep and rugged western slope. During the Pleistocene, they may have been partially covered by shallow glacial formations (Marjanac T., Marjanas L., Oreski, 1990), which served as a barrier to migrations between the coast and the continent.

Research in Krapina resulted in the discovery of Neanderthal remains that were accompanied by the Mousterian industry (Simek and Smith, 1997). In contrast to this site, Vindia and Velika Pechina also contain Upper Paleolithic layers and play an important role in the discussion of the interaction of Neanderthals and modern anthropological humans, as well as the problem of the transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic in Central Europe (Wolpoff, 1999; Smith, Jankovic, Karavanic,

page 11

Figure 1. Location of the most important Mousterian sites in Croatia.

2. View from the Vindia Cave. Photo by I. Karavanich.

2005]. Data from Vindia have recently been discussed in a number of studies from an archaeological, paleoanthropological, geological, and genetic point of view (Zilhao, 2009; Green et al., 2010; Jankovic et al., 2011). Various hypotheses have been put forward regarding the rock industry of layer G1, where Neanderthal remains were found (Zilhao, 2009). This paper offers an alternative explanation for the transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic based on the Vindia Cave materials in the context of sites in Central Europe and the Eastern Adriatic. Unlike the territory of Northwestern Croatia, no stratigraphic sequence of sediments with Middle and Upper Paleolithic layers has been recorded in the Eastern Adriatic, although there are archaeological sites with both Late Stjerian and Aurignacian artifacts (Karavanic, 2009). Nevertheless, the sites of these two regions provide additional information for interpreting human behavior during the Late Middle and Early Upper Paleolithic and help to approach the understanding of the complex processes of the biocultural evolution of the genus Homo.

Parking location and research history

Vindia Cave is located 2 km west of the village. Dona Voca and 20 km west of Varazdina. Its dimensions are over 50 m in length, up to 28 m in width, and more than 10 m in height (Fig. 2). S. Vukovich discovered the cave in 1928 and explored it for more than 20 years with small interruptions (Vukovich, 1950). In 1974, M. Malez began systematic work in Vindia, which was carried out annually until 1986. During this period, most of the stone artefacts, faunal remains, and all known anthropological materials were collected. A stratigraphic section with a thickness of approximately 9 m (Fig. 3) contains approx. 20 geological horizons that, according to M. Malez and D. Rukavina (Malez and Rukavina, 1979), were formed in the period from the beginning of the Risian stadial (oxygen-isotope stage 6 or earlier) to the Holocene (see also: Karavanic, 1995).

The faunal collection from Vindia has been repeatedly studied (Miracle, 1991; Brajkovic, 2005; Brajkovic and Miracle, 2008; Karavanic and Patou-Mathis, 2009). The results of osteological and isotope analyses showed that the cave dwellers were highly carnivorous and obtained almost all dietary proteins from animal meat (Karavanic and Patou-Mathis, 2009; Richards et al., 2000). In this respect, they are similar to other Neanderthals from various parts of Europe (Bocherens and Dracker, 2006).

Neanderthal bone remains were found in the G complex, which includes five geological horizons numbered from top to bottom (from G1 to G5). Layer G3 contained about 100 fragments of their bones, accompanied by a Late Mousterian industry. Two AMS were obtained from these bones-

page 12

3. Stratigraphic profile of Vindia (according to [Ahern et al., 2004, fig. 1]).

dates: >42 Ka BP (Krings et al., 2000) and about 38 Ka BP (Serre et al., 2004). Another one, also obtained from Neanderthal bone remains from the G complex (horizon unknown), is about 44 Ka BP (Green et al., 2010) (for other dates, see Wild et al., 2001; Ahern et al., 2004, tab.1). The G1 layer also contains a series of fragments of human bones, whose morphological features make it possible to correlate them with Neanderthals (Smith and Ahern, 1994; Smith et al., 1999). Several different radiocarbon dates have been obtained for faunal remains from this layer (see [Ahern et al., 2004, tabl. 1]). Most important are the results of direct dating from Neanderthal bones. Initially, they were used to obtain dates of 28 and 29 Ka BP [Smith et al., 1999], and later, using a more accurate method, about 33 Ka BP [Higham et al., 2006], which correlates well with one of the dates obtained earlier from animal bones [Karavanic, 1995].

The Vindii sediment sequence contains both Middle-Paleolithic (Mousterian) and Upper-Paleolithic industries. Tools from the lower Mousterian horizons are made from local raw materials (Kurtanjek and Marci, 1990; Blaser, Kurtanjek, and Paunovic, 2002) using the Levallois splitting method. The latter is not represented in the materials of layer G3, but the use of local raw materials (flint, quartz, tuff, etc.) is recorded.In addition, in layer G1, Neanderthal fossils are accompanied by stone tools and Upper Paleolithic bone points, which is the most interesting and confusing problem at this site, which will be discussed in detail below.

