THE PALEOLITHIC CAVE ART OF VASCO-CANTABRIAN SPAIN

Summary. This article explores the relationship between cave art and Upper Paleolithic archeology in northern Spain (and extreme southwestern France). Among the 83 known art sanctuaries, only three can probably be terminus ante quem dated to the early Upper Paleolithic (c. 35,000-20,000 BP). Other types of evidence (virtual absence of ornaments and mobile art objects before the Solutrean, stylistic similarities between works of late Upper Paleolithic mobile art and parietal art, overwhelming association of Solutrean and/or Magdalenian cultural deposits with art sanctuaries) clearly suggest that most of the cave art was done in the period between c. 20,000-10,000 BP. Cave art sanctuaries are distributed in non-random fashion. The clusters of sanctuaries usually correspond with dense clusters of habitation sites. The clusters are separated by substantial geographical gaps. These chronological and geographical facts coincide with contemporaneous subsistence intensification, all of which tends to support the hypothesis of increased territorialism in the late Last Glacial.     

Glacial Stratigraphy of the Upper Mersey Valley,Tasmania

The upper Mersey Valley was glaciated on three occasions during the Pleistocene. The youngest, Rowallan Claciation, probably commenced after 28000 years B.P. The maximum ice limit was attained before 13500 years B.P., and retreat occurred before 10000years B.P. Deposits associated with Rowallan Glaciation are weakly weathered chemically. They overlie moderately weathered deposits that were formed during the Arm Glaciation, which is inferred from relative dating data to have occurred before the Last Interglacial Stage. North of the deposits and ice limits of the Arm Glaciation extremely weathered tills and rhythmites occur. They were formed by ice of the Croesus Glaciation which is inferred to be of Early Pleistocene age or older.     

What can supraspecies richness tell us?

Biogeographers, ecologists, palaeontologists, and conservation managers often deal with checklists in which not all individuals have been identified to a species level, or the accuracy of species identification is questionable. Is it possible and credible to investigate species richness based on such checklists? Studies on macrofauna in the Far Eastern seas, eastern Arctic seas, and adjacent waters of the Pacific and Arctic Oceans suggest that in different habitats and for diverse taxa, species, and higher taxa richness strongly correlate with each other and increase with an expansion in the study area and sample size according to the species–area law. Such an increase is higher in the bottom zone than in the pelagic. Species and higher taxa richness also show a decrease from lower to higher latitudes, which is in line with the Humboldt–Wallace’s law. According to Willis’ law and self-similarity in the organisation of taxonomic levels, species richness can be assessed based on the genus, family, and order richness. In other words, supraspecies richness itself can tell us the same as species richness and therefore certain global patterns revealed at the species level may also be revealed at the supraspecies level. Such a concordance in general trends among richness parameters at different taxonomic levels in practice implies that species richness can be studied based on lists that lack species identifications or lists with doubtful species identification. We suggest bolder use of supraspecies richness in science and practice, discussing the disadvantages and advantages of this approach.