Quartz assemblage from the early mesolithic Helvetinhaudanpuro settlement site in Eastern Central Finland

Bipolar blades

1883

85.5 %

of identified quartz blades

Platform blades

320

14.5 %

of identified quartz blades

Cores

296

4.9 %

of identified techniques in quartz artefacts

Bipolar cores

179

53.3 %

of identified quartz cores

Platform cores

157

46.7 %

of identified quartz cores

Tools, identified

116

1.9 %

of identified techniques in quartz artefacts

Bipolar tools

85

73.3 %

of identified quartz tools

Platform tools

31

26.7 %

of identified quartz tools

Tools, unidentified

63

35.2 %

of quartz tools

The fracture properties of quartz make it prone to fragmentation, posing challenges in attempting to determine the reduction technique. It was possible to determine the reduction technique in 6003 items (25 % of all quartz artefacts) from Helvetinhaudanpuro. Out of these, 4198 (69.9 %) were manufactured using the bipolar technique (Fig. 4: 1-3) and 1805 (30.1 %) using the platform technique (Fig. 4: 4-6).

While studying the quartzes, we discovered some exceptional features in items manufactured using the platform technique. First, among the complete long blades we found some pieces without an eraillure scar. The lack of an eraillure scar is possible, but rare when using the basic platform technique in quartz. These unusually shaped flakes and blades are also relatively straight and quite thin for quartz flakes. These features suggest perhaps the difference in percussion, probably even the use of pressure flaking (Fig. 4: 7-10). The signs of pressure flaking in flint and other rock types include regular shape as well as the almost complete absence of compression waves, eraillure scars and bulbs of percussionS0rensen M., Rankama T., Kankaanpaa J., Knutsson K., Knutsson H., Melvold S., Eriksen B. V., Gbrstad H. The First Eastern Migrations of People and Knowledge into Scandinavia: Evidence from Studies of Mesolithic Technology, 9^th-8^th Millennium BC // Norwegian Archaeological Review. 2013. Vol. 46, iss. 1. P. 19-56.. These traits are usually hard to detect in quartz, and therefore it is particularly complicated to distinguish direct percussion from indirect percussion in this material. It is difficult, however, to explain the manufacturing of the Helvetinhaudapuro blades in any other way.



Fig. 4. Some examples of quartz artefacts in Helvetinhaudanpuro: Bipolar core (1); bipolar flake (2, 3); platform core (4); platform flake (5, 6); pressure flake (7, 8, 10); pressure blade (9) (1 -- KM 35473:107, 2 -- KM 34661:240, 3 -- KM 35473:963, 4 -- KM 35473:893, 5 -- KM 34661:52, 6 -- KM 35473:888, 7 -- KM 34661:193, 8 -- KM 34661:49b, 9 -- KM 35473:440, 10 -- KM 34661:225) (photos by Aivar Kriiska, technical realization Kristel Roog)

Signs of possible pressure flaking were detected only in 41 artefacts (0,02 % from qurtz artefacts), out of which 24 (59 %) were flakes, 5 (12 %) blades and 12 (29 %) cores. As mentioned, identification of pressure flaking in fragmentary quartz material is complicated and somewhat questionable. Therefore, these figures include only complete or almost complete blades and flakes, which were manufactured using platform percussion. Thus, the actual number of tools produced with pressure flaking is probably larger than the numbers presented above.

The blades, flakes and cores, in which we could detect probable pressure flaking, were relatively large compared to the rest of the material. Their length varied between 3.1-17 cm, width -- between 1.1-14,5 cm, and thickness -- between 0.5-10.8 cm. The average length was 8,6 cm, width -- 6.4 cm, and thickness -- 3.2 cm. A large number of cores (10 out of 41) probably explains at least partially the exceptional width and thickness in this material.

Fig. 5. Narrow retuched quartz and flint points from Helvetinhaudanpuro (1-4), Kunda Lammasmagi (Estonia) (5) and Lotova Gora (Russia) (6) (KM 36024:3305, KM 36024:3310, KM 36024:3319, KM 36024:1, AI 4284:384, 1219) (photos by Aivar Kriiska and Jarmo Kankanpaa, technical realization Kristel Roog)

It is very difficult to distinguish whether these flakes were made by percussion technique or by, for instance, conical flaking. For clarity, it must be mentioned that in this study the conical core pressure blade concept is separated from the subsequent Mesolithic blade concept using keeled cores (often called `handle cores')S0rensen M., Rankama T., Kankaanpaa J., Knutsson K., Knutsson H., Melvold S., Eriksen B. V., Gbrstad H. The First Eastern Migrations of People and Knowledge into Scandinavia... P. 19-56..

Another feature detected in the Helvetinhaudanpuro quartz assemblage that also hints to flint technology are the narrow retouched points (Fig. 5: 1-3). There are three of these in total. The points were manufactured from blades or blade fragments, with dimensions ranging between 1.9-3.0 cm in length, maximum width being between 0.5-1.4 cm, and maximum thickness between 0.4-0.7 cm. The shape of the blade was utilized, and one or two edges exhibit extreme retouching on the dorsal surface. The shape and retouch is quite unusual for quartz. However, flint counterparts have been found in Early Mesolithic settlement sites in the Eastern and Northern European forest zone. In fact, among the lithic material from Helvetinhaudanpuro, there is one flint point (measuring 2.8x0.7x0.5 cm) that has been fashioned in the same way as the quartz points (Fig. 5: 4).

