Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T11:54:17.983Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sexual dimorphism in Upper Palaeolithic hand stencils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Dean R. Snow
Dean R. Snow*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, The Pennsylvania State University, 409 Carpenter Building, University Park, PA 16802, USA (Email: drs17@psu.edu)
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Sexual roles in deep prehistory are among the most intriguing puzzles still to solve. Here the author shows how men and women can be distinguished by scientific measurement in the prints and stencils of the human hand that occur widely in Upper Palaeolithic art. Six hand stencils from four French caves are attributed to four adult females, an adult male, and a sub-adult male. Here we take a step closer to showing that both sexes are engaged in cave art and whatever dreams and rituals it implies.

Keywords

FranceUpper Palaeolithiccave arthandprintsgender studies

Information

Type
Method
Information
Antiquity , Volume 80 , Issue 308 , 1 June 2006, pp. 390 - 404
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Arnold, B. & Wicker, N.L. (ed.). 2001. Gender and the Archaeology of Death. Walnut Creek (CA): AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
Bahn, P.G. 1998. The Cambridge Illustrated History of Prehistoric Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bahn, P.G. & Vertut, J. 1988. Images of the Ice Age. New York (NY): Facts on File.Google Scholar
Bahn, P.G. 1997. Journey Through the Ice Age. Berkeley(CA): University of California Press.Google Scholar
Barrière, C. 1976. L’Art Parietal de la Grotte de Gargas. British Archaeological Reports International Series 14. 2 vols. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
Canby, C. (ed.). 1961. The Epic of Man. New York (NY): Time Incorporated.Google Scholar
Clottes, J. 1996. The cave beneath the sea: Paleolithic images at Cosquer. New York (NY): H.N. Abrams.Google Scholar
Clottes, J. 2003. Chauvet Cave: The Art of Earliest Times. Salt Lake City (UT): University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
Donald, M. & Hurcombe, L. 2000. Gender and Material Culture in Archaeological Perspective. New York (NY): St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Faurie, C. & Raymond, M. 2004. Handedness frequency over more than ten thousand years. Biology Letters 271(S3): S43–S45.Google ScholarPubMed
Hays-Gilpin, K. 2004. Ambiguous Images: Gender and Rock Art. Walnut Creek (CA): AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
Koehler, N., Simmons, L.W. & Rhodes, G. 2004. How well does second-to-fourth-digit ratio in hands correlate with other indications of masculinity in males? Royal Society Biology Letters. vol. 2004. FirstCite.Google Scholar
Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1967a. Les mains de Gargas: Essai pour un étude d‘ensemble. Bulletin de la Sociète Prèhistorique Française 64(1): 107–22.Google Scholar
Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1967b. Treasures of Prehistoric Art. NewYork(NY): H.N. Abrams.Google Scholar
Lorblanchet, M. 1989. Pech-Merle Centre de Preèhistoire Grotte & Musèe. Cabrerets: Grotte et Musée de Pech-Merle.Google Scholar
Lorblanchet, M. 1991. Spitting Images: Replicating the Spotted Horses of Pech Merle. Archaeology44.Google Scholar
Lorblanchet, M. 1995. Les Grotte Ornees de la Prehistoire, Nouveaux Regards. Paris: Editions Errance.Google Scholar
Manning, J.T. 2002. Digit Ratio. New Brunswick (NJ): Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Manning, J.T., Scutt, D. Wilson, J. & Lewis-Jones, D.I. 1998. The ratio of 2nd to 4th digit length: a predictor of sperm numbers and concentrations of testosterone, luteinizing hormone and oestrogen. Human Reproduction 13: 3000–3004.Google Scholar
Mcdermott, L. 1996. Self-Representation in Upper Paleolithic Female Figurines. Current Anthropology 37(2): 227–75.Google Scholar
Napier, J. 1993. Hands. Second edition. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, S.M. & Rosen-Ayalon, M. (ed.). 2002. In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Approaches. Walnut Creek (CA): AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
Prideaux, T. 1973. Cro-Magnon Man. The Emergence of Man. New York (NY): Time-Life Books.Google Scholar
Ramesh, A. & Murty, J.S. 1977. Variation and inheritance of relative length of index finger in man. Annals of Human Biology 4: 479–84.Google Scholar
Ripoll López, S., Ripoll Perelló, E. & Collado Giraldo, H. 2000. Maltravieso: El Santuario Extremeńo de las Manos Memorias 1. Badajoz: Publicaciones del Museo de Caéceres.Google Scholar
Ripoll López, S., Ripoll Perelló, E. Collado Giraldo, H. Mas Cornellá, M. Jordá Pardo, J.F. & Paleolíticos, L.D.E. 1999. Maltravieso: El Santuario Extremeňio de las Manos. Trabajos de Prehistoria 56(2): 59–84.Google Scholar
Sagard, G. 1968. Sagard‘s LongJourney to the Country ofthe Hurons.New York(NY):GreenwoodPress.Google Scholar
Semino, O., Passarino, O. Oefner, P.J. Lin, A.A. Arbuzova, S. Beckman, L.E. De Benedictis, O. Francalacci, P. Kouvatsi, A. Limborska, S. Marcikiae, M. Mika, A. Mika, B. Primorac, D. Santachiara-Benerecetti, A.S. Cavalli-SFORZA, L.L. & Underhill, P.A. 2000. The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective. Science 290: 1155–9.Google Scholar
Shoocongdej, R. 2002. Gender Roles Depicted in Rock Art: A Case from Western Thailand, in Nelson, S.M. & Rosen-Ayalon, M. (ed.) In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Approaches: 187–206. Walnut Creek (CA): AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
Snow, D.R. 1994. The Iroquois. The Peoples of America. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Thomas, D.H. 1978. Arrowheads and Atlatl darts: How the Stones got the Shaft. American Antiquity 43(3): 461–72.Google Scholar
Tuohy, T. 2000. Long Handled Weaving Combs: Problems in Determining the Gender of Tool-Maker and Tool-User, in Donald, M. & Hurcombe, L. (ed.) Gender and Material Culture in Archaeological Perspective: 137–52. New York (NY): St. Martin‘s Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar