UC Merced Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology

Title Petroglyph Manufacture by Indirect Percussion: The Potential Occurrence of Tools and Debitage in Datable Context

Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3vb5w7cx

Journal Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, 21(1)

ISSN 0191-3557

Authors Keyser, James D. Rabiega, Greer

Publication Date 1999-07-01

Peer reviewed

eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California 124 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY

Pendleton, Thomas, and Associates lowing experiments that demonstrated how the 1988 A Research Design for the Management of debitage is produced, this report describes its Cultural Resources at the Pistone/Black characteristic shape and provides suggestions Mountam Con^lex, Mmeral County, Nev­ as to what sorts of contexts might contain this ada (Pistone Phase 11). Report on file at evidence. the Bureau of Land Management, Carson City, Nevada. Pettigrew, Richard M. RECENT professional rock art literature has fo­ 1985 Archaeological Investigations on the East Shore of Lake Abert, Lake County, Ore­ cused on traditional archaeological recovety meth­ gon, Vol. 1. University of Oregon Anthro­ ods and techniques at rock art sites to recover data pological Papers No. 32. that frequentiy have importance for placing rock Ray, Veme F. art motifs in a chronological context or otherwise 1963 Primitive Pragmatists: The Modoc Indians interpretkig the images (Loendorf 1994). The re­ of Northern California. Seattie: Universi­ ty of Washington-Press. sults of such work have yielded important infor­ mation for a variety of sites (Steinbring MS; Thomas, David Hurst 1981 How to Classify the ProjectUe Pokits fipom WhiUey et al. MS; Brink 1979; Loendorf 1990; Monitor VaUey, Nevada. Journal of Cali­ Park 1990; Prison and Van Norman 1993). Cer­ fornia and Great Basin Anthropology 3(1): tainly the most romanticized of these discoveries 7-43. is the exposure of art knages buried by dated sedi­ ments (Buchner MS; Cannon and Ricks 1986; Walker and Francis 1989), but a potentially more common and probably more useful result is the possibility of fkidkig rock art manufacturing tools ki datable context ki association with rock art pan­ els. Evidence of manufacturing activities in the form of tools and related items that have been re­ covered in the archaeological record include en- gravkig implements, hammerstones, abraders (or Petroglyph Manufacture by possibly pigment ^jpHcators), and actual splatters Indirect Percussion: The of pigment (Brink 1979; Bahn and Verttit 1988: Potential Occurrence of Tools 57; Loendorf 1990; Bednarik 1998). and Debitage in Datable Context Unfortunately, only a handful of North Ameri­ can rock art site excavations have focused on the JAMES D. KEYSER retrieval of archaeological materials associated United States Forest Service, Dept. of Recreation, with the production of rock art, and for those few Lands, and Minerals, P.O. Box 3623, Portland, OR 97208. that have, the effort of the investigator was often GREER RABIEGA focused on searching for obvious manufacturing 438 SE Gilham, Pordand, OR 97215. tools that might have worn out and been left be­ hind. Obviously, finding such specimens requires Petroglyph manufacture probably often in­ at least three fortuitous occurrences: (1) the ex­ volved indirect percussion, especially for care­ haustion of a tool at the site; (2) the discard of that fully made lines and edges of larger figures. tool in the immediate area of the art image; and Experimental replication shows that during in­ (3) the archaeologist recognizing and recovering direct percussion, debitage is produced from the chisel-stone that should be recoverable in the tool. Even if a tool became worn past its point archaeological context at rock art sites. Fol­ of functional utility, it may have been saved for REPORTS 125 rework or tossed aside, thus effectively preclud­ stone to produce carefully controlled line engrav­ ing its direct association with the rock art panel. ings. The experiments discussed below suggest Although manufacturing evidence has been that this method was most likely used to make found ki association with pictographs (e.g., Bahn small figures, to produce fkie Ikies as parts of larg­ and Vertut 1988; Loendorf 1990), several factors er images, or to draw carefiil outiines for the edges suggest that such evidence would probably be less of larger figures otherwise manufactured by direct common at pictographs than at petroglyphs. First, percussion. Thus, the research herein focused on pigment containers would likely have been reused identifying and describing the tools and debitage and thus removed from the sites. Second, appli­ used in indirect percussion of petroglyphs. cators (if the artist used more than just fingers) would almost always be perishable materials REPLICATING PECKED PETROGLYPHS (hide, hair, twigs, cancellous bone, feathers) One purpose of this research was to learn what which, even if left at the site, would rarely pre­ kinds of tools would most likely have been used to serve. In this respect, Loendorf s (1990) recov­ produce various types of petroglyphs, and to iden­ ety of two abraders at the Valley of the Shields tify what remainsmigh t have been left behind dur­ pictographs may have been more a result of the ing the course of petroglyph manufacture.' The artist's need for such a tool to smooth the