Content uploaded by Josephine J McDonald
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Josephine J McDonald on Oct 28, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
CLOTTES J. (dir.). — L’art pléistocène dans le monde / Pleistocene art of the world / Arte pleistoceno en el mundo
Actes du Congrès Ifrao, Tarascon-sur-Ariège, septembre 2010 – Symposium « Art pléistocène en Australie »
Pleistocene rock art: a colonizing repertoire
for Australia’s earliest inhabitants
Jo McDONALD and Peter VETH
Abstract
A recent paper discussing the arrival of modern humans into Australia 50 ka argues that rock art was
one of a suite of behaviours which would have facilitated the colonization of the most arid continent on
earth. In this paper we discuss the social mechanisms and likely art correlates for that behaviour. The
distribution of Australia’s earliest art throughout the arid zone –and its cultural continuity in that
environmental context– are discussed.
We have recently argued that rock art played an integral role in the information
exchange systems deployed by colonizers of the most arid continent on earth –
Australia (McDonald & Veth 2011; Veth et al. 2011). We have also argued that there
is good evidence for regional diversification in the use of material symbols in the pre-
LGM record in Australia. The successful colonization of the arid and semi-arid core of
Sahul in this time period has broader implications for the use of art as a social
signifier. In this paper we re-analyze the earlier debates on the chronology for rock
art use in Australia –recasting this not as an evolutionary trend (Maynard 1979) but
rather as a necessary component in the colonization of a naive landscape and then
successful adaptation to a range of environmental niches. By contextualizing this
early rock art into other aspects of the Pleistocene archaeological record, we argue it
is possible to theorize the use of rock art at this early period –despite the elusiveness
of dated assemblages.
Previous models of Australian rock art
In the 1970’s Lesley Maynard provided a tri-partite schema for Australian rock art
(building on the earlier work of e.g. Edwards 1971) and the widespread belief that
there was an ancient engraved tradition across the arid zone (e.g. Basedow 1914).
Maynard’s model saw an evolution from a pan-continental stylistically-homogenous
(i.e. non-figurative) Panaramitee style assemblage of engravings/petroglyphs
replaced by a set of regional Simple Figurative styles and regional Complex
Figurative styles. The complex and simple figurative style(s) are either petroglyphs or
pigment and in a few regions are dual media art bodies (e.g. Sydney: McDonald
2008). Complex figurative styles were seen as only occurring in the north and
northwest of Australia. Maynard’s model was explicitly evolutionary:
Symposium Australie
CD-2
Although she allows for the co-existence of different styles in different parts of the
continent, the notion of a developmental sequence is implicit […], indeed it is quite
explicit in her final analysis. (Rosenfeld 1991: 136)
In the 1990s serious critique of the Panaramitee set in –fuelled by the proliferation
of regional studies around the continent (see debate on chronology in Rock Art
Research 1988; and Rosenfeld 1991, 1993) and by the advent of AMS and other
dating of the various components of rock art around the continent. These earlier
criticisms have been compounded by more detailed analysis of “Panaramitee” sites
(e.g. Franklin 2004) and the proliferation of regional research projects, which have
further demonstrated regional stylistic difference in most parts of Australia. The main
problems with the model are seen as (and see Bednarik 1995, 2010b and this CD;
Franklin 2004; Rosenfeld 1991):
– the definition of the style was too wide (including material which was both
structurally and formally diverse) and yet too narrow (in its insistence on restricted
technology and likely age);
– that regionally diverse styles were demonstrably present in the Pleistocene (at that
time, the dynamic figures from Arnhem Land, the non-figurative integrative systems
from north-east Queensland, as well as track and circle systems in the arid zone);
– and there was evidence for continuity of the ancient track and circle (and other non-
figurative) motifs up to the recent past/present in central Australia.
While the problems of the tri-partite model have been clearly explicated,
increasingly complex patterning which continues to be identified across the continent
has stymied the development of a better model –and this seems likely to be because
the diachronic pattern present across the continent is not unidirectional; but more
episodic and mosaic-like in its patterning.
