UNIVERSITY OF MALTA

THE INTERPRETATION OF

UPPER PALAEOLITHIC

PARIETAL PAINTINGS

BY: SARAH BUSUTTIL

APRIL 2002

DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS AND ARCHAEOLOGY, FACULTY OF ARTS IN PART FULFILLMENT OF A B.A. (Hons.) DEGREE IN ARCHAEOLOGY

I

PREFACE.

Aii is one of the factors of human life that fall under the category of symbolism. In my study I will focus on the paintings of Upper Palaeolithic Western Europe that are found in the Franco-Cantabrian caves. My interest in this study was triggered off in my search for the first tangible and intensely manifested fonn of art that the Homo Sapiens Sapiens has produced. In fact, the Franco-Cantabrian caves attest to the grandest form of symbolism of our human ancestors. It is through this same symbolism that man has managed to pass on some of his intrinsic beliefs in a simplified pictorial way. Yet, it is these 'simplified' messages that have proved so difficult for scholars to read what our primitive ancestors wanted to say. This has all resulted from the fact that we are studying a stage from prehistory.

Since the time of the first discoveries of these paintings, controversies have been rampant as to how we could interpret such a heritage. In order to try and get a good stronghold on the wide picture, my aim was to follow the development of the theories that have been proposed up to now, together with a concise resume of the paintings themselves. The biggest question ever that continues to elude scholars is the meaning of these widely acclaimed painted canvases. In fact, this topic will be wrapping up our observations, with the debate of the widely speculated answers.

I will try my best to reach my aims by immediately passmg on to an abridged introduction on art - its significance, origins and the problems of its interpretation due to the fact that no documentation supports it. My introduction will end with a concise geographical and sociological background to the Upper Palaeolithic cave paintings.

What will follow is a general summary of the parietal paintings found inside the caves of the Frnnm-<:1:mtl'.lhri1::m region Th011gh very mrn~h restrir.tP-cl hy spar.e, T will try to e;ive the reader a small picture of the various, though homogeneous, types of drawings and techniques used by the painters.

The various trends of interpretation of the drawings and the disadvantages of the same study itself will ensue. The paramount importance of this study is due to the fact that cognition is the basis of the interpretation of visual images, which come up to us without

II commentary. Still, this fascinating subject, with all its difficulty due to the immense lack of tangibility, leads scholars to try to get to the meaning of these mural depictions,

This is not an easy task, yet its importance lies in the fact that it also manages to elucidate us on the beliefs of the Upper Palaeolithic people, their identity and environment - a holistic enterprise. In trying to read the paintings, all these factors are coming to light and some of them, with the basic focus on the literal interpretation of the drawings, will be discussed in chapter 4. I will have to warn the reader though, that regrettably I did not have the chance to visit these vestiges in first person. My studies were carried out solely on photos taken by various established scholars. It was the interest triggered off by these same photographs that urged me to delve into this writing, my aims being to elucidate amateurs like me on this amazing subject. Thus hoping that my lack of first hand evidence will not impede the coherence, intelligibility and interest of my text.

III ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My first and foremost acknowledgements go to my tutor and Head Of Department, Profs. Anthony Bonanno for guiding me throughout the whole project with his professional help and advise. Further thanks go to Dr. Nicholas Vella. He made it possible for me to bring infonnation from abroad and for always being there. I am also most grateful to my proofreader, Mrs. Sammut Tagliaferro for her help, generosity and continuous support, always with a smile. Her help was vital in accomplishing my task. Lastly, my most heartfelt thanks go to my dear family, together with Lailla and Owen, for plenty of support, help and encouragement.

IV CONTENTS

Pg.

Preface II

Acknowledgements IV

Contents v

List Of Figures VII

List Of Tables x

List Of Appendices XI

Chapter 1: Upper Palaeolithic Parietal Paintings: Their Study

1.1 - Introduction 1 1.2 - Art and its Significance 3 1.3 - The Origins of Art 5 1.4 - Taphonomy and its problems 8 1.5 - The Artists, Their Society and Their paintings 10

Chapter 2: Parietal Paintings: A Resumel

2.1 - Introduction 14 2.2 - Compositions 14 2.3 - Confronted animals 19 2.4 - Equivocal Factors in the Style of Painting 22 2.5 - Perspective 24 2.6 - Antropomorphic Representation 25

v Chapter 3: Development ofInterpretations

3.1 - Introduction 33 3.2 - The First Discoveries 34 3.3 -The Copying of Motifs 35 3.4 - The Challenge of Tradition 36 3.5 - Modem Interventions 40

Chapter 4: Meaning

4.1 - Introduction 44 4.2 - Early Developments 45 4.3 -French Structuralism Onwards 48 4.4 - Water Mythology 49 4.5 - Shamanism 51

Chapter 5: Conclusions 60

Figures 64

Tables 98

Appendices 103

Bibliography 107

VI LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Part of the Central Composition of te Rotunda of Lascaux.

Figure 2A: One of the horses of Ekain.

Figure 2B: One of the horses of Le Portel.

Figure 3: Part of a panel from Tito Bustillo.

Figure 4: A typical example of the Niaux/Le Portel type of stylisation.

Figure 5: Frieze of the dotted horses of Pech Merle.

Figure 6: The central composition found on the right-hand wall of the Axial Gallery of the Rotunda of Lascaux.

Figure 7 A: The Altamira ceiling.

Figure 7B: A close-up of one of the bisons from the ceiling of Altamira.

Figure SA: The head of a bison found in the cave of Le Mas D' Azil.

Figure SB: A bison from the cave of Les Trois Freres.

Figure 9A: The Dotted Mammoth of Pech Merle.

Figure 9B: Digital enhancing of the Dotted Mammoth.

Figure lOA: The actual representation of the symbolic transition from bison to woman.

Figure lOB: Digital enhancing of the panel 'bison/woman'.

Figure llA: A group of three bisons found at Pech Merle.

Figure llB: Digital enhancing of the three bisons of Pech Merle.

Figure 12: Digital subtraction of the inline composition of confronted mammoths at Rouffignac

Figure 13A: The ghost-like depictions of the human form as depicted in the cave of Cougnac, together with the 'unfinished' depiction of a stag.

VII Figure 14A: A wounded man pierced by an arrow, found in a side chamber at Pech Merle.

Figure 14B: Digital enhancing of the wounded man.

Figure 15: Silhouette of a man in red.

Figure 16A: Outline of a man pierced by lines together with the outlines of a brace­ shaped sign and part of another brace-shaped sign on top.

Figure 16B: Digital enhancing of pierced man.

Figure 17A: Man confronted by a bison found in the cave ofVillars.

Figure17B: Digital enhancing of the same picture.

Figure 18A: The specific imposition of bison on horse found at Pech Merle.

Figure 18B: Digital enhancing of the superimpositions.

Figure 19A: Intersecting quadrangular signs. El Castillo.

Figure 19B: Intersecting rows of dots.El Castillo.

Figure 20A: The scene of the 'Dead Man' of Lascaux.

Fig. 20B: Digital enhancing of the 'Dead Man' scene.

Figure 21: The unique composition that is found in a small chamber at Le Combel: a quadrangular sign made up of dots and another set of single dots.

Figure 22: The panel of hinds, Covalanez.

Figure 23A: Four negative hand prints of the Gargas cave.

Figure 23B: One of the many "mutilated" hand depictions found in Gargas.

Figure 23C: Red negative print, Gargas.

Figure 24: Part of the panel of Quadrangular signs and dots found at Altamira.

Figure 25: An example of brace-signs, Coucnac.

Figure 26: An example of claviform signs accompanied by a black barbed sign. El Castillo.

Figure 27: An example of a tectiform sign from Les Trois Freres.

Figure 28: A panel made up solely of quadrangular signs found in a side gallery at Altamira.

Figure 29A: Drawing of Le Sorcier.

VIII Figure 29B: Le Sorcier.

Figure 30: Elands. San African Rock Art.

Figure 31: A panel of elands. San African Rock Ali.

IX LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Some highlights of environmental conditions of the Franco-Cantabrian

region during the Wurm Glacial Maximum.

Table 2: Difficulties met with when interpreting Leroi-Gourhan's theory of cave

organisation and that of sex classification.

Table 3: Leroi-Gourhan's results derived from cave distribution of figures.

Table 4: A list of motifs divided by their sex as attributed by Leroi-Gourhan.

Table 5: Details of pigment preperation: Chemical Configuration of Pigment.

Table 6: Details of pigment preperation: Working of Pigment-Examples.

Table 7: Details of pigment preperation: Application of Pigment.

Table 8: Cwes of the Frnnm-C:::mtrihri::m region thrit rire fmmrl neFtr writer somces.

x LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Chronological list of the cultures and periods of the Upper

Palaeolithic in which cave art flourished.

Appendix 2: Case Studies.

XI CHAPTER!

UPPER PALAEOLITHIC PARIETAL PAINTINGS: THEIR STUDY

1.1 INTRODUCTION

" ... the art stands in many ways as the most impressive and enduring testimony to the creativity of Upper Palaeolithic culture - not only in terms ofthe sheer skill and aesthetic flair ofthe artists themselves, but also in their capacity to convey highly sophisticated, symbolic messages in a remarkable variety offorms. "1

One of the best-known aspects of the palaeolithic world is surely its art. This fact can be attributed to its supreme quality, even though it dates back to the hunter-gatherer primitive societies of 30,000 BC. Apart from its uniqueness and relatively very high standards, the impmiance of prehistoric art lies also in the fact that the paintings make up one of the most tangible and reliable factors in prehistory's material remains. We have no written commentary whatsoever on the artists, on what they thought, on why they did paint and engrave, who they were and what they wanted to communicate. Also, the interpretation of prehistoric paintings is more difficult to achieve than any other art interpretation due to the fact that it belongs to the prehistoric era and the only data the archaeologists have to work on lies sparsely in their tools, some habitation remains and last, but not least, their primitive aii.

1 Mellars, P. 1994: 67

1 Although the word primitive invokes a sense of lack of capability, this is certainly not so for the Upper Palaeolithic societies. In fact, whenever I might be using the word, what I mean is its very old age and the fact that it is the first known aiiistic expression of the anatomically evolved modem humans. In fact, the people who lived in Europe from 30,000 to 8,000 BC. lived a nomadic or semi-nomadic life. They had discovered the use of fire, hunted down livestock and gathered plants for food and made use of wood, bone and flint for tools. But they also produced extremely high-quality art and this fact is what impedes us from calling them savage.

Palaeolithic art is distributed from the Iberian Peninsula to the Urals, omitting Greece and the

East Mediterranean, with a huge concentration in the Franco-Cantabrian region. It also comes in various forms, in petroglyphs, (i.e.: engravings on rock surfaces), engravings on animal bones, bas-reliefs, sculptures and paintings. It is also generally divided in two major classes: p01iable art, (like bone, antler and wood engravings among others) and parietal aii, (like the pictographs and petroglyphs found painted ai1d engraved on ceilings, floors and walls of caves).

Regrettably, in this study I can only tackle the parietal pictographs found in caves. This is because it would have been impossible to take into account all Upper Palaeolithic art, owing to restrictions of time and space. And due to the complexity of Upper Palaeolithic parietal paintings, only one small portion of this art will be tackled here: the Franco-Cantabrian region.

The aim of my study is to compile a coherent study on the parietal cave paintings of France and

Spi'lin Alth011p;h this topir- hl'ls heen wrung to exhaustion since the last century and I am not intellectually qualified to come up with an original study, my wish is to make this topic as comprehensible as possible in a cleai· unified text.

2 1.2 ART AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE.

In my first introductory paragraph I have mentioned the difficulty of interpreting prehistoric art because it lies alone on the walls without further commentaiy. Here I am going to discuss the meaning of art to try and comprehend the subject better. According to Bahn,2 the notorious difficulty in interpreting art lies in the fact that it makes paii of normal life and is not seen as a separate entity. In fact, the Aborigines do not have a specific word for art and all that has aesthetic significance is related to the human experience and is just an extension of the cultural and natural environment.

The general view of art is divided basically in two concepts: Plato's view that art is simply the need to imitate what we see and the nineteenth century theo1y that art is the need to express one's emotions. In fact, the contemporary impression of most artists is the latter: a feeling that cannot be expressed otherwise, the giving of shape to our dreams with the intention to give aesthetic pleasure. But unfortunately, this explanation does not help archaeologists at all as it does not shed any light whatsoever on the culture of the artists or artist producing the painting.

Some archaeologists resort to refrain from mentioning the word art at all, to refer to paintings as images or rock paintings; or to put the word "art" in inverted comas so as not to infer the aesthetically pleasing only. This is because lots of different things are indeed aesthetically pleasing and this all-encompassing nomenclature veers you off from what you specifically intend. On the other hand, we can argue that the word "art" is deemed appropriate just because it does not create boundaries; it is ephemeral and neutral, thus adhering to its concept that it does not have a single specific meaning.

2 Balm, P. 1998:xii

3 What one can certainly conclude about art is the fact that it is done by human intervention and not by nature. But this would subsequently include everything that is man-made and would surely not solve our problem. A finer distinction can be made, namely, that art is an expression in a visible and tangible form, produced consciously by a human - the expression of a person in a durable form. In fact, Fagg3 states that art is solely a means of expression of those things that speech tends to limit, like feelings and values, the transcending of everyday experiences through expression. Bonanno states that art is a body of cultural expressions, one purpose of which is aesthetic gratification and communication.4 According to Shanks and Tilley,5 art is the result of the influence of society's political, economic and social factors on the artist. Thus mi represents the society the artist lived in but only to a certain extent. This is because these influences m·e transformed by the artist's perception of his society and what he wants to transmit.

Odak,6 in the Darwin International Congress of 1988, vigorously criticised the archaeological study of Upper Palaeolithic art. In fact, he primarily wanted to discard the word art itself for the studies to become relevant. This is because for him art reflects only the need for an aesthetically pleasing object and the aim of the Palaeolithic primitive societies was surely not the need to produce the paintings for their beauty. Conkey7 also supports his idea and adds that by seeing these primitive images as mi we are mixing altogether thirty thousand years of cultural evolution

(in the sense that we are seeing art of 30,000 years ago with the eyes of the year A.D.2,000), and putting all art in the same category.

For Lorblanchet, although agreeing with Odak and Conkey in that we have to read Palaeolithic paintings not with the eyes of a person living in the 21st century, this factor is not deemed relevant enough to discard the word art itself. Whether it is Gothic, abstract, or prehistoric, art is

3 Fagg, W. 1992: 150 4 Bonanno, A. Personal communication. 5 Shanks, M. & Tilley, C. 1992: 149 6 Odak 1992: 115 7 Conkey, M. 1992: 115

4 still art, although there exist various types whose significance and function are different.

Also, the fact that Palaeolithic paintings are aesthetically impressive cam1ot be neglected and it is surely degrading for their creators not to be called artists, whatever might be their significance. I think that both the theory that the paintings were created solely as "art for art's sake" and the refusal of calling the Upper Palaeolithic cave drawings art, are indeed both exagerated views.

In fact, theories have been carried so far as to allude to art as being a degrading inference to monolithism. A one-sided view that puts the art of our ancestors in the same category as that of today because it is given the same name. What I think is that things have been pushed a little too far and that by calling Upper Palaeolithic paintings the same way in which we call a Picasso today, (i.e. mi) we are still not inferring any particular meaning or interpretation, it is just a categorical nomenclature. In fact, "art", in my opinion, is that specific word which does not infer any boundaries. It does not infer m1y single specific thing. Its meaning lies in our sensibility in front of man's past creative productions. By considering the historicity of meanings and the usages of Palaeolithic paintings we are conscious of the lapse of time and we can just the same call them objets d'art.

