Pecos River Style Rock Art: A Prehistoric Iconography 9781623496401, 1623496403, 9781623496418

Citation preview

PECOS RIVER STYLE ROCK ART

Publication of this book is made possible by a generous gift from Ellen Weinacht in honor of Dave Hedges with appreciation for his lifelong interest in the prehistoric rock art of the American Southwest

harrison3.indd 1

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Limestone enclave near the Pecos River.

harrison3.indd 2

7/17/18 8:24 AM

PECOS RIVER STYLE ROCK ART a prehistoric iconography James Burr Harrison Macrae

Texas A&M University Press College Station

harrison3.indd 3

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Copyright © 2018 by James Burr Harrison Macrae All rights reserved First edition This paper meets the requirements of ansi/niso z39.48–1992 (Permanence of Paper). Binding materials have been chosen for durability. Manufactured in China through Four Color Print Group Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Macrae, James Burr Harrison, 1976– author. Title: Pecos River Style rock art : a prehistoric iconography / James Burr Harrison Macrae. Description: First edition. | College Station : Texas A&M University Press, [2019] | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018018127| ISBN 9781623496401 (book/hardcover (printed case) : alk. paper) | ISBN 1623496403 (book/hardcover (printed case) : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781623496418 (e-book)

harrison3.indd 4

Subjects: LCSH: Rock paintings—Pecos River Valley (N.M. and Tex.) | Petroglyphs—Pecos River Valley (N.M. and Tex.) | Art, Prehistoric—Pecos River Valley (N.M. and Tex.) | Antiquities, Prehistoric—Pecos River Valley (N.M. and Tex.) | Pecos River Valley (N.M. and Tex.)—Antiquities. | Indians of North America—Pecos River Valley (N.M. and Tex.)—Antiquities. Classification: LCC GN799.P4 M224 2018 | DDC 759.01/13097649—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018018127

7/17/18 8:24 AM

To my daughter, Hazel

harrison3.indd 5

7/17/18 8:24 AM

The ferocity of the Tepehuan nation is inscribed in its name, which comes from the Mexican word teptl, which means “mountain,” or from the derivative tetl, which means “rock” or “cliff.” Both suit the Tepehuan equally well, for they live among mountains and cliffs. They are of a hardened and rough nature, like the tall oaks among which they are raised. —Pérez de Ribas, 1645

harrison3.indd 6

7/17/18 8:24 AM

CONTENTS Acknowledgments

harrison3.indd 7

ix

Chapter 1.

Introduction

Chapter 2.

Theory and Methods

11

Chapter 3.

Organization of the Imagery

17

Chapter 4.

Pecos River Style Typology

36

Chapter 5.

Discussion

72

1

References

89

Index

97

7/17/18 8:24 AM

harrison3.indd 8

7/17/18 8:24 AM

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I

would like to acknowledge Théodora Jonsson, my loving and supportive wife, who helped in the completion of this book. Some of the people who contributed to the preparation of this manuscript include: Damon Abdallah, Mike Alvard, Megan Biesele, Robert Bednarik, Steve Bourget, Carolyn Boyd, Terry and Kathleen Burgess, Chester Cayou Jr. (paya-hux-ton), David Carlson, M. D. Davis, Ted Goebel, Margaret Greco, Jonathan Haller, Jamie Hampson, Jim and Bea Harrison, George Hill, Jeff Jackson, Mike Klein, Laura McCullough, Leona Stanger, Shawn Marceaux, Michael O’Brien, Timothy Perttula, F. Kent Reilly III, Marvin Rowe, Harry

harrison3.indd 9

Shafer, Jack Skyles, Alice Tratebas, Solveig Turpin, Scott Tybony, Walter Wakefield, Chester Walker, Guy Weaver, and David Whitley. I would also like to thank all of the private landowners who allowed access to their property for this study. It is important to acknowledge the following institutions for their assistance in my research: National Park Service, The Nature Conservancy of Texas, Seminole Canyon State Park, Shumla Archaeological Research & Education Center, Texas A&M University, Texas State University, the University of Texas at Austin, and the Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory.

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Circular limestone bridge near the Rio Grande.

harrison3.indd 10

7/17/18 8:24 AM

PECOS RIVER STYLE ROCK ART

harrison3.indd 11

7/17/18 8:24 AM

harrison3.indd 12

7/17/18 8:24 AM

1

INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Book

T

his book presents a fresh perspective on the analysis of the Pecos River Style pictographs. A fundamental precept of archaeology is the desire to understand and describe how past human cultures lived. This book is an attempt to explain certain aspects of both the pictographs of the Lower Pecos and the people who created them. This study conveys how the Pecos River Style was locally developed and how it was deeply rooted to a life in the Lower Pecos canyons and the people who resided there. The symbolism is as indigenous as the Texas mountain laurel or lechugilla. At the same time, this symbolism bears testimony to outside influences and contemporary archaeological trends of the Middle Archaic period (ca. 3000–5800 BP). The Pecos River Style contains a great deal of information about an ancient and long-lasting culture of the Lower Pecos desert. The art contains deeply spiritual

harrison3.indd 1

content and is an important and accessible data set for understanding regionally specific religious practice during the Middle and Late Archaic. The paintings are also a diachronic series of historical monuments, and they encode a great deal of social information. In this book, I argue that the art is a historical record, providing symbols of the leaders and medicine men. The Pecos River Style is an iconography of power and a “reunion with nature” (Turpin 1999:24). The style is also an adaptive system contributing to social organization, identity, and cohesion. Because of their regularity and content, the paintings undoubtedly reflect a much deeper underlying context of legends, oral history, and ritual behaviors. The Pecos River Style is highly aesthetic and developed. These large-scale murals required intelligence, skill, knowledge, and creativity to create. Achieving heights upwards of 10 m (30 ft) from the rock shelter floor, some paintings required elevated scaffolding. Classic Pecos River Style poly-

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Chapter 1

chrome paintings are a combination of red, black, yellow, and white colors. The major shelters are layer after layer of painting episodes, each marked by the characteristics of the site, the artist, and the time periods of the different paintings. These painting episodes are archaeological features that collectively make up a site, the diachronic accumulation of repeated ritual behavior still marking the landscape. Pecos River Style iconography is the visual legacy of a Native American people who resided in the Lower Pecos region; ancient, haunting, and unfamiliar, it is a testament to both their adaptation and artistic achievement.

Geology and Climate The Lower Pecos lies within the Chihuahuan Desert. Its neighboring regions are the Trans-Pecos, Texas Hill Country, South Texas Thornscrub, and the vast Bolsón de Mapimí desert of northern Mexico. The Lower Pecos is a desert defined by horizontal layers of exposed limestone bedrock. To the south, the relatively verdant Serranías del Burro rise, forming sky-islands of oak and palm forest watered by the rainfall that the mountains receive. The Lower Pecos spans the borders of the United States and Mexico and the states of Texas and Coahuila. The US portion of the Lower Pecos consists of a plateau that has been deeply incised by the Rio Grande, Pecos, and Devils rivers along with their numerous tributaries. The Mexican half of the region is defined by the Serranías del Burro and its drainages as well as a vast desert plain separating those mountains from the river, split by several large arroyos. The predominate vegetation in these areas outside

of the canyons are sagebrush and cactus, including prickly pear, cholla, agave, yucca, mammillaria, and ocotillo. The Lower Pecos is an arid landscape defined by karst Cretaceous limestone exposures carved into a labyrinth of dendritic canyons, rock shelters, and caves. The canyons form linear riparian corridors harboring plant and animal life. Numerous rock shelters and overhangs occur throughout the region, forming parabolic shelters carved by deep flood eddies in the bends of rivers and creeks during earlier eras of channel downcutting through the layers of uplifted limestone. Later, these overhangs and rock shelters became attractive natural domiciles for the Archaic hunterfisher-gatherers residing here and over time became the canvases for their paintings. The rock shelters provided convenient refuge that was warm in winter, cool in summer, protected from the elements, and dry. Annual rainfall is in the range of 30 cm to 55 cm in an increasing gradient from west to east across the region, as well as being influenced by elevation (Kochel 1982:230; Shafer 1988:25). Rainfall occurs in a bimodal pattern peaking in April–June and September. Winter precipitation often occurs in the form of light rain or heavy mist when low clouds settle over the desert as the result of winter storms. Winters are generally mild with only rare snowfall; however, evening temperatures are often cool or cold and can be below freezing between October and March. Summers are hot and commonly well over 90°F or 100°F with intense solar exposure. Summer rainfall often falls in the

2

harrison3.indd 2

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Introduction

form of thunderstorms, sometimes causing flash flooding in the bedrock canyons. Tropical Gulf systems sometimes track into the Lower Pecos desert, resulting in large, widespread rainfall events. According to Poole and others (2007:14– 25), the Lower Pecos straddles three distinctive natural regions: the Edwards Plateau (east and north), Trans-Pecos (west), and South Texas Brush Country/Tamaulipan Thornscrub (south). Water is rare and not equitably distributed across the Lower Pecos landscape. Perennial surface water occurs in the Rio Grande, Devils, Pecos, and San Rodrigo rivers. The Rio Grande and Pecos River may have been nonpotable, and the latter was referred to by the Spanish as the Río Salado (Salty River). There are numerous springs and seeps within the canyons. These springs are the upwelling of ground water from regional aquifers and are found most frequently at lower elevations in the deeply incised river canyons. Reliable water is less common on the surrounding limestone uplands, but occasional springs can be found. The evidence from fossil pollen from the Devils Mouth site, Eagle Cave, Bonfire Shelter, and other sites indicates that the paleoenvironment during the Paleoindian, Early Archaic, and first half of the Middle Archaic was noticeably wetter than the climate today. Pine pollen was more common, indicating stands of pine trees closer to the Lower Pecos. Pollen of Nyctaginaceae (daisy family) was also more common, indicating stronger spring and summer rains. There was also a low percentage or absence of many xeric species during this time period. Liquidambar (sweet gum tree)

pollen was also present during the earlier periods, but absent later. The second half of the Middle Archaic (ca. 4500 BP and onward) saw a distinctive and long-lasting shift toward a drier climate. Pine pollen diminished and was replaced with pollen from desert species such as agave, yucca, acacia, and prosopis (mesquite). These xeric conditions have continued to the present day. But this shift was not wholly unilateral; the pollen record does indicate occasional, punctuated interludes back to wetter conditions, particularly during one such change in the early part of the Late Archaic, (ca. 2200–3000 BP) (Story and Bryant 1966:144–156). Starting with Taylor (1964), anthropologists working in this area have hypothesized the existence of a landscape of stable hunter-fisher-gatherer cultures on the basis of the premise of “tethered nomadism.” According to this idea, bands circulated around reliable sources of water, as the presence of water determined group territories and core cultural areas. Different groups were at least partially spatially insulated because of vast arid spaces lying between them. Dymond (1976:63) elaborated on seven different models that this type of “tethered nomadism” might have looked like in the Lower Pecos. The arid Lower Pecos is surrounded by a series of diverse ecological areas: the Trans-Pecos and Big Bend regions (west and northwest), Llano Estacado (northeast), the Edwards Plateau (east), the Gulf Coastal Plains (southeast), and the desert and basin of the Gran Chichimeca region of Northern Mexico, including the outer ranges of the Sierra Madre Oriental (south 3

harrison3.indd 3

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Chapter 1

and southwest). Each of these areas is geologically and ecologically unique, and each had its own hunter-fisher-gatherer peoples. A series of large springs trace the edge of the Edwards Plateau, forming the headwaters of several rivers; this series of springs extends at least from the Lower Pecos and Del Rio (San Felipe Springs) to Belton, Texas (Miller Springs). The Pecos River and Rio Grande were paths linking the Lower Pecos with the Desert Southwest and Gulf Coastal Plains. Isolated desert springs allowed travel in and out of the Lower Pecos in all directions, at least by those familiar with the intricacies of the landscape. The spatial distribution of projectile points and archaeological assemblages can be used to partially trace the movement of these peoples.

Archaeological Context The subject of this book is the paintings produced by the indigenous peoples of the Lower Pecos, specifically the earliest paintings, which demonstrate the Pecos River Style. These paintings are the visual legacy of a desert-adapted aboriginal people, far removed and culturally cut off from us, the modern, western observer. This Lower Pecos Archaic culture developed a unique and complex symbol system and expended a great deal of energy creating these often monument-sized paintings. This tradition persisted for many millennia. The production of the paintings was naturally linked to the seasonal round of these mobile hunter-fisher-gatherers, their group mobility strategy based on the acquisition of wild food resources, such as cactus, wild fruit, small game, large game,

fish, and mussels. Temporary overexploitation of natural resources such as plants, game, or firewood necessitated moving from place to place. The seasonal round was also based on reaching particular resource patches at their period of maximum productivity. Some of the large rock shelters, such as Panther Cave, were likely occupied year round by at least a few individuals, particularly those who would have difficulty traveling: the old, young, injured, or infirm. Mobility strategies in the region could have varied between those hunter-fishergatherer bands with semipermanent base camps supported by task groups and fully mobile hunter-fisher-gatherer bands. The challenging nature of existing as a hunterfisher-gatherer on the wild plants and game available in the Lower Pecos would have limited population size. Linear canyon systems were logical population corridors, stable cultural heartlands that combined water, riparian habitat, and aquatic resources as well as the presence of large dry overhangs for shelter. There are expansive, stratified river terrace sites at the mouth of the Pecos and Devils rivers, but they are now inundated by Lake Amistad. As a seminal and diagnostic cultural trait, the Pecos River Style has been adopted as the identifier for the Lower Pecos cultural area (Shafer 1977:14). Pecos River Style paintings are found only on limestone overhangs, and thus the spatial limits of the pictographs are ultimately based on the spatial distribution of surface-exposed karst limestone and canyon systems. Similar overhangs occur in Central

4

harrison3.indd 4

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Figure 1. Overview of the Lower Pecos region.

harrison3.indd 5

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Chapter 1

Texas and areas of West Texas, and no Pecos River Style paintings are known there. Before significant studies of the meaning of the rock art, archaeologists had documented the rich archaeological record of the Lower Pecos in many studies (Hall and Black 2010). The archaeological record is the context of the imagery, and it is very important in understanding the meaning of the rock art. For example, the Middle Archaic San Felipe phase (and possibly the terminal Eagle Nest phase) is associated with the initial creation of the Pecos River Style. This time period has relatively abundant and well-documented layers within many of the stratified rock shelters and river terrace sites that have been tested or excavated, along with an archaeological landscape of smaller lithic or processing sites dated on the basis of the presence of contemporaneous projectile point styles. Both aspects of the archaeology, the archaeological sites and complex pictographs, can be used synergistically to better understand the past. Pandale points are a distinctive, twisted, lanceolate projectile point style produced in the Lower Pecos region between ca. 4500 and 6000 BP. In terms of lithics, Pandale points represent a distinctive locally derived form that is most common in the Lower Pecos but also known in surrounding regions. They are an important local cultural development that just predates the creation of the Pecos River Style. By the Middle Archaic, when the Pecos River Style was being produced in full force, Pandale Points had been replaced by the diagnostic, angular, corner-notched Langtry and Val Verde points. Pecos River

Style paintings of the Late Archaic, when this rock art was still being produced, are associated with people producing Montell, Castroville, and Marcos points as well as smaller corner-notched Shumla points (Turner and Hester 1999). Archaeological work has been conducted in the Lower Pecos since the 1930s, and well-preserved, perishable cave deposits were documented during these projects. In the late 1960s a suite of salvage archaeology work was conducted before the construction of Lake Amistad, including the excavation of the deeply stratified Devils Mouth and Arenosa sites at the mouths of the Devils and Pecos rivers (Shafer 2013:59). This led to work at Hinds and Baker caves. A number of studies of paleoecology and diet were conducted on the basis of the material remains found in the caves, especially pollen and coprolites. Studies since the 1990s have been more focused on the region’s rock art (mostly the Pecos River Style) along with other specialized studies based on analyses of the area’s rich and varied archaeological and paleoecological record (Hall and Black 2010). In the 1990s, Marvin Rowe and colleagues at Texas A&M University developed a cutting-edge technique for dating pictographs with organic binder. Significantly, many of the initial dates were from Pecos River Style samples collected by Hyman and Rowe (1997:64–65) from sites with highly spalled paintings in Seminole Canyon. Their method, a combination of plasma oxidization and accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon dating, is now being conducted by a second lab. Because this new technique is practiced by only a few

6

harrison3.indd 6

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Introduction

labs, these radiocarbon dates are not universally accepted by academics and are still considered experimental by some, creating a conundrum for placing Pecos River Style pictographs in a sound and well-established chronological context. Rowe’s radiocarbon dates show that Pecos River Style paintings were produced between ca. 1500 and 4000 BP, an interval of over two millennia (Bates et al. 2015:53; Rowe 2004:149–151). This date range falls within the San Felipe, Cibola, Flanders, and Blue Hills Intervals (Shafer 2013: Table 1). If correct, these radiocarbon dates extend the production of Pecos River Style art at least a thousand years later than previously thought. On the other hand, traditional archaeology has attributed these pictographs to the second portion of the Middle Archaic, the San Felipe phase (Hester 1989:59; Turpin 1990:100). As with many forms of rock art, and despite substantial and ongoing research efforts, the time frame of Pecos River Style paintings has not been entirely tied down. With continued and additional research, it should be possible to better ascertain the date range; therefore, a general Archaic association is often cited in this book.

Biographical Information and Field Methods In order to provide a brief accounting of my background and perspective in the Lower Pecos region, the following synopsis is included. I am from the Texas Gulf Coast (Brazoria County), and my first trip to the Lower Pecos was during a 1991 family camping trip to Devils River State Natural Area at age 15. During that trip State Park

Ranger Bill Armstrong guided us to a wellpreserved Pecos River Style site (41VV888) located there. In college from 1995 to 1998, I traveled frequently to “the Pecos” to climb at a now-closed area near the National Park Service boat ramp at the mouth of the Pecos River. During this time, I canoed the Pecos and Devils rivers with friends and family and encountered other Pecos River Style sites. In 1998 my parents, Jim and Bea Harrison, took a job with the Nature Conservancy of Texas as land stewards of the Dolan Falls Preserve on the Devils River. From 1998 to 2001 I spent much time in the area and became more familiar with the landscape. Dr. Carolyn Boyd (from Texas A&M University) visited Dolan Falls Preserve during this time and I accompanied her to pictograph sites located within the nature reserve. After graduating from Southwest Texas State University and going on to work on an excavation project in Middle Tennessee I decided to pursue a graduate degree focusing on the Pecos River Style. I was accepted into the master’s program at Texas A&M University in 2001 with a committee consisting of Carolyn Boyd, David Carlson, Mike Alvard, Marvin Rowe, and outside committee member F. Kent Reilly III. My graduate research in the Lower Pecos was conducted from January to May 2003. I was based at the Nature Conservancy’s Devils River properties and the Shumla School campus near Langtry. The objective of my graduate research was to identify rock art spatial or territorial markers across the region with Pecos River Style paintings. During my graduate research, I visited 7

harrison3.indd 7

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Chapter 1

approximately 65 sites and selected 43 for formal recording. Some sites had to be left out of the study because they were of another style. Others were in too bad of a condition to record; we were unable to see enough of the rock art to conduct a good analysis. I sketched and photographed the pictographs Figure 2. Devils River riparian corridor. on the panel from left to right, with core motifs I have found that it is imperative to (explained later) as the basic unit of draw the pictographs, rather than just to recording. A series of full color renderings photograph or describe them in written of select pictographs was created using narratives. Sketching the pictographs was colored art markers. Certain interesting important for noticing small details that and complex images were illustrated in might otherwise be overlooked. Drawing this way. the images in their entirety makes it more Small panels were studied in a few difficult to gloss over details unfamiliar to hours, and the largest sites required up to our cultural eye. Because Pecos River Style five days to record. There was no contact art does not necessarily fall within any sign with or damage to the pictographs as a or symbol category for our culture, such result of our study. Natural lighting was images tend to be over-looked, as if they used for all photographs, and the photogwere invisible. raphy required visiting each shelter during shady or cloudy conditions.

