peoples

INTELLECTUAL AND SPIRITUAL EXPRESSION OF NON-LITERATE PEOPLES PROCEEDINGS OF THE XVII UISPP WORLD CONGRESS (1-7 SEPTEMBER, BURGOS, SPAIN) Volume l / Session A20

Edited by

Emmanuel Anati

ARCHAEOPRESS ARCHAEOLOGY

ARCHAEOPRESS PUBLISHING LTD Gordon House 276 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7ED

www.archaeopress.com ISBN 978 l 78491 281 9 ISBN 978 l 78491 282 6 (e-Pdf) Archaeopress, UISPP and authors 2016

VOLUME EDITOR: Emmanuel Anati SERIES EDITOR: The board of UISPP SERIES PROPERTY: UISPP - International Union of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences The editing of this volume was funded by the Instituto Terra e Memória, Centro de Geociências UID/ Multi/00073/2013, with the support of the Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia FCT/MEC) KEY-WORDS IN THIS VOLUME: Rock Art - Tribal Art - Anthropology - Cognitive Archaeology UISPP PROCEEDINGS SERIES is a print on demand and an open access publication, edited by UISPP through Archaeopress BOARD OF UISPP: Jean Bourgeois (President), Luiz Oosterbeek (Secretary-General), François Djindjian (Treasurer), Ya-Mei Hou (Vice President), Marta Arzarello (Deputy Secretary-General). The Executive Committee of UISPP also includes the Presidents of ali the international scientific commissions (www.uispp.org) BOARD Of THE XVII WORLD CONGRESS OF UISPP: Eudald Carbonell (Secretary-General), Robert Sala l Ramos, José Maria Rodriguez Ponga (Deputy Secretary-Generals)

QOQ

USWO EUROTW ipt

INSTITUTO TERRA E MEMÓRIA

AH rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com

Archeology, Rock Art, Archeoacoustics and Neuroscience: What Kind of Relation? Fernando COIMBRA Instituto Terra e Memória, Centre for Geosciences, Portugal [email protected]

Abstract

The presenr yaper is o Hiiilridisdplinan' approach baseei ou ciara availabie from arcJieologi'. rock an. airheoaconsrícs and ueuroscie/ice. Afrer some imroducwiy fheoretíccti remaria, riie (inicie is orgairíied in nm parrs: lhe fírsr one analvses rhe rehirioii benveen archeology: rock an cr/ici archeoacoitstics. approaching some cispecn qf' The ear/v ase of sound cmtong Jnimer-gcnherer socieries cmd some excimpies regarding ihe presence ofsoima inposr-Paíaeo/iríiic rock cm. The secondparr discasses rhe reicirJon ben\'een arciieo'íog\; archeoacoasrics cmd nearoscience. focusiv.g ou acoiisricaí properríes from prehistoric chambers i,i ríie UK, liah and Maím. A/noiig fitese acousricai effecrs. special anemion is girei i to a commou rescmcmce in lhe ric;nin: qf 110 H:, presein in cmtiosr ai! rhe chambers. ii7;/Y7; itr/s snidied br neuroscieinisis for irs effecrs oit ihe Jnunciit brciiii of severa i roli/uteers. /iioriirorec! ir/'r/; elecrroencep/ialogrcipin'. Some cases of mind body experiences ic/r// ciconsric origins \\-itliinpfvlristoric chambers are also auahsed. Key words: ctrcheolog\\ 'iienroscierice. resoacmce, freqitencr, srandhig itr/ves

