rock art studies in northernmost europe, 2000 - Joakim Goldhahn

Fig. 2.4. The famous rock art panel from Bedolina in
Valcamonica documented by video-scanning techniques (after
Goldhahn 2006).
Another important contribution to this field has been
made in Värmland in Midwest Sweden, where Heimann
has documented the Neolithic rock paintings for his PhD
(Heimann 2005).
Adding to these vast new sources of information are some
interesting new rock art panels found in the northernmost
part of Sweden (Mulk and Bayliss-Smith 2001, 2006;
Kivikäs 2003; Lindgren 2004; Viklund 2004; Broström
2005), Dalsland (Andersson 2003, 2005), Bohuslän
(Andersson and Toreld 2003), Östergötland (Broström et
al 2005) in Sweden, Jong in Akershus (Simonsen and Vogt
2005), and on Lofoten (Bertelsen and Nielssen 2002) in
Norway.
A positive trend is that a lot of new techniques have
been introduced into the work of documentation which
may alter our understanding of this phenomenon, such
as digital photos to record rock paintings (Kivikäs 2000,
2003, 2005; Ramqvist 2002b; Slinning 2002) and video
scanning for the documentation of engravings (Johansson
and Magnusson 2004, also Simson et al. 2004; Trinks et al.
2005) (Fig. 2.4). Also the techniques of tracing and rubbing
have been improved by adding the depth of the engravings
in the final document (Fig. 2.5, also Coles 2001b, 2003b,
2005a).
More importantly, different problems and possibilities
with different methods have been discussed (e.g. Bertilsson
and Magnusson 2000; Coles 2000, 2005a; Nordbladh 2000,
2004a, 2004b; Bertilsson and Fredell 2003; Bengtsson
2004a; Helskog 2004; Helskog and Høgtun 2004; Goldhahn
2005b).
Despite all these progressive improvements I think
2. Rock Art Studies in Northernmost Europe, 2000–2004 25
Fig. 2.5. A section of the famous “Skomakaren” panel at
Backa in Brastad, Bohuslän, in Sweden, documented so that
a tentative depth of the engravings is shown. Documentation:
Vitlycke Museum, Tanumshede.
it is worth pointing out that they will not solve any
epistemological issues concerning the meaning and
significance of different rock art traditions (cf. Bertilsson
and Magnusson 2000; Helliksen and Holm-Olsen 2001;
Bertilsson and Fredell 2003: 7). Even if the video scanning
technique has improved our ability to document different
engravings (Fig. 2.4), it is not reasonable to describe it as an
“objective and precise method” (Johansson and Magnusson
2004: 133). What has been made by Mother Nature and
altered by people in the past, or the present, what is found
and lost, is still an analysis that must be learnt the hard
way, and by using arguments and interpretations made by
human beings. New methods cannot, and will not, leave
us with any firm and safe answers, but maybe with new
questions and possibilities? Time will tell.