Beads

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3934-5_8471-2

Of the Paleolithic forms of possible symbolic products, beads and pendants seem to tell us the most about the cognition and technology of their users. First, there are the purely technological aspects. To make a bead, one has to be able to drill through an object (or enlarge a natural perforation), thread a string through the hole, and fasten the ends of the string, presumably by knots (Warner & Bednarik, 1996). To persist with such a process of manufacture, one must have a mental construct of the end product and a desire to acquire what is clearly a non-utilitarian artifact. While the bead is such an artifact, the string is not, being utilitarian. It is merely a means of permitting the bead to fulfill its non-utilitarian role. Hence, this is a combination not only of diverse (composite) and interactive artifacts but also a hierarchy of diverse concepts of relating to them. The primary imperative, presumably, is to display the bead to its best advantage; the secondary intent is to...

Keywords

Stone Tool Snail Shell Campanian Ignimbrite Ostrich Eggshell Symbolic Artifact 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Baldeon, A. (1993). El yacimiento de Lezetxiki (Gipuzkoa, País Vasco). Los niveles musterienses. Munibe. Sociedad de Ciencias Naturales Aranzadi (San Sebastian), 45, 3–97.Google Scholar
  2. Baur-Röger, M. (1987). Der Rohstoff Straußeneischale. Archäologische Informationen, 10, 180–184.Google Scholar
  3. Baur-Röger, M. (1988). Prähistorische Straußenei-Artefake aus der Ostsahara. Archäologische Informationen, 12, 262–264.Google Scholar
  4. Beaumont, P. B., Miller, G. H., & Vogel, J. C. (1992). Contemplating old clues to the impact of future greenhouse climates in South Africa. South African Journal of Science, 88, 490–498.Google Scholar
  5. Bednarik, R. G. (1995). Towards a better understanding of the origins of body decoration. L'Anthropologie, 33, 201–211.Google Scholar
  6. Bednarik, R. G. (1997). The role of pleistocene beads in documenting hominid cognition. Rock Art Research, 14, 27–41.Google Scholar
  7. Bednarik, R. G. (2005). Middle pleistocene beads and symbolism. Anthropos, 100, 537–552.Google Scholar
  8. Bednarik, R. G., & Yuzhu, Y. (1991). Palaeolithic art from China. Rock Art Research, 8, 119–123.Google Scholar
  9. Bordes, F. (1969). Os percé Moustérien et os gravé Acheuléen du Pech de l'Azé II. Quaternaria, 11, 1–5.Google Scholar
  10. Boucher de Perthes, J. (1846). Antiquités Celtiques et Antédiluviennes. Paris: Abbeville.Google Scholar
  11. 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. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 104, 9964–9969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Camps-Fabrer, H. (1962). Note sur les Techniques d’Utilisation des coquilles d’oeuf d’Autriche dans quelques gisements Capsiens et Néolithiques d’Afrique du Nord. Bullétin de Société Préhistorique Française, 59, 525–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Camps-Fabrer, H. (1966). Matière et Art Mobilier dans la Préhistoire Nord-Africaine et Saharienne. Paris: Mémoires du CRAPE.Google Scholar
  14. Camps-Fabrer, H. (1975). Un Gisement Capsien de Faciès Sétifien, Mendjez II, El-Eulma (Algérie). Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.Google Scholar
  15. Cziesla, E. (1986). Excavations at Wadi Sahal. Nubische Studien, 42, 143–149.Google Scholar
  16. Goodwin, A. J. H. (1929). The Wilton industry. Annals of the South African Museum, 27, 251–270.Google Scholar
  17. Goren-Inbar, N., Lewy, Z., & Kislev, M. E. (1991). The Taphonomy of a Bead-Like Fossil from the Acheulian of Gesher Benot Ya'aqov, Israel. Rock Art Research, 8, 83–87.Google Scholar
  18. Grün, R., & Beaumont, P. (2001). Border cave revisited: a revised ESR chronology. Journal of Human Evolution, 40, 467–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Helmecke, G. (1990). Eine Sammlung palästinischer Amulette und Schmuckstücke. Abhandlungen und Berichte des Staatlichen Museums für Völkerkunde Dresden, 45, 99–122.Google Scholar
  20. Keeley, L. H. (1980). Experimental determination of stone tool uses. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  21. Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1965). Prehistoire de l’Art Occidental. Paris: Mazenod.Google Scholar
  22. Marmier, F., & Trecolle, G. (1979). L’utilisation des Oeufs d’Autriche; il y a 15000 Ans au Sahara. Archéologia, 135, 6–11.Google Scholar
  23. Marshack, A. (1991). A reply to Davidson on Mania and Mania. Rock Art Research, 8, 47–58.Google Scholar
  24. Marshall, L. (1976). The !Kung of Nyae Nyae. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Martin, H. (1907–1910). Récherches sur l’Évolution du Moustérien dans le Gisement de la Quina (Charente). Industrie Osseuse (Vol. 1). Paris: Schleicher Frères.Google Scholar
  26. Mason, R. (1988). Cave of Hearths, Makapansgat, Transvaal (Occasional papers, Vol. 21). Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand: Archaeological Research Unit.Google Scholar
  27. McBrearty, S., & Brooks, A. S. (2000). The revolution that wasn’t: A new interpretation of the origin of modern human behaviour. Journal of Human Evolution, 39, 453–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mottl, M. (1951). Die Repolust-Höhle bei Peggau (Steiermark) und ihre eiszeitlichen Bewohner. Archaeologica Austriaca, 8, 1–78.Google Scholar
  29. Narr, K. J. (1951). Alt- und mittelpaläolithische Funde aus rheinischen Freilandstationen. Bonner Jahrbuch, 151, 5–47.Google Scholar
  30. Prestwich, J. (1859). On the occurrence of Flint-implements, associated with the remains of extinct Mammalia, in undisturbed beds of a late geological period. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 10, 50–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sandelowsky, B. H. (1971). Ostrich egg- shell caches from South West Africa. South African Archaeological Bulletin, 26, 153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Smith, W. G. (1894). Man the primeval savage. London: E. Stanford.Google Scholar
  33. Stepanchuk, V. N. (1993). Prolom II, a middle palaeolithic cave site in the Eastern Crimea with non-utilitarian bone artefacts. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 59, 17–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. van der Made, H. (2002). A bead from the Mousterian site at Fontmaure, France. Rock Art Research, 19, 135–136.Google Scholar
  35. Warner, C., & Bednarik, R. G. (1996). Pleistocene knotting. In J. C. Turner & P. van de Griend (Eds.), History and science of knots (pp. 3–18). Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Woodhouse, H. C. (1997). Ostrich eggshell beads in Southern Africa. Rock Art Research, 14, 41–43.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MeadowcreekUSA
  2. 2.Caulfield SouthAustralia