Rock art, ritual and relationships Chapter Nine Conclusions 9.1 Introduction This thesis set out to investigate the relationship between the central Australian rock art assemblage and the behavioural contexts in which the assemblage was produced. Rock art researchers in the past have invoked ritual as the context in which many rock art assemblages throughout the world have been produced. Prior to this research, however, the relationship between ritual in hunter-gatherer societies and the structure of rock art assemblages resulting from these practices was poorly understood. In this thesis, I have formulated a theoretical framework, which outlines the structural principles universal to ritual behaviour and adapts them as hypotheses for the interpretation of the behaviour involved in the production of rock art. Using this theoretical framework, I have been able to identify aspects of the central Australian rock art assemblage produced in ritual contexts. 9.2 The ritual and rock art theoretical framework The theoretical framework developed from Rappaport's (1999) anthropological research on ritual, has a number of strengths, which make it particularly useful for the analysis of the relationship between rock art and ritual behaviour. First, both ritual and the production of rock art are seen as practices involving communication. If ritual is a method of communicating information, it is logical that the practice will adopt forms or objects that can communicate such information. Rock art therefore, provides an ideal database from which to investigate ritual behaviour in the past. Second, in recognising that the content of individual rituals will differ, the theoretical framework I have proposed seeks to identify those aspects of the ritual that are universal. In doing so, the focus of analysis is placed on the structure rather than the individual content of each rock art assemblage so that the theoretical framework can be equally applied to a range of varying assemblages without concern for the meaning of particular motifs. This is especially relevant to the analysis of prehistoric rock art assemblages where meaning cannot be recovered. 295 Rock art, ritual and relationships Third, the universal ritual structures outlined in the theoretical framework could be identified in the central Australian rock art assemblage but it was necessary to introduce various innovative analyses directed specifically at identifying them. Finally, the theoretical framework is broad enough to identify the structure of two different types of ritual behaviour, one relating to ritual sanctioned by the supernatural and the other relating to more mundane or self-referential ritual. Significantly, Rappaport (1999:31-32) stressed that the individual structures evident in ritual are not exclusive to it, but rather, it is the conjunction of these structures that are unique to ritual. It was essential then, to find methodological approaches that enabled me to identify all of the ritual structures and the interrelationships between them. Structures such as repetition, invariance and persistence had to be identified on many levels, not only through time, but across the region, within complexes and in individual panels or faces. These structures had to be understood in relation to the geographic and cultural contexts in which the assemblages were produced. Potential audiences had to be assessed and the timing of the production of the rock art assemblage proposed. It is clear that the use of the theoretical framework can only be fruitful if appropriate analytical methods such as those formulated in this thesis, are adopted. Difficulty in assessing the presence of a number of the structural principles was evident in the analyses. The identification of a 'specialised time' for the performance of ritual in a hunter-gatherer community dependent on unpredictable resources was difficult to establish except in general terms. Evidence for 'participation', posed additional difficulties. Participation is the type of ritual activity least likely to leave a signature in the archaeological record. Rubbing motifs with ochre, touching motifs or surfaces associated with rock art or even watching carefully have all been noted (Dick Kimber personal communication) as recent acts associated with ritual involving rock art, but none of these would leave marks visible in the archaeological record. It is clear that many ritual acts relating to rock art do not leave evidence identifiable in the archaeological record and others that do, have been subjected to taphonomic processes. It therefore seems probable that the structural criteria applied to rock art 296 Rock art, ritual and relationships assemblages will provide results that underestimate the assemblages produced in a ritual context. The structural feature that was most difficult to assess was that of 'stylised form' as all art motifs are stylised to a degree. Stylisation can take the form of reduction or elaboration of an iconic form. Although I argued that the production of handstencils, handprints and hand outlines and the meandering tracks and trails was spontaneous and lacked the formal structure associated with 'stylised form', a contrary argument could be mounted which recognised that aspects of both these assemblages are stylised with tracks conforming to conventionalised forms indicating the essential features of the movement of birds or macropods across the landscape. Analysis of this structural feature was applied in a uniform manner to all Groups so that under the criteria I set to identify stylised form, the more spontaneously produced motifs, such as hands and macropod trails, had to be excluded. Further aspects of the theoretical framework will be considered against the conclusions of the chronological and spatial analyses discussed below. 9.3 Chronology of central Australian rock art Investigations aimed at identifying structural aspects of the central Australian rock art assemblage include detailed chronological and spatial analyses. Some areas of the identification and classification of chronological change in the assemblage remain problematic. This is particularly evident in the engraved assemblage where it was difficult to assign patinated engravings to relative chronological assemblages on visual appraisal alone. The use of additional indirect evidence provided some data from which to propose relative chronological change but the engraved motif Groups (Groups i, and iii), remain broad and ill defined. Direct dating of targeted engraved motifs in the future would provide chronological parameters for the motif Groups identified in this thesis and lead to a greater understanding of the relationship between rock art and other archaeological evidence. Although some of the patinated engravings may be of late Pleistocene origin, there is no archaeological evidence from central Australia, as yet, that can be used to support such assertions. At this stage, these claims remain speculative. 297 Rock art, ritual and relationships The detailed chronological analysis has provided the clearest understanding of the structural changes and composition of many aspects of the central Australian rock art assemblage that was, up until recently, considered to be a two part assemblage: engravings being of considerable antiquity and a separate assemblage of more recent paintings. The comparative analysis, which identified stylistic similarities between motifs, application methods and contexts of production in the engraved and the painted assemblages known to be more recent (Group iv), has demonstrated that at least some parts of the central Australian engraved assemblage are more recent in origin than previously acknowledged. The comparative analysis also showed that, rather than two separate assemblages, some painted and engraved motifs constituted part of the same coeval rock art tradition with preferences shown for particular techniques according to location or preference of the producer. Aspects of many of the motif groups were produced into the recent past including the fresh motifs from the engraved assemblage, handstencils, handprints and hand outline motifs, the painted assemblage including visually dominant repeated motifs, trails of tracks and the drawn assemblage. Analysis has demonstrated that the rock art assemblage in the last few hundred years was produced in a broad range of techniques in a number of different geographic contexts using both the core motif vocabulary and additional new site-specific motifs. The more recent motif Groups are more clearly defined and represent a much shorter period of production. The chronological definition of the assemblage has implications for the successful application of the theoretical framework as a means to identify ritual. The structure of the large, poorly defined and chronologically unconstrained engraved motif group (Group iii) was difficult to identify. It is highly likely that aspects of this assemblage were produced in association with ritual but the general nature of the engraved assemblage meant that some of the ritual structural principles could not be clearly identified. In contrast, the structure of the small well-defined assemblage, rare and unique abraded motifs (Group vi), was more easily identified. While the differing results obtained in the analysis for these two Groups may well reflect the different contexts of their production, more reliable results may have been obtained if the large engraved assemblage could have been subdivided into tighter chronological