Methods of art history tested against prehistory: session C74. Spiral and circular forms: the most common rock art in the world?: session C81. European cave art: session C85. Euro-Mediterranean rock art studies: session S02. Global state of the art: session S07. Current state of North American rock art: session WS37 9781407306490, 9781407336466

Citation preview

BAR S2108 2010

UNION INTERNATIONALE DES SCIENCES PRÉHISTORIQUES ET PROTOHISTORIQUES INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR PREHISTORIC AND PROTOHISTORIC SCIENCES PROCEEDINGS OF THE XV WORLD CONGRESS (LISBON, 4-9 SEPTEMBER 2006) ACTES DU XV CONGRÈS MONDIAL (LISBONNE, 4-9 SEPTEMBRE 2006) Series Editor: Luiz Oosterbeek VOL. 35

UISPP 2006: SESSIONS C74, C81, C85, S02 & S07

Session C74

Methods of Art History Tested against Prehistory Session C81

Spirals and Circular Forms: the Most Commom Rock Art in the World? Session C85

European Cave Art Session S02

Euro-Mediterranean Rock Art Studies Session S07

Global State of the Art Session WS37

Current State of North American Rock Art Edited by

Marc Groenen and Didier Martens (C74) Jane Kolber, John Clegg and Alicia Distel (C81) Kevin Sharpeg and Jean Clottes (C85) Mila Simões Abreu (S02) Giriraj Kumar and Robert Bednarik (S07) James Keyser and Mavis Greer (WS37) Cláudia Fidalgo and Luiz Oosterbeek (Volume Editing)

B A R

BAR International Series 2108 2010

UNION INTERNATIONALE DES SCIENCES PRÉHISTORIQUES ET PROTOHISTORIQUES INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR PREHISTORIC AND PROTOHISTORIC SCIENCES PROCEEDINGS OF THE XV WORLD CONGRESS (LISBON, 4-9 SEPTEMBER 2006) ACTES DU XV CONGRÈS MONDIAL (LISBONNE, 4-9 SEPTEMBRE 2006) Series Editor: Luiz Oosterbeek VOL. 35

Session C74

Methods of Art History Tested against Prehistory Session C81

Spirals and Circular Forms: the Most Commom Rock Art in the World? Session C85

European Cave Art Session S02

Euro-Mediterranean Rock Art Studies Session S07

Global State of the Art Session WS37

Current State of North American Rock Art Edited by

Marc Groenen and Didier Martens (C74) Jane Kolber, John Clegg and Alicia Distel (C81) Kevin Sharpeg and Jean Clottes (C85) Mila Simões Abreu (S02) Giriraj Kumar and Robert Bednarik (S07) James Keyser and Mavis Greer (WS37) Cláudia Fidalgo and Luiz Oosterbeek (Volume Editing)

BAR International Series 2108 2010

†

ISBN 9781407306490 paperback ISBN 9781407336466 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407306490 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

TABLE OF CONTENTS C74 – Methods of art history tested against prehistory Les méthodes de l’histoire de l’art à l’épreuve de la préhistoire – Introduction .................... 3 Marc Groenen & Didier Martens Application de la méthodologie de l’Histoire de l’art à l’étude de l’art paléolithique: l’attribution des oeuvres anonymes à ses auteurs ............................................................. 5 Juan-María Apellaniz Les peintures de la grotte de la Pasiega A (Puente Viesgo, Cantabrie) à l’épreuve de la méthode de l’attribution ...................................................................... 13 Marc Groenen, Didier Martens The recognition of diversity through style in the Saharan rock-art research: an historiographic approach from the Western Sahara ................................................... 23 Joaquim Soler Subils The rock art of South-Morocco revisited: On surprising stylistic and thematic characteristics of the so-called “Pseudo-Bovidien” and “Tazinien” rock art from the mid valley of Wadi Draa .................................................................................. 31 Renate Heckendorf C81 – Spirals and circular forms: The most common rock art elements in the world? Spirals in Humahuaca and in the NW of Argentina (South America).................................. 39 José Luis Mamaní, Alicia Ana Fernández Distel Spirals at Sturt’s Meadows ................................................................................................... 49 John Clegg Circular elements in the rock art of the State of Bahia, Brazil ............................................. 55 Guilherme Albagli de Almeida Spirals of the prehistoric Open Rock painting from Kosova ................................................ 59 Edi Shukriu C85 – European cave art To be or not to be Palaeolithic, that is the question .............................................................. 65 Robert G. Bednarik The Margot Cave (Mayenne): a new palaeolithic sanctuary in West France ....................... 81 Romain Pigeaud, Stéphan Hinguant, Joël Rodet, Nicolas Mélard, Alain Bénard, Thibaut Devièse, Clelia Dufayet, Geoffroy Heimlich, Laureen Martin, Emilie Trelohan-Chauve, Jean-Pierre Betton, Pascal Bonic i

Fluted Animals in the Zone of Crevices, Gargas Cave, France............................................ 93 Kevin Sharpe, Leslie Van Gelder S02 – Euro-Mediterranean rock art studies Schematic panel with paleolithic punctuation and other questions of Paleoastronomy and Philosophy of Antiquity .......................................................... 105 José Fernández Quintano Epipaleolithic and Mesolithic Burial’s from 12000 to 7000 BP in Levantin Territory Art Rock ..................................................................................... 115 Carme Olària, Francesc Gusi, José Luís López Gravuras serpentiformes na região de Trás-os-Montes ...................................................... 125 Maria Fernanda Ferrato Melo de Carvalho S07 – Global state of the art The Camera Obscura and the Origin of Art: The Case for Image Projection in the Paleolithic ........................................................................................................... 135 Matt Gatton, Leah Carreon, Madison Cawein, Walter Brock, and Valerie Scott Etude et présentation de l’art rupestre en Iran (exemple d’étude dans les régions du province central et Kermân d’Iran).......................................................................... 143 Elyas Saffaran WS37 – Current state of North American rock art Archeological Use of Caves on the Northwestern Plains, USA ......................................... 153 John Greer and Mavis Greer Mogollon rock art and the status of the “flute player” ....................................................... 161 Maarten van Hoek The findings of the presence of the sabre toothed tiger ...................................................... 175 M.C.M.C. Beltrão and M. Locks

ii

LIST OF FIGURES Fig. 1.1. Cerf 1. Las Chimeneas ............................................................................................. 6 Fig. 1.2. Cerf 2. Las Chimeneas ............................................................................................. 7 Fig. 1.3. Cerf 3. Las Chimeneas ............................................................................................. 8 Fig. 1.4. Décoration à sillons parallèles sur côte epipaléolithique – Arenaza ...................... 10 Fig. 1.5. Décoration expérimentale à sillons parallèles sur côte .......................................... 10 Fig. 1.6. Coupes des sillons de quelques côtes ..................................................................... 10 Fig. 1.7. Distribution M.S.D. de la collection archéologique ............................................... 11 Fig. 1.8. Distribution M.S.D. de la collection expérimentale ............................................... 11 Fig. 1.9. Distribution M.S.D. des collections archéologique et expérimentale .................... 12 Fig. 2.1. La Pasiega A (Cantabrie, Espagne): 1. cheval, 2. biche, 3. chamois, 4-5. aurochs, 6. cheval .................................................................................................... 17 Fig. 2.2. La Pasiega A (Cantabrie, Espagne): 7-8. cheval, 9. bovidé, 10-11. cheval, 12. biche .................................................................................................. 18 Fig. 3.1. 1. Location of the sites in the Zemmur; 2. Some painted rock-shelters of Rekeiz Lemgasem; 3. Dancers’s Style; 4. Strocked Style; 5. Dark Figures Style; 6. Linear Style; 7. Shaped Style; 8. Shaped Style ........................................................... 27 Fig. 3.2. 1. Antilopes in Outlined Substyle painted under the rock-shelters roof; 2. Antilopes in Outlined Substyle; 3. Ostrich in Outlined Substyle; 4. Giraffes in Outlined Substyle painted under a rock-shelters roof; 5. Overlap of a rhinoceros and an ox in Outlined Substyle over an Strocked ox.................................. 29 Fig. 4.1. Representational types illustrated by cattle depictions........................................... 34 Fig. 5.1. Espiral de Arquímedes: r =aϕ, r ≥ 0, a > 0, φ ≥ 0 .................................................. 40 Fig. 5.2. Espiral de Arquímedes fractalizada ....................................................................... 40 Fig. 5.3. Espiral de Arquímedes fractalizada ....................................................................... 41 Fig. 5.4. Grabados rupestres de Cerro Colorado de Dpto. Yavi. Jujuy ................................ 41 Fig. 5.5. Sitio: Chayamayoc. Jujuy ...................................................................................... 41 Fig. 5.6. Sitio: El Morado. Jujuy .......................................................................................... 41 Fig. 5.7. Cerro Colorado. Yavi ............................................................................................. 42 Fig. 5.8. Detalle de la fig. 5.19. Es una espiral con tendencia triangular compuesta por diez trazos segmentarios ......................................................................... 42 Fig. 5.9. Espiral combinada en un símbolo típicamente andino. Cerro Colorado. Cultura Yavi......................................................................................... 42 iii

Fig. 5.10. Alusión a la Madre de los Vientos o Huayrallojsina, en un relieve de piedra de la cultura Tiahuanaco (años 600 al 800 d.C.), Bolivia. A partir del Centro o Muyu originario, parten los Cuatro Vientos.................................. 42 Fig. 5.11. En Ansilta (San Juan-Argentina) se halló este petroglifo (dibujo grabado en roca) pigmentado con color negro y rojo… data desde el año 400 antes de nuestra Era ..................................................................... 42 Fig. 5.12. Sitio: El Morado. Espiral en la parte inferior central del atuendo. Bicromía en blanco y negro de 0,65 m de altura ............................................................ 43 Fig. 5.13. Cerro Colorado. Yavi ........................................................................................... 43 Fig. 5.14. Cerro Colorado-Yavi............................................................................................ 43 Fig. 5.15. Un felino, grabado de Barrancas – Jujuy ............................................................. 43 Fig. 5.16. Sitio: Quebrada de Quesala. Norte de Chile que tiene frontera común con el NO argentino ............................................................................................ 43 Fig. 5.17. Espiral y formas “eses”. Peña blanca. Humahuaca. Período: Cultura Humahuaca (800-1200) ..................................................................................... 45 Fig. 5.18. Formas claras de espirales con tendencia circular. Un tumi (hachas de dos filos) en la parte superior izquierda, figura característica del Período Inca (1430-1536). Procedencia: Cerro Negro de Coctaca – Humahuaca........................................................................... 45 Fig. 5.19. Inédita del Fotógrafo Cuevas. Laguna Colorada? Cultura Yavi. (900-1400) ............................................................................................... 45 Fig. 5.20. Espiral unida a boca o cuello de un camélido. Cerro Negro de Coctaca. –Humahuaca ................................................................................................................... 45 Fig. 5.21. Fotografía de un montaje idealizado, realizado por Luis Pellegrini sobre Inca Cueva. Humahuaca. Museo Arqueológico Provincial de Jujuy .................... 46 Fig. 5.22. Pieza 3255. Proc. Volcán. Museo Arqueológico Tilcara – Jujuy ......................... 46 Fig. 5.23. Espiral en cerámica prehispánica. Museo Arqueológico Tilcara ......................... 46 Fig. 5.24. Espiral con tendencia cuadrangular en esta muñequera tejida del Museo Arqueológico Tilcara .................................................................................... 46 Fig. 5.25. Pieza 2749. Proced.: Coiruro. Dpto. Tumbaya. Período: 850-1480 DC. Dos espirales de 7 espiras cada una, con final aparentemente cerrado. Museo Arqueológico Tilcara .......................................................................................... 46 Fig. 5.26. Proc. Ciénaga Grande. Purmamarca. Período 850-1480 DC. En la parte superior presenta una espiral de doce espiras. Museo Arqueológico Tilcara .......................................................................................... 46 Fig. 5.27. Geoglifo: El mono de Nazca. Representación artística anónima. (Cultura Nazca 0-700 DC). Perú .................................................................................... 47 Fig. 6.1a, 6.1b. Parts of Sturt’s Meadows site. The scale can be judged from the 4WD at centre right .......................................................................................... 50 Fig. 6.2. Tracing of approximately two square metres of South Saddle, Sturt’s Meadows. Of the several trails shown here, the trail of 4 triangular tracks in a vertical line through the centre of have smaller left than right tracks; they consistently show different toolmarks, suggesting that pairs of “tracks” may have been pecked by partnering artists ................................................. 50 Fig. 6.3. The engravings in this photo can be interpreted as a trail of tracks. From bottom upwards a kangaroo sits up on its heels, looking about, then puts its hands on the ground as it feeds, then hops into the distance ...................... 50 Fig. 6.4. This spiral that has been carefully pecked and repacked, suggesting it had long-term significance. The whole CXNF includes an outer swirl to the left with wiggles. Other CXNFs have a spiral that takes in other linear figures in its outer loops ....................................................................................... 51 iv

Fig. 6.5. A “loopy figure” about 1 metre long. The chalk lines that appear in this and other photos were immediately washed off with water from the site .................................................................................................................... 51 Fig. 6.6a, 6.6b, 6.6c, 6.6d. Photos and inked-in casts of small exploratory spirals at Sturt’s Meadows. The chalk lines in photos were immediately washed off with water from the site .................................................................................................. 52 Fig. 6.7. Paired spirals of opposing senses at Sturts Meadows. Cast with pecking inked ................................................................................................. 52 Fig. 6.8a, 6.8b. Two of 20 or more “faces” at Cleland Hills ................................................ 53 Fig. 6.9a. Previously unpublished face engraving at Mount Wood...................................... 53 Fig. 6.9b. Face engraving at Mount Wood ........................................................................... 53 Fig. 6.10. The one possible “face” at Sturt’s Meadows ....................................................... 54 Fig. 8.1. Map of the rock paintings and other sites near Vlashnja ....................................... 60 Fig. 8.2. Vlashnja prehistoric paintings ................................................................................ 60 Fig. 8.3. Vlashnja: Spirals, roof 1 A ..................................................................................... 61 Fig. 8.4. Vlashnja: Double spirale, roof 1 B ......................................................................... 61 Fig. 8.5. Vlashnja: The deer, horizon 1 ................................................................................ 62 Fig. 8.6. Vlashnja: Mrrizi of Kobaja site .............................................................................. 62 Fig. 9.1. Some of the petroglyphs from Kienbachklamm, Upper Austria ............................ 66 Fig. 9.2. The painted limestone plaque fragment from Hohle Fels, Germany, and the underside of the fragment showing the fractures and the distribution of paint traces .............................................................................................. 67 Fig. 9.3. Red pigment marking in Mladeč Cave, Czech Republic, claimed to be Palaeolithic, in reality of the late 19th century .......................................... 68 Fig. 9.4. Selection of petroglyphs of the lower Côa valley, Portugal, occurring a few metres from purported Palaeolithic petroglyphs that are often less weathered than these motif and dated inscriptions ......................................................... 68 Fig. 9.5. Vandalized petroglyph at Mazouco, northern Portugal.......................................... 70 Fig. 9.6. The only petroglyph at the Ocreza site near Mação, Portugal, claimed to be Palaeolithic, which it is unlikely to be ..................................................... 70 Fig. 9.7. Cupules at Escoural Cave, southern Portugal, on marble, possibly of the Chalcolithic ............................................................................................ 70 Fig. 9.8. Part of a pounded zoomorph (equine), weakly repatinated, superimposed over earlier, completely repatinated single-incision markings (filiform) ......................................................................................................... 71 Fig. 9.9. Three different published versions of the principal ‘Palaeolithic’ motif in Church Hole, United Kingdom, all having been produced by Bahn, Pettitt and Ripoll ............................................................................................. 72 Fig. 9.10. Shishkino site, Lena valley, central Siberia. ‘Naturalistic’ petroglyph made with a metal tool and of recent origin ................................................. 73 Fig. 10.1. Aerial view of the “canyon of Saulges”. The position of Margot and Rochefort caves is mentioned .................................................................................. 82 Fig. 10.2. The main panel of Mayenne-Sciences ................................................................. 83 Fig. 10.3. The “galet au Glouton” (pebble with wolverine), discovered in the 19th century in the caves of the “canyon of Saulges” ............................................ 83 Fig. 10.4. The Margot Cave. Decorated sectors. Topographical map with the position of the Palaeolithic representations. D: digital marks (handprints, finger…). R: gray marks. N: black marks .................................................. 84 v

Fig. 10.5. Probable Megaloceros n°7. Brown painting using the concretions of the wall to figure its antlers. a. Photo with a view distorted by the lack of distance. b. Photo arranged in orthogonal projection. ................................................ 85 Fig. 10.6. Negative black hand stencil D6, with “cut fingers” ............................................. 85 Fig. 10.7. Schematic female figure (type of Gönnersdorf-Lalinde?).................................... 86 Fig. 10.8. Engraved horse n°11 ............................................................................................ 86 Fig. 10.9. Horse n°16, engraved partly on the calcite, partly on the bare rock. The dots indicate modern graffiti. The shaded zone indicates the bare rock area .......... 87 Fig. 10.10. Anthropomorphic engraving n°19...................................................................... 87 Fig. 10.11. Engraved woolly rhinoceros n°23 ...................................................................... 88 Fig. 10.12. Panel with the engraved horses n°26 and 27, the head of a bison n°28 and the head of a feline n°29 ................................................... 88 Fig. 10.13. The two engraved horses n°26 and 27. View of the heads ................................. 88 Fig. 10.14. Head of a probable bison (n°28), using the relief of a concretion of the wall in order to figure its forehead ....................................................................... 89 Fig. 10.15. Rhinoceros. Black painting ................................................................................ 89 Fig. 10.16. Geographical location of the decorated caves mentioned in this paper. The grey line shows the position of the coastline at the time of the Last Glacial Maximal. 1. Margot Cave. 2. Mayenne-Sciences. 3. Church Hole. 4. Robin Hood. 5. Orival. 6. Gouy. 7. Boutigny. 8. Croc-Marin. 9. Trois Pignons. 10. Grande Grotte. 11. Grotte du Cheval. 12. Geissenklösterle. 13. Hohle Fels ................................................................. 90 Fig. 11.1. Barrière’s drawing of his Bovid 1 ........................................................................ 95 Fig. 11.2. Barrière’s drawing of his Animal 5 ...................................................................... 95 Fig. 11.3. A conservative rendering of Barrière’s Animal 5 based on an examination of the drawing itself............................................................................... 95 Fig. 11.4. Barrière’s drawing of Barrière’s Bison 8 ............................................................. 95 Fig. 11.5. A conservative rendering of Barrière’s Bison 8 based on an examination of the drawing itself............................................................................... 96 Fig. 11.6. Barrière’s drawing of what he calls Bison 9 ........................................................ 96 Fig. 11.7. A conservative rendering of Barrière’s Bison 9 based on an examination of the drawing itself............................................................................... 96 Fig. 11.8. Barrière’s drawing of his Bison 10 ...................................................................... 96 Fig. 11.9. Barrière’s drawing of his Bison 11 ...................................................................... 97 Fig. 11.10. Barrière’s drawing of his Bison 15 .................................................................... 97 Fig. 11.11. Barrière’s drawing of his Animal 16 .................................................................. 97 Fig. 11.12. Barrière’s drawing of his Double Bison 17 ........................................................ 98 Fig. 11.13. Barrière’s drawing of his Bison 18 .................................................................... 98 Fig. 11.14. A conservative rendering of Barrière’s Bison 18 based on an examination of the drawing itself............................................................................... 98 Fig. 11.15. Barrière’s drawing of his Bovid 19 .................................................................... 98 Fig. 11.16. Barrière’s drawing of his Bison 20 .................................................................... 99 Fig. 11.17. A conservative rendering of Barrière’s Bison 20 based on an examination of the drawing itself, including the two lines Barrière takes to form the back, but which really do not ................................................ 99 Fig. 11.18. Barrière’s drawing of his No. 21, what he thinks may be a bovid (left) and a pair of horns (right) ......................................................................... 99 Fig. 11.19. Barrière’s drawing of his Animal 22, what he thinks may be a goat or a deer ............................................................................................................. 100 vi

Fig. 11.20. Barrière’s drawing of his Animal 23, what he thinks may be a bovid ............. 100 Fig. 11.21. Barrière’s drawing of his Animal 24, what he thinks may be a bovid or a cervid ........................................................................................................ 100 Fig. 12.1. Points next to a lunar symbol. Paleolitic lunar eclipse? El Castillo (Cantabria) .................................................................................................. 106 Fig. 12.2. Astronomical lunar eclipse................................................................................. 106 Fig. 12.3. Phases of the Moon ............................................................................................ 106 Fig. 12.4. Paleolitic punctuations? Castillo de Villafames (Castellón) .............................. 106 Fig. 12.5. Paleolitic punctuations. El Pindal (Asturias)...................................................... 107 Fig. 12.6. Paleolitic punctuations. Chufín (Asturias) ......................................................... 107 Fig. 12.7. Paleolitic punctuations. Llonín (Asturias) .......................................................... 107 Fig. 12.8. Paleolitic punctuations. El Castillo (Cantabria) ................................................. 107 Fig. 12.9. Paleolitic punctuations. Maltravieso (Cáceres) .................................................. 107 Fig. 12.10. Paleolitic punctuations. Fuente del Trucho (Huesca) ....................................... 107 Fig. 12.11. Paleolitic punctuations. Cueva del Moro (Tarifa, Cádiz) ................................. 108 Fig. 12.12. Paleolitic punctuations. La Pileta (Málaga) ..................................................... 108 Fig. 12.13. Panel with astral paintings and points, shelter of Pala Pinta (Carlao, Portugal) ......................................................................................................... 109 Fig. 12.14. Detail panel Pala Pinta. Solar painting with points (Carlao, Portugal) ......................................................................................................... 109 Fig. 12.15. Sun and points. Cañaica del Calar (Murcia) .................................................... 109 Fig. 12.16. Ramiform and digitations. Lapa dos Coelhos (Portugal) ................................. 109 Fig. 12.17. History in churinga. Australia.......................................................................... 112 Fig. 12.18. Altamira (Spain). History? ............................................................................... 112 Fig. 13.1. General view of collective burial (Cingle del Mas Nou, Ares del Maestre, Castellón)......................................................................................... 116 Fig. 13.2. Complete Skeleton of principal individual......................................................... 116 Fig. 13.3. Pelvis and mode of flexion................................................................................. 117 Fig. 13.4. Detail’s Skull of principal individual with the false eye .................................... 117 Fig. 13.5. Provable clothes and shoes on............................................................................ 118 Fig. 13.6. General view of stratification sequence in Fosca Cave ...................................... 119 Fig. 13.7. General view of burial in Fosca Cave ................................................................ 120 Fig. 13.8. Female skeleton and skull belonging of Fosca Cave ......................................... 120 Fig. 14.1. Serpentiforme na Mão do homem ...................................................................... 128 Fig. 14.2. Serpentiforme de Panóias................................................................................... 129 Fig. 14.3. Serpentiforme de Lamelas.................................................................................. 130 Fig. 16.1. carte NO1. La carte de l’Iran et la Province de Markazi ou Arak ...................... 144 Fig. 16.2. carte NO2. La carte de l’Iran et la Provence de Kermân.................................... 144 Fig. 16.3. carte NO3. La carte détaillée la ville de Khomeyn et ses régions de notre recherche en Province Central ........................................................................ 145 Fig. 16.4. et 16.5. Les thèmes représentantes des animaux dans même sens dans les deux sites de notre recherche NO 4 à province Arak et NO 5 à province Kermân .......................................................................................... 146 Fig. 16.6. et 16.7. Les thèmes représentantes d’utilisation les outils et instruments l’exemples en province central .............................................................. 147 vii

Fig. 16.8. et 16.9. Les exemples de thèmes les figures rares NO 8 en province Kermân et NO 9 en province Arak ........................................................... 147 Fig. 16.10. et 16.11. Les lieux naturel de la chasse etc concernant le but et ainsi des motivations ces art et dessins ............................................................... 148 Fig. 16.12. et 16.13. Les deux différents exemples concernant l’existence de grands nombre l’art rupestre dans ces régions NO 12 à province de Arak et NO 13 à province de Kermân...................................................................... 148 Fig. 16.14. et 16.15. Des différent exemple les dessins en taille miniatures et le plus petit et aussi le plus grand NO 14 à province de Arak et NO 15 à province de Kermân ................................................................................... 149 Fig. 16.16. Le rapprochement entre les peintures rupestres d’Iran et celles des autres régions du monde par exemple 1a période concernant le cerf magicien de la grotte des Trois – Frères en France (10.000-15.000 av. J.C.). Avec le cerf de la province central et Kermân ..................................................................................................................... 149 Fig. 16.17. et 16.18. Les images nous montrant l’importance ces lieux pour maîtriser les causes de détérioration, afin de contribuer à l’amélioration de l’état des oeuvres et d’assurer leur pérennité ................................. 150 Fig. 17.1. Northern Plains primary study area.................................................................... 155 Fig. 17.2. Two Hands Cave, Montana ................................................................................ 156 Fig. 17.3. Juniper Cave, Wyoming ..................................................................................... 156 Fig. 17.4. Rainbow Bear Cave, Montana ........................................................................... 157 Fig. 17.5. Red pictographs in Triangle Cave, Montana ...................................................... 157 Fig. 17.6. Red pictographs in Pass Creek Cave, Wyoming ................................................ 157 Fig. 17.7. Yellow pictographs in Frozen Leg Cave, Montana ............................................ 158 Fig. 17.8. Yellow pictographs in Frozen Leg Cave, Montana ............................................ 158 Fig. 17.9. Carved stalactite in form of a snake, Sidney Montana ....................................... 158 Fig. 18.1. Map showing the location of the study area (enclosed by the dash line) within the Americas. A: Petroglyph from Indian Creek, Utah. B: Petroglyph from Jalisco, Mexico ............................................. 162 Fig. 18.2. Rock art images from North American .............................................................. 163 Fig. 18.3. Chart of Southwestern chronology..................................................................... 166 Fig. 18.4. Petroglyph of a biomorph. Three Rivers, New Mexico ..................................... 168 Fig. 18.5. Anthropomorphs featuring a “flute player”-like posture. A: Painting on Black-on-white Mesa Verde Bowl; B: Petroglyph. Galisteo Basin, New Mexico. The large spoon-shaped object most likely is of different authorship; C: Petroglyph. Velarde, New Mexico; D: Petroglyph. Jemez Mountains, New Mexico ........................................................... 169 Fig. 18.6. Petroglyphs of “monkeys playing a wind instrument”. Pakra, Peru. Solid arrow: actual slope; open arrow: possible original slope of the fallen boulder ............................................................................... 169 Fig. 18.7. Map of Three Rivers, New Mexico. Inset: location of Three Rivers within the study area ..................................................................................................... 170 Fig. 18.8. Petroglyph of a biomorph in a “flute player” position. Three Rivers, New Mexico ........................................................................................... 170 Fig. 18.9. Petroglyph of a biomorph in a “flute player” position. Three Rivers, New Mexico ........................................................................................... 171 Fig. 18.10. Petroglyph of a biomorph in a “flute player” position. Three Rivers, New Mexico ........................................................................................... 171 viii

Fig. 18.11. Petroglyph of a biomorph in a “flute player” position. Three Rivers, New Mexico ........................................................................................... 171 Fig. 19.1. Rock painting of a saber tooth tiger; special attention should be done to the atypical tail ............................................................................................ 176 Fig. 19.2. A saber tooth tiger fossilized skeleton; note the atypical tail ............................. 176 Fig. 19.3. A saber tooth tiger reconstitution ....................................................................... 176

ix

LIST OF TABLES Tab. 13.1. Chronology of Cingle of Mas Nou (Castellón, Spain) ...................................... 12

x

Session C74 METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

“LES MÉTHODES DE L’HISTOIRE DE L’ART À L’ÉPREUVE DE LA PRÉHISTOIRE” INTRODUCTION Marc GROENEN & Didier MARTENS Depuis l’époque des Lumières, l’histoire de l’art a développé diverses méthodes d’approche des représentations figurées, en se concentrant en particulier sur le Moyen Âge et la Renaissance. L’étude du style comme support de la chronologie, l’identification de mains d’artiste, mais aussi l’interprétation iconographique des œuvres à la lumière de sources textuelles ou autres ont occupé, dès le XIXe siècle, une place prépondérante dans les recherches. Au XXe siècle se sont ajoutées la description formelle et l’étude technologique de l’oeuvre d’art. Si la première vise à comprendre l’image dans son identité visuelle, la seconde cherche à reconstituer les étapes du processus de sa genèse.

spectateur, constitue un autre champ d’investigation potentiellement fécond. Paul Philippot a rappelé récemment tout l’intérêt qu’offre celui-ci, alors même qu’il tend quelque peu à être négligé aujourd’hui par les historiens d’art (Philippot, 2002). Enfin, l’approche technique des représentations est susceptible d’offrir des informations importantes, notamment sur la présence de tracés préparatoires, des différentes phases d’élaboration ou le matériel utilisé par les peintres et graveurs préhistoriques. Des collègues ont répondu à notre suggestion, et le colloque a été riche en informations et en discussions. Juan-María Apellániz, dans sa contribution consacrée à “l’application de la méthodologie de l’histoire de l’art à l’art paléolithique”, s’est attaché à présenter ses ultimes recherches sur l’attribution des mains d’artistes. Marc Groenen et Didier Martens, quant à eux, ont tenté de définir les conditions de possibilité d’une analyse d’attribution et les limites de la méthode, en intégrant les exigences actuelles de la démarche telle qu’elle est actuellement pratiquée par les historiens de l’art des périodes historiques; les peintures de la grotte cantabrique de la Pasiega A ont servi à illustrer ce travail. L’art du Levant espagnol était également au programme, avec les recherches d’Esther López Montalvo sur “la composition dans l’art du Levant: mécanismes d’ordonnancement et intégration des figures dans l’espace graphico-narratif”. Enfin, l’art rupestre africain était largement représenté avec les communications de Renate Heckendorf sur “l’art rupestre sud-marocain revu: les surprenantes caractéristiques stylistiques et thématiques du PseudoBovidien et du Tazinien de la vallée moyenne du Draa” et de Joaquim Soler Subils, dont l’exposé portait sur “l’approche stylistique des peintures rupestres préhistoriques de Zemmu, dans le Sahara occidental”.

Les méthodes élaborées par les historiens d’art ont été reprises, avec les adaptations nécessaires, par des archéologues classiques, des spécialistes des arts de l’Amérique précolombienne ou de l’Extrême-Orient. En revanche, les préhistoriens sont trop souvent restés réfractaires à ces méthodes. Contrairement à ce qu’on pourrait croire, l’image est la grande absente des études consacrées aux arts préhistoriques. Certains ont pu manifester un scepticisme quant à la validité même de cette notion d’image, encore renforcé, à vrai dire, par l’irruption des sciences de laboratoire dans la discipline. Pourtant, eu égard aux résultats acquis dans des champs de recherche fort éloignés de la Renaissance italienne, il est pour le moins tentant de s’interroger sur ce que certains outils traditionnels de l’histoire de l’art peuvent apporter au préhistorien. Rappelons, à cet égard, les tentatives d’attribution fructueuses faites, par exemple, sur le décor des céramiques géométriques, sur les idoles cycladiques ou sur l’art de la statuaire africaine. Cette dernière a d’ailleurs conquis un public demandeur, avec la belle exposition tenue à Bruxelles en 2001, et illustrée par un catalogue très convaincant (de Grunne [dir.], 2001; Stepan, 2001).

Un fait singulier mérite, à notre avis, de retenir notre attention: la plurivocité de la notion de style. Il est, en effet, frappant de constater à quel point cette notion – centrale lorsqu’il s’agit de l’image – est utilisée, sans qu’une définition, même sommaire, ne permette de savoir vraiment à quoi elle renvoie. Dans certains cas, le style semble caractériser une époque, il a alors valeur chronologique. Dans d’autres cas, il désigne un phénomène collectif et fonctionne comme s’il était le produit d’une entité culturelle. Parfois encore, le style ne concerne qu’un site ou une région; il s’agit dès lors d’habitudes graphiques susceptibles de caractériser un nombre limité d’artistes. Enfin, cette notion est encore utilisée pour cerner les particularités graphiques de

Il nous a donc semblé utile de proposer comme thème de réflexion général l’image préhistorique ou, plus exactement, l’emploi pouvant être fait des principaux champs disciplinaires de l’histoire de l’art pour l’analyse des arts préhistoriques sur paroi rocheuse. Les possibilités sont variées. La stylistique, tout d’abord, est évidemment un outil potentiel privilégié, en particulier par la possibilité qu’il offre de pouvoir fonder la datation ou l’attribution. L’iconographie doit rester un deuxième point d’ancrage de l’analyse de l’image, en particulier par l’identification des thèmes figurés récurrents. L’analyse formelle, ensuite, qui traite, par exemple, de l’étude du rapport entre l’image et le support ou entre l’image et le 3

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

certaines œuvres; elle sert dans ce cas à identifier des manières de faire individuelles. Le flou qui entoure cette notion a évidemment eu – et a d’ailleurs encore – des répercussions lourdes de conséquences sur notre lecture de l’image préhistorique, il est vrai tellement limitée par l’absence d’un ancrage chronologique fiable. C’est pourquoi il nous a semblé que le travail de terrain ne devait pas exclure le questionnement sur les présupposés théoriques de l’histoire de l’art. Les fructueux échanges de ce colloque ont, en tout cas, permis de vérifier à quel point les participants étaient sensibles à ce point de vue. Un prochain congrès devrait sans doute permettre de prolonger les travaux dans ce sens...

Bibliographie DE GRUNNE, B. (dir.) (2001) – Mains de maître. À la découverte des sculpteurs d’Afrique. Bruxelles, BBL, 272 p. STEPAN, P. (2001) – Donatellos afrikanische Brüder. Zu einem Paradigmenwechsel in der afrikanischen Kunstwissenschaft. Belvedere, 2, p. 36-47, 7 fig. PHILIPPOT, P. (2002) – Plaidoyer pour la forme. Annales d’Histoire de l’Art et d’Archéologie de l’Université Libre de Bruxelles, 24, p. 91-94.

4

APPLICATION DE LA MÉTHODOLOGIE DE L’HISTOIRE DE L’ART À L’ÉTUDE DE L’ART PALÉOLITHIQUE: L’ATTRIBUTION DES OEUVRES ANONYMES A SES AUTEURS Juan-María APELLANIZ Universidad de Deusto. Bilbao. Spain Abstract: The article justifies the necessity and the possibility of applying to paleolithic art works the method attributing the authorship, used in the History of art. The necessity is based on the unquestionable fact paleolithic art works are anonymous. Therefore to establish the existence of the style it is necessary to identify the authors that practice it. Widespread style doesn't exist if it isn’t proved that the works attributed to it have been created by several authors. The possibility is based on the effectiveness of the attribution criteria such as the layout and the stroke. There are even more effectives than the used ones in the Art History. The attribution procedure is developed in three phases. First, the macroscopic observation of the regularities in the repetition of the form, the layout and the stroke of the figures. Second, the formulation of the hypothesis of attribution. And third, its confirmation by means of the experimentation and statistics. The paper exposes how the attribution has been carried out. It presents the analysis of the three deer figures located in the cave “Las Chimeneas” (Cantabria, Spain) in order to explain how the observation and the formulation of the hypothesis have been made. And to explain how the confirmation has been done, the paper also presents the analysis of the decoration of parallel grooves Made on four epipaleolithic bone objects from the cava of Arenaza (Basque Country, Spain), which are reproduced and their data prosecuted statistically. Key words: method, attribution, author, art, paleolithic Résumé: L’article justifie la nécessité et la possibilité d’appliquer l’hypothèse de l’attribution d’auteur (ou détermination d’auteur) aux oeuvres paléolithiques, à l’instar de l’Histoire de l’art. La nécessité se fonde sur le fait indiscutable que toutes les oeuvres paléolithiques sont anonymes. L’unique possibilité donc d’établir l’existence d’un style c’est d’identifier les auteurs des oeuvres supposées d’appartenir à cet style, c’est à dire, de montrer que les oeuvres ont été faites par plusieurs auteurs, pas par un même et unique auteur. La possibilité se fonde sur l’efficience des critères d’attribution, dont ceux du tracé et du trait. Le procédé de l’attribution se développe en trois phases: l’observation macroscopique des repetitions des ressemblances de la forme, du tracé et du trait; la formulation de l’hypothèse; et finalement la confirmation de celle-ci par l’expérimentation et le traitement statistique des donnés. L’auteur montre comment l’attribution a été menée par lui même. A fin d’expliquer comment-il a mis en prattique l’observation et la formulation de l’hypothése, il présente son analyse de 3 cervidés de la grotte de Las Chimeneas (Cantabria. Espagne). De même, pour montrer de quelle façon a mis en prattique la confirmation, il présent l’analyse de la décoration à sillons parallèles sur objets epipaléolithiques en os provenants de la grotte de Arenaza (Pays Basque, Espagne). Mots clef: méthode, attribution, auteur, art, paléolitique

Je prétende au premier lieu justifier la nécessité et la possibilité d’utiliser l’hypothèse de l’attribution de l’auteur (c'est-à-dire de la main d’artiste), provenant de l’histoire de l’art, pour analyser et interpréter le dessin paléolithique, et au deuxième, montrer, à l’aide de deux exemples, comment je l’ai mis en œuvre. NÉCESSITÉ DE L’ATTRIBUTION DE L’AUTEUR

deuxième, que ces théories n’ont pas démontré que les œuvres caractéristiques de chacun de ces soi-disant styles étaient l’œuvre d’auteurs différents et non d’un seul, sans quoi il n’y aurait pas de style possible. La troisième, que l’art paléolithique se réduit à un style unique composé tantôt de multiples styles individuels (auteurs), tantôt de styles collectifs de groupes d’auteurs situés dans une région et participant des mêmes traditions formelles (“écoles”).

Les théories traditionnelles (Leroi-Gourhan, 1995) ont supposé que les différences entre les figures étaient dues aux changements généralisés et successifs de la forme, appelés styles, a la manière de l’Histoire de l’art. Mais elles n’ont pas attribué les œuvres de chacun d’eux à ses auteurs. Le manque de styles généralisés et successifs s’appuie dans trois raisons. La première est que les théories traditionnelles n’ont pas présenté des ensembles suffisamment larges de caractéristiques formelles exclusives de chacun d’eux y distinctes de ceux des autres par moyen desquelles puissent être différenciés. La

Ce manque des styles je l’ait montré au moyen du traitement statistique des similitudes entre les figures, décrites grâce à un système de variables quantitatives, dont la valeur explicative de la variance est très élevée. La description des figures par ces variables a été rendue possible grâce au fait que les Paléolithiques ont réduit leurs figures au contour et qu’ils les ont dessinées en les imaginant systématiquement en perspective latérale et dans une position statique et suspendue dans l’air (Apellániz y Calvo Gómez, 1999; Apellániz, Ruiz Idarraga et al., 2002). 5

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

L’attribution étant une hypothèse, le pourcentage de sa probabilité augmente au fur et à mesure que la régularité est assurée par un grand nombre de répétitions et que l’hypothèse peut être confirmée.

THÉORIE DE L’APPLICATION DE L’ATTRIBUTION À L’ART PALÉOLITHIQUE Toutes les œuvres paléolithiques sont anonymes. Alors il est nécessaire de commencer son étude par l’attribution des œuvres à ses auteurs, comme on le fait en histoire de l’art.

PROCÉDURE DE L’APPLICATION DE L’HYPOTHÈSE D’ATTRIBUTION

L’application de l’hypothèse de l’attribution d’auteur à l’art paléolithique est possible parce ‘il s’agit d’un art composé de figurations et d’abstractions comme tous les autres. En outre, il peut emprunter aux autres ses critères d’attribution.

Je montrerai en analysant des figurations de cervidés, comment j’ai mis en œuvre l’observation macroscopique et la formulation de la correspondant hypothèse d’attribution. Et finalement, en analysant une décoration géométrique, je montrerais le procédé pour confirmer l’hypothèse au moyen de l’expérimentation et du traitement statistique des données.

Le critère d’attribution utilisé par l’Histoire de l’art est celui de la similitude la forme des figures, surtout des ceux de ses parties plus petites (oreille, œil, bouche, etc.) (Friedländer, 1969: 125-134). Ce critère se fonde dans la comparaison du dessin à l’écriture, critère que la Graphologie utilise pour identifier l’individualité, et dont la valeur a été confirmée par l’expérimentation et la statistique (Hill, 1977: 85-94). En outre, l’art paléolithique peut améliorer ce critère en l’ajoutant celui du tracé et du trait, que j’ai développé (Apellániz, 1984; 1992; Apellániz, Ruiz Idarraga et al., 2002).

L’observation macroscopique de la forme, du tracé et du trait L’observation se porte sur la répétition au premier lieu de la forme, et après celle du tracé et le trait dans trois figures de cerfs à contour noir, de la grotte de “Las Chimeneas” (Cantabria, Espagne) (González Echegaray, 1972).

Tel que je l’ai systématisé, l’hypothèse d’attribution se développe en trois phases: 1. Observation de la régularité dans la répétition de la forme (contour externe et interne, perspective et modelé), du tracé (nature et rapport entre les lignes manière de dessiner) et du trait (bouger la main en une impulsion unique), 2. Formulation de l’hypothèse pour l’expliquer, et 3. Confirmation de cette hypothèse.

Le cerf 1 (Fig. 1.1) La forme. La figure est relativement peu inclinée vers le sol, ses pattes-avant étant un peu plus courts et situés un peu plus bas que ses pattes-arrière, ce qui produit une sensation de suspension dans l’air. L’avant-train est relativement court. La tête est légèrement levée vers le haut. Elle est petite, moins triangulaire que trapézoïdale; elle n’a pas d’œil, naseau ni oreille. La ramure, complète, présent la perche droite

Répétition, ne veut pas dire que toutes les formes ou toutes les modelés qu´un auteur donne a toutes les figures qu’il répète soient complément égales, ce que n’est pas possible. Mais dans ce cas les différences se caractérisent par le fait qu’elles sont très petites et parce que leurs différences s’ordonnent de manière échelonnée. C’est ici que se pose le problème d’estimer la “grandeur” des différences, c'est-à-dire de “mensurer” son importance ou sa valeur. Mais on pourrait dire a peu près, que la différence serait grand si les lignes présentent des dessines opposées, et petite si la différence se réduit a son ampleur ou a sa position. Un principe reposant sur le raisonnement et sur l’expérimentation assure: que les œuvres d’un même auteur sont plus semblables entre elles que celles de deux auteurs différentes, que les différences entre eux sont beaucoup plus grandes, et que ses valeurs ne s’ordonnent pas de manière échelonnée, comme ils le font entre ceux du même auteur. La régularité de la répétition de la forme dans les figures ne peut pas toujours être démontré parce qu’elles ne présentent pas toujours les mêmes parties surtout les plus petites. C’est pourquoi, que j’aie proposée d’ajouter à ce critère, celui du tracé et du trait, étant forcément toujours présentes.

Fig. 1.1. Cerf 1. Las Chimeneas 6

J.-M. APELLANIZ: APPLICATION DE LA MÉTHODOLOGIE DE L’HISTOIRE DE L’ART À L’ÉTUDE DE L’ART PALÉOLITHIQUE…

(toujours du point de vue du spectateur) et les andouillers souples et arqués, celle de gauche ne l’étant qu’aux extrémités. Le cou est assez court et un peu large, ce qui lui donne peu de sveltesse. Le tronc est relativement long. Le contour du dos est très peu arqué; le contour du ventre étant très semblable, presque parallèle, et très légèrement levé vers le pli inguinal, ce qui lui donne une forme légèrement cylindrique. L’arrière-train est relativement étroit. La fesse décrit une double courbe, peu arquée et peu saillante. La queue est formée par l’extrémité arrière du contour du dos et non par une ligne indépendante. L’anus est suggéré par un espace vide assez petit, produit par la convergence déplacée des extrémités arrière du dos et du dessus de la fesse.

Fig. 1.2. Cerf 2. Las Chimeneas La figure est un peu plus inclinée vers le sol que la précédente et produit le même effet de suspension aérienne.

Les pattes-avant, légèrement tournés vers l’avant, sont très peu plus courts que les pattes-arrière, tournés vers l’arrière, et relativement peu séparés. Sont formées exclusivement par de lignes convergentes en grande partie superposées, et terminées en pointe aigue.

Son avant-train est un peu plus grand que celui de la précédente. La tête est levée vers le haut comme celle de la précédente. Elle est un peu plus grande et plus triangulaire, ce que ajouté à la plus grande longueur et étroitesse du cou, la rend plus svelte que la précédente. Le naseau, l’œil et l’oreille sont manquants. La ramure port deux perches un peu plus courtes et les andouillers basilaires, comme la précédente.

Les procédés de représentation: la perspective de la ramure et des pattes est complètement latérale. Manque total de modelé. Le tracé. Dans les Figs. 1.1, 1.2 et 1.3 le trait c’est le morceau compris entre deux modifications visibles et succesifs de la ligne, produits par cassure, par juxtaposition, ou par croissement.

Le tronc est peut-être imperceptiblement plus court et aussi large que celui de la précédente. Les contours du dos et du ventre sont aussi arqués et presque aussi parallèles entre eux que ceux de la figure précédente. L’inclinaison du ventre vers le pli inguinal est un peu plus faible, de sorte que l’aspect cylindrique est légèrement plus prononcé.

Les lignes longues sont composées de plus de trois traits et de moins de huit traits. Le dorsal est composé par au moins de six traits, le ventral par au moins de trois, du même que le poitrail et la ramure. Les lignes courtes sont composées de au moins un trait et de trois traits au plus. Celui du frontal par au moins d’un, comme la mâchoire, les andouillers; les pattes-avant par au moins deux, et les pattes-arrière par trois.

L’arrière-train est un peu plus large que celui de la figure précédente. Le contour de la fesse est quasiment identique au niveau de la saillance que dans la précédente. La queue est formée, comme pour la précédente, de l’extrémité derrière du contour dorsal.

La jonction entre les traits se produit de quatre formes: légèrement croisée, comme à l’avant-bras et à la fesse; continue ou très légèrement superposée, comme au dos; superposée, comme aux andouillers, pattes-arrière et au poitrail, et convergent ou très légèrement superposé comme aux pattes-arrière.

Elle a deux pattes-avant, également formés de deux tracés convergents un peu plus courts, moins superposés, moins appointés et plus séparés que dans la précédente. Elle n’a qu’une seule patte-arrière.

Le trait présente un épaisseur moyenne et ses extrémités sont légèrement appointées. Toutes les lignes présentent une charge de piment pratiquement uniforme.

Quant aux procédés de représentation, la perspective de la ramure et des pattes est latérale, comme dans la figure précédente. Le modelé est également absent.

Le cerf 2 (Fig. 1.2)

Le tracé. Les lignes longues sont composées de trois traits au moins et de moins de huit traits, comme pour la ligne de dos, le ventre, le cou/poitrail; les lignes courtes sont composées d’au moins un trait et de moins de trois traits, étant le frontal formé de deux traits, comme pour la précédente. Les perches de la ramure sont un plus courtes

La figure est composée de deux grandes parties, l’avanttrain et le tronc et arrière-train, trop séparées entre eux, comme si elles eurent été dessinées à deux reprisses, la distance entre eux étant défectueusement calculé. 7

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

que celles de la précédente, et les andouillers sont un peu moins arqués. La jonction entre les traits est, comme pour la figure précédente, présente quatre formes: légèrement croisé, comme à l’avant-bras droit, continue ou très légèrement superposée, comme au poitrail, superposée, comme au dorsal et au ventral, et convergent ou très peu superposée, comme aux pattes-avant. Le trait est d’épaisseur moyenne, il est régulier, avec des extrémités légèrement appointées, comme pour la figure précédente. Les lignes de l’avant-train sont moins chargées de pigment que celles du tronc et de l’arrière-train. Fig. 1.3. Cerf 3. Las Chimeneas

Le cerf 3 (Fig. 1.3) Figure à deux grandes parties, l’avant-train et le tronc et l’arrière-train séparées par des interruptions des contours dorsal et ventral. Probablement a été dessinée à deux reprises, la distance entre les parties étant mal calculée, comme la précédente.

Quant aux moyens de représentation, la perspective de la ramure et des pattes-avant est latérale, comme dans la figure précédente, celle des pattes-arriére, cas unique, semble être correcte. Le modelé fait également défaut, comme dans les figures précédentes.

La forme. La figure est un peu plus inclinée vers le sol que la première et autant que la précédente, produisant le même effet de suspension aérienne.

Le tracé. Les lignes longues sont formées par minimum trois et maximum huit traits, comme pour les contours dorsal et ventral et le poitrail; les lignes courtes sont formées par un trait et moins de trois, comme pour la mâchoire, le frontal, les pattes, la fesse.

Son avant-train est un peu plus grand que celui des deux précédentes. La tête est plus levée, plus petite et moins triangulaire que la précédente. Lui manque aussi le naseau, l’oeil et l’oreille. Ces caractéristiques jointes à la largeur du cou/poitrail et à l’arrondi plus important de la partie centrale en font une figure moins svelte que les précédentes.

Les jonctions entre les traits sont, comme pour les figures précédentes, présentent quatre formes: légèrement croisé, comme au pattes-arrière, continue légèrement superposée, comme aux contours dorsal et ventral, superposée, comme au dorsal, et convergent légèrement superposée, comme aux pattes-arrière

Le tronc est de longueur similaire à celui des figures précédentes, peut-être un peu plus long. Les contours du dos et du ventre sont plus arqués et moins parallèles, ce qui lui donne un aspect moins cylindrique et plus trapézoïdal.

Le trait est d’épaisseur moyenne, régulier et ses extrémités sont légèrement appointées. Les lignes de l’avant-train sont moins chargées de couleur que celles du tronc et de l’arrière-train, comme pour le cerf 2.

L’arrière-train présente une fesse plus saillante que dans les figures précédentes. La queue est formée par l’extrémité arrière du dos, comme dans les précédentes. L’anus est produit par le même procédé que dans les figures précédentes, mais le déplacement du dos et de la fesse est très faible, de sorte que l’espace de l’anus est assez bien plus petit que dans la figure précédente et ressemble davantage à celui du cerf 1.

Les répétitions Dans la forme: La tête est levée, les pattes-avant sont légèrement tournées vers l’avant et les pattes-arrière vers l’arrière. Les proportions: la tête petit, l’encolure courte et large, le tronc long et trapezoïde, pattes courtes; l’avanttrain étroit et haut, le tronc long et trapezoïde el l’arrièretrain court et large. Les détails anatomiques de petite taille (museau, oeil, oreilles, sexe,) ont été supprimés.

Il présente deux pattes-avant également formés par deux traits convergents et dont la forme appointée est très semblable à celle de la figure précédente, à l’exception d’une patte où les traits ne se rejoignent pas. Et, comme dans les figures précédentes, ils sont plus courts que les pattes-arrière. Ils sont davantage séparés l’un de l’autre que dans la figure 1.1 et presque autant que dans la figure 1.2.

Dans le tracé. La taille et nombre des andouillers peut légèrement varier. Les parties anatomiques formés par des lignes convergents (nuque, pattes, anus, gueule, coude) ces-ci ne sont pas unies (aléatoirement le pli inguinal, la gueule, ne le sont pas, mais pas toujours simultanément les mêmes). Les lignes longues ne sont pas continues 8

J.-M. APELLANIZ: APPLICATION DE LA MÉTHODOLOGIE DE L’HISTOIRE DE L’ART À L’ÉTUDE DE L’ART PALÉOLITHIQUE…

(aléatoirement certaines le sont, mais pas simultanément les mêmes). Les extrémités sont toujours réduites à deux lignes convergentes.

CONFIRMATION DE L’HYPOTHESE: L’EXPERIMENTATION ET LA STATISTIQUE Je montrerai comment l’hypothèse d’attribution peut être confirmée grâce à l’expérimentation et au traitement de données par des procédures statistiques, en analysant une décoration. Le but de cette analyse c’est de montrer comment le tracé et le trait sont des critères d’attribution de valeur supérieur a cet de la forme, puis que les formes à analyser ont été créées par des mouvements de la main en une impulsion unique. C’est le cas de la décoration composée par de sillons parallèles gravés par le mouvement de va-et-vient (Apellániz, Ruiz Idarraga et al., 2002).

Dans le trait. Les lignes longues sont formées par des traits courtes et moyennes, exceptionnellement par des traits longues, mais pas toujours dans les mêmes endroits de la ligne. Les lignes de moyenne longueur ne sont pas dessinés par de combinaisons des traits de différents longueurs; exceptionnellement le trait longue peut être combiné avec le trait courte. Les lignes courtes sont toujours formées par de traits très courts. Les jonctions des traits sont légèrement croisée, ou légèrement superposée, convergente ou très légèrement superposée et superposées. La jonction purement continue est exclu.

L’objet de l’étude (collection archéologique) est composé de 4 objets en os, décorés sur une face et/ou sur les deux au moyen de 198 sillons parallèles, distribués en trois groupes de 23 séries, provenant des niveaux épipaléolithiques de la grotte de Arenaza (Pays Basque, Espagne) (fig. 1.4).

L’échelonnement continuel des différences Pour l’inclinaison de la figure, la plus inclinée serai la deuxième, suivie de la troisième et finalement de la première. Pour l’élévation de la tête, la plus élevé serai cette de la troisième, suivie de cette de la première et finalement de cette de la deuxième. Pour la forme triangulaire de la tête, la plus triangulaire serai cette de la deuxième, suivie de cette de la première et finalement de cette de la troisième. Pour la taille de la tête, la plus grande serai cette de la deuxième, suivie ex aequo de ces de la première et de la troisième. Pour la courbure du contour dorsal, le plus courbée serai celui de la troisième, suivie de celui de la deuxième et finalement de celui de la première. Pour le parallélisme des contours dorsal et ventral, les plus parallèles seraient ceux de la première, suivies de ceux de la deuxième y finalement de ceux de la troisième. Pour l’ampleur de l’anus, le plus ample serait celui de la deuxième, suivi de celui de la première et finalement de celui de la troisième. Pour la longueur de l’anus le plus longue serait celui de la deuxième, suivie de celui de la troisième, et finalement de celui de la première. Pour la rondeur de la fesse, la plus ronde serai cette de la troisième suivies ex aequo de ceux de la première et deuxième. Pour la longueur des pattes-avant les plus longues seraient ces de la première suivies simultanément de ces de la deuxième et la troisième. Pour l’ampleur de la séparation entre les pattes-avant, les plus séparées seraient ces de la deuxième, suivies ex aequo de ces de la première et la troisième. Les figures 1.1 et 1.2 auraient été dessinées simultanément par le plus grand nombre de traits, suivies de la 3.

L’observation macroscopique de la collection et formulation de l’hypothèse L’observation dans la collection archéologique se porte à: la forme externe (longueur, largeur, etc.) et interne (largeur et profondeur du sillon, -tracé et trait-) aussi que sa disposition tant à l’intérieur de sa série que par rapport aux autres. L’observation permet de constater que les sillons de chaque série, et les séries de chaque objet (excepté un cas spécial), sont beaucoup plus similaires entre eux que par rapport aux autres. En outre, on observent 4 groupes de similitudes majeures (séries de l’objet 1, ceux de l’objet 2 et certaines de l’objet 5, et séries de l’objet 4 et de l’objet 6) et 2 groupes de similitudes mineures (séries 3, 4 et 5 de l’objet 5 et séries de l’objet 2 et de l’objet 5). L’hypothèse suppose que les ressemblances majeures représentent les auteurs, qu’ils sont au nombre de 4 et que rien ne nous permet d’envisager un cinquième. L’expérimentation et la collection expérimentale L’expérimentation a été faite dans le but d’identifier les ressemblances et les différences de forme, de tracé et du trait et de la position des sillons parmi les auteurs connus ou expérimentateurs (modèle expérimentale), pour les prendre comme modèles afin de différencier les auteurs inconnus de la collection archéologique. Elle fut réalisée par 6 personnes, droitières et gauchères, chacune d’elles ayant gravé deux objets au moyen de 2 séries de sillons, jusqu’à former un total de 12 groupes de 24 séries et 192 sillons (fig. 1.5).

Formulation de l’hypothèse La régularité de la forme (nombre, dessin, dimensions et proportions des parties les plus grandes et les plus petites), l’utilisation absolument prédominante de la perspective latérale et l’exclusion systématique du modelé, et surtout la régularité du tracé (nombre et forme des traits composant les lignes courtes et longues, manière qu’ils ont de se rejoindre, l’ordre suivi dans le dessin des parties) s’expliquent mieux si l’on suppose que les figures sont l’œuvre d’un seul auteur, plutôt que de plusieurs.

Lors d’une observation macroscopique de la collection expérimentale, les objets, séries et sillons sont similaires à ceux de la collection archéologique. Ils diffèrent du point de vue de la plus grande étroitesse, profondeur, régularité et fuite de l’instrument que ceux des archéologiques, que 9

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

Fig. 1.4. Décoration à sillons parallèles sur côte epipaléolithique – Arenaza

Fig. 1.5. Décoration expérimentale à sillons parallèles sur côte

Fig. 1.6. Coupes des sillons de quelques côtes l’on peut expliquer par le peu d’expérience des expérimentateurs.

internes ou du tracé, et en particulier celle de la profondeur du sillon (fig. 1.6). Pour améliorer la capacité explicative de la variance, il aurait été utile de d’envisager d’autres variables qui décriraient avec plus de détaille le tracé et le trait des sillons. Pour faire cela, il aurait fallu utiliser une technologie dont le coût élevé ne pu pas être financé. C’est pourquoi on doit supposer que, dans cette hypothèse, la probabilité du résultat aurait été augmentée.

Le traitement statistique des collections 17 mesures de chaque sillon ont été prises, qui décrivent la forme externe (variables 1-7), interne (variables 8-12) et sa disposition au sein de la série et en rapport avec les autres séries (variables 13-17).

Dans les deux collections ont été étudiées la forme et la disposition des sillons au moyen de l’analyse de la variance et l’échelonnement multidimensionnel (Multidimensional Scaling) (E.M.D / M.D.S.).

Comme sujet de comparaison, on a choisi la série et non le sillon, en raison du trop grand nombre de ceux-ci pour les tests statistiques, parce qu’elle représente également la nature de l’analyse étant donné que la série peut être réduite à la moyenne de chacune des variables de tous les sillons, parce que l’expérimentation révèle que le graveur maintenait la cohérence entre les sillons tout au long de chaque série et ne la faisait varier qu’au commencement de chaque série nouvelle, et parce que dans le test E.M.D. des archéologues et des expérimentateurs on observe une forte tendance des sillons à se regrouper en séries. Dans les graphiques, l’abréviation VAR représente donc la série.

Le graphique (Fig. 1.7) montre trois groupes, chacun étant très semblable entre eux et très fortement différent des deux autres. L’un est constitué des objets 4 et 6, l’autre des séries courtes de l’objet 5 (les plus dissemblables entre elles et de toutes les autres) et le troisième, des objets 1, 2, 3 et des séries longues de l’objet 5. Les objets 4 et 6 montrent un degré très élevé de ressemblance entre leurs séries et de dissemblance par rapport aux autres, y compris les séries courtes de l’objet 5. Les objets 1, 2, 3 et les séries longues de l’objet 5 montrent un degré élevé de ressemblance entre leurs séries et aussi une plus grande dissemblance par rapport aux autres. Le degré de similitude entre les objets 1, 2, 3 et les séries longues de l’objet 5 est différent. Ainsi, l’objet 1 est plus ressemblant à l’objet 3 et aux séries longues.

Malheureusement il n’est pas possible de rendre compte détaillée de la procédure statistique. Elle a commencé par sélectionner les variables à forte valeur discriminative au moyen de l’analyse factorielle. Celle-ci a révélé que c’était les variables de la forme, surtout les variables 10

J.-M. APELLANIZ: APPLICATION DE LA MÉTHODOLOGIE DE L’HISTOIRE DE L’ART À L’ÉTUDE DE L’ART PALÉOLITHIQUE…

Fig. 1.7. Distribution M.S.D. de la collection archéologique

Fig. 1.8. Distribution M.S.D. de la collection expérimentale Dans la collection expérimentale, le test se répète (fig. 1.8). Le graphique montre que les séries de chaque auteur ressemblent davantage à elles-mêmes qu’aux autres. De la même manière, les différences majeures se situent entre les groupes de séries: d’une part les séries

du 9/10, 7/8 et 11/12 et d’autre part les séries du 13/14 et 17/18, et les similitudes majeures se situent entre les séries du 7/8, du 11/12, du 13/14 et du 17/18. Chaque paire de groupes de séries est l’œuvre du même graveur. 11

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

Fig. 1.9. Distribution M.S.D. des collections archéologique et expérimentale La comparaison entre les collections confirme la validité du traitement pour isoler les deux collections (Fig. 1.9). En outre, les relations de similitude et de dissemblance de la collection archéologique sont analogues à celles de la série expérimentale pour avoir été toutes traitées au moyen des mêmes variables et procédures. Ainsi donc, si dans la collection expérimentale on peut tenir pour certain d’avoir individualisé les auteurs, on peut supposer aussi qu’on peut faire la même chose pour ceux de la collection archéologique. Dans la collection archéologique, la variabilité des valeurs moyennes de toutes les variables est toujours moindre que celle qui se présente dans la collection expérimentale, résultat du manque d’expérience des graveurs expérimentaux.

Bibliography APELLÁNIZ, J.M. (2004) – La Interpretación del arte paleolítico mediante la hipótesis de la evolución de los estilos o mediante la de la forma y la autoría. Trabajos de Prehistoria, 61, nº 1, 2004, pp. 63-79. APELLANIZ, J.M. and CALVO GOMEZ, F. (1999) – La forma del arte paleolítico y la estadística. Cuadernos de Arqueología de Deusto nº 17. Universidad de Deusto. Bilbao. APELLÁNIZ, J.M., RUIZ IDARRAGA, R. and AMAYRA, I. (2002) – La autoría y la experimentación en el arte decorativo del Paleolítico. Cuadernos de Arqueología de Deusto nº 19. Universidad de Deusto. Bilbao.

D’après les résultats de l’expérimentation et son traitement statistique, on peut dire qu’on peut identifier dans la collection archéologique 4 ressemblances importantes et évidentes qui feraient référence aux auteurs des objets 1, 2 et 3 entre lesquels il y a quelques similitudes, et de l’objet 4/6. Il existe des similitudes exclusives entre les séries longues de l’objet 5 et l’auteur de l’objet 1, permettant de les lui attribuer. Il y a de petites ressemblances entre l’objet 5 et l’auteur des objets 4/6, favorisant son attribution, mais elle resterait incertaine.

FRIEDLÄNDER, M.J. (1949). El arte y sus secretos. Von Kunst und Kennerschaft. Traducción española (1969). Barcelona. GONZALEZ ECHEGARAY, J. (1974) – Las pinturas y grabados de la cueva de Las Chimeneas (Puente Viesgo, Santander). Monografías de arte rupestre paleolítico nº 2. Barcelona. HILL, J. (1977) – Individual Variability in Ceramics and Social Prehistoric Organization. In Hill, J. Gunn, J. The individual in Prehistory (1977). New York.

12

LES PEINTURES DE LA GROTTE DE LA PASIEGA A (PUENTE VIESGO, CANTABRIE) – À L’ÉPREUVE DE LA MÉTHODE DE L’ATTRIBUTION Marc GROENEN Centre de Recherches archéologiques (CReA-Patrimoine), Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue F.D. Roosevelt 50, B-1050 Bruxelles, [email protected]

Didier MARTENS Unité d’Histoire médiévale, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue F.D. Roosevelt 50, B–1050 Bruxelles, [email protected] Abstract: This work brings to light “master’s hands” in animal representation painted in the Cantabrian cave of La Pasiega A. It was managed by combining classical morpho-anatomic approaches used in art history. Three stylistic groups were constituted. Two correspond to isolated personalities: we named them the Master with outlines divided in two and the Master with expressionist outlines. In the present state of our research, six animals belonging to different genera were made by the first, and three by the second. The third group corresponds to a workshop style. Keywords: Palaeolithic Art, La Pasiega A, stylistic analysis, attribution, Master with outlines divided in two, Master with expressionist outlines Résumé: Ce travail met en évidence des “mains de maître” dans les représentations pariétales d’animaux peints de la grotte cantabrique de La Pasiega A. Il a été mené en combinant les approches morpho-anatomiques classiques utilisées en histoire de l’art. Trois groupes stylistiques ont été constitués. Deux correspondent à des personnalités isolées: nous les avons appelés le Maître aux Contours dédoublés et le Maître aux Contours expressionnistes. Dans l’état actuel des recherches, six animaux appartenant à des genres différents sont le fait du premier, trois du second. Le troisième groupe, quant à lui, correspond à un style d’atelier. Mots-clés: Art paléolithique, La Pasiega A, analyse stylistique, attribution, Maître au Contours dédoublés, Maître aux Contours expressionnistes

de l’art occidental cherche en effet avant tout à ramener l’ensemble des oeuvres conservées à un nombre limité de “styles” qui s’articuleraient en une évolution unique. Ceux-ci auraient été pratiqués durant des millénaires, dans toute l’aire culturelle paléolithique. Dans un tel modèle, aucune attention n’est consacrée à l’individualité des “artistes”, simples vecteurs d’une sorte de volonté stylistique universelle qui les transcende. Ainsi, par exemple, selon Leroi-Gourhan, toutes les figurations du réseau de La Pasiega A relèveraient d’un monolithique style III: elles constituent, du point de vue de l’exécution, un ensemble très homogène d’animaux et de signes peints en rouge. (...). Les figures sont, dans leur ensemble, d’une excellente qualité et elles offrent, lorsqu’on les compare avec l’ensemble périgourdin, d’indiscutables caractères du style III (Leroi-Gourhan, 1978: 483-484).

LES ENJEUX DE L’ATTRIBUTION Depuis un siècle, la question de l’auteur dans l’étude des peintures et gravures des grottes ornées paléolithiques a suscité différentes réponses. Tout d’abord, et pendant longtemps, dans le cadre de la théorie de la magie de la chasse, on a posé implicitement que chaque figuration à l’intérieur d’un même réseau devait avoir été réalisée par un exécutant différent. Dans ce scénario, on imaginait les chasseurs entrant dans la grotte, peignant ou gravant l’animal à abattre afin de l’envoûter, puis partant à la chasse: à l’époque de la grande chasse, la poursuite quotidienne du gibier et sa multiplication dans la nature, ou le succès des expéditions de chasse, étaient la préoccupation primordiale. (...). Ainsi, quand nous visitons une caverne ornée, nous pénétrons dans un sanctuaire où, il y a des millénaires, se sont déroulées des cérémonies sacrées, dirigées sans doute par les grands initiés de l’époque (Breuil, 1952: 23). Cette approche de la représentation en termes de fonctionnalité magique impliquait que les figures fussent fondamentalement indépendantes les unes des autres. Il ne pouvait donc être question d’en attribuer plusieurs à une seule et même main.

Ces dernières années, sous l’influence de l’histoire de l’art, la possibilité de reconnaître des “mains de maîtres” dans les dessins, peintures et gravures de l’art du Paléolithique supérieur s’est imposée avec une évidence croissante aux préhistoriens. C’est sans nul doute J.M. Apellániz (1984, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992) qui a, le premier, posé la pertinence du problème de l’attribution pour des périodes aussi anciennes. Tout en s’attachant à démontrer l’existence d’individualités esthétiques paléolithiques, il a néanmoins estimé qu’elles ne devaient consacrer que peu de temps à leur art, absorbées qu’elles étaient par les tâches vitales de la chasse et de la cueillette. L’activité figurative n’aurait en

Avec le modèle d’André Leroi-Gourhan, on est, au contraire, passé de la multiplicité quasi infinie des “auteurs-chasseurs” à un refoulement complet de la dimension individuelle de la production artistique au Paléolithique supérieur. L’auteur de la célèbre Préhistoire 13

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

fait constitué, selon Apellániz, qu’une sorte de loisir auquel l’homme du Paléolithique supérieur se livrait de manière occasionnelle. Les œuvres n’auraient pas été le fait de professionnels, mais bien plutôt d’autodidactes n’ayant reçu aucune véritable formation (Apellániz, 1991: 25).

destinée à occuper le temps, les structures de combustion témoignent d’un savoir-faire que ne démentent d’ailleurs pas les analyses des figurines elles-mêmes (Vandiver et al., 1989; Soffer et al., 1993; Verpoorte, 2001). Un deuxième indice, qui plaide également en faveur de la professionnalité des artisans du Paléolithique supérieur, peut être induit de l’habileté des exécutants. Devant la plupart des peintures et gravures qu’ils nous ont laissées, on est frappé par la maîtrise du trait, l’absence d’hésitation dans les contours, la sûreté des proportions, le recours à des formules graphiques d’une grande efficacité représentative. Tout cela n’est possible qu’à condition de peindre ou de dessiner régulièrement, comme on l’observe encore aujourd’hui. Le peintre ou le graveur du Paléolithique supérieur n’improvisait pas. Ce n’est pas un amateur, mais un homme de métier s’appuyant sur l’expérience, qui guidait chacun de ses gestes.

