Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
How is Rock Art aged?
Log In to post a reply

412 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
5758 posts

Re: How is Rock Art aged?Moving On
Dec 20, 2012, 00:03
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
Evergreen Dazed wrote:
tiompan wrote:
bladup wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Sanctuary wrote:
tiompan wrote:

Granite would take longer but it is not used too often .It does tend have lots of natural cup like holes that could help as a start i.e. they that just get enhanced . Although granite on granite would work with nothing to enhance ,just take longer , the more complex motifs are usually avoided too .

Funnily enough that's a point (no pun intended!) I was going to raise, the use of a natural cup like hole to start it off. If they did and there was more than one, the 'pattern' produced would have been random and may not have been important to them, just the cupmarks themselves. Does that tell us anything other than the obvious?

No , it does us tell us something ,same as the important point that the rock surface often has a big input into what gets engraved . The assumption is often that the engraver approaches the canvas with a composition in their head that gets faithfully trasferred to the canvas .It doesn't seem that is what going on in many cases . It's more like jamming , you are constrained to an extent but not following anything prescriptive , you react to things as they appear to impose stuff .

Following the flow of energy in the rock or following and using "the fault lines" in the rock, see you do know.

As we don't know what the engraver imagined about the rock that is not visually obvious we can't comment . What we can see that obviously has an infuence on the engraver are the texture , slope , cracks and fissures and shape of the rock .

When I was at achnabreck a few years back (jumped the fence I'm afraid, simply couldn't resist) I was sat there dumbfounded, attempting to follow logical lines of thought to work out what it could have been that the people responsible were attempting to communicate, but I've come to think it is not an attempt at communication at all. If it were, why would not one individual throughout that entire time span have engraved a simple, naive, immediately recognisable image?
With what Tiompan has said above, and bladup to some extent, I wonder if the answer lies closer to the natural "characteristics" of the rock (or whatever properties the rock was thought to hold) being enhanced. The rock being manipulated for use in some way, rather than any type of communication.

We Honestly saw the energy in the rock at night once trippin on Ilkley moor and the next morning we were astonished to see the energy we had seen matched the rock art, the one thing i don't know about what i saw - is the rock art marking the patterns of energy in the rock or is the rock art shaping the energy in the rocks into the patterns of the artist?

You saw the rock art first hand but before that had seen pics these influenced what you saw when tripping . If you have never heard of or seen the Buddha or Christ you won't dream about them or see them on trips .
Your mind is creating the patterns that resemble rock art motifs it's just that you believe you are seeing energy patterns . Others believe they see energy patterns that look nothing like rock motifs , what they are seeing isn't energy either .

like fuck, this isn't what happened at all and certainly isn't how my mind works,Ilkleys a very special place indeed, I was in their mainly unchanged landscape [maybe a few less trees] walked where they walked, ate what they ate, slept where they slept and saw what they saw, simple as that, learning from experience, you can't beat it, you should try it as it'll make your knowledge on the subject complete, without you'll never ever really know.

Lots of things are "seen " and experienced whilst tripping .Where these experiences are useful , other than the sheer pleasure and interest , is that they tell us something about ourselves . Just because you saw a giant pink rabbit doesn't mean that there really was one there , no matter how realistic it may have seemed .

Never had/seen anything silly, my mind isn't like that, it's as strong as you get, and everything i've been though is more real than this reality, this is very like the mayans belief [see you were right roy], this reality isn't quite as real as people think, we probably only experience 2 percent of true reality.

I only used the rabbit as an obvious joke . Believing what you described could equally be described as "silly " .
Topic Outline:

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index