Discussion: “An Upper Palaeolithic Proto-writing System and Phenological Calendar” by Bennett Bacon et al. (2023)

IF 1.8 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY Journal of paleolithic archaeology Pub Date : 2023-10-21 DOI:10.1007/s41982-023-00158-8
Miguel García-Bustos, Olivia Rivero, Georges Sauvet, Paula García Bustos
{"title":"Discussion: “An Upper Palaeolithic Proto-writing System and Phenological Calendar” by Bennett Bacon et al. (2023)","authors":"Miguel García-Bustos, Olivia Rivero, Georges Sauvet, Paula García Bustos","doi":"10.1007/s41982-023-00158-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A recent work by Bacon et al. (2023) proposes to interpret a large part of Palaeolithic art as an ethological calendar. They argue that by studying the association of certain signs (dots, lines, and Y-shapes) with an animal, it is possible to infer vital episodes such as reproduction, birth, and migration of the represented species. However, in the present article, we discuss some methodological errors made by the authors. For instance, they use a tracing to demonstrate the association between a mammoth and a series of lines at El Pindal, although this tracing is not faithful to the actual arrangement of the pictorial motifs in the cave. In Pair-non-Pair, Sotarriza, and Atxurra caves, the signs considered do not really exist. And in other cases, such as Altxerri, Covaciella, or Tito Bustillo, the signs have been misinterpreted. Important problems such as the lack of definition of “association” and various apriorisms and presentisms adopted by the authors are also exposed and discussed. In conclusion, this proposal lacks methodological support and it is not possible to conclude that an ethological calendar was present in Palaeolithic art.","PeriodicalId":73885,"journal":{"name":"Journal of paleolithic archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of paleolithic archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41982-023-00158-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract A recent work by Bacon et al. (2023) proposes to interpret a large part of Palaeolithic art as an ethological calendar. They argue that by studying the association of certain signs (dots, lines, and Y-shapes) with an animal, it is possible to infer vital episodes such as reproduction, birth, and migration of the represented species. However, in the present article, we discuss some methodological errors made by the authors. For instance, they use a tracing to demonstrate the association between a mammoth and a series of lines at El Pindal, although this tracing is not faithful to the actual arrangement of the pictorial motifs in the cave. In Pair-non-Pair, Sotarriza, and Atxurra caves, the signs considered do not really exist. And in other cases, such as Altxerri, Covaciella, or Tito Bustillo, the signs have been misinterpreted. Important problems such as the lack of definition of “association” and various apriorisms and presentisms adopted by the authors are also exposed and discussed. In conclusion, this proposal lacks methodological support and it is not possible to conclude that an ethological calendar was present in Palaeolithic art.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
讨论:Bennett Bacon等人的《旧石器时代晚期的原始书写系统和物候历法》(2023)
Bacon等人(2023)最近的一项工作提出将旧石器时代的大部分艺术解释为一种动物行为学日历。他们认为,通过研究某种动物与某些符号(点、线和y形)的联系,就有可能推断出所代表物种的繁殖、出生和迁徙等重要事件。然而,在本文中,我们讨论了作者在方法上的一些错误。例如,他们用描画法来证明猛犸象和El Pindal的一系列线条之间的联系,尽管这种描画法并不忠实于洞穴中图案图案的实际排列。在Pair-non-Pair、Sotarriza和Atxurra洞穴中,这些被认为是不存在的标志。而在其他情况下,如Altxerri, Covaciella或Tito Bustillo,这些迹象被误解了。对“联想”的定义缺失、作者所采用的各种先验主义和现在论等重要问题也进行了揭露和讨论。总之,这一建议缺乏方法学上的支持,也不可能得出旧石器时代艺术中存在动物行为学日历的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Newly Dated Late Pleistocene and Holocene Archaeological Assemblage from Bukhtarma Cave in the Southern Altai Piedmont, East Kazakhstan Raw Materials and Lithic Production During the Early Magdalenian in Cantabrian Spain: Cova Rosa (Ribadesella, Asturias) “Gravettians in the Altmühl Valley”? Comprehensive Reassessment and New Data from the Sequence from the Abri I im Dorf (Neuessing, Bavaria, Germany) The Initial Upper Paleolithic from Tolbor-16, Mongolia: Characteristics of the Lithic Assemblage and Their Evolutionary Implications Qaleh Kurd Cave (Qazvin, Iran): Oldest Evidence of Middle Pleistocene Hominin Occupations and a Human Deciduous Tooth in the Iranian Central Plateau
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1