The Grotte De Chauvet ( Pont-D'arc )

In the latter part of December 1994, a group of three French speleologists discovered what was to become one of the most marvelous and certainly the oldest gallery of paleolithic cave-paintings ever found. Using carbon-14 dating techniques, some of the art within Chauvet-Pont-D’arc has been identified as being from between 30,340 and 32,410 BCE, far older than those found at the incredibly famous Lascaux caves (Clottes). But despite it’s extreme age, and it’s wondrous depictions of ice-age animals never before seen on cave-walls, the “Grotte” was closed to researchers for several years following a spectacular series of lawsuits (Harrington1). Then, in late 1998, the cave was finally opened to researchers, allowing the greater anthropological community a look at a gallery that has, in the years since, “revolutionized hitherto accepted concepts on the appearance of art and its development”, proving “that homo sapiens learnt to draw at a very early stage" (Raynal).The art within Chauvet-Pont-D’arc is truly spectacular; this paleolithic gallery is not simply a handful of poorly done charcoal scribbles on the wall, and in some cases, the roof of a drafty old cave. No, the “Grotte” is a collection of fine art, and a record of creatures never before seen in the paintings of ancient humans, some of which are painted in places where the humans of today could not reach without leaving at least some traces (Raynal). Its walls depict a disturbingly large percentage of dangerous animals, predators and unpredictable herbivores that roamed through the Pont-D’arc area during the late Pleistocene; this alone makes Chauvet-Pont-D’arc unique, as the number of depictions of paleolithic animals that were hunted for food, which appear predominantly in paleolithic art elsewhere, are disproportionately low in the “Grotte” (Clottes). The use of shading and perspective in the art is incredibly advanced for the age to which it has been dated, and many researchers firmly believe that the paintings are a work not of a troop of paleolithic artists working separately in different areas of the cave, but instead a single master painter, possibly accompanied by a small group of what Jean Clottes describes as “acolytes,” or “assistants who shared the same conventions and techniques.” Later studies have come to show that our famous trio of speleologists, led by Jean-Marie Chauvet, were not the first explorers to come across the “Grotte.” Until 26,120 ± 400 years ago when the cave was finally sealed by a what is generally assumed to have been a rockslide, groups of intrepid, stone-age humans, assumed to be of the Solutrean or Magdalenian paleolithic cultures, made pilgrimages to Chauvet-Pont-D’arc, as evidenced by the appearance of torch marks over the calcite layers covering parts of the original paintings, (Clottes) as well as bits of charcoal that litter the floor of the cave. The evidence found by Jean Clottes’ team also shows that cave was not, however, used for human habitation; Bears lived within Chauvet-Pont-D’arc, and the paleolithic artists who painted the wondrous works of art within the cave were little more than frail, bipedal interlopers. When the “Grotte” was discovered by Jean-Marie Chauvet and his two associates, Christian Hillaire and Eliette Brunel, the French government, specifically the Ministry of Culture, for whom Chauvet worked as a part time park ranger, immediately began working to secure the cave and all the rights thereof, exclusively for themselves (Harrington1 ). Thus began a series of legal battles that left the cave closed to researchers for over three years, wrapped the Chauvet-Pont-D’arc cave in a mess of red tape, and effectively labeled the cave as having “provided more work for lawyers than for archeologists.”(Couvrette) Eventually, Chauvet and his two associates managed to navigate enough of the red-tape to assert that they, not the government, had exclusive rights to the pictures and video they had taken inside the “Grotte,” as the Ministry of Culture had used a false, backdated document to claim that Chauvet was “on assignment” when he discovered the cave with two “volunteers”(Couvrette). The court agreed, and the primary legal battle of Chauvet-Pont-D’arc was put to rest, though the compensation awarded to the three, as well as the profit from Chauvet’s book, scarcely covered the legal costs from the long and exhaustive battle with the French Ministry of Culture (Couvrette). But that is not the proverbial “end all and be all” of the Ministry’s legal actions concerning the “Grotte;” they themselves are loathe to mention and quite discreetly overlook these ethically questionable acts. It was only through third parties, that is, American periodicals, such as Time and Archaeology, that this mess was exposed, and the legal events leading up to the opening of the cave to the research community brought to light. Indeed, even the manner in which the government obtained the land on which the cave sits is direct and impersonal, if not a little harsh. The land on which Chauvet-Pont-D’arc sits was owned by three men, and once the cave was discovered, the government readily offered a total of 25,000 francs to the trio only to be turned down; The three men claimed that due to later tourist revenue, they would require at least seventy million francs before they would part with the property (Harrington1). Unfortunately for these three men, the government promptly expropriated the land, and extended their original offer as a sort of compensation (Couvrette).When the legal issues were finally solved, and the cave opened to researchers in the latter part of 1998, Archeologist Jean Clottes, a science advisor to France’s own Ministy of Culture, and a team of eager researchers were immediately given the go-ahead to begin working within the cave (Begley). Originally, Clottes’ team was given only a single year, but after later analyses of the cave and the art within, the Ministry of Culture authorized an additional term of three years, after which a “publication of these first research campaigns”(Clottes) was to be prepared. Unfortunately, this meant that the research team would only be allowed a four-year period in which to study the “Grotte,” and despite Clottes’ repeated appeals to the Ministry of Culture, each time saying that four years simply wasn’t enough time to properly analyze Chauvet-Pont-D’arc, the research being done within the cave itself all but ended with the close of the four-year period(Harrington2 ). Also unfortunately, there have been no public announcements as to whether or not the cave will be reopened to researchers (or the public, for that matter) in the near, or even distant future.The fieldwork that was being done at the Grotte de Chauvet during the original, four-year research period was well documented and meticulous to say the least. It occurred over two separate terms per year, each consisting of fifteen days, with two additional, stand-alone, week-long work-periods saved specifically for the floor specialists and the geologists (Clottes). Each member of the research team was provided with room and board, as well as space to work that afforded access to all of the computers and analysis equipment on site (Clottes). Due to conclusions originally drawn from the analysis of the cave’s own “micro-climate,” only about one-half of the team was allowed to work within the cave each six to seven hour day, generally bringing the total number of workers, at any given time, to about eight or nine people with the few specialists that made occasional appearances throughout the day (Clottes). Those members of the team not working within the cave still found plenty to do; back at “base camp,” the researchers would sift through data, exchange ideas, and generally work together in a relatively friendly and non-competitive environment (Clottes). In recent years, the analysis of the “Grotte” has managed to  continue; outside of Chauvet-Pont-D’arc, in the private laboratories of Jean Clottes and some of his closest colleagues, the tale of the cave is still being fleshed out. In truth, a complete report, in fact a book, was written by Jean Clottes on what the research team uncovered within the walls of Chauvet-Pont-D’arc, but he has released at least one more since that time, giving the public and the greater anthropological community a new, fresh look at the “Grotte” that includes the research and opinions of specialists in related fields, such as art history and ethnology (Amazon).Chauvet-Pont-D’arc is incredible to say the least; the art upon it’s walls is the earliest yet found and yet it is not the work of an amateur. The Grotte de Chauvet is paleolithic master’s canvas, a holy place where ancient humans came and saw that master’s art long after he had died, and kept coming for over four thousand years after his death. It is a window into the past, a place full of ancient masterpieces that archeologists, art historians, ethnologists, and anthropologists have stood and stared at for hours, contemplating art that has not been touched by human hands or seen by human eyes in over twenty-five thousand years and wondering: “what was that artist thinking about when he finally put paint, chisel, or charcoal to the wall and created something so strange, so enigmatic, and yet so beautiful?”   Works CitedBegley, Sharon. “Insert from Newsweek” The Bulletin, Australian periodical. May 25, 1999    http://www.hominids.com/donsmaps/chauvetcave.html*Clottes, Jean & Valérie Féruglio “ The cave of Chauvet-Pont-D’arc.” Official Site.    http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/arcnat/chauvet/en/index.htmlCouvrette, Phil. “Shadows on the wall.” Time Vol. 152, No.16. October 19, 1998:    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/1998/int/981019/europe.shadows_on_the_w18a.htmlHarrington1, Spencer. “La Débâcle Chauvet.” Archeology Vol. 50, No.2. March/April 1997:    http://www.archaeology.org/9703/newsbriefs/chauvet.htmlHarrington2, Spencer. “Chauvet Study Begins.” Archeology Vol. 51, No.6. Nov./Dec. 1998:    http://www.archaeology.org/9811/newsbriefs/chauvet.htmlRaynal, Florence. “Fur Clad Michelangelos.” Ministry of Foreign Affairs / Label France, Magazine    http://www.france.diplomatie.fr/label_france/ENGLISH/SCIENCES/CHAUVET/cha.html    www.amazon.com, Editorial review: Books: Return to Chauvet Cave: Excavating the Birthplace of Art: the First Full Report.*A loose collection of articles pertaining to the cave.