The presented final qualifying work of the bachelor M. D. Kupriyanova is devoted to a little–developed topic - the study of the technology of processing solid organic materials at the very beginning of the Upper Paleolithic. As a source base, a collection of artifacts obtained during the excavation of the site of layer IVb Kostenki 14, whose age is currently estimated at 42 thousand BC, is used. The uniqueness of the collection is not only in such a significant age, but also in the fact that this complex is represented by well-preserved remains of the settlement, the collection contains finds of various categories, including art objects.
The relevance of the topic is due to the fact that the layer of the initial Upper Paleolithic in Eastern Europe, that is, the time of the initial settlement of people of modern anatomical appearance in this territory, has been studied relatively recently and at the moment is exactly the topic that attracts the attention of many prehistorians. Thus, Maria Dmitrievna's work is in line with modern research on Paleolithic archaeology. At the same time, it makes a significant contribution to the overall picture, since a detailed study of the technology, function and typology of tusk and horn products was not carried out not only for the collection under consideration, but also for other synchronous industries. The study of this topic is important for solving questions about the genesis of the so-called "behavioral modernity" complex, which includes both systematic and established technology for processing and using products made of solid organic materials.
The purpose of the work – the study of the tusk and horn as a resource in the early period of the Upper Paleolithic – identified a fairly large number of tasks that had to be solved in the process of work. Among the tasks set and successfully solved are: collecting information about the K14/IVb industry, chronology, stratigraphy and paleofaunistic study of the collection; familiarity with the literature on the structure of the tusk and horn to understand their properties that can affect processing techniques and the state of preservation; familiarity with research methods that are used in relation to bone industries; desk processing of a part of the considered collection; description of the entire array of sources, compilation of an inventory and a dictionary; analysis of the entire production sequence with hypothesis testing through experiments and, finally, reconstruction of approaches to handling the tusk and horn as a resource. The solution of these tasks is reflected in the structure of the work and in the album of illustrations.
During the preparation of the WRC, Maria Dmitrievna proved herself as a specialist in products made of solid organic materials, who has qualifications for primary in-house processing and preservation, as well as for the description and analysis of products made of solid organic materials. The results of Maria Dmitrievna's work were reflected in publications and speeches at conferences of young scientists, where they were positively evaluated by the professional community.
The study was carried out at the modern scientific level and is a reliable basis for reconstructive tasks of archaeology, which is reflected in the conclusions summarized in the "Conclusion".
The structure of the work does not differ in logical harmony, there are narrative jumps and returns to topics that have already been discussed (not repetitions, namely returns to some plots), however, all sections should be recognized as important for solving research problems, none of them looks redundant and all the necessary sections are present and disclosed in the to a sufficient degree.
In the work submitted for defense, there are noticeable shortcomings regarding design, editing and layout. For example, the quantitative characteristics of the source base are given in different places of work somewhat differently: "more than 170 specimens of objects from horn and tusk", "56 fragments of separated processes of red deer horn and 90 fragments of bones and mammoth tusks are presented", "35 horn objects [and] a little more than 120 objects from tusk". These contradictions could be smoothed out by an appendix in the form of a complete inventory of materials, but there was no place for it among the tables. It is a shame that the author did not have enough time to present an interesting and high-quality study at a high level.
Despite the mentioned formal shortcomings, the work meets the requirements for the final qualifying work, can be admitted to the defense and deserves high assessment.



Associate professor of the Department of Archeology
Institute of History, St. Petersburg State University
PhD Ksenia Nikolaevna Stepanova