On Dec 22, 2008, at 5:02 PM, [email protected] wrote:
I have an unreliable memory of reading recently of discoveries of "very old" artwork. Unfortunately, I can't remember how old. One was the uncovering of something in color on a man-built wall of a once vital community (in Peru?), the other had three-dimensional figures of feline-like creatures (in Asia?). I think the archaeologists claimed the wall-art was the oldest known (I'll guess they were overlooking the cave paintings), My question: If the cave artists quit, say, 15,000 years ago and the "very old" art was done 5,000 years ago, do scholars believe that humankind made no pictorial art for 10,000 years -- after the spectacular accomplishments in the caves? It's hard to believe. (Even as I write this I'm appalled by my ignorance of "pre-history" history.)
No, but the reason old things survive involve the durability of the materials and the climatic conditions. The Altamira cave paintings are many hundreds of yards underground, in a setting of relatively unchanging humidity and temperature, and are made of similar substances, colored earth pigments. The other things you mention are made of stone, which is quite durable, and earth colors, too.
Now, don't forget that 5,000 years ago is 3,000 BC. Damascus is the oldest continuously inhabited city in the world, dating to c. 5000 BC (that is, 7000 years ago). The pyramids and dynastic Egyptian culture is older than 3000 BC. And the climate of Egypt is very dry, which allows fragile materials like papyrus and encaustic to survive where they'd be destroyed in more humid regions. The Ishtar gates and similar monuments from Mesopotamia are of comparable antiquity. There are very few artifacts from equatorial Africa that antedate 1700 AD or thereabout, because those cultures did not build much with stone nor use a lot of permanent materials in their artifacts, so their adornments and monuments perished from climatic forces.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Michael Brady [email protected]
