پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 161 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,532 |
| تعداد مقالات | 70,501 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 124,111,995 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 97,215,724 |
هنر و بقایای زیورآلات پارینه‌سنگی ایران از منظر سه فرضیه اصلی درباره خاستگاه‌های ظرفیت شناختی در انسان | ||
| نشریه هنرهای زیبا: هنرهای تجسمی | ||
| دوره 29، شماره 3، مهر 1403، صفحه 95-111 اصل مقاله (1.14 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jfava.2024.368899.667223 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| تهمینه ایزدیاری1؛ مژگان جایز* 2 | ||
| 1کارشناسی ارشد باستان شناسی، گروه باستان شناسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. | ||
| 2استادیار گروه باستانشناسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه.تهران، تهران، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| انسانشناسان، حضور بقایایی که نشاندهندهی پیچیدگیهای رفتاری (همانند تولید هنر) میباشند را حاصل شکلگیری ظرفیتهای شناختیِ پیچیده در ذهن میدانند. تاکنون سه فرضیه اصلی (انقلاب شناختی، فرآیند تجمعیِ تدریجیِ تطور و گونه‌های چند‌گانه) در خصوص منشأ چگونگیِ آغازِ پیچیدگیهای رفتاری و ظرفیتهای شناختی بر مبنای قدیمی‌ترین آثارِ هنری و صنعتیِ به‌جای‌مانده از انسان شکل گرفتهاست. در این پژوهش با بررسیِ قدیمی‌ترین یافته‌های مرتبط با زیورآلات در دوران پارینه‌سنگیِ ایران این سه فرضیه مورد مطالعه قرار خواهند گرفت. هدف از این پژوهش بررسیِ جایگاهِ ایران در مطالعات شکل‌گرفته در خصوص خاستگاه‌های احتمالیِ ظرفیتهای شناختی در انسان می‌باشد. بر‌این‌اساس قدیمی‌ترین یافته‌های خودآرایی در ایران (از محوطه‌های پارینه‌سنگی غار یافته در لرستان، غار بوف در استان فارس و غارهای کمیشان، کمربند و التپه در مازندران) نشان می‌دهند که خودآرایی همانند دیگر اجزای مدرنیتهی رفتاریِ فرضشده مفهومی نیست که در تاریخ پنجاه هزار سال قبل بهطورِ ناگهان ظهور کرده باشد، بلکه قدیمی‌ترین آثارِ نمادینِ شناخته‌شده از انسانِ هوشمند در آفریقا نشاندهندهی حضورِ بقایای مدرنیتهی رفتاری، هزاران سال پیش از ورود انسانِ هوشمند به اوراسیا هستند. از این منظر انسانِ هوشمند از همان ابتدا دارای ظرفیتهای شناختیِ موردِ نظر بودهاست و براساس شرایط و نیازهای احتمالیِ خویش این ظرفیت‌ها را به دیگر نقاط جهان انتقال داده است. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| رفتار نمادین؛ زیورآلات؛ هنر پیش از تاریخ؛ ظرفیتهای شناختی؛ مدرنیتهی رفتاری | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| A Study on the Paleolithic Ornaments of Iran and Evaluating the Main Models Concerning the Origins of Cognitive Capacity in Human Species | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Tahmineh Izadyari1؛ Mozhgan Jayez2 | ||
| 1Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 2Assistant Professor, Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Thus far, three primary hypotheses—Modern Revolution, Cumulative Evolutionary Process, and Multiple Species Model—have been formulated to explain the origin of cognitive capacities and symbolic behavior, drawing from the earliest artistic artifacts created by humans. This research delves into the examination of these three hypotheses by analyzing the oldest archaeological findings related to art and ornaments in the Paleolithic Period of Iran. The objective is to scrutinize and interpret data on ornaments in Africa and Eurasia, with a specific focus on Iran. The study examines existing analyses and hypotheses on the formation of modern behavior and the continuity of