SlovenSká archeológia lXVIII – 2, 2020, 193 – 218 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31577/slovarch.2020.68.10 PROTO-AURIGNACIAN UNIQUE SITE CLUSTER IN EUROPE Logistic Settlement Pattern with a Base Camp and a Series of Supply Chain Loci at Raw Material Outcrops in Transcarpathia (Ukraine) * Yuri e. DemiDenko – Béla rácz – Adrián nemergut The article is dedicated to the good memory of Ladislav ‘Laci’ Bánesz (1932 – 2000), who always wanted to see really connected Paleolithic records of Eastern Slovakia and the Ukrainian Transcarpathia. in the article a group of Berehove and muzhievo surface find spots situated near in situ Proto-aurignacian Berehove i site in transcarpathia (ukraine) is discussed. the conducted study allow us to take a new look at these loci and their uP lithics. instead of the before viewed as a group of middle aurignacian real sites, the considering actually Proto-aurignacian loci are now understood as representing a series of various supply chain loci with raw material outcrops, workshops, a site-workshop, and special camps for now Berehove i base camp. all these functionally vary- ing loci and the site situated at raw material outcrops at Berehove volcanic Shallow mountain area do represent a logistic settlement pattern.a ccordingly, it is the first case fore uropean Proto-aurignacian when a complex settle- ment pattern with a base camp and sites-satellites is recognized for a closely located cluster of loci. now recognized Proto-aurignacian site of tibava in eastern Slovakia most probably also belongs to Berehove and muzhievo Proto- aurignacian site complex. keywords: central europe, transcarpathia and eastern Slovakia, Proto-aurignacian, raw material outcrops, site cluster, logistic settlement pattern. INTRODUCTION data from italy (riparo Bombrini site in liguria, north-Western italy – Riel-Salvatore/Negrino 2018) in- Proto-aurignacian industry type, which term dicating a possibility that some Proto-aurignacian was proposed by G. Laplace (e.g. 1966, 217 – 229; artifact bearing tradition humans (Homo sapiens) 1970) and much later re-introduced again by French have been able to survive a harsh climate conditions colleagues (e.g. Bon 2002; Bordes 2002; Teyssandier of the HE-4 and CI eruption for a little while. in- 2007; also known among some other names as Pé- dustrially, Proto-aurignacian is distinct from other rigordian II, aurignacien à lamelles, aurignacian 0, aurignacian industry types by a clear blade and archaic/Primitive aurignacian, early aurignacian bladelet debitage character with either a continuous of krems-Dufour industry type – e.g. Bazile 1983; blade and then bladelet reduction within one and Delporte 1968; Demidenko 2000 – 2001; 2002; Peyrony the same core reduction system (e.g. Bon 2002) or 1933; 1936; Sonneville-Bordes 1955a; 1955b; 1960), is separate blade and blade/bladelet, and bladelet core industrially and chronologically the earliest and reductions (e.g. Demidenko 2012a, 289, 290). initial aurignacian in Western eurasia. geochro- these technological features are connected to nologically, it is the only known now aurigna- the several presence of blade, blade/bladelet cores cian industry type in europe that can be placed and bladelet ‘carinated’ cores with, at the same into the time period preceding heinrich event 4 time, some occurrence of wide-fronted carinated (HE-4) and campanian ignimbrite (CI) eruption, endscraper – cores, a few nosed/shouldered end- ca. 46 000 – 40 000 cal BP, GI-12 – GI-9. Such the scraper – cores and a near-absence of carinated chronology certainly puts Proto-aurignacian into burin-cores, explaining the availability of nume- european initial upper Paleolithic together with rous on-axis and flat and/or slightly incurvate in Bohunician/early emiran, Szeletian, châtelperro- profile Dufour sub-type bladelets/microblades with nian and ulizzian. at the same time, there are some alternate and/or ventral retouch. Proto-aurignacian * the paper was supported by Project VEGA 2/0101/19. 194 Yuri e. DemiDenko – Béla r ácz – Adrián nemergut sites are known throughout mainly southern ter- town. the region politically belonged to hungary ritories in europe – somewhat above 40° n latitude since early 10th c. when hungarian tribes settled to around 46° n latitude, from the iberian Peninsula in the carpathian Basin of central europe. Du- in the west to north-Western caucasus in the east ring hungarian times and later on of the austro- (e.g. Demidenko/Noiret 2012, 343 – 352). Some mollusk hungarian monarchy, transcarpathian region shell ornaments and various but rather simple types was a part of north-eastern hungary, comprising of bone/antler points and awls additionally occur parts of its four committees. geographically, it was in Proto-aurignacian assemblages. there is a