• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • Early dates for 'Neanderthal cave art' may be wrong

    Author(s)
    Aubert, Maxime
    Brumm, Adam
    Huntley, Jillian
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Brumm, Adam R.
    Aubert, Maxime
    Huntley, Jillian
    Year published
    2018
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Current evidence suggests that some Neanderthal populations engaged in modern human-like forms of symbolic behavior, including: the extensive and systematic use of ochers and other prepared mineral pigments (i.e., paint; Dayet et al., 2014, Heyes et al., 2016); use of perforated shells and various other modified and unmodified objects and substances as ornaments (e.g., ‘jewelry’), including bird feathers (Finlayson et al., 2012) and claws (Radovčić et al., 2015); manufacture of elaborate structures of unknown purpose inside deep cave passages (Jaubert et al., 2016); and engraving of non-figurative markings on bones (Majkić ...
    View more >
    Current evidence suggests that some Neanderthal populations engaged in modern human-like forms of symbolic behavior, including: the extensive and systematic use of ochers and other prepared mineral pigments (i.e., paint; Dayet et al., 2014, Heyes et al., 2016); use of perforated shells and various other modified and unmodified objects and substances as ornaments (e.g., ‘jewelry’), including bird feathers (Finlayson et al., 2012) and claws (Radovčić et al., 2015); manufacture of elaborate structures of unknown purpose inside deep cave passages (Jaubert et al., 2016); and engraving of non-figurative markings on bones (Majkić et al., 2017) and cortical areas of flaked stone artifacts (Majkić et al., 2018), and also on immobile rock surfaces (i.e., at Gorham's Cave; Rodríguez-Vidal et al., 2014). Scientific opinion is deeply divided over the meaning of these behaviors—the empirical evidence for which, in some instances, is not yet unanimously accepted. Indeed, the notion that even late-surviving Neanderthals had acquired aspects of cognitive ‘modernity’, either independently or through direct cultural contact (including interbreeding) with the first modern humans to enter Europe, remains a subject of lively debate.
    View less >
    Journal Title
    Journal of Human Evolution
    Volume
    125
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2018.08.004
    Subject
    Archaeology
    Neanderthal cave art
    Mineral pigments
    Stone artifacts
    Rock art
    Cave art
    Uranium-series dating
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/382420
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E
    • TEQSA: PRV12076

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander