ALTXERRI, A DECORATED CAVE IN NORTHERN SPAIN:

Red painted panel, Altxerri Cave, Spain. Internet image, public domain.

A cave in northern Spain, in the Basque territories, provides some new examples of cave art.

Identified as an antelope, Altxerri Cave, Spain. Internet image, public domain.

“Altxerri Cave is located in the east of the northern Spanish coast, in the town of Aia (Basque Country, Spain). The present entrance (the original entrances collapsed) was uncovered by quarrying in 1956, and the first graphic representations were found in 1962. The cave system consists of three levels, connected by shafts and chimneys, where the modern entrance leads to the intermediate level. The important Magdalenian art ensemble in this level has been published in two monographs and warranted the inclusion of the site in UNESCO’s World Heritage List in 2008. However, neither of the monographs included the upper passage (Altxerri B), although the existence of paintings had been cited. These have since been studied briefly, confirming the existence of a large red bison and mentioning the remains of other red figures, which, according to the authors, were impossible to interpret. The authors also cited a bison vertebra inserted in a fissure and published the results of two 14C-AMS dates for two chamois bones (Rupicapra rupicapra) deposited beneath the wall with the paintings.” (González-Sainz, Cesar et al., 2013: 457) Altixerri B is the third, and upper, passage that is difficult to access and so had been pretty much overlooked in previous studies.

Mouflon, Altxerri Cave, Spain. Internet image, public domain.

“The cave, which had been sealed off for millennia, was discovered in 1956 when a temporary quarry was opened during road-building. This broke through to the intermediate level of the cave system. In 1962, speleologists discovered paintings in this passage (Altxerri A).” (Ruiz-Redondo, Aitor, et al., 2015:66)

Reindeer with fox inserted, Altxerri Cave, Spain.

Close-up of reindeer with fox inserted, Altxerri Cave, Spain.

My absolute favorite example of rock art here is the beautiful palimpsest of a fox superimposed upon a large reindeer, or vice versa. It is tempting to posit a relationship between them and look for a deeper meaning, but I do not think we have anywhere near enough information for such an analysis.

Fish, Altxerri Cave, Spain. Internet image, public domain.

Genetic testing has indicated that the modern inhabitants of the Basque regions are genetically related to the Paleolithic residents of the same area.

“In May 2012, the National Geographic Society Genographic Project released a study that showed through detailed DNA analysis of samples from French and Spanish Basque regions that Basques share unique genetic patterns that distinguish them from the surrounding non-Basque populations. The results of the study clearly support the hypothesis of a partial genetic continuity of contemporary Basques with the preceding Paleolithic/Mesolithic settlers of their homeland.” (Wikipedia)

Horse, Altxerri Cave, Spain. Internet image, public domain.

I find it personally quite exciting to learn that the modern descendents of the creators of this Cave art may still inhabit the area. What a feeling of attachment to the land and a sense of belonging might that confer.

NOTE: Images in this column were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

González-Sainz, Cesar et al., 2013, Not only Chauvet: Dating Aurignacian rock art in Altxerri B Cave (northern Spain), Journal of Human Evolution 65, pp. 4 57-464. Accessed online 21 September 2025.

Ruiz-Redondo, Aitor, et al., 2015, Back to the past: Symbolism and archaeology in Altxerri B (Gipuzkoa, Northern Spain), Quaternary International, March 2017, DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2015.07.013, Available online October 2015, pp. 66-76. Accessed online 21 September 2025.

Wikipedia, Origin of the Basques, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Basques. Accessed online 8 November 2025.

 

ARABIAN PETROGLYPHS AS SIGNPOSTS TO WATER:

 

Large camel petroglyph. Internet image, public domain.

I have previously written a column about large camel petroglyphs in Arabia. On 10 March 2018 I wrote a column titled “Ancient Saudi Guest Artists-In-Residence” about these. Now, a new study (Guagnin et al. 2025)  published by Nature Communications online suggests that many  of these, as well as images of a number of other creatures, date back over 10,000 years, and may be indicators for the presence of water.

 

Heavily eroded large camel carved in the round. Internet image, public domain.

“Dated archaeological sites are absent in northern Arabia between the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) and 10,000 years ago (ka), signifying potential population abandonment prior to the onset of the Holocene humid period. Here we present evidence that playas became established in the Nefud desert of northern Arabia between ~16 and ~13 ka, the earliest reported presence of surface water following the hyper-aridity of the LGM. These fresh water sources facilitated human expansions into arid landscapes as shown by new excavations of stratified archaeological sites dating to between 12.8 and 11.4 ka. During the Pleistocene-Holocene transition, human populations exploited a network of seasonal water bodies - marking locations and access routes with monumental rock engravings of camels, ibex, wild equids, gazelles, and a urochs. These communities made distinctive stone tool types showing ongoing connections to the late Epipaleolithic and Pre-Pottery Neolithic populations of the Levant.” (Guagnin et al. 2025:1) The recording of these animals (other than camels) considerably enlarges our data pool for this area.

