The evolution of early symbolic behavior in .

Kristian Tylén, Riccardo Fusaroli, Sergio Rojo, Katrin Heimann, Nicolas Fay, Niels N Johannsen, Felix Riede, Marlize Lombard
Author Information
  1. Kristian Tylén: Department of Linguistics, Cognitive Science and Semiotics, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark; kristian@cc.au.dk. ORCID
  2. Riccardo Fusaroli: Department of Linguistics, Cognitive Science and Semiotics, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. ORCID
  3. Sergio Rojo: Department of Linguistics, Cognitive Science and Semiotics, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. ORCID
  4. Katrin Heimann: Interacting Minds Centre, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
  5. Nicolas Fay: School of Psychological Science, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA 6009, Australia. ORCID
  6. Niels N Johannsen: Interacting Minds Centre, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. ORCID
  7. Felix Riede: Interacting Minds Centre, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. ORCID
  8. Marlize Lombard: Palaeo-Research Institute, University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park, 2006 Johannesburg, South Africa. ORCID

Abstract

How did human symbolic behavior evolve? Dating up to about 100,000 y ago, the engraved ochre and ostrich eggshell fragments from the South African Blombos Cave and Diepkloof Rock Shelter provide a unique window into presumed early symbolic traditions of and how they evolved over a period of more than 30,000 y. Using the engravings as stimuli, we report five experiments which suggest that the engravings evolved adaptively, becoming better-suited for human perception and cognition. More specifically, they became more salient, memorable, reproducible, and expressive of style and human intent. However, they did not become more discriminable over time between or within the two archeological sites. Our observations provide support for an account of the Blombos and Diepkloof engravings as decorations and as socially transmitted cultural traditions. By contrast, there was no clear indication that they served as denotational symbolic signs. Our findings have broad implications for our understanding of early symbolic communication and cognition in .

Keywords

References

  1. Science. 2002 Feb 15;295(5558):1278-80 [PMID: 11786608]
  2. Nat Commun. 2015 Jan 13;6:6029 [PMID: 25585382]
  3. PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e40106 [PMID: 22768232]
  4. J Physiol. 1968 Mar;195(1):215-43 [PMID: 4966457]
  5. Trends Cogn Sci. 2008 Oct;12(10):381-7 [PMID: 18760658]
  6. Vision Res. 1995 Mar;35(6):733-8 [PMID: 7740765]
  7. Cogn Sci. 2015 Jan;39(1):171-83 [PMID: 25039798]
  8. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Aug 5;105(31):10681-6 [PMID: 18667697]
  9. Trends Cogn Sci. 2005 May;9(5):250-7 [PMID: 15866152]
  10. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 12;363(1509):3553-61 [PMID: 18799421]
  11. J Physiol. 1995 Mar 15;483 ( Pt 3):797-810 [PMID: 7776259]
  12. Neuron. 2007 Oct 25;56(2):384-98 [PMID: 17964253]
  13. Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Jul;8(7):315-24 [PMID: 15242691]
  14. Proc Biol Sci. 2005 Feb 7;272(1560):267-75 [PMID: 15705551]
  15. Behav Brain Sci. 2010 Jun;33(2-3):61-83; discussion 83-135 [PMID: 20550733]
  16. J Hum Evol. 2009 Jul;57(1):27-47 [PMID: 19487016]
  17. Vision Res. 1984;24(2):121-8 [PMID: 6710874]
  18. Cogn Sci. 2018 Mar;42(2):664-677 [PMID: 29023934]
  19. Curr Anthropol. 2003 Dec;44(5):627-51 [PMID: 14971366]
  20. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Jul 9;93(14):7358-62 [PMID: 8692998]
  21. Annu Rev Psychol. 2013;64:77-107 [PMID: 23020642]
  22. Psychol Bull. 1972 Oct;78(4):266-78 [PMID: 4562947]
  23. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Apr 6;107(14):6180-5 [PMID: 20194764]
  24. PLoS Comput Biol. 2017 Jan 26;13(1):e1005273 [PMID: 28125595]
  25. Theor Popul Biol. 2008 Aug;74(1):46-55 [PMID: 18571686]
  26. Science. 2011 Oct 14;334(6053):219-22 [PMID: 21998386]
  27. J Neurosci Methods. 2007 May 15;162(1-2):8-13 [PMID: 17254636]
  28. J Vis. 2006 Sep 21;6(10):1068-78 [PMID: 17132078]
  29. Nat Hum Behav. 2017 Sep;1(9):657-664 [PMID: 31024135]
  30. Brain Behav Evol. 2018;91(3):136-147 [PMID: 30099459]

MeSH Term

Biological Evolution
Engraving and Engravings
History, Ancient
Humans
Social Behavior
Symbolism

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0symbolichumanbehaviorearlyengravingscognition000yBlombosDiepkloofprovidetraditionsevolvedevolutionevolve?Dating100agoengravedochreostricheggshellfragmentsSouthAfricanCaveRockShelteruniquewindowpresumedperiod30Usingstimulireportfiveexperimentssuggestadaptivelybecomingbetter-suitedperceptionspecificallybecamesalientmemorablereproducibleexpressivestyleintentHoweverbecomediscriminabletimewithintwoarcheologicalsitesobservationssupportaccountdecorationssociallytransmittedculturalcontrastclearindicationserveddenotationalsignsfindingsbroadimplicationsunderstandingcommunicationarcheology

Similar Articles

Cited By