1.3 THE ORIGINS OF ART

No one can ignore the fact that art in general and Upper Palaeolithic art in particular, is a pure fom1 of symbolism. 8 For most archaeologists, the beginning of art was the reflection of the emergence of Homo sapiens sapiens as it was then that the mind was fully developed to the extent that symbolism was made possible. The reason for this statement, i.e.: - beginning of symbolism = homo sapiens sapiens, stems from the fact that there is a marked difference in symbolic representation which is scarce in the Middle Palaeolithic and abundant in the Late

8 Mithen, S. 1996: 181

5 Palaeolithic. Thus, fully modem behaviour is reflected by the significant adaptation towards fully-fledged symbolism.

On the other hand, skeletal remains of morphologically modem humans have indeed been found dating to the Middle Palaeolithic. Some examples come from southwestern Asia and North

Africa. This means that symbolic behaviour is not dictated by the fact that the mind was fully evolved. What I mean to say is that the transition to Homo sapiens sapiens did not naturally bring about the use of symbolism. But this conclusion is only valid if the long tradition that assumes the origins of art dating back only to the Upper Palaeolithic is not questioned.

In fact, some equivocal signs of symbolism have been traced back to the Middle Palaeolithic. At

Darra-i-kur, a rock-shelter in western Badakshan in Afghanistan, a fossil shark's tooth has been excavated together with the remains of a modern human. The tooth, worked from both ends, has been considered symbolic. The working is really not clear, and according to Lindley and Clark,9 it is equally probable that the workings are carnivore gnaw marks. While no instances of symbolism are recorded in No1ih Africa's Middle Palaeolithic, evidence in Sub-Saharan Africa is relatively fruitful.

Four worked bones were unearthed at the Klasies River Mouth, on the east coast of the Republic of South Africa. Two rib fragments were found serrated, one bone with thin parallel grooves and one bone formed in a point. At Florisbad, in the Orange Free State, a curved wooden implement was found broken, with parallel markings on the end. Also, a perforated Conus shell was found, some 80 km away from the Straits of Madagascar, in a possibly infant burial site.

9 Lindley, J.M. & Clark, G.A. 1990:235.

6 According to Balm, 10 objects without any function containing incipient forms of decoration have been found, produced by Neande1ihals and even Homo erectus, dating back to 200,000 and even 300,000 years ago. Bahn also stresses the fact that tools have to be taken unequivocally into consideration when talking about the origins of mi. He states that there is indeed a distinction between the utilitarian tools and the symmetrically propo1iioned ones of relatively high standard, dating at least to the Lower Palaeolithic. But, on the other hand, he also stresses the fact that their primary aim was most surely their utility and not their aesthetically pleasing form, and what for us is aesthetically pleasing does not mean the same for the primitive societies. He mentions as an example the decoration at the base of most tools and even weapons, which was done to enhance the grip of the objects and not to please the eye.

Surely, symbolic mem1ing was expressed in some fo1m or other before our period of study, but in my opinion, this evidence is too vague and scarce to leave any imprint for the change of focus from the Upper to the Middle Palaeolithic as regards the origins of art. Also, any indication of patterning in its occmTence is absent. The mi of the Upper Palaeolithic, as we are soon going to see, is much more sophisticated, advanced and clear. Also, as regards the origins of morphologically modern humans, whether they coincide with the start of art or not is still open for debate. I think that it seems that there was indeed a gap, but only one of transition, between the Middle and the Upper Palaeolithic both in the physical and in the mental evolution from the archaic Homo sapiens to the Homo sapiens sapiens, which consequently led to the development of symbolic behaviour, including mi.

If taphonomic implications (what has not survived and what has not been discovered does not mean it did not exist) are not taken into consideration, what little evidence we have of morphologically evolved modern humans, together with the presence of symbolic behaviour,

10 Bahn,P.1998:xv

7 only shows the slow road of human and mental evolution to the fully evolved man. Due to the variability of intensity of artistic production from the Middle to the Upper Palaeolithic,

Mithen sees the Upper Palaeolithic as a creative boom. 11 Taking all this into consideration, we can safely say, until fu1iher discoveries, that the rock art, including the paintings of the Upper

Palaeolithic, are the first objets d'art (our conception of art) of the anatomically modem human, at least in Europe.

1.4 TAPHONOMY AND ITS PROBLEMS.

The word taphonomy encompasses all the transformations affecting the archaeological record as we see it today. The archaeological record is affected primarily by the natural deteriorating process. As one can imagine, Palaeolithic paintings represented on perishable materials such as bark, would surely not survive up to our day.

Thus, when investigating a culture only through its parietal paintings we are leaving out a lot of vital information. What has an-ived up to our day is obviously a minute fraction of what the group left behind it thousands of years ago. We must also take into consideration that some groups of people could not have produced any graphic art at all, while others could have produced it on perishable materials and for us these societies are consequently considered non­ existent.

The paintings in the caves are not the sole representative sample of Upper Palaeolithic societies.

And this is a really huge problem as archaeological studies are solely caiTied on taphonomic characteristics of the evidence. Theories are constructed out of studies on what are the remains composed of, how they are distributed ai1d their numbering sum.

11 Mithen, S. 1996: 171

8 The natural taphonomic selection of the parietal paintings depends also on their location, the paint type utilised, on what media they were produced and in what climate, among other factors. Although the art found in the deep limestone caves of the Franco-Cantabrian area are susceptible to less deterioration factors than in the open air and they tend to survive to the present day as complete assemblages, the longevity of the paints varies considerably.

The most common pigment used by primitive societies is the ochre: iron oxide and hydrous iron oxide. These minerals are not stable and their reflective properties vary with how much they adhere to the wall - how much they are adsorbed, how much they are absorbed, the amount of capillary or crystalline water in the wall and the grain size of the wall. 12 As it is their reflective quality that makes the colour we see and since they may vary according to a multitude of factors, the use of colour as a method of analyses is very restrictive. It cannot be used for any statistical purposes or to define styles because, for example, what today is red could have been a multitude of other colours like orange, yellow or brown.

Although Upper Palaeolithic paintings were not exclusively concentrated in caves, due to taphonomic constraints of location, they are studied as being an intrinsic phenomenon appertaining solely to caves. But, although they are found only inside caves, it does not mean that they were produced only there. It reflects only the fact that the paintings could not have survived outside the caves. What remains up to this day is only a part of what was created by the primitive artists, totalling to 2188 figures in France, Spain and Italy together, but which were a product of 600 human generations. 13

Apart from the natural deterioration processes, paintings are also subject to the personal interpretation of the person studying it. What I mean is that a person studying a painting has

12 Bednarik, R.G 1994: 70 13 Bednarik, R.G.1994: 71

9 certain aims that he wants to arrive to and this will produce a subjective interpretation of what he is studying. For example, if I am searching for a proof that the paintings were done by the same artist, what I see is only the similarities of the paintings and a minute detail, which would prove contrary to my hypothesis, will be unintentionally ignored. In fact, Mithen14 states that,

"Interpretations can only reflect the prejudices and interests of he/she who is making them!".

Although he is a bit of an extremist in his thinking, we cannot ignore the fact that much truth lies indeed in his statement. Also, what impedes a true interpretation are the things that catch the eye.

In this case, the most beautiful pictures will be studied extremely well while the less sophisticated ones are naturally ignored. What I mean is that, although everything is recorded, it is what hits the limelight that is emphasised and this creates disto1iions in the archaeological record over time.

As we have seen, various aspects have to be kept in mind when studying Palaeolithic art. The uncertain conditions attributed by the fact that we still cannot mTive to one definition of the word mi itself, the equivocal dating of the origins of art and the complications of taphonomy are a few major aspects that hinder archaeologists in the study of primitive art. By highlighting them I have not arrived to solve these problems, but at least by being aware of them, my conclusions will be weighted down by certain implications whose exclusion would infer different assumptions and results.

1.5 THE ARTISTS, THEIR SOCIETY AND THEIR PAINTINGS.

After having considered some of the problematica surrounding the parietal paintings of France and Spain dating to the Upper Palaeolithic, I would like to give a summary of the historical background and a short resume of the paintings themselves to make the picture setting a little clearer.

14 Mithen, S. 1990 : 243

10 According to Sieveking, 15 analogies with the Australian Aborigines suggest that the artist was most probably a specialist in the tribe. His society could afford to have a person to specialize in artistic productions just as it was viable, food-wise, to have a specialist in tool making and repairing. This is also backed up by the fact that although no exact copies exist from one cave to another, all caves and all images inside caves tend to have a common style and a common distribution. Also, although some mediocre paintings are found in caves, these tend to be an exception and not the rule. The majority of the paintings are of an extremely high standard, even to our eyes, and although some of the paintings are incomplete, we cannot attribute this factor to lack of competence. Thus we can safely conclude that they were indeed carried out by a specialist.

The artist and his group belonged to the middle period of the last glacial phase, called the Wunn,

(see table 1). By this time, between 40,000 and 15,000 years ago, the artist had evolved into

Homo sapiens sapiens and the groups had dominated the whole of Europe. The industry of the artist and his society was made up of the use of bone and antler. Spear points, throwers, needles and engraving tools were some of the utensils that started being produced. A new method of flint making was also evolved and thus the variety of tools increased drastically, in that long narrow blades, chisels and points were being produced.

Although the types of the tools changed according to need, as already stated above, the consistency of the art of Western Europe shows that there were no significant social disruptions in the Chatelperronian and the Magdalenian age. 16 (These periods correspond to the Upper

Palaeolithic in France.) Though the Upper Palaeolithic was affected by two glacial maxima, their duration was not very long and the periods in between them were enough to harbour continuous

15 Sieveking, A. 1979:12 16 Sieveking, A. 1979:20

11 occupation, especially in the region of southwest France that was m no time uninhabitable. This was probably because it is found in the south end of the latitude and wood for burning, tools, building and heating was still found.

The tribes that occupied Western Europe in the period of the Upper Palaeolithic lived a semi­ nomadic life. They spent some time at the limestone caves; perhaps to get shelter in the coldest times where they produced the paintings. The aforementioned homogeneity of the paintings over space and time shows that at least some of the group either interbred or mixed well with other tribes. They could have also roamed over great distances and left their artistic impressions behind them.

The art on the cave walls consists of schematic and naturalistic figures, representations of humans and mainly of animals: bisons, mammoths and reindeer most of the time, but other examples of herbivores and carnivores are not rare at all. This shows that these animals were, most probably, a major part of their diet. I stated this because a great number of scenes depicting the animals are also hunting scenes. As some of the animals were migratory, their hunters had to migrate up to a certain extent as well, or else they had to make do without meat when it was most probably an impo1iant part of their diet. On the other hand, gathering was most probably also a part of their subsistence, if ethnographical analogies are to be taken into consideration. If the gathering of nuts, fruit and vegetables were indeed part of their diet, some moving around of the tribes was also necessary due to the seasonal natural growth of this produce and due to the fact that they would, in time, run out.

Apart from showing practical factors of primeval times, the cave paintings most surely infer other religious and sociological aspects. Although their meaning is still widely open for debate, which will be more specifically discussed in a later chapter, their distribution shows immediately

12 that the role of the paintings was much more than simply an aesthetic one. This is because the majority of the paintings are found in confined recesses, deep down in the caves and, in short, not on show.

This does not mean that their aesthetic impact is diminished, because, as it has already been specified, they were even capable of producing a 3D effect with the use of natural shades and the protrusions of the walls themselves. This further increases the importance of their role. The fact that the general effect was not important, due to overlappings, unfinished and even-upside down drawings should not imply lack of ability. It continues to sustain the theory that their specification was not an aesthetic one but went fmiher. Also, their impeccability and grandeur is by no means diminished by these facts. In fact these oevres d'art are impressive even when seeing them on photos nowadays. Imagine the effect they would leave on an homo sapiens sapiens of 30,000 years ago when seeing them in person!

13 CHAPTER2

PARIETAL PAINTINGS: A RESUME

2.1 INTRODUCTION

We can now have a look at the general picture - what did our ancestors draw? As already

stated, we will look at the more characteristic highlights, hoping it will suffice to give the

general reader a good apprehension of the content of the Franco-Cantabrian caves. I will start with some compositional examples to give a holistic idea on the types of motifs represented. I will then delve into specific themes and techniques utilised by our ancestors, tens of thousands of years ago.

2.2 COMPOSITIONS

Scholars divide cave paintings into many categories, better called compositions. 17 I also think that Upper Palaeolithic portrayals are indeed themes, that is stories depicted by drawings.

According to various interpretors, these stories were divided into a number of separate panels

within the caves, each with a different aim, which necessitated the need to create divisions in the seemingly endless quantity of depictions. The animals and other depictions did indeed

make sense together and were not put near each other randomly.

17 Although this fact has been ascertained my various scholars, still, others say that they are depicted,"almost equally invariably as single individuals, rather than as associated groups or scenes (with some rare exceptions ... )". Mellars P. 1994: 71

14 One of the most impressive and monumental compositions of Upper Palaeolithic art is found in the Rotunda of Lascaux. 18 The Rotunda is a natural division consisting of a circular opening situated immediately after the entrance. Its core is made up of five great bovines.

"Great" is here used in its literal meaning, as the animals depicted are more than seven metres in length, whereas the ones at Altamira, another important site, are only about three metres in length. In the Rotunda two bovines confront another three, while seven horses facing the ones on the right accompany those on the left; two other horses facing the ones on the left also back up the latter. An enigmatic creature with two straight horns brings up the rear of the left side. The rear end of the right hand side is made up of a bear, concealed in the black modelling of one of the bulls. Various signs accompany the frieze. These consist of barbed signs, (a straight line crossed by other short strokes), strokes accompanied with dots and various parallel lines. On the right hand side of the frieze, three red bovines and a ghost-like figure with two round eyes bear the same relationship with the large bulls as do the horses in the left side of the composition (see fig.l).

Horses are one of the commonest features present in compositions and represented in Upper

Palaeolithic caves. In fact, they make up 48% of the representations of the Cosquer cave and in the Ekain cave thirty-three of the thiliy-five figures represented are horses. Their size, ranging from forty to seventy centimetres in length, is approximately equal to that of the depictions of Le Portel, while smaller than the ones appearing in Niaux, whose average exceeds a metre in length. The schematic coat markings of a depicted horse at Ekain (see fig.2A) are almost identical to the outline, pose and coat markings to a horse at Le Portel, (see fig.2B). Another trait that brings out the similarity between the horses at Ekain and the ones in the Pyre1maen region is the line at the shoulder that is double and the wavy markings that emphasize the ventral area. However, the horizontal stripes present at the feet of some of the

18 Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1968: 312.

15 Ekain horses are not a Pyrennaen feature and the closest resemblance comes from the cave of Tito Bustillo in Asturias, Spain (see fig.3).

This schematic type of drawing characterized by prominent black outlines is in fact sectioned off as a category for itself under the name of "Niaux/Le Portel" type, 19 (see fig.4). Another example of a composition appartaining to this category (the "Niaux/Le Portel" type) can be found at the cave of Font de Gaume, in the Dordogne. The thick black outline shows a whole horse together with the hindquarters of another one formed out of a stalagmite. Here we encounter the ingeniousness of the prehistoric artist through his utilisation of the natural surfaces of the rock to portray the figures.

