The Grendels of Gilf Kebir

a reply to: Kandinsky

Did you see this article the other day?

Stone age artists used rock art as billboard.

In general, animals depicted in rock carvings are shown moving in all different directions. But in Gamnes, most of the reindeer have been drawn with their muzzles pointed in the same way.

“The reindeer are following the fjord inland. This may mean that the artist was trying to depict a migration route,” says Anja Roth Niemi, who is project manager for archaeological excavations for the University Museum in Tromsø, UiT – The Arctic University of Norway.
Niemi believes the drawings showed where the animals were located and how they moved around in the area. In short, these were vital messages from one hunter to another.

I really loved this as it sounds so familiar and so likely. We assume sometimes that art is for storytelling or for leisure but actually, today, our public symbols are mostly functional and/or instructive. So why not here too?

You know, maybe 'further west you might meet killer baboons - be careful here!'
Something else to ponder.

a reply to: beansidhe

VERY interesting! I stumbled on a website years ago. It showed petroglyphs and painted symbols from various Native American sites and how they had various map-like meanings - pointers to water, hazards and 'left round the next canyon corner.' When I went back to check on how accurate the research was, the site was gone and I couldn't find a similar one.

It makes sense that, at least, some of the art we see now was intended to be informative. Particularly as they, presumably, had a smaller working vocabulary than we do. They lived in hostile times and might have used 'tags' that made sense to their own and warned off opponents.

By coincidence, there was also a recent study that showed the placement of the stencilled hand-prints (in some caves/shelters) had a pattern to them - individual preferences relating to positioning. I'll link it in shortly.

a reply to: Kandinsky

TY

A while ago, when some of us were thinking about the carvings on the Pictish stones, we saw one that just had a fish. So smart arse here was giving it, hmm maybe an astrological connection, or maybe something to do with Fionn McChuill's salmon of knowledge, perhaps?
The stone was in a river. It turns out when the fish was visble, the water was shallow enough to cross; when it wasn't, the water was too high to cross.

Uurgh, how we laughed (at me ).

So yes, I liked this study too because it just made so much sense. When you remember that these people weren't mystical beings of another realm - they were our grandfathers - things can slot into place.

I'll look forwards to the hand-print pattern info, that sounds very intriguing.

originally posted by: SoulVisions
Based on the images alone, these "monsters" appear to simply be primates of some sort. The powerful hunched shoulders obstruct where part of the neck/head is from a profile or side viewpoint. The ears, eyes, mouth, rear, and tail suggest this as well.

I agree, they look like giant apes. I definitely see a head on almost all of them.

a reply to: beansidhe

Dammit! Lost my reply due to a back-button clutz.

It took a while to find the link: Prehistor ic hand stencils in Spanish caves not randomly placed, say researchers

Human occupants of two caves in Northern Spain put some thought into where they placed their hand stencils on cave walls as much as 37,000 years ago, during Palaeolithic times. The topography and physical characteristics of the walls in the low light conditions of the caves seem to have mattered to them, suggest a team of researchers.

Bouncing off your other points, I've got a link to First Contact: Lost Tribe of the Amazon that you might like (link). If it catches your interest, let me know and I'll PM it.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Yes, back-button clutz, I know you so well.
Thanks for both links, the hands do seem to be purposefully placed. And yes, First Contact looks great - cheers for that.