Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Finding a Common Bandwidth: Causes of Convergence and Diversity in Paleolithic Beads

  • Thematic Issue Article: Symbols, Signals, and the Archaeological Record
  • Published:
Biological Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ornaments (aka beads) are the most common and ubiquitous art form of the Late Pleistocene. This fact suggests a common, fundamental function somewhat different to other kinds of Paleolithic art. While the capacity for artistic expression could be considerably older than the record of preserved (durable) art would suggest, beads signal a novel development in the efficiency and flexibility of visual communication technology. The Upper Paleolithic was a period of considerable regional differentiation in material culture, yet there is remarkable consistency in the dominant shapes and sizes of Paleolithic beads over more than 25,000 years and across vast areas, even though they were made from diverse materials and, in the case of mollusc shells, diverse taxonomic families. Cultural and linguistic continuity cannot explain the meta-pattern. The evidence indicates that widespread adoption of beads of redundant form was not only about local and subregional communication of personal identity or group affinity, but also an expansion in the geographic scale of social networks. The conformity of the beads grew spontaneously and in a self-organizing manner from individuals’ interest in tapping into the network as a means for spreading social and environmental risk.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Riparo Mochi preserves five major UP cultural horizons—early or proto-Aurignacian (layer G, ca. 36 kya), classic Aurignacian (layer F), Gravettian (layer D), early Epigravettian (layer C), and late Epigravettian (layer A, ca. 9 kya; Kuhn and Stiner 1992, 1998). Klissoura Cave 1 contains an early UP phase known as the Uluzzian (layer V, >39 kya), followed by several Aurignacian (IV–IIIa–g) and Gravettoid (III–III′) components, and Mesolithic (ca. 9 kya; Koumouzelis et al. 2001; Kuhn et al. 2010). Üçağızlı Cave I contains several Initial Upper Paleolithic layers (I–F) followed by several pre-Ahmarian and Ahmarian layers (E–B), capped by an Epipaleolithic deposit (ca. 17 kya; Kuhn et al. 2009).

  2. As an epilogue to the UP pattern, it is interesting to note that bead “madness” shifts in the Epipaleolithic, when tube beads made from the long bones of birds and small mammals and Dentalium (tusk) shells hit the height of fashion and were used in great numbers alongside basket-shaped types (e.g., Bar-Yosef 1989).

References

  • Akazawa T, Muhesen S, Dodo Y et al (1995) Neanderthal infant burial from the Dederiyeh Cave in Syria. Paléorient 21(2):77–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez Fernández E (2002) Ejemplares perforados del gasteropodo Homalopoma sanguineum durante el Paleolithic Superior en Europa occidental. Cypsela 14:43–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose SH (1998) Chronology of the Later Stone Age and food production in East Africa. J Archaeol Sci 25:377–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bader ON (1970) Das zweite Grab in der paläolitischen Siedlung Sungir im mittleren Russland. Quartar 21:103–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahn PG, Vertut J (1988) Images of the Ice Age. Facts on File, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Yosef DE (1989) Late Paleolithic and Neolithic marine shells in the southern Levant as cultural markers. In: Bar-Yosef O, Valla FR (eds) Proceedings of the 1986 shell bead conference: selected papers. Research Records number 20. Rochester Museum and Science Center, Rochester, pp 169–174

  • Bar-Yosef O, Vandermeersch B, Arensburg B et al (1992) The excavations in Kebara Cave, Mt. Carmel. Curr Anthropol 33:497–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Yosef Mayer DE, Vandermeersch B, Bar-Yosef O (2009) Shells and ochre in Middle Paleolithic Qafzeh Cave, Israel: indications for modern behavior. J Human Evol 56(3):307–314

  • Bicho NF, Stiner M, Lindly J et al (2003) Preliminary results from the Upper Paleolithic site of Vale Boi, southwestern Portugal. J Iber Archaeol 5:51–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Boëda É (1986) Approche technologique du concept Levallois et évaluation de son champ d’application. Thèse de doctorat, Université de Paris X, Paris

  • Bouzouggar A, Barton N, Vanhaeren M et al (2007) 82,000-year-old shell beads from North Africa and implications for the origins of modern human behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:9964–9969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burch ES Jr (1991) Modes of exchange in north-west Alaska. In: Ingold T, Riches D, Woodburn J (eds) Hunters and gatherers: property, power, and ideology, vol 2. Berg, Oxford, pp 95–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Clottes J (2003) Chauvet Cave: the art of earliest times. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City

    Google Scholar 

  • Cashden EA (1985) Coping with risk: reciprocity among the Basarwa of northern Botswana. Man 20(3):454–474

