Are these studies relevant? Can they contribute anything to our contemporary industrial society? What types of people would see our academic and conservation efforts to be of value?
Alan,
I'll start this off. The studies are relevant because they give us more data on our species and the journey we underwent to get to where we are currently, and hints at where we could be in the future. Just like we have discovered cyclic migration from rural to urban and from urban back to rural, again and again. Studying the causes gives insight into future.
What types of people? I think there is a basic human need to know where we come from. Look at the popularity of genealogy. People want to identify with their roots. I think they also like to compare what people of yesterday had with want they, themselves, have today. To wonder, if you will, at what it would have been like to live a "primitive" existence. Face it, many people of our generation hearken back to their youth, or the youth described by their parents or grandparents. The bygone era: a time with less worry, more family, and less hustle and bustle.
Archaeology, or rock art, when presented correctly, can be that avenue to another time.
James,
Wonderful answer. Yes a search for roots and meaning, yes? Interesting you mention genealogy. Also a diversion into primitive skills technology. Insights into the past and insights into the future...
Dear Alan
I find rock art enthralling since I read Christopher Tilley's The Materiality of Stone. From there I headed for Richard Bradley's Rock Art and the Prehistory of Atlantic Europe, and to some of his other books, like The significance of Monuments, Ritual and Domestic Life in Prehistoric Europe, and Image and Audience. Rethinking Prehistoric Art, which I have used in my course on the History of Architecture; plus Nash and Chippindale, eds., European Landscapes of Rock Art. This last I particularly find useful for your question because includes an essay on stone in today's urban landscape, thus touching upon a sort of archaeology of the present. Reminds me of another book on the archaeology of the "contemporary past": Victor Buchli and Gavin Lucas, Archaeologies of the Contemporary Past. All these books deal with an essential concept: "material culture", of which stone is one of the most persistent item because of what it is: hard and durable. The sheer amount of bibliography on the question of stone / rock art proves the importance of this subject for us today.
My best, Lilliana
In the renaissance before cave painting were discovered, before science and archeology existed,Leon Batista Alberti (1404-1472), De Statua speculated how painting could have originated:
"I believe that the arts which aim at imitating the creations of nature originated
in the following way: in a tree trunk, a lump of earth, or in some other
thing were accidentally discovered one day certain contours that needed only a
very slight change to look strikingly like some natural object. Noticing this, people
tried to see if it were not possible by addition or subtraction to complete
what still was lacking for a perfect likeness. Thus by adjusting and removing
outlines and planes in the way demanded by the object itself, men achieved what
they wanted, and not without pleasure. From that day, man's capacity to create
images grew apace until he was able to create any likeness, even when there was
no vague outline in the material to aid him.”
Dear Louis, "rock art" is not exactly what Alberti meant in his treatise De statua. What impresses anyone about Michelangelo's marble statues is that they do not seem made in marble but look alive, which happens with most sculpture until the late 19th century. Traditional sculpture, even in Gothic statuary, defies the hardness of stone trying to make it appear supple. "Rock art" is a term devoted to prehistoric examples of art made with rocks or on rocks. Menhirs are examples of art made of rock, while petroglyphs, inscriptions or reliefs, as well as rock paintings, are examples of art made on rocks. In rock art, the materiality of stone stands out in such a way that the art done with them seems like it was necessary to "conquer" the stone's weight (as in menhirs, which were carried long distances to their final destination) or its hardness. Stonehenge, or the Egyptian pyramids, of Machu Pichu or Rapa Nui stage the "drama of difficulty" in quarrying, shaping, moving, or otherwise handling huge stones, while carving the stone staged the "drama of skill" in marking the stone with different techniques that required more care for smaller detail. But in all these examples, the rock is there, majestic, durable, hard, bearing its own attributes, bearing witness to the battle between it's surface and the human will.
Contrary to Alberti's idea of "similitudine" (which means that the work of the sculptor would be addressed at making a statue similar to whatever body or object he wished: by "amending the lines, polishing and repolishing them, he would find the effigy he wanted", I translate from my Italian version of Alberti's text), the neolithic man let the rock "be". Contemporary rock art in many ways follows that prehistoric idea of letting the rock "be". Contemporary architecture too shows off the rock as, for example, Peter Eisenmen' City of Art in Santiago de Compostela, and Frank Lloyd Wright's Falling Water House, among many other examples of contemporary rock art.
Sorry for whatever typos!
