The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua: Motif classification, quantification, and regional comparisons 9781407305608, 9781407336190

Citation preview

BAR S2084 2010

Paris Monographs in American Archaeology 25

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

BAKER

Motif classification, quantification, and regional comparisons

Suzanne M. Baker THE ROCK ART OF OMETEPE ISLAND, NICARAGUA

B A R

BAR International Series 2084 2010

Paris Monographs in American Archaeology 25

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Motif classification, quantification, and regional comparisons

Suzanne M. Baker

BAR International Series 2084 2010

ISBN 9781407305608 paperback ISBN 9781407336190 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407305608 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

ABSTRACT encouragement. Many people have graciously assisted us, but we would particularly like to thank Bernabé Lopez, Francisco Alvares Cruz, Heliodoro Carrillo, Carmen Lopez, Aura Maria Hernandez Flores, José Maria Centeño, Blanca Garcia, Juan Centeño, Feliciano González, and Juan Santos.

This study presents a motif classification, quantification, and regional comparisons for engraved rock art from the Maderas Volcano on Ometepe Island, Nicaragua. Maderas has the largest concentration of petroglyphs thus far reported in Central America. A formal analysis was conducted, which included construction of a typology for, then quantitative analysis of motifs found on over 700 boulders—only a portion of that known to exist on the island. Quantification showed that abstract curvilinear designs were predominant. Representative images, including both anthropomorphs and zoomorphs, exist but in far fewer numbers. Comparisons with rock art in adjacent regions to the south and north indicate that the Ometepe petroglyphs have more affiliations with and are probably part of a widespread abstract curvilinear tradition found in rock art of southern Central America, with probable cultural affiliations to Chibchan populations. Indicators of Mesoamerican contact and influence were found, but they are a relatively weak presence.

In the United States my appreciation goes first and foremost to my colleagues and friends at Culturelink, in particular to Michael Smith who has been assistant field director during all but one season and has made a majority of the project maps. Jerry Doty did exemplary duty as project photographer from 1998 through 2006. James Martin undertook some of the laborious chore of digitizing photographs and producing computer graphics. He is also our web site creator and has sometimes been the project photographer. Their conscientious work has contributed immeasurably to the Ometepe project. Dr. Frederick Lange and Larry Steinbrenner were generous with their time and expertise on Nicaragua. A thank you also goes to Dr. Andrea Stone, who shared her knowledge of Central American rock art and whose interest in the Ometepe petroglyphs encouraged me during this long process.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many people have contributed to the success of the Ometepe Archaeological Project and, ultimately, this dissertation. I would like to extend my gratitude to a number of colleagues in Nicaragua. Archaeologist Rafael González Rivas originally brought the archaeological potential of Ometepe to my attention. He has been an enthusiastic participant in each field season since its inception and has been of great assistance in facilitating logistics and contacts with local people. Dr. Rigoberto Navarro Genie participated in fieldwork in 2004 and has been exceptionally generous with sharing the results of his own excellent research on the statuary of Ometepe and the Lakes region. In Managua, Edgar Espinoza Peréz of the Departamento de Investigaciones Arqueológicas, Museo Nacional de Nicaragua, facilitated permissions for fieldwork and has kindly shared his knowledge about Nicaraguan archaeology. I would also like to thank Margarita Vanini and library staff at the Centro Histórico de Nicaragua y Centro América, University of Central America, Managua, who welcomed and graciously assisted me during research, and historian Patrick Werner, who took the time to talk with me about and share his research on Nicaragua’s history.

My love and heartfelt thanks go to my husband, Dr. Laurence H. Shoup, who has always supported my work in Nicaragua and patiently endured my long absences. My son, Dr. Daniel Shoup, also an archaeologist, has participated with me in fieldwork, given me help with analysis, been an important critic, and encouraged me along the way. This study and the Ometepe Project owe much of their success to the many volunteers who came from diverse places and countries with a love of archaeology and tremendous enthusiasm for rock art and adventure. I would like to thank all of them for their participation and hard work. Finally, my gratitude to the Rock Art Research Institute at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, especially Dr. Benjamin Smith and Dr. Geoffrey Blundell, who taught me a great deal about rock art. Thanks also for giving me the opportunity to write on a topic far afield from Africa. I dedicate this work to Edna Shoup, my much-loved mother-in-law, who first introduced me to rock art in Hawaii many years ago.