Introduction

The archeologist is not digging things. but people. (Sir Mortimer Wheeler) This quotation from the 1960s. by the British archeologist Mortimer \Mieeler. is a good basis for staiting the present article. because it is deeper than it looks at first sight. Indeecl. archeology focuses initially on the smdy of material culture but. as R. Bradley (1998) mentioned. this approach represents no more than the first phase of an intellecmal constmction process. \vhich resonates with other scieuces. either social or exact. Archeology hás. therefore. an anthropological dimension and the initial studies of the material heritage can constitute a source to cliscover the immaterial heritage of past societies. In order to ftilfil that aim. the present article presents a multidisciplinaiy approach based on data availabie from archeology. rock ait. archeoacoustics and neuroscience. From these four disciplines, archeoacoustics and neuroscience are obviously less familiar at a congress of archeology. Thus. it is necessaiy to make some statements about them. Archeoacoustics can be considered as an interdisciplinary field of smdy. which tries to analyse the use of souiid(s) in past societies. combining archeological data with mocleni acoustic enguieering. Despite some methodological problems regarding the detenmnation of cleliberate actions by prehistoric human beings. as C. Scarre (2006: 9) saicl. "the archeoacoustics of prehistoric contexts is potentially a vital part of the understanding of the livecl experience of past societies.' Neuroscience will be mentioned m this article íbllowing some pilot studies based on data resulting from expenments involving sound in prehistoric and protohisíoric chambers in the UK and Italy1 and their effects on the human brain. monitorecl with electroencephalography. The Inpogíimi from Chidaíe dei Friuli. near Udiiie, 121

INTEUECTUAL AND SPiRITUAL EXPRESSION OF NON-LiTERATE PEOPLES

In the preseiir text \ve first analyse The relation benveen archeology. rock art and archeoaconsTics and. after that. The relation of archeology. arclieoaconsTics and iieuroscience. Archeoacousíics is therefore used as a cominou link in au attempt to develop this discipline amoiig The archeological coimmuiity. siiice The pasT was surely IIOT silent. Archeology, Rock Art and Archeoacoustics

Since The origius of maukiud there have been sounds in namre: thunder. wind. rain and The soiuid of The waves in the sea. amoug others. were obviously familiar ro the fim human groups during The PalaeoliThic. But clid those men and wonien produce sound in that period? Archeological records have revealed several Paleolithic objects making sovuid. such as the group of boné fintes and whistles from Istiuitz and Maisières and The bnllroarer froiii Laugerie-Basse (Dordogne). ali in France (One. 1995) and the rasps (or idiophones) from Pekania. Moravia (Czech Republic). Abri Lafaye Bmniquel (France) an7d Mas d"Azil. Ariège. France (Morley. 2006). These artefacts coustitute archeological evidence of the inteutioual production of sounds in the PalaeoliThic.2 Among the five hiunan senses. besides visiou. hearing hás a cnicial protective character and even today. when on the street we hear an unexpected sound. we immediately mm our heads to see if there is any danger for us. Looking back at the Palaeolithic hunter-gatlierer societies. there were predators such as lions. bears and also dangerous animais such as rhinoceros. boars and others. as \vell documented b}' cave an. When walking iu open comitiy outside The protection of the caves, groups of hunters miglit be attacked by any of These animais and certainly acoustical wamings from a distance would have been veiy helpful. This could be. for example. the function of whistles: to wam about imrninent danger or call for help. producing louder sounds than the human voice (Coimbra. 2014). In a pioneering work of archeoacoustics. I. Reznikoff and M. Dauvois (1988) suggested that caves were remarkable amplifiers of sounds. due ro their inner resonance/ arguing that the acoustics of several caves in France ha d an importam role iu detemiming where the Paleolithic pauitings were located. leading to The supposition that music or chants were importam elements in cave ceremonies around 20.000 years ago' (ScaiTe. 1989: 382). However. some sounds produced iiiside caves can have been made by the human body itself. when vocalizing. hancl clapping and foot staniping. Besides the evidence of sound production from these archeological artefacts. post-Paleoliúiic rock art provides some examples of The depicTion of sound. as in engravings from Saimaly-Tash (Kazakhstan). dating from the second millenníum BC', representing rimai dancing in from of a mau holding a sua (Fig. 1). Observing this scene carefully. it is surely difficult to couceive it inclependently from chaming or music. because nobody dances without any kind of sound. Funhemiore. Reznikoff and Dauvois (1988: 238) also said that 'il n"y a pás de sociétés sans chants et plus précisément il n'y a pás de rimei ou de célébration qui ne soit aussi sonore.' This seems to be the case in another rock art scene depicted on Rock 32 from Naquane (Yalcamonica. Italy). where seven female 'praying figures' are inouming the prone female (possibly deacl). or praying for her health. - We are not goiiig to di»cus> hereif they were used for making any kind ofmuiic or just to produce sound. because thU is not the aim of thú article. '• Resonmice ii not considered here as an echo but as the amplification of ioiuid iu inteiiíiry or iii duration.