Lilliana
Lilliana Ramos-Collado,
I am sure that if I would go into a cave and using a torch to light the cave then if I observe the wall then I would see all kind of sceneries, animals on the rock face as an interplay between the light, shadow and natural creases into the rock face. Then the idea of using some sharcoal or other rock staining material and do exactly as Alberti sudgested I would just make these things I see stand out more. This is how I imagine this form of art to have began. I went into an art fare and one artist was selling small rock that he painted in very interesting manner taking advantage of the natural texture of the rock and its natural shape. The artist told me that he had to see into the rock what he would later make stand out. This reminded me of Michelangello process of sculpture of liberating the form from the rock.
I understand, Louis, though Michelangelo did not "find" a figure in the stone but, like Alberti had said, "chipped away, or polished and repolished" the excess marble to get to the similitudine. One thing is to find in the rock itself a form to be highlighted with whatever technique, and something else is deliberately chipping or polishing something that will not resemble the original aspect of the stone. Michelangelo"s sculptures would never be considered "rock art" because the lack of mimetic will, because of the will to downplay the presence of the material.
Best regards, Lilliana
A passerby once saw a Native American sitting on a log, rock and antler in his hands. "What are you making out of that rock?" asked the man.
"I do not know," replied the Native, "it has not told me yet."
Interesting interchanges all! Glad to have sparked this discussion.
Dear all,
Picasso seeing the paintings from Lascaux said, that we didn' t learn anything more since that time.
I believe that "art" and the idea of an Artist is rather new in the cultural development.
Before it was an intrinsic necessity to do this to stay in communication with all the nature and its dimensions, not regarding if now we still understand them or not. But it could be learned again. And anyhow seen the many billions of rockpictures existing and what they tell, so it is one of the greatest libraries of mankind.
- How come we do not try to decipher what our ancestors were thinking is worth while to transmit.
If you do not mind i ask our RG-friends how the think about it...
Hi Alan: Having had the honour of studying and dating the rock art of their 1st Nations ancestors, some to 3500 years ago on volcanic ash & AMS dating (see: http://http-server.carleton.ca/~bgordon/RockArt/FieldResults/Hedley/Hedley1.htm), and knowing such art as sacred, like some sites that you and i have explored, I see the wisdom in their knowing Mother Earth as all-embracing and knowing that if you damage one part of Her environment that it will have repercussions elsewhere. Best, Bryan Gordon.
Some composers of rock art used the imperfections, the dips and flows of the rock, to give the impression of depth. Light as a medium in rock/cave art? Was it like that at Lascaux, where the movement of the torchlight upon entering the cave caused a perceived shift, an impression of movement in the drawing?
Good point, James: I was privileged to visit the underground Lascaux twice. On my 2nd visit and after we has descended by following the railing in absolute darkness, instead if looking directly ceiling-wise, I observed the faces of the 4 Canadians and one American archaeologists when they looked up. There was no moving torch, but the expressions on their faces gave me some indication about Lascaux's 1st visitors thousands of years ago. A moving light would have made it even more impressive, if that's possible. Bryan Gordon.
Yes the emotional tenor of directly experiencing rock art is very impressive...
The archaeology is interested in the history of human social and their environment. While the paleontology is focused with life in past geologic setting.
for more information, please vist the following links:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/career-education/difference-between-paleontologist-and-archaeologist/
http://www.saa.org/ForthePublic/Resources/EducationalResources/ForEducators/Archaeologyfo
Sometimes you have to wonder whether cave artist(s) worked in secret and then sprung their artwork on other members of the clan in similar dramatic effect. Like the shaman who makes a new mask in secret then leaps out of the shadows during a gathering to capture and enrapt the crowd.
Yes there is truly an element of surprise, mystery and magic in experiencing rock art that is a bit different than our direct interaction with other archaeological sites. With rock art the images are overpoweringly, dramatic and of course enigmatic. Some are just beautiful to behold and commands one's attention. I feel honored and privileged to experience these remarkable paintings and drawings - a catch a faint glimpse of the awe and power of Native religion, cosmology, ritual, symbolism and ceremony.
Yes there is truly an element of surprise, mystery and magic in experiencing rock art that is a bit different than our direct interaction with other archaeological sites. With rock art the images are overpoweringly, dramatic and of course enigmatic. Some are just beautiful to behold and commands one's attention. I feel honored and privileged to experience these remarkable paintings and drawings - a catch a faint glimpse of the awe and power of Native religion, cosmology, ritual, symbolism and ceremony.
An employee with a nation-wide sports store told me, when he found out what I do in the course of looking for some good field boots, that he visited his brother, who was living in California. His sibling took him to a canyon outside of town and showed him dozens of Native American rock art. I believe he said that one was on a shear cliff and was over 100 feet tall. He was awestruck by the experience and couldn't wait to return and see more. That, my friends, is art that transcends time and culture.
