THE ORIGINS OF MYTHOLOGYIN THEUPPER PALEOLITHIC CULTURES OF EURASIAπ Bennett Blumenberg 1994Bennett BlumenbergReality SoftwarePO Box 105Waldoboro, ME 04572 January 9, 1994Table of ContentsThe Origins of Mythology . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .Cosmic Serpent and Mythic Horse . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15Overview of the Upper Pleistocene . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .The North German Reindeer Ritual . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18Cultural Chronology of the UpperPleistocene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .The Upper Paleolithic Shaman . . . . . . . .5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19Lunar Calendars . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .The Primary Deity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21Seasonal Faunal Imagery . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .The Goddess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23The Earliest Mythic Images . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .The God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28The Bear Cult . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Burial Rituals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Asvamedha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .29Continuity into the Mesolithic . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32In Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .362The Origins of MythologyHow early does mythic perception begin? How early can mythicperception begin? From the late Homo erectus site of Becov inCzechoslovakia c. 250,000 B.C. has come a quartzite rubbing stone and astriated piece of ochre lying on a floor with a spread of red ochrepowder. Yet, ochre can be used to tan hides, staunch insect bites and treat stomach woundsand so may have no metaphorical significance (Marshak 1991: 381, Blanc (1961). Othershave seen evidence for ritual cannabalism in the nature (which is interpreted as deliberate)of damage around the foramen magnum at the base of skulls in both Homo erectusindividuals from Peking and archaic Homo sapiens in continental Europe c.250,000 yearsago and also in Neanderthals from the site of Monte Circeo in Italy. Debate over what suchskull damage actually implies has gone on for nearly a century with no resolution. SomeNeanderthal 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 neanderthalensishad a conscious conception of an afterlife and deliberately designed burial rituals tofacilitate the passing from this æworldÆ to another realm. But the details of narrative andrites will forever elude us because the Neanderthals did not create any pictorial art oriconographic vocabulary. A good introduction to the problem of the ultimate origns ofreligion may be found in Pfeiffer (1982)Many researchers have noted the occurence of mythic iconography in the cave artand sculpture of the European Upper Paleolithic.1 See Cambell (1988), Gimbutas (1991)and Jelφnek (1975) for recent examples of such discussions. However these books providelittle 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 theprocess of backward extrapolation. Such a process is filled with pitfalls because itassumes a mind set in Upper Paleolithic cultures equivalent to the later time period that isused as the base line for backward extrapolation. Neolithic mythologies were lived outwithin the context of the agricultural revolution, permanent settlements that practicedagriculture and animal husbandry as primary food production activities. Furthermore bythe seventh millenium B.C., several such settlements in the Near East had attained thestature 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 (andthereby the eclipse of the associated myth and rituals), metallurgy, weaving, pottery and theconcentration of wealth and trading activities in such towns where a class structuredsociety 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 inphilosophical content than those of the Upper Paleolithic, whatever iconographicsimilarities may be catalogued by archeologists. If backward extrapolation isunacceptable, then the more conventional position that mythic narratives æreflectÆ human 1 The major cultural regions of this period in Europe are the Mediterranean (eastern Spain, Italy), Franco-Cantabrian (France - particularly the cave-rich Dordogne area, northwest Spain), Central EuropeCzechoslovakia, Germany) and eastern Russia.2created history and societal structures leads to the same conclusion of an unavoidablephilosophical-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 ecologicaland cultural dissimilarites between the Upper Paleolithic and Neolithic. Neolithic mythhas its origins in the Upper Paleolithic; it did not manifest de novo. Important similaritiesmust exist but their discovery must be approached with caution. The form of mythicnarrative embodies an enormous amount of structure generated by the specifics of socialstructure, food procurement strategies, local ecology and the history of a people. Upon theobjective skeleton of universal archetypes is built layer upon layer from group specificnarrative and ritual that allows the initiated access to sacred time. Only when undertakingsuch journeys, can human beings expand their potential and tap the resources ofsupranatural dimensions. One researcher stands out has having chosen to tackle Upper Paleolithic symbolismon its own terms. Alexander Marshak (1991) did not bring Neolithic or Classicalnarrative to his analysis, although when his methods yielded similarites they were noted.His conclusions are based primarily upon what the imagery itself yields when scrutiniziedin isolation without reliance upon the metaphors and narratives provided by cultures thathad writing, and indulged in intellectual philosophy. Some of his insights are, inretrospect, not unusual. Others would have been difficult to imagine before his researchwas published. ARE YOUR INTRIGUED? ARE YOU INTERESTED? WOULD YOU LIKE TOREAD THE COMPLETE STORY OF MANKINDÆS FIRST DISCOVERY OF THEGODS AND THEIR RITUALS? THEN REGISTER: SEE REGIST15.RPL. 2 Cutting across differences and regardless of what societies are being compared, are the archetypes. Asdefined by Jung (1991), archetypes are those timeless, immortal images of fundamental pyschicprocesses that continually re-appear in cultures of the most diverse outward taxonomies. Cross culturalsimilarities have been thoroughly investigated and are striking! Such an observation does not contradictthe differences presumed to characterize the myths of the Upper Paleolithic and Neolithic becausemythic narrative is not populated solely by archetypes. An enormous amount of mythic content reflectsthe history, ecology and specific traditions of the people. The fascinating truth is the continual re-emergence of archetypes from a seemingly bewilding diversity in narrative and geneology.3
(.txt)