Anthropological remains

Skeletal remains of Neanderthals from Layer G3 show clear changes in the morphology of facial bones compared to earlier representatives of this species Homo. These distinctive features are characteristic not for individual skulls and their fragments, but for the entire craniological material from this layer (see Smith, 1984; Wolpoff, 1999; Ahern et al., 2004; Cartmill and Smith, 2009). These include a change in the shape of the supraorbital roller, a decrease in the alveolar height of the upper jaw and the width of the nose, a more vertical position of the mandibular symphysis, and a slightly higher cranial arch. According to all these features, the inhabitants of Vindia Cave, whose skeletal remains were found in layer G3, occupy an intermediate position between geologically earlier Neanderthals from Krapina and Upper Paleolithic Europeans, although they are still closer to the former (Smith 1994; Karavanic and Smith, 1998; Cartmill and Smith, 2009). A small Neanderthal sample from layer G1 is characterized by essentially the same features (Smith and Ahern, 1994). Anthropological materials from Vindia played an important role in substantiating the assimilation model of the origin of modern humans (Smith, Falsetti, Donnelly, 1989). This model implied a small but significant contribution of Neanderthals to the composition of the Sapiens population that migrated to Central Europe. Recently, the morphological type of people from Vindia is considered as a manifestation of a small sapient admixture in late Neanderthals (Smith, Jankovic, Karavanic, 2005; Cartmill, Smith, 2009; Jankovic et al., 2011). The assimilation model is equivalent to the genetic "mostly from Africa" model, as well as the recently proposed "incomplete substitution" model (see Gibbons, 2011).

page 13
Artifacts

The gun set from Layer G3 is 17 % of the total stone inventory. This Late Mousterian industry is dominated by scrapers and scalloped products, although some Upper Paleolithic tool types are also present (for example, scrapers [Karavanic and Smith, 1998]). Some of the scrapers may originate from Upper Paleolithic horizons, resulting from mechanical mixing of layers. Nevertheless, the materials of the G3 layer, in addition to the flake technology, indicate the production of bifaces and lamellar splitting (Karavanic and Smith, 1998). New studies (Karavanic and Patou-Mathis, 2009) have shown that some "retouchers" from layer G (Karavanic and Sokec, 2003; Ahern et al., 2004) are actually pseudo-tools. The notches on the Priapic bone of the cave bear (Karavanic and Smith, 1998) may also be the result of natural processes rather than human activity.

The combination of Middle and Upper Paleolithic tool types is also characteristic of the G1 layer, which contains a variety of stone products, bone points, and Neanderthal remains. Some stone artefacts from this layer, originally identified as tools, may not be such (see [Zilhao and D'Errico, 1999; Jankovic et al., 2006; Zilhao, 2009]). Nevertheless, the relatively poor collection of stone tools indicates the further development of the Mousterian technical and typological tradition (without the Levallois method of splitting). Bone tools from layer G1 have a typical Upper Paleolithic appearance. Such an unusual combination of Neanderthal remains and Upper Paleolithic bone points was considered both as a result of mechanical mixing of different horizons (Kozlowski, 1996; Zilhao and D'Errico, 1999; Braner, 2009; Zilhao, 2009) and as a cultural peculiarity of the complete collection (Montet-White, 1996; Karavanic, 1995, 2000, 2007; Karavanic Smith, 1998, 2000; Jankovic et al., 2006; Karavanic and Patou-Mathis, 2009]. Recent studies have used taphonomic analysis (Karavanic and Patou-Mathis, 2009), repair of stone artefacts (Bruner, 2009), as well as analysis of pseudo-tools, typology of stone products, and the study of bone tools and site formation processes (Zilhao, 2009).

A number of interpretations have been proposed for the stone industry from the G1 layer (see, for example, [Karavanic, 1995, 2000; Kozlowski, 1996; Montet-White, 1996; Karavanic and Smith, 1998; Miracle, 1998; Zilhao, 2009]). Svoboda [Svoboda, 2001] assumed kinship with Selet, and A. Montet-White (1996) used the term "olypevian"to define it. I. Karavanic (2000, 2007) used this term to describe a possible specific "transition" industry in the region. In one of the last works of J. Zilhao (2009) assigned the complex from the G1 layer to selet. More broadly, L. G. Straus [Straus, 1999], A. Montet-White [Montet-White, 1996], I. Karavanic and F. H. Smith [Karavanic, Smith, 1998], J. Ahern and colleagues [Ahern et al., 2004], and I. Yankovic and co-authors [Jankovic et al. al., 2006, 2011] considered an unusual industry from the G1 layer in the context of the complex problem of the transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic in Central Europe.

Discussion

Vindia Cave in northwestern Croatia has played an important role in numerous discussions regarding the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition forms in Central Europe. The morphological characteristics of the inhabitants of this cave served as one of the main arguments in favor of the hypothesis of Neanderthal hybridization with modern humans. They have played an important role in discussions about the causes of Neanderthal extinction (Smith, Falsetti, Donnelly, 1989; Smith, 1994; Ahern et al., 2004; Smith, Jankovic, Karavanic, 2005; Cartmill, Smith, 2009). Recently, biological research in Vindia has shifted from morphology to paleogenetics: in 2010, approximately 3 billion years of research have been conducted in this area. The base pairs of the Neanderthal genome were sequenced from three small indeterminate fragments of long bones from this site [Green et al., 2010]. Comparison with the genomes of modern humans showed that the Windian Neanderthals are somewhat closer to modern Eurasians than to Africans. R. Green and co-authors found that the most likely explanation for this fact is the Neanderthal admixture in the amount of 1 - 4% absorbed by Sapiens after their exit from Africa. This explanation, along with the latest interpretation of the Denisovian genome [Reich et al., 2010; Gibbons, 2011], supports the theory that the dispersal of sapiens migrating from Africa across Eurasia was accompanied by a small mixing with archaic populations of this continent. Geneticists refer to this interpretation as the "incomplete substitution model" (Gibbons, 2011), which is essentially the same as the assimilation model.