Solid rock art has been the consequence of training with fragile sand art?
Was art originally initiated with drawings in sand or carvings on tree trunks, disappeared for ever?
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=sand+art&qpvt=sand+art&qpvt=sand+art&FORM=IGRE
Marcel,
Some have to work at art, others come by the talent naturally. I think those with talent do not necessarily "practice", but who is to say that some rock art/cave paintings are not just that, practice. In begs a question: is wanting to become an artist even though you have no talent a device of modern man? Did Paleolithic man have ego to do what couldn't be done, rather than accept what had to be?
The propensity for art also reminds me of a mistake I made in my youth. I was a drummer: one that had to practice my art to get better. A young boy who had never touched a set of drum asked if he could try them. Try them he did. I felt like the child as this upstart of a boy beat tunes that would take me weeks to master. That is the difference between inherent talent and learned talent.
Maybe I should post again Le Corbusier's interesting proposal in Vers une architecture:
"There is no primitive man. There are primitive means. The idea is strong from the beginning." (my translation more or less).
Our forebears were already brilliant, which explains how he managed to get here alive, after thousands of years. It was not mystery that helped us, but the knowledge harvested from deciphering those mysteries. Most rock art, monumental and small, show impressive techniques and insinuate a great skill at tool-making. Myth went hand in hand with work and invention in the material world. Rock art bears witness to that.
I do not call for a debate over the word "primitive" as Corbu says there is no primitive man, but that there are less than perfect means, resources, instruments, etc. And especially, that intelligence —the strong idea—has always saved the day and toiled hard in the making of better and better tools.
My best, Lilliana
Hello James,
I have difficult to accept that rock art came out of the blue, suddenly from Nothing. There must have been some practices before, even by very talented people, and perhaps it started as a child playing in the sand discovering the abilities to create?
Pardon, they were rhetorical questions, to say the least. One of the questions in anthropology currently is the long time between phases of tool making by ancient man. To think that man could exist for 300,000 years or more with the same tool kit. Several propose that it was a change in the brain that imbibed a greater creativity in the species: a spark that then helped our ancestors invent at a greater pace than before. And did this "spark", this change in brain chemistry? connections? also give rise to art? religion?
James, "creativity" is such an appropriate word here! I wonder if some tools did not change in shape because the same tools were put to a different use. Could that be? That would account for "creativity", and for "economy" of means and effort, also proofs of intelligence. I'm speculating, of course.
Lilliana
Marcel,
Je suis d'accord, oui. Lilliana will vouch that sometimes I play the Devil's Advocate. I believe that these discussions not only help to share information and ideas, but also to explore topics in different ways. To expand the mind. To show that there is more than one approach to a problem. More than one view.
Yes, not doubt early man, possibly even early hominin species, created art. I am sure that artists practiced with whatever medium they work. That is the bane of archaeology/anthropology: the incomplete picture (pun intended). What we find often is only a drop in the bucket to what once was. Imagine a stone thrown far out in a lake: we can only see the ripples that lap the section of shore on which we stand, all else is lost or obscure.
Dear James, what a beautifully crafted comment, your last one. From an architectural viewpoint, the lake's rippled surface resembles a façade seen from above, hardly the usual place from where to gaze at something, the bird's eye view, lofty for us who would like to fly. This is, metaphorically, what you say about exploring topics in different ways.... and from different vantage points. Questions come to my mind: how can we determine what is a creditable archaeological site? how to recognize what we have never seen before? How do we know this or that stone was not a tool but just a stone...? I might sound naive, but our archaeological finds might be not early, but rather late in the (pre)history of our relationship with materials and with the development of a "material culture". Our best witnesses of human development are always material. How can we determine modes of walking or running, the "invention" of the smile or the smirk, when did we learn to cry or to stick our tongue out at somebody, in sum, how can we compile elements for a history of gesture, for example, so important for communication, and which did not depend on tools, but on self-managing the surface of the human body? Ripples on a lake have taken me far.
Lilliana
Lilliana,
I searched for an analogy that would express our (archaeologists & anthropologists) true lack of a clear or complete picture of even an infinitesimal slice of the total of humanity's past, drawing on imagery that I created in the previous sentence of a drop of water in a bucket. In hindsight, I believe that someone has already used that analogy in printed media and my mind dredged it to the surface like so many things thought lost in an incomplete storage and retrieval system called the brain. For that I apologize to the originator unknown.