122

••'• -'•" :

F. COIMBRA: ARCHEOLOGY, ROCK ART, ARCHEOACOUSTICS AND NEUROSCIENCE:

FIGURE l. DANCING TO THE SOUND OF CHANTING OR MUSIC (AFTER MARTYNOV, 1995).

The importance of sound when producing different rock engravmgs in the Scaiidínavian Bronze Age tradirion is mentioned by the Swedish archeologist Mats Malmer: 'If vou smash nvo stones imo each other vou get a loud sound and the sound alters with the shape and bedrock of the panei. A solid panei gives a biight somid. a cracked panei a more hollow sound . . . The rhythm of the poundmg was most certainly a well-known sound for the people during the Bronze Age. and it certainly transmitted the message that there was soinething veiy important going 011 out there 011 the rocks.' (Malmer. quoted by Goldliahn. 2002: 38). P. Nordstrom developed Malmer "s arguments. suggesting that 'the sound of the stones can also be understood as a forni of ritual communication with the various spirits that were thought to dwell iu the rocks"4 and that 'the echo that emanated from the pecking and pounding of engravings could nave been mterpreted as a canier of messages benveen the world of the liviug and the dead ancestors" (Nordstrom, quoted by Goldhalm. 2002: 58). The relation between rock art and sound can also be seen in several examples which represent musical instnimeiits. for instance the dnims clepicted m the Bronze Age rock art from Bhimbetka, índia íMeshkens. 1999) and the representation of people dancing to the sound of the asymmetiic lyre in the rock art from Wadi Harash (Negev. Israel), dating from the second millemiium BC (Anati. 1994). among other examples.5 • Tlie idea of a spiritual \vorld witliin the rock can also be >een among the San ("Biuhmen) of South Afiica. besídes other cultores (\Valier. 2006). That is probably why some rock art figures in different parti of the world seem to emerge from cracks in the rock smíaces. ' Meu playina fintei, often appear in rhe rock art from Nortli and South Ainenca. dating fi'om more recém periods ('Coimbra. 2014).

