Recently discovered sculpture fragments from the area surrounding the important but little-studied site of Telantunich confirm a regional tradition of human portraiture quite distinct from the better-known canon of Maya stelae. Comparative material presented here shows connections between this tradition and a regional emphasis on depictions of masculine sexuality, especially depictions of human phalli. The authors present an analysis of this corpus that confirms that such depictions both reflect Classic Maya conceptions of masculinity and were deployed to convey and reify such conceptions within society.

There has been much controversy recently regarding Lewis-Williams's assertion that altered states of consciousness and shamanism can explain Palaeolithic art. Evidence now seems to be accumulating that this account is unable to provide a sustainable explanation for Upper Palaeolithic depictions. This proposition will be explored and substantiated by examining further weaknesses contained therein. Additionally, in response to claims by those defending altered states that no alternative explanation for palaeoart has been proposed as a viable alternative, it will be shown that such a description does exist but has not been given the attention it deserves because of a misplaced concern for shamanism.

Archaeologists have explained the spatiality and spread of traditions primarily in terms of conflict-free transfers of knowledge. This article critiques the sociospatial conceptualization of tradition implicit in many of these explanations and re-theorizes tradition as a relational process of symbolic conflict. Of particular concern are hierarchical approaches to traditional knowledge that set the more durable unconscious or ‘embodied’ elements of tradition apart from ‘symbolically invested practices’ and attribute to each a unique spatiality, with that of embodied tradition involving largely benign mechanisms of transmission. This article proposes instead that the spatiality of tradition is the outcome of continuous reflexive transformation of embodied traditional knowledge in contested social and symbolic relationships between groups. This transformation unfolds in conflict over the meaning, ownership, and value of symbolic inventories (knowledge, names, practices, symbols) within social fields. Ethnographic and archaeological data are used to argue that strategies of symbolic conflict propel traditions along the relational pathways of fields.

Formlings, now better understood to depict termitaria (termites' nests) and termites, are a pervasive category of San (Bushman) rock art north of the River Limpopo. This article investigates the associations of termites' nests in San thought, belief, and ritual, in an attempt to explain formling symbolism and why termites' nests, and not other subjects, were chosen for depiction. Unequivocal ethnographic testimonies of San spiritual world-view are compounded with iconographic analysis to show nuances of San understanding and perception of the spirit world. In turn, this ethnographic hermeneutic reveals a significant but previously unexplored facet of spirit-world imagery which evokes notions of creative and transformative power. This newly highlighted vignette of San cosmology unlocks aspects of San imagery, such as the interface between the natural and the metaphysical, that have hitherto been less understood.

An approach to interpreting possible steps in language evolution is offered here from systemic functional linguistic (SFL) theory. SFL models language at three levels from sounds to wordings to complex patterns of social discourse. Typological studies in this framework have shown striking commonalities at each level across languages, that are not yet adequately accounted for by existing models of language phylogenesis. Four conditions are suggested for developing explanatory models that may account for these linguistic phenomena. These include (a) a mechanism for reproducing complex cultural behaviours intergenerationally over extended time, (b) a sequence by which articulated wordings could evolve from non-linguistic primate communication, (c) extension of the functions of wording from enacting interpersonal interactions to representing speakers' experience, and (d) the emergence of complex patterns of discourse for delicately negotiating social relations, and for construing experience in genres such as narrative. These conditions are explored, and some possible steps in language evolution are suggested, that may be correlated with both linguistic research and archaeological models of cultural phases in human evolution. The aims of the article are to offer some useful tools to the field of language evolution, at the same time as indicating potential interpretations of existing work, using insights from SFL research.

Why are humans musical? Why do people in all cultures sing or play instruments? Why do we appear to have specialized neurological apparatus for hearing and interpreting music as distinct from other sounds? And how does our musicality relate to language and to our evolutionary history?

Anthropologists and archaeologists have paid little attention to the origin of music and musicality — far less than for either language or ‘art’. While art has been seen as an index of cognitive complexity and language as an essential tool of communication, music has suffered from our perception that it is an epiphenomenal ‘leisure activity’, and archaeologically inaccessible to boot. Nothing could be further from the truth, according to Steven Mithen; music is integral to human social life, he argues, and we can investigate its ancestry with the same rich range of analyses — neurological, physiological, ethnographic, linguistic, ethological and even archaeological — which have been deployed to study language.

In The Singing Neanderthals Steven Mithen poses these questions and proposes a bold hypothesis to answer them. Mithen argues that musicality is a fundamental part of being human, that this capacity is of great antiquity, and that a holistic protolanguage of musical emotive expression predates language and was an essential precursor to it.

This is an argument with implications which extend far beyond the mere origins of music itself into the very motives of human origins. Any argument of such range is bound to attract discussion and critique; we here present commentaries by archaeologists Clive Gamble and Iain Morley and linguists Alison Wray and Maggie Tallerman, along with Mithen's response to them. Whether right or wrong, Mithen has raised fascinating and important issues. And it adds a great deal of charm to the time-honoured, perhaps shopworn image of the Neanderthals shambling ineffectively through the pages of Pleistocene prehistory to imagine them humming, crooning or belting out a cappella harmonies as they went.