More on the Roche-Cotard "face".

[Jacques Cinq-Mars]

All

Already discussed extensively on other lists, the possible meaning of the Roche-Cotard "face" is discussed, HERE, by Paul Pettitt, in the January 2004 News Section  of "Before Farming".

Jacques Cinq-Mars

PS   Note that –- if you have access to Antiquity – the original English article by Marquet & Lorblanchet that Pettitt refers to can be read HERE

[Mikey Brass]

All

Already discussed extensively on other lists, the possible meaning of the Roche-Cotard "face" is discussed, HERE, by Paul Pettitt, in the January 2004 News Section  of "Before Farming".

Petit, in other publications, argues against Neanderthals possessing significant symbolic behaviour, if any at all. I wonder, and I may be being too judgemental, how many of these objections he would have raised if this had been found in a later H.s.s. context in Europe.

PS   Note that –- if you have access to Antiquity – the original English article by Marquet & Lorblanchet that Pettitt refers to can be read HERE

Unfortunately, that is merely the contents page. There is supposed to be pdf access to past archives being made available in September this year. Otherwise, it's a library trip.

[trehinp]

I have read the Antiquity paper on the Roche-Cotard "face" Neanderthalian art. Actually, I did so several times to make sure I didn't miss anything. I was puzzled by the fact that there was already a description of that "mask" (M. Lorblanchet, “La naissance de l’art, Genèse de l’art préhistorique ”, Editions Errance 1999) and was wandering if there had been some newly discovered facts justifying a new article on this subject.

In my opinion there is nothing really new or additional in this paper compared to what Lorblanchet was saying in his 1999 book. He was already attributing it to the Mousterian culture.

In "Antiquity", the description of the site where the "mask" was discovered is more detailed, the description of the mask itself is also refined and more precise, but gives no more details than the ones in the 1999 book.

One exception though : the indication that the bone position in the hole was secured by wedging two small flint splinters, demonstrating witout doubt human intervention. The 1999 description was only mentioning sediments blocking the bone in place. Thinking about it that may be enough to justify the publication...

One information is missing in the "Antiquity" paper though : the date of "the mask" discovery by J.C. Marquet, which was 1997. This date is mentionned in M. Lorblanchet's 1999 book.

However in no place, the authors claimed this mask to be a new discovery though. It may be the absence of discovery date that may have lead some journalists to assume that it was a very recent discovery.  

There was indeed some hype around that article,following the BBC article  "Neanderthal 'face' found in Loire" By Jonathan Amos,  which includes some reactions by Paul Bahn and Petitt : (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3256228.stm).

A suivre...

Paul Trehin

[Jacques Cinq-Mars]

I have read the Antiquity paper on the Roche-Cotard "face" Neanderthalian art. Actually, I did so several times to make sure I didn't miss anything. I was puzzled by the fact that there was already a description of that "mask" (M. Lorblanchet, “La naissance de l’art, Genèse de l’art préhistorique ”, Editions Errance 1999) and was wandering if there had been some newly discovered facts justifying a new article on this subject.

In my opinion there is nothing really new or additional in this paper compared to what Lorblanchet was saying in his 1999 book. He was already attributing it to the Mousterian culture.

In "Antiquity", the description of the site where the "mask" was discovered is more detailed, the description of the mask itself is also refined and more precise, but gives no more details than the ones in the 1999 book.

One exception though : the indication that the bone position in the hole was secured by wedging two small flint splinters, demonstrating witout doubt human intervention. The 1999 description was only mentioning sediments blocking the bone in place. Thinking about it that may be enough to justify the publication...

One information is missing in the "Antiquity" paper though : the date of "the mask" discovery by J.C. Marquet, which was 1997. This date is mentionned in M. Lorblanchet's 1999 book.

However in no place, the authors claimed this mask to be a new discovery though. It may be the absence of discovery date that may have lead some journalists to assume that it was a very recent discovery.  

There was indeed some hype around that article,following the BBC article  "Neanderthal 'face' found in Loire" By Jonathan Amos,  which includes some reactions by Paul Bahn and Petitt : (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3256228.stm).

A suivre...

Paul Trehin

In my view, the best treatment given to the Roche-Cotard "Mask" (or "face", as I called it, is to be found in the following paper:

Marquet, J.C. et Michel Lorblanchet. 2000. Le "Masque" moustérien de la Roche-Cotard, Langeais (Indre-et-Loire). PALEO  12: 325-338.