8

harrison3.indd 8

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Figure 3. Cedar Springs rock shelter.

Figure 4. Devils River, limestone upland environment.

harrison3.indd 9

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Figure 5. Eagle Cave near Langtry.

Figure 6. Parabolic Rock shelter on the Devils River.

harrison3.indd 10

7/17/18 8:24 AM

2

THEORY AND METHODS Structural-Iconographic Analysis

I

was introduced to this iconographic method based on examples in Olmec material while an undergraduate student at Southwest Texas State University by F. Kent Reilly III. He demonstrated that a series of four separate jade figurines that, when placed together, create a logical sequence of human to jaguar and vice versa (Reilly 1995). Reilly was the graduate student of Linda Schele at the University of Texas at Austin. Thus, the methods in this book stem from her work. Structural analysis had already borne fruit in the studies of Mayan art and the decipherment of Mayan hieroglyphs (Coe 1992). Structural analysis is the term Linda Schele used to describe her approach to Mayan hieroglyphs, which led to the eventual interpretation of much of its corpus. However, among a broader anthropological community, the term “structural analysis” has a different meaning relating largely

harrison3.indd 11

to the earlier work of Leroi-Gourhan and Levi-Strauss. Schele was aware of this work, and she chose the term “structural” to reflect the similarity, but the scope and praxis of her methods represented a true development from classic structural analysis in that she did not apply any a priori schema to the hieroglyphs—instead, she traced out and defined the inherent patterning in as empirical and unbiased a manner as possible. It can be considered a poststructuralist approach. Besides this pictograph study, her method has been used only in the study of Mayan hieroglyphics and some Mesoamerican and Southeastern iconography. I use the term “structuraliconographic analysis” for the approach used in Schele and Reilly’s work to clarify this distinction. In Schele’s work a single symbol (single hieroglyph or hieroglyph element) was identified, removed from the art, and then analyzed and described in isolation as a salient unit. The next step was to find other

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Chapter 2

examples of the same symbol in other images of the same style and look at the contexts in which they occurred. The basis of structural-iconographic analysis is simple and intuitive; however, rigorous data collection in the form of a large sample size of stylistically related imagery is required for the analysis to be meaningful. It is a means to extract patterns, rules, and structure from a prehistoric art style without the aid of cultural informants or secondary sources of information. Using the terminology of Taçon and Chippendale (1998), it is a formal rather than informed methodology. Structural-iconographic analysis has been used mostly in studies of Mesoamerican art and more recently with the iconography of the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex (Lankford 2011:13–14). It is almost unknown in rock art studies, possibly because of crossdisciplinary barriers and the somewhat insular nature of archaeological and rock art research. Schele was an art historian and epigrapher, not an archaeologist. Structural-iconographic analysis tries to recover inherent patterns within an art style. The larger the corpus, the better the potential for meaningful results. Structural-iconographic analysis identifies salient patterns in the art and then traces out their syntax and context within the imagery. Pictographs are not writing like Maya hieroglyphs, but they are a complex iconography, designed to record and communicate information relevant to a culture at any specific time. Art of this kind has an inherent logic and organization. Schele made paper copies of Maya

engravings, cutting and pasting repeated elements side by side to understand the syntax and variability of each one. Widespread and thorough recording of sites is the first step in this approach; it is important to be able to compare a large amount of imagery from across the region, preferably the entire corpus of existing images. Structural-iconographic analysis is a pure form of inductive research, letting the inherent structure of the art drive the research questions. Once a discrete pattern or symbol within the art is identified, the research delves into the artistic corpus to look for other examples and follow them wherever they lead. The context of the symbol is carefully analyzed within the corpus in as many examples as possible. What other symbols and motifs occur and in what order in the composition? At what sites does it occur? In what contexts does it appear in the imagery? Is the symbol frequently associated with motifs or in an alternating context with them? Are the symbols in context with other recognizable symbols, and in what type of pattern and regularity? After gathering a large corpus of related images and following this method piece by piece, example by example, tracing out multiple avenues of investigation based on numerous salient elements, one finally sees where those avenues lead until eventually the paths connect back to one another. One example is the use of the Single Pole Ladder Symbol. Structural-iconographic analysis can gain insights into the patterning and interpretation of ancient iconography. Large and representative sample sizes

12

harrison3.indd 12

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Theory and Methods

of comparable imagery are imperative, as using one or a few examples can lead to spurious conclusions. Ideally, a structuraliconographic analysis in rock art should account for the entire list of repeated signs and symbols depicted in the art; otherwise, important concepts are not included in the analysis. Another component of structural-iconographic analysis is the recognition of substitution sets, examples where an abstract symbol is variously substituted for one that is recognizable. By looking to these “substitution sets,” the meaning of some of the otherwise unexplained iconography is possible. Simple forms of substitution sets in Pecos River Style rock art occur wherever extra recognizable elements are added to the iconography of any specific painting, helping to interpret missing information in other, more abstract or incomplete forms. The figures or “anthropomorph symbols” (explained later) are one example of this. Structural-iconographic analysis relies on the basic premise that a prehistoric art style contains codified patterns and information. This method would not work for idiosyncratic art; the art must occur as part of a recognizable style. Its ultimate effectiveness is that it traces and reproduces the inherent patterns within a prehistoric art style with meaning to the culture that created it. The first step is pattern recognition, which is comparable to recognizing and recovering the letters and words of a language without being able to read or understand their sound or meaning. Patterns themselves do not provide meaning, but they can be studied and sometimes understood.

Structural-iconographic analysis is a systematic process, and it is very important to separate clearly the pattern recognition and interpretation phases. This process makes the work more robust. The interpretation can be rejected without rejecting the pattern. In this way, the pattern recognition phase is a stepping stone, and new and better theories can reject today’s possibly flawed interpretations without throwing out the method or some of the basic patterns that have been defined. Another researcher can repeat the analysis and do their own study using the same methods. Like passages in an unexplored cave or unclimbed routes on a mountain, new avenues of research can be explored while still having a secure camp to retreat to. For this reason, the text for each symbol is separated into description and interpretation sections in chapter 4, “Pecos River Style Typology.” The strength of a structural-iconographic approach is that it relies on repetitive patterns rather than idiosyncratic information, such as trying to make broad inferences from one or only a few sites. To summarize a rule of thumb from Professor F. Kent Reilly III, finding one or two occurrences of a symbol or structure may not have much meaning, but there may be a more widespread pattern worth paying attention to if three or more instances are found. Structural-iconographic analysis is a scientific method. It is empirical and repeatable. The methods and data obtained in the analysis should be replicable. Because (and if) rock art research is nondestructive to the art being studied, 13

harrison3.indd 13

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Chapter 2

panels and corpuses can be studied repeatedly. The potential of high-resolution, three-dimensional, digital recording of Pecos River Style sites is a very important developing technology, which is why it is so important that all Pecos River Style pictograph sites be accurately recorded and the resulting data available to researchers.

Shamanic Art The Pecos River Style has long been considered “shamanic art.” It is true that the imagery depicts themes Eliade (1964) wrote about. In the absence of ethnography, general shamanic theory has provided a means to place the art within a larger anthropological discussion. At this point, the term “shaman” has lost much of its meaning in the anthropological literature, and has become hackneyed (Bahn 2010; Harrison 2013; Kehoe 2000). This term carries preconceptions that may bias our understanding of the past. Many tribes consider “shaman” and “shamanism” to be pejorative or meaningless terms when applied to their culture. We should conceptualize Pecos River Style as religious, ceremonial, spiritual, and mythological in nature rather than shamanic. I, and others (e.g., Hampson 2016), continue to employ “shamanic” interpretations for this rock art, but the epistemology and discussion have evolved over time to reflect these critiques. A large proportion of the Pecos River Style literature is concerned with shamanic themes, and these sources are included in the interpretations presented in chapter 4. Current ideas about “shamanism” are broad and cross-cultural. Instead, with the Pecos River Style, we

should look beyond broad and general shamanic interpretations. In this analysis, I try to understand the particular Middle and Late Archaic Native American religion conveyed in the Pecos River Style by drawing on the specific, distinctive content of this rich iconography.

Contextual Analysis Despite its limitations, formal analysis presents a good starting point in incremental research. Ultimately, this formal analysis is only one part of a contextual approach to understanding the Lower Pecos Archaic along with other aspects of sound anthropological investigation, including ethnography. But ethnographic analogy, such as that of Boyd and Cox (2016), provides its own set of potential biases when the imagery is interpreted in terms of very specific myths from far-flung cultures and other time periods without clearly demonstrating the relationship between these concepts and how these traits were transmitted in a cultural, historical sense. By focusing on a single site, Boyd and Cox ignore the overall context provided by the Pecos River Style canon. An essential aspect of all human cultures is that they develop and adapt over time, taking on the characteristics of other groups. The ethnohistorical literature as well as the sequence of rock art styles in the Lower Pecos both indicate cycles of cultural change and migration in and out of the region subsequent to the production of the Pecos River Style. Pecos River Style typology (see chapter 4) presents a division between data collection and recording with interpretation

14

harrison3.indd 14

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Theory and Methods

of results and maintains the theoretical fine line as a matter of principle and of methodological exposition. These interpretations cite the ideas of other rock art researchers in addition to my own. We should keep in mind the paradox of Hodder’s (1992:189) hermeneutic circle, how “our understanding of the past ‘other’ is dependent on prejudice and tradition.” This form of circular logic in archaeology gives rise to flawed, idiosyncratic interpretations about prehistory. We reflect our own experiences on the art, particularly when striving to explain misunderstood and ancient symbolism like that of the Pecos River Style. Like a mirror, we reflect upon our experiences and our culture to interpret the ancient rock images. This is part of the reason that the methodological approach of separating pattern recognition from interpretation is so important. The Pecos River Style shares certain characteristics with the well-known Barrier Canyon Style and other forms of archaic mural art in the American West, Mexico, and Brazil. Like the Pecos River Style, these forms of imagery are created on the panel into discrete thematic scenes often organized around a central figure. Other similarities include the body shape of the anthropomorphs and their frequent internal body patterning, anthropomorphs with wings or depicted with birds, and the presence of wavy lines (Harrison 2013b).

Semiotics Structural-iconographic analysis is a method based in the theory of semiotics. Pecos River Style art is a symbol system with language-like characteristics and

structure. The method attempts to model and recover this inherent structure. In a structural-iconographic analysis, it is the relationship between symbols that is most important rather than the symbols themselves. In this analysis of the rock art and specifically core motifs, meaning resides in the ways that signifiers are related to other signifiers. Pecos River Style rock art has a syntax or grammar-like structure in which much of the information is contained in the linkage between motifs in a composition similar to words in a sentence or paragraph. In effect, the Pecos River Style has a generative grammar that was used to create new and novel paintings by recombining the standard corpus of symbols, motifs, and themes. This grammar led to the innovative use of some of the symbols and common structures from the art to produce the various core motifs. I describe this characteristic of Pecos River Style rock art as “rule-bound creativity.” The combination of symbolism adds a great deal of language-like content to the Pecos River Style in terms of the iconographic relationship between all the figures. The relationship between painted symbols that occur in a scene, rather than the symbols themselves, provides meaning. This semiotic model corresponds very well to the organization of Pecos River Style art and potentially to other comparable styles in which a limited and recognizable number of signs organized together in consistent scenes are found. Pecos River Style compositions are structured and repetitive in terms of theme and narrative, but they are also always unique and creative on an 15

harrison3.indd 15

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Chapter 2

individual basis. However, a clear syntactic structure can be defined for the overall style.

Pecos River Style Analysis At the beginning of this structural-iconographic analysis and while I was in graduate school in 2001, I noticed a series of recurrent scenes in Kirkland’s full-panel renderings of Pecos River Style art, each centered on a major anthropomorphic figure (Kirkland and Newcomb 1996 [1967]). By drawing a box around each example as well as reviewing photographs and visiting a few sites, I began to define a list of these core motifs. The initial figures recognized were In Field, In Sinuous Lines, Hole-in-theUniverse (Turpin 1994a), and Associated Mountain Lion (Turpin 1994b) (see below). Other core motifs were defined between 2002 and 2003: Series of Equals, Two in Juxtaposition, Associated Apprentice, Impaled Objects, Related Super-positioning, and Line of Deer. In April 2003 I presented a paper at the Society for American Archaeology annual meeting in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, entitled, “Anthropomorphizing the Landscape: The Pecos River Style Core Motifs,” which described the first comprehensive typology of these structures. This core motif typology was tested in the field every time a new site was recorded. By the end of this research I had determined that core motif themes are common and widespread in Pecos River Style sites across the Lower Pecos. I recorded 43 sites with notes and draw-

ings on blank acid-free paper later bound into a series of notebooks. Each core motif recognized was given a number based on the site trinomial (e.g., 45VV696 CM-1). Each panel was (arbitrarily) recorded from left to right; therefore, the core motif numbers at any given site generally follow that order. Since then I have continued to conduct further structural-iconographic research and analyses, largely from the data (notes, drawings, and photographs) I collected during graduate school. Since 2003, I have given conference papers about Pecos River Style pictographs at the Society for American Archaeology annual meeting, the American Rock Art Research Association conference, and the Annual Congress of the International Federation of Rock Art Organizations. I have also published papers on Pecos River Style art in American Indian Rock Art, Rock Art Research, and American Antiquity. This research led to many of the ideas in this book. The further one delves into the Pecos River Style, the more logic and creative expression one will notice. Core motifs are made up of a limited corpus of symbols positioned into a narrative or syntax. No two core motifs are alike; they are defined not by any single symbol, but instead through the relationship between figures. Core motifs provide an archaeological feature context with which to analyze Pecos River Style pictographs, thus constructing a meaningful context with which to understand site formation processes.

16

harrison3.indd 16

7/17/18 8:24 AM

3

ORGANIZATION OF THE IMAGERY Anthropomorphs

A

prevalent yet vexing aspect of Pecos River Style imagery is the presence of numerous human-like figures. Although recognizable as anthropomorphs based on their form, they have a specific, abstract, nonhuman appearance. Pecos River Style anthropomorphs are rectilinear, wedge shaped, or cigar shaped and sometimes have heads (but lack facial characteristics). Arms and legs are typically short, straight lines. The insides of the bodies are often filled with geometric patterns or symbols. In their most simple form, only the rectilinear bodies are shown, and yet they are still recognizable as anthropomorphs. Many of the major anthropomorphs contain various symbols, designs, and bisecting lines painted within their torsos. This in-fill patterning is inspired in part by the natural modeling of the limestone water streaks (described below), especially in terms of symmetrical outlines and center lines. These elements are also useful to fill

harrison3.indd 17

space within the anthropomorphs in the area created by the open, rectilinear shape of the body. These patterns further elaborate and embellish the anthropomorph. These in-fill patterns provided another opportunity for the prehistoric artist to embed symbolic content, style, and effect within the art. In addition to the major anthropomorphs, there is a variety of simple forms. Small, elongated, “stick-figure” anthropomorphs are common, including a series of recurring anthropomorph symbols in which the classic anthropomorph is reduced in size and changed into one of a series of simple geometric forms: T, U, W, Y, Cross, Fire Cracker, and Rio Bravo symbols (Harrison 2009) (see chapter 4). The comprehension of these symbols aids in our understanding of the imagery. Because they are ubiquitous and can be readily recognized, Pecos River Style anthropomorphs provide a common, social, and human-linked pattern in the art. However, they are also confounding factors because of potentially divergent interpre-

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Chapter 3

Figure 7. Anthropomorphs at 41VV888. The left anthropomorph is ca. 60cm tall.

tations of what they may represent. Pecos River Style anthropomorphs are individualistic as far as no two are alike, but they lack the human like traits or features that could make them directly recognizable as individuals. This form of naturalistic painting was not at all part of the stylistic canon. The difficulty in interpretation lies in the fact that any number of types of entities could conceivably be anthropomorphic in form. These types could include gods, demigods, humans, ancestors, spirits, and even abstract symbols. As humans, we project ourselves onto all of them, and all could have an anthropomorphic form when depicted in the art. Anthropomorphs are a multivocal symbol; this form can

have a multitude of meanings depending on context, and may even have potentially contradictory meanings within the same culture. Pecos River Style anthropomorphs have characteristics indicative of both real world and supernatural, nonhuman concepts. All are highly stylized in terms of abstract form; they are elongated and rectilinear with disproportionate features such as bodies, arms, legs, heads, and hair. But a key to understanding the meaning of Pecos River Style anthropomorphs lies in their diversity and individuality. Practically no two Pecos River Style anthropomorphs look alike except within the context of an individual core motif. It can be argued that a single god or

18

harrison3.indd 18

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Organization of the Imagery

entity would likely be conveyed through a near-identical or closely related set of iconography. By contrast, in the Pecos River Style we see the opposite trend, with individuality and creative uniqueness being the norm. Focal point anthropomorphs in the Pecos River Style exhibit extreme variability. This is either an expression that these anthropomorphs depict actual, real world, historical individuals, or, if they are nonhuman, that the art depicts an incredibly diverse, complex, and convergent spiritual pantheon. Perhaps, as seen in some folklore, the painter was given the freedom to depict the same god, character, etc. in different ways with the meaning still understood.