Pour notre part, nous estimons au contraire que les peintures et gravures du Paléolithique supérieur sont le résultat d’une activité professionnelle, exercée par des spécialistes ayant bénéficié d’une formation adéquate. De nombreux indices plaident dans ce sens (Groenen, Martens & Szapu, 2004). Tout d’abord, le nombre impressionnant d’œuvres livré par certains gisements est évidemment difficilement compatible avec l’idée d’une simple occupation à laquelle on s’adonnait en dilettante. Des sites abritaient indubitablement des ateliers spécialisés, comme cela a été mis en évidence pour des gisements aurignaciens du Jura souabe, dans le BadeWurtemberg, mais aussi pour le site morave pavlovien de Dolní Věstonice (Schütz, 2005-2006). Des réserves d’ivoire ont, par exemple, été découvertes dans les grottes de Vogelherd (Hahn, 1986: 18) ou de Geissenklösterle (Christensen, 1999: 146). La présence de nombreux copeaux d’ivoire dans la presque totalité du gisement à Geissenklösterle (Conard et al., 2003: 167) ou à Hohle Fels (Hiller, 2003: 21), mais aussi la mise en évidence de réserves de produits semi-finis – 25 pointes de sagaies inachevées et 10 plaquettes à Vogelherd (Hahn, 1986: 18) – démontrent l’existence d’ateliers où cette matière a été travaillée en abondance. Dans la couche IV de Hohle Fels par exemple, des parures et des œuvres d’art mobilier inachevées, à tous les niveaux de la chaîne opératoire de fabrication, apportent la preuve d’une production intensive de produits variés, tout entière orientée vers l’exploitation de l’ivoire (Hiller, 2003: 21). Dans certains cas, l’organisation du travail reste perceptible dans la structuration même de l’espace. Ainsi, dans l’horizon III de la grotte de Geissenklösterle, J. Hahn (1995: 125) a pu montrer que l’atelier comportait deux zones d’activité distinctes: la première, face à la lumière du jour, où les pièces auraient été façonnées; la seconde, à proximité du foyer, où elles auraient été finies.

Enfin, tout indique que les peintres et graveurs du Paléolithique supérieur ont bénéficié d’une reconnaissance sociale. Le soutien du groupe leur était, en tout cas, assuré lors de la réalisation d’ensembles pariétaux de format monumental. On voit mal, en effet, comment de grandes frises sculptées, telle celles du Cap Blanc ou de l’abri Reverdit en Dordogne, par exemple, auraient pu voir le jour sans le concours de nombreux assistants. Il a fallu fabriquer et réaffûter des dizaines de pics en silex pour sculpter plusieurs mètres de paroi calcaire, mais aussi racler, polir et peindre les animaux, parfois de grandes dimensions. De même, la mise en place d’échafaudages ou de passerelles a été démontrée à Lascaux (Delluc, 1979: 175-184) ou à Rouffignac (Barrière, 1982: 43). Elle peut être postulée pour la réalisation de certaines figures en position haute à El Castillo (Cantabrie) ou à Tito Bustillo (Asturies). Ceci implique évidemment des collaborations, non seulement pour l’abattage des arbres, mais aussi pour leur transport – un kilomètre sous terre à Rouffignac –, la construction et le placement de ces dispositifs. Or, la professionnalité de l’activité artistique, parce qu’elle implique la répétition, conduit tout naturellement au développement d’habitudes graphiques, de “tics” de métier, de solutions toutes faites. L’exécutant s’approprie progressivement les conventions graphiques en vigueur à son époque jusqu’à les faire siennes. Au fil des années, il leur donnera une inflexion de plus en plus personnelle. C’est ce processus d’appropriation d’un langage artistique collectif par la pratique individuelle qui crée les conditions nécessaires à l’identification de styles personnels. Selon nous, ceci vaut aussi bien pour les siècles habituellement étudiés par les historiens d’art que pour le Paléolithique supérieur.

Quant au site morave de Dolní Věstonice, l’abondance des figurines en terre cuite mise au jour est telle qu’il faut admettre l’existence d’ateliers produisant des oeuvres dépassant, et de loin, les besoins du groupe. Même si le nombre de modelages reste incertain – environ 6750 pièces pour P. Vandiver (et al., 1989: 1002-1003) et plus de 5760 pour A. Verpoorte (2001: 96) –, il faut songer ici à une production destinée à l’échange. Il faut rappeler aussi les deux fours mis au jour par B. Klíma (1962, 1984), dont le premier contenait encore 2300 fragments de terre cuite! Ce four mesurait 130 cm de diamètre et 40 cm de haut. Il était constitué par une coupole mêlée d’argile et de fragments de calcaire, et son alimentation en oxygène était régulée par des conduits d’aération et des dispositifs particuliers (Klíma, 1962, Gonyševová, 1999). Impossible donc d’alléguer une activité ponctuelle

On peut se demander si ces styles personnels demeuraient constants sur une longue durée. En histoire de l’art, on observe généralement une grande stabilité des identités stylistiques. Même si une évolution interne peut être reconnue, la personnalité artistique d’un Rubens, par 14

M. GROENEN & D. MARTENS: LES PEINTURES DE LA GROTTE DE LA PASIEGA A (PUENTE VIESGO, CANTABRIE)…

exemple, reste fondamentalement identique, depuis l’époque de son voyage en Italie (1600-1608) jusqu’à sa mort (1640). C’est cette relative constance qui permet d’attribuer à un seul et même peintre des œuvres réalisées sur une période de 20, 30 voire 40 ans. En outre, dans la culture de la Renaissance et des Temps Modernes, la stabilité du style personnel était commandée par une double volonté, intérieure – celle de l’artiste – et extérieure – celle de la société. Tout créateur de renom se devait d’avoir une manière de faire personnelle qui, telle une signature optique, lui appartenait en propre et rendait ainsi ses œuvres immédiatement reconnaissables aux yeux de l’amateur éclairé. Cette recherche d’individualité stylistique était grandement facilitée par le fait que les artistes pouvaient avoir accès à leur production antérieure. Certains réalisaient des ricordi, c’est-à-dire des copiessouvenirs des œuvres commandées; d’autres tenaient même, comme Claude Lorrain (1600-1682), un “livre de raison”, dans lequel ils reproduisaient, en format réduit, toutes leurs “inventions”. En outre, à l’intérieur de l’atelier demeuraient les œuvres inachevées ou invendues, ainsi que les esquisses. Enfin, de nombreux maîtres avaient périodiquement l’occasion de revoir dans les églises les retables qu’ils avaient eux-mêmes réalisés. Cette confrontation du peintre avec son propre passé artistique faisait tout naturellement de celui-ci le modèle esthétique de son œuvre futur.

d’une volonté intérieure ou d’une volonté extérieure soutenant leur individualité stylistique, ces artistes auraient pu évoluer de manière rapide et fondamentalement imprévisible. Si tel devait être le cas, il serait évidemment impossible de reconnaître la main du même exécutant sur une période de quelques années. Seules les œuvres réalisées au même moment par le même individu pourraient lui être attribuées en toute sécurité. Apellániz (1991: 25) a considéré, pour sa part, que durant leur vie, les chasseurs n’avaient pas le temps de modifier de manière à ce point substantielle leur style personnel que celui-ci ne puisse être reconnu. Il précise qu’ils évoluaient très lentement parce qu’ils n’avaient que peu d’occasions de contempler les œuvres d’autres artistes. Nous sommes enclins à lui donner raison. Nous pensons, en effet, que la personnalité artistique présentait dès le Paléolithique supérieur une certaine stabilité. Plusieurs indices nous paraissent plaider en ce sens. Tout d’abord, il semble bien que certains groupes soient revenus à plusieurs reprises dans les grottes ornées. De grands “sanctuaires” présentent des parois surchargées de figures qui parfois se superposent, parfois s’enchevêtrent. Dans quelques cas, des motifs ont été soit effacés, soit refaits, comme on peut l’observer avec les célèbres bisons noirs de la corniche dans la grotte d’El Castillo, où l’un des animaux a été réalisé par dessus un autre, dessiné antérieurement (Groenen, 2007). Mais il est également de nombreuses figures, retracées en totalité ou en partie. Rappelons, par exemple, le “cheval-aurochs” d’El Castillo, peint d’abord en jaune et retracé en rouge, ou ce cheval de La Pasiega A (Breuil et al.: 9-10, n° 16), dont l’avant-train a été repeint avec une couleur différente. En fait, les exemples de motifs réactivés sont plus nombreux qu’on ne pourrait le penser, et ils montrent que les artistes du Paléolithique ont dû avoir la possibilité de revoir leurs créations, peut-être même périodiquement.

Dans le domaine de l’art du Paléolithique supérieur, la situation paraît de prime abord fort différente. Existait-il une culture de l’originalité soutenue par une double volonté – intérieure et extérieure? Le groupe réclamait-il explicitement des artistes une interprétation personnelle des conventions graphiques du moment? Ceux-ci éprouvaient-ils le besoin de se singulariser en développant un style personnel? En toute honnêteté, on ne saurait actuellement répondre à ces questions. En revanche, on est en droit de penser que les artistes du Paléolithique supérieur ne pouvaient avoir une connaissance de leurs productions antérieures comparable à celle d’un peintre des Temps Modernes. Ils n’ont dû ni pratiquer la copiesouvenir, ni tenir des livres de raison. De même, on imagine difficilement l’existence d’ateliers préhistoriques dans lesquels se seraient entassées les esquisses des maîtres. À vrai dire, cette idée avait été défendue autrefois par H. Breuil sur la base d’une gravure de bison découverte, en 1927, dans le gisement de La Genière (Ain). Elle était, en effet, identique à l’un des bisons polychromes de Font-de-Gaume (Dordogne) et aurait pu être le fait d’un artiste itinérant utilisant ses carnets d’esquisses pour la réalisation d’œuvres sur paroi. On le sait, l’authenticité de la gravure n’a malheureusement pas résisté à l’analyse critique de A. Rieth (1958).

En outre, il faut noter qu’il peut y avoir constance stylistique sans que celle-ci soit soutenue ni par une volonté intérieure, ni une volonté extérieure. On observe, par exemple, ce cas de figure dans le domaine de l’écriture individuelle, telle qu’elle est pratiquée aujourd’hui dans nos sociétés. Celle-ci acquiert, dès l’adolescence, une forme personnelle clairement reconnaissable, qui sera conservée tout au long de la vie, jusqu’au moment où surviendront éventuellement des problèmes moteurs liés à l’âge. Cette continuité semble exister par le seul poids de l’habitude, car les conventions sociales n’exigent nullement d’un individu qu’il demeure fidèle à son écriture, pas plus que nous ne cherchons consciemment à nous mettre en représentation à travers elle. Dans ces conditions, il ne nous paraît pas nécessaire de postuler que la culture contemporaine doit accorder à la personnalité de l’artiste une valeur particulière pour que naissent et se développent des manières de faire spécifiques à un peintre, et relativement constantes. Même si les contemporains n’en avaient peut-être pas conscience, de véritables styles personnels ont pu exister

Doit-on en déduire, pour autant, que la personnalité stylistique des artistes du Paléolithique supérieur était fondamentalement instable, qu’elle était susceptible de se transformer rapidement jusqu’à devenir méconnaissable après quelques années? Faute d’un contact permanent avec leur production antérieure, faute peut-être aussi 15

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

dans la durée au Paléolithique supérieur. En droit, ils seront susceptibles d’être reconnus par un observateur formé aux méthodes de l’histoire de l’art.

1913: 9-10, n° 18) (fig. 2.1.2) ne peut que difficilement avoir fait aussi celle du panneau XI (Breuil et al., 1913: 9, n° 17) (fig. 2.2.12). Cette dernière se signale par un contour extrêmement stylisé dominé par des courbes. On remarquera particulièrement celle de la ligne dorsale et celle du ventre et du cou. Faite d’une seule venue, la ligne du ventre est à peine interrompue par la saillie des pattes antérieures. Le contraste est grand avec la biche n° 18, dont la silhouette présente à la fois un aspect plus rigide et un caractère plus analytique. L’animal semble, cette fois, construit par segments: la tête, le cou, le corps et les pattes constituent autant de parties distinctes qui s’articulent harmonieusement et souplement entre elles. De même, on ne songerait nullement à imputer aux auteurs des biches n° 17 et 18 celle qui figure dans la Coupole (Breuil et al., 1913: 11, n° 25). Les proportions de ce troisième animal sont fort différentes. Le corps étrangement étiré est rendu de manière fort schématique, sous la forme de deux grandes courbes.

La présente communication s’inscrit dans le prolongement de nos recherches sur l’attribution d’œuvres préhistoriques. Nous allons tenter cette fois de mettre en évidence différentes “mains” dans la grotte de La Pasiega A. LA GROTTE DE LA PASIEGA: PRÉSENTATION La grotte de La Pasiega, on le sait, se trouve dans le Monte del Castillo, à Puente Viesgo (Cantabrie, Espagne), à environ 190 mètres d’altitude. Elle se situe entre la grotte de Las Monedas, d’une part, et celles de La Flecha, de Las Chimeneas, d’El Castillo et d’El Oso, d’autre part. Avec un développement de quelque 415 mètres, elle apparaît relativement petite par rapport aux réseaux qui l’entourent. Elle-même comprend quatre parties (A-D), séparées par des cloisons maçonnées dans les années 1960, et s’ouvre par trois entrées. La première donne accès aux réseaux A, B et D, la seconde – empruntée par les inventeurs – est aujourd’hui fermée. La troisième, enfin, mène au réseau C.

Selon nous, ces différences dans le tracé correspondent à des personnalités distinctes. Comme certaines ont pu prendre en charge l’exécution de plusieurs figures, il nous paraît légitime de chercher à opérer des regroupements. L’une des personnalités les plus originales, dans l’état actuel de notre analyse, est sans doute le “Maître aux Contours dédoublés”. Non moins de six figurations, situées en différents endroits du réseau, peuvent raisonnablement lui être attribuées (fig. 2.1.1-2.1.6): la biche n° 18 (Breuil et al., 1913: 9-10, n° 18), dont il vient d’être question, deux chevaux (Breuil et al., 1913: 8, n° 7 et id.: 15, n° 36), deux aurochs (Breuil et al., 1913: 15-16, n° 40 et id.: 12, n° 27) et un chamois (Breuil et al., 1913: 14, n° 36). Ces six animaux partagent de nombreuses caractéristiques, dont certaines sont exceptionnelles. Les proportions sont similaires, la tête semblant démesurée par rapport aux pattes. On relèvera le curieux dédoublement de certains contours, en particulier au niveau du poitrail ou des pattes postérieures. Enfin, l’articulation entre la ganache et le cou se présente toujours sous la forme de deux courbes convergeant en pointe. Celle-ci “entaille” la partie antérieure du cou, suggérant un étrange rétrécissement.

La Pasiega a été découverte le 23 mai 1911 par Hugo Obermaier, Paul Wernert et l’un des ouvriers fouillant dans la grotte d’El Castillo, Eloy Gutiérrez (Ripoll Perelló, 1964: 10; Cabrera Valdés, 1984: 65). Peu après, Hermillio Alcalde del Río découvre le réseau C, tandis que l’abbé Breuil, qui travaillait alors dans la grotte de La Pileta en Andalousie, revient en Cantabrie pour entamer le travail de relevé. Ce travail débouchera sur la célèbre monographie de 1913, La Pasiega à Puente Viesgo (Santander), cosignée par H. Alcalde del Río, H. Breuil et H. Obermaier. Dans les décennies suivantes, peu de travaux seront consacrés à La Pasiega. Ils se limitent essentiellement à la publication de quelques figures nouvelles (Ripoll Perelló, 1956; González Echegaray, 1964; González Echegaray & Moure Romanillo, 1971, par exemple). Enfin, dès 1984, Rodrigo de Balbín Behrmann et Cesar González Sainz reprennent l’étude de la grotte, en particulier celle du réseau B, en élargissant le nombre de motifs répertoriés à 440 figures identifiables. Leur recensement comprend 2 motifs anthropomorphes, 295 motifs zoomorphes et 143 “signes” (Balbín Behrmann & González Sainz, 1994, 1995, 1996).

Le peintre a donc recours aux mêmes formules de dessin et au même système de proportions pour représenter des animaux de genres différents: la biche, le cheval, l’aurochs et le chamois. Malgré des conditions de travail très variables, il demeure toujours reconnaissable, ce qui dénote indubitablement une remarquable habileté. Certaines parties du réseau sont d’accès malaisé, il a donc dû y travailler dans une position inconfortable. On nous permettra de ne pas développer davantage l’analyse dans la mesure où l’oeuvre du Maître aux contours dédoublés fera très prochainement l’objet d’une publication particulière (Groenen & Martens, à paraître).

LES ARTISTES DE LA PASIEGA De prime abord, le spectateur reconnaît dans les figurations du réseau le style caractéristique du Paléolithique supérieur. Pourtant, au delà d’une première impression de ressemblance, il est possible de dégager des différences. Il est clair, par exemple, que le peintre qui a réalisé la biche du panneau XII (Alcalde del Río et al.,

Il est possible de reconnaître un deuxième maître, que nous avons proposé de baptiser le “Maître aux Contours 16

M. GROENEN & D. MARTENS: LES PEINTURES DE LA GROTTE DE LA PASIEGA A (PUENTE VIESGO, CANTABRIE)…

Fig. 2.1. La Pasiega A (Cantabrie, Espagne): 1. cheval, 2. biche, 3. chamois, 4-5. aurochs, 6. cheval (collection M. Groenen) expressionnistes”. Trois figurations peuvent lui être attribuées. Deux sont contiguës: un cheval (Breuil et al.: 13-14, n° 34) et un bovidé (Breuil et al.: 14, n° 35) se faisant face. Une troisième figuration, une tête de cheval, est isolée (Breuil et al.: 13, n° 30). Les animaux sont délimités à l’aide d’un tracé rouge assez épais, d’aspect peu soigné. Ce contour semblera particulièrement expressif aux yeux de l’observateur moderne, d’où la dénomination proposée.

semblent flotter dans l’espace, au-dessus de l’encolure. Le cou est anormalement mince. Il est délimité, dans le haut, par un trait courbe concave. Ce trait rejoint la ligne du front pour donner naissance à un angle très aigu. La partie inférieure du cou est rendue par une ligne plus épaisse que la partie supérieure. La ganache présente une curieuse forme triangulaire évasée. Enfin, l’allure générale de la tête surprend: le museau plonge vers le bas, un peu à la manière de celui de l’élan.

Les deux chevaux sont unis par un réseau de similitudes remarquables (fig. 2.2.7 et 2.2.9). La crinière est rendue sous la forme de traits parallèles, presque verticaux. Ils

Mais ce maître ne s’est pas limité à peindre des chevaux puisque nous lui avons également attribué une figure de bovidé (fig. 2.2.8). La confrontation avec le cheval qui lui 17

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

Fig. 2.2. La Pasiega A (Cantabrie, Espagne): 7-8. cheval, 9. bovidé, 10-11. cheval, 12. biche (collection M. Groenen) fait face est particulièrement révélatrice. On notera la façon similaire d’exécuter le contour de l’animal. Le peintre combine tracés continus et ponctuations. Parfois, les points sont très écartés. Le contour présente alors un aspect discontinu – bien visible notamment au niveau de la ligne de dos –, et manque d’homogénéité. Par endroits, il apparaît même translucide, l’instrument étant plus ou moins chargé de matière colorante.

obsessionnel chez l’artiste: un petit arc évasé, légèrement brisé. Ce motif lui sert aussi bien à représenter la ganache des chevaux que la “bosse” du bovidé. Le problème d’attribution posé par deux autres figurations de chevaux (Breuil et al.: 9, n° 15 et id.: 9-10, n° 16), dans le même réseau, est sans doute plus complexe que ceux qui ont été évoqués jusqu’ici (fig. 2.2.10-2.2.11). De prime abord, ce sont à nouveau les ressemblances qui s’imposent à l’attention. Les deux animaux, contournés en rouge, sont représentés en mouvement. Les pattes antérieures ont l’aspect de simples lignes parallèles. Le dessin de l’arrière-train des deux animaux est à ce point similaire que l’on pourrait en superposer les contours. Le

Les proportions des deux animaux sont fort similaires. On observe un allongement du corps et de la tête. Ceci est particulièrement frappant dans le cas du bovidé, auquel le peintre a donné des proportions peu conformes au modèle naturel. Enfin, on est tenté de reconnaître un motif formel 18

M. GROENEN & D. MARTENS: LES PEINTURES DE LA GROTTE DE LA PASIEGA A (PUENTE VIESGO, CANTABRIE)…

cou se situe dans le prolongement de la ligne de dos. On note une légère inflexion dans le poitrail, au-dessus des pattes. Les proportions entre segments anatomiques sont, en outre, analogues: les pattes paraissent courtes par rapport au corps curieusement étiré. Enfin, ce qui est sans doute le plus frappant, l’articulation entre la ligne antérieure du cou et la ganache est marquée par un fort décrochement.

ailleurs, on dénombre plusieurs dizaines de panneaux de style bensonien, qui portent clairement la marque du peintre brugeois, sans que l’on puisse affirmer qu’il ait participé lui-même à leur exécution (Marlier, 1957; Collar de Cáceres F., 2003). Nous proposons de transposer ce modèle dans le domaine du Paléolithique supérieur et de réunir dans un seul et même groupe stylistique les deux “chevaux en mouvement”. La notion de style d’atelier permet, selon nous, à la fois de rendre compte des ressemblances et des différences observées. Cette notion implique évidemment que les artistes du Paléolithique supérieur recevaient eux aussi une formation, et que le style d’un maître pouvait se transmettre à ses élèves et à ses collaborateurs.

De prime abord, cet ensemble de coïncidences formelles invite à attribuer les deux images à un seul et même artiste assez original, ayant notamment une manière très personnelle de dessiner la tête. Pourtant, dans le cas présent, nous nous refusons à parler d’un “Maître”. Certaines dissemblances entre les deux animaux ne peuvent être ignorées. La crinière, en particulier, est rendue de manière tout à fait différente. Dans le cheval “au galop volant”, elle se présente sous l’aspect de traits obliques parallèles relativement fins, qui semblent comme “suspendus” à la ligne du cou. Le second cheval, en revanche, est doté d’une crinière rendue de manière beaucoup plus synthétique. Elle est constituée de gros traits obliques courts, terminés en pointe. Ceux-ci forment la ligne du cou qui, pour le reste, n’est matérialisée par aucun contour. En outre, le rendu de l’encolure des deux animaux diffère fortement. Elle est évasée dans le cheval au galop volant, tandis qu’elle présente une curieuse forme “en tuyau” dans le second animal. Que conclure de ces observations?

Les chevaux représentés dans le réseau A de La Pasiega se signalent par leur grande variété stylistique. Certains, on l’a vu, peuvent être assignés à de véritables maîtres anonymes, tels celui aux Contours dédoublés ou celui aux Contours expressionnistes. D’autres encore semblent bien être le fait de peintres ayant une personnalité artistique affirmée, mais auxquels il n’est pas possible, pour l’instant, d’attribuer d’autres figurations. On citera ici un cheval à la tête en forme d’ellipse et aux oreilles représentées sous la forme de bâtonnets parallèles plantés sur le front (Breuil et al.: 8, n° 5). On signalera également cet autre cheval à l’encolure puissante, dont l’anatomie est rendue de manière particulièrement synthétique (Breuil et al.: 13, n° 35). Il est dû à un exécutant au talent visiblement plus modeste. Enfin, on mentionnera un cheval dessiné en noir, dans lequel on peut reconnaître l’oeuvre d’un artiste très expérimenté (Breuil et al.: 12, n° 25). Il réduit le contour à une série de segments droits ou courbes qui, juxtaposés, composent avec une grande économie de moyens la figure de l’animal. Entre les segments subsiste, le plus souvent, un vide. Cet artiste n’en était certainement pas à son premier essai. Malheureusement, dans l’état actuel de notre analyse, nous n’avons pas pu lui assigner d’autres figurations.

D’une part, on relève des analogies, dont certaines présentent même un caractère exceptionnel par rapport à l’usage dominant dans l’art du Paléolithique supérieur. D’autre part, on observe deux manières de faire radicalement différentes dans le rendu de segments anatomiques pourtant identiques. Nous sommes clairement en présence de formules divergentes pour rendre la crinière du cheval. Peut-on imaginer qu’un seul peintre pouvait adopter des manières de procéder à ce point contradictoires? En histoire de l’art, lorsque deux œuvres sont unies par un réseau étroit de parentés formelles, mais diffèrent par certains détails importants, on considérera qu’elles sont dues à des exécutants distincts, œuvrant toutefois dans le même milieu, et sans doute en contact étroit. Ce cas de figure se présente fréquemment lorsqu’un artiste s’entourait de collaborateurs. Formés à imiter le style du maître, ils partagent avec lui une même esthétique, un même répertoire de types, sans pour autant pouvoir dissimuler complètement leur individualité. Entre les œuvres du maître et celles des collaborateurs, il y aura le plus souvent une ressemblance stylistique étroite, non pas une véritable identité. On parlera alors d’un style d’atelier (Martens, 2000: 101-102). L’un des exemples peut-être les plus fameux, à cet égard, s’observe à Bruges au XVIe siècle. Il s’agit de l’atelier du peintre Ambrosius Benson (vers 1490/1500-1550). On ne possède de cet artiste que deux œuvres signées et quelques-unes que l’on s’accorde à lui attribuer sur la base de comparaisons stylistiques. Par

CONCLUSION Dans cette communication, nous avons souhaité présenter des recherches visant à mettre en évidence des “mains de Maître” dans les peintures de la grotte de La Pasiega A. Dans ce but, on a utilisé les critères de l’histoire de l’art, en combinant les approches morpho-anatomiques classiques (Morelli, Berenson, Friedländer, Longhi...). Nous avons ainsi constitué trois groupes stylistiques. Deux correspondent, selon nous, à des personnalités isolées, le troisième à un atelier. Eu égard à la relative simplicité des représentations, l’hypothèse d’un intervenant unique présentait, a priori, une forte vraisemblance. Il n’est pas nécessaire, en effet, de convoquer une équipe pour réaliser quelques animaux au trait, de format moyen, sans modelé intérieur. On constate que le même artiste pouvait peindre des animaux appartenant à des genres différents, et que ces 19

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

images sont localisées sur des parois non contiguës. Chez les peintres identifiés par notre méthode d’analyse, le traitement de l’anatomie animale est suffisamment original, parfois même déviant, pour que l’on puisse y voir une marque stylistique personnelle. La méthode traditionnelle de l’attribution, telle qu’utilisée en histoire de l’art depuis plus d’un siècle, ne permet toutefois pas de reconnaître des exécutants dont le style correspondrait pleinement à la norme esthétique dominante. Seuls quelques peintres du Paléolithique supérieur sont donc susceptibles d’être mis en évidence de cette manière. Mais on peut espérer que l’analyse des matières colorantes, qui n’a pu encore être effectuée pour les grottes du Monte del Castillo, permettra un jour d’identifier des mains supplémentaires.

BALBÍN BEHRMANN, R. DE & GONZÁLEZ SAINZ, C. (1995) – L’ensemble rupestre paléolithique de la “Rotonda”, dans la Galerie B de la grotte de La Pasiega (Puente Viesgo, Cantabria). L’Anthropologie. 99, p. 296-324, 41 fig. BALBÍN BEHRMANN, R. DE & GONZÁLEZ SAINZ, C. (1996) – Las pinturas y grabados del corredor B.7 de la cueva de La Pasiega (Cantabria). In Moure Romanillo A. (ed.) – “El hombre fósil”. 80 años después. Volumen conmemorativo del 50 aniversario de la muerte de Hugo Obermaier. Santander; Universidad de Cantabria. p. 271-294, 10 fig., 5 pl. BARRIÈRE, C. (1982) – L’art pariétal de Rouffignac. La grotte aux cent mammouths. Paris: Picard. 207 p., 519 fig., 8 pl. coul. BREUIL, H. (1952) – Quatre cents siècles d’art pariétal. Les cavernes ornées de l’âge du Renne. Montignac; Art et industrie. 418 p.

Bibliographie BREUIL, H., OBERMAIER, H. & ALCALDE DEL RÍO, H. (1913) – La Pasiega à Puente Viesgo (Santander). Monaco: A. Chêne. 64 p., 25 fig. 29 pl. (“Peintures et gravures murales des cavernes paléolithiques”).

CABRERA VALDÉS, V. (1984) – El yacimiento de la Cueva de El Castillo (Puente Viesgo, Santander). Madrid: CSIC. 473 p., 186 fig., 24 pl. (Bibliotheca Praehistorica Hispana, n° XXII).

APELLÁNIZ, J.-M. (1984) – L’auteur des grands taureaux de Lascaux et ses successeurs. L’Anthropologie. 88, p. 539-561, 22 fig.

CHRISTENSEN, M. (1999) – Technologie de l’ivoire au Paléolithique supérieur. Caractérisation physicochimique du matériau et analyse fonctionnelle des outils de transformation. Oxford; BAR Publishing. 201 p. (“B.A.R. International Series”, n° 751).

APELLÁNIZ, J.-M. (1986) – Análisis de la variación formal y la autoría en la iconografía mueble del Magdaleniense Antiguo de Bolinkoba (Vizcaya). Munibe. 38, p. 39-59, 14 fig.

COLLAR DE CÁCERES, F. (2003) – Informe históricoartístico. In Retablo de Carbonero el Mayor. Restauración e investigación. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. p. 10-89, fig.

APELLÁNIZ, J.-M. (1987) – Aplicación de técnicas estadísticas al análisis iconográfico y al método de determinación del autor. Munibe. 39, p. 39-60, 40 fig.

CONARD, N.J., DIPPON, G. & GOLDBERG, P. (2003) – Chronostratigraphy and archaeological context of the Aurignacian deposits at Geissenklösterle. In Zilhao, J., D’errico, F. (ed.) – The chronology of the Aurignacian and the transition technocomplexes. Dating, stratigraphies and cultural implications. Trabajos de Arqueología. 33, p. 165-176.

APELLÁNIZ, J.-M. (1988) – La cabeza de felino del Magdaleniense superior/final de Atxeta (Forua, Vizcaya). Munibe. 40, p. 3-7, 1 fig., 3 cl. APELLÁNIZ, J.-M. (1989) – Analyse de la rectification comme mécanisme de la méthode de détermination de l’auteur dans l’iconographie paléolithique. Les graveurs de la plaquette du Magdalénien VI de Ekaïn (Deva, Guipuzcoa, Pays Basque, Espagne). L’Anthropologie. 93, p. 463-474, 13 fig.

DELLUC, B. & G. (1979) – L’accès aux parois. In LeroiGourhan, A., Allain, J. (dir.) – Lascaux inconnu. Paris: C.N.R.S. p. 175-184, fig. 135-142. (12e supplément à “Gallia préhistoire”).

APELLÁNIZ, J.-M. (1991) – Modelo de análisis de la autoría en el arte figurativo del Paleolítico. Bilbao: Universidad de Deusto. 189 p., 56 fig. (“Cuadernos de Arqueología de Deusto”, n° 13).

GONYŠEVOVÁ, M. (1999) – Fabrication expérimentale d’artéfacts gravettiens en terre cuite et essai de reconstitution d’un “four” (Moravie, République tchèque). L’Anthropologie. 103/4, p. 519-529.

APELLÁNIZ, J.-M. (1992) – Modèle d’analyse d’un auteur de représentations d’animaux de différentes espèces: le tube de Torre (Pays Basque, Espagne). L’Anthropologie. 96, p. 453-472, 31 fig.

GONZÁLEZ ECHEGARAY, G. (1964) – Nuevos grabados y pinturas en las cuevas del Monte del Castillo. Zephyrus. 15, p. 27-35.

BALBÍN BEHRMANN, R. DE & GONZÁLEZ SAINZ, C. (1994) – Un nuevo conjunto de representaciones en el sector D.2 de la cueva de La Pasiega (Puente Viesgo, Cantabria). In Lasheras, J.A. (ed.) – Homenaje al Dr. Joaquín González Echegaray. Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura. p. 269-280, 8 fig., 8 ill. coul. (“Museo y Centro de Investigación de Altamira”, Monografías, n° 17).

GONZÁLEZ ECHEGARAY, G. & MOURE ROMANILLO, A. (1971) – Representaciones rupestres inéditas en la Cueva de La Pasiega (Puente Viesgo, Santander). Trabajos de Prehistoria. 28, p. 401-405. GROENEN, M. (2004) – Thèmes iconographiques et mythes dans l’art du Paléolithique supérieur. In Groenen, M. (ed.) – Art du Paléolithique supérieur et 20

M. GROENEN & D. MARTENS: LES PEINTURES DE LA GROTTE DE LA PASIEGA A (PUENTE VIESGO, CANTABRIE)…

du Mésolithique (Section 8). Actes du XIVe Congrès de l’UISPP (Université de Liège, Belgique, 2-8 septembre 2001). Oxford: BAR Publishing. p. 31-40, 20 fig. (“B.A.R. International Series”, n° 1311).

Kind, C.L. (ed.) – Jungpaläolithische Siedlungsstrukturen in Europa – Kolloquium 8.-14. Mai 1983 Reisensberg/Günzburg. Tübingen: Archaeologica Venatoria. 6. p. 257-263.

GROENEN M. (2007) – “Voir l’image préhistorique: bilan des travaux dans la grotte ornée d’El Castillo (Cantabrie, Espagne) ”. In J. Évin (dir.), Un siècle de construction du discours scientifique en préhistoire, vol. III. “… aux conceptions d’aujourd’hui”. Actes du Congrès du Centenaire de la Société préhistorique française (Avignon, 21-25 septembre 2004), Paris, S.P.F., pp. 307-321, 16 fig. (XXVIe Congrès préhistorique de France).

LEROI-GOURHAN, A. (1978) – Préhistoire de l’art occidental. Paris: Mazenod. 482 p., 804 fig. MARLIER, G. (1957) – Ambrosius Benson et la peinture à Bruges au temps de Charles Quint. Damme: Éditions du Musée Van Maerlant. 343 p., 80 pl. MARTENS, D. (2000) – Un disciple tardif de Rogier de la Pasture: Maître Johannes (alias Johannes Hoesacker?). Oud Holland. 114, p. 79-106, 32 fig. RIETH, A. (1958) – Die Bisongravierung von La Genière – eine Fälschung. Germania. 36, p. 418-420.

GROENEN, M., MARTENS, D., SZAPU, P. (2004) – Peut-on attribuer des oeuvres du Paléolithique supérieur? In Lejeune, M., Welté, C. (dir.) – L’art du Paléolithique supérieur. Actes du XIVe Congrès de l’U.I.S.P.P. (Liège, 2-8 septembre 2001). Liège: Université de Liège. p. 127-138. (E.R.A.U.L., n° 107).

RIPOLL PERELLÓ, E. (1956) – Nota acerca de algunas nuevas figuras rupestres de las cuevas de El Castillo y La Pasiega (Puente Viesgo, Santander). In Actas IV Congreso internacional de Ciencias prehistóricas y protohistóricas (Madrid, 1954). Zaragoza: Secretaria general de los Congresos arqueológicos nacionales. p. 301-310.

GROENEN, M., MARTENS, D. (à paraître) – Le Maître “aux contours dédoublés”. Un artiste du Paléolithique supérieur cantabrique. Goya.

RIPOLL PERELLÓ, E. (1964) – Vida y obra del Abate Henri Breuil. Padre de la Prehistoria. In Miscelánea en Homenaje al Abate Henri Breuil (1877-1961). I. Barcelona: Diputación de Barcelona. p. 1-69.

HAHN, J. (1986) – Kraft und Agression. Die Botschaft der Eiszeitkunst im Aurignacien Süddeutschlands? Tübingen: Archaeologica Venatoria. 254 p. HAHN, J. (1995) – Les ivoires en Allemagne: débitage, façonnage et utilisation au Paléolithique supérieur. In Hahn, J., Menu, M., Taborin, Y., Walter, P., Widemann, F. (ed.) – Le travail et l’usage de l’ivoire au Paléolithique supérieur. Rome. p. 115-135.

SCHÜTZ, R. (2005-2006) – Les ateliers d’art au Paléolithique supérieur: étude des sites du Jura souabe et de Dolní ĕstonice. V Bruxelles: Université Libre de Bruxelles. Mémoire de DEA (inédit). SOFFER, O., VANDIVER, P., OLIVA, M., SEITL, L. (1993) – Case of the Exploding Figurines. Archaeology. 1, p. 36-39.

HILLER, B. (2003) – Die Nutzung von Elfenbein im Jungpaläolithikum des Hohle Fels bei Schelklingen. Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Urgeschichte. 12, p. 7-23.

VANDIVER, P., SOFFER, O., KLÍMA, B., SVOBODA, J. (1989) – The origins of ceramic technology at Dolní Vĕstonice, Czechoslovakia. Science. 246, p. 10021008.

KLÍMA, B. (1962) – The first groundplan of an Upper Paleolithic loess settlement in Middle Europe and its meaning. In Braidwood, R., Wiley, G.R. (ed.) – Courses toward urban life: archaeological considerations of some cultural alternates. Chicago. p. 193-210.

VERPOORTE, A. (2001) – Places of art, traces of fire. A contextual approach to anthropomorphic figurines in the Pavlovian (Central Europe, 29-24 kyr B.P.). Leiden. 141 p.

KLÍMA, B. (1984) – Grundrisse ganzer jungpaläolithischer Siedlungen aus Mähren. In Berke, H., Hahn, J.,

21

THE RECOGNITION OF DIVERSITY THROUGH STYLE IN THE SAHARAN ROCK-ART RESEARCH: AN HISTORIOGRAPHIC APPROACH FROM THE WESTERN SAHARA Joaquim SOLER SUBILS Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte und Archäologie des Mittelalters, Universität Tübingen [email protected] Abstract: An historiographic itinerary through the Sahara rock-art research during the XXth century reveals the subordinate place of style. Although this poor consideration, here I defend that style should be an indispensable analytical tool in Saharan rock-art research because, in contrast to previous analytical criteria, it allows to deal better with diversity. In order to support my arguments I introduce the results of my research in the Zemmur. There style has been primordial in order to reveal the regional particularities. Even an individual style could be isolated thanks to an stylistic analysis. Key words: Rock painting, late prehistory, Western Sahara, individual style, Saharan historiography Resumée: Un parcours historiographique a travers recherche sur l’art rupestre du Sahara pendant le siècle XX montre la place subordonnée de l’style dans la recherche. Malgré sa pauvre considération, ici je défense que l’style doit être un indispensable outil analytique dans l’étude de l’art rupestre dans le Sahara parce-que, en contraste vers les critères analytiques antérieurs, il permet d’appréhender meilleur la diversité. Pour illustrer mes arguments je présente les résultats de ma recherche dans le Zemmur, ou l’style a été primordial pour révéler des particularités régionaux. Même un style individuel a été isolé a partir de l’analyse stylistique. Mots clés: Peinture rupestre, préhistoire récente, Sahara Occidental, style individuel, historiographie du Sahara

INTRODUCTION

will introduce the results of my research in the Zemmur (Western Sahara) in order to show the capabilities of style to deal with diversity.

I could not find a better way to begin my synthesis about the role of style in the rock-art research in the Sahara than James R. Sackett’s initial words of his classic paper: The meaning of style in archaeology: a general model:

STYLE, CHRONOLOGY AND THE RISE OF THEODORE MONOD’S PARADIGM

No very profound acquaintance with archaeologists is needed to appreciate the fact that students of culture history use the word “style” in variety of ways. It is an omnibus word they employ to transport several different meanings to several different destinations over the landscape of their research. Because it carries such a mixed burden the term seems to defy clean and clear definition when we try to grasp it as a whole. This is not necessarily to be regretted, for of at least a few such crashing ambiguities of the sort which seem to nourish our thoughts however abstract they may be. (Others readily come to mind, such as “ecology”, “structure”, even perhaps “culture” itself). Nonetheless, there is profit from time to time in subjecting such words to critical analysis, attempting to separate what is essential to their nature from those accessories of meaning that have grown up around them as a result of their adaptation to specific kinds of problems and data and theoretical outlooks (Sackett 1977:369).

The first attempts to classify the North African rock-art were done before 1930 by G.B.M Flamand, Leo Frobenius and Hugo Obermaier (for a synthesis see Almagro 1946, Muzzolini 1995). Later Théodore Monod (1932, 1938), Raymond Vaufrey (1939), Raymond Mauny (1954) and Henry Lhote (Lhote 1959) did a similar effort for the Saharan rock-art. Their goals were, after establishing a succession of several periods, to classify the images into any of them in order to give an age to the pictures. Because that was their main concern, at this moment is difficult to find a clear boundary between classification and dating. Among those Saharan archaeologists from the middle XXth century, style was considered only a simple, limited and doubtful dating tool. Their lack of confidence is comprehensible because at those times styles were very simple and very subjective defined. Then the concept of style applied to Saharan rock-art only involved the image’s degree of naturalism. And the extended idea was that the naturalism was older than the schematism. An high degree of naturalism was related to the birth of a style and the schematism was related to its decadence and dead. That was the cycle of an style or artistic tradition. In this way style acquired a chronological sense.

My contribution does not aim to define what style is but instead to deal with those accessories of meaning. In fact the I exploit here the ambiguities and evolving meanings of style in the Saharan rock-art research in order to explain its survival and evolution. I will illustrate how the definition and meaning of style constantly changes in order to deal with the existing research agenda. Finally I 23

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

beaucoup plus modestes, représentant des animaux d’espèces actuellement indigènes –parmi lesquels apparaît pour la première fois le Chameau– associés à une écriture libyco-berbère (le tifinar). Tous les auteurs postérieurs ont reconnu le bien-fondé de cette division, dont C. Kilian et T. Monod ont pris acte pour distinguer entre une époque rupestre précaméline et une époque caméline (Vaufrey 1939:5).

Usually the archaeologists first classified the images in two groups through technic attributes and their patination. One was the group of the incised engravings, the other was the group of the pecked engravings. Because the incised engravings were though to be more naturalistic than the pecked, the associations incised-naturalisticancient and pecked-schematic-recent were established. However, for someone so preeminent in Saharan archaeology like Raymond Vaufrey style still was uncertain and too much unsafe to be used in fieldwork. Even it laid under the control of people more interested in theory and abstract entities.

Prehistorians working in the Sahara adopted Theodore Monod’s geological and zoological grounded dating system. They merged their chronostylistic model with Théodore Monod’s chronobiologic proposal. The result was a confident and objective framework to classify and date the images.

Les théoriciens de l’art préhistorique (et plus généralement les typologistes) oublient trop, à mon avis, que, de tout temps, il y eut de grands artistes et des mauvais, des créateurs et des imitateurs, des œuvres originales et d’autres, conventionnelles. Qu’il y ait eu dans l’ensemble une évolution de l’art préhistorique et notamment de l’art néolithique nordafricain, et que cette évolution se soit terminée par une période de décadence, c’est vraisemblable et même probable, mais, dans chaque cas particulier, pour les raison que je viens de dire, le style d’une œuvre ne semble pas suffisant pour en apprécier l’âge relative avec certitude. Dans le Sud-Oranais, nous l’avons noté, ces indications du style ne sont pas confirmées par l’industrie recueillie sur les sites rupestres (Vaufrey 1939:58).

Theodore’s Monod method became very popular because all the images from the Sahara could be studied using his framework. The system itself was simple, comprehensible, objective and user-friendly. Besides, the results of the new dating system were backward compatible because they integrated the previous results obtained with the chronostylistic approach. In 1954 Raymond Mauny completed Monod’s work. Weapons and accessories of the human figures were introduced as chronologic criteria (Mauny 1954). Style did not disappear from the research but it was irrelevant. For example Martín Almagro Basch still supported the idea that two styles, one naturalist and another characterized by a more modern drawing. At the same time he adopted Théodore Monod’s framework.

Being style only considered as a low confidence dating tool, it was very early shadowed by more resolutive methods, as the proposed by Théodore Monod. This geologist and explorer of the western edges of the Sahara took the previous groups defined by the technic and the patina and ordered them chronologically by the presence or absence in the compositions of some animal species and alphabets.

Ante todo, desde los primeros trabajos de conjunto sobre estas creaciones artísticas se distinguieron dos grandes grupos de grabados, unos de estilo naturalista, trazados con líneas profundas en V, por regla general de gran tamaño y que representaban en su inmensa mayoría grandes mamíferos emigrados en la actualidad de todo el norte de África. A su lado se diferenció un segundo grupo de representaciones de dibujo más moderno, trazado con grabados superficiales por repiqueteo de la silueta, siempre de dimensiones más pequeñas y que, además, ofreció sólo animales que viven actualmente aun en aquellos territorios, entre los cuales se ve ya el camello. Los dibujos de este estilo aparecen con frecuencia asociados a la escritura líbicobereber, que denominamos tifinagh. Tal división de un estilo y período precamélido y otro camélido en el arte rupestre norteaafricano queda en pie como visión certera y única clara para su clasificación cronológica (Almagro 1946:206).

Three groups or periods resulted from his classification (Monod 1932, 1938). The first was the Ancient period, with no camels or texts but with cattle and elephants. The second was the Middle or lybico-berber (preislamic) period, with camels and also texts written in the tifinagh alphabet. The third and last was the Recent, arabo-berber and islamic group, with depictions of camels and text in both alphabets (tifinagh and arabic). Following his geologist background, those animal species were used as director fossils of these three periods. Raymond Vaufrey gives us an example of this paradigm: Flamand –après Barth (1857-1858), Duveyrier (1864 et 1875), Hamy (1870), Nachtigal (1879) et Bonnet (1889) mais plus explicitement- distinguait entre deux groupes de gravures rupestres, les unes gravées profondément, de style naturaliste, figurant, souvent à grande échelle, une faune de grands Mammifères, pour la plupart émigrés; les autres gravées superficiellement par piquetage, et de dimensions

STYLE AND ETHNICITY Although the groups and periods replaced styles in the chronological sequences, the concept did not disappear. On the contrary, it evolved to deal with ethnicity. 24

J. SOLER SUBILS: THE RECOGNITION OF DIVERSITY THROUGH STYLE IN THE SAHARAN ROCK-ART RESEARCH…

The ethnic interpretation of rock-art styles has in Henry Lhote the most preeminent example because of the magnitude and the popularity of his research. Henry Lhote, who was the best specialist from the Tassili, Hoggar, Saharan Atlas and Aïr’s rock-art between 1950 and 1991, expanded Théodore Monod’s model. He proposed the existence four periods (Bubalin, Bovidien, Caballin et Camelin) in which the buffalo, the domestic bovines, the horse and the camel were used as director fossils.

Muzzolini updated it in the nineties. Alfred Muzzolini criticized many points of the framework and introduced corrections in the relative and absolute chronology of the groups (Muzzolini 1995) which supposed a major rupture. Those improvements were possible due to the new archaeological and zoological data and a critic reanalysis of many images. First he demonstrated that it was not possible to distinguish a period without cattle (bubalin) and another with cattle (bovidien): the domestic bovines are found in both periods. He also demonstrated that regional diversity should be taken in account: the Monod-Lhote’s periodization was too simple (Muzzolini 1995).

He not only classified the paintings in several periods, following Théodore Monod, but also he discerned other 12 art-styles into the periods (Lhote 1959:205). He defined styles in a similar way we do now: using technic morphologic and metric attributes and not only by their degree of naturalism. However, its major contribution is the new meaning he gave to the styles, as the expression of a culture and a people. The stylistic variation in rockart was taken as evidence of population changes and external influences:

In conclusion, the classification and dating system of Théodore Monod, Raymond Mauny had a serious inconvenient. Because all the periods followed one after another without overlap or contemporaneity, the system was unable to deal with regional or other forms of diversity.

With this ‘decadent’ phase the great period of the ‘Round Head’ paintings closes. From a time that was, no doubt, but little posterior to the of the execution of the ‘White Lady’ of Aouanrhet foreign influences began to be felt and these may be evidence for the first migrations which announced the ‘Bovidian’ invasion. But however this may be, the art of negroid peoples – already several thousands of years old–– was on decline. Soon the Tassili was invaded by newcomers who in no way resembled their predecessors and who pushed before them into upper valleys herds of slowmoving cattle. Thenceforth the walls of the Tassili shelters were to be covered with pictures of an absolutely new style and in an entirely new tradition (Lhote 1959:199).

Because of his critic about the differentiation between the bubalin and bovidien periods, Alfred Muzzolini defined groups of images (écoles) more than periods. He proposed to define groups by many criteria and to date them later. Always taking in account the possibility of contemporaneity. In this effort style was only another criterion which define the écoles (Muzzolini 1995:72). As Henry Lhote, Alfred Muzzolini also believed that style is indicative of the extension of an ethnic group, people sharing the same culture: Sans nous laisser émouvoir par les pamphlets à la mode contre le style, conférons rang majeur, dans la hiérarchie des critères, au style, car il exprime de quelque manière -fût-elle indirecte ou complexel’identité d’un groupe ethnique (Muzzolini 1995:84).

In the Spanish Western Sahara Henry Lhote’s classification, which were everywhere the most popular, were not so spread because most of his new classifications were applied on paintings, which in the Western Sahara were almost inexistent. On the other hand, some very vague relation between style and ethnicity had been always been present in the research in the Western Sahara. For example Julio Martínez Santa-Olalla had already bound the group of the naturalistic and sensorial images to hunter-gatherers communities due to supposed exclusive depictions of big wild animals like rhinoceros and elephants and the also supposed absence of cattle. On the other hand the group of the schematic and intellectualizing engravings was bound a hunterer-pastoral population because, it was said, all the depictions of domestic cattle were found among this group (Martínez 1941:165).

The previous inaptitude to deal with particularism and diversity is a consequence of the usage of too simple classification criteria. The incised-engraved dichotomy, the degree of patina and the depicted fauna are not enough in the context of the Saharan rock-art to define or identify groups which are representative of regional or other particularities. The capabilities of cattle, horses or camel depictions to cope with regional diversity are fairly low too. At the beginning of the research that was not a big problem because main concern was chronology. From the late fifties, with already a consensus in chronology, Henry Lhote started to interpret style as the result of ethnic change through time, but not as result of ethnic diversity at the same time. More than different people living at the same time, Henry Lhote drawn a map of successive migrations waves which acculturated the whole Sahara several times. The actual stage began in the late eighties, when Alfred Muzzolini criticized the paradigm and put diversity and contemporaneity on the scene (Muzzolini 1995).

STYLE, REGIONAL PARTICULARITIES AND THE COLLAPSE OF MONOD-LHOTE’S PARADIGM Henry Lhote’s paradigm, with his roots in Théodore Monod’s work, became very popular until Alfred 25

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

Sahara by Henry Lhote were useless in the Western Sahara: some themes are similar but the pictures have other technic and morphologic attributes.

THE ZEMMUR EXAMPLE In the Western Sahara the consequences of Alfred Muzzolini’s results could not be introduced in the research due to the Spanish withdrawal from his ancient colony, the Moroccan occupation and the independence war.

The styles were defined without using any chronologic attribute. The goal was to make them independent of any chronologic attribute, which could change in the future and ruin the classification system in the same way that the presence of cattle in the Bubalin period of Henry Lhote affected his classification and chronologic system. The criteria used in the definition of the styles of the Zemmur are technic (fill, stroke, size of the lines and the images, gradients, colors, perspective and other) and also morphologic (shape of the legs, feet and hooves, presence of fingers, type of hairdressing, shape of the body and other) (Soler et alii 2006).

In the ancient Spanish colony the last important contributions to the study of the rock-art before the actual war were done by Manuel Pellicer Catalán and Pilar Acosta Martínez (Pellicer et alii 1973-1974), Rodrigo de Balbín Behrmann (Balbín 1975) and Herbert Nowak and Sigrid and Dieter Ortner (Nowak et alii 1975). Rodrigo de Balbín Behrmann’s research is particularly interesting because he already put attention in the Western Sahara’s regional particularities. He began to break the MonodLhote’s paradigm due his interest in the Western Sahara’s regional particularities. Rodrigo de Balbín Behrmann detached some engravings with antlantic influences from others, which he related to a Saharan tradition. Although the criteria to sort them in a group or another were the engraving technic and the motifs depicted (not deeply defined styles), noteworthy the Western Sahara regional particularities appeared as a point of interest.

Later the styles were dated. First I searched for overlaps I sorted the styles in a relative chronology. After that I dated some styles in basis of the depictions of fauna, weapons and texts. As a result, the most ancient, the Dancers’ Style (fig 3.1.3), belongs to an early or medium Bronze Age (3.800-3.200 BP), as the depiction of halberds shows. The most recent, the Lineal Style (fig 3.1.6), should be dated between 2.400 BP and the beginning of the Christian era because of the presence of lybico-berber texts and the lack of camels. The ages of the Shaped (fig 3.1.7), Stroked (fig 3.1.4) and Dark Figures (fig 3.1.5) styles lie between the ages of the Dancers’ and the Lineal styles (besides, all three seem to be contemporany due to overlaps). Finally, there is also a unique ancient ancient Arabic text, which might represent the historic ages after XV century AD. It was not possible to get a radiometric age for any style: the chemical tests on some samples of paintings did not detect enough organic material to allow the 14C dates.

Since 1995 and in the context of the actual cease-fire, our team from the University of Girona (Catalonia, Spain) has started over with the archaeological research in the Western Sahara in collaboration with the Ministry of Culture of the Saharawi and Arabic Democratic Republic. One of the major discoveries were the painted rockshelters in the Zemmur region, in the north-eastern Western Sahara (fig. 3.1.1). The rock-shelters are found along the low sandstone hills of the region (fig. 3.1.2). Five new sites of the Zemmur, which have been studied in depth and which we mention here, are Wadi Kenta (26 rock-shelters), Wadi Ymal (2 rock-shelters), Asako (1 rock-shelter), Rekeiz Ajahfun (1 rock-shelter) and Rekeiz Lemgasem (80 rock-shelters). In most of the Zemmur rock-shelters, painted and unpainted, lithic artifacts, pottery remains, engraved ostrich’s shells and carved mills have been discovered but no excavation was undertaken due to time and logistic constraints.

STYLE AND INDIVIDUALITY IN THE ZEMMUR Inspired by the research of Juan Maria Apellániz (1992) and Marc Groenen, Didier Martens and Pierre Szapu (Groenen et alii 2004) I examined the data from the Zemmur with the aim to identify a individual style in the Zemmur. I had expectations with the Shaped Style and its Outlined Substyle. Before this search for an individual style, several images belonging to the Shaped Style, had already been grouped by technic and metric arguments into this Outlined substyle.

Most of the 2.700 images studied are described in the doctoral thesis of the author (Soler 2004-2006). Descriptions of the sites, the themes and the styles defined have been recently published (Soler 2006, Soler et alii 2006).

The depictions in Outlined Substyle are characterized by depictions of animal beings of high dimensions (around 1 meter), drawn with wide lines and diffused edges and presented in a strict lateral view. On the contrary the depictions in Outlined Substyle have no finished legs (fig 3.2.x).

The sharing of characters between many paintings and the depiction of recurrent themes led me to study the Zemmur’s rock-paintings from a stylistic point of view. The main objective of the research was to propose a succession of cultural periods in the Western Sahara and to give an age to the images.

Aside from these particularities, the figures depicted in Outlined Substyle are strongly related to Shaped Style depictions by several morphologic similarities. In both

To deal with diversity I must define several new styles for the Zemmur rock-paintings. Those defined in the Central 26

J. SOLER SUBILS: THE RECOGNITION OF DIVERSITY THROUGH STYLE IN THE SAHARAN ROCK-ART RESEARCH…

Fig. 3.1. 1. Location of the sites in the Zemmur; 2. Some painted rock-shelters of Rekeiz Lemgasem; 3. Dancers’s Style; 4. Strocked Style; 5. Dark Figures Style; 6. Linear Style; 7. Shaped Style; 8. Shaped Style 27

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

cases the bellies are extremely rounded (figs. 3.1.7, 3.1.8, 3.2.1, and 3.2.4) and have straight foreheads (figs. 3.1.7, 3.1.8, 3.2.2 and 3.2,4). Both groups also share a trend to separate the neck from the rest of the body with a clear hump (figs. 3.1.7, 3.1.8, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4 and 3.2.5). Other shared attributes are some rounded muzzles (figs. 3.1.7, 3.1.8 and 3.2.2), even in the unrealistic case of an ostrich (fig. 3.2.3), and rounded chests (figs. 3.1.8, 3.2.3 and 3.2.4).

considered a proof of the skill and professionalism of his creator too. In conclusion, the Outlined Substyle might be the work of an individual painter. CONCLUSIONS After historiographic and field research, it is clear that in Saharan rock-art research the concept, usage and meaning of style have constantly been shaped in order to make them compatible with the research agenda. With this experience on mind, it seems difficult to define a very precise and detailed concept of style valid for every archaeologist.

To evaluate the hypothesis that the figures in Outlined Style could be the work of a sole professional I checked the characteristics of these images and styles against the criteria provided by Groenen et alii 2004 an several other. First, Outlined Substyle is geographically and numerically very restricted. Among 5 rock-art sites, Outlined Substyle is only found in Rekeiz Lemgasem. And among the 80 rock-shelters of Rekeiz Lemgasem, only in 6. In Rekeiz Lemgasem there are 2180 depictions but only 19 of them are related to the Outlined Substyle. That means that the figures in Outlined Substyle fall into the work-range of an individual.

Although some controversy exists about the value of style as a research tool in archaeology (Lorblanchet & Bahn 1993), from my experience can only conclude that style should be the main analytical tool when studying the rock-art from the Sahara. Neither my proposal of a sequence of styles for the Western Sahara or the identification of an individual style could not have been possible without an stylistic analysis. This opinion is not new: we have seen how a more positive consideration of style among the scholars working in the Sahara has emerged since Henry Lhote’s research. But this trend contrasts with meanings from some scholars working on European rock-art (Lorblanchet & Bahn 1993).

Second, in the Zemmur we have a big corpus of images, isolated in the temporal and geographical axis, in which we have defined several styles. This diversity allows the existence and the identification of an individual style. Third, the proposed individual style is related by morphologic characters to what should be a more collective style, the Shaped Style. Therefore, both styles could be compared in order to search for the common fundaments of both styles and the particularities of the individual style.

In the context of our colloquium, my example from the Western Sahara shows that style is an adequate tool to date images and perceive diversity. On the other hand, the historiographic research tells us that we must define styles properly: without too much subjectivity, without aesthetic prejudices and without chronologic criteria.

Those results indicate that the idea that Outlined Substyle could be the work of an individual is quite reasonable. But there are many other arguments not exposed in Groenen et alii 2004 which support it.

At this moment, work is still in progress in the Western Sahara. Until now we have discovered and studied thousands of images. We have perceived chronologic, regional and individual diversity. But we still do not know what does this diversity means in the context of the Western Sahara’s late prehistory. We need other sources of data beyond rock-art. The increasing research being developed in the Western Sahara should enlighten us and this forgotten area in the following years.

Thematic arguments, for example. In what we call collective style, the Shaped Style, human beings and animals were depicted. In the individual style, the Outlined, only animals. This reduction of the subjects can be explained as the result of an individual working on his particular area of interest. In fact, the themes depicted in Shaped Style are more free than the themes depicted in other styles. In Dancers’ and Dark Figures styles recurrent themes where depicted, also with very similar composition.

Acknowledgments

Other support comes from the location of the paintings in Outlined Substyle. Several of them are placed on places with difficult access (for example under the roof of the rock-shelter, figs. 3.2.1 and 3.2.4). Therefore some infrastructure was needed. Those Outlined Substyle paintings seem to be more the work of a professional than the result of an amateur activity.

I would like to thank the University of Girona and the Ministry of Culture of the Saharawi and Arabic Democratic Republic for leading and supporting this research project in the Western Sahara. This work has been also possible thanks to the Spanish Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, which sustains my research with a postdoctoral grant.

The size of the depictions in Outlined Substyle, which are bigger than the depictions in other styles, can be 28

J. SOLER SUBILS: THE RECOGNITION OF DIVERSITY THROUGH STYLE IN THE SAHARAN ROCK-ART RESEARCH…

Fig. 3.2. 1. Antilopes in Outlined Substyle painted under the rock-shelters roof; 2. Antilopes in Outlined Substyle; 3. Ostrich in Outlined Substyle; 4. Giraffes in Outlined Substyle painted under a rock-shelters roof; 5. Overlap of a rhinoceros and an ox in Outlined Substyle over an Strocked ox 29

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

MAUNY, R. (1954) – Gravures, peintures et inscriptions rupestres de l’ouest africain. Dakar: Institut Français de l’Afrique Noire. p. 91. (Initations Africaines, 11).

Bibliography ALMAGRO BASCH, M. (1946) – Prehistoria del Norte de África y del Sahara español. Barcelona: Instituto de Estudios Africanos, Centro Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, p. 302, figs. 262.

MONOD, T. (1932) – L’Adrar Ahnet. Contribution à l’étude archaeologie d’un district saharien. Paris: Institut d’Ethnologie de l’Université de Paris. p. 180.

APELLÁNIZ, J.M. (1992) – Modèle d’analyse d’un auteur de représentations d’animaux de différentes espèces: le Tube de Torre (Pays Basque, Espagne), L’Anthropologie. Paris. 96:2-3, p. 453-472.

MONOD, T. (1938) – Gravures, peintures et inscriptions rupestres. Contributions à l’étude du Sahara Occidental. Fascicule 1. Paris: Larose, 156 p. 100 figs. 5 lams. (Publications du Comité d’Études Historiques et Scientifiques de l’Afrique Occidental Française, serie A, 7).

BALBÍN de BEHRMANN, R. (1975) – Contribución al estudio del Arte Rupestre del Sáhara español. Resumen Tesis Doctoral. Madrid, p. 37.

MUZZOLINI, A. (1995) – Les images rupestres du Sahara. Toulouse: Alfred Muzzolini. p. 447, figs. 510. (Préhistoire du Sahara, 1).

DOWSON, T.A. (1998) – Rain in Bushman belief, politics and history: the rock-art of rain-making in the southern-eastern mountains, Southern Africa. In Taçon, P.S.Ç.; Chippindale, C., eds. – The Archaeology of Rock-Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 73-91.

NOWAK, H.; ORTNER, S. & D. (1975) – Felsbilder der spanischen Sahara. Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt. p. 75, figs. 48, lams. 75. PELLICER CATALÁN, M.; ACOSTA MARTÍNEZ, P.; HERNÁNDEZ PÉREZ, M.S., MARTÍN SOCAS, D. (1973-1974) – Aportaciones al estudio del arte rupestre del Sáhara español (zona meridional). Tabona. La Laguna. 2, p. 92, figs. 46, lams. 26.

GROENEN, M.; MARTENS, D.; SZAPU, P. (2004) – Peut-on attribuer des œuvres du paléolithique supérieur? In Lejeune, M., dir.- L’art pariétal paléolithique dans son contexte naturel. Actes du colloque 8.2, Congrès de l’UISPP, Liège, 2-8 septembre 2001. Liège. p.127-138. (ERAUL; 107).

SOLER SUBILS J. (2004-2006) – Biblioteca d’articles i comunicacions. Avaliable at http://www.udg.edu/ipac/ sahara/biblioteca.html.

LHOTE, H. (1959) – The search for the Tassili Frescoes. The story of the prehistoric rock-paintings of the Sahara, London: Hutchinson, p. 236.

SOLER SUBILS, J. (2006) – Late prehistorical paintigs in the Zemmur (Western Sahara). International Newsletter on Rock Art. Foix. 45, p. 15-23.

LORBLANCHET, M; BAHN, P; eds. (1993) – Rock Art Studies: The Post-Stylistic Era, or where do we go from here? Papers presented in Symposium A of the 2nd AURA Congress, Cairns 1992. Oxford: Oxbow Books. p. 215. (Oxbow Monograph, 35).

SOLER SUBILS, J.; SOLER MASFERRER, N.; SERRA SALAMÉ, C. (2006) – The painted rock-sheltersr of the Zemmur (Western Sahara). Sahara Journal. Milano. 17, p. 129-142.

MARTÍNEZ SANTA-OLALLA, J. (1941) – Los primeros grabados rupestres del Sahara Español, Atlantis. Actas y Memorias de la Sociedad Española de Etnografía y Prehistoria. Madrid. 16:1-2. p. 163176, 2 figs.

VAUFREY, R. (1939) – L’art rupestre nord-africain, Paris: Masson et Companie Éditeurs. p. 127, lams. 45. (Archives de l’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine, 20).

30

THE ROCK ART OF SOUTH-MOROCCO REVISITED: ON SURPRISING STYLISTIC AND THEMATIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SO-CALLED “PSEUDO-BOVIDIEN” AND “TAZINIEN” ROCK ART FROM THE MID VALLEY OF WADI DRAA Renate HECKENDORF Scholarship holder (Kommission für Archäologie außereuropäischer Kulturen, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Endenicher Straße 41, D – 53115 Bonn) [email protected] Abstract: In South-Morocco, the rock carvings that are commonly attributed to the so-called “Tazina-” and “Bovidien-” styles were generally taken as evidence for cultural and economic change. The supposed transformations were assumed to have taken place under the pressure of an alleged desertification process in prehistoric times. A complete reappraisal of this unfounded interpretation was made possible by the systematic investigation of 1881 engravings that were identified on 919 panels from 20 rock art sites of the mid valley of Wadi Draa. Their unexpected thematic composition, as it is revealed by a new classification, alters the chronological framework for the rock art of South-Morocco. To a certain extent, the criteria underlying the study draw on concepts that were advanced by eminent art historians, such as E. Panofsky, M. Schapiro and E. Gombrich. Key words: Rock Art, Morocco, Bovidien, Bubalin (Tazina-Style), Wadi Draa Résumé: Les gravures rupestres attribuées au style ou à l’école dite de “Tazina” et au “Bovidien” ou “Pseudo-Bovidien du Sud marocain” passaient généralement pour témoignages d’un changement culturel et économique causé par la désertification supposée du Sud marocain. L’étude approfondie de 1881 gravures rupestres, découvertes sur 919 panneaux dans 20 stations d’art rupestre de la vallée moyenne du Draa, a permis une révision complète de cette interprétation insuffisamment fondée. Le nouveau classement stylistique révèle une composition thématique inattendue qui change le cadre chronologique de l’art rupestre du Sud marocain. Les critères qui sont à la base de l’étude sont inspirés, en grande partie, par des conceptions avancées par des historiens d’art comme E. Panofsky, M. Schapiro ou E. Gombrich. Mots-clés: Art rupestre, Maroc, Bovidien, Bubalin (Style de Tazina), Oued Draa

INTRODUCTION

large plains, which are called “reg”. Crests dominate the so-called “rich”-areas on the southern side of the Jbel Bani.

The numerous rock art sites that are to be found in the Moroccan pre-Sahara are just barely known. Nevertheless, they are in serious danger of destruction.

Presentation of the rock art sites

Several seasons of fieldwork in the mid valley of Wadi Draa led to the discovery of about 1881 engravings. They were identified on 919 panels from 20 rock art sites. A thorough examination of the documentary evidence has shown the varying composition of the rock art sites and the inadequacy of the traditional classificatory frame (Heckendorf 2008).

At the outset of the project (1995-2005), more than one third of the rock art sites listed in the official inventory of Moroccan monuments and sites (Catalogue 1977) were situated in the research area. At present, about 134 sites are known within the region. Still, their uneven spatial distribution has to be noted. The disparities are chiefly caused by factors related to the history of research.

Presentation of the research area

Basically, the rock art sites are linked to hills. Outside the Anti-Atlas, in the areas of the “feïja” and the “rich”, they are mostly located on crests. Sometimes, they extend over several kilometres. To the north of the Jbel Bani, they are often placed on slopes. Some are to be found on the edge of a plain or on the side of a transverse valley. Others are placed on steep slopes, as for instance on the sides of the river valleys in the Anti-Atlas.

