No data to support petroglyph theory

In his latest article, Dr Louis Vella, LL.D. (The Sunday Times, August 17) makes a case for preserving one part of Malta's heritage. While Dr Vella is to be lauded for his efforts, there are various inaccuracies in his article, which beg correction.

The Misqa tanks, located some 250 metres north of the Mnajdra temples, remain one of the most intriguing features of our heritage. There are various such tanks, although an exact count is not possible since many have more than one opening.

These tanks are different and larger than the Bronze Age cisterns, which many readers may be familiar with. Based on their form and location, David Trump assigns them a prehistoric date (Trump 2002: 152). Unfortunately, due to repeated clearing of these tanks, it is not possible to excavate original deposits that could provide a date.

Dr Vella also points out petroglyphs in the area. The best way to view these presumed petroglyphs is via a photograph. When considered in their raw form (i.e. without any suggested shapes drawn on the photograph) their interpretation is highly problematic, as is their date.

Apart from their proximity to the tanks, there is nothing that suggests any particular date for them. I agree with Dr Vella that these should be protected - especially until they are identified. If they are ancient petroglyphs, then they are another unique feature of our rich cultural heritage.

Dr Vella was quick to interpret these presumed petroglyphs as a bird. He has even provided a 'reconstruction', one that is not based on anything concrete.

In his latest piece, Dr Vella also goes further and links this to Egyptian theology. Such an announcement is hasty at best and not based on any sound evidence. The science of archaeology requires careful, methodical study. Conclusions are arrived at after such studies, not beforehand.

Until these presumed petroglyphs are identified as such with any certainty, any further 'theories' would be an argument from silence, and therefore a logical fallacy. This includes further suppositions on linking Malta to Egypt. Besides, even if the petroglyphs were identified as a bird of sorts, there is no reason to link the two countries automatically in that manner.

Incidentally, the Records of Thoth Dr Vella mentioned were first mentioned by Edgar Cayce, a so-called psychic who believed these were hidden under the Sphinx. These records' existence was created by fans of the esoteric, not by the Egyptians.

Dr Vella also interprets an aerial view of Misqa as a depiction of a symbolic womb and somehow links this to Sumer and Babylon. His reasons are not fully clear. It is also not clear why Dr Vella takes the Genesis account of the flood as fact.

Several 'flood accounts' exist in various cultures, but I am sure Dr Vella is aware that there was no global flood in antiquity. A brief look at the contemporary archaeological records of Jericho, Nabta Playa (Egypt) and Klasies River (South Africa) should serve as a sufficient example.

In a stance that strongly recalls diffusionism (a school of thought at its strongest in the 1930s, which sees everything as resulting from the spread of a cultural trait from one point of origin), Dr Vella further tries to link Malta with the UK.

Basing presumed similarities on something universal (in this case pregnancy and child bearing) is another flawed argument with no scientific basis.

What is of utmost importance in archaeology is context. Context refers both to artefacts (where they were found, what was found with them, etc.) and to sites (how one site relates to another). Context is crucial to archaeology, indeed, without it there is no archaeology.

It is thus not impossible to find expressions of fertility and child bearing all over the world. However, this does not mean there is a direct link between these expressions, that they were made by the same people, at the same time.

It should come as no surprise that people from different areas and times thought of the same things, which they witnessed in their everyday lives.

Moving on, Dr Vella revisits Noah's Ark, taking the Bible as factual history. Although history exists within the Bible, I suggest that Dr Vella becomes more familiar with Biblical exegesis before venturing to interpret it further.

Might I refer Dr Vella to two excellent texts on the matter. The first is a book by John Bartlett and the second an article by Roland de Vaux (references below). Both are easily obtainable from the University of Malta library and make an excellent read.

Not content with claiming Malta as the site where Noah landed, Dr Vella makes further far-fetched connections and connects a presumed script marked at Misqa with the Celtic Ogham script. This argument is another logical fallacy and there is nothing to suggest a script at Misqa, much less a link with the Celtic world. Incidentally the Ogham script dates to the 4th century AD (Thomas 1997: 142).

Another attempted link is also made between the Phoenicians and the Celts, without any concrete evidence presented. The Phoenicians and the Celts were two distinct peoples, living at different times and different parts of the world. There is no evidence either that the Celts originated in Malta or were descendants of the temple builders. Readers should note that absence of evidence does not make any theory 'true'.

The science of archaeology is indeed fascinating. Archaeology has often been described as a big jigsaw puzzle with many missing pieces. Making sense of the past requires a rigorous scientific approach. As archaeologists, we work with what we have, using the evidence at hand. Our theories have to fit our data, not vice versa.

References

Bartlett, John. 1990. The Bible, Faith and Evidence: A Critical Enquiry into the Nature of Biblical History, London: British Museum Press de Vaux, Roland. 1970. On the Right and Wrong Uses of Archaeology, in James Sanders (ed.) Essays in Honour of Nelson Glueck: Near Eastern Archaeology in the Twentieth Century, New York: Doubleday.

Thomas, C. 1997. Celtic Britain, London: Thames & Hudson Trump, David. 2002. Malta: Prehistory and Temples, Malta: Midsea Books Ltd.