123

INTELLECTUAL AND SPIR1TUAL EXPRESSION OF NON-LITERATE PEOPLES

Archeology, Archeoacoustics and Neuroscience

Archeology only can niature \vhen the philosopher and the archeologist are the same person. (Richard Bradley)6 Several studies of megalithic stmcmres from the UKrevealed that "some possess remarkable acoustic properties. suggesting that sound may have playecl an importam role in any ceremonies held at the monuiueuts in prehistory" (Watson. 1997). Indeed in the chambers of nionuments such as Camster Round (Scotland) and Maeshowe (Orkney Islands) an acoustic effect kno\vn as standing waves occurs. According to Watson (2007) sound waves mteract while reflected between walls. being either enlianced or cancelled. changing the nature of the sound.in To a listener passing by the pattems of these standing waves some effects may happen. the sounds becoming louder with distance from the source: some frequeucies can also resonate parts of the body." Aaron Watson (2007) argued that' standing waves might have been understood as the voices of spirits. ancestors or other forces. They might have contributed to the special character of the monument as these sounds could not have beeu reproduced anywhere else." Furthennore. Jalm er ai. (1995) reported the similarities between some cases of megalithic art from Kewgrange and Loughcrew and the resonant sound pattems that characterize these chambers. For example. these authors argue that two zigzag figures 'etched 011 the corbel at the left side of the west sub-chamber of Newgrange have precisely the same number of "nodes" and "aiitinodes" as the resonant stauding wave pattem we mapped from the chamber centre out along the passage' (Jalm er a!.. 1995: 9). Other acoustic phenomenona occur in some chambered mouncls. like the so-called Helmholtz resonance. being 'caused by the repeated oscillation of soimd waves benveen an enclosed chamber and the outside world along a confined passageway. Under certain conditions a single frequency can be powerfully amplified to leveis that far exceed the original source" (Watson. 2007). Watson also argues that the fonnat of the passage grave of Maeshowe (Fia. 2) is veiy similar to the classic Hehnlioltz Resonator. Some acoustic tests were caniecl out at Maeshowe by A. Watson and D. Keating using a single drum. which caused a resonance with a frequency of 2 Hz. Although this infrasoimd camiot be heard by hiimans it can iiiduce a variety of sensations such as dizziness. headaches and disorientation (Watson. 2007). Some individuais who participated in acoustic tests inside chambered cairns reported other physiological effects. such as changes in breathing and pulse pattem (Watson and Keating. 1999). Furthemiore. according to P. Debertolis and N. Bisconti (2014). rnfrasound can create feelings of awe or fear in huniaas. in some cases resulting in a misplaced belief that some strange or supemamral event is taking place. Other experiments canied out at the chambered caims of Camster (Caithness. Scotland) revealed mteresting results. For example. dmmming in the chamber of Camster Round created a bass sound that was felt around the back of the monument as if it were 'emerging from beneath the ground rather thau from inside the caim" (Watson. 2007). The sound of that dmmming was heard within another chamber (Camster Long) 200 ni away. although it could not be heard in the open air benveen the nvo moiiuments. Aaron Watson and D. Keating (1999: 330) argue that 'dniniming could have been used as a forni of cominuiiicatiou benveen tombs which were in close proximity". mentioiúng the examples from Camster and also from Knowth. 'where a larae tomb is surrounded bv a number of smaller caims' Autlior'^ translation of a quote frouiBradíey's article in Pormsuese (199S1. after the original iii English: R. Bradley. -Tlie philoiopher and the iiekl archeologist: Colling\vood. Bers-u and the excavation of Kitig Arthur's Romicl Table'. Proceedmgj of the Prehistoric Society. 60 (1994). pp.2'-.U. Sound effects and bodily seniations aho happened in the interior of the Hal Saflieni rrypogeurn in Malta, duriiig an experuneut m \vhiclvthe author participated. They are deicnbed below. 124

: '}~~:-

F. COIMBRA: ARCHEOLOGY, ROCK ART, ARCHEOACOUSTICS AND NEUROSCÍENCE:

Maeshowe - location of motifs

l r

O

FIGURE 2. THE PLAN OF MAESHOWE PASSAGE GRAVE ANO THE LOCATION OF ROCK ART MOTIFS. (AFTER &R&DLEY ETAL. 2000).

,-itíU^V' /

FIGURE 3. KNOWTH AND ITS SATELLITE TOMBS (AFTER WATSON AND KEATING).

50 m

(Watson and Kearing. 1999: 330). Curiously. "uiany of rliese sareilite tombs have theii' passages orieured towards me main mound. perhaps assisting me rransiuission of sound benveen what were othenvise separate components of a cemeteiy' (Watson and Keatmg. 1999: 330-1) (Fig. 3). Standing waxres. Hehulioltz resonance and infrasouncl don't prove, of course. that prehistoric megalithic cliambers were built with the aim of producing expected acoustic results. However. 'it seems unlikely that acoustic effects wouícl have goue unnoticed iu prehístoiy" (Cook and Watson. 2006: 107). For example. iii the hypogeiuii of Hal Saflíem (Malta) there is archeological evidence of prellistoric bmials during a long period of tiuie (Pace. 2004). where funerary rituais took place. probably accompanied b}- the sound of chants or instmnieiits such as dmins or homs. This huniau pemianence m the hypogeum is also confímiecl by the presence of several groups of red ochre prehistoric paintings. consisting of intricate spirals. some disks and other geonietric pattems (Fig.

125

iNTELLECTUAt AND SPIRITUAL EXPRESSION OF NON-LITERATE PEOPLES

FIGURE 4. PREHISTORIC PAINTINGS FROM HALSAFLIENI (PHOTO: OTSF).