The article provides very good illustrations (drawings) of what is obviously a Mousterian industry, together with detailed drawings and b&w photographs of the "mask" itself.

The recent media and internet "hype" surrounding this discovery is essentially the result of a lag caused by an ever present linguistic problem/barrier. The book/paper you are referring to, as well as the PALEO article are all in French!

Jacques Cinq-Mars

[trehinp]

Thanks Jacques,

I think that you are right, the hype was comming from the journalists, and probably was triggered by some losses in translations...

I have searched for the Original French article on the net for about one hour... I have looked for the address of the magazine "PALEO" in both cases without success. I think I have not been the only one to have difficulties with finding this article :-). As a French person, reading in French would be a lot easier for me...

I have found an abstract of The French 2000 article on the excellent website "Ma Préhistoire", a web site designed by Thierry Koltès "amateur de préhistoire" as he call himself :

http://ma.prehistoire.free.fr/

Just a question, is the article in French (Marquet, J.C. et Michel Lorblanchet. 2000. Le "Masque" moustérien de la Roche-Cotard, Langeais (Indre-et-Loire). PALEO  12: 325-338) the basis for the Antiquity article (MARQUET J.-C., LORBLANCHET M., 2003 - A neanderthal face ? The protofigurine from La Roche-Cotard, Langeais (Indre-et-Loire, France). Antiquity, volume 77, n°298, décembre 2003) ?

Thanks.

Paul

[Jacques Cinq-Mars]

Thanks Jacques,

I think that you are right, the hype was comming from the journalists, and probably was triggered by some losses in translations...

I have searched for the Original French article on the net for about one hour... I have looked for the address of the magazine "PALEO" in both cases without success. I think I have not been the only one to have difficulties with finding this article :-). As a French person, reading in French would be a lot easier for me...

I have found an abstract of The French 2000 article on the excellent website "Ma Préhistoire", a web site designed by Thierry Koltès "amateur de préhistoire" as he call himself :

http://ma.prehistoire.free.fr/

Just a question, is the article in French (Marquet, J.C. et Michel Lorblanchet. 2000. Le "Masque" moustérien de la Roche-Cotard, Langeais (Indre-et-Loire). PALEO  12: 325-338) the basis for the Antiquity article (MARQUET J.-C., LORBLANCHET M., 2003 - A neanderthal face ? The protofigurine from La Roche-Cotard, Langeais (Indre-et-Loire, France). Antiquity, volume 77, n°298, décembre 2003) ?

Thanks.

Paul

Paul,

PALEO is, unfortunately, not "online", except for the TOCs of the recent issues which can be read HERE.

As for the articles, I suppose they are all part of the usual scientific dissemination drive or strategy.

Jacques Cinq-Mars

[thuur khan]

Mr Cinq-Mars,

You had translated (2001) for Palanth a part of the text published in PALEO. May the webmaster of http://ma.prehistoire.free.fr/mask_english.htm   use your text for any English reader ?
Your  correcting is welcome.
 tk

[Jacques Cinq-Mars]

Mr Cinq-Mars,

You had translated (2001) for Palanth a part of the text published in PALEO. May the webmaster of http://ma.prehistoire.free.fr/mask_english.htm   use your text for any English reader ?
Your  correcting is welcome.
 tk

As usual. I am a bit confused, here. I don't recall this translation of mine (and I really don't have time to look it up), but, if it's there, you are certainly welcome to use it.

Jacques Cinq-Mars

[Daryl Habel]

As usual. I am a bit confused, here. I don't recall this translation of mine (and I really don't have time to look it up), but, if it's there, you are certainly welcome to use it.

Jacques Cinq-Mars

Jacques,

The translation of the Paleo article displayed on the questioner's webpage:

http://ma.prehistoire.free.fr/mask_english.htm

is a translation you sent to the now-defunct palanth-l Yahoo group on May 22, 2001.  I have a record of this translation in my files.

I will add that when I looked at the questioner's webpage, the translation is credited to you on May 22, 2001, but the reference on the webpage reads "Palanth" - NOT PALANTH-L.

If it matters,
Dar

[Jacques Cinq-Mars]

Jacques,

The translation of the Paleo article displayed on the questioner's webpage:

http://ma.prehistoire.free.fr/mask_english.htm

is a translation you sent to the now-defunct palanth-l Yahoo group on May 22, 2001.  I have a record of this translation in my files.

