On the Origin of the GenusPsilocybeand Its Potential Ritual Use in Ancient Africa and Europe.
The role of altered states of consciousness in the production of
geometric and figurative art by prehistoric cultures in Africa and
Europe has been hotly debated. Helvenston and Bahn have tried to refute
the most famous hypothesis, Lewis-Williams’ neuropsychological model, by
claiming that appropriate visual hallucinations required the ingestion
of LSD, psilocybin, or mescaline, while arguing that none of these
compounds were available to the cultures in question. We present here
mycological arguments that tell another story. A prehistoric worldwide
distribution of the mushroom genus Psilocybe,
and therefore of psilocybin, is supported by the existence of endemic
species in America, Africa, and Europe, the disjunct distribution of
sister species, and the possibility of long-distance spore dispersal. It
is more difficult to point to instances of actual prehistoric ritual
use in Africa and Europe, but there are a growing number of suggestive
findings.
Key Words
Lewis-Williams neuropsychological model hallucinogens Psilocybe distribution origins of art
Sobre el Origen del GéneroPsilocybey su Uso Ritual Potencial en África y Europa Antiguas.
El papel de los estados alterados de conciencia en la producción de
arte geométrico y figurativo por culturas prehistóricas en África y
Europa ha sido fuertemente debatido. Helvenston y Bahn han tratado de
refutar la hipótesis más famosa, el modelo neuropsicológico de
Lewis-Williams, al afirmar que las alucinaciones visuales apropiadas
requieren la ingestión de LSD, psilocibina o mezcalina, al mismo tiempo
que sostienen que ninguno de estos compuestos estaba disponible para las
culturas en cuestión. Presentamos aquí argumentos micológicos que
cuentan una historia diferente. La distribución prehistórica mundial del
hongo del género Psilocybe, y por
ende de la psilocibina, es apoyada por la existencia de especies
endémicas en América, África y Europa, por la distribución disyunta de
especies hermanas, y por la posibilidad de dispersión de esporas a larga
distancia. Es más difícil señalar ejemplos de uso ritual prehistórico
reales en África y en Europa, pero hay un número creciente de hallazgos
sugerentes.
Introduction
One
approach to understanding the origins and development of prehistoric
artistic traditions involves altered states of consciousness (Froese 2013), especially in the context of shamanic rituals (Whitley 2009). Most prominently elaborated by Lewis-Williams and his colleagues (e.g., Clottes and Lewis-Williams 1998; Lewis-Williams 2002; Lewis-Williams and Dowson 1988),
one key hypothesis is that certain characteristic visual hallucinations
could have been the inspiration for some prehistoric geometric and
figurative motifs.
Three kinds of
hallucinations have received special attention: 1) basic geometric
forms, sometimes superimposed on the environment; 2) more complex
geometric forms and some basic figurative imagery, which can also be
superimposed; and 3) alternate realities, typically involving travel to
lower subterranean and upper astral realms. All are co-determined by
neural, psychological, and cultural factors, ordered from more
neurobiological to more psychosocial influences. For example, the
stereotyped geometric patterns are likely mostly shaped by the neural
architecture of the early visual system, i.e., the part of the cerebral
cortex that is responsible for the processing of low-level visual
features such as lines and edges (Bressloff et al. 2002).
And they might also be induced by self-sustaining neural dynamics,
since the spatial distribution of neural activity that maintains itself
in the absence of entrainment to external sensory influences can
spontaneously assume a variety of geometric forms such as spiral
patterns (Froese et al. 2013).
Nevertheless, explaining which of these basic hallucinatory patterns
were selected for artistic reproduction also involves appeals to
cultural norms (Lewis-Williams 2014).
Figurative imagery and alternate realities are less physiologically
constrained, and can also directly include personal memories and
cultural contents.
This so-called
“neuropsychological model” has been developed by Lewis-Williams and
colleagues as a framework to better understand prehistoric traditions,
particularly in Europe (e.g., Lewis-Williams 2002; Lewis-Williams and Pearce 2005) and southern Africa (e.g., Lewis-Williams and Challis 2011). Given its wide-ranging ambitions, it is unsurprising that it has received extensive criticisms (e.g., Bahn 1988, 2010; Bednarik 1990; Hodgson 2006). Helvenston and Bahn (e.g., 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006) have been posing one of the most influential challenges that can be summarized in three essential steps.
First,
the neuropsychological model is simplified into a fixed three-stage
sequence, which they call the “Three Stages of Trance” (TST) model,
assuming that it is limited to the three types of hallucinations
mentioned above, namely geometric forms, figurative imagery, and
alternate realities, and that these types must always be experienced in
this exact order to be appropriate for explaining the relevant
prehistoric art. Second, they argue that this three-stage sequence can
only be experienced following sufficient ingestion of psilocybin,
mescaline, or LSD. Third, they claim there is no evidence to suggest
that any of these psychoactive compounds were available during
prehistoric times in the Old World. They therefore conclude that the
neuropsychological model is refuted.
Helvenston
and Bahn have made valuable contributions to the archaeological debate
about the origins of prehistoric art by differentiating between distinct
kinds of altered states of consciousness, and thereby highlighting that
only some of these lead to relevant forms of hallucination. They must
also be credited for enabling a sustained debate in mainstream
archaeology about the potential role of certain psychoactive substances
in promoting key transformations in human prehistory, and for demanding
the development of a hypothesis potentially refutable by empirical
evidence. However, the refutation of Lewis-Williams’ neuropsychological
model over a decade ago has had the unfortunate effect of discouraging
further refinement of that model. It also threatens to prematurely
undermine investigations into the potential role of altered states more
generally. Thus, in order to reopen the debate and encourage renewed
empirical research, it is important to highlight that all three of the
refutation’s steps have weaknesses.
Briefly,
to reduce the complexities of the neuropsychological model to the TST
model is to set up a “straw man” argument, i.e., to create a caricature
in order to more easily defeat it. To limit the methods of inducing
relevant altered states of consciousness to the ingestion of those three
substances is questionable, and to try to refute a hypothesis based on
the absence of evidence is a logical fallacy (confusion between absence
of evidence and evidence of absence). Here, we will leave aside these
problems, which have already been discussed at length elsewhere (e.g.,
Froese 2015; Froese et al. 2014; Pearce 2004).
Instead, in the following, we focus on the third and final step of the
refutation, i.e., their empirical claim that psilocybin was unavailable
in prehistoric Africa and Europe. We conclude that this claim is in fact
unsupported by mycological arguments, meaning that even the TST model
cannot be refuted on its own terms. Accordingly, we call for renewed
efforts to investigate the potential role that altered states of
consciousness played in human prehistory, whether induced by psilocybin
or other means.
Role of Psilocybe Fungi in Archaeological Debate
Mainstream archaeology had largely ignored the potential role of Psilocybe
mushrooms in human prehistory until this possibility gained prominence
over a decade ago due to the critical writings on the topic by
Helvenston and Bahn, who rejected this possibility on empirical grounds.
We therefore summarize their attempts to base the refutation of the TST
model on the absence of psilocybin, the principal psychoactive compound
of Psilocybe mushrooms, during prehistoric times in Africa and Europe.
At first, they argued for the complete absence of the genus in the Old World. For example, Helvenston and Bahn (2003:214) failed to mention that Psilocybe
is widespread in the wild in Europe today, writing that psilocybin is
“found in hallucinogenic mushrooms growing in Mexico, Central America
and South America.” Helvenston and Bahn (2004:94–95)
continued to insist on the lack of naturally occurring psilocybin in
contemporary Europe, claiming that “although plants containing these
substances are frequently found in South America, particularly, and
North America also, there is no evidence that any such plants ever grew
in Europe…In our view, this fact refutes the model” (p. 95). They also
extended their claims to South Africa.
Later, Helvenston and Bahn (2005:29–31) acknowledged a single Psilocybe species, P. semilanceata,
in contemporary Europe. Yet, they tried to save their refutation by
hypothesizing that it was introduced to Europe after sailors first made
contact with the Americas. However, the evidence does not support a
recent introduction to Europe. As Froese et al. (2014) pointed out in response to Helvenston, the genus Psilocybe actually includes around 150 hallucinogenic species worldwide (Guzmán 2009). Several species are found in Europe and nowhere else. Furthermore, apart from Psilocybe, there are several other genera of fungi containing psilocybin in Europe, for example Inocybe (Kosentka et al. 2013). Helvenston (2015a)
remains unconvinced because the mere presence of psilocybin does not
guarantee their psychoactive potential. She is right that we do not know
much about the effects of Inocybe,
including whether the compound is present in sufficient concentration
to be effective after oral consumption. We will therefore restrict our
mycological assessment to Psilocybe alone.