Material Culture and Zoomorphs These major anthropomorphs are often found in association with a combination of other elements from the canon, including objects of material culture. These objects include atlatls, darts, bundles, and streamer-like objects hanging down from the arms of some anthropomorphs. Some possibly analogous artifacts have been documented in the archaeological record. Zoomorphs (animals) and material culture (manmade objects) are in some ways straightforward classes of imagery to consider. However, even these are layered, multivocal symbols; they could have multiple interpretations, some of which could be counterintuitive to what we as outside researchers might expect simply on the basis of form or context. Despite this, as representations of tangible, realworld objects, these symbols provide an

important iconographic link into the art. Unlike the other classes of imagery, material culture and zoomorphs have tangible, real-world correlates. The clear depiction of the artists’ equipment was an important focus of the paintings. It has been said that archaeological investigation is a process of working from the known to the unknown, and some aspects of material culture (such as atlatls, darts, and rabbit clubs) are known from the region’s archaeological assemblage. Less well-known objects are those that have a ceremonial basis: staffs, bundles, streamers, and regalia. These objects that appear in Pecos River Style art have analogs with materials used by medicine men and societies within some Native American groups recorded ethnographically. Such objects are special and highly curated, passed down from generation to generation and carefully guarded or hidden, and thus they are rarely found in excavations of dry rock shelter sites in the Lower Pecos and Big Bend areas. Like material culture, zoomorphs are a form of recognizable imagery within the Pecos River Style canon with a selective set of figures (largely mountain lions, deer, and birds). These three animals are commonly depicted within the Pecos River Style; they must have had cultural significance and functioned as well-known symbols and metaphors. This material culture and zoomorphic imagery provides stepping stones for moving deeper into the art and toward the more abstract components of the style. Deer are silent and swift of foot. They can quickly travel long distances to forage. Deer were an important source of meat 19

harrison3.indd 19

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Chapter 3

and an important prey animal to sustain the population. Many scenes show deer impaled by atlatl darts. Mountain lions are fierce large predators that share residence with humans in the Lower Pecos canyons. With their night vision and stealth, the big cats can easily turn man-the-hunter into prey. Their fierce scream can make one’s blood run cold. Their grace and power is unmatched. Birds, like deer and mountain lions, are metaphors and symbols within the art as well as actual animals. Birds cannot be recognizable on the basis of species in the Pecos River Style. They have a football-like or oval shape with linear or curved wings. A series of lines extend to represent the wing feathers. In Pecos River Style art, birds generally represent the concepts of flight and the sky; they are depicted in context with horizontal anthropomorphs, some of which have wings themselves.

They are not, however, typically idiosyncratic, and they fall into a few recognizable types with distinctive characteristics. They were initially assigned a series of nondescriptive names such as Enigmatic Character A, Enigmatic Character B, etc. One of the enigmatic characters (Dartheaded Figure) had already been recorded in the literature (Turpin 1986a). I classified the others as descriptively as possible; some were given names based on apparent iconographic links to real world animals (e.g., centipede and gar). Pecos River Style enigmatic characters represent a pantheon, and all but one appear to be unique to the Lower Pecos (at least with respect to their being depicted in rock art). Various enigmatic characters are sometimes depicted in a semianthropomorphic form, indicating the complexity of the social, mythological, and religious context and meaning of these figures.

Enigmatic Characters

Geometric Symbols

Enigmatic characters are a series of imagery within the Pecos River Style that has proven challenging to decipher. Enigmatic characters are recurring, animate figures in the art and are partially related to zoomorphs. They are products of the Lower Pecos culture’s mental world, figures from myth and the supernatural realm. Realworld iconographic ties with these enigmatic characters are limited. Instead they are part of an oral history and culture now lost to ethnography. Enigmatic characters required years of research to describe (Harrison 2010). The rest of the art had to be outlined before the enigmatic characters could be identified.

Geometric symbols are a component of the art that adds a great deal of complexity to Pecos River Style imagery. Geometric symbols are easy enough to identify, but they are difficult to interpret because much of their meaning is inferable only through rare substitution sets in the art. Twenty-one different Pecos River Style symbols are described in chapter 4. A few are very common, such as Sinuous Line, Petaloid Motif, and Single Pole Ladder; these three are core components of the imagery. Uncommon signs include Deer Stand-like Symbol, Macro Bar, and Impaled Dot. Seven anthropomorph symbols have been demonstrated to represent various

20

harrison3.indd 20

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Organization of the Imagery

forms of miniature, abstracted anthropomorphs (Harrison 2009: fig. 3).

Real-world versus Symbolic Content The Pecos River Style is a combination of imagery at various levels of abstraction and symbolism: some real, some supernatural, all organized into a well-developed, canonical framework. The cosmological setting, when shown, is completely abstract as a culturally specific set of symbols that depict either the earth or, in some cases, other-world contexts. Humans are semiabstract in the art. These major figures are depicted in a symbolic form. Although arms and legs are straight, action is indicated by position and other visual inference clues: prone, being at an angle, or upside down. Clusters of symbols painted around the anthropomorph often add to the effect of motion. Nonhuman actors within the art include zoomorphs and enigmatic characters. The first type is recognizable and comprehensible, but the latter is understood only through a combination of associations. On the other hand, material culture, notably weapons, ritual items, and regalia, is realistically depicted in the art. These tools include atlatls, darts, staves, rabbit clubs, and medicine bundles. These items appear to have been realistically depicted in order to communicate the integral nature of these objects in the processes depicted in the art. The regalia and weapons are key components of the imagery. Atlatls, for example, were used in both hunting and man-to-man conflict, and thus they are

powerful symbols. We know ethnographically that bundles, staves, and regalia are the tools of the medicine man. In addition, the art contains a vocabulary of culturally specific signs and pictographs. The Pecos River Style, therefore, can be conceptualized as a lens, conveying and depicting select aspects of the Lower Pecos Archaic culture, or as an abstract visual record of their world. All this imagery is put together in energetic scenes that surround a central figure. Paintings are symmetrical, balanced, and planned, and the combined effect is aesthetically pleasing. This is the indigenous art and heritage of the Lower Pecos Archaic peoples, the well-developed expression of their religion, society, and culture.

Paint and Painting Technology Pecos River Style art is polychrome, with a color combination of red, black, yellow, and white. Red is the most common color, and white is the least common. Minerals used to create the paints include hematite for red, limonite for yellow, and manganese oxide for black (Gebhard 1960:79). Chemists have not been able to scientifically determine what binder was used, but Boyd and Dering (2013:180–181) have been able to experimentally produce paint using local materials. The paint medium was likely made from combining a natural ground pigment with an organic binder and a vehicle to make the paint flow. The natural pigments were combined with an organic binder and possibly an emulsifier to create the paint. The Pecos River Style binder and vehicle had to be fairly colorless to produce yellow 21

harrison3.indd 21

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Chapter 3

and white pigment. The vehicle substances have not been identified, but reasonable possibilities include animal fat, bone marrow, and yucca sap. Similar to other antique paint recipes from around the world, artists probably also used substances like tree sap, resin, or egg yolk as binders (Cennini and Thompson 1960; Mayer 1948, 1970) to ensure the longevity of the ancient paintings. Scaffolding would have been required to paint the taller figures. Some sites, like 41VV696, have a few small holes pecked into the bedrock that could have conceivably supported scaffolding or a windscreen. To my knowledge, no scaffolds have ever been recovered archaeologically. Turpin (1997) has described pigment cakes as a component of the San Felipe Phase archaeological assemblage and evidence for the supplies necessary to produce these pictographs. Hair and yucca fiber were likely used to produce the paintbrushes. A variety of sizes of brushes would have been required to create the polychrome paintings. The handmade, single-use nature of the paints and brushes is a tremendous aid in distinguishing core motifs within the art. Line and pigment quality, color, and hue vary painting by painting.

Core Motifs The Pecos River Style is largely organized into a series of thematic compositions I refer to as core motifs. In the context of the style, core motifs are a universal theory in that they can be used to explain the content of every Pecos River Style site. Core motifs consist of nineteen common themes in the art that hypothetically convey key cultural

ideas, including mythology, ritual, religion, cosmology, social structure, and leadership. Core motifs are not defined by the presence of any particular figure but instead consist of the contextual relationships between figures. Each core motif is unique and defined by the principle of rule-bound creativity; no two are exactly alike. The artists were working within an understood canonical framework to create individual and unique compositions. This necessitated wellplanned compositions with detailed knowledge of other paintings, time to gather and prepare the materials, and a skilled artist to paint the uneven, curved surface of the rock shelter. Many core motifs have distinctive traits that, along with line quality and color, help to distinguish them. Site 41VV124 CM-1, for example, has the colors black, yellow, red, and white. Many of the figures in this painting have dots. Core motifs are vignettes from the Lower Pecos oral history and mythology; archaeological description of these patterns and proper interpretation of their meaning are essential for understanding the culture and worldview of the Lower Pecos Archaic. They are the key to understanding the meaning of Pecos River Style art. The stories and myths conveyed in the art are the beliefs at the heart of Lower Pecos culture. A major concept behind core motifs is the presence of a focal point, the visual center of the painting. This central figure is usually an anthropomorph, but it can be multiple anthropomorphs, enigmatic characters, a symbol, or a zoomorph. Other figures are painted around the focal point anthropomorph to create a core motif.

22

harrison3.indd 22

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Organization of the Imagery

Thus, core motifs are never composed of a single figure. The surrounding figures augment the focal point figure; they often draw the viewer’s eye toward the central figure and add a visual logic of movement to the scene. The second main concept behind core motifs is the fact that they fall into a series of regular visual patterns. As defined in this typology, there are nineteen core motif themes. An individual core motif that

depicts more than one of these themes is known as a “compound core motif.” Approximately 25 percent of core motifs fall within this category. Those depicting only one theme are referred to as “simple core motifs.” Compound core motifs increase the complexity of the art and further bring into play the principle of rulebound creativity by the creative integration of the various themes.

Table 1. Types of observations needed for the identification of core motifs within a complex, overpainted rock art panel The color or combination of colors as well as the individual hue of the paint. Relative location and scale of the figures. Line width, paint quality & type of brush used. Idiosyncratic stylistic traits given to multiple elements within the scene. Theme–the depiction of one or more core motif types (see chapter 4). Consistent patterns of overpainting relative to other unassociated paintings. Figure 8. A portion of 41VV612 with multiple overpainted core motifs and natural water streaks obscuring some paintings. Black anthropomorph with yellow outlining (lower right) is ca. 55cm tall.

23

harrison3.indd 23

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Table2. 2. Number of Pecos River at 43 sites Table Number of Pecos River Style coreStyle motifscore at 43motifs sites

1 1

2

1 3 8

3

4

15

12 5 3

1 12 5 5 1

1 2 2

3 3 1

11 1 2 3 1

2 9 2 3 3 1 1 4

1 5 2 3 3

3

1 1 4 2 78

1 1 9 2 5 2 2 1 4

6 5 3 7 1 1 3

1 3 1

2 1 1 3 5 1 1

3 6 1 1 1

1 5

3

4 2 2 2 1 1

2 4

2

1

1

6 2 2 1 2

1

1

2 3 1 1

2 2

1 1 1 1

2

2 2 1 1 4 2

2 2 4 2

1

1 1

2 5 1 4 1

3 1 1 1

1

1

3

1

2

1 1 4

1 1 3

1 2 1

1

1 3 1 2

1 3

1

3

1

80

1

1 2 1

1

89

43

36

1 2

1

1

2 2 1

4 2 51

1

1

1

7

1 3 16 2 5 6 1 1 3

3 3 2 2

2 2 2

13 5 1 2 2 11 1 1

2

15

10

94

Source: Data from Harrison (2003b).

Source: Data fromBlack Harrison (2004a). AMBS, Amorphous and Sinuous Character AMBS, Amorphous Black and Sinuous Character

harrison3.indd 24

Associated

Associated Mountain Lion

Flying Across

Heraldic

Associated Apprentice

1

1 3

1

Two in Juxtaposition

In Sinuous Lines

Series of Equals

1 6 1 3 19 1 1 47 18 29 9 10 19 4 4 0 5 12 41 11 16 12 6 4 13 1 1 5 12 6 7 11 16 2 5 2 3 9 3 2 14 4 2 397

Hole-in-theUniverse

41VV1959 41VV207 41VV888 41VV1603 41VV1604 41VV1618 41VV1350 41VV696 41VV612 41VV1230 41VV1284 41VV840 41VV40 41VV18 41VV78 41VV79 41VV211 41VV76 41VV83 41VV74 41VV224 41VV124 41VV129 41VV237 41VV134 41VV1411 41VV1035 41VV912 41VV62 41VV65 41VV616 41VV584 41VV1971 41VV530 41VV770 41VV225 41VV286 41VV165 41VV167 41VV1970 41VV242 41VV1972 41TE309 Totals

In Field

Smithsonian Number Trinomial of Core (Site Motifs Number)

Associated Dart-headed Figure

Pecos Style Core

Pecos Style Core Motif Themes

7/17/18 8:24 AM

3

2 2

3

15 1 1 1 1

2

3

1 1 1 1

1

1 2

1

10 1 3 16 2 5 6 1 1 3

3 3 2 2

94

harrison3.indd 25

13 5 1 2 2 11 1 1

3 1 1 1

1 1

1

1

2 2 1

1

2

1

9 1 1 1

1

1

1 2

3 2

18 1

11

2 2

1

1 1

2

1 2 2 1

1

1

2 14 1 1 1 1

1

9

3 1 2

1 1

1 2

Impaled Objects

Flight Metaphor

Related Superpositioning

Line of Deer

Associated Plume Serpentine Being

Associated Polysymbolic Ethereal Being

Associated AMBS Character

Associated Centipede Being

Associated Gar Being

Associated Dart-headed Figure

Associated Mountain Lion

Flying Across

Pecos Style Core Motif Themes

1

1 1

1 2 1

1

1

1

1 3 2

1 1

1 1

1 1

1

1

1

1

4

1 1 1 3

9

13

7/17/18 8:24 AM

Figures 9a,b. Core motif breakdown of 41VV124 (White Shaman site) based on illustration by Michael O’Brien.

26

harrison3.indd 26

7/17/18 8:24 AM

27

harrison3.indd 27

7/17/18 8:25 AM

CM-1: Compound Core Motif–Series of Equals/Heraldic/Flying Across/Involved Superpositioning/In Sinuous Lines/Associated Centipede Being/Impaled Objects/Associated Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings. CM-2: Compound Core Motif–Hole-in-the-Universe/Associated Dart-headed Figure. CM-3: Simple Core Motif–In Field. CM-4: Simple Core Motif–Associated Dart-headed Figure. CM-5: Compound Core Motif–In Field/ Associated Dart-headed Figure. 28

harrison3.indd 28

7/17/18 8:25 AM

CM-6: Simple Core Motif–Associated Dart-headed Figure. CM-7: Simple Core Motif–In Field. CM-8: Compound Core Motif–Two in Juxtaposition/ Associated Dart-headed Figure. CM-9: Simple Core Motif–Associated Dart-headed Figure. CM-10: Simple Core Motif–In Field. CM-11: Simple Core Motif–Associated Centipede Being. CM-12: Simple Core Motif–Series of Equals. 29

harrison3.indd 29

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 3

Site Formation In the modern world, we think about paintings in the context of gallery settings, with large amounts of neutral, unused space between framed paintings or sculptures. A second modern context is mural art, which is typically a large, cohesive scene painted on some type of manmade wall. Pecos River Style paintings were not prescribed to these types of contexts. Instead, at the larger sites paintings are often superimposed on top of one another on the surface of the rock shelter. There were no qualms about painting directly on top of earlier pictographs. I do not think this was done as an erasure of the earlier work, but rather as a means of reusing an important place. Based on the concentrated nature of the rock art, which site was selected may have been of paramount concern. The rock art sites are diachronic in nature, not synchronic whole-panel narratives. Their organization can be closely compared to a typical archaeological site. The panels are a product of periodic and episodic use, with paintings layered one on top of another. The major sites like Panther Cave, Cedar Springs, Rattlesnake Canyon, and Abrigo Diego, consist of the accumulation of dozens of painting episodes forming a visual palimpsest. The overlapping imagery at these sites can be overwhelming (Figure 3). The individual core motifs and other paintings are features in an archaeological site. An important part of the creation of new Pecos River Style imagery was a knowledge and familiarity with the work

of previous artists. This was necessitated by the principle of rule-bound creativity through which the style was developed over time. The artists knew the canon, and they knew the constraints and corpus. The Pecos River Style progressed over time as new artists studied and integrated the work of the ancestors who painted before them. These accumulated painting episodes created Pecos River Style sites in a long-term diachronic process.

Taphonomy Most Pecos River Style paintings are actually covered with a very thin layer of rock that has accumulated in the thousands of years since the art was produced. This layer seals and protects the paintings inside the cliff face. The earth-tone hues visible today are muted when compared with the appearance of the original bright pigments. There are examples at site 41VV165 where some of the rock crust has flaked off showing bright yellow and red paint underneath. The patina on some of the overhangs has eroded and fractured because of wind and chemical weathering, causing the loss of these paintings. Tufas, water streaks, and rotten rock have obscured or destroyed some elements of the original paintings. Goats and other animals have rubbed away many of the lower paintings located on the sloping skirt of the shelter. At the same time soot from countless campfires has blackened the roofs of many shelters. Many are in occupation sites with floors composed mostly of fire-cracked rock and have been affected by the ash, dust, and smoke. The quantity and diversity of motifs visible at any site is diminished by these

30

harrison3.indd 30

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Organization of the Imagery

Figure 10. Leaping Panther rock shelter, Pecos River. Anthropomorph between cougars (above large spall) is ca. 55 cm tall.

processes, complicating the study and recording of the pictographs. Despite these problems, Pecos River Style pictographs are remarkably preserved for their age, which may be attributed to the region’s aridity, the overhanging rock, and the stable microclimates provided by the rock shelters.

Intrasite Stylistic Traditions Individual core motifs often reference earlier paintings at the same site, leading to “intrasite stylistic traditions” (Harrison 2004a:99). At a minimum, these references were made to show integration of the new work into the existing corpus. They also show respect for the earlier paintings. Different sites demonstrate this trend to vary-

ing degrees; at some major sites, no intrasite stylistic traditions can be recognized. These intrasite stylistic traditions speak to a trend in which the artists incorporated distinctive features from other paintings from the same site into their new scenes. Halo Shelter (41VV1603) is a site with one of the most distinctive intrasite stylistic traditions. First, many of the anthropomorphs at the site have dashed outlines, a characteristic almost unique to this site. Second, sinuous lines at this site are often more like zigzag lines. Third, seven anthropomorphs have a head motif that (through our modern lens) looks like a Renaissancestyle “halo,” thus contributing to the name of the site. This element consists of a small 31

harrison3.indd 31

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 3

arch above an anthropomorph’s head that sometimes has hair fringes on the upper side. I named this motif the Ecstatic Scalp (Harrison 2004a:119) because the symbolism combines three common Pecos River Style motifs: an anthropomorph with a disarticulated head, the Unbound Locks motif, and the Hole-in-the-Universe core motif (Harrison 2004a: Figure 5.9). Intrasite stylistic traditions are characteristics that make an individual Pecos River Style site unique and cohesive, but they are too small in spatial scale to be considered substyles. A second prominent example of an intrasite stylistic tradition is at Panther Cave (41VV83). As the name suggests the site has depictions of nine mountain lions in a variety of forms. Eight Feather Hip Cluster motifs occur at the Panther Cave site, seven on the body of anthropomorphs and one painted independently. The majority of all known Feather Hip Clusters occur at Panther Cave, but there is also one each at the nearby Hanging Cave (41VV79) and Fate Bell Rock Shelter (41VV74). A

Table 3. Levels of structure within the Pecos River Style

➧

Pecos River Style (all sites)

➧

Intra-site Stylistic Traditions (one site) Core Motif (one painting)

third possible Feather Hip Cluster occurs at 41VV207 near the Devils River, further demonstrating the mobility of the artists and their tendency to incorporate elements from other, earlier paintings from throughout the region.