While genetic data indicate Neanderthal admixture in modern humans, traces of sapient admixture in late Neanderthals are not detected. R. Green and co-authors note that the admixture is usually recorded in the gene pool of colonists (in this case, people with early Neanderthals).-

page 14
temporary species), not aborigines (in this case, Neanderthals). However, the authors do not exclude the possibility of sapient admixture in Neanderthals (Green et al., 2010, p. 721). This may be supported by the fact that the sapient tendency in a number of morphological features is more pronounced in the late Windian Neanderthals than in other Neanderthal groups.

Recently, in support of the assimilation model, it has been suggested in the literature that the last published dates of 34-33 Ka BP (Higham et al., 2006), obtained from the bones of two Neanderthals from the G1 layer of Vindia, indicate a possible minimum age, and in reality these samples should be older (Zilhao, 2009). His colleagues [Green et al., 2010] believe that interbreeding between Neanderthals and early modern humans must have occurred before the latter split into European and Asian branches, since the Neanderthal genome is equally similar to modern Europeans and Asians. In their opinion, hybridization most likely took place in the Middle East around 100 thousand years ago.However, since it is unlikely that there was no gene flow between modern Europeans and Asians after their separation, interbreeding could have continued later. In addition, Vindia can serve as evidence of the influence of modern humans on late Neanderthals, regardless of whether the available dates are considered as a minimum age or not. Zilhao (2009) argues that in order to adopt the assimilation model, the site must have earlier dates than the first modern people of Central Europe. However, this is not entirely true, especially if we consider the anthropological materials from Vindia as an indicator of gene flow in Neanderthal populations. In any case, the arguments of J. The argument that the site dates indicate only a possible minimum age also applies to the dating of early humans of the modern anatomical type in Europe, and therefore their age should also be considered as a minimum.

Much of the discussion about the possibility of hybridization between Neanderthals and modern physical humans is based on archaeological materials from Vindia. Probably, some stone products (e.g. Vi 1061, Vi 3383) are actually pseudo-tools, which was recently noted by J. Zelao [Ibid.We previously paid attention to this fact and took it into account in later interpretations (see [Jankovic et al., 2006]). J. Zelao's statement that the industry belongs to seletum is not new. M. Malez made this assumption more than 30 years ago [Malez, 1979], although it remains unclear which layer of complex G he was referring to. I. Svoboda also noted some proximity of the industry from layer G1 to seletum [Svoboda, 2001]. On the contrary, J. Kozlowski saw more similarity with the Levallois-Mousterian complexes of Central Europe and the Balkans (Kozlowski, 1996). Both points of view have their drawbacks. Layer G1 does not contain any evidence of Levallois technology, although it can be defined as Mousterian. We see the same situation when examining a collection from the G3 layer. The assumption about the presence of the Selet industry in the G1 layer is based solely on one tool-a well-shaped bifacial tip. There is no reason to say that this tool was made locally; in addition, it is made of red radiolarite originating from the territory of Hungary (Montet-White, 1996; Biro and Marko, 2007). In the last few years, thanks to the research of D. Perhoc [Perhoc, 2009], the amount of work on finding and mapping sources of raw materials used in different epochs has increased in Croatia, and such a variety of raw materials has not been found. Therefore, this uncharacteristic instrument for the Vindii collection (bifacial products from the G3 layer differ from it typologically and are made from local raw materials) is not suitable for cultural attribution of the entire industry. Moreover, it cannot be an indicator of selet, the presence of which has not yet been proven on any Croatian monument. The presence of this tool, however, indicates contacts with other geographical regions during the time of human habitation at the level of layer G1.

The presence of pseudo-tools and the results of repair work (Bruner, 2009; Zilhao, 2009) confirm that mixing of materials at different times is typical for different layers. This may explain the presence of Upper Paleolithic types of stone products made of high-quality flint in layers G1 and G3. In the studies of K. Bruner [Bruner, 2009], vertical mixing is considered as a result of post-depositional processes that affected a total of 2.4% of detectable tools. Approximately 8 % of artifacts from the G1 layer are applied. However, some of the finds from the underlying and overlying sediments can also be assembled into a single product by means of remanufacturing. This, according to K. Bruner, suggests that the G1 layer is one of the most disturbed in the parking lot [Ibid., p. 77]. During long-term observations, we have established the presence of both bioturbation and cryoturbation processes in Vindia, which are the most likely cause of mixing artifacts from different layers in some parts of the cave (Smith, 1984; Karavanic and Smith, 1998). However, the areas with the most significant finds do not bear traces of deformations. In the light of the recorded violations, the assignment of kamenny in-

page 15
It is not possible to move from the G1 layer to the Olynevian as a transition industry (Karavanic, 2000, 2007). It is most likely that its Middle and Upper Paleolithic characteristics are the result of mechanical mixing of layers. Nevertheless, the problem of co-occurrence of Neanderthal bones and Upper Paleolithic bone cusps remains open. M. Pacher (2010) correctly pointed out the absence of diagnostic features that would allow the Olshevskaya industry to be attributed to the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic, but we cannot agree with her statement that human remains from the G1 layer of Vindia allegedly do not belong to Neanderthals. They are indeed very fragmentary, but, as shown in a number of articles and books (see, for example, [Karavanic and Smith, 1998; Wolpoff, 1999; Cartmill and Smith, 2009]), they undoubtedly have Neanderthal features (as well as some modern-type features). The results of taphonomic analysis show a similarity in the degree of preservation of bone tools and bone remains of large mammals and humans from the same layer (Karavanic and Patou-Mathis, 2009). These finds do not bear trampling marks (with the exception of the basal part of t.n. tip of the Mladech type-Vi 2510). The reddish color characteristic of the G1 layer deposits was recorded on the surface of the so-called tip of the Mladech type Vi 3439 and the bones of Neanderthals from this layer. Thus, there is reliable evidence that these finds were buried in the same stratigraphic layer during the same time interval.