Specific groups of artefacts related to the percussion of the quartz is in Helvetinhaudanpuro are 19 anvil stones (see Table 2 and Fig. 6) and three hammerstones. The anvils are relatively soft stones (5 on the Mohs' hardness scale) with indentations of different size on one or several sides. The largest of these stones has dimensions of 32.0 x 21.5 x 12.0 cm. Most probably, anvil stones were used for bipolar percussion of quartz, but one cannot rule out the possibility of using them in some cases in pressure flaking as platforms, around which a construction withstanding heavier pressure was built.

Fig. 6. Anvil stones found from Helvetinhaudanpuro: 1 -- KM 36024:2030; 2 -- KM 36024:2584; 3 -- KM 36024:2029; 4 -- KM 36024:2086; 5 -- KM 36024:2437; 6 -- KM 36024:2583 (photos by Tapani Rostedt and Aivar Kriiska, technical realization Kristel Roog)



Table 2. Anvil stones from the Helvetinhaudanpuro site

No	Number of museum (KM)	Weight (g)	Length (mm)	Width (mm)	Height (mm)	Fragment	Number of indentations	Dimension of indentations (mm)	Smaller use marks
1	34661: 244	2950	197	148	60	x	6	24-45x18-30x2-8	x
2	35473: 521	483,2	120	75	65	x	4	27-9x17x2-5
3	35473: 899	538,8	142	110	25	x	2	23-26x23-26x4	x
4	35473: 1009	1060	142	90	60		2	30-32x24-26x3-5	x
5	35473: 1076	7200	258	178	105		2	40-45x35-40x2	x
6	36024: 586	168	93	60	23	x	0		x
7	36024: 665	3,5	23	22	6	x	1	25x25x2
8	36024: 2029	1390	180	O 00	60		6	26-42x15-33x3-7
9	36024: 2030	3762	210	200	50		11	20-43x20-43x2-8	x
10	36024: 2031	253	87	60	34	x	1	13x9x2	x
11	36024: 2033	1655	180	126	45		2	33-51x22-26x3-5	x
12	36024: 2034	4021	237	126	104		1	47x40x4	x
13	36024: 2035	745	105	98	70		8	28-42x24-28x4-7	x
14	36024: 2086	9300	320	215	120		1	59x47x4	x
15	36024: 2437	638	109	81	56		2	16-25x12-17x2-4	x
16	36024: 2582	842	85	79	71		6	19-42x14-36x3-8	x
17	36024: 2583	1546	146	97	68		8	24-41x24-41x4-8	x
18	36024: 2584	5450	200	145	97		10	18-36x9-30x3-5	x
19	36024: 3253	2600	177	165	53		1	20x20x2



Discussion and conclusion

Human curiosity and creativity, the ability to create `friendly model environments in hostile environments', and first and foremost, the ability to decide whether to be innovative or conservative makes every one of us a unique creature. Nevertheless, it is difficult to imagine a society that can function by itself without having any impact on its surroundings. Shelter, clothing, nourishment and overall life style are largely dependent on the environment. In fact, the challenges of and adaptations to the environment are reflected in one way or another in almost every aspect of human societyNunez M., Okkonen J. Environmental Background for the Rise and Fall of Villages and Megastructures in North Ostrobotnia 4000-2000 cal BC // Dig it all. Papers dedicated to Ari Siiriainen / ed. by M. Huurre, Jyvaskyla, 1999. P. 112; Rankama T. The colonization of northernmost Finnish Lappland and the inland areas of Finnmark // Mesolithic on the Move / eds L. Larsson, H. Kindgren, K. Knutsson, D. Loeffler and A. Akerlund. Oxford, 2003. P. 43-44.. Anyhow, humans do not just passively adapt to their environments, but they also shape them. People from different cultures shaped and took advantage of their environments in a variety of ways. These differences can be seen in both technology and the way in which people experience their surroundings. Relying solely on ecological models of human-environment relationships is always questionable, because archaeologists create these models based on their own cultural experiences, unconsciously or notUleberg E. Cultural Landscapes in Stone Age Research // The Mesolithic of Central Scandinavia / ed by J. Boaz. Oslo. 1999. P. 41; Welinder S. Manniskor och landskap. (Aun, vol. 15). Uppsala, 1992. P. 63..

To create an accurate image of society, it is necessary to study, for instance, how economic and technological changes impact the social structures of societies. In this way, society is seen as a complex entity with constant and daily conflicts in between challenges and needs. Personal challenges, ancestral customs and social norms created by society become the influencers. Thus, society is not viewed as a coherent unit, but rather as a loose alliance where every individual has a function and needs. Through compromise and adaptation, together they create the society and its image to the outside worldTilley C. Conceptual Frameworks for the explanation of Sosio-cultural Change // Pattern of the Past / eds I. Hodder I, G. Isaac, N. Hammond. Cambridge. 1981. P. 368..

The reasons for temporal-geographic shifts and changes within society should be looked for not only in ecological explanations but also in internal sociocultural actors. Both approaches can be studied independently, but for better results, it is beneficial to everyone to compare the interdependence of the two. In this way, it is possible to avoid the overuse of environmental determinism, in which the natural environment is seen as the main factor that shapes culture.

In the Helvetinhaudanpuro material, we detected characteristics connected to adaptation to the local raw material -- quartz -- but the material also contained technical achievements and tool shapes which indicate a deeper socio-cultural background. Technology is a vital research tool when attempting to understand the persistence of occupation and social connections in cases where the raw materials change. In Finland, we are only at the beginning of understanding the earliest occupation, currently concentrating on collecting and describing the empirical evidence, but we should also keep in mind the long-term goal of studying the diversity of the society. The Helvetinhaudanpuro material has strong explanatory potential for studying the beginning of the local habitation.

