EVALUACIÓN DE LAS MANIFESTACIONES GRÁFICAS PARIETALES DE LA CUEVA DEL FORCÓN (A FUEBA, HUESCA): NUEVAS PERSPECTIVAS SOBRE EL ARTE PALEOLÍTICO EN LA VERTIENTE SUR DEL PIRINEO CENTRAL/Evaluation of the parietal graphic motifs from El Forcón Cave (A Fueba, Huesca): New Perspectives on the Palaeolithic Art in the Southern slope of the Central Pyrenees

In 1976, a team led from the Museum of Huesca conducted a series of archaeological works in El Forcón Cave (San Juan de Toledo, A Fueba, Huesca). In addition to the recovery of several materials and prehistoric tools in a completely disturbed context, it was discovered the existence of parietal anth...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Zephyrus Vol. 78; p. 195
Main Authors: Redondo, Aitor Ruiz, Conte, Ignacio Clemente, Lanaspa, Javier Rey, Ballbé, Ermengol Gassiot, Casas, Mikel Etxebarría
Format: Journal Article
Language:Spanish
Published: Salamanca Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca 01-07-2016
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In 1976, a team led from the Museum of Huesca conducted a series of archaeological works in El Forcón Cave (San Juan de Toledo, A Fueba, Huesca). In addition to the recovery of several materials and prehistoric tools in a completely disturbed context, it was discovered the existence of parietal anthropic engravings. After the discovery of the Palaeolithic parietal site of Fuente del Trucho, also on the southern slope of the Central Pyrenees, and joined to the formal similarity of the El Forcón engravings with other Franco-Cantabrian ensembles, a Palaeolithic chronology was proposed for the 'parietal art' of this site. Since then, the scientific literature has included this ensemble in the inventory of cave art. Recently, we undertook a study of the graphical device -unrevised since its first publication-, to assess its potential and the arguments to establish a chronology. In this paper we discuss the evidence found and present the conclusions of the study. The most relevant is that the arguments do not support a Palaeolithic -or even a Prehistoric- chronology for the parietal motifs.
ISSN:0514-7336
DOI:10.14201/zephyrus20l678l9520l