CONCEPT-MEDIATED MARKING IN THE LOWER PALEOLITHIC

Elucidation of the evolutionary context of the earliest production of humanly made, intentional markings is hampered by insufficient resolution in the relevant archaeological ''record,'' failure to consider the effects of taphonomic selection on this ''record,'' archaeological biases against evidence purported to relate to early cognitive capacities, inadequate familiarity of some protagonists with the available relevant evidence, archaeological conservatism predicated on the durability of unfalsifiable propositions, and a tendency to interpret lack of a particular class of evidence as denoting the historical absence of the phenomenon it is thought to represent. Contending with these and other formidable biases, I review the Lower Palaeolithic evidence that seems to permit glimpses of the cognitive and technological capacities of early hominids. I reject the general concept of abrupt transitions between the major phases of the Palaeolithic, arguing that such models can be accounted for by plateaus derived from taphonomy, methodology, dating techniques, and the archaeological penchant for creating cultural taxonomies. A more gradual evolution of cognitive faculties is favoured, beginning with the Lower Palaeolithic, for which concept-mediated marking is suggested.