Colloque UNESCO – DÉCEMBRE 2008 – Pages 00 à 00

DISCOVERY OF A NEW ROCK ART IN EAST BORNEO:

NEW DATA FOR REFLEXION

Jean-Michel CHAZINE (1) & Pindi SETIAWAN (in absentia) (2)

1

Abstract: Although a small number of articles or notices had mentioned the presence of some Rock art scattered in a few islandsof Indonesia, no real detailed study had been carried on concerning that discipline. Distance had been a determining factor, butinterest itself towards the past of supposed unchanging «primitive» cultures, was not much developed. It had nevertheless beenadmitted that some rock art could be found in eastern Indonesia, largely, if not completely inspired by a late Austronesian or pos-sibly Australian Aborigines cultures and influences. On the northern island of Borneo, a few paintings had been checked in somecaves on the Malaysian provinces of Sarawak and Sabah, presenting some links with recent or even modern periods. They hadthus been classified as rather recent, i.e. 2.000 to 200 y. B.P. The recent and unexpected discovery in East Kalimantan of pain-tings of «archaic» features, especially negative hand stencils, has changed that opinion and let develop a new interest towardsregional rock art. This late presents such specificities that some clues or hypothesis may be deduced and generalised to theunderstanding of some Rock art functions and practices.Linked to surveys and recordings of that rock art, archaeological excavations provide occupations and activities remains relatedto Pleistocene periods (more than 10.000 y. BP). Therefore, added to the late surveys managed by UNESCO in West Papua andTimor in the far East, these discoveries would confirm the real importance for Indonesia to enhance researches and protectionactions to ensure the conservation of that important patrimony.

Key-words: rock Art, Borneo-Hand stencils, shamanism, south East Asia, Pleistocene, cultural Patrimony.

Résumé : Découverte d’un nouvel art rupestre dans l’est de Bornéo : nouvelles données de réflexion. Bien qu’un petitnombre d’articles ou de notices aient mentionné la présence d’un art rupestre, sur quelques îles d’Indonésie, aucune étude appro-fondie n’a été menée concernant cette discipline. Si la distance a sûrement constitué un facteur déterminant, l’intérêt pour lepassé des cultures “ primitives ” supposées figées n’était pas très développé. Il avait cependant été admis que quelques élé-ments de cet art rupestre pouvaient être trouvés dans l’est de l’Indonésie, très largement, sinon complètement inspirés par uneinfluence tardive austronésienne ou même issus des cultures aborigènes d’Australie. Dans la partie nord de Bornéo, quelquespeintures ont été relevées dans quelques grottes des provinces malaises de Sarawak et Sabah, permettant des rapprochementsavec des périodes récentes à modernes (entre 2 000 et 200 ans). Des découvertes récentes dans l’Est indonésien de Bornéo depeintures d’apparence “ archaïques ”, en particulier, des mains négatives, ont modifié cette opinion et provoqué un nouvel inté-rêt pour cet art rupestre régional. Ce dernier présente de telles spécificités que des indices ou des hypothèses peuvent êtredéduits et généralisés pour la compréhension de quelques unes des fonctions ou utilisations de l’art rupestre (pratiques de gué-rison, de magie ou de chamanisme par exemple). En relation avec les repérages et les enregistrements de cet art rupestre, lesfouilles archéologiques fournissent les restes d’occupations et d’activités datées du Pléistocène (plus de 10 000 ans avant le pré-sent). C’est pourquoi, ces découvertes, venant s’ajouter aux récents repérages menés sous l’égide de l’Unesco en Papouasieouest (ex-Irian Jaya) et au Timor, dans la partie orientale de l’Indonésie, confirment l’extrême importance pour l’Indonésie dedévelopper les recherches et les actions de protection afin d’assurer la conservation de cet important patrimoine culturel.

Mots-clés : art rupestre, Bornéo, mains négatives, chamanisme, Asie du Sud-Est, Pleistocène, patrimoine culturel.