Unity of the Style Indigenous peoples traveled around the Lower Pecos as part of their own band territories or on trips to visit other groups. The major pictograph sites occur in occupational rock shelters and often near the area’s rivers; as hunter-gatherers, these peoples knew the region and were familiar with the art that was found throughout it. Part of the process of creating a Pecos River Style painting was traveling through the Lower Pecos to observe the work of earlier artists, as can be seen in the regularity of the style and common patterns and stylistic references found within this art form. There is no differentiation in the style between regions, at least not in the different river valleys north of the border. The Pecos River Style is quite unified and consistent. There are no real differences between the Rio Grande, Pecos River, and Devils River valleys or on particular sides of the river. Two studies (Benz 2012; Harrison 2005;) considered this uniformity in some detail and with rigorous methods; both concluded that the Pecos River Style was significantly unified and that the rock art style could not be sub classified according to geospatial characteristics. One possible exception is a comparison between the art of the well-known US portion of the Lower Pecos and that of the much-less-visited panels located in

32

harrison3.indd 32

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Organization of the Imagery

the Serranías del Burro of Mexico. Turpin (2010:63), who has conducted almost all of the research in the region, has noted motifs that are almost exclusively restricted to these mountains. This topic has never been fully investigated because of the difficulty in accessing sites in this region. Harrison (2005) looked at the possibility of geographically restricted elements within the Pecos River Style and focused on eight anthropomorph head forms. The strongest geospatial pattern identified was in regard to the Feather Hip Cluster. None of the figures were found to be spatially restricted within the geographic region, and they were not territorial indicators as had been previously hypothesized (Boyd 2003:112). The Pecos River Style is a unified iconography in time and space, and it is indicative of a shared belief system and ritual practice. Zintgraff and Turpin (1991:10) described how the patterned iconography of the Pecos River Style finds its coherency and consistency in the ritual and religion that it illustrates.

Termination of Production and Other Rock Art Styles Harrison (2009) proposed a hypothesis about a Pecos River substyle that was diachronic in nature. These traits are thought to be attributable to the Late Archaic Period. These paintings are divergent compared with more typical examples of Pecos River Style art. This substyle is small and uses a single color of paint (usually red). The prehistoric artists used Pecos River Style symbols and modified core motif themes in these often-miniature paintings

(Turpin 2011:11). Some examples occur at major sites alongside classic Pecos River Style paintings, and the figures sometimes grade into what is considered Red Linear style imagery (Turpin 2011a:5; Boyd et al. 2013; Harrison 2015:201). Major examples include significant numbers of paintings at 41VV207, 41VV1284, 41VV616, and 41TE309. Many of these sites are located on the fringe of the spatial distribution of Lower Pecos art. It has been suggested on the basis of sites in Mexico that these paintings represent diaspora or migration episodes. This Red Linear substyle logically represents a terminal phase of Pecos River Style production. These later paintings exhibit a greater degree of freedom and variability than the earlier paintings. Animals often replace anthropomorphs at the center of the core motifs. The paintings are much smaller, and although core motifs continue to occur, they are not easily classified into the standard themes of the Pecos River Style. The smaller size of the paintings and the fewer colors used represent a decreased investment of labor compared with earlier large-scale works. According to this hypothesis, this breakdown of canon represents cultural change in the Lower Pecos, including the abandonment and deliberate modification of ancient cultural practice, lifeways, and religion all reflected in the Pecos River Style. This represents a major transition compared to the earlier Pecos River Style paintings (Turpin 2011a:11). However, a recent radiocarbon date obtained from verified “classic” Pecos River Style images at 41VV76 and 41VV124 indicate that this tradition may be more complex than cur33

harrison3.indd 33

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Table 4. Lower Pecos chronology with rock art types Year (BP) 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 3400 3600 3800 4000 4200 4400 4600 4800 5000 5200 5400 5600 5800 5000 5200 5400 5600 5800 6000 6200 6400 6600 6800 7000 7200 7400 7600 7800 8000 8200 8400 8600 8800 9000 9200 9400 9600 9800 10,000

harrison3.indd 34

Period

Phase

Historic Late Prehistoric

Historic Infierno Flecha

Late Archaic

Pictographs

Petroglyphs

European contact period rock art Discrete Bold Line Geometric Geometric Style Red Monochrome

Blue Hills Red Linear Style

Mobile Art

Painted Pebbles

Lower Pecos Serpentine Style

Pecos River Style Flanders Cibolo Middle Archaic San Felipe

Eagle Nest

Early Archaic

Viejo

Paleoindian

Oriente

Bonfire

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Organization of the Imagery

rent theories suggest and that the production of “classic” Pecos River Style imagery may have persisted longer than previously imagined into the Late Archaic Blue Hills phase (Bates et al. 2015:45). This is like the trend described by Hegmon and colleagues (2016:268): the strong correlation between low stylistic diversity (i.e., stylistic unity) and persistence. Eventually styles changed and the Pecos River Style canon was abandoned for other forms (Table 4). Rock art production in the Lower Pecos continued for millennia, even into the early historic period. Other subsequent styles include Red Linear, Red Monochrome, and Bold Line Geometric

(Turpin 1986b) as well as contact period art often displaying native perspectives in the form of Spanish mission, presidio, and ranchero imagery. Early petroglyphs at Lewis Canyon have been labeled Lower Pecos Serpentine style (Turpin 1997). These images share stylistic characteristics with Red Linear pictographs and are logically related. A second phase of pictographs at Lewis Canyon is known as Discrete Geometric style. They are carved into the same limestone slab as the Lower Pecos Serpentine petroglyps. Meanwhile, painted pebbles were produced throughout much of the prehistoric sequence (Mock 2011:116).

35

harrison3.indd 35

7/17/18 8:25 AM

4

PECOS RIVER STYLE TYPOLOGY

T

he following presents an element-by-element typological structure for nineteen Pecos River Style pictograph core motifs and fifty-five individual symbols and motifs. Each type is described and

interpreted with references to sources in the literature that discuss the specific form and other anthropologists’ interpretations. Each interpretation can be accepted or rejected subject to the best available evidence and theory.

Core Motifs: Multiple Interrelated Figures 1. In Field Anthropomorph or central figure(s) surrounded by a concentration of identical objects, symbols, or marks [Photo: 41VV696; anthropomorph is ca. 110 cm tall]. Interpretation Visual elaboration of the central figure. Reference Harrison (2005:117), A “central figure surrounded by a cloud or nimbus of smaller symbols.”

harrison3.indd 36

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

2. In Sinuous Lines Anthropomorph or central figures(s) surrounded by sinuous lines [Illustration: 41VV1604; anthropomorph is ca. 40 cm tall]. Interpretation A central figure surrounded by power or energy. Visually sinuous lines imply motion. References Kirkland (1938:19, Plate 1), The “illustrations of some myth or religious idea in which the wavy lines represent serpents, or perhaps spiritual power.” Gebhard (1960:80), “tenacious moving lines” Kirkland and Newcomb (1967:56, 1976:184), “force lines” Harrison (2005:117), A “central figure enclosed by sinuous lines.” 3. Hole-in-the-Universe Anthropomorph or central figures(s) oriented perpendicular to an arch or horizontal line, often with a central gap or circular element. Lines sometimes connect the shoulders of the central figure with the arch or central element [Photo: 41VV83; anthropomorph is ca. 80 cm tall]. Interpretation Supernatural flight from one plane to another. An opening is located at the axis of an arched horizon line, possibly representing a hole in the roof of a parabolic rock shelter, a cave, a natural bridge, the sky, or a combination of these. A supernatural gateway accessed by a medicine man. References Turpin (1994a:88), The “ability to recognize the hole-in-the-universe design broadens our understanding of Lower Pecos cosmology.” 37

harrison3.indd 37

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

Boyd (1996:154–155), The “characteristics common to this primary motif include an arch formed by a serpentine line, a portal or passageway at the top of the arch, and an emerging or descending anthropomorph.” Harrison (2005:119), “a central figure passing headlong toward or through a barrier or portal” 4. Series of Equals A row of related anthropomorphs of similar size and appearance. There is no single central figure that is larger than the others [Photo: 41VV1230; anthropomorphs are ca. 20 cm tall]. Interpretation Equal status between a group of leaders. References Grieder (1966:719), “row of men, men in line” Harrison (2005:122), “row of three or more anthropomorphs, each of very similar size and form” 5. Two in Juxtaposition A pair of related anthropomorphs of similar size and appearance. In some examples, the two anthropomorphs are of equal size and similar shape but have distinctive characteristics, such as being two different colors [Photo: 41VV696; left anthropomorph is ca. 40 cm tall]. Interpretation A pair of leaders with equal status. This motif reflects social hierarchies within the culture and the concept of power sharing between two individuals. Artistically it satisfies the convention of Bilateral Symmetry (see #71).

38

harrison3.indd 38

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

Reference Harrison (2005:123) “two very similar anthropomorphs positioned side by side.” 6. Associated Apprentice An anthropomorph paired with a second, smaller, related anthropomorph with an appearance and style similar to that of the larger figure [Photo: 41VV76]. Interpretation Differential status of a pair of leaders. Reference Harrison (2005:123), “a major anthropomorph with a single, much smaller, related anthropomorph by its side.”

7. Heraldic Central figure(s) with an associated group of smaller anthropomorphs, or sometimes symbols. The group of smaller anthropomorphs typically surround or line up with the central figure [Photo: 41VV612; red anthropomorph is ca. 40 cm tall]. Interpretation The smaller figures draw attention to the larger figure, showing the higher status of a leader relative to other individuals. This core motif reflects the authority of the larger figure. As an artistic convention, it draws attention inward toward the central figure and is based on the visual principle that the larger figure is more important than the smaller ones. References Kirkland and Newcomb (1967:54) Newcomb (1976:184), “supporting cast” 39

harrison3.indd 39

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

Harrison (2005:123), “a central figure with a series of visually subordinate smaller figures” 8. Flying Across Anthropomorph associated with a series of smaller horizontal anthropomorphs that are oriented toward the torso of the central figure [Illustration: 41VV1971]. Interpretation Relates to flight and motion. The action is with the smaller figures in the art rather than the central figure. Visually draws attention to the central figure on the basis of its relative size compared with the horizontal figures. Reference Harrison (2005:123), “group of diminutive anthropomorphs fly horizontally across or diagonally down and across a central figure who is not flying.” 9. Associated Mountain Lion An anthropomorph associated with a mountain lion(s). A relationship is shown through relative position, similarity of style, similarity of size, or additional elements connecting them. Claws and cat ears are typical characteristics of the mountain lion and are also in some cases seen on the anthropomorph. (see #37) [Photo: 41VV18; anthropomorph is ca. 250 cm tall]. Interpretation A medicine man transforming into a Nagual cougar; a human spirit embodied in an animal. Ability of man to harness the characteristics and power of a mountain lion. Supernatural control of a mountain lion by a medicine man. This is an important component of Archaic Lower Pecos religion and mythology. 40

harrison3.indd 40

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

References Turpin (1994b:80), “Were-Cougar” Harrison (2005:126), “major anthropomorph is represented along with one or more cougar zoomorphs.” 10. Associated Dart-headed Figure (Enigmatic Character A) One of the most common core motifs is an anthropomorph associated with a Dart-headed Figure. The enigmatic character is oriented toward the anthropomorph in a consistent way, making it recognizable. Dart headed Figures can be broken into three components: (1) terminal bar, (2) parallel lines, and (3) body. The terminal bar of the Dart-headed Figure is placed just off the arm of the anthropomorph. The parallel lines of the figure extend laterally and upward, curving slightly. These lines end at its body, which is usually located high on the wall and well to the side of the anthropomorph (see Dartheaded Figure). The body has an oval shape and is often fringed by small lines. Small dots or a pair of lines sometimes extend out of the far end of the body. Many variations of this common Pecos River Style Enigmatic Character exist, including those with multiple bodies and multiple sets of parallel lines (see #40) [Illustration: 41VV840; anthropomorph is ca. 50 cm tall]. Interpretation A medicine man in control of or interacting with a supernatural Dartheaded Figure. Distance is suggested by the long parallel lines connecting the body and terminal bar of the figure. The means of interface and control of the Dart-headed Figure is an item of material culture (a staff, atlatl, atlatl dart, or rabbit club) that 41

harrison3.indd 41

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

is held in one hand by an anthropomorph. Associated Dart-headed Figures are a core component of Lower Pecos Archaic religion. References Kirkland (1938:23), “god or mythological character” Campbell (1958:158), “gourd rattle” Grieder (1966:716), “fisherman” Gebhard 1965:9), “pod or pouches on a line” Newcomb (1967:49), “prickly pear pad or pouch” Turpin (1986a:15), “mythical creature” Turpin (1991:60), “mythological figure… a well-known actor in the Pecos River cosmological cast” Bass (1994:71), “rounded pads connected to stalks” Boyd (2003:90), “datura” Harrison (2005:126), “In this composition the enigmatic character is positioned just beyond the hand of the central anthropomorph.” Harrison (2011:81), “a second more numerous group of dart headed figures…those associated with anthropomorphs” 11. Associated Gar Being (Enigmatic Character B) Anthropomorph with a related Gar Being or with Gar Being characteristics (see #42) [Illustration: 41VV134; anthropomorph is ca. 160 cm tall]. Interpretation A medicine man or mythological figure interacting with a Gar Being. Gar Beings are supernatural beings related to the alligator gar (Atractosteus spatula), a large fish that resides in the darkest and lowest reaches of the area’s rivers. Thus Gar Beings are logically related to the watery 42

harrison3.indd 42

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

underworld and reflect this in the cosmology depicted in the art. Reference Harrison (2005:129), “anthropomorph with…a Gar Being” 12. Associated Centipede Being (Enigmatic Character C) Anthropomorph with a related Centipede Being or with Centipede Being characteristics. The anthropomorph is often smaller than the Centipede Being, and the pair can be depicted in multiple relative positions (see #41) [Photo: 41VV124; red anthropomorph is ca. 40 cm tall]. Interpretation A medicine man interacting with a supernatural Centipede Being. Centipede Beings are fearsome creatures associated with upside-down (possibly dead) and skeletonized humans. Centipede Beings are thought to be related to the native giant desert centipede (Scolopendra heros), and they are associated with a metaphorical, cave-related underworld because they reside in inaccessible, deep rock crevices. Their coloration (red, black, and yellow) correlates with the colors comprising classic Pecos River Style art. References Turpin (1999:29), “creatures with centipede-like bodies, curved pincers, and jagged teeth” Harrison (2005:126), “linkage between an anthropomorph with a kind of centipede monster.” 13. Associated Amorphous Black and Sinuous Character (Enigmatic Character D) Anthropomorph with a related Amorphous Black and Sinuous Character or with 43

harrison3.indd 43

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

Amorphous Black and Sinuous Character traits (see #43) [Illustration: 41VV1230; anthropomorph is ca. 55 cm tall]. Interpretation A medicine man interacting with a supernatural Amorphous Black and Sinuous Character, a mythological figure found in this art. This core motif also includes examples in which Amorphous Black and Sinuous Characters are depicted alongside one or more other enigmatic characters. They would have occurred in oral histories and religion. They represent an “other world” context. References Harrison (2005:129), “large, amorphous form with sinuous lines as appendages or with a sinuous body shape.” 14. Associated Polysymbolic Ethereal Being (Enigmatic Character E) Anthropomorph(s) surrounded by a group of Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings (see #44). Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings are medium-sized figures that draw attention to the central figure of the composition via position and/or implied motion. This core motif also includes a group of Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings without a central figure [Illustration: 41VV612; anthropomorph is ca. 50 cm tall]. Interpretation A medicine man surrounded by a group of supernatural Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings. Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings lack legs and are denizens of the airy realm. The action takes place in the sky or supernatural world and is tied to an oral history about these figures. They are termed “polysymbolic” because they seem to convey a combination of other diverse traits from the Pecos River Style 44

harrison3.indd 44

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

(see #31, #69, and #70). Reference Harrison (2010), “a component of the other-world pantheon” 15. Associated Plume Serpentine Being (Enigmatic Character F) Anthropomorph with related Plume Serpentine Being(s). This core motif also includes some examples of a Plume Serpentine Being associated with another enigmatic character but without an anthropomorph present (see #45) [Illustration: 41VV1411]. Interpretation A medicine man associated with one or more Plume Serpentine Beings, which are supernatural figures. Plume Serpentine Being-like figures are also found in Barrier Canyon Style pictographs. 16. Line of Deer Anthropomorph(s) with a related row of deer or other artiodactyllike images usually located below and to the side of the anthropomorph. Can also be a row of deer without a central figure (see #46) [Illustration: 41VV1618; anthropomorph is ca. 75 cm tall]. Interpretation Ability to procure or locate large game using supernatural means. Interpretation of “hunting magic” inferred from the presence of speared animals associated with anthropomorphs. References Newcomb (1976:183), “diminutive deer are associated with the anthropomorphic figures, their bodies often pierced by darts.” Harrison (2005:132), “deer-like or other zoomorphs are depicted as if running across the shelter wall.”

45

harrison3.indd 45

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

17. Involved Super-positioning Two anthropomorphs deliberately painted on top of one another. Involved Superpositioning has three typical forms: (1) two figures are perpendicular to one another, their torsos intersecting at or near the waist and one anthropomorph is vertical while the other horizontal; (2) two anthropomorphs are painted on top of one another in different colors, positioned at an angle giving a shadow-like appearance and a form of visual duality; and (3) a rare form seen at three sites (41VV124, 41VV129, and 41VV237) in which a major anthropomorph has a faint mirror image of its torso painted above and to the side of it [Photo: 41VV696; red anthropomorph is ca. 160 cm tall]. Interpretation Involved Super-positioning is related to the concept of duality and possibly the separation of the physical and spiritual bodies. References Turpin (1999:29), “showing duality by shadowing” Harrison (2005:132), “symbolically linked anthropomorphs placed in superposition by deliberate over-painting.” 18. Flight Metaphor An anthropomorph associated with birds in the art (see #38) [Illustration: 41VV74]. Interpretation Supernatural flight. A key component of the mythology and religion depicted by the art. A similar motif also occurs in pictographs in Barrier Canyon Style (Schaafsma 1994:53), Grand Canyon Polychrome Style (Christensen et al. 2013:74) and Grand Mural Style (Crosby 46

harrison3.indd 46

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

1997:212), indicating that this religious concept was common to each of these Middle Archaic cultures. References Turpin (1994a:87), “ascending shaman, escorted by flock of birds.” Harrison (2005:132), “flock of zoomorphic birds around a central anthropomorph. 19. Impaled Objects An anthropomorph associated with a group of figures of different types, all impaled by atlatl darts (see #21) [Illustration: 41VV76; anthropomorph is ca. 310 cm tall]. Interpretation Inflicting harm on different elements by either physical or supernatural means. References Harrison (2005:132), “central figure surrounded by sets of dart-impaled objects.” Turpin (2011a:9), “Impalement Theme”

Non-Core Motifs Fifty-four specific symbols and motifs from the Pecos River Style are defined in this structural-iconographic analysis. These non-core motifs are individual diagnostic elements found in the pictographs, often as constituent parts of other figures and core motifs. Non-core motif elements are organized according to category: material culture, anthropomorph head forms, zoomorphs, enigmatic characters, unclassified figures, geometric symbols, and artistic conventions.

47

harrison3.indd 47

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

Material Culture 20. Atlatl A slightly curved, linear element (atlatl shaft) with a short-angled line (atlatl spur) on one end that forms an acute angle. Atlatls sometimes have an oval near the opposite end (wrist loop) as the small line. Atlatls are most frequently depicted near the arm of an anthropomorph [Photo: 41VV1230; anthropomorph is ca. 35 cm tall]. Interpretation An atlatl. Indicates the power of the central figure, which is based on the ability to physically harm an enemy. An essential piece of material culture of the time. Reference Kelley (1949:73), “atlatl” 21. Dart A line (dart shaft) with a symmetrical, bisected, leaf-shaped element near one end (fletching). The opposite end of the line sometimes has a Single Pole Ladder Symbol. Darts can be depicted alone or in groups, but they are most frequently associated with an atlatl and an anthropomorph [Photo: 41VV1230; left dart is ca. 20 cm tall]. Interpretation An atlatl dart. Indicates the power of the central figure based on the ability to hunt or physically harm or kill an enemy. The Single Pole Ladder Symbol in this case represents the projectile point. Reference

48

harrison3.indd 48

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

Kelley (1949:73), “dart” 22. Rabbit Club A moderate-length, linear element with a small knob on one end, somewhat similar in appearance to a shortened golf club. Rabbit Clubs can be straight or slightly curved. Rabbit Clubs are shorter in length than darts and staffs [Photo: 41VV237; anthropomorph is ca. 55 cm tall]. Interpretation A rabbit club is a welldocumented object of material culture found archaeologically in the Lower Pecos. Artistically it represents the power of the central figure based on the ability to hunt or physically harm an enemy. References Kelley (1949:73), “rabbit stick?” Campbell (1958:158), “rabbit stick” 23. Staff A long, linear object with multiple subforms based on elements on the distal (upward) end. Some are trident-like; others end in a Y shape or have a pair of sinuous, curvilinear elements. Staves have a variety of forms. The larger staff on the right has Single Pole Ladder Symbols in place of the lines (see #40 and #49) [Photo: 41VV696; right Staff is ca. 70 cm long]. Interpretation Staff used by medicine men/leaders depicted in the art. Staves are supernaturally potent status objects and are found in association with Dart-headed Figures, whose bodies are made up of the staff and other elements.

49

harrison3.indd 49

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

24. Wrist Object Pair of spine-covered, oval objects attached to the wrist of an anthropomorph [Photo: 41VV83; Wrist Object is ca. 25 cm long]. Interpretation Prickly pear pouch, rattle, or piece of regalia.

25. Medicine Bundle A circular object with descending, moderate-length, linear elements attached to it. Typically depicted on the arm of an anthropomorph, with the circular part of the object above the arm and the linear elements below [Photo: 41VV840; Medicine Bundle is ca. 10 cm long]. Interpretation A bundle, a power object used by a medicine man. 26. U Symbol Medicine Bundle A form of Medicine Bundle with a U Symbol substituted for the circular element (see #55) [Photo: 41VV40; anthropomorph is ca. 10 cm tall]. Interpretation A Medicine Bundle linked to Were-cougar symbolism, transformation, and power. References Turpin (2011b:94), “abbreviated were-

50

harrison3.indd 50

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

cougar.” 27. Deer Antlers Medicine Bundle A form of Medicine Bundle with Deer Antlers Symbol substituted for the circular element (see #62) [Photo: 41VV76; Medicine Bundle is ca. 50 cm long]. Interpretation A Medicine Bundle linked to deer symbolism and power and sometimes to peyote when the antlers have dots on their ends (Boyd 1999; 2003:77). 28. Miscellaneous Arm Object Various objects attached to the arm of an anthropomorph and often shown as lines descending from the arm with or without objects attached to them [Photo: 41VV83; anthropomorph is ca. 165 cm tall]. Interpretation Various ceremonial arm regalia objects worn by a medicine man/ leader. 29. Feather Hip Cluster Multiple short, curved, linear elements emanating from one or the other side of an anthropomorph’s torso near the waist. Feather Hip Clusters sometimes have a line that crosses the waist of the anthropomorph. They are specifically associated with the Panther Cave site (41VV83) [Photo: 41VV83; Feather Hip Cluster is ca. 30 cm long]. Interpretation A material culture object; a piece of regalia tied to the waist. The lines may depict tassels or feathers. References Kirkland and Newcomb (1967:49), “cluster of feathers or a feathered sash.” Boyd (2003:42), “feather hip cluster.”

51

harrison3.indd 51

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

Anthropomorph Head Forms 30. Plume Head Form An anthropomorph with a short, branched, linear element extending from its head, either straight up or at an angle [Photo: 41VV83; Plume Head Form is ca. 15 cm long]. Interpretation Headdress, regalia or iconographic indicator of a particular figure. Reference Harrison (2004a:104), “may represent a particular headdress”

31. U Head Form An anthropomorph with a flat-topped head and short-rounded ear- or horn-like elements at either corner (see #55). A variant is the similar W Head Form seen at a few sites (see #56) [Photo: 41VV83; anthropomorph is ca. 325 cm tall]. Interpretation Indicates a Were-cougar medicine man or mythological being. References Kirkland and Newcomb (1967:49), “A distinctive ‘horn’ headdress, it is, two rather blunt projections extending upward.” Turpin (1994b:77, 80), “cat ears,” “werecougar” Harrison (2004a:105), “anthropomorph with a U head”

52

harrison3.indd 52

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

32. Rabbit Ears Head Form An anthropomorph with one or two elements shaped like an elongated plummet (tear drop) and extending from its head, usually at an angle [Illustration: 41VV167; anthropomorph is ca. 155 cm tall]. Interpretation A headdress, likely made from one or two long feathers. Likely indicates aspects of myth and oral history as well as other possibilities mentioned above. References Turpin (1991:30), “rabbit ears or two feather headdress” Boyd (2003:90), “single or dual feather headdress or rabbit ears.” Harrison (2004a:112), “one or two feather headdress.” 33. Antlers Head Form An anthropomorph with deer antlers on its head (see #62) [Photo: 41VV124; Antlers Head Form is ca. 4 cm long]. Interpretation A headdress made of white-tailed deer antlers worn by a medicine man. Could also indicate a particular myth or mythological character. May indicate a set of ceremonies involving deer and hunting magic or other cultural information (Bement 1994). Dots on the antler tines might be an indication of peyotism (Boyd 1999). References Boyd (1999:232), “antlered anthropomorph with tines decorated with black dots” Harrison (2004a:114), “an important Pecos River Style head form.”

53

harrison3.indd 53

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

34. Arch Head Form An anthropomorph with an arch-like element above its head. The arch sometimes has small, linear elements extending from its upward side [Photo: 41VV1230; anthropomorph is ca. 100 cm tall]. Interpretation The Arch Head Form combines three other Pecos River Style motifs: (1) Hole-in-the-Universe core motif, (2) Unbound Locks, and (3) an anthropomorph with a disarticulated forehead. This non-core motif relates to the Hole-in-theUniverse motif in Lower Pecos religion and mythology. The typical arch motif is scaled down and modified to fit the crown of the anthropomorph’s head. The lines sometimes shown on top of the arch represent both the hair and the crenellations seen on a typical Hole-in-the-Universe motif. Reference Harrison (2004a:119), “a motif which represents both the radiant and separated crown of the head as an indicator of trance as well as representing the celestial horizon.” 35. Unbound Locks An anthropomorph with long hair extending upward or at an angle from its head. In most cases the hair is standing straight up [Photo: 41VV83; Anthropomorph is ca. 40 cm tall]. Interpretation Long, flowing hair indicates motion, energy, or a religious context. Likely also related to oral history and mythology. Reference Turpin (1991:25), “radiant or unbound hair”

54

harrison3.indd 54

7/18/18 8:13 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

Zoomorphs 36. Deer Deer or artiodactyl-like zoomorph with or without antlers. Deer bodies are shaped like a laurel leaf split down its midline. They are typically shown in profile with four legs in an extended position, indicating motion [Photo: 41VV83; Deer is ca. 30 cm long]. Interpretation White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). Key large-game prey species for the hunter-fisher-gatherer people of the Lower Pecos. A simple but naturalistic image of the native white-tailed deer running at a distance. Along with other likely meanings, this is an indication of “hunting magic” in the art. 37. Mountain Lion Feline zoomorph that looks like a mountain lion. A large, curled tail often fringed with small lines is a prominent and often emphasized characteristic. [Photo: 41VV83; Mountain Lion is ca. 250 cm long]. Interpretation Mountain lion (Puma concolor); the most powerful natural predator common to the Lower Pecos. An important component of Lower Pecos Archaic religion and mythology. 38. Bird Avian zoomorph of varying form; cannot be identified to the species. Birds have wings and are typically depicted in groups. They have ovate bodies that are not very standardized in shape [Illustration: 41VV207]. Interpretation A bird or an animal able to fly, literally accessing the sky. A component of Lower Pecos mythology metaphorically symbolizing the sky, a higher plane, and flight. 55

harrison3.indd 55

7/18/18 8:13 AM

Chapter 4

39. Other A zoomorph that does not clearly fit into the category of Deer, Mountain Lion, or Bird. Interpretation any zoomorph not clearly falling into the three categories above.

Enigmatic Characters 40. Dart-headed Figure (Enigmatic Character A) Figure with a plummet- or ovalshaped or circular body with lines (typically two) extending out to a perpendicular line or lines that are sometimes a Staff, Dart, or Rabbit Club. Thus Dart-headed Figures have three main parts: the body, parallel lines, and the terminal bar. When Dart-headed Figures are associated with an anthropomorph, the terminal bar is depicted in close proximity to the anthropomorph’s hand. When motion is indicated, the terminal bar is shown to be the figure’s “head.” The terminal bar is often a recognizable object of material culture, such as a Staff, Dart, or Rabbit Club. In rare cases, two or more parallel lines and bodies originate from a single terminal bar (see #10, #21, and #23) [Photo: 41VV696; right Dart-headed Figure is ca. 60 cm tall]. Interpretation An often-depicted supernatural being that can be handled by a medicine man using a Staff, Dart, or Rabbit Club. The simple, linear “heads” could also represent a simple, unadorned staff. Dartheaded Figures can also exist independently, flying to and fro with their rotund bodies following their long, parallel-line torsos and linear heads. Intermediate examples of anthropomorphs and Dartheaded Figures indicate oral history, myth, and possibly transformation by a medicine 56

harrison3.indd 56

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

man. Dart-headed Figures are an important part of the religion and myth depicted in the art. A form of mythological being, the Dart-headed Figures is one of the most characteristic traits of Pecos River Style art. References Grieder (1966:716), “catfish” Newcomb (1967:54), “may or may not be human” Turpin (1986a:15), “mythical creature,” Turpin (1991:60), “fantastic creatures … identified by a set of coherent attributes.” Boyd (1995:268), “datura” Harrison (2005:126), “Staff-headed Being” Harrison (2010), “most frequent association, those extending from the hand of an anthropomorph.” 41. Centipede Being (Enigmatic Character C) A large, linear, and often sinuous figure with prominent pincers. Small lines (legs) extend out from one or both sides of the body. In some cases various traits are excluded. Often depicted with small and upside-down or skeletonized anthropomorphs. The pincers, if present, indicate the figure’s “head” (see #12) [Illustration: 41VV1604; left Centipede Being is ca. 40 cm long]. Interpretation A powerful supernatural being encountered by medicine men and a component of their religion. Centipede Beings are metaphorically linked to giant desert centipedes (Scolopendra heros), which have long bodies, multiple legs, and pincers. The coloration of these centipedes (red, black, and yellow) is the same as that of the pictographs. Centipede Beings are dangerous denizens of the underworld. They are components of oral history 57

harrison3.indd 57

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

and myth. Some humans are depicted in transitional forms with Centipede Beings, representing some type of transformation. References Turpin (1999:29), “creatures with centipede-like bodies, curved pincers, and jagged teeth.” Harrison (2004a:126), “Centipede Being” 42. Gar Being (Enigmatic Character B) Large figure with a horizontal, elongated, slightly asymmetrical, and cigarshaped body. One end of the figure sometimes has an expanding trapezoidal shape. This is the figure’s “head.” Just inside of this is a “cross bar” element, lines that extend out from either side of the body. The end of the body opposite from the “cross bar” is rounded. (see #11) [Illustration: 41VV134; Gar Being is ca. 180 cm long]. Interpretation A supernatural being that lives underwater and is a metaphor for this realm. Gar Beings are linked to the large alligator or spotted gar, which is native to the rivers of the Lower Pecos, where they inhabit deep pools. The “cross bar” element is analogous to the side fins of a fish when viewed from above. As with Centipede Beings, anthropomorphs are also depicted in transitional forms with Gar Beings. There are a few sites with Gar Beings illustrated with multiple small humans lining either side of their body. This is likely an indication of a myth or meaning associated with Gar Beings in oral history. Reference

58

harrison3.indd 58

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

Harrison (2004a:129), “Gar Being” 43. Amorphous Black and Sinuous Character (Enigmatic Character D) A large and irregularly shaped or rectilinear figure with no consistent body form. Amorphous Black and Sinuous Characters often have sinuous line appendages extending out from the main body. Amorphous Black and Sinuous Characters are often painted black with red accents (see #13, and #47 and #52) [Photo: 41VV76]. Interpretation A supernatural being that is part of the oral history and mythology depicted in Pecos River Style art. Amorphous Black and Sinuous Characters have no definitive body form, but they often have sinuous tendrils. They are important denizens of another world, members of the pantheon of Pecos River Style Enigmatic Characters. They are sometimes associated with anthropomorphs in the art, possibly indicating interaction with a medicine man or a component of mythology. References Jackson (1938:222), “problematical paintings” Harrison (2004a:129) 44. Polysymbolic Ethereal Being (Enigmatic Character E) Small anthropomorphic figures that are found in groups. They lack legs; instead, their torsos are unusually elongated, ending in points or connecting to other Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings. They often form a group around a central figure in a core motif, their positioning suggesting motion or flight. Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings can be recognized by their distinctive U Head Forms and short, stubby, and slightly downturned arms 59

harrison3.indd 59

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

combined with unadorned bodies. Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings are small and lack material culture elements or other typical anthropomorph characteristics (see #31) [Illustration: 41VV696; figure is ca. 90 cm long]. Interpretation Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings are supernatural beings found in groups. Lacking legs, they are denizens of the airy realm sometimes found as part of Hole-in-the-Universe motifs. Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings are depicted in formations with or without an associated central figure. Their U Head Forms suggest that they are a particular form of supernatural being related to Were-cougars. They play a direct role with the central figure, flying around or otherwise surrounding them. Reference Harrison (2010:5), “polysymbolic ethereal beings have this characteristic appearance and are always found in groups.” 45. Plume Serpentine Being (Enigmatic Character F) Sinuous figure with a long, slightly tapering body. The “head” is in the form of a trilobed element that looks something like a clover leaf. The opposite end, or tail, of the figure often has small lines on it that extend from either side (see #15) [Illustration: 41VV1971]. Interpretation A mythological figure depicted in Pecos River Style art. Similar beings also occur in the Barrier Canyon Style pictographs of Utah.

60

harrison3.indd 60

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

46. Square-winged Character (Enigmatic Character G) Anthropomorphic figure with characteristic rectilinear wings. Square-winged Characters often have a blank oval face. Typical characteristics include antlers on the head and claws on the wings. Square-winged Characters are frequently surrounded by Single Pole Ladder and Antler symbols (see #49 and #62). Some examples have Associated Dartheaded Figures. Square-winged Characters are not properly classified as Enigmatic Characters because they could be a type of anthropomorph, but they are not a typical anthropomorph because of an overwhelmingly consistent body form and the lack of variability between examples. [Photo: 41VV74; Anthropomorph is ca. 95 cm tall]. Interpretation Square-winged Characters could represent a specialized form of anthropomorph, a god, or a mythological being. They may represent a particular ceremonial context with a medicine man/ leader dressed in a particular form of regalia: blank face, deer antlers, and square wings. Surrounded by impaled figures and Single Pole Ladder Symbols, Squarewinged Characters invoke death. Some examples have been found associated with Dart-headed Figures. References Kirkland (1938:23), “a god or mythological character.” Kirkland and Newcomb (1967:56), “a particular variation of the shaman.” Boyd (1999:240), “a winged antlered anthropomorph—which may be understood through analogy.”

61

harrison3.indd 61

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

Geometric Symbols 47. Sinuous Lines Symmetrical, curvilinear, sine wave images. Often 1 m or more in length [Photo: 41VV40; Sinuous Line shown is ca. 110 cm long]. Interpretation Supernatural power or energy. Visually denotes motion and fluidity.

48. Petaloid Motif A line or figure with repetitive foliate elements on one side [Photo: 41VV1604; Petaloid Motif is ca. 20 cm long]. Interpretation In some contexts, Petaloid Motifs are a locative for the sky or celestial realm, as has been documented in the Southwest. In other examples the meaning is unknown. 49. Single Pole Ladder A short, linear element crossed by several (typically 3 or 4) perpendicular lines. Single Pole Ladder symbols are often depicted at the end of an atlatl dart (see #21) [Photo: 41VV696; upper left Single Pole Ladder is ca. 8 cm long]. Interpretation Death. In various contexts, the symbol can depict a projectile point spear tip or human rib cage. Other, less well-understood contexts are also shown. References Kirkland and Newcomb (1967:58), “projectile point symbol.” Gebhard (1965:10), “dart point” Turpin (1991:53), “in some contexts, this design seems to represent feathers but in others, it remains ambiguous.” Boyd (2003:38), “single pole ladder” 62

harrison3.indd 62

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

50. Deer Stand-like Symbol A square or rectilinear box-like figure with two short lines extending downward at an angle from the lower corners. Sometimes Deer Standlike Symbols have interior design elements similar to those seen in anthropomorphic figures (see #3). This example at 41VV76 is the central figure of a core motif surrounded by other Deer Stand-like Symbols [Photo: 41VV76]. Interpretation A particular type of Holein-the-Universe. In some cases it seems to be an animate figure or possibly a transitional form with an anthropomorph. References Jackson (1938:225), “box like element” Gebhard (1965:10), “stylized human” 51. Impaled Dot A circle (filled in or hollow) with an atlatl dart sticking into it (see #21) [Photo: 41VV83]. Interpretation Peyote cactus button. Dart evokes a peyote-hunting ceremony (Boyd 1995). References Bass (1992:411), “dot” Boyd (1995:270, 1999:239), “peyote” Harrison (2004a:115), “share a host of symbolic attributes” 52. Macro Bar A large horizontal symbol greater than 1 m in length. The bottom is flat, with multiple rounded crenellations extending upward. Some examples are impaled by atlatl darts and are at the center of core motifs (see #48) [Illustration: 41VV1604; lower Macro Bar is ca. 100 cm long]. Interpretation Unknown. May represent or be related to the Amorphous Black and 63

harrison3.indd 63

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

Sinuous Character on the basis of some examples (See #43 above). References Grieder (1966:712–713, 719), “canoe” Kirkland and Newcomb (1967:58), “resembles boat or sparse toothed comb” Bass (1992:411), “bumpy bar” 53. S Symbol A symbol that looks like the Roman letter S as well as like a short segment of a Sinuous Line (see # 47) [Photo: 41VV124; S Symbol is ca. 17 cm long]. Interpretation Segment of a Sinuous Line; supernatural power or energy. Reference Harrison (2004b:69), “linked to the iconography of sinuous lines.”

