“…The similarity in size and technical skill between the engravings and reliefs at the Camel Site, and their geographic overlap, suggest that the reliefs discussed in this article may represent a more sophisticated, 3D expression of the same tradition (Charloux et al 2020). A recent chronological assessment of the Camel Site suggests a Neolithic date for the reliefs (Guagnin et al 2021), and the engravings described here may therefore be of a similar age. Superimpositions observed amongst some of the newly documented panels provide further evidence of their probable age.…”
Section: Artistic Links With the Camel Site And Chronologysupporting
confidence: 53%
“…Recent investigations of the Camel Site in the Jawf region of Saudi Arabia (Figure 1) have provided a Neolithic date for a group of naturalistic reliefs depicting life-sized camels and equids (Charloux et al 2018; Guagnin et al 2021). The site documents a level of skill, technical knowledge and communal effort that is unprecedented in the Near East.…”
Among the rock art in Arabia, a little-known Neolithic tradition of large, naturalistic camel depictions stands out. Their geographic distribution and stylistic traits suggest close links with the Camel Site reliefs. Four newly documented panels appear to have been carved by the same individual (or group), tracing repeated movements over hundreds of kilometres.
“…The similarity in size and technical skill between the engravings and reliefs at the Camel Site, and their geographic overlap, suggest that the reliefs discussed in this article may represent a more sophisticated, 3D expression of the same tradition (Charloux et al 2020). A recent chronological assessment of the Camel Site suggests a Neolithic date for the reliefs (Guagnin et al 2021), and the engravings described here may therefore be of a similar age. Superimpositions observed amongst some of the newly documented panels provide further evidence of their probable age.…”
Section: Artistic Links With the Camel Site And Chronologysupporting
confidence: 53%
“…Recent investigations of the Camel Site in the Jawf region of Saudi Arabia (Figure 1) have provided a Neolithic date for a group of naturalistic reliefs depicting life-sized camels and equids (Charloux et al 2018; Guagnin et al 2021). The site documents a level of skill, technical knowledge and communal effort that is unprecedented in the Near East.…”
Among the rock art in Arabia, a little-known Neolithic tradition of large, naturalistic camel depictions stands out. Their geographic distribution and stylistic traits suggest close links with the Camel Site reliefs. Four newly documented panels appear to have been carved by the same individual (or group), tracing repeated movements over hundreds of kilometres.
“…Carbonates are more stable than oxalates and Useries dating results are more reliable than other dating systems. Attempts have been made to determine the age of petroglyphs and weathering crusts and varnishes efficiently support the substrate for radiocarbon [30,33] and chemical measurement of elements [80][81][82][83][84]. In this case, the required sample is small, and it can be collected, after a careful geomorphological assessment of surfaces, on the rock substrate of engravings but not directly on them.…”
Section: Methods For Investigation Of Rock Artmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When rock varnish is a relict landscape feature or the rate of varnish formation is too slow to re-cover engravings, it represents a non-renewable canvas for ancient artists and the rate of varnish [76,78]. However, the partial regrowth of rock varnish is a valid relative dating method for engravings superimposition [76,79], as well as offering the opportunity to estimate petroglyphs' age via chemical measurement of elements and areal density of Mn and Fe [80][81][82][83][84]. From a different point of view, the formation of continuous and some tens of microns-thick Mn-rich coating represent a case-hardened shell [61] protecting rock surfaces against wind abrasion.…”
Rock art is a widespread cultural heritage, representing an immovable element of the material culture created on natural rocky supports. Paintings and petroglyphs can be found within caves and rock shelters or in open-air contexts and for that reason they are not isolated from the processes acting at the Earth surface. Consequently, rock art represents a sort of ecosystem because it is part of the complex and multidirectional interplay between the host rock, pigments, environmental parameters, and microbial communities. Such complexity results in several processes affecting rock art; some of them contribute to its destruction, others to its preservation. To understand the effects of such processes an interdisciplinary scientific approach is needed. In this contribution, we discuss the many processes acting at the rock interface—where rock art is present—and the multifaceted possibilities of scientific investigations—non-invasive or invasive—offered by the STEM disciplines. Finally, we suggest a sustainable approach to investigating rock art allowing to understand its production as well as its preservation and eventually suggest strategies to mitigate the risks threatening its stability.
“…However, the extent of this economic shift is still uncertain in northern Arabia. Cattle feature prominently in the rock art of this period, yet faunal assemblages recovered from Neolithic sites are often dominated by wild species, for example at Jebel Oraf, and at the Camel Site [ 1 , 7 ]; while faunal remains from ritual contexts often consist of a mixture of wild and domesticated species [ 8 , 9 ]. It is also not known to what extent the exploitation of wild or domesticated plants was part of the subsistence economy.…”
Archaeological sites with surface hearths are a ubiquitous feature across the arid zones of the Arabian interior. At Jebel Oraf, in the Jubbah basin of the Nefud Desert of northern Arabia, numerous grinding stone fragments were found in association with hearths, though the original purpose of these stones was unclear owing to the poor preservation of faunal and botanic remains. Here we describe results from use-wear analysis on five grinding tools at Jebel Oraf, demonstrating that such artefacts were used during the Neolithic for plant processing, bone processing, and pigment production. Grinding stones were often broken up after initial use and fragments were subsequently re-used for alternative purposes, before finally being placed on hearths or discarded. More specifically, plants were ground or prepared and possibly cooked in the hearths, and bones were processed as well. The analyses also highlight the importance of pigment processing at Neolithic sites and provide a link to painted rock art. The frequent use of pigment in the archaeological record suggests that pigment was widely used, and that Neolithic painted art may have been more common than the surviving images suggest.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.