Another example of a composition where the natural surfaces are exploited can be found at the cave of Peche Merle (see fig.5). Here, two horses are found moving away from each other with their hindqumiers overlapping. The broad black line of the "Niaux/LePortel" type emphasizes the curves of their back, neck and rump, while their heads and shoulders are filled in with black. The head of the horse on the right hand side is more realistically depicted, again, through the utilisation of a natural relief in the rock itself and moreover, their schematisation is rendered so natural that according to Powell,20 they infer an observation in their natural habitat due to their naturality of pose and freedom of movement.

Returning to the Lascaux cave, one encounters another technique employed by the miists, in another frieze of a family of horses, which is surely deemed stylised and not at all natural looking. The horses are tubby, their legs short, their bellies big and their backs stretched, while on the other hand, their heads are normally proportioned, eliciting the impression, together with the other more elaborate friezes found here, that the knowledge was surely

19 Sieveking, A. 1979: 165. 20 Powell, T.G.E. 1964: 32

16 acquired. Also, what marks Lascaux and the prehistoric painters' capability is the utilisation of various pigments, producing different colours such as red, brown, black and yellow, contrary to the 'Niaux/Le Portel' type, both in style and frequency. This is what makes Lascaux the more unique, because polychrome painted caves do not amount to more than a handful (see fig.6).

Another cave where polychrome paintings can also be found is Altamira. This evolved technique attests to the artists' supreme ability and is further endorsed by the famous ceiling at Altamira, which marks the apogee of Upper Palaeolithic artistic performance (see fig.7).

The lower side of the composition is full of claviform signs (triangular signs with a line in the middle, seen as representing the female genital organ), while the periphery of the core is made up of a horse complemented by a big hind and another horse standing on the opposite side. The core of this magnificent theme is made up of bisons shown in various attitudes.

Most of them are collapsed on the ground while others have their heads turned, possibly sensing danger. In fact this amount of detail could be, contrary to Breuil' s suppositons, another clear example that visualisation was in the minds of the artists, and their clarity was also intentional. The bison's tails, eyes and horns are emphasised by engravings but apart from this, they lack liveliness, in the sense of vitality and animation.

According to Lommel,21 this is caused by the fact that their models were in fact dead bisons, as opposed to Powell's inference to the two horses at Peche Merle, mentioned above. The argument for the use of dead models is backed up by the lack of tension in the muscles and the lack of the 'compact fit of legs and body that belong to the standing beast.'22 Lommel continues to assert his theory by mentioning the fact that the sighting point is from below the legs and that the legs that are further away are longer than the feet nearer in perspective.

21 Lommel, A. 1966: 55 22 Lommel, A. 1966: 56.

17 While this could well be the reason for their lack of animation, I feel that this could also infer the intentional disregard on the part of the artists of a model. This is evidenced by the depiction of abstract signs and unfinished animals, (which will be discussed later). These precedents confirm that the exact copy of live animals was not considered important in ce1iain instances.

The absence of live models is also backed up by the upright portayal of their tails with the hair standing out, not normal for a bison.23 On the other hand, a certain degree of liveliness was deemed important by the artist because of the advantageous use of the natural protruberances of the ceiling, like the examples we have already seen at Peche-Merle and

Font de Gaume, which appartain to the 'Niaux/Le P01iel' type. In fact, the bisons on the

Altamira ceiling are also delineated by the characteristic heavy black outline.

At Niaux itself we also find a compositon of bisons, heavily outlined in black. What is particular about this group is the fact that although they seem to be randomly placed, when taken together they form two roughly vertical rows that are almost parallel. At Niaux, lots of panels whose main figures are bison can be found. Most of them represent the incomplete figures already mentioned. Most of the time they lack a body, another technique illustrated by the Upper Palaeolithic painter, i.e; only the head is present, (see fig.8), as in the frieze of the second panel of the Side Gallery where three bison and the head of a fourth are depicted.

Returning to the Peche-Merle and the 'Niaux/LePortel' group, in the main hall of the former can be found one of the most peculiar friezes of the Palaeolithic caves. As opposed to the other clearly intended friezes, like the Altamira ceiling, the structure of this paiiicular story is a little shaky. Twenty red dots are found inside the head of a mammoth together with eight

23 Powell, T.G.E. 1964: 43.

18 small silhouettes, all of which are painted in red and lie under the ridge of a big subsided block (see fig.9 & 10). The silhouettes are described as schematic and they have been described as belonging to bisons and women with dangling breasts,24 whose replica can also be found on the ceiling nearby. This schematisation is testimony to the ingeniousness of the primitive artists who did not stop at depicting just the natural imagery. In fact, Leroi-

Gourhan25 sees in them the actual transition, in a schematised way, from bison to woman due to their important association with each other.

2.3 CONFRONTED ANIMALS.

Apart from the large crowded friezes that include various animals together with signs and relatively few human representations, there are also to be found depicted compositions of the

same species of two animals confronting or facing each other. I have already mentioned one example, which can fall under this category; the two horses of Peche-Merle, (fig.5). Although they are moving away from each other, their relationship and associaton is more than

obvious. An example of bisons confronting each other can also be found at Pech Merle, (see

fig. I I). Here, the bisons are ramming each other and this continues to attest to the fact that these combined themes were indeed in the artists' mind, as was the liveliness of the ceiling

frieze of Altamira, and it is not just an idea conjured during the last century, when these

drawings were first interpreted.

According to Welte,26 it does not suffice that the animals are looking at each other to be

confronting. They have to be of the same size and compositon, represented in the same

attitude and on the same level. Moreover, the link between their action, either passive or

24 Sieveking, A. 1979:114 25 Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1968: 322 26 Welte, A. 1989: 215.

19 active, has to be clear. A clear example can be found at Rouffignac, in the Dordogne. Eleven mammoths are divided in two groups confronting one another (see fig.12). Mammoths are, in fact, very common in the cave of Rouffignac.

What is certainly clear with the painting of mammoths is the need felt by the artist to portray pronounced details. A fine example can be found at Peche-Merle, where only the domed head and the slant of the back is reproduced but in a very natural way. That renders the animal instantly recognizable to the viewer in contrast to the aforementioned rigid bisons of the ceiling of Altamira. Red strokes cover the head of the mammoth; the trunk and the tusks are merely indicated and the feet not at all.

Another example of confronted animals can be found in Grotte Chauvet. 27 Two rhinoceroses are butting each other on the head. We can also find two confronted owls in the cave of Les

Trois Freres, in the Ariege. These can be found in what was probably the former entrance, section H according to Leroi-Gourhan's28 division of the cave. Although in this instance the forms of the owls are a little ambiguous, (one has to attribute them to a type of bird because of the wings), Lorblanchet attributes the san1e type of head to representations of human figures. 29

These equivocal representations can be found in caves such as Les Combarelles, Le Portel and Cougnac, (see fig.13). They are in fact geometrical facial motifs, which invest the human figure with a ghost-like appearance rather than a faithful rendition of the human form.

Normal human representations can also be found in the Upper Palaeolithic caves. The fact that the aiiists represented human faces more as the shape of a ghost than as a real human

27 Clottes, J. 1996: 276 28 Leroi-Gourhan, A 1968: 366 29 Lorblanchet, M. 1989: 130.

20 does not mean they did not know how, but because their intention went fmiher than the intent to just portray humans realistically. In fact several ghost-like depictions can be found, although when in relation to the other species they are relatively few (see fig.14-17, topic will be picked up again in 2.6)

The overall effect of the paintings was not important for the Upper Palaeolithic aiiist. What I mean is the aesthetic impact a naturalistic elaborate painting normally leaves on us today. It seems there was a certain degree of neglect on the part of the painters to give a clean and clear rendition of a live representation. The cave of Rouffignac where another set of confronted schematic depiction is found attests to this. Two confronted mammoths are only depicted by their cervico-dorsal outline, going round to portray also a silhouette of their face.

The fact that the lack of elaboration and pomp was not always important for the Upper

Palaeolithic painters is further reaffirmed by another technique frequently met with in these caves; that of superimpositions. Although in spacious caves this technique was avoided as much as possible, at small sites, like the caves of Les Combarelles, La Mouthe and El

Castillo, this technique was commonplace. This technique was made more complex by the superimposition of pairs. In the cave of Peche Merle one finds in the long black frieze, for example, bison superimposed specifically on horses, (see fig.18) and man1moths superimposed on oxen. Apart from the normal superimpositions of different animals, at Les

Combarelles we have more amplified space exploitation. Here, groups of bisons are inserted between groups of previously drawn figures.

Furthennore, these ambiguities, (superimpositions, highly-schematic abstract representations like the aforementioned ghosts, unfinished paintings and the utilization of dots), whether

21 intentional or otherwise, did not hinder the visual impact on the spectator, in that they do not make the panels less impressive. This can be further attested to by the confronted pair of mammoths found in the "Gallery of the Two Mammoths". The fact that they are confronting each other is unquestionable together with the fact that they are indeed mammoth representations, notwithstanding that only their outline can be seen.

2.4 EQUIVOCAL FACTORS IN THE STYLE OF PAINTING.

One of the strange aspects of Upper Palaeolithic parietal paintings is the theme of unfinished paintings (see fig8). This is considered more as an intentional abbreviation of the paintings rather than that they remained incomplete for some accidental reason.

The most frequent examples can be found in the Pyrenean area. At Le Portel, for example, various isolated stags' antlers can be found in "The Old Sanctuary" together with another 'ten more or less incompletely rendered figures. ' 30 I cannot comment upon the latter because no pictures portray them, but the antlers are clearly shown. They are isolated and complete in themselves, i.e. they suffice as a representation of a stag.

Another example can be found in the Resau Rene Clastres where a bison is depicted solely by its cervico-dorsal line. Among various other examples, the cave of Cougnac has to be mentioned here due to the great number of unfinished drawings found here. In fact 40% of the animal figurations in this cave are partial representations. These are divided between paiiial or full representations of horns, single or sets of antlers, manes or just outlines of backs. What makes this factor more ambiguous is the fact that sometimes various components belonging to different species are so mixed up that attempts to decipher them is

30 Leroi-Gourhan, A 1968: 325.

22 rendered more difficult and could even lead to an interpretation of composite figures, (which will be described later on).

Another peculiar factor that can be found in the cave paintings is the utilisation of dots, (see fig.19b). According to Powell,31 they must have had some magical significance. What is certain is the fact that although they can be found as constituting the only colour inside an animal's body, as in the composition of the two horses at Peche-Merle, mentioned above, their intention was not shading. This is because they extended beyond the outline of the body and are also found in between animals and other representations.

An example of such a use of dots can be found at Lascaux, among others already mentioned.

This can be found as constituting a part of the composition of the pit scene, a small gallery reached from the floor of the apse by a vertical shaft in seven metres of depth. A rhinoceros accompanies the scene of the 'Dead Man', an image that will be concentrated upon later on.

The rhinoceros is a little cast off by itself and it is actually not clear if it forms part or not of the composition itself. Two rows of dots can be found aligned horizontally underneath it (see fig.20).

In a small chamber giving off from the left side of the entrance at Le Combel, the only paintings present consist solely of quadrangular signs formed by dots, (see fig.21). At Pindal, an elephant is depicted with a large red spot in its centre. According to Bandi, et.al. the red spot may indicate the presence of the heart. 32 In the cave of La Pasiega, in the third gallery, a stag is outlined with red dots.

31 Powell, T.G.E. 1966: 32 32 Bandi, HG et.al. 1961: 65

23 2.5 PERSPECTIVE.

Deer is also a particular species in the Franco-Cantabrian paintings owing to the particular perspective with which the antlers are represented. Almost all examples I met with fall under the category of 'perspective tordue', i.e. twisted perspective. While the heads are depicted in profile, their antlers are depicted in frontal view. A clear example can be found in the cave of

Le Portel. In one of the niches situated at the rear end of the first con-idor, a red reindeer is depicted in a linear style, reclined and with its antlers in 'twisted perspective.'

At Covalanez, one encounters various friezes formed solely of stags. One of them depicts two hinds but is in a poor level of preservation. A herd follows them. A pm1icular hind is depicted with its head turned backwards and another is facing the right, and another one follows behind, (see fig.22). Their outline is made up of red spots, which merge together in pm1icular spots. Apm1 from evidencing here the use of dots, in order to create the contours of the animals, in this cave we see another utilisation for this device, whose meaning appears to be more specific. One stag is depicted above the entrance of the final part of the sanctuary with four dots beneath its belly. According to Leroi-Gourhan,33 the dots in this fonnat mean entrance, as they are found also at the back of the sanctumy before the other entrance, and this is further attested to by the depiction being above the door. On the other hand, this theo1y alters somewhat when applied to the dots of the rhino mentioned earlier as this painting is situated in a pit.

Deer are the animals most frequently depicted realistically and in animated motion, (i.e. not

'dead' models like the bisons of Altamira mentioned above). Their heads are drawn from

33 Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1968:336.

24 vanous directions; they are also looking at different directions. Other animals are most of the time depicted in full profile and rigid in their movements. An exception to this otherwise general rule is the horse, which is turning its head in the cave of Angles-sur-1' Anglin.

Coming back to the 'perspective tordue', a particular frieze found in the cave of Les Trois

Freres, in one of the panels of the sanctuary, is worthy of mention. It is made up of a rhinoceros and a number of bison and ibexes. The horns of the ibexes are drawn in twisted perspective, very rarely met with for this kind of species.

Together with the unfinished drawings and the contour lines made up of dots, the perspective tordue does not indicate that the artists were incapable of producing the right perspective.

This fact is verified by the other paintings that are drawn in normal perspective. When seen in cumulative relation, there are much more depictions of normal than twisted perspective. What

I feel the twisted perspective shows is just a special effect that the artist wanted to create due to the impressive effect of the antlers themselves that are so impressive even for us today.

2.6 ANTHROPOMORPHIC REPRESENTATION

Another equivocal representation in Upper Palaeolithic parietal paintings is the stencilling of hands. Its ambiguity lies in the fact that it is difficult to arrive to their meaning and purpose.

Hands can be found both on their own and as part of animal compositions. There are both negative (colour put around hand) and positive, (hand dipped in ink and put on wall) imprints. The latter are relatively few, while hand representations in general are very common. For example, in the cave of Castillo fifty imprints are found and Gargus has the exceptional count of more than one hundred and fifty (see fig. 23).

One of the many examples lies in the composition of the two dotted horses in Peche Merle.

Six stencilled negative hands surround them. They are all of the negative type and the hand

25 furthest to the left has some fingers that are not complete. The ceiling of "The Ossuary" is also scattered with hands, this time positive prints in red. Another example of negative prints is found in the cave of Le Gabillou. At Bernifal, in the first room together with a mammoth and a bison's head in red, a group of negative handprints can be found, outlined in black.

A unique example can be found in the Grotte d' Archambeau. It is unique because the hand is the sole representation found in the cave. Its uniqueness lies also in the fact that negative hands in red are rare. Sieveking34 stated in 1979, that only another similar imprint is found in the area of the Perigord. This is to be found in the shelter of Puymartin, where representations of all the negative type ofhandprints can be found.

Another exceptional example can be found in Grotte Cosquer. After Gargas, we have here the greatest amount of handprints, totalling 55 up to the end of 1994.35 Except for one representation, which is found in the southern part of the chamber, all handprints are situated in the eastern side of the chamber at the end of a shaft, 25 m deep. All of the hands found here were stencilled in negative print except for one, which is in positive print. Some of them have been either scratched or painted over, some of them with dots. Also, some of them have mutilated fingers, like the one in Peche Merle and also in Gargas, where all silhouettes are negative. Examples with one or two joints cut off are also here represented.