The amount of information that we can glean from the artifacts and strata will never be more than a tiny fraction of what was. During a sugar plantation excavation we recovered 39 ceramic sherds that had manufacturing marks, but in the tens of thousands of maker's marks recorded in dozens of identification books we could only find 6 of them. Imagine that! We only had records for slightly more than 15 percent of the factory marks that were used on ceramics between ca. 1845 and 1890. We have lost almost 85 percent of the manufacturing records from only ~125 to 170 years ago. And that was only those marks we had recovered in that one locality. What does that say for 500, 1000, 2000, 10000 years ago?
You're correct, there are things we will never know about the development of the human psyche; communication; gesture; physiology; although there have been some interesting studies that show that some gestures are near universal, some utterances common.
But steering this back to Alan's favorite topic, rock art, how can we ever really know what some of the symbols meant to those that etched or painted them? Are some just imitations, like graffiti seen by one person and repeated because they liked it? Kilroy was here? Is it something that means one thing to one people and something totally different to another, like the Miwok's Coyote and Italapas, the Coyote of the Chinook, one a trickster and the other a creator and provider? Alan's rock drawings have the potential to fill in gaps in the archaeological record of an area, but until a Linda Schele comes along that can unlock the key to understanding...
To all,
I also have to apologize for my lengthy discourse. Friends say I acquired a penchant for the written word from my mentor, who was known to write 2,500 page monographs on the aspects of lithic reduction from a single site. Its a curse that I tend to inflict on others without thinking.
Rock art can tell you about the social relations of past societies. It can be frustrating because it holds the promise of easy answers that are not forthcoming, but it is a great analytical tool. I suggest readings some papers on this. I'll attach one of my own, in which I use changes in rock art to explain changes in social interactions from bonding as a colonising group, to greater emphasis on territoriality, when a continent is settled.
Claire, I just read your paper. I'm not an expert, not even an "aficionada", but your argument and your conclusions made me remember an article I read two or three years ago about the dissemination of graffiti in Havana, Cuba, for the last few years. The author used epidemiology techniques to explain the widespread of graffiti and to predict which direction it would take in the city, I mean, to which neighborhoods it would move next. He was able to predict that flawlessly. What amazed me me was that the places in Havana where graffiti was painted were heavily territorialized by urban gangs, and those were relatively homogeneous‚ as you propose during a colonizing process, but those graffiti done by "artists" were usually much more heterogeneous, but equally territorial, though this time it was evident that artists were defending their individuality. I do not mean to say that your work with pleistocene communities can be used for explaining a present-day phenomenon, but I found much use of your conclusions in classifying the different users of graffiti.
Wanting to learn more, Lilliana
Dear Bryan and James, yes it is completely true, the shapes and natural forms of rocks have been often used in the minuscule as well as in greater dimensions to produce the feeling and meaning they wanted to give and Show. This has been used inside the Caves, but also outside like in Africa and Tasmania.
But light was also used not only by the torch but as well by the sunbeams entering the Caves at specific Dates like the equinox and pointing thus in Lascaux to animals which have been recognized as the starcalendar / zodiac from that time by now. Another aspect is the Position in regard to the sounds/echoes and their Vibration which is very Special at or just near the place of paintings.
Hi All: A very interesting thing about Lascaux is that:
1. all the paintings were done by memory by hunter-artists. Only those who observed them alive would know how to depict them in living action, unlike the animals in Alta Mira who appear dead, although they could also have been painted by hunters. Tooth sectioning seasonality shows Lascaux hunters were there in winter, with the nearby Vezere River an ice highway, not a game water-crossing. See my BAR book on "Of Men and Herds in French Magdalenian Prehistory".
2. The most important game, not the most impressive, dangerous nor colorful, is absent on the cave walls. That is reindeer, whose bones are abundant in Lascaux's radiocarbon-dated levels. This is not difficult to explain. How many people have pictures of loaves of bread or bowls of rice in their homes? Yet, these are the world's main staples and are taken for granted.
3.So the use of light and sound in creating memorized art was crucial, especially when it was remembered from sunny summer times to the south months and miles earlier.
Best, Bryan.
Rock art is actual. But art rock is not study so much. They ara actual if you find somethin new. I don't think if that will help us us suciety, but i know industry destroied very much arceology cultures.
Alan,
Bryan brings up an interesting point with the reindeer. In the plains of the U.S. and Canada, bison once roamed in immense herds. Its been estimated that before Europeans started killing them off there were an estimated 60 million Bison bison in North America. There was also the extinct Bison antiquus. Several kill sites have been identified in the form of bison kills and bison jumps, thus we know they were important to Native Americans in the central part of the continent. Are bison represented proportionally in rock art? If not, were they too easy to kill to warrant depiction? What are the most common animals depicted in North American rock art?
