AR
Copyright © 2003 by Kevin Sharpe and Leslie Van Gelder. All rights reserved.
In process.
Mirian Finger Flutings in
Graduate College, Union Institute and University, Cincinnati, Ohio
Harris Manchester College, Oxford University, Oxford
Oxford Institute for Science and Spirit, Oxford
kevin.sharpe@tui.edu
www.ksharpe.com
and
Leslie Van Gelder
Walden University, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Oxford Institute for Science and Spirit, Oxford
leslievg@ksharpe.com
This paper uses an
empirical methodology to examine finger flutings (termed ‘Mirian’ Flutings) in
Chamber A
KEY WORDS. ??? Finger flutings, methodology, parietal art, prehistoric art.
CONTENTS.
TO SORT
·
Make
sure things from AR49 and AR86 are included here.
·
Finding repeating patterns in DS: Good photos – use multiple lights,
camera mount ball for tripod to create 360º or dome photos. Ron Murray at Library of Congress
to help stitch them together. Or video. Look at pix of each alcove to see if
same pix and the number of pix, etc. Create a photo like Barrière did drawn.
·
Statistical graph of numbers from DS to
determine fingers.
·
Are there repetitions of structures?
·
Look at example where there’s the hesitation in
the middle. Interruption in the lines when stepping etc.
·
General
· Have Tim in Roundstone look at the Mirian lines – is there something we’re missing?
In the Cave
· How long are the units?
· Could some units be made by placing both hands on the ceiling? Physically possible, but difficult to state for certain. It’s possible for two hands of one person to make unparallel lines. It’s possible for two persons to make parallel lines. It’s possible for one person to make two sets of parallel lines.
To Include in the
Paper
· No apparent pattern was recognized (Mary’s and my visit) either in length, direction, or number of fingers used in meanders. Would need to be analyzed carefully. Many meanders ran into other meanders or at some points paralleled them. This made it difficult to determine exact beginnings and ends, and the number of fingers used for each meander. Some finger meanders did contain four fingers and it was possible to determine the little finger because it started below the other three fingers.
· Re undulations: did they tend to start from right to left? Did they have a certain number of turns?
·
For Jean, lines are where to draw a picture
later. But there are no pictures in A
· Call a meander a ‘Gambetta.’
· Fingers spread with a high ceiling because of stretching.
· Lines overlie each other.
· Patterns (e.g., zigzags) exist.
· Error in Barrière’s 1982: Fig. 276: This is only to point out that a central focus for the ceiling is very difficult to find, if one indeed exists.
·
Note: two pieces of partly charcoaled wood with
clay run over them rest in the wall beneath the ceiling flutings in Chamber A
·
Chamber E, Panel II: Many of the Mirian lines
have three-fingered widths of
Matters for the
Analyses
·
Are there repetitions of structures?
· How many individuals can be ascertained as present given the distinctive finger widths?
· The number of lines in each unit.
· The cluster down J and in A1 that look the same: if same finger widths, done by same person? Signature? Do an analysis of cluster in A1.
· Tectiforms: if same structure; same finger width? Done by same person? Signature? Use Frédéric Plassard’s work when it comes out.
Experiment
· A stream’s widths can vary a lot along it. Experiment to get an idea of the variation.
A
In the Cave
·
Check in unwalked on subchambers in A
·
Check the periods of clay inflow into the fluted
subchamber of A
·
Look at the children’s markings in the
·
Re-examine: In what direction did the children
face when held aloft? At the forward end of the fluted chamber, a small natural
wall jutting out from both sides and about
· A number of shells and shell fragments are exposed in the ceiling. In some places, large shells are missing, perhaps dislodged when fingers knocked into them. Fingers passing over one shell probably broke it as the two sides remain and the flutings on each side have the same width and number of fingers. Some shells look like they might cut fingers running over them. Of particular help in reconstructing the activities in the chamber may be differences in the marks on either side of an obstacle such as a shell because they might help show the direction of the fluting. ??? do I need to be more specific about this ??? Put directionality on the photos.
·
If only
two lines appear in a unit (for instance,
??? ), perhaps the
fluter folded down all but those two fingers, or one would expect in the
bumpiness of being carried aloft that at least a third would sometimes appear.
·
In other places (for instance at the bottom of
the ‘race course’ ??? ), a ‘jog’ appears in a unit, in this case where the
carrier changes angular direction while walking.
·
Look for
evidence of a child being carried.
·
Chart
the lines in relation to the floor-to-ceiling height. Do certain sized lines
only appear at specific heights?
·
What is
the proximity between adult/child hands in the space of the ceiling-wall?
·
Finger
widths and heights.
·
Are
there visible breaks that correspond to the floor’s geography (e.g., bear
pits)?
·
(A
·
(A
·
(A
To Include in the
Paper
· The smaller fingers in the badger panel are not children’s.
· Children held aloft with their feet on the walls.
· Meaning: can’t say. But perhaps done for the act of doing them. Sensuous, tactile. Then:
o Bare feet on walls: feeling of feet in the clay and could have walked in there with bare feet over broken flint nodules? Carried in?
o Why only this range of marking and not others? E.g., hand prints, finger prods, sideways, etc. There is some motif repetitions (e.g., racecourse in two segments), which implies some cultural input into what was done, not just all sensuous.
· Note in the paper that Séverine found the first footprint.
· Footprints: this is further evidence of a child being carried.
· Footprints: the clay is too hard and too thin to make foot impressions. What we’re seeing are natural ‘foot and toe shaped’ depressions. The running of the clay would have filled in any actual foot indentations by now. But it has run down. Looking at them, say the best example (the first one seen by Séverine) what is the shape of the rock under the footprint? Is the clay think enough to have been compressed by a foot? Would it have been soft enough (it’s not now)? One the thing would be to see how thick the clay is over the footprint. Another would be to see what really is the shape of the rock under the mud. Get a sonar or ultrasound device to do this.
·
(A
·
(A
·
(A
·
(A
·
(A
·
(A
Matters for the
Analyses
· Distinguish (the number of) individuals.
· Where do we see adults and where do we see children?
·
What
types of lines are made by children’s hands? Do we see the same in adult hands?
·
Difference between
·
(A
·
(A
·
(A
·
(A
·
(A
·
(A
Experiment
·
Experiment
with levitating a tot.
Adam and Eve Chamber
In the Cave
·
(Adam and Eve Chamber): Bones? Chicken? Teeth? At
the end of this chamber. Perhaps this chamber, like A
To Include in the
Paper
· (Adam and Eve Chamber): Mirian lines of mixed sizes across the ceiling and low ceiling spots here.
· (Adam and Eve Chamber): Junction point leading to this in the Abbé Breuil Chamber: lots of lines here.
Matters for the
Analyses
Experiment
E
In the Cave
· Boundary between Kirian and Mirian lines.
To Include in the
Paper
·
(E) Motif-based flutings and other line markings
such as discussed above in Chamber E, and the tectiform image (for instance,
Barrière
Matters for the
Analyses
Experiment
Rouffignac Overall
In the Cave
·
(Geography) Mirian lines appear in similar
chambers (new one, Via Sacra, A
To Include in the
Paper
Matters for the
Analyses
Experiment
Via Sacra
In the Cave
· (Via Sacra) Are some of the clusters of inseparable lines? Different therefore from the Rugolean. Make this a definitional difference from Rugolean? (Ought I to say that if the lines are a jumble, then probably their final individualized appearance wasn’t important to the fluters?)
·
(Via Sacra) Looking for a suitable place on the
ceiling for an analysis. The kolk with ‘
· (Via Sacra) Also do a photograph of the long ceiling lines, etc., just beyond the grated area.
To Include in the
Paper
· (Via Sacra) Walking while drawing implies Mirian lines.
· (Via Sacra) Mirian lines in the ceiling: not too low a ceiling: a short person could stand up.
·
(Via Sacra) A lot of
·
(Via Sacra) Not dissimilar to A
Matters for the
Analyses
Experiment
______________________________________________________
, have sometimes been called ??? macaroni, meanders, or serpentines, or related to water or initiation ceremonies, or made as shamanistic ritual.
Chamber A
Previous writings on the
flutings:
1.
Marshack
2.
Barrière
3.
Plassard
4.
Lewis-Williams and Clottes
5.
Big book (Barrière’s chapter)
6.
Small old book
7.
Etc.
C. Suggestion
that they were made by women or adolescents in initiation ceremonies
D. Meanings:
water signs; serpentines and death
Writes Marshack
[Marshack,
The meanders [in the cave of Rouffignac] are the most numerous and complex in any cave in Europe….One large chamber with a low ceiling has thousands of criss-crossing meanders marked by fingers in the soft red clay. It looks like ‘macaroni’ in the truest sense, a random mélange of interlacing lines running in every direction. There is neither structure, pattern, image, nor composition in the accumulation. On the walls as one descends from the incredible complexity of the ceiling, the markings tend to thin out and in these areas the meander tradition and system are clear….Different persons, with fingers and print spacing of different sizes, made meander “unit” marks using one, two, three, or four fingers. Sometimes the meander is serpentine, sometimes angular, sometimes a mere arc or a single line. Lateral branches are attached to the core meanders or cross over them. [ ??? this sense of building from a central meander with crossings etc. needs refuting ??? ] Some serpentine images are extended linearly by the marking of another hand. Occasionally a form takes on the appearance of an image, but analysis indicates that different fingers were involved in the marking [ ??? use this approach to refute the anthropomorphs etc. here ??? ]….
It is clear that some of the simple, single marks are part of the process of accumulation. They are not intended to form an image, as do some of the serpentine meanders, but they are nevertheless probably equivalent as acts of participation within the system. No mark on these walls was apparently random. In quantitative terms, the meanders in Rouffignac represent perhaps thousands of individual ‘acts of participation’ whereas the animals in the cave represent perhaps some two hundred images….
We are dealing with water-related iconography. [Marshack,
Barrière
The primary question this paper addresses is this: Were
children the authors of at least some of the flutings found in Chamber A
If this can be answered in the positive with a high degree of probability based on the physical evidence the flutings provide, then further matters may present themselves for research and other things may be ascertained about the fluters and perhaps even what the flutings meant – or more likely, what they probably did not mean – to them. It may also be possible with similar techniques to elucidate the various characterizations and meanings associated with the flutings in question.
Sometimes appear to
use modules, holes and other surface features in compositions.
This research is part of a general research program whose
methodology is based on the severines themselves, without first bringing ideas
as to meaning and significance and then looking to prove those ideas ((Sharpe,
Preprint; Sharpe and Fawbert
Marshack, though he defers to his predecessors, pioneers strategies for this type of research. He writes:
I tried to develop techniques and a theoretical basis
for the intensive internal analysis
of the Upper Paleolithic symbolic materials….My effort was…directed toward…a
study of the cognitive processes
involved in the formation of an image, a study of the sequence of making an image or a composition or the sequence of
accumulating images on a surface….This enquiry was…functional and psychological
(Marshack
Having laid this base for the methodology of looking at the
physical marks for clues, Marshack retreats from grounded analysis to
speculation (for instance, by expounding water as the meaning of the markings),
and does so without clearly differentiating between the two approaches. The
core of Marshack’s methodology needs adopting and developing, and his
speculations as to meaning need putting aside. In other words, this work
continues from Marshack and, following him, Bednarik (Aslin, Bednarik, and
Bednarik
The methodology adopted therefore not only examines the markings themselves, but may involve experimentation to ascertain how the markings may have been made and limitations on them given their means of manufacture. In particular,
1. Laboratory Experimentation
Research is undertaken in the laboratory to ascertain
what can and cannot be fluted or engraved in the situations of the severines,
to clarify what particular features of the severines still visible may imply
about how they were made and who made them, and to refine data recording
techniques (Lorblanchet
2. Fieldwork
A thorough examination of the lines is made using
non-intrusive techniques such as varied lighting techniques. Photography with
digital technology, different filters, light sources (including infrared and
ultraviolet), and note taking of the severines are the foundations of the field
techniques (Lorblanchet
3. Analysis
After the fieldwork, the lines are drawn and reconstructed electronically. This redrawing often raises points about the image that need clarification and that only further field work can answer. From this work, specific research questions can be formulated for further investigation.
The number of fingers
used for each unit was between
· How can you draw long straight lines? Do the lines show evidence of locomotion by the fluters?
this means that it
is most likely to be play, children’s ‘finger painting,’ although ceremonial
activities for youths are also possible. Fluting may have been done for
decoration or identification, perhaps associated with rituals, but it remains
enigmatic’ (Mulvaney and Kamminga
Discussion: Robert re. why children. Breuil had something on this too? Too speculative at present. See the other interpretations of these flutings also too speculative, but informable by this study (e.g., initiation at purberty). Suggests future studies. Stuff from Alex. What do the flutings mean? Besides being able to rule out the above suggested meanings, the import of the flutings as intended by their makers remains unknown; it will probably never be known and should probably not be expected to be known.
??? d’Errico and symboling or iconography ???
Fluted severines in Chamber A
The fluted severines in Chamber A
(from Plassard pp. 18-26)
Medieval use of the cave is attested to by evidence found in the cave porch. The great multitude of names and initials, sometimes with dates, throughout the cave show that knowledge of the cave’s existence remained continually since the Middle Ages.
In 1575, François de Belle-Forest in his book, Cosmographie Universelle et de Tout le Monde, describes the Cro du Cluzeau (the ‘hole of the Cluzeau’). In it, he records information from François Amault de la Borie and shows that the cave is known well. The cave then was in the estate of the Marquis de Miremont.
In 1759, Gabriel Bouquier drew the first plan of the cave.
In 1893, Édouard-Alfred Martel completed his topographical study of the cave, published in his 1894 work titled, Les Abîmes. It included commentaries and an explanation of how the cave network formed…the first scientific work on the cave. From 1945 to 1949, local speleologists, with help from those from Charentes, explored deep into the cave and from this drew up a detailed plan.
Breuil visited the cave in 1915 and Glory in 1948. Neither ventured very far in. Then. On 26 June 1956, Nougier and Robert entered and recognized what they saw on the walls as prehistoric. Much conflict ensued. They first consulted Breuil, without telling anyone else, who arrived on 17 July and stayed for 12 hours. He enthusiastically authenticated the authenticity of the art and submitted an official report. Nougier and Robert announced their find on 20 July at the 25th Prehistory of France Congress.
The ensuing conflict in understandable. Many people – probably hundreds – had already visited the cave and not noticed or recognized the significance of the art. Then there were those perplexed at the relative lateness of this discovery, decades after the other prehistoric art caves.
Speleologists Pierret and Faccio were convinced that none of the paintings existed when they explored the cave from 1945 to 1949, at least that is what the press reported. Nevertheless, they and Blanc, director of the Seventh District of Prehistoric Antiquities, admitted to have seen certain of the pictures. Only they thought them to be fakes.
They even suggested forgery since they said that certain of the drawings were not there the year before.
Three visits help seal the authenticity.
On 9 August, specialists Graziosi from Italy, and on 10 September, Almagro from Spain visited the cave and they too authenticated the art as prehistoric.
A multidisciplinary international group under Graziosi and Almagro came to the cave on 12 September. Each specialist verified the art’s authenticity.
A more recent find of the text by François de Belle-Forest from 1575 where he mentions the presence of drawings of then unknown animals and the tracks of ‘large and small beasts’ helps seal the case. The style of the art, its themes, the anatomical detail of the animals depicted, the physical condition of the art, and the composition of the media used for the art, all point to the Paleolithic age of the art.
The first study of the art was published in 1959 by the discoverers. Claude Barrière joined them in their research there.
·
Note that Barrière’s
Plassard pp. 60-62, 76-78
[The] enigmatic lines take four distinct forms, justifying different approaches.
The first we will discuss comprises the multitude of finger flutings in tangled meanders often thought of as macaroni….They are found in most of the decorated galleries where they cover large surfaces totaling about 500 m2.
Equally, some finger flutings – in small groups, organized in parallel bands, in beams, in chevrons, or in carefully executed meanders – punctuate the galleries…or are associated with certain mammoth figures….
The third category comprises tectiforms. As the name indicates, these geometric figures suggest the image convention of a pitched roof of double slopes, supported by a vertical mast resting on a horizontal base….This basic structure can give place to various lay outs, such as the addition of lateral walls or double roof slopes, one on top of the other….With fourteen of them, these signs contribute to anchor the art of Rouffignac in a comparatively small geographic context, for one finds this same conjunction of mammoth with tectiform in the caves of Bernifal, Combarelles and of Font-de-Gaume, all of about ten kilometers distance.
We will group together in the fourth category the group of traits or apostrophe-like marks, engraved and drawn, that are associated with various animal figures. Such marks are present on the body of one of the mammouths of the Big Pit…, on the rhinoceroses in the frieze, or on some mammoths on the Great Ceiling.