Although mutilated handprints are relatively few, in relation to the frequency with which one encounters whole ones and due to the fact that they are also found in a small number of caves, (Gargas, Tibiran, Fuente del Trucho and Maltravieso), their discovery at Cosquer has shown that although few they are distributed till the very edge of the Mediterranean Sea.

When dwelling on this topic one should also take account of the great taphonomic problem

34 Sieveking, A. 1979: 108. 35 Clottes, J. 1998: 14

26 already mentioned in Chapter 1. Conclusions have been drawn on the fact that mutilated fingers were reserved to the inland region. But this argument fails to take account of the sites covered by water after the last Wunn, the last glacial maximum, which also have contained examples of mutilated fingers.

Lorblanchet also makes mention of the finger tracings. In the cave of Quercy, for example, these were done by means of paint and clay. He also came out with the theory that the drawings that have dots in them evolved from the handprints. After having discovered that reproduction of their hands is possible, the artists evolved their technique to include impressions with fingertips, which later constituted the figures of the animals.

These kinds of impressions with fingertips form part of another type of representatons, practically under the heading of "signs". These are most of the time abstract, due to the fact that their meaning is unknown. They are just the same pleasing to the eye, perfo1med in black and red, as part of friezes and also occupying a panel on their own. These abstract signs further testify that paintings were indeed canied out with thought and were not created just as art for mi's sake. For simplification of their extremely wide range and diversifications, these

signs can be categorically divided into two groups. The first group consists of quadrangular,

oval and triangular shaped signs. The other group is made up of basically lines and strokes,

like the grouping found in the cave of Lascaux mentioned in 2.1.

An f'xmnpl<" <'i'ln hf' fonnrl in thf' Ci'!Vf' of El C:nstillo, which holrls ::i wist rn1mhf'r of sie;ns. Tn the nanow side chamber, the second cavity on the left side of the cave, four quadrangular

signs can be found. Signs in the form of a ladder made up of dots can be found accompanying them (see fig.24). Another set of quadrangular signs can be found at the nanow passage that

demarcates the end of the cave itself. They are accompanied with barbed signs, (lines crossed

27 out with several other shorter ones). Facing them on the opposite wall are several human masks foimed out of the inegular surface of the wall, another instance of exploitation of natural surface. Sixty groups of black signs can be found dispersed throughout the cave, from its entrance till the furthest tip of the ending nanow passage. They accompany friezes and can also be found on their own. They consist almost entirely of short lines like strokes and dots.

According to Leroi-Gourhan,36 these latterly mentioned sets were all made at the same time due to their homogenious style.

The aforementioned quadrangular signs have their similarities in the caves of La Pasiega and

El Castillo. At La Pasiega the signs have unequivocal attributes to those of Altamira and other cave of the Perigord region, but here their number is especially high and can be found

dispersed both in forgotten comers and also in the midst of complex friezes. In the first

Gallery, two signs accompany the central composition of the gallery and a group of twenty­ five amassed together are grouped at the rear. They are all variations of the brace-shaped theme (see fig.25). At the entrance of the second Gallery, three claviform signs accompany a number of animal depictions. These claviforms, like the ones found in the ceiling of Altarnira mentioned in 2.2, are made up of strokes with a semi-circular or a short line projected at the end and appartain to the second group (see fig.26).

A strange group of signs is horizontally aligned by itself in the third Gallery. The signs on the left are reminiscent of variants of the brace shaped/tectifom1 signs (see fig.27), like imprints of feet can be found in thf.' centre anci a cpiacinme;11l::ir sie;n on thf': rie;ht is simil::ir to those found at Altamira and El Castillo, the latter's similarity makes them almost identical.

This strange horizontal aligning has led archaeologists to believe that it might be an inscription. Although this is widely debatable as the reasons for alignement can be never-

36 Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1968: 329.

28 ending, from pure randomness to inspirational artistic patterning, similarities can be found in the caves of Lascaux, Niaux - the composition ofbisons already mentioned in 2.2, El Castillo and Cougnac.

Further representations of quadrangular signs can be found at El Castillo. An example is a collection of about six squarish signs whose upper comers are slightly rounded. They are also divided from the centre by a vertical line that extends from the base of the square till it reaches a little more than half way through. Another example found at Le Castillo confim1s to the pairing of signs from both groups. It consists of various lopsided rectangles crisscrossed by vertical and horizontal lines and accompanying them are found columns of vertically aligned dots. Further pairing of signs can be found in the cave of Lascaux in the 'Chamber of

Felines'. Here, a barbed sign, a stroke and a row of dots accompany three quadrangular signs.

Another example can be found at Altamira where several lines criss cross the interior of the quadrangles (see fig.28).

In the cave of Baume-Latrone, another type of abstract signs is depicted. Apaii from the hands depicted on the ceiling of the main and only chamber, the elephants depicted have their trunks formed out of zigzagged lines. Thus, here we have an example in which these abstract signs are not so abstract after all. Either the other ones were the evolution of the contextualised one in this cave and evolved into the unfinished type - although I have no statistical information to prove this fact by cumulative comparisons - or else this was just another type of artistical expression, having nothing to do with the other sets of abstract signs. In the cave of Santian, two rows of signs painted in red depict tridents, (linear symbols forked in three), and others are shaped in the form of a club. Some components of this set of fifteen signs seem to depict human arms and hands in an abstract manner.

29 Apart from these abstract human representations and the ghostly figures already mentioned, other human representations consist of composite figures and a few others portray naturalistic representations, like the masks mentioned earlier in the compositions of

signs of Altamira.

Women representations are indeed very rare in the parietal paintings although they are very

popular in figurines and reliefs on stone plaquettes that spread from France to Russia. Very

few representations depict women as bending forward with voluminous behinds and bulging thighs. Men, on the other hand are much more frequent, although still relatively seldom when

compared with animal portrayal.

The male depictions in the cave of La Marche are faithful examples of natural male

representation. They show that the artists were as capable of portraying humans as much as

the realistic representations of animals (see fig.15-17). On the other hand, natural

representations are very few when compared to the schematised ones. An example that

cannot be neglected is the Dead Man composition of Lascaux, (see fig.20). It is composed of

a man with outstretched arms thrown on the ground by a bison. The bison has a spear in his

side and his entrails are out. Underneath these figures lies a barbed sign with another vertical

one whose tip has the shape of a bird. It is only their outline that is drawn and the man is

rendered rather flat with an elongated torso, in the sense that it is very crudely done when

compared with the normal depictions of animals portrayed in very high standards. The fact

that they are not aligned makes it impossible to see which of them, either the man or the

bison, is fallen but it is clear enough that they make part of the same compositon, although

they do not fall under the requisites of Welte, already mentioned.

30 Another example can be found in the cave of Villars. Here, a man 1s ra1smg his arms in front of a charging bison, fig.1 7. We have here again a rough schematisation of a man filled with black paint. The bison, on the other hand is clearly drawn with an emphasis on the fact that he is charging. This is emphasized by the frontal part being bigger that the hind paii, to the extent that his hindqumiers are not shown.

The composite figures are made up of the hybrid combination of man and animal or of two different animals. The best examples can be found in the cave of Les Trois Freres. In a part of the Sanctuary, an engraved and painted composition is made up of a bison with the hindquarters of a human and another dancing figure with the head of a bison. The creature is putting to its mouth a longish instrument, most probably some kind of flute. Further examples of composite figures can be found scattered along the cave together with distorted human faces, but the most fan1ous remains "Le Sorcier" of Les Trois Freres. It dominates the whole sanctuary by its small round eyes staring from its face and by it being positioned thirteen feet above ground. It has the face of a stag with a beard coming down to its chest. Its forelegs are raised up while its hindlegs are depicted as if it is dancing and a horse's tail is also appendeged. Black strokes produced by brushes help in emphasizing certain parts of its body, like its genital organs and the huge antlers that crown its head (see fig.29).

An example consisting of animal composite figures can be found at Les Combarelles, apart from a conglomeration of human figures and signs, which are all engraved, like almost all human representations. A horse is depicted wih the head of a bull. At Le Portel, we again find a composition consisting of a horse's forequmiers, a brace-shaped sign and two small male figures outlined in red. Their sexual part is formed out of stalagmites slightly protruding out of the wall. But these can be just a coincidence and not intentional. This is because it is not distinct and if you widen a little the imagination lots of other things can be stated. This is

31 because a multitude of attitudes to interpretation of visual images exist and it is to this problem that we now turn.

32 CHAPTER3

DEVELOPMENT OF INTERPRETATIONS

3.1 INTRODUCTION

After having looked at a general picture of the paintings that can be found in the caves of the

Franco-Cantabrian region, we can now turn to the development of the methods of interpretation. The analytical development of Upper Palaeolithic cave art is divided into three phases.37

• the birth of this new discipline, between 1878 and 1900

•the period of the first systematic deciphennents, 1900 to 1950

• the most recent and advanced period, from 1950 to today.

In this chapter I am going to concentrate on the development of the analysis of the paintings in particular. I should like to state at the outset that it was not always easy to separate the drawings from the engravings and reliefs as they are almost always studied together. This happened especially during the early phases of analysis, when all types of artistic rernlitions were treated as a whole.

37 Aujoulat, N. 1987: 44

33 3.2 THE FIRST DISCOVERIES

Continuous clashes between the discoverers and the scientists characterise this initial period.

These arguments gave rise to disastrous effects on the preliminary experiments cmTied out on these historical treasures. In the first half of the nineteenth century and later on in 1866, two professors reported in their personal notes that they had witnessed the presence of some paintings in the cave of Niaux. No mention whatsoever of their possible antiquity was uttered. It was not until 1878 that some due importance was attributed to these representations, although no hint was made as to their Palaeolithic provenance. L.Chiron discovered the cave of Chabot in 1878, and some details of the engravings and of the technique of superimpositions were noted. Chiron was also the first one to photograph this kind of parietal representation. But his photos were restricted to the naturally lighted areas of the cave and the engravings positioned at the entrance.

The discovery of Altamira by Maria Sanz de Sautuola in 1879, led to the begim1ing of the specific study of the caves, by her father. The studies took a more professional twist through the use, for the first time, of a primitive form of electrical flash, by Professor Escalante, but the produced results remained nevertheless fairly mediocre. Sautuola attributed these depictions to prehistory but this interpretation was not shared by the scientists of the day. It was not until twenty years later, through further discoveries that this view began gradually to establish itself.

E. Riviere discovered the cave of La Mouthe and attributed it positively to the same period of

Grotte Chabot. In 1897, the need for better evidence induced researchers to improve their method of lighting for better photography. A torch ignited by a mix of magnesium and sulphur chloride proved to be a failure due to the amount of magnesium that fell off and invaded the confined space of the caves. Later on, torches lighted with petrol were used.

34 These emitted red and orange light with a little green and no blue whatsoever, thus, resembling more and more the light produced by the candles of the 'primitive' painters. To

further enhance the contrast between the wall and the depiction, lines were redrawn on the

authentic drawings themselves! This treatment was seen "facheux"38 even in 1930.

On the other hand this also highlights the obstinacy on the part of the researchers to produce tangible proof of the authenticity of the paintings, which was still umesolved and open to

question. In fact, the utilisation of La Mouthe as an experimental lab by Riviere, ruined the

representations forever. Various other experiments were carried out on engravings by Daleau

and Regnault, mainly tracings, but it was not until the arrival of Breuil that the analytical

revolution occurred and finally the assigning of the paintings to the Upper Palaeolithic.

3.3 THE COPYING OF MOTIFS

At the turn of the century, discoveries staiied to multiply, both in the south of Frai1ce and in

Northern Spain. Here we see the start of the second period of investigations, dominated by

the studies of French priests, especially Abbe Breuil. He concentrated on the deciphern1ent of

the bestiary and the signs found in the caves. Breuil did away with the tracing, moulding and

photographic techniques and started copying the drawings and engravings. A technique, in

my opinion, that has the disadvantage of subjectivity, in that you draw what you want to see,

but which on the other hand, evades the technical mistakes produced by the former

techniques. This simple but effective method of analysis was also more precise due to the

introduction of a systematic method of baselines. For half a century Breuil copied drawings

from the Perigord to the Pyrenees, from the Spanish Levant to Cantabria, venturing even to

the south of Africa.39 His homogeneous technique resulted in consistent comparative results.

38 Aujoulat, N. 1987: 16. 39 Ajoulat,N. 1987: 23

35 Abbe Breuil dominated the scene and concepts of peintures rupestres for fifty years and studies are still carried on from his drawings.

After they had studied together various caves, both in Ariege and Dordogne, at the end of his career, Breuil handed over the study of Lascaux to his closest friend and collaborator Abbe

Glory. Glory sectioned the panels, drew the designs on cellophane, checked his results by putting them on the drawings themselves and finished it off by placing it on a drawing board for the reinforcement of principal lines. The whole result was again checked in situ, which permitted the clarification of the whole mosaic, made clearer by the cellophane transparent paper.

3.4 THE CHALLENGE OF TRADITION

As the years progressed, we turn into the third phase of studies. The Second World War ended and the discoveries of the caves plummeted, so did the plurality of the fields of research. Apaii from the traditional fields of archaeology and mi, anthropology, ethnology, climatology, geology, statistics and informatics widened and improved dramatically the horizons of the studies. The importance of exact documentation and the quest for finding answers dominates this period. Technological improvements marked a huge step in the development. M.Begouen's work led him to the use coloured photos, which were consequently made simpler through their commercialisation.

The u3cr-fricndly 35mm camera and the decrease in the prices eventually invoked the use of photography as a major source of analyses by Laming-Emperaire and Leroi-Gourhan, whose works were substantiated by the now deceased Vertut, whose immense contribution in this field makes him immortal. The works of both Laming-Emperaire and Leroi-Gourhan, carried out from 1957 created a revolution in the milieu of the traditional artistic discipline. They did

36 away with the preceding ethnographic method of analogy, (proposed previously in 1899)40 and destroyed completely Breuil' s theory that the figures inside the caves were created singularly and not as part of compositions. Moreover, the recording of the figures and systematic studies were over. A search for meaning had begun.

Laming-Emperaire and Leroi-Gourhan criticised vehemently previous interpreting works in that they no longer read literally the painted figures, taking them as a direct reflection of what the artist wanted to say but rather saw them as symbols.41 Their predecessors thought that the figures p01irayed directly what the artist wanted to say, but they, on the other hand, saw them as symbols, signifiers of more deep and intrinsic beliefs, a metaphysical system. In contrast to

Leroi-Gourhan who studied the caves in particular, Laming-Emperaire worked more on the open-air shelters, so her due impo1iance will not be given here. Still, their work corresponds directly with that of Leroi-Gourhan in that she was the one who came up with the sexing theory, which Leroi-Gourhan adopted.

In fact, the attribution of gender both to animals and signs and their complementary and opposed arrangement inside the caves was one of the two theories, (refer to 2.6), proposed by

Leroi-Gourhan that astounded the whole circle of scholars. This theory, the attribution of gender to representations, rested on his other theory that the topographical distribution of the figures was organised into specific groups.42 (see tables 2, 3 and 4)

At the end of the sixties ultraviolet and infrared photography began to be used again by

Marshak. More detailed and accurate studies could start to be carried out by people who did not physically visit the caves and better results could be attained by those who did visit the

40 Balm P.G. & Vertut J. 1988: 150 41 Balm, P.G. & Vertut, J. 1988: 166 42 Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1968: 118

37 caves, smce this particular method of photography works with the intensity of heat and brings out details hitherto hidden to the naked and subjective eye.

