230Th dating of flowstone from Ignatievskaya Cave, Russia: Age constraints of rock art and paleoclimate inferences

Paleolithic antiquity of parietal art in Ignatievskaya cave, Southern Ural, is supported by its subject (Late Pleistocene animals) as well as by paleontological and palynological data, and 14C dates from cultural layers associated with artistic activity (17.8−16.3 cal ka BP; association is establish...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inGeoarchaeology Vol. 36; no. 3; pp. 532 - 545
Main Authors Dublyansky, Yuri, Shirokov, Vladimir, Moseley, Gina E., Kosintsev, Pavel A., Edwards, R. Lawrence, Spötl, Christoph
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Hoboken Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.05.2021
John Wiley and Sons Inc
Subjects
230Th dating
Charcoal
Holocene
Paleoclimate
Paleolithic
Paleolithic cave art
Permafrost
Pleistocene
Ural
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Paleolithic antiquity of parietal art in Ignatievskaya cave, Southern Ural, is supported by its subject (Late Pleistocene animals) as well as by paleontological and palynological data, and 14C dates from cultural layers associated with artistic activity (17.8−16.3 cal ka BP; association is established by finds of ochre in these layers). However, three 14C dates of charcoal motifs yielded younger, Holocene ages (7.4−6.0 cal ka BP). In this study, we constrain the age of parietal art in the cave by 230Th dating of flowstone that brackets the paintings. Flowstone did not form in the cave between c. 78 and 10 ka BP, due to widespread permafrost in northern Eurasia at that time. Our 230Th dates do not support the middle Holocene age of art in Ignatievskaya cave and are consistent with its Upper Paleolithic antiquity instead.
Bibliography:Scientific editing by Zenobia Jacobs.
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:0883-6353
1520-6548
DOI:10.1002/gea.21851