What is clear is that there is an older –predominantly geometric– art form present
across Australia, which is replaced in some areas by one or more figurative art
vocabularies; while in other areas this iconography appears to endure. While the
timing for the introduction of different elements into the art graphic through time is no
doubt a continuing point of departure for many rock art researchers –and the dating
of the earliest aspect of this is still wide-open for debate (and the development of
suitable and replicable dating techniques), most researchers these days consider
that there is a Pleistocene art signature in Australia, and the debate is more about
what this can tell us about the earliest inhabitants of this most arid country on earth.
The colonization of Sahul
When people moved into the semi-arid and arid interior of Sahul circa 45,000
years ago, surface water was abundant and conditions were considerably more
benign than they are now (Hiscock & Wallis 2005; Veth et al. 2009). Evidence
relating to the economic, technological and social strategies employed by these
colonizing populations is limited, but has been interpreted as indicating highly flexible
territorial arrangements and subsistence activities (Veth 2005). It also suggests that a
focus of people’s activities was on large, freshwater lake systems which would have
provided an array of predictable aquatic resources.
The rapid dispersal of the colonizing populations into an array of different habitats,
points to the existence of complex information exchange systems that enabled parent
and daughter populations to maintain existing social networks and small colonizing
McDONALD J. & VETH P., Pleistocene rock art: a colonizing repertoire for Australia’s earliest inhabitants
CD-3
populations to establish new networks as well as pass on information about the
location and distribution of resources (Balme et al. 2009; Veth et al. 2011). The
establishment and maintenance of social networks would have been particularly
important for the long-term survival of small, dispersed and highly mobile populations
in semi-arid and arid habitats characterized by spatially and temporally patchy
resources (cf. Smith & Hesse 2005; Veth 2005).
Part of Pleistocene Sahul now lies beneath the ocean, but perhaps of greater
consequence in constraining the recovery of evidence for the earliest rock art is the
nature of the art sites and the landscapes in which they are found –and the way that
people have used these. Low energy geomorphic settings which allow continuous
accumulation of sediment without major changes in temperature and moisture are
needed to preserve organics over many thousands of millennia. The limestone caves
of Palaeolithic Europe are of course perfect repositories for this type of evidence. In
Australia, however, petroglyphs and paintings tend to occur –not in deep caves– but
in shallow sandstone or quartzite rockshelters on surfaces that are open to the
elements and where long-term preservation is less likely. The deep limestone caves
in Australia occur across a southern arc (e.g. Devils Lair, Nullabor Plain and Mt
Gambier): these are the exception to this: and indeed it is in these contexts that
some of the earliest symbolic behaviour (rock art and mobiliary art) has been
demonstrated (Bednarik 2010a). But these relatively few deep caves do not appear
to have provided the same sort of loci for continuous social action over long periods
of time, as is witnessed in Europe. And many have argued that finger fluting is more
a visual manifestation of a gesture rather than a system of referential symbols
(Rosenfeld 1993: 77).
The types of material markers employed, and the contexts in which they were
used, have an obvious effect on the probability that they will enter the sedimentary
record. Ornaments and complex tools imbued with high social value were
undoubtedly curated, transported and/or recycled and consequently, entered the
archaeological record infrequently. Judging from the frequency with which broken
slabs of engraved or painted rock are recovered from dated stratigraphic contexts,
they too had a low probability of entering the sedimentary record, albeit for different
reasons. Direct dating of the mineral skins that cover rock paintings and petroglyphs
has been attempted in Australia, but the number of reliable age determinations is still
limited (Watchman 2001; Cole & Watchman 2005; Smith et al. 2009) and few of the
oldest paintings contain organic materials that could be dated using radiocarbon.
This affects our ability to effectively assess the extent of ancient symbolic systems.