surface intent was to focus on pecked petroglyphs, both in preparation for pigment application rather than because they are so common worldwide and be­ a paint applicator. As Loendorf (1990:47) noted, cause they are produced by the process most likely the abraders were expedient tools casually ac­ to leave behind evidence of their manufacture. quired in the site area, used short-term, and im­ A petroglyph can be pecked either by direct or mediately discarded. indirect percussion. Direct percussion produces Alternatively, petroglyphs were made with a an image by pounding a hammerstone directly variety of tools that would likely preserve in the against the surface of the rock "canvas," creating archaeological record; for example, abraders, a small crushed area or "dint" which shows up as hammerstones, splinters of dense long bone, ant­ a lighter grey or white against the normally dark­ ler tines, stone flakes, and even sharp metal er rock surface (Turner 1963).^ This light- tools—all used to produce a variety of pecked, colored pecked image is most noticeable when the incised, scratched, and abraded petroglyphs canvas is a dark basalt or sandstone, but it is also throughout western North America (Turner visible on lighter colored parent rocks such as 1%3; Grant 1967; Keyser 1977; Loendorf 1984; granite and quartzite. Repeated blows on the Keyser and Klassen MS). Some of these were small cmshed area create a shallow pit that can surely "tools of the moment" (like the abraders then be expanded to make the design. found at Valley of the Shields) and would more Unless the image is deeply pecked or abraded lUoely have been abandoned at the site. However, smooth after initial pecking, direct percussion finding and identifying one of these tools still re­ typically shows a pattem of slightiy unevenly dis­ quires that the artist leave it in the immediate tributed peck marks (Fig. 1) that produce large area of the engraved knage, rather than tossing it areas with a densely stippled appearance (e.g., even just a few feet away. Schaafsma 1980:29; Keyser 1992:70). Lines Some kinds of pecked petroglyphs, however, pecked by direct percussion show slight irregular­ provide a much more favorable opportunity for lo­ ities if they are narrow (e.g., antlers, feet, fin­ cating manufacturing evidence. These are pecked gers). Slightly ragged edges characterize larger images produced by indirect percussion, where a pecked areas or wide lines such as legs, arms, or hammerstone is used to strike a smaller chisel- "stick" bodies (e.g.. Busby et al. 1978:104-105). 126 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY cient for pecking petroglyphs. Stones of lesser weight lack sufficient mass to produce petro­ glyphs in a reasonable time on the basalts that characterize the northem Great Baski and south- em Columbia Plateau, which was the area of re­ search. Heavier stones cause the carver's arm and hand to tire quickly and result in much less contt-ol for blows against the canvas. Even with optimally sized hammerstones, tiring of the arm decreases pinpoint accuracy of the blows before even a moderately sized petroglyph (25 by 25 cm. of pecked area) can be finished using direct freehand pecking. During direct pecking, a hammerstone may fracture and a spall may de­ tach, but hours of experimentation show that these occurrences are not common. In more than 20 hours of petroglyph manufacture, only two of the five hammerstones used had small spalls de­ tach. Hammerstones did exhibit characteristic wear patterns, including dulling and flattening of the points or edges that directly impacted the rock surface (Fig. 2). Indirect percussion kivolves placing a smaller chisel-stone against the rock canvas and hitting Fig. 1. Replicated petroglyph of a mountain sheep. the chisel-stone with a hammerstone. The mass Note the stippled ^jpearance, relativelywid e of the larger hammerstone is transferred through Ikies, and ragged edges, all indicative of di­ the chisel-stone to produce the same cmshed area rect percussion. which, through repeated blows, can be enlarged kito a pk of the desired depth and ultimately into These irregularities of line and edge result from a design. The primaty difference in these two the inability of even an experienced petroglyph methods is that by using a chisel-stone, the artist maker^ to exactly align individual peck marks or can place it exactly where desired to mark the make especially fine lines (less than five mm. canvas and thereby create carefully aligned peck wide) by direct percussion with a hammerstone marks that produce regular, thin-lined, even- large enough to produce a figure in any reason­ edged designs. After many hours of experimen­ able time.'* Our experimental results agree with tation, indirect percussion was found to be the suggestions made by Tumer (1%3), von Werlhof only way to produce narrow, finely controlled (1965), and Loendorf (1984), and were designed pecked lines in a petroglyph during a reasonable to evaluate specific suggestions for comparing time. the two methods (see Busby et al. 1978:100). The results of these experiments showed that even the most carefiiUy controlled direct freehand Direct and Indirect Percussion pecking (with hammerstones weighing from 100 Our experiments indicate that hammerstones to 600 g.) produced lines five to seven mm. wide weighing between 350 and 700 g. are most effi­ with ragged edges and a few out-of-alignment REPORTS 127

