Specifically, our understanding of cave art is changing. The purpose of these images has long been a mystery. The fact that they exist at all is due to the nature of their placement. Protected by the elements, the art is in almost pristine shape when first discovered. Some art has suffered from the breath of visitors and the technology that has been introduced to the cave system.
In some cases, elaborate models have been created to mimic an exact copy for tourists to experience. Most caves have been closed to the public, except for researchers.
While not obviously stated, the general consensus has been that the creators of the cave art were male. The sense was that the males were generally thought to be the hunters of the society, and the art seemed to be primarily about the animals that were hunted.
The most thought the reason of the images was to capture the spirit of the animal in order to have a successful hunt. Placing the images in a very dark cave system was at least two-fold. 1) proving the bravery of the hunter, and 2) capturing the spirit of the animal to be hunted. There may be other reasons, but none definitely determined the gender of the creators. Of at least no one thought about it.
I few years ago there was a study of the various handprints that were also left behind. It could be the remains of visitors it also could be a type of signature of the creators. It turns out that a new study suggested that 75% of the handprints were female.
Size alone was not the major factor. It turns out that the finger lengths of prehistoric individual are more different between male and female, and not the same as between a young boy and an adult male.
This is not as true today with modern skeletons, but the averages of the lengths of certain fingers can determine the sex as well as the pelvis.
This is how they determined that 75% of the cave art handprints were female. If so, then why were they created?
For me, it makes sense that delicate work might favor the female. Common activities may have been basket weaving. Using tools or brushes in a cave might favor women. Just getting into some of the caves would have been easier for a slighter frame.
Much could be decided if we knew for certain the reason and purpose of the cave art.
What we do known from history is the lack of women creating art for society for hundreds if not thousands of years. Only two women were well known during the Renaissance, and both had relatives that were famous and provided access to customers. Art was not a job for women.
There were a few women painters/sculptors but they were rare. It wasn’t until the mid 1800s when women began being recognized as art makers. They must be a reason for this.
We must not think that this is a problem that has been solved. Statistics have shown that twice as many women majored in art while in college, but museum show twice the number of men than women.
Numbers do tell a story, and it is not good.
About johndiestler
Retired community college professor of graphic design, multimedia and photography, and chair of the fine arts and media department.
Cave Art is Changing
Specifically, our understanding of cave art is changing. The purpose of these images has long been a mystery. The fact that they exist at all is due to the nature of their placement. Protected by the elements, the art is in almost pristine shape when first discovered. Some art has suffered from the breath of visitors and the technology that has been introduced to the cave system.
In some cases, elaborate models have been created to mimic an exact copy for tourists to experience. Most caves have been closed to the public, except for researchers.
While not obviously stated, the general consensus has been that the creators of the cave art were male. The sense was that the males were generally thought to be the hunters of the society, and the art seemed to be primarily about the animals that were hunted.
The most thought the reason of the images was to capture the spirit of the animal in order to have a successful hunt. Placing the images in a very dark cave system was at least two-fold. 1) proving the bravery of the hunter, and 2) capturing the spirit of the animal to be hunted. There may be other reasons, but none definitely determined the gender of the creators. Of at least no one thought about it.
I few years ago there was a study of the various handprints that were also left behind. It could be the remains of visitors it also could be a type of signature of the creators. It turns out that a new study suggested that 75% of the handprints were female.
Size alone was not the major factor. It turns out that the finger lengths of prehistoric individual are more different between male and female, and not the same as between a young boy and an adult male.
This is not as true today with modern skeletons, but the averages of the lengths of certain fingers can determine the sex as well as the pelvis.
This is how they determined that 75% of the cave art handprints were female. If so, then why were they created?
For me, it makes sense that delicate work might favor the female. Common activities may have been basket weaving. Using tools or brushes in a cave might favor women. Just getting into some of the caves would have been easier for a slighter frame.
Much could be decided if we knew for certain the reason and purpose of the cave art.
What we do known from history is the lack of women creating art for society for hundreds if not thousands of years. Only two women were well known during the Renaissance, and both had relatives that were famous and provided access to customers. Art was not a job for women.
There were a few women painters/sculptors but they were rare. It wasn’t until the mid 1800s when women began being recognized as art makers. They must be a reason for this.
We must not think that this is a problem that has been solved. Statistics have shown that twice as many women majored in art while in college, but museum show twice the number of men than women.
Numbers do tell a story, and it is not good.
Share this:
About johndiestler
Retired community college professor of graphic design, multimedia and photography, and chair of the fine arts and media department.