Despite the factors affecting the survival and visibility of past information exchange
systems, the early Pleistocene records of Australia and New Guinea preserve a
variety of such evidence. We have discussed this substantial body of evidence in our
recent papers (Balme et al. 2009; Veth et al. 2011) but we summarize the relevant
data here, particularly as this is in contrast to other reviews of Upper Palaeolithic
traits (Brumm & Moore 2005; Habgood & Franklin 2008).
Identity markers
Items of personal adornment that arguably functioned as identity markers and
helped to mediate intra- and/or inter-group interactions have been recovered from
widely dispersed pre-Last Glacial Maximum sites. Two of these sites are in the semi-
arid zone of north-west Australia. At Mandu Mandu Creek, 22 cone shell beads older
Symposium Australie
CD-4
than 32,000 BP were recovered, while at the Kimberley site of Riwi, 10 tusk shell
beads were dated to c. 30,000 BP (Balme & Morse 2006). The Mandu Mandu beads
have perforations and edge damage consistent with their having been strung. The
Riwi beads also have evidence of suspension edge damage as well as the remains
of fibre and ochre colouring. On New Ireland, a perforated shark’s tooth from Buang
Merabak (Leavesley 2007), dated to between 40,000-28,000 BP was recovered,
while bone beads from Devil’s Lair, in south-west Australia, have been dated to
19,000-17,000 BP (Dortch 1984).
Fig. 1. Locations of sites in Sahul that contain early evidence for symbolic behaviour
(from Veth et al. 2011: Fig. 2).
Ochre processing
Ochre is preserved at many Australian pre-LGM sites, but we restrict our
discussion here to thosesites that contain facetted ochre, grindstones that were used
to process ochre, or slabs smeared with pigment. A painted rock fragment recovered
from Carpenter’s Gap in the Kimberley has been dated to 42 ka (O’Connor &
Fankhauser 2001) and evidence for the grinding of ochre has been recovered from
McDONALD J. & VETH P., Pleistocene rock art: a colonizing repertoire for Australia’s earliest inhabitants
CD-5
Malakunja 2 and Nauwalabila 1 in Arnhem Land, the lower levels of which are dated
by OSL to 53 and 59-53 ka (Roberts et al. 1994). Younger sites with evidence for the
processing of ochre are scattered across the continent (Fig. 1).
Long distance movement of material
The extent of people’s social networks is documented at a number of pre-LGM
sites by evidence for long-distance movement of materials (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2. Map of Sahul showing the evidence for long distance movement of high social value materials
dated to >25,000 years and the areas in which Pleistocene art is found (from Veth et al. 2011: Fig. 3).
Ochre has been recovered from many Pleistocene sites, but only a few of these
occurrences have been sourced. The oldest evidence for long-distance movement of
ochre used in a ritual context is the ochre that decorated the Mungo III cremation,
between 42,000-38,000 BP. The nearest source of ochre is in the Barrier Range,
250 km from Lake Mungo. In central Australia, ochre sourced at Karkurr was moved
125 km to Puritjara between 32-18,000 BP (Smith et al. 1998), while the closest
source for the ochre recovered from the 25-22,000 year-old levels at Mandu Mandu
was 300 km away.
Un-worked pearl and baler shell are present in the 28-19 ka levels at Widgingarri
when the coast was 200 km away, and baler shell is present in the 30-19 ka levels at
Carpenter’s Gap, when the coast was more than 100 km away (O’Connor 1995). The
Symposium Australie
CD-6
nearest coastline was 500 km away from Riwi 30 ka when shell beads were
transported to the site.
Complex tools
Complex tools including boomerangs appear in the earliest Kimberley pigment
paintings and stencils (the irregular infill animal period) with subsequent phases of
Bradshaw figures (or Gwion Gwion: Doring et al. 2000) demonstrating increasingly
complex weaponry (Walsh 2000). Complex tools are also recorded amongst dynamic
figure pigment art in northern Australia (Chaloupka 1993). Although dating of these
art styles is not conclusive, an OSL date suggesting a minimum age of 17 ka for one
Bradshaw/Gwion Gwion painting (Roberts et al. 1997) and studies of style, motif and
environment (e.g. Lewis 1988; Chaloupka 1993; Chippendale & Taçon 1998) suggest
that these could reasonably be expected to be Pleistocene (see below).