The total share of stone products applied from different layers is relatively small. While the remounting can serve as evidence of mixing of layers, we assume that the change in the nature of the raw material used from the Early Middle Paleolithic to the late Upper Paleolithic layers (an increase in the amount of flint and a decrease in the proportion of quartzite; see [Vlaser, Kurtanjek, Paunovic, 2002]) is a much more significant indicator reflecting behavioral changes. According to the research of J. R. R. Tolkien, Ahern et al., 2004, tabl. 9], according to this indicator, the G1 layer occupies an intermediate position between the Mousterian (G3) and Upper Paleolithic.

Unlike Zh. Zilhao [Zilhao, 2009, tabl. 2], who sees in the materials of the G1 layer a mixture of celete, aurignac 1 and 2, and interprets the finds from the Fd/d layer as aurignac 2 or 3/4, we have two possible explanations. First, the G1 industry belongs to mustier. In this case, the mentioned bifacial stone point is considered as an import and is evidence of contacts between various Neanderthal groups in Northwestern Croatia and Hungary (if Selet is associated with Neanderthals) or Neanderthals and early modern humans (if Selet is associated with the latter). Upper Paleolithic elements, in particular bone points and possibly some types of stone products, indicate contacts (exchange or acculturation) between Neanderthals and groups of people of modern anatomical type.

The second explanation is as follows. The industry is Mousterian, the above-mentioned stone bifacial point is brought, and the presence of bone points and Upper Paleolithic stone tools in the G1 layer is a consequence of mixing with the upper layers of the site. In this case, each of the stratigraphic horizons Fd/d and Fd corresponds to the Aurignacian. However, due to the diversity of the Aurignacian industry (see: [Churchill, Smith, 2000; Kozlowski, Otte, 2000; Teyssandier, Bon, and Bordes, 2009]), a small percentage of typical Aurignacian products in Vindia and the fact that the stone industry is typologically different from the Aurignacian of French monuments do not allow us to use the terms "Aurignac 1, 2, 3/4"unconditionally for collections from Vindia (see: [Miracle, 1998]). At the same time, Early-Upper Paleolithic bone points are often found at sites in Croatia and Slovenia accompanied by very small collections of stone tools (with the exception of the Zijjalka Stream). Thus, the absence of typical Aurignacian tools in Vindia and other sites can be explained by the functional specialization of sites associated with specific hunting activities (cf.: Hahn, 1977).

Despite the fact that direct dating of bone points from Vindia and Velikaya Pechina was not successful (Smith et al., 1999), the age of layer "i" of the latter is estimated at 34 thousand years (conventional date) (Malez and Vogel, 1970). Consequently, bone points (presumably with split bases) can be attributed to this time [Ibid.]. A similar tool (most likely with a split base) from Divje Babe I (Slovenia) comes from a layer that is also approximately 34 thousand years old [Nelson, 1997], while a similar tool (most likely with a split base) from Divje Babe I (Slovenia) comes from a layer that is also approximately 34 thousand years old [Nelson, 1997]. The Mladec-type cusps from the Zijyalki Stream date from 31 to 29 Ka BP (Hofreiter and Pacher, 2004), from the Mamutova Cave near Krakow in Poland - 33 to 32 Ka BP (Wojtal, 2007), and the Early Upper Paleolithic cusps from the German sites - 32 to 27 Ka BP. calibrated BP (Conard and Bolus, 2003, 2008; Bolus and Conard, 2006), and age (proto)The Aurignacian spines with a split base from Trou de la Mer-Clochette in northeastern France are 33-35 Ka old (Szmidt, Brou, and Jaccottey, 2010). Although some of the listed sites are geographically significantly remote from Vindia, it should be noted that among the listed sites are:

page 16
Some dates are earlier than for the Neanderthal layer G1 of Vindia, while others are more recent. Although we do not have data on direct dating of the points, the dates of comparable archaeological layers indicate that the bone points from Velikaya Pechina and Divje Babe I are older than the Neanderthal G1 layer of Vindia or they are simultaneous. If we adhere to the generally accepted point of view, according to which these points are associated with modern humans, then the question arises about possible contacts of the latter with Neanderthals.

Zh. Zelao (2006) sees Neanderthals as predating early modern humans in all of Europe, with the exception of the area south of the "Ebro border". Thus, according to his model, evidence of possible contacts in Vindia-type sites is problematic. According to Zelao, even the late Neanderthals must be older than the G1 layer of Vindia. This explains his insistence on treating the dates obtained for this layer (34-33 Ka BP) as a possible minimum age (Zilhao, 2009). We have always agreed that there are stratigraphic sequence problems in Vindium [Karavanic and Smith, 1998, 2000], and we also understood that there will always be doubts about the "purity" of collections from the G complex (especially G1). Nevertheless, there is evidence of genetic mixing between Neanderthals and early modern humans [Green et al., 2010; Reich et al., 2010], even for a fairly late time of Neanderthal existence in Europe [Sankararaman et al., 2012], and the possibility of the presence of modern humans in Europe earlier than previously thought [Benazzi et al., 2012]. al., 2011; Higham et al., 2011], mean that data in favor of such an interaction should be in the archaeological material. They will certainly be implicit and, as in the case of Vindia, potentially difficult to separate from possible artificial confusions.

