THE ORIGINS OF MYTHOLOGY IN THE UPPER PALEOLITHIC CULTURES OF EURASIA c Bennett Blumenberg 1993 Bennett Blumenberg Reality Software PO Box 105 Waldoboro, ME 04572 09/28/93 02:02 PM origins.doc Table of Contents The Origins of Mythology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Overview of the Upper Pleistocene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Cultural Chronology of the Upper Pleistocene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Lunar Calendars . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Seasonal Faunal Imagery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 The Earliest Mythic Images . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 The Bear Cult . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Cosmic Serpent and Mythic Horse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 The North German Reindeer Ritual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 The Upper Paleolithic Shaman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 The Primary Deity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 The Goddess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 The God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Burial Rituals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Asvamedha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 27 Continuity into the Mesolithic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 In Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 THE ORIGINS OF MYTHOLOGY How early does mythic perception begin? How early can mythic perception begin? From the late Homo erectus site of Becov in Czechoslovakia c. 250,000 B.C. has come a quartzite rubbing stone and a striated piece of ochre lying on a floor with a spread of red ochre powder. Yet, ochre can be used to tan hides, staunch insect bites and treat stomach wounds and so may have no metaphorical significance (Marshak 1991: 381, Blanc (1961). Others have seen evidence for ritual cannabalism in the nature (which is interpreted as deliberate) of damage around the foraman magnum at the base of skulls in both Homo erectus individuals from Peking and archaic Homo sapiens in continental Europe c.250,000 years ago and also in Neanderthals from the site of Monte Circeo in Italy. Debate over what such skull damage actually implies has gone on for nearly a century with no resolution. Some Neanderthal tribes did bury their dead, and at Shanidar in Iraq this was done with flowers (Soleki 1971). It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Homo sapiens neanderthalensis had a conscious conception of an afterlife and deliberately designed burial rituals to facilitate the passing from this `world' to another realm. But the details of narrative and rites will forever elude us because the Neanderthals did not create any pictorial art or iconographic vocabulary. A good introduction to the problem of the ultimate origns of religion may be found in Pfeiffer (1982) Many researchers have noted the occurence of mythic iconography in the cave art and sculpture of the European Upper Paleolithic.1 See Cambell (1988), Gimbutas (1991) and Jelnek (1975) for recent examples of such discussions. However these books provide little in the way of interpretation and analysis beyond noting similarites with the mytho-poetics of the Neolithic and later times. They infer meaning for the Upper Paleolithic by the process of backward extrapolation. Such a process is filled with pitfalls because it assumes a mind set in Upper Paleolithic cultures equivalent to the later time period that is used as the base line for backward extrapolation. Neolithic mythologies were lived out within the context of the agricultural revolution, permanent settlements that practiced agriculture and animal husbandry as primary food production activities. Furthermore by the seventh millenium B.C., several such settlements in the Near East had attained the stature of towns with stratified proto- urban societies and populations of several thousand. Activities in the Neolithic which bear little relationship to the lifestyles of tribal hunter- gatherers in the Upper Paleolithic include a minor role relegated to big game hunting (and thereby the eclipse of the associated myth and rituals), metallurgy, weaving, pottery and the concentration of wealth and trading activities in such towns where a class structured society may also be reliably inferred. If we take society to be structured by mytho-poetics, then the myths and rituals of the Neolithic might be assumed to be quite different in philosophical content than those of the Upper Paleolithic, whatever iconographic similarities may be catalogued by archeologists. If backward extrapolation is unacceptable, then the more conventional position that mythic narratives `reflect' human created history and societal structures leads to the same conclusion of an unavoidable philosophical- religious gap between the Upper Paleolithic and later times.2 Surprsingly, research will reveal the gap to be much smaller than imagined, in spite of the ecological and cultural dissimilarites between the Upper Paleolithic and Neolithic. Neolithic myth has its origins in the Upper Paleolithic; it did not manifest de novo. Important similarities must exist but their discovery must be approached with caution. The form of mythic narrative embodies an enormous amount of structure generated by the specifics of social structure, food procurement strategies, local ecology and the history of a people. Upon the objective skeleton of universal archetypes is built layer upon layer from group specific narrative and ritual that allows the initiated access to sacred time. Only when undertaking such journeys, can human beings expand their potential and tap the resources of supranatural dimensions. One researcher stands out has having chosen to tackle Upper Paleolithic symbolism on its own terms. Alexander Marshak (1991) did not bring Neolithic or Classical narrative to his analysis, although when his methods yielded similarites they were noted. His conclusions are based primarily upon what the imagery itself yields when scrutinzied in isolation without reliance upon the metaphors and narratives provided by cultures that had writing, and indulged in intellectual philosophy. Some of his insights are, in retrospect, not unusual. Others would have been difficult to imagine before his research was published. OVERVIEW OF THE UPPER PLEISTOCENE The term `Pleistocene' refers to a geological era while the appellation `Paleolithic' designates a culture in which stone tools predominate. The last ice age was a succession of glacial retreats and advances punctuated by brief warm periods known as interglacials. Professional geologists call this period the Wrm glaciation. It began perhaps 125,000 years ago and ended in most regions by 10,000 B.C. At times of maximum glacial advance, it produced some of the coldest temperatures the northern hemisphere has ever endured. During the first two thirds of the Upper Pleistocene, the Neanderthals evolved and dominated human populations of Europe, the Near East and North Africa. They are formally given subspecies status by paleoanthropologists - Homo sapiens neanderthalensis. They were of stocky body build, with facial features that we would not deem attractive today: brow ridges; big, forward thrusting noses, and large, elongated skulls. Neanderthals were not primitive or stupid, contrary to the popular portrayals of only a few years years ago. Much of their body shape can be explained as an adaptation to living both in caves and the outdoors in an arctic environment. Eskimos also show a stocky body build with short arms and legs compared to other races. The average brain size of Neanderthals was actually a bit larger than our own! They were big game hunters, utilized fire to stay warm, made many types of stone tools and wore skin clothing. There is a controversy as to whether or not their vocal anatomy could support the complex vocalizations necessary for spoken language. However, it is difficult to imagine how the complexity of their material culture could be taught and passed on without verbalization. Of their more abstract thinking we know next to nothing; the recreations in popular novels and films are based on speculation and surmise, not archeological evidence. However, it clear that they buried their dead and, and in at least one locality, did so with flowers (Leakey 1981; Soleki 1971; Wolpoff 1980). About 30,000 years ago, Europe saw a rapid intrusion of a taller, more slender people whose skull anatomy was identical to our own. They are termed full modern humankind: Homo sapiens sapiens. Their geographic origin is still not clear, although most theories suggest the Near East and/or North Africa. The earliest racial variants of our own species, which are designated archaic Homo sapiens, evolved in sub- Saharan Africa at least 250,000 years ago. We have no idea of the skin color of either Neanderthals or modern H. sapiens because no fossilized skin has been found, which would be the only source of direct evidence. It is generally surmised that both subspecies would have been light skinned in Europe because that maximizes the amount of vitamin D that can be synthesized in a climate with reduced intensity of sunlight. Obviously, modern man evolved dark skinned races in the tropics, perhaps to minimize the danger of second or third degree sunburn. The culture that Homo sapiens sapiens brought into Europe (or quickly evolved once there) exhibits a complexity heretofore unseen in tools, clothing, habitation and art. This complexity is adaptive because many more solutions may be brought to bear upon the problems of survival in a harsh climate. These first totally modern humans also created the first art which articulated a variety in form and imagery of amazing complexity as will be explored in this document. The inference seems unavoidable that the brain of H. sapiens sapiens, even though slighty smaller than that of the Neanderthals, was reorganized and rewired by evolution (mutations) in a manner that promoted the creation of new, highly complex behaviors (Blumenberg 1983). There is little evidence for conflict with the Neanderthals and in that sense, Jean Auel's novel Clan of the Cave Bear and the film based on her novel, are accurate. The Neanderthals disappeared in a few thousand years, perhaps due to a combination of intermarriage and quiet cultural extinction. CULTURAL CHRONOLOGY OF THE UPPER PLEISTOCENE Marshak (1991: 96-97) presents a good chart which summarizes the progression of cultures throughout the latter part of the Upper Pleistocene which this diagram is based upon. The Aurignacian began c.30,000 B.C. and the Final Magdalenian ended in all regions by c. 11,000 B.C. Within this span of the Upper Paleolithic, the timing of each culture is variable. For example, the Gravettian mammoth hunters did not appear in each culture region at the same time. UPPER PALEOLITHIC CULTURE CULTURE REGION East Central Franco- Mediterranean Cantabrian Soviet Union Czechoslovakia France Eastern Spain Germany Northwest Spain Italy CULTURAL PROGRESSION Aurignacian Aurignacian Aurignacian (France) Aurignacian to to Perigordian (nw Sp) to East Gravettian East Gravettian Solutrean Perigordian(It) (Gr) to (`Pavlovian'-Czech) to to to Magdalenian Magdalenian Solutrean (e.Sp) to Epi-Gravettian (It) Hamburgian (Gr) to to to Ahrensburg (Gr) Levant Magdalenian (e.Sp) Romellian (It) ARE YOU INTRIGUED? ARE YOU INTERESTED? IF SO REGISTER AND RECEIVE THE COMPLETE REPORT (32 pp.) ABOUT MARSHAK'S RESEARCH AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ORIGIN OF MYTHOLOGY! See register.txt!