In those same paintings dilly bags are also depicted showing the presence of a
fibre technology. Fibre is rarely preserved in early archaeological deposits but other
evidence from the region suggests its critical importance in the development of
complex technology. Fibre was almost certainly used as a fastening component in
the colonization watercraft that had to cover long distances and strong currents. The
presence of large deep-water fish in Timor at the site of Jerimilai and from the New
Ireland site of Buang Merabak, both dating to about 40 ka, implies deep-sea fishing
techniques. The use of nets has been invoked to explain the abundance of fish of
uniform size within single use middens preserved in Pleistocene sand dunes
bounding an inland lake in western New South Wales (Balme 1995). The Riwi and
Mandu Mandu beads with evidence for stringing are further confirmation of the role of
fibre in complex artefact design.
Regional art traditions
Much of the extant body of painted and engraved art in Sahul is of unknown age,
and most of it is undoubtedly Holocene in age. However, the art from at least four
areas includes likely Pleistocene components: the early paintings from Arnhem Land
(Lewis 1988; Chaloupka 1993; Chippindale & Taçon 1998), the Kimberley (Roberts
2000; Roberts et al. 1997), the early paintings and petroglyphs from Cape York
peninsula (Rosenfeld et al. 1981; Morwood 2002; Watchman 1993; Cole &
Watchman 2005) and engraved arid zone assemblages some of which include
“archaic faces” (Fig. 2). The art from each of these areas is quite distinct, and
indicates that symbolic differentiation of populations from different parts of the arid
zone likely took place before the LGM (McDonald 2005; see also Franklin 2004).
These are not formal definitions of “art traditions” but refer to geographic location or
well-known studies of the art (e.g. archaic faces (Dix 1977); Kimberley (Walsh 1994);
Arnhem Land (Chaloupka 1993); Cape York (Rosenfeld et al. 1981).
In the Cape York Peninsula, age determinations for pigment minerals contained in
the oxalate crusts show that paintings were likely being produced in this region 32.6-
29 ka (Watchman 2001). This pigment may have been part of a stencil or a painting
and no stylistic information exists for this “art”. Similarly, excavation at Sandy Creek 1
indicated that this site was first occupied 34 ka ago, and that painting was a feature
of site use throughout the entire cultural sequence, while in Sandy Creek 2 a rock
painting was direct dated to 27 ka (Morwood 2002: 270). Engraved art in this part of
Queensland is also known to be late Pleistocene in age: at Early Man Shelter, buried
McDONALD J. & VETH P., Pleistocene rock art: a colonizing repertoire for Australia’s earliest inhabitants
CD-7
engraved art on the back wall of the shelter (tracks and geometric designs) was
dated to a minimum of 15.7 cal. BP (Rosenfeld et al. 1981), while a similar age was
obtained at Sandy Creek 1. At Green Ant Shelter, a date of 10 ka was obtained for a
buried slab with patinated petroglyphs (Flood & Horsfall 1986). The point to be made
about the dated engraved art in this region is that it is all minimum ages, dependent
upon subsequent sediment build up in rockshelter locations.
On the Arnhem Land plateau four phases of painting have been distinguished on
the basis of content and stylistic conventions. Several phases pre-date the post-
glacial rise in sea level, an inference based on the depiction of extinct animals in the
earliest paintings and the fact that contemporary marine and swamp fauna are
depicted only in the most recent paintings (Lewis 1988; Chaloupka 1993;
Chippendale & Taçon 1998). There are marked discontinuities between the different
phases of painting, reflecting changes in the environment as the sea flooded the
Arafura Plain. A recent find in the Katharine area –a depiction of now extinct
Genyornis, has provided further evidence of pigment art being depicted around 40 ka
(Gunn, quoted in Australian Geographic, June 1, 2010). Archaeological and
paleontological evidence for the extinction of Genyornis in Australia is between 40-
50 ka (Field & Wroe 2007).
In the Kimberley region, an OSL age determination of 17.5 ka on a mud wasp nest
that overlay a pigment figure (Roberts et al. 1997; Roberts 2000; Walsh 2000)
suggests that this art tradition was well established (at a minimum) a few thousand
years after the LGM. Several paintings in the Kimberley have now been interpreted
as depicting the extinct carnivore Thylacoleo carnifex (Akerman 2009; Akerman &
Willing 2009). One of these is consistent with the early large naturalistic phase
(Akerman and Willing 2009), while the other is associated with an early Bradshaw
figure, with the human and striped marsupial separated by a multi-barbed spear
(Akerman 2009). If this depiction has been interpreted correctly as Thylacoleo
carnifex then it suggests considerable antiquity for this art as there is no available
evidence for Thylacoleo more recent than 44,000 and 42,000 years ago (Turney et
al. 2001).
In many parts of the arid zone, a distinctive suite of petroglyphs has been
documented. While being a broadly homogeneous style (Edwards 1971; Maynard
1979), variation in the proportions of motifs depicted suggests regional differentiation
within this widespread graphic tradition (Franklin 2004; McDonald 2005). These
petroglyphs are undated but most of them are heavily weathered, patinated and
otherwise altered by geological processes. Thus, they are widely regarded as old
(Edwards 1968; Dix 1977; Walsh 1994: 68-74; McDonald 2005), although none has
been uncontroversially dated (Reneau et al. 1991; Watchman 1992, 2000). “Archaic
faces” found amongst this art tradition have been interpreted as demonstrating the
extent of a regional networks in this distinct graphic tradition (McDonald 2005).
This differentiation of art styles relatively early in the continent suggests that
symbolism was used to mark identity over areas much wider than has been
documented by the chance (firmly dated) occurrences of personal ornaments or
fragments of ochre. While shell ornaments are likely to have demonstrated personal
relationship role levels within the social groups, the marking of places through
painting and/or petroglyph would have indicated the relationship of the artists to their
country –both to members of the society and to outsiders. In both respects, symbols
seem likely to have conveyed information important to the successful colonization of
the arid and semi-arid regions.
Symposium Australie
CD-8
The fact that an older –predominantly geometric– arid zone art form present
across most of the continent, is replaced in some areas by one or more figurative art
vocabularies should form the continuing focus for research. The fact that this
iconography has endured in the arid zone should similarly provide a significant focus
for continuing research. Many researchers –including Bednarik in this pre-conference
publication– have expressed incredulity that a rock art style might persevere from the
Pleistocene through the Holocene and indeed to the current day. The challenge to
current research in Australia is not only to date the earliest art in Australia; but to
continue to disentangle the ethnographic realities of a recursive rock art tradition; to
understand how people use an iconographic style –to attempt to explore the
patterning in this with a view to understanding the deep past.
Acknowledgments
This paper relies heavily on research and previous papers written by the authors with
others. We thank Jane Balme, Iain Davidson and Nikki Stern for stimulating various aspects
of this debate which have been developed here. Figures 1 and 2 were drawn by Rudy Frank,
La Trobe University (Veth et al. 2011: Fig. 9.1 and 9.3).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
AKERMAN K. 2009. — Interaction between humans and megafauna depicted in Australian rock-art? Antiquity, 83 (322).
Antiquity's Project Gallery <http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/akerman322/> (accessed 2012/04/06).
AKERMAN K. & WILLING T. 2009. — An ancient rock painting of a marsupial lion. Thylacaleo carnifex, from the Kimberley
region Western Australia. Antiquity, 83 (319). Antiquity's Project Gallery <http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/akerman319/>
(accessed 2012/04/06).
BALME J. 1995. — 30,000 years of fishery in western NSW. Archaeology in Oceania, 30, p. 1-21.
BALME J. 2000. — Excavations revealing 40,000 years of occupation at Mimbi Caves in south central Kimberley of Western
Australia. Australian Archaeology, 51, p. 5.
BALME J., DAVIDSON I., MCDONALD J., STERN N., VETH P. 2009. — The symbolic signatures of modern diasporas: the
southern arc. Quaternary International, 202, p. 59–68.
BALME J. & MORSE K. 2006. — Shell beads and social behaviour in Pleistocene Australia. Antiquity, 80 p. 799-811.
BASEDOW H. 1914. Aboriginal rock carvings of great antiquity in South Australia. Journal of the Royal Anthropological
Institute, 44, p. 195-211.
BEDNARIK R.G. 1995. — Taking the style out of the Panaramitee style. AURA Newsletter, 12 (1), p. 1-5.
BEDNARIK R.G. 2010a. — Australian rock art of the Pleistocene. Rock Art Research, 27, p. 95-120.
BEDNARIK R.G. 2010b. — The nature of Australian Pleistocene rock art. : In : L’art pléistocène dans le monde, Congrès de
l’Ifrao, sept. 2010. Symposium « Art pléistocène en Australie ». (Pré-Actes).
BRUMM A. & MOORE M.W. 2005. — Symbolic revolutions and the Australian archaeological record. Cambridge
Archaeological Journal, 15, 157-175.
CHALOUPKA G. 1993. — Journey in Time. The World's Longest Continuing Art Tradition. The 50, 000-year Story of the
Australian Aboriginal Rock Art of Arnhem Land. Sydney : Reed.
CHIPPINDALE C. & TAÇON P.S.C. 1998. — The many ways of dating Arnhem Land rock art, north Australia. In :
CHIPPENDALE C. & TAÇON P.S.C. (eds.), The Archaeology of Rock-art, p. 90-111. Cambridge : Cambridge University
Press.
COLE N. & WATCHMAN A. 2005. — AMS dating of rock art in the Laura region, Cape York Peninsula, Australia-protocols
and results of recent research. Antiquity, 79, p. 661-678.
DAVIDSON I. 2010. — The Colonization of Australia and Its Adjacent Islands and the Evolution of Modern Cognition. Current
Anthropology, 51 (S1), June, p. S177-S189.
McDONALD J. & VETH P., Pleistocene rock art: a colonizing repertoire for Australia’s earliest inhabitants
CD-9
DIX W. 1977. — Facial representations in the Pilbara rock engravings. In : UCKO P.J. (ed.), Form in Indigenous Art, p. 277-
285. London : Duckworth.
DORING J. (ed.), with NGARJNO, UNGUDMAN, BANGGAL, NYAWARRA 2000. — Gwion Gwion: Dulwan Mamaa. Secret
and sacred pathways of the Ngarinyin Aboriginal people of Australia. Köln : Könemann.
EDWARDS R. 1968. — Prehistoric rock engravings at Thomas Reservoir, Cleland Hills, western central Australia. Records
of the South Australian Museum, 15 (4), p. 647-670.
EDWARDS R. 1971. — Art and Aboriginal Prehistory. In : MULVANEY D.J. & GOLSON J. (eds.), Aboriginal Man and
Environment in Australia, p. 356-377. Canberra : ANU Press.
FRANKLIN N.R. 2004. — Explorations of Variability in Australian Prehistoric Rock Engravings. Oxford : Hadrian Books Ltd,
British Archaeological Reports. (BAR International Series ; 1318)
HABGOOD P.J. & FRANKLIN N.R. 2008. — The revolution that didn’t arrive: A review of Pleistocene Sahul. Journal of
Human Evolution, 55, p. 187-222.
HISCOCK P. & WALLIS L. 2005. — Pleistocene settlement of deserts from an Australian perspective. In : VETH P., SMITH
M., HISCOCK P. (eds.), Desert Peoples: Archaeological Perspectives, p. 58-77. Oxford : Blackwell.
LEAVESLEY M. 2007. — A shark-tooth ornament from Pleistocene Sahul. Antiquity, 81, p. 308-315.