Hammerstone used for both direct and indirect percussion. The crushed, flattened end nearest the camera (arrow 1) was used m direct percussion experiments (see mountaki sheep in Fig. 1). The large, smoothed facet along the side of the tool (arrow 2) is the striking area for chisel- stones in indirect percussion experiments.

dints. Directiy stmck individual peck marks were produced by direct percussion. Indirect pecked two to four mm. wide using several different lines are readily recognizable by the careful hammerstones. Clearly, with marks being a alignment of peck marks along a line or at the minimum of two mm. in width, there is almost edge of a figure, or by the narrowness of a com­ no possibility that direct percussion could align pletely pecked line that shows no extraneous, such marks perfectiy. In contrast, indirect per­ "out-of-alignment" peck marks alongside it (Fig. cussion was used to produce even-edged lines 4). In some instances, a large, directly pecked that were two, three, and four mm. wide. Dints area was first outiined with indirect pecking that made by indirect percussion were also two mm. shows up as an especially even border on an wide, but by careful placement of the chisel- otherwise roughly pecked area. Our experiments stone they could be perfectiy aligned and even showed tiiateve n a novice carver can produce the slightiy overl£q)ped to avoid any raggedness finest lines and most carefully controlled align­ along the Ime edge. ments using indirect percussion. In actual petroglyphs, fine, even lines were Tool Breakage often used to make entire figures, but more fre­ quently they were used to carve legs, feet, fui- In contrast to hammerstones that seldom break gers, toes (see Fig. 3), ears, homs or antlers, or or spall, chisel-stones show patterns of wear and interior body decoration on figures otherwise breakage, producing characteristic debitage and 128 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY

Fig. 3. Replicated petroglyph. Note the thin, even-edged lines forming cat claws produced by indirect percussion. worn-out tools that would thus seem likely to Hammerstones included specimens with a gen­ have been abandoned in the immediate area of erally spherical shape and others with a more cy­ the image being pecked. lindrical shape. In the many hours of experi­ In our indirect percussion experiments, a va­ menting with indirect percussion conducted by riety of chisel-stones and two different shapes of one of us (JDK), the more cylindrically sh^)ed hammerstones were used. Selected hammer­ hammerstone, held like a short, thick rod, stones (Figs. 2, 5) were larger river-rolled basalt seemed to offer the best opportunity for finer cobbles as they are the most common fist-sized hand-eye coordination and was less tiring to the (and larger) rocks in the area where most of the user's hand.^ This seems to be due to less trans­ petroglyphs occur. Selected chisel-stones were fer of the shock from repeated blows into the river gravel pebbles measuring from three to five muscles and bones of the hand when the haiimier- cm. in maximum dimension and weighing 20 to stone is held loosely at one end while the side of 60 g. Experiments showed that significantly the (^qx)site end strikes the chisel. This position smaller stones could not be readily held with one allows the hammer itself to rebound slightiy hand and stmck with the hammerstone, and sig- (thereby absorbing energy) and much of the re­ nificantiy larger chisel-stones absorbed too much maining energy can be absorbed by the wrist of the hammerstone's energy. Using a larger joint. Using a more spherical hammerstone, hammerstone with a larger chisel-stone quickly which must be grasped like a ball, significanfly tired the petroglyph carver. more shock was transferred into the user's hand, REPORTS 129 r^ •mm, M^ /

'.^?^HH

^K To Cm •

1 Fig. 4. Replicated petroglyphs showing differences in lines due to the type of percussion. The thin lines in the top row(secon d from left, diago­ nal at right) and bottom row (second from right) were produced by three different chisel- stones. \Wder, more ragged edged lines were produced by three different direct percussors.

since it was more difficult to grasp loosely and had less freedom to rebound. A loose grasp was cmcial to allow the shock to dissipate with either type of hammer. Alfliough several novice petro­ glyph makers expressed no preference for either spherical or cylindrical hammerstones, the 30 hours of experimentation conducted by one of us (GR) convincingly demonstrated that for him, too, cylindrical hammerstones were easier to use Fig. 5. Cylindrical hammerstone used extensively in and less tiring. The hammerstones that the au­ indirect percussion. Note that two spalls have thors found easiest to use measured 11 and 15 detached from the upper left comer of the cm. in length and weighed 455 and 640 g., re­ tool, but k remained fiuictional for continued spectively. use. Bottom is cross section at tick marks. 130 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY

Fig. 6. Chisel-stones used ki mdirect percussion experiments. Arrows kidicate the striking platform for the hammerstone: (a) from left to right, views are profUe, reverse, obverse, flake flront and back, and flake profde; (b) from left to right,view s are profde (note wom facet), reverse, obverse, reverse (turned 180° to use sharpened edge as working edge), flake, and flake profUe. The dotted lines show scars of flakes previously detached when the end was the striking platform for the hammerstone.

Chisel-stones (Figs. 6, 7) were selected from Both cylindrical hammerstones and chisel- quartz, quartzite, basalt, and coarse chert (much stones spalled during indirect percussion. One coarser than typical chert tool stone). Experi­ hammerstone (Fig. 5) initially spalled along the ments with optimum conditions (for shape, size, side of the working end at a flaw in the stone that and grasp of both chisel and hammer) showed that was not originally visible to the naked eye. De­ the more elastic stone types, such as quartz and spite the break, this hammerstone was still func­ quartzite, had a significantly longer use life than tional and additional heavy use caused a second the more brittle basalt and chert. Optimal chisel- (much smaller) flake to detach from the mitial stones could survive more than 200 blows before fractured edge. Neither spall precluded further spalling and as many as twice that number before use of die tool, but both of them would likely have multiple spalls wore them out. Chisel-stones of fallen to the ground at die base of a panel on which sedimentaty rock types were either too soft or tiie petroglyph was being pecked, and might have quickly broke or split along bedding planes. ended up incorporated into the archaeological tie- REPORTS 131