The question raised is very straight- "How does the study of rock art and archaeology make a difference?" Enough has been elaborated by various scholars. Art wither prehistoric or contemporary tends to enhance our abstract thinking, reasoning, and when both the past are compared it reveals a history of our thinking process and social, cultural and philosophical development. An art panel would speak volumes than the written content. because we may not read the past script but can easily read the picture.
Hi Alan,
I’ve been meaning to comment on your question, but I wasn’t quite sure how to phrase my answer. So rather than posting a long comment, I thought perhaps a game would be in order.
If one can figure out what the motifs depict, then one will begin to understand why the study of rock art is so relevant to the field of art, archaeology, anthropology, and history, what it can contribute to our “contemporary industrial society” and lastly who would see our efforts of value.
Before I explain the game, you and James can’t play, as you’re familiar with my hypothesis. So no comments from the peanut gallery.
The rules are that you cannot visit my Home Page and read my papers, or search the internet for answers.
That said, my research deals with the panels of rock art found in Ireland, the UK and France.
Now, on with the game. Below are two images. Download them, bring them up side by side on your desktop, and study them for as long as you wish. Then post your response. However, do not tell me what you SEE, tell me what you OBSERVE.
CLUE: If you've ever visited a site in Ireland, the UK or France where panels of rock art are associated with the site, then the answer to this puzzle was staring you in the face.
Nice approach, Sean. I think the "observation" will be even easier if you rotate the upper image maybe 30 degrees to the left.... Sorry for butting in :-)
Here's some info on the images. The 1st is of the panel on Or. L.2 within the Mound of the Hostages at the Hill of Tara, and the 2nd a map of Tara.
All fields are important. If there was only one field then there would be so much known about it that no one person could ever even read all there is to read let alone contribute to the field. But if we are so narrowly focused we will miss ideas that understanding that come from these other fields and there by miss the true meaning.
George
Art as documentation, useful as the missing piece to complete an existing puzzle.When archaeology clarifies the history of science. Often hidden in plain sight but dismissed as "art" and myth.Counterfactuals raises alternative hypotheses and advances competing conjectures. Modern myth-busting, where science meet art, we may have to go back further in history beyond just an oral tradition to build up a case from archeological artifacts. Sumerian heliocentric solar system documented on tablet:
Discoveries and breakthroughs by inventors, proponents etc.were often the piecing together of a pattern from fragments previously uncovered. So in the end it's never a waste of time, only lost to time!
Archaeologists mainly study about the human past and present, through the materials which humans have left behind The materials are those that humans used, made, or modified. They analyze skeletal remains and artifacts, such as tools, pottery, cave paintings, and ruins of buildings. Stratigraphy also engaged in the study of natural hazards and disasters like earthquakes, volcanic activity, tsunamis, etc. Stratigraphy, or study of rock was originally introduced as a branch of geology. However, it is often applied in other disciplines, especially in archaeology . I'm curious how the approach of other disciplines to stratigraphy differs from the archaeological. I'm especially interested in geology - because it is the main and original discipline for stratigraphy, and because the geological time is very different from the archaeological time
Understanding and studying rock art is fundamental to understand humankind, to understand who we are. Rock art is a very complex symbolic expression, full of meaning. Even though we cannot always crack the code, just asking ourselves the question about its meaning is quite revealing. On the other hand, aside from archaeology, we need the aid of other disciplines, in order to formulate more adequate hypothesis about the meaning of rock art: landscape archaeology, cultural astronomy, iconography, ethnohistory, ethnography and hermeneutics.
Recent research used cave art to help clarify the origins of the European bison:
Cave paintings reveal clues to mystery Ice Age beast
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-37649597
Mystery species hidden in cave art appears to be unknown bison-cattle hybrid
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161018133142.htm
Probably one of the big questions in any art: is it an accurate depiction or an interpretation/beginner's drawing?
Wonderful input all. Thank you for your insights, wisdom and reflections. This really helps me to provide a broader perspective.
Interesting study on both the uses of ochre and the techniques used to prepare it:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/11/161102143618.htm
Something that has been mostly taken for grant over here. However, I am fairly certain that an ochre processing area has not been found like in this study. There have been some ochre processing found in the Southwestern cultures of the U.S. where dry conditions prevail.
Hello, there is not always a difference between them. In eastern spain, a team of researchers was able to show, that for rock art paintings of the late neolithic as well as for the decoration of the contemporaneous the sam elithic resources were used.
Autism indicated in cave art?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/11/161115101244.htm
without the past how could we have a future? Understanding the past allows us to form a future that is better than the one that we are studying in the history. It also lets us know when we have lost ground and had to make it up. There are times in history when we advance and times when we digress. Only through understanding these times can we move forward instead of back. Even today it seems that we move backward in time when it comes to religion, race, culture, and understanding of others.
