Anthropos: Anthropos, 89.1994,1/3

Anthropos, 89.1994,1/3

Bibliographic Data

Journal

Structure Type:: Journal

Works URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-714820

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-714820

Persistent identifier:: BV043334262

Title:: Anthropos

Sub Title:: internationale Zeitschrift für Völker- u. Sprachenkunde

Place of Publication:: Fribourg

Publisher:: Ed. St. Paul

Year of Publication:: 1906

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Domain:: Social and cultural anthropology > General overview

Journal Volume

Structure Type:: Journal Volume

Works URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-711882

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-711882

Persistent identifier:: 1513767681452

Title:: Anthropos, 89.1994,1/3

Year of Publication:: 1994

Call Number:: LA 1118

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Journal Issue

Structure Type:: Journal Issue

Title:: Bd. 89, 1994, Heft 1-3

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Journal Article

Structure Type:: Journal Article

Title:: Art Origins

Other person:: Bednarik, Robert G.

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Anthropos 89.1994: 169-180 Art Origins Robert G. Bednarik Abstract. - This paper attempts a global review of the pres ently available evidence of Palaeolithic art, art-like phenomena, non-utilitarian behaviour evidence, and indications of hominid cognitive development of the pre-Upper Palaeolithic periods. The various claims for such early evidence are considered, especially those of the most recent years, and some relevant hypotheses are discussed. General patterns are defined and lead to the formulation of a coherent hypothesis of how “artistic” activities of the Upper Palaeolithic appear to have developed from earlier beginnings. [Palaeolithic art, non-utilitarian be haviour, cognitive evolution, symbolism, epistemology] Robert G. Bednarik, Chairperson of International Federation of Rock Art Organizations (IFRAO), Secretary of Australian Rock Art Research Association (AURA), Chairperson of AU RA Congress, Editor of three scientific journals and two se ries of archaeological monographs. - The author has produced about 300 own publications, predominantly on palaeoart. 1. Introduction Art origins are suggested to be closely related to the cognitive development of Middle Pleistocene hominids (Bednarik 1992a), to the beginnings of human consciousness, to the advent of language (Davidson and Noble 1989), to the earliest sym bolic behaviour (Davis 1986; Halverson 1987), even to the beginnings of ritual and religion. The subject has often been addressed in a less than objective or informed fashion. For instance, any attempt to discuss art origins (or any related sub ject) by considering nothing else than the Upper Palaeolithic art of Europe needs to be banished into the realm of archaeological mythology. Most Pleistocene palaeoart is found outside of Europe (Bednarik 19927?, 1992c, 1993), and palaeoart pre dates the Upper Palaeolithic in several continents (Bednarik 1992d). Therefore the Franco-Canta- brian evidence dating from the Upper Palaeolithic neither marks the beginnings of art, nor is it of more than peripheral significance to the question of its origins. The complete neglect of extra-European evi dence in most publications on the subject is, how ever, not the only reason for having to ignore syntheses on the origins of art. The major stum bling block is of epistemological nature. Most au thors on the subject seem to be unaware that their own cognition and their biological intelligence (Je- rison 1973), the current result of human cognitive and intellectual evolution, are of limited relevance when one examines the processes that led to these faculties. A conceptual model of reality cannot be objectively contemplated by confirmationist re course to the biological intellect that is its own product. Anthropocentric reality, the only reality accessible to humans, probably does not resemble the real world, and while it may suffice in the study of other aspects of our universe, to study the begin nings of human cognition within such a simplistic framework is futile. The reason for this is simple: in all probability, palaeoart played a major role, if not the key role, in deriving the conceptual artefact which we experience as reality. This is because it is art which externalizes human concepts of reality: since its beginnings, art communicated awareness of perceived reality between humans. It does not, however, define objective reality, nor does the conceptualization of the world based on art, i.e. our reality, do so. Nor does empiricist “science.” This means, in essence, that an intelligent or ganism must base any study of its own cognition, if it is to be scientifically valid, on premises not derived from that cognition: palaeoart must be studied outside of human reactions to it. This will be extremely difficult to achieve for an organism that is normally unable to operate outside its own cognitive framework, and I would suggest it is the greatest scientific challenge humans have ever faced or will ever face. The present paper is not about how one might proceed in such an endeav our, I will simply survey the relevant phenomeno logical basis as it exists.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Anthropos, 89.1994,1/3

Journal

Journal Volume

Journal Issue

Journal Article

Table of Contents

Downloads

Full record

This page

Image fragment

Formats and links

Formats

Links

Cite

Full record

This page

Citation recommendation