LEWIS D.J. 1988. — The Rock Paintings of Arnhem Land, Australia: Social, ecological and material culture change in the
postglacial period. Oxford : Archaeopress, British Archaeological Reports. (BAR International series ; S415).
McDONALD J.J. 2005. — Archaic faces to headdresses: The changing role of the rock art across the arid zone. In : VETH
P., HISCOCK P., SMITH M. (eds.), Desert Peoples: Archaeological Perspectives, p. 116-141. Oxford : Blackwell.
McDONALD J.J. 2008. — Dreamtime Superhighway: Sydney Basin rock art and prehistoric information exchange.
Canberra : The Australian National University. (Terra Australis ; 27).
ANU E Press <http://epress.anu.edu.au/titles/terra-australis/ta27_citation> (accessed 2012/04/06).
McDONALD J.J. & VETH P. 2011. — Information Exchange amongst Hunter-Gatherers of the Western Desert of Australia.
In : WHALLON R., LOVIS W.A., HITCHCOCK R.K. (eds.), Information and Its Role in Hunter-Gatherer Bands. Los
Angeles : Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press. (Ideas, Debates and Perspectives ; 5).
MAYNARD L. 1979. — The archaeology of Australian Aboriginal art. In : MEAD S.M. (ed.), Exploring the Visual Art of
Oceania, p. 83-110. Hawaii, Honolulu : University Press of Hawaii.
MORWOOD M.J. 2002. — Visions from the Past: The archaeology of Australian Aboriginal Art. Crows Nest, N.S.W. : Allen &
Unwin.
O'CONNELL J.F. & ALLEN J. 2004. — Dating the colonization of Sahul (Pleistocene Australia-New Guinea): a review of
recent research. Journal of Archaeological Science, 31, p. 835-853.
O’CONNOR S. 1995. — Carpenter’s Gap Rockshelter 1: 40,000 years of Aboriginal occupation in the Napier Ranges,
Kimberley, WA. Australian Archaeology, 40, p. 58-59.
O’CONNOR S. 2007. — New evidence from East Timor contributes to our understanding of earliest human colonisation east
of the Sunda Shelf. Antiquity, 81, p. 523-535.
O’CONNOR S. & FANKHAUSER B.L. 2001. — Art at 40,000 BP? One step closer: an ochre covered rock from Carpenters
Gap Shelter 1, Kimberley Region, Western Australia. In : ANDERSON A., LILLEY I., O’CONNOR S. (eds.), Histories of
Old Ages: Essays in honour of Rhys Jones, p. 287-300. Canberra : The Australian National University, Research School
of Pacific and Asian Studies, Pandanus Books.
RENEAU S.L., OBERLANDER T.M., HARRINGTON C.D. 1991. — Accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon dating of
rock varnish: Discussion and reply. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 103, 310-314.
ROBERTS R.G. 2000. — Luminescence dating of Kimberley rock art. In : WALSH G.L. (ed.), Bradshaw Art of the Kimberley,
p. 46-49. Toowong (Qld) : Takarakka Nowan Kas Publications.
ROBERTS R., JONES R., SPOONER N.A., HEAD M.J., MURRAY A.S., SMITH M.A. 1994. — The human colonisation of
Australia: Optical dates of 53,000 and 60,000 years bracket human arrival at Deaf Adder Gorge, Northern Territory.
Quaternary Science Reviews (Quaternary Geochronology), 13, p. 575-583
ROSENFELD A. 1991. — Panaramitee: dead or alive. In : BAHN P. & ROSENFELD A. (eds.), Rock Art and Prehistory:
Papers presented to Symposium G of the AuRA Congress, Darwin 1988, p. 136-144. Oxford : Oxbow Books.
ROSENFELD A. 1993. — A review of the evidence for the emergence of rock art in Australia. In : SMITH M.A., SPRIGGS
M., FANKHAUSER B. (eds.), Sahul in Review: Pleistocene archaeology in Australia, New Guinea and island Melanesia,
p. 71-80. Canberra : The Australian National University, Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies.
(ANU, Occasional Papers in Prehistory ; 24).
ROSENFELD A., HORTON D., WINTER J. 1981. — Early Man in North Queensland: Art and archaeology in the Laura area.
Canberra : The Australian National University, Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies. (Terra
Australis ; 6).
Symposium Australie
CD-10
ROSS J. & SMITH M.A. 2009. — An Engraved ―Archaic Face‖ in the Northeastern Simpson Desert. Short Report. Australian
Archaeology, 69, p. 68-70.
SMITH M.A. & HESSE P. (eds.), 2005. — 23ºS: Archaeology and Environmental History of the Southern Deserts. Canberra :
National Museum of Australia Press.
SMITH M.A., FANKHAUSER B., JERCHER M. 1998. — The changing provenance of red ochre at Puritjarra rock shelter,
central Australia: Late Pleistocene to present. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 64, p. 275-292.
SMITH M.A., WATCHMAN A., ROSS J. 2009. — Direct Dating Indicates a Mid-Holocene Age for Archaic Rock Engravings in
Arid Central Australia. Geoarchaeology, 24 (2), p. 191-203.
TURNEY C.S.M., BIRD M.I., FIFIELD L.K., ROBERTS R.G., SMITH M., DORTCH C.E., GRUN R., LAWSON E., AYLIFFE
L.K., MILLER G.H., DORTCH J., CRESSWELL R.G. 2001. — Early human occupation at Devil's Lair, Southwestern
Australia 50,000 years ago. Quaternary Research, 55, p. 3-13.
VETH P.M. 2005. — Cycles of aridity and human mobility: risk minimisation among late Pleistocene foragers of the Western
Desert, Australia. In : VETH P., SMITH M., HISCOCK P. (eds.), Desert Peoples: Archaeological Perspectives, p. 100-
115. Oxford : Blackwell Publishing.
VETH P.M., STERN N., MCDONALD J., BALME J., DAVIDSON I. 2011. — The Role of Information Exchange in the
Colonization of Sahul. In : WHALLON R., LOVIS W.A., HITCHCOCK R.K. (eds.), Information and Its Role in Hunter-
Gatherer Bands. Los Angeles : Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press. (Ideas, Debates and Perspectives ; 5).
VETH P.M., SMITH M.A., BOWLER J., FITZSIMMONS K., WILLIAMS A., HISCOCK P. 2009. — Excavations at Parnkupirti,
Lake Gregory, Great Sandy Desert: OSL ages for occupation before the Last Glacial Maximum. Australian Archaeology,
69, p. 1-10.
VETH P., SMITH M.A., HISCOCK P. (eds.), 2005. — Desert Peoples: Archaeological Perspectives. Oxford : Blackwell
Publishing.
WALSH G.L. 1994. — Bradshaws: Ancient rock paintings of north-west Australia. Geneva : Édition Limitée for Bradshaw
Foundation.
WALSH G.L. 2000. — Bradshaw Art of the Kimberley. Toowong (Qld) : Takarakka Nowan Kas Publications.
WATCHMAN A. 1992. — Doubtful dates for Karolta Engravings. Journal of the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Studies, 1, p. 51-55.
WATCHMAN A. 1993. — Evidence of a 25,000-year-old pictograph in Northern Australia. Geoarchaeology, 8, p. 465-473.
WATCHMAN A. 2000. — A review of the history of dating rock varnishes. Earth Science Reviews, 49, p. 261-277.
WATCHMAN A. 2001. — Wargata Mina to Gunbilmurrung: the direct dating of Australian rock art. In : ANDERSON A.,
LILLEY I., O’CONNOR S. (eds.), Histories of Old Ages: Essays in honour of Rhys Jones, p. 313-325. Canberra : The
Australian National University, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Pandanus Books.
ZILHÃO J. 2007. — The emergence of ornaments and art: an archaeological perspective on the origins of behavioral
―modernity‖. Journal of Archaeological Research, 15, p. 1-54.