The area of Finland was first inhabited after the last Ice Age, according to the newest data, approximately soon after 9000 cal BCPesonen P., Hertell E., Simponen L., Mannermaa K., Manninen M. A., Rostedt T., Taipale, N., Tallavaara M. Postglacial pioneer settlement in the Lake Sarvinki area, eastern Finland. Lateglacial and Postglacial Pioneers in Northern Europe // British Archaeological Reports, International Series. Vol. 2599. Oxford, 2014. P. 174-190; Kriiska A., Rostedt T., Jussila T. The Development of Early Mesolithic Social Networks During the Settlement of Virgin Lands in the Eastern Baltic Sea Region-Interpreted through Comparison of Two Sites in Finland // Comparative Perspectives on Past Colonisation, Maritime Interaction and Cultural Integration (New Directions in Anthropological Archaeology). South Yorkshire, 2016. P. 34.. The peopling of Finland was part of the rapid colonisation of the Eastern and Northern European forest zone, extending from the Baltic Sea all the way to the Urals. In the early phases of colonisation, close contact with the homeland continued, and through wide social networks, raw materials, particularly flint, were also exchanged. For instance, flint makes up almost half of the lithics at the Saarenoja 2 settlement site in Southern Finland, the only Early Mesolithic site in this micro region with a relatively short occupation period (c. 8700 cal BC) that has been extensively excavated to dateKriiska A., Rostedt T., Jussila T. The Development of Early Mesolithic Social Networks During the Settlement of Virgin Lands in the Eastern Baltic Sea Region- Interpreted through Comparison of Two Sites in Finland // Comparative Perspectives on Past Colonisation, Maritime Interaction and Cultural Integration. (New Directions in Anthropological Archaeology). South Yorkshire, 2016. P. 25..

Flint does not occur naturally in Finland and therefore quartz usually became the substitute for it in southernmost Finland. The shift in raw materials took place within a few hundred years and appears to have coincided with the change in social networks related to the break in connections with the homelandIbid. P. 34.. Helvetinhaudanpuro belongs to the second phase of early colonisation of Finland, for which one of the characteristics is the use of local materials. Foreign raw materials, in particular flint, make up a marginal amount of the material excavated (0.07 % of the total lithic assemblage). There is no reason to doubt that the first settlers of Helvetinhaudanpuro had already been using quartz before arriving at the site. Some of the signs indicating that people were already familiar with quartz are the overall mastery of quartz reduction and several carefully crafted quartz objects that would not have been of such high quality if the population was just experimenting with quartz knappingKnutsson H., Knutsson K., Molin F., Zetterlund P From flint to quartz: Organisation of lithic technology in relation to raw material availability during the pioneer process of Scandinavia // Quaternary International. 2016. Vol. 424. P. 32-57..

The quartz techniques seen in Helvetinhaudanpuro are very similar to those from other Finnish Mesolithic sites -- bipolar technique dominates, but platform percussion was also used to some extentJussila T., Kriiska A., Rostedt T. The mesolithic Settlement in NE Savo, Finland and the earliest Settlement in the Eastern Baltic Sea // Acta Archaeologica. 2007. Vol. 78, iss. 2. P. 143-162; and the literature mentioned there.. However, some items are unusual, even special, and more comparable to flint than quartz material.

In both materials, tools are dominated by scrapers, but what connects the two technologically and morphologically events are the Helvetinhaudanpuro points. To our knowledge, no quartz counterparts have been found to date in other parts of Finland. Similar points from flint have been found in Saarenoja 2 (see Fig. 5: 5) and Lahti Ris- tola in Finland, in Kunda Lammasmagi (see Fig. 5: 5) and Pulli in Estonia, as well as in Veschevo 2 on the Karelian Isthmus and Lotova Gora (information from Tuija Rankama and Jarmo Kankaanpaa) (see Fig. 5: 6) on the Vologda region in Russia.Jussila T., Kriiska A., Rostedt T. Saarenoja 2 -- An Early Mesolithic Site in South-Eastern Finland: Preliminary Results and Interpretations of Studies Conducted in 2000 and 2008-10 // Fennoscandia archaeological. 2012. Vol. XXIX. P. 3-27; Takala H. The Ristola Site in Lahti and the Earliest Postglacial Settlement of South Finland. Jyvaskyla, 2003.

The second characteristic of the Helvetinhaudanpuro assemblage is the possible use of pressure flaking in quartz knapping. The abnormally straight blades and flakes lacking eraillure scars as well as some cores are an indicator of pressure flaking, but proving this hypothesis requires further research and experimental knapping. If indeed we have evidence of pressure flaking, then this assemblage is unique with no precedents in Finland or the Eastern Baltic.

Pressure flaking is generally associated with other lithics than quartz. Pressure flaking was used with the intention of producing an abundance of tools or blanksS0rensen M. Teknologiske traditioner I Maglemosekulturen. En diakron analyse av Maglemose- kulturens flskkeindustri // Stenalderstudier. Tidlig Mesolitiske jsgere og samlere i Sydskandinavien / ed. by E. B. V. Arhus. Jutland Archaeological Society. 2006. P. 19-77; S0rensen M. The Arrival and Development of Pressure Blade Technology in Southern Scandinavia // The Emergence of Pressure Blade Making. From Origin to Modern Experimentation / ed. by P. M. Desrosiers. New York, 2012. P. 237-260; Sulgostowska Z. The Earliest Mesolithic Settlement in North-Eastern Poland // The Earliest Settlement in Scandinavia. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia. Series in 8, no. 24. Stockholm, 1996. P. 297-305; Sulgostowska Z. Final Palaeolithic