Only one bone point was found in the Eastern Adriatic: in the N layer of the Shandaglia II site in Istria (Croatia) (Karavanic, 2009). It is relatively small in comparison with the points from Central Europe, has a split base and a rounded cross-section, and shows similarities with the Madeleine points of Franco-Cantabria (oral report by L. Straus). Judging by the latest dates for layer F of Shandalia II, this artifact must be older than 32 thousand years ago (oral report by M. Richards). Apart from this site, only one Early Upper Paleolithic and two Middle Paleolithic sites are known in Istria (Komso, Balbo, Miracle, 2007; Komso, 2008). There are several Mousterian sites in Dalmatia, of which only the Muchina Pecina has been studied systematically (Karavanic, 2009). A significant concentration of open-type Mousterian localities is found in the region north of Zadar. This situation is probably explained not by the high population density, but by the high degree of mobility of people in the Middle Paleolithic, since most of these monuments are short-term sites (Vujevic, 2007). If we assume that at least some Middle Paleolithic hunters from the continental regions of Croatia crossed the cr. In the case of the early Upper Paleolithic sites in the region, which are rare, as well as in the Eastern Adriatic as a whole (Karavanic, 2009; Mihailovic, 2009), the above-mentioned Adriatic region can be considered as a transit territory [Ibid.]. Sites belonging to the early Upper Paleolithic period are rare in this region, as well as in the Eastern Adriatic as a whole (Karavanic, 2009; Mihailovic, 2009).. Moreover, no industry here has any progressive features that indicate a local transition to the Upper Paleolithic. For example, uluzzo is absent in the Eastern Adriatic, although this industry is represented at sites in Italy and Greece (Koumouzelis et al., 2001; Peresani, 2008).

It remains unclear why no monuments reflecting the transition from the Middle Paleolithic to the Upper One have been found so far in the Eastern Adriatic, and Early Upper Paleolithic ones are rarely found. Possible reasons for this are the small number of explored sites, flooding or erosion of ancient human habitats as a result of sea level rise, and the low population density of the territory during the transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic and during the early part of the latter.

Nevertheless, new research adds to our understanding of the distribution patterns of Mousterian traditions and the complexity of the processes underlying the interaction between Middle and Upper Paleolithic populations in the late Pleistocene. Of key importance will be the continuation of work, including mapping and exploratory excavations of cave and open-pit sites in both regions of Croatia. It is most likely that many Paleolithic hunter-gatherer habitats disappeared due to sea level rise at the end of the Pleistocene. However, some sites, such as Kashtel Shtafilich, are still preserved under water (Karavanic et al., 2009). The implementation of underwater projects can enrich our knowledge of the degree of mobility of the Mousterian traditions and help solve the mystery of the transition era in the Eastern Adriatic. Regional differences between the northwestern and Adriatic parts of Croatia should be considered in the context of both geographical factors and complex cultural processes during the transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic.

page 17
Acknowledgements

We express our gratitude to the researchers who provided various assistance in obtaining information for this article: I. Yankovich, D. Komso, J. Kozlowski, K. Sobschuk, M. Richards, D. Perhoch, L. Straus, J. Ehern, M. D. Papagianni. We are also grateful to the organizers of the symposium "Features of the transition to the Upper Paleolithic in Eurasia: Cultural dynamics and development of the genus Homo" (July 4-10, 2011 Denisova cave. Altai) to A. P. Derevyanko and M. V. Shunkov, the research was supported by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports (project N 130 - 0000000 - 0871) and the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Croatia, as well as the University of Illinois.

List of literature

Ahern J.С. М., Karavanic I., Paunovic M., Jankovic I., Smith F.H New discoveries and interpretations of hominid fossils and artifacts from Vindija Cave, Croatia // J. of Human Evolution. - 2004. - Vol. 46. - P. 25 - 65.

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

Biro K., Marko A. Stones "hit the road" // Highways and Byways in Space and Time / ed. by T. Kovacs. - Budapest: Hungarian National Museum, 2007. - P. 14 - 19.

Blaser F., Kurtanjek D., Paunovic M. L'industrie du site neandertalien de la grotte de Vindija (Croatie): une revision des matieres premieres lithiques // L'Anthropologic. - 2002. -Vol. 106. -P. 387 - 398.

Bocherens H., Drucker D. Dietary competition between Neanderthals and modern humans: insights from stable isotopes // When Neanderthals and Modern Humans Met / ed. by N. Conard. - Tubingen: Kerns Verlag, 2006. - P. 129 - 143.

Bolus M., Conard N.J. Zur zeitstellung von geschosspitzen aus organischen materialien im spaten Mittelpalaolithi-kum und Aurignacien // Archaologisches Korrespondenz-blatt. -2006. -Bd. 36. -S. 1 - 15.

Brajkovic D. Korelacija tafodema skupine Ungulata iz gornjopleistocenskih spilja Vindija, Velika pecina i Veternica u sjeverozapadnoj Hrvatskoj: Unpublished PhD Dissertation / University of Zagreb. - Zagreb, 2005. - 284, XXXIII str.

Brajkovic D., Miracle P.T. Middle Palaeolithic and early Upper Palaeolithic subsistence practices at Vindija cave, Croatia // The Palaeolithic of the Balkans / eds. A. Darlas, D. Mihailovic. - Oxford: Archaeopress, 2008. - P. 107 - 116.

Bruner K.M. Testing Stratigraphic Integrity of Upper and Middle Paleolithic Deposits in Vindija Cave (Croatia): A Chipped Stone Refitting Analysis: Unpublished Master Theses / University of Kansas. - Lawrence, 2009. - 124 p.