Palimpsest of animals (camel, donkey, oryx) outlined. Image from M. Guagnin et al., Nature Communications, 2025. 

I have also written a number of columns about rock art in Saudi Arabia which can be found by clicking on Saudi Arabia in the cloud index at the very bottom of the blog. “Rock art has been found in Saudi Arabia before, but those petroglyphs date from the Neolithic period around 8,000 years ago. The engravings found at Jebel Misma, Jebel Arnaan and Jebel Mleiha – all rock outcrops in a remote part of the Nefud, near its southern edge – are much older. The engravings can be seen for miles and were probably intended to mark territory or indicate nearby sources of water, says Petraglia, the director of the Aurstalian Research Center for Human Evolution at Griffith University in Brisbane.” (Metcalf 2025) So, the new rock art written about is almost 50% older than most previous sites.

Tracings of the four camel engravings with greatest similarity (after Figure 4). The two camels on the right have been mirrored for better comparison (© G. Charloux and M. Guagnin, Figure 5, page 1306. 

In order to learn more about the people and culture involved the team literally dug in to the subject. They conducted excavations under the art. “Looking for buried clues that might shed light on the new engravings, Guagnin and her colleagues dug trenches in sand beneath the art. The excavations uncovered over a dozen animal bones and thousands of artifacts, including hearths, stone beads and tools, and shells from various animals. One palm-sized stone with clear battering marks matches pecking tools discovered at petroglyphs sites in Europe and South America, indicating it was likely used to peck some of the nearby engravings. Radiocarbon dating of an ostrich egg, oyster shell, and charcoal from one of the hearths, in conjunction with measurements of how long it had been since the sediments around the buried artifacts were last exposed to sunlight, revealed the art and artifacts were between 12,800 and 11,40years old.” (Brown 2025) Finding significance in a hammerstone that supposedly matches sites in Europe and South America is silly. So, it doesn’t match hammerstones from North America, or Asia, or Africa? Of course it does, a hammerstone is a hammerstone. This statement is the result of the obsessive need to cite every statement in such a paper, the researchers found papers about hammerstones from Europe and South America.

Three large camels and one very small antelope (in lower left). Image from arkeonews.net.

Their surveys and research hve contributed a great deal of new knowledge of rock art of Saudi Arabia. “Surveys identified previously unknown rock art landscapes with life-sized depictions of wild mammals and human figures. Across the three areas 62 rock art panels were recorded, containing 176 engravings. Of these, 130 were life-sized and naturalistic engravings depicting camels (90), ibex (17), equids (15), gazelles (7), and aurochs (1), with individual representations frequently measuring up to 2.5–3.0m in length and 1.8–2.2m in height. In addition, we identified 2 camel footprints, 15 smaller scale naturalistic depictions of camels, 19 human figures, 4 human faces or masks, and 6 unidentified, partial engravings. Most of the recorded engravings show camels in a detailed and naturalistic style that echoes the reliefs of the Camel Site to the north of the Nefud desert. This includes the frequent depiction of a bulging neckline, indicating they represent male camels in rut.” (Guagnin et al. 2025:3) Such remarkable attention to detail indicates the importance of the imagery to its creators.

Large camel. Image from cambridge.org.

The researchers also tackled the difficult task of working out the stratigraphy of palimpsest panels that had experienced multiple occasions of petroglyphs creation. “The depictions span multiple engraving phases, with images often overlapping on rock surfaces. Sometimes this was done to update an existing representation or to depict a different animal species. We distinguish four phases here. Two early rock art phases: small, stylised depictions of women (phase 1, traced in green), followed by large human figures in frontal view (phase 2, traced in yellow). These human figures were always noted to be older than, i.e. underneath, the recorded life-sized animal representations, and they make up a much smaller proportion of motifs. The third phase shows detailed, extremely naturalistic representations of animals, where each depiction has individual characteristics (traced in white). A later, fourth phase (traced in blue) shows more stylised depictions of animals with cartoonish features, including rounded eyes and horn ridges, and more standardised, near-identical depictions of animals.” (Guagnin et al. 2025:3)

 

Large camel carving. Internet image, public domain.

If these animal images point to sites where water is available the sheer variety somewhat mystifies me. If I had produced an image of a camel as a marker to fresh water wouldn’t I use the same image to mark the next fresh water source as well? And, if there is already a picture marking the site why did I need to add another picture to mark it again. While some of these may incidentally mark water sources my guess is that they are found near where water was available because the people were found near where water was available, the propinquity may be a coincidence. Yes, they mark sites near water, but no, they are not purposeful signs pointing to a water source.

NOTE: Some images in this column were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Brown, Taylor Mitchell, 2025, Prehistoric camel art pointed to precious water sources in the Arabian Desert, 30 September 2025, Science (online), American Association for the Advancement of Science. doi:10.1126/science.zzwcsrv. Accessed online 1 October 2025.