4). According to A. Pace (2004: 3 /) some of these motifs 'in certain places. they overlap slightly. suggesting that they may nave been painted at dlfferent times." Thus. the continiious presence of people inside the hypogeum surely led to the perception of several somid effects (Coimbra. 2014). that would be impossible to be unnoticed.8 The pemianence of humaii groups inside prehistoric chambers occurred also at Irisli passage graves, where niegalithic art 'miglit nave celebratecl the passage of the deceased into another world" (Bradley et ai.. 2000: 64). It occurred also at Maeshowe. where filiform carvings (Fig. 5) are veiy similar to others found in nearby Neolithic settlements. seeuiing to 'create a sense of community in which the deceased reuiained involved in the eveiyday activities of the liviug" (Bradley et oí.. 2000: 64). Now \ve are going to relate some of the acoustical effects in prehistoric chambers in comiection \\~i\\\t research m neuroscience.9 Archeoacoustic investigations inside prehistoric chambers such as Newgrange. Loughcrew. Chim Qnoit (Comwall) and Waylaud"s Smithy (Berkshire), among others. identified acoustic resonauces benveen 95 Hz and 120 Hz (Jahn et ai. 1995). In a later neurophysiologic smdy. 30 healthy adults listenecl. iu sequence. to tones of 90-130 Hz. \\1nle their brain activity \vas monitored \\iih electroencephalography. It was noticecl theu that brain activity in language at 110 Hz is significantly lo\ver10 than at other frequências, allowing other processes to become more prominent (Cook et ai. 2008). This process results also in 'a shift in prefrontal activity that may be related to emotional processing' (Cook et ai. 2008: 96). ; Iiideed. the acoustic properties of the hypogeimi are veiy mipressive. Duiing the author's recent visit to this monumeut he decided to vocalize a souncl that. in fact. reverberated to a great extent througliout tlie entire stmcture. It is also interesting to mention that some sounds inside the hypogeum reverberate for ".S seconds after the original sound had stopped (reported by Dr Rupeit Till durma the conclusions of the Archeoacoustics Conference. Malta. Febraaiy 2014). \vhich must have lúglily impressed the prehistoric listeners. ' \Ve are uot going to disciii? here the theoiy of phosphenes in prehistonc art. because ít would be a tlieme for a separate article. ;" Paul Devereux (2006) argues that tliis kind of brain activity is associated with the half-awake half-asleep Içpnogogic state with vivid mental imageiy and auditoiy hallucinations. Accordiua to J. Goldhahn (2002: 50!. 'visual and aurai hallucmations caii also be induced tlii'ougli the application of loud and repetitive uoise. só called audio-dilviug'.

126


\t

FIGURE 5. FILIFORM CARVINGS FROM MAESHOWE (ADAPTED FROM BRADLEYET/U. 2000).

Similar research canied our by P. Debeitolis. G. Tírelli11 and F. Mouti12 at The hypogeum of Cividale dei Friuli.13 Italy (Fig. 6). revealed rhat acriviry in the left Temporal regiou was foiincl TO be significantly lower. closer TO 110 Hz. rhaii ar other frequencies. Addirionally. The panem of asymmetric activity over The prefroiiTal córtex sliifted from oue of higher acTiviry. ou The left ar most frequencies. TO righlsided domiuance at 110 Hz. The results of these experiments showed that each volmiteer had his her o\vn individual frequency of activation That can be significanTly differenr from 110 Hz. buí ahvavs in The range of 90-120 Hz (Debertolis er ai. 2014). The same researchers reported that The volimteers with fi'onTal lobe prevalence. diuing The Tone hearing. receivecl ideas and thoughts similar To \vhat happens dming meditation. while those \vith occipital lobe prevalence visualized images (Debeitolis er ai.. 2014). Recenr neurophysiologic research regarding mediratiou based on hearing a tradirional rnaiitra. or a nou-semantic meditation sound. seems to supporr not ouly The discoveries of Cook er aí. (2008) but mainly These argmnents of Debeitolis. Tirreli and Monti. Indeed. studies assessing brain activity by fimctional magnetic resonance iniaging. iu experienced practitioners of meditarion. revealed that this practice 'iucreased activiry in The prefronTal córtex, showiiig a large cluster with the point of maximal activation in The srraighr gynis. coveriug a large pait of The righT orbiofrontal córtex as \vell as medial prefroutal áreas" (Xu er a!.. 2014: 5). The sauie authors (2014: 9) argue ThaT This acmin,- 'is related ro The relaxed focus of attention. wliich allows spoutaneous thoughts. images. sensations. uiemories and emorions". Debenolis and Tii'el!i are at the Department of Medicai Science. University of Trieste. Iraly. •: Head of Clinicai Newophysiologic Unir.'. Department of Newology. University Hospital of Trieite. ; - Some «.tone heads discovered iu this hypogeum seem to date it from the Iron Age (Debertolh eral.. 2014).

127

ÍNTELLECTUAL AND SP1RITUAL EXPRESSiON OF NON-LITERATE PEOPLES

FIGURE 6. STONE HEAD FROM THE HYPOGEUM OF CIVIDALE DEL FRIULI (PHOTO: P. DEBERTOLIS).

Retuming TO The acoustical propeities of some prehisToric chambers. it lias been uoticed Thar rhey can resulr in The experience of seusarions and emotions. For example. P. Deveretix mentions ThaT The acousrician David Kearing. diuing one acousric experimeiiT ar Maeshowe. 'repoited being piw imo a srare iu which his body became relaxecl but his minei alerr. au inirial sTage of deep Trance" (Landscape percepriou. not dared). Also The atiThor of rhis paper experienced bodily sensaTions14 caused by soimds diuing The experimeurs canied our aT Hal Saflieni iu Febmary 2014. In facr. sraiiding in fronT of The prehistoric painTings iu Room 20. rhe sound of a honi played in The Oracle Room \vas felr "crossing" The ainhor"s body aT high speed. leaving a seusariou of relaxariou. The iustrument was played agaiu. after a shorr break. with rhe resulr similar buT even more relaxíng. íbllowed by The illusion ThaT rhe sound was reflected fixam The auThor's bod}- TO The wall ThaT contains The eugravings (Coimbra. 2014). Iu The sequence of rliese nvo cases of miud body experiences. \virh acousric origins. repoited by nvo differeiiT researchers and iu nvo differeiiT places. some questions arise: did Neolirliic human beiugs feel similar sensarions. caused by sound. while inside chanibered moniunents? Could The prehistoric arr rhat exists iu some of these chambers be The depicTion of bodily experiences wirh acousiic origins? IT is not easy. of course. TO answer These questious without being specularive. In order TO reach more objective and coiiclusive resulrs fiutlier research must be clone iu several European prehistoric chambers. especially in Those that have megalirliic arr on their walls and sound reverberarious \virli a frequency aroimcl 110 Hz. These smdies sliould involve obviously nor only archeologisrs bur also acousricians and iieuroscientisrs. among orher researchers. Meanwhile. The discoveiy inside The Hal Saflieni Irypogeum of rhe clay model known as The 'Sleeping Lady'. lying on a couch (Fig. 7). led TO rhe feasible and acceprable idea ThaT ir 'was paitially a dream 1 Goldhahii (2002:41) argiiei Tliat • bodily expêiieuces of a placo are vital for the mterpretation of the prehiitoric • luindscape' of that lanchcape'. quoting authors such as Tilley. Xaih and Ouzinan.

128

F. COIMBRA: ARCHEOLOGY, Rocx ART, ARCHEOACOUSTICS AMD NEUROSCIENCE:

FIGURE 7. SLEEPING LADY (PHOTO: F. COIMBRA).

incubation temple. a practice tliat was widespread in at least the larer ancient MedireiTanean \vorlcT (Devereux. 2009: 226). In facr. beiug laid 011 a concli inside a higlily resonant chamber could be a procedure for conríoitably liearing reverberating soimds and getting mind body expeilence through tliem. involviiig probably similar experiences to those reported by Xu er aí. (2014: 9). such as 'spontaneous thouglits. images. sensarions. memories and emotions". Could some sotmds produced inside prehistork chambers be relatecl to rlie oiigin of traditional mautras ? Ir is cunotis to note that in the iniddle of tlie seconcl inillemiium BC the Yedanta traclition (4.22) menrions that 'by sound vibration one becomes liberated". meaning that souncl is already known to be a vibration by those times. It could be the case of ílie traditional mantra 'AUM'. that hás. of course. a specific frequency leadmg to a desirable (or expected) influence on people. that is. a socially organized sound (Coimbra. 2014). Final Note

