PICTOGRAPHS AT TWO SITES ON BONAIRE, N. A.: DESCRIPTION, ANALYSIS AND A REGIONAL COMPARISON
by
Gary N. Beiter
A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Social Science
Master of Arts
Florida Atlantic University
Boca Raton, Florida August 1989 PICTOGRAPHS AT TWO SITES ON BONAIRE, N. A.: DESCRIPTION, ANALYSIS AND A REGIONAL COMPARISON
by
Gary N. Beiter
This thesis was prepared under the direction of the candidate's thesis advisor, Dr. Wm. Jerald Kennedy, Department of Anthropology. It was submitted to the faculty of the College of Social Science and was accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE: (
,
Dean, College of Social Science ~-6).~/ Dean for Advanced Studies
i1 ABSTRACT
Author: Gary N. Beiter
Title: Pictographs at Two Sites on Bonaire, N. A.: Description, Analysis and a Regional Comparison
Institution: Flo.r.lda Atlantic Pni vers i ty
Thesis Advisor: Dr Wm. Jerald Kennedy
Degree: Master of Arts
Year: 1989
Two previously unrecorded sites on Bonaire in the Netherland
Antilles are reported in this study. Pictographs on the
island were subjected to a form analysis to determine the
relationship of the representational elements to the non-
representational elements. The results show that the
pictographs at Site Sl are primarily non-representational
and do not have recurring motifs found at other sites on
Bonaire. Those at Site S2 are unlike any othe~s on Bonaire.
The rock art from the Lesser Antilles and Venezuela is
primarily representational and petroglyphs. Those found in
western Cuba, Aruba and Curacao are non-representational with recurring motifs. The Dominican Republic's and
eastern Cuba's rock art is representational and, like curacao, both have pictographs and petroglyphs present.
iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Acknowledgments fo~ intellectual, technical o~ financial assistance are due to Dr. Wm. Jerald Kennedy and D~. Yasar
!scan, both from the Department of Anthropology at Flo~ida
Atlantic University; Senate~ Rubin Ellis of the government of the island of Bonai~e, N.A.; and 0~. Bobbie Stewa~t of Bar~y
Unive~sity.
iv TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT . . . . . • . . . • . . • ...... • . . . . • . . . . • . 11 i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... iv
LIST OF TABLES ...... vi
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS viii
Chapter I . INTRODUCTION ...... 1
II. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF BONAIRE • . . . . . • • ...... • ...... 8
I I I . METHODOLOGY ...... 2 2
IV. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THE BONAIRE SITES ...... 26
V. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF OTHER REGIONAL SITES...... 45
VI. CONCLUSION ...... 59
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 80
v LIST OF TABLES
Table Page 1. Possible Chronology of Bonaire ...... 21
2. characteristics of Site S1. Panels S11 - S17 ...... 37
3. Characteristics of Site S1. Panels S18 - S116 ...... 38 4. Percentage Frequency of Elements and Marks, by Panel. Site S1, Panels Sll - Sl 7 ...... 39
5. Percentage Frequency of Elements and Marks, by Panel. Site S1, Panels Sl8 - Sl16 ...... ~0
6. Percentage Frequency of Forms and Marks at Site S1, by Site and by Panel ...... 41
7. Characteristics of Panels S21, S22, B1, B2, B3, 85, and 87...... 42
8. Percentage Frequency of Forms and Marks. Panels S21, S22, B2, B3, 84, B5, and B 7 ...... 4 3
9. Percentage Frequency of the Forms and Marks on Bonaire ...... 44
10. CharacteLlstics of the Rock Art Panels on Curacao ...... 49
11. Percentage Frequency of the Forms and Marks on Curacao ...... 50
vi 12. Characteristics of the Rock Art on Aruba . • • • . • . . . . . • • ...... • • ...... • . . . . . 51 13. Percentage Frequency of the Forms and Marks on Aruba • .. • . . . • . . . . . • ...... • . . . . . 52
14. Characteristics of some Sites from Venezuela ...... 53
15. Percentage Frequency of the Forms and Marks from some Sites in Venezuela ...... 54
16. Characteristis of some Sites from the Lesser Antilles ...... • ...... 55
17. Percentage Frequency of the Forms and Marks from some Sites in the Lesser Antilles • ...... • . . • . . . . . 56
18. Characteristics of some Sites from the Greater Antilles ...... •...... •...... 57
19. Percentage Frequency of the Forms and Marks from some Sites in the Greater Antilles ...... 58
vii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
1~ Map of the Caribbean 9
2. Map and Stratigraphy of Bonaire ...... 10
3. Plan of Site Sl, Bonaire 27
4. Plan of Site S2, Bonaire 28
5. Classification of the Rock Art of the caribbean ...... 60
6. Illustrations of the Panels at Site Sl. Panels Sll, SllA, Sl2, Sl2A ...... 67
7. Illustrations of the Panels at Site Sl. Panels S13, S14, Sl5 and Sl6 ...... 68
B. Illustrations of the Panels at Site S1. Panels Sl7, S18, S19 and S110 ...... 69
9. Illustrations of the Panels at Bite Sl. Panels Slll, Sll2, Sl13 and S114 ....••...•.. 70
10. Illustrations of the Panels at Site S1. Panels Sl15 and S116 ...... 71
11. Illustrations of the Panels at Site S2. Panels S21 and S22 ...... , ...... 72
12. Illustrations of Panels on Bonaire. Panels B1, B2, B3 and B4 ...... 73
13. Illustrations of Panels on Bonaire: B5 and B7. Illustrations of Panels on Curacao: C1, C2, C3 and C4 . . . . . • ...... 74
viii 14. Illustrations of Elements from Venezuela, the Lesser and Greater Antilles ...... ~...... 75
15. Photographs of Panels at Site Sl, Bonaire. Panels Sll, SllA, Sl2 and S12A .•.•.•.....•.. 76
16. Photographs of Panels at Site 81, Bonaire. Panels 813, 814, 819 and 8111 ...... •...... 77
17. Photographs of Panels at Site 81, Bonaire. Panels 8112, 8113, SllS and 8116 . . . • ...... 78
18. Photographs of Panel S22 at Site 82, the interior of Site 81, and the entrance to Site 82. Bonaire...... 79
ix I. INTRODUCTION
The general term "rock art" includes several types of human activities on rocks or rock surfaces: sculpturing; bas-relief; incised, rubbed or pecked surfaces (petrnglyphs); cave painting and pictographs. The purpose of this study is twofold: 1. To describe the
"rock art" found in two caves, in the Caribbean, on the island of Bonaire, N. A.
2. To analyze and compare the characteristics of the "rock art" from these caves to other locations and localities on Bonaire and elsewhere in the Caribbean. The "rock art" on Bonaire is, as far as is known at pr~sent, solely pictographs. Pictographs are a form of "rock art" that incorporate the use of color to make marks on rock surfaces. on Bonaire, the colors of the paint used were red, black and white. Red pigment was most likely derived from hematite. The author observed deposits of the mineral on Bonaire and Heekeren (1963:9) noted a hematite fragment at a pictograph site near Tafelberg on Curacao. Pictographs have been found on Bonaire at six locations and recorded by
Hummelinck (1953). A seventh was referred to but not
1 2
described in his publication. Heekeren (1963:17) reported designs of a "snake, a boat and two human creatures" along with curvilinear lines, dots and concentric circles at
Spelonk and sun emblems at Onima. The seventh location of
Hummelinck's and the reference by Heekeren was probably at
Spelonk, on the northeast coast, near the area vhere pictographs at the two sites described in this study are located.
Of all the forms of ''rock art" pictographs are one of the first remains of material culture that are affected by the elements and man. Until recently, the preservation of the pictographs on Bonaire has been facilitated because of the near desert cl!mate and moderate temperatures. Activities of humans have been negligible since the island has no special attraction except for scuba diving. Each year, however, the pictographs are increasingly threatened as the island is becoming more popular and developed. Destruction of these non-renewable cultural resources could take place at any time because of recent developments. Consequently, the recording of these pictographs is of the upmost importance. 3lte 1, for example, has already been altered by graffiti though the location is over 2 kms. from the nearest road through a desert of almost impenetrable cactus and sharp coral rock.
As to its importance, Site 1 is one of the few locations in the entire Caribbean where pictographs comprise multiple 3 panels. The only other location as prolific in panels as
Site 1 is found in Cuba. Of 43 caves recorded by Nunez
(1975) on Cuba only two possess more elements than Site 1 on
Bonaire.
"Rock art" has been practiced worldwide in prehistoric times, but, little of this activity has taken place in contemporary primitive cultures (Heizer and Clewlow 1973:3).
Dubelaar (1986:53-58) found that the group~ surveyed in south America have no knowledge of the origins of the "rock art" in their geographical areas .
Many attempts have been made to understand the motivation behind art and its role in culture:
Janson (1962:15) stated that every artist starts out on a level of craftsman, " because he imitates other's works and absorbs traditions of the times and places. Only a few leave that stage and become creators of new techniques or traditions. To create one must break from tradition." "·
A true creator does not create for self satisfaction, but wants the work approved by others. Therefore an artist needs an audience: friends, critics, bystanders, deities, spirits or ancestors."
Langer (1957:27) notes the essential act of thought is symbolization and is expressed as sound, writing, ritual or art. The meaning does not deal with qualities but with relations (Langer 1957:14,55). Representations of objects are always symbols, no matter how closely they resemble the 4
object. " A painting is only a momentary state and cannot
report a history. To do so would require captions in a
series of pictures. To ~onvey a history man uses a language"
(Langer 1957:68,73).
Gideon (1962:9) interpreted art as "a spontaneous
invention to complete the scenes observed; an expression of
an~iety or fear; a past time or amusement; a ritual or magic;
an act of initiation; adornaments; or the urge to communicate
thoughts."