The area under study (29°-30° N, 7°-9° W) is located in the domain of the western Anti-Atlas. It is situated in a transitional zone between the Mediterranean region and the desert. This area is often designated as the Moroccan “pre-Sahara”. Its relief displays a clear structure. Wadis that drain the waters of the Anti-Atlas to the south characterize it on the one hand, and alternating plains and crests that are oriented southwest/northeast on the other. In the centre of the area, the Jbel Bani rises up to 100 m above the ground. A series of transverse valleys cuts across this Ordovician ridge. The alluvial deposits from above are accumulated in the so-called “feïja”-areas on the northern side of the Jbel Bani. Below the transverse valleys, alluvial deposits and Quaternary glacis form

Land use and context of the rock art sites Today, the land use in the area under study is characterised by an opposition between the agriculture of the oasis-dwellers on the one hand and the nomadic use of the surrounding pastures on the other. 31

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

The uncultivated land in the vicinity of the rock art sites is mainly used as pasture for goats or dromedaries. Occasionally, this fact seems to be mirrored in the rock art. In addition, various types of nomad encampments and Muslim tombs, water resources and paths, sometimes even small palm groves and the so-called “maader” (accumulation zones on the sides of the wadis that are used for the cultivation of barley) are to be found in the surroundings. Furthermore, the archaeological context includes pre-Islamic tombs and a variety of surface finds from various prehistoric periods. Unfortunately, both the visible prehistoric monuments and the surface finds are subjected to systematic vandalism and theft.

of a style, because a given motif may appear in different styles or otherwise different motifs may occur in a given style (Gardin 1958, 348-9; Schapiro 1953, 289). In fact, none of the 20 above-mentioned rock art sites presents a homogenous composition of any sort. Furthermore, only part of the engravings fit into the traditional classificatory frame. Accordingly, there is a large amount left over that cannot be classified. However, a comparative study of the particular associations of rock carvings reveals some quite interesting differences between the individual sites: − The size of the rock art sites (number of panels and pictures): In the area under study, a single rock art site comprises an average of 54 panels and 111 engravings, and a single panel an average of two carvings.

COMPOSITION OF THE ROCK ART WITHIN THE ROCK ART-SITES

− Aspects of graphical representation (technique): The criterion of technical composition allows of a clear distinction between rock art sites with a dominant part of either polished or pecked engravings. Here, to simplify matters, the former are called “s-sites” and the latter “p-sites”. Although the “p-sites” of our sample are almost exclusively composed of pecked carvings, the “s-sites” show a rather heterogeneous composition. The majority of their representational engravings (anthropomorphic-, zoomorphic- and artefact pictures) are polished, whereas either pecked or polished carvings dominate among their inscriptions and geometrical forms.

As a matter of fact, new engravings can always be added to open-air rock art sites and already existing images can constantly be modified. All the same, the rock art sites were habitually taken as a whole and attributed to one of the “styles” that are part of the traditional classificatory frame. Presentation of the traditional classificatory frame The rock art of the research area was traditionally attributed to two main “styles”. Hence, it seemed to reflect economical and cultural changes that were imputed to a supposed “desertification” of the Moroccan preSahara.

− Aspects of visual representation (representational engravings): The rock art sites also show marked differences as to the contour of their representational engravings. Within “s-sites”, the outline of representational carvings is either open or close, whereas inside “p-sites”, either sheeted or open outlines predominate and the part of closed outlines varies. Furthermore, as for the perspective of their representational engravings, the rock art sites show significant differences, too. The flat-parallel perspective of depiction outnumbers the flat-twisted perspective inside all except one of the “p-sites”, and within the majority of “s-sites”.

In South-Morocco, the “Bubalin” according to Henri Lhote (Lhote et al. 1989) is represented by the so-called “Tazina-Style”. In general, the corresponding rockcarvings are described as polished delineations of schematized wild animals with distorted proportions and they are dated to a presumed “period of hunters”. Besides, they were supposed to be found essentially on the southern side of the Jbel Bani. On the other hand, the term “Bovidien” usually refers to a rather heterogeneous group, essentially composed of “sub naturalistic” pecked cattle-drawings, that is dated to a presumed “period of herders”. As it does not seem to show any stylistic or thematic relation with Saharan rock art whatsoever, Alfred Muzzolini (Muzzolini 1995, 3746) appropriately named this group the “South-Moroccan Pseudo-Bovidien”. It was supposed to be found essentially on the northern side of the Jbel Bani.

− Aspects of pictorial representation (theme of individual engravings): Eventually, two main thematic groups are to be distinguished. On the one hand, the group of animate motifs that essentially comprises zoomorphic subjects, and the group of inanimate motifs that is chiefly composed of geometric patterns on the other. The representations of animals include both wild and domestic species. Within all “s-sites”, images of wild fauna outnumber depictions of domestic creatures, whereas “p-sites” are rather characterized by illustrations of domestic animals. However, some of the latter show a predominance of wild animal representations.

Critique of the traditional classificatory frame On closer view, we are faced with the problem that none of these “styles” has ever been adequately defined. Basically, a technique can only be considered as typical of a style insofar as it affects the formal features of a representation (Schapiro 1953, 289). As a matter of principle, a theme cannot directly be regarded as typical

As a result, it is impossible to maintain previous assertions that held that “Tazina-sites” were characterized 32

R. HECKENDORF: THE ROCK ART OF SOUTH-MOROCCO REVISITED…

by engravings of wild fauna and “Bovidien-sites” by carvings of domestic mammals.

patina and their dating can be narrowed down by the presence of pictures of cattle, daggers, horses and arcs. The carvings of the “Meskâou-Group” (polished, closed contour) also show a neutral patina and they distinguish themselves by a great number of figures of ostrich and rhinoceros, as well as a small amount of images of bovid. An indication as to their age is provided by the presence of illustrations of cattle, daggers, halberds and horses.

PRESENTATION OF THE REPRESENTATIONAL TYPES The traditional classificatory frame turned out to be inadequate for the characterization of the rock art in the research area. Besides, the use of the term “style” should not obscure the fact that with reference to rock art 1 it merely refers to a certain quality of formal characteristics (Layton 1991, 50; Panofsky 1964, 49-53;) that may be typical of a place or a time (Gombrich, 1983, 391; Rosenfeld/Smith 1997, 407). As far as that is concerned, the sorting of rock art is akin to the classification of other archaeological material.

Variations of the “Pseudo-Bovidien” As for the rest, there are essentially three variants of the “Pseudo-Bovidien” to be distinguished inside the research area. They also typify the corresponding representational types and they are mostly to be found to the north of the Jbel Bani. One variation is marked by depictions of wild fauna, whereas pictures of domestic mammals largely characterize the two others.

From the results of the above-mentioned analysis, a revised definition of the traditional classificatory units – i. e. the “Tazinien” and the “Pseudo-Bovidien” – can nevertheless be specified. The rock art was therefore divided into “representational types” (Fig. 4.1). These are defined by combining the features of contour, perspective and technique. The dating of each corresponding rock art group is based on a comparative analysis of its thematic composition.

The “Moumersal-Group” (pecked, open contour) differs from the rest in the high percentage of depictions of barbary sheep and roan antelope (flat-parallel perspective) or scimitar-horned oryx and korrigum (flat-twisted perspective). The engravings show either a neutral or a clear patina and their dating can be narrowed down by the presence of pictures of cattle, halberds and horses.

Dating of the rock art

The carvings of the “Taheouast-Group” (pecked, closed contour) mostly show a clear patina and they distinguish themselves by numerous figures of cattle and ostrich, and a great many images of archers. An indication as to their age is provided by the presence of illustrations of cattle, metal axes, daggers, halberds, horses, and arcs.

In the case at issue, the represented motifs unfortunately provide only very few indications as to the possible age of the representational engravings. These are in particular the presence of depictions of cattle, metal arms, horses, bowmen, and the absence of pictures of the dromedary. Judging by these clues, the main part of the carvings was created between the 3rd millennium B.C. and the beginning of our era. Moreover, on account of the indications given by the range of represented motifs, we have to assume that the “Tazinien” and the “PseudoBovidien” are contemporaneous. Furthermore, they have to be regarded as neither Epipalaeolithic, nor Neolithic, but as relics from the Metal Ages.

The “Imâoun-Group” (pecked, sheet contour) is characterized by a large number of representations of cattle and ostrich. The engravings mainly show a clear patina and their dating can be narrowed down by the presence of depictions of cattle, metal axes, and arcs. The new classificatory frame is based on the largest rock art sample that was ever subjected to analysis in the Moroccan pre-Sahara. It is both easily understood and capable of development. In addition, this classification makes it possible to look at the rock art from a different angle.

Variations of the “Tazinien” The analysis of the rock art in the area under study resulted in the differentiation of essentially two variants of the so-called “Tazinien” that exemplify the corresponding representational types. They are mainly to be found to the south of the Jbel Bani and they are chiefly characterized by representations of wild fauna.

INTERPRETATION OF THE ROCK ART As a matter of principle, any stylistic or chronological classification of rock art that is to be based on the results of thematic analyses has to consider the disparity of three distinct levels of interpretation, or rather “phases of iconographical examination” (Layton 1991, 34-5; Straten 1997, 26-32). On the level of the “pre-iconographical” description of the depicted themes, the facts related to the “phenomenological sense” of the representation are made accessible by means of empirical statements (Panofsky

The “Tiggâne-Group” (polished, open contour) differs from the rest in the great variety of depicted species of antelope and gazelle. The engravings show a neutral 1

The concept of style that is advocated here with reference to rock art is essentially modelled on the suggestions put forward by Cole (1990, 346), Franklin (1989, 278), Guy (1996, 99-100), Rosvall (1978, 213-5), Sacket (1977, 370), Schapiro (1953, 286-9), Züchner (2001, 111).

33

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

Fig. 4.1. Representational types illustrated by cattle depictions 34

R. HECKENDORF: THE ROCK ART OF SOUTH-MOROCCO REVISITED…

1964, 95). In the absence of written or ethnographic sources, there is no possibility to reach beyond this level.

association with man are neither identifiable as hounds, nor as sheepdog. Furthermore, only two scenes that belong to the “Moumersal-Group” apparently show people tending cattle.

However, the rock art sample under study does not contain any evidence for the replacement of a huntergatherer economy by a pastoral economy. Moreover, the range of represented motifs does not corroborate former notions of desertification. Therefore, previous allegations on the matter of cultural and economic change under the pressure of a desertification process in prehistoric times cannot be maintained.

The illustration of animal behaviour cannot be regarded as a characteristic trait of the rock art under study either. Some engravings that belong to both of the main groups show animals with a bowed had or with an erected tail. Depending on the animal species, the depicted behaviour may have various meanings. For instance, the ducked posture of a Giraffe-Gazelle with its neck sticking out indicates anxiety.

Motif range of rock art groups (representational types)

The compositions – that are constituted of several carvings – mainly give a picture of static associations of domestic or wild fauna. Some of these are particularly conspicuous. There are, for example, depictions of animals with their calves. With regard to the “TiggâneGroup” and the “Imâoun-Group”, these show rhinoceroses and with reference to the “Taheouast-Group” and the “Imâoun-Group”, they display elephants. One image that belongs to the “Moumersal-Group” illustrates the male korrigum defending its territory during the mating season.

Regarding the most important aspects of their motif range, the engravings of the “Tazinien” and of the “Pseudo-Bovidien” – as redefined above – have a lot in common. There is a noticeable correspondence with regard to the qualitative level of motif composition. Depictions of cattle, elephant, and antelope constitute an integral part of the motif range of all variants of both main groups. Moreover, pictures of ostrich, rhinoceros, lion, and gazelle appear in the motif range of almost all corresponding representational types. Among the most important species of antelope and gazelle that are to be found in the motif range of the majority of the representational types are scimitar-horned oryx and dama gazelle, as well as korrigum, reedbuck, eland, and clarke’s gazelle. The former are Saharan species, whereas the latter are common today in sub-Saharan Africa.

Spatial distribution of representational types The spatial distribution of the different rock art groups (as redefined above) follows the course of the main wadisystems that cross the huge transverse valleys of the Jbel Bani from north to south. However, the particularly prominent crest does not form the boundary of the northern extension of the “Tazinien” or the southern expansion of the “Pseudo-Bovidien”. Although the former rarely occur to the north of the elevation, the latter frequently appear to its south. For the most part, the “Tazinien-” engravings are located to the south of the Jbel Bani. They are mainly to be found in the wadi-system of Foûm Adîs, and then in the wadi-systems of Akka n’Aït Sidi and Foûm Akka. The “Pseudo-Bovidien-” carvings are situated both to the north and to the south of the ridge. The pictures of the “Imâoun-Group” and of the “Taheaouast-Group” generally appear to the north of the crest, whereas those of the “Moumersal-Group” mostly occur to its south.

On the other hand, there is an obvious dissimilarity with reference to the quantitative level of motif composition. The difference is mainly connected with the respective portions of images of wild or domestic animals. A low percentage of depictions of domestic mammals (cattle) and a high proportion of figures of wild fauna characterizes the “Tazinien-” engravings, whereas the carvings of two variants of the “Pseudo-Bovidien” are marked by a high percentage of images of domestic mammals (cattle) and a low proportion of illustrations of wild fauna. In spite of a high percentage of depictions of sheep/goat (barbary sheep), the “Moumersal-Group” shows a virtually balanced ratio of wild and domestic animal representations and takes up a special status.

CONCLUSION

The portrayal of the exploitation of animals by man cannot be considered as a distinctive feature of the rock art under study. The theme of the archer, for example, appears almost exclusively in the motif range of the “Taheouast-Group” and of the “Imâoun-Group”. A high portion of cattle figures characterizes either group. The accompanying game animals include elephant, giraffe, hartebeest, and roan antelope. Apart from that, several alleged “hunting scenes” have to be considered as palimpsests, because the pictures of hunter and game are formally distinct. Moreover, the dogs that appear in

It goes without saying that additional fieldwork would be necessary in order to corroborate and to explore the pattern of rock art distribution that could be established so far. Probably, engravings that belong to the “PseudoBovidien” are to be discovered both in the mountain ranges of the Anti-Atlas and the High Atlas. At the moment, the presence of engravings that belong the “Imâoun-Group” has been ascertained within the rock art complex of Waramdaz (now destroyed) that was situated on a pass of the Anti-Atlas (Salih/Heckendorf 2002, 8335

METHODS OF ART HISTORY TESTED AGAINST PREHISTORY

86), as well as inside the rock art complex of Oukaïmeden (now seriously threatened) that may still be located on a mountain pasture of the High Atlas (Salih et al. 1998, 287 Fig. 22).

Erörterung über die Möglichkeit “kunstwissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe”. In: Oberer, H. / Verheyen, E., eds. – Aufsätze zu Grundfragen der Kunstwissenschaft. Berlin [(1)1925], p. 49-75. PANOFSKY, E. (1964) – Zum Problem der Beschreibung und Inhaltsdeutung von Werken der bildenden Kunst. In: Oberer, H. / Verheyen, E., eds. – Aufsätze zu Grundfragen der Kunstwissenschaft. Berlin [(1)1925], p. 85-97.

Bibliography CATALOGUE (1977) – Catalogue des sites rupestres du Sud marocain. Rabat: Royaume du Maroc. Ministère d’État Chargé des Affaires Culturelles.

ROSENFELD, A., SMITH, C. (1997) – Recent developments in radiocarbon and stylistic method of dating rock-art. Antiquity, p. 71, 405-11.

COLE, S.J. (1990) – Legacy on Stone. Rock Art of the Colorado Plateau and Four Corners Region. Boulder.

ROSVALL, J. (1978) – An attempt at a framework for visual analysis of rock art. In: Marstrander, S., ed. (1978) – Acts of the International Symposium on Rock Art [Lectures at Hankø, 6-12 August 1972]. Oslo/Bergen/Tromsø, p. 211-24.

FRANKLIN, N.R. (1989) – Research with style. A case study from Australian rock art. In: Shennan, S., ed. – Archaeological Approaches to Cultural Identitiy. Boston/Sydney/Wellington, p. 278-90.

SACKETT, J.R. (1977) – The meaning of style in archaeology. A general model. American Antiquity. 42 (3), p. 369-80.

GARDIN, J.-Cl. (1958) – Four Codes for the Description of Artifacts. An Essay in Archeological Technique and Theory. American Anthropologist. Menasha, Wisconsin. 6, p. 335-57.

SALIH, A., OUJAA, A., HECKENDORF, R., NAMI, M., EL GHARRAOUI, M., LEMJIDI, A., ZOHAL, H. (1998) – L’aire rupestre de l’Oukaïmeden, Haut Atlas, Maroc. Occupation humaine et économie pastorale [Das Felsbildgebiet Oukaïmeden, Hoher Atlas, Marokko. Besiedlung und mobile Viehwirtschaft]. Beiträge zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archäologie. Bonn. 18, p. 253-95.

GOMBRICH, E.H. (1983) – L’histoire de l’art et les sciences sociales. In: Gombrich, E.H. – L’écologie des images. Transl. A. Lévêque. Paris: Idées et Recherches, p. 323-49. GUY, E. (1996) – Sur les transformations de la vision artistique au Paléolithique supérieur. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique de l’Ariège. 51, p. 99-110.

SALIH, A., HECKENDORF, R. (2002) – L’art rupestre “libyco-berbère” au Maroc. État des connaissances [Zum Stand der Erforschung der libyco-berberischen Felsbilder Marokkos]. Beiträge zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archäologie. Bonn. 22, p. 65-94.

HECKENDORF, R. (2008) – “Bubalin” und “Bovidien” in Südmarokko. Kontext, Klassifikation und Chronologie der Felsbilder im mittleren Draa-Tal. Bonn: Forschungen zur Archäologie Außereuropäischer Kulturen 6.

SCHAPIRO, M. (1953) – Style. In: Kroeber, A.L., ed. – Anthropology Today. An Encyclopedic Inventory. Chicago, p. 287-312.

LAYTON, R. (1991(2)) – The anthropology of art. Cambridge [(1)1981, Reprint 1992].

STRATEN, R. van (1997(2)) – Einführung in die Ikonographie [Inleiding in de Iconografie, deutsch]. Transl. R.E. Feilchenfeldt. Berlin [Muiderberg 1985, Berlin (1)1989].

LHOTE, H., CAMPS, G., BERNUS, E., SOUVILLE, G. (1989) – Art rupestre. Encyclopédie Berbère. Aix-enProvence. 6 (A 278), p. 918-39. MUZZOLINI, A. (1995) – Les images rupestres du Sahara. Toulouse: Préhistoire du Sahara 1.

ZÜCHNER, Ch. (2001) – Archäologische Datierung. Eine antiquierte Methode zur Altersbestimmung von Felsbildern? Quartär. 51-2, p. 107-14.

PANOFSKY, E. (1964) – Über das Verhältnis der Kunstgeschichte zur Kunsttheorie. Ein Beitrag zu der

36

Session C81 SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

ESPIRALES EN HUMAHUACA1 Y EN EL NOROESTE DE ARGENTINA (SUDAMÉRICA) José Luis MAMANÍ Colegio N° 2 “Armada Argentina”. Lisandro De la Torre 350.cp4600, S.S. de Jujuy, Argentina [email protected]

Alicia Ana FERNÁNDEZ DISTEL Centro de Estudios Indígenas y Coloniales, Universidad Nacional de Jujuy, Otero 257, 4,600, S.S. de Jujuy, Argentina [email protected] Spirals in Humahuaca and in the NW of Argentina (South America) Abstract: The spiral has been studied for the first time in “About the spirals”, by Archimedes (Greece, 287-212 BC). This figure has introduced the words “spire” for the single spin and “spiral” for the complete figure with various spins. In America, the design of spirals seems to have been used previous to Archimedes’ time, although in the Northwest of Argentina the appearance of this figure can be dated between the years 800 and 1,400 (AD). The spiral is found in the cave paintings, in pumpkin carvings and in pottery, particularly those painted inside of plates (pucos in quichua language). There can be seen simple linear spirals, double spirals and spirals filled with squares, spirals in two, facing each other symmetricaly, as well as spirals joined to animals. The number of spires detected in the largest spiral is 12,a number of evidently sacred characteristics. When there are several spirals in an earthenware vessel, it can be seen that all of them spin to the same side whether it is clockwise or not. This could have been caused by the predominance of the use of either one hand or the other by the ancient artist. This paper is produced with computer methods used to design spirals in the computer, either Archimedes’s or the logarithmic ones. Finally, the wrong use in archaeology of the term “quadrangular spiral” is discussed, because in these cases we are in front of either: 1-Simple consecutive segments, or 2-A linear spiral with tendencies to be triangular or quadrangular. In this paper, the arithmetic is complemented (with its specific field: geometry) with the archeology of art (Chippindale and Taçon 1998). Keywords: Spiral, complementarity (between Math and Archeology) Resumé: Le spiral est étudié pour la premier fois dans le livre “De las espirales” pour Archiméde (Grece 287-212 BC) cette figure présente le mot “spire" pour un spin et “spiral” pour la figure complète. Dans Amérique le dessin de spirals semble avoir été utilisée avant le heure d´Archiméde, ainsi dans le Nord-ouest d´Argentine la ressemblence de cette figure est entre 800 et 1400 après Jesús- Christ. L´spiral se trouve painted en grottes, en pumpkin taillé, en céramique, particulièrement painted au sein des plats (puco en langue Quechua). La on peut voir spirales linéaire simple, spirales avec tendance triangulaire ou quadrangulaire, spirals double et spirals pleins avec de réticulé, spirals face à face , un avec l´autre et symètriques, ainsi unis aux animaux. Le numero de spira détecté de le plus grand spiral trouvé dans le Nord-ouest Argentin, c´est de 12. Quand il y a beaucoup de spirals dans un vase d´argile, on peut les voir que tous tournant dans le même sens,c´est à dire dans le sens des aiguilles de l´orloge , ou l´inverse. Probablement tout ça a été causé pour la prédominance de l´usage des mains, gauche ou droite de l´artist antiqué. Ces spirals se similaires aux spirals appellés “De Archiméde” Ce document est produit avec de méthodes informatiques utiliser pour dessiner spirals dans l´ordinateur, soit celle d´Archiméde o soit celui du spiral logarithmique. Dans ce document, Mathématiques est complément (dans en champ plus spécifique:la Géometrie)avec l´art arqueologique. Mot-clé: Spiral, la complémentarité (mathématiques et archéologie)

INTRODUCCIÓN 1

fines de acercarnos a una mejor y más acertada interpretación de las mismas, en la idea de que ambas perspectivas, apuntan al Mundo Unico, término tomado de Jung. 2

Se trata de un trabajo interdisciplinario básicamente arqueológico-matemático. Desde el punto de vista matemático se aplican conceptos de ésta ciencia a la espiral, ya que existe una notable similitud entre espirales precolombinas con figuras geométricas académicas. Se recurre a textos de Historia de la Matemática, para ubicar en el tiempo el origen de la espiral y su concepto, y de esta manera realizar un paralelo, entre las figuras geométricas de la Historia de la Matemática Occidental y las figuras geométricas precolombinas. Todo ello a los

ESPIRALES EN LA HISTORIA DE LA MATEMÁTICA “De las espirales” es el título de uno de los libros de Geometría Plana de Arquímedes (griego 287-212 AC.), quien estudia ésta figura y a él se le atribuye la denominación de “espiral”.

1 Humahuaca: es una Localidad de la Quebrada de Humahuaca declarada “Patrimonio Cultural y Paisajístico”, por la UNESCO, en el año 2003, esta ubicada en la Provincia de Jujuy en la Argentina.

2

39

Jung Carl G.: psicólogo y psiquiatra suizo (1875-1961).

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

Fin primera espira Fin segunda espira

Fig. 5.1. Espiral de Arquímedes: r =aϕ, r ≥ 0, a > 0, φ ≥ 0

Arquímedes es el más científico de todos los griegos, el sabio más profundo de la antigüedad clásica; es el primero en darse cuenta de que el mundo exterior (la naturaleza) es el profundo hontanar del que mana todo conocimiento.

debe a que son algoritmos que solo computacionalmente pueden expresarse en formas y estructuras. La esencia del mensaje de Mandelbrot es que muchas estructuras naturales, con una aparente complejidad (por ejemplo: nubes, montañas, costas, fallas tectónicas, sistemas vasculares, superficies fracturadas de materiales, etc.) estén caracterizadas por una invariancia de escala geométrica, cuya dimensión fractal provee una adecuada descripción matemática del fenómeno. (Vera de Spinadel, Perera Jorge G. y Perera Jorge H. 1994). 3

Conceptos previos Espiral de Arquímedes: (ver figura 5.1) La curva sale del polo O y puede considerarse engendrada por un punto que se mueve con velocidad constante, sobre una semirrecta, que a su vez gira con velocidad angular constante.

¿Será lo anterior, tal vez, una re-armonización de la Matemática con la naturaleza? Ejemplos

Espira: es cada vuelta que da la espiral, por ejemplo, la siguiente es una espiral de dos espiras. Empezando desde el centro (figura 5.1), la espiral de Arquímedes gira en sentido antihorario es decir en sentido contrario a las agujas del reloj.

Si aumentamos considerablemente el número de espiras en la espiral de Arquímedes obtenemos las figuras 5.2 y 5.3:

Entre otras espirales se tienen: la hiperbólica, la logarítmica o “espiral maravillosa” como la denominó el matemático suizo Jacob Bernoulli (1654-1705), y la esférica o loxodrómica así llamada por el matemático holandés Snellius de Roijen (1591-1626), ésta última sobre una superficie esférica, mientras que las anteriores son planas. Fractalización de la espiral La palabra fractal fue introducida en 1.980 por Berroit B. Mandelbrot, matemático polaco, nacido en Varsovia en 1.924. Fractal proviene del adjetivo latino “fractus”, que significa interrumpido o irregular. Mandelbrot abrió los ojos del mundo a la Geometría Fractal de la naturaleza, un nuevo lenguaje. ¿Y qué es la geometría fractal? Es, antes que nada, un nuevo lenguaje. Así como los elementos de la Geometría Euclideana son puntos, líneas, círculos, etc. los elementos de la Geometría Fractal escapan a la percepción directa. Ello se

Fig. 5.2. Espiral de Arquímedes fractalizada (Vera de Spinadel, 1994) 3

En adelante, el número entre paréntesis corresponderá al número de orden en la bibliografía citada, de donde se extrajo el párrafo, figura o foto.

40

J.L. MAMANÍ & A.A. FERNÁNDEZ DISTE: SPIRALS IN HUMAHUACA AND IN THE NW OF ARGENTINA (SOUTH AMERICA)

De acuerdo a los fechados radiocarbónicos del lugar,se considera que podrían haber sido realizadas entre el 9001460 DC. (Krapovickas, Pedro, 1978). El primer ícono de la figura 5.4 vincula dos dibujos de relevancia dentro del arte rupestre: la espiral y la forma circular, podría decirse con trazos lineales. El último ícono, también de la figura 5.4, tiene una forma “ese”. Se trata de espirales en dos dimensiones, y que no pasan de una espira. Ver más espirales con tendencia circular en fig. 5.17 y 5.18. Espiral con tendencia cuadrangular Las figuras 5.5 y 5.6, no pasan de una espira y, corresponderían al período de Desarrollos Regionales (900-1430), (Fernández, Jorge, 2000), en este período y el período Inca (1430-1536), es recurrente el gráfico de espirales, en cerámica, tejidos (fig. 5.24), y calabazas arqueológicas de la Quebrada de Humahuaca y Puna Jujeña.

Fig. 5.3. Espiral de Arquímedes fractalizada (Vera de Spinadel, 1994) La anterior es similar con algunas espirales lineales prehispánicas, por ejemplo con las espirales de las figs. 5.25 y 5.26. (Ver sección figuras). Se ha marcado una franja para mostrar la similitud de la forma y reticulado de la misma, con figuras de espirales en cerámica precolombina, por ejemplo con las fig. 5.22 y 5.23. Usando conceptos de Jung, serían casos de “sincronicidad” o “coincidencias significativas”, que no están conectados casualmente, y apuntan a una idea unitaria de la realidad, -el mundo único-. Los símbolos son intentos naturales para reconciliar y unir los opuestos dentro de la psique. (Jung, Carl G., 1984). (Lo racional-consciente y lo intuitivo-inconsciente).

Fig. 5.5. Sitio: Chayamayoc. Jujuy. (pinturas en rojo y blanco), (Fernández, Jorge 2000)

ESPIRALES EN EL ARTE RUPESTRE PRECOLOMBINO Espirales con tendencia circular El motivo más popular, y que define el estilo preponderante en Cerro Colorado, es la espiral, la técnica empleada fue el piqueteado, los diámetros mayor y menor de las espirales, son respectivamente: 260 mm y 50 mm.

Fig. 5.6. Sitio: El Morado. Jujuy, (Fernández, Jorge 2000)

Fig. 5.4. Grabados rupestres de Cerro Colorado de Dpto.Yavi. Jujuy (Krapovickas, Pedro 1974) 41

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

Fig. 5.7. Cerro Colorado. Yavi (Fernández Distel, A.A. 2002) Existen también espirales dobles, interconectadas. Se combinan espirales con tendencia cuadrangular, con formas “eses” y con espirales con tendencia circular. Ver figura 5.7. Espiral con tendencia triangular

Fig. 5.10. Alusión a la Madre de los Vientos o Huayrallojsina, en un relieve de piedra de la cultura Tiahuanaco (años 600 al 800 d.C.), Bolivia. A partir del Centro o Muyu originario, parten los Cuatro Vientos (Fernández Chiti, Jorge 1998)

Fig. 5.8. Detalle de la fig. 5.19. Es una espiral con tendencia triangular compuesta por diez trazos segmentarios Espirales con posible interpretación dentro de la cosmovisión andina

En la figura 5.11, son cuatro formas de espirales unidas a una línea central, fácilmente asimilables con las figuras 5.9 y 5.10, aún con la notable coincidencia en el sentido de los giros de las mismas, y todas no pasan de una espira.

La figura 5.9 y 5.10, son similares, ésta coincidencia ayuda a comprender la figura 5.9, y a plantear una hipótesis: las espirales podrían ser representativas del viento.

Fig. 5.11. En Ansilta (San Juan-Argentina) se halló este petroglifo (dibujo grabado en roca) pigmentado con color negro y rojo… data desde el año 400 antes de nuestra Era (Fernández Chiti, Jorge 1998)

Fig. 5.9. Espiral combinada en un símbolo típicamente andino. Cerro Colorado. Cultura Yavi (Krapovickas, Pedro 1974) 42

J.L. MAMANÍ & A.A. FERNÁNDEZ DISTE: SPIRALS IN HUMAHUACA AND IN THE NW OF ARGENTINA (SOUTH AMERICA)

Entonces, por la antigüedad del dibujo 11, surge la pregunta: ¿los dibujos de espirales en América, son previos a Arquímedes?

fundamentales, en la cosmovisión andina. El aire es compartido por humanos, animales y plantas.

Espirales unidas a cuerpos zooantropomorfos

Fig. 5.15. Un felino, grabado de Barrancas – Jujuy (Fernández Distel, A.A. 2004)

Fig. 5.12. Sitio: El Morado. Espiral en la parte inferior central del atuendo. Bicromía en blanco y negro de 0,65 m de altura (Fernández, Jorge 2000)

Fig. 5.16. Sitio: Quebrada de Quesala. Norte de Chile que tiene frontera común con el NO argentino (Valenzuela, R. y Daniela, P. 2002)

El –si mismo-4 se simboliza muchas veces en forma de animal que representa nuestra naturaleza instintiva y su relación con nuestro medio ambiente. (Jung Carl G., 1984). ESPIRALES EN VISIONES CONTEMPORÁNEAS

Fig. 5.13. Cerro Colorado. Yavi (Krapovickas, Pedro 1974)

Es importante la participación de la psicología Junguiana, para un mejor acercamiento a la interpretación de los íconos, ya que el mismo Jung escribe: “…cuando se desea investigar la facultad del hombre para crear símbolos, los sueños resultan el material más básico y accesible para ese fin…lo que no conseguimos ver conscientemente, con frecuencia lo ve nuestro inconsciente, que nos transmite la información por medio de los sueños.” No podemos permitirnos ser ingenuos al tratar de los sueños. Se originan en un espíritu que no es totalmente humano, sino más bien una bocanada de naturaleza, un espíritu de diosas bellas y generosas, pero también crueles. Si queremos caracterizar ese espíritu, tendremos que acercarnos mas a él, en el ámbito de las mitologías antiguas o las fábulas de los bosques primitivos, que en la conciencia del hombre moderno…En beneficio de la

Fig. 5.14. Cerro Colorado-Yavi (Fernández Distel, A.A. 2002) Existen varios casos de espirales unidas a cuerpos de animales en el arte rupestre precolombino, (figura 5.20, 5.21, 5.27 y figura 5.15 y 5.16). Se ha vinculado hipotéticamente la espiral con el viento, podría extenderse esta posibilidad al aire, siendo este uno de los elementos

4 El “si mismo”:el centro mas interno, la totalidad de la psique. (Jung, Carl G. 1984).

43

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

estabilidad mental y aun de la salud fisiológica, el inconsciente y la conciencia deben estar integralmente conectadas y, por lo tanto moverse en líneas paralelas ”.

Arquímedes, encontró las primeras fórmulas matemáticas que permitían graficar una espiral en un plano y estudió en ella numerosas propiedades. Luego otros matemáticos descubrieron otras fórmulas que también al llevarlas a un sistema de ejes cartesianos dan como resultado diversas espirales.

Relatos de sueños: 1. Una pintura hecha por una mujer sencilla, que había pasado su niñez en un ambiente protestante, mostraba un mandala 5 en forma de espiral. En un sueño, esta mujer recibió la orden de pintar la Divinidad. Posteriormente, (también en un sueño) la vió en un libro. De Dios mismo ella sólo vio la flotante túnica, el ropaje del que hizo un hermoso despliegue de luz y sombra. Esto contrastaba de modo impresionante con la estabilidad de la espiral en la profundidad del firmamento azul. Fascinada por la túnica y la espiral, la soñante no miró con detenimiento a la otra figura que estaba en las rocas. Cuando se despertó y pensó acerca de quien eran esas figuras divinas, se dio cuenta de repente, que era “el propio Dios”. Esto le produjo una conmoción de miedo que le duró mucho tiempo… (Jung, Carl G. 1984, p. 224).

Y esto matemáticamente hablando encuentra hoy a la espiral en los gráficos fractales, siendo esta última una ciencia reciente. Algunos matemáticos suelen afirmar que ellos no inventan las figuras sino que las descubren, y a la luz de lo expuesto podríamos decir que la espiral forma parte de la Geometría Sagrada del Universo. La espiral fue monumentalizada en el Geoglifo: Mono de Nazca (fig. 5.27), en el Perú, esta obras trazadas en una superficie aproximada de 450 km2, han asombrado a los científicos de tal manera que algunos de ellos le atribuyeron la obra a “extraterrestres”. Se vinculan en el presente trabajo, figuras ancestrales de las espirales, con figuras de espirales en la ciencia matemática, y con narraciones orales contemporáneas de sueños, teniendo en cuenta que:

2. El siguiente relato puede relacionarse por su semejanza con la figura 5.14. Algo vuela o entra arrojado por la ventana análogo a un insecto grande con patas retorcidas en espiral, amarillo y negro, como un tigre, patas de oso, casi humanas y un rostro afilado como el de un lobo…Pero veo que aquel ser se ha transformado en mitad mujer, mitad animal… (Jung, Carl G. 1984, p. 139).

Si queremos ver las cosas en su verdadera perspectiva, necesitamos comprender el pasado del hombre así como su presente. De ahí que sea de importancia esencial comprender los mitos y los símbolos. (Jung, Carl G. 1984). La espiral sería uno de esos viejos y verdaderos símbolos que, lejos de estar muerto, trata de renacer en forma moderna.

CONCLUSIÓN La espiral: ¿un símbolo Universal? ¿Una figura de la Divinidad?

Bibliografía

La espiral es un símbolo, un arquetipo, que perdura en el tiempo: 6

7

FERNÁNDEZ CHITI, Jorge (1998) – “La simbólica en la cerámica indígena argentina”. Tomos1 y 2. Ediciones Condorhuasi. Bs. As. Argentina.

Los indígenas precolombinos del Mundo andino la tuvieron presente en sus íconos desde sus primeras representaciones abstractas en piedra, buscando siempre alcanzar esos símbolos secretos del Universo que no se perciben directamente, y que ellos probablemente lo alcanzaban en estados de éxtasis o trance, tal vez producto del fosfeno, 8 o bien eran aquellos símbolos que dejaron como herencia las mentes arcaicas del Mundo.

FERNÁNDEZ DISTEL, A.A. (2002) – “Santa Catalina un centro cultural prehispánico con arte rupestre en la frontera argentino-boliviana”. En: Fernández Distel, A.A. (compiladora) “Arte rupestre y menhires en el Sur de Bolivia, NO de Argentina y Norte de Chile”. Editorial Universidad Nacional de Jujuy. Jujuy. Arg. FERNÁNDEZ DISTEL, Alicia A. (2003) – “Arte rupestre cerca del cielo”. cd-rom.

5

Mandala: palabra hindú adoptada por Jung (círculo mágico). Es una representación simbólica del “atomo nuclear” de la psique humana, cuya esencia no conocemos. 6 Símbolo: es un objeto del mundo conocido, sugiriendo algo que es desconocido, es lo conocido expresando la vida y sentido de lo inexpresable. (Jung, Carl G. 1984). 7 Arquetipos: son imágenes simbólicas que no tienen origen conocido y se producen en cualquier tiempo o en cualquier parte del mundo. (Jung, Carl G. 1984). 8 Fosfeno: (del griego phôs,luz y phaino,brillar). Sensación luminosa a que da lugar la compresión brusca del ojo cuando los párpados están cerrados.

FERNÁNDEZ DISTEL, Alicia A. (2004) – “Iconografía prehispánica de Jujuy: una visión desde la arqueología”. Editorial Dunken. Bs. As. FERNÁNDEZ, Jorge (2000) – “Algunas expresiones estilísticas del arte rupestre de los andes de Jujuy. En: “Arte en las rocas”. M. Podestá y M. de Hoyos.Ed. Sociedad Argentina de Antropología y Asociación de Amigos del INAPL. Bs. As. Arg. 44

J.L. MAMANÍ & A.A. FERNÁNDEZ DISTE: SPIRALS IN HUMAHUACA AND IN THE NW OF ARGENTINA (SOUTH AMERICA)

JUNG, Carl G. (1984) – “El hombre y sus símbolos”. Editorial Biblioteca Universal Contemporánea. Barcelona. España.. 4º edición.

SARASOLA MARTÍNEZ, C. y LLAMAZARES, A.M. (2004) – “El lenguaje de los dioses. Arte, chamanismo y cosmovisión indígena en Sudamérica” Editorial Biblos. Bs. As. Argentina. 1ºedición.

KRAPOVICKAS, Pedro (1978) – “Los grabados rupestres de Cerro Colorado” (Departamento de Yavi, Provincia de Jujuy, República Argentina)En Sapiens Rev. del Museo Arqueológico Dr. Osvaldo F.A. Menghin, N°2, Chivilcoy. Argentina.

VALENZUELA, R. y DANIELA, P. (2002) – “Arte rupestre de la Quebrada de Quesala: relaciones con el área circumpuneña” en Fernández Distel A. A. (compiladora) “Arte rupestre y menhires en el Sur de Bolivia, NO de Argentina y Norte de Chile.”Editorial Universidad Nacional de Jujuy. Jujuy. Argentina.

MAMANÍ, José Luis (2005) – “La Geometría en la iconografía en cerámica prehispánica de la Quebrada de Humahuaca: una visión desde la Matemática”. Tesis de Licenciatura en Enseñanza de la Matemática.Inédita. Facultad de Ingeniería.UN Ju. Jujuy. Arg.

VERA, Francisco (1948) – “Breve historia de la Geometría”. Editorial Losada. SA. Bs. As. VERA de SPINADEL, PERERA JORGE, G. y PERERA JORGE, H. (1994) – “Geometría Fractal”.Editorial Nueva Librería. Bs. As.. Argentina. 1º edición.

REY PASTOR, J. y BABINI, J. (19..) – “Historia de la Matemática”. Espasa Calpe Argentina. SA. Bs. As. Mexico.

FIGURES

Fig. 5.17. Espiral y formas “eses”. Peña blanca. Humahuaca. Período: Cultura Humahuaca (800-1200) (Fernández Distel, A.A. 2003)

Fig. 5.19. Inédita del Fotógrafo Cuevas. Laguna Colorada? Cultura Yavi (900-1400)

Fig. 5.18. Formas claras de espirales con tendencia circular. Un tumi (hachas de dos filos) en la parte superior izquierda, figura característica del Período Inca (1430-1536). Procedencia: Cerro Negro de Coctaca – Humahuaca (Fernández Distel, A.A. 2003)

Fig. 5.20. Espiral unida a boca o cuello de un camélido. Cerro Negro de Coctaca – Humahuaca (Fernández Distel, A.A. 2003) 45

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

Fig. 5.21. Fotografía de un montaje idealizado, realizado por Luis Pellegrini sobre Inca Cueva. Humahuaca. Museo Arqueológico Provincial de Jujuy (Mamaní, José Luis 2005)

Fig. 5.22. Pieza 3255. Proc. Volcán. Museo Arqueológico Tilcara – Jujuy (Mamaní, José Luis 2005)

Fig. 5.23. Espiral en cerámica prehispánica. Museo Arqueológico Tilcara (Mamaní, José Luis 2005)

Fig. 5.24. Espiral con tendencia cuadrangular en esta muñequera tejida del Museo Arqueológico Tilcara (Mamaní, José Luis 2005)

Fig. 5.25. Pieza 2749. Proced.: Coiruro. Dpto. Tumbaya. Período: 850-1480 DC. Dos espirales de 7 espiras cada una, con final aparentemente cerrado. Museo Arqueológico Tilcara (Mamaní, José Luis 2005)

Fig. 5.26. Proc. Ciénaga Grande. Purmamarca. Período 850-1480 DC. En la parte superior presenta una espiral de doce espiras. Museo Arqueológico Tilcara (Mamaní, José Luis 2005) 46

J.L. MAMANÍ & A.A. FERNÁNDEZ DISTE: SPIRALS IN HUMAHUACA AND IN THE NW OF ARGENTINA (SOUTH AMERICA)

Fig. 5.27. Geoglifo: El mono de Nazca. Representación artística anónima (Cultura Nazca 0-700 DC). Perú (Mamaní, José Luis 2005)

47

SPIRALS AT STURT’S MEADOWS John CLEGG Archaeology, The University of Sydney, Australia Abstract: Sturt’s Meadows is a large and ancient rock art site in Australia. The site as a whole arguably focuses on telling stories. Some of the pictures document individual artists’ mathematical explorations, perhaps science, perhaps art, certainly play. Key Words: spirals, science, art, exploration, Aboriginal Résumé: Sturt’s Meadows est un site d’art pariétal aborigène australien, ancien et de taille importante. On peut soutenir que le site, dans l’ensemble, se concentre a raconter une histoire. Certaines images documentent les explorations mathématiques des différents artistes. S’agit-it d’images liées a un savoir scientifique, s’agit-il purement d’art, la question se pose .Mais l’élément ludique est indubitable. Mots-clés: spirales, science, art, exploration, aborigène

spirals– are not available. We have so far counted 187,000 motifs.

SITE In 1982 I chose to study the large Aboriginal rock art site in western New South Wales site known as Sturt’s Meadows because it was a convenient example of sites of its sort, (the Panaramitee). Interest in such sites accelerated during the 1960s and 1970s, when Lesley Maynard proposed the name for them. Her work showed that rock art of its sort was found over an enormous area of central and south Australia, and that it was not only old, but long-lived. I hoped to describe one large site that might be used for comparison. Fortunately others have contributed to knowledge of comparable sites (Nobbs, Forbes, Mott). We still do not know what archaeological entity or kind the assemblage of engravings (as we call them in Australia) represents (but see Galt-Smith).

The engravings are mostly pecked; a few are abraded. Toolmarks sometimes show clearly, and enable differentiation between tool points and the motifs they made. The left and right of some pairs of “roo tracks” 1 (for example the trail of 4 triangular tracks in a vertical line through the centre of figure 6.2) were made consistently by different tools, suggesting that some pairs of “tracks” may have been pecked by partnering artists. There are few superpositions, though some have been studied by Deirdre Dragovich, and similar situations at other sites by Robert Bednarik. (Pers. Com. e-mail 2006). When first made, they may have been light on a dark ground. Some 60% of the motifs 2 look like animal tracks; many are in “trails”. Trails of tracks necessarily tell stories, because they show progress. The many trails tell different, very detailed stories. One set of tracks shows a kangaroo hopping; a spear (that also leaves a track) in its left side; the left foot trails the right, the tracks get closer together as the kangaroo tires and slows. Figure 6.3 shows engravings that resemble tracks of a kangaroo; feeding at first, with hands and feet (and heels) on the ground, then hopping away on two hind feet.

The engravings are on many low rock outcrops scattered over an area about 1 km by 1,5 km.

DATE Evidence that the engravings are old is afforded by cracks in the rock that have obviously happened after they were engraved, and several layers of dark so-called desert varnish that covers most surfaces. It was deposited both before and after engraving, although apparently it is not being deposited now, or is being removed as fast as it forms. We have C14 dates of 10,000 or so BP on carbonate deposits over engravings (Dragovich, Clegg 1987:241), which may date to before the last ice-age maximum of 2022,000 BP.

Besides the 60% “tracks”, the site and many others like it have only 10% or so engravings that look like pictures of people or animals. The other 30% are so-called noniconic lines and circles (and spirals). Concentric circles and spirals in rock art look similar; indeed it may be difficult to correctly diagnose worn or incomplete examples. Both have sets of approximately parallel equidistant curves that all bend in the same way, going

At Sturt’s Meadows, we counted the incidence of motifs of agreed types on individual rocks, mostly at selected areas we called subsites. These are characterised by particularly dense concentrations of engravings, on rock that is good both for engraving and seeing engravings, often shiny with desert varnish. The motif types to be counted were chosen to be few enough to deal with as well as for their descriptive power. As a result some details relevant to this paper – such as the minutiae of

1 As with all graphics without verbal annotation, we cannot tell what they meant to the makers or anyone else. Some of this paper relies on the assumption that graphics that look to me like depictions of other entities are such representations. Such interpretation is here indicated with quotation marks. The main gist of the paper is however about spirals, which may not represent anything other than spirals. 2 These proportions are approximate. Their apparent consistency is often remarked but not yet explained.

49

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

Fig. 6.1a

Fig. 6.1b

Fig. 6.1a, 6.1b. Parts of Sturt’s Meadows site. The scale can be judged from the 4WD at centre right

Fig. 6.2. Tracing of approximately two square metres of South Saddle, Sturt’s Meadows. Of the several trails shown here, the trail of 4 triangular tracks in a vertical line through the centre of have smaller left than right tracks; they consistently show different toolmarks, suggesting that pairs of “tracks” may have been pecked by partnering artists

Fig. 6.3. The engravings in this photo can be interpreted as a trail of tracks. From bottom upwards a kangaroo sits up on its heels, looking about, then puts its hands on the ground as it feeds, then hops into the distance

50

J. CLEGG: SPIRALS AT STURT’S MEADOWS

Fig. 6.4. This spiral that has been carefully pecked and repacked, suggesting it had longterm significance. The whole CXNF includes an outer swirl to the left with wiggles. Other CXNFs have a spiral that takes in other linear figures in its outer loops

Fig. 6.5. A “loopy figure” about 1 metre long (also figured in Clegg 2002:104). The chalk lines that appear in this and other photos were immediately washed off with water from the site round recognisable centres, yet these similarities are superficial. They are very distinct mathematically and perhaps conceptually.

start to finish of a spiral you get to somewhere else. Circles can contain things, spirals do not enclose space. At Sturt’s Meadows there are many variant forms of spirals and near-spirals that suggest an inventiveness or activity that could foster discovery (Brook 1979), like Klee’s lines taken for a walk. (Haftmmann 1954).

The mathematical and biological literature about spirals refers to many natural examples, such a sun-flower seed arrangement, bean tendrils, and snail-shells. Most fit interesting mathematical formulae, such as the Archimedean spiral, in which successive turnings of the spiral have a constant separation distance. Spirals at Sturt’s Meadows seem to approximate Archimedean spirals, as do curled snakes and ropes. A circle has one line, with no ends Salomon (1979). Concentric circles have as many lines as circles. A spiral of any length or number of turns has one line, and two ends, so long as it remains unbroken. Circles present limited ways to go, clockwise or widdershins. Whichever way you go, you reach where you started. Unlike circles, spirals have direction. In travelling from the beginning to the end, or

This paper concentrates on two variants of spirals at Sturt’s Meadows. Loopy figures are spirals in that they are a single continuous line that loops round itself. Like “trails of tracks”, they can be followed to see where they go. At Sturt’s Meadows, both loopy figures and formal spirals can be parts of complex non-figuratives (CXNFs). This category is very varied. They occur more commonly at Sturt’s Meadows than in the numerous comparable sites. 51

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

Fig. 6.6a

Fig. 6.6b

Fig. 6.6c

Figo. 6.6d

Fig. 6.6a, 6.6b, 6.6c, 6.6d. Photos and inked-in casts of small exploratory spirals at Sturt’s Meadows. The chalk lines in photos were immediately washed off with water from the site

Fig. 6.7. Paired spirals of opposing senses at Sturts Meadows. Cast with pecking inked

I have published (Clegg 2002:104) the suggestion that this loopy CXNF resembles a map of the route if a burrowing animal that forages on the surface, often returning to its burrow. The “bird track”s are irrelevant.

on-site, one (starting from the centre) as 1 ½ (360’ turns) a(nticlockwise), ½ c(lockwise), ½ a, 1 ½ c, ½ a. Counting turns of less than 180’ adds ¼ a, ½ c, ¼ a. There are clearly many problems, but even this analysis demonstrates 8 changes of sense in a total of 5 ½ counted turns. The numbers of wiggles in recursive spirals are all different, as though there was continued exploration and experiment, rather than developing a single preferred version.

Recursive spirals Sturt’s Meadows spirals sometimes reverse direction, almost joking. The turns of some examples were analysed 52

J. CLEGG: SPIRALS AT STURT’S MEADOWS

Fig. 6.8a

Fig. 6.8b

Fig. 6.8a, 6.8b. Two of 20 or more “faces” at Cleland Hills. From Edwards 1971

Fig. 6.9a. Previously unpublished face engraving at Mount Wood

Fig. 6.9b. Face engraving at Mount Wood, from Clegg 1978

Most of the engraved lines at Sturt’s Meadows have been gone over at least twice, making it difficult to be certain they reflect the work of individual makers. But some reversing spirals are series of discontinued but clear pecks. They are the result of a single phase of manufacture. Several reverse direction as though the artist was exploring – playing with – the directionality of spirals. Some seem funny. Such playing may be called mathematics or art. I’d not dare to distinguish the two.

line and area, also exploited as figure and ground (Figure 6.8).

At Sturt’s Meadows there is only one unconvincing example (Figure 6.10).

I was excited to find a demonstration that paired spirals can have opposing senses.

CONCLUSION

In many different cultures (Maori, Celtic, Greek capitals, the European Romantic Movement).circles or spirals are used symmetrically in decoration, or are developed into a decorative curvilinear way of drawing. In art pairs of spirals or concentric circles powerfully become eyes. In other “Panaramitee” sites, circles are used for faces’ eyes. In Cleland Hills inventiveness uses the tension between

At the ancient rock art site of Sturt’s Meadows many of the engravings tell stories. Spirals were exploited as possible story-tellers or route-maps, and their reversibility was discovered. Paired circles’ or spirals’ powerful capacity to become depictions of eyes was exploited at some comparable sites, making inventive variations on the theme of staring faces. This possibility was not

The two convincing faces at Mountain Outstation, Mount Wood, near Tibooburra are drawn differently from each other and those of Cleland Hills (Figures 6.9a, 6.9b).

53

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

Association Annual Conference. Tempus, Volume 7:Chapter 10:101-8. CLEGG, John (2005) – “Aesthetics, Rock Art, and Changing States of Consciousness” in Thomas Heyd and John Clegg (eds) Aesthetics and Rock Art Ashgate, London, 159-76. DRAGOVICH, D. (1986) – Minimum age of some Desert Varnish near Broken Hill, New South Wales. Search, 7, 5-6, May/June: 149-150. EDWARDS, R. (1968) – “Prehistoric rock engravings atb Thomas Reservoir, Cleland Hills, western central Australia. Records of the South Australian Museum, 15(4):647-70. EDWARDS, R. (1971) – “Art and Aboriginal Prehistory” in Mulvaney, D.J. and Golson, J. Aboriginal Man and Environment Australia Australian National University Press, Canberra.

Fig. 6.10. The one possible “face” at Sturt’s Meadows exploited at Sturt’s Meadows, where research into spirals led towards geometry more than to drawing faces.

FORBES, Sarah (1982) – Aboriginal Rock Engravings at N’Dhala Gorge: An analysis of a Central Australian ‘Panaramitee style’ rock art site Litt B thesis, Department of Prehistory and Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra.

Acknowledgements

GALT-SMITH, Brett (1997) – Motives for Motifs: Identifying Aggregation and Dispersion Settlement Patterns in the rock are Assemblages of Central Australia. BA (Hons) thesis, Department of Archaeology and Palaeoanthropology, University of New England, Armidale.

I am indebted David Lee, whose weekend of discussions enhanced these ideas and presentation, and to Jack Clegg for pointing out some mathematical and conceptual problems. Bibliography

HAFTMANN, Werner (1954) – The Mind and Work of Paul Klee Faber London: 98-9.

BRONOWSKI, J. (1973) – The Ascent of Man BBC, London.

MAYNARD, Lesley (1979) – “The Archaeology of Aboriginal Art” in S.M. Mead (ed) Exploring the Visual Art of Oceania the Universities Press of Hawaii, Honolulu: 83-110.

BROOK, Donald (1979) – “A transinstitutional nonvoluntary modelling theory of art” Educational Philosophy and Theory Vol. 11, No 2: 37-54.

MOTT, David (1999) – Thesis abstract: ‘Aboriginal Rock Engravings of the Panaramitee Hills, South Australia’ Australian Archaeology, 49:68-69 referring to (Mott, David Hamilton 1998 Aboriginal Rock Engravings of the Panaramitee Hills, South Australia BA (Hons) thesis, Department of Archaeology, Flinders University).

CLEGG, John (1978) – Aboriginal Art Calendar 1979 Clegg Calendars, Balmain. CLEGG, John (1983) – “Correlations and associations at Sturt’s Meadows” in Moya Smith (ed) Archaeology at ANZAAS 1983 Western Australian Museum: 214-235. CLEGG, John (1984) – Enquêtes préliminaires a Sturt’s Meadows: un gisement australien de pétroglyphes du style Panaramitee L’Anthropologie (Paris) Tome 88, no 4, pp 595-610.

NOBBS, Margaret (1984) – Rock Art in Olary Province, South Australia Rock Art Research Volume 1 Number 2: 91-118. SALOMON, M. (1979) – “A Method for Classifying Petroglyphs,” in: Crara ‘77, Edited by Doris Lundy, Papers from the Fourth Biennial Conference of the Canadian Rock Art Research Associates, Victoria, 2730 October 1977, Heritage Record No. 8 (Victoria: British Columbia Provincial Museum, 1979).

CLEGG, John (1987) – Style and tradition at Sturt’s Meadows World Archaeology Volume 19 No 2:236255. CLEGG, John (2002) – “Variability and Information in Rock Art” in Barriers, Borders, Boundaries: proceedings of the 2001 Australian Archaeological

54

CIRCULAR ELEMENTS IN THE ROCK ART OF THE STATE OF BAHIA, BRAZIL Guilherme ALBAGLI de ALMEIDA Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, Ilhéus Bahia Brazil Abstract: The geographic position of the State of Bahia, in the middle of South America’s Eastern coast, makes it a convergence focus of different paleocultures, in different times. Although being somehow difficult to differentiate some of these cultures by means of their lithic and, its sometimes present ceramic evidence, their Rock Art can show well recognizable TRADITIONS overlapping in this area. Not all of them emphasize equally the production of worldwide round shaped complete figures and round elements elements (dots). In fact, only in the painted and carved "GEOMETRIC TRADITIONS", which is widespread on the Central Brazilian Highlands, round figures and elements appear in expressive proportions. This article aims to annalyse and to present a personal synthesis on first hand and bibliographic data available in the field’s specialized literature. Résumé: La position géographique de l’état de Bahia, centralement situé sur la côte de l’Amérique du Sud, a fait de cette région un centre de convergence des différentes paléocultures qui sont survenues ou se sont développées en des moments différents de sa Préhistoire. Malgré le fait que, dans une certaine mesure, il soit relativement complexe d’ établir une distinction entre ces cultures à travers ses évidences lithiques et céramiques, ces évidences paléographiques peuvent souligner des traditions bien déterminées qui se rencontrent et se superposent. Toutes ces traditions paléographiques n’attribuent pas la même importance aux signes et aux éléments graphiques circulaires. Bien entendu, uniquement dans la “Tradition Geométrique”, distribuée sur le plateau central du Brésil, ces éléments sont rencontrés en nombre expressif. Cet article prétend aborder cette thématique à travers une approche exploratoire, et cela à partir d’un échantillon constitué par des sources primaires dejá publiées.

PRESENTATION

found in 1927, by Dart, in an Australopithecus context inside a Tanzanian cave (Bahn, 1996), to Homo Erectus hand axes cut in showy and colorfully patterned stones; from Neanderthal necklaces and their ochre colored funerals to Cro-Magnon panels in Altamira, Lascaux and Foz-Côa, all points out to the intrinsic dialectics between Mankind and its “art” of polisemic or multilegble communication.

Long before appearance of Mankind, many animals already used sound, olfative and visual resources to achieve mutual communication. After development of Australopitecines primates, with their more complex brain system capable of retaining and elaborating memories of their life’s experiences, to expand their survival conditions, it became also greatly improved human means of communication, with gradual development of more elaborated gestual, verbal and graphic languages (Vialou, 1996:14).

OBJECTIVE AND METHODOLOGY In this article I will try to identify and to understand some of the circular painted signs ( or circular parts of larger signs) in Bahia’s State Rock Art in the wider context of South American Prehistoric Man. I will, also, try to demonstrate the “open” character of these signs that sometimes seems to represent different objective ideas, sometimes to be a simple byproduct of ludic and nonrepresentational experiences for human self-pleasure and, also, to be a fraction of other non-circular signs. My purpose, here, is not to deepen in interpretative approaches leading to overestimation of the concrete, factual evidence, but to give an overall look on forms, techniques and context of a small sample constructed from personal field notes taken in six archaeological sites, in Bahia’s Highlands, between 1995 and 2001, and from data presented in the evergrowing field’s specialized litterature. In spite of normal difficulties of precise degrees of of rock art data interpretation (Seda, 1997), specially for the frequent superimpositions found in Bahia’s sites, it will be attempted here some degree of understanding of their possible meanings and functions.

Later on, some of these languages started to be used for human own and public entertainment, to add variated mental stymulus to their life through “open messages” with wider legibility and meaningfulness. These languages, today, are commonly known as “art” – a word stemming from an indo-european root denoting the idea of “technical skill”, but used today, also, to mean a large range of human actions or artifacts with potential aesthetic appeal -. Being multifunctional and serving to different human needs, art appeared primarily as a byproduct of ludic activities concerned to many animal species, serving, later, to communicate more or less objective ideas to the needs of magic, religion, political power and almost infinite other purposes. So, since before its Australopithecus stage, Mankind performs attitudes and uses material objects very similarly to what we call today “art”. From the small naturally polished reddish pebble similar to an human baby face 55

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

Bibliographical sources

GEOGRAPHICAL AND PALEOCULTURAL FEATURES OF BAHIA

The main bibliographical sources to provide a general framework to my research were: I)

Being placed in the center of Brazilian coast and, curiously, having the same triangular shape of both Brazilian territory and South American Continent, Bahia State has a general geological outlook dominated by a coastal plain with some 200 km East-West, in some parts, and a Central Plateau (Chapada Diamantina) which nests, in its center, a deep depression where flows, from South to North, the São Francisco river. This hydrographic unity neighbors wider Platine and Amazonic basins, both with western higher sources in Andean regions. The position of São Francisco valley makes it a natural corridor to ancient migrations in the center of the country that can be evident in different lithic and rock art traditions that have been studied by C. Ott, V. Calderón, P. Smith, M. Beltrão, G. Martin, C. Echevarne, M. Otte, J. Perfeito and G. Albagli de Almeida.

A collection of articles published in fifteen CLIO magazines, from post-graduation programs in History from Recife’s Universidade Federal de Pernambuco- UFPE;

II) A F. Kaufman Doig study on the history of old Peruvian society presenting some illustrations capable to permit comparative analysis between ancient Peruvian and Brazilian Rock Art forms and themes; III) G. Martin’s “Northeastern Brazilian Prehistory” with its dense chapter on regional Rock Art showing plenty examples of round shaped rock art motives; IV) Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais’ A. Prous’ text “Brazilian Archaeology” with a chapter introducing eight Brazilian Rock Art Traditions in different regions;

CIRCULAR SIGNS IN SOUTHAMERICN AND BRAZILIAN’S ROCK ART

V) A brief article on Bahia’s Rock Art presented by this researcher in 1999’s IRAC Ripon Congress, where it was stabilished an alternative thematic tipology of local’s Rock Art;

Southamerican Rock Art was first noticed by travelers and explorers since the beginnings of European colonization (Prous, 1996:509) and several authors identifyed many of these pioneer describers or recorders of panels or isolate graphic art (Martin, 1996:209).

VI) Eight articles published by the Museum of Natural History of Federal Minas Gerais University scientific magazine;

In Bahia it is well known Spix & Martius’ (1981:216) description of a rock art panel in Serra do Anastácio, where the authors, after a careful recording, invested in hypothesizing its finality and techniques of preparing its pigments. Some of its signs were the simple and multiple circles so frequent in this area. Presently partially destroyed magnificently carved Pedra do Ingá, in Central Northeastern Brazil, also, was a long time ago described by pioneer Brazil’s hinterland explorers. This site is emblematic to the destruction trend of many of local’s Rock Art Sites by vandalism and, sometimes, by rock cutting companies.

These above presented data, alien from Bahia’s present political boundaries were usefull to permit a wider understanding of the specific object here in focus. Methodological development This article, however partially based in field notes taken in different sites, in a single region of Bahia State (“Chapada Diamantina”= Central Highlands), is partially constructed by bibliographical data presented by other authors in other Bahia, Brazilian and South American areas.

CIRCULAR SIGNS IN THE ROCK ART OF THE STATE OF BAHIA, BRAZIL

In a first moment, I plan to delineate a brief and general sketch of the geographic settings and researches on human migrations through the area. Following, I plan to show an outline of Brazilian Rock

The most common types of rock art signs found in Bahia’s Highlands sites can be classified in seven categories as follows:

Art provinces, according to N. Guidon and A.P. Prous (Prous, 1996:510), with their main thematic and formal features. In a third moment, I plan to point out circular forms in the mentioned traditions and, finally, to attempt to stabilish a tipological model for local circular graphic signs.

I)

SIMPLE AND CONCENTRIC CIRCLES

1) Isolated unilinear circles; 2) Isolated circles with a completely painted interior; 3) Dotted circles having, eventually, a central horizontal diametrical line;

The pictures to be presented will illustrate textual assertions on the sampling and will be followed by identifications of size, color, tone, conservation, placement and orientation of the graphisms.

4) Linear circles with a central horizontal diametrical line; 56

G. ALBAGLI DE ALMEIDA: CIRCULAR ELEMENTS IN THE ROCK ART OF THE STATE OF BAHIA, BRAZIL

5) Isolated circles with one, two, three or more outside rays;

general Ethnology and Ancient History. In Brazil, as much as in many other American cultures, the sun, moon and stars were object of worship until after the upcoming of Christian faith, as one can be weel seen in the front wall of Nossa Senhora da Escada dos Índios de Olivença (Our Lady of the Stair of Olivença Indians) Church, built by the Indians under supervision of the Jesuits, in 1699, showing a well recognizable rayed sun, also a sign of Jusuit’s Society, carved in local’s marine sandstone (Azevedo, 1982).

6) Dotted circles with interior meridians; 7) Circles with four vertical lines in its interior (three lines frequent in Western Mato Grosso area); 8) I nside radiated circles (four or more rays); 9) Outside rayed circle with inverted “T” in its center, with dots surrounding it; 10) One or two concentric circles having two or three short straight outside lines or longer ziz-zag “tails”;

In Bahia, these round signs appear mostly isolated or, sometimes (specially in Class I above mentioned), associated to seemingly overpainted lagartiforms. In one single noticed case, these round (celestial?) figures were painted 34 times, in different versions, in a single cave ceiling, the so called “Cosmos Rock Shelter”, found by M. Beltrão in the 1970’s, in São Francisco Basin. They were, mostly, variations of circles and a few asterisk-like depictions (Above “E” Class). Two of them show something like a “tail”, being considered depictions of comets. Almost all of these signs were painted in very visible and accessible places but, very seldom, rock art panels are located in very inaccessible spots where prehistoric artifacts were left in the ground, possibly for millennia, without being disturbed by later visitors, as seen in Serra do Ramalho’s area, near Minas Gerais State border. Following the general trend of other classes of local’s prehistoric rock art, Bahia’s prehistoric circular rock art signs seems to attend to different classes of objectives and meannings, being painted with different pigment and application techniques, in different times.

11) Two or more concentric circles; 12) Half concentric circles; 13) Outside radiated concentric circles; 14) Horizontal series of circles with inner single dots; II) SIGNS USING NATURAL GEOLOGICAL TOPOGRAPHY 15) Natural round depressions on the rock wall with painted outside rays (sometimes later repainted); III) SPIRALS 16) One single line or two interlocked spirals IV) CIRCLES ON NON-CIRCULAR SIGNS 17) Rectangular or triangular dotted fields 18) Round dotted radiated fields; 19) Dotted elipses with or without regular separations;

Acknowledgements

20) Amorphous dotted fields;

Maria da C. de M.C. Beltrão, Fréderic Garcia, Marcelo Aragão and UESC’s students Caroline Gresik do Amaral de Almeida, Dayse Rodrigues and David Melgaço.

21) Zoomorphism or antropomorph “heads”, “eyes” or “bodies”; V) ROUNDISH STAINS TO ERASE PREVIOUSLY PAINTED SIGNS

Bibliography ALBAGLI de ALMEIDA, G. (1999) – Brief remarks to the Rock Art in the State of Bahia, Brazil. IRAC Congress 1999, Ripon.

VI) ASTERISK SHAPED SIGNS VII) ROUNDISH NON-INTENTIONAL OR NON REPRESENTATIONAL STAINS FOR CLEANNING HANDS IN THE ROCK WALL

AZEVEDO, P.O.D. de (1982) – Inventário de Proteção ao Acervo Cultural da Bahia(IPAC) Região Litoral Sul. Governo da Bahia, SIC, Salvador. BAHN, P. (1999) – Face to face with the oldest “Art Object”. SIARB Congress, Cochabamba, 1997. Oxbow Books, Oxford.

CONCLUSIONS In spite of avoidance, by some authors, to interpret the original meaning of Prehistoric Rock Art Signs, some of them, at least partially, can be somehow understood, as we do with figures as anthropomorphs, zoomorphs, fitomorphs or artifacts. Signs being considered as possible astronomical representations, also, can be placed in this level of interpretation, for its shapes, details and the continuity of astronomical religious belief recorded by

KAUFFMANN DOIG, F. (1992) – Historia del Peru Antiguo. Ed. Kompactos, Lima. MARTIN, G. (1996) – Pré-História do Nordeste do Brasil. Recife, Ed. UFPE. PEREIRA, E. (1997) – As Pinturas e as gravuras rupestres do Noroeste do Pará Amazônia- Brasil. Revista CLIO, Ed. UFPE, Recife. 57

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

PROUS, A.P. (1999) – Dating Rock Art in Brazil. SIARB Congress, Cochabamba, 1997. Oxbow Books, Oxford.

ROOSEVELT, A. (1999) – Dating Rock Art at Monte Alegre, Brazil. SIARB Congress, Cochabamba, Bolivia, 1997, Oxbow Books, Oxford.

PROUS, A.P. (1992) – Arqueologia Brasileira. Ed. UNB, Brasília.

