Beyond size: The potential of a geometric morphometric analysis of shape and form for the assessment of sex in hand stencils in rock art

Hand stencils are some of the most enduring images in Upper Palaeolithic rock art sites across the world; the earliest have been dated to over 40 Kya in Sulawesi and 37 Kya in Europe. The analysis of these marks may permit us to know more about who was involved in the making the of prehistoric images as well as expanding the literature on the evolution of human behaviour. A number of researchers have previously attempted to identify the sex of the makers of Upper Palaeolithic hand stencils using methods based on hand size and digit length ratios obtained from digital or photo-based images of modern reference samples. Some analyses report that it was males who were responsible for the majority of hand stencils, whilst the most recent analysis determined that females produced the majority of hand stencils. Taken together, however, these studies generate contrasting and incompatible interpretations. In this study we critically review where we currently stand with methods of sexing the makers of hand stencils and the problems for the interpretation of hand markings of Palaeolithic age. We then present the results of a new method of predicting the sex of individuals from their hand stencils using a geometric morpho-metric approach that detects sexual differences in hand shape and hand form (size and shape). The method has the additional advantage of being able to detect these differences in both complete, as well as partial hand stencils. Finally we urge researchers to test this method on other ethnic groups and populations and consider ways of combining efforts towards a common goal of developing a robust, predictive methodology based on diverse modern samples before it is applied to Upper Palaeolithic hand stencils

De « l’art pour l’art » au chamanisme : l’interprétation de l’art préhistorique

From « Art for Art’s Sake » to Shamanism: Interpretation of Prehistoric Art Interpreting fossil art – as Paleolithic art is – is an obviously difficult endeavor, because the ultimate meaning of the works is unreachable. This is why a few specialists were tempted by pessimism and recommended to abandon all research on meaning. However, it is still possible to reach a certain degree of understanding, an interpretative framework rather than a global interpretation. This can be done by using three types of arguments from the art itself, its archaeological context and from comparisons with some recent traditional societies that used to practice rock art. Since the second half of the XIXth century, several explanations were put forth, for portable as well as for wall art. The first one was the Art for Art’s sake theory. Engravings and carvings would have had no aim but to adorn weapons and tools, for the fun of it. It was abandoned because it could not explain the works of art deep inside the caves, out of sight far from habitation sites. Totemism briefly tempted some prehistorians and influenced many. It implies a narrow privileged relationship between a human group and a particular animal or vegetable species that will characterize the group and be venerated by it. Sympathetic magic was more successful. It was the prevalent theory for half a century. It is based upon a straight relationship between the image and its subject: by acting upon the image one can act upon the animal it represents. Magical practices would have had three main purposes: to help with the hunting and fertility of useful animals and to destroy the dangerous noxious ones. The second half of the XXth century was that of structuralism. Animals and geometric signs had a particular symbolic meaning and they were put all through the caves in relation to each other as well as in relation to topographic peculiarities. More recently, cave art was interpreted within the framework of a shamanic type of religion. Its authors would have gone underground to explore the supernatural world and to get into touch with the spirits that lived there. Taking advantage of the work previously done, this hypothesis is the one that currently explains best the data to-day known for portable and cave art in the Upper Paleolithic

Aventignan – Grotte de Gargas

Date de l'opération : 1990 - 1991 (RE) Inventeur(s) : Menu Michel ; Clottes Jean Peu de temps avant la disparition de A. Clot, M. Menu, Ph. Walter et G. Querre (LRMF, Paris) ont effectué, dans le cadre de leurs recherches sur la peinture préhistorique des Pyrénées, et en sa compagnie, une première campagne assortie de treize microprélèvements pariétaux. Une seconde mission eut lieu durant l’hiver 1991 (vingt-deux microprélèvements). Une problématique spécifique propre à Gargas et à Tibiran a..

De 20 000 à 18 000 BP en Quercy : apports de la séquence du Cuzoul de Vers à la compréhension de l'évolution des comportements socio-économiques entre Solutréen récent et Badegoulien

Essai de synthèse des travaux menés autour du gisement du Cuzoul de Vers (Lot)

Paleolithic Petroglyphs at Foz Côa, Portugal

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Do observers like curvature or do they dislike angularity?

Humans have a preference for curved over angular shapes, an effect noted by artists as well as scientists. It may be that people like smooth curves or that people dislike angles, or both. We investigated this phenomenon in four experiments. Using abstract shapes differing in type of contour (angular vs. curved) and complexity, Experiment 1 confirmed a preference for curvature not linked to perceived complexity. Experiment 2 tested whether the effect was modulated by distance. If angular shapes are associated with a threat, the effect may be stronger when they are presented within peripersonal space. This hypothesis was not supported. Experiment 3 tested whether preference for curves occurs when curved lines are compared to straight lines without angles. Sets of coloured lines (angular vs. curved vs. straight) were seen through a circular or square aperture. Curved lines were liked more than either angular or straight lines. Therefore, angles are not necessary to generate a preference for curved shapes. Finally, Experiment 4 used an implicit measure of preference, the manikin task, to measure approach/avoidance behaviour. Results did not confirm a pattern of avoidance for angularity but only a pattern of approach for curvature. Our experiments suggest that the threat association hypothesis cannot fully explain the curvature effect and that curved shapes are, per se, visually pleasant