We must not only discover the past but understand the past. Many times this is in the form of art not just the word.
George
Until we can actually date rock art and and develop its history conceptually, possibly in a progressive series in many regions of the world, we are really data gathering. This is needed, especially for future studies. But it misses the conceptual part of its symbolic growth in the human brain. Bryan,
Anthropologists uncover art by (really) old masters: 38,000 year-old engravings discovered
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170127112921.htm
"An international team of anthropologists has uncovered a 38,000-year-old engraved image in a southwestern French rockshelter -- a finding that marks some of the earliest known graphic imagery found in Western Eurasia and offers insights into the nature of modern humans during this period."
This new study shows just how important, and for how long, it was important to our ancestors:
Ochre use by Middle Stone Age humans in Porc-Epic cave persisted over thousands of years - Ochre pigment acquisition, processing, use likely reflect cohesive behavioral system
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170524140728.htm
This study has implications for fields as diverse as improving dating to ritual/religious practices:
New research reveals earliest directly dated rock paintings from southern Africa
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/06/170601124100.htm
Accurate dating of rock art (not stylistic) is badly needed, especially as more and more art is being recorded or disappearing. A main problem is cost, training and accuracy for the complex methods. Most rock art dating researchers are not scientists? But must they be? Rock art without dating is like writing a history picture book without dates - what does it mean? DStretch shows what pigment remains after years of wear, a very good tool, but many pigment particles or droplets had fallen to the ground where and when the artist stood, and then buried. Date carbon material (fragments of wood, bone, leaf, needles, shell) on the same level!
Methods used for dating carbon in the actual paint are very expensive, demand microscopic handling and very expensive equipment. Most past attempts have not been all that successful, either!
That is why I designed my method using common household utensils that can be used by anyone. My method is described on this website and on Academia.edu.
People just have to make the leap from the art on the wall to the earth where the artist stood. Plus, residual carbon in almost all non-charcoal paint (almost all pictographs) is rare and my method works regardless of the paint. It is described at
http://http-server.carleton.ca/~bgordon/RockArt/FieldResults/Montevideo/Montevideo1.htm
with a published paper downloadable at:
https://www.scahome.org/publications/proceedings/Proceedings.25Ritter.pdf
How the artist painted such neat vertical rock panel in the very first attempt? Was there any practicing panel?
Before painting the rock walls some sort of practice is implied and specially so for imparting training to the next generation. Can we identify such practicing panels? Or was the prehistoric painter a perfect talented person? If so there could have bee hardly a few such artists in one area. The painting styles and similarities among panels may reveal this. Have we approached the problem from this perspective?
Time for acoustics to get in on the subject (again!):
Acoustic scientist sounds off about the location of cave paintings - A systematic acoustic study is proposed to explore whether there is any relationship between the location of paintings and points of reverberation in caves.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/06/170629175551.htm
Important for understanding the evolving human mind and its ethical development
In thousands of cases, all over the world, rock art is the only archaeological feature that has preserved essential elements of the symbolic systems of human cultures that disappeared long ago. This is of great importance because it helps us to achieve a better understanding, not only of past societies, but also of ourselves, contemporary human beings. I agree with Leroi-Gourhan that the development of oral and graphic expression appeared together in the lives of modern human beings (homo sapiens). Both are equally important and complementary. The impulse to speak and the impulse to draw and paint are basic structural abilities of modern humans.
Studying rock art in an interdisciplinary way, paying attention to its relations to other manifestations of material culture and landscape gives us a much more clear vision of our own history.
I think that rock art interpretation is rather complex, and that it is not easier than decoding ancient scriptuers. Each culture has its own stylistic and iconographical conventions, that can only be fully understood if you know the conventios. I've been teaching image interpretation at the National University in Mexico, since 1986 and studying rock art since 2002 and am aware that the matter is really a difficult and complex one. For those who read Spanish you can find several articles and two books about the question in my ResearchGate page.
The fields deepens our understanding of the material and visual cultures of ethnic societies and people. They stir up the imagination machines of students and stirs up their ability to create original designs to solve challenges confronting contemporary industries. The artistic geniuses of old studied in Rock Art as well as the creative pieces of Archaelogical finds widens the aesthetic knowledge of artists and it incites them to create functional and aesthetically pleasing pieces to meet the ever-changing taste of clients. We must remember that it is in our past that we learn lessons for the present and the future. Indeed, the study of Rock Art and Archaeology make giant difference in contemporary industries especially the art and creative arts industry.