Masovian Cycle and Mesolithic Kunda Culture Relations // Tanged points cultures in Europe. Read at the international Archaeological Symposium, Lublin, September 13-16, 1993. Lublin, 1999. P. 85-93.. Pressure flaking is not commonly seen in the early colonisation wave in Finland, but there is evidence of its use in the lithic material from the Early Mesolithic Sujala in UtsjokiRankama T, Kankaanpаа J. Eastern arrivals in post-glacial Lappland: The Sujala site 10 000 cal BP // Antiquity. 2008. Vol. 82. P. 884-900., Jokivarsi 1 in Eno and Saarenoja 2 in LappeenrantaJussila T., Kriiska A., Rostedt T. Saarenoja 2 -- An Early Mesolithic Site in South-Eastern Finland: Preliminary Results and Interpretations of Studies Conducted in 2000 and 2008-10 // Fennoscandia archaeological. 2012. Vol. XXIX. P. 15. settlement sites. The raw material used in Sujala was metamorphic sand stone, whereas flint was the raw material used at the Jokivarsi in Eno, Ristola in Lahti and Saarenoja 2 in Lappeenranta settlement sites.

Pressure flaking in itself is an unusual lithic reduction method. Experimental archaeological studies have shown that adopting the technique does not take very long. In fact, the technique is learned faster than freehand percussion. Once the tools and constructions required had been manufactured, detaching blades from the core by applying pressure was actually a relatively simple processPelegrin J. Prehistoric lithic technology: some aspects of research // Archaeological Review from Cambridge. 1990. Vol. 9, iss. 1. P. 116-125; S0rensen M. The Arrival and Development of Pressure Blade Technology in Southern Scandinavia // The Emergence of Pressure Blade Making. From Origin to Modern Experimentation / ed. by P. M. Desrosiers. New York. 2012. P. 250; S0rensen M. et al. The First Eastern Migrations of People and Knowledge into Scandinavia: Evidence from Studies of Mesolithic Technology, 9^th-8^th Millennium BC // Norwegian Archaeological Review. 2013. Vol. 46, iss. 1. P. 23..

The dating of pressure flaking varies in Eurasia. The technique is considered to have originated in Paleolithic Mongolia more than 20,000 years agoInizan M.-L. Pressure dйbitage in the old world: forerunners, researchers, geopolitics -- handing on the Baton // The Emergence of Pressure Blade Making. From Origin to Modern Experimentation. New York, 2012. P. 11-43; Darmark K. Surface Pressure Flaking in Eurasia: Mapping the Innovation, Diffusion and Evolution of a Technological Element in the Production of Projectile Points // The Emergence of Pressure Blade Making. From Origin to Modern Experimentation. New York, 2012. P. 261-284.. The oldest dates from Europe derive from the Eastern European Forest zone from where the technique seems to have spread to the westS0rensen M., Rankama T., Kankaanpаа J., Knutsson K., Knutsson H., Melvold S., Eriksen B. V., Gl0rstad H. The First Eastern Migrations of People and Knowledge into Scandinavia: Evidence from Studies of Mesolithic Technology, 9th-8th Millennium BC // Norwegian Archaeological Review. 2013. Vol. 46, iss. 1. P. 19-56.. The earliest evidence near Finland dates to the Early Mesolithic, c. 9000 cal BC or slightly later. It coincides with the earliest Mesolithic colonisation of the Eastern and Northern European Forest zone (the Pulli period, c. 9000-8500 cal BC) and with the subsequent period when local cultures (e. g. Butovo, Kunda, Veretye) had already been developed. Pressure flaking was in use during the Mesolithic in both Russia and the Eastern BalticOshibkina S. V. Tanged point industries in the northwest Russia. // Tanged points cultures in Europe. Read at the international Archaeological Symposium, Lublin, September 13-16, 1993. Lublin, 1999. P. 325-336; Koltsov L. V., Zhilin M. G. Tanged point cultures in the upper Volga basin. Tanged points cultures in Europe Lublin, 1999. P. 346-360; Zhilin M. G. Early Mesolithic communication networks in the East European forest zone // Mesolithic on the Move. Oxford, 2003. P. 688-693; Zhilin M. G. The terminal Paleolithic -- Early Mesolithic of the Upper Volga and colonization of the north-west of eastern Europe // Pioneer settlement and colonization Processes in the Barents Region. Vuollerim papers on Hunter-Gatherer Archaeology. Vol. 1. Vuollerim, 2005. P. 163-179; Kriiska A., Lфhmus M. Archaeological fieldwork on Kivisaare Stone Age burial ground and settlement site // Archaeological fieldwork in Estonia 2004. Tallinn, 2005. P. 31-43..

Pressure flaking is one of many techniques and formal similarities that connected these areas in the Early Mesolithic. The similarities in lithic technology also include the conical core pressure blade concept, flint arrowheads with a tang and retouch on the ventral side of edge, flint edge burins on blades, flint chisels etc.Ostrauskas T. Mesolithic Kunda Culture. A glimpse from Lithuania // De temporibus antiquissi- mis ad honorem Lembit Jaanits (Muinasaja teadus, vol. 8). Tallinn, 2000. P. 67-180; Jussila T., Kriiska A., Rostedt T. Saarenoja 2 -- An Early Mesolithic Site in South-Eastern Finland: Preliminary Results and Interpretations of Studies Conducted in 2000 and 2008-10 // Fennoscandia archaeological. 2012. Vol. XXIX. P. 3-27; S0rensen M. et al. The First Eastern Migrations of People and Knowledge into Scandinavia: Evidence from Studies of Mesolithic Technology, 9th-8th Millennium BC // Norwegian Archaeological Review. 2013. Vol. 46, iss. 1. P. 19-56.

