Ways Prehistoric Art can be Interpreted - Essay Example

?Other (s) Q2: Ways Prehistoric “Art” can be Interpreted Introduction Prehistoric art are generally artifacts and artwork ranging from cave paintings, megaliths, to figurines that were produced prior to the existence of written language. The interpretation and analysis of prehistoric art requires the collaborative efforts of both historians and archeologists. For example, archaeologists are usually involved in looking for any tangible evidence through the examination of rocks, stones and minerals while historians may be needed to help in creating a chronology as well as the relationship of the artifact to the culture of its time. Generally, during the interpretation of any prehistoric work, a number of concerns regarding the driving force behind the creation of such works usually arise (Cunliffe, 118). Consequently, in order to fully interpret and understand prehistoric arts, archeologists, historians as well as art historians usually make their interpretations based on the clues of the cultures of the people that produced such artifacts. The interpretation of any prehistoric work usually begins with understanding and placing them in the context of human creative expressions, the age, as well as the form of the artifact. Additional investigations can also be carried out to determine the tools that were used to make the artifacts and other necessary material evidences that can help towards the formation of a working explanatory hypothesis. For example, archeological evidence reveals that rituals or religious purposes were behind most of the prehistoric artifacts. The interpretation of ancient depictions generally focuses on the probable message of the art, aesthetic and principles and norms, their composition, and reflection of life. Although many archeologists, historians or art historians may interpret prehistoric arts differently depending on their own personal understanding, scientific clarity requires that any interpretation must not negate the narrative possibilities of the remains of the prehistoric art. This paper discusses some of the different ways through which prehistoric “art” can be interpreted. Contextual Interpretation One of the most important ways of interpreting prehistoric artefacts and artworks is the contextualization of images during the interpretation of their symbolism based on the prevailing cultures of their time. Generally, this method involves making judgments on prehistoric artifacts within the presumed context of the peoples daily routines and domestic structure. For example, the interpretation of prehistoric works such as the vulture paintings of Mellaart’s shrine VII.8 can be effectively interpreted as an evidence of the excarnation of the dead. This is particularly because the vultures were not related to any of the archeological practices of the time and therefore it is more likely that such paintings may have seen the vulture as a Goddess of death when they saw vultures cleaning copses (Lewis-Williams, 73). It can be argued that contextual interpretation is based on the fact that most prehistoric artists were more concerned with the abstract relationships of their artifacts than with the artworks themselves. It is however worth noticing that the contextual interpretation of prehistoric archeological artifacts is normally based on unjustifiable assumptions regarding the tastes or religious practices and ideologies of the people who designed or made the artifact. As earlier been noted, prehistoric art can be several things from the dolmens to little stone collectibles. Sometimes paintings on the walls of the ancient man’s caves as well represent prehistoric art which are vital in the interpretation of the ancient history of the development of art by man. Many palaeontologists, geologists and geneticists while studying the past art use the participant observation in formulating hypothesis concerning social behavior of man during the Stone Age periods when the artistic nature of men improved greatly. Contextual symbolism can also be seen in the prehistoric art as expressed through their size relationships. For instance, the most powerful or important figure/objects are normally the largest. Additionally the paintings and artwork depicting animals are usually prese4nted in strict profiles since it is the only way animals can be effectively depicted in a single view. Lastly, in most cases, the prehistoric artists left behind artworks that not only provoke our sense of curiosity but also provides important insights into their society as it existed thousands of years ago. In this regard, the art remains can be used as effective tools of understanding both the culture and the aspects of the early human life. This is generally because most of the paintings, objects and other prehistoric artifacts to some extent had both functional and ritualistic purposes. There are a number of theories of facts identification of unique landforms used by archaeologists during their field studies. These facts and the land forms were the some of the best ways of finding and interpreting various ancient artefacts. The artefacts are important in showing evidence of workmanship with an artistic purpose. Workmanship according to the archaeologists existed earlier about 40000 years ago in the upper Palaeolithic period. The presence of Mesolithic, cave paintings and various arts such as beads and figurines highly provides evidence that man existed as an artistic animal. In Neolithic era, while studying various artistic features of man in the landscapes by the archaeologists, the evidence of the early pottery, sculpture as well as construction of megalithic in the caves clearly brought about the artistic nature of the early man. Early rock art as well to some extent in this period also was an art of man. Metal working was also identified by the archaeologists in the Bronze Age as a stage of development of the art of man while interpreting the prehistoric art of man. Metal working also brought a milestone in the improvement of art of man from stone art to metal art. Finally, the dating methods were also used in interpreting the prehistoric art. These methods include; argon dating, relative dating, cross-dating, geochronology and absolute dating. These methods of dating were very helpful especially in the interpretation of the ages of the prehistoric art in relation to fossils excavated from the prehistoric sites. The dating methods by the archaeologists put artefacts in a series based on assumptions that one cultural style slowly replaces an earlier style over time. This methods though do not show accurate dating of the prehistoric art, are approximates of given duration of time hence giving clue on the date of occurrences. In the history of art, dating is always the major way of interpretation. Art produced in the preliterate and prehistoric cultures begin in the late geological history until the era of writing and other methods of record-keeping. The dating methods unveil major chronological and historical events while interpreting the prehistoric art example in the era of specialization as a result of emergence of art as a way of spending leisure time. Prehistoric and ancient art therefore largely depend on the dating methods by the archaeologists in determining and interpreting prehistoric art and providing the fossil’s records for future references. Interpretation through biological meaning Unlike the traditional interpretation of prehistoric arts such as contextual interpretation which relies on the clues of symbolism and hidden ritual meanings, a number of ancient artifacts can also be interpreted through the identification of the animals as well as animal behavior depicted on the prehistoric objects and cave walls to provide clues about the ancient human culture and way of life. A good example is the painting on the ceiling of Altamira Cave (dating back to 12,000 ago) that can be effectively be interpreted through the analysis and identification of the species represented as well as their species-specific postures as depicted in the paintings. According to many experts, most of the prehistoric art particularly during the Paleolithic period were primarily a hunter’s art characterized by depictions of weapons, wounds, traps and a diverse number of animal species. In this regard, it is widely believed that most of these usually ignored biological signs and markings can be analyzed and interpreted to provide important insights into the meaning and context of what they represented. These evolutionary biologists study the origin, development and the evolution of species over time. This is a very important aspect in interpreting the prehistoric art. Palaeontology interprets various agricultural activities that took part in the past. This study of history of life on earth is based on fossils which are the remains of animals, plants and other living organisms that are over the years ceased to exist. Palaeontologists use fossil remnants to understand various aspects extinct cases, prehistoric art and living organisms. Individual’s fossils usually contain vital information about the organism’s life and environment hence studying fossils bring a broad scope of platform for interpretation of the prehistoric art. Additionally, the today’s archeologists and historical researchers have consistently demonstrated that most of the animals depicted in many Paleolithic artworks are usually the ones that were least frequently consumed as human food. For example, although the paintings at Altamira depicted Bisons, the people of the time primarily depended on red Deer meat and most likely ate no Bison. Consequently the interpretation of the prehistoric art through biological meaning can effectively help shed light into the aspects of cosmology and cultural beliefs of the people who existed during the Paleolithic period. Spatial patterning and ethnography Occasionally some prehistoric art may be found to be arranged in certain patterns which imply the understanding of the cosmological relationship between the settlement and way of life. Spatial patterning such as the arrangement of the artifacts as well as the paintings can be used to interpret the relationship between the culture and the natural worlds. According to Marshack(37), ethnographic studies have also been widely applied together with spatial patterning to help interpret various forms of prehistoric art such ads figurines, cave wall paintings and other common artifacts. This is particularly based on the assumption that the ancient artifacts were part of the broader cultural systems of depiction of the ancient period and should consequently be part of the interpretation process. This can be normally achieved when the given artworks are considered and interpreted in the context of spatial as well as temporal patterning as well as their relationship with the other archeological materials. Generally this is based on the argument that material evidence is always closely linked to the original cultural context of the particular ancient population. Consequently, the analysis of the spatial patterning can therefore be an effective way of establishing important links between the artifact and the cultural context as well as for developing hypotheses that can be tested. For example, at Katalhoyuk, one of the most notable volcanic paintings is seen to emphasize the relationship between the natural world and human culture since the painting acknowledges landscape as changeable and active (Clottes and Lewis-Williams, 28). On the other hand, it can be argued that the presence of obsidian artifacts that were found inside the building served to bring the volcano into the house and was therefore linking the important landscape image to the everyday life of the people of that time. Although the other interpretations of the Katalhoyuk paintings may also be possible, the analogies regarding the link between natural and the cultural elements may not be far fetched. In most cases, the formal and symbolically architecture and artifacts are usually expressions of the prevailing spatial understandings of the time and can therefore be interpreted in a number of different ways. It is also plausible that images and artwork can often be used to mark out and create a number of differential meanings of space within the household just like on the other aspects of the ancient architecture (Pfeiffer, 84). Despite the fact that images are considered to be part of the fabric of the house, it is worth noting that since some of the images such as painting may have been made over a period of time, both their spatial location and temporal context is critically important in the interpretation of there several aspects. Conclusion In conclusion, there are several ways through which prehistoric art can be interpreted. Generally in order to fully interpret and understand prehistoric arts, archeologists, historians as well as art historians usually make their interpretations based on the clues of the cultures of the people that produced such artifacts. Although many archeologists and art historians may interpret prehistoric arts differently depending on their own personal understanding, scientific clarity requires that any interpretation must not negate the narrative possibilities of the remains of the prehistoric art. References Bahn, Paul G. Cambridge Illustrated History: Prehistoric Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Cunliffe, Barry. Ed. Prehistoric Europe: An Illustrated History. Oxford: Oxford University press. 1998.Print. Clottes, Jean & Lewis-Williams, David. The Shamans of Prehistory: Trance and Magic in the Painted Caves.New York: Abrams, 1999.Print. Lewis-Williams, David. The Mind In The Cave: Consciousness and the Origins of Art. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2002.Print. Marshack, Alexander. The Roots of Civilization: The Cognitive Beginnings of Man's First Art, Symbol, and Notation. Mount Kisco, N. Y.: Moyer Bell, 1991.Print. Pfeiffer, John E. The Creative Explosion: An Inquiry into the Origins of Art and Religion. New York: Harper & Row, 1992. Read More