Fig. 7. Chisel-stones used in indirect percussion experiments. Views in all are profile, reverse, obverse, flake(fron t and back for lowest flake in Figure 7c), and flake profUe. Note flakes detached from both ends of Figure 7c. 132 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY posit at the site. Other than this one hammer­ chisel-stones seem likely to be a key artifact type stone, none spalled or fi-actured in any way during that could be recovered from a petroglyph site. indirect percussion, despite repeated heavy blows. Produced at the petroglyph itself, and likely de­ All cylindrical hammerstones showed characteris­ posited ki die immediate area, these small, bipolar tic wear patterns characterized by wom facets percussion flakes have a characteristic morpholo­ along their edges where the tool stmck the chisel- gy that should be readily identifiable. The spalls stone. (Figs. 6,7) tend to be broad, thick, cortex flakes, The experiments indicated, however, that relatively flatan d "tabular" in botii cross and long spalls regularly detached from both ends of the section. Terminations are hinged, indicating in­ chisel-stones when they were used in indirect per­ sufficient force to cany through the long axis of cussion. If the chisel-stone was seated firmly the chisel-stone. This indicates that the blows on against the canvas stone, nearly all of the spalls the chisel-stone were intentionally stmck with less (see Figs. 6b, 7a) detached from the proximal end force tiian would be the case with a knapper ttying of the chisel-stone (the end stmck with the ham­ to split the pebble (J. Fagan, personal communica­ mer). If the chisel was less firmly seated, or held tion 1998). These flakes have a markedly curved just slightly away from the canvas stone, spalls dorsal profile produced by a relatively wide, vety often detached from the distal end that stmck the duck platform (and correspondingly thick bulb of canvas as well as from the proximal end (Figs. percussion). Additionally, platforms are so heavi­ 7b-c). Spalls on loosely seated chisels were about ly cmshed and battered that they should be readily evenly split between both ends when the chisel- recognizable in lithic analyses. In Pagan's opin­ stone was finally exhausted. In cases of cata­ ion, these flakesuniforml y showed all the charac­ strophic failure, the chisel-stone itself split longi­ teristics of those produced by bipolar percussion, tudinally. For those with flaws, this occurred af­ and should be readily distinguishable from flakes ter only a few blows. produced during bifacial reduction. In two cases, chisel-stones did not spall and Our experiments suggest that such percussion ultimately wore out because their heavily cmshed flakes might be manufactured most frequently working ends fkially became too broad to produce from quartzite, skice this stone type worked the fine lines (they still could be used in indirect best of any that were used in this study. In most percussion of larger areas). But other than these of the Columbia Plateau, such quartzite flakes two cases, all chisel-stones eventually spalled. would not be common at the predominantly basalt Even most of those that survived heavy use (more cliffs where many petroglyphs are pecked, and re­ than 200 blows to produce parts or all of several cent research has shown a significant association glyphs) ultimately spalled at one or both ends be­ of quartz grains (or quartzite) embedded in the cause the chisel-stone itself was actually being rock varnish covering petroglyphs pecked in ba­ subjected to contkiuous (albeit relatively light) bi­ salt throughout much of the westem Uruted States polar percussion.^ For some chisel-stones, the (Whitley et al. MS). In this case, a convergence initiation of spallkig r^idly rendered the tool use­ of experimental and site-specific evidence strongly less as the broken edge quickly cmshed and col­ suggests that evidence of quartz and quartzite at lapsed. Others (e.g.. Fig. 6b) suffered spall de­ pecked petroglyphs should be expected to be re­ tachment and could still be used for more peck­ covered. ing—on some of the most elastic specimens, the spalled (sharpened) ends even provided better DISCUSSION edges for finer pecking.^ Similar to die argument made herein, Bednar­ The debitage spalls produced from these wom ik (1998:23, 25, 31-32) pointed out tiiat recover- REPORTS 133 ing manufacturing tools at petroglyph sites will many thousands of petroglyph sites. He sup­ provide increased opportunities for dating the ported his conclusion by contending that if indi­ images, and he urged archaeologists to begin rect percussion was so widely used, there should looking for these tools in their excavations at be large numbers of wom-out chisel-stones at rock art sites. He also provided a summaty of such sites. While we agree that many petro­ previous replication work in Australia and Rus­ glyphs were made by direct percussion (and sia, lamenting the fact that more replication ex­ therefore left no chisel-stones or bipolar debi­ periments have not been conducted. Further, he tage), Bednarik's (1998) argument says nothing noted some similarities of morphology, use, and about the occurrence at archaeological sites of wear patterns for his hammerstones that mimic such tools and their debitage that actually were those described above. made by indirect percussion. However, Bednarik's (1998) research results Although he denied the use of indirect percus­ differ from ours ki two substantive findings: the sion, Bednarik (1998) cited data that seem to sup­ size of the hammerstones and the use of indirect port the probable occurrence of such a techiuque, percussion. Both from experiments and actual ar­ at least at some sites. For instance, he cited an tifacts recovered from rock art sites, Bednarik unpublished experiment by Clegg that did pro­ (1998:28) found that hammerstones most fre­ duce both direct percussion and indirect percus­ quentiy ranged from 100 to 150 g., and were sion knages, but concluded that direct percussion "vety rarely over 250 gm." While this signifi­ was more "effective" (Bednarik 1998:24). Un­ cant size difference cannot readily be explained, fortunately, "effective" is not defined, and ap­ it may be due to many variables that could make pears only to reflect an ability to make a large it more or less difficult to peck a petroglyph on pecked area. Clegg's experiment also apparently different types of rock canvases (see Bednarik failed to explore the possibility that indirect per­ 1998:24). In the experiments discussed above, cussion may have been a specialized technique to hammerstones of different weights were used, make special figures or parts of figures (like the and heavier ones seemed to work better. carefully controlled, fine line figures described in Bednarik's (1998:24) conclusion that there is this report). "no evidence that the indirect percussion method Bednarik (1998:27, 30) also cited Russian ar­ was ever used, in Australia or in any other con- chaeological research that proposed indirect per­ tkient, in any significant frequency—if at all" is cussion of some petroglyphs but found only ham­ significantly at variance with our proposals that merstones used in direct percussion, as well as the method appears likely to have been used at Russian experiments that replicated a petroglyph many sites in the northem Great Basin and the using the direct percussion method. However, he southern Columbia Plateau and that, if so, the did not demonstrate that the Russian researchers by-products of this method could provide infor­ even searched for bipolar debitage at this rock art mation to archaeologists. Unfortunately, it ap­ site, and he noted that the Russian replicator had pears tiiat Bednarik's (1998) conclusion is based trouble producing "a precise edge; he attributes both on a vety different perception of the use of this to his lack of experience" (Bednarik 1998: indirect percussion and on a nusinterpretation of 30). some of the evidence he cited. Initially, Bednar­ That is precisely the point made herein—we ik (1998:24) seemed to suggest that other re­ do not lack experience, and we, too, had difficul­ searchers' assertions of the use of indirect per­ ty pecking a precise edge unless we used indirect cussion relate to nearly all pecked petroglyphs, percussion. Elsewhere, Bednarik (1998:24) also and he maintained that this cannot be tme for noted that the precision issue is important, but he 134 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY seemed to cortiuse k with depth of pecking, rath­ diocarbon dating of sediments from which these er than the careful alignment of dints. Finally, artifacts are recovered, would aid greatiy in plac- he noted that "rock art scientists have . . . col­ kig the rock art ki a chronological context. Giv­ lected large numbers of [direct percussion imple­ en recent advances in the recovety and recogni­ ments] in evety continent" (Bednarik 1998:24- tion of microscopic remnants of pecking tools in 25). We know the rock art literature of North petroglyph varnish studies (e.g., Whitiey et al. America reasonably well, and we know of no MS), it nught even be possible to relate specific such "large numbers" reported on this continent. tools to specific images on a panel containing several petroglyphs. In any case, recovety of CONCLUSIONS such artifacts in dated context would provide a The authors have examined thousands of pet- minimum age for the petroglyphs that were pro­ rogljT)hs throughout westem North America (in duced. We hope tiiat future research is directed the Columbia Plateau, on the Northwestem toward the discovety of such specimens. Plains, and in the Great Basin), as well as in China and Italy. While we agree with Bednarik NOTES (1998) that many thousands of petroglyphs were 1. Following more than two decades of studying made by direct percussion, some carvings (or and observmg petroglyphs on three continents, the se­ parts of carvings) in all of these areas were vety nior author began an experimental project in 1994 to replicate various types of glyphs in order to under­ likely accomplished by indirect percussion. stand both the method of manufacture and the evi­ Many of these petroglyphs are located in settings dence that such work might leave behind. Greer where chisel-stone debitage (and even wom-out Rabiega became associated with the project in 1997 as chisel-stcHies and used hammerstones) could easi­ a member of the Oregon Museum of Science and In­ dustry (OMSI) Young Scholars Archaeology/Rock Art ly have become incorporated into sediments at Program, during which time he elected to study the the bases of vertical panels or adjacent to more wear and breakage of petroglyph pecking implements horizontal ones. Certainly, the Great Basin and as his Young Scholars research project (Rabiega MS). Columbia Plateau regions, with their extensive OMSI sponsored these Young Scholars archaeology programs in 1994, 1995, and 1997 with funding fiom panels of petroglyphs pecked on vety hard and OMSI, the National Science Foundation (Grant ESI- often heavily varnished basalt cliffs and boulders, 9452688), die USDA Forest Service, and die Bureau offer an optimum opportunity for recovering de­ of Land Management. Jeffiy Gottfried of OMSI bitage and broken tools from petroglyph produc­ served as Project Dkector, James Keyser as Principal Investigator, and Daniel Leen as Field Supervisor. tion. The softer sandstones of the Plakis, Colo­ 2. When fresh, the light color of the dint is due rado Plateau, and Southwest might be less prone both to crushed rock "powder" (the geologist's to produce such bipolar debitage from chisel- "streak") and the exposure of the lighter colored, un- stones, but Loendorf s (1984) experiments show weatheied interior of the stone. The "streak" is what makes very lightiy scratched petroglyphs so obvious that sintilar chisel-stone wear does occur when ^A^ien fiesb,an d its removalb y weathoing (wind and pecking petroglyphs on sandstone. Loendorf ram) is the major reason why scratched glyphs are so (1984:107-124) also reported quartzite flakes in difticult to see after a few months or years (and why a dated cultural level below a petroglyph panel at so many scratched petroglyphs are siqierimposed by odiers). For a pecked petroglyph, however, the knage Petroglyph Canyon in Montana, but the possibil­ goes deep enough to expose the lighter interior stone, ity of these being spalls from chisel-stones was and k also frequentiy offers enough relief that k can not recognized and the morphology of these be seen even after weathering and varnish accumula­ flakes was not reported. tion have returnedth e pecked surface back to a color that is the same or similar to the unpecked surface. Recovety of bipolar debitage or exhausted 3. One of us (JDK) has pecked more than 25 pet­ chisel-stones in archaeological deposits, and ra­ roglyphs and supervised the production of more than REPORTS 135

15 others by various novice carvers, including the Forest Service, and U.S. Bureau of Land Management second author (GR). for thek sponsorship of the Young Scholars program, 4. For several reasons, our researchwa s not de­ out of which this report ultimately came. We also signed to document the actual time necessary to pro­ thank David S. Whitiey for his encouragement to pub­ duce a measured area of pecked figure. First, the lish and two anonymous reviewers, many of whose amount of petroglyph area produced varies signifi- comments were quite useful. cantiy based on the hardness of both the hammerstone (or chisel-stone) and the rock canvas. Second (and REFERENCES somewhat obviously), more pecked area can be pro­ Bahn, Paul G., and Jean Vertut duced m a given time on a large, broad, fuUy-pecked figure than on an intricate line design or one with 1988 Images of the Ice Age. London: Wind- many separate parts (e.g., appendages, interior body ward Press. decorations). For the purposes of our research, we Bednarik, Robert G. felt that a "leascmable time" was between 30 minutes 1998 The Technology of Petroglyphs. Rock Art and two hours to produce a pecked petroglyph figure Research 15(l):23-35. usmg a fist-sizedhammerstone . We recognize that it Brink, Jack might be possible to produce a fine-line pecked image 1979 Archaeological Investigations at Writing- that would mimic one produced by mdirect percussion On-Stone. Archaeological Survey of Al­ by using a much smaller and tighterhammerston e and berta, Occasional Paper 12/13:1-74. correspondingly far more fi:eehand blows. We simply Buchner, Anthony P. felt that taking many hours to produce indivichial MS The Southwestem Saskatchewan Rock Art images was unlikely for most rock art, given the fact Project. Manuscript in possession of the that indirect percussion can produce them in such a authors. shorter time. Busby, C, R. Fleming, R. Hayes, and K. Nissen 5. For direct percussion, the hammerstone could 1978 The Manufacture of Petroglyphs: Addi­ be held tightiy in the palm and fingers of the hand, tional Replicative Experiments from the but we found it both easier and less tiring to loosely Westem Great Basin. In: Four Rock Art hold the hammerstone near the ends of the fingers so Studies, C. WUliam Clewlow, Jr. ed., pp. that k could rebound slightiy and so that the rebound 89-108. Ballena Press Publications on of fingers and wrist could absorb much of the remam- North American Rock Art No. 1. ing energy. 6. During discussion with expert flintknapper, Cannon, WUliam J., and Mary J. Ricks John Fagan, he mdicated that bipolar percussion m- 1986 The Lake County, Chegon, Rock Art Inven­ tended to ^Ut small chert or obsidian tool stone peb­ tory: Implications for Prehistoric Settie- bles mvolved significandy harder blows to the pebble. ment and Land Use Patterns. Pordand: As­ Pecking a petroglyph involves sharp, hard blows, al­ sociation of Oregon Archaeologists, Con­ though the carver attempts not to dunage the chisel- tributions to the Archaeology of Oregon 3. stone. The spaUing that results splits the pebble less Prison, George C, and Zola Van Norman frequentiy than does bipolar percussion (except for 1993 Carved Steatite and Sandstone Tubes: those chisel-stone pebbles with flaws), but the spalls Pipes for Smoking or Shaman's Parapher­ are eventually produced due to repeatedblow s of ap­ nalia. Plakis Anthropologist 38(143): 163- proximately equal force directed at the same plat­ 176. forms (one on each end). The result is heavUy bat­ Grant, CampbeU tered and ciushed platforms—even more than on tool 1967 Rock Art of the American Indian. New stone flakesproduce d by bipolar percussion. York: Thomas Y. Crowell, Co. 7. An anonymous reviewernote d that his/her re­ search showed that hammerstones used to make me- Keyser, James D. tates and pesties from sandstone and andesite were 1977 Writing-On-Stone: Rock Art on the North­ sknUariy mtentionally flaked to produce "sharpened, westem Plains. Canadian Journal of Ar­ chisel-like" woridng edges. chaeology 1:15-80. 1992 Indian Rock Art of the Columbia Plateau. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Seattie: University of Washington Press. Keyser, James D., and Michael Klassen The authors thank the National Science Founda­ MS Indian Rock Art of the Northwestem tion, Oregcm Museum of Science and Industry, USDA Plains. MS in possession of the authors. 136 JOURNAL OF CALIFORNIA AND GREAT BASIN ANTHROPOLOGY Loendorf, Lawrence L. Reflections on the United States 1984 Documentation of Rock Art at Petroglyph Canyon, Montana. University of North Da­ National Museum-Gates kota, Department of Anthropology and Ar­ Expeditions to the American chaeology, Contribution 207. Southwest, 1901 and 1905 1990 A Dated Rock Art Panel of Shield Bearing Warriors m Southcentral Montana. Plains MAX G. PAVESIC Antiiropologist 35(127):45-54. Dept. of Anthropology, Boise State Univ., Boise, ID 83725. 1994 Traditional Archaeological Methods and Thek Applications at Rock Art Sites. In: New Light on Old Art, David S. Whitiey American archaeology has reached a level and Lawrence L. Loendorf, eds., pp. 95- of intellectual maturity which allows the study 103. Los Angeles: University of Califor­ and analysis of its development. While most nia, Los Angeles, Institute of Archaeology studies have stressed the growth of the disci­ Monograph 6. pline, few have emphasized the sociohistorical Paik, John A. context or the motivations of the individuals in­ 1990 The Sknanton Peooglypb HUl Site (24PH- volved. The United States Natioruil Museum- 2072): A Ceremonial Complex in North­ Gates Southwest expeditions serve as a focus of em Montana. Archaeology In Montana these historical variables, and this report dis­ 31(2):41-49. cusses community lifestyle, expedition partici­ pants, and financial agreements to clarify the Rabiega, Greer organization and success of the endeavors. MS A Study of the Artifacts and Debitage Created During the Production of Indirect Percussion Petroglyphs. MS m possession of the author. TURN of the centuty American archaeology wit­ Schaafsma, Polly nessed a shift in regional studies from the 1980 Indian Rock Art of the Southwest. Albu­ "Moundbuilder" controversy of the Eastern querque: University of New Mexico Press. Woodlands to the American Southwest (Willey Steinbring, J. H. and Sabloff 1980). The Soutiiwest offered tiie MS The Herschel Rock Art Project. Manu­ study of sedentaty, pottety-producing Pueblo so­ script in possession of the authors. cieties as part of a historical continuum in a spec­ Tumer, Christy tacular natural setting. Early archaeologists tended 1963 Petroglyphs of the Glen Canyon Region. Flagstaff: Museum of Northem Arizona, to view the archaeological record as a mirror of Bulletin 38. contemporaty Pueblo culture (Gumerman 1991: von Werlhof, Jay C. 102), thereby establishing a focused direction to 1965 Rock Art of Owens Valley, California. areal sttidies. This period (ca. 1875 to 1920) Berkeley: Reports of the University of "played an important role in the professionaliza- California Arcbaeolc^cal Survey No. 65: tion of anthropology" (Parezo 1987:4) and in the 1-128. large archaeological and ethnographic museum Walker, Danny N., and Julie E. Francis collections established throughout the countty. 1989 Legend Rock PeOoglyph Site (48H04), WyMning: 1988 Archaeological Investiga­ While the United States National Museum-Gates tions. Report on fUe at the Wyoming State (hereinafter referred to as USNM-Gates) expedi­ Archaeologist's Office, Laranue, Wyom- tions were a part of this practice, little is known of mg. the background of this effort. As Hinsley (1986: Whitiey, David S., Ronald I. Dom, Joseph M. Si­ 231) observed: mon, Robert Rechtman, and Tamara K. Whitiey MS Sally's Rockshelter and the Archaeology Curiously, we know very littie of those who of the Vision Quest. MS in possession of paid for so much American archaeology: their mo­ the authors. tivations, expectations, or influences on its devel-