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowan R, Jonard N (2004) Network structure and the diffusion of knowledge. J Econ Dyn Control 28:1557–1575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • d’Errico F (2008) The rouge et le noir. Implications of early pigment use in Africa, the Near East and Europe for the origin of cultural modernity. In: Lombard M, Sievers C, Ward V (eds) Current themes in Middle Stone Age research. South African Archaeological Society Goodwin Series, vol 10, pp 168–174

  • d’Errico F, Zilháo J, Julien M, Baffie D, Pelegrin J (1998) Neanderthal acculturation in Western Europe? A critical review of the evidence and its interpretation. Current Anth 39:S1–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson I, Noble W (1989) The archaeology of perception: traces of depiction and language. Curr Anthropol 30:125–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feblot-Augustins J (2009) Revisiting European Upper Palaeolithic raw material transfers: The demise of the cultural ecological paradigm? In: Adams B, Blades BS (Eds) Lithic Materials and Paleolithic Societies. Wiley, New York, pp 25–46

  • Gamble CS (1986) The Palaeolithic settlement of Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamble CS (1999) The Palaeolithic societies of Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Geneste J-M (1985) Analyse lithique d’industries moustériennes du Périgord: une approche technologique du comportement des groupes humains au Paléolithique moyen. Thèse de Doctorat de l’Université de Bordeaux I, Bordeaux

  • Granovetter M (1973) The strength of weak ties. Am J Sociol 78:1360–1380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurioli F, Cilli C, Giacobini G, Broglio A (2005) Le conchiglie perforate aurignaziane della Grotta di Fumane (VR). Atti del IV Convegno Nazionale di Archeozoologia, 13/15 novembre 2003, Pordenone, pp 59–65

  • Hahn J (1972) Aurignacian signs, pendants, and art objects in Central and Eastern Europe. World Archaeol 3:252–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henshilwood C, d’Errico F, Vanhaeren M et al (2004) Middle Stone Age shell beads from South Africa. Science 304:404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henshilwood CS, d’Errico F, Watts I (2009) Engraved ochres from the Middle Stone Age levels of Blombos Cave, South Africa. J Hum Evol 57(1):27–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koumouzelis M, Ginter B, Kozlowski JK et al (2001) The early upper Palaeolithic in Greece: the excavations in Klissoura Cave. J Archaeol Sci 28:515–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozlowski JK (ed) (1982) Excavation in the Bacho Kiro Cave, Bulgaria. Paristwowe Wydarunictwo, Nawkowe, Warsaw

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn SL (1995) Mousterian lithic technology: an ecological perspective. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn SL (2012) Emergent patterns of creativity and innovation in early technologies. In: Elias S (ed) Origins of human innovation and creativity. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 69–88

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn SL, Stiner MC (1992) New research on Riparo Mochi, Balzi Rossi (Liguria): preliminary results. Quat Nova II:79–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn SL, Stiner MC (1998) The earliest Aurignacian of Riparo Mochi (Liguria). Curr Anthropol 39:S175–S189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn SL, Stiner MC (2007) Body ornamentation as information technology: towards an understanding of the significance of early beads. In: Mellars P, Boyle K, Bar-Yosef O, Stringer C (eds) Rethinking the human revolution. McDonald Institute monographs. University of Cambridge Press, Cambridge, pp 45–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn SL, Stiner MC, Reese DS, Güleç E (2001) Ornaments in the earliest Upper Paleolithic: new results from the Levant. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:7641–7646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn SL, Stiner MC, Güleç E, Özer I, Yılmaz H, Baykara I, Açikkol A, Goldberg P, Martínez Molina K, Ünay E, Suata-Alpaslan F (2009) The Early Upper Paleolithic occupations at Üçağızlı Cave (Hatay, Turkey). J Human Evol 56:87–113

  • Kuhn SL, Pigati J, Karkanas P, Koumouzelis M, Kozlowski J, Ntinou M, Stiner MC (2010) Radiocarbon dating results for the early Upper Paleolithic of Klissoura 1. Eurasian Prehist 7(2):37–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Meignen L (1988) Un exemple de comportement technologique différentiel selon des matières premières: Marillac, couches 9 et 10. In: Otte M (ed) L’homme de Néandertal. Vol. 4: La technique. ERAUL 31, Université de Liège, Liège, pp 71–80