symbolic behavior. It questions whether the hypotheses, initially designed to elucidate the emergence of behavioral modernity in African and European populations, adequately account for the findings in Iran. Alternatively, are they grounded solely in pan-European or pan-African perspectives? Through an exploration of these three hypotheses, the author asserts that the oldest instances of self-adornment in Iran, found in Paleolithic cave sites such as Yafteh in Lorestan, Ghar-e Boof in Fars, and the caves of Komishan, Belt, and Altappeh in Mazandaran, challenge the notion that self-adornment, like other facets of behavioral modernity, abruptly emerged around fifty thousand years ago, as posited by the human revolution model. Instead, early symbolic works in Africa by modern humans suggest the development of cognitive capacities and symbolic behavior thousands of years prior to their migration to Eurasia. Subsequently, as humans dispersed from Africa, they transmitted these capacities to other regions based on varying conditions and needs. This research contends that the artifacts of self-decoration (ornaments) in Iran, spanning the New Paleolithic and the Caspian Mesolithic (between 43 and 10 thousand years ago), align with the hypothesis of the Cumulative Evolutionary Process of development. The temporal correlation of these ornaments with the departure of Homo sapiens from Africa and their expansion into other parts of the world, including Iran, supports the notion of a continuous and cumulative evolution. In addition, the multiple species model, utilized by some researchers to elucidate the origins of behavioral modernity, suggests that many defining characteristics of modern behavior, such as ornaments and art, are not exclusive to the Homo sapiens species. Among Neanderthals, there is evidence indicating their capability to produce these artifacts. However, in Iran, there is a lack of discovered remains suggesting the presence of symbolic behavior in this human species. Also, can we use behavioral modernity as a metaphor to describe the human condition, even if not all identified behaviors are universally observed among all Homo sapiens? Furthermore, the paper suggests integrating various disciplines, including ecology, population science, cognition, genetics, botanical archaeology, morphology, paleoclimatology, geology, and experimental studies. The conclusion is drawn that symbolic culture alone cannot serve as a definitive indicator of cognitive capacities, suggesting that different populations with equal cognitive capabilities may produce varied (practical and symbolic) artifacts based on their unique conditions and needs. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Symbolic Behavior, Ornaments, Prehistoric Art, Cognitive Capacity, Modern Behavior | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
دریاب، سمن و وحدتی نسب، حامد. (1393). انسان نئاندرتال: مرگ و مرگ‌آگاهی. پژوهش‌های انسان‌شناسی ایران، 4(1)، 131-149. {doi: 10.22059/ijar.2014.55492}
شیدرنگ، سونیا. (1385). اشیای تزئینی اوایل دوره‌ی پارینه‌سنگی جدید از غارهای یافته و پاسنگر، لرستان. باستانشناسی و تاریخ، 21(1)، 38-44.
شیدرنگ، سونیا، (1398)، زاگرس در دوران پارینه‌سنگی جدید. بنیاد ایران‌شناسی، تهران.
وحدتی‌نسب، حامد و شاهین آریامنش، (1394)، باستانشناسی پارینه‌سنگی ایران از آغاز تا سپیده دم روستانشینی. تهران: پژوهشگاه میراث فرهنگی، صنایع دستی و گردشگری.