Charloux, Gillaume, Maria Guagnin, Michael Petraglia, and Abdullah al Sharekh, 2022, Project Gallery Arock art tradition of life-sized, naturalistic engravings of camels in Northern Arabia: new insights on the mobility of Neolithic populations in the Nafud Desert, Antiquity 2022 Vol. 96 (389): 1301–1309 https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2022.95 , Accessed online 12 October 2025.

Faris, Peter, 2018,Ancient Saudi Guest Artists-In-Residence, RockArtBlog, 10 March 2018. www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/7760124847746733855/8288369396956779505.

Metcalf, Tom, 2025, 12,000-year-old rock art hints at the Arabian Desert’s lush past, Science News (online), https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ancient-rock-art-arabian-desert-wet. Accessed online 5 October 2025.

A GIANT CARVED SNAKE IN SOUTH AFRICA’S RHINO CAVE:

Coulson et al., 2011, Fig. 2, page 22.

A natural rock feature in a cave in Botswana has been found that had been modified to resemble the head and part of the body of a python. “Rhino Cave, located at the World Heritage site of Tsodilo Hills, is one of the three main Middle Stone Age (MSA) sites in Botswana. Initial investigations during the mid-1990s left unanswered a number of key questions regard­ing the early use of the cave. This prompted the current investigations, which have unearthed a wealth of MSA artifacts from a lag deposit. Results of a selectively employed chaîne opératoire analysis have revealed a very special set of behavioral patterns. It will be argued that the best-fit interpretation of the results from this investigation lies within the realm of ritualized behavior. The assemblage is characterized by an unexpectedly large number of MSA points, which are for the most part produced in non-locally acquired raw materials. These points are colorful, care­fully and often elaborately made, and, once complete, never left the cave. They were either deliberately burned to the point where they could no longer be used, abandoned, or intentionally smashed. These artifacts were found together with tabular grinding slabs and pieces of the locally available pigment, specularite. This assemblage was recovered directly beneath a massive, virtually free-standing rock face that has been carved with hundreds of cupules of varying sizes and shapes. A section of the carved rock face was recovered from well within the MSA deposits in association with handheld grinding stones.” (Coulson et al. 2011) The large number of artifacts and the fact that so many of them had been broken immediately said to the researchers that this was evidence of ceremonial use of the cave.

The serpent highlighted, internet image, public domain.

This discovery certainly fits within the belief system of the local San people who historically resided in the area.

“Associate Professor Sheila Coulson, from the University of Oslo, can now show that modern humans, Homo sapiens, have performed advanced rituals in Africa for 70,000 years. She has, in other words, discovered mankind’s oldest known ritual. The archaeologist made the surprising discovery while she was studying the origin of the Sanpeople. A group of the San live in the sparsely inhabited area of north-western Botswana known as Ngamiland. Coulson made the discovery while searching for artifacts from the Middle Stone Age in the only hills present for hundreds of kilometers in any direction. This group of small peaks within the Kalahari Desert is known as the Tsodilo Hills and is famous for having the largest concentration of rock paintings in the world. The Tsodilo Hills are still a sacred  place for the San, who call them the ‘Mountains of the Gods’and the ‘Rock that Whispers’. The python is one of the San’s most important animals. According to their creation myth, mankind descended from the python and the ancient, arid streambeds around the hills are said to have been created by the python as it circled the hills in its ceaseless search for water. Sheila Coulson’s find shows that people from the area had a specific ritual location associated with the python. The ritual was held in a little cave on the northern side of the Tsodilo Hills. The cave itself is so secluded and access to it is so difficult that it was not even discovered by archaeologists until the 1990s. When Coulson entered the cave this summer with her three master’s students, it struck them that the mysterious rock resembled the head of a huge python. On the six meter long by two meter tall rock, they found three-to-four hundred indentations that could only have been man-made. ‘You could see the mouth and eyes of the snake. It looked like a real python. The play of sunlight over the indentations gave them the appearance of snake skin. At night, the firelight gave one the feeling that the snake was actually moving’.”  (AtHope 2017) So the adding of the pecked pits are assumed to be a way of representing the scales of the python.

Drawings by Damien AtHope, 2017.

Dating for the great serpent is uncertain. Samples from excavation within the cave below the panel were taken for radiocarbon and thermoluminescence dating. The radiocarbon date came back at 14,500±50 BP for the Middle Stone Age level, and the thermoluminescence date retrieved was 18,175±2,871 BP. (Coulson 2011:23) However, when artifacts were compared to dated material from nearby locations they led to conclusions of much older dates. “The dating of the MSA assemblage from this site then had to revert to a typological comparison to the nearby well-dated MSA sites of White Paintings Shelter (66,400±6,500 and 94,300±9,400 BP) (Robbins et al. 2000b: 1092) and the open-air pan site of ≠Gi (77,000±11,000 BP) which is approximately 120km southwest of the Hills. For example Laurel Phillipson (2007: 20), who recently re-examined a selection of the MSA points from the 1996 excavations, states that she concurs “with the excavators that the Middle Stone Age lithics from these adjacent sites appear so similar…that the series of age determinations from the White Paint­ings Shelter can also be applied to the material from Rhino Cave.” Therefore, although the exact dating of Rhino Cave remains unresolved, this MSA assemblage can be consid­ered to be generally comparable to those from White Paintings Shelter.” (Coulson et al. 2011:23)

Diagram of the pecking, drawn by Damien AtHope, 2017.

So, which is it, fourteen to eighteen thousand years, or sixty-six to ninety-three thousand years? If fourteen thousand we might go a little way out on a limb and guess that the serpent was made by the earliest ancestors of the present-day San residents. But, if it is seventy thousand years old that may be a bough too far.

 

REFERENCES:

AtHope, Damien, 2017, Stone Snake of South Africa: first human worship 70,000 years ago, 5 March 2017, https://damienmarieathope.com. Accessed online 24 August 2025.

Coulson, Sheila, et al., 2011, Ritualized Behavior in the Middle Stone Age: Evidence from Rhino Cave, Tsodilo Hills, Botswana, Paleoanthropology 2011:18-61, DOI:10.4207/PA.2011.ART42. Accessed online 26 August 2025.

SECONDARY REFERENCES:

Phillipson, L., 2007, Reassessment of Selected Middle Stone Age Artefacts from Rhino Cave and from White Paint­ings Rock Shelter, Tsodilo Hills, Botswana. South Afri­can Archaeological Bulletin 62(185): 19–30.

A PICTURE OF THE LAST CAVE LION IN EUROPE?

 

Plaque engraved with the cave lion from Grotta Romanelli, Italy. Image from Sigari et al., 2024, fig. 12, p. 11. 

Or, the last picture of a Cave Lion in Europe. According to a 2024 paper in Quaternary Science Review, Grotta Romanelli, in southern Italy, has the last portrayal of a Cave Lion (Panthera spelaea) so far discovered. The authors somewhat whimsically refer to it as a portrait of the last Cave Lion.

Our early ancestors in both Eurasia and North America knew Panthera spelaea (the Cave Lion) intimately. “Panthera spelaea, commonly known as the cave lion (or less commonly as the steppe lion), is an extinct Panthera species that was native to Eurasia and northwest North America during the Pleistocene epoch. Genetic analysis of ancient DNA has revealed that while closely related, it was a distinct species genetically isolated from the modern lion (Panthera leo), with the genetic divergence between the two species estimated at around 500,000 years ago.” (Wikipedia)

Early indications are that Neanderthals wore Cave Lion pelts for protection from the cold, but it is unknown whether these were actively hunted, or scavenged from lions that had died. “Panthera spelaea interacted with both Neanderthals and modern humans, who used their pelts and in the case of the latter, depicted them in artistic works. Cave lions became extinct about 13,000 years ago as part of the end-Pleistocene extinction event, the precise cause of which is unknown, though climatic change, changes in prey abundance, and competition with other carnivores and humans have been suggested as possible causal factors.” (Wikipedia)

Cave lion panel from Chauvet Cave, France. Internet image, public domain.

"Early members of the cave lion lineage assigned to Panthera (spelaea) fossils during the Middle Pleistocene were considerably larger than individuals of P. spelaea from the Last Glacial Period and modern lions, with some of these individuals having an estimated length of 2.5-2.9 meters (8.2-9.5 ft), shoulder height of 1.4-1.5 meters (4.6-4.9 ft) and body mass of 400-500 kilograms (880-1,100 lb), respectively, making them among the largest cats to have ever lived. The Late Pleistocene Panthera spelaea spelaea was noticeably smaller although still large relative to living cats, with an estimated length of 2-2.1 meters (6.6-6.9 ft) and whoulder height of 1.1-1.2 meters (3.6-3.9 ft), respectively. The species showed a progressive size reduction over the course of the Last Glacial Period upl until its extinction, with the last P. spelaea populations comparable in size to small-sized modern lions, with a body mass of only 70-90 kilograms (150-250 lb), a body length of 1.2-1.3 meters (3.9-4.3 ft) and a shoulder height of 70-75 centimeters (2.30-2.46 ft) respectively." (Wikipedia)

Cave Lion size diagram. Image from Wikipedia.

In other words the Cave Lion got smaller over the ages, finally ending up at about the size of modern lions before disappearing. This still makes for a formidable predator, think of what something the size of the earlier Cave Lions would have presented people with. This awsome animal was often recorded in Paleolithic art.

Plaque engraved with the cave lion from Grotta Romanelli, Italy. Image from Sigari et al., 2024, fig. 9, p. 9.

Looking at the body shape of the Cave Lion from Grotta Romanelli it is more reminiscent of the body of a bison, but looking carefully at the legs they end in tiny claws, thus, a lion.