The same wide distribution area is seen in bone tools and technology, particularly with regard to arrowheadsIbid. P. 19-56; Zhilin M. Early Mesolithic bone arrowheads from the Volga-Oka interfluve, Central Russia // Fennoscandia archaeological. 2015. Vol. XXXII. P. 35-54.. The acidic nature of the soil in Finland causes rapid deterioration of organic materials and therefore only burned bones usually survive. Because of this problem, only two tools have been found that can be securely assigned to the Early Mesolithic based on typology: a tip fragment of an arrowhead with a biconical head and several fragments of slotted point from Lappeenranta Muilamaki. Flint inserts associated with slotted points have been found in many locations: Saarenoja 2 (ca. 10 % of all flint tools from the site), Muilamaki, Helvetinhaudanpuro, Lahti Ristola and Eno Jokivarsi 1 settlement sitesKriiska A., Rostedt T., Jussila T. The Development of Early Mesolithic Social Networks During the Settlement of Virgin Lands in the Eastern Baltic Sea Region- Interpreted through Comparison of Two Sites in Finland // Comparative Perspectives on Past Colonisation, Maritime Interaction and Cultural Integration (New Directions in Anthropological Archaeology) / eds L. Melheim, H. Glorstad, Z. Glorstad. South Yorkshire, 2016. P. 27.. There is at least one quartz insert from Helvetinhaudanpuro (NM 36024:3316, bipolar flake measuring 2.7 x 0.5 x 0.2 cm).

To sum up, the quartz assemblage from the Helvetinhaudanpuro settlement site, dating approximately to 8500 cal BC, is a unique link between flint and quartz knapping technology. The material is diverse and representative, and due to the short occupation sequence this site is an exceptional location for studying the early period of change in raw materials in Finland.

The majority of the quartz artefacts from the site are analogous to the `normal' and previously described quartz material from Finnish Mesolithic sites younger than Helvetinhaudanpuro. Nevertheless, the assemblage contains retouched points and insert from quartz that seem to connect the material more to flint than quartz and through this to older settlements in Finland and wider areas in Eastern and Northern Europe. It appears that pressure techniques usually associated with flint knapping were adopted for use in quartz knapping at the Helvetinhaudapuro site, at least for a while. This is a very unusual feature in quartz reduction, and in fact, the first possible evidence from Finland, Russian Karelia and Estonia for this technological 'memory' from the initial colonisation period in the Early Mesolithic.



References

1. Ailio J. Die Steinzeitliche Wohnplatzfunde in Finland I-II. Helsingfors, Kommission bei der Akademischen Buchhandlung, 1909, 394 p.

2. Andrefsky W Jr. Raw-material availability and the organization of technology. American Antiquity, 1994, vol. 59, iss. 1, pp. 21-34.

3. Andrefsky W Jr. Lithics. Macroscopic approaches to analysis (Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology). Cambridge, 1998, 326 p.

4. Bamforth D. B. Technological efficiency and tool curation. American Antiquity, 1986, vol. 51, iss. 1, pp. 3850.

5. Bleed P. The Optimal Design of Hunting Weapons: Maintainability or Reliability. American Antiquit, 1986, vol. 51, iss. 4, pp. 737-747.

6. Brantingham P. J., Olsen J. W, Rech J. A. and Krivoshapkin A. I. Raw Material Quality and Prepared Core Technologies in Northeast Asia. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2000, vol. 27, pp. 255-271.

7. Callahan E. An evaluation of the lithic technology in middle Sweden during the Mesolithic and Neolithic (Aun, vol. 8). Uppsala, Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis, 1987, 72 p.

8. Callahan E., Forsberg L., Knutsson K., Lindgren C. Frakturbilder. Kulturhistoriska kommentarer till det sдregna sцnderfallet vid bearbetning av kvarts. Tor, 1992, vol. 24, pp. 27-63.

9. Crabtree D. E. An introduction to the technology of stone tools (Occasional papers of the museum, number 28). Pocatello, Idaho, Idaho State University, 1972. 98 p.

10. Darmark K. Surface Pressure Flaking in Eurasia: Mapping the Innovation, Diffusion and Evolution of a Technological Element in the Production of Projectile Points. The Emergence of Pressure Blade Making. From Origin to Modern Experimentation. Ed. by P. M. Desrosiers. New York, 2012, pp. 261-284.

11. Eskola P. Kidetieteen, mineralogian jageologian alkeet. Porvoo, Werner Sцderstrцm Osakeyhtiц, 1957. 337 p.

12. Europaeus A. Ojalankankaan kivikauden lцytцpaikka Alavudella. Suomen Museo 1916. Helsinki, 1919, pp. 73-82.

13. Gero J. M. Assessing social information in material objects: how well do lithics measure up? Time, energy and stone tools. Ed. by R. Torrence. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989, pp. 92-105.

14. Hayden B. Practical and Prestige Technologies: The Evolution of Material Systems. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 1998, vol. 5, iss. 1, pp. 1-55.

15. Hertell E., Manninen M. A. Rдvasens kvartsmaterial. Finskt Museum 2002. Helsinki, 2005, pp. 84-100.

16. Hertell E., Tallavaara M. High Mobility or Gift Exchange: early Mesolithic chipped lithics in Southern Finland. Mesolithic interfaces: Variability in lithic technologies in eastern Fennoscandia. Ed. by T. Rankama. Saarijдrvi, The Archaeological Society of Finland, 2011, pp. 11-41.

17. Inizan M.-L. Pressure dйbitage in the old world: forerunners, researchers, geopolitics -- handing on the Baton. The Emergence of Pressure Blade Making. From Origin to Modern Experimentation. Ed. by P. M. Desrosiers. New York, 2012, pp. 11-43.

18. Jussila T. Saimaan kalliomaalausten ajoitus rannansiirtymiskronologian perusteella. Saimaan ja Pдijдnteen alueen kalliomaalausten sijainti ja syntyaika. (Kalliomaalausraportteja 1). Ed. by P. Kivikдs, T. Jussila, R. Kupiainen. Jyvдskylд, Kivikдs -- muinaistaidekeskus, 1999, pp. 113-133.