SEDA, P. (1997) – A questão das Interpretações em Arte Rupestre no Brasil. Revista CLIO, Ed. UFPE, Recife.

RIBEIRO, L.M.R. (1997) – Tradição e Ruptura na Lapa do Gigante, Montalvânia, MG. Revista CLIO, Ed. UFPE, Recife.

SPIX, J.B. & MARTIUS, K.F. (1981) – Viagem Pelo Brasil. Ed. USP, São Paulo. VIALOU, D. (1996) – Chausseurs et Artistes au Coeur de las Préhistoire. Gallimard, 1996, Paris.

58

SPIRALS OF THE PREHISTORIC OPEN ROCK PAINTING FROM KOSOVA Edi SHUKRIU University of Prishtina, Kosova Abstract: Spirals and the deer compose the prehistoric open rock art found in southwest Kosova. Paintings done in red color are placed on the two roofs and the wall. Roof 1 holds four spirals (zone A) and, two double spirals (Zone B). Roof 2 holds two double spirals. Wall has two levels: Horizon I start with the figure of the deer, followed by three spirals. Horizon II hold damaged spirals, except the preserved second spiral and, the other damaged signs. The image of the deer and numbers of spirals are linked with the worshiping of the Sun, the virtual circle of life, since the whole site have been a part of the initiation rituals. Spirals are very present in Kosova. The close circle labyrinth dedicated to Dea Dardanica can be seen as the development of spirals as well as the continuity of the Sun worship by Dardanians. Keywords: spirals, deer, rock art, Vlashnja, prehistoric, Kosova Resumé: Le décor de l’abri trouvé dans le sud-ouest du Kosova est composé de spirales et de cerfs. Les peintures, de couleur rouge, sont placées sur les deux toits et le mur. Le toit n°1 est décoré de quatre spirales (zone A) et de deux spirales doubles (zone B). Le toit n°2 est orné de deux spirales doubles. Le mur comprend deux niveaux : au premier plan, une figure de cerf, suivi de trois spirales. Le second plan est composé de spirales endommagées, seule la seconde spirale a été préservée. L’image du cerf et les spirales ont été reliées à l’adoration du Soleil, le cercle (virtuel) de vie, puisque le site entier semble avoir été consacré aux rituels d’initiation. Les spirales sont très présentes au Kosova. Le labyrinthe circulaire consacré à Dea Dardanica peut être aussi bien vu comme le développement des spirales que comme la continuité de l’adoration solaire par les Dardaniens. Mots clés: spirales, cerf, roche art, Vlashnja, prehistorique, Kosova

Wall paintings are placed west of the roof paintings and they consist of the two levels: Horizon I and Horizon II. Horizon I (12.5 x 0.58 m) start with the figure of the deer (29 x 29 cm. Fig. 8.5). Behind the dear is well-preserved spiral followed up by the smaller double spiral and, not so preserved the other one. On the deer’s left antler the very small spiral is notified. Horizon II (12.70 x 0.74 m) stays on the other rock level under the Horizon I. Images of this horizon are damaged, except the preserved second spiral on the clockwise direction (75 x 65 cm). The horizon has a lot of traces of other spirals and other signs as interrupted long horizontal tracks on the upper part of the horizon II as well as a sign like letter T.

The schematic groupings of spirals and the deer compose the prehistoric open rock art found in the site Mrrizi i Kobajës (Kobaja Shade) near the village Vlashnja (municipality of Prizren, southwest Kosova). This is new archaeological discovery and, the first of this kind in region (April, 2005). 1 It is placed on the non-compact surface of the rock sediment, in isolated zone of lower mountains, between the right side of the Lumbardhi River and its entrance to the canyon of Drini i Bardhë (Fig. 8.1, 8.5). Vlashnja prehistoric open rock paintings represent the repetitive schematic groupings of spirals as conceptual ideograms and the pictogram of the deer, which leads the spirals at the Wall Horizon I (Fig. 8.2). Paintings are done in red color (mixture of animal blood and wax or ocher) sited on the white basement. They are placed on the two roofs (Roof 1 and Roof 2) and on the wall (Horizon I and Horizon II). The roof paintings are composed only by spirals placed on Roof 1 (zone A, B) and Roof 2, whereas the wall paintings are placed on two Wall horizon (Horizon I, II).

Paintings are mostly covered by calcite. It has to be said that the whole area consists on calcareous stone (limestone) with the presence of granite in its lower part. The site presents the peripheral zone of the cultural complex composed by fort Gradishta in Vlashnja (Neolithic – Late Antique), Gorica e Madhe fort and Gorica e Vogël fort (Eneolithic – Iron Age) and several other smaller archaeological sites.

Roof 1 (4.70 x 0.85 m) consists on eight spirals, separated into two zones: Zone A (west), and Zone B (east). Zone A consist of four spirals in a clockwise direction and, Zone B consist on two double spirals (Fig. 8.2, 8.3). Roof 2 (0.97 x 0.70 m) is placed under the Zone A of the Roof 1 and it holds to double spirals. The distance between zone A and B is 73 cm.

MOTIVES ON THE ROCK ART In its complexity Vlashnja prehistoric rock art is different on her image and symbolism, dealing with the solar cult and the heliolatry of her creators and worshipers. The artist/artists have made specific choices choosing several spirals and double spirals as pictograms and, single animal image of the deer as ideogram.

1

Discovery of the author, after the information of Major Jetulla Krasniqi (Kosova Protection Troops).

59

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

Fig. 8.1. Map of the rock paintings and other sites near Vlashnja

Fig. 8.2. Vlashnja prehistoric paintings 60

E. SHUKRIU: SPIRALS OF THE PREHISTORIC OPEN ROCK PAINTING FROM KOSOVA

Fig. 8.3. Vlashnja: Spirals, roof 1 A

Fig. 8.4. Vlashnja: Double spirale, roof 1 B

The image of the deer from Vlashnja seems to be more developed than the Camonica Valley deer of early Bronze Age and there is visible link of sun symbols shown at the Camonica Valley stag and the circle of the sun. 2 The dear appears on the western Balkans rock art in Tren (Korca, Albania) and Lipci (Boka of Kotor, Montenegro), but the images there present the deer hunting by human male: horse-riding and holding spears. 3 The deer is present on Illyrian art too 4 and, it is used to be one of the most respected animals of the ancient Albanians. 5

Dardanian worship of the Sun and the development of its cult personalized by Dea Dardanica. DATING The dating of the Vlashnja prehistoric rock art seems to be difficult having in mind that the analogies are not present in Balkans. It has to be mentioned that the sun symbolism dominates societies of the Bronze Age in Balkans (Dupljaja Sun-chariot), but it appears much earlier, starting from Neolithic Age. Two rock art sites in the huge region, Tren and Lipci, present the different images: the deer hunting and, the presence of the human. The Tren rock art, similar to Valcamonica, but without spirals, is dated to the end of the II millennium or the beginning of I millennium 8 as well as Lipci rock art with five deer’s, doe, two swastikas and hunter. 9

The spirals dominate on the prehistoric rock art of Vlashnja and they are presented at all images in both directions: a clockwise direction and the opposite. Spiral, as a common symbol in the different cultures and times, as a symbol of the sun or representing the cycle of life, is present in prehistoric Kosova also. It is presented on Neolithic pottery and, later one on the Iron Age jewelry. 6 Spirals from Vlashnja, some presenting the bringing forth of life from a central point and the others presenting return to the center of creation, present the spiritual symbol of growth and evolution, respectively the later idea of death and rebirth. The continuity of this idea, correspondingly the image of the holly geometry or the Universe has found its expression on the unique close circle labyrinth from Kosova dedicated to Dea Dardanica (year 211). 7 At the same time it shows the continuous

The plenty of different period archaeological sites near Vlashnja sacred place do not make the dating easier. The site was adorning holy place were the population with complex economy worshipped the Sun or did a kind of special initiation. Having in mind the entire composition, the presence of the schematic groupings of sings, the motive of deer and spirals and their position as well as the absence of human images I consider that the Vlashnja rock art is created in between Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age (3600 – 2000).

2 Green M. (1991) – The Sun – Gods of Ancient Europe, London: B.T. Batsford Ltd, 1, 23, Fig. 75, 5, Fig. 40: after E. Anati. 3 Korkuti M. (1969) – Piktura e Trenit, Studime Historike 23/ 6, nr. 2, Tirana, 127-132; Pušić I. (1971) – Lipci, Morinja, Risan dessines préhistorique, Epoque préhistorique et protohistorique en Yugoslavie, Société archéologique de Yougoslavie, Beograd, 117-151, T. XI. 4 Stipčević A. (1981) – Kultni simboli kod ilira, Sarajevo: Akademija Nauka i Umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine, 1981, 10-11. 5 Tirtja M. (2004) – Mitologjia ndër shqiptarë, Tiranë: Akademia e Shkencave e Shqipërisë, Dega e Etnologjisë, 64-65. 6 Shukriu E. (1995) – Dardania paraurbane, Peja: Dukagjini, 97-98, T. XXIV 2, XXXIX 1; it is common in Illyrian area: Stipčević A., o.c., 1011. 7 Shukriu E. (2004), Ancient Kosova, Prishtina: Museum of Kosova, 114-115, Photo 1 and 92.

CONCLUSION The open prehistoric rock art from Vlashnja (Mrrizi i Kobajës: Kobaja Shade) is an important discovery created in Kosova in the period between Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age (3600 – 2000). The site seems to have served as a ritual landscape and revealed sacred geography. The 8 9

61

Korkuti M., o.c., 127-132. Pušić I., o.c., 117-151, T. XI.

SPIRALS AND CIRCULAR FORMS: THE MOST COMMON ROCK ART ELEMENTS IN THE WORLD?

Fig. 8.5. Vlashnja: The deer, horizon 1

Fig. 8.6. Vlashnja: Mrrizi of Kobaja site

image of the deer and numbers of spirals and double spirals are linked with the worshiping of the Sun, the virtual circle of life, since the whole site have been a part of the initiation rituals. Placed in different position, especially on the Roofs A and B, they can have calendrical significances too.

GREEN, Miranda (1991) – The Sun – Gods of Ancient Europe, London: B.T. Batsford Ltd. KORKUTI, M. (1969) – Piktura e Trenit, Studime Historike 23/6, nr. 2, Tirana.

Being expressions of the mind, soul and heart of its prehistoric habitants it also indicates the other finds of this kind in this part of the Balkans. Vlashnja prehistoric rock art will offer much more than at this point, after conducting an adequate contemporary analyses and profound studies.

SHUKRIU, E. (1995) – Dardania paraurbane, Peja: Dukagjini.

PUŠIĆ, I. (1971) – Lipci, Morinja, Risan dessines préhistorique, Epoque préhistorique et protohistorique en Yugoslavie, Société archéologique de Yougoslavie, Beograd.

STIPČEVIĆ, A. (1981) – Kultni Simboli kod ilira, Sarajevo: Akademija Nauka i Umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine. TIRTJA, M. (2004) – Mitologjia ndër shqiptarë, Tiranë: Akademia e Shkencave e Shqipërisë, Dega e Etnologjisë, Open rock.

Bibliography ANATI, E. Introducing the World Archives of Rock Art (WARA): 50.000 years of visual arts, www.ccsp.it/ ANATI%20WARA%20rev%20PRE.htm).

62

Session C85 EUROPEAN CAVE ART

TO BE OR NOT TO BE PALAEOLITHIC, THAT IS THE QUESTION Robert G. BEDNARIK International Federation of Rock Art Organisations (IFRAO), P.O. Box 216, Caulfield South, Vic. 3162, Australia [email protected] Abstract: The tendency of many European and some Asian archaeologists to pronounce rock art as being Palaeolithic in the absence of any evidence other than stylistic vibes is examined. Numerous examples are presented and discussed, especially from central Europe. It is shown, for instance, that there is currently no evidence of any Pleistocene rock art in the central regions of Europe. All claims from outside the traditional main corpus, essentially in France and Spain, are in fact tenuous and largely unsupported, and this applies to the entire region from Portugal to China. There are literally hundreds of false or very tenuous claims for Pleistocene rock art from Eurasia. This state is then compared with the situation in other continents, in an effort to understand the psychology of those making precipitate claims.

INTRODUCTION

bearing in mind that Pleistocene art itself occurs in all continents except Antarctica (Bednarik 2003) — here I wish to limit myself to exploring the propensity of European pre-Historic art specialists to pronounce Holocene rock art as being of Pleistocene antiquity, always on the basis of “perceived Palaeolithic style”. There are so many examples of this penchant that it ought to be possible, by looking for common features and trends, to construct a rational explanation for it.

One of the most fascinating articles I have ever read about Palaeolithic art is Freeman’s (1994) erudite review of the undercurrents involved in the discovery, rejection and acceptance of the Altamira rock art, examining how myths and beliefs have conditioned the research about Palaeolithic art. It also explains the parallels in the validation of religious shrines and their usurpation by ecclesiastical authority:

One aspect of this phenomenon is that, almost invariably, when the pronouncement of Pleistocene age is questioned or contradicted, the protagonists favouring it express great disquiet and may resort to extreme measures to defend their chronological assertions. But this does not seem to apply to cases in which an assumed Holocene age is corrected to a Pleistocene age. In other words, the implication seems to be that, when a Holocene age is proposed for purported Pleistocene art, this constitutes a personal criticism of those who support the initial view, but not when a Pleistocene age is proposed for purported Holocene art. Clearly, then, this is not about the implication of being wrong; just as in the phenomenon discussed by Freeman, there is some other factor involved. I would like to examine what that factor might be.

Those special beliefs and feelings [about Palaeolithic art] are held by the professional prehistorian as well as the average citizen. Neither is particularly good at self analysis. ... There are reasons to believe that the behaveor associated with the Palaeolithic sites is not directly modeled on that surrounding Christian shrines, but that these two manifestations of belief, reverence, and validation of experience have the same origin at a deeper structural level. I still cannot pretend to understand that origin; I believe it to be promising material for further serious investigation. (Freeman 1994: 341) In the following paper I will attempt to address some of the questions Freeman raised, by illuminating specific developments mostly of the subsequent few years. It is a well-known maxim in palaeoart studies that the interpretations of early art tell us much more about the interpreter than about the art (Mandl 1996). A case in point is the preoccupation of many European rock art connoisseurs with finding Upper Palaeolithic art. Two aspects of this mostly European phenomenon illustrate the point. First, there is a distinct tendency in Europe, of assigning Pleistocene ages to Holocene rock art or portable art. Second, while there are no known instances of Pleistocene art frauds in Africa, Asia, Australia or South America, some examples are known in the United States, but in Europe, thousands of instances have occurred, and many have no doubt not been exposed yet (Bahn 1993; Bahn and Vertut 1997: 77-83).

CASE HISTORIES Northern Alpine Limestone Belt, Austria To examine the issue carefully it is essential to consider some case histories. I begin with a case that has received rather little attention. In Austria, portable art of the Pleistocene is rare, although it includes some of the most famous specimens in the world, such as the two anthropomorphous figurines from Willendorf and the Galgenberg figurine (Bednarik 1989a). There are also a few known fakes (Mohr 1933), but there is no known rock art of Palaeolithic age in Austria. However, a number of petroglyphs in the Northern Limestone Belt of Upper Austria have been ascribed to the Ice Age by Kohl and Burgstaller (1992). These occur at two sites,

While it would be fascinating to explore the reasons for the geographical distribution of fakes of Pleistocene art — 65

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

contesting parties in Austria with great vigour and controversy. The scientific issue itself seems easy to resolve, but the political fallout it has caused has stifled informed debate. German cave art Over the course of the 20th century, numerous cases of Pleistocene rock art have been reported from Germany, all of which now stand falsified (Bednarik 2002). The Palaeolithic ages of the representation of a stag from the Kleines Schulerloch, Bavaria (Birkner 1938: Pl. 13; Maringer and Bandi 1953: 23), and the engraving of a zoomorph from the Kastlhänghöhle (Bohmers 1939: 40) have long been refuted (Bosinski 1982: 6; Freund 1957: 55). Many others, however, have been maintained until the late 1990s, and one was introduced only recently (Conard and Uerpmann 2000). I have examined all of them.

Fig. 9.1. Some of the petroglyphs from Kienbachklamm, Upper Austria

A “black-brown pigmented fragment” from the Aurignacian of Geißenklösterle (Hahn 1988a) is a Vshaped piece of limestone with dark markings (see also Hahn 1988b, 1988c, 1991; Richter et al. 2000). Conard and Uerpman (2000) warn, however, that the irregular nature of the black and brown colour could be the result of natural processes or accidental human intervention. Indeed, my examination of the dark-brown coating of about 50 microns thickness identified it as a plant resin. The fragment appears to be a pyroclast, which supports the possibility that the accretion derived from incomplete combustion of resin-rich fuel. This dark organic deposit was partly covered by a thin calcite skin that is exfoliating locally, and the marking Hahn perceived is the natural result of this process (see Bednarik 2002 for details).

Stubwieswipfel on the Warscheneck mountain, and Kienbachklamm, a canyon near Bad Ischl (Fig. 9.1). According to Burgstaller, considered to be the “Father of Austrian rock art studies”, seven naturalistic animal heads at the first site and several more figures at the second belong into the Upper Palaeolithic period, and were made either immediately before or after the Last Glacial Maximum. The figures in the Kienbachklamm, occurring together with thousands of other, presumably much more recent images, are claimed to include two mammoths, some stags and a reclining woman. These age claims are based on style and alleged subject matter. Other observers have either been unable to detect these figures, or regard them as natural grooves on the heavily weathered rock. The published photographs of some of these figures, particularly of the “female figure” and the “mammoths”, suggest that the identifications are the result of wishful thinking.

The “black, yellow and red pigmented fragment” from the same site and period, but from a different stratum, has been coated or impregnated first by yellow, then black and lastly whitish materials. The first colour varies considerably, from yellow to red and even purplish. It is attributable to a layer of iron oxides or hydroxides that have locally been subjected to heating in a reducing flame, converting goethite to haematite. This was later covered by a blackish accretion, followed by a lightcoloured thick calcite accretion that contains pockets of small black particles, probably charcoal. Although it is possible that the initial iron deposit derives from an anthropic pigment, there is no indication supporting this idea, and the irregularly shaped limestone clast is quite damaged and has almost certainly lain in a fireplace. I agree with Conard and Uerpman that it is no proof of rock art, but there is a remote possibility that it is portable palaeoart.

At both sites, the petroglyphs occur on limestone walls that are exposed to the rain. This in itself practically excludes an age of more than a millennium or two, because limestone recedes between 2 to 20 mm per 1000 years when exposed to atmospheric precipitation (Schwegler 1995: 109; Bednarik 2001: 61); in fact under laboratory conditions of continuous dissolution, the rate of 1 mm per 31 days has been reported (Chou et al. 1989). Hundreds of petroglyph sites in the region have been studied, and dated inscriptions, safely datable motifs and superimpositions have provided numerous secure age estimates (Mandl 1996). According to these, over 70% of the region’s rock art is post-Medieval, and under 2% is Roman or earlier. This is not to imply that no rock art was created in earlier times, but that the record is severely truncated by taphonomy. The probability of finding Pleistocene petroglyphs among this corpus is for all practical purposes nil.

On the other hand, Conard and Uerpman (2000) introduce a painted rock fragment from the Magdalenian of the Hohle Fels cave as an exfoliated fragment of rock art. I have refuted that pronouncement conclusively, by

Despite these decidedly unfavourable odds, the issue remains unresolved, and is being pursued by the 66

R.G. BEDNARIK: TO BE OR NOT TO BE PALAEOLITHIC, THAT IS THE QUESTION

Fig. 9.2. The painted limestone plaque fragment from Hohle Fels, Germany, and the underside of the fragment showing the fractures and the distribution of paint traces

demonstrating that the piece was already exfoliated at the time two series of double rows of red pigment dots were applied on one side. Not only are there painted motifs on the outer surface of the plaque, which had been applied with finger tips, but I found extensive microscopic pigment traces also on the spalling surface, consistent with having been caused by paint-covered fingers as the artist held the stone (Fig. 9.2). Afterwards the plaque was smashed with considerable force, which is consistent with a practice often observed with Palaeolithic mobiliary art right across Europe (Bednarik 2002).

Czech cave art There have also been a couple of claims for Pleistocene cave art from the Czech Republic (Kozlowski 1992: 410). In the first case, a number of red pigment markings in Mladeč Cave have been suggested to be Palaeolithic (Oliva 1987, 1989). This site yielded several Late Pleistocene hominin specimens, which together with most faunal finds may have fallen into the cave through a vertical shaft in its roof, and the cave may not have been accessible to humans during the Upper Palaeolithic. To resolve the controversy of the red paint marks I examined them in the company of M. Oliva in 2003 (Bednarik 2006). There are in all sixteen such marks, as well as numerous inscriptions from the first phase of the site’s archaeological exploration, the late 19th century. Four of these red marks are clearly letters and seem to date from about 1880. Most others consist of simple lines or double lines (Fig. 9.3), and the preservation of all red markings matches that of the four letters. Notably, the degree of pigment diffusion through moisture is similar in the letters and the other markings. Moreover, I conducted detailed colorimetric analyses of all marks, which suggested that the same pigment was used as in the written characters. Most of the paint marks occur in a specific area of this extensive cave system where it is believed the human remains were found, and the favoured explanation of them is that they were made about 1880 to indicate the find spots of human remains. None of the red signs resembles authentic Palaeolithic marks, and since there are even justified doubts that the site could have been occupied by Upper Palaeolithic people (Jelínek 1987; Svoboda 2000, 2001) there is no reason to attribute any of the marks to them.

Also from the Hohle Fels cave are dozens of stone fragments that exfoliated from the cave walls. This is evident from the Bärenschliff they bear, a polish occasioned by cave bears as they rubbed against cave walls and the sides of large boulders in a cave. On these smooth surfaces occur thousands of randomly engraved lines, which form no apparent designs, but have been widely accepted as cave art (Hahn 1991, 1994; Scheer 1994; Conard and Uerpman 2000; Holderman et al. 2001). I subjected the collection to microscopy in 2002, arriving at a very different explanation. The Bärenschliff occurs because sand and clay embedded in the shaggy fur of the cave bears acted as an abrasive, and in studying these phenomena in numerous European caves (Bednarik 1993) I have often observed incised lines identical to those from Hohle Fels. They were caused by large quartz grains in the mud or clay embedded in the fur, and they are easily recognizable by microscopic examination. Their characteristics occur commonly on the Hohle Fels plaques (Bednarik 2002). It follows that, at present, there is no legitimate claim for Pleistocene rock art in Germany. All cases proposed refer either to art of the Holocene, or to natural markings of various types, and in one case to authentic Pleistocene art applied to a portable plaque already exfoliated from the cave wall, rather than rock art.

The second Czech limestone cave where Palaeolithic rock art has been reported is Býcí Skála (Oliva 1996: 120, 129, Abb. 2). This site contains Hallstatt period burials and numerous inscriptions and other wall markings. One black pictogram of a cervid figure has been suggested to be of 67

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Two more eastern European cave art sites have been proposed as candidates for Pleistocene antiquity, Cuciulat in Romania and Badanj in Croatia. In both cases the claims are unsupported and need to be investigated by specialists. Côa valley, Portugal The lower Côa valley of Portugal features a series of petroglyph sites on schistose facies of low metamorphism. The corpora comprise images and inscriptions of greatly varying ages, a large component consists of modern and Christian motifs, dated inscriptions and markings made with metal tools, but markings made with stone tools also occur (Bednarik 1995a; Zilhão et al. 1997). The major concentrations coincide with the presence of old watermill buildings or ruins of such structures. A series of semi-“naturalistic” animal figures, mostly bovine and equine, at about a dozen sites has been pronounced Palaeolithic, and 20,000 to 30,000 years old, on the basis of perceived style. Yet these figures are often less weathered than dated inscriptions of 200 or 300 years age on the same or adjacent rocks (Fig. 9.4), they were found to dissect lichen thalli in many cases, and the rock panels they occur on are subjected to rapid weathering. Schist recedes at about half the rate of limestone (i.e. at 1–10 mm/1000 years), which means that no petroglyphs could possibly survive on it from the Pleistocene, fully exposed to the rain. Yet some of the presumed Solutrean images at Côa sites are superbly preserved in every microscopic detail. In 1995, a series of “blind tests” by rock art dating scientists found that the art at the three Côa main sites is generally of the late Holocene, and most of it is of historical antiquity only. The archaeometrists also determined that the terraces along the present course of the river are very recent, that the valley itself is geologically very young (essentially a Quaternary feature), and that there are no prospects of finding Pleistocene occupation deposits or rock art along the present river.

Fig. 9.3. Red pigment marking in Mladeč Cave, Czech Republic, claimed to be Palaeolithic, in reality of the late 19th century

the Palaeolithic, but Svoboda et al. (2005) have recently reported a carbon-isotope result from the paint residue according to which it appears to be about 680 years old, i.e. of the Middle Ages. A second date derived from a geometric pattern of numerous lines suggests that this motif is in the order of 4420 years old, which would place it in the Chalcolithic or Eneolithic period. The design resembles decorations commonly found on ceramics of the Baden culture. Certainly there is no evidence of Pleistocene age rock art from this site either. Eastern Europe There have been several more claims for Pleistocene rock art from eastern Europe, but they are generally vague, isolated and unverified. For instance the engraved rock art in Jenö Hillebrand, Hungary (Kozlowski 1992: 41), has not been examined by a specialist so far. Some paintings in the Dominica Cave in Slovenia are thought to be of Neolithic antiquity, like some of those in Býcí Skála. Two sites in the Ural Mountains offer a selection of rather diffuse and undiagnostic paintings, some of which have been claimed to depict Pleistocene fauna. They are Kapova and Ignatiev Caves, and one motif in the latter site has yielded radiometric dating evidence. A figure described as depicting a mammoth is estimated to be about 7370 years old (Steelman et al. 2002). However, it must be remembered that mammoths survived well into the Holocene in Siberia, and numerous frozen carcases have been found of them (Bednarik 1994). Recently Solodeynikov (2005) has greatly improved the legibility of the imagery in Kapova Cave through colour enhancement, and there do appear to be figures of mammoth and wooly rhinoceros among them. Nevertheless, this may not be adequate to demonstrate a Pleistocene age for this corpus, particularly as there is currently no evidence of any Palaeolithic rock art from Siberia.

Fig. 9.4. Selection of petroglyphs of the lower Côa valley, Portugal, occurring a few metres from purported Palaeolithic petroglyphs that are often less weathered than these motif and dated inscriptions 68

R.G. BEDNARIK: TO BE OR NOT TO BE PALAEOLITHIC, THAT IS THE QUESTION

This finding led to a major academic controversy, as every archaeological commentator had insisted the Côa rock art must be of the Pleistocene (e.g. Bahn 1995a, 1995b). A group of Portuguese archaeologists set out to refute the scientific determinations, by excavating the sediments around numerous decorated rocks, and by searching for archaeological remains of Pleistocene human settlement of the valley. Concealed petroglyphs were found below ground in only one case, and although mainly microlithic stone implements were excavated, they occurred together with ceramic remains, indicating that they were Neolithic or younger. At one site, Cardina 1, some microliths were also found just below pottery, indicating the possibility of a late Mesolithic occupation (Aubry et al. 1997). Moreover, the extensive Portuguese research confirmed that the largest terrace, at Penascosa, is of recent age, and remnants of a Late Pleistocene terrace were found 40 m above it. Radiocarbon analysis results were not disclosed, except for one final Holocene date (Zilhão et al. 1997).

examining the issue (Gonçalves 1998: 18). Those who dare question this age claim are branded as being opposed to the preservation of the Côa rock art. The dating scientists have been personally attacked in published papers, correspondence and at international conferences. In these circumstances there is no room for reasoned discussion. Voices of reason, such as the concern of a senior Portuguese archaeologist that the faith in stylistic arguments is not justified, and that a combination of scientific methods needs to be used to resolve the issue (Raposo 1995), have been drowned out by political rhetoric. Mazouco, Ocreza and Escoural, Portugal The controversy concerning the Côa rock art is not made any easier by the concurrent problems the Palaeolithic claims relating to other Portuguese sites have encountered. Here, too, some archaeologists had vigorously argued for Palaeolithic antiquity, and again without presenting falsifiable evidence. Mazouco is located within walking distance of the Côa valley, consisting of a very small group of animal figures on a schist cliff. The only complete outline, apparently of a horse, is said to be of Palaeolithic style (Jorge et al. 1981). But like the Côa figures (Jaffe 1996), it has been subjected to extensive vandalism by archaeologists, making analytical work difficult. The equine motif has even been re-engraved for better visibility, therefore none of its original surface remains available for study.

In 1999, a petroglyph panel covered by fluvial sediment and colluvium was excavated at Fariseu, and as the colluvium was claimed to contain Gravettian stone tools the rock art was pronounced to be over 21,000 years old (IPA 1999; Himelfarb 2000). However, these strata were probably formed only in the last decades, and the components of the colluvium — which is a secondary deposit derived from the steep hill sides since the dam was built — are entirely unrelated to its age, and thus the age of the rock art (Abreu and Bednarik 2000). One of the horse figures at Fariseu even seems to wear a bridle, rendering a Pleistocene age particularly unlikely, and all figures are practically unpatinated. Recently some TL dates from the Fariseu colluvium were introduced, but still no carbon dates were revealed. However, even charcoal dates would obviously be irrelevant if they were derived from a colluvium, so the supporters of Pleistocene age have produced no tangible evidence for such antiquity, despite enormous efforts to do so. What the archaeological work conducted in the Côa valley does indicate is that there are no Pleistocene sediments present near the valley floor, their residues may occur only high up on the slopes, at the Pleistocene river levels.

Even long before the Côa petroglyphs were reported, a Portuguese archaeologist explicitly rejected the Palaeolithic age of the Mazouco figures, after he found a stylistically similar equine motif at Vale da Casa (near the confluence of Côa and Douro), in what he defines as a clear Iron Age context (Baptista 1983: 63). In contrast to most of the Côa rock art, the Mazouco site is located well above the river, so the petroglyphs would not have suffered from fluvial erosion, but the schistose support rock is also unsheltered, and weathering retreat renders a Pleistocene age unlikely. In view of the extensive vandalism the site offers little scope for scientific study, its research potential having been destroyed (Fig. 9.5). The recently found Ocreza site is located in the steep valley of the Ribeiro do Ocreza shortly before it flows into the Rio Tejo. There is a small concentration of petroglyphs, assumed to be of late Holocene age, except for one apparently equid but headless image (Fig. 9.6). Located about 5 m above the normal water level, this one image is attributed to the Palaeolithic, purely on the basis of its style. However, the flood levels reach over 15 m depth here, and recent fluvial sand deposits occur next to the small petroglyph (28 cm), which faces the water flow. The soft schist is being fluvially worn, and the image can at the most be 200 or 300 years old.

The recent age of the current valley was thus confirmed, rendering the presence of any Pleistocene petroglyphs even more unlikely, and the presence of Pleistocene occupation deposits on the valley floor impossible. But the debate had become so thoroughly politicized that no Palaeolithic art specialist was willing to question the official policy of the Portuguese Institute of Archaeology that the Côa rock art is Palaeolithic. This policy continues to be disseminated publicly in Portugal, having been politically tied to the demand for preservation of the rock art (Gonçalves 1998: 17): the rock art must be preserved because it is Palaeolithic, so in order to be worthy of preservation it must be pronounced Palaeolithic. “The political nature of the archaeologists’ strategy influenced their scientific discourse”, comments a social scientist

In contrast to the open sites with the controversial age claims of their petroglyphs, usually produced by impact 69

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Fig. 9.5. Vandalized petroglyph at Mazouco, northern Portugal

Fig. 9.7. Cupules at Escoural Cave, southern Portugal, on marble, possibly of the Chalcolithic of the few figurative images are of typically Upper Palaeolithic style, and many of the apparently noniconic images resemble Holocene art elsewhere. The main figures are much more reminiscent of the filigran figures at such sites as Vermelhosa, Siega Verde and many other Iberian sites of more recent antiquity. Moreover, the complete absence of the so-called Palaeolithic signs, which are by far the most typical imagery in Palaeolithic cave art of Iberia (Casado Lopez 1977), renders a Palaeolithic age of the Escoural cave art somewhat unlikely. Siega Verde, Spain In the case of this site it is particularly absurd that its petroglyphs should have ever been pronounced Palaeolithic (Balbín et al. 1991; Balbín and Alcolea 1994; Bahn and Vertut 1997: 130). Siega Verde is a corpus of several hundred motifs spread along the left bank of the Río Agueda over some 1300 m, located north-west of Ciudad Rodrigo, just 50 km from the Côa sites. Equid depictions dominate again, all animal figures are almost unpatinated, whereas filigran markings on which at least one has been superimposed are fully repatinated and thus significantly older (Fig. 9.8). This already excludes a Palaeolithic age categorically. Styles and methods of execution differ considerably within the corpus. The rock art occurs on soft schist blocks that have been, and continue to be, sculptured by the very coarse angular quartz grains of the river sand. The river floods annually to 6 or 8 m depth, and all petroglyphs are located within this flood zone.

Fig. 9.6. The only petroglyph at the Ocreza site near Mação, Portugal, claimed to be Palaeolithic, which it is unlikely to be (such percussion petroglyphs are unknown in authentic Palaeolithic rock art), the engravings and faint paint marks of Escoural occur in a cave, and until recently their Palaeolithic age had been widely accepted. However, a critical review of the site (Lejeune 1997) emphasizes the possibility that post-Palaeolithic art may be present in the marble cave, which was exposed during quarrying operations. Escoural contains occupation evidence from two periods, the Middle Palaeolithic and the Neolithic/Chalcolithic. The former is restricted to the area of the previous entrance, which is now closed, and among the large boulders outside this area, further finds from the Middle Palaeolithic and Neolithic occur, together with Chalcolithic material from the fortified settlement on the hill above the cave (Araújo and Lejeune 1995). There are extensive cupule panels of the mid to late Holocene immediately above the cave, and most of the rock art in its interior appears to be of the same age (Fig. 9.7). If any of it were of the Upper Palaeolithic, the absence of that period’s occupation evidence, including ochre or charcoal from torches, would need to be explained. However, none

Among the petroglyphs, the base of one of the support columns of a stone bridge has been constructed of the same schist rock the rock art occurs on. It, too, is being sculptured by the sharp-grained quartz sands being rafted past every time the site is inundated. I have measured the surface retreat of the bridge base to be as much as 30 mm, which indicates graphically the susceptibility of the schist to fluvial abrasion. The bridge was built in 1925, and I 70

R.G. BEDNARIK: TO BE OR NOT TO BE PALAEOLITHIC, THAT IS THE QUESTION

during the last 2000 years. The animal figures are mostly of horses and Spanish fighting bulls, with their characteristically curved, forward-pointing horns, and there is not a single geometric motif of the type usually called “signs”, which are the most characteristic and distinctive of the Palaeolithic designs in cave sites. Both extinct animal depictions and “signs” are numerous in Spanish cave sites, in fact the latter occur in huge numbers in various parts of Spain, therefore their complete absence at all open sites is most conspicuous. The Levantine shelter art, Spain Precisely the same applies to the Levantine rock paintings in eastern Spain: there are no Palaeolithic “signs”, no extinct animal species, or any other indications of Pleistocene age. And yet this art was attributed not only to the Palaeolithic period, it was initially assigned to the very early part of the Upper Palaeolithic. Breuil (1948, 1952), for instance, placed the Spanish Levantine paintings into the Perigordian (which effectively begins with the Neanderthal Châtelperronian and leads to the Gravettian), partly because of its stylistic similarities with the paintings of Lascaux, which he also regarded as Perigordian (see below). He and others perceived this entire art corpus as essentially Upper Palaeolithic. Martínez Santa-Olalla (1941), Pericot (1942), Bosch Gimpera (1956, 1967) and Hernandez Pacheco (1959), by contrast, placed it in the Holocene, usually the bulk of it in the Mesolithic, and both Almagro (1966) and Ripoll Perello (1964, 1968) agreed with this assignment, even extending the duration of the Levantine figurative art to the Neolithic. Jordá Cerda (1964) went further still, concurring with Martínez SantaOlalla that the art is Neolithic and Bronze Age, with the “schematized” figures extending into the Iron Age.

Fig. 9.8. Part of a pounded zoomorph (equine), weakly repatinated, superimposed over earlier, completely repatinated single-incision markings (filiform) have examined many rock inscriptions in its vicinity. In these circumstances, the petroglyphs cannot possibly be expected to survive more than a few centuries, even in well-protected locations. Some of the inscriptions are dated, enabling the calibration of the rate of fluvial wear. According to this method, none of the surviving petroglyphs of the entire site can be more than 300 years old (Bednarik 2009). Moreover, close examination of the site reveals numerous small remnants of an old, very coarse-grained alluvial terrace among the engraved rocks. These are firmly lodged in any deep crevices and cracks. It is entirely impossible that the rock art could be older than this terrace, because both its accumulation and later degradation would have involved massive surface modification of the now engraved boulders. The deposit consisted largely of cobble- and boulder-sized granite and quartz detritus. Therefore this terrace provides a secure terminus post quem for the Siega Verde petroglyphs. In 1998 I located a 10-cm-large red pottery shard in the remains of this terrace, just above some petroglyphs, which has been identified as probably being of the Roman period (M. Simões de Abreu, pers. comm.). It was very water-worn and had clearly been transported for some distance, so there can be no doubt of the historical age of the rock art. Its real age, however, may well be related to a large watermill, the ruins of which still loom in the southern part of the site. The villagers from nearby Castillejo de Martin Viejo, who “had always believed the art to have been made by shepherds whiling away the time and ... had had a good laugh when archaeologists told them that the art was Palaeolithic” (Hansen 1997), are probably right; and the experts of Palaeolithic art, who insist on the Palaeolithic age of the Siega Verde art, are certainly wrong

After the rejection of the Pleistocene age, the Levantine shelter art was widely accepted to be of Mesolithic age for several decades, and published as such on countless occasions. Only during the late 1980s was this attribution finally abandoned, especially through the work of Beltrán (1982) and Hernández Pérez et al. (1988). The entire art corpus remains essentially undated, but the present consensus favours an age of Neolithic or younger. This is a classical example of a well known, extensively studied and published major regional rock art tradition that has been attributed to virtually every archaeological period from the very beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic to the Iron Age, i.e. to all pre-Historic periods of the region for the past 30,000 years. The complete absence of any credible proof of Pleistocene antiquity did not prevent these claims, which are now assumed to be false, and which were based largely on stylistic assumptions. Lascaux, France

As in all the Portuguese sites, and indeed at all of the open petroglyph sites supposedly of the Palaeolithic that are currently known from the Iberian peninsula and the Pyrenees (Bednarik 1995a), there is not a single animal depiction of a species that did not exist in the region

One of the most famous of all “Palaeolithic art sanctuaries” (note the religious overtones) is the classical cave of Lascaux. Its painted art of 600 figures (plus 1500 engravings) is indeed one of the greatest to have survived 71

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

in Europe, particularly the panel of the large bovids ranks among the most superb artistic masterworks of all time. Its attribution to the late Solutrean or early Magdalenian, however, is highly suspect: these paintings are not likely to be Palaeolithic at all.

Hole, are of the Palaeolithic and about 12,000 years old, based on style. The main figure was described as an ibex, but in a second report the authors decided that it was the image of a stag (Ripoll et al. 2004). After I commented on the poor quality of both recordings, they provided yet another version of the same engraving, again totally different (Ripoll et al. 2005) and still unsatisfactory, as evident from the photograph of the same figure (Fig. 9.9). By now, the number of “Palaeolithic images” in the cave had increased to forty-two, the “most richly carved and engraved ceiling in the whole of cave art”, and excessive claims of the find’s importance flooded the media. However, it is clear from the photographs of some of these many motifs that they are natural features of the cave ceiling, while at the same time numerous other engravings present are consistently ignored in the recordings.

Initially, Breuil and Peyrony placed the Lascaux art into the Perigordian (Bahn and Lorblanchet 1993), i.e. the early Upper Palaeolithic, but after charcoal from the poorly conducted excavations in the cave was analysed, the art corpus was pronounced to be about 17,000 years old. Although substantially younger charcoal occurs in abundance in the cave, and often together with ochre, it was assumed without good reason that all the art relates to the earliest charcoal found. Not only is this quite unlikely in a logical sense, Bahn (1994, 1995c) has convincingly argued that the Lascaux corpus comprises considerable cultural diversity. The sediments were haphazardly excavated to allow access by tourists, and later carbonisotope analysis of the mostly un-provenanced charcoal has provided many Holocene dates, beginning at about 7500 years BP. There is no doubt that the cave was open during the Holocene, and visited and probably painted in by humans. To then assume that all of the art is of the late Solutrean is illogical, it is more likely that the most recent visitors created the most recent art, and Holocene art might even dominate. To be more specific, the huge bovid figures are decidedly unique in Palaeolithic art, they are among the most recent components of the Lascaux assemblage, and if they depict aurochsen, as is widely assumed, then they cannot be of the age usually assigned to them. Not only are most aurochs remains from the Holocene, the species has never been found in southwestern France between the Gravettian and the very final Magdalenian (Delpech 1992: 131). It seems therefore impossible that these figures, at least, could be of Solutrean or early Magdalenian age. Moreover, their resemblance to bovid depictions of the above-mentioned Levantine shelter art was already noticed by Breuil, which is precisely why he assumed that both were Perigordian. The same, incidentally, applies to the recent Lascaux cervids, for instance in the way their antlers are detailed. But while it is accepted today that the Levantine art is of the Holocene, the myth that all Lascaux art is of the Ice Age continues, despite the complete absence of any proof to support it. It is true, as Bahn suggests, that the older painting phases of Lascaux are likely to be Pleistocene, but it is quite unlikely that this also applies to the more recent phases of the site. Nevertheless, at least one archaeologist has tried to argue for a Pleistocene age of some Côa bovids on the basis of their stylistic similarity to the large Lascaux bovids (Zilhão 1995). Perhaps he is right concerning the stylistic similarity, but if this were valid, he would only demonstrate that the Côa art is probably not of the Pleistocene. Church Hole, United Kingdom

Fig. 9.9. Three different published versions of the principal ‘Palaeolithic’ motif in Church Hole, United Kingdom, all having been produced by Bahn, Pettitt and Ripoll

Recently, Bahn et al. (2003) proposed that three engravings in one of the Creswell Crags caves, Church 72

R.G. BEDNARIK: TO BE OR NOT TO BE PALAEOLITHIC, THAT IS THE QUESTION

The precipitate mode of announcing the Church Hole finds (the first paper was submitted and approved for unrefereed publication within a week of discovery), the misidentification of several images, lack of relevant analytical work, and excessive public claims about the incredible importance of the find, combined with acrimonious debate (see Ripoll et al. 2005) and a profound reluctance to subject the site to critical review all render it difficult to determine the veracity of the claims made. For instance when I proposed to examine the engravings I was subjected to personal abuse instead of being offered access. It is clear enough from the few published photographs that many of the claimed Palaeolithic images simply do not exist, they are natural markings. It is also clear that the Church Hole researchers are unable to comprehend that by creating poor recordings in which they omit any engravings they judge to be postPalaeolithic they are providing only subjective data that derive from circular reasoning. Their caustic discourse and refusal to subject the site to critical examination suggest that they are not confident of their own claims. We must therefore reserve our view of the Church Hole engravings until the site is subjected to critical review by a reputable specialist, and all of its rock markings are studied comprehensively and by field microscopy. There have been previous false claims of Palaeolithic rock art in Britain, and if this present claim is not to suffer the same fate, its promoters need to improve their scholarship and understand that science is based on refutation. Therefore their beliefs about this site need to be tested by attempts of falsification. Describing such attempts as “malicious and entirely predictable” is not only unscholarly, it is counterproductive in that it fosters doubts.

Mori (1974) and others have assigned to the Pleistocene, based on the “naturalistic style” and the apparent preoccupation of the artists with hunting aspects. Muzzolini (1990) has convincingly shown that this art must be Neolithic, and that it postdates 6000 BP, by demonstrating that it includes many depictions of domesticated sheep. In central Siberia, a few painted animal figures selected from the large rock art site of Shishkino have been pronounced Palaeolithic on the basis of style, and again these are horse and cattle figures (Okladnikov 1959), and an engraving of a stag looking remarkably like the Church Hole stag (Fig. 9.10). The Shishkino figure, although also attributed to the Pleistocene by archaeologists, was clearly made with a metal tool (Bednarik and Devlet 1993). At another Siberian site, Tal’ma, Okladnikov recorded what he thought was the figure of a rhinoceros. I examined the site, and found that the figure does not even resemble the recorded image which itself does not, I must confess, remind me of a rhinoceros (see H. Breuil’s similar mistake at Minateda, Spain). This figure, like the Shishkino paintings, occurs among other painted and engraved figures, the latter were made with metal tools and often depict recent motifs, especially horses with riders. At both these Siberian sites, the rock art is fully exposed to the weather, the rock is subjected to rapid destruction in this harsh climate, and a microscopic examination of the paint residues renders it extremely doubtful that these figures are any older than the engraved motifs around them (Bednarik and Devlet 1993).

PLEISTOCENE AGE CLAIMS FOR NON-EUROPEAN ROCK ART This raises the question, to what extent could the styles that we might be inclined to perceive as “Palaeolithic styles” have continued into the Holocene? Some researchers deny this possibility outright (Ripoll 1997; Rosenfeld 1997), others accept it as a valid phenomenon (Lorblanchet 1989; Beltrán 1992; Marshack 1992; Bahn 1997). Many authors have reported finds of perceived Palaeolithic style that are clearly post-Palaeolithic (Vilaseca 1934; Martin 1973; Couraud 1985; Aparicio Pérez 1987; Fullola I Pericot et al. 1987; Lejeune 1987; Lorblanchet and Welté 1987; Roussot 1987; Villaverde Bonilla 1987; Marshack 1991; Beltrán 1992; Otte et al. 1995). Such finds occur not only in south-western Europe, rock art or portable art of animal motifs of “naturalistic style” that might be perceived as resembling Palaeolithic art have been reported from regions that were never occupied in the Late Pleistocene (e.g. Scandinavia), or from site contexts where they cannot be of such age (e.g. Austria, see above). Moreover, such “naturalistic” art occurs also outside of Europe, where it has on occasion been assigned a Pleistocene age. The best-known example is perhaps the Bubaline tradition of the Sahara, which

Fig. 9.10. Shishkino site, Lena valley, central Siberia. ‘Naturalistic’ petroglyph made with a metal tool and of recent origin There are hundreds of other claims of Pleistocene art in Asia, for portable as well as rock art, which have been refuted by me, including claims involving numerous 73

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

“engraved” ostrich eggshell fragments in India, a female figurine at Lohanda Nala, also in India, and 600 supposedly engraved bone objects from wenhua Shiyu, China. In China, claims not only of Pleistocene rock art, but in one case even of Tertiary rock art have been made. None of them deserve any serious consideration (Bednarik and Li Fushun 1991). On the other hand, Chinese cave art of distinctly “naturalistic” animal figures that would be perceived as Palaeolithic in Europe has been correctly described as being 2000 or 3000 years old. These paintings were found near Hutiaoxia, Huayi, and Yinbiruo in Lijian (Peng Fei 1996). About thirty sites on the Kalguty River of the Ukok Plateau in south-western Gorniy Altai were attributed to the Stone Age, possibly even the Palaeolithic, again on purely stylistic grounds (Molodin and Cheremisin 1993, 1994). Similarly, Novgorodova (1983) described the petroglyphs of DelgerMuren and Tes in the same general region as Mesolithic. Kubarev (1997) refutes both claims, showing that all central Asian rock art west of China is either of the Bronze Age or younger. In Mongolia petroglyphs have been described as Pleistocene even though they were superimposed over the most recent glacial striations and are clearly much younger than these.

DISCUSSION It needs to be emphasized that there are many examples of valid claims for Pleistocene rock art in Australia, possibly even in the Americas, and there is certainly Pleistocene rock art in Asia, and can be presumed to be in Africa (although not so far demonstrated). Similarly, the presence of Ice Age rock art as well as portable art is securely established in various parts of Europe. The issue here is therefore not the question of existence of Pleistocene art, but the issue of inventing such antiquity for more recent art corpora. There are many misidentifications in all continents, but actual fakes of Ice Age art, both of rock and portable objects, are to the best of our knowledge limited to very few world regions. This may be a related issue, because the regions where it does apply seem to coincide with those where unsupported or unsupportable age claims of this nature tend to be most fervently defended. Of particular relevance seem to be the twenty or so “Palaeolithic” open air sites of south-western Europe, as they can be loosely grouped together on the basis of several variables. They are found on the Iberian Peninsula, and all occur on schist, a particularly soft rock, at open sites fully exposed to weathering. Schist is subjected to re-equilibration reactions under prolonged aqueous exposure, i.e. it reverts to its lower metamorphism phases and eventually disintegrates. At least half of these sites occur just above the rivers of young valleys, on rocks that show massive evidence of kinetic and abrasive action in their high-energy environments. These are certainly not the kinds of places where one would even expect to find particularly early rock art. In some cases, such as Siega Verde, it is simply absurd to assign the art to the Pleistocene. In that environment it could not possibly have survived for the immense time span such antiquity demands.

Claims of Pleistocene art have also appeared in the Americas. I have refuted those relating to Pedra Furada in north-eastern Brazil, of 32,000 years for paintings of the late Holocene, but accepted a final Pleistocene/early Holocene age for another site in the region, Perna 1 (Bednarik 1989b). In the United States, the Holly Oak, Delaware, engraving of a mammoth was exposed as a fake when the shell fragment it was engraved on was analysed well over a century after its “discovery”. The shell yielded a radiocarbon age of only about 1500 years, much later than the extinction of the mammoth in North America (Griffin 1988). Bahn (1991: 92) has reported a bone from Jacob’s Cave, Missouri, bearing an image of a rhinoceros. Apparently he falsely believes that the rhinoceros once existed in North America.

Other open air schist petroglyphs, mostly of horses, that have been attributed to Palaeolithic artists are those at Domingo García (Martín Santamaría and Moure Romanillo 1981) and the nearby sites Carbonero Mayor, Bernardos and Ortigosa (Ripoll Lopez and Muncio Ganzalez 1994); Piedras Blancas near Escullar, Almería (Martinez 1986/87); and Fornols-Haut, Campôme, in the French Pyrenees (Bahn 1985). They have not yet been examined critically, and all are again on schist. The complete absence of depictions of extinct species, as well as of the characteristic geometric “signs” of Palaeolithic art is manifest at all these sites.

Even Australia has not been immune to this tendency of attributing Ice Age antiquity to more recent rock art. The claims of Late Pleistocene antiquity of petroglyphs at three sites in the Olary region, made in 1988 and subsequent years, are now essentially invalid, as the analyst concerned has discredited his own results. In late 1996 archaeologists claimed to have dated a cupule panel at the Jinmium rockshelter to between 58,000 and 75,000 years (Fullagar et al. 1996). This was rejected by several Australian rock art specialists before publication, but a British archaeology journal, against better advice it was offered by me, insisted on publishing the false claims. They were subsequently refuted by more detailed scientific analysis of the site and its sediments, which showed unequivocally that the rock art was of the Holocene. Other Australian claims for Pleistocene rock art have been made, in some cases on the basis of the supposed depiction of extinct fauna, in one other case on the basis of experimentally using OSL dating.

The frequent occurrence of equid motifs at all these sites is noteworthy, because horse engravings and other petroglyphs are such a common feature in the region in question. Hansen (1997) describes a 4-m-high stone wall of almost two kilometres length at Castro in western Spain which bears hundreds of horse figures. This is located near Siega Verde, and Hansen reports that the owners of the land have not permitted archaeologists to 74

R.G. BEDNARIK: TO BE OR NOT TO BE PALAEOLITHIC, THAT IS THE QUESTION

enter the site because they “are wary of them”. Judging by some of the horse-like figures from Siega Verde, any motif that even remotely resembles a horse is considered Palaeolithic by some researchers, so there may be many more “Palaeolithic” figures waiting to be discovered on the stone wall of Castro.

opposed to those of some European archaeologists: they perceive the most recent rock art as the most important, not only because it demonstrates the continuity of their society’s expressions of material culture and thus validates legitimacy, e.g. in their connection with the land, but also because it is the most recent rock art that can best be related to historically. From their point of view, the concept that the oldest art is the more important would necessarily seem illogical.

If we are to assume that Pleistocene rock art may be mistaken for Holocene, and vice versa, a random result might be to have similar numbers of both forms of errors. In fact there seem to be very few cases of an attribution to the Holocene having been corrected to Pleistocene (as for instance in Australia). These are far too rare to reflect a random process, and most importantly, they have not led to any objections from archaeologists. This would seem to indicate a strong predisposition towards favouring greater ages rather then lesser. The hypothesis can be proposed that an inclination to prefer the greater ages is the principal reason for this apparent imbalance. It seems to derive considerable support from three factors:

Even in Europe, similar principles do apply. Various living societies perceive the rock art in their regions as part of their own cultural heritage, as having been made by their own ancestors (e.g. in Scandinavia and Britain). Moreover, various groups of researchers specifically work with relatively recent rock art, precisely because it provides information of recent cultural dynamics. An example are the members of Verein Anisa, a research group working in parts of Austria and southern Germany, who specialise in the study of rock art and rural, especially montane, settlement patterns, and for this purpose may find pre-Historic rock art considerably less interesting.

1. The pronounced clustering of such instances of preference for greater than real ages in specific parts of Europe; this suggests again the involvement of nonrandom determinants.

It follows that the principle of the earliest rock art of a region being the most important reflects the bias of Palaeolithic rock art connoisseurs of quite specific regions, most especially of south-western Europe. It is also in this area that the incidence of fakes of Pleistocene art reached plague proportions (see Bahn 1997: 77-79; consider for comparison that not a single fake is known from Russia and Siberia, where similarly large corpora of portable Palaeolithic art are known). I propose that these two factors are connected: a construct of significance has created the conditions encouraging both forgery and excessive age claims. If any of the age claims were fraudulent, then we could even establish a continuum, spanning the spectrum between the genuinely honest belief in Pleistocene antiquity and the unmitigated fake made purely to deceive. Somewhere in this spectrum we may find the archaeologist who, having realised his mistake in claiming a false age, decides to maintain his interpretation regardless of veracity.

2. The distinctive tendency in these same geographical areas of local rock art specialists to strongly defend their pronouncements, and to reject the principles of falsifiability of propositions, in order to preserve preferred age interpretations. 3. The factor particularly well identified by Gonçalves (1998), that Pleistocene age is used as the reason why a particular corpus of rock art must be saved or preserved. The third factor appears to have no rational basis, in fact logically it even presents a preservation threat to other rock art. Clearly if archaeology were to champion the principle that eligibility for preservation is a function of age, it would pre-empt any future demands to preserve more recent rock art. This, I would argue, is unacceptable to rock art science, for obvious reasons. Most of the world’s rock art is clearly not of the Pleistocene, and to prejudice its survival by designating it as “less valuable” or less worthy of preservation would be irresponsible. Perhaps some European archaeologists actually do feel that rock art of the Pleistocene is more important than rock art of the Holocene, but surely they are aware that other stakeholders in rock art may have other priorities. Surely it is also obvious that this kind of value system has no rational basis, it is essentially emotive and irrational. Moreover, there are many stakeholders in rock art who may find this value system entirely contrary to their own. I am not just referring to practitioners of other disciplines who may hold interests in rock art (e.g. art historians, ethnographers, anthropologists, semioticians), but primarily to the cultural owners of rock art in those parts of the world where they still exist. Peoples such as the Aborigines of Australia hold views concerning the importance of rock art that seem to be diametrically

Two observations become evident if this reasoning is followed through. First, the decision of some Portuguese archaeologists to pronounce sites such as those on the Côa as Palaeolithic reflect merely their own value system, and not a value system that anyone else might necessarily share. Second, their nomination of this purported Palaeolithic antiquity as the reason why this rock art must be preserved is not only without rational justification, it invites several serious criticisms: a. This form of logic is unacceptable to rock art researchers of the rest of the world, not just because it devalues other rock art forms, but because it prejudices the preservation of younger rock art. It is therefore selfish, being designed to satisfy the self-interest of a specific group of scholars. 75

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

b. This strategy reinforces an arbitrary value system for rock art that lacks objective justification.

BAHN, P.G. (1995a) – Cave art without the caves. Antiquity, 69: 231-237.

c. A preservation campaign based on the age of rock art, particularly when there are reasonable doubts about that age, invites the possibility of failure if the true age of the rock art should become apparent. It is therefore imprudent.

BAHN, P.G. (1995b) – Outdoor creations of the Ice Age. Archaeology July/August: 37.

d. A campaign conducted on this basis misleads the public, and it corrupts academic debate because it bears within it the need to persevere with false claims once they were made.

BAHN, P.G. (1997) – Comment on R.G. Bednarik, ‘Rock art as reflection of conditional visual perception’. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 7: 259-261.

BAHN, P.G. (1995c) – The impact of direct dating on Palaeolithic cave art: Lascaux revisited. Anthropologie, 33(3): 191-200.

BAHN, P., PETTITT, P. & RIPOLL, S. (2003) – Discovery of Palaeolithic cave art in Britain. Antiquity 77(296): 227-231.

Such a campaign debases scholarship, because it is likely to lead to victimization of researchers who eschew political expediency or correctness, and it favours the agendas of the politically active.

BAHN, P.G. & LORBLANCHET, M. (1993) – Introduction. Rock art studies: the post-stylistic era, or Where do we go from here? (Lorblanchet, M. & Bahn, P.G. eds). Oxbow Monograph 35, Oxbow Books, Oxford: v-viii.

The validation of the value judgments such a campaign is based on is, from Freeman’s (1994) perspective, a procedure resembling the process of validating religious shrines, particularly in the Catholic tradition. It lacks scientific credibility because its “stylistic” beliefs are criteria inaccessible to falsification. In this sense it turns archaeology into a belief system, a quasi-religion.

BAHN, P.G. & VERTUT, J. (1997) – Journey through the Ice Age. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London. BALBÍN BEHRMANN, R. DE & ALCOLEA GONZALEZ, J.J. (1994) – Arte paleolítico de la meseta española. Complutum, 5: 97-138. BALBÍN BEHRMANN, R. DE, ALCOLEA GONZALEZ, J., SANTONJA, M. & PEREZ MARTIN, R. (1991) – Siega Verde (Salamanca). Yacimiento artístico paleolítico al aire libre. Del paleolítico a la historia, Museo de Salamanca, Salamanca: 33-48.

References ALMAGRO, M.J.G. (1966) – Algunos idolos cylindricos megaliticos desconocidos. Ampurias 28: 49-63. ABREU, M.S. DE & BEDNARIK, R.G. (2000) – Fariseu rock art not archaeologically dated. Rock Art Research 17: 65-68.

BAPTISTA, A.M. (1983) – O complexo de gravuras rupestres do Vale da Casa – (Vila Nova de Foz Côa). Arqueologia, 8: 57-69.

APARICIO PÉREZ, J. (1987) – Chronologie de l’art mobilier paléolithique dans l’Espagne méditerranéenne. L’art des objets au Paléolithique, 1. L’art mobilier et son contexte (Clottes, J. ed.). Actes du Colloque de Foix-Le Mas d’Azil, 16-21 Nov. 1987, Ministère de la Culture: 101-120.

BEDNARIK, R.G. (1989a) – The Galgenberg figurine from Krems, Austria. Rock Art Research, 6: 118-125. BEDNARIK, R.G. (1989b) – On the Pleistocene settlement of South America. Antiquity, 63: 101-111. BEDNARIK, R.G. (1993) – Wall markings of the cave bear. Studies in Speleology 9: 51-70.

ARAÚJO, A.C. & LEJEUNE, M. (1995) – Gruta do Escoural: necrópole Neolítica e arte rupestre Paleolítica. Trabalhos de Arqueologia 8, Instituto Português do Património Arquitectónico e Arqueológico, Lisbon.

BEDNARIK, R.G. (1994) – The Pleistocene art of Asia. Journal of World Prehistory, 8: 351-375. BEDNARIK, R.G. (1995a) – The age of the Côa valley petroglyphs in Portugal. Rock Art Research, 12: 86103.

AUBRY, T.; CARVALHO, A.F.; ZILHÃO, J. (1997) – Arqueologia: Salto do Boi – Cardina I. Arte rupestre e pré-história do Vale do Côa (trabalhos de 1995-96). Relatório científico ao Governo da República Portuguesa, Lisbon: 1-23.

BEDNARIK, R.G. (1995b) – Refutation of stylistic constructs in Palaeolithic rock art. Comptes Rendus de L’Académie de Sciences Paris, 321(série IIa, No. 9): 817-821.

BAHN, P.G. (1985) – Ice Age drawings on open rock faces in the Pyrenees. Nature 313: 530-531. BAHN, P.G. (1993) – The ‘dead wood stage’ of prehistoric art studies: style is not enough. Rock art studies: the post-stylistic era, or Where do we go from here? (Lorblanchet, M. & Bahn, P.G. eds). Oxbow Monograph 35, Oxbow Books, Oxford: 51-59.

BEDNARIK, R.G. (2001) – Rock art science: the scientific study of palaeoart. Brepols, Turnhout

BAHN, P.G. (1994) – Lascaux: composition or accumulation? Zephyrvs, 47: 3-13.

BEDNARIK, R.G. (2003) – The earliest evidence of palaeoart. Rock Art Research 20(2): 89-135.

BEDNARIK, R.G. (2002) – Paläolithische Felskunst in Deutschland? Archäologische Informationen 25(1-2): 107-117.

76

R.G. BEDNARIK: TO BE OR NOT TO BE PALAEOLITHIC, THAT IS THE QUESTION

BEDNARIK, R.G. (2005) – Church Hole: a controversial site. International Newsletter on Rock Art 42: 19-21.

Colloque de Chancelade 1988, Comité des Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques, Paris: 127-135.

BEDNARIK, R.G. (2006) – The cave art of Mladeč Cave, Czech Republic. Rock Art Research 23: 207-216.

CONARD, N.J. & H.-P. UERPMANN (2000) – New evidence for Paleolithic rock painting in central Europe. Current Anthropology 41: 853-56.

BEDNARIK, R.G. (2009) – Fluvial erosion of inscriptions and petroglyphs at Siega Verde, Spain. Journal of Archaeological Science 36: 2365-2373.

COURAUD, C. (1985) – L’art azilien. Originesurvivance. 20th Supplement, Gallia Préhistoire, CNRS, Paris.

BEDNARIK, R.G. & DEVLET, E.K. (1993) – Konservatsiya pamyatnikov naskal’nogo iskusstva verkhneï Leny. Pamyatniki naskal’nogo iskusstva. Biblioteka Rossiïskogo Etnografa, Rossiïskaya Akademiya Nauk, Moscow: 7-24.

FREEMAN, L.G. (1994) – The many faces of Altamira. Complutum, 5: 331-342. FREUND, G. (1957) – L’art aurignacien en Europe centrale. Bulletin de Société Préhistorique de Ariège 12: 55-78.

BEDNARIK, R.G. & LI FUSHUN (1991) – Rock art dating in China: past and future. The Artefact, 14: 2533.

FULLAGAR, R.L.K., PRICE, D.M. & HEAD, L.M. (1996) – Early human occupation of northern Australia: archaeology and thermoluminescence dating of Jinmium rock-shelter, Northern Territory. Antiquity, 70: 751-773.

BELTRÁN, A. (1982) – Felskunst der Spanischen Levante. Gustav Lübbe Verlag, Bergisch Gladbach. BELTRÁN, A. (1992) – Crisis in traditional ideas about European rock art: the question of diffusion and convergence. Rock art in the Old World (Lorblanchet, M. ed.). IGNCA Rock Art Series 1, Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts, New Delhi: 401-413.

FULLOLA I PERICOT, J., VIÑAS I VALLVERDU, R. & GARCIA ARGÜELLES I ANDREU, P. (1987) – La nouvelle plaquette gravée de Sant Gregori (Catalogne, Espagne). L’art des objets au Paléolithique, 1. L’art mobilier et son contexte (Clottes, J. ed.). Actes du Colloque de Foix-Le Mas d’Azil, 16-21 Nov. 1987, Ministère de la Culture: 279-285.

BIRKNER, F. (1938) – Die erste altsteinzeitliche Felszeichnung in Deutschland. Bayerisches Vorgeschichtsblatt 15: 59-64. BOHMERS, A. (1939) – Die Felszeichnung in der Kastlhänghöhle. Germania 1939: 39-40.

GONÇALVES, M.E. (1998) – Science, controversy and participation. The case of the Foz Côa rock art engravings. Journal of Iberian Archaeology, 0: 7-31.

BOSCH GIMPERA, P. (1956) – The chronology of the rock-painting of the Spanish Levant. Prehistoric art of the western Mediterranean and the Sahara (Pericot, L. & Ripoll P., E. eds). Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology 39, Wenner Gren, New York: 118-136.

GRIFFIN, J.B. (1988) – A mammoth fraud in science. American Antiquity, 53: 578-582. HAHN, J. (1988a) – Das Geißenklösterle 1. Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in BadenWürttemberg 26. Kondrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart.

BOSCH GIMPERA, P. (1967) – Las relaciones prehistóricas mediterráneas. Anales de Antropologia, 4: 95-126.

HAHN, J. (1988b) – Die Geißenklösterle-Höhle im Achtal bei Blaubeuren 1: Fundhorizontbildung im Mittelpaläolithikum und Aurignacien. Stuttgart.

BOSINSKI, G. (1982) – Die Kunst der Eiszeit in Deutschland und in der Schweiz. Kataloge Vor- und Frühgeschichtlicher Altertümer 20, Habelt, Bonn.

HAHN, J. (1988c) – Neue Erkenntnisse zur urgeschichtlichen Besiedlung der GeißenklösterleHöhle, Gemeinde Blaubeuren-Weiler, Alb-DonauKreis. Archäologische Ausgrabungen in BadenWürttemberg 1987: 19-22.

BREUIL, H. (1948) – Introduction. Lascaux, “Chapelle Sixtine” de la préhistoire (Windels, F. & Laming, A. eds). Centre d’Études et de Documentation Préhistoriques, Montignac: 4-5.

HAHN, J. (1991) – Höhlenkunst aus dem Hohlen Fels bei Schelklingen, Alb-Donau-Kreis. Archäologische Ausgrabungen in Baden-Württemberg 1990: 19-22.

BREUIL, H. (1952) – Four hundred centuries of cave art. Centre d’Études et de Documentation Préhistoriques, Montignac.

Hahn, J. (1994) – Geritzte Bärenschliffe aus dem Hohle Fels, Schelklingen. In A. Scheer (Hrsg.), Höhlenarchäologie im Urdonautal bei Blaubeuren, pp. 9698. Museumsheft 1, Urgeschichtliches Museum Blaubeuren, Tübingen.

CASADO LOPEZ, M.P. (1977) – Los signos en el arte Paleolítico de la Península Ibérica. Monografías Arqueológicas 20, Zaragoza. CHOU, L., GARRELS, R.M. & WOLLAST, R. (1989) – Comparative study of the kinetics and mechanisms of dissolution of carbonate minerals. Chemical Geology, 78: 269-282.

HIMELFARB, E.J. (2000) – Portuguese petroglyphs. Archaeology, 53(2). IPA (1999. Archaeologically dated Palaeolithic rock art at Fariseu, Côa valley. Institute Portugués de Arqueologia Internet site.

DELPECH, F. (1992) – Le monde Magdalénien d’après le milieu animal. Le peuplement magdalénien. Actes du 77

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Felsritzbilder. Mitteilungen der Anisa, 17(2/3): 136156.

JELÍNEK, J. (1987) – Historie, identifikace a význam mladečských antropologických nálezů z počátku mladého paleolitu. Anthropos 25: 51-69.

MARINGER, J. & BANDI, H.-G. (1953) – Art in the Ice Age. Allen und Unwin, London.

HANSEN, B.S. (1997. From Hell to Inferno. Rock Art Research, 14: 51-53.

MARSHACK, A. (1991) – The female image: a ‘timefactored’ symbol. A study in style and aspects of symbol use in the Upper Palaeolithic. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 57: 17-31.

HERNÁNDEZ PACHECO, E. (1959) – Prehistoria des solar Hispano. Madrid. HERNÁNDEZ PÉREZ, M.S., FERRER I MARSET, P. & CATALÁ FERRER, E. (1988) – Arte rupestre en Alicante. Fundación Banco de Alicante y Grupo Banco Exterior, Alicante.

