The Debate Concerning the Dating of Parietal Art at Chauvet

Archaeologist Paul Pettitt throws a fascinating light upon the idea of comparing the paintings of Chauvet and Lascaux by challenging the currently accepted dating of the former.  In his 2008 paper (full citation below), Pettitt calls for a thorough scientific inquiry into the currently accepted Aurignacian dating for the parietal art at Chauvet.  He explains that this issue is critically important because it influences our interpretation of the state of development of Homo sapiens at the time of the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition.  Pettitt notes that the majority of charcoal samples collected for radiocarbon dating were taken from the Chauvet cave floor, and therefore may not be contemporary with the paintings, but rather may derive from an earlier visit to the cave by a population which did not create parietal art.

Pettitt, P.  2008.  Art and the Middle-to-Upper Paleolithic transition in Europe: Comments on the archaeological arguments for an early Upper Paleolithic antiquity of the Grotte Chauvet art.  Journal of Human Evolution, 55, 908-917.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248408000845