“On the occasion of the review of the portable art of Grotta Romanelli, a decorated stone with a feline figure was object of an interdisciplinary study. The analysis considered different approaches so to: characterise the stratigraphic setting of the finding, the rock support, look into the techniques used to decorate the stone, elaborate a graphic documentation (photographs, 3D models and tracings), relate the symbolic production with the environmental context, and consider the motifs into the wider late Upper Palaeolithic (LUP) art production.” (Sigari et al. 2024:1)

Lion man from Stadel cave in Hohlenstein Mountain in the Lone valley, Swabian Alb Germany. Photograph Thomas Stephan, Ulmer Museum.

“The work allows confirming that the represented subject corresponds to a Panthera spelaea, and fixing some issues concerning the variability of the decorating activity, which is in line with the graphic tradition of the European LUP. Style and formal variable features of the figure might have responded to specific social conventions or to single author’s skills, tracing new investigation lines about the cultural behaviour and the decorating activity: from the collection of the raw material and the preliminary modelling of the support, to the different artistic techniques (engraving and painting), from the use of the object to the definition of possible local artistic variations and/or inspiration at large scale. Moreover, it questions the thematic aspect in relation to the local fauna and its influence in the symbolic production, highlighting the importance of this stone in the wider debate about the extinction extinction of the cave lions. Indeed, the Romanelli lion may represent the last evidence of this animal in Europe.” (Sigari et al. 2024:1)

“The people who lived in Grotta Romanelli collected pebble  and boulder-sized rock fragments fallen down from the cave-roof and walls and produced portable art objects, occasionally reusing the same pieces. The pebbles were entirely decorated according to the natural shape of the stones and, in case of irregularities, even rubbing to “prepare the canvas”. The fragmentary aspect of the stones should not be explained as the result of a decorated and later broken vault, but as a cultural behaviour or as unintentionally post-decorating breaking off.” (Sigari et al. 2024:12)

 So is this a picture of the last Cave Lion in Europe, or the last picture created of a Cave Lion in Europe? Only time will tell.

NOTE 1: The full list of authors for the paper “The last cave lion of the late Upper Paleolithic: The engraved feline of Grotta Romanelli (southern Italy)” is D. Sigari, C. Bourdier, C. Conti, J. Conti, L. Forti, M. García-Diez, G. Lai, I. Mazzini, P. Pieruccini, and R. Sardella.

NOTE 2: Some images in this posting were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Sigari, D. et al., 2024, The last cave lion of the late Upper Paleolithic: The engraved feline of Grotta Romanelli (southern Italy), 8 May 2024, Elsevier Ltd., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2024.108670. Accessed online.

Wikipedia, Panthera Spelaea, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panthera_spelaea. Accessed online 27 August 2025.

DID PALEOLITHIC ARTISTS HAVE THE BLUES?

Azurite mineral deposit. Internet image, public domain.

I have posted previous columns about the use of the color blue in rock art and other ancient art (click on ‘color’ in the cloud index at the bottom). Recently, one column was about the discovery of indigo on grinding stones dated 34,000 years ago. Now we have evidence of the use of a blue mineral pigment, azurite, in Europe from about 13,000 years ago.

Doctor Izzy Wisher of the Department of Archaeology and Heritage Studies, and the Department of Linguistics, Cognitive Science and Semiotics of Aarhus University, Denmark, wrote: “Blue pigments are absent in Palaeolithic art. This has been ascribed to a lack of naturally occurring blue pigments or low visual salience of these hues. Using a suite of archaeometric approaches, the authors identify traces of azurite on a concave stone artifact from the Final Palaeolithic site of Mühlheim-Dietesheim, Germany. This represents the earliest use of blue pigment in Europe. The scarcity of blue in Palaeolithic art, along with later prehistoric uses of azurite, may indicate that azurite was used for archaeologically invisible activities (e.g. body decoration) implying intentional selectivity over the pigments used for different Palaeolithic artistic activities.” (Wisher et al. 2025:1) The evidence was found as trace deposits in between the grains of a grinding stone, presumably used to grind the azurite as a pigment, or somehow shape it.

Blue pigment residue found at site in Central Germany. Photograph by Izzy Wisher.

Detection of these mineral traces depended upon a suite of techniques available to modern, cutting-edge laboratories. “To characterize the composition and crystalline structure of the blue residue, and to determine whether it resulted from the processing of a blue pigment, we deployed a suite of archeometric methods: micro- and x-ray florescence (μXRF/XRF); scanning electron microscopy coupled with electron dispersive spectroscopy (SEM-EDS); particle induced x-ray emission (PIXE); Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR); fibre optic reflection spectroscopy (FORS); multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry ((MC-)ICP-MS); and multiband imaging.” (Wisher et al. 2025:5) Presumably this is why the paper lists a team of fifteen scientists involved in this investigation.

Azurite deposit on artifact. Internet image, public domain.