Cartmill M., Smith F. The Human Lineage. - Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. - 609 p.

Churchill S., Smith F.H. Makers of the Early Aurignacian of Europe // Yearbook of Physical Anthropology. - 2000. -Vol. 43. -P. 61 - 115.

Conard N. J., Bolus M. Radiocarbon dating the appearance of modern humans and timing of cultural innovations in Europe: new results and new challenges // J. of Human Evolution. -2003. -Vol. 44. -P. 331 - 371.

Conard N. J., Bolus M. Radiocarbon dating the late Middle Paleolithic and the Aurignacian of the Swabian Jura // J. of Human Evolution. - 2008. - Vol. 55. - P. 886 - 897.

Gibbons A. A new view on the birth of Homo sapiens II Science. -2011. -Vol. 331. -P. 392 - 394.

Green R., Krause J., Briggs A., Maricic Т., Stenzel U., Kircher M., Patterson N., Li H., Zhai W., Fritz M., Hansen N, Durand E., Malaspinas A-S., Jensen J., Marques-Bonet Т., Alkan C., Priifer K., Meyer M., Burbano H., Good J, Schultz R.., Aximu-Petri A., Butthof A., Hober В., Hoffner В., Siegemund M., Weihmann A., Nusbaum C, Lander S., Russ C., Novod N., Afourtit J, Egholm M., Verna C., Rudan P., Brajkovic D., Kucan Z., Gusic I., Doronichev V., Golovanova L., Lalueza-Fox C, de la Rasilla M., Fortea J., Rosas A., Schmitz R., Johnson P., Eichler E., Falush D., Birney E., Mullikin J, Slatkin M., Nielsen R., Kelso J, Lachmann M., Reich D., Paabo S. A draft sequence of the Neandertal genome // Science. -2010. -Vol. 328. -P. 710 - 725.

Hahn J. Aurignacien: das Altere Jungpalaolithikum in Mittel- und Osteuropa. - Koln: Bohlau, 1977. - 355 S. -(Fundamenta. Ser. A.; vol. 9).

Higham T., Compton T., Stringer C, Jacobi R, Shapiro B., Trinkaus E., Chandler B., Groning F., Collins C., Hillson S., O'Higgins P., FitzGerald C, Fagan M. The earliest evidence for modern humans in northwest Europe // Nature. -2011. -Vol. 479. -P. 521 - 524.

Higham Т., Ramsey C.B., Karavanic I., Smith F.H, Trinkaus E. Revised direct radiocarbon dating of the Vindija Gl Upper Paleolithic Neandertals // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. -2006. -Vol. 103. -P. 553 - 557.

Hofreiter M., Pacher M. Using ancient DNA to elucidate raw material origin of bone points from Potocka zijalka (Slovenia): preliminary Results // Potocka Zijalka: Palaeontological and Archaeological Results of the Campaigns 1997 - 2000 / eds. M. Pacher, V Pohar, G. Rabeder. - Vienna: Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2004. -P. 201 - 2010.

Jankovic I., Karavanic I., Ahern J.C.M, Brajkovic D., Mauch Lenardic J, Smith F.H Vindija Cave and the modern human peopling of Europe // Collegium Antropologicum. -2006. -Vol. 30. -P. 457 - 166.

Jankovic I., Karavanic I., Ahern J.C.M, Brajkovic D., Mauch Lenardic J, Smith F.H Archaeological, paleontological and genomic perspectives on late European Neandertals at Vindija cave, Croatia // Continuity and Discontinuity in the Peopling of Europe: one Hundred Fifty Years of Neanderthal Study / eds. S. Condemni and G. -C. Weniger. - N. Y: Springer, 2011. - P. 299 - 313. - (Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology).

Karavanic I. Upper Paleolithic occupation levels and late-occuring Neandertal at Vindija Cave (Croatia) in the context of Central Europe and the Balkans // J. of Anthropological Research. - 1995. - Vol. 51. - P. 9 - 35.

Karavanic I. Olschewian and appearance of bone technology in Croatia and Slovenia // Neanderthals and Modern Hu-

page 18
mans - Discussing Transition / eds. J. Orschiedt, G-Ch. Weniger. - Mettmann: Neanderthal Museum, 2000. - P. 159 - 168. - (Wissenschaftliche Schriften des Neanderthal Museums; Bd. 2).

Karavanic I. The Middle/Upper Paleolithic interface in Croatia // New Approaches to the Study of Early Upper Paleolithic "Transitional" Industries in Western Eurasia: Transitions great and small / eds. J. Riel-Salvatore, G.A. Clark. -Oxford: Archaeopress, 2007. - P. 75 - 89. - (BAR Intern. Ser; N 1620).

Karavanic I. Adriatic coast of Croatia and its hinterland from 50 000 to 25 000 BP // The Mediterranean from 50 000 to 25 000 BP: Turning points and new directions / eds. M. Camps, С Szmidt. - Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2009. - P. 163 - 178.

Karavanic I., Patou-Mathis M. Mddle/Upper Paleolithic interface in Vindija Cave (Croatia): new results and interpretations // Sourcebook of Paleolithic Transitions: Methods, Theories and Interpretations / eds. M. Camps, P. Chauhan. - N. Y: Springer, 2009. - P. 397 - 105.

Karavanic I., Smith F.H The Middle/Upper Paleolithic interface and the relationship of Neanderthals and early modern humans in the Hrvatsko Zagorje, Croatia // J. of Human Evolution. - 1998. -Vol. 34. -P. 223 - 248.