MARSHACK, A. (1992) – An innovative analytical technology: discussion of its present and potential use. Rock Art Research, 9: 37-64.

HOLDERMANN, C.-S., MÜLLER-BECK, H. & SIMON, U. (2001) – Fundstücke. In H. Müller-Beck et al. (Hrsg.), Die Anfänge der Kunst vor 30,000 Jahren, pp. 107–127. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart.

MARTIN, Y. (1973) – L’art paléolithique de Guy. Jacques Buquet, Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray. MARTÍN SANTAMARÍA, E. & MOURE ROMANILLO, J.A. (1981) – Un grabado de estilo paleolítico de Domingo Garcia (Segovia). Trabajos de Prehistoria, 38: 97-105.

JAFFE, L. (1996) – Systematic vandalism and improper conduct in the Côa valley rock art area. AURA Newsletter, 13(2): 12-13.

MARTÍNEZ, J. (1986/87) – Un grabado paleolítico al aire libre en Piedras Blancas (Escullar, Almería). Ars Praehistórica, 5/6: 49-58.

JORDÁ CERDA, F. (1964) – El arte rupestre paleolitico de la región cantabria: nueva secuencia cronológicocultural. Prehistoric art of the western Mediterranean and the Sahara (Pericot, L. & Ripoll P., E. eds). Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology 39, Wenner Gren, New York: 47-81.

MARTÍNEZ SANTA-OLALLA, J. (1941) – Neues über prähistorische Felsmalereien aus Frankreich, Spanien und Marokko. Jahrbuch für prähistorische und ethnographische Kunst, 25-26: 32-46.

JORGE, S.O., JORGE, V.O., DE ALMEIDA, C.A.F., SANCHES, M.J. & SOEIRO, M.T. (1981) – Gravuras rupestres de Mazouco (Freixo de Espada à Cinta). Arqueología, 3: 3-12.

MOHR, H. (1933) – Eine Ritzzeichnung und andere Höhlenfunde aus Steinhaus am Semmering. Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 63: 371-375.

KOHL, H. & BURGSTALLER, E. (1992) – Eiszeit in Oberösterreich: Paläolithikum-Felsbilder. Österreichisches Felsbildermuseum, Spital am Pyhrn.

MORI, F. (1974) – The earliest Saharan rock-engravings. Antiquity, 48: 87-92. MOLODIN, V.I. & CHEREMISIN, D.V. (1993) – Drevneïshie petroglify Altaya. Obozrenie, Novosibirsk.

KOZLOWSKI, J.K. (1992) – L’Art de la préhistoire en Europe orientale. CNRS, Paris. KUBAREV, V.D. (1997) – O petroglifakh Kalguty. Naskal’noe iskusstvo azii. Kyzbassvuzizdat, Kemerovo: 88-97.

MOLODIN, V.I. & CHEREMISIN, D.V. (1994) – Rock art of the Ukok Plateau. International Newsletter on Rock Art, 8: 10-12.

LEJEUNE, M. (1987) – L’art mobilier paléolithique et mésolithique en Belgique. Éditions Centre d’Études et de Documentation Archéologique, Treignes.

MUZZOLINI, A. (1990. The sheep in Saharan rock art. Rock Art Research, 7: 93-109. NOVGORODOVA, A.E. (1983) – Arshan-Khad — drevneïshiï pamyatnik izobrazitel’nogo iskusstva Vostochnoï Mongolii. Istoriya I kul’tura Tsentral’noï Azii.

LEJEUNE, M. (1997) – Analyse critique de l’art pariétal de la Grotte d’Escoural (Portugal): synthèse et problèmes. L’Anthropologie 101(1): 164-184. LORBLANCHET, M. (1989) – De l’art naturaliste des chasseurs de rennes à l’art géométrique du Mésolithique dans le Sud de la France. Almansor, Revista de Cultura, Colloquio Internacional de Arte Pré-Historica, Montemor O-Novo, Portugal 1988, 7: 95-124.

OKLADNIKOV, A.P. (1959) – Shishkinsie pisanitsi. Irkutsk. OLIVA, M. (1987) – Aurignacien na Moravě. Studie muzea kromeřížska. Kromeříž. OLIVA, M. (1989) – Mladopaleolitické nálezy z Mladečských jeskyní. Acta Musei Moraviae 74: 3554.

LORBLANCHET, M. and WELTÉ, A.-C. (1987) – L’art mobilier paléolithique du Quercy. Chronologie et thèmes. L’art des objets au Paléolithique, 1. L’art mobilier et son contexte (Clottes, J. ed.). Actes du Colloque de Foix-Le Mas d’Azil, 16-21 Nov. 1987, Ministère de la Culture: 31-64.

OLIVA, M. (1996) – Le Paléolithique supérieur de la république Tchèque (1991–1995). In M. Otte (Hrsg.), Le Paléolithique supérieur européen: bilan quinquennial 1991–1996, pp. 115-129. UISPP 1996, Kommission 8, Band 76, Liège.

MANDL, F. (1996) – Felsritzbilder auf dem Dachsteingebirge: Beiträge zur Datierung ostalpiner 78

R.G. BEDNARIK: TO BE OR NOT TO BE PALAEOLITHIC, THAT IS THE QUESTION

L’art des objets au Paléolithique, 1. L’art mobilier et son contexte (Clottes, J. ed.). Actes du Colloque de Foix-Le Mas d’Azil, 16-21 Nov. 1987, Ministère de la Culture: 189-202.

OTTE, M., YALCINKAYA, I., LEOTARD, J.-M., KARTAL, M., BAR-YOSEF, O., KOZLOWSKI, J., LÓPEZ BAYÓN, I. & MARSHACK, A. (1995) – The Epi-Palaeolithic of Öküzini cave (SW Anatolia) and its mobiliary art. Antiquity, 69: 931-944.

SCHEER, A. (1994. Neue jungpaläolithische Funde aus dem Hohle Fels bei Schelklingen, Alb-Donau-Kreis. Archäologische Ausgrabungen in Baden-Württemberg 1993: 24-27.

PENG FEI (1996) – Cave paintings in Yunnan, China. Rock Art Research, 13: 134-137. PERICOT, L. (1942. La Cueva del Parpalló. Instituto Diego Velázquez, Madrid.

SCHWEGLER, U. (1995) – Datierung von Felszeichnungen und Schalensteinen. Mitteilungen der Anisa, 16: 99-123.

PHILLIPS, F.M., FLINSCH, M., ELMORE, D. & SHARMA, P. (1997) – Maximum ages of the Côa valley (Portugal) engravings measured with chlorine36. Antiquity, 71: 100-104.

SOLODEYNIKOV, A. (2005) – Research on the recordingof rock paintings in the Kapova Cave Urals). International Newsletter on Rock Art 43: 10-14.

RAPOSO, J. (1995) – Avaliação de impacte ambiental e património cultural. O aproveitamento hidroeléctrico do RIO CÔA. AL-MADAN (II SÉRIE), 4: 104-106.

STEELMAN, K.L., ROWE, M.W., SHIROKOV, V.N., & SOUTHON, J.R. (2002) – Radiocarbon dates for pictographs in Ignatievskaya cave, Russia: Holocene age for supposed Pleistocene fauna. Antiquity 76: 3418.

RICHTER, D., J. WAIBLINGER, W.J. RINK and G.A. WAGNER (2000) – Thermoluminescence, electronspin resonance and 14C-dating of the late Middle and early Upper Palaeolithic site of Geissenklösterle Cave in southern Germany. Journal of Archaeological Science 27: 71-89.

SVOBODA, J. (2000) – The depositional context of the Early Upper Paleolithic human fossils of the Koněprusy (Zlatý Kůň) and Mladeč caves, Czech Republic. Journal of Human Evolution 38: 523-36.

RIPÓLL LOPEZ, S. & MUNCIO GONZÁLEZ, L.J. (1994) – Un grand ensemble d’art rupestre paléolithique de plein air dans la Meseta espagnole. International Newsletter on Rock Art, 7: 2-5.

SVOBODA, J. (2001) – Mladeč and other caves in the Middle Danube region: early modern humans, late Neandertals, and projectiles. Les premiers hommes modernes de la Péninsule Ibérique. Actes du Colloque de la Commission VIII de l’UISPP, pp. 45-60. Lisbon.

RIPOLL, S. (1997) – Comment on R. G. Bednarik, ‘Rock art as reflection of conditional visual perception’. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 7: 261.

SVOBODA, J.A., VAN DER PLICHT, H. & BALÁK, I. (2005) – Býcí Skála Cave, Czech Republic: radiocarbon dates of rock paintings. International Newsletter on Rock Art 43: 7-9.

RIPOLL PERELLO, E. (1964) – Problemas cronológicos del arte paleolitico. Prehistoric art of the western Mediterranean and the Sahara (Pericot, L. & Ripoll P., E. eds). Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology 39, Wenner Gren, New York: 83-100.

VILASECA, S. (1934) – L’Estació-taller de silex de Sant Gregori. Memoria de la Academie de Ciencias y Arte de Barcelona, 23(21): 415-439.

RIPOLL PERELLO, E. (1968) – Cuestiones en torno a la cronologia del arte post-paleolitico en la Peninsula Ibérica. Simposio International de Arte Rupestre Barcelona 1966 (Ripoll P., E. ed.). Diputación Provincial de Barcelona, Instituto de Prehistoria y Arqueologia, Barcelona: 165-192.

VILLAVERDE BONILLA, V. (1987) – Animation et scènes sur les plaquettes du Parpallo (Gandia, Espagne): quelques considérations sur la pictographie dans l’art mobilier. L’art des objets au Paléolithique, 1. L’art mobilier et son contexte (Clottes, J. ed.). Actes du Colloque de Foix-Le Mas d’Azil, 16-21 Nov. 1987, Ministère de la Culture: 227-241.

RIPOLL, S., MUÑOZ, F., PETTITT, P. & BAHN, P. (2004) – New discoveries of cave art in Church Hole (Creswell Crags, England). International Newsletter on Rock Art 40: 1-6.

ZILHÃO, J. (1995) – The age of the Côa valley (Portugal) rock-art: validation of archaeological dating to the Palaeolithic and refutation of ‘scientific’ dating to historic or proto-historic times. Antiquity, 69: 883901.

RIPOLL, S., MUÑOZ, F., PETTITT, P. & BAHN, P. (2005) – Reflections on a supposed controversy. International Newsletter on Rock Art 42: 21-23. ROSENFELD, A. (1997) – Comment on R. G. Bednarik, ‘Rock art as reflection of conditional visual perception’. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 7: 261-263.

ZILHÃO, J., AUBRY, T., CARVALHO, A.F., BAPTISTA, A.M., GOMES, M.V. & MEIRELES, J. (1997) – The rock art of the Côa valley (Portugal) and its archaeological context: first results of current research. Journal of European Archaeology, 5: 7-49.

ROUSSOT, A. (1987) – Art mobilier et art pariétal du Périgord et de la Gironde. Comparaisons stylistiques.

79

THE MARGOT CAVE (MAYENNE): A NEW PALAEOLITHIC SANCTUARY IN WEST FRANCE Romain PIGEAUD

USM 103, UMR 7194 CNRS, Département de Préhistoire du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Institut de Paléontologie Humaine, 1, rue René Panhard 75013 Paris, France E-mail: [email protected]

Stéphan HINGUANT

UMR 6566 – CReAAH du CNRS, Université de Rennes-1, INRAP

Joël RODET

UMR 6143 CNRS, Université de Rouen, France

Thibaut DEVIÈSE

Centre de Recherches et de Restauration des Musées de France, Paris, France

Clélia DUFAYET Inrap

Geoffroy HEIMLICH

Université de Toulouse II-Le Mirail, Université Libre de Bruxelles

Nicolas MÉLARD

Conservateur du Patrimoine, Direction Régionale des Affaires Culturelles de Picardie

Jean-Pierre BETTON

Association du Patrimoine d’Asnières, France

Pascal BONIC Equipe Spéléologique de l’Ouest, France Abstract: Since 1999, a research project called Les occupations paléolithiques de la vallée de l’Erve, directed by Jean-Laurent Monnier, is organized by the UMR 6566-CReAAH du CNRS, University of Rennes-1, to perform archaeological studies in the Erve valley, with special regard to cave art. There are now new archaeological researches led by Stéphan Hinguant which give us at last a reliable stratigraphic context and engravings sandstones for the upper palaeolithic period in the valley. Today, a new decorated cave has been discovered in Mayenne: the Margot Cave. This is the first decorated cave identified in Western France since 1967. Up to now, there are 101 representations known, including 7 horses, 8 woolly rhinoceroses and 5 birds. We attribute the positive and negative hands and the paintings to the Gravettian period, the engravings to the Solutrean and Magdalenian period. Keywords: Cave art, Mayenne-Sciences, Margot, Mayenne, Gravettian, Solutrean, horses, rhinoceroses, birds

PROBLEMATIC

CONTEXT

Everybody knows the cave art in the south of France. But few heard about decorated caves in the North of the Loire. Nevertheless, there are seven caves and rock shelters: Mayenne-Sciences (Mayenne), Gouy and Orival (Seine-maritime), Croc-Marin, Les Trois Pignons and Boutigny (Essonne), La Grande Grotte and La Grotte du Cheval at Arcy-sur-Cure (Yonne). Cave art in Northern Europe was enriched by the recent discoveries in England (Bahn, Pettit, Ripoll 2003), and in Germany (Conard, Uermann 2000). Today, a new decorated cave has been discovered in Mayenne: the Margot Cave. This is the first decorated cave identified in Western France since 1967. In this paper, we present the principal palaeolithic engravings and paintings discovered since July 2005.

The Margot cave is located in the “canyon” of Saulges (Mayenne, France), 250 kilometers at the South-West of Paris (figure 10.1). This valley is a karstic formation of 1.5 km in length, through which flows the Erve, a tributary of the Sarthe River. Until now, speleologists have checked out and explored 30 caves in this valley. Just ten of them were excavated at the end of the XIXth century and at the beginning of the XXth century. Neanderthal lived perhaps in the canyon, but the major resident was Homo sapiens. The Upper Palæolithic is especially represented by the Aurignacian (36,000-30,000 years ago) and the Solutrean (21,000-18,000 years ago). Gravettian (29,000-19,000 years ago) is possibly inexistant, but some Magdalenian artefacts (17,000- 9,000 years ago) are present (Allard 1983, Hinguant et al. à paraître). 81

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Fig. 10.1. Aerial view of the “canyon of Saulges”. The position of Margot and Rochefort caves is mentioned. Ph. H. Paitier Since 1999, a research project called Les occupations paléolithiques de la vallée de l’Erve, directed by JeanLaurent Monnier, is organized by the UMR 6566CReAAH du CNRS, University of Rennes-1, to perform archaeological studies in this valley, with special regard to cave art. There are now new archaeological researches led by Stéphan Hinguant which give us at last a reliable stratigraphic context for the upper palaeolithic period in the valley.

culture seems to be the most represented in the Rochefort Cave. The classical lithic corpus with its “pièces foliacées” is completed by remarkable remains of bone tissues coming from butchery activities, ornamental elements made from horns of cervus or made from shells. The solutrean in the Erve Valley is the most northern expression of this culture known up until now, absolutely out of the geographical area generally admitted (Hinguant, Biard à paraître; Hinguant, Biard et al. à paraître).

The great hall of the Rochefort Cave has been searched partially in the XIXth century and the gallery leading to the hall was searched in 1930. Today, there are new researches going further. Since 2001, these researches made sure that there are still in place the antique and protohistoric levels, but also levels from mesolithic and palaeolithic occupations. In these levels we identified one that is to be attributed to the Tardiglaciaire where the lithic and faunic corpus is not very abundant but its quality is quite exceptional for the region. It might be dated at the final azilien horizon, but you cannot exclude the presence of a late magdalenean. The remains of faunic bones seem to point out the last representatives of the cold fauna in western France, especially the reindeer and the rhinoceros. The presence of this animal must be linked to the engravings found in the Margot Cave. Since 2005 the researches are concerning the first solutrean level, this

Up until now, among the caves discovered by speleologists, only the cave of Mayenne-Sciences, discovered on june 11th 1967 by Roger Bouillon’s team, contained engravings and paintings (figure 10.2). Pigments from these paintings were analyzed by radiocarbon dating and yielded a date of about 25,000 BP, the gravettian era (Pigeaud, Valladas et al., 2003; Pigeaud, 2004, 2006). 1 This parietal art is associated to a poor portable art, mostly without any cultural attribution (Monnier et al., 2003; Pigeaud, 2003) (figure 10.3). Fortunately, since 2006, the team of Stéphan Hinguant discovered in a solutrean context, about 400 fragments of sheets of sandstone, with fragments of figurative engravings, including a plate with a head of a ibex. 1

24.220 ± 850 BP (Gif A 100 647) and 24.900 ± 360 BP (Gif A 100 645).

82

R. PIGEAUD ET AL.: THE MARGOT CAVE (MAYENNE): A NEW PALAEOLITHIC SANCTUARY IN WEST FRANCE

The Margot Cave is a major cavern if the Erve river karst network. Its left bank location opposes to the Rochefort Cave, little lesser in lenght, but with a very different underground organization right bank. The Margot Cave paper is not yet well understood, but its main function as a water output drainage located on a determined water level gives it a basic paper in the structuration and evolution of the canyon karst pattern (Rodet 2002). That is the second main cave, after the René-Paul Cave, into the underground drainage network. The morphological observations allowed to characterize two kinds of galleries: open passages and former infilled passages opened later by human works. Those last passages were infilled by an underground river with terrigeneous deposits and sealed under a calcitic groundfloor deposed at the end of the draining or after the water flood stopped.

Fig. 10.2. The main panel of Mayenne-Sciences. Ph. H. Paitier

In the Margot Cave, former archeological excavations and touristic management had destroyed calcite formation overlaying more or less thick terrigeneous infillings. The age of these floor formations is unknown but older than the human presence that demonstrates the early human had to crawl to access to the deeply passages. It is only into this first penetrable volume where the prehistoric artist may have explain himself, and where we have to search prehistoric testimonies. The 2005 discoveries testify to the early exploration of the cave in spite of the smallness of the narrow passages. The Margot Cave was first mentioned in 1706, but the touristic running began only in 1861. The site was excavated by many archaeologists between 1870 and 1936. Unfortunately, the paucity of the publications and scientific analyses restrict our knowledge of the archaeological context of the cave. All the cultures of the Upper Palaeolithic are represented, but the best documented are the Solutrean and the Magdalenian (Allard 1983). The cave was also converted for tourism. The ground was actually dug out and, consequently, the stalagmitic floor was broken around 1879. Today exploring the cave is rather easy but before the breaking of the natural ground and the installation of lighting, the Margot cave was dangerous. The visitor (modern and Palaeolithic) had to progress in narrow galleries (less than 1 m in height) before arriving in a comfortable chamber, the ‘‘Palais de Margot’’. Oral tradition and letters tell us about tragic accidents; this was confirmed by the discovery of modern skeletons (Davy de Virville 1924).

Fig. 10.3. The “galet au Glouton” (pebble with wolverine), discovered in the 19th century in the caves of the “canyon of Saulges”. Drawing R. Pigeaud THE MARGOT CAVE

METHODOLOGY

Since 2002, after the end of the study of MayenneSciences, we searched for new palaeolithic drawings in the “canyon”. We were convinced that Mayenne-Sciences was not isolated. We chose to inspect the Margot Cave, because this is the second biggest cave in the “canyon” (about 400 m in lenght). In July 2005, we found palæolithic drawings in this cave, which is yet visited since a long time.

The walls of the cavity are mostly invaded by modern graffiti, so it is very difficult to identify palaeolithic drawings. However, some graffiti are dated, and this information is precious, because we may thus evaluate the height of the bottom at the moment when the modern visitor graved or painted his name. For instance, a graffito 83

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Fig. 10.4. The Margot Cave. Decorated sectors. Topographical map with the position of the Palaeolithic representations. D: digital marks (handprints, finger…). R: gray marks. N: black marks. After ESGT, Equipe Spéléologique de l’Ouest complete ones. The first, second and third sectors correspond to the gallery where the circulation was rather tight, owing to the small height of the ceiling. Logically, the drawings in this sector are very schematic. We have today identified the body of an herbivore (n°1), devoid of his head, possibly the head of a bison (n°2) and fragments of a red painting of an aurochs, more visible with UV lighting (n°4). The fourth sector is a first rather wide room, where the Prehistoric man could stay upright. Two and more possible negative black handprints were identified (D1-3). From this room, a narrow turning passage leads to a “cat flap”, the entrance to a very small room, which we cannot enter without the help of a professional speleologist. On the left wall of the passage, we identified a brown painting of a possible Megaceros using magnificently the concretions of the wall in order to figure its horns (n°7) (figure 10.5). After this one, there is another brown and red painting of two unidentified animals (n°8 and 9), situated below two positive brown handprints (D4 and D5). The fifth sector now is a small gallery where the Prehistoric man had to crawl again. At the end of the sector, we noted a negative black handprint, with “fingers cut”, similar to those you can see in the Gargas cave (Hautes-Pyrénées) and the Cosquer cave (Bouches-du-Rhône) and classically attributed to the

dated from 1816 is today situated at 2.5 m in height, but just at 1.5 m if we suppose the flowstone is intact. Actually, the fragments of the flowstone are situated between 50 cm and 1 m above the modern circulation way. We supposed that the level of the bottom, that preceded the touristic adjustments, was the level of the bottom, where the prehistoric men circulated at the Upper palæolithic period. So we prospected above this level. And this strategy was successful: paintings and engravings were identified, some of them are situated in sections today preserved from the contacts with the modern visitors. But, at the principal sector where the most beautiful figures are represented, the flowstone and the actual level are jointed, and the tourists can put their hands on them. Our job consists now in noting down the right position of the palaeolithic artefacts, in making precise drawings, and in proposing solutions for their conservation. INVENTORY We may divide the cave in sectors. Up to now, there are 101 representations known, including 7 horses, 8 woolly rhinoceroses and 5 birds. We present only the most 84

R. PIGEAUD ET AL.: THE MARGOT CAVE (MAYENNE): A NEW PALAEOLITHIC SANCTUARY IN WEST FRANCE

Fig. 10.5. Probable Megaloceros n°7. Brown painting using the concretions of the wall to figure its antlers. a. Photo with a view distorted by the lack of distance. b. Photo arranged in orthogonal projection. Ph. H. Paitier. c. Drawing R. Pigeaud

Fig. 10.6. Negative black hand stencil D6, with “cut fingers”. Ph. H. Paitier and drawing R. Pigeaud Gravettian period (D6, figure 10.6). The sixth sector is a little room, where the Prehistoric man could stay upright again, like in the eighth and the ninth sectors. We have discovered a back of a horse engraved (n°22). The seventh sector is a gallery, 15 m in length, so called “Galerie du Chêne pétrifié”. Its walls left and right, are covered with palaeolithic drawings and fragments of red paintings. Among this, we identified a schematic femal figure (n°15) and three horses (n° 11, 12 and 16) (figures 10.7, 10.8 and 10.9). In the ninth sector, probably the end of the sanctuary, there is an anthropomorphic engraving (n°19), which represent a man, devoid of his head, running to the back of the gallery (figure 10.10).

In a small and winding gallery (the tenth sector) obliged to ramp again. Nevertheless, three woolly rhinoceroses (n°23, 32 and 33) were engraved on this wall by the Prehistoric man (figure 10.11). One of the rhinoceroses, the number 23, was probably engraved using a former representation of a bears’s head. This is actually the most northern figure of a rhinoceros in cave art. At the end of the gallery, we emerged in a little room, where we could stay upright again. Before us, a splendid panel was developped (figure 10.12). The principal figures are two engraved horses, probably stallions. One of them, at the left, seems to tense his neck and to neigh. This probable scene of ethology is treated with great realism in the purest magdalenian style (figure 10.13). Near the shoulder 85

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Fig. 10.7. Schematic female figure (type of Gönnersdorf-Lalinde?). Ph. H. Paitier and drawing R. Pigeaud

Fig. 10.8. Engraved horse n°11. Ph. H. Paitier and drawing G. Heimlich of the left horse, you can see the profile of the head of probably a bison (n°28), which uses the relief of a concretion in order to figure its forehead (figure 10.14).

the gravettian period. A pigment of a red line was scraped and identified to a charcoal by Eric Laval (Centre de recherches et de restauration des Musées de France, Musée du Louvre). We hope to get soon a radiocarbon dating. The schematic female figure (a headless human body) presents a torsion of the pelvis similar to the figures of Gönnersdorf-Lalinde. The context of this type of figures is predominantly delimited between the end of the Magdalenian period and the Epipaleolithic (Bosinski, 1991; Sentis, 2005), in other words between 13,000 and 9,000 BP. Horses and rhinoceroses actually present mostly naturalistic details: eyes, ears, nose, hairs, and they are correctly proportioned. This style is comparable with one of the head of ibex, exactly dated of the Solutrean

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS The positive and negative hands are traditionally attributed to the Aurignacian and the Gravettian period Lorblanchet 2007). In spite of their presence in decorated caves precisely dated of the Magdalenian period, such as in the cave of Combarelles 1 (Perigord), they can be used as a good chronological marker. For the paintings (figures 10.5 and 10.15), we reserved a chronologic attribution to 86

R. PIGEAUD ET AL.: THE MARGOT CAVE (MAYENNE): A NEW PALAEOLITHIC SANCTUARY IN WEST FRANCE

Fig. 10.9. Horse n°16, engraved partly on the calcite, partly on the bare rock. The dots indicate modern graffiti. The shaded zone indicates the bare rock area. Ph. H. Paitier, drawing T. Devièse and R. Pigeaud

Fig. 10.10. Anthropomorphic engraving n°19. Ph. H. Paitier and drawing A. Bénard period, according four radiocarbon dates of associated reed bones (Hinguant, Colleter, 2008). 2 We can therefore propose that the majority of engravings were made 21,000-19,000 BP ago.

CONCLUSIONS In a majority the decoration of the Margot Cave can reasonably be attributed to the Solutrean and the Magdalenian periods; so this cave can be correlated with some of the 12 caves known in Northern Europe, and firstly with the caves of Gouy and Orival, in Normandy.

2 19025 + 120 (GrA-39337), 19190 + 110 (GrA-39323), 19500 + 70 (GrA-38157) et 19600 + 80 (GrA-38159).

87

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Fig. 10.11. Engraved woolly rhinoceros n°23. Ph. H. Paitier.and drawing C. Dufayet

Fig. 10.12. Panel with the engraved horses n°26 and 27, the head of a bison n°28 and the head of a feline n°29. Drawing R. Pigeaud, E. Trélohan, L. Martin, G. Souquet

Fig. 10.13. The two engraved horses n°26 and 27. View of the heads. Photo H. Paitier radiocarbon date of 12,050 + 30 BP (Gif A-92346). Flints discovered at the entrance of the cave are attributed, according to different specialists, to the Magdalenian,

In these caves, we find similar schematic females of the type of Gönnersdorf-Lalinde (Martin, 2001). Furthermore, the dating of a bone excavated in Gouy yielded a 88

R. PIGEAUD ET AL.: THE MARGOT CAVE (MAYENNE): A NEW PALAEOLITHIC SANCTUARY IN WEST FRANCE

Fig. 10.14. Head of a probable bison (n°28), using the relief of a concretion of the wall in order to figure its forehead. Ph. H. Paitier, drawing L. Martin and R. Pigeaud

Fig. 10.15. Rhinoceros. Black painting. Drawing R. Pigeaud and E. Bougard 89

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Fig. 10.16. Geographical location of the decorated caves mentioned in this paper. The grey line shows the position of the coastline at the time of the Last Glacial Maximal. 1. Margot Cave. 2. Mayenne-Sciences. 3. Church Hole. 4. Robin Hood. 5. Orival. 6. Gouy. 7. Boutigny. 8. Croc-Marin. 9. Trois Pignons. 10. Grande Grotte. 11. Grotte du Cheval. 12. Geissenklösterle. 13. Hohle Fels. Map R. Pigeaud

Azilian or the Federmesser culture (Fosse, 1997). In England, according to recent dating and to the archaeological context (Pike, Gilmour, Pettit, Jacobi, Ripoll, Bahn, Muñoz, 2005), the art of the Church Hole and Robin Hood caves can be attributed to a similar chronological period, between 15,000 and 12,000 years ago. However, the culture there is identified as the Creswellian, a regional culture found at the end of the Upper Palaeolithic. In the Swabian Jura (Germany), the painted fragment of the cave of Hohle Fels was discovered in a level dated from 13,000 years ago, and attributed to the Magdalenian culture (Conard, Uermann 2000). Finally, in central France, in the Essonne department, rock shelters exist with paintings and engravings attributed to the same chronological period and estimated as being Magdalenian in style (Wagneur, 1992). Independently of the archaeological artefacts, only by considering dating and stylistic comparisons, this

forms a group of eight caves, which are connected to a similar symbolic territory. The most fascinating perspective for research is: how may we interpret the apparent melting-pot of the Magdalenian, Creswellian, Azilian and Federmesser cultures? Nevertheless, we must ask the important question about the influence of the south-western caves. It is obvious, for us, that the gravettian decoration of Mayenne-Sciences takes its inspiration from the Quercy (Cougnac, Pech-Merle). Could this conclusion be verified too for the Solutrean and the Magdalenian period, by the discoveries in the Margot Cave? The research is just beginning. Acknowledgments We are grateful to Philippe Auphan and Jean-Pierre Griveau, mayors of the Saulges village, Marcel Mottais 90

R. PIGEAUD ET AL.: THE MARGOT CAVE (MAYENNE): A NEW PALAEOLITHIC SANCTUARY IN WEST FRANCE

HINGUANT S., COLLETER R. dir. (2008) – Rapport intermédiaire de fouille dans la grotte Rochefort (Saint-Pierre-sur-Erve, Mayenne): campagne 2008 (1/3). Publ. UMR 6566 – CReAAH du CNRS, Rennes.

and Bernard Morice, the mayors of Saint-Pierre-sur-Erve and Thorigné-en-Charnie, Jacques Naveau and Anne Bocquet, departmental archeologues in the Conseil Général de Mayenne, Bernard Mandy and Guy San Juan, directors of the “Service régional de l’Archéologie des Pays de la Loire”, and Nelly Le Meur, in charge of the Mayenne Department in the same service, for the authorization to study the Margot cave. We would like to thank also for his kind assistance in providing access into the caves at the Erve valley, Karine Boëme, the cave’s manager. A friendly greeting to Jean-Pierre Griveau, for his generous hospitality, and to Hervé Paitier for his beautiful photographs. And many thanks to Estelle Bougard and Alfrieda Pigeaud who kindly corrected this text.

LORBLANCHET M. (2007) – A la recherche de l’art pariétal aurignacien du Quercy. In H. Floss et N. Rouquerol dir., Les chemins de l’Art aurignacien en Europe, Actes du colloque international Aurignac 2005, Aurignac, éditions Musée-forum Aurignac, cahier 4, p. 187-208. MARTIN, Y. (2001) – Authentification d’une composition graphique paléolithique sur la voûte de la grotte d’Orival (Seine-maritime). C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris 332, p. 209-216. MONNIER, HINGUANT, S., PIGEAUD, R., ARELLANO, A., MELARD, N., MERLE, D., MOLINES, N., MOULLE, P.-E. (2005) – Art mobilier et parures sur matières dures animales: collections anciennes et découvertes récentes dans le Paléolithique supérieur de la vallée de l’Erve (Mayenne). Mémoire de la Société Préhistorique Française XXXIX, p. 101-121.

References ALLARD, M. (1983) – État de la question sur le Paléolithique supérieur en Mayenne; les grottes de Thorigné-en-Charnie et de Saint-Pierre-sur-Erve. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 80, 1012, p. 322-328. BAHN, P., PETTIT, P., RIPOLL, S. (2003) – Discovery of Palaeolithic cave art in Britain. Antiquity 77, p. 227-231.

PIGEAUD, R. (2003) – Le ‘Galet au Glouton’ de la collection Chaplain-Duparc (Musée de Tessé, Le Mans, Sarthe): nouvelle étude. Paléo 15, p. 263-272.

BOSINSKI, G. (1991) – The representation of female figures in the Rhineland Magdalenian. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 57, p. 51-65.

PIGEAUD, R. (avec la collaboration de M. Bouchard et d’E. Laval) (2004) – La grotte ornée MayenneSciences (Thorigné-en-Charnie, Mayenne): un exemple d’art pariétal d’époque gravettienne en France septentrionale. Gallia Préhistoire 46, p. 1-154.

CONARD, N., UERMANN, H.-P. (2000) – New Evidence for Palaeolithic Rock Painting in Central Europe. Current Anthropology 41, p. 853-856.

PIGEAUD, R. (2006) – “La grotte ornée MayenneSciences (Thorigné-en-Charnie, Mayenne). Le Quercy dans l’Ouest de la France?” International Newsletter on Rock Art, n°44, p. 8-15, 8 fig. http://www. bradshawfoundation.com/inora/discoveries_44_2.html

DAVY DE VIRVILLE, A. (1924) – Les grottes de Saulges. Aperçu historique et description d’une nouvelle salle dans la Cave à Margot, Bulletin de Mayenne-Sciences, année 1923, p. 48-70.

PIGEAUD, R. (2008) – Les cavernes vagabondes. Mobilité des thèmes, mobilité des styles. In José Gomez de Soto (Dir.), La notion de mobilité dans les sociétés préhistoriques, Actes du 130e Congrès des Sociétés Historiques et Scientifiques, “Voyages et Voyageurs”, La Rochelle, 18-23 Avril 2005, p. 19-37, 19 fig., 27 réf. bibliographiques. Article en ligne: http://cths.fr/ed/edition.php?id=4257

FOSSE, G. (1997) – Le Paléolithique récent et final du bassin de la basse-Seine (Yvelines-Eure-Seine Maritime), in J.-P. Fagnart, A. Thévenin (dir.), Le Tardiglaciaire en Europe du Nord-Ouest, Paris, Ed. CTHS, p. 233-244. HINGUANT, S., BIARD, M. (à paraître) – Le Paléolithique supérieur ancien de la vallée de l’Erve (Mayenne): un état des connaissances. In P. Bodu, L. Chehmana, G. Dumarcay, L. Klaric, L. Mevel, C. Peschaux, S. Soriano, N. Teyssandier coord., Le Paléolithique supérieur ancien de l’Europe du NordOuest, Actes de la séance de la Société Préhistoire Française, Musée de Sens (Yonne), 15-18 Avril 2009.

PIGEAUD, R. (à paraître) – L’Ouest: carrefour ou périphérie ? Observations sur l’art pariétal et mobilier du Paléolithique supérieur ancien des “grottes de Saulges”. In P. Bodu, L. Chehmana, G. Dumarcay, L. Klaric, L. Mevel, C. Peschaux, S. Soriano, N. Teyssandier coord., Le Paléolithique supérieur ancien de l’Europe du Nord-Ouest, Actes de la séance de la Société Préhistoire Française, Musée de Sens (Yonne), 15-18 Avril 2009.

HINGUANT, S., BIARD, M., MOULLE, P.-E., PIGEAUD, R. (à paraître) – La Vallée de l’Erve (Mayenne): présence solutréenne au nord de la Loire, in M. Almeida, T. Aubry et B. Walter coord., Actes du colloque international “Le Solutréen… 40 ans après Smith’66”, SERAP Vallée de la Claise, Preuilly-surLoire, 28 oct-31 nov. 2007.

PIGEAUD, R., HINGUANT, S., RODET, J., BETTON, J.-P., BONIC, P. (à paraître) – A l’Ouest, du nouveau: la grotte habitat Rochefort et la grotte ornée Margot (Mayenne). International Newsletter on Rock Art. 91

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Creswell Crags, UK. Journal of Archaeological Science 32, p. 1649-1655.

PIGEAUD, R., RODET, J., DEVIESE, T., BETTON, J.P., BONIC, P. (2006) – Palaeolithic Cave art in Northern Europe: an exceptional discovery. Antiquity, vol. 80, n°309, Septembre 2006. http://antiquity.ac.uk/ ProjGall/pigeaud/index.html

RODET, J. (2002) – Le karst, milieu conservateur, in J.C. Miskovsky (dir.), Géologie de la Préhistoire, Paris, Géopré, p. 167-187.

PIGEAUD, R., VALLADAS, H., ARNOLD, M., CACHIER, H. (2003) – Deux dates carbone 14 en spectrométrie de masse par accélérateur (SMA) pour une représentation pariétale de la grotte ornée Mayenne-Sciences (Thorigné-en-Charnie, Mayenne): émergence d’un art gravettien en France septentrionale? C.R. Palevol, 2, p. 161-168.

SENTIS, J. (2005) – Les silhouettes féminines stylisées peuvent-elles caractériser des territoires culturels?, in J. Jaubert, M. Barbaza (dir.), Territoires, déplacements, mobilité, échanges durant la Préhistoire, Paris: Ed. du CTHS, p. 411-420. WAGNEUR, C. and J. (1992) – Fontainebleau Rock Art: An Oberview, in M. Lorblanchet (ed.), Rock Art in the Old World, New Dehli: IGNCA Rock Art Series 1, p. 519-536.

PIKE, A.W.G., GILMOUR, M., PETTIT, P., JACOBI, R., RIPOLL, S., BAHN, P., MUÑOZ, F. (2005) – Verification of the age of the Palaeolithic cave art at

92

FLUTED ANIMALS IN THE ZONE OF CREVICES, GARGAS CAVE, FRANCE Kevin SHARPE Leslie Van GELDER

College of Education, Walden University, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Box 111 Glenorchy 9350, New Zealand [email protected] Abstract: The (assumedly Paleolithic) finger flutings in Gargas Cave, France, have been known since 1907. Many are in poor condition, but in all they are extensive. This paper reports on a re-examination of some of them, namely the supposed animal figures drawn with one finger and found in the Zone of Crevices, comparing the studies by Breuil and Barrière with the actual drawings. Results point to the inaccuracy of the previous studies, suggesting that many of the figures probably do not depict animals as previously published. These figures and the other flutings in the cave require further study. Key words: Claude Barrière, Henri Breuil, finger flutings, Gargas Cave, prehistoric art

Gargas Cave lies in the Commune of Aventignan in the Department of the Hautes Pyrenees, and is most wellknown for its 250 hand stencils. It is also celebrated for its mazes of engravings, and contains in its Zone of Crevices a very large area of what we call ‘finger flutings’ (Sharpe and Van Gelder 2006a) – lines drawn with fingers in soft clay or moonmilk. This paper concerns a portion of the corpus of flutings in the cave.

Pena, and Clotilde de Santa Isabel (Breuil 1952; Breuil and Obermaier 1912; Cartailhac and Breuil 1907; 1910). After several years of research, Claude Barrière (1976; see also his 1977; 1984) published his 1976 monograph on the parietal ‘art’ of Gargas, the second comprehensive study and the most definitive work to date on the subject. Though usually considered Aurignacian, Gargas’s flutings have received no absolute dating. A C14 dating of bone slivers found in the wall of the cave beside a hand print gives 26,860 ± 460 years (Clottes et al. 1992: 273), but no one has established that this also pertains to the flutings.

The lower cavern of the cave is an arched, almost straight gallery, about 140 meters long and 25 meters wide, which divides into three chambers. The Zone of Crevices lies in the third of these (we choose the English word ‘crevices,’ a valid translation of the French, ‘les crevasses,’ because it more aptly describes these ceiling features than does ‘crevases’). Chamber III extends approximately 60 meters and grows increasingly broader until it concludes at about 40 meters wide. The floor, which runs almost level, remains dry for the most part and the pools that can form on it spread to a maximum of about two meters in diameter. The ceiling hangs low and forms two distinct areas. The left side is level but its surface is rough, and an unbroken curve connects it to the chamber wall. In contrast, a high fissure with ascending chimneys runs along the straight right hand wall. The ceiling in between is broken by roughly parallel crevices of different widths that run across the gallery at a slightly oblique angle to its line; they start from fissures in the rock and occasionally widen out into large domes. Soft clay (which may have come down the high chimneys), occasionally calcitic, frequently covers the sides of these crevices, which rise roughly vertically and often bear finger flutings.

Breuil writes (sometimes with Cartailhac and sometimes with Obermaier): A very large surface of the ceiling of the Chamber of Crevices…is coated with clay. On more than 100 square meters, this coating is completely covered with particular kind of decoration mainly comprising interlaced, intertwined flowing lines of an unpredictable and irregular form, traced by human fingers held together or separated. These strange images often continue on spaces so wide that a person could only create them by changing position several times (Cartailhac and Breuil 1907: 215-216; 1910: 139-140; KS transl.). These lines constitute a form of fluting. Breuil supposes (1952: 256-257) their Aurignacian origin and writes: ‘such drawings have now been found in so many places… that their antiquity and their [precedence] over all other techniques are no longer questioned.’ He then introduces the fluted drawings that form the subject of this paper:

FINGER FLUTINGS AND GARGAS

Some animal figures (bison), very roughly drawn in clay, are visible among and framed by [these flutings]. These animals are reduced to elemental lines, but their

In 1907, Breuil and Cartailhac identified and then investigated Gargas’s finger flutings, recognizing their similarity to those in the caves of Altamira, Hornos of 93

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

significance is not in doubt. [Like the other flutings,] they are of the same brown [oxidized] color as is the unmarked surface, obviously different from the color of the modern names written into it. Concretions frequently cover these old features, and often the surface of the clay has undergone a particular modification to give it a grainy appearance that affects the old drawings but not the modern names (Cartailhac and Breuil 1907: 215-216; 1910: 139-140; KS transl.).

symbols in them, or to insist that a mathematical logic determines their position in the cave (e.g., Leroi-Gourhan 1967). It also means the avoidance of terms like ‘macaroni’ and ‘meanders’ to describe flutings unless justified for a particular panel (Sharpe and Van Gelder 2006c). The lines must speak for themselves and yield data without direct attempts at interpretation of form. RESULTS

His 1952 book adds a little to this description:

The Zone of Crevices takes up over half of Chamber III and flutings cover much of its soft surfaces. All the animal figures in the Zone, Barrière writes (1976: 151), ‘have been drawn with one finger. Most of them are [bovids]; in several instances a tuft of beard or humped back enables them to be identified as bison.’ He adds that the heads are drawn very schematized, in profile and, being monodigital, they readily stand out from the polydigital flutings (Clottes 1973: 481).

the first animal figures drawn with a finger...[are] very primitive but already vigorously naturalistic in style….Some…are very large, but…have been so disfigured by modern scribbling that I had to give up the idea of tracing them.…[Those remaining are] clearly recognizable and some [have] a remarkable [form] comparable to those at Altamira, Clotilde, etc., made in the same technique (1952: 254-255, 257).

Below are the published figures that Barrière numbers, with some gaps, 1 to 24 (we have retouched all of Barrière’s drawings for clarity). He omits some of the numbers, and we omit others because they do not refer to monodigital flutings in the Zone of Crevices. We arbitrarily sampled his figures for detailed investigation and below present the results of this work plus his and Breuil’s descriptions of all the mondigital figures in the Zone.

Gargas contains, writes Barrière (1976: 14), ‘countless [fluted] drawings, especially in the section of the “[Crevices].”‘ Finger drawing…is used on surfaces covered with soft clay or chalk in a state of clayey decomposition (mond-milch [moonmilk])….It is called monodigital when a single finger was used; this is true of the animal figures in the region of the [Crevices] (1976: 368). The Zone of the Crevices is limited to the right half of Chamber III and in and among its many polydigital [flutings] several figures can be distinguished. These are always made with a single finger, especially represent bovids (bulls and bisons), and depict a simple sinuous contour in frontal aspect with the animal more or less complete. Seventeen figures were noted (1984: 518; KS transl.). [Note that he actually published more than 17 of these figures.]

No. 1 (see Figure 11.1). We could not find Barrière’s (1976: 151, 152 [fig. 40, 1], 153 [pl. 36, 1]) Bovid 1 where his map indicates its location, or anywhere else. He writes (Barrière 1976: 151): ‘No. 1. The head of a [bovid], facing left. The horn which curves forward, the head and the neck are drawn in a single line, a line joined on to this gives the rest of the neck; two lines in front of the horn and running parallel with it could be first attempts which failed, or a second horn. 25 cm.’ We are skeptical that this cluster depicts a bovid or anything else that can be recognized now.

We revisited the animal flutings isolated by Breuil and Barrière as part of our research program to examine Paleolithic lines drawn by fingers. Our published results to date include descriptions of our methodologies (Sharpe and Van Gelder 2004; 2006a-c) and analyses of the Desbordes Panel in Chamber A1 of Rouffignac Cave that show young children fluted a significant potion of the panel. Our methodology allows inferences about the gender, age group, height and other personal attributes of the fluters, plus the catalogue of flutings from each individual and a determination of the number of fluters at a site. One of the main aspects of the methodology is the repeated examination of a panel. This especially led us to re-examine the animal figures to ascertain the viability of Breuil’s and Barrière’s conclusions about them. Following our method of study, the investigator ought not to hold in mind concepts and interpretations that might lead to reading them into the flutings; thus, for instance, we do not try to see animal or human forms or recognizable

No. 5 (see Figure 11.2). Barrière writes (1976: 151; see also 153, pl. 36, 2): ‘a head facing left, round, one horn joined to it, the nostril roughly modeled by tearing off pieces from the layer of clay (now calcitic), the eye created by a heavy impression made with the tip of the finger. 20 cm.’ An examination of the original drawing reveals the following (see Figure 11.3). Barrière’s rendition of this figure includes a three-fingered unit on the right. Since he determines the animal drawings by their being monodigital, he should have ignored three-fingered units, including this one, unless good non-interpretative reasons exist for their inclusion. The finger points for the ‘eye’ and ‘nostril’ add to the sense of this depicting an animal, but another point lies just to the left of the ‘nostril.’ This suggests, assuming one person made all the points, that 94

K. SHARP & L. VAN GELDER: FLUTED ANIMALS IN THE ZONE OF CREVICES, GARGAS CAVE, FRANCE

the fluter may not have intended the ‘nostril’ and ‘eye’ points as such but either used pre-existing points to help create an animal impression or that we read them into the ‘animal.’ Note that two finger points make the ‘nostril’ and that a fingerprint has been left in the clay here. The ‘horn’ comprises a short single line that ends 15 mm before the ‘head’ and does not extend further left as Barrière’s drawing suggests. Two lines lay a little to the left and a little lower than it but, by their patination, appear modern. The ‘head’ line on the right does not appear to continue with that of the ‘jaw’ (the two lines appear to be separate flutings and hence one should not draw them, as Barrière does, with open ends). These matters result in a cluster of lines that less likely depicts an animal than Barrière suggests, but still may do so. No. 8 (see Figure 11.4). Breuil writes (1952: 251, fig. 276): ‘Bison outlined on clay…, covered by stalagmite. Note “iron wire” style [the term he uses for the monodigital fluted animals, fairly complete or complete in outline], quite conspicuous here, with a single horn. Length: 0.80 m.’ Barrière also writes: Fig. 11.1. Barrière’s drawing of his Bovid 1

A bison facing left….Length 55 cm….It was deliberately damaged by a ‘tourist’ during the summer of 1972. The figure was made with two lines, each one starting from a horn, of which one gives the outline of the forequarters, from the horn to the leg, while the other runs from the second horn to the tail, with a line joined on to form the hind leg; the horns are thus joined to the outline and shown in ‘normal’ perspective (1976: 151; see also 154, fig. 41; 155, pl. 37).

Fig. 11.2. Barrière’s (1976: 152, fig. 40, 2) drawing of his Animal 5

Fig. 11.4. Barrière’s drawing of Barrière’s Bison 8 Barrière later writes (1984: 522) that the head of the bison was irreparably damaged between his visits, but, elsewhere he shares (1984: 517; KS transl.) that ‘the head of a beautiful fluted bison was erased after 1976,’ versus

Fig. 11.3. A conservative rendering of Barrière’s Animal 5 based on an examination of the drawing itself 95

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Fig. 11.6. Barrière’s drawing of what he calls Bison 9 Fig. 11.5. A conservative rendering of Barrière’s Bison 8 based on an examination of the drawing itself the pre-1972 date he earlier gave. Conservation and protection in the cave are required, not only for the hand stencils, but for the engravings (see, e.g., Begouën and Breuil 1933) and flutings. An examination of the original of No. 8 reveals a more complex and less convincing image (see Figure 11.9) than the one Barrière drew, even when ignoring the damaged portion at the bottom of the horns. He appears to have overlooked two lines in the horns, taken a calcitic deposit as a hump on the head, rendered a part of a natural line as a drawn line under the chin, made a series of lines hair on the belly though drawn with quite a different character. Further, he selected one of a pair of faint fluted lines as the inside of the rear leg, a faint scratched line as the outside of the rear leg, imaginatively connected and extended two separate lines to form a back, and incorporated a wide finger or stick unit of two lines under the back as part of the composition. The actual monodigital drawn image (less the damaged area), 60 centimeters wide and 45 centimeters high, looks more like in Figure 11.9.

Fig. 11.7. A conservative rendering of Barrière’s Bison 9 based on an examination of the drawing itself

No. 9 (see Figure 11.6). Barrière writes: Large head, neck, and withers of a bison, facing right. Length 1.30 metres. One line gives a horn, the hump and the beginning of the back, another line gives the other horn, the head and the neck. Horns in semitwisted perspective, cutting the outline, skull open (1976: 151; see also 156, fig. 42; 157, pl. 38).

Fig. 11.8. Barrière’s drawing of his Bison 10 No. 10 (see Figure 11.8). Barrière writes (1976: 151; see also 158, fig. 43, 1; 159, pl. 39): ‘rough drawing of a hump joined to a horn and the beginnings of a forehead, belonging to a bison…, with a large horizontal line made with the finger across it. Length 55 cm.’ We have not examined this figure but it does not obviously represent a bison.

An examination of the original reveals (see Figure 11.7) that the line of the bison on the far left is a crack, the split at the back actually comprises a unit of two lines, the back line is separate from the left horn, the right horn starts futher to the left than Barrière suggests, and no obvious single lines exist like the one he indicates under the chin. The actual monodigital drawn image looks more like in Figure 11.7. This cluster may still represent a bison.

No. 11 (see Figure 11.9). Barrière writes: 96

K. SHARP & L. VAN GELDER: FLUTED ANIMALS IN THE ZONE OF CREVICES, GARGAS CAVE, FRANCE

Fig. 11.9. Barrière’s drawing of his Bison 11 a bison facing right: horns in normal perspective intersecting the line of the hump and the back, and also the line of the forehead, a tuft of beard joined on to the outline. The backward-sloping line of the hump was done by hatching. The back, together with the [polydigital] drawing which obliterates the bison, disappears to the left under a thick layer of calcite. Length 50 cm (1976: 151; see also 158, fig. 43, 2; 160, pl. 40).

Fig. 11.10. Barrière’s drawing of his Bison 15

We have not examined this figure, but it may well represent a bison. Nos. 12 and 12bis. Barrière writes (1976: 136; see also pl. 35): ‘No. 12….Some curves in the [flutings] suggested to Breuil the head of a species of [bovid]: this is possibly so. Nearby, on the roof (12bis), there is a work of the same type.’ We have not examined these figures though, given Barrière’s reticence to agree with Breuil, they may not represent bovids. No. 13. Breuil considers Barrière’s No. 13 a tectiform, as seen in caves in the Vézère Valley, those in Rouffignac Cave being good examples (Barrière 1982). But Barrière writes (1976: 136; see also 146, pl. 33, 1): ‘No. 13 suggests the outline of a tectiform, but is not one in my opinion. Length 75 cm, height 30 cm.’ Looking at Barrière’s photogaph of it, we agree with his judgment.

Fig. 11.11. Barrière’s drawing of his Animal 16 form of the rock.’ Besides the fact that only monodigital flutings should form part of the figure, judging from Barrière’s drawing, this cluster does not produce an obvious rendition of a goat – with or without the mono- or polydigital flutings.

No. 15 (see Figure 11.10). Barrière writes: A bison facing right: drawn in two lines running in opposite directions: the hump and the back, and a single horn intersecting the bearded head. Heavy lines made with the fingers and set either straight or sloping left, form a separate area covering a large part of the figure. Length 60 cm (1976: 151; see also 161, fig. 44; 162, pl. 41).

No. 17 (see Figure 11.12). Breuil writes (1952: 251, fig. 275): ‘Bison outlined on the clay….On the left, the head and the horns, the legs are merely sketched. 1 m.’ Barrière also writes: a large figure 1 meter long, facing right (toward the cave exit) usually taken to be a bison. A line starts from the withers and forms the back, the hindquarters and the tail which is set high at an angle; a second line which obliterates the first at the withers forms the horn, head, beard and chest. But looking at it the other way round, the hindquarters and tail are used again as the hump of a bison outline with a single horn intersecting the line of the head (1976: 164-165; see also pl. 42).

We have not examined this figure in detail. No. 16 (see Figure 11.11). Barrière writes (1976: 136; see also 147, fig. 39, 1; 148, p1. 34, 1): ‘The contours of a rock recall the profile of a species of goat. It has been striped with rectilinear and parallel [flutings], then impressed with a design in [mono- or polydigital] lines which seem to complete the form evoked by the natural 97

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Fig. 11.12. Barrière’s drawing of his Double Bison 17 Fig. 11.14. A conservative rendering of Barrière’s Bison 18 based on an examination of the drawing itself under it. Similarly, the short vertical line Barrière draws above this leg appears part of another unit of fluted lines within the right hand side of the bison. No. 19 (see Figure 11.15). Barrière writes: a strange figure…[vigorously] drawn with one finger. It can only be the head of [a bovid] because of the horn and the narrow muzzle. The horn and head are in a single continuous line, the line of the neck is separate, the eye was made by pressing with the fingertip, the nostril similarly (?). The whole thing is heavily covered with calcite. Length of the head 20 cm (1976: 164; see also 167, pl. 44). Fig. 11.13. Barrière’s drawing of his Bison 18 We have not examined this figure. No. 18 (see Figure 11.13). Breuil writes (1952: 251, fig. 274) ‘Small bison….Very rudimentary figure. Approximate length: 0.60 m.’ Barrière writes (1976: 164; see also 166, pl. 43): ‘a bison facing left; length 55 cm. One line forms the horn intersecting the hump and the back, a line joined on to the horn forms the head and chest; a third, joined on to this, forms the two spaced forelegs, which are short and pointed, and the beginning of the belly.’ An examination of the original drawing reveals the object in Figure 11.14. The horn comprises two lines, perhaps representing two horns. Barrière’s eye line is not obvious in the original, whereas the fluter could have easily made an obvious line or finger point here. The junction of the neck and the chest comprises the end of one line and the beginning of another. The figure may not include the line Barrière draws as meeting the chest, or the one he mistakenly draws as the top of the left leg because they appear to have been drawn earlier than the bison. The right line of the right leg is separate from and over the left hand line of that leg. The two lines Barrière draws to the left and right of the right hand line of the right leg appear unrelated to the bison and parts of another unit of lines

Fig. 11.15. Barrière’s drawing of his Bovid 19 An examination of the original drawing reveals the following. Between the two finger points in the ‘muzzle’ of the ‘bovid’ lies a third finger point, rendering Barrière’s interpretation of the two as ‘eye’ and ‘nostril’ 98

K. SHARP & L. VAN GELDER: FLUTED ANIMALS IN THE ZONE OF CREVICES, GARGAS CAVE, FRANCE

doubtful. In fact, in the immediate neighborhood of No. 19 lie 12 finger points. (‘Between points 19 and 20,’ Barrière also writes [1976: 136; see also 144, pl. 31], ‘is an area of about one square metre riddled with shallow depressions made with the fingertips.’) The three fluted lines on the ‘neck’ of the ‘bovid’ constitute a unit of three and hence he should not have counted them as part of the construction. The line above the ‘eye’ is one of 11 short single finger flutings in this immediate neighborhood and therefore not definitely part of the construction. The single line across the end of the ‘muzzle’ is a portion of a line that begins (or ends) just above the first bend in the profile line and runs under it; if considered part of the construction, the image of a ‘bovid’ vanishes so he should have ignored it. In fact, like the single line to the left of the profile, this line is one of several separate mondigital units fluted down this crevice. Nothing convincingly suggests the left one as part of the ‘bovid’ construction. The short line merging into it about a third of the way down its length is hard to distinguish on the original; Barrière may have drawn a portion of the calcite prolific in this vacinity. The final lines in his drawing of the profile may depict one of a unit of three that here meet the profile line, and hence he should have ignored it. The net result of this critique leaves only the strongest aspect of Barrière’s ‘animal’ drawing, namely (most of) the profile line. This line by itself may not suffice to call this a depiction of a bovid or anything else.

parts of two lines joined with hatching on Barrière’s drawing; the juncture lies under calcite and difficult to distinguish. Drawing the probably accurate paths of these two lines (see Figure 11.17) causes the back of the bison to disappear. This examination leaves only the horns, eye, and the top and bottom of the muzzle. The cluster may, however, still represent an animal.

Fig. 11.17. A conservative rendering of Barrière’s Bison 20 based on an examination of the drawing itself, including the two lines Barrière takes to form the back, but which really do not

No. 20 (see Figure 11.16). Barrière writes (1976: 164; see also 168, pl. 45): ‘Part of it has become heavily covered with calcite. A bison, its head with a hump, facing left, a single horn whose base intersects the head and is obliterated by the eye which is oval and very large. Length 40 cm.’

Fig. 11.18. Barrière’s drawing of his No. 21, what he thinks may be a bovid (left) and a pair of horns (right) Fig. 11.16. Barrière’s drawing of his Bison 20 No. 21 (see Figure 11.18). Barrière writes (1976: 164; see also fig. 45; pl. 46): ‘The small head of [a bovid] (?), facing left, a horn intersecting the outline, eye made with the fingertip. Length 15 cm. Obliterated by a [polydigital] drawing. Below this, a line drawn with one finger shows a pair of horns (?).’ Though we have not examined these drawings, Barrière’s interpretations are probably not sustainable.

The first thing to note about this figure from an examination of it is the large number of lines here and that distinguishing a bison requires excluding almost all the other markings, including several monodigital flutings. The eye appears to comprise finger points. Two horns exist, the right of which Barrière has drawn and the left lies under calcite and hard to see. The back comprises 99

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

No. 24 (see Figure 11.21). Barrière writes (1976: 164; see also pl. 48): ‘a long line made with one finger gives the outline of the horn head and neck of [a bovid or a cervid]. Length 60 cm.’ This does not convincingly represent anything. We have not examined the original drawing.

Fig. 11.19. Barrière’s drawing of his Animal 22, what he thinks may be a goat or a deer No. 22 (see Figure 11.19). Barrière writes (1976: 136; see also 147, fig. 39, 2; 148, pl. 34, 2): ‘One finds here a pattern which similarly, though less clearly, recalls a species of goat or deer.’ Though we have not examined this drawing either, we anticipate that Barrière’s identification may not stand. In addition, the fluings are polydigital. No. 23 (see Figure 11.20). Barrière writes:

Fig. 11.21. Barrière’s drawing of his Animal 24, what he thinks may be a bovid or a cervid

Indeterminate animal’s head, facing right. Two ‘horns,’ a long thin muzzle with a spatulate end, humped neck. Made with three lines: one for the hump, one for one horn and the corner of the jaw, the other for the front horn the muzzle and the neck. Length 60 cm (1976: 164; see also pl. 47).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS Not all the mondigital flutings or mondigitally fluted clusters in the Zone of Crevices represent animals or might reasonably represent animals, despite Breuil’s and Barrière’s observations. To summarize our results: • we were unable to locate No. 1 (it does not appear where Barrière’s map suggests); and • we doubt Breuil or Barrière’s interpretations as to what many of the figures represent (specifically Nos. 1, 10, 12, *12bis, *13, *16, 19, 21, 22, 23, and 24 [*Barrière also appears to question Breuil’s identification of these figures as representing an animal or tectiform]). The remaining eight (Nos. 5, 8, 9, 11, 15, 17, 18, and 20) may well be drawings of animals as Barrière published them or as we modified his drawings (we altered five of them, all significantly, Nos. 5, 8, 9, 18, and 20). We have not examined the three (Nos. 11, 15, and 17) of the eight figures not in the last list. This means that, by our estimation and in relation to the figures we have examined, none of the figures Barrière or Breuil say

Fig. 11.20. Barrière’s drawing of his Animal 23, what he thinks may be a bovid Again, we have not examined this figure but, judging by Barrière’s drawing and photograph, this does not convince. 100

K. SHARP & L. VAN GELDER: FLUTED ANIMALS IN THE ZONE OF CREVICES, GARGAS CAVE, FRANCE

constitute animal drawings as they publish them are exactly what they claim.

techniques in Rouffignac Cave in the Dordogne, France (e.g., Sharpe and Van Gelder 2004; 2006b-c; To Appear), will publish further work resulting from these investigations and from the extended work in Gargas (Sharpe and Van Gelder In Prep.), and plan further work in Rouffignac and elsewhere.

It would appear that Breuil and Barrière overstretched their imaginations. Barrière, given the notation on some of his figures, apprarently worked from photographs for at least some of the figures and thus uncritically included natural lines or finger dots that appear frequently in the local area. In some occasions, the lines he drew do not really exist.

Despite our critique of Barrière’s drawings and analyses of the figures, we want to acknowledge the tremendous patience he showed to look at this very large area in detail, to search out single lines, to try to make sense of them as animals or known patterns (or symbols), and then to publish all of this methodically and comprehensively so that researchers after him have something solid with which to start their own work.

He also seems to have made two erroneous assumptions: that all monodigital lines represent or are parts of representations of animals, and that the monodigital fluters mainly aimed to draw animals. In his summary of the flutings in Gargas, Barrière writes (1976: 136): ‘A certain number made with one finger and generally found in an isolated position…[and] which always show animal figures[,] are in contrast with the others.’ It would appear that Breuil and others after him, including Barrière, assumed – once they noticed they could interpret as animals the monodigital fluted clusters they observed in the Zone of Crevices – that all monodigital flutings in the Zone depict animals. Their minds appeared set to see as many animals or signs or symbols as they could, especially in the monodigital flutings. But they were wrong. We cannot as yet say why only some of the monodigital clusters depict animals and others do not, though different fluters could have created the different types. Perhaps in the Zone the fluters only made animals with one finger rather than with sweeps of more than one, but this does not mean all monodigital flutings in the Zone represent animals.

Acknowledgements We wish to thank those who have helped in this research: Conservation Régionale de l’Archéologie, Toulouse, and the Mayor and Commune of Aventignan for permission to work in Gargas Cave; Marie-Paule Abadie and Nicolas Ferrer for discussions and guiding us in the Cave; Union Institute & University, for financial support through its faculty research grants; Robert Bednarik, Jean Clottes, Francesco d’Errico, Pascal Foucher and Cristina San Juan, Sandor Gallus,* Michel Lorblanchet, Alexander Marshack,* and Hallam Movius Jr.* for discussions and support (*now deceased). References

These conclusions require a re-examination of Barrière’s (1976) and other similar stylistic typologies of the fluted figures.

BARRIÈRE, C. (1976) – L’art pariétal de la Grotte de Gargas: Palaeolithic art in the Grotte de Gargas. Transl. W.A. Drapkin. BAR Supplementary Series, no. 14; Mémoires de l’Institut d’Art Préhistorique de Toulouse, no. 3. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.

Further, the scholar need not theorize about more ‘evolved’ fluters who intended animals rather than scribbles, and with this separate the mondigital fluters from the polydigital ones. This constitutes an imposition by the researcher desiring to see as much ‘evolved’ or ‘sophisticated’ activity here as possible, and it provides a good example of the reigning interpretative paradigm overreaching itself by misinterpreting the marks, or creating for them a context which probably does not apply. Scholars require much more data before offering any tenable suggestions as to the fluters’ intentions and meaning, or as to the significance of the flutings in Gargas for human evolution.

BARRIÈRE, C. (1977) – A propos des mains de Gargas. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française: Comptes Rendus des Séances Mensuelles. 74:8 (November), p. 226-227. BARRIÈRE, C. (1982) – L’art parietal de Rouffignac: La grotte aux cent mammouths. Paris: Picard. BARRIÈRE, C. (1984) – Grotte de Gargas. In LeroiGourhan, A. ed. L’art des cavernes: atlas des grottes ornées paléolithiques Françaises. Paris: Ministère de la Culture, Direction du Patrimoine, Sous-Direction de l’Archéologie, p. 514-522.

The above type of study is not the only objective of our research into flutings. With the methodology we have developed we can, in some instances, tell the age group, the gender and handedness of the individual fluter. Further, we can determine the number of fluters involved, each fluter’s corpus of flutings, their heights, and sometimes something about their character (Sharpe and Van Gelder 2006a). We have successfully used these

BEGOUËN, H.; BREUIL, H. (1933) – De la protection des grottes préhistorique. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française. 30, p. 235-238. BREUIL, H. (1952) – [1979] Four hundred centuries of cave art. Transl. Boyle, M.E. Montignac, France: Centre d’Études et Documentations Prehistoriques [New York: Hacker Art Books]. 101

EUROPEAN CAVE ART

Société Préhistorique Française: Etudes et Travaux. 64:1, p. 107-122.

BREUIL, H.; OBERMAIER, H. (1912) – Les premièrs travaux de l’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine. III. Fouilles et relevés de dessins à Gargas (HautesPyrénées). L’Anthropologie. 23, p. 26-27.

SHARPE, K.; VAN GELDER, L. (2004) – Children and Paleolithic ‘art’: indications from Rouffignac Cave, France. International Newsletter on Rock Art. 38, p. 917.

CARTAILHAC, M.E.; BREUIL, H. (1907) – Une seconde campagne aux cavernes ornées de Niaux (Ariège) et de Gargas (Hautes-Pyrénées). Comptes Rendus: Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. p. 213-222.

SHARPE, K.; VAN GELDER, L. (2006a) – The study of finger flutings. Cambridge Archaeological Journal. 16:3, p. 281-295.

CARTAILHAC, M.E.; BREUIL, H. (1910) – Les peintures et gravures murales des cavernes Pyrénnées. L’Anthropologie. 21, p. 129-148.

SHARPE, K.; VAN GELDER, L. (2006b) – Evidence for cave marking by Paleolithic children. Antiquity. 80, p. 937-947.

CLOTTES, J. (1973) – Circonscription de Midi-Pyrénées. Gallia Préhistoire. 16:2, p. 481-523.

SHARPE, K.; VAN GELDER, L. (2006c) – Finger flutings in Chamber A1 of Rouffignac Cave, France. Rock Art Research. 23:2, p. 179-198.

CLOTTES, J.; VALLADAS, H.; CACHIER, H. (1992) – Des dates pour Niaux et Gargas. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française. 89:9 (December), pp. 270274.

SHARPE, K.; VAN GELDER, L. (To Appear) – Four forms of finger flutings as seen in Rouffignac Cave, France. In a festschrift for Alexander Marshack.

LEROI-GOURHAN, A. (1967) – Les mains de Gargas: essai pour une étude d’ensemble. Bulletin de la

SHARPE, K.; VAN GELDER, L. (In Prep.) – The finger flutings of Gargas Cave, France.

Copyright © 2010 by Kevin Sharpe and Leslie Van Gelder. All rights reserved.

102

Session SO2 EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

SCHEMATIC PANEL WITH PALEOLITHIC PUNCTUATION AND OTHER QUESTIONS OF PALEOASTRONOMY AND PHILOSOPHY OF ANTIQUITY José FERNÁNDEZ QUINTANO [email protected] Abstract: 1. Group of points and moon symbol in “El Castillo” cave (Cantabria, Spain), interpreted as an observation of moon eclypse. 2. Group of points in the schematic panel in the shelter of “El Castillo de Villafamés” (Castellón, Spain), interpreted as a “Paleolithic punctuation”. 3. The paintings on the polychrome roof in the cave of “Altamira” (Cantabria, Spain), interpreted as a library of generational tales that refer to the History of the clan. Keywords: Paleoastronomy, Paleolithic Punctuations, Abstract Signs, “Churinga” Résumé: 1. Ensemble de points et symbole lunar dans la grotte "El Castillo" (Cantabria, Espagne), interprétés comme l’observation d’une eclipse lunar. 2. Ensemble de points dans le panneau schématique de l’abri “El Castillo de Villafamés” (Castellón, Espagne), interprétés comme ponctuation paléolithique. 3. Les peintures du plafond polychrome de la grotte d’Altamira (Cantabria, Espagne) interprétées comme une bibliothèque avec des histoires générationnelles qui rapportent l’Histoire du clan. Mots-Clés: Paleoastronomie, Ponctuations Paléolithiques, Signes Absctraits, “Churinga”

is a “moon-like” sign, and the points around are considered stars. My opinion was that even if it was drawn in the deepest part of the cave, it was a real sky observation, so it was the representation of a group of stars beside the moon. The objective of painting a sky observation could surprise us.