Works of rock art are currently known from about 350 underground and above ground sites. The majority contain representations of large mammals, while rodents, birds, insects, fish and snakes are rare or totally absent. Rouffignac fits perfectly into this scheme, even with there being reference to the world of reptiles, for, among the innumerable flutings that we have just pointed out, some received special treatment. While the majority of the meanders were made by impressing while moving the soft part of two, three, or four fingers at once, some were marked in two successive lines. These are not simpler meanders, but rather carefully suggest the undulation of a snake. Even one of the ends is comparatively globular, making one think of a head….One notices, nevertheless, that these snakes are systematically traced with fingers, while several techniques are usually used to represent the other animals. The question may therefore be asked whether the evocation of the snake is only the product of chance, or if, from an opposing point of view, whether all the meanders represent snakes. In this case, rather than the speaking of ‘the cave of the one hundred mammoths,’ it would be ‘the cave to the snakes’!
INVENTORY OF THE WORKS Themes Number Percentage
Mammouth 158 62
Bison 28 11
Cheval 16 6,35
Bouquetin 12 4,79
Rhinocéros 11 4,1
Ours 1 0,4
Humain 4 1,67
Serpent (?) 6 2,45
Tectiforme 14 5,57
Indéterminé 4 1,67
Total 254 100 Tracés digitaux en méandres : 500 m 2
….
The ceiling of the snakes
The first subchamber opens up two hundred meters from the entrance. After slowly moving over the chaotic floor of its vast corridor, one comes upon two rocky bars forming a sort of door way. This is three hundred meters from the exterior, the ceiling arch now lowering itself abruptly and one feels a change in the world. The ceiling is only 1.6 meters above the floor. A series of alcoves come together in a low room of about 150 m2….On this surface, coated with clay from the cavern-forming water, the prehistoric artists have, with their fingers, and perhaps also with a bundle of sticks reminiscent of fingers, created a multitude of single, double, or triple lines that zigzag and become entangled in a swirling mass. In any case, such is the first impression for, once passed the first moments, the body of lines takes on more structure. One could not really talk about organization, but rhythms appear. One discovers the beginning of a line then the end, echoes of lines, some grids or cross-hatchings. By their geometry, they stand out from the mass….Then, according to the corner, gradually appear meanders made with two hands at once and forming symmetrical pairs, or true chevrons with sharp angles. At last, some meanders very carefully executed in two successive gestures, more clearly evoke snakes. One of them even appears to have a head….The presence of several of these more elaborate graphic units does not nevertheless make everything seem clear, and even with such a revelation, it retains all its mystery. Two facts emerge: the choice of the end of this gallery with its particular shape and form, and the exclusive presence of this form of expression primarily raise the question: does the meaning lie in the gesture or in the result?
Because in Rouffignac at no place are mammoths and flutings absent, not far from there, in a secondary branch of the cave, some flutings as meanders appear beside two mammoths.
##Fill Out Were the lines in question made by fingers and not by tools, for instance by leather covered sticks (Sharpe 2004 seeks a parallel distinction between lines scratched by animal claws and lines engraved by humans). ??? Plassard mentions this in his book Show characteristics expected of finger made lines. Different points for the beginnings of flutings in a unit. A variety of widths. Shape different from fingers. Striations. Number of lines per unit. When each finger shows up, e.g., the fourth or fifth. Splaying (though line separations may also change with sticks). The question is, Were some of them indeed made by young children with their fingers?
·
ABSTRACT.
KEY WORDS.
CONTENTS.
Question
for this Paper and Further Mirian Form Research
Comparison
between Mirian Severines in Chambers A1 and E
Historical, geographic, cave layout
Forms, Mirian Form, previous work on Mirian Form in Rouffignac and elsewhere
Overall questions, specific questions for this form
Overall methodology, specific methodologies, comparison with other methodologies
Research results
·
Ceiling of A
· Divide the fluted area of chamber the into segments (alcoves) defined by the ‘arms’ reaching from the walls, starting with Segment I (which we’ve been working on) defined by the entrance boulder of the right (facing toward the rear of the cave), the wall area, and the first wall arm down on the right hand side. Make the apex of the segment around the point of the ‘race course.’
· See chart below for hand sizes.
· Some triple zigzags – mostly in pairs.
·
The lines under Cluster C of the Kirian Form of
severines and on the face perpendicular to it appear to be a
· See chart below for hand sizes.
·
They cover
·
Mirian lines are
Specific conclusions, general implications, further questions arising
Chamber E
Chamber A
Circle @