Karavanic I., Smith F.H. More on the Neanderthal problem: the Vindija case // Current Anthropology. - 2000. -Vol. 41. -P. 838 - 840.

Karavanic I., Sokec T. The Middle Paleolithic percussion or pressure flaking tools? The comparision of experimental and archaeological material from Croatia // Prilozi Instituta za arheologiju u Zagrebu. - 2003. - Sv. 20. - Str. 5 - 14.

Karavanic I., Zupcic K, Pesic M., Parica M., Sosic Klindzic R. Kastel Stafilic - podvodno paleoliticko nalazis-te // Hrvatski arheoloski godisnjak. - 2009. - Sv. 5 (2008). -Str. 549 - 551.

Komso D. Limski kanal // Hrvatski arheoloski godisnjak. -2008. - Sv. 4 (2007). - Str. 264 - 267.

Komso D., Balbo A., Miracle P.T. Cepicko polje // Hrvatski arheoloski godisnjak. - 2007. - Sv. 3 (2006). - Str. 225 - 228.

Koumouzelis M., Ginter В., Kozlowski J.K, Pawlikowski M., Bar-Yosef O., Albert R.M., Litynska-Zajsc M., Stworzewicz E., Wojtal P., Lipecki G., Tomek Т., Bochenski Z.M., Pazdur A. The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Greece: The excavations in Klisoura Cave // J. of Archaeological Science. -2001. -Vol. 28. -P. 515 - 539.

Kozlowski J.K Cultural context of the last Neanderthals and early Modern Humans in Central-Eastern Europe // Proceedings of the XIII UISPP Congress: The Lower and the Middle Palaeolithic / eds. O. Bar-Yosef, L.L. Cavalli-Sforza, R.J. March, M. Piperno. - Forli: Abaco, 1996. - Vol. 5. -P. 205 - 218.

Kozlowski J.K, Otte M. The formation of Aurignacian in Europe // J. of Anthropological Research. - 2000. - Vol. 56. -P. 513 - 534.

Krings M., Capelli C., Tschentscher F., Geisert H., Meyer S., Von Haeseler A., Grossschmidt K., Possnert G., Paunovic M., Paabo S. A view of Neandertal genetic diversity // Nature Genetics. - 2000. - Vol. 26. - P. 144 - 146.

Kurtanjek D., Marci V. Petrografska istrazivanja paleolitskih artefakata spilje Vindije // Rad Jugoslavenske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti. - 1990. - Sv. 449. - Str. 227 - 238.

Malez M. Nalazista paleolitskog i mezolitskog doba u Hrvatskoj // Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja / ed. by. A. Benac. - Sarajevo: Svjetlost, 1979. - Sv. I. - Str. 227 - 276.

Malez M., Rukavina D. Polozaj naslaga spilje Vindije u sustavu clanjenja kvartara sireg podrucja Alpa // Rad Jugoslavenske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti. - 1979. -Sv. 371,N17. -Str. 187 - 218.

Malez M., Vogel J.C. Die Ergebnisse der Radiokarbonanalisen der quartaren Schichten der Velika Pecina in Nordwest-Kroatien // Bull, scientifique Conseil des Academies des Sciences et des Arts de la RSF de Yougoslavie. - 1970. -Vol. 15,N11/12. -P. 390 - 391.

Marjanac Т., Marjanac L., Oreski E. Glacijalni i peri-glacijalni sedimenti u Novigradskom mora // Geoloski vjes-nik. - 1990. - Sv. 43. - Str. 35 - 42.

Mihailovic D. Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Chipped Stone Industries from Crvena Stijena - Belgrade: University of Belgrade, 2009. - 152 p. - (Prehistoric settlements in caves and rock-shelters of Serbia and Montenegro; fasc. II).

Miracle P.T. Carnivore dens or carnivore hunts? A Review of Upper Pleistocene Mammalian Assemblages in Croatia and Slovenia // Rad Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti. -1991. -Sv.458,N25. -Str. 193 - 219.

Miracle P.T. The spread of modernity in Europe // The Origins and Past of Modern Humans - Towards Reconciliation/ eds. K. Omoto, Ph. V Tobias. - Singapore: World Scientific, 1998. -P. 171 - 187.

Montet-White A. Le Paleolithique en ancienne Yougoslavie. - Grenoble: Jerome Mllon, 1996. - 268 p.

Nelson D.E. Radiocarbon dating of bone and charcoal from Divje Babe I Cave // Mousterian "Bone Flute" and other Finds from Divje Babe I Cave site in Slovenia / ed. by I. Turk. -Ljubljana: Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, 1997. -P. 51 - 64.

Pacher M. Raw material analysis of Upper Paleolithic bone points and the invention of the Olschewian // New Aspects of the Central and Eastern European Upper Palaeolithic - methods, chronology, technology and subsistence / eds. Ch. Neugebauer-Maresch, L.R. Owen. - Vienna: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2010. - P. 319 - 325.

Peresani M. A new cultural frontier for the last Neanderthals: the Uluzzian in Northern Italy // Current Anthropology. -2008. -Vol. 49. -P. 725 - 731.

Perhoc D. Sources of chert in Middle Dalmatia: Supplying raw material to Prehistoric lithic industries // A Connecting Sea: Maritime Interaction in Adriatic Prehistory / ed. by S. Forenbaher. - Oxford: Arhaeopress, 2009. - P. 25 - 46. - (BAR Intern. Ser; N2037).