I PALEOLITHIC REPRESENTATION OF MOON ECLYPSE As a philosopher, when I have visited a cave, abstract signs have intrigued me. Among the ammount of this type of signs, sequences of punctiform signs are the reason in this paper. When abstract signs (points, incisions, notches, virgules) are painted as a sequence, such representations could be a part of a bigger cultural group that we call ‘notations’. They are considered sequences done with a lot of stylistic similarities, appear in caves very separated from each other, in different chronological periods (even a century). This suggests the conclusion that they are signs that offered some information. What is more, they could stop being notations to turn into writing if they we could decipher them.

The area of the moon painted is the most northern one. But in moon phases, the horns of the moon are on the left or on the right depending on the moment of the phase (fig. 12.3). Or what is the same, the moon appears and disappears from the right to the left. Checking some photographs over, I found some of them in which the moon appeared as it was painted in “El Castillo”, and it always happens when a moon eclypse takes place (fig. 12.2). The moon of “El Castillo”, that impressed so much Paleolithic artist, was the moon in an eclypse phase. So this composition was a Paleolithic observation of a moon eclypse.

In april of 2002, when I visited the caves of “El Pindal” (Asturias) and “El Castillo” (Cantabria) I became more in more interested in abstract motives. In “El Castillo” cave, some schematic motives interested me. This a proof of the presence of very later cultures that were obviusly different. Almost at the end of the way, I saw sequence of punctiform signs formed by two lines of red points. On the superior line, on its right side, there was a moon with its horns orientated to the floor (fig. 12.1). Experts’ explanation, as guides of the caves say, is that these signs are still an mistery. Luz Antequera († 2006) 1 thinks that it

If when someone looks at a bison or another Paleolithic animal, it is able to recognize that animal (apart from what we think it represents), it seems obvious that a sequence of points next to a moon are a sky observation. It is not sure the purpose of the fact, like in Naturalist motives. The pleasure of painting such an extraordinary happening in the cave, leaving a proof of a sky reality or a magic action to obtain hunting success from the moon. It could be painted in an disturbed state of consciousness or an ecstasy moment.

1

SCHEMATIC PANEL WITH PALEOLITHIC PUNCTUATION ON IBERIAN EAST

Antequera (2001), pag. 59. In 1991 she presented her doctoral thesis of Art, where she related bisons of the polychrome roof in “Altamira” cave to constellations. She also mentions in her thesis that six points above a bull in “Lascaux”, coincide with Pleiades and Taurus constellation. It is easy to see that the cow below this bull is almost penetrating in it, a symbolic representation of an eclypse.

In September 2004, I visited the shelter of the castle of Villafamés (Castellón), whose panel was dated by 105

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

Fig. 12.1. Points next to a lunar symbol. Paleolitic lunar eclipse? El Castillo Fig. 12.2. Astronomical lunar eclipse (Cantabria), (“Cuevas de Puente Viesgo (Cantabria). Galerías de los Discos”, (http://www.uesocc.edu.sv/contenido.php Escudo de Oro SA, Barcelona) ?id=8&opcion=breves )

Fig. 12.3. Phases of the Moon (http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/do cs/moon_phases.html )

Fig. 12.4. Paleolitic punctuations? Castillo de Villafames (Castellón), (“Vilafamés, pinturas rupestres”, Direcció General de Patrimoni Artístic, Consellería de Cultura, Educació i Ciència, Generalitat Valenciana, Castellón 1998) (Cáceres), “La Pileta” (fig. 12.12) (Málaga), “Cueva del Moro” (fig. 12.11) (Tarifa, Cádiz). This type of punctuations are found in French Paleolithic caves, too; specially in “Chauvet” and “Pech Merle”. In “Pech Merle” the most interesting paintings are two horses with punctuations, that some specialists consider wounds or darts. Even though, in the same cave there is another panel with isolated punctuations, which are not associated with animals. “Chauvet” punctuations are the most ancient of all the parietal punctuation series (dated 31000 years ago). It is important to notice that they were painted with the palm of the hand, without drawing any finger.

Antonio Beltrán († 2006) 2 in an advanced stage of Bronze Age. In the panel of this shelter there are several groups of motives. The one that caught me is on the left, where there are a lot of punctiform motives (fig. 12.4). Beltrán identifies three series of punctuations. The spiral sign with two arms is relevant. He thinks it is a sun representation, and mentions in a comparative way spirals in Gallego, Irish and English petrogliphs. Although most of the caves with Paleolithic art are placed in Cantabria and Asturias, some caves with excellent evidence of Paleolithic art have been discovered along the rest of the Iberian Peninsula.

Punctiform signs in Vilafames shelter, are made with the same style than the rest of punctuations existing in other French and Spanish Paleolithic caves. But, is it possible to find Paleolithic and schemathic paintings in a Meditarranean panel, as the one in “El Castillo”?

The similarity of the photographs of punctuations in paleolithic caves is obvious. Please look at the enclosed pictures of punctuations in “El Castillo” (fig. 12.8), “La Pasiega” and “Chufin” (fig. 12.6) (Cantabria), “El Pindal” (fig. 12.5) and “Llonín” (fig. 12.7) (Asturias), “Fuente del Trucho” (fig. 12.10) (Huesca), “Maltravieso” (fig. 12.9)

Carmen Olaria notices 3 a special proximity among Levantine and Paleolithic deposits. The same happens in places so far away from each other as Huesca, Tarragona,

2

3

Beltrán (1967), pag. 117.

106

Olaria (2001), pag. 214.

J. FERNÁNDEZ QUINTANO: SCHEMATIC PANEL WITH PALEOLITHIC PUNCTUATION AND OTHER QUESTIONS...

Fig. 12.5. Paleolitic punctuations. El Pindal (Asturias), (Photo of Rodrigo de Balbín Behrmann. “Yacimientos Arqueológicos de Asturias”, Gobierno del Principado de Asturias )

Fig. 12.6. Paleolitic punctuations. Chufín (Asturias), (http://grupos.unican.es/arte/prehist/paleo/o/default.htm )

Fig. 12.7. Paleolitic punctuations. Llonín (Asturias), (Berenguer, Magín. “El arte parietal prehistórico de la cueva de Llonín”, pág. 14-15)

Fig. 12.8. Paleolitic punctuations. El Castillo (Cantabria), (Historia del Arte. Volumen 1: Prehistoria, África Negra y Oceanía. Editorial Salvat, Diario El País, Madrid, 2006. Pag. 89)

Fig. 12.9. Paleolitic punctuations. Maltravieso (Cáceres), (http://www.uned.es/dpto-pha/extremadura/maltravieso/ fotos/maltravieso7.jpg )

Fig. 12.10. Paleolitic punctuations. Fuente del Trucho (Huesca), (http://www.huexpo.net/000_estructura/ index.php?id=14&museo=19)

Alicante, Albacete or, even, Fratel in Portugal. This coincidence makes it possible to talk about some kind of

“collective memory” of hunter recollector societies n transition periods. 107

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

Fig. 12.11. Paleolitic punctuations. Cueva del Moro (Tarifa, Cádiz), (http://www.elestrecho. com/arte-sur/moro.htm )

Fig. 12.12. Paleolitic punctuations. La Pileta (Málaga), (http://www.naturenotes.org/notes/dpaleo/paleo_pileta.htm )

come the 5612 decorated plaques, the largest collection of European Art). In 2000 the first Parietal gravings are found (end of Magdalenian age), in the province of Castellón, in d’En Melià shelter (near to levantine shelters from La Valltorta, and less than 30 miles far from El Castillo de Villafamés shelter). In 2003 gravings, paintings and Parietal signs from Solutrian age are found in Cova Meravellas (Alicante). The methodology of comparing this samples with traditional Paleolithic art, is the same that I use to associate punctuations from Villafamés to classic Paleolithic ones. All of us realize (in the same way in Valencia and Castellón, in Cantabria or Asturias, or in French Bourgogne), that modern and advanced datation methods shall corroborate this antiquity. In Castillo de Villafamés shelter would turn into the sixth location of Parietal art in the Valencian Community.

Here, it must be considered very identificative and suggesting, that less than 0,6 miles far from El Castillo de Villafamés shelter, there is Matutano cave, where stone and ceramic traces have been found, and also Paleolithic and Epipaleolithic ones (excavation led by Carmen Olaria and Francisco Gusi). Magín Berenguer notices 4 this relevant stylistic finding about punctuations. Punctuations and stains are really numerous in Cantabric art and in the art of other caves in the peninsula so far away from each other, as for example, La Pileta (Malaga) and Maltravieso (Cáceres). Even punctuations from Llonín have an extraordinary similarity to punctuations from Chufín (Cantabria). It is obvious that punctuations series represent motives related to Paleolithic art, even if in the same panel other motives of different styles and later periods can be found.

As a conclusion, in what regards to its meaning, the presence of punctuations beside moon and sun symbols, mean that they are expressions of sky observations. It happens the same in Mesopothamic and Egyptian art, in addition to their well-known mithologic meaning.

Punctuations in “El Castillo”, “La Pileta” and Villafamés shelter, are expressions of Paleolithic Age. It is still unknown if they were painted in that chronological period or they were cultural continuity of later tribes. This second possibility is a hypothesis proposed by archaelogists.

If punctuations are not associated to an astral or naturalist motive, and appear in caves geographically and chronologically separated, those punctuation reach the level of “notations”, but their meaning is still a mistery for us.

Carmen Olaria 5 quotes and shares Antonio Beltrán’s opinion, who observes that the recent findings of numerous plaques with engraved animals of Magdalenian style in Mesolithic or Azilien layers in southern France, could extend parietal Magdalenian style to later stages and fill in some supposed blanks. With this theory the idea of continuous evolution might be stronger.

POINTS IN THE SCHEMATIC ART Points exist in Schematic Iberian Art. They appear, for example in Pala Pinta (Portugal, Fig. 12.13-14) and Cañaica del Calar (Murcia, Fig. 12.15). In Pala Pinta some points next to a Sun, seem to be a punctuated representation of another Sun or maybe a star. In Cañaica del Calar they appear next to a human figure and a Sun, too, and they are painted in a group with spherical shape.

It is very important to note that Paleolithic Parietal art in Valencian Community is recent. In the 80’s the first traces are found. In Vall d’Ebo (Alicante) appear a horse-like figure and a goat from the Solutrian age in Reinós cave, and Parietal gravings from the end of the Magdalenian age, in Cova Fosca. Gravings and Paleolithic paintings appear also in El Parpalló cave (Valencia, from this cave 4 5

Points in Schematic art, contrary to Palaeolithic punctuations, reflects a consonance with figures that are

Berenguer (1979), pag. 29. Olaria (2001), pag. 216. Beltrán (2002), pag. 86-87.

108

J. FERNÁNDEZ QUINTANO: SCHEMATIC PANEL WITH PALEOLITHIC PUNCTUATION AND OTHER QUESTIONS...

Fig. 12.13. Panel with astral paintings and points, shelter of Pala Pinta (Carlao, Portugal) [cop. José Fdez. Q.]

Fig. 12.15. Sun and points. Cañaica del Calar (Murcia) [cop. José Fdez. Q.]

Fig. 12.14. Detail panel Pala Pinta. Solar painting with points (Carlao, Portugal) [cop. José Fdez. Q.]

Fig. 12.16. Ramiform and digitations. Lapa dos Coelhos (Portugal) [Martins, A. Rodrigues A.F., García Díez, M. “Arte esquemática do Maciço Calcário estremenho: Abrigo do Lapedo I e Lapa dos Coelhos”. ARKEOS. Perspectivas em diálogo, nº 15, 2005, pag. 26]

close to them that, instead of constituting symbols with an indecipherable meaning, they belong to figurative realism. In Portugal and Murcia, this realism can be associated to the Sun. In those three situations, they are a slight group of points that do not acquire the name of punctuations, as they appear even in groups of hundreds, in Palaeolithic art.

POINTS, DIGITATIONS

In the final analysis we can suggest a hypothesis, depending a lot on the analysis of a larger number of samples, that points in Schematic art have not got a symbolic identity out of the naturalist group where they are painted. So they acquire a naturalist dimension in Schematic art that make them be easily interpretable thanks to the naturalist motives found with them.

Also they appear points and digitations in the shelter of Lapa dos Coelhos (Portugal, fig. 12.16). This shelter presents two levels of occupation in Magdalenian age.

When I visited La Valltorta museum, few kilometres far from the shelter, I saw a representation of Villafamés shelter too, the representation of “La Serradeta” shelter (Castellón). In this representation, there are punctuations next to digitations. They really caught my attention.

It seems that digitations are usual in Mediterranean shelters. A catalog of paintings and motives from shelters on the Catalan coast, describes digitations next to point 109

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

signs in several of them. For example: “Mas d’En Carles” (among others, there are motives next to digitations), “la Oreneta” (points and digitations), and “Can Castellví” (points).

relationship between signs and animals,among animals and among signs. These particularities evidence the hard difficulty in Art Rock interpretation: while most of point signs are red, most of line signs are black; while the bison is the most repeated animal (in Bedeillac cave there are four times more bisons than horses), in Portel cave there are more horses than bisons; while lineal signs appear more frequently beside Naturalist figures, point signs tend to be far from figurative panels. It is also very relevant, the identification stablished for red and black club shaped signs in El Pindal cave (Spain); identical to those in Fontanet and Niaux (all of them Magdalenian IVth); what leads to the consideration of this fact, even if it is isolated,as a certain contact among inhabitants of these three caves (later he mentions some black stellate shaped signs in El Castillo, similar to the red ones found in Viaux, that caught the attention of Breuil, and later, LeroiGourghan).

Of the points to the digitations? It could be accepted that digitations might be a stylistic evolution of Levantine and schemathic art. THE INTEPRETACION OF ABSCTRACT SIGNS The first great study about abstract motives was developed by Marthe Chollot-Varagnac in 1965, about paleolithic mobiliar art. This researcher at first dedicated herself to Mesopothamia, but looking for its origins she got interested in Paleolithic art. She was lucky because, with Breuil leading her research, she could work with the important mobiliar collection Piette. In her thesis 456 mobiliar items (31 from the Aurignacian age, 100 from the Solutrian and 325 from the Magdalenian) are classified in 25 different geometric groups. Among the conclusions of the thesis must be mentioned: it is still impossible to explain the meaning of geometric motives of mobiliar art; geometric mobiliar art has a different functionality from parietal art or naturalist plaques; and when we find different geometric motives in the same panel, they constitute some kind of written expression as somehow they are transmitting some information.

F. Bernardo de Quirós and A. Mingo Álvarez carry out a valoration about theories that had tried to interprete signs historically. For both authors Art Rock signs have gone through a “complete and superficial analysis” even if the subjects “are more numerous and varied”. They revise previous works and give special relevance to the works of Leroi, Casado and Vialou. Leroi contributed to make evident the different zones of the cave, some of them with a special symbolic meaning. Casado ensured that signs are more usual in paintings than in gravings, and red was more used than black for their creation. Vialou reaches an important conclusion; while paintings are more similar in Paleolithic caves, so they constitute an element of special individual values of the cave’s clan. They also mention the recent shaman theories of Clottes and LewisWilliams. As they make depend Art Rock motives realization (both Naturalist and abstract), on alterated states, they don’t see essential differences between both groups. As a conclusion for this review, they note that all of these studies have provided new elements, but it seems to indicate that far from a unique theory to explain them, it might be assumed that they could be interpreted from various points of view, as Reinach stated.

Leroi-Gourghan interpretes points and other signs according to Naturalist art interpretation, and in a nonparticular way, so it accords with structuralist point of view: horses and points are masculine signs, and bisons and squares are feminine. In Spain the first extense study about signs was developed by Pilar Casado in 55 Paleolithic caves in Spain and Portugal. From her conclusions, the main point is the difficulty to explain the meaning; she doesn’t agree with the idea of considering sings a piece of some general interpretative group, like hunting magic, sexual duality or social organization. The location of signs in the caves is very irregular, they are not situated in a fixed place, and their usual location close to horses and bisons (the latter more numerous in Parietal art) is not conclusive, either.

In a generic work Eduardo Ripoll dedicates various reflections to signs. He coincides with leroi-Gourghan in the consideration of them as abstract signs connected to figurative animals, and several of them have a lot to do with genre values, but contrasts Leroi’s rigour with the existence of caves where there are only signs (Santián in Cantabria, Herrerías in Asturias), and he wondres how should they be interpreted. He remembers Vialou’s opinion, who realized that a bear paw had suggested the creation of a sign. Ripoll thinks that signs are chronologically complementary or more ancient than Naturalist figures. Or what is the same, signs have a simetric structure and a vertical axis. And he states that what we do know is that they were transmitted from generation to genetration, and that behind them lies a universe of concepts and a very extended long lasting symbol core.

In France, Denis Vialou carried out a thorough empiric study about signs in eleven Paleolithic caves from the French region of Ariège. This study originates,without any doubt, a new investigation line; nevertheless, in every single moment, it is conscious Vialou that his conclusions are geographically limited. In general, his macro- study doesn’t solve abstract signs interpretation. In his analysis of the 11 caves (some of them well-known, like TroisFrères or Niaux), he counts 539 signs. Among them, 395 are painted in red and 116 in black; the main part of the signs are related to Naturalist paintings, and are painted instead of being carved (which coincides with Casado). His study centres on each group of signs, on the 110

J. FERNÁNDEZ QUINTANO: SCHEMATIC PANEL WITH PALEOLITHIC PUNCTUATION AND OTHER QUESTIONS...

Nowadays, with the example of shaman theories, we can say that abstract motives are, in so many ways, an important charter in general interpretative theory and a result of phosphene vision or excited states of consciousness.

different ideas. Each group, when they painted an animal, placed in it their particular ideas. Luckily, some of them could be transmitted for some centuries, but others were lost along the way, and gropus who arrived to the cave later were not able to decipher them. It was not possible for contemporary groups, and the same happens to us nowadays.

As a conclusion I can state that, now that we know naturalist paintings are not only art, it seems that these geometrical motives are more than decoration.

LIBRARY IN MESOPOTAMIA One of the most interesting characteristics of Mesopothamic civilization is the existence of libraries. There were kept thousands of clay tablets. More than 200,000 tablets have been recovered, just a 10% of the total. There was a personal library for the king, the palace and the temple one, and there were also particular libraries. Tablets in them inform about a lot of issues: sales, royal post, transactions, prophecies, popular texts. A few of them were principal texts of that period (“Enuma Elish”, “Epic of Gilgamesh”, etc), mathematical and astronomical questions, legal codes, etc. A lot of them were used by students at school, and there were also spelling-books: lists of words in Sumerian and Acadian destinated to create next scribe generations.

II WRITING IN FIRST CIVILIZATIONS Studies of phossil traces of our Paleolithic ancestors shows that they had our intellectual and linguistic abilities. Given that we know better cultural stages from Paleolithic to Neolithic, it is also a principal task to look for cultural similarities in Paleolithic and first civilizations, as Mesopothamia. Writing appeared in the IVth level in ancient sumerian city of Uruk. From 3500 to 3200 BC first appeared pictographs, but it was some centuries later when appeared a developed writing, as cuneiform writing. Before Uruk, it is acceptable the hypothesis of the existence of pictograph registres in The Balcans, or even among abstract Neolothic and Paleolithic motives. “Token” are earlier than Uruk, small items geometricallyshaped, that later were placed into hollow clay spheres (“bullae”). The engravings outside informed about the quantity and type of items that there were inside, in order to certfy the content. The most ancient “token”are dated 10500 years BP ago and they were found in Jarmo (Irak) and Zagros Mountains in Iran. They belong to a chronological stage in which men were still hunters and collectors. These items are also found in Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan.

PALEOLITHIC LIBRARY Rock art panel as a library As we found in Mesopotamian plaques made by scholars, we found proved and confirmed childish negative hands in some panels. Among other explanations, they could represent the initiation of the youngest members to art formation. After that, it could be identified as art symbolism (the meaning of Paleolithic art, about which we love speculating since a century and a half ago).

First writing, also called cuneiform, because of the way the incisions were made, was created by sumerians to express their language. It was used by groups with different languages, that consequently, gave different meanings to the same symbols. So, a symbol had different meanings depending on the people who used it: Sumerian, Acadian, Elamites, Hurrites, Hitites, Ugaritics, Cananean.

Datation of individual paintings separates chronologically what appears in front of us as a group, (remember the slight datation differences of “Altamira” bisons). It becomes more evident when Paleolithic and schematic samples coexist in the same cave (like in “El Castillo”). In a Mesopotamian library we also find tablets that belong to different chronological stages, many of them, are copies of originals dated a millenium before.

If in the Ancient Near East therev were so many languages, it is evident that in Paleolithic Europe there might coexist various languages. This could explain the reason why art manifestations appeared and disappeared in separated caves. If they had only been art, they would have been assimilated by the following cultural groups. But as they had other meanings, that we cannot understand nowadays, they also were misunderstood by new inhabitants.

The panel like a library suggests adding interpretation hypothesis about paintings drawn on earlier ones: they can be a modification of the first narration caused by a cultural evolution in the clan -when an animal is removed and replaced by another one- (the definitive version of Gilgamesh Poem was performed in 12 chapters in 1200 BC approximately, leaving behind 3 chapters that existed in earlier copies). When this happens, the second painting turns into an updated copy that strengthens previous symbolism,it is a result of the clan change in the cave, and for that, new art symbolism.

Rock Art represented Paleolithic writing, but like cuneifrom writing it was only used as an expression of 111

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

Fig. 12.17. History in churinga. Australia. [Historia del Arte. Volumen 1: Prehistoria, África Negra y Oceanía. Editorial Salvat, Diario El País, Madrid, 2006. pag. 282. Colection Tara, Nueva York]

Fig. 12.18. Altamira (Spain). History? [http://www.spanisharts.com/arquitectura/imagenes/prehist oria/altamira.html]

know agriculture, they subsist collecting food and they do not build houses or huts, given that they lived in caves before. The most important of their sacred objects are the churingas (fig. 12.17), plain and oval stones with a lot of engravings. The notches, lines and geometrical motives on them contain ancient chronicles of the past. Furthermore, the paintings on the walls disclose the origins of the group, their achievements, a cosmogonic tale with their own concept of the Creation. At first heros created rivers and seas, that later were settled by animales and later men arrived.

“ALTAMIRA” ROOF AS A COSMOGONIC TALE We have analyzed punctuations without identifying them as stars. But there is no doubt that Paleolithic man focused his attention on the Sun of daily sky, and eventually, the Moon; and the stars and the Moon of night sky. For this reason, as a philosopher, I have felt attracted to abstract signs, and in the same way as an researcher of Ancient Astronomy, Naturalist and abstract motives on the roofs of the caves appeal me. And of course, among all of them, the most relevant is the Polychrome Hall in “Altamira” cave.

With this description of Australian aborigins culture, we could develop an explanation for the reason why in Paleolithic caves humans are so limited. (Although at this point it should be reminded the criticism of LeroiGourghan who called this kind of comparative analysis “to do the australian”).

Nowadays shamanism is a one of the stronger cultural efforts to interprete Paleolithic Art. The continuous advances in primitive societies studies provide us more comprehension elements. Otherwise, instead of knowing better actual tribes, we can state that we have less prejudices now that in early XIXth century to evaluate their cultural forms. Although they can be sometimes mercilessly savage, they own a rich ammount of culture. Lewis-Williams in his essay “The Mind in the Cave”, talks about the relevant condition of the San tribe in southern Africa.

We have seen that on the walls of Australian caves is described a Creation in which first appeared animals and later, humans. At this point I could conjecture that the roof of the Polychrom Hall in “Altamira” and the other exclusively animal panels are the first cosmogonic works of Humanity (fig. 12.18). In them, the origin of the World is narrated, based on a world where animals existed but not yet humans. What an overwhelming and precise description in such a remote historical moment! The

Among all the actual aborigines, Australian ones show the best connection to their ancestors. Geographically situated in the northern and central desert Australian, they do not 112

J. FERNÁNDEZ QUINTANO: SCHEMATIC PANEL WITH PALEOLITHIC PUNCTUATION AND OTHER QUESTIONS...

cosmological discourse of the Paleolithhic clans did not consider the presence of gods or primary seas. It could also justify chronological differences among animals in the same panel. Maybe clan after clan, they added their own memories, making it stronger when they incorporated a painting that looked like the previous ones. I could say that the anthropomorph figures that were painted in Paleolithic caves are the human evolution from its origins, or an intermediate stage from animal to humankind, or what is the same, they also could be the first humans crossing the door that connects these two worlds.

CORPUS DE PINTURES RUPESTRES (1994) – Volumen 2: Area central i meridional. Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Cultura. Barcelona.

So, a Rock Art panel contains information that links the group with its own origins as a clan, and even includes a narration of the origin of Humanity. The group of animals turns out to be a historical tale of the group. By recovering Paleolithic art, we have also recovered, even if we do not understand it, its culture, its History.

GROENEN, M. (2000) – Sombra y luz en el arte paleolítico. Ariel, Barcelona. First edition: Ombre et lumière dans l’art des grottes, Université libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, 1997.

CLOTTES, J. & LEWIS-WILLIAMS, D. (2001) – Los chamanes de la prehistoria. Ariel, Barcelona. First edition: Les chamanes de la préhistoire, Éditions du Seuil, 1996.

FERNÁNDEZ QUINTANO, J. (2002) – “Cap. V-VI. Interpretación y definición del arte rupestre” (pag. 61103); “Cap. XVI. Visita a las cuevas de El Pindal y El Castillo” (236-245); “Cap. XVIII. Huesos paleolíticos con notaciones” (256-272). In: Revista BEROSO, nº 8/9, Barcelona.

HERNÁNDEZ PÉREZ, M.S. and SEGURA MARTÍ, J.M. (coordinators) (2002) – La Sarga. Arte rupestre y territorio. Ajuntament d’Alcoi, (Alicante).

Acknowledgments

LEROI-GOURHAN, A. (1968) – “Les signes parietaux du Paléolitique supérieur franco-cantabrique”. Simposio Internacional de Arte Rupestre (Barcelona 1966). Instituto de Prehistoria y Arqueología, Barcelona, pag. 67-77.

I would like to thank Ester Albalat for her help in the translation of this paper. Bibliography

LEROI-GOURHAN, A. (1994) – Las religiones de la prehistoria. Laertes, Barcelona. First edition: Les religions de la Préhistoire, Presses Universitaires de France, 1964.

ANTEQUERA, L. (2001) – “Los hombres del Paleolítico y las estrellas”. Symposium “Ias Jornadas de Historia de la Astrología en la Antigüedad”. Revista BEROSO, nº 4, Barcelona, pag. 56-68.

LEWIS-WILLIAMS, D. (2005) – La mente en la caverna. Akal, Madrid. First edition: The mind in the Cave. Consciousness and the Origins of Art. Thames & Hudson Ltd., London, 2002.

“Arte oceánico: El arte de los aborígenes australianos” (2006) – VV.AA. In: Historia del Arte. Volumen 1: Prehistoria, África Negra y Oceanía. Editorial Salvat, pag. 279-287, Madrid.

MARGUENON, J.C. (1996) – Los mesopotámicos. Cátedra, Madrid. First edition: Les Mesopotamiens (2 vol), Armand Colin Éditeur, 1992.

BELTRÁN MARTÍNEZ, A. (1967) – “Las pinturas esquemáticas y abstractas del Castillo de Villafamés (Castellón)”. In: Caesaraugusta, Vol. 29-30, Zaragoza, pag. 111-120.

MARTINS, A., RODRIGUES, A.F., and GARCÍA DIEZ, M. (2005) – “Arte esquemática do Maciço Calcário estremenho: Abrigo do Lapedo I e Lapa dos Coelhos”. ARKEOS. Perspectivas em diálogo, nº 15, pag. 15-27.

BELTRÁN MARTÍNEZ, A. (2002) – Mito, misterio y sacralidad. Biblioteca Aragonesa de Cultura. Ibercaja, Zaragoza.

MELIÀ MARTINEZ, F., GUILLEM CALATAYUD P. M. and MARTÍNEZ VALLE, R. (2001) – “Hallazgo de grabados rupestres de estilo paleolítico en el norte de la provincia de Castellón: el Abric d’en Melià (Serra d’en Galceran). Saguntum. Papeles del Laboratoria de Arqueología de Valencia. Nº 33, pag. 133-140. Edition in the web: http://planadelarc. iespana.es/ guitarra.htm

BERENGUER, M. (1979) – El arte parietal prehistórico de la cueva de Llonín. Instituto de Estudios Asturianos, Caja de Ahorros de Asturias, Oviedo. BERNALDO DE QUIRÓS, F. & MINGO ALVAREZ, A. (2005) – “La interpretación de los signos”. El significado del arte rupestre. Course of the “Universidad Internacional Menéndez y Pelayo” (Santander 2002). Ministerio de Cultura, Madrid, pag. 211-228. CASADO, Pilar (1977) – Los signos en el arte Paleolítico de la Península Ibérica. Universidad de Zaragoza.

OLARIA PUYOLES, C.R. (2001) – “Pensamiento mágico y expresiones simbólicas entre sociedades tribales del litoral mediterráneo peninsular: 100007000 BP”. In: Quaderns de Prehistoria i Arqueología de Castelló. Nº 22, pag. 213-233.

CHOLLOT-VARAGNAC, M. (1980) – Les Origines du Graphisme Symbolique, Fondation Singer-Polignac, Paris.

OOSTERBEEK, L., Co-ordinator, (@ 2006) – “Abrigo do Pala Pinta”. In: “EuroPreArt, the project”. IPT Tomar (Portugal). http://www.europreart.net/cgi-bin/ 113

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

baserun.exe?_cfg=record.cfg&_fil=code%3D%22pint a001%22

UCKO, P.J. and ROSENFELD, A. (1967) – Arte paleolítico. Editorial Guadarrama, Madrid. First edition: Paleolithic Cave Art, McGraw-Hill, Toronto, 1967.

RIPOLL PERELLÓ, E. (1986) – Orígenes y significado del arte Paleolítico. Silex ediciones, Madrid.

VIALOU, D. (1986) – L’art des grottes en Ariège magdalénienne. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.

THOMPSON, G.D. (@ 2006) – Illustration Gallery Astronomical Artefacts and Cuneiform Tablets, etc. http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gtosiris/page111.html

114

EPIPALEOLITHIC AND MESOLITHIC BURIAL’S FROM 12000 TO 7000 BP IN LEVANTIN TERRITORY ART ROCK Carme OLÀRIA Archaeology Laboratory. University of Castellón. Spain. [email protected]

Francesc GUSI Archaeology and Prehistoric Service of Castelló, Spain. [email protected]

José Luís LÓPEZ Anthropologist. University Autonoma of Madrid Abstract: The sites of Cave Fosca and Cingle of Mas Nou presented the burials in the End Palaeolithic and Mesolithic faces very interest. That show the type of people habited in this territory characterised for the Levantine rock art. Keywords: Mesolithic, End Palaeolithic, Burial, Rock-Art Resumen: Los yacimientos de Cova Fosca y Cingle del Mas Nou han presentado enterramientos muy interesantes de las fases del Epipaleolítico y Mesolítico. Los cuales demuestran los tipos humanos que habitaron este territorio caracterizado por una numerosa presencia de arte rupestre de estilo levantino. Palabras clave: Mesolítico, Epipaleolítico, enterramientos, arte rupestre

INTRODUCTION

Above it there where various plane blocks and over it a tomb of stones.

In this paper we will present the preliminary results of the last interventions from 1999 until 2003, of the prehistoric sites of Cave Fosca and Cingle of Mas Nou, both situated in plain “Levantine territory” of area of the Maestrazgo of Castellón (Spain).The recent discoveries at Gasulla Park of graves of the late Mesolithic and the beginning End Palaeolithic will contribute clear evidences of when the occupations of this territory began and how long different social groups remained in these Levantine phases.

Close the tomb a votive site was located, containing a manipulated spear of cervid and partially burned in its ends,- was it an offering or was it a prestige piece that identified a shaman or another figure? Nine burials were deposited, probably os secondary type only the skulls are conserved and the postcranial skeleton some long bones.

At Cova Fosca in 2003 an individual grave below the Mesolithic level was found, dating from 12130 ± 100 BP, which would mark the beginning, at least, of the existence of ancient populations in the territory of Gasulla’s Park.

The rests found in this grave indicate to us that the minimum number of individuals that were deposited there is nine, distributed in the following way: • One male adult (between 40-45 years) who is the main individual (figure 13.2)

Also in 2002, and on the site near Fosca called Cingle Mas Nou, located at short distance of joint caves with rock art of Racó Molero, Cova Remigia, Cingle Gasulla and Cova Cirerals, a collective grave that contained nine individuals was discovered on the same site. The dating by collagen of the rest of the bones offered a dating of 7000 BP.

• One male adult • One graceful woman • One young man of about 15 years • One child of 6-8 years • One child of 2-3 years

Therefore between both establishments (Cova Fosca and Cingle Mas Nou) we have a time-range of the five millennia of uninterrupted human occupation in this rock art Levantine territory.

• One child of between 4 years and 12 months • One baby ob between one years and six months • One newborn of 6 weeks

CINGLE OF MAS NOU: COLLECTIVE BURIAL

These remains were found sitting on the inferior extremities of a main burial that occupied the totality of the base of the grave, corresponding to an adult individual of masculine sex. The height of the stature of this individual is around the 165 cm.; very similar statures

In the base of the level sequence, formed by a extremely hard sediment, a not very deep and remarkably narrow oval grave was found. (Figure 13.1) 115

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

Fig. 13.1. General view of collective burial (Cingle del Mas Nou, Ares del Maestre, Castellón) The set of the remains is still in the process of studding, but even so we are able to advance some of the characteristics of this interesting burial. First of all we have to emphasize the individual’s complete skeletal connection and that it is in a good state of conservation. One is a man who was deposited in the base of the grave, which offers some singular anatomical characters concerning pathologies. The left pelvis show a depression in the totality of the iliac crest, as a result of a chronic inflammation of the iliac muscle. The analyses demonstrate that he suffered and acute brucullosis, and perhaps this let to a sacroileitis. As a consequence he might have suffered an intense pain flexing the hip due to the action of the muscle coxofemoral joint. (Figure 13.3) Inside his mouth were rests os esquire of flint and ocher, also on his chest. The space of its orbit is occupied by and artificial ocular globe, made by means of and ocher ball, in whose center radial incisions was put to simulate rainbow. A red ocher eye… he wore it living, or it was placed post mortem? One extracted of the robit we see that the fragment of ocher shows the marks of being carved emulating a pupil. Originally it would be bigger, but now it is partially degraded. In this sense we would want to remember the words of Edmund Müller indicating that the lack of vision of an eye can cause hallucinations. The circles with parallel undulations or lined or “scalereiphorm” or canes would be in this stage of universal hallucinogenic productions of the human brain.

Fig. 13.2. Complete Skeleton of principal individual

Another an that could confirm this hypothesis is the extraordinary wearing down of the dental crowns that have left the pieces at level of gums covering barely the dental arch, abrasion that could be caused due to the jawbone infection mentioned earlier. (Figure 13.4)

have been considered for the European Mesolithic populations. (Meiklejohn, C., Schentag, C., Venema, A., Key, P., 1984)

At this point the uniformity of the wearing down in both dental arches calls the attention, which might seem an intentional anthropical polishing, perhaps post mortem; 116

C. OLÀRIA ET AL.: EPIPALEOLITHIC AND MESOLITHIC BURIAL’S FROM 12.000 TO 7.000 BP IN LEVANTIN TERRITORY ART ROCK

Fig. 13.3. Pelvis and mode of flexion

Fig. 13.4. Detail’s Skull of principal individual with the false eye nonetheless it is reasonably that it could be due to a continued coriaceus nutrition; more stranger would seem that the cause was due to a specific function, such as chewing an the preparation of skins, since that had affected only canine teeth and hardly the premolars and molars.

material, given the shortage of remains of this type and chronology that prevails in the Iberian Peninsula. We were before a single grave in which there were appraised, a priori, remains of several individuals, a complete one and in anatomical connection and one or several packages of bones on legs of this one.

On the whole we see that the skeleton of this individual will offer much information about pathologies, nutrition and other interesting cultural aspects.

In order to begin to understand how this situation was produced we will apply a taphonomic study of the grave. At first we can appreciate that the structure of the thoracic box had displaced itself towards the belly, that is to say, it has folded itself as if it was a blind, without losing the anatomical connection.

It is necessary to emphasize that at the inside of the tomb there was great amount of smalls balls of ocher next to small dispersed remains of engraving, but with an abundant accumulation inside the mouth of the adult man who conserves the complete anatomical connection. Also a small perforated very fragmented bony plaque was found.

The jaw has fallen, because of the gravity, towards the thorax and in a specific moment in which the temporojaw ligaments (that maintain the jaw together with the skull) would still not be totally broken, the head falls bay degradation and breakage of neck muscles towards the left dragging with it to the jaw.

Before the beginning of the anthropological study it was appropriate to make a first evaluation of the found 117

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

Once removed the package of bones we observe the position of the pelvis that is slightly open because after the loss of the muscular mass which it supported gluteus maximus muscle and the degradation of the sacrum ligaments and the pubic symphysis, this one tends to separate and each coxal falls by gravity sideways.

foot towards the left side in inverted position, or bones of the left hand which do not appear anatomical position. As result of all the previous we are able to affirm that: • This tomb was reused in several occasions for different burials in which previously the tomb was emptied, next the newest burials was deposited and afterwards the previous remains were placed as a package of bones on the inferior extremities.

In the present case only the right coxal is displaced a little from its anatomical position, but tahta this movement has not repelled in the leg, because as much the right as the left conserve the kneecaps in position, otherwise they would have fallen towards the sides. This means that a wall effect exists that held the pelvis as well as the legs letting them remain in position in spite of on skeletatization.

• The burials decomposed and the skeleton dried out in an empty space that allowed the bones to modify its position when seeing itself affected by the previously mentioned taphonomic processes. • The grave had to count on some type of cap or cover that allowed the mentioned empty space, as well as to open it for later reuse.

As possible explanation would be based on the existence of wrapper as a shroud that was well tied to the waist, legs and feet, although due to the chronology of the site this does not seem likely.

COVA FOSCA: INDIVIDUAL BURIAL

Another possibility that due to its simplicity could be more reasonable is than this individual had been buried with trousers or other type of clothing, fastened to the waist, knees and ankles, including a footwear that also maintained the bones of the feet united during the skeletatization, as we demonstrate in the figure (Figure 13.5). This hypothesis is reinforced by position in which the bones of the feet (talus bone) were found, indicated in figure 13.3 by the blue arrows, that are placed upwards, position in which the feet must have been located during the burial.

From 1999 to 2003 the excavations of Cova Fosca were reinitiated with the purpose of obtaining a complete stratigraphic sequence not altered by removals.(Figure 13.6) The stratigraphy presented a succession of Neolithic, Mesolithic and Epipalaeolithic levels. It is a deposit amply known although at the present time it had a stratigraphic sequence of more than seven meters of power, that have allowed us to individualize the succession of the floors of occupation from the 6000 BP to the 12200 BP; establishing at the same time associations sure of the material culture, especially of the ceramic types that correspond to it, for each one of its occupations; advancing in this work that the printed ceramics of cardial type only appear in a chronological context of the end of the Antique Neolithic (circa 4500 BC) and do not correspond far from it to the ceramics productions older than the cavity contains. (Figure 13.7) In the recent discoveries of Cova Fosca in 2003 one was an individual burial whose dating of 12130 ±100 BP, which would mark at least the beginning of the existence of ancient populations of initial Epipalaeolithic, on the rock art territory of Park Gasulla. On the level [-380 cm] below the Mesolithic levels an individual tomb was found which was placed intentionally between a series of great landslide blocks.

Fig. 13.5. Provable clothes and shoes on

This tomb was closed by means of a small wall that was left cover as a vault by a cooked earth level. It has a north-south orientation, and in its interior were remaining of an individual burial whose superior half presented signals of having been put under an intense heat source, due to the skull being totally destroyed. As in the burial of Cingle Mas Nou it also presented an offering of spears of wild caprid?

By the form in which the metatarsi and the phalanges of the feet have been distributed it is possible that, in addition to the gravity force, other factors have been implied. In this case we suppose that it was a flotation process that has transferred some metatarsus of the right 118

C. OLÀRIA ET AL.: EPIPALEOLITHIC AND MESOLITHIC BURIAL’S FROM 12.000 TO 7.000 BP IN LEVANTIN TERRITORY ART ROCK

Fig. 13.6. General view of stratification sequence in Fosca Cave 119

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

Fig. 13.7. General view of burial in Fosca Cave

Fig. 13.8. Female skeleton and skull belonging of Fosca Cave But perhaps most interesting it is the presence of the fire like ritual incineration from buried one that affected his chest and partly his head, but after study all show us that is buried a lot of years after the skeletitazion.

Her age estimated from numerous bones is established between the 25 and 29 years old.(Figure 13.8) Of delicate stature, she does not shows signals to have suffered any pathology, although there are facets of crouching down in the femur and the tibia, and less marked in the talus bones. Which might be the reason why this crouched down position had being habitual in this individual or in this populations?

The remains are in anatomical position with the fractures owed to the pressure of substrate on the bones. It shows the arms and the both sides of the body and a slight inclination of the legs towards the right side as a result of the ground and the rocks between which it was deposited.

The stature of this woman, who without being a dwarf is extremely short, opens a up a variety of questions, given the antiquity of the remains: would be a normal standard in its population?, on the contrary: would she be

The individual is of feminine sex, with a estimate stature, taken the physiological length of the left femur, of 146,74 cm (with an interval between 139,34 cm and 153,14 cm) 120

C. OLÀRIA ET AL.: EPIPALEOLITHIC AND MESOLITHIC BURIAL’S FROM 12.000 TO 7.000 BP IN LEVANTIN TERRITORY ART ROCK

Labor.

Num.

Deep

Material

BP

BC

Cal BP

Cal BC

BETA

148998

[15-9]

charcoal

3030 ± 70

1080 ± 70

3380-2990

1430-1040

BETA

148993

[9-15]

charcoal

5820 ± 40

3870 ± 40

6710-6510

4760-4560

BETA

148995

[26-32]

charcoal

1850 ± 40

-100 AD

1880-1700

70-250 AD

BETA

148994

[15-41]

charcoal

5980 ± 70

4030 ± 70

6990-6660

5040-4710

BETA

148996

[34-48]

charcoal

5850 ± 70

3900 ± 70

6790-6480

4840-4530

BETA

148997

[45-57]

charcoal

5870 ± 80

3920 ± 80

6870-6480

4920-4530

BETA

148999

[45-83]

charcoal

5980 ± 70

4030 ± 70

6990-6660

5040-4710

BETA

149000

[49-78]

charcoal

6080 ± 80

4130 ± 80

7190-6730

5240-4780

BETA

149001

[65-79]

charcoal

6140 ± 90

4190 ± 90

7260-6760

5310-4810

BETA

149003

[77-89]

charcoal

5440 ± 140

3490 ± 140

6490-5920

4540-3970

BETA

184495

[76-140]

charcoal

6110 ± 70

4160 ± 70

7200-6770

5260-4820 5290-4900 4890-4860

BETA

149004

[111-120]

charcoal

6150 ± 70

4200 ± 70

7240-6850 6840-6800

BETA

149005

[118-120]

charcoal

6070 ± 80

4120 ± 80

7180-6730

5230-4780

BETA

149006

[119]

charcoal

6250 ± 80

4300 ± 80

7320-6940

5370-4990

BETA

149007

[120-130]

charcoal

6130 ± 60

4180 ± 60

7200-6850 6840-6800

5260-4900 4890-4860

BETA

149008

[126]

charcoal

5990 ± 110

4040 ± 110

7170-6560

5220-4600

BETA

149009

[135]

charcoal

6390 ± 40

4440 ± 40

7420-7250

5470-5300

Teledyne

I-9367

[160]

charcoal

5715 ± 80

3765 ± 80

No calibrada

No calibrada

BETA

184496

[169-233]

charcoal

6380 ± 50

4430 ± 50

7420-7240

5470-5290

BETA

184497

[233-306]

charcoal

7780 ± 60

5830 ± 60

8650-8420

6700-6470

CSIC

356

[180]

charcoal

7100 ± 70

5150 ± 70

No calibrada

No calibrada

CSIC

357

[182]

charcoal

7210 ± 70

5260 ± 70

No calibrada

No calibrada

CSIC

353

[184]

charcoal

7640 ± 110

5690 ± 110

No calibrada

No calibrada

Teledyne

I-9868

[270]

charcoal

8880 ± 200

6930 ± 200

No calibrada

No calibrada

Teledyne

I-11313

[278]

charcoal

9460 ± 160

7510 ± 160

No calibrada

No calibrada

BETA

184498

[304-319]

charcoal

9340 ± 80

7390 ± 80

10720-10260

8770-8310

BETA

184506

[369]

charcoal

10020 ± 50

8070 ± 50

11940-11280

9990-9330 10670-10530 10430-9960

BETA

184512

[600]

charcoal

10320 ± 40

8370 ± 40

12620-12480 12380-11910

BETA

184504

[365]

charcoal

10350 ± 40

8400 ± 40

12640-12470 12390-11920

10690-10520 10440-9970

BETA

184500

[319-365]

charcoal

10700 ± 110

8750 ± 110

13000-12600 12510-12330

11050-10640 10560-10380

BETA

184513

[304/319]

charcoal

10920 ± 100

8970 ± 100

13160-12800 12740-12650

11210-10850 10790-10700

BETA

184511

[407]

charcoal

11340 ± 50

9390 ± 50

13770-13690 13480-13150

11820-11740 11530-11200

BETA

184499

[311]

charcoal

11630 ± 110

9680 ± 110

14020-13300 13250-13180

12070-11350 11300-11230 13120-12880 12320-12260 12180-11350 11300-11230

BETA

184501

[347]

charcoal

11750 ± 170

9800 ± 170

15070-14830 14270-14210 14130-13300 13250-13180

BETA

184503

[357]

charcoal

11830 ± 240

9880 ± 240

15290-14660 14360-13160

13340-12710 12410-11210

BETA

184509

[379/380]

charcoal

12130 ± 100

10180 ± 100

15310-14650 14370-13820

13360-12700 12420-11870

121

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

Tab. 13.1. Chronology of Cingle of Mas Nou (Castellón, Spain) type

sector/level deep

Radiocarbonic

Convencional age

2σ Calibrated

Intersection datation radiocarbonic with calibrated curve

Beta 136676

Collagen bone

S-3 N1 [-16 ]

6800 ± 70 BP

6900 ± 70 BP

Cal BC 5900-5655 Cal BP 7850-7605

Cal BC 5750 Cal BP 7700

Beta 136677

Collagen bone

S-3 N1 [-31 /-39]

6900 ± 70 BP

7000 ± 70 BP

Cal BC 6005-5730 Cal BP 7955-7680

Cal BC 5865 Cal BP 7815

Beta 136678

Charcoal

S-3 N1 [-31 /-39]

6560 ± 130 BP

6560 ± 130BP

Cal BC 5710-5295 Cal BP 7660-7245

Cal BC 5495 Cal BP 7445

Beta 170713

Collagen bone

S-5 N2B [-51/101]

6670 ±4 0 BP

6760 ± 40BP

Cal BC 5720-5620 Cal BP 7670-7570

Cal BC 5660 Cal BP 7600

Beta 170714

Collagen bone

S-5 N3 [-101/122]

6910 ± 40 BP

7010 ± 40BP

Cal BC 5985-5790 Cal BP 7935-7740

Cal BC 5880 Cal BP 7830

Beta 170715

Collagen bone

S-5 N3 [-125]

6820 ± 40 BP

6920 ± 40BP

Cal BC 5870-5720 Cal BP 7820-7670

Cal BC 5780 Cal BP 7720

Referen.

anomalously short between her people? The settlers of that region of the east Spanish peninsula would have averages of stature smaller than the present ones?

The site correspond a permanent habitat during the Neolithic’s cultures.

Until now, the given shortage of human remains of this antiquity found in the zone does not allow us to answer these questions, although this study may be a precedent for later discoveries.

Bibliography GÓMEZ PÉREZ, J.L. (2008) – Estudio antropológico Yacimiento del Cingle del Mas Nou (Castellón) (en prensa).

THE ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY

GÓMEZ PÉREZ, J.L. (2009) – Estudio antropológico Cova Fosca (Castellón) (en prensa).

We finally present the obtained results of the dating 14 carbon carried out in both deposits: Cingle of Mas Nou and Cova Fosca. They demonstrate in its whole an evident homogeneity as well as the certainty that the human occupations in this territory did not stem from Neolithic but from a much more archaic period as it is the initial Epipalaeolithic.

MEIKLEJOHN, C., SCHENTAG, C., VENEMA, A., KEY, P., (1984) – Socioeconomic Change and Patterns of Pathology and Variation in the Mesolithic and Neolithic of Western Europe: Some Suggestions. En Paleopathology at the Origins of Agriculture. Ed. M.N. Cohen and G.J. Armelagos. Academic Press, Inc. Chapter 4 p. 75-100.

CINGLE OF MAS NOU

MORALES, A. y RODRÍGUEZ, L. (inédito) – Los mamíferos del cingle del Mas Nou (Ares del Maestre, Castellón). Informe técnico del laboratorio de Arqueozoología número 2005/4. U.A.M.

In this table shows the radiocarbon dating with a total of six, three obtained in the excavation of Sector 3, made in 1999, and the other three pertaining of Sector 5 excavated in the 2002. (See table number 13.1).

OLÀRIA PUYOLES, C. (1988) – Cova Fosca. asentamiento meso-neolítico de cazadores en serranía del Alto Maestrazgo. Monografies Prehistoria i Arqueologia Castellonenques, 3, 424 SIAP. Diputació. Castelló.

This site presents the first level with ceramic material that correspond to Neolithic Ancient, the others levels are of the Mesolithic culture with geometric flints and without ceramic industry.

Un la de pp.

OLÀRIA PUYOLES, C. (1999) – Noves intervencions arqueològiques als jaciments neolítics del Cingle del Mas Nou i Cova Fosca (Ares del Maestre, Alt Maestrat). Quaderns de Prehistòria i Arqueologia Castellonencs, 20, pp. 347-350. SIAP. Diputació. Castelló.

COVA FOSCA

OLÀRIA PUYOLES, C. (2000a) – Nuevas dataciones de C – 14 para el neolítico mediterráneo peninsular. Quaderns de Prehistòria i arqueologia de Castelló, 21,

This site present the levels correspond a Neolithic Ancient culture, Mesolithic and Epipalaeolithic initial. 122

C. OLÀRIA ET AL.: EPIPALEOLITHIC AND MESOLITHIC BURIAL’S FROM 12.000 TO 7.000 BP IN LEVANTIN TERRITORY ART ROCK

2734 pp. Servicio Publicaciones Diputacion Provincial Castellon. Castelló.

Castellonencs, 21, pp. 463-468. SIAP. Diputació. Castelló.

OLÀRIA PUYOLES, C. (2000b) – Projecte d’Investigació arqueològica cofinançat per la Direcció General de la Promoció Cultural i Patrimoni Artístic de la Generalitat Valenciana i la Universitat Jaume I de Castelló. 2000. Quaderns de Prehistòria i Arqueologia

OLÀRIA PUYOLES, C., GUSI JENER, F., DÍAZ, M. (1987-1988) – El asentamiento neolítico del cingle del Mas Nou (Ares del Maestrat, Castellón). Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arqueología Castellonenses, 13, pp. 95-169. SIAP. Diputación. Castellón.

123

GRAVURAS SERPENTIFORMES NA REGIÃO DE TRÁS-OS-MONTES Maria Fernanda FERRATO MELO DE CARVALHO Instituto Politécnico de Tomar e Universidade de Trás -os- Montes e Alto Douro Resumo: Na região norte de Portugal, são encontradas diversas gravuras com formato de serpentes. Tais gravuras foram relacionadas a povos castrejos de origem celta. O grande número de gravuras, bem como as características dos locais onde elas se encontram – que muito provavelmente foram, outrora, espécies de santuários–, indica um comportamento ofiolátrico por parte desses povos. O significado de tais gravuras ainda é um mistério; no entanto, através da história desses povos e de estudos feitos sobre a simbologia das serpentes, podemos rumar a um maior entendimento do comportamento dessas sociedades. O potencial turístico a ser explorado é outro factor de destaque, uma vez que as gravuras serpentiformes de Trás-os-Montes são elementos importantes para a Arte rupestre e, conseqüentemente, para o turismo cultural. Palavras-chave: simbolismo – ofiolatria – povos celtas- cultura – significado

INTRODUÇÃO

que habitaram grande parte território europeu, incluindo Portugal, anteriormente à invasão romana, exercendo muita influência na cultura do povo do Oeste da Península Ibérica, principalmente os povos que habitavam Trás-osMontes. Conforme Parente (2003), a ofiolotatria era praticada pelos Sefes e por um de seus povos-membros, os Lapiteas, povos de origem celta que ocuparam o Norte de Portugal. Desse modo, tem-se um indício da origem das manifestações de ofiolatria verificadas na região trasmontana.

A região de Trás-os-Montes, no Norte de Portugal, marcada em seu nome como portadora de uma extensão montanhosa e de grandes vales onde se encontram muitos vestígios de povos remotos, vestígios que datam desde o Paleolítico até os períodos mais recentes, passando pelo Neolítico, Calcolítico, Idade do Bronze etc. Entre esse grande acervo do passado humano um ponto que se evidencia, devido ao grande mistério e ao legado que o envolve, são as gravuras serpentiformes.

Os gregos deram ao Norte de Portugal o nome de Ofiussa, palavra que significa “Terra das serpentes”. Segundo anotações do poeta romano Rufus Avenius Festus baseadas em uma viagem marítima, os Oestrimnios, um povo que há muito tempo habitava o norte de Portugal, fugiram por causa das invasões de serpentes. Nesse caso, pode-se interpretar os nomes Saephe ou Sefes (o povo das serpentes) e Dragani (o povo dos dragões) como “as serpentes”. Esses povos, de acordo Parente (2003), entraram na Península Ibérica por volta de 600 a.C. e passaram a habitar a Galiza, território que compreende parte da Espanha e o Norte de Portugal.

O que se objectiva neste artigo é apontar algumas das diversas gravuras serpentiformes encontradas na região trasmontana, fazendo menção ao simbolismo da serpente que pode ser identificado em tais gravuras, bem como ao imaginário popular português. O estudo das gravuras serpentiformes e o apontamento de um culto ofiolátrico – o termo ofiolatria designa a adoração e o culto de serpentes, tomando a serpente como figura divina – praticado pelas populações castrejas do Norte de Portugal pode indicar um importante elemento de resgate dos próprios pilares culturais que sustentam ainda hoje a mítica regional de Trás-os-Montes.

Não se pode deixar de ressaltar, inicialmente, a importância que a simbologia tem para o estudo dessas gravuras, uma vez que sobre elas não há fontes escritas provenientes dos autores das mesmas. A tradição das manifestações ritualistas celtas mantinha-se através da passagem oral, e, consoante Bellingham (1999), a finalidade de resguardar as bases de seus cultos era designar o poder religioso a determinada elite da sociedade celta. Sendo assim, a simbologia é a ferramenta que pode ser utilizada na busca de uma melhor compreensão da cultura material.

Embora a maior parte das gravuras de serpentes encontradas na região supracitada tenha sido feita pelos povoados de Castros, ali podemos encontrar diversas rochas que, devido a alterações geológicas – e não à acção humana –, possuem fissuras que se assemelham a gravuras serpentiformes. Mesmo não tendo sido geradas pela produção humana, estas gravuras, especificamente, podem ter causado grande impacto na cultura de povos passados, uma vez que o símbolo da serpente é marcante em suas culturas. Neste artigo, serão mostrados não somente gravuras – feitas pela acção do homem –, mas também algumas das muitas formações naturais que muito possivelmente contribuíram valorativamente para a afirmação deste símbolo na conjuntura cultural desses povos.

A arte rupestre em geral comunga da mesma problemática: a manifestação cultural pode estar gravada em rochas, paredes de cavernas etc., mas a chave para a sua compreensão tem de ser buscada, de maneira mais coerente, pelos estudos de seus autores, de seus hábitos sociais, através de um número limitado de vestígios, ou mesmo, de vestígios enigmáticos, pois não se pode chegar a um significado exacto e definitivo, nem se pode atribuir

De acordo com as datações e os estudos feitos sobre as gravuras rupestres em forma de serpente encontradas ao Norte de Portugal, credita-se sua autoria aos povos celtas 125

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

um significado complexo a um elemento que talvez não signifique nada além de mera representação artística ou funcional. Contudo, de uma maneira ou de outra, subjaz o estudo da arte rupestre a relevância de se perceber o que uma dada sociedade manifesta de importante conforme sua(s) visão(ões). Lembra-se que se algo é gravado ou pintado em uma rocha ou uma fraga, quer dizer que foi percebido, escolhido e reproduzido para algum fim. Resta saber, por estudos minuciosos, que tipo de finalidade, ou finalidades, foram pretendidas.

empregou trabalho em expô-las há alguma razão, e é essa razão que o estudo do símbolo vai buscar. Existem, porém, símbolos universais, símbolos que podem ser vistos nos mais diversos sítios e representados nas mais diferentes épocas. O símbolo da serpente é um deles e vai ser melhor explorado mais adiante. No intuito de compreender a expressão desses símbolos universais, podemos analisá-los de duas formas: 1) Primeiramente como manifestação de um impulso universal inato a todo o ser humano – esta ideia foi exposta por Jung (2002) em seu conceito de símbolo arquetípico;

No caso específico das serpentes, elas estão gravadas em locais considerados sítios de culto. Devido à história do povo celta, há a identificação de segmentos adoradores de serpentes. Neste sentido, a serpente é vista como um ícone ligado ao sagrado, ao metafísico e ao transcendental. É, portanto, dessa forma que irá ser abordada a problemática das gravuras rupestres na região trasmontana.

2) Explorar as peculiaridades de cada cultura para que não se generalize erroneamente o significado de um símbolo. Portanto, para o estudo dos símbolos, não podemos ignorar os impulsos humanos universais que fazem com que uma representação seja mais que uma simples representação, mas que contenha em si mais significados. Muitas vezes, podemos chegar a significados idênticos entre culturas. Entretanto, em cada representação simbólica é depositada as peculiaridades de cada cultura, que faz de cada símbolo exposto por cada cultura algo único.

O SÍMBOLO O uso de símbolos é uma acção que distingue o ser humano dos demais animais vistos como desprovidos de pensamento simbólico. O símbolo, ao ser estudado, deve ser explorado em sua totalidade uma vez que, de acordo com Jung (2002), um símbolo pode nos ser familiar e deter em si outros significados não tão evidentes.

O SIMBOLISMO DA SERPENTE

“O símbolo pode ser comparado a um cristal que reflecte de formas diferentes a luz, conforme a face que a recebe. E pode- se dizer ainda que ele é um ser vivo, uma parcela do nosso ser em movimento e em transformação. De forma que ao contemplá-lo, ao tomá-lo como objecto de mediação, se observa também a propria trajectória que se pretende seguir, apreende-se a direcção do movimento na qual o ser levado” (Chevalier; Cheerbrant, 1994, p. 289)

A serpente reúne características capazes de provocar as mais diversas reacções no ser humano. É, em primeira instância, um animal que causa medo, pois é capaz de matar de modo imprevisível, aparecendo e desaparecendo rapidamente. Ocupa dimensão extensa quando esticada. Por outro lado, ao enrolar-se em torno de si, obtém uma forma que ajuda a camuflar-se. Muda de pele uma vez por ano, possui sangue frio e não tem patas, portanto, arrastase. De olfacto aguçado e boa visão, percebe inúmeras vibrações à sua volta.

Na Arqueologia, o estudo de um símbolo deve estar sempre relacionado à cultura na qual ele está incluído. É necessário um estudo das práticas culturais da sociedade em questão para que se possa atribuir ao símbolo sua devida “densidade simbólica”. Na Arqueologia PréHistorica, esse estudo não é simples, uma vez que não podemos contar com documentos escritos e grande parte do material cultural não pode ser analisado, já que as produções culturais nem sempre deixam resquícios materiais, e aqueles provenientes de uma manifestação simbólica nem sempre resistem ao tempo. No entanto, se houver um estudo minucioso dos vestígios arqueológicos e heranças culturais deixadas por uma certa sociedade, podemos, com a ajuda de observações antropológicas e analogias ponderadas com sociedades estruturadas sobre os mesmos elementos, cuidadosamente compreender alguns símbolos encontrados. Na arte rupestre, por exemplo, pode ser vista uma série de símbolos: pinturas e gravuras que foram expostas, pois são cheias de significado. Partimos do princípio de que se o ser humano

O símbolo da serpente aparece em povos de várias regiões e épocas. A mítica que circunda o animal é, sem dúvida, muito ampla e rica. Cada povo que tomou a serpente como um de seus símbolos adoptou, no bojo do seu olhar, as peculiaridades manifestadas pelo réptil e inseriu-as em sua cultura, modificando sua produção social e seu modo de interpretar o mundo. Os celtas possuíam uma relação íntima com a natureza. Seus cultos eram voltados às forças naturais como o Sol, a Lua, as águas, os animais etc. Sendo assim, as serpentes, muitas vistas gravadas em rochedos de Trás-os-Montes por habitantes (com influência céltica) de castros da região, pertenciam à essa gama de símbolos referentes à natureza. Simbolicamente a serpente implica poder. Ao mesmo tempo que causa medo ao Homem, como dissemos acima, 126

M.F. FERRATO MELO DE CARVALHO: GRAVURAS SERPENTIFORMES NA REGIÃO DE TRÁS-OS-MONTES

pode significar fonte da cura. É um animal que se esconde, vem de sítios obscuros, que remetem ao desconhecido e àquilo da natureza que o ser humano desconhece. A serpente é um ser dual, possui a cabeça quase semelhante ao rabo, o que, instantaneamente, dificulta a identificação de seu começo (cabeça) e de seu fim (cauda).

a totalidade. O ser humano e as forças que regem o mundo e que dão a vida. É o material ligado ao imaterial. SANTUÁRIOS OFIOLÁTRICOS EM TRÁS-OSMONTES E ALTO DOURO Encontra-se um grande número de os locais identificados como santuários ofiolátricos em Trás-os-Montes. A seguir estão enumerados e comentados alguns dos principais:

A serpente pode ser relacionada à Lua por ser um animal que vem das trevas, do obscuro que se renova, uma vez que sofre transformações cíclicas (a troca da pele) tal qual a Lua, que possui suas fases. O ciclo que a serpente atravessa pode ser tomado como o poder do renascimento. Provavelmente, era vista como ser de renascimento, de morte e de vida. Para ratificar essa ideia de renascimento relacionada ao símbolo da serpente pode-se mencionar a Uroboro: famosa figura de serpente engolindo sua própria cauda. Essa representação, de um ciclo, indica a continuidade sem fim, a morte e a vida. A vida que se faz através da morte e a morte que se faz através da vida. Também representa, de acordo com Chevalier & Cheerbrant (1994), a criação do tempo e a auto fecundação. O símbolo da serpente manifesta a fertilidade. Sua forma pode permutar entre forma fálica e a forma da gentalha feminina, quando se encontra enrolada. Embora possa remeter, de acordo com a forma adoptada, aos dois sexos, a serpente é relacionada ao feminino. A mudança cíclica de pele pode ser relacionada ao ciclo menstrual, que se liga à fecundidade, à vida. Para os gregos, para algumas tribos indígenas do Brasil e ainda hoje para alguns indianos, a serpente é vista como símbolo de fertilidade.

Baldoeiro Situado no concelho de Vilariça, o Castro do Baldoeiro abriga muitos vestígios de sociedades castrejas e apresenta um santuário rupestre com algumas gravuras serpentiformes. Visitado por Santos Junior (1931), referência da qual retiramos as informações apresentadas neste item e em que podem ser consultadas outras informações mais, o sítio arqueológico possui uma enorme fraga, denominada de “Fraga do Corvo”, onde podem ser vistas muitas covinhas, duas cavidades em formato rectangular e um sulco de grande largura que abrange praticamente toda a extensão da fraga. Tangendo o caminho que leva ao santuário ofiolátrico está o “Penedo do Cobrão”, no qual existe uma gravura serpentiforme de 1,85 cm, em que se verifica a parte da cabeça devido a maior grossura em relação à cauda. Na base da “Fraga do Corvo”, há um sulco ondulado de grande largura medindo 3,50 m de comprimento. Pode-se notar a gravação de mais serpentiformes na mesma fraga.

Estudando a mitologia celta encontraremos uma interessante representação da mulher, muitas vezes sendo igualada, em termos de poder, aos homens, ou até superando-os nesse quesito. Isto porque a mulher era tida como um ser misterioso e sensitivo, capaz de comunicarse com o que não era visível, fazendo a conexão entre o mundo material e o mundo transcendental.

No topo da fraga, encontra-se mais três gravações em forma de serpente. Uma delas apresenta carácter levemente ondulado, 3 m e cabeça acentuada. Com formato em “S”, a outra tem 2,3 m de comprimento. Já a última, 3,5 m. Ainda na mesma fraga, notam-se dois sulcos: um de 2,5m designado como outra serpentiforme, e outro dividido em duas partes iguais por uma inflexão. Uma das porções possui 75 cm, a outra, 2,7 m. Nenhuma delas é muito ondulada.

Segundo Chevalier & Cheerbrant (1994), o ser humano e a serpente são ao mesmo tempo opostos e semelhantes. A serpente situa-se no início do processo evolutivo dos vertebrados – é um animal rastejante, de sangue frio, sem pêlos e penas –, e o Homem é um animal biologicamente complexo. Mesmo estando em um estado primitivo na cadeia evolutiva, a serpente desperta o medo e, consequentemente, a luta do Homem.

Existe também uma covinha na parte mediana entre os dois segmentos provocados pela inflexão da gravura. Mão do homem

Por esse ângulo, Homem e Serpente, atravessam os ciclos evolutivos e competem em um mesmo patamar. Num segundo momento, a ligação da serpente ao obscuro e à força da natureza, sobrepõe o réptil ao ser humano, que se curva perante a natureza, contemplando-a e cultuando-a.

Esse sítio, que data do final da Idade do Bronze e início da Idade do ferro, contém um interessantíssimo altar com gravuras rupestres. A Mão do homem está situada na aldeia de Escariz, na freguesia de Adoufre, e expõe um dos mais importantes conjuntos de gravuras rupestres da região: gravuras de mãos com braços, estilizadas, presença de um zoomorfo e de uma serpentiforme, além de algumas outras gravuras de sentido recôndito, cuja autoria é atribuída aos Lapiteas, segundo Parente (2004).

Portanto, pode-se tratar o culto ofiolátrico dos povos que habitavam o Norte de Portugal como o culto de um símbolo que liga o mundo real ao mundo sobrenatural, o microcosmo e o macrocosmo, unindo-os e representando 127

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

Fig. 14.1. Serpentiforme na Mão do homem (Parente, 2003, p. 245) Abaixo segue uma foto de uma gravura de serpente encontrada no referido sítio 1 (Figo. 14.1).

derivam, provavelmente, dos Lapiteas, povo que viveu durante longo período na região.

Panóias

É interessante notar que, no simbolismo da serpente, a ideia que prevalece é a da vida, mais especificamente, do renascimento. Em Panóias, os rituais que eram feitos tinham como objectivo renovar a vida através da oferta de sacrifícios aos deuses. Aquele sítio foi marcado desde o período da instalação dos Lapiteas como um local sagrado, já que lá se encontram símbolos de ofiolatria. A ideia do sagrado foi levada adiante no período em que as inscrições foram feitas nos penedos.

Quando se faz uma visita à Panóias, sítio em que se encontra um santuário dedicado aos deuses dos Lapiteas, verifica-se uma infra-estrutura para recepção turística. As visitas são guiadas por pessoas incumbidas de explicar e esclarecer dúvidas sobre Panóias. Nos penedos localizados nesse local, onde se encerram muitas estruturas que comportavam rituais de oferendas aos deuses, estão gravadas algumas inscrições de autoria do romano Caius Calpurnius Rufinus. É possível verificar a intenção de culto ao deus Serápis, um deus de imenso poder, equiparado a Júpiter ou Zeus. O culto ao deus Serápis teve início no Egipto, estendendo-se pelo Império Romano do século III d.C.