I will add that when I looked at the questioner's webpage, the translation is credited to you on May 22, 2001, but the reference on the webpage reads "Palanth" - NOT PALANTH-L.

If it matters,
Dar

Dar,

No. It does not matter. And you are certainly welcome to make use of my feeble attempts at translating French into English!

Jacques

[trehinp]

I forgott to mention an article reviewing Marquet and Lorblanchet article in Antiquity :

Laurence Nicoud, "L'ART NÉANDERTALIEN : RÉALITÉ ET ÉNIGME", Archéologia, Janvier 2004

The article gives some additional background on the Mask of La Roche-Cotard : History of its discovery, Michel Lorblanchet's interpretation and some other possible explanations of the purpose of this object outside the art domain.

History :
<<La découverte remonte à 1975>>
<<L'objet "pas ordinaire" est alors étudié puis rangé sous l'étiquette "objet énigmatique" dans les témoins non techniques du musée du Grand-Pressigny. >>

Interpretation as an art object :
<<Lorsque Michel Lorblanchet se rend au musée 20 ans plus tard, il interprète l'as¬semblage comme étant une protofigurine issue de l'art néandertalien.>>

Other interpretation:  

The article quotes Francesco d'Errico, researcher at CNRS in France : "il est possible de considérer l'objet comme un poids ayant peut-être été utilisé pour fixer une tente, l'os enfoncé dans le trou facilitant la fixation d'une corde".

The article continues :
<<L'archéologue, qui attribue de possibles capacités symboliques aux Néandertaliens, reste sceptique quant au caractère artistique de l'objet. >>

The conclusion calls for cautious interpretation of this object.

Paul
PS : is it necessary that I translate in English ?

[Jacques Cinq-Mars]

Paul
PS : is it necessary that I translate in English ?

Thanks for passing this on this additional info on the Roche-Cotard "mask". And, yes, given that the vast majority of our users and guests is English speaking, a translation would be welcome.

Jacques

[trehinp]

OK, I translated the parts that were in French in my previous post.

Laurence Nicoud, "L'ART NÉANDERTALIEN : RÉALITÉ ET ÉNIGME", Archéologia, Janvier 2004

Title in English :

"NEANDERTHALIAN ART : REALITY AND ENIGMA"

The article gives some additional background on the Mask of La Roche-Cotard : History of its discovery, Michel Lorblanchet's interpretation and some other possible explanations of the purpose of this object outside the art domain.

History (translated quotes by a French man... No guaranty...) :
<<The discovery was made back in 1975>>
<<The object "Not an ordinary one", was then studied and stored, with the label "enigmatic object," among the non technical records of "Museé du Grand-Pressigny". >>

Interpretation as an art object :

<<When Michel Lorblanchet came to the museum, 20 years later, he interpreted the assemblage as a protofigurine coming out of Neanderthalian art .>>

Other interpretation:  

The article quotes Francesco d'Errico, researcher at CNRS in France : "it is possible to consider the object as a weight that may have been used to steady a tent, the bone wedged in the hole placed to facilitate stringing a rope ".

The article continues :

<<The archeologist, who credits Neanderthalians with possible symbolic capabilities, remains skeptical with regard to the artistic character of the object. >>

The conclusion calls for cautious interpretation of this object.

Paul

[goldilocks]

I saw at this face when it was first published (in English) and found it very strange, even frightening .  Now looking at it again it reminds me of a wolf or a lion..  Nobody has considered one possibility: a father (or mother) could have made it on the spur of the moment say, and and handed it to a nearby child, perhaps as an amulet  to protect from bad dreams.  I mean it looks nothing like a human face at all, more like a (protective?) spirit.  Yet people still question whether Neandertals were capable of symbolic thought!
Maria

[lagarvelho]

Maria:

The "face" *does* look rather "catlike".  I suppose that, assuming it was supposed to represent *some* living organism, the organism in question might have been some sort of cat.  One other possibility is, that it might have been a representation, in stone, of some "totemic" creature.  Either way, and for whatever purpose, if  it was supposed to represent "something", it suggests some pretty sophisticated capabilities.  The problem, however boils down to whethro or not it *did* represent something.  Unless more such objects are found in Neandertal contexts, this particular one, like the Divje Babe object, will always be contested.
Anne G