Reich D., Green RE., Kircher M., Krause J, Patterson N., Durand E.Y., Viola В., Briggs A.V., Stenzel U., Johnson P.L.F., Maricic Т., Good J.M, Marques-Bonet Т., Alkan C, Fu Q., Mallick S., Li H, Meyer M., Eichler E.E., Stoneking M., Richards M., Talamo S., Shunkov M.V., Derevianko A.P., Hublin J. -J., Kelso J, Slatkin M, Paabo S. Genetic history of an archaic hominin group from Denisova Cave in Siberia // Nature. - 2010. - Vol. 468. - P. 1053 - 1060.

Richards M.P., Pettitt P.B., Trinkaus E., Smith F.H., Paunovic M., Karavanic I. Neanderthal diet at Vindija and Neanderthal predation: The evidence from stable isotopes // Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America. - 2000. - Vol. 97. - P. 7663 - 7666.

page 19
Sankararaman S., Patterson N., Li H., Paabo S., Reich D. The Date of Interbreeding between Neandertals and Modern Humans // PLoS Genetics. - 2012. - Vol. 8, N 10: el002947. doi:10.1371/joumal.pgen.l002947.

Serre D., Langaney A., Chech M., Teschler-Nicola M., Paunovic M., Hofreiter M., Possnert G., Paabo S., Mennecier P. No evidence of Neandertal mtDNA contribution to early Modern Humans // PLoS Biology. - 2004. - Vol. 2. -P. 313 - 317.

Simek J.F., Smith F.H Chronological changes in stone tool assemblages from Krapina (Croatia) // J. of Human Evolution. - 1997. - Vol. 32. - P. 561 - 575.

Smith F.H. Fossil Hominids from the Upper Pleistocene of Central Europe and the origin of modern Europeans // The Origin of Modern Humans: A world survey of the fossil evidence / eds. F. H. Smith, F. Spencer. - N. Y.: Alan R. Liss, 1984. -P. 137 - 209.

Smith F. Samples, species and speculations in the study of modern human origins // Origins of Anatomically Modern Humans / eds. M. Nitecki, D. Nitecki. - N. Y.: Plenum, 1994. -P. 227 - 249.

Smith F.H, Ahern J.C. Brief Communication: additional cranial remains from Vindija Cave, Croatia //Am. J. of Physical Anthropology. - 1994. -Vol. 93. -P. 275 - 285.

Smith F.H, Falsetti A.B., Donnelly S.M. Modern Human origins // Yearbook of Physical Anthropology. - 1989. -Vol. 32. -P. 35 - 68.

Smith F.H, Jankovic I., Karavanic I. The assimilation model, modern human origins in Europe, and the extinction of Neandertals // Quaternary International. - 2005. - Vol. 137. -P. 7 - 19.

Smith F.H, Trinkaus E., Pettitt P.B., Karavanic I., Paunovic M. Direct radiocarbon dates for Vindija Gl and Velika Pecina Late Pleistocene hominid remains // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. - 1999. -Vol. 96. -P. 12281 - 12286.

Straus L.G. The Neanderthal problem continued: Reply // Current Anthropology. - 1999. -Vol. 40. -P. 352 - 355.

Svoboda J. La question szeletienne // Les industries a outils bifaciaux du paleolithique moyen d'Europe occidentale / ed. by D. Cliquet. - Liege: Univ. de Liege, 2001. - P. 221 - 330. - (ERAUL; vol. 98).

Szmidt C.C., Brou L., Jaccottey L. Direct radiocarbon (AMS) dating of split-based points from the (Proto)Aurigna-cian of Trou de la Mere Clochette, Northeastern France: Implications for the characterization of the Aurignacian and the timing of technical innovations in Europe // J. of Archaeological Science. -2010. -Vol. 37. -P. 3320 - 3337.

Teyssandier N., Bon F., Bordes J. -G. Within projectile range: Some thoughts on the appearance of the Aurignacian in Europe // J. of Anthropological Research. - 2009. - Vol. 66. -P. 209 - 229.

Vujevic D. Srednji paleolitik na podrucju juzno od Razanca: Unpublish Master Theses / University of Zadar. - Zadar, 2007. -181 str.

Vukovic S. Paleolitska kamena industrija spilje Vindije // Historijski zbornik. - 1950. - Sv. 1 - 4. - Str. 241 - 256.

Wild E.M., Paunovic M., Rabeder G., Steffan L, Steier P. Age determination of fossil bones from the Vindija Neanderthal site in Croatia // Radiocarbon. - 2001. - Vol. 43. - P. 1021 - 1028.

Wojtal P. Zooarchaeological studies of the Late Pleistocene sites in Poland. - Krakow: Institute of Systematics and Evolution of Animals, Polish Academy of Sciences, 2007. - 189 p.

Wolpoff M.H Paleoanthropology. -2 ed. -N. Y: McGraw-Hill, 1999. - 878 p.

Zilhao J. Neandertals and moderns mixed, and it matters // Evolutionary Anthropology. -2006. -Vol. 15. -P. 183 - 195.

Zilhao J. Szeletian, not Aurignacian: A review of the chronology and cultural associations of the Vindija Gl Neandertals // Sourcebook of Paleolithic Transitions / eds. M. Camps, P. Chauhan. -N. Y: Springer, 2009. -P. 407 - 126.

Zilhao J., D'Errico F. The Neanderthal problem continued: Reply // Current Anthropology. - 1999. - Vol. 40. - P. 355 - 364.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 22.01.13, and the final version was published on 28.01.13.

page 20

Permanent link to this publication: