Are Petroglyphs Teenage Graffiti?

[Kernos]

From: http://www.livescience.com/history/060214_cave_art.html

Bjorn Carey
LiveScience Staff Writer
posted: 14 February 2006 02:56 pm ET

Many art historians and anthropologists believe Paleolithic cave wall art was done by accomplished shaman-artists, but mixed in with the finer paintings are graffiti-like scenes of sex and hunting. An analysis of thousands of paintings from the late Pleistocene epoch suggests the graffiti artists back then were likely the same as today—teenage males.

Most cave art from 10,000 to 35,000 years ago was done by hand, quite literally. Artists would chew up a bit of red ocher, place their hand against a wall, and spit over their hand.

"It was like kids taking a pencil and drawing an outline around their hand," said Dale Guthrie, a paleobiologist from the University of Alaska Fairbanks.

Men and women have different hand proportions—men have thicker thumbs and palms—so by analyzing the dimensions of the hands in European cave art, and comparing them to 1,000 photocopies of modern hands of men and women of different ages, Guthrie determined just who painted what.

Men and women and boys and girls of all ages left their marks but, statistically, teenage males dominated, contrary to popular belief.

Most of the paintings are of large game, such as bison, horse, ibex, and red deer. Cave bears and lions, which would have inspired fear, were also depicted.

Many of the hunting scenes, although sloppily done compared to the fine, finished work of an adult artist back then, are full of graphic detail.

"Lots of the wild animals in the caves have spears in them and blood coming out of their mouths and everything that a hunter would be familiar with," Guthrie told LiveScience. "These were the Ferraris and football games of their time. They painted what was on their minds."

And as with modern teenagers, the ancients had more on their minds than just cars and sports.

"In the graffiti, there is a lot of below-the-belt-art," Guthrie said. "The people in the art are predominantly women, and not a single one has any clothes on."

But these weren't just any women, they were Pleistocene Pamela Andersons adorned with ludicrously huge breasts and hips. The walls were also decorated with graphic depictions of genitalia.

"These were not the type of paintings that make it into the coffee table art books," Guthrie said.

While female artists accounted for less than 20 percent of the cave art, they were being creative in other ways, researchers say.

"What we find in the fossil record doesn't always represent what was going on," Guthrie said. "Prior to the pottery age, women in all societies are working in things that don't preserve very well, such as skins and braiding fiber."

Guthrie presents his findings and more than 3,000 images in his new book, "The Nature of Paleolithic Art" (University of Chicago Press, 2006).

[DJ Droood]

of course, life expectancy was about 25 years, so pretty much everything was teenager-driven.

Ancient Cave Art Full of Teenage Graffiti

By Bjorn Carey, LiveScience Staff Writer

Many art historians and anthropologists believe Paleolithic cave wall art was done by accomplished shaman-artists, but mixed in with the finer paintings are graffiti-like scenes of sex and hunting.

An analysis of thousands of paintings from the late Pleistocene epoch suggests the graffiti artists back then were likely the same as today—teenage males.

Most cave art from 10,000 to 35,000 years ago was done by hand, quite literally. Artists would chew up a bit of red ocher, place their hand against a wall, and spit over their hand.

"It was like kids taking a pencil and drawing an outline around their hand," said Dale Guthrie, a paleobiologist from the University of Alaska Fairbanks.

Men and women have different hand proportions—men have thicker thumbs and palms—so by analyzing the dimensions of the hands in European cave art, and comparing them to 1,000 photocopies of modern hands of men and women of different ages, Guthrie determined just who painted what.

Men and women and boys and girls of all ages left their marks but, statistically, teenage males dominated, contrary to popular belief.

Most of the paintings are of large game, such as bison, horse, ibex, and red deer. Cave bears and lions, which would have inspired fear, were also depicted.

Many of the hunting scenes, although sloppily done compared to the fine, finished work of an adult artist back then, are full of graphic detail.

"Lots of the wild animals in the caves have spears in them and blood coming out of their mouths and everything that a hunter would be familiar with," Guthrie told LiveScience. "These were the Ferraris and football games of their time. They painted what was on their minds."

And as with modern teenagers, the ancients had more on their minds than just cars and sports.

"In the graffiti, there is a lot of below-the-belt-art," Guthrie said. "The people in the art are predominantly women, and not a single one has any clothes on."

