Utah Rock Art Volume I

Papers Presented at the First Annual Symposium on the Rock Art of Utah May 1981

Second Printing RRevised and Edited by Steven J. Manning

UTAH ROCK ART

VOLUME I

Papers Presented at the First Annual Symposium of the Utah Rock Art Research Association (URARA)

Price, Utah

May 23, 24, 25, 1981

Published in 1982 by the Utah Rock Art Research Association Salt Lake City, Utah

First Printing 1982 Edited by Cindy Everitt and Phil Garn

Second Printing January 1994 Revised and Edited by Steven J. Manning

Copyright 1994 by the Utah Rock Art Research Association, Salt Lake City, Utah. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, by any means, without permission in writing by the publisher. Printed in the United States of America. Jesse E. Warner PREFACE

The Utah Chapter of the American Rock Art information. By holding monthly meetings Research Association (UCARARA) began and field trips, we give the public the with Dr. Ken Castleton's hosting committee greatest positive exposure. These meetings for the Sixth Annual Symposium of the were also organized to provide a place to American Rock Art Research Association allow this growth and activity to find (ARARA) at Bottle Hollow, Utah in 1979. expression. These meetings allow members After that Symposium, the committee saw to gain experience in presenting material on the necessity of continuing to meet to rock art. We intend to let the State and consider the special problems existing in Federal Government agencies know that Utah. One of the concerns was the amount there is now an organization in the State that of time and money spent duplicating what is dedicated, capable and qualified to survey had already been done. With an organiza- rock art. tion that could coordinate efforts, much of this waste could be eliminated. Through the Since we have a common goal, selected efforts of several members, work was begun representatives from State and Federal to pull this organization together. agencies were invited to present information at our first Symposium. Their presentations Much of this effort was by Jim Olive, the were relative to their policies, current Chapter's first president. The committee activities, problems, programs and how we members desired to be organized as an can be of assistance. Of those invited, State ARARA chapter. In Albuquerque, New Archaeologist Dave Madsen presented some Mexico, sanction was sought from Dr. Jack of his views on the value of rock art, and Cawley, president of ARARA. Since prior how rock art and archaeological interpreta- to that time there had been no requests for tion can be coordinated. Dottie Sammons state charters, the by-laws did not cover presented the rock art that is on the National technicalities for chapters. We were given Register, what benefit it has to place other his unofficial blessing until these problems sites there and how to do it. BLM Archae- could be worked out by their By-Laws ologist Blaine Phillips presented a report on Committee. The members of the Hosting rock art preservation. BLM Archaeologist Committee, and thus the Charter Members, Blaine Miller gave a presentation on, "What were: Kenneth and Heloise Castleton, the BLM Has Done, What They Intend to Spencer Squire, Jim and Mignon Olive, Ben Do to Preserve Rock Art, and How Others and Cindy Everitt, Layne and Charlene Can Help." Miller, and Jesse and Judy Warner. The Chapter's membership is now beginning to Since we are the Utah Chapter, we have grow. adopted the policy that our symposia will deal only with the rock art that relates to Programs are being developed to create a Utah. This includes Utah art styles that spill State File. We have begun to coordinate the over into neighboring states, and neighbor- effort of recording Utah's rock art. This ing styles that occur in Utah. Because of coordination has not only minimized dupli- this policy we have been accused of not cation, but has improved the recorded being interested in rock art that occurs

Utah Rock Art,Volume 1, Page i elsewhere. This is not true. During one of our trips we assisted the Shoshone, Idaho • Specific Site Reports: a presentation of BLM Archaeologist in recording several panels that compose a single, simple or rock art sites on Bennett Mountain. We do complex site, or series of sites. feel, however, that if we are to do our job right, we need to take care of our rock and • Nomenclature--Site Records and let Arizona, Nevada, Idaho and Colorado Computer Processing: the technical take care of theirs. aspect of labeling, handling or improv- ing glyph and site descriptions, catalog- To gain a better understanding of the ing processes and computer encoding. diversification of styles that had an indirect bearing or direct influence on Utah art we • Vandalism and Preservation: sites that have at least one excursion out of the state have had increasing vandalism; insights each year. The first of these was to the into reasons for vandalism; methods to Valley of Fire, Nevada. The second was to protect against vandalism; suggestions Water Flow, Three Rivers, and Alamo for public education programs and tech- Mountain, New Mexico: Hueco Tanks and niques in dealing with vandalized sites. Fort Hancock, Texas. Next year we intend to visit Willow Springs, Arizona and sites • Analysis, Interpretation, Significance further south. and Comparisons: an in-depth or comparative study of styles, sites, motifs, This has proven invaluable in both the elements, techniques, etc. lessons learned from the rock art and for the exposure of what is going on in other areas. • Calendrical Considerations: descrip- It has also been invaluable in extending tions of the interrelationships of glyphs, friendly relationships with rock art research- and solar, lunar, stellar or planetary ris- ers in other areas. It has been a unique ing or movements; observations of experience to build relationships with other sunlight and shadows in association with people who care and have a common solstice and equinox markers. concern. However, the main goal of the Utah Chapter is to record the rock art from • Historical Aspects of Rock Art: a study Utah first. of panels that record known historical events; a verification of recorded history The categories in which symposia reports through rock art. are solicited, are not exactly the same as those of the national organization. These Reports submitted for presentation may be include: formal (for publication) or informal (for symposium presentation only). These • Values of Rock Art: studies which presentations are the specific views of the show the reasons rock art is studied, individual authors and not those of the Utah benefits received and types of knowl- Chapter of ARARA. We are not responsible edge derivable from iconography and for any of these views, accuracy of figures non-iconic representations. represented or interpretations made in these papers. • Methods of Recording: descriptions of new or unfamiliar techniques of re- Twelve of the papers presented at this cording, or additional insights into cur- symposium are not included in this publica- rent methods. tion. These include:

Jesse Warner, Preface, Page ii

1. Rock Art and Archaeological Interpretation, by Dave Madsen. 2. Rock Art on the National Register, by

Dottie Sammons. President UCARARA 3. Rock Art Preservation, by Blaine 1982 Phillips. 4. What the BLM Has Done, What They Intend to Do to Preserve Rock Art and How Others Can Help, by Blaine Miller. 5. Overview of Archaic Rock Art, by Sally Cole. 6. The Rock Art of Paiute Canyon, by Ken Castleton. 7. Whence the Barrier Canyon Style: Questions Raised by Hell Roaring Can- yon, by Bruce Louthan. 8. A Report on the Ideas Behind the Crow Canyon School's Interpretive Programs, by Fred Blackburn. 9. Barrier Canyon Shamanism, by Layne Miller. 10. Identifying Solstice and Equinox Petroglyphs in Northeastern Utah, and Their Cultural Affiliations, by V. G. Norman. 11. A Theoretical Approach to Identifying and Interpreting Calendrical Petro- glyphs in Utah, by V. G. Norman. 12. Salt Creek Faces, by John Noxon.

We wish that more of these papers had been included in this publication. Because they were not submitted for publication, they have not been included. This stresses the importance of attending the symposia.

We encourage anyone who is interested in rock art, and feels they may have something they would like to contribute, to seriously consider presenting this information at future symposia. Since this is an organization made up of mostly non-professionals in the field of recording rock art, your contributions may be of equal or greater value than any others presented.

Utah Rock Art,Volume 1, Page iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface Jesse E. Warner...... i

1. Statistical Programs Available for Computer Analysis of Rock Art. John Winkle...... 1

2. Presence and Absence. Jesse E. Warner...... 5

3. Indicators. Jesse E. Warner...... 17

4. An Hypothesis for a Pueblo IV Date for the Barrier Canyon Style. Steven J. Manning ...... 29

5. The Importance of Determining the Significance and Relationships of Rock Art Rather than Interpretation. Jesse E. Warner...... 39

6. Desert Varnish: A Summary of Findings C. B. Hunt (As summarized and presented by Cynthia A. Everitt)...... 49

John Winkle STATISTICAL PROGRAMS AVAILABLE FOR COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF ROCK ART

The feasibility of using computerized statistical analysis to study prehistoric rock The use of computers also introduces art has been investigated. This approach certain disadvantages. The ability to has not been used extensively in previous process vast amounts of information may rock art studies. Therefore, an effort has tempt the user to overuse the computer; for been made to define the significant aspects instance, a full computerized approach of rock art research that lend themselves to should not be necessary when analyzing a statistical investigations. limited number of sites, however, it would be highly desirable when analyzing all state- Rock art research has moved in recent years wide occurrences of a particular figure type. away from a mere cataloging of petroglyphs The capability to easily cross-correlate data and rock paintings toward a scientific might similarly lead to the generation of investigation of stylistic elements. At the vast amounts of useless information. same time, emphasis appears to be shifting Finally, the ease of data retrieval entails away from earlier, more subjective interpre- highly structured data input. This implies tations of rock art towards interpretations of forethought and meticulous attention to a quantitative nature. Thus, a present formatting the data. evaluation of rock art is likely to concen- trate on identifiable stylistic elements whose Before computerized statistical packages are basic size, shape, frequency of occurrence, applied to rock art research, an effort must geographical distribution and context could be made to define the desired features and be statistically quantified. Such an ap- scope of a statistical approach. A prelimi- proach promises to reveal a wealth of nary definition might include the following information about the movements of desired features: prehistoric peoples and ideas without a need for subjective, and perhaps erroneous, • The approach should begin with a interpretations of rock art elements. manageable method of handling input. Computerized approaches necessarily An extensive use of a statistically based involve presorting of the data into ele- evaluation of rock art types is likely to ments and figure types by the re- require the use of computerized statistical searcher. Consequently, figure types packages and large amounts of computer should be clearly defined and held to a memory. reasonable number. • Enough cases to provide a statistically The principal advantage of a computerized relevant analysis should exist for each of statistical approach lies in the ability of the basic figure types that are defined. computers to process vast amounts of Unique rock art cases that fall outside information. Other advantages include the basic element, or figure type catego- increased capability to cross-correlate data ries, should be noted by the researcher, from several sites, and ease of data retrieval. so they are not lost in a statistical fog.

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 1 • The output from a statistical analysis of would go along for the ride while the actual rock art elements and figure types analysis considered a more basic figure type should be easy to comprehend and in- or element; for instance: "abstract", "ab- terpret. Perhaps the clearest output for- stract circle", "anthropomorph", etc. mat would be a series of frequency plots, such as those generated by While the number of cases and variables Schaafsma in The Rock Art of Utah, and does not appear to be a limitation in larger appropriate correlation data. statistical programs, the possibility of statistical inaccuracy due to over specifica- Similarly, the scope of the desired work tion of cases remains a valid concern. The must be defined before applying a comput- number of variables used to describe a erized statistical approach. Important in this particular petroglyph will also have a regard are such variables as: the number of significant bearing on analysis costs. rock art elements, figure types, the number of attributes associated with each basic A set of criteria used for selecting a statisti- figure type, size, location, and perhaps cal program involves the following: association with known habitation and/or hunting sites. These, and any other desired • Availability: The program must be variables, will effect the scope of the locally available and affordable. statistical analysis. In turn, the scope of the • Accessibility: The program must be analysis will effect the required input accessible from an input/output stand- format. Ideally a standardized system with point and should be accessible on a a broad enough scope of entered data would large number of different machines. be agreed upon by a majority of rock art • Capability: The program must have researchers so that it would be useful to sufficient subroutines and options to future research and so that results can be address the desired problem. easily compared. Given this set of selection criteria, both Warner and others are proposing a standard- small- and large-scale statistical programs ized classification system so any figure type have been evaluated. can be easily described by a computer code consisting of approximately ten characters. Nearly all programmable, hand-held calcu- To illustrate how the number of input lators (such as the T159, HP67 or HP41CV) variables could effect the scope of a statisti- contain fundamental statistical packages. cal analysis, consider some small statistics These packages include mean, standard programs that appear to be limited to deviation, coefficient of variation, and approximately 500 total input values. If linear regression subroutines that might be each petroglyph must be described by ten useful in dealing with quantitative data such characteristic variables, a total of 50 petro- as petroglyph size or distance from a central glyphs could be statistically compared with location. In addition, frequency of occur- each other at a time. In addition to the rence could be easily calculated for a small limitations this would place on the scope of set of data. These features are not as the analysis, it would probably lead to automatic as they would be in a large-scale highly specific figure types. This would statistical package. However, hand-held effect the quality of the analysis. The ten calculators are readily available, easily character classification system could, affordable, and would be accessible to most however, be altered by a preprocessing researchers. Therefore, the use of pro- routine such that the descriptive information grammable calculators should not be ruled

John Winkle, Statistical Approach to Research, Page 2

out when analyzing a relatively small set of data.

When dealing with a large amount of data, such as state-wide occurrences of several figure types, large-scale statistical packages will be necessary. A Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) would be an example of this type of program. SPSS is limited to 500 independent variables while the number of cases is determined only by the amount of memory available in the computer being used. The program is available and is accessible on a number of different computers, including IBM, CDC, XEROX, and Univac Machines. SPSS contains a full library of statistical functions. The functions listed in the section above are also available in SPSS.

The costs of Using SPSS or a similar large- scale program for rock art research analysis have not yet been determined. Several other large-scale statistical programs need to be evaluated and reported upon. A future update of this topic and its implications to rock art research will be necessary.

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 3

Jesse Warner PRESENCE AND ABSENCE

Depending on our involvement with rock art, Schaafsma (1971) improved the application most of us have dealt with the concepts of and status of lists in her Tables 1-8 and presence and absence. Because of a relative Figure 7. Some of her contributions include: vagueness, rock art researchers have not lists of the attributes of anthropomorphs, and placed this in an appropriate perspective or statistical comparisons of elements within a taken full advantage of it. These, like many style and between various styles. She also other omnibus words, imply different mean- introduced charts that show profiles of ings with the ways they have been applied. occurrence percentages (presence) of major The terms are not ambiguous; they only lack element categories between several styles. proper attention in relation to rock art. No This will be referred to as a style profile one has defined their applications, or the (Figure 1). limits they have with rock art. Even though improved, the overall informa- This should help petroglyphologists be aware tion present is very limited. The potential of of the implications, potentials and value of expanding presence information is limited using presence and absence. Because of its only by our ability to record more precise scope, and the necessity of treating it as a information and construct more informative unit, each area will receive only a brief charts. By including classes or types of introduction. Each area could be treated in an figures, based on a combination of presence in-depth study of its own. Hopefully, after a and absence of features and variations of consideration of the subject, subsequent body form and appendage expression (arms, research should be more complete and legs and head gear) rather than Schaafsma's definitive than it has been. After considering three categories of large, small and flute- the facts, the value of such a tool, when used playing anthropomorphs, the derivable to its fullest, can be appreciated. information will be tremendously increased.

Even though presence and absence are very Also by eliminating generic and category important factors, it is obvious that rock art terms, redefining element names, restricting researchers seldom realize their full potential. variations of form and including classes of Most of the emphasis on presence is placed in elements, lists can be better suited to present very limited statistical element lists and this additional information. Since element cumulative data tables. Because of poorly lists would be the best area for these expres- selected and constructed terms, element lists sions, these lists should be modified to at present are inherently lacking in the include as much of this information as amount of information presence and absence possible. More benefit can be obtained when can provide. Because of their inadequate it occurs in chart form. structure, a broad spectrum of valuable information is ignored. Most can only imply To fully understand the importance of pres- the presence of an element in a given area. A ence, consider the archaeological procedure few are expanded to show the importance of that identifies or distinguishes cultures or an element by its frequency of occurrence. styles by the presence or absence of many features of material culture. In most cases,

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 5 Figure 1 culture cannot be defined or identified by iconography, and not derivable from projec- nondescript rock art, any more than any other tile points and pot shard technology, is that item of nondescript material culture. How- graphic representations, whether on rock ever, pottery or lithic techniques and form panels or decorations on pottery, are one of can show the peculiarities inherent in specific the only physical evidences of the concepts social groups. It also shows the beginning of that their mental processes expressed. traditions, concentrations of associated traits, Marshack (1975, 1979) has revealed many the discontinuance, evolution and the diffu- areas and means in which man has expressed sion of various traits. his mental activities. Eliada (1959:129) shows that what happened in the sacred past, When a study includes presence and absence, must never be forgotten. Once created, these a considerable amount of information can be symbols never die (Eliada 1959:137, 142, retrieved. Rock art by its nature also carries 183). He also states that: some cultural impetus. It has the capability to provide similar input on both the organic Symbols not only make the world open, level, represented by the sphere of the physi- but help him to attain the universal. It is cal and tangible objects and degree of ab- through symbols that man finds his way straction, and the superorganic level, repre- out of his particular situation. Symbols sented by conceptual and intellectual ideas or awaken individual experiences and transmute it into a spiritual act, into meta- elements representing organic, tangible physical comprehension of the world. In objects, which are so stylized they are pres- the presence of a sacred symbol a man ently unrecognizable. It also has spatial as can attain to a highest spirituality. By well as temporal dimensions. understanding the symbol he can live the universal [Eliada 1959:211-212]. Each of these has their particular areas of contribution. The main thing inherent in

Jesse Warner, Presence and Absence, Page 6

These symbols were important to those who material culture. What they have not done is made them, and it is important that they be an equally comprehensive analysis of the recorded. Taking full advantage of presence rock art. It will be up to us, with the expres- and absence will help us make a more com- sion of presence within rock art, to show the plete record. types, variations and representations of element features that were not previously The real importance of presence and absence relatable in former lists and charts. It will be is illusive. It is difficult to grasp their full this additional information from the new potential at one time. It is not simple pres- expanded tables that will be more effective in ence and absence of a form alone that is most providing the clues that identify and isolate beneficial to rock art studies—it is the local, sometimes regionally restricted expres- presence and absence of multiple aspects. sions and their variations, as well as, wider conventional usages within styles. When given temporal and spatial dimensions, or when used with repetitions and variations, With only a partial survey, it seems that when it is presence that indicates a rock art style on more detail, and thus indicators, are present the cultural level and distinguishes its various within a style (particularly in the Vernal regional art styles. In the same manner, area), the better the chances are for one style presence can isolate and distinguish local and of material culture to share more sub-styles of regional glyphic systems within a style. It is rock art. While in western Utah, where detail the main aspect of rock art that shows in rock art is almost absent, several different whether or not traits were shared between styles of pottery (i.e., Promontory gray, Salt regional or temporal cultures, styles or Lake, and Sevier gray, and different types of groups. It is the main characteristic of rock projectile points) can be found in repeated, art that expresses movement of style bearers. isolated associations with what now seems to be the same basic general style of rock art This brings to point an important issue where (Warner 1979:91). At this point too little has the solution will be based on presence. It is been done in this area. assumed that a comparative analysis between regional distributions of rock art will not When studying presence or absence, two directly correspond to other portions of further items must be considered because of material culture or the people assumed to the influence they have on presence. These have produced the rock art. Evidence seems concern the sphere of element tangibility and to exist that styles of Fremont material the degree of abstraction. The sphere of the culture, and rock art styles used to identify physical tangible object is referred to as the the same regional group of Fremont, do not organic. The superorganic sphere consists of exactly correspond (Warner 1979:91). the conceptual, intellectual ideas or elements representing organic, tangible objects that are Only modified and more complete element so stylized they are presently unrecognizable. lists and tables, with presence lists of other items of material culture and total inventories Examples of this concept, on the tangible of rock art, will show the proper interrelation- organic level, are two different types of ships of the problem. To fully define the Fremont necklaces. One Vernal type consists differences expressed between material of repeated, individual, detached, rhomboid culture and rock art, every aspect of the pendants in necklace form without the element, panel and site, needs to be consid- curving necklace attachment drawn. This is ered. Archaeologists have already docu- only one of several features that serve as mented the presence of shared items of stylistic indicators of one Vernal style. Even

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 7 though many points can imply style, and thus problem discussed earlier about mapping out be indicators when they show a constant presence of material culture and rock art repetition of presence, it is the multiplicity of styles. One type of occurrence not mentioned indicators, when present, that creates the is the presnce of material culture, where the specific definition and isolates the various associated rock art style is absent. The segments of style. Some anthropomorphs probable reasons for all these possibilities contain up to eight different characteristic should be considered. features that can be used to identify their style of sub-variants. It is obvious that with more The second aspect of presence is more detail there are often more indicators. problematical. The non-tangible superorganic sphere and highly abstracted glyphs Another distinct form of necklace comes are more difficult to identify. It is easy to from Capitol Reef. There, the typical form identify a lizard, but what do specific ideas consists of solid, circular pendants suspended look like? Even though some of Martineau's from a curving line with short strings. This explanations seem logical, others do not have style is represented with similar feature sufficient consistency. Many other explana- categories used with the Vernal figures, tions are as reasonable, and a few that are except that like the necklaces, these are more logical show a greater consistency. expressed with the Capitol Reef preferred difference in type or form. Ethnographic accounts help us to understand some of the ways the symboling of ideas has Mapping out the presence distribution of been done, but few of these occur in rock art these elements show the places the carriers of panels in our area. Marshack (1979:271, 287, these preferred forms went. The areas 304, 309) also points out some of the problem expressing an absence are also important to in using ethnographic evidence referring to consider. Centers of higher concentrations rock art of other cultures, or in areas too far show probable habitation areas. These are in the past for oral traditions to preserve the central locations that the people fre- accurate information. The broader one's quented who shared these specific forms. acquaintance with different worldwide Many panels show the presence of these symboling processes, the more one is aware forms in finger-like corridors radiating out that there are an infinite number of ways to along natural passageways. Presence de- express similar non-tangible concepts. creases as the distance from the concentrated Seldom do more than a few non-related centers increases. The Vernal type is present cultures express singular thoughts the same in three panels at Capitol Reef. The Capitol way. Reef forms are absent in the Vernal area, and as is now known only occurs once in the There are some basic universals, but the Dinosaur National Monument area. After differences in the thinking and symboling careful deliberation, the implications of these processes are too numerous. Many glyphs become obvious. from different cultures show that symbols are very stylized, even to the point of abstraction. In addition to the semantic content, presence The more abstract a glyph becomes, the less in element concentration implies group it probably represents an object, and the identity and domain. Presence in isolated greater are its changes to represent concepts areas implies identification and movement. associated with that object, e.g., a natural Compare the figures with the necklace type at heart becomes a valentine-shaped heart with Capitol Reef to the concentration of related implications of love. This is a concept forms in Indian Creek. This illustrates the extension. However, even this is not always

Jesse Warner, Presence and Absence, Page 8

the case. The greater the abstraction, the Because rock art is a relatively new area of more impossible it is to identify the object investigation, little is known about the realms and the concept. One thing important to of man's symboling processes. It is assumed remember, is that one does not need to that one symbol will seldom, if ever, restrict interpret a glyph to receive benefit from its itself over time and space to one concept. It study (Marshack 1979:290). Here, the is the presence of similar elements in differ- importance of presence is stressed. At the ent contexts that suggest element extension, moment, it is the presence of a glyph and its and the care needed to be taken in element form and context that we should be con- terminology. The Fremont culture, beginning cerned with, not the various levels of inter- about 450 A.D., must have had their own set pretation. of symbols from their predecessors. At 1360 A.D. (Marwit 1970:137-145) an element, or Simple presence represents many varying context, could have retained its original form concepts. The simple presence of a figure in and changed its meaning in this thousand a panel equals a corresponding counterpart in year period. It is also possible that the either the organic or super-organic sphere the meaning could have remained somewhat the artist. The presence and absence of this same, and the shape of the element, or its information has value. The source of the context, could have become more stylized, symbol that the artist drew upon, whether etc. sacred or profane, whether physical or conceptional, was an expression of his With this in mind, it is easy to see why ordinary reality (Levine 1971:421-434). meaning cannot be considered universal, i.e., These glyphs may also be an expression of one glyph cannot mean the same whenever it his non-ordinary reality (Hedges 1982:1-6). occurs. This is why interpretations cannot be The types of presence, and the presence consistent in their meanings, or be universal within contexts, are crucial in examining from paleo-situations to historic times, and these possibilities. In this sense, any glyph is from Egyptian contexts to St. George, Utah. representational, no matter how abstract, Rather than interpretation, presence and because it represented the concept present in absence can help us determine significance the mind of the artist who made it. This is and relationships and, hopefully, an idea of still true, whether any one else understood it what the source of the glyph was. or not. Thus, the term "nonrepresentational" is meaningless. The nature of presence also implies the psychological makeup of the group to which Depending on the glyph, it's nature and the the artist belonged. When considering concept behind it, presence can express and philosophical outlook, aspects of presence identify the symboling level of his cosmol- need to be considered. These include the ogy. Johansen noted: presence or absence of: size, detail, attitude, poise, and specific relationships of element Prehistoric "art" is not necessarily to be placement, i.e., the total context. A small considered as the … attempt at … repre- figure has an absence of a large factor, and senting for decorative purposes some- the concepts size implies. A plain figure has thing in the real world. Rather, it is to be an absence of detail, and the concepts detail regarded as the end product of complex implies. When placed in association with a syntactic symbolic behavior in a special detailed figure, its presence has significance context [Johansen 1979:299]. relative to the presence and absence of detail, relative placement, etc.

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 9 The attitude, or position present in a figure, is forms. As mentioned earlier, it is believed directly related to the concepts of the context. that abstract designs most likely represent the Size, detail, attitude, and context find their conceptional, non-tangible, super-inorganic expression relative to the outlook of the parts of reality. It seems that they considered individual and the group that gave him his it more appropriate to represent what they philosophical structure. Culture predicates thought about, rather than representing figures be made from extremely large to the themselves—as anthropomorphs at least. In very small, from the very detailed to the very observing the style profile for a specific plain and when figures are to be represented context of the Barrier Canyon figures and a in those ways. The outlook is also relative to few Anasazi contexts, such as the Salt Creek the degree of detail and thus the amount and Faces, anthropomorphic percentages are as types of indicators present. An interesting high as Vernal anthropomorphic figures. comparison could be made between one complex Vernal style and the Western Utah Because of the presence of their specific petroglyph styles. attitude toward the anthropomorph (as revealed in panel and site contexts), contexts, The heroic, highly detailed, sometimes head- like the Barrier Canyon Style figures, are not holding anthropomorphs of a specific group considered portraits. This may seem at first a from Vernal express (by their attitude, contradiction. Because of the likely religious extreme detail and associated objects) an or ceremonial context, and a more sacred egocentric, somewhat conceited, often attitude or poise, they are taken as represent- arrogant-looking group, whose style mainly ing deities, intermediaries or shaman, instead consists of portraitures. Over fifty percent of of personal portraits. This exemplifies the the glyphs in the overall Vernal style, consid- sacred aspect of this cosmological context, ered by Schaafsma (1971), are portrait-like. and thus the sacredness of the site, verses the "Quadrupeds" represent 20-30 percent; other profane poise, content and context of the "representational" figures 3-5 percent, and Vernal figures. Barrier Canyon figures and "abstract designs" consist of 13-25 percent the way they are represented are not viewed (Schaafsma 1971:14, her terminology). My as actors in a variety of roles like the Vernal statistics will not be complied until my figures, but rather mark the arenas where survey is completed. At this point my specific roles should be performed (Sakett percentages of portraitures are higher. 1977:370; Elida 1959:21).

It is easy to see what the main emphasis of There are several other considerations of panel content is when presented in a style presence and absence. These involve the profile. The main emphasis present within presence of a feature as a part of an element, panel content is an expression of what the from the closest contiguous relationship, to culture considered at that time most important those most far ranching. to represent, and probably the most accept- able way to represent it. To a large extent, it The first consideration is presence within or also expresses their attitude toward these as a part of an element. This type of pres- categories. ence can be a clue to several types of facts. This can indicate identification to a more The San Rafael, Western Utah and Great specific group, or distinction from other Basin Curvilinear Styles, by a percentage of regional, socio-political or religious groups presence, place a minimal importance on that share a specific style. It can also indicate portraiture, or representations of anthropo- an extension, combination or alteration from morphs, and a grater emphases on abstract the main concept of a glyph. When there is a

Jesse Warner, Presence and Absence, Page 10

constantly repeated presence within an help imply semantics. With sufficient element, such as two horns on a snake or repetition of the relationships, the more similar geometric designs over the left breast important the context. The importance of an of several anthropomorphs, a specific distinc- element is, in part, derived from the specific tion is being made with those where there is relationship of relative element placement. It an absence. is often the presence of associated abstract elements in specific relationships with The specific type of horn form, or the repre- naturalistic elements and the repetitions of sentation of the geometric designs in other contexts, that provide the concrete concept association for proper identification. To properly identify concepts, sufficient repetitions need to be examined to find the presence of the concept in several concrete contexts in as many situations as possible. This provides an unquestionable association for what the concept represents. This does not indicate what the element may mean—only the idea behind the form (Warner 1982). contexts, expresses a shared distinction of the Third is a high degree of presence between group by their preferred forms Figure 2). panels with an extreme rarity elsewhere. With differences in feature presence, the concepts differ. With differences in related forms, the groups differ. The repetition of one horn and two legs on a sheep marks a distinction from the presence of two horns and four legs on a sheep. With occurrences of incorporated features, a distinction and possible personal or group identity is being made. That odd combinations or types of horns, legs, feet and body shapes in sheep occur, may imply references to the groups who mainly produced those types. The presence of modifications or additions (changing sheep from a two-horned, four- legged type to one with one horn and two legs) reinforces other concepts (Warner 1982a:117-130). Figure 3

The second consideration is presence be- This implies an extremely limited sphere in tween elements. This establishes contexts which the elements circulated. This is an and special or similar relationships. There area from a personal level, to that of a small are many associated elements that reoccur group—if the glyph never occurs beyond the within similar contexts. Study of these will vicinity. An example of this is a site east of

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 11 Richfield, Utah (Figure 3). At this site there tion corresponds to the area over which it are ten stones, each with designs resembling a occurs. A broader importance may be bird-like head. With the amount of repetition stressed by a limited repetition with occur- and its predominance it stresses the impor- rences over more associated sites. An tance it had for those who made it. Since this example of this is a unique element found immediate vicinity is the only one where this near the previously described bird-like heads. glyph is known to be depicted like this, it This element referred to as an "enclosure" restricts the importance of that form and occurs just under 250 times at eight very context to a group of people in a very local localized sites (Figure 4). The presence of area (Warner 1982b). At three other sites this different associated elements and contexts element only occurs once: Bocks Canyon, within the panel, and the physio-geographical Manning Canyon and Diamond Valley. situation at the site where they occur, provides strong evidence for three different Fourth, is presence between associated sites. associated concepts. It is probable that there This expresses a larger, but still limited, was only one basic concept and two different sphere of circulation. Evidence that it is just extensions (Warner 1982b).

Figure 4 an element of local importance can be supported by its absence elsewhere. Actual Fifth, is presence between more distant sites. glyph importance is a relative and compara- An element's occurrence at a number of other tive consideration. The importance of a sites, if similar or identical in form and glyph is not as relevant to the area over which context, could imply the movement of those it occurs as much as the presence of detail, who produced the glyph at its concentrated specific attitude, specific context and degree location. When the enclosure, with its of repetition. Its degree of conventionaliza- specific type of associations in its limited

Jesse Warner, Presence and Absence, Page 12

contexts, occurs at other distant locations, same, similar or shared contexts, by its with an exact duplication of form and espe- production by other groups. An example of cially consistently associated forms of this is a variation of the enclosure (Figure 6). elements, it can be assumed that there was a The similarities present represent the same movement of this group. This occurs at concept, but the variation implies a different style group as the author. A different element repeated with similar form comes from: Connor Springs, Standsbury Island, Utah Lake, Parowan Gap and Manderfield, Utah (Figure 7). The Vernal and Capitol Reef necklaces fit those types of presence. If the element is present only Figure 5 Conners Spring in isolated clusters in sites with fairly equal Connor Springs, about 200 miles north of distributions from one point to the next, or if Richfield, Utah. The forms at Connor intervening examples are not present, impli- Springs duplicate six points of correspon- cations would be relative to its occurrence. dence (Figure 5). Similarities and differences between the Capitol Reef figures and those similar forms When wider representations of the same from Indian Creek show the Capitol Reef motif occur with less similarity and different necklace with marked variation. The Indian contexts and attitudes, it would not imply the Creek figures show several other Capital Reef

Figure 6

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 13 indictors along with Anasazi influence. ered to be unacquainted—the similarity in presence and form of elements is too strong. Sixth is presence between styles. This may The converse is also true—if profiles or indicate a level of greater or lesser intellec- presence are more diverse, either little tual intercourse between groups. This type of acquaintance or little philosophical agreement presence implies different levels of symbol can be assumed. circulation, which emphasizes various cultural interactions restricting, altering or The more the elements share similarity, the expanding the presence of the form or context closer the two styles should be. The more the of an element. The philosophical or cosmo- dissimilarity between elements or forms, the farther apart in time, space and attitude the styles would seem to be. This is the basis for stylistic indicators. An example of this is that each area of the Fremont express the treatment of the human body, yet each treats it differently. These are also different from those of the Barrier Canyon, Anasazi and Ute forms. The seventh consideration is presence or absence between cultures. This implies a much broader cosmological base which shared whatever ideas that have presence on a basis relative to the degree and type of representation. Again, the degree of element similarity that is shared would express the closeness between those who shared it— culture, style or group. The predominance of an element between one culture and another, and the numbers of associated elements that each have in common, imply the breadth of Figure 7 the cosmology that was shared. The degree of presence between the cultures, or the logical importance of a symbol is not in- balance of presence, may imply the donor, if creased with a wider expression of presence. one has more or earlier or later representa- Wider spatial expression simply implies tions than the other. An example of this is greater style interactions, which may produce the predominance of the flute player in the more similarities in style and uniformity in eastern Fremont styles and its absence the their style profiles and outlook. The closer western Fremont styles. Another example is the style profiles (an expression of presence), the large number of two horned snakes in the closer the styles are socially or philoso- Barrier Canyon and Fremont art and their phically related. rarity in later Pueblo art. Yet, their predominance occurs in later Basketmaker. Figure 1 shows this between two contiguous areas of the Vernal style and two other With this brief introduction, the types of Fremont style areas—the San Rafael and the information derivable from an improved Sevier. The later two Fremont styles express recording system, analyzed with such an a profile very close to that of the Great Basin approach, becomes apparent. Without Curvilinear. These styles cannot be consid- considering these more detailed points of

Jesse Warner, Presence and Absence, Page 14

view, rock art research will remain un- 1971 The Rock Art of Utah. Papers of the definitive. There are many more examples Peabody Museum of Archaeology that illustrate these principles. However, and Ethnology Vol. 65. Harvard because of the restrictions of space they University, Cambridge. cannot be included here. For further information, please contact Rock Art Research of Warner, Jesse Utah, 960 West 700 South, Salt Lake City, 1981 Engraved Pebble Style of the Salt Utah 84104. Flats of Western Utah. American Indian Rock Art 6:80-102. El Toro, California. REFERENCES CITED 1982a Concepts and Significance of Two and One Horned Sheep. American Indian Rock Art 7:117-131. El Eliada, Mircea Toro, California. 1959 The Sacred and the Profane. 1982b Enclosure Petroglyph Motif: One Harper Torchbooks. The Clister Possible Interpretation. American Library. Harper and Row, New Indian Rock Art 7:104-116. El York. Toro, California. 1982 Concrete Concept Associations. Hedges, Ken Paper to be presented at the Second 1982 Phosphenes in the Context of Na- Annual Symposium of the Utah tive American Rock Art. American Chapter of the American Rock Art Indian Rock Art 7:1-10. El Toro, Research Association, September California.

Johansen, Morton 1971 Prehistoric Art and Ideology. In Man and Adaptation. The Institu- tional Framework. Ed. Yehudi A. Cohen. Aldine-Atherton, Chicago and New York.

Marshack, Alexander 1979 Upper Paleolithic Symbol Systems of the Russian Plain: Cognitive and Comparative Analysis. Current Anthropology 20(2): 271-311. 1975 Exploring the Mind of Ice Age Man. National Geographic 147(1):64-89

Marwit, John 1970 Median Village and Fremont Cul- ture Regional Variation. Univer- sity of Utah Anthropological Pa- pers, No. 95, Salt Lake City.

Schaafsma, Polly

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 15

Jesse E. Warner INDICATORS

Boas' objective in Primitive Art: what they should indicate. The most common denominator associated with ceramics, Was to determine whether valid laws and the facts they identify are style and controlling the growth of spe-cific art segments of it. Many procedures have been styles exist. He felt that aesthetic suggested, all of which use multiple facets of value could be gauged by the stan- ceramics, as indicators to determine style, or dard of excellence attained. Further other more restricted categories, such as typical fixed forms would develop, traditions, horizons, clusters, etc. indicating the existence of a standard of perfection (Marshall 1977:82). Long ago Schapiro summed up the way indicators could determine style, Lee and Bock (1982:28), while looking for examples of progressive stylization, belied For the archaeologist, style is exem- that standards are needed to identify re- plified in the motif or pattern or in peated patterns that have become schema- some directly grasped quality, which tized, shorthand forms of more detailed helps him to localize and date the forms. work and to establish connections between groups of works or between Horne (1976:119) notes, "Statistical non- cultures. Style here is a symptomatic random variability in rock art points to trait, like the non-aesthetic (form) … patterns favored by the makers". It was the of an artifact (Schapiro 1953:287). typical fixed forms and favoring of patterns that created the abrupt difference in style In rock art no one at present has broken noticed by Grant (1967:115), Snyder down Fremont glyphs into their basic parts, (1978:126-7) and others. Most often these and shown in lists that specific attributes stylistic distinctions were only made on the express cultures, regional styles or sub- very obvious differences in the elements and groups. their basic forms. In this report more subtle distinctions will be suggested which will not Sackett (1977) has re-examined the term only suggest a culture or style, but will style to clear the confusion surrounding its indicate the author's association with various many applications. The extremes to which it segments of a culture, style or group. has been used has helped in a sense to dilute and misconstrue its meaning. By placing One of the early problems of archaeology style back in proper perspective, we can see was the typing of artifacts and identifying some extremes many have followed. Some and determining cultural affiliation. Ceram- of these directly relate to rock art research. ics and their varieties are to archaeology as Many enthusiasts, without basic background key fossils are to paleontology. Each in archaeology, seldom realize that it is the indicates the factors relative to their circum- total material culture, not just one aspect stances. With ceramics, many reports (i.e., rock art), that equals or identifies a argued what the indicators should be and style or a culture.

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 17 This will help set a precedence for indicators Many try incorrectly to determine a cultural and illuminate the benefits of procedure. style or a culture area with the use of rock The question is: If rock art form is diagnos- art. Rock art style areas and culture areas tic, can it, like a disease, express itself in may differ. Rock art should be defined in single pieces of a recognizable pattern like terms of cultural areas—not the reverse. pieces of a puzzle? Cultural areas are already well established. Can glyphs, or features of elements, be When looking for what it is that may make a consistent enough to be like symptoms of a glyph a determining factor, one must become disease that reoccur in recognizable patterns, involved with norms and laws of regularity. as Schapiro stated? It is the symptoms that These are the first and most significant items act as indicators, allowing doctors to diag- in discerning style. Cultures and their styles nose and isolate one disease from those with are definitely not homogeneous. Yet, there different symptoms. After one becomes is patterning in the various parts of a culture familiar with the glyphs and features of that show up in its remains. It should not be elements, they are like symptoms that any one particular feature, or element, or a reoccur in rock art; and it is obvious that panel that is used to indicate the style group cultures, styles within a culture or groups of the author. It should be the total—the within a style, do have indicators sympto- combination of all the indicators from the matic of their art forms. They then are panel, context, etc., that indicates the culture, diagnostic of their group, style and culture. or segments within that culture (Sutherland 1975:62). When a rock art researcher applies the tools of his trade like a doctor, he can diagnose It is the manipulation or alternation of and isolate symptoms to identify one seg- different preferred physical modes of render- ment or attitude as part of a larger whole, a ing an individual form that basically estab- part of a pattern or a piece of a puzzle. The lishes and distinguishes the rock art style of investigative procedure the doctor follows is one culture from another. This is what important. Rock art symbols, like the pa- enables Morss (1931:34-42) and Worming- tient's words, are ambiguous. Because the ton (1955:79-85, 138-162), without being patient does not know exactly what is going well versed in rock art phenomenology, to on within him, the doctor needs to have the identify and isolate the Fremont-type graphic expertise to diagnose. In the same way, one representation from the Archaic and Ana- without expertise cannot categorize (diag- sazi. By presence and absence, and verifica- nose) when he is not acquainted with the tion of indicator forms, Schaafsma (1971), in limitations of rock art and the scientific Tables 1-8 and Figure 7, shows that each approach. Because the patient's words Fremont regional style has a profile that (glyphs) are not often decisive, even the reveals either a similarity to or difference doctor has to look at and consider the from other Fremont and non-Fremont styles. evidence such as: body language, and hand signs and gestures (the attributes, attitudes To exemplify that there are specific things in and context of glyphs), which also describe rock art patterns that could be used as what the patient is feeling, or what the artist indicators, and the ways these can be ap- thinks. plied, consider a comparison of the process of medical diagnosis to style identification.

Jesse Warner, Indicators, Page 18

Even the most conscientious observers To gain a better understanding of what is frequently overlook both the obvious and the going on beneath the surface of the water obscure (Sutherland 1979:82). If one's (the patient or the rock art) the doctor (or the background does not involve sufficient researcher), with the onset of intensity and experience in rock art phenomenology, even rhythm (the repetition and variation of a the most scientific can miss the obvious and glyph), first gives a verbal examination. The usually the un-obvious. Such a case oc- assessment of the indicators in this prelimi- curred with the Fajada Butte Observatory nary survey restricts the number of possibili- (Sofaer, et al. 1979:120). If the profession- ties, and predicts the type of investigation to als not trained in rock art have trouble, how follow. Second, comes the physical exami- can a non-professional without training in nation and appropriate tests. These are rock art have a chance. It is not the amount comparable to the rock art researcher's of education that makes a petroglypholo- statistical and comparative analysis. This is gist—it is the degree and type of experience. what should confirm his earlier suspicions. An old geology professor once said, "Burn the text books and buy some hiking boots. In a routine exam, the exact order of the Ten to twenty years from now you will write investigation does not matter. That this texts which will out date these." same order is followed each time does matter. Chronological or sequential exami- The visual impression of the beginning nation is important. It is not that an impor- researcher is analogous to the visual reaction tant procedure or area of comparison may be to the refracting angle of a stick in water. A left out, it is that many areas of research person not familiar with this natural process, cannot be started until other areas of investi- or without study, cannot accurately read the gation have been completed (Warner 1982a). signs. In the doctor's case, knowing the principles of cause and effect (light and Culture has provided the glyph-maker with a refraction), he can use them as indicators in preferred mold for elements, forms and the process of diagnosis. contexts to produce the features that become his material culture. Concerning the shape This is the medium (the indicators) through of a tool or utensil, the demands of the which he can accurately reconstruct the environment have a great influence. The cause by the visual effect. To the would-be manner in which they are decorated is not rock art researcher, uneducated in the scope, based on environmental influence. Instead, possibilities and potential of the symbolizing his world view and his relationship to his process, any statements of interpretation are environment precipitates the expression of sheer speculation. What he sees on the his philosophical outlook (Gunn 1975:424- surface of the water is an optical illusion—a 434; Levine 1971:924-934). In part, it is this pseudo reality. The stick looks bent, when philosophical outlook that predicts the actually it is not. In interpretations of any indicators and their forms; the rest depends kind, we can only gloss over this illusionary on the element selected for representation. surface. No one can ever experience the full subsurface realty. However, because of Different cultures allow different degrees of indicators, he can assign spatial and temporal freedom in the expression of personal affiliation and possibly a concept associa- preference. In cultures with strict regula- tion. tions or with little imagination, there seem to be few elements that appear to have minor

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 19 variation. Groups often produce glyphs with main features, those most susceptible to statistically favored forms, or which are stylistic variation, and those most easily iconographically different from other groups manipulated. (Marshack 1979:279-291). In societies that allow maximum personal preference, the The following is a list of characteristics of variations and indicators would still seem to anthropomorphs that do and do not indicate a fall into recognizable categories of differ- style on a cultural, regional or group level. ences. The form he chooses to give the Non- indications of anthropomorphs (i.e., glyph is highly specific and characteristic. geometrical or abstract designs, glyphs These choices are historically diagnostic, representing anything other than items because they are unique, that is, they are associated with the human form or its peculiar to given time and location (Sackett treatment) will be treated in a subsequent 1977:371). report.

While working on Fremont taxonomy, One: features that provide cultural, regional assistance was requested from Dr. Albert or group identification, when they are Wood, Professor of Ethnology, Dayton, repeated as specific, unique or regional Ohio, then Chairman of the Nomenclature forms of: Committee for the American Rock Art Research Association. One of the areas he 1. Body shape asked us to consider involved the concept of 2. Head shape cultural and stylistic indicators. These are 3. Head gear facts beyond terminology, and are a byprod- 4. Hip and waist treatment uct of taxonomy. These involve features, segments and characteristics of elements Two, features that generally occur as less (which do or do not carry the information often than the above will become indicators allowing them to be cultural or style deter- only when represented as specific repeated minatives). forms of:

Determinatives, as diagnostic traits indicat- 5. Body decoration: i.e., torso painting, ing a style, would not always be an element necklace, sash or belt itself, but a feature, attribute, form or treat- 6. Facial treatment: i.e., facial features, ment of an element that was done in a tear streaks or facial painting characteristic conventionalized manner. 7. Forms of legs Consistent use with other indicators betrays 8. Forms of feet the author as a member of a specific style 9. Forms of genitalia group. 10. Objects held

On the basis of statistics of different catego- Three, features that generally do not provide ries of constantly repeated features used as determination. These, as well as any others, determinatives, one category was predomi- will not be indicators when they do not occur nant. The main category was attributes of as specific repeated forms of: anthropomorphs. Among these, only specific parts of body or appendage expression 1. Arm form or position implies style identification. These involve 2. Leg and foot form and position those parts of the body that comprise the 3. Hand and finger shape and position

Jesse Warner, Indicators, Page 20

4. Body decoration ing a glyph to a specific group. It will 5. Facial treatment increase accuracy in element assignment 6. Objects held better than the assignment made on the basis of laundry-like element lists alone (Warner The existence of both groups of indicators 1981). Crotty (1979:27) was aware of this suggests a reservoir of culturally preferred when comparing Modoc glyphs with those forms unique to that group. Those associ- described by Steward for the Great Basin ated with the human form are indicators of style. anthropomorphs. Non-anthropomorph indicators, or those not associated with the Specific, typical, regional, Fremont body human form, are other naturalistic and types have been described by Morss (1931), abstract designs. Non-indicators do not Wormington (1955), Grant (1967) and reveal the stylistic pool that expresses Wellmann (1979). The common denomina- features, or qualities that can be manipulated tors these people use to describe Fremont to give specific expression to the semantic body types, are that they generally restrict content they imply. themselves to the styles of a few more typical anthropomorphs found in specific It was considered that if semantic content parts of the Fremont area. There are many carried more weight to distort the style other body types and areas (i.e., Nine Mile, indicators, then those distortions should still San Rafael, Moab, Parowan, Sevier, Utah be represented in a culturally prescribed and Salt Lake Valleys to name a few) which manner (Pearce 1971:6). Even these with consistently contain Fremont style indica- sufficient representation will become indicators, just as much Fremont, but which do not tors. The trouble is they seldom repeat often comply with the early Fremont River drain- enough in rock art to become diagnostic. age body form definition. This would be according to cosmological sanction or cultural conditioning—a form of The main reason for this difference, was that repetition fixation. This implies that indi- the early descriptions, most often used as viduals seldom change old forms (indicators) references, generally described the specific, or initiate new ones, they generally repro- well-known, localized variants of two areas duce what they have seen done in a similar that share a considerable number of indica- style. This operates like functional fixed- tors. Morss described these found in the ness, until some necessity arises or influence Fremont drainage. Wormington reviewed creates new innovations. those by Morss and the Vernal and Dinosaur National Monument variants, and added the The manipulation of non-indicators marks White River and West Water variants. Most the difference between an expression with of these have much the same stylistic indica- minimal semantic content, and those which tors. However, with careful examination, it are loaded. These also betray the group's is easy to separate the distinctive regional psychological frame of mind, and help to indicators. create the distinctiveness of a style profile. Schaafsma (1971) was the first to describe in What isolates a figure on the cultural level, any detail other variants, but by then the can be refined to identify regional styles and anthropomorph typically representing the other subgroups. This will allow us to Fremont culture became synonymous with narrow down the possibilities when assign- the variants described by Morss and Worm-

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 21 ington. These and similar differences in the variations of each. Many of these are objects of material culture have caused some unique, and thus indicate different segments to insist on isolating or restricting the of the Vernal style; the rest are universally Fremont term to only that described by Fremont. A couple of these forms of head Morss (Madsen and Lindsay 1977). With gear are shared with both Barrier Canyon subsequent comparative analysis, it is and Anasazi representations. These cannot obvious that there are indicators that are be confused with Barrier Canyon or Anasazi universal to all the regional Fremont styles. glyphs because of the body form and associ- Some of these make it impossible to deny ated elements; yet, their head gear is identi- that this culture was present within the cal. eastern boundaries of Nevada, south of central Idaho, well within western Colorado, Within the Ashley and Dry Fork area, a and south beyond the Colorado River. The distributional sequence showed marked existence of some of these in isolated distinctions between areas with high verses occurrences in peripheral areas may be due low percentages of presence of certain types to hunting activities, as Ambler (1970) of headgear. The dividing line between suggests. But with heavy concentrations of these overlaps somewhat. A general division Fremont glyphs, along with possible grana- would be the confluence of the Ashley and ries and associated artifacts, settlement of Dry Fork Rivers at the old Merkely Park. some type cannot be ignored. This may be North of this there is a high percentage of the situation near Indian Creek and Canyon certain features and characteristics, and a Lands. low presence or absence of others.

All of these regional rock art expressions South of the junction the predominance indicate their membership within a larger reverses, indicating at least two groups or cultural tradition that must be called Fre- time frames of Fremont. Each had distinct mont. Even though each have considerable preferences for specific types of head gear— regional differences, they all have sufficient and several other characteristic elements. overall similarities. This implies large The features immediately obvious include aerial, but loosely knit, ties and strong the following: Nearly all shield figures smaller clan-like ties (Warner 1982b). occur north of the junction. To the north Information is being compiled on each of nearly all the shield figures are large. To the these regional groups to present a greater in- south, most are very small. Nearly all depth analysis for each style and area of diminutive figures occur south of the junc- expression. tion. A significant percentage of head- holding scenes occurs north of the junction. In an overall territorial survey of Fremont To the north, "decapitated heads" are most indicators, it became obvious that those naturalistic while "decapitated heads" at the styles with more detail naturally contained south are most often highly stylized. Most more indicators. These indicators can be contexts north of the junction are generally transformed into style profiles (Schaafsma side-by-side compositions with few geomet- 1971:Figure 17). rical abstract designs. To the south, compositions have more variation in element In the Ashley and Dry Fork Canyon alone placement, and they contain more geometri- there are over eleven different, distinct, cal abstractions. consistently repeated types of head gear with

Jesse Warner, Indicators, Page 22

Other diagnostic traits unique to the Vernal those figures that are more like one style style consist of a conventionalized treatment than another. These tend to lean toward one of necklace, ear bobs, waist and chest group, but whose indicators are not as decoration, and sometimes body, leg and feet specific or concrete as they should be for shape typical of the Vernal style. All of the positive identification. The possible cate- various Vernal Fremont styles, more than gory includes those figures without indica- any other, played with head shape, head gear tors, or those that are not sufficient to isolate and decoration. As is now known, there are them from any others. This category con- more different head shapes and types of head tains those which show basic universal traits gear in the Vernal style area than in all the that are equally shared by other groups. In other Fremont regional styles combined. the last two categories, panel content and There are also more combinations of head context need to be considered. On a basis of decorations and treatments combined in comparative analysis, an indefinite glyph these combinations than any other area. could be given a more positive identification

if a panel contains other indicators, and it is Comparisons between the Vernal and contiguous and consistent in technique, Capitol Reef style necklace types were media, repatination, dint pattern, etc. briefly treated in the preceding paper. These types alone, when used to diagnose style It may seem natural to assume that in each of areas, could isolate the Vernal and Capitol the three categories indicators, which Reef forms, but it is the multiplicity of determine universal features or characteris- indicators that define styles. Prime examples tics (i.e., the overall cultural style, regional are the types of necklaces from Cub Creek, style and styles of subgroups), would be where the two styles occur together and dominant in number and with more regional hybridize. However, other indicators seem representations. After the process of isolat- to maintain a dominant regional divergence ing indicators begins, it becomes obvious for aerial isolation. that such is not the case. At this point it is

difficult to determine if there are fewer In Chapter Four of the Barrier Canyon characteristics to determine either regional Report (Warner, Manning and Miller n.d.) it styles or subgroup styles. was shown that one or two such traits do not always define a glyph as a member of a style It was assumed that the characteristics used group. For greater accuracy it is necessary to determine the culture would be the to consider as many indicators as possible. greatest, since any indication of a more Depending on the style being considered, the restricted Fremont subgroup automatically more indicators present, the more positive defines a part of the Fremont culture. the identification. In that section it was However, the groups of indicators that suggested that three categories of identifica- specifically relate to the cultural level, tion be considered, so the ambiguous, (universals) without any input as to group or indefinite examples could have some tenta- regional style, are the fewest. The area in tive, comparative assignment. which most of the indicators seem to be

applied is the regional stylistic sections of This includes a positive category. In this the culture. The next largest seems to isolate category are those figures that unquestiona- subgroups within or among the various bly belong to a specific culture, style or regional styles. The cultural level contains group. The probable category contains the fewest specific indicators. It is felt that

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 23 examination of more evidence will not more restricted features, further segregating change this later on. the representations of subgroups. This can be done from body, leg and foot shape that I encourage studies exemplifying the use of imply a specific subgroup in itself to those indicators on the group level. These will with different head shapes. Significant show that one style can have within its repetition occurs with several different head glyphic system different regional restricted shapes. Two of the prominent types of heads indicators and forms of elements that are are the inverted bucket form, with a spot that combined with the same style indicators with occurs quite often on its forehead, and a which other different regionally restricted form with ear-like protrusions (Figures 1-2). element indicators occur.

Figure 1 Vernal Area

Figure 2 Vernal Area

It cannot be coincidental that the largest In the Vernal area the expression of the number of anthropomorphs associated with anthropomorph can be broken down into head-holding scenes have the inverted

Jesse Warner, Indicators, Page 24

bucket form head, spot on the forehead or a examination of associated representations of variant. Implications seem to imply a one- and two-horned anthropomorphs warrior society with possible ranking. occurring in panels with the one-and two- Consistent repetitions of various forms of horned sheep (Warner 1981c). inverted bucket heads imply a group that was identified by that feature. Further segrega- It was noticed that prehistoric modifications tion based on variations could be made were made on two-horned, four-legged because of their consistency in form, varia- sheep. It was assumed these changes were tion and frequency of repetition. This may made by a one-horned group, since the imply several smaller distinct groups with addition of one-horned anthropomorphs the "order" of inverted bucket heads (Warner seemed to be later. These modifications n.d.). often change the two-horned, four-legged sheep to a one-horned, two-legged expres- Throughout the Fremont territory there are sion. Sometimes legs were also modified. many other glyphs that may be group Seven criteria for isolating a modification indicators that repeat often enough to beg were set up. With further study it became investigation. Among those which stand out obvious that some panels contain additions the most, are two specific types of horned that express similar differences in these two- head gear. The intellectual acrobatics that horn types. Panels that contain processions have occurred within their panels show of both types on horned anthropomorphs without question that there were several show them in segregated groups isolated and other distinct groups that functioned within opposed or alternating with those of the Fremont society. Any attempt at stating the opposite horn type. The report concluded exact facts would be dangerous, however, that evidence suggests that group identifica- we can examine the interplay within the tion can be made, and that these specific graphic system and retrieve a considerable groups suggest some type of moiety among amount of information without interpretation the Fremont (Warner 1982c:117-130). (Marshack 1979:290, 304). Without the application of the process of One study examined the interrelationships of indication, the style of rock art expressed these two types of horned head gear. The remains just a skeletal format. Indicators most prominent type is the typical two- and the concepts of presence and absence horned anthropomorph, and the next are the place the muscle and tissue on that frame to anthropomorphs with one horn. This inves- make each area of the Fremont style body a tigation began after finding an unusually viable functioning entity. These two areas of high percentage of one-horned, two-legged study provide the facts that bring character to sheep in the restricted area near Richfield, rock art. These give greater credibility to Utah. When comparing percentages of style studies, and make rock art research similar sheep forms for other areas, it was more definitive. noticed that whenever this one-horned, two- legged sheep occurred it was sometimes For further information on these points of associated with an enclosure like those near concern, please contact Rock Art Research Richfield. Even though no other sites of Utah, 960 West 700 South, Salt Lake duplicate such a high percentage of occur- City, Utah 84104. rence, small pockets do occur which repeat this form and its context. This led to an

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 25 REFERENCES CITED Marshack, Alexander Ambler, John Richard 1979 Upper Paleolithic Symbol System 1970 Just What Is Fremont? Paper pre- of the Russian Plain: Cognitive sented at the 35th Annual Meeting and Comparative Analysis. Cur- of the Society for American Ar- rent Anthropology, Vol. chaeology, Mexico City. 20(2):271-311.

Crotty, Helen Marshall, Francine 1979 Rock of the Modoc Territory. 1977 Aesthetics of the Great Basin American Indian Rock Art 5:22- Pecked Style. American Indian 35. El Toro, California. Rock Art 3:80-85 El Toro, Cali- fornia. Grant, Campbell 1967 The Rock Art of the North Ameri- Morss, Noel can Indian. Thomas Y. Crowell, 1931 The Ancient Culture of the Fre- New York. mont River in Utah. Papers of the Peabody Museum, Harvard Uni- Gunn, Joel versity. Vol. 12. No. 3. 1975 An Envirotechnological System for Hogup Cave. American Antiq- Pearce, J. C. uity 40(1):3-21. 1971 The Crack in the Cosmic Egg. Pocket Books, New York. Horne, Stephen 1976 Analysis of Chumash Rock Art Sackett, James R. from Sierra Madre Ridge, Califor- 1977 The Meaning of Style in Archae- nia. American Indian Rock Art ology; A General Model. Ameri- 2:114-125. El Toro, California. can Antiquity 42(3):369-380.

Lee, Georgia and A. J. Bock Schaafsma, Polly 1982 Schematization and Symbolism in 1971 The Rock Art of Utah. Papers of American Indian Rock Art. the Peabody Museum. Vol. 65. American Indian Rock Art 7:26- Harvard University, Cambridge. 32. El Toro, California. Schapiro, Meyer Levine, Morton 1953 Style. In Anthropology Today. (Ed. 1971 Prehistoric Art and Ideology. In A. L. Krober) pp. 287-312. Uni- Man in Adaptation, The Institu- versity of Chicago Press. tional Framework (ed. Yehudi A. Cohen) Aldine-Atherton, Chicago Snyder, Ernest and New York. 1978 A Comparison of Hohokam and Possible Patayan Petroglyphs. Madsen, David B. and LaMar Lindsay American Indian Rock Art 4:120- 1977 Backhoe Village. Antiquities Sec- 123. El Toro, Calif. tion Selected Papers, Vol. 4, No. 12. Salt Lake City, Utah.

Jesse Warner, Indicators, Page 26

Sofaer, Anna, Volker Zinser and Ralph South, Salt Lake City, Utah Sinclair 84104. 1979 A Unique Solar Marking Con- struction of the Ancient Pueblo Wellmann, Klaus Indians. American Indian Rock 1979 A Survey of North American In- Art 5:115-125. El Toro, Califor- dian Rock Art. Akedemische nia. Druck-u. Verlagsanstalt Granz- Austria. Sutherland, Kay 1979 A Classification and Preliminary Wormington, H. M. Analysis of Pictographs at Hueco 1955 A Reappraisal of the Fremont Cul- Tanks State Park, Texas: The Poli- ture. Proceedings No. 1. Denver tics of Preservation. American In- Museum of Natural History, Den- dian Rock Art 5:81-97. El Toro, ver. California. El Toro, California.

Warner, Jesse 1981 Some Considerations of Style and a Reappraisal of the Western Utah Painted Style. American Indian Rock Art 6:80-87. El Toro, Cali- fornia. El Toro, California. 1982a Significance and Relationships Versus Interpretation. Utah Rock Art, this volume. Salt Lake City, Utah. 1982b Presence and Absence. Utah Rock Art, 1:5-17. Salt lake City, Utah. 1982c The Concepts and Significance of Two- and One-Horned Sheep. American Indian Rock Art 7:117- 131. El Toro, California n.d. Inverted Bucket Head Headhunters and their Associations with Bear- like Elements. Ms. on file with Rock Art Research of Utah, 960 West 700 South, Salt Lake City, Utah 84104.

Warner, Jesse, Steve Manning and Layne Miller N.d. The Barrier Canyon Report: The Structure, Analysis and Definition of a Unique Style. Ms. on file with Rock Art of Utah, 960 West 700

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 27

Steven J. Manning AN HYPOTHESIS FOR A PUEBLO IV DATE FOR THE BARRIER CANYON STYLE

The existence of a rock art style distinct from Barrier Canyon Style to the earliest known that of the Fremont or Anasazi, as found in occupation, i.e., Archaic. In a later publica- the northern half of the Colorado Plateau, was tion she refined this date, "...the Barrier first hypothesized by Schaafsma (1971). Canyon Style falls late in the Archaic se- Schaafsma proposed that this style be named quence. It may have been, in part at least, The Barrier Canyon Style after the name of contemporaneous with the Anasazi Basket- the canyon where the most numerous, and makers to the South, and a rough tentative perhaps the best examples, are located. dating between 500 B.C. and A.D. 500 is suggested" (Schaafsma 1980:70). The Barrier Canyon Style has neither been positively dated nor unequivocally ascribed The purpose of this paper is to present to any culture. There are two reasons for this evidence that formulates and substantiates a (in addition to there being an absence of hypothesis that the majority of the presently direct dating methods). First, there is a lack of known Barrier Canyon Style pictographs clearly defined association with distinctly were painted, not in Archaic times, but in datable artifact material. It appears that all approximately the Pueblo IV period — A.D. Barrier Canyon Style rock art sites with 1300 to 1600. associated artifact materials, thus far investigated, show mixed occupations, i.e., combi- The first possibility for determining the age nations of Fremont, Basketmaker and Pueblo of the Barrier Canyon Style from elements (Gunnerson 1957, 1969; Lucius 1976; appearing in the paintings is suggested by one Steward 1941). anthropomorphic figure in a panel located in a side canyon of Barrier Canyon. It was Second, there is an apparent lack of any recorded in 1973 and has site number datable or identifiable elements appearing in 42WN369. (The location given in the the paintings. Schaafsma (1971:129) ob- original site report is in error. The site is served that, "Because of the heavy emphasis located about two miles south of the de- on anthropomorphic representation, very few scribed location.) An anthropomorph in the objects are portrayed in the paintings. It is of panel (see Figure 1A) has been popularly considerable interest that the bow and arrow, named the Blue-eyed Princess. An adjacent which is commonly represented in Fremont anthropomorph (see Figure 1B) appears to art, is absent in all recorded examples of the have suspended from its waist a fox pelt Barrier Canyon Style". Schaafsma therefore pendant. concluded that the Barrier Canyon Style pictographs predated the introduction of the The fox pelt pendant appears widely in bow and arrow into Utah, which she states modern Pueblo rites, and its use is well took place approximately at A.D. 650 to 700. documented by early investigators throughout the Southwest; for example, it is a common Citing these and other evidences, and also feature at Zuni, Shipaulovi, Acoma, Walpi, noting similarities to the Archaic Pecos River Taos and Jemez. (Stephen 1936; Parsons paintings of Texas, Schaafsma attributed the 1939; Bourke 1884 and many others). If the

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 29 date of the introduction of the fox pelt pendants attached, which appear to be a fox pendant into the Colorado Plateau and into pelt. If this interpretation is correct, it would the Pueblo ceremonies could be ascertained, indicate that a large number, perhaps the it would form the basis for dating these majority, of presently known Barrier Canyon pictographs. Unfortunately, this has not been Style pictographs are associated with the fox studied nor determined. pelt pendant and are therefore of Pueblo IV origin. Its introduction, however, appears to have been recent, because these pendants have not These hypothetical dates are, of course, been described as appearing on kiva walls at based upon the correctness of Awatovi, where occupation is dated at A.D. the interpretation of the pendant illustrated in 1375 to 1500, and Pottery Mound, where the pictographs. It has been suggested that occupation is dated at A.D. 1300 to 1450 the pendant in the pictographs could represent (Hibben 1975; Smith 1952:xii). Furthermore, the white sash commonly found in Pueblo no examples of fox pelt pendants appear to kiva murals, but this is probably not correct, have been reported on earlier elaborately because the artists possessed white paint and decorated, Sikyatki pottery (Fewkes 1919), used it at 42WN369. If the pendant was nor on Mimbres Pottery, dated at A.D. 1100 intended to be a white sash, they most likely to 1200 (Brody 1977). From this informa- would have portrayed it with white paint. tion, it would appear that the fox pelt pendant Additionally, this difference in interpretation entered into the Pueblo religious ceremonies does not radically affect this indicated late at these sites sometime after A.D. 1500. date, because the white sash is as much a part Somewhat substantiating this late date is the of the Katchina costume as is the fox pelt observation by Parsons that the fox pelt pendant. Unlike the fox pelt pendant, how- pendant is characteristically associated with ever, the white sash is commonly found in the Katchina ceremonial costume (Parsons kiva wall paintings dated in the Pueblo IV 1939). It is therefore assumed that the period. pendant was either incorporated into the Anasazi religion at the same time as the These pictographic examples alone did not Katchina tradition or at a later date. Schaaf- provide sufficient documentation to formulate sma and Schaafsma (1974) suggest that the hypothesis that many of the Barrier Anasazi incorporation of the Katchina cult Canyon Style paintings dated as late as the took place between A.D. 1325 and 1350 Pueblo IV period. Additional information (This date has not yet been substantiated by indicated that this hypothesis had merit and archaeological findings). appeared to substantiate it. This paper will briefly cover five substantiative points. The Although all the above information does not examples presented here are not comprehen- provide an exact date, it does indicate a time sive. Others are known, but limitation of frame in the Pueblo IV period for the intro- space prevents their inclusion. duction of the fox pelt pendant into the Katchina Cult and, therefore, a correspond- The first point: The very position and nature ing, or even later time, for the painting of the of Barrier Canyon Style Pictographs argue Barrier Canyon Style pictographs found at the against their great antiquity. Almost all the 42WN369 site. Barrier Canyon Style panels are found in exposed positions on cliff faces and not deep Other Barrier Canyon Style pictographs also caves; and since almost all examples of this have been found in Barrier Canyon, the San style are paintings, the erosive properties of Rafael Reef and Buckhorn Wash that have sand, wind and rain would be expected to

Steven Manning, Dating Barrier Canyon Style, Page 30

quite rapidly erase this fragile paint. They rock face are so faint that they are now would weather many times more rapidly than almost indiscernible. There is no evidence petroglyphs. That these pictographs appear that Mr. Fausett "enhanced" the figures on his as distinct as they do in their exposed loca- canvas and did not accurately portray them. tions suggests that they are of relatively It is interesting that Pearl Baker, who grew up recent origin. Noticeable weathering of near Horseshoe Canyon and visited the site several of these pictographs has been ob- many times, said concerning this panel, "It served since their discovery and documenta- seems to me that the figures are not as bright tion, which further suggests that some are not as they were forty or fifty years ago..." (Baker very old. Unfortunately, not many Barrier 1976:152). Canyon Style sites were known 20 or 30 years ago, and accurate photographs of sites (4) A comparison of photographs taken by that could be used for study, that have not the author in 1968 at Thompson Wash with been vandalized, are almost non-existent. those taken again in 1981, and a re- Four specific examples of what I call historic examination of the panel, indicates a general weathering are given here. fading of the pictographs, apparently due to weathering. (1) At a Barrier Canyon Site in North Wash called the "Moki Queen" is a zoomorph. It These examples of historical weathering was first reported and photographed in 1932 indicate that these pictographs are eroding by Julian H. Steward (1941:Plate 128A). away at a visible rate. Their distinct appear- Although faded, you could still see four legs, ance of several of the panels suggests that ears and a muzzle in his photograph. In 1979 they were painted in the very recent past and no evidence remained of these features. Dr. not 2000 or more years ago. Castleton, describing the site said, "The other figure, also painted in red, has an oval body The second point: Another indication of a with a head and tail. It has been referred to as late date for the Barrier Canyon Style is a dog, bird or six legged duck, despite the found in the fact that they are almost exclu- fact that no legs are visible!" (Castleton sively pictographs; very few are petroglyphs. 1979:136, figure 4.1, also personal observa- A change in Pueblo graphic arts that appears tion). to have taken place in the Pueblo II through IV periods may account for this difference. (2) At a site in Horse Canyon called the "Bird This change was due to the development of a Site" or "Harvest Scene" there appears a new religious entity — the kiva wall paint- small but very detailed painting (Schaafsma ings. The first paintings occurred at ap- 1971:Figure 77). The small figures have proximately A.D. 1000 in the Pueblo II weathered so badly since E. J. Bird first period (A.D. 800 to 1100). Four well-known copied them, approximately 20 years ago, early sites with Kiva wall painting are: (1) that they are now almost gone (Personal Alkali Ridge, Utah (Brew 1946); (2) near observation). Cortez, Colorado (Prudden 1914); (3) in Mancos Canyon, Colorado (Jackson 1875) (3) In the Museum of Natural History at the and (4) in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico University of Utah, there is a copy of the (Ingersoll 1877). Kiva wall paintings grew large panel called the "Great Gallery" that is gradually in complexity as they spread in Barrier Canyon. It was painted by Lynn throughout the Pueblo region, where they Fausett as a public works project in 1940. appear to have culminated at the artistic, There are two figures near the center of the intricate, and beautiful paintings at Pottery panel that appear in the painting, but on the Mound, Awatovi, etc.

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 31 appear to be related. Some specific compara- The Introduction of kiva wall paintings led to tive examples are: the development of greatly improved painting techniques, such as: fine detailed lines, great (A) The rain cloud symbol appears in Barrier complexity, pigments of many different Canyon Style panels in Barrier Canyon (from colors, etc. Barrier Canyon Style Pictographs author's photographs in 1972; Smith 1980), exhibit these same characteristics. Even the and in the Maze district of Canyonlands same colors were used, e.g., reds, oranges, National Park (Lucius 1976). The rain cloud greens, purples, and whites. When kiva wall symbol is found in common use throughout painting became an accepted practice in the the modern Southern Colorado Plateau Pueblo areas, this influence may have spread pueblos (Mallery 1893). The rain cloud to the Barrier Canyon Style artists, and they symbol has not been reported as appearing in could have turned from the mediums of Fremont rock art, nor in Anasazi rock art in pecking, incising, and chiseling to painting. Anasazi occupation areas of Utah, yet it Kiva wall painting was in full swing in the appears several times in the Barrier Canyon 1400's and 1500's, at the time when it is Style in Utah. Thus it would appear that the hypothesized in this paper that the majority of rain cloud symbol came into common use in the Barrier Canyon Style pictographs would the Colorado Plateau, and among the Arizona have been painted. and New Mexico pueblos, after Anasazi "abandonment", or lessening of the popula- The third point: Schaafsma observed that tion in Utah, which took place about A.D. the design and technique of the Barrier 1200 to 1300. Canyon Style appeared to exhibit a sophistication not found in other rock art in the (B) An anthropomorph adjacent to the "Blue- Colorado Plateau (Schaafsma 1971). This eyed Princess" has a chevron torso decora- has an important implication. This observation. Multiple chevron torso decorations tion suggests that these pictographs would have not been reported as occurring in Utah have been painted late in time, during what is Fremont or Anasazi rock art (Castleton 1978, considered to be the cultural apex of the 1979), but have been found as a decorative inhabitants of the Colorado Plateau, and not element in New Mexico and Arizona pueblos in Archaic times. The cultural height of these (Fewkes 1919). inhabitants was reached in the Pueblo IV period. (C) The unusual and distinctive eye treatment of a figure called "The Great Ghost" (indeco- Also an important consideration is that if the rously called by some "The Holy Ghost") in Barrier Canyon Style was superior to others the Barrier Canyon, finds a close parallel in in the area, did some outside culture have a Canyon de Chelly in Arizona (Grant 1978). direct influence on the artists, or did the The Arizona figure is in proximity with artists come from somewhere else or did they Pueblo IV material. develop this "sophistication" by themselves? Possible answers to these questions will be (D) On another anthropomorph near the discussed below. "Blue-eyed Princess" there appears to be a representation of a "squash blossom" hair The fourth point: There are many similari- style (Figure 1C). Schaafsma also suggested ties between the Barrier Canyon Style and the appearance of an example of this hair rock art associated with Anasazi Pueblo IV style on a Barrier Canyon Style pictograph in material reported as occurring only in Ari- Black Dragon Canyon. This is an Anasazi zona and New Mexico; and, therefore, they Pueblo characteristic, and indicates a strong

Steven Manning, Dating Barrier Canyon Style, Page 32

association of the Barrier Canyon Style artists Cult of the Pueblo Indians, as reported from with the late Pueblo culture. ethnographic data recorded in the historic Pueblo V period of A.D. 1540 (when the first (E) There are a large number of birds that Europeans came into contact with the Indi- appear in the Barrier Canyon Style paintings. ans) to the present time. Two examples are This stands in contrast to the relatively small given here. number of birds on other rock art panels in the Northern Colorado Plateau. The follow- (1) Figures holding snakes: Anthropomor- ing may account for this difference. phic figures holding snakes appear at major Barrier Canyon Style rock art sites. Figures In the Developmental Pueblo period, there appearing with snakes are found on numerous began to be an increased interest in birds in rock art panels in the Colorado Plateau, but Pueblo ritual and ceremony. Hamilton A. only in the Barrier Canyon Style are they Tyler in Pueblo Birds and Myths said, commonly found holding snakes in their hands. The Pueblos have been watching their birds for centuries and during that time These pictographs exhibit a striking resem- have incorporated these creatures into blance to Hopi snake dance ceremonies every aspect of community life. where snakes are held in the hands of per- Even…mundane tasks…require the formers (Hough 1902). A relationship presentation of feathers from particular between the Barrier Canyon Style Picto- birds, while in the rituals that support graphs and the Hopi Snake Dance has also religious cremonialism, birds and their been suggested by Martineau (1973). feathers become counters that keep a complex symbol system in order. As (2) In 1899 Fewkes collected a series of signs, birds relate to goods, act as mes- drawings made by native Hopi artists of sengers between men and gods, or Katchina figures. There are some striking stand as signals between man and man. similarities between these drawings and the As a part of the surrounding world, Barrier Canyon Style pictographs. This birds relate to all manner of natural comparison becomes very impressive when phenomena and to weather control [Ty- the meaning of the Katchina figures is ler 1979]. understood. Fewkes said, "The Hopi Indians represent their gods in several ways, one of The existence of many birds in the pictograph which is by personation — by wearing masks panels, and the importance given to them by or garments bearing symbols that are re- the Barrier Canyon Style artists, suggest that garded as characteristic of those beings" these artists were participants with the (Fewkes 1903). Some figures of the Barrier Pueblos in the incorporation of birds into Canyon Style, especially those of The Great their social and religious orders. Since this Gallery, appear to represent the symbols incorporation took place sometime after A.D. depicted on these masks and clothing and 1300 the implication is, that the Barrier may well represent early Katchina figures. Canyon Style pictographs would have been Additionally, the Barrier Canyon figures painted during or following the Pueblo IV appear to be in parade formation, with period. individual figures standing alone, much the same as a Katchina ceremony. The fifth point: There are numerous similarities between figures in the Barrier Canyon All the above evidence points toward a Style pictographs and figures in the Katchina conclusion that some, perhaps many, of the

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 33 Barrier Canyon Style pictographs date more had no kiva walls to paint, so instead placed recently than archaic times, and that there their paintings upon cliff walls. was a definite and close association between the late Arizona and New Mexico Pueblo We are here faced with numerous specula- Anasazi culture and the Barrier Canyon Style tions about who these artists were and where artists. What exactly this association was and they came from. These speculations will how it functioned are not completely clear at remain just speculations until more archaeo- this time. Neither is the question of who logical data is gathered. were the Barrier Canyon Style artists. Perhaps they were Fremont people who Another explanation that the data presented abandoned Central Utah in the general here does not refute, is that some of the exodus around A.D. 1300, to live with the characteristics of the Katchina Cult — the fox Pueblo people in the Northern Arizona—New pelt pendant, the rain cloud symbol, etc. — Mexico area for a time, and then returned could have been developed by the Barrier periodically to paint on the cliffs symbols of a Canyon artists and taken by them, in the newly acquired religious belief. Or perhaps Pueblo IV period, to the Southern Pueblos. they were painted by Anasazi Pueblo people who left Northern Arizona in Pueblo IV The late date hypothesized in this paper for times, to travel throughout the Northern the Barrier Canyon Style may be very diffi- Colorado Plateau. Or perhaps a more plausi- cult to substantiate for two reasons: ble explanation is that they were painted by people who never left. Archaeologists have (1) If conditions in the Colorado Plateau, at told us that this region of the Northern the time the pictographs were painted, were Colorado Plateau underwent complete as Jennings (1978) postulates, that is, a abandonment by the Fremont and Anasazi change of the climate, which forced a corre- people during the years A.D. 1200 to 1300 sponding change in the cultural subsistence (Jennings 1978:235, Wormington 1947:80, patterns, back to a nomadic hunting-gathering and others); and that no one else was in the way of life, away from farming, permanent area until the Shoshoni language speakers dwelling construction and difficult-to-move came in the 1600's, i.e., the Ute, the Piute and implements; then evidence of this culture the Gosiute (Goss 1965). would be difficult to find, identify, and date.

That idea has been questioned by several (2) Vandalism poses a very real threat to the investigators (Rudy 1953:169; Taylor gathering of information. Publicity, the 1957:163-6; Cordell and Plog 1979:418). public's interest in antiquities, ease of access, This area may not have been completely more off-road vehicles, all have increased abandoned. It is much more likely that there vandalism and artifact collecting to devastat- was instead a very large reduction in the ing proportions in the Northern Colorado population. A few hardy people likely Plateau. Many of the Barrier Canyon Style remained, people who could have been the painting sites are now heavily visited. Sites Barrier Canyon Style artists. These people in Buckhorn Wash and Thompson Wash are could easily have been in contact with the badly vandalized. An attempt to totally Pueblo culture to the south, and they could destroy some Barrier Canyon Style picto- have been influenced by the thriving graphs in Courthouse Wash was recently Katchina Cult. These people did not, perhaps made. Black Dragon Canyon pictographs could not, because of economic conditions have been repeatedly defaced with heavy (drought, sparse food supply, etc.), build chalking. Sites in Horseshoe Canyon, the permanent dwelling places, and, therefore, Maze District, and the San Rafael Reef are

Steven Manning, Dating Barrier Canyon Style, Page 34

now showing signs of vandalism. If Barrier 1979 Escaping the Confines of Norma- Canyon Style rock art is of recent origin, then tive Thought: A Reevaluation of cultural material needed to date these picto- Puebloan Prehistory. American An- graphs would most likely be found on or near tiquity 44(3):405-429. the surface. It is these easily visible artifacts that people collect that are vanishing rapidly. Fewkes, J. Walter At the present rate of destruction, in a few 1903 Hopi Katchinas Drawn by Native years, no untouched Barrier Canyon Style Artists. Bureau of American Eth- sites with datable artifacts will remain. nology, 21st Annual Report, pp. 3- 126, Washington, D.C. It is our responsibility to make a complete 1919 Designs of Prehistoric Hopi Pot- and accurate record of these sites if we find tery. Bureau of American Ethnol- them—without disturbing any artifacts—and ogy, 33rd Annual Report, pp. 207- report them to the appropriate land manage- 284. Washington, D.C. ment agency—and also to the State Antiqui- ties Office—before they are totally destroyed Grant, Campbell and the recordable information lost forever. 1978 Canyon de Chelly, It's People and Rock Art. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

REFERENCES CITED Goss, James A. 1965 Ute Linguistics and Anasazi Aban- Baker, Pearl donment of the Four Corners Area. 1976 Robbers Roost Recollections. Utah American Antiquity 31(2):73-81. State University Press, Logan. Gunnerson, James H. Bourke, John G. 1957 An Archaeological Survey of the 1884 The Snake Dance of the Moquis of Fremont Area. University of Utah Arizona. Reprinted 1962, Rio Anthropological Papers, No. 28. Grande Press, Chicago. Salt Lake City. Brew, J. O. 1969 The Fremont Culture: A Study in 1946 Archaeology of Alkali Ridge, Culture Dynamics on the Northern Southeastern Utah. Peabody Mu- Anasazi Frontier. Papers of the seum, Harvard University, Vol. 21. Peabody Museum of Archaeology Cambridge. and Ethnology, Harvard Univer- sity, Vol. 59, No. 2, Cambridge. Brody, J. J. 1977 Mimbres Painted Pottery. Univer- Hibben, Frank C. sity of New Mexico Press, Albu- 1975 Kiva Art of the Anasazi at Pottery querque. mound, New Mexico. K. C. Publi- cations, Las Vegas, Nevada. Castleton, Kenneth B. Hough, Walter 1978-79 Petroglyphs and Pictographs of 1902 The Moki Snake Dance. The Pas- Utah. Utah Museum of Natural senger Department, The Santa Fe History, 2 vols, Salt Lake City. Route, Chicago.

Cordell, Linda S., and Fred Plog Ingersoll, Ernest

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 35 1877 Village Indians of New Mexico. 1953 Archaeological Survey of Western American Geographical Society Utah. University of Utah. Anthro- Journal 7:114-126. pological Papers, No. 12. Salt Lake City. Jackson, William H. 1875 Ancient Ruins in Southwestern Schaafsma, Polly Colorado. Bulletin of United States 1971 The Rock Art of Utah. Papers of the Geographical and Geological Sur- Peabody Museum of Archaeology vey of the Territories. 2nd Series, and Ethnology, Harvard Univer- No. 1, pp. 17-30. Washington, sity, Vol. 65. Cambridge. D.C. 1980 Indian Rock Art of the Southwest. School of American Research, Jennings, Jesse D. Santa Fe, University of New Mex- 1978 Prehistory of Utah, and the Eastern ico Press, Albuquerque. Great Basin. University of Utah Anthropological Papers, No. 98. Schaafsma, Polly and Curtis F. Schaafsma Salt Lake City. 1974 Evidence for the Origin of the Pueblo Katchina Cult as Suggested Lucius, William A. by Southwestern Rock Art. Ameri- 1976 Archaeological Investigations in can Antiquity 39:535-545. the Maze District Canyonlands Na- Smith, Gary and M. E. Long tional Park, Utah. Antiquities Sec- 1980 Utah's Rock Art: Wilderness Lou- tion Selected Papers, Vol, 3, No. vre. National Geographic 157:94- 11. Utah State Historical Society, 117. Salt Lake City. Smith, Watson Mallery, Garrick 1952 Kiva Mural Decorations at Awatovi 1893 Picture Writing of the American and Kawaika-a with a Survey of Indians. Bureau of American Eth- Other Wall Paintings in the Pueblo nology, 10th Annual Report, Southwest. Papers of the Peabody Washington, D.C. Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard Univer- Martineau, LaVan sity, Vol. 37, Cambridge. 1973 The Rocks Begin To Speak. K.C. Publications, Las Vegas, Nevada. Stephen, Alexander M. 1936 Hopi Journal of Alexander M. Parsons, Elsie C. Stephen. 2 vols. Edited by Elsie 1939 Pueblo Indian Religion. 2 vols, Clews Parsons. Columbia Contri- University of Chicago Press, Chi- butions to Anthropology, Vol. 23, cago. Columbia University Press, New York. Prudden, T. M. 1914 The Circular Kivas of Small Ruins Steward, Julian H. in the San Juan Watershed. Ameri- 1941 Archaeological Reconnaissance of can Anthropologist, N.S., 16(1):33- Southern Utah, Bureau of Ameri- 58. can Ethnology, Bulletin 128:275- 368. Rudy, Jack R.

Steven Manning, Dating Barrier Canyon Style, Page 36

Taylor, Dee C. 1957 Two Fremont Sites and Their Posi- Wormington, H. Marie tion In Southwestern Prehistory. 1947 Prehistoric Indians of the South- University of Utah Anthropologi- west. The Denver Museum of cal Paper No. 29. Salt Lake City. Natural History, Popular Series No. 7. Denver. Tyler, Hamilton A. 1979 Pueblo Birds and Myths. Univer- sity of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 37

Figure 1 42Wn369, "The Blue-eyed Princess" Panel.

Steven Manning, Dating Barrier Canyon Style, Page 38 Jesse Warner THE IMPORTANCE OF DETERMINING THE SIGNIFICANCE AND RELATIONSHIPS OF ROCK ART, RATHER THAN INTERPRETATION

In our effort to record rock art, we are translated or fully understood to be studied sometimes incomplete in noting what really and compared" (Marshack 1979:290, Foot- exists, particularly the relationships of note 2). various elements that compose an entire panel, and the context surrounding the In the past, many scholars have left petro- panel's situation. In our work to carefully glyphs to art historians to be viewed as photograph, sketch and trace elements it is examples of "primitive art" instead of, what possible that our efforts may be counterpro- is more likely, that these are important ductive, since the iconographer probably expressions of a particular time, place and viewed his accumulation of elements and the culture. By obtaining a basic understanding setting as a whole. of the symbols of the cultures with which we are concerned, we begin to see repetitions of The sum of the different parts, when placed the context in which these occur. With a fair in their proper relationship to each other, percentage of these occurrences determined, constitutes a scheme that may be more we may have identified a cultural tradition closely related to the whole concept. This (Steinbring 1979:155). not only involves linear placement, but process of line accumulation as well. It is Because of cultural conditioning, one has a often impossible to reconstruct the whole tendency to read into these glyphs the when each part is not shown in its original subconscious, culturally oriented ideas relationship. This is also true when super- acquired from our Anglo background, rather impositions are drawn as one unit (Turner than those derived from Indian thought and 1982). Individual elements, as well as the environment. groupings in which they are expressed, have significance. Even though interpretations The more traditional, often inaccurate modes are often inaccurate, it would be worthwhile of visualizing primitive or aboriginal sym- to gain an insight into the intent of the artist bolism by many professionals and amateurs without being burdened with the problems of are often naive surface level interpretations. interpretation. We need to reorient ourselves—abandon our subjective concepts, and place ourselves in a There are basically three groups of people more compatible position with the individual that have worked with rock art. The first who created the inscriptions. views petroglyphs as thoughtless expressions with no particular value or meaning except For now, we can study various styles of rock those which the panels may evoke. Second, art and learn the significance of composition, are those at the other extreme who try to location, size, relationships, repetition, etc. translate every panel into a precise state- We should learn about the context, role and ment. The third are those that believe that importance of aboriginal inscriptions. We "images and compositions need not be can then modify our recording process to

Utah Rock Art, Volume 1, Page 39 broaden our important role as rock art then support it with any secondary or exter- researchers. It will be our efforts that clarify nal sources. these prehistoric art canons and modes of expression. From November 1965 to November 1966, I lived next to Harold Tuchins, a Navajo When we take into account the many facets Hataal'ii (singer) at Coppermine, Arizona. that may be of significance and their rela- During that year I gained insight into Navajo tionships, as shown in aboriginal composi- life, values and the standards he felt impor- tions, we may still lack the ability to inter- tant. I also learned a lot about Navajo pret the contents, and still lack an under- philosophy. While questioning him about standing of the artist's intent. However, we Navajo religion, he would only discuss will have a better understanding of composi- questions—never answering them, until I tions with contexts and repetitions. We will considered certain blocks of information. thus be better able to preserve for posterity After learning the proper times, places and the panels that we are recording. procedures of requesting information, I took him to several petroglyph sites at Copper- The purpose of this paper is to present a mine. Some of these were associated with procedure that will follow a simple avenue Pueblo II surface structures. After following of investigation. This procedure determines his rules and establishing a need to know, I glyph significance and relationships rather inquired about what could be told about than glyph interpretation. In the context in them. To verify Tuchins' statements, I asked which we wish to apply it, establishing the William Dalton, a Hopi friend from Tuba glyph's importance or its significance, does City, to tell me what he could of these not define, translate or affix meaning, but panels. He added to the procedures of carries the facts that are necessary to con- Tuchins, and shed a different light on the sider when trying to determine concepts. idea of establishing a glyph's significance This procedure will consider any theory if it and relationships. shows credibility. Sufficient conclusive evidence needs to be produced before any Both Tuchins and Dalton acknowledged that credibility can be ascertained. the meaning was lost; and to understand them one would need to spend the time to This avenue of investigation will analyze find the significance of one glyph to an- any plausible concept using the scientific other, and what these relationships are. process. At this point, it is important to These are the two key words Dalton used. remember that one of the shortcomings of Tuchins described these elements as one this process is that it cannot prove any one being more important than another. He concept to be the right one, the one the artist proceeded to say that even though he did not intended to imply. All it can do is eliminate know the meaning of the artist, he was often or discredit others that are not as logical and able to tell a difference in the significance therefore, are less likely to be correct. and relationships of many elements. This was mainly accomplished by considering It is also clear that we are outsiders looking how the different elements were interrelated in. We lack the cultural ties to the people within a composition. that produced most of these inscriptions. We also lack the ability to determine many of the Tuchins defined a composition as either a contexts in which they were produced. conscious or subconscious action. A sub- Because of this, it is important to derive their conscious composition would be predicated significance from an internal source, and by, and reflect his moral or ethical standards,

Jesse Warner, Determining Significance and Relationships, Page 40

if he had any. This he did by assessing the that increases in size has a relative factor that ways that elements were intentionally placed its increased size implies. These generally or composed next to one another, thus have a relative or corresponding amount of establishing a symbolic context or relation- detail that allow compositions to be harmo- ship. Even in situations where individuals nious in all their relationships. The combi- had made additions or alterations to earlier nation of these two facts of relating con- compositions, such additions by their size, cepts, represent the significance and show location and other significant facts continue the relationships that the iconographer or disrupt the compositional aspects of the desired to imply within the composition. original. This is even the case when no significant meaning was intended by the Repetition This is the number of times and placement or element that was added. By the context in which an element repeats in a the size and the context that they chose to panel or at a site, as well as the commonness place their additions, one can tell a reverence or rarity in which a given element is repeated or disregard. This will also reveal insights within a cultural area. The repetition of into their system of symbolism about them- these elements and the contexts in which selves, and the group to which they added they occur provide the key to establishing their glyphs. their significance and relationships within the style or cultural area. A large percentage The facts that both Tuchins and Dalton of similar representations may indicate a considered important include the following: conventionalization. The widespread acceptance of the convention is directly Comparative Element Placement: It is proportional to the amount of repetition and important to consider the context and the the area over which it occurs. make-up of the composition, the placing of various elements in relationship to one The number of repetitions, the identicity or another. This placement is usually inten- similarity and dissimilarity of each element, tional and frequently establishes a symbolic as it is repeated is significant. Tuchins context. It is important to visualize: vertical indicated that similarities and differences in and horizontal placement, above, below, to repetition are probably the most important the right or left, at an angle to, within, aspect relating the information these ele- adjacent to, superimposed, facing, following ments contain. He indicated that viewing or peripheral. many panels, with and without the variation in repetition, is necessary to determine the Comparative Element Size: It is important significance of any specific repeated element to consider both general and relative size— to the context in which it occurs. The type such as larger, smaller, equal or normal (in of variation will be relative to the way the terms of natural size relationships or in element was used. relationship to the size of other elements shown). Exaggerations are also important— Any dissimilarities may include more such as too large or too small. The size of important facts to carry the concept the artist various parts of an element, in relation to the intended. The degree of divergence stresses rest of that element, also possesses signifi- the specific meanings and the relative cance. This is exemplified by an enlarged significance of the element. The differences hand, foot, phallus, etc. A small figure has in repetition allow one to establish an order. an absence of a large factor—and those This permits an understanding of the ele- implications. Large figures not only have ment's relationships, in different panels, from the absence of a small factor— each figure more complete (complex) to its most simple

Utah Rock Art, Volume I, Page 41 form. Sometimes this will be an isolated Direction This is defined as the direction in occurrence. The more representations of a which the element faces. The directional particular glyph, with its variations, are face, the way the element is oriented is located, the more our understanding of that important. Consider: Frontal, profile, plane glyph increases. view, up, down, vertical, horizontal, facing or following, multiplicity of direction in Hopefully, elements will be found in a element combinations, and the other ele- composition that will allow the identification ments to which it may be related. Note also of a concept association. This is the place- the direction the panel faces, or the time and ment of a more abstract concept into a type of light under which it is best viewed. concrete (easily identifiable) relationship with a more realistic natural element. This Attitude This is the state or activity—the will allow an association that will suggest pose—in which the element is depicted. An the concept of the abstract part. When anthropomorph may be standing with its several different but related examples are appendages in different positions. The ways found that contain the repeated context or of manipulating body appendages relate to concept association, the identity of the the concepts the artist intended. Determine abstract element can be alluded to. if the element is isolated or involved with other elements. When elements are com- Details The degree of details, or lack of, bined by lines, they may express extended indicates the importance of a figure or concepts. Types of detail add to the attitude. element in the composition, and frequently Exaggerated, hollow-looking eyes and the help dichotomize the context. Plain figures erratic manipulation of media, create an have an absence of detail and of those ethereal effect in Barrier Canyon art. implications. Detailed figures have the added presence of additional elements, and Subsequent Activity Has there been any the things they imply. Each type of detail intervention, addition, reinforcement, can imply different things. Exaggerated defacement, modification, etc., to the figures details in particular (those too large or too or to the panel? Some additions seem to small for the element as a whole, or which reinforce, modify or demean the original differ from the usual relationship found in concept. The over-pecking of a panel with a nature) are significant. These represent new composition may indicate the need to efforts on the part of the iconographer to restructure a relationship or illustrate a new specifically evoke a response. What needs one. This may also intend to denigrate the to be noted is what is detailed, when, where status or concept behind the element. To it occurs, and how it is placed. determine all the possibilities, all the information will need to be considered, even Angle This is defined as the state of being when it its obscure, faint or so defaced that above, below, or parallel to associated only a small remnant remains. Face, chest, glyphs. Note the actual or apparent angle or hand or feet peck-outs, slash-outs and mud- slope of the element depicted, as well as its overs, by the way they were done, imply relative angle to other figures. Angle disregard or reverential concealment. frequently indicated differing relationships to other less closely associated figures. Location This is defined as the environment Angle also plays an important role in solar in which a panel is located. Analyze the and astronomically related compositions. setting and panel direction to physical features. Note whether the glyphs are on ground level, ceiling, nook or any physical

Jesse Warner, Determining Significance and Relationships, Page 42

features of the surface that may have been intended. It will then enable future scholars important in the selection of that location. to determine, at least to a degree, the signifi- Note if any surface formations, irregularities cance and relationships of the images, and or modifications of natural features were possibly imply the concept intended by the incorporated within or near the design. Note long-forgotten member of a yet not-too-well- whether the composition is visible from a understood culture. distance or only a selected point. Does it have a hidden or open quality? These Now that the potential of relative size and determine private and public sites. Establish spatial relationships has been considered, it the location of other compositions, archaeo- is important to realize that even though we logical sites and how they are clustered. If see the importance and relationships, we do possible, determine the types of activities not understand what they may mean. What and resources in the area. has been learned from these items just considered, are facts that were either con- Record and consider the regional geographi- sciously or subconsciously important to the cal features in the local area. These will play culture, and the one who created the panels. an important part in directional or carto- In many cases, specific meanings will be graphic considerations. Take a compass impossible to obtain, since much of what is direction, and check for possible association seen is symbolic, schematic, stylized, with solar, lunar, stellar and planetary abstracted, conventionalized and finally risings. Consider all the environmental personalized. Yet, when a certain element is factors that might provide a context for the constantly repeated under selected circum- creation of the panel, and a pretext for its stances, and if we are sensitive and careful in content. recording, the context will indicate certain intentional variations. By studying these This information, used along with the repetitions and possible concept associations, information from an internal analysis, will patterns will emerge that can provide infor- help establish the type of site being consid- mation about the culture that created the ered. All this information will be useful symbols. (whether we think so at the time or not) to those who will undertake an analytical and Given enough sites in a given time for a comparative study of the symbols. Thus the culture, a statistical and analytical analysis recorded information must be sufficiently can often determine the general concepts; comprehensive to help other researchers see indicate variations, combinations and and understand the representations—as if at extensions in the use of the concept (mean- the site itself. Since aboriginal iconography ing still not determined). When elements are is the preeminent surviving form of expres- repeated in association with other elements, sion for prehistory, we must preserve the they often provide a concept association. knowledge it contains if we are ever to Thus, it is important not only to consider the clarify what was the past. elements by themselves, but to record as well the overall panel, and to carefully None of the above points occur isolated at indicate spatial relationships and sizes, so sites or in compositions. They are combined that more detailed element records can be and used together. Each echo and reinforce reassembled for later analysis. the composer's intentions. By applying a new understanding of these important ideas, While all art, and more specifically rock art, our recording process will preserve a more need not contain a message, it is certainly complete picture of what was originally true that many societies utilize such symbols

Utah Rock Art, Volume I, Page 43 in different ways. Art occurs as icons In addition to all the aspects considered, (religious symbols), mnemonic devices there exists in every culture various modes (memory aids), ritualistic elements, vision of communicating these symbols that are and dream records, memorials to preserve frequently referred to as levels of communi- important people, thoughts, actions, events, cation or planes of symboling (Eliada and as registers, markers, directional indica- 1959b:3). These range from the most simple tors, message boards, solar observatories and to the most complex. These levels require calendars. As societies developed, we find different levels of understanding, and each that symbolism became increasingly stylized usually has its own progressive stylization, and complex. These follow particular from the most naturalistic and simple to the conventions in shape, composition, color, most abstracted, stylized, conventionalized technique and embellishment. Similarities and complex. and differences can be seen in their depic- tion's. These details often become more As one moves from the profane, there is an important than the elements themselves. assumption of a more learned knowledge on With time, some elements take on allegorical the part of both the artist and viewer. This is meanings (meanings quite different from a common body of knowledge that is shared what the elements appear to be). Glyphs and often to the exclusion of others. This, and signs become symbols where elements stand the previously described important aspects, for particular concepts (Marshack 1979:301, can be illustrated by considering a petro- 303, 304). glyph from Venice, Utah (see Figure 1).

In most types of cultures, signs often belong This simple composition includes most of to a highly sophisticated, complex stage of the principles discussed. Balance, direction development that include many forms of and size were ingeniously relied upon to symbolism, icons and non-iconic abstraction, construct the desired concept. To see the and allegorism. The nature of this symbol- application of these principles consider the ism is better understood when we consider row of three sheep centered within this the existence of many secret organizations. composition. Those outside are rams and Within these, initiates were responsible for face in opposite directions. B is the largest the propagation of their complex, sacred and most powerful looking. It faces left traditions. At the same time, they kept their toward A, the smallest single element in the knowledge away from those who did not composition. A is also front-facing and is a have a need or a right to know. bird-like stick figure. D is the smallest ram and faces right, toward E—another abstract Many levels of iconographic representation front-facing outlined figure. This is the as well as non-iconic objects played impor- largest element in the composition. Between tant roles in the maintenance of these tradi- rams B and D is element C—the only ewe. tions. The decoding of these depictions is no She follows and faces in the direction of B. easy matter. All that we have is the repetition of a structural form—knowing that more By her placement in the middle, she could be was involved. Marshack (1979:304) noted, a fulcrum. As a point of balance the whole "Our difficulty in interpreting them...is due composition revolves and repeats around her not to the fact that they are symbols...but to like ripples around a pebble dropped in a the fact that we lack contextual reference and pool. In the first ring of association are rams relevant productions in any other mode". B and D. Notice the similarities in balance; both are sheep—specifically rams. They are represented in full profile, solidly pecked

Jesse Warner, Determining Significance and Relationships, Page 44

Figure 1 and facing in opposite directions. In the exaggerated. By sex, the composition is also second ripple of association are A and E. balanced. Again, notice the balanced similarities; both are front-facing, abstract, outlined or stick Following the formula to find the importance figure, and the largest and smallest in the of each element to the context, they need to composition. be placed in an ordered line by the criteria listed earlier. The importance would seem to In this scale, situation E carries the most be E, then B; C and D would be equal. weight. Because of element placement, we Group F may be next, and A may be last. have a unique situation between B, C and D. Dalton suggested that within some panels, Both B and C follow in the same direction, there may be a possible "direction of read- while D is going in the opposite direction. ability." This is generally not right to left, Also, notice the size relationships: C and D left to right, top to bottom, or from center are equal, while B is larger; A is small and E outwards. Most often, as exemplified by this is larger, and F are the smallest sheep. All composition, elements should be viewed the main figures are on one plane. The from the most prominent, largest or signifi- subordinate figures F are below and placed cant figure to each succeeding smaller and nearest the figure that they are evidently less significant element. related to. They were probably placed in a way to clue their relationship. There may be a division of interest or direction represented here. Imagine a vertical Sex is a significant part of the concepts. The line between C and D. All the sheep to the three largest sheep have been given sexual left are represented in profile and facing A. identification, one of which is extremely The importance of composing these elements in this manner is reinforced by the fact that

Utah Rock Art, Volume I, Page 45 the sheep to the right of the line is also in On a higher level, we begin to enter an profile, and faces in the opposite direction increasingly symbolic sphere that has been toward E. As mentioned, this in a sense acts defined by Eliada (1959a) as more sacred—a as a means to balance the concepts, by level beyond the profane. Even here, on this naturally pairing them in a context with what more emotionally subjective and symbolic they relate to or are associated with. level, there are various degrees of meaning. An interesting story could be created for A and E are on the same symbolic level— each level. One of these could be that these but by no means equal. Both may represent sheep do not represent sheep, but being concepts or actual objects, and are dissimilar symbolic may represent people. This idea is in that one was given much more space and not too far removed, noting that the Hopi detail. These two, both abstract and styl- often represented themselves on cliffs and ized—assumed to be front-facing, are similar government pay vouchers by sign-signatures in that respect, and are dissimilar in that they of clans represented by animals and plants are the smallest and the largest in the com- (Fewkes 1897). position. C and D being equal in size may express B and D would then also be opposed poles some equality in power, influence or social on another symbolic level. B and D would status. Since these are clearly and equally be balanced in that they are both sheep, given sexual identification as male and male, solidly pecked and both facing in female, they may indicate friends, siblings or different directions. They would be opposed a spousal relationship. On this more sym- in size, detail and direction. bolic level, it may have represented the circumstances when someone representing As Dalton stated, opposition or variation in the larger ram came and took C, and what- size often has meaning. What these may be ever F represents. Some may argue that this will relate to the degree of their size and is probably closer to the artist's intent than placement. Without the cultural context, the the first one. It is still doubtful that this is meaning is lost, and only their significance the story the artist intended, or the way he and possibly a concept of what they may implied it to be read. mean can be recovered. If their size is important to meaning, A and E, and B and D If it is true that these sheep, acting out do not seem to be valued equally by the various roles of some forgotten play, do artist. represent individuals, then by the second interpretation, it could have been either B or To show an example of what happens when D who drew the panel. If it was B, then he interpretation is attempted without the would be egotistically expressing his mascu- cultural context, visualize this somewhat linity at the expense of D. If it was D, we traditional, rationally objective interpretation would have to advance to a higher level of of Figure 1. Consider that on the lowest symbolism. Here a more complex level of level this scene may represent two rams that deduction for analysis is needed. have rutted for a female. The young male D has lost to the more experienced, bigger ram On this level with D as probable artist, B B. This has an obvious superficial meaning was undoubtedly drawn larger because he because of our background. It is doubtful was probably more powerful—although not that this is the exact intent of the artist. more important. Exerting influence on C and F, and persuading them with possibly A to follow him would not necessarily need to

Jesse Warner, Determining Significance and Relationships, Page 46

be a sexual connotation. In many ethnic represent an opposition in meaning or value societies, sexual prowess and intellectual in the mind of the artist. It may also imply superiority, or at least shrewdness, were something totally unrelated to E. It is only often synonymous (Reichard 1963:139). important to note that the artist depicted a difference in size and detail to communicate A may represent a concept or philosophy facts in addition to those carried by the that B in following subscribes to, as opposed element form. The variable degree to which to D, who possibly believes in a different A and E may be positive or negative would philosophy that may be represented by E. In depend on the point of view of both the artist other words, C may not have been taken for and observers. Each may argue the theoreti- sexual use, but intellectual pursuit. B was cal points, if not the selection of the size unable to persuade D to follow him, as he depicted. Based on the fact that size, detail did C and F. and relative element placement are important, then these contexts would carry these If D was the artist, he represented himself significances. Because of his size, B would smaller than B and equal to C, which would be more influential or powerful than C and seem to evoke more sympathy from observ- D, who being equal, are in turn more signifi- ers. One point that would show some cant or important to the story than F, which credence for D as the artist, is that if B had by size and location show their subordina- drawn it, A may have been the largest figure tion. in the panel and E the smallest. One usually represents his side of the story as the most Direction and sex seem to be of considerable important, which, in this case, is equal to the importance. A and E probably face to the largest. Since D is going toward the largest front, and may act as a polar influence on all figure, even though he may have lost or is the other elements represented by drawing going away from C, he must have taken their attention and opposition in their direc- comfort in the fact that he is heading toward tion of movement. It is very seldom that sex something that is "bigger and thus better." is depicted in other animal representations. When it has been depicted to such a promi- Notice how on each increasingly symbolic nent degree and exaggerated to this extent, it level, the "interpretation" was, in certain holds pertinent meanings. C and D are equal respects, no more logical, but it became in every respect except the difference of much more involved. This could be added to sexual identification. When a figure has and enlarged upon, but it already contains some derivation from what may be consid- way too much speculation, and suffices to ered the norm, or may have points that have put the point across. The purpose for these been stressed, concepts (not meanings) are few interpretations, is to illustrate that any generally implied. Remember that differ- interpretation is possible, and to show that ences of such stressed points in many these artists sometimes had a particular respects contain more information than do biased point of view that might be obviously the similarities. Thus, the genitalia of C and discernible. All that we can really say about D—exaggerated equally—do not carry the this, are the facts described prior to the same weight or impact of significance as interpretations. does the degree to which the phallus of B has been exaggerated. A and E can possibly be equated. E may possibly be the most powerful, important, Here I have established a few important good or whatever else its value expresses. facts, and placed the elements in various A, being opposite in size, may possibly levels of significance without placing a

Utah Rock Art, Volume I, Page 47 meaning (i.e., translation) on them. From These individuals have a faulty structure, this point I allow individuals to draw their because they skipped or hurried over impor- own conclusions. What is most important in tant construction steps. By using these new this type of presentation, is to make cogni- recording techniques, we can make rock art zant as many facts as possible so a reader research more definitive now and more can, with a greater degree of education, profitable in the future. choose for himself if he feels a need to find a meaning. REFERENCES CITED Meaning is not the major importance that can be derived from a study of these glyphs. Eliada, Mircea When meaning is considered along with all 1959a The Sacred and the Profane. the other pertinent and valuable information Harper Torchbooks. The Cloister that can be gathered from their study, Library. Harper & Row, New meaning is only one small aspect of a whole York. picture. Understanding that petroglyphs may 1959b Cosmos and History. Harper hold many facts and concepts of value, their Torchbooks. The Bollingen Li- worth and potential value for future research brary. Harper & Row, New York. increases. Thus it falls to us to properly record all the conceivable facts that may or Fewkes, J. Walter may not seem pertinent now. Later, these 1897 Tusayan Totemic Signatures. seemingly less significant facts may show American Anthropologist 10(1):1- some pattern that will allow us to gain new 11. insights. Marshack, Alexander The process of recording rock art and 1979 Upper Paleolithic Symbol Systems establishing proper relationships is similar to of the Russian Plain: Cognitive carpentry. A foundation has to be laid and Comparative Analysis. Cur- before the floor, and a floor has to be laid rent Anthropology 20(2):271-311. before a wall is raised. Without a wall, a window or roof cannot be installed. Each Reichard, Gladys step in construction, as well as analytical 1963 Navajo Religion A Study in Sym- interpretation and interpretive analysis, has bolism. Bollingen Series XVIII. to wait until all the previous steps are Pantheon Books. New York. complete before any further progress can be made. Analytical interpretation is like rough Steinbring, Jack carpentry, where each step ties in and makes 1979 Late Archaic Dynamics Through possible the next step. Interpretive analysis Cross-Media Rock Art Compari- is like finish carpentry—all it does is try to sons. American Indian Rock Art recreate the structure that was in the mind of 5:155-172. El Toro, California. the artist who created the rock art. With enough facts, and their proper handling, Turner, Wilson G. hopefully, this will be the way that the artist 1982 The Importance of Complete Rock intended it to look. Art Inventories and Their Help in Decipherment. Paper presented at Too many are impatient and hurry over the the Ninth Annual Symposium for less exciting analytical procedures to get a American Rock Art Research As- finished product—"a fully translated glyph". sociation. El Toro, California.

Jesse Warner, Determining Significance and Relationships, Page 48 C.B. Hunt (Summarized and Presented by Cynthia A. Everitt) DESERT VARNISH: SUMMARY OF INVESTIGATIONS

One of the conspicuous features of any In the humid, eastern part of the United desert landscape is the dark stain of iron and States staining by iron and manganese oxide manganese oxide, called desert varnish, that is going on extensively at the present time, covers much of the surface of rocks. It as in railroad cuts or walls of diversion produces a decorative tapestry effect on tunnels of the Tennessee Valley Authority. canyon walls; it darkens boulder fields at Clearly the stain is being deposited where the foot of cliffs and on mountain sides and there are seeps along the face (or fracture) it colors the extensive desert pavement on of a cut. It seems absurd to refer to these gravel terraces and gravel fans. It occurs on deposits as desert varnish, but they are no every type of rock, although it is less different from the western type in any way. common on limestone and dolomite than on the less calcareous rocks. The surfaces Along the walls of canyons on the Colorado stained may be the top or sides of isolated Plateau the stain or varnish is being depos- individual stones; they may be vertical or ited wherever there are live seeps. Rings of overhanging cliffs, or other surfaces desert varnish also mark the level of high splashed by rivers or wetted by seeps. These water in rock tanks. Varnish occurs on stained surfaces may be exposed to direct rocks of all ages: Paleozoic, Mesozoic of sunlight or surfaces never reached by the the Colorado Plateau and on rocks in the sun, such as joint planes or tunnel walls. Basin and Range Province. Desert varnish is forming today where water is sufficient to The stain, usually no thicker than a thin coat transport iron and manganese to the rock of wood varnish, consists of the oxides of surface. Canyons of Glen Canyon and the iron or manganese. It has been observed as Colorado River illustrate long stripes of thick as a millimeter in some locations stain that imply a drip effect quite like those (Engel and Sharp 1958). The proportion of at live seeps, only on a far grander scale. iron to manganese varies between 1:1 and Tapestries head at places that in a wetter 10:1 (Hunt and Mackey 1966). Trace period would be seep zones or at low places elements mixed with the stain indicate that in the cliff tops where runoff would collect. rocks resting on the ground derive their stain from the ground and not from the rock Desert varnish also covers stones lying on that is stained. These trace elements are the the ground. This is observed in two ways: same whether the stone is a chert, sandstone the first are varnished talus blocks that are or igneous. On extensive bedrock surfaces found on a slope below a varnished cliff. the stain is derived from the bedrock. The varnish on the blocks is a relic from the Airborne material contributes little to the cliff. The area on the cliff where the blocks staining. fell is now free of varnish—varnish has not yet formed on the scar. A closer view of the If we accept that the present is a key to the talus blocks show the varnish on them is past, and consider how and when desert being removed, knocked off at the corners varnish is being deposited, we can look at and edges, and the varnish remains only on locations where varnish is observed today. the relatively protected flat surfaces. In

Utah Rock Art Volume I, Page 49 most places where there is gradation be- REFERENCES CITED tween varnished and unvarnished surfaces, the gradation is the result of erosion of Dutton, Bertha P. ancient varnish. At many sites a higher 1975 Indians of the American South- percentage of talus blocks have their west. Prentice-Hall. New Jersey. varnished surfaces upward, and must have slid rather than rolled down the slope. Engel, C. G. and R. P. Sharp 1958 Chemical Data on Desert Var- The second instance of ground-level desert nish. Geological Society of Amer- varnish is called desert pavement. Stones ica Bulletin. 69:487-518. closely set or widely spaced can form dark, burnished cover over many square miles Hunt, Alice P. such as observed on the high benches of 1960 Archaeology of the Death Valley Death Valley (Hunt 1960). Salt Pan, California. University of Utah Anthropological Paper Generally throughout the Colorado Plateau 47. and Basin and Range we find compelling evidence that extensive varnished surfaces Hunt, Charles B. and D. R. Mackey antedate (come before) those prehistoric 1966 Stratigraphy and Structure, Death Indians who were in the region after about 1 Valley, California. U.S. Geologi- A.D. (Dutton 1975) The most artistic and cal Survey Professional Paper majority Southeastern pictographs are 494-A. younger than the varnish on the rock surfaces where they were engraved, and this SEE ALSO is true whether the surfaces are nearly flat and near the ground, or on cliffs and walls Hunt, Charles B. of overhangs. The stone walls of cliff 1954 Desert Varnish. Science 120:183- dwellings at Mesa Verde, Colorado are not 184. stained but are built against varnished sandstone cliffs. There are hundreds of Laudermilk, J. D. these prehistoric apartment houses along the 1931 On the Origin of Desert Varnish. cliffs of the Colorado Plateau. Many of American Journal of Science. 5th these stone structures date back to the first series, 21:20-66. millennium A.D., but they are not stained 1974 Natural Regions of the United with varnish except where the stones abut States and Canada. W. H. Free- against live seeps. Yet the cliffs back of man and Co., pp. 466-467. them, and the ground around them, are darkly stained.

Referred to as lacquer, varnish, "patina" or sheen, desert varnish is a deposit of considerable antiquity, a relic of past environ- ments; with an origin that is unclear.

Cynthis Everitt, Desert Varnish Summary of Investigations, Page 50