Various scholars criticised Leroi-Gourhan's theories of analyses, amongst them Ucko and

Rosenfeld,43 who were swift to voice their concerns. Apart from highlighting various weaknesses in his argumentations, they argued for the higher reliability of ethnographic analogies. Their primary claim was that ethnographic parallels decrease the level of subjectivity. Although Leroi-Gourhan does not interpret Palaeolithic figures in the same way as he would a 20th century painting, his assumptions are, nevertheless, based on his assessment of what was important for these early artists. When analogies are used for interpretations, the critical eye is in some way oriented towards a society that reflects an

Upper Palaeolithic one in economy, for example; the interpreter managing to come out of his personal subjective interpretation. If the cave paintings are interpreted with reference to, for example, Australian Aborigines; 20th century western European thought is somewhat put aside. On the other hand Ucko and Rosenfeld also point out the fact that although analogies are made with 20th century hunter-gatherers that still paint on rock surfaces, it is only their economy that is known to be parallel. This fact does not elucidate us on other factors of their life, be it belief systems or attitudes.

The 70's continued to be dominated by the works of Leroi-Gourhan, regardless however, of the destructive criticism he received by everyone. By 1982, he himself dropped his theory of sexual dualism. Ironically, notwithstanding all the criticism levelled against him, all studies revolve around his theories till this very day. Another important pioneering work which is still of relevance today is his study of chronology, attributing a sequence to the styles of paintings. Still used today, his chronology is only tempered with by some of the more recent

43 Ucko, P.J. & Rosenfeld, A. 1972: 195

38 discoveries. As opposed to the period when Breuil44 directed the studies, chronology took on an imp01iant twist for recent studies. Its relation to the other images established the meaning and dating of an image. The importance and complexity of Leroi-Gourhan's work is best understood in situations where, due to modern developments in scientific analyses, an en-or is found. This disturbs the whole forn1at of the discipline, which sets all the images in relation with each other and each cave in relation with another. This further attests the developments can-ied on from the time of Breuil when images were studied singularly, a particular depiction on its own and not dependent on the whole frieze that sun-ounds it.

This fact has been fiuiher attested to by the recent discoveries of the caves of Cosquer and

Chauvet. A structuralist study of the caves has proved futile when one aspect of taphonomy was taken into consideration. The whole chronological structure of Upper Palaeolithic aii was shaken to its very foundations when Grotte Cosquer was discovered on the French

Mediten-anean coast. Apart from questioning the validity of the traditional stylistic analyses of dating 45 due to the introduction of radiocarbon testing, the fact that no consideration whatsoever had previously been taken of the geographical distribution of the Franco-

Cantabrian caves which extend till the very edge of the Medite1rnnean, induced a re-analyses of the whole methodology. This was fuiiher reaffirmed by the various new styles of paintings discovered in Chauvet. In fact, it was asse1ied by Clottes46 that Leroi-Gourhan's theories "are no longer tenable after Chauvet". His attributions of Style 1, the structure of the cave, and the view that they were produced together are proved to be false.

44 Clottes, J. 1990: 529 45 Clottes, J. 1998: 116 46 Clottes, J. 1998: 121

39 3.5 MODERN INTERVENTIONS

Although the analyses of interpretation of Upper Palaeolithic visual imagery has been

historically divided into three periods, I feel that the time is ripe for a fmiher sub-division, which will eventually become another major division in the fullness of time when further

specific improvements are made, away from the French Structuralist view that dominated the previous phase. I think that from the earliest stages of the 80's with a transactional prelude

from the ve1y late 70's, major improvements have taken place. From then onwards, the

concept of art for art's sake, advocated by Breuil, has been rejected. The idea that the figures represent symbolically a metaphysical theme, suggested by Leroi-Gourhan, is no longer the

sole bases of studies. From then onwards, the multitude variability of studies being carried

on, include the conscious theoretical fragmentation of analyses into content and context. The

content of the paintings is put on the same balance with the cultural and sociological context that surrounds it.

Substantial work is being carried out, among others, by Conkey who tiies to clarify our

conceptions about the production of Late Pleistocene paintings by searching for an

"aggregation site"47 which would clarify the sociological and economic dynamics of the

period, and consequently to the why? and what do they mean? of the paintings. Conkey48

states that we must go 'beyond aii', and quotes Lewis-Williams in that the make up of the

imagery has to be one with and directed towards the physical relations and the cognitive

processes of prehistory. It is them that constitute the art and make it part of the social context

as a whole. I also think that extreme views should not be taken and that a certain degree of meaning should still be sought for in the drawings themselves. Conkey continues to assert that as the framework of analyses is enlarged by the addition of context to content, so does

47 Conkey, M. 1980: 609 48 Conkey, M. 1997: 345

40 the amount of subjectivity, because contexts are constituted, made-up by a person.49 The conceptions that are rationally constituted by us are a product or our times, from our present cognitive, cultural and sociologically oriented minds; and not from those of the original artists.

What is evident when taking into account the present methods of analyses is that the amount of self-awareness in the process of interpretation is being emphasised more and more. What I mean is that before, from the first discoveries to the interpretations of Leroi-Gourhan, interpretations were can-ied out by taking into consideration only the paintings. From now on, the medium of interpretation itself is being analysed. One of the problems, which is nowadays being seriously tackled, is that of subjectivity.

I also feel that Leroi-Gourhan has been consistently criticised due to the subjectivity involved in his studies. But, although foiiy years have passed since his first proposals were made, this problem has still not yet been satisfactorily resolved. According to Marshak50 this problem starts before the actual process of interpretation. It commences from our classificatory nomenclature: realistic/ abstract/ schematic, animal/human/undiagnostic, manufactured/ natural. I think that by giving subjective categorisations, when we do not have even the vaguest inkling as to whether they were also divided by the prehistoric painters, (most probably not), our subjectivity leads us to ignorance. Ignorance in the sense that by giving headings we are ignoring everything that does not fall under the category. For example, most figures that are seen as undiagnostic are completely forgotten in rep011s, and conclusions reached without even taking them and their importance into consideration.

49 Conkey, M. 1997:347 50 Marshack, A. 1992: 181

41 Marshack argues that although categories in themselves, taken separately from what meaning we assign to them, we maximise subjectivity. We are moving away from what they meant to the artist. We have no vague idea under what category their paintings fell. This continues to increase the time, cultural and spacial bridge that separates us from the Upper

Palaeolithic people.

Ucko also finds problems with subjectivity in the way fieldwork is carried out.51 He states that when interpreting paintings, we only search for answers that are still open to question, which is logical enough. But the answers found are then related to what is already established without further questions. This becomes obvious when some representation already recorded is not found when reassessments of the specific cave are carried out. I think that this may be due to taphonomic problems but can also be attributable to interpretation. When considering that all studies are based on what a researcher interprets, what he sees, the harsh implications are increased. Preconceptions alter what you see, make you see what there is not or make you omit what there is.

This has led archaeologists to go to the root of research and start afresh. This can be accurately seen by the efforts of Lorblanchet52 to recreate the cave paintings himself. He reproduced the 'Black Frieze' of Peche Merle, described in Ch.2. Such basic manual studies allow us to get closer to the mind, soul and touch of the aiiists. This technique of analyses at least moves away from a great ainount of subjectivity and 21st century presuppositions.

51 Ucko, P. J. 1992: 141 52 Lorb lanchet, M. 1991 :26 He utilised the spitting technique shown to him by an Australian Aborigine. This technique is assumed to having been utilised as well by the Upper Palaeolithic artists.

42 The "actualistic study"53 of the techniques in which drawings were carried out plays an important role in our quest to decipher the meaning behind parietal art The inherent study of pigment preparation54 has shown us the skill of the aiiist in what he was doing and a clearer knowledge about the time spent in the process (see tables 5, 6 and 7 for further information that such actualistic work has produced.) This tangible study also plays a vital role in interpretation in that the resulting picture is built from and depends on the actual preparation of pigment. So much so that it leads one to think that their production is part of their meaning. 55 Be it or not, various answers have been put forward as to how we can interpret these visual representations - summarized in the methods we have just seen. This leads us now to the developmental analyses of the meanings of the paintings.

53 Conkey, M. 1987: 422 54 Bahn, P.G. & Vertut, J. 1988: 97 55 Conkey, M. 1987:423

43 CHAPTER4

MEANING

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Finally, after having attempted to give a synoptic appraisal of Upper Palaeolithic parietal paintings, one can no longer avoid the thorny question: what do the paintings mean? What did our prehistoric ancestors wish to communicate through such artistic expressions? Various theories have been put forward over the last hundred years or so since their discovery. Yet, are we any closer to reaching a plausible explanation as to what they mean?

Some scholars are still of the opinion that we will never get to know what the true meaning behind these painted motifs actually is. Mithen states, "It is an ethnocentric assumption for us to think that the meaning of a work of art in an actual culture actually should be able to be verbalised."56 Some avoid the question by stating that we still have to search for further clues among the caves, their distribution, their chronology and other social aspects before we can arrive at an answer. I think that we can find an answer through the deciphering of the meaning of the paintings.

In this chapter I will try to examine the various theories that have thus far been put forward in an attempt to arrive at what can at best be a rough approximation of what their hidden meaning might possibly be. The shamanistic attribution to the studies of the caves is the most

56 Mithen, S.1990: 151

44 attested theory till now. It has been the most substantiated, and yet, as always, the most criticised. I feel that by analysing the various theories that have been put forward one is able to, at least, get a clearer picture of the complexity of the situation.

4.2 EARLY DEVELOPMENTS

Before the parietal art of France and Spain was discovered, the explanation of art for art's sake was attributed to the decorated objects, the so-called portable art. This arose primarily from the influence of the anti-clerical movement led by de Mortillet57 dominating the early era of the first discoveries before the tum of the 20th century. Up to this time it was not thought plausible that early man had religious aspirations.

After the parietal paintings inside caves were recognised, the first theory was no longer tenable, "although pure delight in (the paintings') beauty should not be excluded."58 Also, certain scholars, like Van Gennep, still maintain that Palaeolithic art is no different from today's, in that it has nothing to do with magic rituals.59 Generally, it was deemed impossible that such wonders were created just for the sake of amusement and produced deep inside the caves where no one could see them. Thus, T otemism became the new answer to these phenomena as it was realised that even so far back, people had to meet the religious and social expectations of their society. This is the worship of a specific animal, whose magical potency was directly prop01iional to how skilfully its image could be reproduced in pigments by these early artists.

Still, this theory found its opposition due to the fact that some animals are depicted wounded, and this would not do for a representation of a god. Also, the species inside caves are mixed;

57 Bahn, P.J. & Vertut, J 1988: 149 58 Sieveking, A. 1979: 28 59 U cko, P .J. & Rosenfeld, A 1968: 119

45 there is not a single cave where a single species is depicted. Then came the era of

Breuil and the other priests. They invoked the idea that the paintings were the representation of Sympathetic Magic primarily construed by Reinach in 1903.

From ethnological examples, scholars could deduce that prehistoric people had to face up to continuous, harsh living circumstances. Thus, they needed power over animals so that at least their food and safety could be guaranteed. This control was handled through the animal depictions inside the caves. The artists, representing their clan, took possession of the animal they painted. The act of calling upon supernatural forces to facilitate a hostile world was seen as a universal of human thought in this era of interpretation practically dominated by the

Catholic Church.

According to the scholars, the magic was focused on three aspects: hunting, fertility and destruction. The arrows and the signs, which were interpreted as weapons and traps respectively, reinforced the facilitation of hunting. The execution of unfinished drawings was intended to diminish the animals' power and thereby make them easier prey. The power over feiiility was seen represented in the pre-coupling scenes and the depictions of pregnant females. The depictions of dangerous animals, like the rhino and the felines were seen as representing the power of the prehistoric hunter-gatherers over destruction. It was also put forward by Begouen that it was the act of painting in itself that mattered in the Sympathetic

Magic rites. 60 If this was indeed the case it would account for the huge amount of superimpositions present inside the caves. The ritual incorporated the production of a drawing or an engraving for a certain aim or the modification of an image already executed.

60 Ucko, P.J. & Rosenfeld, A. 1968: 135

46 This theory can be further attested to by an explanation ascribed to the representation of hands, which suggests that they symbolize the "magical hold of hunters over symbolised prey".61 Various other explanations have, over the years, been proposed for the representation of hands:

• the usual art for art's sake attribution

• they were done accidentally while work was being carried out on other representations, but this theory does not take account of their dominating frequency as in, for example, the Gargas cave.

• the theory put forward by Leroi-Gourhan that they were female hands and thus represent the feminine symbol, has been discounted.

A good number of the depicted hands are represented with one or two phalanges missing. The reasons given for this strange 'technique', if indeed it can be referred to as such, range from ritual or pathological mutilations to bent fingers of upturned hands. 62 But the recent discovery of the Cosquer cave has forced scholars to drop the previously asserted themy relating to pathological mutilations. This is because the Cosquer cave has shown that incomplete fingers are more widely distributed than it was previously thought, and, moreover, they were all produced contemporaneously. Clottes63 questions the probability of a crippling disease developing independently in areas far away from each other which may have prompted the affected people to depict their pathology on the walls of caves, a phenomenon which is also present in Australian Aboriginal paintings.

Returning to the themy of Sympathetic Magic, it is important to bear in mind that lots of types of depictions are left unaccounted for. Moreover, relatively few of the motifs back up

61 Ucko, P.J. & Rosenfeld, A. 1968: 149 62 Bahn P.J. & Vertut, J. 1988: 105 63 Clottes J. 1998: 115

47 the theory. One such example is the image of animals pierced by filTOws, which are only found in the caves ofNiaux and Cosquer.

4.3 FRENCH STRUCTURALISM ONWARDS.

This led the Structuralists, in turn, to consider the figures in the cave as a whole. In their view, the figures represent an expression of the living world. Sauvet continued to structure the work of Leroi-Gourhan and took this even further by assigning the female role to the cave

64 and the source of life and death . Laming-Emperaire considered the representations as symbolising a social system, each species representing a social group that is in complex relation with another. She considered the drawings as being truly naturalistic and realistic and chose to ignore the geometric signs, failing to give them their due importance. She thought that schematisation is a simple interpretation of what is tangibly visible. 65

What does not follow, in my opinion, is that there is no single proof that the figures represent a systemised sociological structure. Apart from this, it is true that significance was given to every type of representation. But, if the paintings had symbolic value, what reason can one give for the great alllount of detail found in a number of figures? For example ageing the ibex of Rouffignac was possible from the length of their horns that differs from those of the other depicted ibex of the same cave.66 In fact, scholars like Gonzales-Echegaray67 have used the figures for insights into the flora and fauna of the time. This is also attested to by the sophistication of techniques used in the depictions of certain caves, like at Chauvet, where the walls were purposely scraped before paintings were reapplied. 68 The Structuralists' theory, as already stated, rests solely on subjective interpretation with feeble substantiation.

64 Bahn, P.G. & Vertut, J. 1989: 168 65 Lorblanchet M. 1992: 19 66 Clottes J. 1997: 37 67 Clottes J. 1997: 21 68 Clottes J. 1998: 117

48 A multitude of explanations have been put forward following the impetus the Structuralists' innovative method of analyses engendered. These varied from cumulative comparisons of horse vs. bison representations, but this time on the surface on which they are drawn, either convex or concave, 69 to the theory that the caves were aii schools and hunting tallies. 70 The computer era also got mingled in the Palaeolithic caves question, giving rise to the

'Information Theory' .71

4.4 WATER MYTHOLOGY

Another aspect that has been taken into consideration when tiying to ascribe meaning to these venerated images is their distribution. Leroi-Gourhan made a detailed study on how the paintings were distributed inside the caves but it was Bahn who took it a step further by ai1alysing the distribution of the painted caves. Bahn bases his theory on what he states is one of human universals. This "universal" concept is the veneration of water and he also chose to disregard ethnographic analyses. 72 I think however that he fell in the trap of using ethnographic parallels just the same, although he makes secondai-y and not primary reference.