But these weren't just any women, they were Pleistocene Pamela Andersons adorned with ludicrously huge breasts and hips. The walls were also decorated with graphic depictions of genitalia.

"These were not the type of paintings that make it into the coffee table art books," Guthrie said.

While female artists accounted for less than 20 percent of the cave art, they were being creative in other ways, researchers say.

"What we find in the fossil record doesn't always represent what was going on," Guthrie said. "Prior to the pottery age, women in all societies are working in things that don't preserve very well, such as skins and braiding fiber."

Guthrie presents his findings and more than 3,000 images in his new book, "The Nature of Paleolithic Art" (University of Chicago Press, 2006).

[Kernos]

Agreed. And, 16 year olds were a lot more mature back then than they are today.

[wolf560]

Agreed,

Since many people back in the age of these paintings also were parents by the time they were 12-15 years old, the very term "teenager" loses its meaning. Even into the Middle Ages, the term 'teenager' was not a consideration.

'Maturity' was more a factor of the ability to conceive children or to provide sustenance for the tribal community. So for the term 'teenager' to carry any weight, the age limit on this phenomenon slips downwards to probably 7-11 years of age.

Could you imagine the implications of such a system if it were still in effect today?

..... pause for effect......


/|\ Mark

[DaRC]

Aye we often threaten the kids with cleaning the chimney or working down the mines

Pre WWII a teenager would be walking 10 miles to plough a field and 10 year olds would be spending the night outside watching the sheep! There was a local old woman who actually was pulling the plough, with her sister, when she was young and her dad was driving it.

[Kernos]

Personally, I think that artificially delayed maturity is a big social problem.

[DJ Droood]

Personally, I think that artificially delayed maturity is a big social problem.

25 is the new 15....although, with no jobs and a bleak outlook, playing xbox and smoking pot all day waiting for a parent to come home from work and make dinner is understandable.

[Huathe]

I have read somewhere that people rarely lived more than 40 years in ancient Celtic times. Women lived shorter lives than men due to problems related to childbirth. Even as recently as 100-150 years ago lifespans averaged only 50 years or so.

It is a fact that kids grew up faster in the past, at least mentally. Back in the 1930's the average 12 year old was, at least in some ways more mentally mature than a modern 20 year old. The more demanding lifestyle promoted this. And mentioning the fertility of girls in ancient times, could the average girl get pregnant at 14? While I am sure it was possible I doubt it was that common. 100 years ago the average teenage girl started her period at around 16 years old. Today it is closer to 12. This decrease is often attributed to body mass. Girls today are heavier and have better access to food and physically grow up faster than their ancestors. The body says " Wha La " it is time to grow up and turns everything on. This naturally creates a social problem with 13 year old girls having womens bodies and not having the maturity to handle the changes and often attention from much older males. Shortly said, Girls grow up faster physically than in past years and slower mentally than in past years. Boys are even worse. Girls still mature 1.5 yeears ahead of boys in the teenage years. Another thing that may speed up menstruation and physical maturity in girls is hormones added to food they eat. Hormones intended to boost growth or fertility in the animal that is eaten. Those hormones can be held in the meat and tissues the person eats.

Judging by what I have read in the past. Ancient peoples may have lived a bit longer than 25. Perhaps 30-35 years old.

[DJ Droood]

I have read somewhere that people rarely lived more than 40 years in ancient Celtic times. Women lived shorter lives than men due to problems related to childbirth. Even as recently as 100-150 years ago lifespans averaged only 50 years or so.

There is a bit of a misconception, I think, or so I've read, about the life expectancy of the ancestors....infant/child mortality was very high in times past, and of course infectious disease wreaked havoc, but this means that the statistical lifespan was, say, 40, averaged out....If you made it past the age of 10, you had a good shot to make it to 70. (especially in huntng and gathering societies, before livestock and settlements started spreading diseases) I think people sometimes think that if you made it to 50, you dropped dead, but the actual life span "potential" of a human being, at any point in history, was about the same as it is now. There were 80 year old Cro-Magnons and Greeks and Romans and Normans and Puritans...just not as many, proportionally, as now. (I'm re-reading Guns, Germs and Steel, and I think I go that info from there). So even the Cave Bear Clan probably had an old woman or two telling the youngesters to smarten up.

[Huathe]

DJ, I agree that child mortality was high back then. Childhood diseases wrecked havoc. And concerning life expectancy averages, they are just that. Averages. Your statement on the max age of human beings is probably correct but few ever reached it. James

[DaRC]

HmmmI think that maturity was, to an extent forced upon young people, there were no teenagers; only children and adults. Adulthood started at around 14 if you look to the pre-WW1 society as an example - so marriages at 14 and pregnancy would not have been uncommon.

The trouble with discussion around maturity is how to gauge it - from historical details it is difficult at best. All modern teenagers are a curious mix of childish and adult behaviours. I suspect it was not much different in the past, particularly if you look at some of the rumbunctious behaviour attributed to apprentices throughout the historical records.

I think the high mortality rates of children, plus those of adulthood (compared with a modern westerner) brought about a different attitude to death and mortality than we have currently.

[wolf560]

I think that maturity was, to an extent forced upon young people, there were no teenagers; only children and adults.

Agreed,

The social expectations now force more to be learned and understood before "maturity" can be socially attained. Driver's licenses, High school (or now College) educations, and/or a steady job can (and usually ARE) indicators of having reached that maturity.

[Jake]

There is a bit of a misconception, I think, or so I've read, about the life expectancy of the ancestors....infant/child mortality was very high in times past, and of course infectious disease wreaked havoc, but this means that the statistical lifespan was, say, 40, averaged out....If you made it past the age of 10, you had a good shot to make it to 70. (especially in huntng and gathering societies, before livestock and settlements started spreading diseases) I think people sometimes think that if you made it to 50, you dropped dead, but the actual life span "potential" of a human being, at any point in history, was about the same as it is now. There were 80 year old Cro-Magnons and Greeks and Romans and Normans and Puritans...just not as many, proportionally, as now. (I'm re-reading Guns, Germs and Steel, and I think I go that info from there). So even the Cave Bear Clan probably had an old woman or two telling the youngesters to smarten up.

Yeah I think you might have got it from "Guns, Germs and Steel" too, because I think I remember a discussion of this subject in the book. The high rates of infant and child mortality in the past totally skew the average life expectancy stats and make people think everyone died at 35 before the late 1800s sometime. Completely off.

This table of average life expectancy in ancient Rome is really interesting: http://www.utexas.edu/depts/classics/do ... /Life.html

You can see how life expectancy more than doubles if our generic ancient Roman made it to the age of 10. Life expectancy is 25 at birth and 51 at age 10.

I have a genealogy database of 24,543 individuals born between 1320 and 2009. Around 85% were born between 1700 and 1860. I also have a couple of nifty programs that run the data and produce fun statistics. The average adult lifespan in my database is 65.4 for males and 64.1 for females. The average age at marriage for men is 26 and for women it's 22.2.

This isn't a statistically valid sample or anything and yes there are more contemporary folks in there messing with the data a little bit. But still I think it's an interesting picture.

[Jake]

HmmmI think that maturity was, to an extent forced upon young people, there were no teenagers; only children and adults. Adulthood started at around 14 if you look to the pre-WW1 society as an example - so marriages at 14 and pregnancy would not have been uncommon.

Actually it looks like it would have been pretty uncommon at that time. This info is from the US but I can't imagine the UK numbers would be that far off: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005061.html

It shows the median age at marriage in 1890 was 26.1 for males and 22 for females (spooky how close that is to my data mentioned above) and it hasn't really changed that much in all that time. It looks like it drops to its lowest in 1950 and 1960 when the age was 22.8 and 20.3 for men and women, respectively.

And things were not so different in the Middle Ages according to the sacred Wiki -- "The average age of marriage in the late 13th century into the 16th century was around 25 years of age." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage

[wolf560]

Hello All,

Books and even statistics online are only as accurate as the person entering the data.
"Wiki" items are notorious for their "open source" which allows anyone to enter that data.

Something interesting; Roman men were recorded as being married at an average age of 22, while nothing about women was recorded past the age of 12-14. In Rome women, even at an older age, were considered a part of the property or household. In simple words, we know the men got married about 22 but they could have been married to 12 year old girls.

