Measuring the damage rate of prehistoric cave images: a case study in the Maros-Pangkep karst area South Sulawesi Province, Indonesia

Abstract

Damage to prehistoric cave drawings, like other cultural objects, is inevitable. This claim was widely accepted among researchers and observers of prehistoric culture in Indonesia. Even more so for images in karst caves with a medium for painting in the form of limestone surfaces that have dynamic properties. The life cycle of this rock type is influenced by natural processes, mainly by water factors such as dissolution and sedimentation. In addition, the sun, temperature fluctuations, and wind also accelerate the weathering rate, which causes many changes in the structure of the rock both thoroughly and massively, and partially. The belief in damage to prehistoric cave drawings in the Maros-Pangkep Karst Area has long been echoed by researchers and conservationists, but very few of these circles can prove how the damage process occurred, even to prove how fast the damage is. However, the development of image conditions can be measured by a simpler method to determine the speed of damage. This article offers a method that can be applied to cases of prehistoric cave image damage so that changes can be identified, in particular the volume of damage.

The historical impact of anthropogenic air-borne sulphur on the Pleistocene rock art of Sulawesi

“…8 ). Here, time-lapse photography conducted since October 2018 has identified an active exfoliation hot-spot within a rock art panel dominated by inactive spall-patches 3 . The width of the most active spall-patch under investigation has doubled from ~2.5 cm to ~5 cm between October 2018 and June 2021.…”

“…Knowledge of the long-term history of the Maros-Pangkep rock art loss is essential to put the observed damage into context and evaluate potential causes. A recent conservation study of 340 rock art images in five sample caves showed that 93% are damaged 3 . Twelve types of physical, chemical and biological causes have been identified, with exfoliation (89%) and algal growth (31%) dominant 3 .…”

“…A recent conservation study of 340 rock art images in five sample caves showed that 93% are damaged 3 . Twelve types of physical, chemical and biological causes have been identified, with exfoliation (89%) and algal growth (31%) dominant 3 . Importantly, the available assessment data on rock art degradation in Maros-Pangkep, based on broad criteria, show significant differences in the preservation of artwork among shelters 7 , 11 (Fig.…”

“…Huntley et al 15 proposed that the Pleistocene rock art has weathered at an alarming rate in recent decades. However, systematic assessments of the rate of rock art loss in selected cave sites have only been underway since 2018 3 . Therefore, as yet, there are no definitive measurement results to validate an acceleration of panel loss.…”

“…1). More than 240 caves and rock shelters harbouring an irreplaceable archive of imagery have been documented 3 . The exquisite older rock art is characterised by red/mulberry hued pigments and includes hand stencils, figurative depictions of animals, and human/animal composites 1,2 .…”