Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T00:45:27.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A taphonomy of palaeoart

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2015

Robert G. Bednarik
Robert G. Bednarik*
Affiliation:
International Federation of Rock Art Organizations, PO Box 216, Caulfield South VIC 3162, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

As one digs back through the archaeological record, art and other evidence of symbolic behaviour becomes scarcer, so it is much disputed just when human marking behaviour and human language began. Is the fading away a real fact of prehistory, or a distorting effect of selective survival?

Type
Papers
Information
Antiquity , Volume 68 , Issue 258 , March 1994 , pp. 68 - 74
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bahn, P.G. 1985. Ice Age drawings on open rock faces in the Pyrenees, Nature 313: 530–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bahn, P.G. 1992. Collins dictionary of archaeology. Glasgow: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1970. Die Grabungen in der Promen–adensteighöhle (1961–1964), Die Höhle 21: 117–26.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1977. A survey of prehistoric sites in the Tom Price region, northwestern Australia, Archaeology & Physical Anthropology in Oceania 12: 51–76.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1979. The potential of rock patination analysis in Australian archaeology — part 1, The Artefact 4: 14–38.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1980. The potential of rock patination analysis in Australian archaeology — part 2, The Artefact 5: 47–77.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1986. Parietal finger markings in Europe and Australia, Rock Art Research 3: 30–61, 159–170.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1987. No pictographs at end of Rochester Creek rainbow, La Pintura 15 (3&3): 14–18.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1990a. More to Palaeolithic females than meets the eye, Rock Art Research 7: 133–7.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1990b. Priorità nella conservazione dell’arte rupestre, Survey 4 (6): 13–23.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1990/91. Epistemology in palaeoart studies, Origini 15: 57–78.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1992a. Mehr über die rote Farbe in Vorgeschichte, Almogaren 23: 179–89.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1992b. Developments in rock art dating, Acta Archaeologica 63: 141–55.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1992c. Natural line markings on Palaeolithic objects, Anthropologie 30 (3).Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1992d. The stuff legends in archaeology are made of: a reply to critics, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 2 (2): 262–5.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1992e. Oldest dated rock art — a revision, The Artefact 15: 39.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1992f. The Paleolithic art of Asia, in Goldsmith et al. (1992): 383–90.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1992g. Palaeoart and archaeological myths, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 2 (1): 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1992h. Prioritetnye napravleniya v rabotakh po konservatsii pamyatnikov naskal’nogo iskusstva, in Naskal’nye risunki evrazii, Pervobytnoe iskusstvo: 8–13. Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk ‘Nauka’, Sibirskoe otdelenie.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1992i. On Lower Paleolithic cognitive development, in Goldsmith et al. (1992): 427–35.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. 1993. Palaeolithic art in India, Man and Environment 18.Google Scholar
In press.Who’re we gonna call? The bias busters! in Lorblanchet, M. & Bahn, P. (ed.), Proceedings of Symposium A, Second AURA Congress. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
Bednarik, R.G. & Yuzhu, YOU. 1991. Palaeolithic art from China, Rock Art Research 8: 119–23.Google Scholar
Crawford, I.M. 1964. The engravings of Depuch Island. Perth: Western Australian Museum. Special publication 2.Google Scholar
Engel, C.E. & Sharp, R.P. 1958. Chemical data on desert varnish, Rulletin of the Geological Society of America 69: 487–518.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, S. Garvie, S. Selin, D. & Smith, J. (ed.). 1992. Ancient images, ancient thought: the archaeology of ideology. Calgary: University of Calgary Archaeological Association. Proceedings of the 23rd Chacmool Conference.Google Scholar
Hahn, J. 1990. Höhlenkunst aus dem Hohlen Fels bei Schelklingen, Alb-Donau-Kreis, Archäologische Ausgrabungen in Baden–Württemberg 10: 19–22.Google Scholar
Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1971. Préhistoire de l’art occidental. Paris: Editions d’art Lucien Mazenod.Google Scholar
Mccarthy, F.D. 1967. Australian Aboriginal rock art. 3rd ed. Sydney: Australian Museum.Google Scholar
Mcnlckle, H.P. 1991. A survey of rock art in the Victoria River District, Northern Territory, Rock Art Research 8: 36–46.Google Scholar
Michelsen, K. 1983. Are pictographs always painted? Norwegian Archaeological Review 16: 34–8.Google Scholar
Noble, W. & Davidson, I. 1991. The evolutionary emergence of modern human behaviour: language and its archaeology Man n.s. 26: 223–53.Google Scholar
Schmid, E. 1958. Höhlenforschung und Sedimentanalyse. Basel: Institut für Ur-und Frühgeschichte der Schweiz. Schriften des Instituts 13.Google Scholar
Stumfohl, H. 1990. Die rote Farbe in Religion und Ritus, besonders in vorgeschichtlicher Hinsicht Almogaren 21 (1): 143–64.Google Scholar
Vinnicombe, P. 1987. Dampier archaeological project: resource document, survey and salvage of Aboriginal sites, Burrup peninsula, Western Australia. Perth: Western Australian Museum.Google Scholar
Welch, D. 1990. The bichrome art period in the Kimberley, Australia Rock Art Research 7: 110–24.Google Scholar