19. Jussila T., Kriiska A., Rostedt T. Varhaismesoliittisesta asutuksesta Koillis-Savossa -- alustavia tuloksia Juan- kosken Akonpohjan Helvetinhaudanpuron asuinpaikan kiviaineistosta. Arkeologia ja kulttuuri. Uutta kivikauden tutkimuksessa. Arkeologipдivдt 2005. Ed. by T. Mцkkцnen & P. Pesonen. Hamina, Suomen Arkeologinen Seura, 2006, pp. 50-61.

20. Jussila T., Kriiska A., Rostedt T. The mesolithic Settlement in NE Savo, Finland and the earliest Settlement in the Eastern Baltic Sea. Acta Archaeologica 2007, vol. 78, iss. 2, pp. 143-162.

21. Jussila T., Kriiska A., Rostedt T. Saarenoja 2 -- An Early Mesolithic Site in South-Eastern Finland: Preliminary Results and Interpretations of Studies Conducted in 2000 and 2008-10. Fennoscandia archaeologica, 2012, vol. XXIX, pp. 3-27.

22. Kankaanpдд J. & Rankama T. Early Mesolithic Pioneers in Northern Finnish Lappland. Pioneer Settlements and Colonization Processes in the Barents Region. (Vuollerim Papers on Hunter-Gatherer Archaeology 1). Ed. by H. Knutsson. Vuollerim, Vuollerim 6000 Вr, 2005, pp. 109-161.

23. Kankaanpдд J., Rankama T. Spatial Patterns of the Early Mesolithic Sujala Site, Utsjoki, Finnish Lappland. Mesolithic interfaces: Variability in lithic technologies in eastern Fennoscandia. Ed. by T. Rankama. Saarijдrvi, The Archaeological Society of Finland, 2011, pp. 42-63.

24. Kelly R. L. The three sides of a biface. American Antiquity, 1988, vol. 53, pp. 717-734.

25. Koltsov L. V., Zhilin M. G. Tanged point cultures in the upper Volga basin. Tanged points cultures in Europe. Eds S. K. Kozlowski, J. Gurba, L. L. Zalisnyak. Lublin, Maria Curie-Sklodowska, 1999, pp. 346-360.

26. Knutsson K. Making and using stone tools. The analysis of the lithic assemblages from the Middle Neolithic sites with flint in Vдsterbotten, northern Sweden. (Aun, vol. 11). Uppsala, Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis, 1988, 206 p.

27. Knutsson K. Garaselet-Lappviken-Rastklippan. Introduktion till en diskurssion om Norrlands Дldsta Be- byggelse. Tor, 1993, vol. 25, pp. 5-51.

28. Knutsson H., Knutsson K., Molin F., Zetterlund P. From flint to quartz: Organisation of lithic technology in relation to raw material availability during the pioneer process of Scandinavia. Quaternary International, 2016, vol. 424, pp. 32-57.

29. Kriiska A., Lцhmus M. Archaeological fieldwork on Kivisaare Stone Age burial ground and settlement site. Archaeological fieldwork in Estonia 2004. Tallinn, Muinsuskaitseamet, 2005, pp. 31-43.

30. Kriiska A., Rostedt T., Jussila T. The Development of Early Mesolithic Social Networks During the Settlement of Virgin Lands in the Eastern Baltic Sea Region- Interpreted through Comparison of Two Sites in Finland. Comparative Perspectives on Past Colonisation, Maritime Interaction and Cultural Integration. (New Directions in Anthropological Archaeology). Eds L. Melheim, H. Glorstad, Z. Glorstad. South Yorkshire, Equinox publishing, 2016, pp. 19-40.

31. Kuhn S. L. Mousterian lithic technology. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1995, 209 p.

32. Luho V Die Askola-Kultur. Die frьhmesolitische Steinzeit in Finnland. Suomen Muinaismuistoyhdistyksen Aikakauskirja. Vol. 57. Helsinki, Suomen Muinaismuistoyhdistys, 1956, 167 p.

33. Luho V Die Suomusjдrvi-Kultur. Die mittel- und spдtmesolitische zeit in Finnland. Suomen Muinaismuistoyhdistyksen Aikakauskirja. Vol. 66). Helsinki, Suomen Muinaismuistoyhdistys, 1967, 124 p.

34. Manninen M. A., Tallavaara M., Hertell E. Subneolithic bifaces and flint assemblages in Finland. Outlining the history of research and future questions. Uniting Sea. Stone Age societies in the Baltic Sea region. (Papers in Archaeology, vol. 33). Eds C. Samuelsson, N. Ytterberg Occasional. Uppsala, Uppsala Uni- versitet, 2003, pp. 161-179.

35. Manninen M. A. Culture, Behavior and the 8200 cal BP Cold Event. Organisational Change and Culture-environmental Dynamics in Late Mesolithic Northern Fennoscandia. (Monographs of the Archaeological Society of Finland, vol. 4.) Helsinki, Archaeological society of Finland, 2014, 87 p.

36. Manninen M. A., Knuttson K. Lithic raw material diversification as an adaptive strategy -- Technology, mobility and site structure in Late Mesolithic northernmosts Europe. Journal of Athropological Archaeology, 2014, vol. 33, pp. 84-98.

37. Matiskainen H. Beitrдge zur Kentnisse der mesolitischen Schrдgschneidepfeile und Mikrolithen aus Quarz. Studia praehistorica Fennica C F Meinander septuagenario dedicata. ISKOS, vol. 6. Ed. by T. Edgren. Helsinki, Suomen muinaismuistoyhdistys, 1986, pp. 77-98.