54. C Symbol A symbol that looks like the Roman letter C (see #22) [Photo: 41VV1230; C Symbol is ca. 7 cm long]. Interpretation Rabbit Club. Reference Harrison (2004b:68), “may be fairly realistic depictions of the wooden objects known as grooved clubs.”

64

harrison3.indd 64

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

55. U Symbol A symbol that looks like the Roman letter U (see #26 and #31) [Photo: 41VV696]. Interpretation Symbol directly related to the U Head Form. Cat ears are an indication of a Were-cougar. Some anthropomorphic U Symbols appear singly or in pairs; a sinuous line extends down from the base of the U in place of the body of an anthropomorph (see #5, #68). References Bass (1992:411), “U shape” Harrison (2009:84)

56. W Symbol A symbol that looks like the Roman letter W. A variant of the U Symbol (see #31 and #55) [Illustration: 41VV83]. Interpretation A variant form of U Symbol that is also related to the U Head Form. Reference Harrison (2009:85) 57. Cross Symbol Symbol in which two lines cross perpendicular to one another. Typically the shorter line segment is positioned toward one end of the longer line segment, more like a Christian cross than an addition sign [Photo: 41VV83; Cross Symbol is ca. 90 cm long]. Interpretation An anthropomorph symbol; a simplified human with arms extended horizontally. Reference Harrison (2009:79)

65

harrison3.indd 65

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

58. Y Symbol A symbol that looks like the Roman letter Y [Photo: 41VV124; Y Symbols are ca. 20 cm long]. Interpretation an anthropomorph symbol; a simplified human with arms extended upward at an angle. Reference Harrison (2009:80)

59. T Symbol A symbol that looks like the Roman letter T [Photo 41VV696; T Symbol is ca. 40 cm long]. Interpretation An anthropomorph symbol; a simplified human with arms extended horizontally. Reference Harrison (2009:80)

60. Rio Bravo Symbol A rectilinear figure with a pair of inward curving, pincer-like elements extending from either end [Photo: 41VV286]. Interpretation An anthropomorph symbol; a simplified anthropomorph with inward curved arms and legs. Reference Harrison (2009:81)

66

harrison3.indd 66

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

61. Fire Cracker-like Symbol A narrow, rectilinear figure with a curving, linear element extending from one end. Often demonstrates Bilateral Symmetry: divided down the middle with different colors on either side (see #35, and #71) [Photo: 41VV612; lower left symbol is ca. 20 cm long]. Interpretation An anthropomorph symbol. A simplified anthropomorph with only a torso and exaggerated Unbound Locks— no arms or legs. Reference Harrison (2009:82)

62. Antlers Symbol Motif that looks like a set of deer antlers (see #27 and #36) [Photo: 41VV1604; Antlers are ca. 4 cm long]. Interpretation White-tailed deer antlers. Related to deer and the symbolism and rituals involving deer and specifically deer antlers (Bement 1994).

63. Thistle Symbol Symbol consisting of a central, linear element out of which multiple short, linear fringes extend at an angle from both sides. Thistle Symbols have a tapering, plummet-like shape [Photo: 41VV770; Thistle Symbol is ca. 15 cm long]. Interpretation Unknown, possibly plants. References Bass (1992:410), “thistles” Bass (1994:71), “plant”

67

harrison3.indd 67

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

64. Circle with Streamer Circle with a short and straight or curving element attached to it. Circle with Streamer symbols are depicted in groups and visually suggest motion. This symbol is only known to occur in Mexican rock art sites [Illustration: San Vicente, Mexico; the figures are ca. 15 cm long]. Interpretation Unknown. References Turpin (1989:279), “series of circles and streamers” Turpin (2010:63), “southern motif ” 65. Sunburst Hollow or solid circle with linear elements radiating out in all directions from around its circumference [Photo: 41VV840; Sunburst is ca. 25 cm long]. Interpretation Unknown. References Bass (1992:410), “sunbursts” Bass (1994:71), “plant”

66. Comb A rake-like symbol: a horizontal line with short, perpendicular linear elements extending upward across its length. Somewhat similar to Macro Bar but much smaller with lines rather than foliate elements extending upward [Illustration: 41VV696]. Interpretation Unknown; possibly related to the Macro Bar symbol.

68

harrison3.indd 68

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

67. Shoulder Dots Anthropomorph or other central figure with a pair of small circles or sub-angular elements located above and to either side of the central figure’s shoulders in symmetrical orientation to the figure [Photo: 41VV40; Shoulder Dots are ca. 10 cm long]. Interpretation Unknown. Possibly a type of Hole-in-the-Universe motif (several co-occurrences of the two motifs have been recorded).

Artistic Conventions 68. Use of Negative Space Deliberate omission by the artist of some typical and expected units of the painting. Some elements of a composition or figure are not included but are assumed on the basis of canon, leading to an abstract composition [Photo: 41VV1230; anthropomorph is ca. 70 cm tall]. Interpretation Artistically indicates advanced aesthetic concepts and a wellunderstood and shared set of iconography. 69. Ascending and Descending Imagery Painting with inverted or converging upward and downward-oriented figures [Photo: 41VV124]. Interpretation Flight and the airy realm. Inverted figures possibly indicate death. Artistically this convention indicates motion and a mythological or religious context. Reference Turpin (1994a:84), “An alternative way of depicting magical flight is through the horizontal or inverted positioning of anthropomorphic forms.”

69

harrison3.indd 69

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Chapter 4

70. Anthropomorph with Horizontal Orientation An anthropomorph painted in a horizontal or diagonal position relative to the floor of the rock shelter [Photo: 41VV242; anthropomorph is ca. 50 cm long]. Interpretation Indicates a medicine man in supernatural flight and a mythological and religious context. Anthropomorphs with a horizontal orientation are sometimes associated with the Hole-in-theUniverse or Flight Metaphor core motifs and, as part of the former, can also incorporate natural holes and cracks in the rock (Turpin 1994a). Reference Turpin (1994a:84) 71. Bilateral Symmetry Visually balanced compositions that can be divided symmetrically along a central midline [Illustration: 41VV696]. Interpretation An artistically balanced composition common to many preColumbian arts.

72. Bilateral Asymmetry Describes cases in which figures with Bilateral Symmetry have been modified stylistically (often by use of color, figure shape, or patterning) to differentiate each side of the painting, changing an otherwise balanced composition [Photo: 41VV584]. Interpretation A Pecos River Style derivative form of Bilateral Symmetry. An artistic convention adding stylistic complexity and differentiating each side of an otherwise symmetrical form. 70

harrison3.indd 70

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Pecos River Style Typology

73. Paint Spattering The application of paint droplets flung from a brush or otherwise applied to the pictographs [Photo: 41VV696; figure is ca. 20 cm long]. Interpretation A component of the art used for visual elaboration and to show motion and action. Paint Spattering unifies a core motif when applied across an entire composition or when linking two or more figures.

74. Voice Dots Anthropomorph or other central figure with dots or Paint Spattering emerging from the side of the figure’s head and extending upwards at an angle. Typically associated with an anthropomorph with a head that is turned to the side, mouth open and facing upward in the same orientation as the dots [Photo: 41VV696; anthropomorph is ca. 30 cm tall]. Interpretation Sound; likely words, prayers, songs, and stories.

71

harrison3.indd 71

7/17/18 8:25 AM

5

DISCUSSION Anthropomorphs and the Landscape

T

he most prevalent figures found in Pecos River Style art are elongated linear anthropomorphs that are abstract in form. Natural-looking humans do not occur in Pecos River Style art. Instead the anthropomorphs have distinctive, tapered, symmetrical bodies with patterns inside of them. The form of these anthropomorphs is similar to some other ancient forms of rock art in the Americas: Barrier Canyon Style (Utah), Grand Canyon Polychrome Style (Arizona), Glen Canyon Style 5 (Utah), Great Mural Style (Baja), and Angelim Style (Brazil) (Allen 1991; Christenson et al. 2013:68; Cole 2004:41; Crosby 1997:217; Morales 2005:33). The anthropomorphs in each of these forms of rock art are similar, possibly indicating some form of early shared cultural diffusion. Some of these styles also contain core motif–like structures (Cole 2004:34–35; Harman 2013). The Pecos River Style anthropomorphs

harrison3.indd 72

lack facial characteristics. They usually have arms and legs but are sometimes reduced to the torso itself. These anthropomorphs often have a cigar- or carrot-shaped body. Heads are indistinct and shrunken and sometimes disconnected from the body. Greco (1984, 2011) has written that Pecos River Style anthropomorphs do not represent humans, but instead are water spirits based on seeps and springs that “come alive” in wet seasons through the seemingly life-like force of flowing water. The appearance and ambience of these natural features changes during wet and dry conditions. Gray limestone crags form a labyrinth of rugged canyons in the Lower Pecos region, and these walls are covered with deep holes, stalactites, flowstones, fossils, cracks, and colorful water streaks. Most of the water streaks form by the drip line under roofs and overhangs. These streaks become animate with water from either cloud bursts from the sky or springs emerging from under the ground. Colorful streaks form because of the presence or absence of water running

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Discussion

down the cliff face. Most of this occurs during heavy rainfall events when water is channeled down runnels or, conversely, blocked by small overhangs. Different types of lichen grow on the limestone depending on the presence and absence and amount of water, and over time a different patina forms on the rocks—grey, blue, yellow, black, red, and white. These colors inspired the polychrome art. Water streaks became a metaphor for the human torso. The colors of the rocks, and in particular the water streaks, carried over into the paintings as did their shapes. The interior center lines or outlining that occur as features of the streaks also form the basis of the colorful in-fill patterns painted inside the bodies of the major anthropomorphs. Within an animistic worldview, these water streaks were more than beautiful

geologic features; they were living spirits of the earth. The culture, through its art, expressed a metaphorical and spiritual connection to the landscape. The paintings have symmetry within the landscape. Features such as caves, arches, and the roofs of rock shelters may have been the inspiration for the circles and arches seen in Holein-the-Universe motifs. There is a logical visual congruency between these natural features and images in the art. The people who produced the Pecos River Style paintings occupied the Lower Pecos for many millennia and would have been familiar with every aspect of their landscape and environment, including a supernatural component that only they understood. The rock shelters with the pictographs are also habitation sites and likely the scene of any number of ceremonies and social and religious activities over time. Thus, the

Figure 84. A pair of Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings and row of five anthropomorphic Rio Bravo Symbols showing the frequent association of Enigmatic Characters and human figures. This image is painted on the roof of Black Cave in Pressa Canyon, Seminole Canyon State Park.

73

harrison3.indd 73

7/17/18 8:25 AM

Figure 85. A Flight Metaphor/ In Field core motif with red and grey birds. The anthropomorph seems to rise over its sandals which are depicted just below. 41VV1230.

Figure 86. An Amorphous Black and Sinuous Figure impaled by atlatl darts, and flanked by two Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings. 41VV40.

harrison3.indd 74

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Figure 87. A possible Hole-in-the-universe core motif with two tiers of four anthropomorphs separated by a horizontal semi-anthropomorphic figure. The lower figures have arms, legs, and heads while the upper figures lack arms and legs but have Unbound Locks. From a distance, these upper and lower anthropomorphs appear to merge, while up close one can see that the pairs of figures are separated. 41VV224.

Figure 88. An In Sinuous Lines/ In Field/ Hole-in-the-Universe/Associated Dart-headed Figure/ Associated Amorphous Black and Sinuous Character core motif. The scene contains a Macro Bar on the right. In a possibly unrelated core motif to the left, a red anthropomorph is surrounded by clusters of atlatl darts. 41VV696.

harrison3.indd 75

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Chapter 5

landscape was imbued with a great deal of significance and meaning. From the perspective of someone inside a rock shelter, the skyline is a similar arching profile formed by the curved overhang. The artists were aware of all aspects of their world, especially water. The streaks and springs may have been seen as the embodiment of spirits or ancestors. From this ancient belief system the Pecos River Style anthropomorph was developed, the body’s form mirroring water streaks and springs on the limestone cliffs. The Lower Pecos San Felipe phase people were anthropomorphizing the landscape through the assimilation of natural features into their social imagery. Conversely, they imbued natural features with social significance. Social power was conveyed through supernatural power and access. Medicine men/leaders are shown in a spiritualized and deindividualized context when depicted in the art. These individuals associated themselves with earth and water spirits of the landscape, natural springs, seeps, and water streaks. This is in part due to the importance of water in this desert landscape.

Social Pressure and Religion Conveyed in the Imagery Turpin (1990:109, 2004) was the first to model a cultural historical theory for the production of Pecos River Style pictographs in terms of scalar stress. The idea was later elaborated into the concept of “cyclical nucleation and sacred space.” In this theory the Lower Pecos canyons became climatic refugia during a period of increasing aridity beginning around ca.

4500 BP. Increasing populations within the canyons required the development of a leadership structure to manage the decision-making and conflict resolution necessary within increasingly large macro-bands. This, in combination with the near-permanent occupation of some large rock shelters, represented a rise to a higher level of social complexity and hierarchy relative to earlier periods that had smaller and more dispersed hunter-fisher-gatherer bands. Centered in these rock shelters, bands were logistically organized and quasi-sedentary rather than nomadic. A hierarchal, social, and religious structure became necessary, and the Pecos River Style is one expression of that phenomenon. Thus, the art reflects the stress of human populations coping with increased aridity and environmental change, which triggered social change and scalar stress (Turpin 1990, 2004). Syntheses of Lower Pecos archaeology have generally noted an increase in the prevalence and thickness of archaeological deposits associated with the Middle Archaic strata, which contain Pandale and Langtry dart points. This abundance of remains in the archaeological record is generally thought to be associated with a relatively intense occupation of the sites during that time (Hester 1989:59; Nance 1972:172). Pecos River Style pictographs were created by hunter-fisher-gatherers as an element of a seasonal round, a continual process of social amalgamation and dispersal throughout the landscape in search of resources. The scale of some of the Pecos River Style paintings and factors such as the preparation of pigment cakes (Turpin 1997)

76

harrison3.indd 76

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Discussion

and scaffolding indicates communal production rather than individual effort. Little is known of this exact process, but Turpin’s theory provides a model that seems to best explain the function of the art as a stabilizing and unifying cultural process. As part of this theory, the Pecos River Style is an expression of the social and religious mechanisms needed to mitigate growing population stress during the San Felipe interval. The paintings developed out of this Middle Archaic crisis period. The pictograph technology and canon were created during rituals at natural shrines on the landscape. As shrines, some rock shelters were visited time and time again as part of a ritual cycle; rock art was produced as part of these events, and thus the major Pecos River Style sites were created over time. The art style continued to be produced for two or more millennia, resulting in the coherent iconography now known as the Pecos River Style. Even for the modern viewer, Pecos River Style pictographs are virtuous, striking, and authoritative. Similar to Northwest Coast art, in the Pecos River Style, The goal of art is to affect the viewer— on the Northwest Coast, to affect the viewer very “powerfully” indeed. The artist is communicating the power itself. To the extent that the artist can strike the viewer, power is literally transferred. There is a clear equation: affecting presence = supernatural power = social power. Emotional power is, to varying degrees, supernatural or spiritual; it can enable the viewer to accomplish great things, or

it can merely impress him [Anderson 1996:63].

Pecos River Style art was created as a form of communication; the medium is largescale, polychrome pictographs in an open rock shelter setting. A style was codified, giving emphasis to and recording the animistic/shamanistic religion practiced by the aboriginal culture. The imagery was used to depict ritual events, and paintings are focused on important medicine men/ leaders. Core motif themes mirror and appear to validate the theory of cyclical nucleation and sacred space (Turpin 2004). Core motifs themselves represent episodic ritual behavior. Society had hierarchical structures that were in part codified through religion, and core motifs reflect this. Most either depict a central figure (hypothetically a medicine man/leader) in a supernatural context or show scaled hierarchies of anthropomorphs expressing social rank and authority, a reflection of a complex hunter-fisher-gatherer society. These are the same hierarchies predicted by the theory of cyclical nucleation and sacred space (Turpin 2004). The various scales of the short-term hierarchies are expressed in different core motif themes: Heraldic, Associated Apprentice, Two in Juxtaposition, and Series of Equals. These themes express the range in leadership scales and their fluid and transitional nature as predicted by the theory. Leadership and status depicted in scalar paintings have been found in ethnographic rock art in South Africa (Dowson 1994), and I argue that something similar 77

harrison3.indd 77

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Chapter 5

occurred in the Lower Pecos. Likewise, some forms of art from the Northwest Coast depict hierarchy in the art and reflect social stratification and competition among individuals, clans, and villages through powerful visual displays of art and style (Jonaitis 1986). There is no reason to think the hunter-fisher-gatherers of the Lower Pecos Middle Archaic could not have had a similar level of hierarchy that could have been conveyed in their art. Pecos River Style anthropomorphs bear all forms of weaponry (atlatls, clubs, darts) conveying power in hand-to-hand combat or in hunting. Some themes seem to convey superiority over a vanquished foe: a central figure is surrounded by one or more smaller, prone anthropomorphs pierced by atlatl darts. Central figure anthropomorphs are frequently depicted with weaponry, the most common being the atlatl and dart. They also wear ceremonial regalia and objects, illustrating power both physical and supernatural. In this way, the art itself was a form of propaganda aggrandizing the status and power of the medicine man/ leader in particular and the hunter-fishergatherer band collectively.

Religion Other core motifs express predominantly religious concepts, often depicting a medicine man/leader shown in supernatural contexts. Within an animistic belief system like the one thought to be represented in Pecos River Style pictographs, humans have spirits/souls, and exist within a network of nonhumans who also have spirits/souls. Helvenston and Hodgson (2010:62–64) described how this belief system can lead to

nonhumans being given anthropomorphic characteristics and the portrayal of humannon-human combinations as is seen in Pecos River Style imagery. On the basis of this reading and in terms of overall cosmology, Pecos River Style pictographs depict a worldview with various realms. These Pecos River Style otherworld contexts relate to areas of the world that we as earth-bound humans are unable to broach: up in the sky, beneath the water, and below the surface of the ground. The upper celestial world included the daytime sky inhabited by birds as well as the dark night full of stars. There was also an “underworld” associated with being below the surface of the water as well as underground in crevices, cracks, and caves in the rock and landscape. Passage to these various worlds was an important component of the religion depicted in the art. Each realm had its own supernatural denizens (the pantheon of “enigmatic characters” listed in chapter 4). As incredible as it sounds, magical flight and ascent into upper and lower realms via caves and holes in the rocks, as well as in the sky itself, were important and powerful components of this religion. These metaphors are conveyed in the art by portraying anthropomorphs in association with birds or in horizontal positions with their hair flowing behind them. Another example is the portrayal of anthropomorphs associated with Hole-in-the-Universe motifs. The upper world is the sky and therefore associated with birds and their ability to fly. This magical flight was part of the Lower Pecos people’s religion, and aspects of this connection are included in many

78

harrison3.indd 78

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Discussion

paintings. The most diagnostic are anthropomorphs surrounded by groups of birds. Comparable paintings are depicted in Barrier Canyon, Grand Canyon Polychrome, and Great Mural styles of rock art, suggesting that magical flight was a widespread belief across the greater Southwest during the Archaic. Pecos River Style pictographs are perhaps the most illustrative of these themes, depicting, in addition to birds, other aspects that indicate flight. As another indication, some anthropomorphs are depicted in a horizontal position with outstretched arms and with streaming, wavy hair. There are also many scenes with crisscrossing, horizontal, and diagonal figures. Other examples include Hole-inthe-Universe motifs that often contain aspects of flight, including the orientation of a horizontal figure with a natural crack or hole in the rock (Turpin 1994:85). A second component of this religion is the supernatural death of a medicine man/ leader conveyed through inverted figures and figures impaled by atlatl darts. Associations with Centipede Beings link these paintings with the underground realm. As well as being intimidating creatures, these giant desert centipedes are natural metaphors because they travel in and out of and live in deep cracks and pockets in the rock, thus traveling freely from one realm to another (Whitley 1994:26). Some anthropomorphs with skeletonized bodies are depicted being devoured by greatly oversized Centipede Beings. These images often contain the Single Pole Ladder symbol forming the skeletonized torso of the anthropomorph. In one example at site 41VV696, a Centipede Being is flanked by

two small anthropomorphs that are positioned near its pincers; the anthropomorph on the right side has a solid body, and the anthropomorph on the left has a skeletonlike body in the form of a Single Pole Ladder. This imagery is believed to represent life and death. Furthermore, a large Centipede Being at site 41VV612 holds a diminutive anthropomorph with Unbound Locks in its pincers. At site 41VV124, a large Centipede Being is depicted in association with an upside-down anthropomorph pierced by an atlatl dart. These three examples indicate the lethality and power of Centipede Beings when shown in context with anthropomorphs in Pecos River Style art. Supernatural access to lower underwater worlds was conveyed by associations with Gar Beings. Most of these paintings are restricted to the lower reaches of the Pecos River Canyon, near its mouth with the Rio Grande. Anthropomorphs are often in a horizontal position and have Gar Being characteristics. Examples at sites 41VV62 and 41VV134 show an anthropomorph and a Gar Being overlapping on the wall, with the two figures connected by small dashed lines or dots. In some cases the anthropomorph takes on the characteristics of a Gar Being or is depicted in a similar horizontal position. A fourth, more ambiguous, supernatural context involves another set of enigmatic characters—the Amorphous Black and Sinuous Character and Polysymbolic Ethereal Being. With contexts associated with flight and Hole-in-the-Universe motifs, these two figures are denizens of an ethereal plane that may be related to the night sky. But medicine men/leaders are also found in 79

harrison3.indd 79

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Chapter 5

context with these two enigmatic characters, and they were part of the belief system. Amorphous Black and Sinuous Characters are defined by their lack of consistent form. They are one of the most difficult to explain aspects of the art, but it is clear from their context that they were active characters in the narratives. Amorphous Black and Sinuous Characters are often large, sometimes dominating a whole pictograph panel. They are associated with several other motifs that produce their form, specifically Sinuous Lines and the Macro Bar Symbol. Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings are also very active characters that are involved in flight- and movement-centered compositions. At the Painted Canyon site, Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings swirl around a central figure. Their lower bodies are sometimes Sinuous Lines or even the arch of a Holein-the-Universe. Were-cougars depict the ability of a medicine man to take the form of and embody a mountain lion and are another important religious aspect of Pecos River Style imagery and mythology (Turpin 1994b). As described by Turpin, Were-cougars are portrayed in a variety of forms and recognized on the basis of several different attributes: ears, claws, and depiction in association with the mountain lion itself. Often a medicine-man/leader is juxtaposed with a mountain lion, and sometimes the two are connected by some type of line or symbol. The Associated Mountain Lion core motif is a frequent theme in the paintings; other themes include examples with cat ears, U Head Forms, or claws. These Were-cougars represent the powers of

the medicine man/leader who can, in this religion, through established ritual practice, take on the form of a creature that is likely the most silent, powerful, and deadly predator in the Lower Pecos. Big cat–human transformation was an impressive and ubiquitous component of Lower Pecos Archaic religion as shown in the pictographs. This ancient and widespread belief was shared across several major indigenous peoples of Mesoamerica, such as the Olmec (Furst 1995:73) and Maya (Coe and Stone 2001:121). In the Lower Pecos, pictographs depict a Were-cougar (Puma concolor) rather than Were-jaguar (Panthera onca) transformation. At site 41VV584 there are two Pecos River Style anthropomorphs with yellow bodies with small, circular, black elements comparable to the distinctive rosettes on the coat of a jaguar. This seems to indicate that the Lower Pecos artists were aware of the jaguar and had a convention for depicting them, but mountain lions were the animals that were at the heart of the imagery and style.

Society Pecos River Style mural art was public art. Many of the largest panels are situated in the sizable habitation shelters found along major rivers and creeks. The paintings were an important component of Lower Pecos Archaic culture and identity, including sets of shared rules and a worldview. Human beings as individuals share a need for belonging, and that need is part of the Pecos River Style. Culture and its expression partially satisfy an individual’s needs for group identity. In an evolution-

80

harrison3.indd 80

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Discussion

Table 5. Model showing the relationship between psychological identity and the archaeological record

➧

Culture

➧

➧

ary sense, a group of cohesive individuals working toward the same goal is better adapted than a group of individuals with divergent goals and no central authority figure or the ability to reach consensus. Archaeology in general, and the Pecos River Style specifically, at one level reflect the concept of personal and cultural identity. Although culture and personal identity exist on very different scales, there is a link between this individual concept and the components of the archaeological record sometimes referred to as ethnic markers (Table 5). Humans are social beings and feel the need to belong to a larger group. Identity markers are selected and expressed through appearance, speech, and behavior. The material culture we as individuals adopt is a tangible signal to others in our group (as well as outsiders) of nontangible concepts of group identification, as well as our role and status within the society. This expression is an important aspect of cognitive archaeology. Style and material culture are determined in part through established, unconscious learning networks operating on a cultural level. At the same time, unless directly coerced, an individual’s personal appearance and trappings are self-selected. Style at one level reflects conscious choice and agency, with the selection of alternative objects that potentially serve the same

➧

➧

➧

Material Culture

Ethnicity

➧

➧

Archaeological Record

Personal Identity

function. Sometimes the selected objects include those that reflect beauty, skill, fine craftsmanship, rarity, or meaning. In these cases, style can indicate a deliberate statement regarding identity, self-identification, and, psychologically, feelings of belonging and association. This self-selection is culture operating at the fundamental level of the individual, and on a long-term scale these individual decisions help form the archaeological record. The Pecos River Style is a record of Lower Pecos religion and cosmology. It is a highly structured and diachronic symbol system. These “symbols in action” (Hodder 1982) filled the role of written language; iconography and symbolism are more ancient forms of visual communication. The paintings are the patrimony of the indigenous local population that resided in these canyons during the Middle or Middle and Late Archaic and their descendants. To some extent, through the imagery, we can model their cosmos and worldview. Religion does not exist within a social vacuum but tends to model the society that produced it. There is also a great deal of social hierarchy expressed in the art. One major goal of the art is the elaboration and magnification of a central figure, often a medicine man/leader. This represents the cultural sanctioning, aggrandizing, and spiritual embellishment of an individual 81

harrison3.indd 81

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Chapter 5

or sets of individuals via ritual process. The Pecos River Style may have functioned as a false consciousness in two regards: by sanctioning differential, unequal status within the society and by increasing the group’s belief in their and their medicine men/leader’s ability to manage the everyday challenges that they all faced—injury, disease, the environment, group cohesion, hunting, gathering, and interactions with other potentially harmful or competitive groups (Harrison 2013c). The nonegalitarian hunter-fisher-gatherer political economy of the Lower Pecos is expressed partially through its religious structure as well as its art. As with the modern perspective, size in the imagery is indicative of importance and status rather than actual dimensions or relative distance. In Pecos River Style art, these scalar patterns are related to hierarchical relationships between figures, whether they be anthropomorphs or supernatural beings. Anthropomorph symbols are one form of diminutive anthropomorph, which frequently serve to elaborate a central figure. These anthropomorphs have been reduced into a series of standard symbols: U, W, Y, T, Cross, and Rio Bravo. These anthropomorph symbols and other forms of diminutive anthropomorphs surrounding the central figure in a painting express the importance of a medicine man/leader. Second are scalar core motifs (Heraldic, Two in Juxtaposition, Associated Apprentice, and Series of Equals) that each depict a different form of hierarchical relationship, either the authority of an individual, a pair, or a small collective of leaders. This is the visual expression of the short-term hier-

archies predicted by Turpin (2004). Social hierarchies worked out at community gathering events were also part of a ceremonial and religious praxis, and these events were recorded in a codified, symbolic way with Pecos River Style art. The central figures in the art represent the incipient leaders predicted in this theory. Therefore, although the art depicts mythological, social, and political information, it is also a “historical” record from the Lower Pecos Archaic. The panels are the natural shrines and the core motifs reflect the cyclical nucleation events and ceremonies conducted there. In this sense, the art also conveys the agency of these individuals, who are operating within a social and political context. The imagery was part of ceremonies involving and benefiting the whole community. The art may have functioned as a community-strengthening process. Through this process the Lower Pecos people created an incredible, unique, and highly refined style. This rock art is their greatest cultural legacy. The Pecos River Style is a highly codified lens through which we can visualize their lifeways, culture, and supernatural world. It consists of canonical narratives that can be interpreted in part in the same way that hieroglyphics can, and our understanding of the imagery will continue to develop over time. With their paintings, the Lower Pecos people created a complex and layered symbolic system. Through refinement and the progression of the style, they developed a high aesthetic and a technically vigorous art form. It conveys important aspects of how the Lower Pecos Archaic peoples created

82

harrison3.indd 82

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Discussion

a sustainable existence in this challenging desert environment using a simple Stone Age technology. Pecos River Style iconography, like other rock art, can supplement other components of the archaeological record in order to address cognitive, social, and spiritual aspects of the past. The analysis of these aspects is part of a contextual approach to archaeology. Important contributions of the pictographs and this analysis include • a record of the Lower Pecos people’s vocabulary of signs and symbols (a cognitive archaeology); • the ability to describe the symbolic structure of Pecos River Style rock art; • the ancient religion and cosmology of the Lower Pecos people as encoded in their iconography; • a recording of the Lower Pecos pantheon of supernatural figures; • information about Lower Pecos society and hierarchy encoded in a cryptic form; • evidence of agency and the ability to study an individual artist; • the potential for “feature archaeology;” • the study of sound synchronic contexts within the art—the individual painting; • an interpretive context for all Pecos River Style sites. This text probes some of the potential answers that archaeology can provide when given such a rich and coherent iconographic record to study. This analysis stems from a well-preserved archaeological landscape with a long history of research as well as numerous rock shelters and open sites.

Pecos River Style pictographs are profound, enduring, and ancient. Some of the art sites are also under threat, and it is important that we preserve these cultural resources for the benefit of future generations. This art is the patrimony of both the culture that created it and the descendants of that culture. The value of these paintings is at the level of a true contribution to the world’s artistic and cultural heritage. These pictograph and rock shelter sites stand as sentinels of the ancient past, protected mostly by isolation and scattered across a rocky West Texas limestone desert now mostly composed of large cattle, sheep, and hunting ranches with a low-population density. These pictographs are only a component of an important, well-preserved, and complex hunter-fisher-gatherer archaeological record dating to the Middle and Late Archaic periods. Modern development in the Lower Pecos region could have an adverse effect on these pictographs and their landscape. Pecos River Style pictographs are one of the most complex forms of rock art worldwide. They are also of great antiquity and therefore speak to a poorly understood but formative past. One thing that is greatly needed is further recording of Pecos River Style pictographs via nondestructive methods in order to produce an accessible corpus for study. These paintings provide a profound view into a very unfamiliar culture and time. We have yet to understand the full history of the ancient Middle Archaic hunter-fisher-gatherer peoples who produced these remarkable and often exquisite rock paintings. 83

harrison3.indd 83

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Some Unique and Particularly Interesting Core Motifs and other Pictographs

Figure 89. Sinuous “grid” and arch motifs of unknown meaning, possibly a combination Amorphous Black and Sinuous Character/Hole-in-the-Universe motif. 41VV40.

84

harrison3.indd 84

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Figure 90. A one-of-a-kind anthropomorph/ Dart-headed Figure combination impaled by an atlatl dart with a Single Pole Ladder dart point. The terminal bar of the Dart-headed figure has been combined with the anthropomorph’s arms. 41VV1604.

Figure 91. An Associated Were-cougar core motif at Panther Cave with a unique style. The upside down anthropomorph is found in context with two Polysymbolic Ethereal Beings, Shoulder Dots, and S Symbols.

85

harrison3.indd 85

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Figure 92. A Series of Equals/ In Field/ In Sinuous Lines/ Associated Dart-headed Figure core motif. The six anthropomorphs are divided into three groupings on the basis of anthropomorph body form and the form of the Associated Dart-headed Figure. At the same time, the Plume Head Forms of the left two figures are different from those of the four figures on the right side, further subdividing the group. 41VV1959.

86

harrison3.indd 86

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Gold and grey water streaks on a curved limestone overhang, Pecos River.

Anthropomorph-like water streaks on a side canyon of the Pecos River.

harrison3.indd 87

7/17/18 8:26 AM

A spring on the Devils River.

harrison3.indd 88

7/17/18 8:26 AM

REFERENCES Allen, Mary K. 1991 Grand Canyon Polychrome Pictographs. Utah Rock Art, 8:1–16. Salt Lake City. Anderson, E. N. (editor) 1996 Bird of Paradox: The Unpublished Writings of Wilson Duff. Edited by E. N. Anderson. Hancock House. Surrey, British Columbia and Blaine, Washington. Bahn, Paul G. 2010 Prehistoric Rock Art: Polemics and Progress. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Bass, Patricia M. 1992 The Pecos Art Project: Interpretive Models for Analysis. Ancient Images, Ancient Thought: The Archaeology of Ideology: Proceedings of the Twenty-third Annual Conference of the Archaeological Associa-

harrison3.indd 89

1994

tion of the University of Calgary, pp. 407–415. Calgary. A Gendered Search through Some West Texas Rock Art. In New Light on Old Art: Recent Advances in Hunter-gatherer Rock Art Research, edited by David S. Whitley and Lawrence L. Loendorf, pp.67–74. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Bates, Lennon N., Amanda M. Castañeda, Carolyn E. Boyd, and Karen L. Steelman 2015 A Black Deer at Black Cave: New Pictograph Radiocarbon Date for the Lower Pecos, Texas. Journal of Texas Archaeology and History 2:45–57. Bement, Leland C. 1994 Hunter-Gatherer Mortuary Practices During the Central Texas Archaic. University of Texas Press, Austin.

7/17/18 8:26 AM

References

Benz, Lauren D. 2012 A Geospatial Analysis of Pecos River Style Art from Val Verde County. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson. Boyd, Carolyn E. 1996 Shamanic Journeys into the Otherworld of the Archaic Chichimec. Latin American Antiquity 7(2):152– 164. 1999 Pictographic Evidence of Peyotism in the Lower Pecos. In The Archaeology of Rock Art, edited by Paul S.C. Taçon and Christopher Chippindale, pp. 229–246. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 2003 Rock Art of the Lower Pecos. Texas A&M University Press, College Station. Boyd, Carolyn E., Amanda M. Castañeda, and Charles W. Koenig 2013 A Reassessment of Red Linear Pictographs in the Lower Pecos Canyonlands of Texas. American Antiquity 78:456–482. Boyd, Carolyn E., and Kim Cox 2016 The White Shaman Mural: An Enduring Creation Narrative in the Rock Art of the Lower Pecos. University of Texas Press, Austin. Boyd, Carolyn E., and J. Philip Dering 1996 Medicinal and Hallucinogenic Plants Identified in the Sediments and Pictographs of the Lower Pecos, Texas Archaic. Antiquity

2013

70(268):265–275. Rediscovering Ingredients in Paintings of the Pecos River Style. In Painters in Prehistory: Archaeology and Art of the Lower Pecos Canyonlands, edited by Harry J. Shafer, pp. 180–181. Trinity University Press, San Antonio, Texas.

Campbell, Thomas N. 1958 Origin of the Mescal Bean Cult. American Anthropologist 60(1):156– 160. Cennini, Cennino d’Andrea and Daniel V. Thompson Jr. 1960 The Craftsman’s Handbook: Il Libro Dell’Arte. Dover. New York. Christensen, Don D., Jerry Dickey, and Steven M. Freers 2013 Rock Art of the Grand Canyon Region. Sunbelt Publications. San Diego, California. Coe, Michael D. 1992 Breaking the Maya Code. Thames and Hudson, New York. Coe, Michael D., and Mark Van Stone 2001 Reading the Maya Glyphs. Thames and Hudson, New York. Cole, Sally J. 2004 Origins, Continuities, and Meaning of Barrier Canyon Style Rock Art. In New Dimensions in Rock Art Studies, edited by Ray T. Matheny, pp. 7–78. Occasional Papers, No. 9. Museum of Peoples and Cultures,

90

harrison3.indd 90

7/17/18 8:26 AM

References

Brigham Young University. Salt Lake City. Crosby, Harry W. 1997 The Cave Paintings of Baja California: Discovering the Great Murals of an Unknown People. Sunbelt Publications, San Diego, California. Dowson, Thomas A. 1994 Reading Art, Writing History: Rock Art and Social Change in Southern Africa. World Archaeology 25:332345. Dibble, David S., and Dessamae Lorrain 1968 Bonfire Shelter: A Stratified Bison Kill Site, Val Verde County, Texas. Texas Memorial Museum Miscellaneous Papers No. 1. The University of Texas at Austin. Dymond, Jan Z. 1976 The Paradox of the Lower Pecos. BA Honors Thesis, The University of Texas at Austin. Eliade, Mircea 1964 Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy. Bollingen Series Vol. 76. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Furst, Peter T. 1995 Shamanism, Transformation, and Olmec Art. In The Olmec World: Ritual and Rulership, edited by Jill Guthrie, pp. 68–81 Art Museum, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey.