basic also a part of upper tisza river region. after the agreement on eastern origin of the european Proto- First World War and the collapse of the austro- aurignacian within levantine ahmarian, although hungarian monarchy, transcarpathia became there is a variety of opinions on the concrete ah- a part of czechoslovakia as ‘Podkarpatská rus’ marian industry type related to the origin subject autonomous land region, in 1920 – 1939. During with one of the present article’s authors preferences the Second World War transcarpathia was again in favor of levantine aurignacian B/ksar akil a part of hungary. Finally, since 1944 the region Phase 4 type (Demidenko 2012b, 396 – 399; Demidenko/ became part of ukraine, Soviet union. Precisely, Hauck 2017). From the chronological point of view, the name ‘transcarpathia’ only originated during new radiocarbon dates for ahmarian at manot first Soviet years in the 1940s due to the geographi- cave (israel; Alex et al. 2017) do strongly support cal position of the region behind the carpathian the ‘industrial origin roots’ of the european Proto- mountains for the position of capital of Soviet aurignacian in the east mediterranean levant and union, moscow. Since 1991 transcarpathia is a part not vice versa way as some colleagues tried to justify of ukraine, the newly independent state after the before using certainly too young dates for ahma- disintegration of the uSSr. rian (e.g. Kadowaki/Omori/Nishiaki 2015). Such the political history and geographical cent- all in all, the european Proto-aurignacian in- ral european position of transcarpathia certainly dustry type is characterized by a real wealth of nu- caused a long-lasting ‘multi-cultural’ character of merous data. at the same time, Proto-aurignacian many life sides in the region, including scientific site settlement pattern variability data are rather investigations that are important for understanding limited, being characterized by about exceptional of Paleolithic research too. presence of living sites with no known definite, regarding brief geomorphological data, tran- for example, various killing – butchery sites and/or scarpathia is located in south-western slopes and workshops supplementing living sites. foothills of the eastern carpathian (ukrainian that is indeed one of the major hiatuses in our carpathian) mountains, occupying north-eastern understanding of Proto-aurignacian sites, their ‘corner’ of the carpathian Basin (Fig. 1). it is actually artifact variability and activities realized by their a transitional zone between the Pannonia/middle human groups there. Danube Plain and the eastern carpathian mountain the present article aims to cover some of the main range. also, geologically, transcarpathia mis sing settlement pattern data. For this purpose is a chain of intermountain basins of a piedmont a set of Proto-aurignacian materials known in deflection and a ridge of various volcanic forma- transcarpathia (ukraine) will be presented to tions. the most notable features in these so-called demonstrate a unique for Proto-aurignacian in volcanic carpathians in transcarpathia were vi- europe a logistic settlement pattern with a base horlat-gutin volcanic range and Berehove volcanic camp supplemented by a series of various loci at Shallow mountain area. the lattert ranscarpathian raw material outcrops. hilly area will be in the center of the present article’s Proto-aurignacian study and discussion. TRANSCARPAHIA: a POLITICAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL SETTING TRANSCARPATHIA AND BEREHOVE i oF THE STUDY REGION PROTO-AURIGNACIAN SITE RESEARCH HISTORY transcarpathian region is the westernmost part of ukraine. this is a very peculiar ukrainian re- First Stone age artifact discoveries in transcar- gion, being the only country’s region located not pathia, at that time in hungary, were realized yet in eastern europe as the rest of ukraine, but in by a local hungarian lawyer and district attorney central europe. also, transcarpathia has one of tivadar lehoczky (1830 – 1915), “the true founder the known geographical centers of the european of Podkarpatska Rus Prehistory” (Skutil 1938, 128). continent, recog nized yet in 1887 near rakhiv lehocz ky’s museum in munkács/mukacheve town Proto -aurignacian unique Site cluSter in euroPe 195 Fig. 1. location of sites. 1 – Berehove; 2 – muzhievo; 3 – tibava. was the largest private archaeological collection in also intriguingly noting the presence of some large- the austro-hungarian monarchy in the beginning sized (ca. 10 cm long and 5 – 8 cm wide) items similar of 20th c. having various archaeological finds from to ‘hand-axe’/pěstní klín tool type (Skutil 1938, 133). at least neolithic up to middle ages. however, any excavations were not realized then however, Paleolithic and particularly upper