38. Matiskainen H. The Palaeoenvironment of Askola, Southern Finland. Mesolithic Settlement and Subsistence 10000-6000 b.p. (ISKOS, vol. 8). Helsinki, Suomen muinaismuistoyhdistys, 1989, 97 p.

39. Nelson M. C. The Study of Technological Organization. Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 3, iss. 1. Ed. by M. B. Schiffer. Arizona, University of Arizona Press, 1991, pp. 57-100.

40. Nunez M., Okkonen J. Environmental Background for the Rise and Fall of Villages and Megastructures in North Ostrobotnia 4000-2000 cal BC. Dig it all. Papers dedicated to Ari Siiriдinen. Ed. by M. Huurre. Jyvдskylд, Finnish Antiquarian Society and Archaeological Society of Finland, 1999, pp. 105-115.

41. Olofsson A. Early Colonization of Northern Norrland: Technology, Chronology, and Culture. Pioneer Settlement in the Mesolithic of Northern Sweden. (Archaeology and Environment 16). Umea, Umea University Department of Archaeology and Sami Studies, 2003, 159 p.

42. Oshibkina S. V. Tanged point industries in the northwest Russia. Tanged points cultures in Europe. Read at the international Archaeological Symposium, Lublin, September 13-16, 1993. Eds S. Kozlowski, J. Gurba, L. I. Zalisnyak. Lublin, Maria-Curie Sklodowska University Press, 1999, pp. 325-336.

43. Ostrauskas T. Mesolithic Kunda Culture. A glimpse from Lithuania. De temporibus antiquissimis ad honorem Lembit Jaanits. Vol. 8: Muinasaja teadus. Eds V Lang, A. Kriiska. Tallinn, Ajaloo Instituut, 2000, pp. 67-180.

44. Pankrusev G. A. Karjalan mesoliittinen ja neoliittinen kausi. Vol. 1. Helsinki, Mesoliittinen kausi,1994, 122 p.

45. Parry W J., Kelly R. L. Expedient Core Technology and Sedentism. The Organization of Core Technology. Eds J. K. Johnson, C. A. Morrow. Boulder, Westview Press, 1987, pp. 285-304.

46. Pelegrin J. Prehistoric lithic technology: some aspects of research. Archaeological Review from Cambridge, 1990, vol. 9, issue. 1, pp. 116-125.

47. Pelegrin J. Blade-Making Techniques from the Old World: Insights and Applications to Mesoamerican Obsidian Lithic Technology. Mesoamerican Lithic Technology: Experimentation and interpretation. Ed. by K. Hirth. Salt Lake City, University of Utah Press, 2003, pp. 55-71.

48. Pesonen P, Tallavaara M. Esihistoriallinen leiripaikka Lohjan Hossanmдellд- kvartseja ja yllдttдviд ajoituksia. Suomen Museo 2005. Helsinki, 2006, pp. 5-26.

49. Pesonen P., Hertell E., Simponen L., Mannermaa K., Manninen M. A., Rostedt T., Taipale, N., Tallavaara M. Postglacial pioneer settlement in the Lake Sarvinki area, eastern Finland. Lateglacial and Postglacial Pioneers in Northern Europe. (British Archaeological Reports, International Series, vol. 2599). Eds F. Riede, M. Tallavaara. Oxford, Archaeopress, 2014, pp. 174-190.

50. Pдlsi S. Palomдen kivikautinen asuinpaikka Urjalassa. Suomen Museo 1913. Helsinki, 1913, pp. 63-79.

51. Rajala U. Kvartsiteknologian tutkiminen ja luokittelu Turun Niuskalan Kotirinteen kiukaiskeraamisen asuin- paikan vuosien 1983 ja 1984 kvartsilцydцt. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Turku. Turku, 1995, 129 p.

52. Rankama T. Ala-Jalve. Spatial, technological, and behavioral analyses of the lithic assemblage from a Stone Age Early Metal Age site in Utsjoki, Finnish Lapland. British Archaeological Reports International Series. Vol. 681. Oxford, Archaeopress, 1997, 146 p.

53. Rankama T. Analyses of the Quartz Assemblages of Houses 34 and 35 at Kauvonkangas in Tervola. Huts and Houses. Stone Age and Early Metal Age Buildings in Finland. Ed. by H. Ranta. Helsinki, National Board of Antiquities, 2002, pp. 79-108.

54. Rankama T. The colonization of northernmost Finnish Lappland and the inland areas of Finnmark. Mesolithic on the Move. Papers presented at the Sixth International Conference on the Mesolithic in Europe, Stockholm 2000. Eds L. Larsson, H. Kindgren, K. Knutsson, D. Loeffler, A. Akerlund. Oxford, Oxbow Books, 2003, pp. 414-430.

55. Rankama T., Kankaanpдд J. Eastern arrivals in post-glacial Lappland: The Sujala site 10 000 cal BP Antiquity, 2008, vol. 82, pp. 884-900.

56. Rankama T., Kankaanpдд J. Fast or slow pioneers? A view from Northern Lappland. Lateglacial and Postglacial Pioneers in Northern Europe. British Archaeological Reports, International Series. Vol. 2599. Eds F. Riede, M. Tallavaara. Oxford, Archaeopress, 2014, pp.147-160.

57. Rдihдlд O. Suomussalmen Salonsaari kivikautinen leiripaikka Kiantajдrven rannalla. Kirjoitelmia arkeolo- gian alalta. Kentдltд poimittua 4. Museoviraston arkeologian osaston julkaisuja, vol. 7. Helsinki, Mu- seovirasto, 1997, pp. 5-23.

