Being reflected by that museum sample of the ancient material culture which is studied by archaeology, such interactions are highly meaningful both in terms of the professional demands of archaeology in its narrow sense (e.g. As a rule, its consequences turn out to be more significant and fruitful than those of the unidirectional effects described as influences.Especially illustrative in this respect, is the Upper Paleolithic microregion of Kostenki, where several cultural complexes, usually termed cultures, coexisted without any interaction.The biological species is a closed unity due to a system of barriers isolating the mechanism of local evolution.It represents a sort of superstructure above the multiethnic structures which may range from single cities to large political unities.It should be kept in mind that cultural integration favours also the formation of new ethnic structures, especially at the regional level.
This is especially evident in the scheme of so-called "formations", an evolutionist doctrine which has acquired deterministic features.An illustration of the complexity of processes resulting in culture formation in various historical periods is provided by the present issue of "Archaeological News".In the Paleolithic, despite the relative abundance of progressive lithic technologies, the process of cultural interaction as a whole was apparently quite rudimentary, and cultural integration seems to have been virtually nonexistent.In doing so they adopted the Greco-Roman prototypes and incorporated them into the local cultural milieu.
The amalgamation of these components resulted in the Celtic civilization.
The tempo and scale of integration are different in periods before and after the emergence of states.