AR
Copyright 2004 by Kevin Sharpe and Leslie Van Gelder.
All rights reserved.
In process. A discussion paper.
by
Kevin Sharpe
The Graduate College,
Union Institute and University, Cincinnati, Ohio
Harris Manchester College, Oxford University
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,
leslievg@ksharpe.com
This paper is written to further discussion on the origin of
the current floor of the fluted subchamber of Chamber A
The flutings here are considered Paleolithic, though they have not been dated directly, because:
(1) there are flutings next to and inside mammoths in the Via Sacra of Rouffignac,
(2) there are mammoths drawn in Chamber A, and
(3) flutings are elsewhere dated to the Paleolithic.
(Note: two pieces of partly charcoaled wood with clay run
over them rest in the wall beneath the ceiling flutings in Chamber A
The current floor surface is smooth though undulating and
probably was originally rougher and comprised of s
The absence of bear scratches and obvious cave bear pits
in the floor means that this indicator of the Paleolithic floor in many other
parts of the cave is of no help in this chamber. There are some ani
One approach to the question is to ask when the clay of the floor was deposited relative to when the ceiling was fluted.
Flutings are in clay on the ceiling, which implies that the chamber was completely filled with clay or clay-bearing water at some point in the past. It has since then cleared of some of the clay and water to produce the current accessible passage. It has been suggested (?reference?) that more recent infills of clay have occurred as well. A high-tide mark of clay rings much of the chamber and this is interpreted to mean that the most recent clay inflow filled the chamber to this level.
What is the temporal relationship between the fluting activity and any of the more recent depositing of clay in the chamber? If clay was deposited after the fluting, some flutings might continue right down to the high-tide mark and perhaps even under it. None were observed. However, one fluted unit was observed going right to the high-tide mark and over it (in Segment VI of the fluted subchamber). This suggests that the clay was deposited before the lines were drawn. The ceiling was fluted after the most recent clay infill of the chamber.
Undulations in the floor of the subchamber (mostly higher at the edges and troughs in the center) as opposed to a flat floor suggest to some investigators that considerable amounts of clay were mined from the subchamber since the lines were fluted, perhaps by Iron Age or Medieval peoples (?Roizia as referred to in Barrire?). This would mean the current floor is markedly different than when the flutings were made.
Mining of the clay from the floor notably closer to the
ceiling before mining than the current floor level would have required
considerable effort both in the excavation and in the transportation of the
results to the surface. Thus, there is the question of whether the quality of
the clay in this subchamber (it is suggested that three chambers were mined: A
Considerable soot on the ceiling from the fires needed to light the subchamber during these extensive operations should be, but are not visible.
Similarly, large amount of charcoal should occur
on the floor from the fires lighting the mining activities. Only s
Marks on the ceilings from the swinging of picks in what would have been a lower ceiling than at present should be, but also are not visible, apart from a couple of recent lines (see Figure.) which are probably the result of relatively modern scraping with sticks.
The miners would probably have put their graffiti on the ceilings, but nothing like that is apparent.
Evidence of mining tools (broken or otherwise) left by the miners might also be evident, though conceivably they might have disintegrated or rusted away by now. By all accounts, none have been found here though apparently some were excavated in the entrance chamber of the cave (?reference?).
It would make sense for the miners to excavate the clay right to the edges rather than only in the center, and not have had to crawl further down the chamber to extend their excavations. However, the depressions are only in the center of the subchamber.
There is no evidence of mining for clay in the fluted
subchamber of Chamber A
The mining hypothesis has been raised because of the undulations in the cave floor, higher at the edges than in the center. It was suggested that mining removed clay in the areas that now form the troughs in the floor. It may be thought that the clay (perhaps deposited under a lake) was flat originally. Despite the possibility that the presence of such a body or bodies of water since the ceiling was fluted may have severely affected the flutings even though it did not touch the ceiling, another observation counts against the lake idea. The clay high tide mark on the walls of this subchamber and its neighbors is at an angle sloping down the chamber. This suggests that the clay wasnt most recently deposited under water in a lake because it would have had a level surface and would have completely drowned the fluted subchamber judging by the level in the upper neighboring subchamber. Probably, therefore, it gradually flowed down the clamber as a slow river of mud. As a slow flow, it probably moved more slowly at the edges or where the floor rose significantly, with friction, viscous tension, and rock-clay attraction holding it closer to the rocks. We might expect, therefore, the surface of the slowly moving river of mud to sink at the center between the walls or appreciable rises in the rock floor, and to remain higher against the walls and these rises.
Another process may help explain a natural undulation in the current clay floor. Since the time the clay flowed and was deposited, it has slowly dried out, though not completely, shrunking with its dehydration. When it dried on the walls or the ceilings (where it did touch the ceiling), it would in time peel and fall off. Thus we should expect the edges of the current chamber to be higher since the clay from the walls has fallen onto it.
The mining hypothesis is also raised because of the relative absence of flint nodules on the floor of the fluted subchamber. Why is the floor of the fluted subchamber mostly devoid of nodules of flint whereas they occur much more profusely on the floors of other subchambers, for instance the adjacent one toward the caves entrance? Did humans remove the nodules to clear the floor, perhaps to mine it?
The relative absence of flint nodules need not require human activity:
The ceiling of this subchamber has many fewer nodules protruding than the ceiling of its neighbor. Fewer nodules in the ceiling mean fewer nodules to fall.
Most of the ceiling is also covered with Paleolithic flutings and relatively more recent activity on the ceiling is obviously so because of differences in patination. Therefore, little flint has fallen since the lines were made.
Few nodules fallen into the neighboring chamber probably would roll into the subchamber of interest because of its natural floor barrier at its entrance end.
In other words, the floor was naturally probably relatively free of fallen flint when the flutings were made. Humans probably did not clear it.
This picture overall suggests that there have probably
been no more clay infills in the interim and probably clay was not mined there.
Thus the floor of the subchamber that the Paleolithic fluters encountered was
rougher than at present and comprised of what looks like s