A seguir está uma imagem de serpentiforme gravada no local (Figo. 14.2). Santuário ofiolátrico de São Bento Nas palavras de Parente (2004, p. 18): O castro de São Bento […] ocupa um alto esporão granítico, de base arredondada, empinado de todos os lados e, por isso, com óptimas condições de defesa natural […] Encontrando esplêndidas condições de defesa, paisagem magnífica e fáceis meios de subsistência, os homens de todos os tempos fizeram ali a sua habitação permanente. Ainda não se realizaram escavações arqueológicas; mas o Período Castrejo e a Época Romana foram coprovadamente

No entanto, ao longo da visita guiada, não iremos notar menção sobre algumas gravuras, que, dessa forma, passam despercebidas pelos turistas. São gravuras serpentiformes e datam de um período anterior ao período em que Rufinus escreveu as epígrafes dedicadas aos deuses nos penedos de Panóias. Essas serpentiformes 1

Mais gravuras de serpentiformes encontradas na região de Trás-osMontes e Alto Douro podem ser vistas em Parente (2003).

128

M.F. FERRATO MELO DE CARVALHO: GRAVURAS SERPENTIFORMES NA REGIÃO DE TRÁS-OS-MONTES

Fig. 14.2. Serpentiforme de Panóias (Parente, 2003, p. 243) existentes no castro. Consideramos como elementos castrejos, em São Bento, os restos da muralha cicóplica e o santuário ofilolátrico.

Vila Pouca de Aguiar; Bouçoais, em Valpaços; Campelo, em Mondim de Basto; Eiras, em Chaves; Lamelas, em Ribeira de Pena; Ludares, em Freguesia de Valnogueiras; Parada de Aguiar, em Vila Pouca de Aguiar; Ribalonga, em Alijó; Richeira, em termo de Águas Santas, Vila Real; Soutelo de Chaves, em Chaves; Torre de Dona Chama, em Mirandela; Vieira do Minho, no concelho de mesmo nome; e Vila Nova, em Valpaços.

No santuário supracitado, formado por 12 pequenos rochedos, estão gravadas vinte serpentiformes e incisos mais de uma dúzia de podomorfos e várias outras plataformas de objectivo cultual, muitas covas e covinhas, às vezes interligadas por sulcos pequenos.

Segue uma foto de serpentiforme presente em Lamelas (Figo. 14.3).

Demais santuários ofiolátricos e gravuras de serpentiformes espalhados pela região Por toda a região trasmontana ainda encontramos gravuras serpentiformes que apontam para um forte culto ofiolátrico praticado pelos povos de origem celta que viveram na região, mais precisamente sociedades castrejas, ou seja, que viviam nas delimitações de castros e possuíam uma cultura bem demarcada. Os vestígios ofiolátricos verificados em toda a extensão de Trás-osMontes são gravuras em formato de serpentes. Essas gravuras por vezes possuem a forma mais definida e detalhada de uma serpente, com a cabeça mais larga do que a cauda. Já algumas outras serpentiformes apresentam um desenho mais ondulado – as ondulações representam a forma mais naturalista de uma serpente, sendo os sulcos e as gravuras menos onduladas representações mais estilizadas do animal.

POTENCIAL TURÍSTICO As figuras serpentiformes gravadas no Norte português estão, em sua totalidade, ao ar livre. Alguns dos sítios que as abrigam possuem infra-estrutura para recepção de turistas, como é o caso de Panóias. Entretanto, o roteiro turístico oficial apresentado em Panóias não inclui as serpentiformes. Outros sítios que apresentam gravuras serpentiformes não dispõem de sinalização adequada indicando como chegar às gravuras, o que indica uma baixa exploração da capacidade turística dessas regiões. Os moradores das redondezas dos sítios, muitas vezes, não têm conhecimento da existência de arte rupestre em sua região. Mesmo que, em vários casos, os sítios onde as gravuras estão são relativamente conhecidos pelos habitantes da região, nota-se a desinformação quanto à

Alguns dos demais sítios no Norte de Portugal onde se pode ver gravuras serpentiformes: Alfarela de Jales, em 129

EURO-MEDITERRANEAN ROCK ART STUDIES

Fig. 14.3. Serpentiforme de Lamelas (Parente, 2003, p. 248) arte rupestre. Actualmente o que se pode encontrar é um escasso material que remete aos santuários ofiolátricos.

relevância e o funcionamento da concepção simbólica na estrutura mantida por aquelas sociedades trasmontanas. Vestígios de organização social, as gravuras serpentiformes representam manifestações religiosas dos povos que ocuparam o Norte de Portugal.

Sendo assim, constata-se que muitos dos locais de gravuras rupestres do Norte de Portugal não possuem um suporte efectivo de orientação turística. O resgate da cultura local vinculado à história representada nos vestígios de arte rupestre deveria formar um importante elemento atractivo das regiões, o que auxiliaria no desenvolvimento cultural e económico (comercial) dos povoados. O turismo intensivo também impulsionaria uma maior conservação dos sítios de arte rupestre, preservando o património histórico e cultural e fomentando actividades trabalhistas voltadas à conservação dos elementos de arte rupestre, o que também beneficiaria o meio científico no que diz respeito ao estudo da arte rupestre e das populações nativas.

É a partir do resgate das manifestações de culto à serpente, materializadas nas diversas gravuras serpentiformes, que se identifica o legado deixado pelas populações ofiolátricas que habitaram Trás-os-Montes. Sobre este ponto, é importante ressaltar que existem diferentes formas de representação de serpentiformes, como pôde-se notar nas gravuras vistas anteriormente neste trabalho. Os actuais povoados nutrem em seu bojo o imaginário referente ao ancestral culto das serpentes. Algumas lendas e canções são repletas de menções ao réptil. Há estudiosos que atribuem o culto ofiolátrico não apenas ao imaginário trasmontano, mas também ao imaginário do povo português.

CONCLUSÃO As gravuras serpentiformes de Trás-os-Montes retratam um grande património da cultura dos antigos habitantes do Norte de Portugal. Sua presença denota a importância simbólica desse réptil na estrutura cultural desses povos. As gravuras, que se encontram em sítios que, possivelmente, eram santuários, revelam um culto às serpentes, denominado culto ofiolátrico. Isso incita o estudo das diferentes simbologias que a presença da serpente pode sugerir, na tentativa de se conhecer a

De qualquer forma, a arte rupestre que se encontra no Norte de Portugal constitui a memória cultural da região e, como tal, requer uma conservação adequada, bem como, uma posição de maior prestígio nas ementas turísticas de Trás-os-Montes. Em contrapartida, infelizmente, a região carece de um levantamento adequado do potencial turístico e de mais investimentos nos sectores turístico, cultural e científico, o que inscreveria as 130

M.F. FERRATO MELO DE CARVALHO: GRAVURAS SERPENTIFORMES NA REGIÃO DE TRÁS-OS-MONTES

gravuras serpentiformes com mais destaque dentro da exploração turística da região.

JUNG, C.G. (2002) – O homem e seus símbolos. Rio de Janeiro (Brasil): Ed. Nova Fronteira. 320 p.

Referências bibliográficas

PARENTE, J. (2003) – O Castro de S. Bento (Concelho de Vila Real) e o seu ambiente arqueológico. [S.l.:s.n.]. 397 p.

BELLINGHAM, D. (1999) – Introdução à mitologia céltica. Lisboa: Editorial Estampa. 128 p.

PARENTE, J. (2004) – Roteiro arqueológico e artístico do Concelho de Vila Real. [S.l: s.n.]. 41 p. SANTOS JÚNIOR, J.R. (1931) – As serpentes gravadas do castro do Baldoeiro (Moncrovo – Trás-os-Montes). XV Congrès International d’ Anthropologie & Archéologie Préhistorique (Portugal). Paris (França). p. 383-386.

CHEVALIER, J.; CHEERBRANT, A. (1994) – Dicionário dos símbolos. Tradução de Cristina Rodrigues e Artur Guerra. Lisboa: Ed. Teorema. 727 p. FIGUEIREDO, M.R. (1973) – Outra vez coa ofiolatría: dous achádegos interesantes. Trabalhos de Antropologia e Etnologia. Porto. 22: 3, p. 1-6.

131

Session SO7 GLOBAL STATE OF THE ART

THE CAMERA OBSCURA AND THE ORIGIN OF ART: THE CASE FOR IMAGE PROJECTION IN THE PALEOLITHIC Matt GATTON

Artist, USA, [email protected]

Leah CARREON

Clinical Research Director, Kenton D. Leatherman Center, USA, [email protected]

Madison CAWEIN Artist, USA

Walter BROCK Artist, USA

Valerie SCOTT

Visiting Professor of Psychology, Indiana University, USA Abstract: There are a number of theories on the origin of art: magic, mutation, sexuality, eidetics, and shamanism. But few of these theories can explain why humans existed in a consistent anatomical form for over 150,000 years before beginning to make recognizable figurative art, suggesting that the source idea of representational art lies more in our nurture than our nature. But how then did anyone first get the idea to make marks that depict the real world? The answer may ultimately be environmental. As humans spread out from their native warm zones they encountered new climates, which required changes in survival strategies. As they pushed further into harsher and colder frontiers, humans were forced to adopt the micro-climate strategy—thick animal hide clothing and completely enclosed animal hide tents. Our experiments with Paleolithic tent reconstructions show that random small holes in the hide covering allowed in a stream of daylight, which projected moving images of the outside world onto the interior surfaces, making an accidental but functional camera obscura. Would seeing a bison walking around on the wall trigger the idea of two-dimensional representational art? Keywords: Camera obscura, micro-climate strategy, animal hide tent, light projected image, Paleolithic art, origin of art, Paleocamera theory La camera obscura et les origines de l’art: le cas en faveur de la projection des images pendant le paleolithique Resumé: Il existe déjà plusieurs théories au sujet des origines de l’art: la magie, la mutation, la sexualité, l’eidetic (ou le rôle de la mémoire dans le rappel des images) et le shamanisme. Cependant, il y a une explication plus pratique: la première conceptualisation de la communication visuelle a été le sous-produit de la nécessité de se rechauffer. Le climat rude a forcé les êtres humains à adopter des stratégies pour retenir le chauffage dans leurs abris, y compris les tentes faites de peaux épaises d’animaux. Notre recherche démontre que de petits trous dans ces peaux auraient permis la projection des images mouvantes à l’intérieur de la tente depuis le monde de dehors, en effet une «caméra obscura» fonctionnante. Imaginez une personne durant le paléolithique remarquant au petit matin l’image des animaux marchant sur les murs autours d’elle: le monde en trois dimensions réduit à deux dimensions sur une surface à l’intérieur de la tente! Comment réagit cette personne? Comment interpréter ces esprits ainsi manifestés? Est-ce le moment de la révélation ultime? Est-ce la porte d’entrée dans le domaine religieux, la pensée philosophique, ou encore la communication visuelle? Mots Clés: Chambre noire, stratégie de micro-climat, tente du Paléolithique, Les habitations, la projection de l’image, l’art Paléolithique, l’origine de l’art, La théorie de la paléo-caméra

At a later point, presently believed to be around 35,000 years ago, humans began to arrange lines in such a way as to form recognizable figures like horses, bison, oxen, reindeer, and mammoths. It is the transition from lines to figures that is at the center of this inquiry into the beginnings of representational art—the very idea of depiction.

INTRODUCTION Many animals leave marks: cats, wolves, and bears claw on trees. So mark-making isn’t, in and of itself, a particularly special skill. Homo erectus incised simple patterns of lines on objects over 350,000 years ago. The H. erectus patterns have a sense of rhythm, regularity, and spacing and may be indicative of higher order thinking. 1

Since humans existed in an anatomically consistent form for over 150,000 years before leaving traces of figurative art, the great difficulty for most researchers has been an inability to find a way in which people could have

1

See John Feliks, “Musings on the Palaeolithic Fan Motif” in Exploring the Mind of Ancient Man: Festschrift to Robert Bednarik [Peddarapu Chenna Reddy ed.] (New Delhi: Research India Press, 2007); “Phi in the Acheulian” (paper presented at the XV Congress of the International Union of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, Lisbon September 4-9, 2006); and Robert Bednarik, “Concept-mediated marking in the Lower Palaeolithic” in Current Anthropology 36 (1995) 605–34, for a full

discussion of the intellectual abilities behind the lines made by Homo erectus.

135

GLOBAL STATE OF THE ART

stumbled upon the idea of representations on the wall. 2 But all a person has to do to see images on the wall is live in a hide tent, an activity well documented in the archeological record. Our experiments with Paleolithic tent reconstructions both in the USA and Europe, show that these dark huts accidentally act as simple camera obscuras. The term camera obscura may conjure the idea of an advanced piece of human engineering, with fine lens and ground glass, but in its simplest and most ancient form a camera obscura is nothing more than a darkened space (of any size) that happens to have a small hole in it. Sunlight reflects off of objects in the world and the light rays pass through the hole and project an upside-down moving image of the outside world onto the interior surfaces of the space—clouds float across the earthen floor, wild animals walk across the walls, and the grasslands magically ripple in the breeze across the ceiling. How would primitive denizens of a Paleolithic tent react to such an image? As they struggled to comprehend the image, would two potent concepts take root in their minds: that a living animal can ‘exist’ in a different form (a two-dimensional approximation) or on a different plane (as a spirit)? This incidental image is perhaps our first glimpse of the divine, planting the very seed of art and religion. For our human species, which had spent its first 150,000 years eking out the most meager of animalistic existences, this was a pivotal moment, for it bore the promise of our advance—visual communication, organization, civilization, faith, and power.

son that they had not invented the automobile yet was not because of a lack of brainpower but a lack of information, compiled cultural knowledge. A long time ago someone domesticated a horse, someone else later invented the wheel, which gave us the cart pulled by the horse; later someone else invented an internal combustion engine, which gave us the automobile; and still later someone else invented cruise control and rear defoggers. We make our advances from an ever-growing platform of existing information, a mountain of discoveries made by our forbears. SOLUTION The Paleo-Camera Theory Small random holes in Paleolithic hide tents coincidentally and occasionally created camera obscuras, which projected moving images inside the dwelling spaces, triggering profound spiritual, philosophical, and aesthetic advances. Dwellings are not normally constructed with the intention of projecting images. We make shelter because we have to. We have not been blessed with thick fur or other physiological adaptations necessary to survive harsh climates. The environment dictates dwellings to us, and we make them with whatever materials that the surroundings supply. The reason that projected images sometimes happen inside dwelling spaces is that the dwelling creates a dim space, which is sometimes surrounded by a much brighter space, the sunlit world. If the dwelling has no holes, or too many holes, then there will be no visible image, but if the angle of the sun and the alignment of an optimum sized hole coincide then an image will be projected. As the sun arcs across the sky daily, a hole that projects a beautiful image at one time of day will project nothing at another time. As the sun’s trajectory shifts seasonally, some holes that are conducive at one point in the year will produce nothing at another. There is an extremely random aspect to when and where images reveal themselves, up until the point where someone gains command of them, and can make images happen at will.

PROBLEM The central problem of the origin of art is one of biological design. We are a very peculiar species. We are hardwired with vast capacities, but only a limited number of abilities. We come into the world with ingrained inquisitiveness and enormous learning potential, but this system is dependent on someone already being there to do the teaching. Our brain is set up to master the skills of language and visual communication but it takes nurture on the part of our culture to activate them. If we need to be taught how to recognize representational lines, then how did we ever begin to create them? This is the conundrum of the origin-of-art.

A camera obscura is literally, a dark room, with a small hole in the roof, wall, or window-shutter through which the view of the outside is projected onto the opposite wall or a screen opposite the hole. 4 The optics are absurdly simple. Lines of light reflect from the bottom of a sunlit landscape through a hole and continue upward in straight lines to the top of the back of the camera. The lines of light reflected from the top of the landscape travel downward to the bottom, and all lines in between top and bottom similarly pass through the center, producing an upside-down image. 5

It is believed the Homo sapien cranial capacity hasn’t changed in over 180,000 years. So if we are as intelligent as we ever were then why didn’t we have cellular phones and microwave ovens 180,000 years ago? Because those inventions are really a function of a cultural evolution— the long march from genes to memes. We know that by the Upper Paleolithic, the artists were like us, with similar abilities in all areas of perception and thinking. 3 The rea2 See David Lewis-Williams, Mind in the Cave ((London: Thames & Hudson, 2002) 184, for a discussion of this problem, and the many strategies that have been employed to try and get around it. 3 Jean Clottes and Jean Courtin, The Cave Beneath the Sea: Paleolithic Images at Cosquer [Trans. Marylin Garner] (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1996) 180.

4

Helmut and Alison Gernsheim, The History of Photography: From the Camera Obscura to the Beginning of the Modern Era (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1969), 17. 5 Peter Pollack, The Picture History of Photography: From the Earliest Beginnings to the Present Day (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1969), 18.

136

M. GATTON ET AL.: THE CAMERA OBSCURA AND THE ORIGIN OF ART: THE CASE FOR IMAGE PROJECTION IN THE PALEOLITHIC

The size of the projected image depends on the distance from the hole to the projection surface, the closer the surface to the hole the smaller the image; the further away the surface is from the hole the larger the image. The size of the hole and the thickness of the material also impacts image quality. There is a trade off, the larger the hole the brighter the image, but it will appear fuzzy at close range; the smaller the hole the tighter the image, but it will appear faint. There is an optimum relationship between the size of the hole and the distance to the projection surface, the focal length, where a balance is struck between brightness and resolution.

of any real object—it is a representation. Photographer Ansel Adams saw the camera image as its own entity, “a thing itself.” 7 The image takes on its own life, its own reality. To be in a room-size camera and behold the beauty and wonder of the objects and beings of the outside world floating ephemerally on every surface, yourself included, provokes deep philosophical questions about the nature of reality. How would Paleolithic people interpret such an event? What would it mean? How could it be understood? How would it change the viewer’s perception of the world? The one thing the camera’s image does is split a quasi-reality away from reality, peeling off an ‘other’ from the ‘is’; instilling the very idea that animals, plants, and humans have existences in other forms, in other realms. The idea of ‘otherness’ is sowed in the human brain and a floodgate of possibility opens—spirits and representations. This is a simple, and yet powerful, instant reconfiguration of the concept of the world.

It is important to note, when the objects outside of the camera are moving their images move correspondingly on the inside. In this respect, the images created by a camera obscura are more like a movie than a still photograph. Our cameras today derive directly from the camera obscura, operating on the same simple physics. The invention of the glass lens was a fabulous technological breakthrough, greatly increasing the brightness of the image in the chamber. A glass lens is advantageous, but is not necessary, a small hole will do. A simple lensless camera obscura is nothing short of miraculous because it is essentially technology-free, that one small hole of light can carry all the visual information of a landscape into a darkened space is both surprising and astounding. 6 The image inside the camera holds shape, value, and movement—just like reality only flat and inverted. The horse on the wall stands for a horse, it’s recognizable and yet it is not a real living, breathing animal. Inside a tent camera obscura a person cannot see the living animal outside at the same time they see its image inside. In that perceptual moment the animal on the wall is independent

In addition to being optically feasible, the paleo-camera theory makes practical sense as the archeological record describes the forms of the Paleolithic tents and their proximity to animal grazing pastures and migration routes, and is also extraordinarily perceptually sound. To detail the perceptual advantages of a camera obscura’s image we must first understand the fundamentals of human vision. Our eyes come equipped with roughly 120 million rods (specializing in colorless lowlight vision and motion detection) and about seven million centrally located cones (specializing in color and acuity). The way our vision works is our rods pick up some peripheral movement and we glance over at it, thus projecting the subject of our interest on the macula area (laden with

6 Luc Sante in Abelardo Morell and Luc Sante. Camera Obscura, (New York: Bullfinch, 2004), 7.

7 Ansel Adams, The Camera (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1980), 30.

137

GLOBAL STATE OF THE ART

cones) that sees the color and detail. We accumulate a picture of our surroundings by building up glances, the illusion of a richly detailed world the function of a constantly fidgeting macula and the brain’s information compiling capacity. The camera obscura’s projected image not only carries recognizable shapes and shading, but also realistic movement which is a critical factor for recognition as the overwhelming surface area and number of receptors in our eyes are design to pick up motion. Whatever is moving outside the tent in reality—animals, birds, clouds, people, waves on the water, leaves swaying in the wind—moves correspondingly in the projection inside the tent. The images projected inside a tent camera obscura are just a half step away from normal perception, operating on the same principles, and are thus readily recognizable.

the camera’s image the group can collectively experience, discuss, verify, confirm, investigate, and interpret. One of the sticking points of the origin-of-art has been that the notion of representation must be socially held. 8 And it is the communal aspect of the camera’s image that makes the paleo-camera theory anthropologically feasible. In addition, it is well described in historic accounts how people react to a camera obscura’s image and how they feel compelled to capture it. 9 Even today participants in our experiments instinctively touch the image. Imagine if you will, a Paleolithic person first furtively touching then outlining the image of a horse projected inside their tent. The horse walks away, and the person and their kinsmen are left staring at the scratched outline. Is this possibly the crystalline moment, the veritable light bulb over the head, the long elusive step from sensation to creation?

But how cognitively feasible is the theory? Some will argue that the brain is actually are most vital visual organ and for the paleo-camera theory to have any validity it must make sense to the brain, to the manner in which our brain processes visual stimuli. Because our eyes are camera obscuras, the image of what is in front of us is actually upside-down on the back of your eyeballs. But the world does not appear upside-down to us, because the brain flips the information. The rods and cones turn the light information into neurological (electro-chemical) information that passes through a switching station called the lateral geniculate nucleus and then streams on to the striate cortex at the back of the brain where the information is processed with amazing dexterity. Whether it is bright or dim, whether we are standing up or lying down we can effortlessly make sense of visual stimuli of varying illumination levels and orientations. Not only does the brain make sense of alterations in scale, color, and orientation it is also filling in gaps. There is an informationless area, the blind spot, at the back of each eyeball where the optic nerve connects. But we don’t perceive a black hole, because our brain fills in the information, changing it to match the surrounding area every time we glance one direction or another.

COMPARISON WITH OTHER ORIGIN-OF-ART THEORIES Origin-of-art theories have traditionally been viewed as antagonistic, each theory competing with the others for the title of the one true universal origin-of-art theory. Recently though, some theorists have begun looking at possible relationships amongst the theories; art historian Whitney Davis thinks that art probably began from “unrelated” origins 10 and researcher John Feliks sees compatibility and potential interactions between origin of depiction theories. 11 These origin theories are not competitive, but are in fact collaborative, even cumulative, each theory providing a piece to a larger puzzle. By piecing these perspectives together we can form a clearer picture of how art arose. These theories can be divided into three categories: interpreted purpose, mental capacities, and recognition. 1) Interpreted purpose A) Hunting Magic (S. Reinach, 1903, later championed by H. Breuil) B) Sexual Dichotomy (A. Leroi-Gourhan and A. Laming-Emperaire, 1958, ((based on ideas of Max Raphael)) later C. Paglia)

Our eyes collect light and our brain takes that malleable information and instantaneously and seamlessly shapes it into an understanding. The paleo-camera theory is cognitively sound because the brain is inherently in the business of interpreting light and molding it for meaning. The cognitive argument against other theories, like recognizing stray marks as representations, is that sort of recognition is thought to require a preexisting notion of the possibility of depiction. In contrast the paleo-camera theory shows that the brain is already geared to recognizing and interpreting light, without need of a preexisting idea of depiction.

C) Totemism (J. F. MacLennan, 1869, later J. G. Frazer) D) Sanctuary (H. Obermaier and H. Bégouën, 1929) 8

Lewis-Williams, The Mind in the Cave, 183. François Arago, ‘Speech to the Académie des Sciences January 7, 1839’, as reproduced in Helmut and Alison Gernsheim, L.J.M. Daguerre: The History of the Diorama and the Daguerreotype, (New York: Dover, 1968), 82: And William Henry Fox Talbot, “Brief Historical Sketch of the Invention of Photography” in The Pencil of Nature (originally published 1844), reprinted (New York: Da Capo Press, 1968), unpaginated. 10 Whitney Davis, “More on the Origins of Image Making: Reply to Delluc and Delluc” in Current Anthropology 27 (1986) 515. 11 John Feliks, “The Impact of Fossils on the Development of Visual Representation” in Rock Art Research 15 (1998), 110. 9

Another important point is that the camera obscura’s images are readily socializable, meaning that everyone in the tent can see the same thing at the same time, unlike a dream or a hallucination where only one individual has an experience and can only share it with others later. With 138

M. GATTON ET AL.: THE CAMERA OBSCURA AND THE ORIGIN OF ART: THE CASE FOR IMAGE PROJECTION IN THE PALEOLITHIC

E) Hunting Tallies (E. Lartet, late 1800’s)

3) Recognition A) Shapes (Leone Battista Alberti, 1400’s, followed by H. Breuil, E. Gombrich, and P. Picasso)

F) Time Factored Systems (Marshak, 1972) G) Coping Mechanisms / Animism (W. Worringer. 1908, later H. Read, L. Schlain)

B) Shadows (Pliny the Elder, CE 77, with renewed currency in the 1700’s-1800’s)

H) Self-glorification (W.P. Yetts, 1939)

C) Reflections in Water (derivative of Pliny)

I) Body Adornment (E. Grosse, 1894, later A. van Scheltema, E. Von Sydow, O. Rank, and P. Bahn)

D) Natural Atmospheric Illusions (first applied to art origins here)

J) Graffiti (R. D. Guthrie, 2005)

E) Fossils (J. Feliks, 1998, based on the observations of LeroiGourhan, Oakley, White, Marshack, and Taborin) F) Claw Marks (J. Maringer and H. Bondi, 1950’s)

2) Mental Capacities A) Supernatural Creation (various mythological traditions)

G) Macaroni (random marks) (Luquet, 1910, later W. Davis )

B) Art-for-Art’s Sake (Aristotle Poetics, É. Lartet and É. Piette, 1800’s, later É. Cartailhac and J. Lubbock)

H) Worked Stones (anthropomorphication) (U. Benekendorff, 1991) J) Paleo-Camera Obscura (M. Gatton, 2005)

C) Art-for-Life’s Sake (E. Dissanayake, 1992) D) Intellectual Reflection (P. Teilhard de Chardin, 1955)

The strength of the interpreted purpose based theories is that necessity is the mother of invention. Art has a very useful function of communicating in the physical absence of the communicator, which lends itself to a variety of applications. Likely all of the purpose theories came into play at one time or another. They tell us about the myriad uses for representational art once it starts. The strength of the mental capacities theories is that they show how humans are biologically evolved and culturally shaped with the capacity for a multitude of communication forms. Clearly the neural wiring had to be in place for art to start. In a broad perspective many of these theories are unassailable. The strength of the recognition theories is that they are very simple and are based on the day-to-day physical environment of Paleolithic people. These theories look for plausible experiences that could have helped to formulate the representational idea, enabling physical expression of symbolic thought.

E) Play (various play theories of art espoused by S. Freud, H. Spencer, J. Huizinga and F. Schiller) F) Boredom (R. Linton, the role of boredom has also been commented on by Goethe, Kierkegaard, Schopenhauer, Adorno, Valéry, Brodsky, and Kant) G) Genius (commonly held mainstream explanation) H) Neural Mutation (R. Klein, 2002) I) Artificial Memory Systems (F. d’Errico, 1994) J) Eidetic Imagery (F. Galton, 1883)

The one issue that inhibits almost all these theories is that they rely on common human experiences that were part of daily life throughout the 150,000 years before the invention of representational art. It is safe to assume that during the time before art that people dreamt, hunted, were afraid, occasionally hallucinated (from high fevers or bad foods), were interested in the opposite sex and procreation, got bored, and saw track marks, shadows, and reflections in water. Therefore, none of these are sufficient causes for the start of art. Though today we can take almost any experience and make a conscious decision to turn it into an artwork, we must differentiate the inspiration for an artwork in an existing artmaking

K) Visions (G. Baldwin Brown, 1928, drawing upon the clinical research of Wilhelm Wundt, later D. Hodgson) L) Hallucinogenic Trances and Flashbacks (D. Lewis-Williams, 2002) M) Dreams (F. Coolidge and T. Wynn, 2007) N) Phosphenes (the shapes seen when rubbing on the eyelids) (R. Bednarik, 1987) 139

GLOBAL STATE OF THE ART

culture from the initial concept of depiction first arising amongst a non-artmaking culture. The new experience that H. sapiens encountered as they fanned out into new climatic zones, was projected images inside their tents. New environments forced the ever-adaptable bands of humans to adopt changes in dwelling forms, from no shelter to natural shelter to simple open faced brush huts to enclosed animal hide tents. The architectural developments of the diaspora spurred the beginnings of figurative depiction. Once the art idea was unleashed, likely at different times in different places, it could be taught, spreading from person to person and group to group.

CLOTTES, Jean and LEWIS-WILLIAMS, David (1998) – The Shamans of Prehistory: Trance and Magic in the Painted Caves [Trans. Sophie Hawkes]. New York: Harry N. Abrams. CLOTTES, Jean and COURTIN, Jean (1996) – The Cave Beneath the Sea: Paleolithic Images at Cosquer [Trans. Marylin Garner]. New York: Harry N. Abrams. CONRAD, Peter (1997) – “It’s Boring: Notes on the Meaning of Boredom in Every Day Life” in Qualitative Sociology vol. 20, 4, 465-475. COOLIDGE, Frederick L. and WYNN, Thomas (in press) – “The role of enhanced working memory in the production of animal and therianthropic art in the Upper Paleolithic” in Journal of Human Evolution.

References ADAMS, Ansel (1980) – The Camera. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.

DAVIS, Whitney (1986) – “More on the Origins of Image Making: Reply to Delluc and Delluc” in Current Anthropology 27.

BAHN, Paul (1998) – Prehistoric Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

DAVIS, Whitney (1986) – “The Origins of Image Making” in Current Anthropology 27, 3, 193-215.

BAHN, Paul (1997) – Journey Through the Ice Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.

DISSANAYAKE, Ellen (2000) – Art and Intimacy: How the Arts Began. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

BAHN, Paul G. (1985) – Pyrenean Prehistory: A Palaeoeconomic Survey of the French Sites. Warminster: Aris & Phillips.

DISSANAYAKE, Ellen (1992) – Homo Aestheticus Where Art Comes From and Why. New York: Free Press.

BEDNARIK, Robert (1995) – “Concept-mediated marking in the Lower Palaeolithic” in Current Anthropology 36, 605–34.

DISSANAYAKE, Ellen (1988) – What is Art For? Seattle: University of Washington Press.

BEDNARIK, Robert G. (1987) – “Engramme und Phosphene” in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 112: 223–35.

d’ERRICO, Francesco (1994) – L’Art gravé azilien: De la technique à la signification. XXXIe supplément à Gallia Préhistoire: CNRS éditions.

BÉGOUËN, Henri (1929) – “The Magic Origin of Prehistoric Art” in Antiquity.

FELIKS, John (2007) – “Musings on the Palaeolithic Fan Motif” in Exploring the Mind of Ancient Man: Festschrift to Robert Bednarik [Peddarapu Chenna Reddy ed.] New Delhi: Research India Press.

BOSINSKI, Gerhard (1994) – “Die Gravierungen des Magdalénien-Fundplatzes Andernach-Martinsberg” in Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 41, 19-58.

FELIKS, John (2006) – “Phi in the Acheulian” (paper presented at the XV Congress of the International Union of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, Lisbon September 4-9).

BOSINSKI, Gerhard (1978) – Die Ausgrabungen in Gönnersdorf 1968-1976 und die Siedlungsbefunde der Grabung 1968. Der Magdalénien-Fundplatz Gönnersdorf Volume 3. Weisbaden: Steiner.

FELIKS, John (1998) – “The Impact of Fossils on the Development of Visual Representation” in Rock Art Research 15.

BOSINSKI, Gerhard and FISCHER, Gisela (1980) – Mammut- und Pferdedarstellungen von Gönnersdorf. Der Magdalénien-Fundplatz Gönnersdorf Volume 5. Weisbaden: Steiner.

FRAZER, Sir James George (1910) – Totemism and Exogamy. London: MacMillan.

BRASSAI, (1967) – Picasso & Co. London: Thames and Hudson.

GALTON, Francis (1883) – Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development. London: Macmillan.

BREUIL, Henri (1952) – Four Hundred Centuries of Cave Art. Montignac: Centre d’Études et de Documentation Préhistoriques.

GERNSHEIM, Helmut and Alison (1969) – The History of Photography: From the Camera Obscura to the Beginning of the Modern Era. New York: McGrawHill.

BROWN, G. Baldwin (1928) – The Art of the Cave Dweller: A Study of the Earliest Artistic Activities of Man. London: John Murray.

GOMBRICH, Ernst H. ed. (1969) – Art and Illusion 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

CLOTTES, Jean (2002) – World Rock Art [Trans. Guy Bennett]. Los Angeles: Getty Publications.

GRAZIOSI, Paolo (1960) – Palaeolithic Art. New York: McGraw-Hill. 140

M. GATTON ET AL.: THE CAMERA OBSCURA AND THE ORIGIN OF ART: THE CASE FOR IMAGE PROJECTION IN THE PALEOLITHIC

GUTHRIE, R. Dale (2005) – The Nature of Paleolithic Art. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

RAPHAEL, Max (1986) – L’Art Pariétel Paléolithique,. Paris: Kronos.

HODGSON, Derek (2006) – “Tracings of the mind: the role of hallucinations, pseudohallucinations and visual memory in Franco-Cantabrian cave art” published online in the Anthroglobe Journal (www.anthroglobe. ca/docs/hodgsond_pseudohall_061204.html).

READ, Herbert (1955) – Icon and Idea; the function of art in the development of human conciousness. The Charles Eliot Norton Lectures at Harvard University, 1953-54; Cambridge Mass. REINACH, Salomon (1903) – “L’art et la magie. A propos des peintures et des gravures de L’age du Renne” in L’Anthropologie, 14, 257-66.

KLEIN, Richard G. and EDGAR, Blake (2002) – The Dawn of Human Culture. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

RENNER, Eric (2004) – Pinhole Photography: Rediscovering a Historic Technique (3rd ed). Oxford: Focal Press.

LAMING-EMPERAIRE, Annette (1962) – La Signification de l’Art Rupestre Paléolithique. Paris: Picard. LAMING, Annette (1959) – Lacaux: Paintings and Engravings [Trans. Eleanore Frances Armstrong]. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

RIEMER, Petra (2002) – “Das kleine Pferd von Laugerie Basse (Dordogne): Odyssee und Analyse eines Kleinkunstwerks des Magdalénien” in Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 49.

LEROI-GOURHAN, André (1967) – Treasures of Prehistoric Art [Trans. Norbert Guterman]. New York: Harry N. Abrams.

RUSPOLI, Mario (1987) – The Cave of Lascaux: The Final Photographs [Trans. Sebastian Wormell]. New York: Harry N. Abrams.

LEROI-GOURHAN, André (1958) – “Le Symbolisme des Grandes Signes dans l’art Parietal Paléolithiques” in Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française, 55 (3), 307-321.

SAURA RAMOS, Pedro A. with BELTRAN, Antonio (Ed.); PEREZ-SEOANE, Matilde Muzquiz; BERNALDO de QUIROS, Frederico; LASHERAS CORRUCHAGA, Jose Antonio (1999) – The Cave of Altamira. New York: Harry N. Abrams.

LEWIN, Roger (1993) – “Paleolithic Paint Job” in Discover; July 1993, Vol. 14 Issue 7, 64.

SHLAIN, Leonard (2003) – Sex, Time, and Power. New York: Viking.

LEWIS-WILLIAMS, David (2002) – The Mind in The Cave. London: Thames & Hudson.

STEADMAN, Philip (2001) – Vermeer’s Camera: Uncovering the Truth Behind the Masterpieces (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

LOMMEL, Andreas (1966) – Shamanism; the beginnings of art. New York: McGraw-Hill. LUBBOCK, John (1904) – Prehistoric Times, (revised 6th ed.) New York: New Science Library, Hill and Co.

SVENDSEN, Lars (2005) – A Philosophy of Boredom [John Irons trans.]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

MARINGER, Johannes and BANDI, Hans-Georg (1953) – Art in the Ice Age [Trans. Robert Allen]. New York: Praeger.

TALBOT, William Henry Fox (1968) – “Brief Historical Sketch of the Invention of Photography” in The Pencil of Nature (originally published 1844), reprinted, New York: Da Capo Press.

MCKIE, Robin (2000) The Dawn Man: The Story of Human Evolution. New York: Dorling Kindersley. MORELL, Abelardo and SANTE, Luc (2004) – Camera Obscura. New York: Bullfinch.

TEILHARD de CHARDIN, Pierre (1955) phénomène humain. Paris: Editions du Seuil.

PAGLIA, Camille (1990) – Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickenson. New Haven: Yale University Press.

–

Le

UCKO, Peter J., and ROSENFELD, Andree (1967) – Paleolithic Cave Art. New York: McGraw-Hill. WAAGE, Frederick O. (1967) – Prehistoric Art. Dubuque: Wm. C. Brown.

PIETTE, Edouard (1907) – L’Art Pendant l’age du Renne. Paris.

WHITE, Randall (2003) – Prehistoric Art: The Symbolic Journey of Humankind. New York: Harry N. Abrams.

POLLACK, Peter (1969) – The Picture History of Photography: From the Earliest Beginnings to the Present Day, New York: Harry N. Abrams.

WORRINGER, Wilhelm (1908) – Abstraktion und Einfühling. Munich: Doctoral Dissertation.

RANK, Otto (1975) – Art and Artist [Charles Francis Atkinson trans.]. New York: Agathon Press, 1975 ed. [1932].

YETTS, W.P. (1939) – The Cull Chinese Bronzes. London: Courtald Institute.

141

ETUDE ET PRESENTATION DE L’ART RUPESTRE EN IRAN (EXEMPLE D’ETUDE DANS LES REGIONS DU PROVINCE CENTRAL ET KERMAN D’IRAN) Elyas SAFFARAN Responsable et Prof. De Département d’art Université de Payame Noor, (Ancien Directeur du Département conservation et restauration Université d’Art Téhéran) Résume: Il existe beaucoup d’endroit sur l’art rupestre dans les différentes provinces et villes de l’Iran. En particulier, dans les régions de province centrale et les autres provinces comme Kermân de l’Iran, dans ces régions nous avons trouvé de nombreux lieux concernant l’art et les gravures de la période préhistorique d’Iran.Grâce à notre étude, travail et recherche archéologique sur ses des œuvres cet endroit, les historiens d’art, les archéologues et les ethnographes peuvent reconnaître les images de l’art préhistorique de l’Iran et le rôle important joué par ce pays pendant cette période. Donc pour bien connaître cet art, on présente dans cette communication avec des documents archéologiques les différentes étapes de nos études scientifiques, notamment: I. Etude sur la situation géographique et historique. II. Circonstances de ces découvertes. III. Description et analyse des peintures et des gravures rupestres. Les mots clés: art rupestre – préhistorique – archéologique – province central – Kermân – Iran

INTRODUCTION

prés des villages montagneux, dans la province centrale (Markazi ou Arak) et la province de Kermân, les historiens d’art, les archéologues et les ethnographes peuvent reconnaître le rôle important joué par l’Iran pendant cette période. Donc pour cette raisonne nous avons eu les travaux sur ce sujet qu’on vous présente dans cet article à base des documents archéologiques et artistiques les différentes étapes de nos études scientifiques.

Comme beaucoup des chercheurs orientalistes, il fait écrire: Peu de pays ont une histoire aussi riche que l’Iran. Dès la plus haute Antiquité, Suse rivalise avec les plus brillantes civilisations mésopotamiennes, mais c’est l’arrivée des Indo-européens au cours du Iie millénaire avant notre ère qui lui donna son identité. Zoroastre élabora, sur fond de mazdéisme, une religion de haute spiritualité. Les Achéménides – Cyrus, Darius, Xerxès – donnèrent aux Perses un immense empire, magnifié à Persépolis, dont l’héritage, après être passé dans les mains d’Alexandre le Grand, fut repris par les Parthes avant de culminer sous la férule des Sassanides. Et que dire de l’immense apport persan à la culture islamique? Citons simplement le nom d’Avicenne, songeons au raffinement qui s’empara des rudes Mongols Ilkhanides ou admirons les splendides réalisations architecturales dont Shah Abbas dota sa ville d’Ispahan (Clio, 2006, p.4-8).

LA SITUATION GEOGRAPHIQUE ET HISTORIQUE La province centrale est située chaîne entre d’Alborz et de Zagros montagnes et dans la proximité Kavir Markazi entre 33 degrés et nord de 30 minutes à 35 degrés et à 35 minutes dans la largeur et 48 degrés et 57 minutes à 51 degrés le méridien de Grinvich oriental de longitude. Cette province est liée au nord par Téhéran et la province de Ghazvin, au sud par des provinces d’Isphahan et de Lorestan, à l’est par des provinces d’Isphahan et de Téhéran et à l’ouest par la province de Hamedan. Le secteur entier de la province centrale est environ 29.152 km2. (Voir Fig. 16.1).

Malgré d’une grande histoire et ces plus brillantes civilisations de ce pays, Mais nous avons peu l’information et la publication concernant des études et présentation sur l’art rupestre dans les différentes provinces et villes de l’Iran, c’est sans doute à cause d’une situation géographique peu accessible que le nombre de la recherche scientifique,artistique et archéologique relative des œuvres rupestres situées dans les montagnes d’Iran est inférieur à celles situées en plaine; les études sur l’origine des œuvres rupestres et sur les peintures et les gravures préhistoriques sont des travaux récents dans ce pays (Saffaran, 2002, p.145). Pour cette raison, la présence de l’Iran est inexistante dans les livres spécialisés en ethnologie de l’art, histoire de l’art, peinture préhistorique, conservation et restauration de l’art préhistorique (Farhadi, 1998, p.19). Mais grâce aux récentes découvertes de gravures rupestres préhistorique

La ville d’Arak est comme centre ou capital. Cette ville de province en base de point historique n’a pas ainsi l’antiquité par rapport à d’autres villes dans cette province, parce que son temps d’établissement est retourné à la période de Ghajdar et au règne du shah d’Fath-Ali. Dans le tôt du règne du Ghajdar en Irak la grande partie de la province centrale était peu sûre en raison de la grande population et de la taille. En période de shah d’Fath-Ali que une force militaire organisée a été formée a appelé comme l’“Irak” et l’“Yusof Khan Gorji” ont demandé le shah d’Fath-Ali à la forteresse militaire de 143

GLOBAL STATE OF THE ART

Fig. 16.1. carte NO1. La carte de l’Iran et la Province de Markazi ou Arak

Fig. 16.2. carte NO2. La carte de l’Iran et la Provence de Kermân

stabiliser un pour cette troupe. Cette forteresse militaire a été appelée comme “Soltan Abad” et la construction primaire de cette ville a été fini en C.A. 1852 avec passer le côté ferroviaire du sud de cette ville, une station établie avec “Arak” nommé est près de la ville. En 1977 A.C. Arak a été choisi comme centre de la province centrale et en 1978 A.C. dans cette ville, la structure gouvernementale de la province centrale a été formée. La vieille ville d’Arak a eu la porte de “Shahrjerd” de quatre portes dans l’est, porte d’“Razan” dans porte de nord, la “de naghi de Haj Ali” dans l’ouest et la porte de Ghebleh dans le sud. (Zendehdel, H., [et all.], 1999, p.187-196).

appelé par Isphahan. (Hossini, S.M., et Mousavi, S.S., 2004. p.1-12) Vieil Arak a eu quatre portes et le Bazar courant était le raccordement interne entre ces portes et les manières de principe et externe a commencé de ces portes. Arak a augmenté quand chemin de fer établi dans cette ville dans les sud et le sud-ouest.

Sur le dénomination ou l’appellation du son nom Arak, il fait dire que le mot Arak signifie le lit de règne, le capital, le jardin, la plantation de paume, la banlieue noire et la cour royale. Professeur Hertesfeld a dit qu’Arak est le mot de farsi de l’Irak avec la signification de la terre lisse. Dans la période de Solukian, 1 en partie de grands médias entre Hamedan et Rey étaient une ville qui a appelé “Khoreh” qui était près d’Arak actuel. Le mot “Khoreh” a changé en le Coreh et d’Al Coreh dans la période Islamique. Dans les âges primaires de l’Islam et de lui augmente dans les frontières de l’Iran, augmentant le grand interoduce de médias de zone au monde, dans le deuxième âge, les pièces entre Hamedan, Rey et l’Irak

Mais géographiquement à cette province une grande partie de notre étude a fait aux villages de Ghidou et de Mazayen sont places sur la même longitude et latitude. Elles sont rattachées également aux communes rurales de Gallehzan, de la ville Khomeyn, et la province d’Arak ou Markazi (Sazman G., 1991, p.194), (voir Fig. 16.3). Ces deux villages sont situes a une vingtaine de kilomètres à l’est de Khomeyn (Ibid., p.247). Le climat est montagnard, c’est-à-dire sec en été, frais au printemps et froid en hiver. I1s sont à environ 1700 m au dessus du niveau de la mer (Ibid. p.248), ce qui permet aux habitants de ce village d’utiliser l’eau de la source et da la rivière de Golpayegan (Farhadi, 1991, p.250-254). Ils sont entoures de hautes montagnes; Les gravures et les dessins rupestres ont été découverts dans les vallées de ces montagnes. II s’agit d’une ancienne et vaste région historique; on pense que pendant l’époque Sassanide, la partie Nord de Teimareh comprenait toute la province d’Ispahan jusqu lac Qom; elle se compose actuellement des vil-les de Khomeyn, Mahallat, Nimroud, Delijan et Golpayegan. Les documents historiques nous prouvent que la ville de Khomeyn a été la mère de Teimareh, ville historique du temps Sassanides et des premières époques Islamiques (Farhadi, 1998, p.66).

Selon le livre d’“Iranshahr” de statistiques en 1941, la population d’Arak était environ 51.000 personnes et alors Arak a été augmenté comme d’autres villes; la situation de transport était la raison principale de son développement en dernières années. (Ibid., p.3-4).

0F

1 Solukian ou de Séleucid (306-150) la période hellénistique est une des plus controversée dans l’histoire de l’Iran. Les dynasties grecques ou macédoniennes jamais ont été entièrement acceptées en tant que plus que des occupants, et rétrospectivement leur règne a été négligé. Dans l’ouest, où les rois hellénistiques ont été défaits par Rome, la plupart des historiens tendent à regarder vers le bas sur eux en tant que tyrans dégénérés. La critique n’est pas complètement non fondée, mais dans beaucoup d’aspects les royaumes de l’âge étaient les états essentiels et dynamiques avec une vue éclectique et progressive des différentes cultures qu’ils ont embrassées. L’empire de Séleucid était de loin le plus grand d’eux et son ambition n’était aucun moins que pour maintenir le grand empire d’Alexandre dans l’est.

144

E. SAFFARAN: ETUDE ET PRÉSENTATION DE L’ART RUPESTRE EN IRAN...

Fig. 16.3. carte NO3. La carte détaillée la ville de Khomeyn et ses régions de notre recherche en Province Central L’autre partie de notre recherche a fait dans les régions Tappé –Shah – Firouz prés Sirjan de Kermân que cette ville est le capital de la province de Kermân (voir Fig. 16.2). La ville de Kermân avec une taille de m. 1755 est située sur une marge élevée de lut de Kavir-e (désert de Lut) dans le sud central de l’Iran, est le capital de la providence de Kermân. Kermân est compté pendant qu’un des villes les plus anciennes et de son nom est dérivé de la course de Germaniol énumérée par Herodotus, et sa construction est attribuée à Ardashir I (Ardashir-e Babakan) en le 3ème de siècle. 2

ont été exportés vers l’Angleterre et l’Allemagne pendant cette période. Car elle est également par main importante un centre de production tissé centaines de tapis du pays, et de petits ateliers a dispersé par la ville. Kermân a eu une longue histoire turbulente. C’était seulement pendant la règle de la dynastie de Qadjar 4 que la sécurité a été reconstituée dans cette ville sous le gouvernement central. Kermân a une petite minorité de Zoroastrien. La majeure partie du Kermân antique a été détruite dans un tremblement de terre 1794. nombreux adeptes chez les nomades Turkmènes. La période Safavide est caractérisée par les très grandes réalisations de l’art Perse, notamment en peinture, en architecture, dans les textiles et la fabrication de tapis. Les miniatures du XVIème siècle et les bâtiments safavides d’Ispahan d’époque sont très recherchés par les marchands européens au XVIIème siècle. 4 La dynastie de Qadjar (1797-1925) LE Qadjar était une tribu turkmène qui a tenu les terres héréditaires en Azerbaïdjan actuel, qui faisait partie alors de l’Iran. En 1779, suivant la mort de Mohammad Karim Khan Zand, la règle de dynastie de Zand de l’Iran méridional, Agha Mohammad Khan, un chef de la tribu de Qadjar, présenté pour réunifier l’Iran. Rivaux défaits par Khan d’Agha Mohammad nombreux et apporté tout l’Iran selon sa règle, établissant la dynastie de Qadjar. D’ici 1794 il avait éliminé tous ses rivaux, y compris Lotf ‘Ali Khan, le bout de la dynastie de Zand, et avait réaffirmé la souveraineté iranienne audessus des anciens territoires iraniens en Géorgie et Caucase. Agha Mohammad a établi son capital chez Téhéran, un village près des ruines de la ville antique du rayon (maintenant Shahr-e Rey). En 1796 il a été formellement couronné comme shah. Agha Mohammad a été assassiné en 1797 et a été réussi par son neveu, Fath Ali Shah.

Kermân a été régné par Turkmans, Arabes et mongoles après le 7ème de siècle et cela a été augmenté rapidement pendant la dynastie Safavide. 3 Des tapis et les couvertures 2

Le Sassanides a établi un empire rudement dans les frontières réalisées par les achéménides, avec le capital à Ctésiphon. Le Sassanides a consciemment cherché à ressusciter des traditions iraniennes et à effacer l’influence culturelle grecque. Leur règle a été caractérisée par centralisation considérable, planification urbaine ambitieuse, développement agricole, et améliorations technologiques. Les gouverneurs de Sassanid ont adopté le titre du shahanshah (roi des rois), en tant que règles petites d’excédent de sovereigns nombreuses, connues sous le nom de Shahrdars. 3 Safavide (1502-1736) la Dynastie qui réalisa l’unification de la Perse en 1501 et établit le chiisme duodécimain comme religion officielle. Les Safavides étaient à l’origine un ordre soufi créé au XIVème siècle par le cheikh Safi al-Din à Ardabil en Azerbaïdjan, qui étendit son influence à toute l’Asie Mineure au cours du XVème siècle, faisant notamment de

145

GLOBAL STATE OF THE ART

Fig. 16.4. et 16.5. Les thèmes représentantes des animaux dans même sens dans les deux sites de notre recherche NO 4 à province Arak et NO 5 à province Kermân CIRCONSTANCES DE CES DECOUVERTES

DESCRIPTION ET ANALYSE

Mes travaux sur les régions de Tappé –Shah – Firouz prés de Sirjan en province de Kermân sont récents, mais pour la province d’Arak ou central, la circonstance de la découverte et de la connaissance les dessins ou les gravures des régions de Ghidou et de Mazayen, ainsi de Teimareh, nous ramène aux la dernière décennie, c’est-àdire entre 1983 jusqu’a 1999. Notre collègue, le Dr Farhadi observa alors les peintures et les gravures rupestres, et fit de nombreuses incursions dans les villages de la région de Teimareh, précisément à Farnaq et Hajile (qu’il était à cette époque maître d’école de ces villages). C’est ainsi qu’en 1984, lors de mon voyage au village de Ghidou, M. Javad Hachaimi me montra une inscription sur une pierre du cimetière. II me demanda de distinguer la période et de la dater. J’ai remarque qu’elle appartenait aux périodes anciennes, c’est ainsi qu’il m’a présente également des gravures rupestres que je devais analyser. Mon hypothèse rejoignit les conclusions de son rapport. Mais dans l’année scolaire 1991-1992, Mlle Parya Hossini, étudiante en ethnographie, établit un rapport et montra des photos concernant trois inscriptions et quelques gravures rupestres de cette région au Dr Farhadi. Ce fut le point de départ de la découverte et de l’étude de ces œuvres.

En effet pour de bien prendre conscience de l’importance de l’art rupestre de ces régions, au niveau national et international il y avait lieu d’élaborer un programme de longue durée du travail. Mais ici nous parlerons brièvement sur notre recherche en huit thèmes suivants: 1) Nombre 2) Taille 3-5) Les thèmes des œuvres en trois types 6) Motivations 7) But 8) datation. Nombre Le nombre peintures et gravures est considérable, au point que seulement une partie, de chaque côte de Tangue Gargabe – Ghidou en province central est évaluée: Entre 3000 et 5000 (animaux, hommes, objets et symboles) sans compter les oeuvres dispersées dans d’autres régions (voir Figs. 16.12 et 16.13). Quant aux dessins, ils peuvent être estimes à plus de 25.000 a 30.000 dans la zone de la rivière de Khomeyn et Golpayegan (Farhadi, Ibid., p.129). Taille Les peintures sont de petit taille (comme celles trouvées dans d’autres régions d’Iran): 7 a 8 cm pour la plus petite, représentant une chèvre. Le plus grand dessin, trouve prés du barrage Mazayen, représente un homme très grand (44 cm) par rapport aux cavaliers, tenant un étonnant lasso (120 cm), (Saffaran, Ibid., p.147).

L’existence des inscriptions en langue Pehlevi ancien (Sassanide) à coté des gravures rupestres, nous montra clairement l’importance des œuvres (Farhadi, 1998, p.62) des différents lieux de cette région – jusqu’aux vallées de Ghidou et de Mazayen –; ces recherches ou études aboutirent ensuite a la découverte d’importantes collections d’art préhistorique (Ibid. p.129). Donc les résultats de notre étude dans les régions du province central et Kermân d’Iran est bien satisfaisant que nous présentons ici la description, l’analyse et les détails de ces gravures de l’art rupestre ou dessins d’ un point de vue archéologique, ethnographique etc. (Saffaran, Ibid., p.146).

Thèmes Les thèmes représentes peuvent être classes en trois types (Voir Figs. 16.4, 16.5, 16.6, 16.7, 16.8 et 16.9): Figures animales: mammifères sauvages, oiseaux, peu d’animaux domestiques: chameau et, chamelier. 146

E. SAFFARAN: ETUDE ET PRÉSENTATION DE L’ART RUPESTRE EN IRAN...

Fig. 16.6. et 16.7. Les thèmes représentantes d’utilisation les outils et instruments l’exemples en province central

Fig. 16.8. et 16.9. Les exemples de thèmes les figures rares NO 8 en province Kermân et NO 9 en province Arak Outils ou instruments: lance-pierres; curieux lasso; la massue; épée ou faucille; javelot, sellerie; etc.

d’accessoires d’y rapportant. De même, l’absence de scènes d’agriculture confirme la relation étroite des peintres avec une vie de chasseurs. Différents facteurs – taille, superposition des peintures a différentes époques, usage d’outils simples, utilisation de la morphologie des lieux et situation propice de ces lieux pour la chasse (abreuvoir, abris, passage d’animaux...) – montrent que les auteurs avaient peu de préoccupations esthétiques (contrairement a Lascaux, Altamira, etc.), et qu’ils ne disposaient que de peu de temps pour réaliser leurs oeuvres, profitant sans doute des périodes de repos ou de brefs séjours en un lieu donne. D’un point de vue culturel et historique ces peintures rupestres sont de même type que les arts pariétaux découverts à Arnan, à Nir de Yazd et à Lurestan, à Kourdestan, à Kermân (Ibid., p. 149) et (Mouvahedy, 1990, p.5-10).

Figures rares: Héros légendaire ou animaux avec trois onglons; combat corps a corps, cavaliers, etc. Mais le principal sujet des gravures rupestre concerne la chèvre montagnarde ainsi que des scènes ou lieux de chasse, et le bouc avec de grandes et larges cornes, représente selon différents styles (Saffaran, Ibid. p.147). Symboles et inscriptions En plus des figures citées plus haut; il existe d’autres motifs dans ces gravures rupestres qui ne sont pas significatifs et clairs aujourd’hui. On suppose qu’il s’agit soit d’un objet spécifique, soit un symbole transmettant un message, soit les 2 à la fois (Ibid., p.147).

Motivations

Identité

Pour quelle raison ont- ils peint sur les rochers ou rocs de Ghidou et Masaien et dans certains terrains accidentes de la région Tiemareh? Les études menées sur le terrain, permettent de supposer plusieurs types, de raisons notamment: lieux propices pour le gibier et pour la chasse (aujourd’hui encore ces mêmes lieux sont connus comme réserves de chasse) existence d’abreuvoirs opportuns (comme la rivière de Golpaygan etc.) et sans danger pour

Quelle était l’identité des auteurs de ces peintures? Pour répondre à cette question, on peut s’appuyer sur des études ethnographiques, archéologiques etc, menées dans l’ensemble de la région de Tiemareh, qui montre qu’on ne rencontre pratiquement pas de scènes pastorales ou d’animaux domestiques. En revanche, il existe de très nombreuses scènes de chasse et représentations 147

GLOBAL STATE OF THE ART

Fig. 16.10. et 16.11. Les lieux naturel de la chasse etc concernant le but et ainsi des motivations ces art et dessins

Fig. 16.12. et 16.13. Les deux différents exemples concernant l’existence de grands nombre l’art rupestre dans ces régions NO 12 à province de Arak et NO 13 à province de Kermân la chasse; présence d’un climat favorable; présence de matériaux (pierres situées près des embuscades et des abreuvoirs); raisons culturelles diverses (voir Figs. 16.10 et 16.11).

cela sert, également de repère de pour dater quelles autres peintures (Farhadi, Ibid., p.213); (Hunter, D. et Whiten, 1976, p.131) On peut comparer ces gravures ou ces peintures sur les outils trouvés en fouilles archéologiques dans d’autres régions de l’Iran. IL serait intéressant d’établir un rapprochement entre les peintures rupestres d’Iran et celles des autres régions du monde par exemple 1a période concernant le cerf magicien de la grotte des Trois – Frères (voir Fig. 16.16) en France 10.000-15.000 av. J.C. avec le cerf de Ghidou (Farhadi, Ibid., p.221-222) et (Grand, P.W., 1967, p.22-101).

But Quel était le but de ces dessins sur les pierres? D’après nos études et les résultats de notre collègue il s’agirait en exécutant des signes, peintures ou gravures, d’obtenir du succès à la chasse, de développer son courage face aux animaux sauvages (lion, léopard, tigre, guépard (Ibid., p.149)

CONCLUSION

Datation

Si l’on considère ensemble ou séparément chaque partie de cette recherche (comme vous avez vu ses images et documents dans la présentation de ma communication par Power Point) richement illustres par des photographies, cartes, dessins et tableaux en couleur et en noir et blanc, on pourra élaborer un ouvrage de référence, une source d’informations, inédite et universelle dans ce domaine (étude et présentation de l’art rupestre et l’art préhistorique d’Iran) pour des chercheurs, historiens, ethnographes, philologues, archéologues, conservateurs,

Quelle est la date ou la période ces peintures? Nos premières études archéologiques et ethnographiques ont indique que ces peintures et gravures rupestres appartenaient: aux périodes préhistoriques. En effet, on peut trouer des éléments de comparaison avec d’autres régions du monde en se référant aux représentations d’outils, de chasse, etc Ainsi l’existence d’animaux domestiques comme le cheval, le chien et le chameau, permet clairement de dater la période de domestication; 148

E. SAFFARAN: ETUDE ET PRÉSENTATION DE L’ART RUPESTRE EN IRAN...

Fig. 16.14. et 16.15. Des différent exemple les dessins en taille miniatures et le plus petit et aussi le plus grand NO 14 à province de Arak et NO 15 à province de Kermân

Fig. 16.16. Le rapprochement entre les peintures rupestres d’Iran et celles des autres régions du monde par exemple 1a période concernant le cerf magicien de la grotte des Trois – Frères en France (10.000-15.000 av. J.C.). Avec le cerf de la province central et Kermân

restaurateurs, ou de simples amateurs d’art et des lecteurs qui veulent faire une plongée dans un des plus grands sites et collections de peintures et gravures rupestres, dans les régions du province central et Kermân d’Iran. Pour formuler une conclusion, il faut rappeler le point primordial, que nous avons compris en réalisent cette étude. A savoir que malgré l’existence d’innombrables oeuvres rupestres préhistoriques en Iran, il n’y a pas eu de grands travaux de recherche pour identifier, conserver et présenter ces oeuvres à l’échelle locale, régionale, nationale et encore moins internationale. C’est pourquoi, pour arriver à des résultats concrets concernant ce problème il faut entreprendre d’abord toutes les actions nécessaires pour connaître et faire connaître les oeuvres, présenter à nos collègues au XVème Congrès de UISPP à Lisbonne; puis maîtriser les causes de détérioration, afin de contribuer à l’amélioration de l’état des oeuvres et d’assurer leur pérennité (Figs. 16.17 et 16.18).

Remerciements En fin mes remerciements a’ tous les responsables et les organisateurs de XVéme congrès d’UISPP surtout pour Dr. Claudia Fidalgo et aussi ma chère collègue Mme Lara Aladina qu’elle a bien lu et présenter de ma place cette communication pour vous à Lisbonne, aussi mes remerciements a’ Mme Melina Casal. Bibliographies CLIO, F. (2006) – Iran,Turquie; Asie centrale…. Paris: Socioté de Clio, brochure. p.4-8. FARHADI, M. (1998) – Museums in the wind.Tehran: ed. Allame Tabataba’i University. p.57. FARHADI, M. (1991) – letter de Kamareh.Teheran: ed. Amire Kabir, Vol., I, p.250-254. 149

GLOBAL STATE OF THE ART

Fig. 16.17. et 16.18. Les images nous montrant l’importance ces lieux pour maîtriser les causes de détérioration, afin de contribuer à l’amélioration de l’état des oeuvres et d’assurer leur pérennité HOSSINI, S.M., and MOUSAVI, S.S. (2004) – Iran tourism guide book of Markzi Province. p.1-12.

SAFFARAN, E. (2002) – la conservation des peintures et graveurs rupestres préhistorique …. Paris: SFIIC. p.145. Acte 10eme journée de l’art avant l’histoire ….

HUNTER, D. and WHITEN (1976) – Encyclopedia of Anthropology. New York: ed. Harper and Row. p.131.

SAZMAN, J. (1991) – Culture géographique des villages. Téhéran: R.I.I, Vol. 59, Golpaygan. p.194.

KHAZAEI, E. (2000) – Geology general & engineerin. Téhéran: ed. Farnaz. p.429-446.

ZENDEHDEL, H. [et all.] (1999) – a series of guide books to Iran, Markazi Province. Tehran: Irangardan Publication. Vol., 25. p.187-196.

MOUVAHEDY, M. (1990) – Rock art in Kerman Sekon. Téhéran: Université d’Art. p.5-10.

150

Session WS37 CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

ARCHEOLOGICAL USE OF CAVES ON THE NORTHWESTERN PLAINS, USA John GREER & Mavis GREER Greer Services, Casper WY USA [email protected] Abstract: Prehistoric and early historic Native American use of caves in the mountains of the northwestern Plains of North America is most evident in areas within or near entrances. Habitation debris mostly is in open entrance areas, whereas rock art sometimes extends back into the twilight zone, transitional dark zone, and interior dark zone -- dark areas necessitating artificial light for viewing. Some rock art is intentionally placed to interact with natural light coming through the cave entrance. Night use of enclosed entrance rooms would experience the same characteristics of total darkness and isolation as rituals done in a true dark zone setting or deep areas of difficult access. Collected and modified speleothems expand cave use into non-cave landscapes. Keywords: caves, dark zone, Native American, prehistory, archaeology, rock art, human remains Resumé: L’utilisation de grottes par des groupes amérindiens préhistoriques dans les montagnes des plaines du nord-ouest de l’Amérique du Nord est la plus évidente dans les zones à l’intérieur ou près des entrées. Les débris provenant des activités résidentielles sont localisés principalement dans les zones d’entrée ouvertes, tandis que l’art rupestre s’étend parfois jusque dans la zone d’ombre, la zone de transition vers l’obscurité, et la zone obscure intérieure – les zones d’obscurité nécessitant l’apport de lumière artificielle pour la vision. Certaines œuvres rupestres sont intentionnellement placées pour interagir avec la lumière naturelle provenant de l’entrée de la grotte. L’utilisation nocturne de salles d’entrée fermées donnerait les mêmes expériences caractéristiques par l’obscurité totale et l’isolement que lors de rituels effectués dans un environnement qui serait une véritable zone d’obscurité totale ou des zones profondes d’accès difficile. Des spéléothèmes collectées et modifiées étendent l’utilisation de la grotte dans un paysage externe. Mots-clés: grottes, zone d’obscurité, Amérindiens, préhistoire, archéologie, art rupestre, restes humains

INTRODUCTION

Many caves were used prehistorically for a number of purposes, here as anywhere in the world. Although painted rock art is perhaps the most obvious cultural addition or modification in limestone caves, especially interior dark zone locations, material remains evidencing other cave use also occurs, and it is useful to consider the total use of caves and the kinds of archeological materials that occur in them.

Dark zone cave use of deep caverns, far from natural light, has been documented in several parts of North America. Although examples are found across the continent, the most prominent areas are the Southeastern United States (particularly the states of Tennessee, Kentucky, and Alabama), the Southwestern United States (particularly New Mexico), and various parts of Mexico from north to south. Central America and the Caribbean contain numerous caves with ceremonial use most evidenced by pictographs and material remains of ceremonies, often deep within dark zone passages.

In this paper we provide brief information on caves on the northwestern Plains, and look at the kinds of caves, their locations, and cultural materials in those sites. This small sample, from our personal experience, is intended as a brief overview.

Our work has documented variable cave use on the northwestern Plains of North America, just south of Canada, in the states of Montana and Wyoming. This western territory is composed mostly of open plains and rolling prairie, interrupted by localized mountain ranges. Most cave areas are composed of limestone, while granite and other igneous materials mostly occur slightly further west but also form the central cores of the limestone mountain uplift areas. Limestone canyons, some very deep and impressive, often dominate the outer portions of the mountain islands. High altitude karst areas — containing some of the deepest cave systems in North America — sometimes cover the high upper crests of the larges ranges. Caves in the dense limestone layers occur as rockshelters, enclosed rooms, tunnels, complex passageways, sinkholes, vertical shafts, and more extensive systems.

CAVE ATTRIBUTES Physical attributes of caves, together with the context of the cultural remains they contain, help define the details of cave archeology. It is useful to consider kinds of caves that were utilized, settings within sites where materials occur, and the kinds of materials that occur there. Caves are measured from front to back, from mouth to most distant extent of the back wall. Rockshelters are wider than they are long (or deep), and caves are longer (or deeper) than they are wide. This is an old definition, long in use, and at least distinguishes cliff faces from deep passages. Caves generally have some degree of light restriction, such as an enclosed room, extended passa153

CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

geway, or complex underground system. The entrance may be large (and allow passage of considerable light), or it may be small and difficult to negotiate. Large, open entrances are essentially daylight settings although they may change quickly in character and lead almost immediately into total darkness, depending on the interior character of the system.

glow can be seen from a distance, either directly or with very little movement from the specific location. The cultural consideration is a beacon of light to guide one out of the cave, at least during the day, with little or no orientation problem and no fear of becoming lost. Traversing the route from a particular point toward the entrance may be a problem, depending on obstacles, such as areas of large breakdown, vertical walls along the route, or deep pits in the floor, but the distance and direction of exit are discernible within this Transitional Dark Zone. Rock art occurs in this zone at several sites.

Caves, as a class, includes categories that range from deep rockshelters, some large and impressive, to horizontal tubes, enlarged joints and cracks, large enclosed rooms, multiple rooms, multiple levels, larger complex systems, and even expedition quality underground caverns. Caves may be strictly horizontal, a combination of horizontal and vertical, vertically oriented pits, or systems hundreds of feet deep and necessitating technical equipment for entry. Some caves are very large; others barely hold one person.

• Finally, there is the Interior Dark Zone, that area of total darkness far from the entrance and with no visible indication of distant light. The setting is deep within a cavern, perhaps within a maze of passages, around a series of corners, deep within a pit or series of pits, or within a more extensive cavern system. Maneuvering in this environment, or travel through it, would require reliable artificial light, a degree of experience in such settings, attention to detail, and preferably familiarity with the specific location. Experience in maneuvering through such an environment in total darkness would be helpful. Exploration of vertical pits would necessitate special equipment, although rawhide ropes or special climbing tools, such as those used by honey climbers in Mexico, might suffice in some cases. So far, there are few examples in Montana or Wyoming of Interior Dark Zone exploration, including rock art, and there is no indication of prehistoric entry into vertical pits, as there is in northern Mexico. This is an area needing much more exploration and research.