The team “confirmed the traces were from the vivid blue mineral pigment azurite, previously unseen in Europe’s Paleolithic art. Their results are published in the journal Antiquity. ‘This challenges what we thought we knew about Paleolithic pigment use,’ says lead author of the study, Dr. Izzy Wisher from Aarhus University. Until now, scholars believed Paleolithic artists predominantly used only red and black pigments – no other colors are present in the art of this period. This was thought to be due to a lack of blue minerals or their limited visual appeal.” (Phys.org 2025) I certainly have to disagree with the ‘limited visual appeal’ statement. What is more beautiful and attention grabbing than a bright blue stone? Remember the importance of turquoise throughout human history. Now, shortage of natural sources makes much more sense because azurite is not that common.

Azurite ore deposit from Serbia. Internet image, public domain.

"Azurite is a soft, deep-blue copper mineral produced by weathering of copper ore deposits. During the early 19th century, it was also known as chessylite, after the type locality at Chessy-les-Mines near Lyon, France." (Wikipedia)

The three areas of blue residue present on the sandstone layer of the stone artefact from Mühlheim-Dietesheim. Area A, due to its more accessible location on a flatter area of the sandstone, was the primary focus of archaeometric analyses. Scale bar is 50mm (figure by authors). Figure 1, page 3, Wisher et al., 2025.

I only know of two older examples of the human use of blue pigment. “’It’s nearly the oldest blue pigment in the world – the only other known example that predates our case is from Siberia, where traces of blue-green pigment were found on figurines dating to around 19-23,000 years ago,’ Dr. Izzy Wisher, lead study author and archaeologist at Aarhus University in Denmark, told IFLScience. There is also evidence from Georgia, dating to 32,000–34,000 years ago, of people potentially creating a purplish-blue pigment from crushed indigo plants (Isatis tinctoria), the same plant that would later give rise to the dyes behind blue jeans. Outside of these rare cases, however, true blue pigments are exceptionally scarce in the prehistoric world.”(Hale 2025) We do not know what this azurite was to be used for, but it was obviously possessed and used for something by these ancient peoples.

So, it would seem that the conclusion has to be that yes, they had the blues, but apparently did not use them in their pictographic art.

NOTE 1: The above reference to IFLScience refers to the website https://iflscience.com.

NOTE 2: Some images in this posting were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Hale, Tom, 2025, Dating Back 13,000 Years, One Of The Earliest Uses Of Blue Pigment Has Been Unearthed, 29 September 2025, https://www.eflscience.com. Accessed online 29 September 2025.

Phys.org, 2025, Europle’s oldest blue mineral pigment found in Germany, September 2025, https://phys.org/. Accessed online 29 Septembe 2025.

Wikipedia, Azurite, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=164155

Wisher, Izzy et al., 2025, The earliest evidence of blue pigment use in Europe, Antiquity, https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2025.10184. Accessed online 19 September 2025.

 

CANADIAN CARVED STONE PILLAR – ANCIENT OR MODERN?

The Vancouver carved stone. Photograph from CBC News.

A supposed First Nations artifact has been discovered on a beach near Vancouver, British Columbia. This one is a conundrum, the artifact may or may not actually be indigenous but it is impressive. A carved stone face found on a rock on a beach at Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, has been identified as an old artifact created by First Nations people, and also claimed by a contemporary artist to be his creation. So, which is it?

"A carved sandstone pillar discovered on Dallas Road Beach last summer is an Indigenous artifact once used in rituals by the Songhees and Esquimalt First Nations, says a Royal British Columbia Museum curator of archaeology." (Kloster 2021) So, it has been authenticated. This seems pretty cut and dried, right? 

The artifact was discovered on the beach in January 2021 by a resident out walking. "Last week, the Royal B.C. Museum announced it had discovered an Indigenous artifact used in rituals by the Songhees and Esquimalt First Nations. The museum said the 100-kilogram oblong pillar with a carved face on its edge had been examined by an archeology curator. After consulting with local communities and looking at anthropological records, the curator came to the conclusion the artifact was likely related to ceremonies involving the feeding of the dead." (Diclson 2021) The discoverer certainly did the right thing in notifying the Royal British Columbia Museum.

Coastal Salish style petroglyphs, Bella Coola, British Columbia, Canada. Photograph by Wolfgang Zintl.

This artifact was studied and pronounced authentic by Royal British Columbia Museum curator of ­archeology Grant Keddie. “It’s very likely a special stone that was used in rituals and ceremonies, he said, explaining that Coast Salish peoples had “weather specialists. They were believed to have “special powers to draw the salmon in when they were late, or you could undertake rituals [with] certain stones to change the weather to make it good for fishing, to make it worse for your enemies, He speculates the pillar once stood near the edge of a cliff above the beach where it was found until parts of the cliff came down in a landslide.” (Haldoupis 2024) While this seems to make sense, given ethnographic records of the people of the area, this is only surmise, not proof.

This is in the area of prehistoric occupation by the Coastal Salish First Nations People. Now I have a few images of rock art by Coastal Salish peoples and none of them resemble this carving in any degree so my first reaction was to doubt the authenticity of the stone carving. The handling of the eye and mouth seem quite out of character for Salish art work.

Artist's photograph claiming authorship of the carving. Photograph on right by Ray Boudreau, from the Times Colonist.

Then, to make things even more confusing, a local artist claimed he had carved the figure. "Ray Boudreau posted a photo of a similar rock carving on the Times Colonist Facebook page, saying it was his carving and he thought it had been stolen." (Dickson 2021) However, the photograph he provided does not quite match the carving in many details, but then the photograph shows a piece that looks unfinished. 

Coastal Salish stone carving - Txwelatse. Photograph from the Burke Museum, Seattle. 

If it helps cast light on this question somewhat similar carved stone figure was held at the Burke Museum in Seattle. The stone T'xwelatse, an ancestor of the Chilliwack (Ts'elxweyeqw) - one of the the Stolo tribes in the Fraser Valley - is a man who was born thousands of years ago and transformed into a four foot high granite statue as punishment for mistreating his wife. This figure has since been returned to the Stolo tribes and has been displayed at their cultural center gallery.

So, we have contradicting claims for the authenticity of the artifact. Is it an authentic Salish relic, or is it not? At this point I could not begin to tell you. You might have to figure this one out for yourselves.

NOTE: Some images in this posting were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Dickson, Louise, 2021, Provenance of stone pillar in question after artist says he created the rock carving on Victoria beach, 1 February 2021, Victoria Times Colonist. Accessed online 18 September 2025.

Haldoupis, Julia, 2024, Carved Stone Pillar Found on B.C. Beach Identified as an Indigenous Artifact, 29 March 2024, https://archaeologyworlds.com/. Accessed online 18 September 2025.

Kloster, Darron, 2021, Stone pillar found on Dallas Road beach likely once used in Indigenous rituals: Curator, 27 January 2021, Victoria Times Colonist. Accessed online 18 September 2025.

HAWAIIAN PETROGLYPHS RE-EXPOSED ON OAHU BEACH:

 

Wainae Beach petroglyphs, Oahu, Hawaii. Internet image, public domain.

On September 10, 2016, I wrote about a group of ancient Hawaiian petroglyphs discovered on Wainae Beach, Hawaii. They had been first noticed by tourists from Texas. Now, a new report of the petroglyphs on Wainae Beach has come out, apparently the same group that had been reported previously. As weather shifts the beach sand it appears that they are periodically exposed and then covered again.

Wainae Beach petroglyphs, Oahu, Hawaii. Internet image, public domain.

An Associated Press report, written by Jennifer Kalleher stated that “Hawaiian petroglyphs dating back at least a half-millennium are visible on Oahu for the first time in years, thanks to seasonal ocean swells that peel away sand covering a panel of more than two dozen images of mostly human-looking stick figures.The petroglyphs are easy to spot during low tide when gentle waves ebb and flow over slippery, neon-green algae growing on a stretch of sandstone. This is the first time the entire panel of petroglyphs are visible since they were first spotted nine years ago by two guests staying at a bayside U.S. Army recreation center in Waianae, about an hour’s drive from Honolulu.” (Kalleher 2025)

Wainae Beach petroglyphs, Oahu, Hawaii. Internet image, public domain.

“This reemergence is connected to patterns of seasonal weather. From May to November, Pacific storms churn the waters, scouring sand from beaches and occasionally bringing archaeological features that were obscured by sediment into view. Over time, the sand will eventually return, burying the carvings until they reappear during a shift in coastal dynamics once again. Specialists monitor the petroglyphs site, which lies within the grounds of a U.S. Army recreation area. The shoreline itself is open to the public, but complete access to the adjacent property requires military identification. This has created an ongoing controversy about how to preserve this part of Hawaii’s cultural heritage and make it more widely available.” (Radley 2025) From the reports it appears to me that nature and the U.S. Army are already doing a pretty good job of preserving the petroglyphs, and I really don’t go along with the part about “make it more widely available.”

NOTE: Some images in this posting were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Kalleher, Jennifer Sinco, 2025, Early Hawaiian petroglyphs on a beach are visible again with changing tides, 24 July 2025, AP News. Accessed online 26 July 2025.

Radley, Dario, 2025, Ancient Hawaiian petroglyphs reemerge on Oahu’s shores after years of being hidden, https://archaeologymag.com (online). Accessed online 26 July 2025.

 

 

PALEOLITHIC ARTIFICIAL MEMORY SYSTEMS:

We have long considered ancient rock art including cave paintings to be data. I also include carved bone and ivory as well as portable carved and modified stones. The authors of this new paper have a modified way of looking at these records. They refer to them as Artificial Memory Systems (AMS), suggesting that after they had been created they could be visited again later to retrieve data from them.

While they focused on bone and ivory it seems to me that their approach could just as well be used looking at painted caves, or any other rock art. “Artificial Memory Systems (AMS) encompass devices that record, store, transmit, and retrieve coded information beyond the brain, via external representations. AMS can be anything from the notches on a gunslinger's pistol, tracking past success, to the symbols on and data encoded within the Voyager spacecraft's golden record, detailing a snapshot of Earthling knowledge and culture.” (Jackson 2025) This is all true, although it is a pretty broad field of examples.

