No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
This paper explores the ontological evolution of the use of ethnographic observations and data to improve our understanding of prehistoric rock art. In Europe, the use of ethnographic information in rock art research dates back to the early discoveries of prehistoric art at the end of the nineteenth century. But the value given to ethnographic observations today has changed significantly. The original use as a primary source for analogical reasoning based on a purely comparative approach (especially in the area of rock art interpretation) has proven to be unsuitable. Through the establishment of direct connections between cultures that were considered ‘similar,’ in spite of being distant in time and space, several reductionist interpretations of the meaning of European Paleolithic rock art were suggested (including totemism, hunting magic, or shamanism). These theories were also eventually applied to other rock art traditions in this, and other, parts of the world. This use of analogical reasoning is today met with scepticism. In this paper I present an argument for the continuing use of ethnographic data to interpret the rock art of past societies, provided that it is based on an ontological shift in the use of ethnographic analogies. Through a comparative analysis of European and Australian rock art traditions, I will discuss how a controlled use of analogies can be used to critically reflect and test archaeological interpretations in European rock art, to provide alternative interpretations, as well as to contribute to our understanding of the processes of creation and use of past rock art.
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.