The Dream on the Rock: Visions of Prehistory

1. Foundations of the Research

1 Foundations of the Research The “Religious” Problem and the Origins of Consciousness If by “religion” we mean (1) a structured system of repeated and repeatable cults and rituals, (2) a reference to alleged divinities or supernatural beings, (3) the existence of some kind of officiants’ hierarchy , (4) places specifically assigned to this purpose, and (5) a notable number of followers or believers who recognize themselves in these practices, then there is no doubt that such a religious or proto-religious form in so-called prehistory did not exist, at least until the Middle/Late Neolithic period. Moreover, the worldwide distribution of “advanced” religious forms took place gradually and in different and widely separated places. Extensive world areas were as yet excluded from it when such anthropological phenomena began to appear in India, Egypt, and the Middle East. Leroi-Gourhan’s palaeontological researches systematically demolish the insubstantial “scientific evidence” about presumed cults of the bones, the mythical cult of the bear, and funerary rituals demonstrating with purported certainty the existence of postmortem expectations. The discovered finds are too scarce and the possible number of variables too high. He concludes, not without some justified sarcasm: Prehistory is a kind of clay-headed colossus, whose fragility increases as one ascends from the ground to the head. The colossus’ feet, made up of geological, botanical and zoological evidence seem solid; but already the hands turn out to be more friable, since the study of prehistoric practices is marked by a large conjectural halo. 11 12 / THE DREAM ON THE ROCK As for the head, this one, alas!, crumbles at the slightest touch . . . the prehistoric man modifies his own religious personality, and now appears as a bloody sorcerer, then devout collector of ancestors’ skulls, and again rutted dancer or sceptical philosopher—according to the authors.1 The complete ignorance by many scholars of the role played in prehistory by Non-Ordinary States of Consciousness (henceforth NOSCs) and associated psychoactive substances has deep historical roots. None of the researchers from the end of the nineteenth century on have dealt with the “primitive mentality,” the epiphany of the “sacred,” archaic supernatural beliefs, or magic and proto-religious “visions.” None have ever dealt with the matter of the origin of the sacred from a point of view we may call “laic,” that is, as a result of knowledge acquired over a period of time employing actual tools able to act on the mental faculties, tools capable of enlarging the psyche of normal consciousness, the ordinary perception of reality. Many are the renowned names involved, from Comte and Durkheim to Malinowski and Lévy-Bruhl, to Frazer and Eliade. We should not really be surprised by such ignorance in light of Enlightenment Positivism, Historical Materialism, and Judeo-Christian culture, each of which has established and different reasons, sometimes opposed, to evade recognition of the importance of the NOSC and its influence on human evolution. It is quite clear that Palaeolithic prehistoric man was essentially a “technological man” driven by a condition of necessity aimed at resolving primary survival needs, and that this “habit of mind,” this practicality, predominated in his behavior even in areas not strictly linked to impelling material needs. Giving a name to surrounding objects and phenomena is the first step in making them less dangerous and more intelligible; the next step lies in establishing cause and effect relations that work if they are repeatable and allow the “subduing” of objects, phenomena, or associations. That fire burns, warms, lights, and cooks are facts that don’t need scientific explanations, but that it could be initiated and controlled is already a subsequent shift to a relationship between fuel, supporter of combustion (oxygen), and tinder. That through either lightning or spontaneous combustion, regarding it as a “gift” from the heavens with a contribution of spirits of the air and Father Sun FOUNDATIONS OF THE RESEARCH / 13 is simply another way to signify the same concept that has nothing “religious” about it, even if it introduces as magical a vision of things prescientific: It is true that remarkable differences in structure and functionality are found between religion and magic, between the priest’s and magician’s ritual practices, but the culture medium is the same, and one wouldn’t at all say that the differential characteristics disfavour magic. Ancient tradition , open to individual experience and creativity, the active initiative of making, the inventive and feverish practice of...