THE ART OF THE CAVE MAN 295 



geometric patterns. In the main this is true, but we should note that some 

 attempts at geometric art appear in palreoHthic work and of course there 

 was some drawing in the neoHthic period. We should not therefore take 

 too seriously the view that the natural e\olution of art is from the representa- 

 tive to the conventional, since the facts of anthropology as a whole make 

 Aurignacian art, for instance, appear only as a school of art or a form of 

 culture that developed but to be displaced by another. In this case so far 

 as we now know, realistic art did precede the geometric, but this is merely a 

 historical fact and not a biological one. There seems to be no inherent 

 reason why geometric art might not have developed first, had the attention 

 of Aurignacian man been focused upon it. 



It may not be out of place to add however that the recent tendency 

 among students of art is to regard the development of geometric art or 

 decorative design as an outgrowth of weaving technique. So far as known 

 the textile arts did not take definite form until the neolithic period. In so 

 far, this is consistent, but the cultural point of view ever reminds us to be 

 cautious since we are dealing with a psychological phenomenon rather than 

 a biological one. 



For the same reason we must not be too dogmatic in the application of 

 the " no-composition" interpretation of Aurignacian art, for while the artists 

 seem not to have discovered true perspective, they have frequently grouped 

 their figures in a way that can scarcely be accidental. In the previous dis- 

 cussion of the paintings in Altamira we noted the apparent disregard of 

 composition, but we must be cautious at jumping at conclusions. These 

 sketches are on the ceiling and the artist may have placed them more or less 

 deliberately in certain conceived relation to one another, since in every 

 cavern so far discovered most of the sketches on the side walls are right 

 side up, showing that position was not by any means disregarded. Then 

 again we find the stately procession of bison and mammoth shown in the 

 drawing where it is difficult to believe that the artists had no definite scheme 

 of composition. To this may be added the herd of cattle in Cogul, the group 

 of horses facing a feline in Font-de-Gaume and several others. \Miat is 

 lacking however is a definite notion of perspective. On the other hand 

 when we come to Magdalenian art we find some suggestion of perspective 

 and some definite composition. In the herd of wild horses we have an 

 example, and again a masterpiece in the grazing reindeer and also in the run- 

 ning herd from Lorthet. 



In short it seems that rudimentary composition is as pronounced in 

 Aurignacian art as initial perspective is in the Magdalenian. It appears 

 that, as in other traits of culture, palaeolithic man moved along in the 

 solution of his art problems by halting and wavering steps, but never really 

 lost his grip upon a solution once attained. As in our day, each diflaculty 

 overcome but widened the horizon of unsolved problems. 