58. Reimer P J., Bard E., Bayliss A., Beck J. W, Blackwell P G., Bronk Ramsey C., Grootes P M., Guilderson T. P, Haflidason H., Hajdas I., Hatte C., Heaton T. J., Hoffmann D. L., Hogg A. G., Hughen K. A., Kaiser K. F., Kromer B., Manning S. W, Niu M., Reimer R. W, Richards D. A., Scott E. M., Southon J. R., Staff R. A., Turney C. S. M., van der Plicht J. IntCal13 and Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0-50,000 years cal BP Radiocarbon, 2013, vol. 55, issue. 4, pp. 1111-1150.

59. Saarnisto M. The late Weichselian and Flandrian History of the Saimaa Lake Complex. Commentationes physico-mathematicae, 1970, vol. 37, pp. 3-7.

60. Schulz H.-P On the Mesolithic Quarz Industry in Finland. Fenno-Ugri et Slavi. Papers presented by the participants in the Finnish-Soviet Archaeological Symposium `Studies in the Material Culture of the Peoples of eastern and Northern Europe' 10-16 May 1988 in the National Museum of Finland. (Iskos, vol. 9). Ed. by T. Edgren. Helsinki, The Finnish Antiquarian Society, 1988, pp. 7-23.

61. Schulz H.-P. Pioneerit pohjoisessa. Suomen varhaismesoliittinen asutus arkeologisen aineiston valossa. Suomen Museo 1996. Helsinki, 1996. 5-45.

62. Siiriдinen A. Yli-Iin Kierikin Asbestikeraamisen asuinpaikan kvartsiesineet. Lдhdekriittinen tutkimus. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, 1968, 123 p.

63. Siiriдinen A. Quartz, Chert and Obsidian. A Comparison of Raw Materials in a Late Stone Age Aggregate in Kenya. Finskt Museum 1974. Helsinki, 1977, pp. 15-29.

64. Siiriдinen A. Problems of the East Fennoscandian Mesolithic. Finskt Museum 1977, Helsinki, 1981, pp. 5-31.

65. Sulgostowska Z. The Earliest Mesolithic Settlement in North-Eastern Poland. The Earliest Settlement in Scandinavia. (Acta Archaeologica Lundensia Series in 8, No 24). Ed. By L. Larsson. Stockholm, Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1996, pp. 297-305.

66. Sulgostowska Z. Final Palaeolithic Masovian Cycle and Mesolithic Kunda Culture Relations. Tanged points cultures in Europe. Read at the international Archaeological Symposium, Lublin, September 13-16, 1993. Eds S. Kozlowski, J. Gurba, L. I. Zalisnyak. Lublin, Maria-Curie Sklodowska University Press, 1999, pp. 85-93.

67. Sorensen M. Teknologiske traditioner I Maglemosekulturen. En diakron analyse av Maglemosekultu- rens flskkeindustri. Stenalderstudier. Tidlig Mesolitiske jxgere og samlere i Sydskandinavien. Ed. by E. B. V Arhus. Jutland Archaeological Society, 2006, 19-77.

68. Sorensen M. The Arrival and Development of Pressure Blade Technology in Southern Scandinavia. The Emergence of Pressure Blade Making. From Origin to Modern Experimentation. Ed. by P M. Desrosiers. New York, 2012, pp. 237-260.

69. Sorensen M., Rankama T., Kankaanpaa J., Knutsson K., Knutsson H., Melvold S., Eriksen B. V., Glorstad H. The First Eastern Migrations of People and Knowledge into Scandinavia: Evidence from Studies of Mesolithic Technology, 9th-8th Millennium BC. Norwegian Archaeological Review, 2013, vol. 46, iss. 1, pp. 19-56.

70. Takala H. The Ristola Site in Lahti and the Earliest Postglacial Settlement of South Finland. Jyvaskyla, Lahti City Museum, 2003, 205 p.

71. Tallavaara M., Manninen M. A., Hertell E. & Rankama T. How flakes shatter. A critical evaluation of Quartz fracture analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2010, vol. 37, 2442-2448.

72. Tilley C. Conceptual Frameworks for the explanation of Sosio-cultural Change. Pattern of the Past. Eds I. Hodder I, G. Isaac, N. Hammond. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1981, pp. 363-386. Trigger B. G. A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989, 500 p. Uleberg E. Cultural Landscapes in Stone Age Research. The Mesolithic of Central Scandinavia. (Universi- tetets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter Ny Rekke nr. 22). Ed by J. Boaz. Oslo, Universitetets Oldsaksamling, 1999 pp. 39-45.

73. Welinder S. Manniskor och landskap. (Aun, vol. 15). Uppsala, Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis, 1992. 141 p.

74. Whittaker J. C. Flintknapping. Making and understanding stone tools. Austin, University of Texas Press,1994, 352 p.

75. Zhilin M. G. Early Mesolithic communication networks in the East European forest zone. Mesolithic on the Move. Papers presented at the Sixth International Conference on the Mesolithic in Europe, Stockholm 2000 Eds L. Larsson, H. Kindgren, K. Knutsson, D. Loeffler, A. Akerlund. Oxford, Oxbow Books, 2003, pp. 688-693.

76. Zhilin M. G. The terminal Paleolithic -- Early Mesolithic of the Upper Volga and colonization of the northwest of eastern Europe. Pioneer settlement and colonization Processes in the Barents Region. (Vuollerim papers on Hunter-Gatherer Archaeology, vol. 1). Ed. by H. Knutsson. Vuollerim 6000 Ar: Vuollerim, 2005, pp. 163-179.

77. Zhilin M. Early Mesolithic bone arrowheads from the Volga-Oka interfluve, Central Russia. Fennoscandia archaeologica, 2015, vol. XXXII, pp. 35-54.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...