(1) CNRS/Maison Asie-Pacifique Univ. Provence Marseille - jmchazine@mailcity.com

(2) Institute of Technology of Bandung Indonésie - pindisp@yahoo.com

Since last decade, Indonesia was not particularly famousfor its Rock Art sites. Although some places had been sur-veyed or checked before World War II, not much informa-tion had filtered out, even through specialised literature.It is obvious that the presence of the huge Australian conti-nent located besides Indonesia shattered easily any temp-tation of presentation. It is true also, that the appreciationof all different Rock Art productions, at that time, was notthe same as it is now. Concerns towards Prehistory byitself were even less developed in countries were it was stillthought that «primitive» cultures having remained «frozen»,had «no history» at all. Traditional communities, andamongst them hunter-gatherers, were still considered asliving survivors of prehistoric times and could thus nothave any significant archaeological interest. Their paintingswere of the same level and those of their possible prede-cessors should be alike.That somehow general attitude may explain why, apart theFranco-Cantabric area, which initiated researches concer-ning prehistoric paintings, they only slowly extended to othercountries. The order of emerging process itself is signifi-cantly organised and follows the consciousness that otherplaces of the world, ancient and new, had a History, whichmeans that they had also some Prehistory to be studied.The difficulty to obtain direct datings on paintings, but alsoon any engravings, kept the most remote remain also wrap-

ped in an uncertain halo. The development of interest inRock Art has thus directly followed the development of pre-historic technics and knowledge. From totally indirect andrelative, in the beginning, based upon comparative ethno-graphic data, they reached later much more precise classi-fications and sometimes permitted direct datings.But it took time for Indonesian space, and even its neigh-bours (Malaysia or Philippines) to get into that move, as itsfar past was masked by the incomparable ancestry of thePithecanthropus, the Java Man. The chronological phase between these remains issuedfrom the very origins of man and the sub-historical ones i.e. those which are currently studied by archaeologicalmethods, has thus just been submitted to the random dis-coveries provided by general surveys. Therefore, localRock Art manifestations have just been mentioned asaddendum of observations, as they were mostly conside-red no more than graffiti.The main study conducted by Röder during the FrobeniusExpedition in 1938, which revealed the huge site along theMcLuer Bay (now called Berau Gulf), in the North Westcoast of New Guinea, did not went far inside the prehisto-ry. The paintings, presented as being regularly re-actuali-sed by traditional ceremonies were considered as sub-contemporaneous. The study has been conducted thus asa part of the general anthropological program led by the

2

Figure 1 - Map of the South East Asia showing a schematic dispersal of different rock art sites related to Wallace Line.

Figure 1 - Carte du Sud-Est asiatique indiquant schématiquement la répartition des sites d’art rupestre par rapport à la Lignede Wallace.

multi-disciplinary Frobenius project. The whole site remai-ned later almost unknown and forgotten until the 80’, whenmore oriented archaeological researches began to spreadover some archipelagoes of Indonesia (Delanghe & Arifin2004). Mostly based upon the Röder’s publications (1959),the remoteness of the site has let it remain unvisited andalmost undisturbed until very recent years (personalcomm. Sejati Assoc., Jakarta, 1996).

In fact, most of the island South East Asia, would haveremained much longer, a complete archaeological terraincognita, if T. Harrisson, a strong character, dropped forWW2 Intelligence Services into the rain forest of Sarawak,had not been by chance a passionate ethnographer. Healso sought behind the present, and had the incomparableopportunity to discover the large Niah cave. That was thevery beginning of prehistoric researches in Borneo, startingsince the late 50’. The discovery of a human fossil skull,dated back to some 40,000 y. BP (Harrisson 1957), intro-duced the whole island as one of the main pole into theisland South East Asian prehistory. As contemporary andthus ethnographic activities associated with more or lessrecent burials laid in and on the bottom ground, the redhaematite figurative drawings which were found there andaround (Harrisson & Reavis 1966), have been consideredno more than sub-recent (see J.-Ph. Rigaud in this volu-me). For the best, they were attributed to the lateAustronesian phase, i.e. 2,000 y. BP. Later, another largeand determining cave (Gua Sireh) has been excavated andprovided clues of Pleistocene to late bronze age dwellingsand burials (Datan 1993), besides red haematite drawings.These too, representing mostly hunting or fighting scenes,some of them including recent weapons and/or boats,have been classified into the same cultural and chronolo-gical period (Solheim 1983). Towards the North, not evensuch paintings had been found, except charcoal drawingsfrom the Singnapan Valley’ caves, South of Palawan island(Peralta 1983). And from some sketches in the vicinity ofManila, it was deduced, that the lack of «classical» pain-tings or Rock Art expression, could be generalised to thewhole North West part of the Indo-Pacific world. Given, atleast until now, that neither Java, nor Sumatra, nor conti-nental Malaysia have shown any ornate cave or rock shel-ter with attested prehistoric paintings.Apart the well detailed, but totally forgotten since, McLuer’sBay massive and particularly expanded group, a few pain-tings had been observed or only briefly checked in Sulawesi,Timor or Ceram Archipelagoes (Ballard 1988; Heekeren 1958;Kosasih 1991; O’Connor 2003). Their location mainly situatedin the Eastern part of the Wallacea, between Sahul and Sundashelves provided some clues for a foreign origin (fig. 1).

Moreover, as most of the figures were mainly figurative,and located within areas settled by Austronesian speakingcommunities, the hypothesis of their origins has naturallyand quite logically been attributed to Austronesians and/ortheir post following cultures (Ballard 1988; 1992). Theirpossible age could not thus trespass at most 5,000 years.In fact, the problem of chronologizing and sorting the dif-ferent paintings is still pending, as far as they do notcontain organic stuff or datable matters. That obstacle hasleft a large space for uncertain or totally hypothetical assi-gnments. Thus, the first hypothesis has been explainingthat the supremacy of Australian Aborigines concerningthe whole Rock Art expression was regionally uncontes-table and so high that they would have unavoidablyinfluenced the eastern part of Insulinde (Heekeren 1972).That late influence would have been able to reach at most,the South West part of Sulawesi, during the last estimatedpopulations moves and exchanges between northernAustralia and some eastern archipelagoes of the Wallacea.Based upon ethnographic and incident clues, thesemovings, contacts and exchanges could have happenedbetween 12,000 and 8,000 years ago. It is nevertheless dif-ficult to share between the different tracks of exchanges;and the originality of Rock Art is not that much prevalent tobe identified elsewhere in itself, although attested by manyscholars (Layton 1992; Flood 1983; Morwood 2002). Later,at the end of the 80’, a more adaptative hypothesis ofAustronesian origin, would explain the similarities with thenewly settled Austronesian cultures. It would fit to partlyexplain the presence of some rock Art in some spots, buteven the general repartition of that Rock Art is not regularenough upon the whole Wallacea, to permit any acutegeneralisation.The unexpected discovery of apparently more archaïc fea-tures of paintings in East Borneo, has obliged to the «revi-sitation» of general knowledge and admitted hypothesisconcerning even these two theories.As said previously, on the island of Borneo which had beendivided between Indonesia and Malaysia (the BruneiEmirate acquired easily a quite surprising independence),archaeological surveys and excavations had beenconducted in Malay provinces only. Thus, the discovery ofcharcoal drawings, right in the centre of the island by aFrench team of cavers crossing Borneo by foot from Westto East (Fage 1988), should have provoked nothing butimperceptible changes in the general knowledge of thatpart of the world 3. It was just one new location of charcoaldrawings, attributed to the more or less recent periods(2,000 to 100 years old) in an area where some others hadalready been observed (Grabowsky 1888, in Kush 1986).In fact, new surveys of karstic outcrops previously organi-

3

(3) It did’nt, just because of the personality of Luc-Henri Fage, one of the speleologist participant, who is a passionateamateur of archaeology, photographer and infographist. He decided to search as much data he could about Rock Artmanifestations in Indonesian Borneo and intended to come back later to direct a documentary. Chance then let us meettogether and I became attracted by the total archaeological gap of ignorance, concerning not only Rock Art, but thewhole prehistory of Indonesian Borneo, which amazed me.Year after year, since 1994, within the «Kalimanthrope Association».created for that purpose, we co-organized surveysand discoveries of caves and rock shelters with LH. Fage and P. Setiawan, unveiling their unexpected contents. Most ofall the natural or retouched photos are due to LH. Fage’s habilities and computering expertise, best visible on:http://www.kalimanthrope.com

sed by Franco-Indonesian teams, led to the unexpecteddiscovery of a cave with a totally different set of paintings.The main new event was the first appearance of negativehandprints, which induced to attribute a much older agefor these paintings. Year after year, using cavers mappingand local bird nests gatherers as guides, we have checked31 ornate caves within more than 150 caves and rock shel-ters scattered mostly into two main areas 50 kms awayeach other (fig. 2 et 3). They are located more or less highon cliffs along tributaries of Mangkalihat mountains flowingout to the sea.One after the other, the discovery of a new form of pain-tings which was confirmed in each of the newly checkedornate caves, induced to set questions concerning theprevious hypothesis. The first one concerning the reverseinfluence from Australia, would not have been limited toWest Sulawesi, but also crossed the Makassar Straits. Thislate corresponding in fact to the Wallace Line, sharing

Wallacea area and Sunda. Then concerning theAustronesian origine of paintings, it could be quite possiblein theory, because the languages spoken actually in theinterior of Borneo are all Austronesian (Adelaar 1995; Blust1988; D. Tryon 2005, pers. comm.). Nevertheless, thelayout of motives, apart a rather large number of negativehandprints, presents more similarities with AustralianAborigines expressions than with Sulawesi or other EastIndonesian features.Therefore, to overpass these apparent contradictions, itbecame important to determine the period(s) correspon-ding to the production of these paintings. The firstattempts upon some pigments was deceitful, because noorganic matter was found in the red to brown haematitesamples analysed in Laboratoire des Musées de France(pers. comm. M. Petit 1995; Chazine 1995f). Thus, onlyindirect ways of datings remained possible. The inventoryof motives, although comprising mainly hand stencils in

4

Figure 3 - Location map of ornatedcaves in Mounts Marang.

Figure 3 - Carte de localisation desgrottes ornées des Monts Marang.

Figure 2 - General studied siteslocation map in East Borneo(Kalimantan Timur).

Figure 2 - Carte de localisationgénérale des sites étudiés dansl’est de Bornéo (Kalimantan Timur).

Figure 4 - The «hands bouquet» locatedupon the Ilas Kenceng ceiling more than8m high.

Figure 4 - Le «Bouquet de mains», situésur le plafond de la grotte Ilas Kenceng,à plus de 8m de hauteur.

Figure 5 - The «tree of life» displaying acouple of differenciating overpaintedhand stencils in Tewet rock shelter.

Figure 5 - «L’arbre de vie» présentantplusieurs mains négatives surpeintesreliées entre elles, dans l’abri Tewet.

5

specific dispositions, and even not associated with anyother motif, was a first broad clue. Then, in Gua IlasKenceng, the horns of one particularly large bovide (1,4mlong), painted on the ceiling of a small squeeze, appearedfrom zoo-archaeologist’s advice (pers. comm. E. Meijaard,1999-2005) to correspond to a species vanished at the endof Pleistocene. Another tapir-like feature (from Gua Karim)would also correspond to some fossilised species (ibid).That possible Pleistocene origin of the paintings was laterobtained and confirmed in Ilas Kenceng. A fragment of acalcite veil having poured upon a wall with negative handprints, has been analysed in the CNRS-CEA Laboratorywith U/Th and C14 methods. Their results convergedtowards values between 9,400 and 10,600 years BP(Causses, Plagnes et al. 2003).The oldest of these paintings were thus anterior to the arri-val, or the direct influence, of Austronesians. Questionsrelated to the direction of influence would thus be possiblyre-oriented. If Rock Art from East Borneo turned out that itwas older than others located more towards the East, thenthe direction of the influence would change also. Not only,that Rock Art expression would predate the arrival ofAustronesians, or at least their influence, but also the func-tions of the practice of these paintings would have beenthemselves influent towards newcomers.These new considerations suggested by themselves somedifferent clues. But they are also completed by the simpledescription of the content of ornate caves or rock shelterssurveyed in East Kalimantan (for more detailed descrip-tions, see Chazine 1995f; 2004; 2001 to 2005 MAE reports;Setiawan 2004; Fage, et al. 2003).We have already said that that Rock Art was mostly repre-sented by a high number of negative hand prints: 1500counted within 32 caves, at a general arithmetic range. Infact, that number has to be changed into 900 within 28caves, because two twin caves contain nearly 300 handstencils, and another one contains 365 hands. These late3 caves present the particularity of having absolutely noother motif, figure or else, than negative handprints. If it isspecified that some of the hands are painted upon the cei-ling, some 12 m high (in Gua Ham), we may suppose a veryspecific function to that kind of realisation. The dispositionof handprints, not only may reach very high situations, butthe display itself appears to be selected: friezes, spreadout or circular (fig. 4). The second characteristic of handsis that they are often overimpressed with simple motiveswhich differenciate them (fig. 7). For instance, 29 differentmotives have been checked in Gua Tewet (which will pos-sibly reach 56 (see National Geographic Magazine Aug.2005) after double controls), and some more in othercaves. A complementary exception related to hand sten-cils, is that some of the overimpressed ones are linkedtogether, forming an obvious elaborated motif like the «treeof life» from Gua Tewet (fig. 5).This late motif generally spread all over the South East Asiaand even as far as India, is said to be a mythic or mytho-logic background representation, related to Austronesiansocial unicity (Hopes 1997).Another sample from Gua Karim represents a «honeytree», just besides a huge bees swarm (themselvesbesides the tapir-like animal already quoted). The ethno-

6

Figure 6 - The «initiatic trek» showing three overpaintedhand stencils, linked together and associated to zoomor-phic and anthropomorphic or symbolic figures.

Figure 6 - Le «chemin initiatique» présentant troisempreintes de mains négatives surpeintes, reliées entreelles et associées à des représentations zoomorphes etanthropomorphes ou symboliques.

Figure 7 - Differenciating overpainted and opposed handstencils, on a panel in Tewet rock shelter.

Figure 7 - Mains négatives surpeintes, différenciées etopposées sur une paroi de l’abri Tewet.

graphic literature tells about honey bee dances and honeytree rituals (Crane 2001) which are performed in preventionof, or after some disaster/calamity which has stressedsome communities, within Dayak or similar ethnic groups(Geddes 1973).It becomes thus possible to predate these ceremonies andmore generally these cultural features to the arrival ofAustronesians. Elaborated in fact by local aborigines, theywould have survived, crossed the time, spread more defini-tely and changed themselves into «Austronesian» traditions.The actual lack of precise and direct datings for thesepaintings is nevertheless counterbalanced by archaeologi-cal findings, which, although not being directly associated,constitute strong clues plunging into at least the latePleistocene. The other originality of East Kalimantan is thespecific distribution of ornate caves and rock shelters.Broadly speaking, they are located at the most remote andhighest level of caves networks and do not contain untilnow, although numerous minitest pits, any dwelling orregular occupation and activities remains (for more com-plete descriptions, see Chazine 2005b).That disposition indicates also specific activities, whichwould thus be more involved towards rituals, which do not«produce» or generate classical archaeological tracks. Thelack of fire and charcoal means that activities were essen-tially diurnal. Likewise, the absence of any food remain(bones and shells) nor hard stuff materials, correspondalso to a limited range of activities. Within these remainingpossibilities, initiatic, healing, shamanic or magic, wouldbecome the most probable. The main elementary physicalconditions are gathered: remoteness, isolation, upraisedposition providing large panoramic view upon the meancanopy and a much drier environment added to generallyflat grounded disposition.

Concerning the regular presence and the particularly highnumber of negative handprints, it may be observed a stronganalogy between the technical operating chains used tocreate hand stencils and healing processes. As the meanimpression provided by the Rock Art present in these orna-te caves is only rarely realistic or deliberately figurative, thechoice of using an inverted way of representation of handsmeans that these hands are not only hands. Thus, the wholewould possibly correspond to a strong and intentional sym-bolic expression. Functioning more like hermitage or sanc-tuary implying some «tabu» practices, because of its isola-ted situation, these sites are therefore, not destined to beseen, or used as open «showroom» places, unlike a largepart of the Australian Rock Art expression. Consequently,one may suggest a peculiar function for these sites, whichwould be more specifically engaged towards initiatic andritual activities or practices. Within them, a «best fit hypo-thesis» (Hempel 1966 cited in Clottes 2004) correlated toethnographical analogies from different parts of the world (atleast, for the most well known African or American but alsoArctic data), would suggest something like a «school». Aspecific and selected place oriented towards formation, ini-

tiation, deprivation or learning of particular practices (fig. 6).At a more symbolic level, it would have functioned as «aca-demic», forming a descent. It would be comparable on adifferent scale, to Greek Pythagorean school or much later,to middle-age church building traditions. It would by theway explain both convergence in styles and contents anddifferences in expressions and dispositions within theneighbouring Marang river and outcrop (Chazine 2003).The whole number of negative hand prints for example,considered as juxtaposed or successive single ceremo-nies, may seem very high. It becomes rather inexplicablysmall if one considers the long span of time, five to ten oreven more, thousands of years. In this way, the hypothesisof a generational training or teaching school, would it befor healing, shamanic (Clottes & Lewis-williams 2001), ini-tiatic or magic practices, becomes an appropriate one. Asin many hunter-gatherers or forest communities, someritual ceremonies used to be organised within more or lesslong cycle periods (25 to 70 years are common in PapuaNew Guinea) and included in the regular way of life. Onlyexceptional events would necessitate special interventionsor practice of specific rituals.Thus, as a main conclusion concerning that newly discoveredRock Art expression, we would observe that it presents spe-cific characteristics. They not only indicate a peculiar usegoing back to earlier periods, i.e. at least the late Pleistocene,but would also initiate the elaboration of different hypothesisconcerning the various uses of ornate caves4.First, the unique use of numerous negative hand stencils insome caves, then their own disposition which is by itselfexpressing an aesthetical preoccupation combined withan intentional applying process. The third and more com-plex originality being the overimpressing of these late handstencils and their common tying in arborescent features.Individualism and community being there totally symboli-sed together. Aesthetics and function are obtained with themost basic possible motif assemblage.

Besides this determining discovery, environmental pres-sures are involved. In the caves, the decaying process isgoing on and began to destroy many of the paintings. Mainlythose located in the entrance, in front of sunshine or rain,show regular signs of destruction. Although this does notseem to be totally systematic, because other punctualconditions would have also helped the development ofsome calcifage bacteries. The absence of any paintings atthe lower levels of cavities could have been due to that kindof erosion but all our as thorough as possible observationswould discard definitely that hypothesis. If even tiny trackshad survived, they should have been observed.Another reason for fearing short term direct or indirect des-truction, is the re-occupancy of that area, by foreign new-comers (Indonesian transmigrants). The two main areas where these painted caves and rockshelters are located, although far remote inside the largerain forest are regularly visited or even dwelled, by generalforagers, seeking and collecting bird nests in every poten-

7

(4) Since this presentation a computer program (©kalimain) has been elaborated in cooperation with A. Noury, which isable to decipher the sexual origin of the painters from 2D/4D fingers length ratio, showing the presence of both men andwomen hands stencils in the caves, not only in Borneo but the whole world (Chazine & Noury 2006b).

tial cavity. Un-authorized individual or small scale loggingenterprises along rivers and tributaries, let new immigrantscomb and exploit every living parcel, out of any control. Seeking now without any respect for previous inhabitantsand their deserted cemeteries or funerary places, they useto break, split, steal anything valuable and add their graffition the walls. Even until they ignored the existence of any oldor important archaeological paintings belonging thus to theKalimantan or Indonesian patrimony, did the practice ofgraffitizing spread, but not faster than the re-colonization ofthe places happened. Actually, and especially since lastyears, the charcoal graffiti (much more sexual than before)overimpressing of ornate caves has exceedingly increased.The local government, who has been aware since of theimportance of the patrimony located in these two remoteareas, has not until now been able to enterprise anythingtangible. Although the good will seems evident, solutions oraction procedure come up against local anarchy, impoten-ce, lack of financial and human means. A larger part of thelocal administration is better aware of the existence of thatunique patrimony, of the importance of its conservation andeven the opportunities for some eco-tourism perspectives.Nevertheless, the complexity of the situation mixing diverseand sometimes antagonistic interests, leads more to inertythan possible dangerous political decisions.