Thanks
Dickson Adom
A critical, patient and thorough study of the great works of the early forebears of man evident in the Rock Art and Archaeological finds show that the old sages in ancient communities understood the rubrics and concepts of art. They craftily showed perspective, rhythm, foreshortening, emphasis, color psychology and symbolism, and other great design elements and principles that can be tapped when learners are patiently made to under-study these thrilling and awe-inspiring pieces of artistic marvels.
I concur with Julio that the study is 'complex'. That notwithstanding, I strongly believe that any investment of time and other resources for studying and understanding the philosophical underwriting of the artistic geniuses in the Rock Art and Archaeology would be worth the efforts devoted. Aside from honing the creativity levels of practicing artists, its bolsters their appreciation and criticism skills for effective analyses of artworks.
The world is cyclical, and such is the development of art and the 'market' that we produce our work for. Therefore, the study in Rock Art and Archaeology have the great potential of preparing students, practicing artists, anthropologists, and humanists in general in understanding the interests and preferences of clients, ethnic societies and the like. The high interest in the design and color schemes evident in the Rock Art by the 'global' community in this modern age, endorse the great essence of beefing up and prioritizing the study of Rock Art and Archaeology.
Thanks.
Dickson Adom
I fully agree with you, Dikson. As David Whitley has pointed out: since its first manifestations (35,000 years ago, like in Chauvet) art appeared in a fully developed way. If you study in detail the techniques of Upper Paleolithic’s art you will find out that they were quite sophisticated, as they have been described by Jean Clottes. Aesthetic complexity goes together with symbolic complexity; Leroi-Gourham explained that, decades ago. All these facts demonstrate that evolutionism is completely wrong. The so called “primitive societies” were as sophisticated as we are in present days, symbolically speaking, and also in what concerns to technology, if you consider what the available means they had at that time. They developed astronomy, medicine, a thorough knowledge of their natural environment and a wonderful technology for producing artifacts. On that respect it is a great experience visiting, in France, the wonderful Musée national de Préhistoire at Eyzies.
Another important question that we have to take into consideration is that there should have been other important manifestations of art during the Upper Paleolithic, made on perishable materials, that couldn’t survive, as Ignacio Barandiarán has clearly pointed out.
Dickson and Julio have explained well. I just add here my conclusion. Human modernity, cultural, behavioural, mental and esthetic developments have been much better through archaeology and rock art beyond doubt.
Rock Art, as we use the term here, refers mostly to pictures or symbols left on rock surfaces by members of traditional cultures. Stones used for pecking petroglyphs, brushes used for applying paint, mortars used to grind pigments and small fireplaces used to change minerals into pigments, these and other objects can link rock art with more typical archaeological materials found in the ground. In that same ground there may be charcoal from a hearth or other organic materials permitting radiocarbon dating. And there are other ways of treating rock art as simply one more kind of evidence in archaeology.
Yes Kiran- making of the pigment paint for art work is a long cultural process and their traces are useful for dating the rock art.Most of the dates of the graphic art on rock panels do not go beyond 25 -30 Kya. But, portable Pleistocene art is much older.
Is anybody aware of the graphic art depicting animal and human figures made on any Palaeolithic pebble? I got a quartzite pebble chopper painted in black depicting animal and human figurines.
Nice link with the acoustics story above:
Archaeologists put sound back into a previously silent past: Innovative tool turns ancient spaces into human places
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170706143145.htm
Chaco Canyon petroglyph may represent ancient total eclipse:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/08/170809140152.htm
Rock art interpretation is very complex. To simplify our attempts we might begin by creating two branches: Public Art and Private Art. We could first concentrate on Ancient Public Art to see trends, countrywide or worldwide if they exist. Then, analyze Ancient Private Art on possible trends that would need dating. This would require computation but rock art databases are starting to appear. It would also allow people entirely outside the field but with specific professional interests to participate – audiologists, 3D and dating experts, contemporary artists, mineralogists, chemists, psychologists, animators, humanists and historians.
(1) Ancient Public Art would be analogous to modern galleries, art shows and museums and represent large collections like Lascaux, Chauvet, Baja, Coso, Alta Mira, etc.
(2) Ancient Private Art might comprise single or a few objects, children and novice attempts, mobiliary art and funerary art.
Since I don't "do" Facebook, I've only just been told about this event at Creswell Crags tomorrow:
https://www.facebook.com/events/1126461977487394/
https://www.facebook.com/events/983838351718489/
http://www.creswell-crags.org.uk/
I'll report back if I can make it...
For levity, something I forgot I did years ago until recently finding it.