  • Meignen L (1998) Hayonim Cave lithic assemblages in the context of the Near Eastern Middle Paleolithic: a preliminary report. In: Akazawa T, Aoki K, Bar-Yosef O (eds) Neanderthals and modern humans in West Asia. Plenum Press, New York, pp 165–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostram E (2003) How types of goods and property rights jointly affect collective action. J Theor Pol 15:239–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peirce CS (1935) Collected papers. Department of Philosophy, Harvard University. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlès C, Vanhaeren M (2010) Black Cyclope neritea marine shell ornaments in the Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Franchthi (Argolid, Greece): arguments for an intentional heat treatment. J Field Archaeol 35(3):298–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rendu W (2010) Hunting behavior and Neanderthal adaptability in the Late Pleistocene site of Pech-de-l’Azé I. J Archaeol Sci 37:1798–1810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roebroeks W, Sier MJ, Kellberg Nielsen T et al (2012) Use of red ochre by early Neanderthals. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:1889–1894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossano MJ (2010) Making friends, making tools, and making symbols. Current Anth 51:S89–S98

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabelli B (1980) In: Feinberg HS (ed) Simon and Schuster’s guide to shells. Simon and Schuster, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweizer T (1996) Reconsidering social networks: reciprocal gift exchange among the !Kung. J Quant Anthropol 6:147–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Shackleton JC (1988) Marine molluscan remains from Franchthi Cave, excavations at Franchthi Cave, fasc. 4. Indiana University Press, Bloomington

    Google Scholar 

  • Starkovich BM, Stiner MC (2010) Upper Paleolithic animal exploitation at Klissoura Cave 1 in southern Greece: dietary trends and mammal taphonomy. Eurasian Prehist 7(2):107–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiner MC (1999) Trends in Paleolithic mollusk exploitation at Riparo Mochi (Balzi Rossi, Italy): food and ornaments from the Aurignacian through Epigravettian. Antiquity 73:735–754

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiner MC (2001) Thirty years on the “Broad Spectrum Revolution” and Paleolithic demography. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:6993–6996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiner MC (2010) Shell ornaments from the Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic layers of Klissoura Cave 1 by Prosymnia, Greece. Eurasian Prehist 7:287–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiner MC, Kuhn SL (2006) Changes in the ‘connectedness’ and resilience of Paleolithic societies in Mediterranean ecosystems. Hum Ecol 34:693–712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiner MC, Kuhn SL, Güleç E (2013) Early Upper Paleolithic shell beads at Üçağizli Cave I (Turkey): technology and the socioeconomic context of ornament life-histories. J Hum Evol 64:380–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taborin Y (1993) La parure en coquillage au Paléolithique. XXIXe supplément à Gallia Préhistoire. CNRS, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanhaeren M, d’Errico F (2006) Aurignacian ethno-linguistic geography of Europe revealed by personal ornaments. J Archaeol Sci 33:1105–1128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanhaeren M, d’Errico F, Stringer C et al (2006) Middle Paleolithic shell beads in Israel and Algeria. Science 312:1785–1788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verneau R (1906) Les grottes de Grimaldi (Baoussé-Roussé): anthropologie. Imprimerie de Monaco, Monaco

    Google Scholar 

  • Watts DJ, Strogatz SH (1998) Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393:440–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White R (2003) Prehistoric art: the symbolic journey of humankind. Harry N. Abrams, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiessner P (1977) Hxaro: a regional system of reciprocity for reducing risk among the !Kung San. PhD Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University Microfilms, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

  • Wiessner P (1983) Style and social information in Kalahari San projectile points. Am Antiq 48:253–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiessner P (1984) Reconsidering the behavioral basis for style: a case study among the Kalahari San. J Anthropol Archaeol 3:190–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wobst HM (1974) Boundary conditions for Paleolithic social systems: a simulation approach. Amer Antiq 39(2):147–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Wobst HM (1977) Stylistic behavior and information exchange. In: Cleland CE (ed) Papers for the director: research essays in honor of James B. Griffin. Anthropological Paper 61, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, pp 317–342

Download references

Acknowledgments

Warm thanks for the help and support of my Italian colleagues while studying the shell collections of Riparo Mochi in Rome, especially A. Bietti, A. Segre, and E. Segre-Naldini; to my Turkish colleagues in the Üçağızlı Cave I excavation project, especially E. Güleç, I. Özer, I. Baykara, A. Açikkol; and to my Greek colleagues in the Klissoura Cave excavation project, especially M. Koumouzelis, P. Karkanas, and B. Starkovich. I am also particularly grateful to Steve Kuhn, sometimes co-author and inspiring discussant on the evolution of human communication systems. Much thanks to Kim Sterelny and Peter Hiscock for their pithy comments on an earlier draft of this paper. Parts of this research were funded by the National Science Foundation and the L. S. B. Leakey Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA

    Mary C. Stiner

Authors
  1. Mary C. Stiner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mary C. Stiner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stiner, M.C. Finding a Common Bandwidth: Causes of Convergence and Diversity in Paleolithic Beads. Biol Theory 9, 51–64 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-013-0157-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-013-0157-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation