Originally published in Nikkei Asia, 4 December 2021
Until recently, the ancient hand and footprints embedded deep into a boulder high up on the Tibetan Plateau -- their origins unknown but seemingly composed with deliberate intent -- have gone unnoted by academic researchers.
Local villagers believed them to be made by yetis and -- at times -- even worshipped them as the markings of the gods.
It was only in September that the ancient patterns came to prominence -- although not without controversy. Discovered by Guangzhou University geologist David Zhang, the impressions were declared to be the imprints of ancient hominid children during Earth's last ice age, between 169,000 and 226,000 years ago.
If Zhang's claims are accurate, the markings would supersede any other known parietal art by at least 120,000 years.
"This makes it the oldest evidence of Tibetan habitation by now extinct hominids," Zhang told Nikkei Asia. "Meaning that these hominids, possibly Denisovans, were living and showing creativity and artful behavior in the area so long ago... this could be one of the biggest findings in ancient human/hominid art history."
When Zhang and his team published their findings in Science Bulletin, the paper made headlines around the world proclaiming the discovery of "the world's oldest art." The discovery's significance, and the implications of what it might reveal about life on the Tibetan plateau, are without question. The bigger question is what these ancient hand and footprints say about cognitive evolution. Or, to put it more simply, can these markings be considered art?
"Applying the term art with its modern, Western connotations is always problematic," says professor April Nowell, an anthropologist at the University of Victoria in Canada. "The term carries a lot of baggage with it."
Indeed, placing a modern definition on something that took place 200,000 years ago might seem odd, but as it is one of the very few ways we have to determine the cognitive ability of our human ancestors, it has sparked heated debate both on and off campus.
At the heart of the discussion is intent. Skeptics argue that composition can easily be confused with adolescent entertainment. "If the cluster of prints are genuine, they can simply be the product of human activity near a water source," said professor Michael Petraglia, of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. "This is an equally viable interpretation and we do not have to jump to the conclusion it is a symbolic or artistic act."
Professor Paul Pettit, of Durham University's archaeology department, said that while "there is apparently some concern with keeping overlap between the prints to a minimum, I see no reason why this need reflect a 'care with the composition,'" adding that "when modern children cover their hands with pigment and press them onto paper, they usually exhibit a 'care' with reducing overlap, but for no explicable reason other than the fact that they are playfully creating handprints."
Then there are those on the opposite side of the debate who argue that deciding whether a child's playfully created handprints can be classified as art is primarily subjective.
According to Zhang's research team, what separates this find to others is the hominid use of handprints in addition to often unmindful footprints -- a rare determiner that its creators were demonstrably leaving their mark.
"The deliberate placement of hands and feet, in this case, is a form of art, in my opinion, at least," says Matthew Bennet of Bournemouth University and a colleague of Zhang's on this find. "The key is the word 'deliberate.' The deliberate choice to make a composition of marks for no real purpose other than for the sake of it."
Apprehension is, of course, to be expected with a major discovery of this nature, especially when the question of intentions is at stake. But for many, this debate has also revealed an undercurrent of Eurocentrism that dominates the insular world of archaeology which holds that European hominids were more cognitively developed than hominids elsewhere.
"Europe was once thought of as a 'finishing school' for humanity because France in particular, was the subject of intense research early on," says Nowell. "We have long known that this view ... is no longer tenable and the richness of the finds from Australia and Indonesia continue to underscore this point."
Academics are largely accepting now, but when the previous contender for 'the world's oldest art' -- a wild pig cave painting in Sulawesi, Indonesia, dating back some 45,000 years -- was submitted for peer review earlier this year, more than one scientific journal refused to even acknowledge its research, with its authors facing criticism often bordering on ignorance.
"We were certainly affected by Eurocentrism when we tried to originally publish our research on the rock art of Sulawesi," says co-author Maxime Aubert, a professor at Australia's Griffith University. "Reviewers had no issues with the dating, but simply would not believe it."
Eurocentrism in archaeology concerns not only the worth of primitive humans, but current ones, too: The study of archaeology has strong European origins and most of its major discoveries are credited to Westerners.
An obvious counterpoint to whether the Tibetan Plateau handprints can be considered art was the 2011 discovery in France's Rouffignac caves of "finger fluting" attributed to children, where claims of whether the markings constituted art were never questioned.
Zhang himself would not comment on whether Eurocentrism was to blame for his discovery not being accepted as art in some academic circles. "Some who are saying that it's not art are using the concept of art in more recent times, to judge something made [200,000] years ago," said Zhang.
What our art externalized, Zhang said, is internal mental states "that came from symbolic thinking, which allowed people to make visual presentation of things they remember, imagine and express. If you find the oldest art expression, you find the landmark for human cognitive evolution." And that is something that, as a species, we can all celebrate.