Bar-Yosef Mayer, D. E., Vandermeersch, B., & Bar-Yosef, O. (2009). ‘Shells and ochre in Middle Paleolithic Qafzeh Cave, Israel: indications for modern behavior’, Journal of Human Evolution, 3(56), 307-314. Bednarik, R. G. (2008). Beads and Cognitive Evolution. Time and Mind: The Journal of Archaeology, Consciousness and Culture, III(I), 285-318. Chase, P. G. (1994). On Symbols and the Palaeolithic. The University of Chicago Press, 5(35), 627-629. Chase, P. G., & Dibble, H. L. (1987). Middle Paleolithic Symbolism: A Review of Current Evidence and Interpretations. JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 6(3), 263-296. Chauvet, G. (1910). ivoires et bois de renne ouvrés de la Charente, hypothèses palethnographiques. PARCOURIR LES COLLECTIONS, 2(13), 239-240. Cochran, M. D., & Beaudry, M. C. (2006). Material culture studies and historical archaeology. In D. Hicks & M. C. Beaudry (Eds.), Historical Archaeology (pp. 191-204). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Conard, N. J., & Ghasidian, E. (2011). The Rostamian cultural group and the taxonomy of the Iranian Upper Paleolithic. In N. J. Conard, P. Drechsler, & A. Morales (Eds.), Between Sand and Sea: The Archaeology and Human Ecology of Southwestern Asia; Festschrift in Honor of Hans-Peter Uerpmann (pp. 33-52). Kerns Verlag. Conard, N. J., & Zeidi, M. (2019). New research on the Palaeolithic occupation of Ghae-e Bood, Fars Province. Archaeology, 4(3), 7-16. [http://archj.richt.ir/article-10-287-en.html] Coon, C. S. (1951). Cave explorations in Iran, 1949. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania. D’Errico, F., Vanhaeren, M., & Wadley, L. (2008). ‘Possible shell beads from the Middle Stone Age layers of Sibudu Cave, South Africa’, Journal of Archaeological Science 10(35), 2675-2685. D’Errico, F. (2003). The Invisible Frontier. A Multiple Species Model for the Origin of Behavioral Modernity. Journal of Evolutionary Anthropology, 4(12), 188-202. D’Errico, F., Henshilwood, C., Vanhaeren, M., & Niekerk, K.Van. (2005). ‘Nassarius kraussianus shell beads from Blombos Cave: evidence for symbolic behaviour in the Middle Stone Age’, Journal of Human Evolution, 1(48), 3-24. Davies, S. (2021). Behavioral Modenrity in Retrospect. Springer Nature, 40(1), 221-232, [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-019-09671-4] Deacon, T. W. (1997). The Symbolic Species: The Coevolution of Language and the Brain. New York, NY: W.W. Norton. Fischer, H. (1897). Quelques remarques sur les coquilles quaternaires récoltées par M.E. Piette dans la grotte du Mas d’Azil (Ariège). Journal de Conchyliologie 45, 193-202. Fischer, P. (1876). Sur la conchyliologie des caverns. Bulletins de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris, 11, 181-186. Fischer, P. (1887). Manuel de conchyliologie et de paléontologie conchyliologique ou histoire naturelle des mollusques vivants et fossiles. Harvard University press. Graziosi, P. (1960). Paleolithic art. London, UK: Faber and Faber. Henshilwood, C. S., & Marean, C. W. (2003). The Origin of Modern Human Behavior: Critique of the Models and Their Test Implications. Current Anthropology, 5(44), 627–651. Henshilwood, C. S., D’Errico, F., Niekerk, K. L. V., Coquinot, Y., Jacobs, Z., Lauritzen, S. E., Menu, M., & García-Moreno, R. (2011). ‘A 100,000-Year-Old Ochre-Processing Workshop at Blombos Cave, South Africa’, Science, 6053(334), 219-222. Henshilwood, C. S., D’Errico, F., & Watts, I. (2009). ‘Engraved ochres from the Middle Stone Age levels at Blombos Cave, South Africa’, Journal of Human Evolution, 1(57), 27-47. Heydari, M., Guerin, G., Zeidi, M., & Conard, N. J. (2021). ‘Bayesian luminescence dating at Ghār-e Boof, Iran, provides a new chronology for Middle and Upper Paleolithic in the southern Zagros’, Journal of Human Evolution, 151(102926), 1-15. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2020.102926] Highama, T., Jacobi, R., Juliend, M., Davidd, F., Basella, L., Wood, R., Daviese, W., & Ramseya, C.B. (2010). ‘Chronology of the Grotte du Renne (France) and implications for the context of ornaments and human remains within the Châtelperronian’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 47(107), 20234–20239. Hoffmann, D.L., Standish, C. D., García-Diez, M., Pettitt, P. B., Milton, J. A., Zilhão, J., Alcolea-González, J. J., Cantalejo-Duarte, P., Collado, H., de Balbín, R., Lorblanchet, M., Ramos-Muñoz, J., Weniger, G. C., & Pike, A.W.G. (2018). ‘U-Th dating of carbonate crusts reveals Neandertal origin of Iberian cave art’, Science, 6378 (359), 1-4. [https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aap7778] Jones, O. (1856). The grammar of ornament. London, UK: Bernard Quaritch. Kissel, M., & Fuentes, A. (2018). Behavioral modernity’ as a process, not an event, in the human niche. Time and Mind, 2(11), 163-183. Manca, L., Mashkour, M., Shidrang, S., Averbouha, A., & Biglari, F. (2018). ‘Bone, Shell Tools and Ornaments from the Epipalaeolithic Site of Ali Tappeh, East of Alborz Range, Iran’, Journal of Archaeological Science 21, 137-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2018.06.023 McBrearty,S., & Brooks, A. S., (2000). The revolution that wasn’t: a new interpretation of the origin of modern human behavior. Journal of Human Evolution, 5(39), 453-563. McBurney, C. B. M. (1969). The Cave of Ali Tappeh and the Epi-Palaeolithic in N.E. Iran. The Prehistoric Society, 12(34), 385-413. Mellars, P. (2010). Neanderthal symbolism and ornament manufacture: The bursting of a bubble?. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(47), 20147-20148. Miller, J. M., Sawchuk, E. A., Reedman, A. L. R., & Willoughby, R. (2018). ‘Land Snail Shell Beads in the Sub-Saharan Archaeological Record: When, Where, and Why?’, African Archaeological Review, 3(35), 347-378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10437-018-9305-3 Moro Abadía, O., & Gonzalez Morales, M. R. (2010). Redefining Neanderthals and Art: an Alternative Interpretation of the Multiple Species Model for the Origin of Behavioural Modernity. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 3(29), 229-243. Moro Abadia, O., & Nowell, A. (2014). Palaeolithic Personal Ornaments: Historical Development and Epistemological Challenges. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 3(22), 952-979. Montón-Subías, S., & Hernando, A. (2017). Modern Colonialism, Eurocentrism and Historical Archaeology: Some Engendered Thoughts. European Journal of Archaeology, 3(21), 455-471. Otte, M., Biglari, F., Flas, D., Shidrang, S., Zwyns, N., Mashkour, M., Naderi, R., Mohaseb, A., Hashemi, N., Darvish, J., & Radu, V. (2007). ‘The Aurignacian in the Zagros region: new research at Yafteh Cave, Lorestan, Iran’, antiquity 311(81), 82-96. Peresani, M., Vanhaeren, M., Quaggiotto, E., Queffelec, A., & D’Errico, F. (2013). ‘An Ochered Fossil Marine Shell From the Mousterian of Fumane Cave, Italy’, PLOSE ONE, 8(7), 1-15. Powell, A., Shennan, S., & Thomas, M.G. (2009). ‘Late Pleistocene Demography and the Appearance of Modern Human Behavior’, Science, 5932(324), 1298-1301. Radovčić, D., Sršen, A. O., Radovčić, J., & Frayer, D. W. (2015). ‘Evidence for Neandertal Jewelry: Modified White-Tailed Eagle Claws at Krapina’, PLOS ONE, 10(3), 1-14. Robert, P., & Stewart, A. B. (2018). Defining the ‘generalist specialist’ niche for Pleistocene Homo sapiens. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(8), 442-550. Romagnoli, F., Martini, F., & Sarti, L. (2015). ‘Neanderthal Use of Callista chione Shells as Raw Material for Retouched Tools in South-east Italy: Analysis of Grotta del Cavallo Layer L Assemblage with a New Methodology’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 4(22), 1007-1037. Scerri, M. L. E., & Will, M. (2023). The revolution that still isn't: The origins of behavioral complexity in Homo sapiens. Journal of Human Evolution, 179, 1-19. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2023.103358] Sehasseh, E. M., Fernandez, P., Kuhn, S., Stiner, M., Mentzer, S., Colarossi, D., Clark, A., Lanoe, F., Pailes, M., Hoffmann, D., Benson, A., Rhodes, E., Benmansour, M., Laissaoui, A., Ziani, I., Vidal-Matutano, P., Morales, J., Djellal, Y., Longet, B., Hublin, J. J., Mouhiddine, M., Rafi, F. Z., Worthey, K. B., Sanchez-Morales, I., Ghayati, N., Bouzouggar, A. (2021). Early Middle Stone Age personal ornaments from Bizmoune Cave, Essaouira, Morocco, SCIENCE ADVANCES 39(7), 1-10. [https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abi8620] Steele, T. E., Alvarez Fernandez. E., & Hallett Desguez. E. (2019). ‘Special Issue: Personal Ornaments in Early Prehistory’, PaleoAnthropology Society, 2019, 24-51. [doi:10.4207/PA.2019.ART121] Sterelny, K. (2011). From hominins to humans: how sapiens became behaviourally modern. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 366(1566), 809 – 822. Sterelny, K. (2017). Artifacts, Symbols, Thoughts. Biological Theory, 4(12), 236 – 247. Tylén, K., Fusaroli, R., Rojo, S., Heimann, K., Fay, N., Johannsen, N. N., Riede, F., & Lombard, M. (2020). ‘The Evolution of Early Symbolic Behavior in Homo sapiens’, PNAS, 9(117), 4578-4584. [https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910880117] Vahdati Nasab, H., Jayez, M., Hojabri Nobari, A., Khademi Nadooshan, F., Ilkhani, H., & Mahfroozi, A. (2011). ‘Komishan Cave, Mazandaran, Iran: an Epipalaeolithic and later site on the southern Caspian Sea’, Antiquity 328(085), 1-3. Vahdati Nasab, H., Nikzad, M., Jayez, M., Hashemi, M., Knapp, Z., Sykes, N., Zareh Khalili, M., Ilkhani Moghaddam, H., Bakhtiari Nasab, F., & Olszewski, D.I. (2020). ‘Komishan Cave: A Mesolithic and Later Settlement on the Southeastern Shore of the Caspian Sea. Iran’, Ancient Near Eastern Studies, 57, 97-121. [https://doi.org/10.2143/ANES.57.0.3288614] Vanhaeren, M., & D’Errico, F. (2006). Aurignacian ethno-linguistic geography of Europe revealed by personal ornaments. Journal of Archaeological Science, 8(33), 1105-1128. Vanhaeren, M., d’Errico, F., van Niekerk, K. L., Henshilwood, C. S., & Erasmus, R. M. (2013). ‘Thinking strings: Additional evidence for personal ornament use in the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave,South Africa’, Journal of Human Evolution, 6(64), 500-517. Vanhaeren, M., Wadley, L., & D’Errico, F. (2019). ‘Variability in Middle Stone Age symbolic traditions: the marine shell beads from Sibudu Cave, South Africa’, Journal of Archaeological Science, 1(27): 1-17. [doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2019.101893] White, R. (2007). Systems of personal ornamentation in the Early Upper Palaeolithic: Methodological challenges and new observations. In P. Mellars, K. Boyle, O. Bar-yosef, & C. Stringer (Eds.), Rethinking the Human Revolution (pp. 287-302). Cambridge, UK: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. White, L. A., (1944). THE SYMBOL: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. Institute of General Semantics, 4(1), 229-237. Zervos, C. (1959). L’art de l’époque du Renne en France. Paris: Cahier d’Art. Zilhão, J. (2012). Personal Ornaments and Symbolism Among the Neanderthals. London, UK: Elsevier. Zilhãoa, J., Angeluccib, D. E., Badal-Garcíac, E., D’Errico, F., Danielf, F., Dayetf, L., Doukag, K., Highamg, T. F. G. ,Martínez-Sánchezh, M. J., Montes-Bernárdezi, R., & Murcia-Mascarósj, S. (2010) ‘Symbolic use of marine shells and mineral pigments by Iberian Neandertals’, PNAS USA, 107(3), 1023-1028. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 201 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 309 |
||