Categories and Principles of Proto-Art: Hypotheses on Early and Middle Palaeolithic Art, Symbol and Religion (original) (raw)

sites throughout the world have yielded objects which been identified as non-utilitarian and which may be viewed as possible instances of "proto-art" (or "palaeo-art" after Bednarik 1997, 1994a, 1994b, 1992). In general, I use the term 'proto-art' to refer to Palaeolithic art, especially nonutilitarian and aesthetic objects, dating earlier than the Upper Palaeolithic, which may thematically survive into the Upper Palaeolithic. Given the state of research to date, it is possible to propose some basic categories of proto-art and to derive from the archaeological evidence and interpretations by archaeologists and prehistorians a tentative list of principles which appears to inform the artifacts believed to be proto-art. Due to taphonomic preservation problems or to archaeological or other theoretical biases against the very possibility of such art, the evidence is limited. Nevertheless there is enough material to draw some inferences. The categories and principles suggested below may be viewed not as conclusions but as hypotheses for further research. I leave aside for now the question of how this art may have provided selective advantage or generally what its role was in hominid evolution and cognitive development. Categories Following Gunn (1997), the many studies of Bednarik, and others, and my own examination of proto-art objects at such sites as Koobi Fora (Kenya), Har Karkom (Israel), Pampau (Germany), and Surrey (England), I would suggest categorizing 'protoart' into the following categories.

Sign up for access to the world's latest research.

checkGet notified about relevant papers

checkSave papers to use in your research

checkJoin the discussion with peers

checkTrack your impact