This is because he makes reference to mythology, which is, in my judgement, on the same level as ethnographic analogies.

He states that it is common knowledge that almost eve1-yone venerates water. This is because of the importance water plays in everyone's life. This is true but this does not mean that it has to be adored. He assumes that as water played an important role in Upper Palaeolithic life and beliefs, it formed paii of any ritual. Here he assumes that Upper Palaeolithic paintings were formed out of ritual practices, which is not substantiated.

69 Bahn, P.G. & Vertut, J 1988: 164 70 Bahn, P.G. & Vertut, J 1988:182 71 Bahn, P.G. & Vertut, J 1988: 185 72 Bahn, P.G. 1978: 125

49 On the other hand, 'the veneration of water' theory is not so far-fetched when one considers that a substantial amount of caves in the Franco-Cantabrian region are situated near lakes,

(see table 8) and springs. Moreover, following the assumption that lakes did not freeze throughout the glacial maxima due to their over-salinity, may well have been so impressive a phenomenon as to determine the people of the day to venerate water. This is because it was only the lakes that did not freeze, thus, our ancestors might have attributed this fact to divine work.

Balm's theory is further substantiated, by etlmographic analogies, to which I do not find any

objection, as already stated (see pp.38-39). An example is Basque mythology, which

encompasses caves and water goddesses that take the form of animals. He states that it is easy for ritual to arise when spirits and natural forces abide in it. This theory can be further

substantiated if certain springs and lakes were believed to have synergistic miraculous effects

as is thought today, although it is by no means certain that rituals were involved.

Bahn does not seek to explain all cave art by his theory but what he asserts is the probability that some veneration must have taken place. This is due to water's real or illusory curative

properties. While I fully agree with him that water is, "a symbol of life and fecundity,"73 the

problem that nothing can be tested remains predominant. Just the same, I think that it has to

be kept in mind. It is a very stimulating theory that can enhance further our vision of the

Upper Palaeolithic.

73 Balm, P.G. 1978: 132

50 4.5 SHAMANISM

Recent scholars have tried to allude to lots of other meanings but the one that has taken a stronghold is the attribution of Shamanism. Various scholars, such as Lommel and Halifax, put this forward but it was only with the work of Lewis-Williams that it was asserted. This is because he substantiated his theories with proof from neuropsyhchology and ethnography.

For him, the caves were not made up of images but of rituals, which did not consist solely of the drawing and engraving of images.

According to Lewis-Williams and Clottes, 74 shamanism is the ritual practice in hunter­ gatherer societies, where the induction, control and exploitation of altered states of consciousness are used to achieve a variety of things. These include: healing, foretelling and the meeting with spirit animals, among other things. These altered states of consciousness,

(ASC), were tested by neuropsychological research on western people. This was seen as valid also for the prehistoric man of the Upper Palaeolithic because it was assumed that as they were already Homo Sapiens Sapiens, their nervous system functioned as that of a 20th century western European human being. By assuming that at least some of the depictions found in caves were done under the effects of ASC through analogical comparisons with ethnographic paintings produced in ASC, Lewis-Williams tried to find out more about the religious and mental life of the Shamans of the Upper Palaeolithic. Hoping that in turn, this would lead to the understanding of the drawings.

ASC are induced when the person is in deep trance. This means that if we take consciousness represented on a straight line, on one end there is alertness while on the far end there is deep trance. While in deep trance the perception of things changes, or to put it more accurately, things that are not physically present are perceived - the subject hallucinates.

74 Clottes, J. & Lewis-Williams,J. D. 1998: 19

51 All senses hallucinate but here we are obviously concerned with the visual affects, as Lewis-

Williams is trying to prove that the paintings - visual motifs - result from hallucinations.

Hallucinations are brought about by a multitude of factors including pathological conditions such as:

• temporal lobe epilepsy

• m1grame

• schizophrenia

•high fever

•hypoglycaemia (low sugar level)

•hyperventilation (induces an increase of oxygen in the brain)

• hypothe1mia (extreme cold) and hyperthem1ia (extreme heat)

The ingestion of psychotropic drugs can also induce hallucinations. These may include, among others:

·LSD

• cocame

• mescaline, (chemical found in peyote plant, among others) 75

• various other hallucinogenic plants

Other factors can also induce ASC. Some of the ethnologically best known are:

• sensory deprivation (pitch darkness for example)

·monotony

•fatigue

750bviously not found in Franco-Cantabrian region due to climate but chemical used for hallucinogenic purposes in Central America. Neuropsychological tests were carried out on male Huichol Indians. It was reported that those who had smoked peyote could see 95 visual images while those who did not saw only 7. (The images they visualised can be found in Huichol art and weaving.) The results show that images appear also independently of ingestion of psychotropic drugs. Thurston L. 1997: 9. What is not clarified in the text is the fact if those who did not ingest peyote for the test had left enough time from the previous time they had smoked so that they were not affected by relapses. Flashbacks of trance occur long after the primary affect has subsided, due to natural release of serotonin by the body.

52 .hunger

• prolonged social isolation

• intense pain

• vigorous dancing

• flickering of light

• intense rhythmic sound like that of drumming and chanting.

The images seen in trance are a combination of two types of images, entoptic and iconic phenomena. 76 Entoptic images are visual images derived from the space between the eyeball and the cortex, images that are stable, called by Kluver form-constants. 77 The iconic images do not develop from the actual structure of the optic system and are culturally controlled.

Images produced under ASC, i.e. the entoptic and iconic images are independent of an external source of light. The scientists divide the trance, the whole trip, from when you start moving away from consciousness until you start to hallucinate, in three stages, from entoptic into iconic. The development is cumulative and not sequential. 78

In the first stage the subject starts to see geometric forms. These include: dots,

zigzags, and sets of parallel lines, curves and grids. They are very brightly projected

and when the eyes are open they project themselves on the surfaces lying in the

direction to which the pupil of the eye is directed. These geometric forms do not

remain stable in front of your eyes but rotate, flicker, change sizes and jolt.

The second stage is characterised by these same geometric forms but they they are

now conceptualisf.'d. Sense is erer.lted out of them so thr.lt they start to resP.rnble th::it

which the subject wants it to resemble, that which is emotionally significant to him.

76 Dowson and Lewis-Williams J.D. 1988: 202 77 Thurston L. 1997: 18 78 Dowson & Lewis-Williams J.D. 1988: 204

53 For example zigzags are seen as snakes. 79

A tunnel marks the introduction into the third stage with a bright light at the end,

famous for being seen by people who experienced near death. The tunnel in ASC

takes the structure of a vortex whose sides are formed out of screens containing the

usual geometric signs. As the subject leaves the tunnel these signs stay on the border

of his view. The main panel of vision now becomes occupied by the first

hallucinations; the entoptic phenomena of the first two stages give way to the iconic

ones. The subject is so taken by the hallucinations that he becomes part of the

animated picture that is also projected on the surfaces onto which he is looking. This

final stage has been described as a movie picture passing from in front of your eyes,

but you are a vital part of it, so vital that if for example you think of a fox you become

that fox in that picture. The depth of the trance does not let you distinguish from the

hallucination and reality. What characterises also this stage is the heightening of the

senses, in this case the vision. Colours are heightened, more vivid and what is 2D can

be seen as 3D and animated in the same time.

This division of trance into three stages has been put forward by Lewis-Williams and

Dowson80 but is not scientifically proven. This fact is highlighted by Thurston 81 who states that the only certain phase of trance is the start with entoptic imagery, which passes on to iconic. She also quotes Kluver in saying that trance sequence "must be viewed as extremely arbitrary".

79 Clottes J. & Lewis-Williams D. 1998: 16 so Lewis-Williams J.D. & Dowson 1988: 203 81 ThurstonL.1997: 14

54 Rock art is known to have been produced, and still is, under ASC. On the other hand, the projection of for example, the art of the San Bushmen82 onto the Upper Palaeolithic cannot be made outright. Although the art of the San has been scientifically proven to be produced under altered states of consciousness, it does not prove that it is the same picture of Upper

Palaeolithic. It is just an analogical example to help substantiate this theory since it is taken from a hunter-gatherer society, albeit a present day one. The fact that the same human species had the same degree of economic evolution implies affinities in thought and behaviour. Their image of the world might have induced the same reasons for them to feel the need of projecting designs on the walls (see appendix 2 and figs.30-31 ).

On the other hand, rock art found deep inside caves can only be found in the Mayan civilisation and in some caves in Tennessee. All the same, the art itself is totally different.

Also, human behaviour is so varied that even in the same ethnic group of people, an image can have different meanings. Yet, in my humble opinion I think that the analogy with the San culture and other shamanistic-based societies gives us an important insight into the subject.

We just have to keep in mind that we are talking about a different culture and take the differences into consideration. At least by taking into consideration the similarities will lead us a step forward just the same.

Lewis-Williams and Clottes continue to assert this point by saying that various similarities

~rin h~ fonml in primitive societies that are separated hy large geographical areas. This again continues to attest to the fact that the human nervous system is the same in the genus Homo

Sapiens Sapiens, thus even for the Upper Palaeolithic man.

82 One of the present day societies whose art has been scientifically affirmed that it is produced under ASC.

55 Clottes and Lewis-Williams attribute a certain pattern of events staiiing from the initiation of the shaman, taken from ethnological analogies. For a man to become a shaman he needs to go on a vision quest. This happens frequently in a fai· off cave because isolation is vital. There the would be shaman spends time in deep meditation, alone, without eating. These factors, together with the probable ingestion of psychotropic drugs, 83 all help in the production of trance, the vision. This is further helped by the neurologically generated sensations of passing through a vortex, the ent1y into the third stage of trance, when roaming the passages of the cave. This is more significant to the subject because the entrance into the cave also means the entry into the underworld cosmos. 84 The cave serves as a liminal phase, a thin border between themselves and the underworld and its creatures, which can be contacted and their power passed on to the shamai1 through the vision, during hallucinations.

Various factors in the way the figures are depicted have led scholars to the attribution of

Shamanism for the Upper Palaeolithic figures. One of the main factors is the reason behind which the artist has exploited the natural surfaces of the cave walls. These enhance the animation of the figures and this impression is further construed by the fact that some of the pictures do indeed move when candlelight is moved beneath them. The fact that the paintings are drawn without scale, without context - not in their natural habitat and without ground - floating, shows that they are a visual manifestation of the third stage of trai1ce, where images float without contexts across the surfaces.

Composite figures are also attributed to the third stage of the trance when the subject starts assimilating himself with his spirit animal, he actually feels himself to be that particular animal. Hand imprints are also a sign of shamanism according to Clottes and Lewis-

83 It is well known that small-scale societies have a very good knowledge of herb use. Even Neanderthals used herbs and plants for the healing of wounds. Use of drugs is one ofhumankinds most widespread practices. 84 Shamanic cosmos is divided into three tiers: the upper realm above, the middle realm: the earth of ordinary reality and the underworld, which together with the upper realm represent extra-ordinary reality. Ouzman, S. 1990: 34

56 Williams. Either they were indeed mutilated on purpose for the induction of ASC, or else it was the act of covering the hand with paint that was impo1iant. This could have signified the actual sealing of the painter with the underworld to enhance his relation with the spirits.

Lewis-Williams and Clottes have developed their the01y to the extent that they assign special activities to specific parts of the caves. They think that the elaborate rich chambers notorious for their excellent productions used to host a good amount of people. This is proven by the amount of preparation needed for the completion of the pigments and the construction of scaffolds, like the Hall of Bulls at Lascaux. These "Embellished Chambers" could have also been used as ritual centres of social groups, where dominance of the hosting shaman and his supreme knowledge of underworld was illustrated by elaborateness of paintings. This is also taken as an explanation for the similarity of the paintings in different caves. The good quality of motifs found in these "lobby" chambers helped also for the channelling of visions. These can be found most of the time near the old entrance of the caves or served as the first real enclosed chamber, thus, the impact of influence these chambers leave on the would be shaman will limit the chance of novel visions, the limitation of the question of power, the stifling of the challenge of tradition. I also think that where these embellished chambers are absent, perhaps the open-air areas outside caves used to replace them. If this was so, the drawings would have by now deteriorated.

Due imp01iance is given to the passages as liminal phases between a chamber and another.

Imagery is found scattered and grouped here, and where pictures are absent their importance is not in any way diminished, as they are still part of the underworld. In fact, absence of imagery can highlight more the figures at chambers on either end. These small chambers and recesses are a major testimony to the fact that something other than art for art's sake was the true motive behind these images. This is because sometimes the space was so restricted as to

57 pe1111it the presence of one to two persons. The images inside vary from some signs to elaborate drawings, like the scene of the Dead Man in the Lascaux shaft. Those upholding the shamanistic theory interpret cuts in the wall as permanent sections where access to spirit world is closer. These are perfect locations for the vision quest and this also explains the amount of superimpositions. While in trance, further enhanced by the pitch darkness, the subject paints his visions.

As already stated, various scholars have found fault with this theory. Bahn85 expects more ethnographic analogies for upholding the theory and needs further justification for the fact that the nervous system is common to one and all and not culture specific. What I think is that something so biological as the nervous system cannot be affected by culture, just as the digestive system is not culture specific. On the other hand, few facts are certain as regards the brain so that room for uncertainty has to be allocated. He also opposes the theory that composite figures, 'the therianthropes' are assigned to iconic phenomena. I too agree that they could just represent people in ritual costumes.

Bednarik further substantiates this fact in the same aiiicle. He quotes various scientists who have in their work asserted that lots of rock art cannot be assigned to either entoptic or iconic phenomena. But the shamanistic theory does not try to encompass all rock art or for that matter all Upper Palaeolithic paintings. It could just have been part of our ancestors' way of life and not all encompassing.

I think that an underlying factor could have influenced our ancestors to produce their primitive art. Certain feelings and attitudes in front of certain day-to-day situations were probably almost similar to those of contemporary society. The feeling of loss and indignation

85 Lewis-Williams J.D. & Dowson T.A. 1988: 217

58 felt at the death of a close member of the clan is an example. This is because we still have not conquered our instincts, those feelings that cmmot be controlled. Instincts are part of us and cannot be explained. The same counts for the awe felt when confronted by an enraged bison, for exan1ple, or when regarding the highly defined profile of a stallion. We still feel the same atmosphere today, we are impressed. We cannot but look. Therefore I think that this amazement might have induced our predecessors a little more in depicting these motifs, though it was not its main motive at all.

Conkey stated, "We cmmot expect to capture 'meaning' as a single, inclusive, empirical entity or category of our inquiry."86 I agree with her in that we can never really feel what our ancestors of 30,000 years ago felt. Still, the Shamanistic theo1y encompasses almost eve1y factor of Upper Palaeolithic parietal paintings located deep inside caves and is applicable to the engravings as well. More studies need to be carried out. We cannot have the whole picture until all discoveries are made, and this is, of course, impossible due to the fragmentary nature of archaeology. Still, even in the unlikely event that this were possible, the tantalizing question of their meaning would continue to elude us as art reflects society and we are here dealing with a time before writing. But we must not be disheartened ... We have to surmise, think and assume. That is m·chaeology!

