---
abstract: "For most archaeologists the meaning of prehistoric art appears to be grounded upon, if not synonymous with, the notion of representation and symbolism. This paper explores the possibility that the depictions we see already 30,000 years before present, for instance, at the caves of Chauvet and Lascaux, before and beyond representing the world, they first bring forth a new process of acting within this world and at the same time of thinking about it. It is argued that the unique ability of those early depictions to disrupt or question the ways the world is experienced under normal conditions makes possible for the visual apparatus to interrogate itself and thus acquire a sense of perceptual awareness not previously available. \r\n"
altloc: []
chapter: Image
commentary: ~
commref: ~
confdates: ~
conference: ~
confloc: ~
contact_email: ~
creators_id:
  - lm243@cam.ac.uk
creators_name:
  - family: Malafouris
    given: Lambros
    honourific: ''
    lineage: ''
date: 2007-06-04
date_type: published
datestamp: 2008-07-24 09:55:33
department: ~
dir: disk0/00/00/61/34
edit_lock_since: ~
edit_lock_until: ~
edit_lock_user: ~
editors_id: []
editors_name:
  - family: Renfrew
    given: Colin
    honourific: Professor
    lineage: ''
  - family: Morley
    given: Iain
    honourific: Dr
    lineage: ''
eprint_status: archive
eprintid: 6134
fileinfo: /style/images/fileicons/application_pdf.png;/6134/1/Ch.21Malafouris.Beyond_and_Before_representation_2.pdf
full_text_status: public
importid: ~
institution: ~
isbn: ~
ispublished: pub
issn: ~
item_issues_comment: []
item_issues_count: 0
item_issues_description: []
item_issues_id: []
item_issues_reported_by: []
item_issues_resolved_by: []
item_issues_status: []
item_issues_timestamp: []
item_issues_type: []
keywords: 'Palaeolithic perception, cave art, representation, the extended mind, enactivism, cognitive archaeology, prehistoric imagery'
lastmod: 2011-03-11 08:57:09
latitude: ~
longitude: ~
metadata_visibility: show
note: ~
number: ~
pagerange: ~
pubdom: TRUE
publication: 'Renfrew C. & I. Morley (eds) 2007 Image and Imagination: A Global History of Figurative Representation. Cambridge: The McDonald Institute, pp. 287-300'
publisher: 'The McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge'
refereed: TRUE
referencetext: "Bar-Yosef, O., 2002. The Upper Paleolithic revolution. Annual\r\nReview of Anthropology 31, 363–93.\r\nBrooks, R.A., 1991. Intelligence without representation.\r\nArtificial Intelligence 47, 39–59.\r\nClark, A., 1997. Being There: Putting Brain, Body and World\r\nTogether Again. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.\r\nClark, A., 2003. Natural-Born Cyborgs: Minds, Technologies\r\nand the Future of Human Intelligence. New York (NY):\r\nOxford University Press.\r\nClark, A. & D. Chalmers, 1998. The extended mind. Analysis\r\n58(1), 10–23.\r\nClottes, J., 1996. Thematic changes in Upper Palaeolithic\r\nart: a view from the Grotte Chauvet. Antiquity 70,\r\n276–88.\r\nClottes, J. (ed.), 2001. La Grotte Chauvet. Paris: L’art Des\r\nOrigines, Editions du Seuil.\r\nClottes, J. & J.D. Lewis-Williams, 1998. The Shamans of Prehistory:\r\nTrance and Magic in the Painted Caves. New York\r\n(NY): Harry Abrams.\r\nCostall, A., 1989. A closer look at ‘direct perception’, in Cognition\r\nand Social Worldseds, eds. A. Gellatly, D. Rogers &\r\nJ.A. Svoboda. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 10–21.\r\nCostall, A., 1990. Picture perception as ‘indirect’ perception,\r\nin Ecological Perception Research, Visual Communication\r\nand Aesthetics, ed. K. Landwehr. New York (NY):\r\nSpringer-Verlag, 15–22.\r\nCostall, A., 1997. Things and things like them, in The Cultural\r\nLife of Images, ed. B.L. Molyneaux. London & New\r\nYork (NY): Routledge, 49–59.\r\nDavidson I. & W. Noble, 1989. The archaeology of perception.\r\nCurrent Anthropology 30(2), 125–55.\r\nDeacon, T.W., 1997. The Symbolic Species: the Co-evolution of\r\nLanguage and the Brain. New York (NY): Norton.\r\nDehaene, S., 1997. The Number Sense. New York (NY): Oxford\r\nUniversity Press.\r\nDeLoache, J., 2004. Becoming symbol-minded. Trends in\r\nCognitive Sciences, 8(2), 66–70.\r\nDeLoache, J., S.L. Pierroutsakos, D.H. Uttal, K.S. Rosengren\r\n& A. Gottlieb, 1998. Grasping the nature of pictures.\r\nPsychological Science 9, 205–10.\r\nDennett, D., 1995. Darwin’s Dangerous Idea. New York (NY):\r\nSimon & Schuster.\r\nDennett, D., 1996. Kinds of Minds. New York (NY): Basic Books.\r\nDeregowski, J.B., 1995. Perception-depiction-perception, and\r\ncommunication. Rock Art Research 12, 3–22.\r\nDonald, M., 1991. Origins of the Modern Mind: Three Stages\r\nin the Evolution of Culture and Cognition. Cambridge\r\n(MA): Harvard University Press.\r\nDonald, M., 1998. Material culture and cognition: concluding\r\nthoughts, in Cognition and Material Culture: the Archaeology\r\nof Symbolic Storage, eds. C. Renfrew & C. Scarre.\r\n(McDonald Institute Monographs.) Cambridge: Mc-\r\nDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 181–7.\r\nEllis, W.H., 1938. Sourcebook of Gestalt Psychology. London:\r\nRoutledge & Kegan Paul.\r\nd’ Errico, F., 1995. New model and its implications for the\r\norigin of writing: La Marche antler revisited. Cambridge\r\nArchaeological Journal 5(1), 3–46.\r\nd’ Errico, F., 1998. Paleolithic origins of artificial memory systems,\r\nin Cognition and Material Culture: the Archaeology\r\nof Symbolic Storage, eds. C. Renfrew & C. Scarre. (Mc-\r\nDonald Institute Monographs.) Cambridge: McDonald\r\nInstitute for Archaeological Research, 19–50.\r\nd’Errico, F., 2003. The invisible frontier: a multiple species\r\nmodel for the origin of behavioral modernity. Evolutionary\r\nAnthropology 12, 188–202.\r\nd’Errico, F. & A. Nowell, 2000. A new look at the Berekhat\r\nRam figurine: implications for the origins of symbolism.\r\nCambridge Archaeological Journal 10(1), 123–67.\r\nDehaene, S., 1997. The Number Sense. New York (NY):\r\nOxford University Press.\r\nFauconnier, G. & M. Turner, 1998. Conceptual integration\r\nnetworks. Cognitive Science 22(2), 133–87.\r\nFauconnier, G. & M. Turner, 2002. The Way We Think: Conceptual\r\nBlending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New\r\nYork (NY): Basic Books.\r\nFoley, R.A., 1995. Humans Before Humanity: an Evolutionary\r\nPerspective. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.\r\nForge, A., 1970. Learning to see in New Guinea, in Socialization:\r\nthe Approach from Social Anthropology ed. P. Mayer.\r\nNew York (NY): Tavistock, 269–99.\r\nFritz C. & G. Tosello, 2007. The hidden meaning of forms:\r\nmethods of recording paleolithic parietal Art. Journal\r\nof Archaeological Method and Theory 14(1), 48–80.\r\nGell, A., 1998. Art and Agency: an Anthropological Theory.\r\nOxford: Oxford University Press.\r\nGibson, J.J., 1966. The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems.\r\nBoston (MA): Houghton Mifflin.\r\nGibson, J.J., 1979. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception.\r\nBoston (MA): Houghton Mifflin.\r\nGrainer, J. & C. Whitney, 2004. Does the Huamn mind raed\r\nwords as a wlohe? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8(2),\r\n58–9.\r\nGregory, R.L., 1980. Perceptions as hypotheses. Philosophical\r\nTransactions of the Royal Society B 290, 181–97.\r\nGregory, R.L., 1990. Eye and Brain: the Psychology of Seeing.\r\nOxford: Oxford University Press.\r\nGregory, R.L., 2005. Knowledge for vision: vision for knowledge.\r\nPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B\r\n360, 1231–51.\r\nHarris, P., 2000. Work of the Imagination. Oxford: Blackwell\r\nPublishers.\r\nHalverson, J., 1992a. The first pictures: perceptual foundations\r\nof Palaeolithic art. Perception 21, 389–404.\r\nHalverson, J., 1992b. Paleolithic art and cognition. The Journal\r\nof Psychology 126(3), 221–36.\r\nHoffman, D.D., 1998. Visual Intelligence: How We Create What\r\nWe See. New York (NY): Norton.\r\nHumphrey, N., 1998. Cave art, autism, and the evolution\r\nof the human mind. Cambridge Archaeological Journal\r\n8(2), 165–91.\r\nHurley, S.L.,1998. Consciousness in Action. Cambridge (MA):\r\nHarvard University Press.\r\nHutchins, E., 2005. Material anchors for conceptual blends.\r\nJournal of Pragmatics 37, 1555–77.\r\nIngold, T., 1993. Introduction: tools, techniques and technology,\r\nin Tools, Language and Cognition in Human\r\nEvolution, eds. K. Gibson & T. Ingold. Cambridge:\r\nCambridge University Press, 337–45.\r\nIngold, T., 1998. Totemism, animism, and the depiction of\r\nanimals, in Animal, Anima, Animus, eds. M. Seppala,\r\nJ.P. Vanhala & L. Weintraub. Pori: Frame/Pori Art\r\nMuseum, 181–207.\r\nKanizsa, G., 1979. Organisation of Vision: Essays on Gestalt\r\nPerception. New York (NY): Praegervon.\r\nKennedy, J.M. & J. Silver, 1974. The surrogate functions of\r\nlines in visual perception: evidence from antipodal\r\nrock and cave artwork sources. Perception 3, 313–22.\r\nKirsh, D. & P. Maglio, 1994. On distinguishing epistemic\r\nfrom pragmatic action. Cognitive Science 18, 513–49.\r\nKoffka, K., 1935. Principles of Gestalt Psychology. New York\r\n(NY): Harcourt, Brace, & World.\r\nKlein, R., 2000. Archeology and the evolution of human\r\nbehavior. Evolutionary Anthropology 9, 17–36.\r\nKubovy, M. & A.O. Holcombe, 1998. On the lawfulness\r\nof grouping by proximity. Cognitive Psychology 35,\r\n71–98.\r\nLeslie, A., 1987. Pretense and representation: the origins of\r\n‘theory of mind’. Psychological Review 94, 412–26.\r\nLewis-Williams, D., 2002. The Mind in the Cave: Consciousness\r\nand the Origins of Art. London: Thames & Hudson.\r\nLewis-Williams, D., 2003. Overview (in review feature): ‘The\r\nMind in the Cave: Consciousness and the Origins of\r\nArt’. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 13(2), 263–79.\r\nMalafouris, L., 2004. The cognitive basis of material engagement:\r\nwhere brain, body and culture conflate,\r\nin Rethinking Materiality: the Engagement of Mind with\r\nthe Material World, eds. E. DeMarrais, C. Gosden\r\n& C. Renfrew. (McDonald Institute Monographs.)\r\nCambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological\r\nResearch, 53–62.\r\nMalafouris, L., 2005. Projections in Matter: Material Engagement\r\nand the Mycenaean Becoming. Unpublished\r\nPhD dissertation, Cambridge University.\r\nMalafouris, L., in press. The sacred engagement: outline\r\nof a hypothesis about the origin of human ‘religious\r\nintelligence’, in Cult in Context eds. D. Barrowclough,\r\nC. Malone & S. Stoddart. Oxford: Oxbow Books.\r\nMalafouris, L., forthcoming. Grasping the concept of\r\nnumber: how did the sapient mind move beyond\r\napproximation?, in Measuring the World and Beyond:\r\nthe Archaeology of Early Quantification and Cosmology,\r\neds. C. Renfrew & I. Morley. (McDonald Institute\r\nMonographs.) Cambridge: McDonald Institute for\r\nArchaeological Research.\r\nMalafouris, L. & C. Renfrew (eds.), forthcoming. The Cognitive\r\nLife of Things: Recasting the Boundaries of the Mind.\r\n(McDonald Institute Monographs.) Cambridge: Mc-\r\nDonald Institute for Archaeological Research\r\nMarr, D., 1982. Vision. New York (NY): W.H. Freeman &\r\nSons.\r\nMarshack, A., 1990. Early hominid symbol and evolution\r\nof the human capacity, in The Emergence of Modern\r\nHumans, ed. P. Mellars. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University\r\nPress, 457–98.\r\nMaturana, H.R. & F.J. Varela, 1980. Autopoiesis and Cognition:\r\nthe Realization of the Living. Dordrecht: Reidel.\r\nMcBrearty, S. & A. Brooks, 2000. The revolution that wasn’t:\r\na new interpretation of the origin of modern human\r\nbehavior. Journal of Human Evolution 39(5), 453–563.\r\nMcPherron, S.P., 2000. Handaxes as a measure of the mental\r\ncapabilities of early hominids Journal of Archaeological\r\nScience 27, 655–63.\r\nMellars, P., 1989. Major issues in the emergence of modern\r\nhumans. Current Anthropology 30, 349–85.\r\nMellars, P., 1991. Cognitive changes and the emergence of\r\nmodern humans in Europe. Cambridge Archaeological\r\nJournal 1(1), 63–76.\r\nMellars, P., 1996a. The Neandertal Legacy: an Archaeological\r\nPerspective from Western Europe. New Jersey (NJ):\r\nPrinceton University Press.\r\nMellars, P., 1996b. Symbolism, language, and the Neanderthal\r\nmind, in Modelling the Early Human Mind,\r\neds. P. Mellars & K. Gibson. (McDonald Institute\r\nMonographs.) Cambridge: McDonald Institute for\r\nArchaeological Research, 15–32.