As an example, although Gua Mardua, the first ornate cavethat we have discovered in 1994 is the first one to be regis-tered, no consequent decision has followed. The cavewas, and still is as far as we know, deserted, just becauseit «is dead». It means that all the bird nests having beenhastily collected, no more swift is still dwelling there.Otherwise, like other ornate caves which are still «active»and where we have not been allowed to visit, these placeswould remain somehow «outlaw». Nevertheless, as thereare still some local families, who pretend to have kin rela-tionships with these caves, they are not totally out ofcontrol. The chief of the village has been able to decree aprotection bill upon the cave which is seemingly efficient.An opposite situation is that one of the Marang cliff andoutcrop. Here there is no more local community still dwel-ling in the area, since more than 60 years. No local customnor link towards the past and its remains did survived.Newcomers feel themselves totally stranger and don’tevoke any relation with any part of the past of that remoteand deserted area.

Thus the general problem not only for the province govern-ments, but for the central administration in Jakarta, is stillto manage the poor and remote means they possess orare able to concentrate. The different archaeological sitesand mainly ornate caves are perceived as important fac-tors for scientific knowledge, and also for their economicpotentials. Some of the Maros caves in South West

Sulawesi, have already been fitted out for touristic tours inmore or less acute conditions (reconstruction of concreteaccess stairs, or repainting of decayed archaeologicalcolours). But in the meanwhile, cement plants have beensettled in the vicinity which have totally destroyed someother ornate caves, although they had since long timebeen officially listed on protection files…

So, until recent years, before new discoveries awoke inter-est towards that hidden part of the prehistory of the region,Indonesian governments would they be central and regio-nal, had no many concerns for these remains. Thanks tothe converging works of different colleagues from differentcountries and institutions, that part of patrimony has beco-me also a part of humankind patrimony 5. And as forarchaeological investigations or excavations, new discove-ries provide inevitably new questions. An important anddetermining challenge for the local as much as internatio-nal community.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ADELAAR A. 1995 - Borneo as a cross-roads for compa-rative Austronesian linguistics, The Austronesians,Bellwood, P, et al. (eds), Canberra, ANU, p. 75-95.

BLUST R .A. 1988 - The Austronesian homeland : a lin-guistic perspective. Asian Perspectives 1988, 26, HawaiiUniversity Press, p. 45-67.

BALLARD C. 1988 - Dudumahan : a Rock Art site in KeiKecil, SE Molluccas. BIPPA, No 8, p. 139-161.

BALLARD C. 1992 - Painted Rock art sites in WesternMelanesia : locational evidence for an «Austronesian» tra-dition. State of the Art : regional Rock Art studies inAustralia and Melanesia, Macdonald, J. & Haskovec, I. P.(eds) Melbourne (Occasional AURA publication No 6), p.94-106.

CAUSSES M., PLAGNES V. & al. 2003 - Cross dating(Th/U-14C) of calcite covering prehistoric paintings inBorneo. Quaternary Research 60 (2003) p. 172-179.

CHAZINE J.-M. 1995f - Nouvelles perspectives archéologiquesà Bornéo. L’Anthropologie, T. 99 (1995, n°4, p. 667-670.

CHAZINE J.-M.2001 to 2005 - Rapports annuels de mis-sion à Bornéo. Paris, MAE, Commission des fouilles, unpu-blished mns, 50p.

CHAZINE J.-M. 2003 - Rock Art and ceramics in EastBorneo : logical discovery or new cornerstone?. Sand, Ch

8

(5) Since 2002, a MOU was signed with the Puslit Arkenas, which precised the cooperation frame and level, for enga-ging our Franco-Indonesian teams into archaeological surveys, excavations and technical researches. We owe our war-mest thanks to many official or private authorities for their financial or logistic supports: French Ministry of ForeignAffairsin Paris and Jakarta (2001-2005); Total-Indonesia (2001-2003); Rolex Awards (2001); Société de Protection des Banques2002-2003); National Geographic Society (2003) and all Institutions involved with our local aides, guides and boat dri-vers, have permitted these discoveries.

(ed), Pacific Archaeology: assessments and prospects,Nouméa, Les Cahiers d’Archéologie 15, p. 43-52.

CHAZINE J.-M. 2004 - Rock Art from Borneo : a compara-tive approach. In Centro Camunio Studii Preistorici (ed.) XXIValcamonica Symposium pre-proceedings, p. 164-173.

CHAZINE J.-M. 2005b - Rock Art, burials and habitations :caves in East Kalimantan. Asian Perspectives Vol.44, n° 1,Hawaii University Press, p.219-230.

CHAZINE J.-M. & NOURY A. 2006b - Sexual determinationof hand stencils in East Kalimantan. InternationalNewsletter On Rock Art, n°44, p.21-26.

CLOTTES J., 2004 - Le Chamanisme paléolithique : fon-dements d’une hypothèse. La spiritualité, Otte, M. (ed),actes du Colloque de la Commission 8 de l’UISPP, déc.2003, Liège, ERAUL 106, p. 1-14.

CLOTTES J., LEWIS-WILLIAMS J.D. 2001 - LesChamanes de la Préhistoire, transe et magie dans lesgrottes ornées: polémiques et réponses, Paris : La Maisondes Roches.

CRANE E. (2001) - The Rock Art of honey hunters, Cardiff :IBRA, 106 p.

DATAN I. 1993 - Archaeological excavations at Gua Sirehand Lubang Angin, Sarawak. The Sarawak MuseumJournal, Vol. XLV, No 66, 192 p.

DELANGHE Ph, ARIFIN, K 2004 - Rock Art in West Papua,Paris, UNESCO, 291p.

FAGE L.-H. 1988 - Les dessins pariétaux de Gua Kaung.Spelunca n°34, p. 57-60.

FAGE L.-H. et al. 2003 - L’arte rupestre di Kalimantan inIndonesia/The Rock Art of Kalimantan. Ligabue Magazine,Anno XXI, n°41, p. 146-166.

FLOOD J. 1983 - Archaeology of the dreamtime, Sydney :Collins.

GEDDES W. R. 1973 - Nine Dayak nights, OxfordUniversity Press, New York.

GRABOWSKY F. 1888 - Kalksteinhöhlen in SüdostBorneo. Globus 54, P.326-329.

HARRISSON T. 1957 - The Great Cave of Niah: a prelimi-nary report on Bornean prehistory, Man 57, p.161-166.

HARRISSON T & REAVIS, J.L. 1966 - The Sarang Caves inSarawak. Sarawak Museum Journa,l 14, (28-29), p. 249-268.

HEMPEL C. G. 1966 - Philosophy of natural science.Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, 116p.

HEEKEREN Van H. R. 1958 - Rock paintings and otherprehistoric discoveries near Maros (SW Celebes). LaporanTahuan 1950, Jakarta: Dinas Purbakala, p. 23-35.

HEEKEREN Van H. R. 1972 - The Stone age of Indonesia.The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff (ed.), 141p.

HOPES M, 1997 - Ilmu: Magic and divination amongst theBenuaq and Tunjung Dayak, Jakarta: Puspa Suara & RioTinto Fundation, 167 p.

KOSASIH 1991 - Rock Art in Indonesia. Bahn, P &Rosenfeld, A (eds), Rock Art and Prehistory : paper pre-sented to Symposium G of the AURA Congress, Darwin,1988, Oxbow Books, Monograph 10.

KUSH H. 1986 - Rock Art discoveries in Southeast Asia: ahistorical summary. Bollettino del Centro Camuno di StudiPrehistorici 23 p.99-108.

LAYTON P. 1992 - Australian Rock Art. CambridgeUniversity Press, 284 p.

MORWOOD M 2002 - Visions from the Past. Crows Nest :Allen & Unwin, 347 p.

O’CONNOR S. 2003 - Nine new painted Rock Art sitesfrom East Timor in the context of the Western PacificRegion. Asian Perspectives Vol.34, No 1, 2003.

PERALTA J.. 1983 - Ta’ut Batu Studies. National Museummonograph No 7, Manila, 219 p.

RÖDER J. 1959 - Felsbilder und Vorgeschicht des Mac-Luer-Golfes, West Neuguinea. Ergebnisse der FrobeniusExpedition 1937-38 in die Molukken und nach holländischNeu-Guinea. Bd. IV. Darmstadt, L.C: Wittich, 161 p.

SETIAWAN P. 2004 - Kawasan kars Sangkulirang :Anropology dan Arkeologi. Research report of «The NatureConservancy», Samarinda, Kalimantan Timur.

SOLHEIM W.G. II 1983 - Archaeological research inSarawak, past and future. SarawakMuseum Journal 10(17-18), p. 35-56.

9

10