Introduction

Given that there has been increasing interest among archaeologists in reconstructing what might be called prehistoric ‘mental things’ (e.g. cognition, perception, ideology, symbolism, values, beliefs etc.), and given that it would be interesting to do so, it behoves us, as scientists, to explore whether, or to what degree, it can be done within the framework of the general method of science. Thus, the question I am asking in this chapter is: ‘To what degree are prehistoric thoughts knowable within the context of hypothesis testing?’ Can we actually test ideas which we may have about such things?

I have long maintained that it is not possible to learn about what was in the minds of prehistoric people - these minds are gone, and their mental contents are not recoverable. While we can examine many aspects of what they did, we can understand nothing about what they thought about what they did. But is this really true?

Although I continue to maintain that we cannot actually know what prehistoric people thought, I now think that it is sometimes possible to make plausible inferences about what they must almost certainly have thought, given very strong circumstantial and analogical evidence.