\r\nMerleau-Ponty, M., 1962. Phenomenology of Perception.\r\nRoutledge & Kegan Paul, 14.\r\nMithen, S., 1996. The Prehistory of Mind. London: Thames\r\n& Hudson.\r\nMithen, S., 1998a. Introduction, in Creativity in Human Evolution\r\nand Prehistory, ed. S. Mithen. London & New York\r\n(NY): Routledge, 1–15.\r\nMithen, S., 1998b. Introduction, in Creativity in Human\r\nEvolution and Prehistory, ed. S. Mithen. London &\r\nNew York: Routledge, 1-15.\r\nMithen, S. 1998c. A Creative Explosion? Theory of Mind,\r\nLanguage and the Disembodied Mind of the Upper\r\nPalaeolithic, in Creativity in Human Evolution\r\nand Prehistory, ed. S. Mithen. London & New York:\r\nRoutledge, 165-191.\r\nMithen, S., 2000. Palaeoanthropological perspectives on the\r\ntheory of mind, in Understanding Other Minds: Perspectives\r\nfrom Autism and Cognitive Neuroscience, eds.\r\nS. Baron-Cohen, H.T. Flusberg & D. Cohen. Oxford:\r\nOxford University Press, 488–502.\r\nNoble, W. & I. Davidson, 1991. The evolutionary emergence\r\nof modern human behaviour: language and its archaeology.\r\nMan 26, 223–53.\r\nNoble, W. & I. Davidson, 1996. Human Evolution, Language\r\nand Mind: a Psychological and Archaeological Inquiry.\r\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press.\r\nNoë, A., 2005. Action in Perception. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.\r\nO’Regan, J.K., 1992. Solving the “real” mysteries of visual\r\nperception: the world as an outside memory. Canadian\r\nJournal Of Psychology 46:3 461-488.\r\nO’Regan, J.K. & A. Noë, 2001. A sensorimotor appraoch to\r\nvision and visual perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences\r\n24(5), 939–73.\r\nPalmer, S.E., E. Rosch & P. Chase, 1981. Canonical perspective\r\nand the perception of objects, in Attention and\r\nPerformance IX, eds. J. Long & A. Baddeley. Hillsdale\r\n(NJ): Erlbaum, 135–51.\r\nPeirce, C.S., 1955. Philosophical Writings of Peirce, ed. B. Justus.\r\nNew York (NY): Dover Publications.\r\nRenfrew, C., 2001a. Symbol before concept, material engagement\r\nand the early development of society, in\r\nArchaeological Theory Today, ed. I. Hodder. Cambridge:\r\nPolity Press, 122–40.\r\nRenfrew, C., 2001b. Commodification and institution in\r\ngroup-oriented and individualizing societies. Proceedings\r\nof the British Academy 110, 93–117.\r\nRenfrew, C., 2004. Towards a theory of material engagement,\r\nin Rethinking Materiality: the Engagement of Mind\r\nwith the Material World, eds. E. DeMarrais, C. Gosden\r\n& C. Renfrew. (McDonald Institute Monographs)\r\nCambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological\r\nResearch, 23–31.\r\nSolso, L.R., 1994. Cognition and the Visual Arts. Cambridge\r\n(MA) & London: MIT Press.\r\nSteiner, D.T., 1998. Images in the Mind: Statues in Archaic and\r\nClassical Greek Literature and Thought. Princeton (NJ)\r\n& Oxford: Princeton University Press.\r\nvan Gelder, T., 1995. What might cognition be, if not computation?\r\nJournal of Philosophy XCII(7), 345–81.\r\nVarela, F.J., E. Thompson & E. Rosch, 1991. The Embodied\r\nMind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge\r\n(MA): MIT Press.\r\nWertheimer, M., 1938. Laws of organization in perceptual\r\nforms, in A Sourcebook of Gestalt Psychology, ed. W.D.\r\nEllis. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 71–88. [First\r\npublished 1923, in Psychol. Forschung 4, 301–50.]\r\nWittgenstein, L., 1953/1958. Philosophical Investigations. 3rd\r\nedition. Oxford: Blackwell.\r\nWynn, T., 2002. Archaeology and cognitive evolution. Behavioral\r\nand Brain Sciences 25, 389–403.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n"
relation_type: []
relation_uri: []
reportno: ~
rev_number: 32
series: ~
source: ~
status_changed: 2008-07-24 09:55:33
subjects:
  - phil-mind
  - evol-psy
  - bio-evo
succeeds: ~
suggestions: ~
sword_depositor: ~
sword_slug: ~
thesistype: ~
title: "Before and Beyond Representation: Towards an enactive conception of the Palaeolithic image\r\n"
type: bookchapter
userid: 6000
volume: ~
<script src="//archive-bar.soton.ac.uk/archive-bar.js"></script>