86 Conkey M. 1990: 127.

59 CHAPTERS

CONCLUSION

After having given a general background introduction to art in general, I have here attempted to render a concise po1irayal of the paintings found in the Franco-Cantabrian caves. This task was a huge endeavour to accomplish due to the enormous amount of representations found in the caves. This fact, together with the limitations of time and space, forced me to concentrate solely on the drawings that are found inside the Franco-Cantabrian caves. Thus, the reader must keep in mind that for a holistic approach on the Franco-Cantabrian Upper Palaeolithic art, studies on engravings would also have to be included. What I also wish to emphasise is the fact that Upper Palaeolithic art does not confine itself only to the Franco-Cantabrian region. Thus, although my comments have not included other regions and countries, these should in no way be forgotten.

My aim for this study was to see how the developments of interpretation evolved separately from each other, each leading to a different answer as to the meaning of the Upper

Palaeolithic paintings. Still, what I wanted to do was to analyse how the studies evolved so that we can get a better insight as to how future studies might be carried out. Studies must indeed go on because as we have seen, the study of Upper Palaeolithic art still poses a number of unanswered questions.

60 Fmiher intense research has to be canied out concerning the spatial and chronological distribution of the paintings. Chronology, analysed through the development of the different styles of painting, with all its difficulties, is of paran1ount importance for any research in

Upper Palaeolithic art. Fmiher studies must also be canied out in search of an understanding of the landscape around the caves and the topography of the paintings themselves. This quest has to be aimed at verifying whether the content and meaning of the paintings was affected by the geographical location of the cave itself and the distribution of the paintings themselves inside the caves. Regrettably, I was again forced to abandon specific research on this topic due to restrictions in the format of the dissertation. Still, these two topics were touched upon, albeit obliquely, at various points throughout the text.

In my enthusiasm to cover the subject as comprehensively as possible, I tried to lay my hands on as many articles, books and illustrations as I could find, even, where possible bringing material from abroad. Since my studies had to rely quite heavily on these resources, it follows that what was deemed m1important by the authors and was left out, was consequently also omitted by me. I tried to compensate for this by utilising the videos available on Internet so that I was able to have clearer visualisations, aiding me in return to have a less subjective interpretation of what I saw. Computer digital enhancing also aided me a lot in this task as, apart from coming closer to the true version of representations, I was able to read details that are not even visible at first hand.

What I have noticed thrnugh this digital aid is the fact that we tend to assume lots of things that are all conditioned by our subjectivity. What I mean is that the main problem lurking behind our general, huge vista of interpretation is that we start to read these visual images with our amplified culturally biased assumptions. I am indeed conscious of the fact that I have repeated this statement over and over again throughout my discussions. Still, I think that

61 this is the mam drawback that impedes scholars m their interpretive work of prehistory due to the arbitrary nature of symbolism.

On the other hand, I tend to agree with the use of ethnological examples, on the basis that modern man and the 30,000-year-old Homo Sapiens Sapiens are anatomically the same, so they tend to follow certain analogous patterns when faced with the day-to-day circumstances.

Still, always up to a certain extent, all humans are characteristically individualistic beings; therefore, we are all different, with some common patterned similarities. It is these similarities that we have to recognize and establish first. It seems that some attitudinal expressions have remained stable throughout the history of Homo Sapiens Sapiens. I allotted an imperceptable amount of attribution for the meaning of Upper Palaeolithic paintings to this factor. The fact that we are still awed by the energy and strength emitted by an enraged bison implies that some similar effect was left on our ancestors, which might in turn have added to the inducement of representing them.

Yet, it is solely through their material remains that we can get to know our past because material remains are a result of their thoughts, which are in turn modified by their knowledge of their world. After having scientifically verified that a certain attitudinal pattern does exist in the human being, it is only then that we can start to read the paintings. This is because it is then that we can assume relatively safely that we are not imposing our attitudes on our earliest Homo sapiens sapiens ancestors. This is because instincts are universal.

Working on this hypothesis might involve lots of inter-disciplinary communication, especially psychology and archaeology. It is also this fact that has paramount imp01iance in prehistoric cognitive studies. This is because we have to get to know the human being, his mind most of all and all aspects influencing him and his environment, to come up with a solid

62 background of reference. I also think that new interpretations have to be carried out from

illustrations that have been newly copied. What I mean is that I did not find modern writing

that involved new copying, tracings or photos of the paintings themselves, though this may have been partly affected by lack of resources on my part. Modem studies intended to throw

new light on Upper Palaeolithic parietal art, still appear to be carried out from the pioneering

copyings and studies of Breuil and Leroi-Gourhan. Their ingeniousness has led to a

substantial amount of plausible conclusions. Still I think that the exploitation of technological

advances that have taken place in the last fifty years will indeed increase our links with our

past. We need to start afresh, copying the material again with the help of modern innovations

of technology and exploit the recently evolved studies on the mind. This will help us explore

new thoughts and ideas on the subject.

We may perhaps one day arrive to consolidate the meaning behind Upper Palaeolithic art,

yet, we can never be certain that what we think happened is the universal truth, due to

absence of documentation. Still, I do not wish to sound pessimistic in any way. I think that

the process of investigation itself, our road leading towards the answer, is the same road that

will lead towards a deeper understanding of ourselves, our artistic expressions, our identity,

our intrinsic symbolic cognition, whose roots lie way back to the Upper Palaeolithic itself!

63 Fig. 1: Part of the Central Composition of the Rotunda of Lascaux.

0\ ~ Fig. 2A: One of the horses ofEkain.

Fig. 2B: One of the horses of Le Portel. The similarity with the one ofEkain is distinct.

65 Fig. 3: Part of a panel from Tito Bustillo. It is both engraved and painted. The horse on the left resembles the ones at Ekain and Le Portel, the Pyrennean trait, although here the horizontal stripes on the feet are not clear.

66 0\ -..._]

Fig. 4: A typical example of the Niaux/Le Portel type of stylisation. In fact, this depiction comes from the ·salon Noir; ot'Niaux itself". This picture also attests to the exploitation of the cave walls by the prehistoric painters where motifs were crammed against others. Fig. 5: Frieze of the dotted horses of Pech Merle. The characteristic broad black outline is clearly seen, together with the exploitation of the natural surface of the cave wall for the realistic 3D depiction of the head appertaining to the horse on the right.

OVERLEAF

Fig. 6: This central composition is found on the right-hand wall of the Axial Gallery, a passage leading away to the right of the Rotunda of Lascaux. The tubby horses are easily identified.

68

Fig. 7 A: The Altamira ceiling, clearly attesting to the ability of Upper Palaeolithic artists in depicting, even to our eyes today, an oeuvre d'art.

-..) 0 Fig. SA: The head of a bison found in the cave of Le Mas D' Azil, portraying the 'unfinished technique'.

Fig. SB: Another example of the 'unfinished technique': a bison from the cave ofLes Trois Freres.

71 Fig. 9A: The Dotted Mammoth of Pech Merle.

Fig. 9B: Digital enhancing of the Dotted Mammoth. It is here made clear that the task was produced by the merging of dots together to form the whole tusk.

72 Fig. lOAi. Fig. lOAii.

According to Leroi-Gourhan, this panel depicts the actual representation of the symbolic transition from bison to woman.

Fig.lOAiii. Fig.lOAiv.

73 ,,,, ·AlHJJ;;,;

if \'< . ' • :~.' ·"' ~"f. iJ ( !

~ig. 10Bi. Fig. 10Bii.

Digital enhancing of the panel.

,,Asr ea

! i* ! '"'-, 1•\.'I ... , . ~ ,,_r

.·• ; ..

'ig. 10Biii. Fig. 10Biv.

74 Fig. 11A: Agroup of three bis.ens found at Pech Merle. The two on the right are confronting each other, more clearly ramming each other, though they are not on the same level. The bison on the left seems to be retreating.

Fig. 11B: Digital enhancing of the three bisons of Pech l\!Ierle.

75 Fig. 12: Digital subtraction of the inline composition of confronted mammoths at Rou:ffignac.

76 Fig. 13A: The ghost-like depictions of the human form as depicted in the cave of Cougnac, together with the 'unfinished' depiction of a stag.

Fig. 13B: Digital subtraction of the panel.

77 Fig. 14A: A wounded man pierced by an arrow, found in a side chamber at Pech Merle. We can see here that the depiction is uterly stylised.

Fig. 14B: Digital enhancing of the wounded man.

78 Fig. 16A: Outline of a man pierced by lines together with the outlines of a brace­ shaped sign and part of another brace-shaped sign on top. The face is here more detailed than the preceeding ones.

Fig. 16B: Digital enhancing of pierced man.

79 Fig. 15: Silhouette of a man in red. His sexual part is seen by Leroi-Gourhan (1968: 480) as being formed out of a stalagmite. This rendition is more natural looking than the previous human depictions.

80 Fig. 17A: Man confronted by a bison found in the cave of Villars.

Fig.17B: Digital enhancing of the same picture.

81 Fig. 18A: The specific imposition of bison on horse found at Pech Merle.

Fig. 18B: Digital enhancing of the superimpositions where the actual strokes of the painters are more defined.

82 Fig. 19A: B: Intersecting quadrangular signs. Intersecting rows of dots.

El Castillo.

83 Fig. 20A: The scene of the 'Dead Man' of Lascaux. The ambiguous sets of dots is here found beneath the rhinoceros' tail.

-'.~·.":. \\·i .. ~.·::\ 11{~1 j.f'! 7 ii-:.' i t.:Ji1, !' (; . ~ : _,/. ..· ".::•:~~;.: . .. · .. ··--~~,/ •. :· $. ~--\'.·~~·· .. , ...~.· • ../'~· .. \ . ~

;·'~ ..~ J. • • .'."-c • : ..•;;~!;' ·. -~:·:~i~ . ~- .. ,,' ·. ,J· "

Fig. 20B: Digital enhancing of the 'Dead Man' scene.

84 Fig. 21: The unique composition that is found in a small chamber at Le Combel: a quadrangular sign made up of dots and another set of single dots.

85 86 Fig. 23A: Four negative hand prints of the Gargas cave. While the two lower hands seem to be depicted with the palm down, flat on the wall, the upper two seem also to be palm down, but with their distal part of the phalanges bent inwards.

87 Fig. 23B: One of the many "mutilated" hand depictions found in Gargas.

88 89 Fig. 24: Part of the panel of Quadrangular signs and dots found at Altamira.

90 Fig. 25: An example of brace-signs, Coucnac.

91 \0 N

Fig. 26: An example of claviform signs accompanied by a black barbed sign. These are found in the cave of El Castillo. Fig. 27: An example of a tectiform sign from Les Trois Freres. The photo was taken with ultraviolet rays.

93 Fig. 28: A panel made up solely of quadrangular signs found in a side gallery at Altamira.

Fig. 29A: Drawing of 'Le Sorcier'.

OVERLEAF

Fig. 29B: The actual 'Le Sorcier', or what remains of him.

94 95 Fig. 30: The eland, a symbol of supernatural power, is here combined with a bird to represent the shamanic flight. (San Rock Paintings)

96 Fig. 31: A herd of elands. They possess the power for the shaman. (San Rock Paintings.)

\0 -...J TABLE 1

SOME IDGHLIGHTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS OF THE FRANCO-CANT.A.BRIAN RE.GI.ON DUR.ING TIIE. WURM_GLACIAL MAXIMUM.

Late Glacial Maximum = process_ o£climatic change_ thaLhappened.in. QX)'gen.Isotopic_ stages_ U,3-

Stagel = cool period between two wann humid phases.

Stage 2 = maximum - rigorous.. conditions._ The huilckup_of the_glaciaLice. sheetto..t.be_nortlLbroughLstatici.sa:tion.ofsignificant quantities_ of water_ Due. to thi&lowering_ofsea:-leyels_- 120 mles&than..toda~"s_­ coastlines_ receeded into t.be_continental shelfin.all.directions

M.ean_summ.eLwater. temperature.=6° c_

SOUTHWEST FRANCE- Littoral.areas_= steppe.. Inte.rior areas_= open.Jandscapes_ - full tundra vegetation.. Valle.ys_ = sheltered.from..extrem.es_- forest preser.vecL

NORTHEAST SP.Arn - SignificanLcentres_ofmmmtain glaciation_ Abundantsno.wfall- snowline.at 150 mof elevation Vegetation.. - limited.presence o£trees._ Heath,_ grassland.in. abundance._

Mostcommon_animals =Red.Deer- Cervus Elaphus Horse. - Equus sp. Mammoth_ -A1.ammuthus sp_ Large Bovid& - Bos primigenius, Bison sp

Stage 3 = deglaciation. - withdrawalo£ice sheets. process endedin.8~000 BC. Expansion of forests- mean.summer water temperatures= 20° C.

98 Difficulties met with when interpreting Leroi-Gourhan's theory of Difficulties met with when interpreting Leroi-Gourhan's theory of Cave Organisation Sex Classification

Original entrance liaS to be established (This proves difficult due to fall ins Sexing was done when hardly a very small amount of figures are in caves throughout thousands of years that have elapsed). specifically sexed.

Studies have to be carried oLt on actual caves because earlier reports are Attribution of female sex to triangular signs and those derived from it, (I.e. not reliable, as figure distribution did not matter in earlier interpretations. almost all shapes). Also just because for us a triangle is a vulva does not mean it meant the same to Upper Palaeolithic people.

Art of each spedifid: peribd has to l)e clearly established. Attribution of male sex to signs that In some way resemble a phallus. The subjective element is clear.

Each panel is not dlearly divided naturallyj ttius it is not so easy to Reason for attribution of sexual signs to geometric stylisation = because distinguish divisions. Upper Palaeolithic people were prudish. Then what about obviously depicted body sexual organs?

Cumulative distribution is not takeh into consideration. Some types of Sex attributed to figures depending what figure they are facing. Ex. If a motifs are also not taken into consideration; like incomplete and unidentified figure is depicted opposite an already established male figure, then it is figures. female.

TABLE2

TABLE3 Leroi-Gourhan's Results derived from cave distribution of figures

Certain species of animals are more common thah dthers. Certain galleries flave one specific species or sign depicted that predominate cumulatlvely. \0 \0 Signs depend on topography for their distribution inside ttie cave. Certain representations are found near other specific representations and vice versa. Female Signs Male Signs Female Animals Male Ahimals

Triangles Barbed Bison Horses

Rectangles Short Strokes bxen Ibex

Lettice-Shaped Dots HilidS Cervids

Tectiforms Mammoths

Ovals

Claviforms

!Brace-Shaped o0

TABLE4 DETAILS OF PIGMENT PREPERATION

Pigment Chemical Configuration of Pigment

Red -> Iron oxide (Haematite or Red Ochre) Black -> Manganese, Dioxide, Charcoal White -> Kaolinite

Bfnding- Medium -> Water

TABLES

Working of Pigment - Examples

Mixing of different minerals - Ex: white pigment-> 10% porcelain clay 20% powdered quartz 70% powdered- calcite- EA. black pigment-> 65% charcoal 25% iron-rich clay 10% other minerals including quartz

TABLE6

Application of Pigments

Ffngers-> Poor results Pigments formed into crayons-> Poor definition except on very humid walls Flints-> Ochre is put on edge Brushes-> Animal hair, crushed or chewed vegetable fibre Blowing technique-> Pigment mixed with saliva and blown from mouth

TABLE7

101 TABLES

CAVES OF THE FRANCO-CANTABRIAN REGION THAT ARE FOUNDNEARWATER SOURCES. (All within the two-hour walk area established by Bahn.)

