Rock Art Research

Lithics have historically been perceived in terms of ‘tools’ and ‘tool-making’. This perspective, perpetuated by archaeologists and anthropologists alike, cannot be taken for granted and may well represent a fallacy. Since the discovery of chipped-stone artefacts by Boucher de Perthes in Abbeville, France, during the 19th century, the suggestion that many of these items may represent some of the earliest attempts of hominins to produce iconography has been dismissed with contempt. However, parietal rock art prompted by natural features found in caves dated to the Palaeolithic suggests that finding evidence for the production of ‘figure-stones’ may not be unreasonable. Whilst the proposition that proto-sculptures are evident amongst many European assemblages is often rejected on the grounds of ‘seeing images in clouds’, pareidolia underpins the identification of all figurative palaeoart. The hypothesis that Middle Palaeolithic lithics do not incorporate iconography is tested with a sample from the Fontmaure occupation site in France. The results suggest the default position adopted by the majority of archaeologists studying lithics, rejecting the incorporation of iconography, is probably incorrect.