Another one; it seems Pliny did some census-taking in the Po valley.
He interviewed people who claimed to be as old as 140 years, and many who said that they were in their 80's, 90's and 100's. The author noted that even Pliny remarked that the data could not be trusted.

Growing up and growing old in Ancient Rome: a life course approach
By Mary Harlow, Ray Laurence
http://books.google.com/books?id=_Ez2TzJuX5AC&printsec=frontcover&dq=age+of+maturity+in+ancient+rome&source=bl&ots=e2rypf3pGc&sig=nRbmvP6WDpuoB32yBsIP2OJi3GI&hl=en&ei=kYCdTICCB4uCsQP98snVAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CCkQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=age%20of%20maturity%20in%20ancient%20rome&f=false

As for the Ancient Celts not much was written but we can extrapolate from the Fenechas written down later on. The age of 14 seemed to be the age of consent for women and they enjoyed a rather intricate set of rights including property rights and the ability to hold positions of political power. Again we see 14 as an age of marriage.

Celtic Women
Peter Beresford Ellis
http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/weekly/aa050598.htm

[Jake]

"Wiki" items are notorious for their "open source" which allows anyone to enter that data.

Which is why it's so important to check the sources. The source cited for the quote I used above is "Schofield, Phillipp R. 2003. Peasant and community in Medieval England, 1200-1500. Medieval culture and society. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan. p 98."

Something interesting; Roman men were recorded as being married at an average age of 22, while nothing about women was recorded past the age of 12-14. In Rome women, even at an older age, were considered a part of the property or household. In simple words, we know the men got married about 22 but they could have been married to 12 year old girls.

They certainly could have been, since 12 was the minimum age a girl could be married under Roman law. But was it the average age? If so, do we have to go back 2000 years to find this to be the norm? That's extremely pre- pre-WWI.

As for the Ancient Celts not much was written but we can extrapolate from the Fenechas written down later on. The age of 14 seemed to be the age of consent for women and they enjoyed a rather intricate set of rights including property rights and the ability to hold positions of political power. Again we see 14 as an age of marriage.

Except that age of consent laws do not tell us at what age people are getting married. They tell us the age below which people are not getting married, at least legally. We have to look at what people are actually doing, not just at what minimum age they're allowed to do it.

About 30 years ago, a cousin of mine got married at the age of 14. It was perfectly legal. But it caused a bit of a scandal because people weren't used to such a thing.

Eighteen is a legal age for marriage in every state in the US but, according to the census bureau, the median age at first marriage is 27.1 for men and 25.3 for women (http://www.census.gov/population/socdem ... abMS-2.pdf). And as the chart shows, this hasn't changed much in well over a century. So I think it would be a mistake to think of eighteen as a "common" age for Americans to marry. Of course people marry at that age and younger but the norm is much older.

[wolf560]

Yes, agreed.

But have we gotten off-topic with "teenagers from 10,000 -30,000 years ago"..???

[TaraMoon]

As someone who has looked at thousands of prehistoric rock art images online and in books and has participated in expeditions to numerous rock art sites, I am highly suspicious of the claims made in the article in question. Certainly, the vast majority of human rock art figures I've seen can not be identified by gender. Of those that can be identified by gender, the vast majority are male. There certainly are abstract female genitalia pictographs and petroglyphs, but they appear independently of human figures. Carved figurines like the Venus of Willendorf are another matter. They often depict voluptuous females, but they are not considered to be "rock art". Rock art is generally considered to consist of petroglyphs (carved on permanent rock structures) and pictographs (painted on permanent rock structures) not figurines.

It may be theoretically possible to determine the gender of some artists who created pictograph hand-images of their own hands simply because extremely large hands are more likely to belong to males than to females. However, it would be impossible to determine whether a slightly smaller hand belongs to a woman with a large hand, a teenage male, or an adult male with a small hand. Even if it were possible to determine that most hand images are male, it is impossible to determine the gender of artists who created other pictographs or petroglyphs. The fact that there appear to me more male hand images may be the result of specific male rituals.

I can't imagine how one could determine the age of the artists. Petroglyphs, in particular, required a great deal of work. If there's one thing younger people don't have in abundance, it's patience. Many prehistoric rock art images depict shamanic transformation figures and hunting magic rituals. It seems silly to me to assume that teenagers would have attained the status or magical skills to have been in charge of such serious business.