In this article we have discussed some aspects of the relation of a recent fíeld of research. archeoacoustics. with disciplines such as archeology. rock an anel neuroscience. It was also mentioned that archeoacoustics lias some methodological problems about deliberate actions by prehistoric human beings. or in another words. the intentionaíity of their acts. Ho\vever. these difficulties can be reduced with the work of an interdisciplinary team. never forgetting that archeoacoustics deals with the human past and therefore it is iiidispensable to have the contiibution of an archeologist (Coimbra. 2014). Fmthemiore. as I. Cross and A. Watsou (2006: 115) outlined. 'it is criticai that. alougskle the application of rigorous methods. acoustical iuvestigations acknowledge the social contexts within which souncl may have been experienced. and remam aware that is easy to impose modeni cultural understandings and experiences onto past societies' and. therefore. 'to lisk hearing ouly echoes of ourselves' (Cross andWatson. 2006: 115).

129

INTELLECTUAL AND SPIRITUAL EXPRESSION OF NON-LITERATE PEOPLES

Iiideed. it is not enotigh to measure veiy precisely standing waves. resonant pattems and otlier somid effects if the past social contexts wliere those acoustic phenoiiieiia were experienced are ignored, Therefore. in disciplines like archeoacoustics it is impoitant to first establish a coherent theoretical basis. which will coutribute to flie definition of a scientific inethodology. which is indispensable for ftuther iiiteipretatiou. Neveitheless. a multidisciplinaiy research involviug archeology. rock ait. archeoacoustics and neuroscieiice cau be very useful for befter imderstanding past ways of thoughí. Bibliography

ANATI, E. 1994. World rock art. The primordial lauguage. Studi Caruimi XII. 153. BRADLEY, R. 1998. O filósofo e o arqueólogo. Trabalhos de Antropologia e Etnologia. 38, 171-183. BRADLEY. R.: PHILLIPS. T.: RICHARDS. C.: WEBB. M. 2000. Decoratiiig the Houses of the Dead: Incised and Pecked Motifs in Orkney Chambered Tombs. Cambridge Archeological Journal. 11:1. 45-67. COIMBRA. F. A. 2014. An Interdisciplinaiy Approach: the Contribution of Rock Art for Archeoacoustic Studies. in Proceedings of Archeoacoustics: The Archeology of Sound. Malta (OTSF Foundation). 51-58. COOK. I. A.: PAJOT. S. K.: LEUCHTER. A. F. 2008. Ancient Architectural Acoustic Resonance Pattems and Regional Braiii Activity. Time and Miud. Volume 1. Issue l, 95-104. CROSS. L: WATSON. A. 2006. Acoustics and the Huuian Experience of Socially-organized Sound. In. Archeoacoustics. Scarre, C: Lawson. G. (eds.). Cambridge. (McDonald Institute forArcheological Research). 107-116. DEBERTOLIS. R: Biscoxn. N. 2013. Archeoacoustics Analysis and Ceremonial Custorus in an Ancient Hypogeuni. Sociology Smdy. Vohmie 3. Number 10, 803-814. DEBERTOLIS. P: BISCONTI. N. 2014. Archeoacoustics aualysis of an ancient hypogeum in Italy, In Proceedings of Archeoacoustics: The Archeology of Soimd. Malta (OTSF Foundation). DEBERTOLIS. P: MIZDRAK. S.: SAVOLAINEN, H. 2013. The Research for an Archeoacoustics Standard. in Proceedings of 2nd ARSA Conference (Advanced Research in Scientific Áreas). Bratislava 305-310. DEBERTOLIS. P: TIRELLI. G.: MONTI, F. 2014. Systems of acousíic resonance in ancient sites and relatecl brain activity. in Proceedings of Archeoacoustics: The Archeology of Sound. Malta (OTSF Foundation). 7-14. DEVEREUX. P. 2006. Ears and Years: Aspects of Acoustics and Intentionality in Autiquity. In Archeoacoustics. Scarre. C: Lawsou. G. (eds.), Cambridge (McDonald Institute for Archeological Research). 23-30. DEVEREUX. P. 2009. A Ceiling Painting in the Hal-Saflieni Hypogeum as Acoustically-Related Imageiy: A Preliminaiy Note. Time and Mind. Volume 2. Issue 2. 225-231. ERRICO. F. D.: LAWSON, G. 2006. The Sound Paradox: How to Assess the Acoustic Significauce of Archeological Eviclence? In. Archeoacoustics. Scarre, C: Lawson. G. (eds.). Cambridge (McDonald Institute forArcheological Research). 41-57. GOLDHAHX J. 2002. Roaring Rocks: An Audio-Visual Perspective on Hunter-Gatherer Engravings in Northern Swedeu and Scandinavia. Norwegian Archeological Review. Vol. 35, No. l, 29-61. JAHN. R. G.: DEVEREUX. P: IBISOX. M. 1995. Acoustical ressonances of Assorted Ancient Stmctures. Journal of the Acoustics Society of America. 99, 649-658. LAKDSCAPE-PERCEPTION ARCHEOACOUSTICS (not/dated) www.landscapeperception.com/ archeoacoustics' Accessed on 8 Februaiy 2014. MARTYXOV. A. 1999. Rock images of the ancient sanctuaiy Saimaly-Tach. in NEWS-95 International Rock Art Congress Proceedings, Pinerolo (CeSMAP). MESHKERIS. V. A. 1999. Musical phenomeua of convergence in Eurasían Rock Art. NEWS-95 International Rock Art Congress Proceedings. Pinerolo (CeSMAP). MORLEY. I. 2006. The Evolutionaiy Origins and Archeology of Music. PhD Dissertation. Cambridge Universitv. 130


