CONCEPT-MEDIATED MARKING IN THE LOWER PALEOLITHIC

Elucidation of the evolutionary context of the earliest production of humanly made, intentional markings is hampered by insufficient resolut ion in the relevant archaeological ''record,'' failure to consider the effects of taphonomic selection on this ''record,'' archaeological bi ases against evidence purported to relate to early cognitive capacitie s, inadequate familiarity of some protagonists with the available rele vant evidence, archaeological conservatism predicated on the durabilit y of unfalsifiable propositions, and a tendency to interpret lack of a particular class of evidence as denoting the historical absence of th e phenomenon it is thought to represent. Contending with these and oth er formidable biases, I review the Lower Palaeolithic evidence that se ems to permit glimpses of the cognitive and technological capacities o f early hominids. I reject the general concept of abrupt transitions b etween the major phases of the Palaeolithic, arguing that such models can be accounted for by plateaus derived from taphonomy, methodology, dating techniques, and the archaeological penchant for creating cultur al taxonomies. A more gradual evolution of cognitive faculties is favo ured, beginning with the Lower Palaeolithic, for which concept-mediate d marking is suggested.