Publications


Response to Aubert et al.'s reply ‘Early dates for ‘Neanderthal cave art’ may be wrong’

Abstract

Aubert et al. (2018) discuss and criticize age constraints for Paleolithic cave paintings recently published by Hoffmann et al. (2018). Aubert et al. (2018) reiterate the importance of demonstrating the human origin of the painting as well as the stratigraphic relationship between the dated calcite and the art. They argue that (1) in Ardales the red pigment found on curtain formations could be of natural origin, or accidently transferred onto the speleothem surface by humans, and (2) in Maltravieso and La Pasiega we have not demonstrated that the dated calcite formations overlie the pigment. Here we clarify why we feel these criticisms are unfounded.

Bibliography

Hoffmann, D. L., Standish, C. D., García-Diez, M., Pettitt, P. B., Milton, J. A., Zilhão, J., et al. (2019). Response to Aubert et al.'s reply ‘Early dates for ‘Neanderthal cave art’ may be wrong’ [J. Hum. Evol. 125 (2018), 215–217]. Journal of Human Evolution, 135: 102644. doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2019.102644.

Authors Hoffmann, Dirk L. and Standish, Cristopher D. and García-Diez, Marcos and Pettitt, Paul B. and Milton, James A. and Zilhão, João and Alcolea-González, Javier J. and Cantalejo-Duarte, Pedro and Collado, Hipolito and De Balbin-Behrmann, Rodrigo and Ramos Muñoz, José and Weniger, Gerd-Christian and Pike, Alistair W.G. and Lorblanchet, Michel
Type article
Title Response to Aubert et al.'s reply ‘Early dates for ‘Neanderthal cave art’ may be wrong’
Citation Hoffmann, D. L., Standish, C. D., García-Diez, M., Pettitt, P. B., Milton, J. A., Zilhão, J., et al. (2019). Response to Aubert et al.'s reply ‘Early dates for ‘Neanderthal cave art’ may be wrong’ [J. Hum. Evol. 125 (2018), 215–217]. Journal of Human Evolution, 135: 102644. doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2019.102644.
DOI 10.1016/j.jhevol.2019.102644
Journal Journal of human evolution
Year 2019
Number 135
Export BibTeX
Back to dataset list