OTTE, M. 1995. Regards sm- Ia musique paléolithique. inNEWS-95 International Rock Ait Congress Proceedings. Pinerolo (CeSIvlAP). PACE. A. 2004. The Hal Saflieni Hypogeuni. Sta Venera (Heritage Books. Heritage Malta). REZXKOFF. L: DAUVOIS. M. 1988. La diineusion sonore cies grottes omées. Bulletin de Ia Société Préhistorique Française, tome 85. N. 8. 238-246. SCARRE. C. 1989. Painting by resonauce. Nature. 338. 382. SCARRE. C. 2006. Sound. Place and Space: Towards an Archeology of Acoustics. in. Archeoacoustics. Scaire. C: Lawson. G. (eds.), Cambridge (McDonald Institute for Archeological Research). 1-10. Xu. J.; YIK. A.: GROOTE. I. R: LAGOPOULOS, J.: HOLEN. A.: ELLKGSEN, 0.; HÁBERG.AK.; ANDDAVANGER. S. 2014. Nondirective meditatiou activates default mode network and áreas associated with memoiy retrieval and eniotional processing. Froutiers in Huuian Neuroscieiice. 8. 1-10. WALLER. S. 2006. Intentioiiality of Rock-ait Placemeut deduced froui Acoustical Measureruents and Echo Myths. In. Archeoacoustics. Scarre. C: Lawsoii. G. (eds.). Cambridge (McDonald Institute for Archeological Research). 31-39. WATSON. A. 1997. Hearing agaiu the soimd of the Neolithic. British Archeology. 23. Online versiou w-wiv.archeologyuk.org/Accessed on 7 April 2014. WATSON. A. 2006. (Un)iutentional Souiid? Acoustics and Neolithic Monumeiits. in Archeoacoustics. ScaiTe. C: Lawson. G. (eds.). Cambridge. (McDonald Institute for Archeological Research). 1122. WATSON. A. 2007. Aaron Watson Archeological Research www.moniimental.uk.coin Accessed on 7 April 2014. WATSON. A.; KEAITNG. D. 1999. Architecture and soiuid: An Acoustic Analysis of Megalithic Monuments in Prehistoric Britain. Antiquity. 73. 325-336.

131