 A. and B. – marks on bone made by modern butchery. From Courtenay et al., 2025,  Figure 1, page 3.

The methodology the team used will be to analyze two groups of marked artifacts, the Paleolithic and what they refer to as ethnographic. The ethnographic artifacts are much more recent and we have actual ethnographic data about their meanings. “Current scientific knowledge suggests humans are the only species to manufacture and use these tools. While a number of artifacts dating back to the Middle Paleolithic have been considered to be early instances of AMS, conclusive and systematic evidence of this function is absent. Here we contrast the spatial distribution of markings on these potential early AMSs to other Paleolithic artifacts displaying butchery and ornamental marks, as well as ethnographically recorded cases of AMS. We find that both eth­nographic and Upper Paleolithic AMSs are endowed with systematically different signatures that distinguish them from the other artifacts. These findings suggest that modern humans in at least Africa and Europe had sophisticated cognitive capabilities for information storage and retrieval, providing insights into the possible development of quantity-related cognition.” (Courtenay et al. 2025) Many researchers have considered the question of numeration in these examples of ancient art, from dots and lines among the animals on cave walls, to grooves on a boulder as a given but the question of what they do or do not count is constant.

 

C.and D. – decorative engraving in the form of zoomorphic (C) and geometric (D) motifs. From Courtenay et al., 2025,  Figure 1, page 3.

Statistical analysis was applied to the Paleolithic bone markings. “The present analysis has shown that the spatial distribution of different types of markings on bone are separable, with distinct patterns emerging for butchery activities, figurative or abstract representations, and potential AMSs; whether the latter be ethnographic examples, or Paleolithic instances interpreted as such from previous studies. These studies have proposed that four distinct factors, in isolation or com­bination, may play a role in creating codes allowing for the storage of information in an AMS; the number of marks, the accumulation of marks over time, their spatial organisation and arrangement, as well as their morphology. To date, the identification of potential Paleolithic AMSs has been based mainly on the technological analysis of marks.” (Courtenay et al. 2025)

E.  and F. – possible AMS. From Courtenay et al., 2025,  Figure 1, page 3.

Having used statistical methods to analyze the Paleolithic examples, the team then used the same methods on more recent artifacts for which ethnographic records are available. “The examined ethnographic datasets included examples of notched sticks, some of which exhibit quantity-related representations, and some that strongly suggest some form of expressive quantification. They are documented from 20th -century artefacts from Muacapenda and Muatchondo (Angola), tally sticks from Medieval England, as well as 19th -century notched wooden artifacts from the Yakun­bura community of the Dawson river (Australia). This raises a plausible interpretation for these artifacts, related with the emergence of quantitative cognition in our species. Although these artifacts present no additional discernible information about their function based solely on the mark­ings beyond the data that has been collected ethnographi­cally or historically, our statistical analyses show that they share many properties with the potential Paleolithic AMSs in our sample. An important remaining question, however, is to determine what aspects of expressive quantification might be involved in Paleolithic AMSs, since quantifica­tion is a multifaceted phenomenon that encompasses a wide range of features and cognitive mechanisms.” (Courtenay et al. 2025) Comparing the results of their study of both groups of artifacts, the team concluded that the Paleolithic markings were indeed capable of recording data, but since we have no knowledge of their languages it is unlikely that we will ever be able to retrieve that data.

G. and H. – known AMS. From Courtenay et al., 2025,  Figure 1, page 3.

Of course we are still using AMS, we just have very technologically different systems nowadays. “Writing systems, recorded music and images stored digitally in computer code represent the most modern form of AMS, utilizing the most complex mix of language and technology ever created, while essentially relying on the simplest binary system of notches and dots to encode.” (Jackson 2025) Of course writing systems, recorded music and digital images rely on considerably more complicated tools to achieve their function. Indeed, I am typing this into a Lenovo laptop computer. My actions in this are not really more complicated than carving notches in a bone would be, but I am only able to do this because someone went to considerable trouble to manufacture my tool, much more complicated than a rock flake.

So, do these markings encode data? If the obvious fact that the marks were produced on purpose by someone with an idea behind them can be considered data, then yes, they do. I really don’t know what this gets us, however. We already believed this. It sort of strikes me as arguing about the difference between red and scarlet. I suppose it is comforting to know that their statistics back up what we believed all along.

REFERENCES:

Courtenay, Lloyd Austin, Frencesco d’Errico, Rafail Nunez, Damian E. Blasi, 2025, Identifying potential palaeolithic artificial memory systems via Spatial statistics: Implications for the origin of quantification, Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 17 (171). https://doi.org.10.1007/s12520-025-02286-4. Accessed online 5 August 2025.

Jackson, Justin, 2025, Searching for Artificial Memory Systems in ancient humans with spatial statistics, 5 August 2025,  Phys.org online. https://phys.org/news/2025-08-artificial-memory-ancient-humans-spatial.html. Accessed online 5 August 2025.