Kennedy (1973:50) and later Dubelaar (1986:83) surmised
that the interpretation of the meaning of rock art or the
assigning of functions to it may be impossible. However,
Kennedy (1973:53) did suggest three possibilities for the
function of petroglyphs: ceremonial, mnemonic and
recreational.
Kennedy (1973:50) subscribed to the ethnographic data
that art is seldom for art's sake in preliterate societies.
Yet Dubelaar (1968:109) noted that very few elements in
preliterate societies show any similarity, except for some
recurring ones that can be considered as motifs; leading one
to suspect that each element was an individual creation of
the artist.
To adequately study "rock art", Ucko (1967:150) was firm
in stating that content and context must be included as well as position. What is desperately needed in studies of "Eock art" is accurate recording and detailed descriptions of the 5
positions and characteristics of every element in as many
caves as possible. Additionally, he believed that spatial
relationships of the components along with their frequencies can aid the studies.
Ucko (1967:153) suggested that absence or presence of
similar artistic outputs from different cultures should not
imply identical causes. Comparisons can only suggest the variety of possible factors. The more the parallels, the more likely a particular parallel is a significant one.
New World studies of rock art have been inventories.
The analyses of the inventories have typically been either regional or typological approaches.
The regional approach classifies an area by index motifs that are predominant in that area or by the type of mark in the abstract elements. Dubelaar (1986:150) noted that the geographical approach may be flawed, since it looks at the
"rock art", in a region, as all being simultaneous.
Examples of regional studies include those conducted by
Boman (1908:815-25), Dubelaar (1986), Rouse (1949:499-502),
Schaafsma (1975) and Schabinger (1976).
The typological approach involves the classification of the "rock art" elements by form or site. Generally, the form classifications con~ists of two types: The representational
(which includes the naturalistic, the childish schematic, stylized, human, animal, anthromorphic, zoomorphic, and man-made objects) and non-representational or abstract 6
(elements that have no resemblence to our reality, geometric forms, meandering lines, angular and curvilinear elements). The site classification was suggested by Maggio
(1973:1), wherein "rock art~ can be divided into those sites made of:
1. Those sites where vegetable or mineral substances were used (pictographs);
2. Those sites where tools we~e used on stone (petroglyphs).
The typological approach has been used by Bullen
(1973:66), Dewdney and Kidd (1962), Dubelaar (1986), Heizer
(1973), Maggio (1973:1) and Nunez (1975).
Another approach to the study of "rock art" was by
Dubelaar (1986:31-33) who explored the possibilities of orientation and natural surroundings as factors but found no correlation. Grant (1974),also, proposed a classification based on the method of application. That is, pictographs done with: 1. A simple wash of flat colors (Full-bodied).
2. Those done with marks.
3. Those that have a combination of flat colors and marks.
Valoky (1975:127) stated that "rock art" can be classified by the:
1. The preponderance of specific elements in a work.
2. The icon content in relation to specific cultural traits or the psychology of the culture.
3. The status of the artist in the community and the social 7 significance of the artistic creation in its time period.
Of particular interests is Valoky's (1975:57) observation that cartain features of the art could define certain areas of many elements as a "work" (panel or section).
Schaafsma (1975) defines an element as a transsection of lines or curves, the close proximity of marks or the integrity of the form of the marks if taken as a group. Heizer (1973:10) noted that abstract forms can be further sub-classified as angular (linear marks joined at angles or single linear marks) and curvilinear.
Dubelaar (1986) found that certain recurring elements appear only in certain regions of the world whereas others appear worldwide. These universal motifs include: concentric circles, circles, sun with rays, zig-zags, the cross, squares, spirals, triangles and the framed cross. Generally, very complicated motifs are restricted to one specific area per motif. II. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF BONAIRE
Physiography
Sometimes called the ABC islands of the Netherland
Antilles, Aruba, Bonaire and Curacao are north of the coast of South America. Bonaire is about 60 kms. north of
Venezuela and 30 kms. east of the island of Curacao. Six hundred kms north the nearest landmass is the Dominican
Republic. To the east, 600 krns, is the Lesser Antilles. To the west of the Netherland Antilles, 1500 kms, is Central
America (Figure 1).
The island, itself, is shaped like a porkchop, with a smaller island named Klein Bonaire 1 km. to the west. The island is widest at the center. From Kralendijk to Spelonk, on the eastern coast, is a distance of 12 kms. The narrowest portions are at the southern flats and east of the western-most point at Boca anima, where the distances are 5 kms. The longest portion from the western to the eastern points is 40 kms.(Figure 2).
8 9
Islands of Caribbean Sea and Bahamas Approximate Scale 2.5 em 11 in.l .. 257 km 1160 mi.)
~leuthera
~at I. I San Salvador ngl.' ATLANTIC Crookedl) ' CaicosJ!; . OCEAN .~,,
t LEE:.,_. AmeriCan ~ British "' ~ .() Virgin Isla.nfis:---..!... --}Iv;....,;n ... Islands • t"'~...... ~.. B--; ,..,:•.,. ~St. Martin Puerw Rico -"- Cro. St.K'1tts • ,.,t. IX ,-:, • Ant. a Nev1s • Jgu ~ ,.P. Guadeloupe ~ 't~rniiD~~ CARIBBEAN SEA - ~-- -- ... ~ ... -s: ~!\!artinique
.SLLuc:ia 2! .c ... est. •Barbados ~ #Vincent .. >
FIGURE 1.- Map of the Caribbean. 10
,... 'f .,. i' N ...,. )'- y. .., i- ..,. r 'f i ..,.. 7
- --'. Holocene
D Be.ach
I -~Salina Neogene and
[[]] Lover Terrace / ':"""1,__ _,
§ Middle Terrace Eocene
~ Conglomerate Albian-Coniacian
~ Washikemba Formation ~ Scale: lcm = l.Skm
FIGURE 2.- Map and Stratigraphy of Bonaire. 11
Bonaire has a seamount type cross-section that rises almost vertically from 50 meters below sea level. At sea level there are narrow wave cut shelves (beaches) from three to five meters wide. Along the coast, the inshore side of the beaches rise three to nine meters above sea level. The first terrace or Lower Terrace extends landward to the next series of terraces. The first terrace is most extensive on the southern half of the island. The northern half of the island is rugged and rises to an elevation of approximately 300 meters above sea level. The eastern side of the island is the windward and for most of the year has heavy wave action. Consequently, most of the water based activity is on the western side.
Anchorages are limited by the lack of shallow water. The eastern side coast is further limited by the heavy wave action, except where notches have been cut in the coastline. The tradewinds are from the east with a mean wind of 5 meters per second. Historically, Bonaire has been spared hurricane activity, since it is to the south of the main hurricane routes.
The Netherland Antilles are in the SOOmm. precipitation zone. Consequently, the region is classified as dry desert.
The mean annual humidity is 75%. The highest rainiall is 12 during october, November, December and January (Strahler
1967). The present climate is considered to be unstable, since a slight shift, in climatological variables, would bring more rain to the island. The island of Margarita 1000 kms. to the east is in a tropical rain forest zone. Evidence from Quarternary deposits reflect a more humid climate in the past
(Strahler 1967, DeBuison 1974).
Fresh water is of limited quantities. Known sources are where fissures or caverns intersect the small entrapped water table. There are a few wells that tap the limited ground water. Most of the fresh water, presently, is obtained from a desalination plant on the eastern side of the island. The soils are similar to the ''desert red", with little humus. The color is derived from small quantities of oxides of iron. The texture is coarse with fragments of parent rock. Deposits of lime carbonate (caliche) are present at depths of less than .3 meters (Strahler 1967).
Biota
Vegetation on the island is mainly varieties of cactus and desert tolerant shrubs. During the rainy season grasses grow where there is suitable soil. During an interview with 13
one of the inhabitants, the info~mant stated that as a boy he remembered the island as being much more verdant than it is now. Due to heavy harvesting of trees, the water retention ability of the soil was decreased, consequently any rain water that falls immediately runs off, rather than being retained for a longer growing season.
Haviser (1987:21) noted that at contact the Caquetio
Indians (who were on Bonaire) cultivated maize, manioc and sweet potatoes and ate cactus fruits, cocuy leaves, maguey, prickly pear and organ cactus.
Wildlife consists of flamingos that feed on the salt flats, which are extensive on the southern part of the island and also occur in the valleys on the northern half of the island. Iguanas are noticed, but, the smaller lizards and geckos are more numerous. Wild parrots are present, as well as numerous small bird species. Wild donkeys. goats and rats are present as imported species.
The varieties of sea life are similar to other areas of the Caribbean, but the sudden drop off to deep water puts larger, more offshore, species closer to land. Shallow grass beds are not found around most of the island, except for a bay on the ~outheastern end. Conch and lobsters are found in this bay.. Conch are not found to any extent at any other location on the island. 14
Haviser (1987:23) listed land snails as a food source on
Curacao as well as marine bivalves and chitons as possible
prehistoric food sources. However, the Ceramic age peoples
had less shellfish in their diet probably because of the
shift to agricultural food. Since Curacao is in close
proximity to Bonaire, the biota of Curacao should be similar
to Bonaire.
Geology
DeBuison (1974), the best source of the geology of
Bonaire, described Bonaire as being built up, during the
Eocene, on a core of basalts, diabases, andesites, dacites
and subaqueous pyroclastic flows with cherty limestones.
This core is collectively called the Washikemba formation of
the Albian-Coniacian. This formation is overlaid by the
Rincon formation of the Senonian, which is composed of
limestone, calcareous sandstone and marl. The Rincon is
followed by the Soebi Blanco formation. Figure 2 depicts the stratigraphy of DeBuison's (1974:117) description of the
geology of Bonaire.
The highest terrace overlays the Eocene deposlt and is composed of the Seroe Domi formation, which is limestone, and 15 is of the young Neogene and possibly the early Pleistocene. Following the Seroe Domi are the Quarternary erosional and depositional deposits of the Middle Terrace and the younger
Lower Terrace.
The Lower Terrace is from four to fifteen meters above mean sea level, except on the southeast side of the island where it is less than four meters. The terrace is from 200 to 600 m wide. Notches that cut into the formation are the result of rain water gullies. Middle Terrace notches located where the surface of the Lower Terrace shows a slight landward bend, as in the vicinity of Spelonk. They developed while the Lower Terrace was forming as solution notches, in quiet water with a small tide and low wave amplitude. These notches may run horizontally over several meters into the cliff face, but the vertical gap may amount to only a few decimeters.
After the Middle Terrace was formed, the sea dropped about 20 meters, and a fringing reef started seaward. Sea levels subsequently rose about five meters, a: which time, a barrier reef was formed causing a lagoon. The forereef of the
Middle Te~race was eroded due to solution and erosional
processes, with the erosional products deposited near the cliff. As the Middle Terrace was being eroded, large blocks
of it were being l~ft on top of the Lower Terrace. 16
In the barrier reef zone, stands of Acropora palmata, tens of meters wide, developed. In the lagoonal zone, an area of quiet water, Monastrea annularis spread a distance of several hundred meters wide. Landward a Siderastrea sp. zone several hundred meters wide formed during a 15 meter rise in the sea level. Subsequent drops in sea level has put the mean sea level between 4 and 15 meters below the Lower
Terrace.
Fossils from the Lower Terrace have given a C14 date of
30,000 to 40,0CO years B.P ..
Caves in the Lower Terrace do not have terrigenous materials, such as flowstones. The caves in the Middle
Terrace have these materials and, in addition, terrestrial vertebrate remains.
The caves in the Middle Terrace had their openings cut during the formation of the Lower Terrace. These caves are elongated and perpendicular to the cliff face. In some of the caves at the landward end and in others halfway to the end, openings have developed on or just below the groundwater table.
Dripstones developed later in the formation of the caves, and are of two types: the horizontal, which are flowstones, that have alternate layers of red or yellow phosphate pellets. The vertical are stalagmites and 17 stalactites, both of which are younger than flowstones, since a drier environment is needed for their formation. The cave floors are partially filled with reddish or yellowish deposits of phosphates cemented with calcite.
Prehistory
Due to the scarcity of information the prehistory of
Bonaire is sketchy. According to Cruxent and Rouse (1969),
Bonaire was inhabited, at the time of the Spanish contact, by
Nee-Indians who spoke the Arawakan language. It is believed that the movements to the South Caribbean chain must have origin~ted in Venezuela.
According to Rouse and Cruxent (1963), the pottery of eastern Venezuela is related to Caribbean and British Guiana styles, whereas Bonaire's pottery styles are more related to those from Western Venezuela. The Nee-Indian styles originated in Western Venezuela and expanded to Bonaire,
Curacao and Aruba. The earliest style is the Dabajuroid from about 1000A.D .. The latest pottery, on Bonaire, is similar to the Playa Guacuco style of western Venezuela.
No Meso-Indian sites have been reported from Bonaire, although they have been reported on Curacao (Haviser 1987).
Heekeren (1963:17) found a shell gouge near the entrance of 18
Spelonk cave. According to Heekeren the gouge and the paintings at Spelonk are indicative of a nomadic non-ceramic group. Rouse and cruxent (1963) stated that Meso-Indian sites do not occur in the Lesser Antilles, b~t they do occux in the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic,
Haiti, and, at the time of Spanish contact, a Meso-Indian group called the Ciboney was still living in parts of western
Cuba. Olsen (1973), however, suggests that Ciboney sites do occur in the Lesser Antilles but have not been found because the Meso-Indians were mainly eaters of fish and shellfish and lived much closer to shore. The sites are now covered by water. A site on Antigua investigated by Olsen may well be a
Meso-Indian site of 800 to 300 B.C ..
Dubelaar (1987) has found no correlation between designs on pottery from the Caribbean basin and the pictographs or petroglyphs present there.
A major study of the prehistory of Curacao was conducted by Haviser (1987). It could be considered as indicative of the prehistory of Bonaire because of their close proximity and similar physiography.
No evidence for a Lithic (Paleo-Indian) age was found on
Curacao, similar to those found in the Lake Maracaibo area or the Taima-Taima and El Jobo of the Coro area. The earliest evidence of human habitation on Curacao was found at Rooi 19
Rincon (4490 BP); this site's material culture is similar to the El Heneral from the coastal N. W. Venezuela area. The Rooi Rincon and the St. Michielsberg sites on
Curacao along with the numerous ephemeral and temporary sites indicates that the Archaic (Meso-Indian) age peoples were small band type nomadic groups who located near the inland bays. The Meso-Indian groups utilized limestone for tool material and occupied rock over hangs and caves for shelter.
The Ceramic (Neo-Indian) period on Curacao occurs earliest at the San Juan site (1440 BP). Haviser notes that these people were of the Arawakan linguistic group and from skeletal remains found on Curacao they were classed as
Amazonids of short to medium stature (less than 160 em), robust with a head form of medium to long with a tendency toward brachycephaly. This group covered the Guayanas,
Venezuela, the Antillean Archipelago and South Florida. They are differentiated from the Isthmids who were present in the
Central American region and west of Lake Maracaibo. The diagnostic ceramics were the Debajuroid series, which belongs to the North Coastal ceramic series of South America that reached Curacao about 1500 BP.
Of the total sites found on Curacao (Haviser 1987:93) 49
(50.5%) were Ceramic, 27 (27.8%) were Archaic, 13.4 %had pictographs present and 8 (8.3%) were of unkown chronology. 20
Burials wern of three types: Pits, primary urn and secondary urn. The Archaic burials were loosely flexed on the side in middens and c0vered by stones.
The pictograph and petroglyph sites on Curacao did not have artifacts associated with them and Haviser
(1987:170-185) does not attribute any cultural age to them.
The general chronology of Curacao, as arranged by
Haviser (1987:82), should be similar to Bonaire's (Table 1). 21
TABLE 1.- Possible Chronology of Bonaire.
Historic 1500 AD D c San Hironimo u s e 1300 AD b e r De Savaan a r a 1000 AD j i m San Juan 0 e i r s c ? 0
M I e n s d 1800 BC 0 i St. Michielsberg a n Rooi Rincon
2700 BC p I a n 1 d ? e i o a n
(Table 1 is based on a chronology arranged by Haviser. (1987:82) for sites on Curacao. Due to its proximity, Bonaire's chronology should be similar to Curacao's.) III. METHODOLOGY
Two previously unreported pictograph locations, identified in this study as Site 1 (Sl) and Site 2 (S2), were visited and surveyed during May and August of 1987.
The overall dimensions of the caves and associations to physiographic features were recorded.
All pictographs were recorded: starting at the cave entrance and moving from east to west; then returning to the east wall, pictographs were recorded from the entrance to the back of the cave. The west wall was recorded from the back of the cave to the entrance.
Recording was accomplished by hand sketching and some photographs. Each mark associated with another mark (by touching or relative closeness) was considered an element.
A mark, as referred to in this study, is a painted area having either a bending (curvilinear) or straight (linear) characteristic that is more than a point (dot). This definition of a mark follows Ocvirk's (1968) definitions of
22 23
art structures.
Non-representational rock art has been classified in the
category of the abstract. Heizer (1973:10), however, made a
distinction in the abstract between angular and curvilinear
elements. The angular in this study are linear marks joined
at angles and the curvilinear are non-linear or wavy
elements.
Following Heizer's (1973:10) recognition of a
distinction between abstract forms, this study uses the
subclassifications of angular and curvilinear forms.
Elements grouped by relative spacing, for the purposes
of this study, are considered us a work or panel. Unless superimposition is present all the elements of a panel are considered as having been created simultaneously, or over a short period of time.
The analysis of the data entails:
1. Determining the form of an element, as objectively as possible, and placing it into one of two broad categories:
Either representational or non-representational. The representational is any form that alludes to reality. Any form that can not be identified as representing some form whether worldly or other worldly, in the observers cultural view, is placed in the non-representational category. If 24 there is any doubt, the element is placed in the non-representational category. 2. The predominant representational panels are sub-categorized as to whether they have human/animal faces, human/animal forms, non-representational or recurring motifs present as minor constituents. The predominant non-representational panels are sub-categorized as to whether they have representational or recurring motifs present as minor constituents. In addition the non-representational panels are sub-categorized as to their curvilinear and angular composition. Recurring motifs, for this study, are defined as any elements that are not representational but occur more than once on other ptlnels at the site, at more than one site or in more than one region.
3. The non-representational is divided into angular or curvilinear sub-categories. The angular consists primarily of straight lines or or lines forming angles. The curvilinear is composed primarily of wavy or rounded forms.
4. Attention is also directed at the quantity of the type of marks used in the individual panels. Whether linear marks (marks having straight characteristics) or curvilinear marks (a wavy or rounded characteristics) are the main content of the ~anels is likewise noted.
5. The colors of the elements are correlated to the 25 designs.
The other sites on Bonaire are analyzed in the same manner as Site 1 and Site 2, with the data that Hummelinck (1953) presented. Three of the sites (Hummelinck's B2, B3, and B4) were surveyed in this study and some of the data not r.ecorded by Hummelinck at these sites has been added as a result of the survey.
Other pictograph sites in the Caribbean, depending on available information, are compared in the same manner. IV. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THE BONAIRE SITES
Site 1
Site 1 is located 2500 m west of the lighthouse on
Spelonk Point, situated along the face of the Middle Terrace. Pictographs are located in one of the caves created during
the formation of the Lower Terrace. The ground level up to
the approaches of the cave is approximately 7 meters above
mean sea level. The approaches to the cave are strewn with
blocks and talus from the Middle Terrace. East of the cave
is one of the notches created during the Lower Terrace
formation, which extends inland as a gully and could have
been formerly a source of fresh water. The Middle Terrace, at Site Sl is 600 meters from the coast.
Forty meters from datum point "C" inside of the cave
there is a partial opening that does not penetrate to the
surface. The floor of the cave is level and is covered by a
reddish deposit. stalactites and stalagmites are numerous
. throughout the cave but more numerous in the western half.
26 27
( 1. 5)
( 1. .5)
8110
819 40M S11A (4) + 811 (4) +
817 (.~) 12A + 816 (3.5) S12 + 815 + _ __,.. 813 + (4) 814 ( 1)
~---15.5M ______
___.N6 ow __-'>~ Scale: 1 em = 6 1-feters
FIGURE 3.- Plan of Site Sl Bonaire. ( () =Height of panel above floor in meters, +=Panel is horizontal). 28
( • I ... ~ "7---:-,-:-.-, ---+---o. Drips tone \.,., \ 4.5M \ ..~...---o / 10M
"W" "E" ~======~i"Bi~======i~ 18M __N60W~ Scale: 1cm = 1.5M
FIGURE 4.- Plan of Site S2, Bonaire. 29
Some have joined making pillars. The average diameter of the vertical dripstone, at the narrowest portion, is 15 em.
The walls of the cave are a pinkish tone, covered by a white patina. Water drops are noticeable on the end of some stalactites.
Pictographs at Site Sl consist of 18 separate groups of elements. These groups or panels start 2 m inside the cave. The shelter area of the cave contains five of the panels
(Sll, SllA, S12, S12A and S13). These five panels are in horizontal position and out of reach of a standing person.
Where less light penetrates, inside of the cave, four of the panels (Sl4, S15, S16 and Sl7) are in a vertical position within reach of a standing person. Nine of the panels (S18-S116) are in the cave area where appreciable light does not penetrate, in vertical positions, within reach of a standing person. S114 is a faded panel obliterated by graffiti. (Figure 3)
All of the elements are red, in color, with some black. The black elements, in most of the occurrences, appears to be superimposed over the red elements. S11, S12A, S13, S14 and
Sl10 are panels consisting of black elements.
The overhangs and small caves east and west of Site 1 have isolated occurrences of pictographs extending 100 meters on each side of the cave mouth at Site Sl. There is a 30 possibility that a more extensive search will locate others.
Analysis of Site Sl
When the total of all the red elements at Site Sl are compared with the total of the representa~ional and non-representational motifs, the results show that they are almost equal in frequency. However, if only the predominant motifs of each panel are compared to the total number of panels then those panels that are non-representational are much greater in frequency (Table 5).
In comparing the black elements, which comprise a small percentage of the total elements at the site, the representational and non-representational are equal in frequency. By panel, the majority are non-representational.
Representational forms are predominantly ovals, animal, hand prints, human and dots. Non-representational forms are mostly curvilinear and linear marks more common than curvilinear marks.
Panel Sll6 is a radical departure from the other panels at Site Sl. It is unique in depicting unmistakeable life-forms of human and animal representations along with hand prints. Panels S14, S114 and Sll5 are representational but unlike S116 are mainly ovals with little life form 31
:representation. Of eighteen panels, those that a:re mainly non-representational a:re found in the shelte:r a:rea of the cave. Five of the non-representational shelte:r fo:rms are horizontal out of the :reach of a standing pe:rson. P:rima:rily :representational panels a:re found only whe:re light does not penetrate, on vertical walls, in the cave a:rea. Combined :representational and non-representational a:re principally located in a:reas between the cave and the overhang along vertical walls. The ma:rks that make up the different elements at Site S2 a:re equally divided between linea:r and cu:rvilinea:r. Consequently, no distinction can be made between elements o:r panels by the ma:rks.
Site S2
Th:ree hund:red mete:rs east of Site Sl, is a smalle:r cave, identified in this study as S2. Site S2 has simila:r physiographic features as Sl. The Lowe:r Te:r:race, at this point, is also seven mete:rs above sea level, but the floo:r of S2 is one and a half mete:rs above the Lowe:r Te:r:race (Figu:re
4) •
At the :rea:r of the cave, in the cente:r of a domed a:rea 32 is a 50 em wide and 60 em high dripstone that has been broken of.f from it's origin. Around the dripstone are six circular depressions forming a 1.08 m diameter circle.
Inside the cave, ten meters from datum point "E" there is a 1.0 m diameter dripstone. Four and a half meters from the dripstone, along the "E" wall, is the first pictogra~h panel. This panel is on both the vertical and horizontal faces of. the domed area of the cave where light does not penetrate. The second panel is 3M to the right of the first on the vertical face of the domed area.
Panel S21 appears to represent objects that are basically similar to each other but is not easily classified objectively. Consequently this panel is classified as non-representational. Panel S22 depicts 1-3 human or animal type faces.
Analysis of Site S2
Of the total elements at Site S2, the majority are non-representational and white in color. The non-representational are primarilly curvilinear in form and the representational are predominantly human or animal faces with black as their color.
When comparing the total panels, the representational and non-representational are equal in frequency. 33
A few black pictographs have been found on the island, but Panel S21 is the only occurrence of white. Panel S22 is the only occurrence of faces on the island.
Other Bonaire Sites
Ten kilometers northwest of Site Sl are four sites pictograph described by Hummelinck (1953:12,36) identified as
Bl, B2, B3, and B4. Inland, 350 meters to the southeast is
Site B5 and ,on the southern part of the island, south of the
International airport is Site B7. Sites B5 and B7 were
,also, described by Hummelinck. With the exception of B3 and
B4, all of the other sites described by Hummelinck are sufficiently separated to be considered sites rather than multiple panels. Bl, B2, B3, B4, B5 and B7 have only one panel at each site.
Near Sites Bl, B2, B3, and B4, is an inlet that could have been used, as it is now, for landings. The inlet was formed by the ocean drowning a stream bed that extends inland from the inlet to the southwastward, through the Middle
Terrace, and could have been a source of fresh water.
Pictographs at sites Bl, B2, B3, B4, B5, and B7 were all painted in a red color. Site B2 has had some superimposition with black or a faded blue. Sites B2, B3, and r4 are positioned horizontally on what are now rock faces. 34
Analysis of Sites Bl, B2, B3, B4, BS and B7
Overall a higher frequency of non-representational elements (Table 9) are represented at these sites. Site Bl has only non-representational element forms. Sites B3 and B4 have the next highest incidence of non-representational forms. Sites B2 and B7 have the lowest incidence, but non-represeritatlonal elements are still the major element form. Non-representational forms used at these sites are equally divided between the curvilinear and angular. Bl, B2 and B7 have mainly angular forms along with the frequent use of the linear mark.
At sites Bl, B2~ B3, B4, BS and B7, the principal subject of the representational elements is the sun with rays. The circle is lowest in frequency.
Non-representational element forms are equally divided between the curvilinear and angular.
In reference to the total panels, the predominant frequency of each of the panels at sites Bl, B2, B3, B4, BS and B7 is the non-representational. Curvilinear and angular panels are equal in frequency. 35
summary of the Bonaire Sites
A comparison of total design elements on Bonaire with
both representational and non-representational indicates that
the non-representational is the predominant element form.
Similarly, a comparison of panels indicate that the
non-representational is also the predominant panel theme
(Table 11).
The principal element form of the non-representational
on Bonaire is the curvilinear motif. Naturalistic forms
(human, animal and handprints) are the primary element form
of the representational, the oval motif is the next highest
element form and the circle is the least frequent element
form.
Trends that are noted of the panels in Bonairean rock art are the representational (S14, S114, S115, S116, and
S22): Sl16 and S22 are naturalistic. S14, Sll4, and S115 are
recurring motifs. The other panels on Bonaire are
predominantly non-representational. There is one exception
(Panel S114) which consists of both representational and non-representational element forms
Non-representational motifs consists of the angular
forms (Sll, Sl2, S18, S19, Slll~ 5113, Bl, B2 and B7) and the 36 curvilinear forms, to which the remainding panels belong.
The relationships of the panels on Bonaire are illustrated on Figure 5.
The sun with ray motif links panels B2, B4 and B7, although B7 is several kilometers away from the others. The use of ovals on Panels 514, 517, 5114 and 5115 indicates a relationship between them. Panel 517 is non-representational and the panels 514, S115 are representational.
The most common panel type for all of the Bonairean rock art is the non-representational of curvilinear element form.
The most common element type is the non-representational of curvilinear form.
Representational rock art on Bonaire is typified by the use of ovals, handprints and human/animal forms. In respect to the universal motifs, the sun with rays is the most frequent and the circle occurs least. 37
TABLE 2.- Characteristics of Site Sl. Panels S11-S17.
Panel 11 llA 12 12A 13 14 15 16 17
Environmt s s s s s s sc sc sc Position h h h h h v v v v Distance M .25 .6 .35 3 3.5 3 1.6 3 Orinttn N60W N60W N60W N60W N60W S40W S40W S40W S40W
Repres 1 0 0 0 2 5 1 1 1 Nonrepres 3 2 3 2 3 1 6 2 1 TtlElmt 4 2 3 2 5 6 7 3 2 AvdisEl 4cm 5 10 6 2 6 22 15 8
Representational element form Human 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Animal 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Dots 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 ovals 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1
Non-representational element form Curvlnr 0 2 1 2 3 1 5 2 1 Angular 3 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0
Mark characteristics
TotalMark 26 6 46 3 15 21 38 :i!l 9 Linear 22 0 40 1 0 8 23 14 7 Curvlnr 4 6 6 2 15 13 15 7 2
Explanation of abbreviations: Orlnttn = orientation of the panel; TtlElmt = total elements present on the panel; ~vdisEl = average distance between elements in the panel; Repres = number of representational elements; Nonrepres = number of non-representational elements in the panel; Curvlnr = number of curvilinear elements; v = vertical; h = horizontal; s = shelter; c = cave; Hndprnts = hand prints; rf = rock face; TbSi = total characteristics of the Site by element; TbPa = Total characteristics of the Site by the major class of the panels; Ttl Marks = Total of the marks. 38
TABLE 3.- Characteristics of Site S1. Panels S18-S116.
Panel 18 19 110 111 112 113 114 115 116
Environmt c c c ·c c c c c c Position v v v v v v v v v Distance M 2 6 2 1 3 1 3 2 .30 Orinttn S40W S80W S80W S80W S80W sa ow N20W N20W N30W Repres 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 11 Nonrepres 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 TtlElmt 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 12 AvdisEl Ocm 15 8 0 0 0 20 10 7 Representational element form Humat, 0 .5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 Animal 0 .5 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.5 HndPrnts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 ovals 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 "v Non-representational element form Curvlnr .5 0 ~ . 5 1 .5 1 0 1 Angular • 5 1 0 . 5 0 • 5 0 0 0 Mark characteristics
TotalMark 15 16 2 20 3 4 12 10 3 Linear 14 7 0 18 0 3 8 0 0 Curvlnr 1 9 2 2 3 1 4 10 3 39
TABLE 4.- Percentage frequency of elements and marks, by panel. Site Sl, Panels S1i-Sl7.
Panel 11 11A 12 12A 13 14 15 16 17 Repres 25 0 0 0 40 83 14 33 50 Nonrepres 75 100 100 100 60 17 86 67 50 Representational element form Human 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 Animal 100 0 0 0 50 20 0 0 0 Dots 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 0 ovals 0 0 0 0 0 80 0 0 100 Non-representational element form Curvlnr 0 100 33 100 100 100 83 100 100 Angular 100 0 67 0 0 0 17 0 0 Mark characteristics Linear 84 0 85 33 0 38 61 67 78 Curvlnr 16 100 15 67 100 62 39 33 22 40
TABLE 5.- Percentage frequency of elements and marks, by panel. Site 1, Panels S18-Sl16.
Panel 18 19 110 111 112 113 114 115 116
Repres 0 50 0 0 0 0 50 100 91 Nonrepres 100 50 100 100 100 100 50 0 9 Representational element forms Human 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 Animal 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 HndPrnts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 ovals 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 0 Non-representational element form Curvlnr 50 0 100 50 100 50 100 0 100 Angular 50 100 0 50 0 50 0 0 0 Mark characteristics
Linear 95 44 0 90 0 75 67 0 0 Curvlnr 5 56 100 10 100 25 33 0 100 41
TABLE 6.- Percentage frequency of forms and marks at Site S1, by Site and by Panel
Category Total by Site Total by Panel Repres 46 5 Nonrepres 54 95 Representational element forms
Human 8 1 Animal 10 1 HndPrts 10 2 oots 4 0 ovals 14 1 Non-representational element forms curvlnr 38 68 Angular 16 27 Marks Linear 60 30 Curvlnr 40 70 42
TABLE 7.- Characteristics Of Panels s21, S22, B1, B2, B3, B5 and B7.
Panel S21 S22 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B7
Environmt c c ? rf rf rf ? ? Position h,v v ? h h h ? ? Orinttn S40W S40W ? N70W N70W N60W ? ?
Repres 0 3 0 6 5 2 1 5 Nonrepres 12 0 3 10 19 14 3 8 TtlElmt 12 3 3 16 24 16 4 13 AvdisEl 15cm 25 ? 8 15 12 ? ? Representational element forms Human 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Animal 0 1.5 0 0 2 1 0 0 Circle 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Sun w/ Rays 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 1 Framed Cross 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Cross 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 Nandu 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Non-representational element forms Curvlnr 12 0 0 3.5 12 8 2 2 Angular 0 0 3 6.5 7 6 1 6 Mark characteristics Total Marks 54 0 24 62 85 26 7 45 Linear 30 0 24 40 32 10 2 34 Curvlnr 24 0 0 22 53 16 5 11 43
TABLE 8.- Percentage frequency of forms and marks. Panels 821, 822, B2, B3, B4, 85 and B7. ---
Panel S2l 822 Bl 82 B3 84 85 87 TbSi TbPa
Repres 0 100 0 30 21 13 25 38 25 10 Nonrepres 100 0 100 62 79 87 75 62 75 90 Representational element form Human 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 Animal 0 50 0 0 40 50 0 0 6 5 Cir~le 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 1 0 Sun/Rays 0 0 0 66 0 50 0 20 6 0 Frmedcross 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 4 0 Cross 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 60 4 0 Nandu 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 20 2 0 Non-representational element forms Curvlnr 100 0 0 35 63 57 67 25 70 50 Angular 0 0 100 65 37 43 33 75 30 50
Hark characteristics Linear 60 0 100 64 38 38 28 75 57 50 Curvlnr 40 0 0 36 62 62 72 25 43 50 44
TABLE 9.- Percentage frequency of the forma and marks on Bonaire.
Site Sl S2 Bl B2 B3 B4 B5 B7 TbS1 TbPa Reprea 43 20 0 38 21 13 25 3d 32 17 Nonrepres 57 eo 100 62 79 87 75 62 68 83 Representational element forms Human 15 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 11 Animal 27 50 0 0 40 50 0 0 24 11 HndPrnts 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 23 Ovals 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 55 Dots 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 Circle 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 2 0 Sun/Rays 0 0 0 66 0 50 0 20 12 0 FrmdCross 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 6 0 Cross 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 60 8 0 Nandu 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 20 4 0 Non-representational element forms Curvlnr 73 100 0 35 63 57 67 25 62 63 Angular 27 0 100 65 37 43 33 75 38 37 Mark characteristics Linear 61 55 100 64 38 38 28 75 59 56 Curvlnr 39 45 0 36 62 62 72 25 41 44 V. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF OTHER REGIONAL SITES
It is noted that outside of the Netherland Antilles pictographs are only reported from Cuba and to a lesser degree from the Dominican Republic. Pictographs are not reported from the Lesser Antilles. The prevailing "rock art" in the Lesser Antilles, Venezuela, and the Greater Antilles are petroglyphs. The main occurrence of petroglyphs in Cuba is on the eastern coast. Besides cultural explanations the presence or absence of petroglyphs might be due to differences in rock types. However, Dubelaar (1986) noted most of these areas contain rocks that are suitable for petroglyphs.
The petroglyphs included in the pictograph analysis are considered in the final summary.
Curacao and Aruba
For the purposes of this study data on Curacao and Aruba is sketchy. On these islands there are pictographs
45 46 composed of numerous elements at various sites. From the reported data it is impossible to determine whether an element is an isolate or belongs with other elements in a panel.
For Curacao and Aruba the pictographic environment,
position and orientation of the elements are unknown. The type of manufacture, for the sample in this study, is
pictographs, except for Site C4, which is a petroglyph. The color used in the pictographs was red.
Curacao's rock art is mainly non-representational, without recurring motifs, and curvilinear in form. Panels C7 and C9, however, combine non-representational and representational motifs. Panel C4, the petroglyph, has a
face as its main subject unlike the other panels on Curacao.
Pictographs on Aruba are also mainly
non-representational. One of the panels (AS) has both
recurring and non-representational elements. Another (A4) is
composed of only non-representational elements.
Venezuela
From the adjacent areas of Venezuela, the data (Dubelaar
1986, Valoky 1975) indicates that representational motifs are
most popular. Design elements from the Tovar site are 47
naturalistic with human and animal forms. The designs from
the Pinto and Indio sites consist mainly of the circle.
Motifs at the Culimacari site are non-representational and
mixed with recurring elements.
The Lesser Antilles
The characteristic element form found in the Lesser
Antilles is simple or complex faces. Anthromorphic,
zoomorphic and some non-representational forms are also
present. (Dubelaar 1986).
The Greater Antilles
Outside of the Netherland Antilles islands, of Aruba,
Bonaire and Curcao, the highest frequencies of pictographs
occur on the mainland of Cuba and the Isle of Pines.
The mainland of Cuba has in excess of 25 pictograph
sites and only 5 petroglyph sites. The petroglyph sites are on the eastern coast of Cuba. Pictographs are also found in
the Dominican Republic but the major rock art appears to be
petroglyphs.
The Berna site in the Dominican Republic has pictographs
that are non-representational with the circle motif. 48
Petroglyphs in the Dominican Republic are primarily representational with the principal subject the face. Circles are also found in petroglyphs in the Dominican Republic.
Non-representational motifs are common in western Cuba, with the angular forms most prevalent. However, at Ambrosia and Point East, two sites in western Cuba the most frequent designs are representational. Circles are the most common motif at these two sites. Eastern Cuba's rock art is primarily representational with human faces as one cf the most popula~ de~igns. Besides the face motif the other naturalistic motif in eastern Cuba is the zoomorphic. The most common recurring motif in eastern
Cuba is the sun with rays. 49
TABLE 10.- Characteristics of the rock art Panels on curacao.
Panels C1 C2 C3 C4 C6 C7 C8 C9 TbSi TbPa
Repres 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 4 7 2 Nonrepres 5 9 1 1 1 9 1 3 30 6 TtlElmt 5 9 1 3 1 10 1 7 37 8 Repreaentational element forms Human 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 Animal 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 S/C faces 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 1 Non-representational element forms Curvlnr 2 9 1 1 0 6 1 2 22 4 Angular 3 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 8 2 Mark characteristics Total Marks 38 24 7 24 20 19 10 9 151 8 Linear 16 6 4 7 15 6 0 3 57 1 Curvlnr 22 18 3 17 5 13 10 6 94 7 so
TABLE 11.- Percentage frequency of the forms and marks on curacao.
Panels C1 C2 C3 C4 C6 C7 ce C9 TbSi TbPa Repres 0 0 0 66 0 10 0 '57 19 2S Nonrepres 100 100 100 34 100 90 100 43 81 75 Representational element forms Human 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 28 0 Animal 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 50 43 0 SIC faces 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 28 so Non-representational element forms Curvlnr 40 100 100 100 0 67 100 67 73 67 Angular 60 0 0 0 100 33 0 33 27 33 Mark characteristics Linear 42 25 57 29 75 31 0 67 38 13 Curv1nr 58 75 43 71 25 69 100 33 62 87 51
TABLE 12.- Characteristics of the rock art on Aruba.
Panels A4 AS TbSi TbPa
TtlElmt 4 25 29 2 Repres 0 7 7 0 Nonrepres 4 18 22 2 Representational element forms Human 0 3 3 0 Animal 0 3 3 0 Nandu 0 1 1 0 Non-representational element forms curvlnr 4 15 19 2 Angular 0 3 3 0 Mark characteristics Total Marks 12 66 78 2 Linear 4 13 17 0 Curvlnr 8 53 51 2 52
TABLE 13.- Percentage frequency of the forms and marks on Aruba
Panels A4 AS TbSi TbPa Repres 0 28 24 0 Nonrepres 100 72 76 100 Representational element forms Human 0 43 43 0 Animal 0 43 43 0 Nandu 0 14 14 0 Non-representational element forms curv1nr 100 83 86 100 Angular 0 17 14 0 Mark characteristics Linear 33 20 22 0 Curvlnr 67 80 78 100 53
TABLE 14.- Characteristics of some Sites from Venezuela.
Panel Tovar Culimacari Pinto Indio TbSi TbPa TtlElmt 17 6 22 25 73 4 Repres 15 1 15 17 48 3 Nonrepres 2 5 7 8 25 1 Representational element form Human 0 0 0 2 2 0 Animal 1 0 4 3 8 0 Circle 1 1 6 1\u 8 1 Sun with Rays 0 0 1 0 1 0 Faces 12 0 3 6 21 1.5 Cu.rlShders 0 0 1 0 1 0 Spiral 1 0 0 6 7 .5 Non-representational element form Curvlnr 0 5 5 3 13 1 Angular 2 0 2 5 9 0 Mark characteristics Total Marks 6 25 14 28 73 1 Linear 6 9 4 20 39 0 curvlnr 0 16 10 8 34 1
Abbreviations: curlShders = Curled shoulder element form 54
TABLE 15.- Percentage frequency of the forms and marks from some Sites in Venezuela.
Panel Tovar Culimacari Pinto Indio TbSi TbPa Repres 88 16 68 68 67 75 Nonrepres 12 84 32 32 33 25 Representational element form Human 0 0 0 12 4 0 Animal 6 0 26 18 16 0 Circle 6 100 41 0 16 33 Sun with Rays 0 0 6 0 2 0 Faces 82 0 21 35 41 50 CurlShders 0 0 6 0 2 0 Spiral 6 0 0 35 16 17 Non-representational element form Curvlnr 0 100 71 37 52 100 Angular 100 0 29 63 48 0 Mark characteristics Linear 100 76 28 72 53 0 Curvlnr 0 24 62 18 47 100 55
TABLE 16.- Characteristics of some Sites from the Lesser Antilles.
Panel S.Kitts Guadela Harting S.Vinc LAnt TbSi TbPa TtlElmt 12 41 11 5 589 658 4 Repres 12 38 10 4 500 564 4 Nonrepres 0 3 1 1 89 94 0 Representational element form Human 3 0 0 0 85 88 0 Animal 0 0 0 0 9 9 0 Faces 9 38 10 4 406 467 4 Non-representational element form curvlnr 0 2 1 1 45 49 0 Angular 0 1 0 0 44 45 0 Mark characteristics Total Marks 0 23 1 1 ? 25 0 Linear 0 21 0 0 ? 21 0 Curvlnr 0 2 1 1 ? 4 0 56
TABLE 17.- Percentage frequency of the forms and marks from some Sites in the Lesser Antilles.
Panel S.Kitts Guadela Marting S.Vinc LAnt TbSi TbPa Repres 100 92 91 80 85 86 100 Nonrepres 0 8 9 20 15 14 0 Representational element forms Human 25 0 0 0 17 15 0 Animal 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 Faces 75 100 100 100 81 84 100 Non-representational element forms curvlnr 0 67 100 100 50 52 0 Angular 0 33 0 0 50 48 0 Mark characteristics Linear 0 91 0 0 ? 84 0 Curvlnr 0 9 100 100 ? 16 0 57
TABLE 18.- Characteristics of some Sites from the Greater Antilles.
Sites Berna DR DR Ambr PEst WCub ECub Cub TbSi TtlElmt 12 159 60 11 105 53 158 400 Repres 5 141 18 8 26 3 29 201 Nonrepres 7 18 42 3 79 50 129 199 Representational element form Human 0 2 4 0 4 0 4 10 Animal 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 3 Faces 0 127 0 0 0 1 1 128 Circle 5 5 14 8 22 0 22 54 Framed Cross 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 Spiral 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Sun with Rays 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 Non-representational Curvlnr 4 9 20 3 32 20 52 88 Angular 3 9 22 0 47 30 57 111 Mark characteristic Total Marks 9 34 378 262 1281 619 1900 2593 Linear 4 20 251 11 563 548 1111 i397 Curvlnr 5 14 127 251 718 71 789 1186
Abbreviations: BernaDR = Berna site, Dominican Republic; DR = Dominican Republic; Ambr = Ambrosia site, Cuba; PEst = Point Este site, Cuba; Cub = Cuba. 58
TABLE 19.- Percentage frequency of the forms and marks from some Sites in the Greater Antilles.
Sites Berna DR Dr Ambr PEst ~Cub ECub Cub TbSi Repres 41 ss 30 73 25 56 18 50 Nonrepres 59 12 70 17 75 44 82 50 Representational element form Human 0 1 22 0 15 0 14 5 Animal 0 1 0 0 0 33 3 1 Faces 0 91 0 0 0 34 3 64 Circle 100 3 78 100 85 0 77 28 Frmd cross 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 Spiral 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sun/Rays 0 0 0 0 0 33 3 0 Non-representational element form Curvlnr 57 50 47 100 40 40 43 44 Angular 43 50 53 0 60 60 57 56 Mark characteristics Linear 44 59 66 4 44 88 58 54 Curvlnr 56 41 34 96 56 12 42 46 VI. CONCLUSION
From the previous analysis, certain conclusions can be made regarding pictographs at Sites Sl and S2, at Spelonk, on
Bonaire. Patterns were observed among these panels, and others on Bonaire. Other islands in the Caribbean show similar patterns. In other instances the absence of any patterns, or differences between them have significance.
At Site Sl, when panels are compared by content, the major designs are non-representational without recurring motifs. This comprises seventeen of Site Sl's eighteen panels. One panel is predominantly representational.
Eight of these panels are in locations where natural light is available. These panels consist of non-repre sentational without recurring motifs. Five of these panels would have re~uired scaffolding to reach them. Panels located in poorly illuminated areas appear predominantly non-representational with recurring or representational motifs.
59 60
FIGURE 5.- Classification of the Rock Art of the Caribbean.
Human/Animal Faces Bonaire (S22), CURACAO (C4) LESSER ANTILLES DOMINICAN REPUBLIC VENEZUELA Human/Animal Forms Predominantly Bonaire (S116) Representational With Non-representational Curacao (C9), E. Cuba VENEZUELA (Indio) With Recurring Motifs Circle Rock Art VENEZUELA, Cuba DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
With Representational Bonaire (Sl4, Sll4) With Recurring Motifs Ovals Bonaire (Sl7, Sll5) Sun with Rays Bonaire (B2, B7) Cross Bonaire (B3, B4, B5) Aruba (A5) Predominantly Curvilinear Non-representational Bonaire (SllA, Sl2A, S13, S15, Sl6, SllO, Sll2, S21) Aruba ( A4) Curacao (C2, C3, C8) curvilincar+Angular Bonaire (Sl8, Slll, Sll3) Angular Bonaire (Sll, S12, S19, Bl) Curacao (Cl, C6)
Words capitalized are predominantly petroglyph locations. 61
In summary, the pictographs at Site S1 are predominantly non-representational without recurring motifs, while representational designs have a low frequency of occurrence.
Panels S14 and S114 are non-representational with representational motifs. Panel S116 is the only predominantly representational panel. At this site all pictographs are painted red except where black has been superimposed over the red on three panels (Sll, S13 and
S114).
The two panels, at Site S2, although only a few meters apart, are totally dissimilar. Panel S21 depicts non-representational motifs while S22 is representational.
Due to the use of white pigmentation and its questionable form S21 is not typical of other panels on Bonaire. Panel
S22 with the face as its subject is also atypical for
Bonaire. These panels (S21 and S22) represent two departures from other panels on Bonaire.
The other panels located at different sites on Bonaire
(81, B2, B3, 84, B5 and 87) have non-representational design motifs, five are cha~acter~zed by recurring motifs. Although not a major subject area of the panels, tfiey are interesting because the forms are not found at Sites S1 or S2 (the 62
Circle, Sun with Rays, the Framed Cross, the Cross, and Nandu bird footprints). The latter are quite common in Venezuela and the Greater Antilles and to a lesser extent in Aruba.
The lack of the cross, the sun with rays, and the nandu print at Sites Sl and S2 could be due to the fact that pictographs at these sites were painted by a different group(s) than the pictographs at the other Bonaire sites. Or, it is possible that sites Sl and S2 served as locations of different social functions from the other sites. Aruba, shares the same motifs as Bonaire. Aruba also has non-representational pictographs as its primary theme.
However, Aruba and Bonaire have only pictographs while
Curacao's Panel C4 is the only reported petroglyph in the ABC
islands of the Netherland Antilles. Curacao's major class of pictographs, as is the case on Aruba and Bonaire is the
non-representational.
In Venezuela, representational motifs are the dominant
component of petroglyphs. One panel at the Culimacari site is non-representational but most designs consist of the human face (Valoky 1975). This motif is also the predominant
subject of the petroglyphs from Martinique, st. Lucia,
Guadelupe, st. Vincent, st. Kitts and G~anada in the Lesser "-._,;,, __ n&l"""'.&..l.~C~•
The Dominican Republic and eastern Cuba in the Greater 63
Antilles have both pictographs and petroglyphs. Pictographs are less extensive in the Dominican Republic than in Cuba.
The site at Berna in the Dominican Republic has predominantly non-representational pictographs with recurring motifs
(Valdez 1978). These pictogra~hs have the circle as its major motif component, this is also the predominant recurring motif at the Pinto site, in Venezuela and at Point Este, on the Isle of Pines, Cuba.
Petroglyphs in the Dominican Republic have the face as the main subject, similar to the Lesser Antilles and to the petroglyphs of eastern Cuba. Additionally, the petroglyphs of eastern Cuba have the sun with rays as one of its subjects; this is also seen in the petroglyphs from Venezuela and the recurring pictographs of Bonaire.
Non-representational with recurring motifs, are the predominant pictog~aph form in western cuba. The major recurring motif is the circle, similar to Pinto in Venezuela, to Berna in the Dominican Republic and to Point Este on the
Isle of Pines.
The classification utilized in this study (Figure 5) indicates that Bonaire has two panels (S22 and Sll6) with similar design characteristics as those in the Lesser
Antilles, Venezuela, Dominican Republic and eastern Cuba.
Both of the Bonaire panels, however, are pictographs. Those 64 from Venezuela, the Lesser Antilles, the Dominican Republic and to a lesser extent those from eastern Cuba are petroglyphs. Curacao shares characteristics of two panels,
(one a pictograph (C9) the other a petroglyph (C4)), with the rest of the Caribbean. The only area that is similar to
Bonaire, Aruba and Curacao is western Cuba where the rock art is predominantly pictographs and is non-representational with recurring motifs.
With the exception of Heekeren's (Heekeren 1963:12) recovery of a Meso-Indian shell gouge at the mouth of one of the caves at Spelonk in Bonaire, archaeological excavations have not revealed the origins and chronology of the pictographs and petroglyphs in Bonaire at this time.
However, Cruxent and Rouse (1969) and Maggiola (1973) reported that no Neo-Indian cultures were documented in western Cuba at the time of Spanish contact. It could be infered that since no petroglyphs have been found in western
Cuba, then pictographs are the manufactu~e of some earlier age than the Nee-Indian.
In the Caribbean basin these possibilities can be considered regarding rock art designs, their distribution and chronology:
1. In Venezuela evidence has been found of Paleo-, Meso and Nee-Indians therefore the petroglyphs could be the 65 remains of any of these ages. Pictographs have not been reported but there is the possibility that they have not been found or have been destroyed.
2. In the Greater Antilles both pictographs and petroglyphs occur along with the remains of both the Meso and Nee-Indian, therefore either the Meso-Indian produced both forms of rock art or either type aloP-e. The same argument can be made for the possibility of Nee-Indian production of both or either alone.
3. Meso-Indian and Nee-Indian remains have been reported on the ABC islands of the Netherland Antilles. ?ictographs and some petroglyphs occur on Curacao therefore the
Meso-Indians or Nee-Indians could have produced both or either alone. However, on Bonaire and possibly Aruba only pictographs have been reported along with both Meso- and
Neo-Indian occup~tion. Therefore, the suggestion is that on
Bonaire and possibly Aruba neither group practiced petroglyph rock art.
4. Cruxent and Rouse (1969) reported that no
Meso-Indian remains have been found in the Lesser Antilles and petroglyphs with human and animal faces are the predominant rock art form. This observation would seem to suggest that that petroglyphs, in the Lesser Antilles, are of
Neo-Indian manufacture. Further investigation may find 66
Meso-Indian sites on the Lesser Antilles. Olsen (1973) reported a possible.Meso-Indian site on Antigua and suggested that more exist but have not been found because their sites existed close to the coast and may now be underwater. If petroglyphs or pictographs are found in the future on the
Lesser Antilles below the present sea level, then the correlation between pictographs and the Meeo-Indian could be strengthened or weakened, depending on the occurrence. 67
\ I •
__S30W_ ____ N __ cale: lcm = 5 em Scale: lcm = 9 em Sll SllA
Black -r-_ ' ., - ., -- - J - - ,. -,. - .. c
~~\.._ ... ' • -\
S30W _S30W__ cale: lcm-;-Scm --- Scale: lcm = 9cm 812 Sl2A
FIGURE 6.- Illustrations of the Panels at Site Sl. Panels Sll, SllA, Sl2, S12A. 68
• •;
· I ~. ~.. :"':.:-.-:~ /.. -. '• " .. .. lcm 9cm cale: lcm = 6cmSl3 = 814
t • ~ •• ' .. ' , .. ' . .' •' . • • • • • .. , • • ~Dots• • -•• #" / ...... --
lcm = Scale: lcm s16- l4cm
iL trations of the Panels "------~~ln·~tFIGURE 7 - Illus Sl6. at Site Sl. Panels Sl3, si4, S15 and 69
cale: lcm = 6cm Scale: lcm = 4cm S17 S18
::=:-G =
cale: lcm = Scale: lcrn = 6cm SllO
FIGURE 8.- Illustrations of the Panels at Site Sl. Panels Sl7, S18, S19 and SllO. 70 L- ·:::>- .:::< :::J
·h· :::J :=!
cale: 1cm = 9cm cale: 1cm = 3cm 5111 5112
cale: 1cm = 4cm Scale: 1cm = Scm 5113 5114
FIGURE 9.- Illustrations of the Panels at Site Sl. Panels Slll, Sll2, Sll3 and 8114. I, 71
cale: 1cm = 4cm 8115
cale: 1cm = l1cm 8116
FIGURE 10.- Illustrations of the Panels at Site Sl. ~anels 8115 and 8116. 72
0 cale: lcm = 20cm S21
~~~.. ~~·~:",.; ;.0..-.:: ..... i ;·.. .;. ·. :..1'• •. •,• '"":: .....\. r'r .I,.--,, •.·· Q.~j,//), .~ .,, ,;: ... .. ·.. . : , ., ~ ', , "·,J.t :-\•,, .•. '1'.''.· ~;, '•i\~;...-/.:l ...: ·~/ cale: lcm = 6crn ·s22
FIGURE 11.- Illustrations of the Panels at Site S2. Panels 821 and S22. 73
• • • , ,
cale: lcm = Scm cale: Bl
.!j z. ::r JD JlZ J. r 'XJ. · t.J ~ r 1 '"y {; t/f
cale: lcm = Scm cale: lcm = Scm B3 B4
FIGURE 12.- Illustrations of Panels on Bonaire. Panels Bl, 82, B3 and B4.
r--- 74 t!J ·.~1ft ·1-- .,,-j-. t 1f 'f/?r T r ,, :1711 I I I if.- t t;D":;.1 ' I cale: lcm = 6cm cale: lcm = Scm B5 B7
{/_,.,. ~ r/~ ~ llt/11 . A4 1d AS mr:t!a~ zc v ':J Cl C2
C3 C4
II
FIGURE 13.- Illustrations of Panels on Bonaire: B5 and B7. Illustrations of Panels on Curacao: Cl, C2, C3 and C4. 75
Venezuela Lesser Antilles
Dominican Republic
FIGuRE 14.- Illustrations of Elements from Venezuela, the Lesser and Greater Antilles. 76
Sll SllA
~·:.: :·~~~-~~-~
... • • .: I • I ~ • .::,.~·i_: -~~~~ .. ,~ • I .· '
Sl2 S12A
FIGURE 15.- Photographs of Panels at Site Sl, Bonaire. Panels Sll, SllA, S12 and Sl2A. 77
Sl4
Sl9 Slll
FIGURE 16.- Photographs of Panels at Site Sl, Bonaire. Panels Sl3, Sl4, S19 and Slll. 78
8112 8113
8115 8116
FIGURE 17.- Photographs of Panels at Site Sl, Bonaire. Panels Sll2, S113, S115 and Sll6. 79
S22 S22
Interior of Site Sl Entrance to Site S2
FIGURE 18.- Photographs of Panel S22 at Site S2, the interior of Site Sl, and the entrance to Site S2. Bonaire. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abate, John de 1971 A Key to the Interpretation of the Petroglyphs of the Orinoco, CIE. (International Congress for the study of Pre-Columbian Culture of the Lesser Antilles) 4:9-12.
Allison, J. 1926 Rate of Stalagmite Growth. American Museum of Natural History, A.P. 19, Part 6. Arthur, G. 1960 Pictographs in Central Montana, Part III, Comments; Anthropology and Sociology Papers, Montana State u., Missoula. Baer, G., E. Ferste and C.N. Dubelaar 1983 Petroglyphs from the Urubamba and Pantiacallo Rivers, Eastern Peru.Verkandlungen der Naturforschender Gesellschaft Basel. Basel, Schweiz.
Beckwith, F. 1935 Ancient Indian Petroglyphs of Utah. El Palacia, 38:6-8, 33-40. Beschel, Roland 1961 Dating Rock Surfaces by Lichen Growth and its Application to Glaciology.International Symposium of Arctic Geology. 2:1044-62. Boman, Eric 1908 Antiquites de la Region Andine de la Republique Argentine et du Desert de Atacama. Paris
80 81
Boyril de Maya, Emile 1955 Monum3nto Megalitico y Petroglifos de Chacuey. Republica Dominicana. Publicaciones de Universidad de Santo Domingo, Series 7, Vol. 97, No.1. Cuidad Trujillo.
Bullen, Ripley 1971 Petroglyphs of the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, ~ 4:13-16. St. Lucia.
Butta, G. A. 1966 Pictografios y Petroglifos en La Provincia de Coquimba: el Panul y el Chacoy. Muso Argueologica de La Serena, Notas del Museo, No. 9. La Serena, Chili.
Cabrena, Ortez W. 1968 Monumento Rupestres de Colombia. Revista Colombiana de Anthropologia, Vol. XIV, anos 1966-1969; pp 81-166. Bogota.
Cain, H. T. 1950 Petroglyphs of Central Washington. u. of Washington. Seattle.
Clark, Ja.D. 1952 Prehistoric Europe - The Economic Basis. Stanford u. Press. Stanford, California. Clerc, Edgar 1971 Petroglyphs on Guadelupe, ~ 4:68-72. St. Lucia. Cox, W.J. 1957 Rock Pictures in Mexico. Natural History, 66: 3, 159-161. Cruxent, J. and I. Rouse 1969 Early Man in the West Indies. Scientific American, Vol. 221: 5, pp. 42-52.
Davidson, D.S. 1952 Notes on the Pictographs and Petroglyphs of Western Australia and a Discussion of Their Affinities with Appearances Elsewhere on the Continent. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 96: 1; 76-117. 82
DeBuison, P.H. 1974 Neogene and Quarternary Geology of Arub~, Curacao, and Bonaire. Deboer-Cuperus, Utrect. Densmore, F. 1917 Petroglyphs on Zodiac Island, Alaska. American Anthropologist, 19: 320.
Devaux, Robert 1975 A Petroglyph Discovery at Stonefield, Saint Lucia, £!§ 6:213. Dewdney, s. and W.E. Kidd 1962 Indian Rock Paintings of the Great Lakes. University of Toronto.
Dubelaar, C.N. 1983 A Comparison Between Petroglyphs of the Antilles and of Northeast South America. CIE 10:33-42.
Dubelaar, C.N. 1986 South American and Caribbean Petroglyphs. Dorbrecht: Foris Publication, Providence, R.I.
Dubelaar, C.N. 1986 An Inventory of The Petroglyphs in the Guianas and Adjacent Areas of Brazil and Venezuela With a Comprehensive Bibliography of South American and Antillean Petroglyphs. Los Angeles Institute of Archaeology.
Dubelaar, C.N. 1987 Personal Correspondence to the Author. A letter dated 23 November, 1987. Fewkes, J.W. 1903a Prehistoric Puerto Rican Petroglyphs. American Anthropologist. Vol. 5:441-467. Fewkes, J.W. 1916 Animal Figures on Prehistoric Pottery from the Mimbres Valley, New Mexico. American Anthropologist, 18:535-545. 83
Fischer, J.L. 1961 Art Styles as Cultural Cognitive Maps. American Anthropologist, 63:79-93. Frassetto, M.F. 1960 A Preliminary Report on Petroglyphs in Puerto Rico. American Antiquity, 25:381-391. Menasha. Gideon, s. 1962 The Eternal Present: the Beginnings of Art. Ballinger Series, Pantheon Books.
Gould, C.N. 1900 Indian Pictographs on the Dakota Sandstone. Science, 11 (277):630-631.
Gourhan, Leroi 1968 Art of Prehistoric Man in Western Europe. London.
Grant, Campbell 1967 Rock Art of the Ameri~an Indian. Thomas Crawell. New York.
Grant, Campbell 1974 Rock Art of Baja California. Dawson Book Shop. Los Angeles.
Haviser, Jay Bryant Jr. 1987 Amerindian Cultural Geography on Curacao. Dissertation. u. of Leiden. Heekeren, H. R. van 1960 A Survey of the Non-Ceramic Artifacts of Aruba, Curacao and Bonaire. Nieuw West-Indische Gios~~' p.103-120, ill. Heekeren, H. R. van 1963 Prehistoric Research on the Islands of Curacao, Aruba and Bonaire in 1960. Nieuw West-Indische Gios 43, p.1-25. 84
Heekeren, H. R. van and DuRy, c. J. 1962 study of the Relics of Indian Culture present in Aruba, Cueacao and Bonaire. Stichting Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek suriname-Nederlandse Antlllen (WOSU&A), Annual Report for 1961, p.31-33. Heizer, Robert and c.w. Clewlow, Jr. 1973 Prehistoric Rock Art of California. Ballena Press. Ramona, California. Hewitt, J.N.B. and William Fenton 1945 Some Mnemonic Pictographs Relating to the Iroquois Condolence Council. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 35:10. Hibben, Frank 1966 Prehispanic Paintings at Pottery Mound. Archaeology, 13:267-274.
Hoffman, W.J. 1888 Pictography and Shamanistic Rites of the Ojibiwa. American Anthropologist, Series 1, I, 209-229. Huckerby, Thomas 1921 Petroglyphs of Grenada and a Recently Discovered Petroglyph in St. Vincent. Indian Notes and Monographs, 1(3), Museum of the American Indian, New York.
Hummelinck, P.W. 1953 Petroglifos y Pictographs en Las Antilles Holandesas de Curacao, Aruba y Bonaire. Curacao, no 2, Segunda Ed. 1957.
Hummelinck, P.W. 1961 Rolstekeningen van Curacao en Bonaire. Deel III, Curacao, Naturwetroncgappelijke Werkgroep, Nederlandse Antilles, 83-126. Janson, H.W. 1962 History of Ar~. Prentice Hall and Harry Abrams. Engelwood Cliffs, New Jersey. Jesse, c. 1971 Petroglyphs and Rock-Cut Basins at Dauphin, st. Lucia, CIE 4:33-34. 85
Kennedy, Wm. Jerald 1971 Comparison of Certain Costa Rican Petroglyph Designs with those from Adjacent Areas. ~ 4:50-55. LaPaz, L. 1948 Meteoritical Pictog~aphs. Contributions of the Meteoritical Society. Popular Astronomy, 56 (6):322-329. Albuquerque.
Langer, Susanne 1957 Philosophy in a New Key. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Mass. Laurie, Keith C. and Lloyd Matheson 1973 Petroglyphs of st. Kitts, w.r., CIE 4:17-20. Levi-Straus, C. 1963 Structural Anthropology. Basic Books, New York. Maggio, Marcia Veloz, Plinio Pina Elpidio Ortega and Bernardo Vega 1973 Antillean Pictographs and Petroglyphs: Patterns and Procedure which can be Applied in the Study of their Location in Time, ~ 4:1-12. Maggio, Marcia Veloz 1977 Arte Indigena y Economia en Santo Domingo. Divulgacion Cultural. Ediciones Cahaba. Mattioini, Mario 1973 Communication Sur Les Petroglyphs De La Martinique, CIE 4:56-60. Nunez Jimenez, Antonio 1975 Cuba:Dibujos Rupestre. Editorial De Ciencios Sociales. La Habana, Cuba. Ocvirk, Otto, Robert Bone, Robert Stinson, Philip Wigg 1968 Art Fundamentals: Theory and Practice. Wm. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 86
Okladnikov, A. P. 1969 The Petroglyphs of Siberia. Scientific American, 221:2, 74-82.
Olsen, Fred 1973 Petroglyphs of the Caribbean Islands and Arawak Dieties, ~ 4:35-46.
Olsen, Fred 1973 Did the Ciboney Precede the Arawaks on Antigua, CIE 4:61-65.
Padilla, s. 1956 Pictografios Indigenes de Venezuela. Grabados Nacionales, Caracas.
Pagan, Perdona 1980 Archaeology in Cave Art of Santo Domingo, CIE 8:18-26.
Rouse, Irving 1949 Petroglyphs, Handbook of South American Indians, Vol. 5, pp. 493-502, Bureau of American Ethnology, Wash., D. c .. Rouse, Irving and J. M. Cruxent 1963 Venezuela Archaeology. Yale u. Press, New Haven.
Rust, H. N. 1906 A Puberty Ceremony of the Mission Indians. American Anthropology, 8:28-32.
Schaafsma, Polly 1975 Rock Art in New Mexico. U. of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. schabinger, Juan 1976 Classificacion Preliminar de Arte Rupestre Sud Americana. Internat. Congress of Americanist, 42:387-388. Smith, H. J. 1927 A List of Petroglyphs in British Columbia American Anthropologist, 29:605-610. 87
Strahler, Arthur 1967 Introduction to Physical Geography. John Wiley and Sons, N. Y •• Ucko, Peter and Andre Rosenfeld 1967 Paleolithic Cave Art. World U. Library, McGraw Hill.
Valdez, Maria Luisa 1978 Nuevos Petrogligos Localizados en La Cordillera Central, Republica Dominicana. Boletin del Museo del Hombre Dominicana, pp. 228-238.
Valoky, Jeannie Sujo 1975 · El Estudia del Arte Rupestre en Venezuela: Su Literature, Su Problematica y Una Nueva Propuesta Methodologia. Univeridad Catolica Andre Bello Instituda de Investigationes.
Walterus, Fr. M. 1952 Nos Tera de Nederlandse Antillen. Curacao, 2nd Ed ..