Gebhard, David 1960– The Diablo Cave Paintings. The Art 1961 Journal 20(2):79–82. Greco, Margaret 1984 Renewing Reality: An Interpretive Framework for Interpreting Pictographs. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Texas, San Antonio. 2011 Seeps, Springs, and the Pecos River Style Pictographs: “Renewing Reality” in the Light of 25 Years. American Indian Rock Art 37:100–114. Glendale, Arizona. Grieder, Terence 1966 Periods in Pecos Style Pictographs. American Antiquity 31:710–720. Hall, Grant D. and Steven L. Black 2010 Chronological Bibliography of Lower Pecos Archaeology. Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society 81:205–226. Hampson, Jamie 2016 Embodiment, Transformation and Ideology in the Rock Art of TransPecos Texas. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 26:217–241. Harman, Jon 2013 Patterns of Figure Placement in Great Mural Art near Mission Santa Gertrudis. Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Congress of the International Federation of Rock Art Organizations, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 91

harrison3.indd 91

7/17/18 8:26 AM

References

Harrison, James B., III 2003a Anthropomorphizing the Landscape: The Pecos River Style Core Motifs. Paper presented at the 68th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 2003b The Pecos River Style Iconography Project. Unpublished graduate field notes and illustrations. 2004a Rock Art Boundaries: Considering Geographically Limited Elements within the Pecos River Style. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, Texas A&M University, College Station. 2004b Analysis of Two Pecos River Style Curvilinear Symbols. La Tierra 31(1):67–71. 2005 Anthropomorphizing the Landscape: The Pecos River Style Core Motifs. Making Marks: Graduate Studies in Rock Art Research at the new Millennium, edited by Jennifer K. K. Huang and Elisabeth V. Culley, pp. 115–134. Occasional Paper, No. 5., American Rock Art Research Association, Tucson, Arizona. 2009 Anthropomorph Symbols in Pecos River ‘Style’ Pictographs. Rock Art Research 26:127–138. 2010 Digging into the Mind: Methods used in the Study of “Enigmatic Characters” in Pecos River Style Pictographs. Paper presented at the American Rock Art Research Association 2010 Conference, Del Rio, Texas.

2011

2013a

2013b

2013c

2015

An Argument for the Expanded Context of Dart-Headed Figures in Pecos River Style Pictographs. American Indian Rock Art 37:75–92. Glendale, Arizona. Review for Introduction to Rock Art Research, 2nd ed., by David S. Whitley. Ethnoarchaeology. 5:76–78. Various Shared Themes and Symbols in the Great Mural Traditions of Archaic North America. Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Congress of the International Federation of Rock Art Organizations, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Visual Hierarchies of Anthropomorphs in Rock Art: Bridging the Gap between High Theory, Middle Range Theory, and Data—A Case Study from 41VV124. Paper presented at the 2013 Annual Congress of the International Federation of Rock Art Organizations, Albuquerque, New Mexico. A Comment on “A Reassessment of Red Linear Pictographs in the Lower Pecos Canyonlands of Texas.” American Antiquity 80:201– 203.

Hegmon, Michelle, Jacob Freeman, Keith W. Kintigh, Margaret C. Nelson, Sarah Oas, Matthew A. Pebbles, and Andrea Torvinen. 2016 Marking and Making Differences: Representational Diversity in the U.S. Southwest. American Antiquity 81:253–272.

92

harrison3.indd 92

7/17/18 8:26 AM

References

Helvenston, Patricia A. and Derek Hodgson 2010 The Neuropsychology of ‘Animism’: Implications for Understanding Rock Art. Rock Art Research 27:61–76. Hester, Thomas R. 1989 A Chronological Framework for Lower Pecos Prehistory. Bulletin of the Texas Archaeological Society 59:53–64. Hodder, Ian 1982 Symbols in Action: Ethnoarchaeological Studies of Material Culture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1992 Theory and Practice in Archaeology. Routledge, London and New York. Hyman, Marian and Marvin W. Rowe 1997 Plasma Extraction and AMS 14C Dating of Rock Paintings. Techné 5:61–70. Jackson, A. T. 1938 Picture-writing of Texas Indians. Anthropological Papers Vol. 2. University of Texas, Austin. Jonaitis, Aldona 1986 Art of the Northern Tlingit. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Kehoe, Alice 2000 Shamans and Religion: An Anthropological Exploration in Critical Thinking. Waveland Press, Long Grove, Illinois.

Kelley, J. Charles 1950 Atlatls, Bows and Arrows, Pictographs and the Pecos River Focus. American Antiquity 16:71–74. Kirkland, Forrest 1938 A Description of Texas Pictographs. Bulletin of the Texas Archeological and Paleontological Society 10:11–39. Kirkland, Forrest, and W. W. Newcomb, Jr. 1967 The Rock Art of Texas Indians. University of Texas Press, Austin. Kochel, R. Craig 1982 Quaternary Geomorphology of Seminole Canyon State Historical Park: Val Verde County, Texas In Seminole Canyon: The Art and Archaeology, edited by Solveig A. Turpin, pp. 227–276. Research Report 83, Texas Archeological Survey, the University of Texas at Austin. Lankford, George E. 2011 Regional Approaches to Iconographic Art. In Visualizing the Sacred: Cosmic Visions, Regionalism, and the Art of the Mississipian World. Edited by George E. Lankford, F. Kent Reilly III, and James F. Garber, pp. 3–17. University of Texas Press, Austin. Leroi-Gourhan, André 1968 The Art of Prehistoric Man in Western Europe. Thames & Hudson, London. 93

harrison3.indd 93

7/17/18 8:26 AM

References

Mayer, Ralph 1948 The Painters Craft. Van Nostrand. New York. 1970 The Artists’ Handbook of Materials and Techniques. Revised edition. Viking Press. New York.

Pérez, de Ribas, Andrés 1999 History of the Triumphs of our Holy [1645] Faith amongst the Most Barbarous and Fierce Peoples of the New World. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Mock, Shirley Boteler 2011 Portable Rock Art of the Lower Pecos Canyonlands: The Symbolic Work of Women. American Indian Rock Art 37:115–132. Glendale, Arizona.

Poole, Jackie M., William R. Carr, Dana M. Price, and Jason R. Singhurst 2007 Rare Plants of Texas. Texas A&M University Press. College Station, Texas.

Morales, Reinaldo, Jr. 2005 The Angelim Style and Northeast Brazilian Rock Art. In Making Marks: Graduate Studies in Rock Art Research at the new Millennium, edited by Jennifer K. K. Huang and Elisabeth V. Culley, pp.27–39. Occasional Paper, No. 5, American Rock Art Research Association, Tucson, Arizona. Nance, C. Roger 1972 Cultural Evidence for the Altithermal in Texas and Mexico. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 28:169–192. Newcomb, W. W., Jr. 1976 Pecos River Style Pictographs: The Development of an Art Form. In Cultural Change and Continuity: Essays in Honor of James Bennett Griffin, edited by Charles E. Cleland, pp. 175–190. Academic Press, New York.

Reilly, F. Kent III 1995 Art, Ritual, and Rulership in the Olmec World. In The Olmec World: Ritual and Rulership, edited by Jill Guthrie, pp. 27–45. Art Museum, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey. Rowe, Marvin W. 2004 Radiocarbon Dating of Ancient Pictograms with Accelerator Mass Spectrometry. Rock Art Research 21:145–153. Schaafsma, Polly 1994 Trance and Transformation in the Canyons: Shamanism and Early Rock Art on the Colorado Plateau. In Shamanism and Rock Art in North America, edited by Solveig A. Turpin, pp. 45–71. Special Publication 1. Rock Art Foundation, Inc., San Antonio, Texas.

94

harrison3.indd 94

7/17/18 8:26 AM

References

Shafer, Harry J. 1977 Art and Territoriality in the Lower Pecos Archaic. Plains Anthropologist 22:13–21. 1988 The Prehistoric Legacy of the Lower Pecos Region of Texas. Bulletin of the Texas Archaeological Society 59:23–52. 2013 Cultural and Stylistic Change through Time in the Lower Pecos Canyonlands. In Painters in Prehistory: Archaeology and Art of the Lower Pecos Canyonlands, edited by Harry J. Shafer, pp. 57–91. Trinity University Press, San Antonio, Texas. Story, Dee Ann and Vaughn M. Bryant, Jr. 1966 A Preliminary Study of the Paleoecology of the Amistad Reservoir Area. Final Report sent to the National Science Foundation (GS667). Taçon, Paul S. C., and Christopher Chippindale 1998 An Archaeology of Rock-Art Through Informed Methods and Formal Methods. In The Archaeology of Rock Art, edited by Christopher Chippindale and Paul S. C. Taçon, pp. 1–10. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Taylor, Walter W. 1964 Tethered Nomadism and Water Territoriality: An Hypothesis. In Actas y memorias del XXXV Congreso Internacional de Americani-

stas, México, pp. 197–203. Mexico City. Turner, Ellen Sue, and Thomas R. Hester 1999 A Field Guide to Stone Artifacts of Texas Indians. Gulf Publishing, Houston, Texas. Turpin, Solveig A. 1986a An Example of a Mythical Creature in Pecos River Style Art: Southwest Texas. La Tierra 13(4):15–19. 1986b Toward a Definition of a Pictograph Style: The Lower Pecos Bold Line Geometrics. Plains Anthropologist 31:153–161. 1991 Sin Nombre and El Fortín: Pecos River Style Pictographs in Northern Mexico. Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society 60:267–281. (for 1989) 1990 Speculations on the Age and Origin of the Pecos River Style, Southwest Texas. American Indian Rock Art 16:99–112. 1991 Time out of Mind: The Radiocarbon Chronology of the Lower Pecos River Region. In Papers on Lower Pecos Prehistory, edited by Solveig A. Turpin, pp. 1–49. Studies in Archaeology 8. Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory, the University of Texas at Austin. 1994a On a Wing and a Prayer: Flight Metaphors in Pecos River Art. In Shamanism and Rock Art in North America, edited by Solveig A. Turpin, pp. 73–102. Special Publication 1. Rock Art Foundation, Inc., San Antonio, Texas. 95

harrison3.indd 95

7/17/18 8:26 AM

References

1994b

1997

1999

2004

2010

The Were-cougar Theme in Pecos River-Style Art and its Implications for Traditional Archaeology. In New Light on Old Art: Recent Advances in Hunter-gatherer Rock Art Research, edited by David S. Whitley and Lawrence L. Loendorf, pp. 75–80. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Archaeology and the Lewis Canyon Petroglyphs. In The Lewis Canyon Petroglyphs, edited by Solveig A. Turpin and Joel Bass, pp. 1–19 Special Publication 2. Rock Art Foundation, Inc., San Antonio, Texas. Reunion with Nature: Pictographic Accounts of the Shamanic Quest. In Ecotropic Works: An Anthology of Works Tracking the Interrelationship between Culture and the Environment, edited by John Campion, pp. 24–35. Eco-Tropic Books, Austin, Texas. Cyclical Nucleation and Sacred Space: Rock Art at the Center. In New Perspectives on Prehistoric Art, edited by Günter Berghaus, pp. 51–74. Praeger Press, Westport, Connecticut. El Arte Indígena de Coahuila. Universidad Autónoma de Coahuila, Saltillo.

2011a

2011b

SIZE MATTERS: The Transition

from Religious to Secular Art in the Lower Pecos Region. American Indian Rock Art 37:1–15. Glendale, Arizona. A Note about Things Worn on the Elbows of Pecos River Style Anthropomorphs: A Were-Cougar Motif from La Mulata, Coahuila. American Indian Rock Art 37:93–98. Glendale, Arizona.

Whitley, David S. 1994 Shamanism, Natural Modeling and the Rock Art of Far Western North American Hunter-Gatherers. In Shamanism and Rock Art in North America, edited by Solveig A. Turpin, pp. 1–43 Special Publication 1. Rock Art Foundation, Inc., San Antonio, Texas. Zender, Marc 2017 Theory and Methods in Maya Decipherment. The PARI Journal XVIII(2) Fall 2017. Zintgraff, Jim, and Solveig A. Turpin 1991 Pecos River Rock Art: A Photographic Essay. Sandy McPherson Publishing Company, San Antonio, Texas.

96

harrison3.indd 96

7/17/18 8:26 AM

INDEX Angelim Style, 15, 72 antlers (see deer antlers) anthropology theories, 3, 11–15, 72, 76–77, 81–82 anthropomorph symbols, 13, 17, 20, 65–67, 73, 82 Arenosa site, 4, 6 artist, 15, 17, 19, 21–23, 30–32, 39, 69, 73, 76, 82–83 arrowhead, (see projectile point) atlatl, 19–21, 41, 44–45, 47–50, 62, 69, 74–75, 78, 84 Barrier Canyon Style, 15, 45–46, 60, 72, 79 Big Bend, 3, 19 bilateral symmetry, (see symmetry) bird, 15, 19–20, 46–47, 55, 74, 78, 79 Bold Line Geometric style, 34–35 Bonfire Shelter, 3 Cedar Springs site, 9, 24–25, 36, 38, 46, 49, 56, 62, 65–66, 68, 70–71, 75 centipede, cover, 43, 57–58, 79 Central Texas, 2–4 Chihuahuan Desert, 2 conservation, 83 corpus (of art), 11–16, 18, 30–31, 35, 69, 77, 80, 82 core motif, 8, 15–16, 22–24, 28–29, 36–47, 59, 70–72, 77–78, 82 cosmology, 21, 42–44, 55–59, 62, 69, 78–81 dart, (see atlatl) Dart-headed Figure, 39, 41–42, 47, 75, 84, 86 death, 43, 61–62, 69, 79 deer, 16, 19–20, 45, 51, 53, 55, 67 deer antlers, 45, 47, 51, 53, 55, 61, 67, 69 Devils Mouth site, 3–4, 6

harrison3.indd 97

Devils River, cover 2–5, 7–10, 32, 88 Devils River State Natural Area, 7, 18 Discrete Geometric style, 34 Dolan Falls Preserve, 7 Eagle Cave, 3, 24–25 Early Archaic, 3, 6, 34, 76 Ecstatic Scalp motif, 32 Edwards Plateau, (see Central Texas) enigmatic character, 20, 22, 41–45, 37, 56–61, 63, 75, 78–80, 85 ethnicity, 80–81 ethnography, preface 5, 1, 14, 20–21, 62 Fate Bell Rock Shelter, 24–25, 32, 61, 74 Feather Hip Cluster 32, 51 flight, 20, 40, 46, 55–56, 59, 61–62, 69–70, 74, 78–80 Glen Canyon Style 5, 72 gods, 18–20, 61 Grand Canyon Polychrome Style, 46, 72, 79 Great Mural Style, 15, 46, 72, 79 Gulf of Mexico, 3 Halo Shelter, 24–25, 31, 38, 44, 48, 54, 64, 69, 74 Hanging Cave, 32 hermeneutics, 15 hierarchy (social), 38–39, 76–77, 81–83 hieroglyph, 11 historic rock art, 34–35 Hole-in-the-Universe motif, 16, 32, 54, 60, 63, 69, 70, 73, 75, 78–80

7/17/18 8:26 AM

Index identity, 1, 80–81 inductive research, 12 jaguar, 80 Lake Amistad, 6 Late Archaic, 3, 6–7, 14, 34, 81, 83 Lewis Canyon, 35 lithics (see projectile point) Lower Pecos Serpentine style, 34–35 material culture, 19–20, 41–42, 47–51, 56, 60, 64, 78, 81 Maya, 11, 12, 80 medicine bundle, 50–5, 69 medicine man, 1, 19–20, 37, 40–41, 43–45, 49, 50–53, 56–57, 59, 61, 70, 76–81 Middle Archaic, 1, 3, 6–7, 14, 34, 47, 76, 78, 81, 83 migration, 2–4, 14, 32–33, 73, 76, 82 mountain lion, cover, 19–20, 31–32, 40–41, 50, 52, 55, 65, 80, 85 mural, 1, 2, 15, 77, 80 Olmec, 11, 80 oral history (see ethnography) paint, 6, 21–23, 30, 43, 71, 73, 76 Paleoindian, 34 Panther Cave, 4, 24–25, 32, 37, 50–52, 54–55, 65, 85 Pecos River, preface 2, 2–5, 79 petaloid motif, 20, 62–63 peyote (and peyote symbolism), 47, 51, 53, 63 plant, 67–68 pollen, 3, 6 projectile point, 4, 6, 48, 62, 76, 84 rabbit club, 41, 49, 56, 64, 78 Rabbit Ears head form, 53 radiocarbon dating, 6–7, 33

rainfall, 2–3, 73 Rattlesnake Canyon, 30 Red Linear style/substyle, 33–35 Red Monochrome style, 34–35 refugia, 76 regalia, 21, 49–53, 78 Rio Grande, 2–5, 79 ritual, 1, 2, 14, 21–22, 33, 50–51, 67, 73, 77–78, 82 Rock formations, preface 2, preface 10, 2–4, 10, 17, 23, 30, 43, 70, 72–73, 76, 78–79, 87 Rock shelter, 1–2, 4, 6, 9–10, 30–31, 37, 70, 73, 76–77, 80, 83 San Felipe phase, 34, 76–77 Seminole Canyon, preface 9, 6, 32, 73 Serranías del Burro, 2, 5, 33, 68 shamanism, 14 Single Pole Ladder symbol, 12, 20, 48–49, 61, 84 sinuous lines, 20, 31, 37, 59, 62, 64, 75, 80, 86 Southeastern Ceremonial Complex, 12 springs, 3–4, 58, 72, 76, 88 staff, 39, 41, 49, 56 Structural Analysis, 11 Structural-Iconographic Analysis, 11–16 symmetry, 38, 67, 70 Tamaulipan thornscrub, 2–3 territoriality, 7, 32–33, 76 Texas Hill Country, 2 Trans-Pecos, 2–3 Transformation into mountain lion, (see Werecougar) underworld, 42–43, 57–58, 78–79 Were-cougar, 40, 50, 52, 62, 65, 73, 80, 85 White Shaman site, cover, 24–29, 42, 53, 64, 69 zoomorph, 47, 55–56

98

harrison3.indd 98

7/17/18 8:26 AM

harrison3.indd 99

7/17/18 8:26 AM

harrison3.indd 100

7/17/18 8:26 AM