Bryan's suggestion is intriguing. However, I wonder how long it would take the experts to agree on the criteria for Public Art versus Private Art? Is the single Auk in the farthest recesses of the cave Private, while the herd of Auk in the larger chamber Public? To modernize this, would a smiley face scratched into a rock at a recreational campsite be Private or Public? I mean, doodling usually is considered Private, so do we distinguish between rock art doodling being Private versus Public, and how?
Alan and Sean being the experts, has rock art been categorized and analyzed in the Southwest and in the UK as messages to the public versus private doodling?
As a historian, I am very interested mostly in petroglyphs, which many people see as just rock-art. But I find similarities in style in these "drawings" and also the inclusion of alphabetic letters sometimes identifying the artist. Sometimes one can trace the artist as he moved from location to location. I suspect that a number of these also crossed continents. I would love to have the time and money to make a database of each of the petroglyphs and their GPS locations, to map the movement of people. I think we can learn a lot from the past, and dispel some of the modern myths we have about ancient people. So, these are not just discussions of aesthetics, but of historical and scientific significance. The better we understand our history, the better we can understand the world around us. As an example, is the earth warming up, or has it gone through cycles? In order to determine this, we need to gather as much information about our past as we can. And petroglyphs and ancient art provide us with significant information.
Dan,
Agree. This thread uses the term "rock art", but so far has been all-inclusive. As noted earlier in this thread, one of the problems with petroglyphs is interpreting their meaning. Does a horizontal squiggle represent a snake, water, hills, a journey of so many days, or something else? What about way-markers? Signposts?
Native Americans of the southeastern United States had no written language. In doing research for a paper I ran across something I had never heard of before. One of the colonials who wrote about his visits, negotiations, and interactions with the Creek Indians said that at the main entrance to each village was a wooden plank that had a symbol painted in red. The symbol was different for each village and was said to represent that village. How could we interpret those symbols if they were carved into a boulder as territorial boundary markers? Inference?
JAG
Caribbean's largest concentration of indigenous pre-Columbian rock art -
Artists before Columbus: New research on the Caribbean's largest concentration of indigenous pre-Columbian rock art
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/10/171029220108.htm
Indonesian island found to be unusually rich in cave paintings: "Lead archaeologist, Distinguished Professor Sue O'Connor from the School of Culture, History and Language, said the paintings help tell the story of the region's history of trade and culture."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/12/171215094501.htm
Did humans speak through cave art? Ancient drawings and language's origins:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180221122923.htm
Not new ideas, but an interesting take on linking them.
Neanderthals were capable of making art
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-43115488
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180222144943.htm
How our ancestors with autistic traits led a revolution in Ice Age art:
The ability to focus on detail, a common trait among people with autism, allowed realism to flourish in Ice Age art
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180514095522.htm
Article How Do We Explain ‛Autistic Traits’ in European Upper Palaeo...
It can even give us a laugh sometimes!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44140200
Strange how people still want to express themselves through rock art - even on a massive scale with the aid of GPS:
Marree Man: The enduring mystery of a giant outback figure
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-44597730
It can indicate the existence of previously unknown cultures:
Prehistoric art hints at lost Indian civilisation
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-45559300
According to the research of (my old friend) Dr. Carolyn Boyd, of the Shumla Center, the rockart panels of the Lower Pecos River (in the canyons of far-western Texas on/near the Mexican border) are "the oldest books in America" written in a pictorial language which we are just beginning to decipher.
be sure not to miss the video on their home page:
http://shumla.org
Many thanks for the video Bob - I'll sign up, donate and share right away!
Interesting to compare the US and UK approach to promotional videos:
https://www.creswell-crags.org.uk/
NOT cave art I'm afraid, but a pretty impressive example of how art can contribute to our understanding of palaeopathology nontheless:
Anthropologist rewrites history using science, art
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/10/181004100016.htm
Article Evidence of an ancient (2,000 years ago) goiter attributed t...
'Oldest animal painting' discovered in Borneo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46114423
Prehistoric cave art suggests ancient use of complex astronomy
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/11/181127111025.htm
Cave art saves us all from evil!
It turns out that the 'Gateway to Hell' is where I regularly take my students:
The gateway to hell? Hundreds of anti-witch marks found in Midlands cave
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2019/feb/15/nottinghamshire-cave-carvings-marks-scare-witches
'Gateway to Hell': Hundreds of historic anti-witch marks discovered in Nottinghamshire cave
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/witch-marks-creswell-crags-gateway-to-hell-nottinghamshire-derbyshire-protection-symbols-a8780541.html
Creswell Crags: 'Witches' marks' found in cave network
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-47242603
At least I now know why their heads spin round on the way home!
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medicine
- Physiology
- Biosignals
- Biomedical Signal Processing
- Statistical Analysis