Helvenston and Bahn (2006:112–114) reiterated the presumed absence of Psilocybe in prehistoric Europe and South Africa, and similarly hypothesized that the presence of a local species, P. natalensis, is due to its recent human introduction:
Although Psilocybe semilanceata,
a psilocybin-containing mushroom is widespread in Europe today, the
earliest unequivocal evidence of this mushroom was in the twentieth
century…Thus, the three stages of trance model is not applicable to
understanding the meaning of Paleolithic cave art…until 1994 no
psilocybine-containing plants were known in South Africa (Gartz et al. 1995:29–34), but a species known as Psilocybe natalensis,
a psilocybin-containing mushroom was discovered…and it is said to
possess strongly hallucinogenic properties. It is unlikely that this
species was transported to Africa prior to the past several decades
(Stamets 1996:134–5).
Their rejection of P. natalensis
as a potential source of psilocybin in prehistoric southern Africa
seems unmotivated, especially given that Gartz and colleagues (1995:29) take it to be “indigenous” to the area. To be fair, Stamets (1996:134–135)
remarks that this species is “undoubtedly more widely distributed,”
although he does not comment on its recent transportation to southern
Africa.
Helvenston and Bahn’s skepticism can still be upheld to the extent that so far no preserved remains of prehistoric Psilocybe
have been found in the Old World (or anywhere else for that matter).
Neither do we have evolutionary analyses of known contemporary species
that could pinpoint the genus’s origins. This should be a target for
future research. Nevertheless, as soon as we acknowledge the existence
of various wild local Psilocybe
species in the Old World, the simplest explanation is that they evolved
there. In other words, the burden of proof is on those who want to deny
their endemic status and who must instead demonstrate their recent human
introduction, a task that is still outstanding. Yet, Bahn (2010:79–80)
writes that prehistoric sources of psilocybin “were unavailable in the
Old World (including southern Africa!)” such that “one can only conclude
that anyone who continues henceforth to cite or apply the ‘three-stage’
model is either ignorant of the facts or has little respect for truth
in scholarship.” We will now show that Helvenston and Bahn’s claims are
not warranted given what we know about the origins of Psilocybe.
Mycological Considerations about the Distribution and Origin of Psilocybe
Psilocybe Worldwide Distribution
Currently, there are approximately 21 species of Psilocybe known in Asia, 15 in Australia, 22 in the USA and Canada, 55 in Mexico, 40 in Central and South America (Guzmán 2005, 2009; Guzmán and Yang 2010), and, importantly, 6 in Africa and 12 in Europe (one of them with five infraspecific taxa) as summarized in Table 1.
Europe and North America (excluding Mexico) have been fairly well
explored; accordingly, a dramatic increase in the number of known
species is not expected. Central and South America may have many more
unidentified species. Although this region is still poorly explored, it
already has 40 species so far and will therefore likely have the highest
diversity (Guzmán 2002:12).
Table 1
World distribution of African and EuropeanPsilocybespecies (in bold putative endemic species; one asterisk only in Africa; two asterisks only in Europe) (Guzmán1983; Guzmán et al.1998,2014; Guzmán and Castro2003; Borovička2008,2011; Borovička et al.2011,2015; Noordeloos2010).
Species
Distribution
*
Psilocybe aquamarina Pegler
Africa (Kenya)
P. azurescens Stamets & Gartz
Western USA, introduced to Europe
*
P. congolensis Guzmán, Nixon & Cortés-Pérez
Africa (Congo)
P. cubensis (Earle) Singer
Africa,
America (subtropical and tropical regions), Asia (Cambodia, India,
Malaysia, Nepal?, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam), Australia
P. cyanescens Wakef.
North
America (Canada, USA), introduced to Europe (Austria, Belgium, Czech
Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland,
Sweden, United Kingdom), Australia, Africa (probably misidentified)
P. fimetaria (P.D. Orton) Watling
America (Canada, USA, Chile), Europe (Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Great Britain, Italy, Norway, Sweden)
**
P. gallaeciae
Europe (Spain)
**
P. hispanica
Europe (Spain)
**
P. liniformans
Europe (Belgium, Italy, Netherlands, Spain)
*
P. mairei Singer
Africa (Algeria, Morocco)
**
P. medullosa (Bres.) Borovička
Northern
and central Europe (e.g., Austria, Czech Republic, Finland, France,
Germany, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, in many papers as P. silvatica)
*
P. natalensis Gartz, D.A. Reid, M.T. Sm. & Eicker
Africa (South Africa)
P. pelliculosa (A.H. Sm.) Singer & A.H. Sm.
America (Canada, USA), cited from Europe (Finland) but maybe only American
**
P. puberula Bas & Noordel.
Europe (Belgium, Netherlands)
P. semilanceata (Fr.) P. Kumm.
America
(Canada, USA, Chile), Asia (India), Africa?, Australia, Europe
(Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
France, Georgia, Germany, Great Britain, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania,
Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, URSS), Tasmania?
**
P. serbica var. serbica M.M. Moser & E. Horak
var. arcana (Borov. & Hlaváček) Borov., Oborník & Noordel.
var. bohemica (Šebek ex Šebek) Borov., Oborník & Noordel.
var. moravica (Borov.) Borov., Oborník & Noordel.
f. sternberkiana (Borov.) Borov., Oborník & Noordel.
America (Canada, USA), cited from Europe, but corresponds to P. medullosa
P. strictipes Singer & A.H. Sm.
North
America (Canada, USA), Europe (Czech Republic, Finland, France,
Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Netherlands, Russia, Spain, Sweden)
P. stuntzii Guzmán et J. Ott
Western USA and Canada, introduced in Switzerland
Until
now, Africa has the fewest species. But it is also the least studied
continent from the mycological point of view. This is the case even in
South Africa, where Crous et al. (2006)
made an exhaustive revision, but it was incomplete in the case of the
agarics. To date, just four species are known to be endemic (Table 1). Tanzania was studied by Härkönen et al. (2003) and Tibuhwa (e.g., 2012). No Psilocybe were found in their collections, so its presence there remains uncertain. Härkönen et al. (2003)
mention that Tanzanians do not eat mushrooms with the characteristics
of this genus. Indirect evidence, for example cases of neurotropic
effects, could show the presence of Psilocybe in East Africa (Charters 1957; Cullinan et al. 1945; Vedcourt and Trump 1969). Recently, P. congolensis (Fig. 1) was described from Congo and a photograph of a bluing Psilocybe, belonging to the P. cubensis-complex from Uganda (Fig. 2), was published (Guzmán et al. 2014).
Figs. 1–2
1: Psilocybe congolensis; 2: Psilocybe complex cubensis from Africa (photos by Stuart C. Nixon).
Several species of Psilocybe grow wild in Europe, and six of them, namely P. gallaeciae, P. hispanica, P. liniformans, P. medullosa, P. puberula, and P. serbica
(including five infraspecific taxa), are only known to exist there and
it is reasonable to assume they are endemic (Guzmán and Castro 2003; Guzmán 2012).
On the Probable Origin of Psilocybe
There are no specific studies about the age and place of origin of the genus Psilocybe. Nevertheless, there is sufficient data so that we can make educated guesses. It is known that mushrooms (Agaricomycotina) originated 380 to 960 mya (million years ago) (Taylor et al. 2004). Based on the fossil Archaeomarasmius, the minimum age for Agaricales (agarics, fleshy mushrooms with gills, such as Psilocybe) can be established to 90 mya, in the mid-Cretaceous (Hibbett et al. 1997).
However, due to their soft nature agarics are very unlikely to become
fossilized, and thus they most likely originated already long before the
Cretaceous. The alkaloid psilocybin in the Inocybeaceae, a family of
Agaricales different from the one to which Psilocybe belongs, appears during the Miocene between 10 and 20 mya (Kosentka et al. 2013). It is probable that the age of appearance of psilocybin in the family of Psilocybe may be around that time as well.
Some Psilocybe species seem to have been introduced to Europe via human activity, as suggested by Borovička (2008) and Noordeloos (2010). Nevertheless, as mentioned above, others are only known to exist in Africa or Europe (Borovička 2008; Gartz et al. 1995). This strongly suggests they originally evolved there. Psilocybe natalensis is a South African xerophytic species very similar to P. aztecorum from Mexico, with basidiomata and basidiospores very much alike in both fungi. However, P. aztecorum
grows only in grasslands in mountainous pine forests, up to 2,000 m
ASL. Currently, no molecular studies have been done, so they only differ
in habitat and geographic distribution (Guzmán et al. 2014). On the other hand, P. medullosa is morphologically almost identical and phylogenetically very related to P. silvatica,
but with differences in its DNA sequences (EF-1α, LSU, ITS); thus it
seems they are different species, the first one European and the second
one American (Borovička et al. 2015).
These are two examples of the disjunct distribution of sister species
that would indicate a prehistoric origin. Lumbsch et al. (2008:424)
mention there are “two alternative explanations, vicariance versus long
distance dispersal” to explain disjunct distributions, the latter
implying a relatively more recent, although still ancient prehistorical,
origin.
Halling et al. (2008)
also observed a disjunction of sister taxa or morpho-taxa of bolete
mushrooms on continents of both Laurasian and Gondwanan origin. They
propose three hypotheses to explain this disjunction. One is the long
distance dispersal through basidiospores; a second hypothesis is a
post-Cretaceous migration over land bridges; and the last one is an
origin before the breakup of Pangaea in the Cretaceous. What these
authors state (2008:440),
namely the “existence of bolete morpho-taxa on continents of both
Laurasian and Gondwanan origin could be explained by an original
Pangaean distribution,” is consistent with the case of Psilocybe as well.
An
alternative hypothesis can be formulated on the basis of evidence that
many fungi are capable of global dispersal via airborne spores
(Fröhlich-Nowoisky et al. 2012). Thus, the presence of Psilocybe
in Africa and Europe could be more recent, coinciding with the
emergence of psilocybin in other genera of Agaricales around 10–20 mya,
followed by long-distance spore dispersal to various parts of the world
and by relatively rapid local speciation events. For example, there is
compelling evidence that the genus Inocybe, which includes psilocybin-containing species (Kosentka et al. 2013), is capable of long-distance, transoceanic dispersal (Geml et al. 2012). It is therefore reasonable to assume that the genus Psilocybe also has this capacity, but this still needs to be empirically demonstrated.
In
conclusion, at the moment there is not sufficient data available to
determine which of these two hypotheses, i.e., local distribution via an
ancient supercontinent or more recent transoceanic dispersal, is the
correct one. Future work could focus on arbitrating between these
possibilities, for example by determining how long ago the only known
endemic species from South Africa, P. natalensis, split off from the rest of the genus. Nevertheless, both hypotheses are in agreement that Psilocybe was already present in the Old World long before the emergence of modern humans.
Ritual Use of Psilocybe in Africa and Europe
In response to Froese (e.g., 2015), Helvenston (2015b) has started to admit that there may be endemic species of Psilocybe in Africa and Europe and thus shifted the emphasis from lack of availability to lack of evidence for ritual use of Psilocybe
in prehistoric times. This is a step in the right direction and
promises a more productive debate. We therefore review current evidence
suggestive of use of this genus since ancient times.
Although Africa is almost virgin with regard to the study of neurotropic mushrooms, according to Samorini (1999)
it is here where the most ancient record of its relation with man can
be found. He argues that the post-Paleolithic murals on the cave walls
of the Tassili n’Ajjer mountain region in Algerian section of the Sahara
Desert, dated 9000–7000 B.C.E., are the oldest prehistoric evidence for
the use of psychotropic mushrooms by man. In one of the paintings
(Fig. 3),
the humanoid figures are dancing or running and carrying mushrooms,
which are connected with dotted lines to their heads, potentially
indicating the influence of the mushrooms on their minds (Samorini 1999, 2001). According to Guzmán (2012), P. mairei could be depicted, a species endemic to Africa that was first described from Algeria (see Table 1).
Fig. 3
Drawing
of one of the paintings from Tassili n’Ajjer (Sahara Desert) showing
humanoid figures dancing or running and carrying mushrooms, which are
connected with dotted lines to their heads, potentially indicating the
influence of the mushrooms on their minds (from Samorini 2001:56).
With regard to a more recent but still ancient African culture, Berlant (2005) has hypothesized that the Egyptian White and Triple Crowns represent primordia (young and still closed fruit bodies) of P. cubensis. He bases his idea in the similar appearance of these crowns and the primordia (Figs. 4–5).
He also highlights the inscription in the tomb of Pharaoh Unas: “He has
eaten the Red Crown, He has swallowed the Green One [and] delights to
have their magic in his belly.” With the motif of a crown we find
another connection between possible representations of Psilocybe and human heads, perhaps alluding to their “magic” effects. Berlant (2005) also speculates that P. cubensis
was cultivated by the Egyptians. In an ancient story, known as “King
Cheops and the Magicians,” it is described that crowns were bestowed on
Egypt’s rulers by deities who had hidden them in barley, which they
exposed to a storm and then left in a storeroom for 14 days. Berlant
notes that this is consistent with modern cultivation practices, in
which moist grain is employed as a substrate for incubating Psilocybe spores for a couple of weeks. However, so far no unequivocal references in imagery or writing have been found.
Figs. 4–5
Young stages or primordia of Psilocybe cubensis (4) (photo by D.T. Leslie, from Guzmán 1983, fig. 770) represented in the Triple Crown (5) (from Berlant 2005:277).
In Europe, mushrooms were depicted (Fig. 6)
by prehistoric men in a mural on the wall of a rock shelter in the
prehistoric archeological site Selva Pascuala in Spain, 6000–4000 B.C.E.
(Akers et al. 2011). The mushrooms represented were identified by Guzmán as P. hispanica (Fig. 7), a common psychotropic species in that region, first described from a location not very far from this site (Guzmán 2012).
The determination is based on its cap and stem form, which can be seen
in the mural, and because this species is coprophilous and is therefore
ecologically related with the bulls also represented in the mural.
Fig. 6
Prehistoric
mural in Selva Pascuala in Spain, dated to approximately 6000–4000
B.C.E. See the line of 13 mushrooms at the right (from Akers et al. 2011:123).
Fig. 7
Psilocybe hispanica (photo by I. Seral). For Guzmán (2012) this is the mushroom represented in Fig. 6.
There
is further evidence of the use of hallucinogenic mushrooms in Europe,
which no longer belongs to the prehistoric period but is still dated to
long before the Spanish returned from the Americas. It is an enigma what
substance was used during the Eleusinian rites in ancient Greece, but
it is possible that it was some kind of fungus. Wasson et al. (1978) proposed involvement of Claviceps purpurea. Alternatively, a species of Psilocybe might have been involved (Gartz 1996). This hypothesis is supported by a relief carving from Farsala, Thessaly (Fig. 8),
dated to the 5th century B.C.E., where two goddesses related to the
Eleusinian rites are represented each holding mushrooms (Samorini 1999), which are agarics, but cannot be identified.
Fig. 8
Relief
carving of two goddesses related to the Eleusinian rites, each holding a
mushroom, from Farsala, Thessaly, 5th century B.C.E. (photo by T.
Froese).
A
later example is the bass-relief on the bronze gates of the cathedral
of Hildesheim, Germany, dated to 1020, in which the first temptation of
the Genesis is engraved (Gartz 1996) (Fig. 9).
Although the mushroom is depicted as a big tree in allusion to the tree
of knowledge, it is so accurately represented that, because of the
campanulate cap with distinctive papilla and the flexuose stipe, the
species can be recognized as P. semilanceata (Fig. 10), a mushroom very common in Europe (Guzmán 1983; Samorini 1999). The association of this species with the fall of man is consistent with the church’s condemnation of ritual use of Psilocybe in Mexico, which is known from colonial documents (Sahagún 1955
[1530]). Yet it is odd that no explicit textual references are known
from Europe before modern times, and so while these interpretations are
plausible they require confirmation.
Fig. 9
One
of the reliefs on the bronze doors at Hildesheim Cathedral, in Germany,
from the Middle Ages. God reprimands Adam and Eve for eating part of
the tree of knowledge in the Garden of Eden. The tree is represented as Psilocybe semilanceata (from https://klimtlover.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/hildesheimdoordetail2.jpg, and Gartz 1996).
Fig. 10
Psilocybe semilanceata. Note the campanulate cap with papilla and the flexuose stipe (photo by A. Milla).
Conclusions
Current
mycological and art historical evidence supports the possibility that
prehistoric cultures had access to psilocybin and therefore to precisely
the three-stage sequence of altered states of consciousness, which
leads from geometric hallucinations to full-blown alternate realities.
Given that this tentative conclusion is consistent with Lewis-Williams’
neuropsychological model, and even with Helvenston and Bahn’s TST model,
research is freed to explore to what extent prehistoric people actually
made use of this resource, which is currently being rediscovered as a
valuable drug by modern medicine (Kupferschmidt 2014).
Indeed, there is a renewed opportunity to think more broadly about why
prehistoric people may have sought out practices of mind alteration in
the first place, whether or not induced by psilocybin (e.g., Froese 2015).
Acknowledgments
Tom
Froese and Laura Guzmán-Dávalos dedicate this article to the memory of
Gastón Guzmán, who sadly did not live to see its publication. Tom Froese
was supported by UNAM’s PAPIIT (project number IA102415).