THE FRENCH PYRENEES

CAVE SOURCE TREATMENT

Les Eglises Ussat-les-Bains Especially the nervous system and Niaux the 'maladies des femmes' Fontanet

Les Trois Freres Audinac-les-Bains Purgative/Diuretic/Tonic qualities · Le Tue D 'Audoubert

Marsoulas Salies-du-Salat Variety of Ailments

- Etcheberriko-karbia Camou-Cihlgue Not Known t- Sinhikole-ko-karbia - · Sasiziloaga -

Labastide Labarthe-de-Neste Not Known Garg as Barbazan Not Known

'FHE CANTABRIAN AREA

CAVE SOURCE TREATMENT LasMonedas Puente Viesgo Rheumatism, Arthritis, Las Chimeneas Cardiac/Cardio-vascular conditions · LaPasiega El Castillo

Ekain Cestona Liver Condition

Homos De La Pena Las Caldas Besaya Not Known

102 YEAR B.C. YEARS A,GO PARIE A · RT <:; ULTURES (1·eference sit<;!s) The division of cultures in to two columns shows partial 0 000 10 000 contemporaneity or chronological .L La Mairie (T eyjat2 uncertainties. It in no way suggests 9 000 that one derives from the other. 10 OOQ ·tonedas • .. 11 000 '· f\liaux ,,.;,: ''.! asti lio ,. ' " If 12 00<) Ali:amii-a . ~.. °' ..; ::\ 13 000 I S 000 T1·ois-freres ·':f ~·- 14 000 Roc-au*·Sorc!e1·s ''~\~ ~~,.~ Cap-Blanc I S 000 ·, ""o.. \ ~·..lr:~ ..,., , ·~.~ 16 oao '~ ..... ,.,~ . Lascaux ? .... ··~· 17 occ ~ -~.ff IB 000 ~ lO 000 f Le Placard ·ijf 19 000 J.W ·~·· ., 20 000 . ·"!?ft 2 1 000 . 22 000 Cougnac •• Pech-Mede 23 ooc ,.is ooo

24 000 ~· Gar-gas , 25 000 ~-;~ 26 000 .\~t. 27 0CC 'I'· .. :i ~l~ 2B 000 30 000 {\!,t ~· ·; 29 000 i.1'. ~>ti~ 30 0()0 ~¥i·- .... ". ,. oi'-llf\ 3 1 O

;t~ 32 000 35 000 ,&It{,~ .• -~ ,..,....::?;

APPENDIX 1 Chronological list of cultures and periods of the Upper Palaeolithic in which cave art :flourished.

103 Appendix 2

For further proof that Upper Palaeolithic cave paintings have a strong element of Shamanism, Lewis-Williams and Dowson1 have applied their neuropsychological model to other arts. These are the parietal paintings of the San Bushmen of South Africa and the Shoshonean Coso of California. With these ethnographic parallels, the authors do not want to infer any implications on the shamans themselves, their social position or their mental health. They have first hand evidence that the art of these tribes are a product of altered states of consciousness. Adding to this fact, some components of their art is made up from the six form constants that are also present in the Upper Palaeolithic paintings.

1 Lewis-Williams, J.D. & Dowson T.A 1988: 214

104 ENGRAVINGS PAINTINGS MOBILE ART PARIETAL ART A I B C D E f G H """"'' ~""""'' I ' II _/x_-\~~f ~ m-- ~=~ . 4r'.'~·i11 fifBhti EEB )/ b/ ( • ' 11".it /// .,,,,, · ------=--- I JillI I ~~ 18 ! ,, / ,..,._,.,. ,,,,,., : -=- I I I 111 -=-- ~, /'//;::: 111~1-, ,,. 0 - I I I Vfl-f/!1'-. • I I I 'lf'.~1 I f Imm 1 ·•·• • - /II/ ...._--I ~.. ~ ·:·.~:: ~ II''\' 0 I I - I I .. - , u1 I 0 0 1__:: ·:-.,,".,;:~o ' . •.. :: : I / " I n 0 - Ii - ·•·· ...... ~ ".· •. • - ~11 -:. 1 0 00 o ,..,, · · ~ : : : 0 _:- 1 S,- /I -. ==;; "'

!VI, ~ 1~ ~ t,1 ~~'VN} /VVV\ f ~

1 1 1 v ~~ ~~~~\.. ~\~IF ~u ~· ~@0J1J~ UJ~ .--/ ~~I.....__. ---- 0,~;JIr I~~ 'i;\\;W,®~P

~(~ n~- JV ~ ~ VI I Jef~ ~G~lfl/ ~ ~~· IC

...... 0 VI The six 'form constants'- Stable entoptic phenomena, seen here as represented by the Upper Palaeolithic, San and Shoshonean rock paintings. SAN coso PALAEOLITHIC w

/\ A

- - - •~

The three stages of trance

106 BIBLIOGRAPHY

AJOULAT,N.

1987 Le Releve des oeuvres parietal paleolithiques. Enregistrement et

traitement des donnees. F ondation de la Maison des Sciences de

l'Homme, Paris.

BAHN, P.G

1978 Water Mythology and the Distribution of Palaeolithic Parietal Art.

Proceedings ofthe Prehistoric Society, Vol.44. pp. 125-134.

1998 Prehistoric Art. Cambridge U.P., U.K.

BAHN, P.O. & RENFREW, C.

1998 Archaeology. Theories, Methods and Practice. Thames and

Hudson Ltd. London.

BAHN, P.G. & VERTUT, J.

1988 Images ofthe Ice Age. Windward, Leicester.

BAILEY, G.N.& GALLOW, P.

1986 Stone Age Prehistory. Cambridge U.P ., U.K.

107 BANDI, H.G.et. aL

1961 Art of the World: The Art of the Stone Age. Methuen, London.

BEATON, J.M.

1994 Seven ways of seeing rock art.Antiquity, Vol.68. pp.158-162.

BEDNARIK, R.

1988 The Coa Petroglyphs: an obituary to the stylistic dating of

Palaeolithic rock art. Antiquity, Vol.69. pp.877-883.

BEDNARIK,R

1994 A taphonomy ofpalaeoart.Antiquity, Vol. 68. pp.68-74.

On Nueropsychology and Shamanism in Rock Art. Current

Anthropology, Vol.31 part l.pp. 77-78.

BRADLEY, R. et.al.

1995 Rock Art and the prehistoric landscape of Galicia: the results of

field survey 1992-1994. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society,

Vol.61. pp. 347-370.

BOYD, C.E.& DERING, J.P.

1996 Meciicim11 imci hl'll111cinogenic plants icientifieci in the sediments

and pictographs of the Lower Pecos, Texas Archaic region.

Antiquity, Vol. 70. pp. 256-275.

108 CHIPPINDALE, C. & TACON, P. (eds)

1998 The Archaeology of Rock Art. Cambridge U.P ., U.K.

CLOTTES,J.

1989 The Identification of human and animal figures in European

Palaeolithic art. In: Morphy, H. (ed.) Animals Into Art. Unwin

Hyman, London.

1990 The parietal art ofthe Late Magdalenian. Antiquity, Vol. 64. pp.

527-548

1997 Thematic changes in Upper Palaeolithic art: a view from the Grotte

Chauvet. Antiquity, Vol.70. pp. 276-288.

1998 The Three Cs': fresh avenues towards European Palaeolithic art.

In: Chippindale, C. & Ta9on, P., (eds.) The Archaeology of Rock

Art. Cambridge U. P., U.K.

CLOTTES, J. & LEWIS-WILLIAMS, J.D.

1999 2ND. Edition. Translated By: Hawkes, S. The Shamans of

Prehistory. Trance and Magic in the Painted Caves. Harry N.

Abrams, New York.

CONKEY, M.W.

1978 The Identification of Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherer Aggregation

Sites: The Case of Altamira. Current Anthropology Vol.21.

pp.609-629.

109 1989 New Approaches in the Search for Meaning? A Review of

Research in Palaeolithic Art, Journal ofFieldArchaeology.Vol 14.

pp. 413-426.

1997 Beyond Art and Between Caves: Thinking About Context in the

Interpretative Process. In: Conkey, M. et.al. Beyond Art.

Pleistocene Image and Symbol. Wattis Symposium Series in

Anthropology. Memoirs Of The California Academy Of Sciences,

No. 23. University of California Press, California.

CUNLIFFE, B. (ed.)

1994 'The Oxford Illustrated Prehistory ofEurope'. Oxford U. P., U.K.

DAVIS, W.

1986 The Origins of Image Making. Current Anthropology, Vol. 2 7, part

3. pp. 193-253.

DAVIDSON, I

1990 Freedom of Information: aspects of art and society in Western

Europe during the last Ice Age. In: Morphy, H (ed.) Animals Into

Art. Unwin Hyman, London.

DAVIDSON. I. & NOBLE, W.

1991 The Archaeology of Perception. Current Anthropology, Vol. 30,

part 2. pp.125-141

110 DELPORTE, H.

1979 L 'image de la femme dans l'art prehistorique. Picard, Paris.

DUHARD, J.P.

1993 Upper Palaeolithic figures as a reflection of human morphology

and social organisation.Antiquity, Vol. 67. pp. 83-91.

GAMBLE,C.

1992 The Social Context for European Palaeolithic Art. Proceedings of

the Prehistoric Society, Vol. 57, part 2. pp. 3-15.

HADINHGAM, E.

1979 Secrets of the Ice Age: the world of the cave artists. Walker and

Company, New York.

HAVILAND,W.A.

1999 Human Evolution and Prehistory. Harcourt College Publishers.

U.S.A.

JOHNSON,M.

2000 Archaeological Theory: An Introduction. Blackwell Publishers.

LAMBERG-KARLOWSKI, C.C.

1978 Hunters, Farmers, and Civilizations. Old World Archaeology:

readings from Scientific American. W.H. Freeman and Co., San

111 Francisco.

LAYTON,R

1988 Trends in the Hunter-Gatherer Art of Western Europe and

Australia. Proceedings ofthe Prehistoric Society, Vol. 57, part 1.

pp.163- 17 4.

LEROI-GOURHAN, A

1971 Les Religions de le Prehistoire. Presses Universitaires de France.

1968 The art of prehistoric man in Western Europe. Thames and

Hudson, London.

LEWIS-WILLIAMS, J.D.

1988 The Economic and Social Context of Southern San Rock Art.

Current Anthropology, Vol. 23, part 4. pp.429-449.

1989 Cognitive and Optical Illusions in San Rock Art

Research. Current Anthropology, Voi. 27, part 2. pp.171-178.

1991 Wrestling with Analogy: A Methodological Dilemma in Upper

Palaeolithic Art Research. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society

57, part 1. pp. 149-162.

1997 Harnessing the Brain: Vision and Shamanism in Upper Palaeolithic

Western Europe. In: Conkey, M.et.al. Beyond Art. Pleistocene

Image and Symbol. Wattis Symposium Series in Anthropology.

Memoirs Of The California Academy Of Sciences. No. 23.

University Of California Press, California.

112 LEWIS-WILLIAMS, J.D.& DOWSON, T.A.

1993 The Signs of All Times. Entoptic Phenomena in Upper

Palaeolithic Art. Current Anthropology, Vol. 29, part2. pp.201-

244.

LINDLEY, J.M. & CLARK, G.A.

1990 Symbolism and Modem Human Origins. Current Anthropology,

Vol. 31, part 3. pp. 233-258.

LOMMEL,A.

1966 Prehistoric and Primitive Man. Paul Hamlyn, London.

LORBLANCHET,M

1994 From man to animal and sign in Palaeolithic art. In: Morphy, H.

(ed.) Animals Into Art. Unwin Hymen, London.

1992 Hands-on Artistry of the Cave Painter. Archaeology,

November/December. pp.26-31.

1992 Le Triomphe Du Naturalisme Dans L 'Art Paleolithique. In:

Clottes,J. & Shay, T. (eds.) The Limitations of Archaeological

Knowledge. Etudes et Recherches Archeologique de L'Universite

de Liege. No.49. Belgium.

MARSHAK, A.

1993 The Analytical Problem Of Subjectivity In The Maker And User.

In: Clottes, J. & Shay, T. (eds.) The Limitations ofArchaeological

113 Knowledge. Etudes et Recherches Archeologique de L 'Universite

de Liege. No.49. Belgium.

MAZEL,A.D.

1993 Rock Art and Natal Drakensberg hunter-gatherer history: a reply to

Dawson. Antiquity, Vol. 67 pp. 889-892.

MELLARS,P.

1994 The Upper Palaeolithic Revolution. In: Cunliffe, B. (ed) The

Oxford Rlustrated Prehistory OfEurope. Oxford U.P., U.K.

MINZONI-DEROCHE, A. et.al.

1995 The Working of pigment during the Aurignacian period: evidence

from The Ucagaci cave (Turkey). Antiquity, Vol. 69. pp. 153-158.

MITHEN,S

1990 Thoughtful Foragers. Cambridge U.P., U.K.

1995 From domain specific to generalised intelligence: a cognitive

interpretation of the Middle/Upper Palaeolithic transition. In:

Renfrew, C. & Zubrow E.B.W. The Ancient Mind: Elements of

Cognitive Archaeology. Cambridge U.P., U.K.

1996 The Prehistory Of The Mind. A search for the origins of Art,

Religion and Science. Thames and Hudson Ltd. London.

114 NELSON,D.R

1993 Second thoughts on a rock-art date. Antiquity, Vol. 67. pp 893-

895.

OUZMAN,S.

2000 Towards a mindscape of landscape: rock-art as expression of

world-understanding. In: Chippindale, C & Ta~on, P. (eds.) The

Archaeology ofRock Art. Cambridge U.P., U.K.

PARKINGTON, J.

1989 Interpreting paintings without a commentary: meaning and

motive, content and composition in the rock art of the western

Cape, South Africa. Antiquity, Vol. 63 pp13-26.

POWELL, T.G.E.

1966 Prehistoric Art. Thames and Hudson, London.

RIGAUD, J-P. & SIMEK, J.F.

1990 The Last Pleniglacial in the south of France. (24 000-14 000 years

ago). In: Gamble, C. & Soffer, 0. (eds.) The World at 18 000 BP.

Vol. 1. High Latitudes. Unwin Hyman Ltd, London.

SANDARS, N.K.

1967 Prehistoric Art In Europe. Penguin Books, Australia.

115 SEELEY, R.R. et.al.

1998 4th Edition. Anatomy And Physiology. McGraw-Hill Companies,

Inc, U.S.A.

SHANKS, M. & TILLEY, C.

1992 2nd Edition. Re-Constructing Archaeology. Theory and Practice.

Routledge, London & New York.

SIEVEKING, A,

1979 The Cave Artists. Thames and Hudson, London.

STRAUS, L.G.

1990 The Last Glacial Maximum in Cantabrian Spain: the Solutrean. In:

Gamble, C. & Soffer, 0. (eds.) The World at 18 000 BP. Vol.I.

High Latitudes. Unwin Hyman Ltd, London.

THURSTON,L

1996 Entopic Imagery in People and Their Art. M.A. Thesis, Online

Publication.

UCKO,P.J.

1992 Subjectivity And The Recording Of Palaeolithic Cave Art. In:

Clottes, J. & Shay, T. (eds.) The Limitations of Archaeological

Knowledge. Etudes Et Recherches Archeologique De L'Universite

De Liege. No.49. Belgium.

116 UCKO, P.J. & ROSENFELD, A.

1968 Palaeolithic cave art. World University Library, London.

WYMER,J.

1982 The Palaeolithic Age. Croom Helm, London.

ZILHAO,J.

1995 The age of the Coa valley {Portugal} rock-art: validation of

archaeological dating to the Palaeolithic and refutation of scientific

dating to historic and proto-historic times. Antiquity , Vol.69. pp.

883-901.

117