NATURAL LIGHTING Archeological materials in caves occur in various settings relative to available natural light. Light can be considered to have four primary kinds of settings. • The Daylight Zone includes the immediate entrance where direct sunlight penetrates and lights up the area on a daily basis for essentially constant use. This is the most common setting for archeological materials, not just in this part of North America, but anywhere in the world. Cultural remains include houses, hearths, bones, lithics, occupational debris, and rock art. Paintings occur on limestone walls, and in some cases on granite, sometimes on high-quality metamorphic surfaces, and less commonly sandstone. Petroglyphs occur mostly on sandstone. Since most caves considered here are in limestone karst areas, most of the rock art associated with caves is painted, and is especially common in the Daylight Zone around the entrance.

Thus, in summary, light settings include the Daylight Zone, Twilight Zone, Transitional Dark Zone, and Interior Dark Zone. In the Montana-Wyoming area, archeological materials and evidence of use occur in all settings, although very few examples are known from the Interior Dark Zone. Use of that setting is known in surrounding regions to the west and south, and more examples are expected to be found here during continued detailed inspection of cave walls.

• The Twilight Zone, or Shadow Zone or penumbra, is further inside the cave, in permanent shadow past direct sunlight, but with visibility during most daylight hours. This is an interior area, perhaps within an extended entrance room or the beginning of a large passage. There is light, but no direct sunlight, and artificial light or torches may be necessary to view paintings on the walls and ceiling. Structures and other features constructed in caves by prehistoric inhabitants occur in Montana and Wyoming, but their occurrence is unusual and probably associated with processing, storage, mineral extraction, or ritual, more than simple habitation in the usually cold, eternal shadow of the interior Twilight or Shadow Zone. Rock art occurs in this shadow zone at several sites.

ROCK ART Looking at kinds of caves and cultural materials that occur in the region (Figure 17.1), we begin with rock art. Painted figures, especially, occur naturally in lighter areas around the entrance but also extend back into dark interior passages and rooms of the Transitional Dark Zone. Several sites contain paintings (and in some rare cases, petroglyphs) in areas where artificial light is necessary to see the art. No carved or modified speleothems have been reported in caves within our study area. Landslide Cave, high on the Rocky Mountain Front in central Montana, has a very tiny entrance and a steep climb-down slope into total darkness. The cave consists of a single narrow passage, perhaps 25 meters long and

• The third area is the Transitional Dark Zone. It is eternally dark, with no natural light, and is located further from the entrance, but in an area where natural entrance 154

J. GREER & M. GREER: ARCHEOLOGICAL USE OF CAVES ON THE NORTHWESTERN PLAINS, USA

Fig. 17.1. Northern Plains primary study area

2.5 meters tall. The long interior dark room has red figures painted along the flat ceiling. Reaching the elusive, tiny entrance high on the mountainside is difficult, while other nearby sites are near the bottom of the mountains, are larger, and mostly open. This cave, therefore, is unique within an area of painted sites.

into the totally dark interior on walls and low ceilings. In one small cave, Crawl Cave (24JF1556) in southwestern Montana, it is necessary to slither backwards into the low entrance, facing upward, and use artificial light to view painted figures in the ceiling cavity — much like some solution cavities at Hueco Tanks in western Texas. Other sites contain ceiling domes and indentations with painted figures viewable only with portable lights. Many of these appear to be associated with shaman activity more than simple beliefs, myths, history, or narrative.

Long horizontal tubes occur mostly in limestone and extend far back into complete darkness. In Triangle Cave (24ME42), central Montana, the wall from front to rear contains an extensive row of paintings relating to shamanism. The line from the bottom of the shaman extends past dozens of hand-smear stylized figures and runs all the way down the passage to the cave entrance.

Some caves are composed of multiple rooms and multiple levels. Several such large development tube complexes contain paintings in Daylight and Twilight areas.

Horizontal cracks and tubes in sandstone, though relatively rare, similarly extend back into near darkness. Two elongated systems in separate mountain areas have sandstone walls intensively covered from front to rear with carved petroglyphs. Ludlow Cave (39HN1), on the western edge of South Dakota, has a wide entrance and deep, irregular passage extending deep into the hillside. Medicine Creek Cave (48CK48) in northeastern Wyoming is a relative narrow, elongated crack but also with bright light in the entrance area.

In one example, an enclosed room in Lookout Cave (24PH402) in central Montana is accessible, with some difficulty, from the large adjacent rockshelter. Sunlight enters the room through a small hole and momentarily lights up a small portion of the opposite wall, and it is in this specific area that a stylized red bison is painted. Most other figures around the room are in near to total darkness. This is one of the few sites with clear sunlight interaction. Large complex horizontal systems also contain rock art mostly in entrance and twilight areas. One large complex, Frozen Leg Cave (24BH425) in southern Montana, has pictographs of different ages and traditions in two large twilight rooms. There is also other evidence of use in dark

Horizontal caves also occur in a number of other forms. Single large rooms may be open, with large entrances, or nearly closed, with small constricted openings. Paintings occur not only in Daylight entrance areas but also back 155

CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

Fig. 17.2. Two Hands Cave, Montana

Fig. 17.3. Juniper Cave, Wyoming

passages and cultural deposits in dark interior rooms in this same cavern complex.

stencils, while at the base of the long, steep entrance slope, in an interior passage off the huge entrance room, a large deposit of bright red ochre has been mined. The red paint material, fine quality hematite, is suitable for long distance, regional redistribution, and trade. A historic mention of Indians mining red ochre as paint from a cave in these mountains may refer to this site. In the main room, rocks have been moved and positioned on the flat floor as if during some activity or construction. The only paintings, however, are the red handprints at the top of the entrance slope.

Another cavern, Blacktail Cave (24LC151) in central Montana, has pictographs at the entrance placed there for tourism. The landowner maintains that the figures were only enhanced and not created recently, but rock art researchers there in the 1960s (and supported by photographs) maintain that paintings were not present at that time. Figures are of local content and style and introduce modern visitors to rock art and various research questions. Of perhaps even more interest at this site, however, are artifacts and possible evidence of ritual deep within the associated cavern, dating perhaps 2000 years ago, and a suggestion of earlier use about 11,000 years ago. Cultural artifacts and dark zone paint smears on interior walls indicate that people at least ventured into large rooms and passages believed to have experienced ceremonial use.

In the Montana-Wyoming area there is no evidence of collection of wall deposits, such as soft calcium carbonate coatings (e.g., moon milch), such as there is in other caves around the world. There are no areas of scrapings that would suggest collection of the white or light gray material as a dietary supplement, salt, fertility powder, pigment or extender for paint, or any other use.

At deep sinkholes, pictographs are mostly at the entrance, in full or restricted daylight, and not in underground settings. In some cases, such sinkholes descend gradually or steeply into huge rooms with flat floors suitable for complex rituals. Some continue down into cavern systems. Paintings, however, are almost exclusively outside the entrance.

Crystals and formations The only known use of cave formations or crystals in the Montana-Wyoming area is single portable object found out-of-context in eastern Montana. The small, white stalactite was broken and removed from an active cave, polished, and then finely incised with a complex design of multiple motifs. The result is an elongated, threedimensional piece that appears to represent a salamander. It was found in an area of late prehistoric agricultural villages dating around 1500 A.D.

OBJECTS REMOVED FROM CAVES Prehistoric cave visitation or use can be evidenced — besides artifacts and features actually in the cave — by objects or materials taken from caves or made from cave formations. Although such occurrences are fairly common in other parts of North America, they are rare in the Montana-Wyoming area of the Plains.

In other regions of the world there is evidence that formations were part of ritual activity, and it is surprising that no additional – and no in-cave -- evidence of prehistoric crystal extraction, speleothem modification, or breakage has been observed in the northern Plains. The varied practice is fairly common in other areas, particularly to the south, In Cueva Higuerón, in the Sierra de El Abra of northeastern Mexico, for instance, we have observed large areas of stalactites that were broken, with very old breaks, but with no pieces of those formations on the flat dirt floor of the large room. In Cueva del Aire,

Mining Mineral extraction for pigment use is evidenced at the deep sinkhole of Hand Stencil Sink (24BW1053) in central Montana. In the entrance area are two red hand 156

J. GREER & M. GREER: ARCHEOLOGICAL USE OF CAVES ON THE NORTHWESTERN PLAINS, USA

In an example of another use of cave formations, we once did a small sample study of ceramics in El Abra area caves of northeastern Mexico. This is an area of Huastecan occupation, with ceramics generally tempered with limestone. Sherds in open village sites were found to be tempered with non-crystalline limestone, as was expected. Prehistoric ceramic fragments inside caves, in areas that suggested ritual use, however, were mostly tempered with finely ground calcite crystal, almost certainly finely ground cave formations. Several caves in the area, like Higuerón mentioned above, appear to have been used as crystal sources, and it appears that at least one use of those crystals was for temper inclusion in ritual ceramic vessels. Use of cave crystal, therefore, is possible for a number of uses. Fig. 17.4. Rainbow Bear Cave, Montana CONSTRUCTION IN CAVES Evidence of feature construction in caves is rare, but there are a few examples. Most are remains of wickiups and walled rooms mostly believed to represent habitation structures or small houses. Logs and branches from a possible wickiup are in the back, dimmest part of a passage deep in the Twilight Zone of Frozen Leg Cave (24BH425) in southern Montana. The cave has evidence of perhaps 2000 years of use, of which this is only a part. Other remains of wooden structures are in twilight and transitional dark zone settings of this cavern system, and paintings occur in the twilight zone of the two entrance rooms.

Fig. 17.5. Red pictographs in Triangle Cave, Montana

In another canyon of northern Wyoming, Juniper Cave (48BH3178) contains several stone-lined house floors in the entrance area, in front of the large entrance room and back just inside the entrance. One of these floors contains large bison bones, and chipped stone artifacts are scattered across the floor. A simple black pictograph consisting of a series of parallel lines is on the ceiling ledge above the interior house floors.

also in northeastern Mexico, we have observed that most stalactites and small stalagmites were intentionally broken and scattered across the floor of the lowest room of the which continues today with the local Huastecan Indians. The breakage, as before, appears to be early, probably prehistoric. Similar examples are known in other parts of the world, including Paleolithic caves in southern France (Jean Clottes, personal communication) but not on the northern Plains.

Another nearby cave in southern Montana also contains remains of similar stone-rimmed houses in a large

Fig. 17.6. Red pictographs in Pass Creek Cave, Wyoming 157

CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

Fig. 17.7. Yellow pictographs in Frozen Leg Cave, Montana

Fig. 17.8. Yellow pictographs in Frozen Leg Cave, Montana

Fig. 17.9. Carved stalactite in form of a snake, Sidney Montana passage, in the Daylight and Twilight zones. No rock art appears to be associated with those floors although pictograph sites are in nearby canyons.

HUMAN REMAINS Human remains have not been reported in this area from contexts within true caves. In other areas there are intentional interments (essentially ritual burial) in Daylight and Twilight zones and back into darkness. Also in other areas (e.g., Felton Cave in western Texas and Hourglass Cave in western Colorado), remains have been found indicating accidental death deep within long cavern systems — presumably people lost in meandering passages during the distant prehistoric past. Nothing has been found yet on the Northern Plains.

In the very large, deep Devils Rockshelter (48BH739), situated in the upper wall of a huge limestone canyon in the same general area of northern Wyoming, there are several small enclosed natural rooms, two of which are sealed from the inside with juniper logs to form an effective wall and close the dark room interiors. There is no associated rock art, although the huge rockshelter contains intensive cultural deposits full of animal bones and stone tools.

DISCUSSION

HABITATION

Function of utilized caves appears at least partially to be related to concepts of light and darkness. The distinction, however, is not universally clear. Twilight interior areas in many cave entrance rooms, especially enclosed rooms, at night are completely dark and isolated from external influences of light and sound, exactly the same as distant, interior dark zone settings. Rituals and other activities carried out in these dark rooms and passages would have much the same characteristics as those done in completely

Other kinds of habitation debris occur mostly in entrance areas and less commonly down into the Twilight zone of elongated entrance rooms. In the lower entrance room of Horsethief Cave (48BH304), a large cavern in northeastern Wyoming, there are intensive ashy deposits with burned rock, chipped stone tools, flaking debitage, and large amounts of butchered bone that indicate repeated use of the interior entrance area for habitation. 158

J. GREER & M. GREER: ARCHEOLOGICAL USE OF CAVES ON THE NORTHWESTERN PLAINS, USA

dark, remote, underground locations. For such activities, the important cultural factor could be the darkness — access to and interaction with darkness, placing oneself in a kind of isolation, partial sensory deprivation, absolute visual effect, and perceived auditory effect — all characteristics of the darkness experience. In many cases, human psychology, and certainly beliefs relating to caves and supernatural association with the underground, designate caves as important and special locations with varying degrees and kinds of cultural meaning and personal effect, or translate those settings as culturally important places. The characteristics of total darkness within a constricted space surrounded by solid rock, with the auditory effects of pounding trance-inducing reverberations and imagined supernatural noises, would be similar between enclosed entrance rooms and deep cavern passages. The degree and intensity of interaction with the earth— and whatever it represents — would presumably change with the depth one goes into the cavern and the degree of isolation one would experience. Although activities could take place in enclosed entrance rooms, one would expect that activities conducted far within the Interior Dark Zone of a deep cavern would have different psychological — and presumably cultural — effects and meaning.

open, well lit areas of the cave mouth, and with decreasing frequency into the deepest recesses of darkness. The change from daily activities and casual appearance of open-air simplicity of the art to more complex themes and presentation in deeper, darker areas is suggested by the paintings, as it is by other kinds of cultural remains. The interior dark zone appears to be under-represented in the sample, and more intensive investigation in this region, and possibly within these caves, will probably change the results of our brief survey. We continue to search throughout the Americas – from Canada to Argentina -- for locations of culturally utilized caves and the activities that were performed within them. The small sample of caves on the Northwestern Plains of the United States serves as examples of the kinds cave use known in the Americas. Acknowledgments We thank Luiz Oosterbeek (Portugal), organizer of the XV UISPP Congress, for organizing the conference. The paper was presented in the session Current State of North American Rock Art, organized by Mavis Greer and James Keyser (United States) at the request of Mila Simões de Abreu (Portugal). During preparation, our colleagues encouraged us to present this brief overview of our findings from the last 30 years of work on the Northwestern Plains. Rock art cave sites are located on land managed by various state and federal agencies and private landowners, and we graciously thank them for access and assistance in our continuing study. During the Congress, Jean Clottes (France) commented extensively on our findings relative to other parts of the world, particularly southwestern Europe, and his extensive experience and insight continue to influence our thought and observations.

Our small sample shows that cave use was culturally important throughout prehistory on the Northern Plains of North America, as it was on other parts of the continent. Cave mouths and twilight zone settings were used for a variety of purposes relating mostly to habitation, subsistence, and performance of daily routines. Locations deeper within the extended twilight zone, transitional dark zone, and the most distant interior dark zone of larger caverns also were used, but probably more for special purposes and rituals than more mundane practices of everyday life. Painted rock art occurs in all zones of these limestone cavities, but with most intensity around the

159

MOGOLLON ROCK ART AND THE STATUS OF THE “FLUTE PLAYER” Maarten van HOEK

INTRODUCTION

Anasazi peoples, the latter abundantly using the “flute player” in their iconography (Figure 18.1).

Within North America, some of the largest concentrations of rock art are found in the Southwest of the United States, a desert and mountain area that is home to thousands of prehistoric Indian rock art sites, comprising pictographs (rock paintings) and/or petroglyphs (images created by removing a portion of the rock surface). One of the most interesting rock art manifestations in both North and South America is the image of a biomorph (an image depicting an anthropomorph, a zoomorph or a hybrid figure) with a straight object from the head that is often interpreted as a “flute’. Such a figure is often referred to as a “flute player”.

Section I: THE AMBIGUITY OF THE “FLUTE PLAYER” One of the major issues in rock art research is the interpretation of images and scenes. Sometimes individual images are interpreted and labeled with astonishing ease and, even more regrettably, these classifications are too easily and often mindlessly copied by others. In my opinion, this also happens with the “flute player” in the rock art of the Southwest of the U.S.A.. When I discussed biomorphs playing the wind instrument in Andean rock art (Van Hoek 2005) I unambiguously stated that any image of an Andean “flute player” not showing specific details, might well represent a “hunter”, a “metalworker” or a biomorph “smoking tobacco or inhaling drugs”. Although I acknowledge the fact that many images of “flute players” in the Southwest of the U.S.A. indeed will represent a biomorph that is playing a wind instrument, it is scientifically incorrect to label every biomorph with a line or an object from or near the mouth or head area unambiguously as a “flute player”, not even as a possible “flute player”, without explicitly offering alternatives. Unfortunately, too many images in Southwestern rock art (and beyond) are unquestioningly and unequivocally identified as “flute players”.

In this survey two different issues regarding the “flute player” of the Southwest of the U.S.A. will be discussed. In the Southwest of the U.S.A. an anthropomorphic “flute player” is often referred to as “Kokopelli”. Unfortunately, the “flute player” in the unsolicited form of “Kokopelli” “constitutes a major example of inverse acculturation” (Malotki & Weaver 2002: 122). Moreover the generalized name “Kokopelli” for a “flute player” is highly controversial (Malotki 2001) and thus I prefer to use the name “flute player” when referring to an image of a biomorph that apparently is playing a wind instrument. This object may be a “flute” or a “trumpet”, another type of wind instrument or, for that matter, something completely different. In the first section the status of the “flute player” is questioned, as it is by no means certain that all “flute players” images are actual flute players. Yet it proves that in many rock art publications a biomorph with a line from the head is too easily accepted as a true flute player. Moreover, if indeed a “flute player” image indeed depicts a true flute player, it may have (had) an entirely different meaning in the varying contexts of each culture that used this icon. It must be emphasized here however that my observations in this survey are by no means meant to minimize the most valuable works of the rock art researchers of the American Southwest.

To illustrate this point, I invite the hopefully unbiased reader to scan the images in Figure 18.2. It is a collage of biomorphs from Northern American rock art sites. At first sight most of them seem to represent a “flute player”. However, it is very hard for me to uncritically accept that all the biomorphs in Figure 18.2 are true “flute players”. I do not question that an object from the head area of a biomorph in Southwestern rock art may well represent a wind instrument and perhaps the anthropomorph in Figure 18.2.16 indeed represents a true “flute player”. Instead, I argue that in many cases acceptable options must be considered, though I do not claim that the alternatives that I offer here represent the correct interpretations. In many cases the evaluation will remain inconclusive.

The second issue concerns the apparent lack of the “flute player” in Mogollon rock art. Interestingly, images of the “flute player” are found in South America (Van Hoek 2005), Meso-America (Mountjoy 2001a) and North America (Slifer & Duffield 1994). The apparent absence of the icon in Mogollon rock art which occurs in an area situated between the west of Mexico, where several “flute players” have been reported, and the core area of the “flute player” in the U.S.A., the north of New Mexico, is quite puzzling, especially as the Mogollon were geographical and temporal neighbors of the Hohokam and

Which alternatives must then be considered? First we will have to accept that in some cases we simply do not know what a “line from the head” depicts. A line emerging from the mouth or nose might even not be an object at all, but may symbolize speech, spit, a magical line or something completely unknown. For instance, a fully pecked, “horned” anthropomorph depicted in frontal view on a 161

CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

Fig. 18.1. Map showing the location of the study area (enclosed by the dash line) within the Americas. A: Petroglyph from Indian Creek, Utah (after a photograph by Maarten van Hoek, July 2005). B: Petroglyph from Jalisco, Mexico (after Mountjoy 2001a: Fig. 20) vertical sandstone cliff at Indian Creek, Utah, clearly has a straight line emerging from the head (Figure 18.1.A), but the two drooping arms do not touch the line. It is therefore obscure what the line represents.

western rock art and beyond, one occasionally finds references to “arrow swallowers” and/or “stick swallowwers” (Schaafsma 1980: 265 and Fig. 214; Schaafsma 1992: 104, 111, 114, 128; Slifer & Duffield 1994: 42; Malotki & Weaver 2002: 120), “snake swallowers” (Slifer 2000b: Fig. 128), and of “cloud blowers” (Slifer 2000b: 121) (Figure 18.2.17).

However, there still prove to be a few acceptable alternatives for the “flute”. In literature about South162

M. VAN HOEK: MOGOLLON ROCK ART AND THE STATUS OF THE “FLUTE PLAYER”

Fig. 18.2. Rock art images from North American. 1: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. A-83; 2: after Slifer 1998: Fig. 229; 3: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. 66; 4: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. 165; 5: after Keyser 1992: Fig. 32; 6: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig.10; 7: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. 176; 8: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. A-48; 9: after Bostwick & Krocek 2002: Fig. 135. 10: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. 96; 11: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Plate 1; 12: after Magne & Klassen 2002: Plate 4; 13, 14, 15 and 16: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. 50; 17: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. 42; 18: after Slifer 2000a: Fig. 86; 19: after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. A-108; 20: after Keyser 1992: Fig. 25c 163

CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

Much further south, in the Jalisco area of western Mexico, several petroglyphs of ostensible “flute players” have been recorded (Figure 18.1.B). Although most of them have been interpreted by Joseph Mountjoy as anthropomorphs (possibly shamans) that use a kind of megaphone (2001a: 61), at least one “flute player” is alternatively and tentatively suggested by him to depict a “shaman that is smoking” through an unnamed object (Mountjoy 2001b: Fig. 8). According to Mountjoy, a megaphone is apparently a kind of “trumpet through which hunters shouted or yelled in order to herd deer in a sacred deer hunt”. Similar instruments are still used in the area today, made of a roll of bark (Pers. comm. 2006).

The biomorph in Figure 18.2.4 is interpreted by Slifer & Duffield (1994: Fig. 165) as a possible “flute player”, probably because the object clearly does not touch the mouth. Also the biomorphs in Figures 18.2.3 and 18.1.8 hold an object that does not touch the head, and yet both are interpreted as a definite “flute players” by Slifer & Duffield (1994: 45, Figs A-45 and 66). Each of these images is better described as “a biomorph holding an unidentified object that, because of its position, might be a flute or, for that matter, something else”. If not touching the head would be a valid criterion for labeling such figures as “flute players” (which I doubt very much), I do not see any reason not to include the anthropomorph from British Columbia in Figure 18.2.20 as a “flute player”. However, it is said (Keyser 1992: Fig. 25.c) to represent a “man spearfishing a sturgeon” (the sturgeon not shown in Figure 18.2.20), which proves that also the graphical context is an important factor in interpreting images. Keyser interprets a pictograph of the anthropomorph in Figure 18.2.5 as a “pipe smoking man” (1992: Fig. 32). His interpretation may be correct, but consequently I do not see any reason not to interpret (whether correctly on incorrectly) an alleged “flute player” from Velarde, New Mexico, (Figure 18.2.6) as a “pipe smoking [sha]man”.

All these practices could have triggered the execution of rock art images that in first instance look very much like the “flute player”, but could well represent one of the scenes aforementioned. My point is that in many cases it is impossible to tell apart, for instance, the “flute player” from the “stick-swallower”. The anthropomorphs in Figures 18.2.13, 18.1.14, 18.1.15 and 18.1.16 appear “randomly” distributed on the same panel and are said to represent “flute players with birds and Arrow Swallowers” (Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. 50). But is, for instance, Figure 18.2.14 a “flute player” or a “stick- or arrow swallower”? Although most “flute players” hold the “flute” with two arms, one-armed “flute players” or biomorphs holding the “flute” with one arm (the other being empty or holding another object) have also been reported (Figure 18.2.15). Another dubious example is the anthropomorph in Figure 18.2.18. Is it a “flute player” as suggested (Slifer 2000a: 104) or an “arrow- or stick swallower”? It proves that too easily such images are identified as “flute players”, without offering any alternative. Only in one case Slifer & Duffield suggest that an anthropomorph is not a “flute player”, but probably “a member of the arrow- or stick swallowing order” (1994: 45).

However, there is another alternative explanation for the line from the head area (see also Van Hoek 2004). Especially images of anthropomorphs that are bending over and/or touching the head area with their hands might be indicative of persons experiencing (shamanic) nosebleeds. Slifer & Duffield (1994: Fig. 96) identify two similar back-to-back figures (only one shown in Figure 18.2.10) as “flute players”, despite the fact that in neither case a “flute” is shown. Although these figures more likely depict persons touching the nose – possibly because of a shamanic haemorrhage – it will remain obscure what precisely these figures do or represents. This comment also applies to the “bent-over anthropomorph” from Grotto Canyon, Canada, which is tentatively interpreted as a “flute player” by Magne & Klassen (2001), despite the fact that the “flute” is rather short and indistinct (Figure 18.2.12). The figure might as well depict a (sha)man with a nose-bleed, especially as one arm seems to be touching the nose or head, rather than the alleged “flute”. The anthropomorph in Figure 18.2.19 has a long, curved line from the head area. As the line definitely is not held or touched by the hands, the line might depict a haemorrhage instead of a real object like a “flute” as suggested by Slifer & Duffield (1994: 72). But again, the true meaning will remain obscure.

The anthropomorph shown in Figure 18.2.1 (Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. A-83) is suggested to be a figure that is “playing [why not eating?] what resembles a corn plant” (Slifer & Duffield 1994: 57), in itself a strange situation. But, alternatively, it might represent an anthropomorph “swallowing an arrow”; the short extensions at the end equally might represent the feathers of an arrow. The anthropomorph in Figure 18.2.2 is suggested to be a “flute player” (Slifer 2000b: 123), but for the same reason it might depict an “arrow swallower”. The anthropomorph in Figure 18.2.11 is labeled as a “flute player in frontal view” by Slifer & Duffield (1994: Plate 1), but again, I do not see any reason why it could not be a “stick swallower”. Similarly, the anthropomorph in Figure 18.2.7 might – because of the zigzag line – be a “snake swallower”, although it was labeled as a “flute player” by Slifer & Duffield (1994: Fig. 176). The anthropomorph in Figure 18.2.9 is suggested to hold “a flute or a blowgun” by Bostwick & Krocek (2002: Fig. 135), but could equally be a “stick swallower”. Yet, at least Bostwick & Krocek offer an alternative.

Because of the ambiguity of the “flute player” image discussed above, it will in many cases remain doubtful what exactly has been depicted by the Pre-historic Native Americans. Yet, for matters of convenience, in the next section the image of a biomorph holding an object suggestive of a wind instrument will be referred to as a “flute player”, bearing in mind that it may represent something completely different. 164

M. VAN HOEK: MOGOLLON ROCK ART AND THE STATUS OF THE “FLUTE PLAYER”

The hohokam

Section II: THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE “FLUTE PLAYER”

Slifer & Duffield state that “flute player” images within the Hohokam culture area appear to be almost totally confined to pottery representations, whereas Hohokam rock art is said by them to include only four “flute players” at three sites (1994: 106). Actually, there are perhaps up to ten “flute players” at those three sites, as South Mountain Park, Phoenix, Arizona, has possibly seven “flute player” images instead of the one reported (Slifer & Duffield 1994). Three of the South Mountain Park “flute players” seem to be authentic (Bostwick & Krocek 2002: Figs 103, 112 and 113). One of the alleged “flute players” at South Mountain Park (Figure 18.2.9) might equally depict a “stick swallower” or a hunting scene in which an anthropomorph uses a blowpipe (Bostwick & Krocek 2002: Fig. 135). This event may be compared with a similar petroglyph at Miculla, Peru, also depicting a possible hunting scene (Van Hoek 2005: Fig. 7B). Three other “flute players”, found at one rock art panel at South Mountain Park (Bostwick & Krocek 2002: Fig. 136), are, in my opinion, doubtful.

Although several Northern American cultures included the “flute player’ into their iconographies, at least three Pre-historic Indian peoples in the Southwest of the U.S.A. definitely used the image of the “flute player” (Figure 18.1): The Fremont, who lived mainly in present-day Utah; the Anasazi, who resided in large parts of the Colorado Plateau (comprising parts of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Arizona); and the Hohokam, who occupied a large area around Phoenix-Tucson, Arizona. Although there was a great deal of contact between these cultural groups, which is expressed in their rock art as well, their iconographies are rather distinct. Yet, there are several geographical, statistical and chronological issues that blur the picture. Regarding the numerical presence of the “flute player” there are notable differences between the Fremont, the Anasazi, the Hohokam and the Mogollon. In their study of the “flute player” in the rock art of the Southwest, Slifer & Duffield present a map of rock art sites featuring “flute player” images (1994: Fig. 1). They included 100 sites within the Anasazi cultural sphere against 20 for the Fremont area, 3 for the Hohokam area and 9 for the Mogollon area. This is a first indication that the “flute player” in Southwest rock art is mainly an Anasazi feature.

The alleged “flute players” at South Mountain Park – an area of roughly 40 square miles – are strikingly concentrated near the major, northern entrance to the mountains. Two more “flute players” (one shown in Figure 18.2.7, although this example may be a “snake swallower”) are found at Sierra Estrella, a mountain range 10 miles WSW of South Mountain Park. One isolated “flute player” has been reported from Aztec Canyon, several miles south of South Mountain Park (Slifer & Duffield 1994: 106). Thus, the few “flute players” occurring in the rock art of the Hohokam prove to be concentrated in a relatively small area, moreover rather distant from the Anasazi region.

If we count the sites with “flute players” in the areas that overlap, a similar picture emerges. The Fremont area has 20 sites, but 12 may be Anasazi, leaving only eight “definitive” Fremont sites featuring the “flute player”. Strikingly, the figures for the Anasazi are: 100 overall sites minus 19 sites in overlap areas, which leave 81 “definitive” Anasazi “flute player” sites. For the Mogollon only two “definitive” “flute player” sites seem to remain as seven sites also are situated in the Anasazi influence sphere. Because in this section I concentrate on the Mogollon rock art at Three Rivers, I will only discuss the two neighboring peoples who may have directly influenced the Mogollon: the Hohokam to the west and the Anasazi to the north (Figure 18.1). From now on, the too distant Fremont culture will be ignored in this survey. Also, rock art imagery of more recent peoples – such as the Navajo – will not be discussed in this work.

But distance is not always a boundary. It is known that the Hohokam had intensive contacts with the south (the area what is now Mexico) and to a lesser extent with the west (the Pacific Coast). Moreover, Brody (Pers. comm. 2005) states that interactions between the Hohokam and the northern Southwest, from the Colonial Period (Hohokam 1 in Figure 18.3) on, were common enough in all directions for almost any kind of pictorial interactions to have taken place. This brings me to discuss two possibilities. Generally spoken, the iconography of distant cultures will often be dissimilar. However, from the natural or cultural context or from certain universalities of the human psychology and nervous system an “identical” image may emerge independently in two separate culture areas. Then we speak of parallel development. On the other hand, such an image may equally be introduced to an area from a distant source, in which case we speak of diffusion, even if the metaphorical contents of the image changes over time.

The statistical picture even gets more polarized when it comes to individual “flute player” images (conveniently ignoring the aforementioned ambiguity of the “flute player”). Slifer & Duffield state that there are probably thousands of “flute player” images in the rock art of the Southwest (1994: 17), and that many more will still be discovered. This further approach will prove almost invariably the Anasazi supremacy of the “flute player”. This can be demonstrated by looking at statistical position of the “flute player” within Hohokam and Mogollon rock art.

Thus, the “flute player” image in Hohokam rock art may equally have traveled from the south or may have been 165

CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

Fig. 18.3. Chart of Southwestern chronology (based on Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. 2 and Schaafsma 1980: Fig. 140) have been adopted from the Anasazi in the north. If indeed the Hohokam borrowed the symbol from another culture, it is uncertain whether icon and ideology ever traveled as a team (Brody: Pers. comm. 2005). Also, a distinguishing feature of (most?) Hohokam “flute player” images is that they are not phallic and not humpbacked, though many are typically bent over. Therefore, the Hohokam “flute player” might constitute a completely separate development in Southwest rock art traditions. It is moreover unlikely that the extremely low number of distantly found “flute players” in Hohokam iconography triggered a boom of “flute players” in Anasazi rock art. But such a development may not be ruled out completely.

Notwithstanding the scarcity in Hohokam rock art, the sharp contrast of only ten known “flute players” against thousands of “identified” examples in Anasazi rock art is overwhelming. This raises a problem, also because there seems not to exist consensus regarding the precise chronology of Southwestern rock art. It has been suggested that the “flute player” image diffused from Mexican antecedents to the Hohokam and thence to the Anasazi by the Pueblo I period – about A.D. 700 (Haury 1976: 240, quoted in Slifer & Duffield 1994: 30). A Mexican origin for the Hohokam “flute player” seems to be confirmed by the discovery of “flute players” at Huejuquilla, Jalisco, Mexico, which seem to have close 166

M. VAN HOEK: MOGOLLON ROCK ART AND THE STATUS OF THE “FLUTE PLAYER”

affinities with Hohokam “flute player” (Olmos Aguilera 2003).

Slifer & Duffield include nine locales with “flute players” within the general Mogollon cultural sphere (1994: Fig. 1). They moreover state that “flute players” are seen in the iconography of the Mogollon of southern New Mexico, but seem to refer mainly to examples on ceramics of the Mimbres (1994: 4), although they also argue that “flute player images are also rare in the rock art of the Mimbres region” (1994: 114). However, Brody informed me that although he has seen a good sample of Mimbres painted pottery – upwards of 6000 examples (some ca. A.D. 875 to A.D. 975; but mostly Mimbres Classic, A.D. 975 to A.D. 1150), and while he may have seen a “flute player” and forgotten it, he has no memory of ever doing so. Importantly, he makes the same remark for Mimbres rock art and the rock art at Three Rivers (Pers. comm. 2005).

On the other hand, Schaafsma suggested (Pers. Comm. to Slifer & Duffield 1994: 30-1) that the “flute player” image appeared in Anasazi rock art by around A.D. 500, two hundred years before the Hohokam influence as suggested by Haury. In another work, Schaafsma argues that the earliest appearance of the “flute player” in Anasazi rock art occurs before A.D. 700 (1980: 132). Moreover, Slifer & Duffield initially suggest that “the Hohokam were painting “flute players” on their pottery perhaps as early as the sixth century A.D.”, while simultaneously and confusingly they state that the earliest appearance of the “flute player” in Hohokam ceramics took place around A.D. 750 to A.D. 850 (1994: 4, 30). The theme appears to have been lost among the Hohokam by A.D. 1200 (1994: 31).

Confusingly, Slifer & Duffield also acknowledge that within the Mogollon culture depictions of humpbacked, and sometimes phallic, figures are found in rock art, but none is playing the flute (1994: 32). To complicate things further, they state that “compared to the Anasazi and Fremont culture areas, there are few “flute player” depictions in the rock art of the Mogollon region” and then mention a possible “flute player” near Reserve, New Mexico, an example that, moreover, has been destroyed (1994: 103). The only possible and still existing “flute player” included by Slifer & Duffield in their Mogollon section (1994: 105, Fig. 173) is said to occur at Three Rivers, New Mexico, but I regard this example as highly doubtful as I will demonstrate further on.

Slifer & Duffield mainly base the early start of the “flute player” in Hohokam iconography on the appearance of the “flute player” on Gila Butte ceramics found at Snaketown, an ancient Hohokam settlement, 12 miles SE of South Mountain Park (1994: 113-4). The Hohokam populated Snaketown from the 1st century BC through the mid-1500s; a rather long time span. Brody (Pers. comm. 2005), confirming that according to Haury’s report (1976) on Hohokam pottery at Snaketown, “flute players” are first noted on Gila Butte pottery (beginning of the Colonial Period, c. A.D. 775 – Hohokam 2 in Figure 18.3), is not aware of “flute players” from the earlier Pioneer Period (Hohokam 1 in Figure 18.3).

A few years later, Slifer (1998) described a Jornada Style elements of a rock art site at Arroyo del Macho (some 70 km NE of Three Rivers) featuring several petroglyphs of humpbacked anthropomorphs that are directly associated with dragonflies. One of the anthropomorphs, which in this case is not phallic and does not have a humpback, holds a straight “object” that “emerges” from the head (Figure 18.2.2). According to Slifer (1998: 209) the anthropomorph appears to be playing a flute-like object. However, it is uncertain whether this “object” is an actual wind instrument. It seems to have feathers at the end (the “object” might even be regarded to have a rattle-snake tail-end) and therefore the anthropomorph may equally represent an “arrow swallower” (or even a “snake swallower”). Moreover, the site is located just within the Anasazi culture sphere and images at that specific site need not be of exclusive Mogollon authorship. Although it cannot be ruled out that certain Mogollon groups played the flute or another wind instrument (Slifer & Duffield speak of flutes fashioned from hollow reeds, especially in the Mogollon area [1994: 20]), Brody (Pers. comm. 2005) cannot recall any end-blown wind instruments being found in Mimbres or Jornada sites, except for relatively small flagelots (flute-like musical instruments consisting of end-blown bird bone "flutes" that have about eight finger holes cut into it). In contrast, flutes and whistles have been recovered from Anasazi Basketmaker III sites (Cole 1990: 114).

The mogollon First of all, Brody rightly argues that it is a mistake to conceive of the Mogollon as a coherent society. They were different groups of people who made similarlooking unpainted pottery, lived in pit houses and occupied a vast area of quite distinctive ecological zones living in (through most of time) small (5 to 20 households), widely scattered settlements (Pers. comm. 2005). However, for matters of convenience, the Mogollon culture has roughly been divided into the Mountain Mogollon in the west of New Mexico and the Desert Mogollon in the east (Schaafsma 1980: 186). Prior to A.D. 1000, an early Abstract Style characterized rock art phases 1 to 4 of the Desert Mogollon (Figure 18.3), while the last rock art phase of the Desert Mogollon culture (Mogollon 5 in Figure 18.3) is called the Jornada Style, which includes the rock art of the Jornada and the Mimbres regions. Importantly, the style and subject of many images on Mimbres ceramics are similar to several rock art images at Three Rivers. This conveniently provides a rough time estimate for the Three Rivers rock art imagery, which largely belongs to the Jornada Style of the Jornada region and approximately dates from A.D. 1000 to A.D. 1400. The statistical gap between the “flute player” in Anasazi rock art and Mogollon rock art is even more striking. 167

CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

This summary leaves us with only two, possibly three dubious “flute players” in Mogollon rock art against the thousands of “unambiguous” figures in Anasazi iconography; again a strong argument in favor of an (independent?) Anasazi origin of the “flute player”. However, there are a few interesting images at Three Rivers that need to be considered in this context because they show a posture that is typical for a “flute player”. But despite the “flute player”-like appearance of the biomorphs involved, it is highly debatable to what extent these images offer conclusive evidence that the Mogollon knew of the “flute player” icon.

Duffield report a few humpbacked and/or phallic figures at Three Rivers, including an ogre-like biomorph that is carefully suggested to represent Kokopelli (1994: 104). But when this biomorph is considered in more detail, it proves that the relative positions of the splayed hand and the open, grinning mouth showing teeth (Figure 18.4) are not appropriately placed to hold a “flute”. Although Slifer and Duffield include a drawing showing a definite phallus (1994: Fig. 189), the status of this body part in the actual petroglyph is somewhat debatable. There are markings in that specific area, but they might be remnants of an (older?) petroglyph like a “solar” image. Another possible “solar” symbol is placed between the arm and the abdomen of the figure. The other indicative seems to be the (slightly) humpbacked nature of the biomorph, which might however have originated from the “necessity” to incorporate or (ergonomically) avoid a large ear-of-cornshaped, natural projection on the rock (situated between the two solid arrows in Figure 18.4). However, at Three Rivers even a petroglyph of a “bighorn sheep” with an enormous “humpback” occurs (possibly in order to create a second, “negative” horn for the bighorn). It is therefore highly unlikely that this ogre-like figure ever was intended to depict a “flute player”. Moreover, I think it is farfetched to call this biomorph a shaman, Kokopelli or anything-else. We simply do not know what it is.

Three Rivers Three Rivers is an enormous petroglyph site on the eastern fringe of the Tularosa Basin and just west of the Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico. Also visible from the top of the one mile long rocky ridge are the two contrasting landscapes of the White Sands gypsum area to the SW and a “recent” black lava flow, called El Malpais; both located in the Tularosa Basin to the west of the site. On the roughly N-S stretching ridge, an intrusive sill, are found about 21.000 individual petroglyphs on a scatter of boulders and outcrops (Duran & Crotty 1999). The great majority of the petroglyphs have been very superficially pecked out of the deeply patinated, igneous rock surfaces. A problem is that additional pecking, bruising and recent vandalizing of rock surfaces easily create distorted and blurred pictures on this type of stone. The enormously varied imagery at Three Rivers comprises a fascinating mixture of abstract designs, zoomorphs and anthropomorphs, many occurring in isolation on a rock face. Hallmarks are cross-rings with an external ring of dots; stepped-fret figures; rectangular quadrupeds, often with interior decoration; birds; feet, hands and paws; Tlaloc figures (anthropomorphs said to be related to a Mesoamerican rain god, but this idea is controversial) and masks or faces. “Flute players” seem to be absent; at least, the theme is not at all mentioned in the report on this major Mogollon site (Duran & Crotty 1999) or in any literature about the Mogollon that I have available or that I have consulted. This absence seems rather strange if indeed the “nearby” Mimbres did produce ceramics depicting “flute players” as Slifer & Duffield suggest (1994: 4). However, it is seriously questioned by Brody (Pers. comm. 2005) if the Mimbres ever have used the “flute player” in their iconography.

Fig. 18.4. Petroglyph of a biomorph. Three Rivers, New Mexico. After a photograph by Maarten van Hoek, July 2005

Possible indications of “flute players” at three RIVERS? Although Southwestern “flute players” are often humpbacked and/or phallic, decisive in establishing an image as a true “flute player” is, of course, the presence of a “flute”. As I have postulated that images of the true “flute player” seem to be completely absent at Three Rivers, other indications than the “flute” may be considered. Indeed, there are phallic figures and humpbacked biomorphs at Three Rivers. Slifer &

Besides the presence of a “flute”, the often phallic nature and/or the hunched back, a fourth characteristic may be the posture that is typical for a biomorph playing a wind instrument. Interestingly, there are some rock art images of phallic and/or hunched biomorphs in Southwestern rock art that are, because of their posture, suggestive of 168

M. VAN HOEK: MOGOLLON ROCK ART AND THE STATUS OF THE “FLUTE PLAYER”

the “flute player”, without a “flute” actually being present (Figure 18.5). Is it possible that the “flute” is graphically invisible but metaphorically present? Although the concept of the non-visual in rock art is highly controversial, as it cannot be proven, the idea of the nonvisual might have been introduced in Southwest rock art imagery as well as the following examples seem to suggest.

Slifer & Duffield describe a “hunting” scene from Monument Valley, Arizona, in which the actual hunter is not depicted. They suggest however, that the presence of the hunter is symbolized by a series of human footprint petroglyphs behind a bighorn sheep (1994: 78). In this way, the hunter is invisible, yet present. Another possible example has been reported from the Mussentuchit area, Utah, where a natural shadow alignment at certain times of the year creates a “flute of light” which gradually extends from the head of an alleged “flute player” to that of an opposite anthropomorph (Slifer & Duffield 1994: 98 and Fig. 166). The flute is invisible most of the year, yet “present” at certain times. Pertaining to the concept of the “non-visual flute”, there is an interesting yet distant analogy. In the coastal desert zone of Chile and Peru, South America, several rock art sites feature biomorphs that seem to play a wind instrument like a flute or a trumpet. In an earlier research paper I tentatively suggested that some of the biomorphs that are in the position of the “flute player” might represent the concept of the non-visual. This means that the “flute” was deliberately not incorporated into the image, but was yet supposed to be present; its presence suggested by the specific position of the biomorph, combined with the graphical context of the iconography on the rest of the rock panel and of the rock art in the region. The “evidence” was largely based on the fact that on a rock panel at Pakra, Valle de Pisco, Peru, three “monkeys” actually were shown to “play a wind instrument”, while a fourth “monkey” in an exactly similar position did not have such an instrument (Figure 18.6). At the nearby site of Huancor more biomorphs were depicted in similar positions, either holding or lacking a musical instrument or an unidentified object (Van Hoek 2005).

Fig. 18.5. Anthropomorphs featuring a “flute player”-like posture. A: Painting on Black-on-white Mesa Verde Bowl (after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. 179); B: Petroglyph. Galisteo Basin, New Mexico (after Slifer & Duffield 1994: Fig. A-48). The large spoon-shaped object most likely is of different authorship; C: Petroglyph. Velarde, New Mexico (after Slifer 2000b: Fig. 44.t); D: Petroglyph. Jemez Mountains, New Mexico (after Slifer 2000b: Fig. 20.i)

Interestingly, also at Three Rivers there are some images of anthropomorphs – often humpbacked and/or phallic – that have the typical position of a “flute player”, but do not feature a “flute”. I will consider these images in more detail.

Fig. 18.6. Petroglyphs of “monkeys playing a wind instrument”. Pakra, Peru. Solid arrow: actual slope; open arrow: possible original slope of the fallen boulder. After a photograph by Maarten van Hoek, July 2004 169

CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

First there is the anthropomorph suggested by Slifer & Duffield to possibly represent a “flute player” (1994: Fig. 173, showing only part of the hand-petroglyph). This fully pecked human figure appears on a small vertical panel of a partially flaked boulder, its position indicated with 1 in Figure 18.7. The anthropomorph seems to be accompanied by a large splayed hand that holds or touches a spear(head) or arrow(head) (Figure 18.8; not showing a small part of the wrist and the rest of the arm of the hand-petroglyph). The anthropomorph – executed in profile – is not humpbacked, but is clearly phallic. The figure has two legs (one partially flaked off) but only one arm that is raised and bent at such an angle that it is possible to imagine a “flute” being held. Moreover, there are some isolated peck marks between the head and the arm and beyond that might be intended to represent a “flute”, or indicate the intention to graphically add such an instrument. Slifer & Duffield include these marks in their illustration partially as if it is a solid, straight line, possibly representing a “flute”. The head also seems to be executed in profile. The way the head is pecked suggests the presence of a nose and an open mouth, but this may be fortuitous. If indeed the mouth is shown, it is certain that there is nothing directly emerging from it. Therefore it is uncertain if a “flute” was really proposed to be represented by the faint line of small pecked areas.

Fig. 18.8. Petroglyph of a biomorph in a “flute player” position. Three Rivers, New Mexico. After a photograph by Maarten van Hoek, July 2005 The second panel that I would like to describe is found only a few meters south of the previous one (indicated by locale 2 in Figure 18.7). On a much sloping part of a medium sized boulder is a row of possibly four or five fully pecked anthropomorphs, all shown in profile, except perhaps for the right-hand figure. The panel is heavily bruised and/or “randomly” pecked in places, which obscures the details to a certain extent. None of the figures is phallic or humpbacked, but especially the two central figures are in a typical position. Both may be classified as “seated” figures (although this is not at all certain). The two have one arm each, which is raised and bent at such an angle that, again, it is possible to imagine a “flute” being held (Figure 18.9; only showing the three right-hand figures). Once more there are many pecked (or bruised) areas between the head and the hand, but these seem to be too haphazard to be indicative of a “flute”, especially as there are many more such pecked areas at other “random” places on the panel. Much further north on the ridge is a most interesting group of petroglyphs on a large boulder located at the foot of the highest knoll on the ridge (its top at 1600 m), its position indicated with 3 in Figure 18.7. Dominating the SE facing, vertical panel is a large anthropomorph with raised arms, frontally depicted, and in a squatting position. On the panel are also some “bird tracks”, a small zoomorph, a row of small arches, two dotted ring marks, a

Fig. 18.7. Map of Three Rivers, New Mexico. Based on Duran & Crotty 1999: Fig. 4. Inset: location of Three Rivers within the study area 170

M. VAN HOEK: MOGOLLON ROCK ART AND THE STATUS OF THE “FLUTE PLAYER”

Fig. 18.9. Petroglyph of a biomorph in a “flute player” position. Three Rivers, New Mexico. After a photograph by Maarten van Hoek, July 2005 mushroom-shape and an uncertain pattern of lines and “randomly” pecked or bruised areas. On the left-hand side is a small but definitively phallic anthropomorph. It is depicted in profile and shows two legs with merging feet and two arms, again raised and bent at such an angle that it is possible to imagine a “flute” being held (Figure 18.10). Remarkable however, is that the figure is clearly humpbacked. Thus it shows all the alleged attributes of a “flute player” and, moreover, it does have the distinctive position of a “flute player”. But there is no “flute”. Instead, the hands seem to “hold” or “enter” a cloud of faint peck marks, but this “cloud” may be a chance feature; it may be later or earlier and not even be related to the anthropomorph. Hence it is definitely not a “flute player”.

Fig. 18.10. Petroglyph of a biomorph in a “flute player” position. Three Rivers, New Mexico. After a photograph by Maarten van Hoek, July 2005

Not far from stone 3 is a small boulder or outcrop, flush with the slightly east sloping hill side; its position indicated with 4 in Figure 18.7. The smooth panel has only two petroglyphs: a short, slightly curved, line; vertical in relation with a most interesting anthropomorph that has been depicted in profile. The figure is fully pecked, except for the head area, which is outlined and possibly features an eye. The figure is clearly phallic and, moreover, distinctly humpbacked. The anthropomorph has two arms, again raised and bent at such an angle that it is possible to imagine a “flute” being held (Figure 18.11). But once more there is no “flute”. And on this panel are no pecked areas that could give the impression of a “flute” being present or intended. So, also this figure definitely does not depict a “flute player”. A last petroglyph is even less convincing. It is on a panel located at site 5 in Figure 18.7 and comprises the lower, vertical part of a high, west facing columnar rock covered with bold geometric patterns. Next to two vertically orientated abstract designs is a pecked figure consisting of two outlined circles. The bigger circle has a groove pointing downward, which might represent a leg. The smaller circle, which could be viewed as the “head” is

Fig. 18.11. Petroglyph of a biomorph in a “flute player” position. Three Rivers, New Mexico. After a photograph by Maarten van Hoek, July 2005 171

CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

connected with the larger circle by a short groove, the neck (?). From the smaller circle runs a groove towards the abstract designs. It is in a position similar to that of a “flute” from the mouth of a “flute player”. The problem is now that the figure definitely is not humpbacked or phallic and only vaguely resembles a “biomorph playing a flute”, especially since there are no definitive anatomical features involved.

the Jornada Mogollon (Schaafsma 1980: 254) and several Mogollon themes appear in Rio Grande Style (Anasazi Pueblo IV) rock art. Brody argues that interactions among all three groups (and it is often the western researcher who thinks of them as three distinct groups rather than as “x” number of peoples) seem to have become increasingly common through time. By the 10th century interactions may have been commonplace in borderland areas and by the 12th century all sorts of interactions were taking place among the three groups so much so that we effectively “lose” the Mogollon while the Anasazi and Hohokam each transform themselves into something new and different by the 1300s (Pers. comm. 2005). However, it seems that certain elements of the Jornada Style rock art iconography and ideas did travel north and partially transformed the Anasazi rock art into what is now known as the Rio Grande Style or Anasazi Pueblo IV Style (Schaafsma 1980: 254). Importantly, there seems not to be any notable exchange of icons or ideas in the other direction and apparently the powerful image of the “flute player” – ubiquitous in Rio Grande Style rock art – was never adapted by the Mogollon. This may mean that the Rio Grande Style borrowed the “flute player” from the earlier Anasazi iconography (Schaafsma 1980: 255-6) at a time that incoherent and elusive Mogollon groups were no longer “able”, “interested” or “willing” to incorporate as an icon the “flute player” from the Anasazi, and definitely not as a sort of pan-Mogollon icon. This seems to be evident at Three Rivers.

CONCLUSIONS Rock art issues often centre on interpretation of a specific image or scene and the terminology used to describe the imagery. Obviously this is also the case for the “flute player” icon in the Southwest of the U.S.A.. Although many images may indeed represent true flute players, it has been demonstrated in this survey that not necessarily all biomorphs with a straight “object” from the head are playing a wind instrument. Moreover, the “flute player” does not exist. It is the western observer who groups a variety of biomorphic images under the category “flute player”, which is modern, non-native and so loosely defined that its enormous net catches a large number of disparate images that cannot possibly have ever had a shared meaning. For that reason the term "flute-player" carries absolutely no ideological implications other than those associated with those who created the category in the first place.

Indeed, at Three Rivers, a well known Mogollon site, not a single convincing image of the “flute player” has been reported so far. Indeed, there are several biomorphs that may be regarded to be humpbacked and/or phallic, but even the humpbacked and phallic nature of an anthropomorph moreover showing the typical “flute player” position is a highly controversial indicative of a “flute player”. A humpback definitely is not an allusion of a “flute player”, as is demonstrated by the “humpbacked” ogre-like biomorph at Three Rivers.

Accepting these observations, it nevertheless is striking that “flute-player” images, whatever they depict or symbolize, occur in a wide area from Chile in South America to Utah in North America and yet apparently is absent in the Mogollon culture area, which is “enclosed” by cultures that feature the “flute player” (Figure 18.1). The issue of the “missing” “flute player” image also seems to be the case in large parts of northern Mexico. Although the icon has been reported in Durango and Jalisco (Mountjoy 2001a; 2001b), it seems to be absent further north in Mexico, in Sonora and neighboring Chihuahua. The “flute player” also seems to be absent on Chihuahuan Casas Grandes polychrome ceramics and this reflects the absence of the “flute player” on the related Mimbres pottery. This absence is puzzling indeed, but one of the possible answers may be that the “flute player” icon did not travel in whatever direction, but instead developed independently in the various cultures, also because the contents of the icon might be completely different. For instance, the “flute players” petroglyphs of the Jalisco area in western Mexico are said to represent anthropomorphs who use a kind of megaphone in a specific hunting ritual (Mountjoy 2001a), while many Anasazi “flute players” indeed seem to represent actual flute players.

At least four biomorphs at Three Rivers are found in a position typical for the “flute player”, but because there are no true “flute player” images at the site (and perhaps at any other Mogollon rock art site) there is no evidence at all that suggests a non-visual “flute” is a serious option (although this never can be ruled out completely – absence of proof is no proof of absence). Concluding, the anthropomorphs from Three Rivers described in this survey may equally hold an invisible “stick” or “staff” (analogous to a figure at a Mogollon pictograph site at Gila River – Schaafsma 1992: Fig. 64), or may hold an invisible “arrow” or “stick” that is being swallowed. Or they may not hold anything at all; they simply may be empty handed. The typical posture may have had a different meaning entirely. Yet, the presence at Three Rivers of humpbacked, phallic anthropomorphs with an attitude typical for the “flute player” is remarkable and must have been significant. Notwithstanding the complete lack of evidence, they might depict “flute players”, but

Yet, there are many indications that icons and ideas migrated from one cultural group to another and in this respect the Mogollon were no exception. There were definitely contacts between for instance the Anasazi and 172

M. VAN HOEK: MOGOLLON ROCK ART AND THE STATUS OF THE “FLUTE PLAYER”

Recording Field School. The Artifact, Volume 37, No. 2. El Paso Archaeological Society. El Paso, Texas. Special Publication No. 2. Archaeological Society of New Mexico. Albuquerque, New Mexico.

this interpretation will remain highly controversial, also because there is no “flute player” tradition in either Mogollon rock art or ceramic art. Indeed, also at other Jornada Mogollon rock art sites, the “flute player” seems to be absent. At least, its appearance is not mentioned in any of the literature about Three Rivers and/or the Mogollon that I have available. However, Brody (Pers. comm. 2005) rightly argues that relatively few of the many Mogollon rock art sites (not all of which look alike) have been documented. Consequently, there is not enough information to accept as fact the published generalizations about “flute player” images in Mogollon rock art. Yet, the “flute player” is a true hallmark of the Southwest and I think (and hope) that even a single “flute player’ at any surveyed Mogollon rock art site would be reported immediately.

MAGNE, M. & M.A. KLASSEN (2001) – A Possible Fluteplayer Pictograph Site Near Exshaw, Alberta. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 25: 1–24. MALOTKI, E. (2001) – Kokopelli: The making of an icon. University of Nebraska Press, Norman. MALOTKI, E. & D.E. WEAVER JR. (2002) – Stone Chisel and Yucca Brush. Colorado Plateau rock art. Kiva Publishing, Walnut, CA. MOUNTJOY, J.B. (2001a) – Ritos de renovación en los petroglifos de Jalisco. Arqueología de Occidente. Arqueología Mexicana, Vol. VIII, Num. 47. 56-63. Editorial Raices, México. MOUNTJOY, J.B. (2001b) – El Arte Rupestre. Antropología en Jalisco, No. 10. Secretaría de Cultura del Estado de Jalisco. Guadalajara, Jalisco.

Acknowledgements I am most grateful to Prof. J.J. Brody for helping me with the preparation of this paper and for his willingness to read and comment on the draft version. I am obliged to Prof. Joseph Mountjoy for sending me specific information on western Mexico and allowing me to use one of his illustrations. I am also grateful to Marty Magne and Michael Klassen for emailing me their paper on the Canadian “flute player” and for their permission to use one of their illustrations. As usual Dennis Slifer generously allowed me to use several illustrations from his various books.

OLMOS AGUILERA, M. (2003) – Reseña de “la Gran Chichimeca, el lugar de las rocas secas” de Beatriz Braniff C. Frontera Norte. enero-junio, Año/Vol. 15. No. 029. Colegia de Frontera Norte. Tijuana. México. SCHAAFSMA, P. (1980) – Indian rock art of the Southwest. UNMP, Albuquerque, NM. SCHAAFSMA, P. (1992. Rock art in New Mexico. Museum of New Mexico Press. SLIFER, D. & J. DUFFIELD (1994) – Kokopelli. Fluteplayer images in rock art. Ancient City Press, Santa Fe, N.M.

References and further reading

SLIFER, D. (1998) – Signs of life: Rock art of the Upper Rio Grande. Ancient City Press. Santa Fe, NM.

BOSTWICK, T.W. & P. KROCEK (2002) – Landscape of the spirits. Hohokam rock art at South Mountain Park. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

SLIFER, D. (2000a) – Guide to rock art of the Utah region. Sites with public access. Ancient City Press. Santa Fe, NM. SLIFER, D. (2000b) – The serpent and the fire. Fertility images in Southwest rock art. Museum of New Mexico Press, NM.

BRODY, J.J. (1977) – Mimbres Painted Pottery. School of American Research, Santa Fe and the University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

VAN HOEK, M. (2004) – Enigmatic quadrupeds in Southern African petroglyph art. Paper read to the RASI-2004 International Rock Art Congress, Agra, India.

BRODY, J.J. & R. SWENTZELL (1996) – To Touch The Past – The Painted Pottery of the Mimbres People. Hudson Hills Press, New York. BRODY, J.J. (1983) – Mimbres pottery: ancient art of the American Southwest. New York: Hudson Hills Press.

VAN HOEK, M. (2005) – Biomorphs “playing a wind instrument” in Andean Rock Art. Rock Art Research, Vol. 22. Nº 1: 23-34. Melbourne.

DURAN, M.S. & H.K. CROTTY (1999) – Three Rivers Petroglyph Site: Results of the ASNM Rock Art

173

THE FINDINGS OF THE PRESENCE OF THE SABRE TOOTHED TIGER M.C.M.C. BELTRÃO & M. LOCKS Abstract: It is discussed here the pictoric depiction of a +Smilodon, popularly known as Saber-Toothed Tiger. The identification was possible due to the size and the characteristics of this animal’s tusk. This finding is one of the ten depictions of the pleistocene animals from the Archaeological Region of Central, among them the bear, the giant armadillo, the peleolhama, the toxodon, the giant sloth and other non-giant sloth but pleistocenic as well, two genuses of the horse and the mastodon. Key words: Brazilian rock painting – Pleistocene animals – saber tooth tiger Résumé: Il s’agit ici de la représentation picturale d’un +Smilodon, connu populairement comme tigre à dents de sabre. Son identification a été rendue possible par la taille et certains aspects caractéristiques des crocs de l’animal. Cette découverte vient s’ajouter à neuf autres représentations d’animaux pléistocènes dans la région archéologique de Central, dont un ours, un tatou géant, un paléo-lama, un toxodonte, une paresse géante et une paresse d’un autre genre, pléistocène également, de plus petite taille, deux genres de chevaux et un mastodonte. Mots clef: tigre à dents de sabre – Resumo: Discute-se aqui a representação pictórica de um +Smilodon, conhecido popularmente como Tigre-de-dente-de-sabre. A identificação foi possível devido ao tamanho e aspectos característicos das presas do animal. Esse achado junta-se a nove outras representações de animais pleistocênicos na Região Arqueológica de Central, entre eles o urso, o tatu gigante a paleolhama, o toxodonte, a preguiça gigante e uma de outro gênero também pleistocênica de menor tamanho, dois gêneros de cavalo e o mastodonte. Palavras chave: Pintura rupestre – Arqueologia brasileira – Sítios arqueológicos pleistocênicos – Fauna extinta – Tigre-de-dentede-sabre

INTRODUCTION

high plane, Agreste and Cosmological. When we delve into the study of this prehistoric Brazilian man’s art, we are amazed at its diversity, known not only as the first writers who colonized this area and from who all indigenous art descends. This type of cultural manifestation, not only expresses an original and rich diversity, but it is also characterized by size. In Bahia there are, for example, canyons of two or more kilometers covered by these rock paintings.

Many different types of interpretation have been formulated to explain the rupestrian paintings found in grottos and rock shelters, walls, canyons and other available rock formations that prehistoric man used to express himself. The rock paintings include other the human groups that have no accurate calendar to establish a sequence of dates. Thus, they do not normally provide precise information about their historic development.

The Brazilian rock paintings appear to be well dated, in some places as in Piauí very precisely. Monzon, in 1987, moved the date back to the now defended dates of between 17,000 to 30,000 years, which has been confirmed by Pessis. In Brazil, the oldest rock paintings appear on the “canyons” of Central, Bahia, because only the groups of pictures with animals that makes up the Pleistocene fauna. There are no other records of pictures representing these animals in any other region of Brazil. Furthermore, the Central Archeological Region has not only these pictures but also direct evidence of this fauna, which today is extinct, in shelters, grottos, wells, tanks etc.

Even though man appeared at least to 2.5 million years ago, the rock paintings and engravings were only registered less than 40,000 years ago. For this reason, one normally attributes the authorship to the Homo sapiens sapiens. In Europe, the paintings are treated as a form of art and their study is divided into parietal (left on the rock surface) and mobile, that is, on mobile supports of different nature. The paintings are integrated in the first Mode together with carvings and sculptures, and as nonfigurative, the paintings became classified by style: geometric figures, synthetic figures and analytical figures, the example of the twentieth century artistic manifestations.

THE FIND The object of this paper is to divulge the discovery, in 2004, of a rock painting in Gameleira of Assuruá, in Gentio do Ouro, Bahia, which represents a saber tooth tiger (Fig. 19.1). She has been included in the list of other Pleistocene mammals, which include the bear, the

In Brazil in opposition to the parietal art it is custom to use the term rupestrian art (on the rocks) in the place of styles, traditions: geometric, São Francisco, northeast, 175

CURRENT STATE OF NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

Fig. 19.1. Rock painting of a saber tooth tiger; special attention should be done to the atypical tail

Fig. 19.2. A saber tooth tiger fossilized skeleton; note the atypical tail

mastodon, the toxodon, the paleolama and the giant armadillo, a smaller armadillo, also from the Pleistocene and two types of horse (Beltrão, 2000). The location of the canyon, code named “escorrega”, where examples of the tiger were located via a GPS. The figure is finished in the colors yellow and red, and shows an animal in a static Form. An important peculiarity to make note of is the red graphic designs on the animal, which are similar to those found in the picturesque Representations of a probable mastodon in a location called The ‘Cânion da Vacaria’. Curiously there is another similarity that brings together these two different Paintings. It is related to the environment where they are situated. During the rainy season, in the ‘Cânion da Vacaria’, the water fills the cavity within the proximity, forming a pool which remains full for long periods of time. Whereas in the canyon of ‘Gentio do Ouro’ the waters retained forms a true swimming pool that also remains for a good length of time.

Fig. 19.3. A saber tooth tiger reconstitution They were corpulent, strong and very successful predators. They weighed about 350 kg, had a short tale, strong legs and a large head like a lion. They distributed themselves almost over all the continents, from Africa to North and South America between approximately 3 million to 10,000 years ago.

The characteristics of the animal do not appear to fit into any representatives of modern day fauna. It’s identification was done based on the lines that defined a tale and the claws leading one to believe that it is one more example of Pleistocene fauna, in this case a saber tooth tiger (Fig. 19.2). The fossilized remains of this animal were also found at various archeological sites, especially at the Toca da Esperança.

We know that there existed at least five different species of Smilodon: the +Smilodon fatalis, the +Smilodon gracilis, the +Smilodon populator, common to Brazil, the +Smilodon californicus and the +Smilodon floridus, the last two are probably a subspecies of the +Smilodon fatalis. The +Smilodon fatalis is probably the most well known of the species. It appeared in North America about 1.6 million years ago and then migrated to the west coast of the continent as far as Peru. It became extinct approximately 10,000 years ago.

DISCUSSION AND METHODS The Smilodon, the scientific name of the Saber tooth tiger (Fig. 19.3), is an extinct form of a large feline, that according to Ross Barnett, a specialist in molecular evolution at the University of Oxford, England, appears to have been the first to separate itself from the rest of the genealogical tree. According to Alan Cooper, from the university of Adelaide, Australia, it appears that the +Smilodon had an ancestor in common with today’s modern cats about 15 million years ago.

The +Smilodon populator first appeared in South America about 1,000,000 years ago and became extinct around 10,000 years ago. It was much bigger than the +Smilodon fatalis and the +Smilodon gracilis. They used to hunt in groups and could not run very fast to capture their prey. 176

M.C.M.C. BELTRÃO & M. LOCKS: THE FINDINGS OF THE PRESENCE OF THE SABRE TOOTHED TIGER

That is why; they had to travel in groups to help in the final capture.

following items: cultural linguistic information, representations of myths, rights, the origins of ‘Bumbameu-boi’, information of picturesque Language, paleoclimatic information, information on the behavior of mammals, information through signs, symbols and events, astronomic information, migratory information etc.

In Brazil, the images of the Pleistocene animals only occur in canyons with the exception – of the giant armadillo and a feline – the saber toothed tiger? – Both painted in white.

Furthermore, the importance of this representation falls also together with the complimentary set of information that may be inferred from a more accurate analysis, other than the identification of the animal in the painting.

Besides, in all of America, apart from the various Pleistocene animals pictured in Central, there is only one scored petrographic design of a wounded elephant, in Northern Washoe County, in the state of Nevada, in the United States of America, more precisely in a canyon the Yellow Rock Canyon, in the same way as in the Central.

Bibliography

The analysis of this figure contributed, firstly, to the possibility of a relationship between the animal represented and the animal known to be extinct 10,000 years ago b.p.. The confirmation of the possibility of the contemporaneous of the Saber tooth tiger and prehistoric man will provide some idea of the paleo-environmental conditions of the region, and confirm the certain antiquity of the painting, or be it, place it as being painted probably at the end of the Superior Pleistocene period, thus we know with exactitude when it’s extinction occurred.

BELTRÃO, Maria (1994) – Art on stone: the stone paintings of the ‘Chapada Diamantina’ and the magic religious world of prehistoric Brazilian man. The catalog of the exhibition was sponsored by Org. Odebrecht and support from Sherwin Williams S/A, São Paulo Alpargatas Ltda. And the Brazilian Archaeological Society – SAB. Financial sources: CNPq and FINEP.

CONCLUSIONS

BIGARELLA, J.J., BELTRÃO, M.C.M.C. and TÖTH, E.M.R. (1984) – The Record of Fauna in Rock Paintings: possible geological implications. Belém, Paraense Museum Emilio Goeldi, ed. Revista de arqueologia, v. 2 – nº 1. p 31-37.

BELTRÃO, M.C.M.C. (2000) – Ensaio de Arqueogeologia: uma abordagem transdisciplinar. Rio de Janeiro, M. da C. de M. Coutinho Beltrão.

Within the Central project, the way taken to understand the significance of the wall paintings as a visual document has been a methodological approach related to the

177