On Ometepe Island undying gratitude goes to the members of the Cooperativa Carlos Diaz Cajina, who welcomed us to the cooperative, housed and fed us at Hacienda Magdalena, did innumerable favors, and have been our friends. Cooperative members helped in many ways, including accompanying us during the survey, making the cooperative truck available when needed, providing local introductions, and assuring that there was a constant supply of cold beer in the refrigerator. They have always given us their patient attention and

PREFACE This publication is based on a dissertation written to fulfill the requirements for a degree of Master of Science in Rock Art Studies at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PREFACE

i i i

1 1.1 1.2

1 1 2 3 4 4 4 5 5

1.3

INTRODUCTION Aims and Rationale Methodological and Analytical Approach Classification Quantification Associational Analysis Locational and Topographic Analyses Regional Geographic Comparisons Summary

2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF OMETEPE ISLAND Topographic And Geological Setting Climate and Hydrology Flora and Fauna Settlement Today

7 7 9 9 10

3 3.1 3.2 3.3

HISTORY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH IN NICARAGUA Previous Archaeological Research Relevant to Ometepe Island Rock Art Research In Nicaragua Summary

11 11 14 16

4 4.1

OVERVIEW OF THE PREHISTORY AND ETHNOHISTORY OF NICARAGUA Prehistory The Greater Nicoya Archaeological Subarea Recent chronology Summary Ethnohistory Pacific cultures Atlantic cultures Cultural disruption

17 17 17 18 22 23 24 26 28

5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5

ETHNOHISTORY OF OMETEPE Ometepe in the 16th and 17th Centuries Ometepe in the 18th Century Ometepe in the 19th Century The 20th Century Summary

29 29 33 35 41 42

6 6.1 6.2

SURVEY AND RECORDING METHODOLOGY Site Survey Methods Petroglyph Recording Techniques The Petroglyph Record Photography Scale-drawings

43 43 45 45 45 46

7 7.1

THE SITES AND THE PETROGLYPHS Site Types Sites without petroglyphs Sites with petroglyphs Historic Sites Associated Site Features Site Distribution The Balgües-Pulman Area Punta Gorda to Punta El Corozal

47 47 47 47 47 47 49 49 51

4.2

7.2

ii

Page 7.3 7.4

Petroglyph Characteristics Other Cultural Modifications Associated with Petroglyphs Grinding features Small pecked holes/dots Rectangular or square pecked depressions Quarry features

8 8.1 8.2

MOTIF CATEGORIZATIONS, QUANTIFICATION, AND ANALYSIS Developing the Classification The Classification Representative figures Anthropomorphic figures Indeterminate heads/faces Zoomorphic figures Non-representative motifs Curvilinears Rectilinears Other motifs

63 63 66 66 66 81 81 92 92 98 104

9 9.1 9.2

9.4

QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS Representative Figures: Anthropomorphs and Zoomorphs Non-Representative Figures Curvilinear designs Rectilinear designs Other motifs Other Culturally Modified Boulders Grinding slicks Mortars and cupules Small pecked holes/dots Rectangular or square pecked and cut depressions Quarry features Discussion

112 112 113 113 115 115 115 115 116 116 116 116 117

10 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4

DATING THE OMETEPE MOTIFS Superimpositioning Ceramic Dating Motif or Iconographic Associations Summary

133 133 133 134 141

11 11.1

11.4

REGIONAL AND INTER-REGIONAL ROCK ART COMPARISONS Nicaragua The Pacific Coast Other Islands of Lake Nicaragua Zapatera, Isla El Muerto, and Isla Jesus Grande The Archipelago of Solentiname Chontales Other Areas of Nicaragua Southern Central America: Costa Rica and Western Panamá Looking Toward the North Honduras El Salvador Summary

144 144 144 145 145 146 146 147 148 151 151 151 152

12

CONCLUDING STATEMENT

154

9.3

11.2 11.3

52 53 53 55 55 55

APPENDIX 1: Sample of Archaeological Site Record and Petroglyph Record APPENDIX 2: Motif List

156 162

BIBLIOGRAPHY

165

iii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1. Chronology for Greater Nicoya and Ometepe Table 2. Site Attributes Table 3. Sites with Heavy Artifact Concentrations Table 4. Sites with Light Artifact Concentrations Table 5. Petroglyph Boulder Numbers and Artifact Concentrations Table 6. Petroglyph Numbers and Averages per Site Locations Table 7. Quantification of Representative Figures Table 8. Anthropomorphic Categories Table 9. Disembodied Body Parts Table 10. Anthropomorphic Heads/Faces Table 11. Zoomorphic Types and Distribution Table 12. Sites Grouped by Anthropomorphic and Zoomorphic Figures Table 13. Spirals Table 14. Meanders Table 15. Circles Table 16. Association of Spirals, Meanders, and Circles Table 17. Arcs and U-shapes by Site Table 18. Rectilinear Motifs Table 19. Squares and Rectangles Table 20. Other Motifs Table 21. Cruciforms Table 22. Mortars and Cupules Table 23. Petroglyph Associations of Grinding Slicks, Mortars, Cupules, and Pecked Holes Table 24. Range of Depths and Average Depths of Mortars and Cupules Table 25. Quarry Stones and Petroglyph Associations

18 58 61 61 62 62 119 120 121 122 123 123 124 125 126 127 129 129 130 130 131 131 132 132 132

LIST OF PHOTOS AND FIGURES Photo 1. Volcan Maderas Photo 2. Volcan Concepción Figure 7-1. Petroglyph Ome-31/N-RIO-19, R64 Figure 7-2. Mortars and Cupules Figure 7-3. Rectangular and Square Pecked Depressions Figure 7-4. Quarry Features Figure 8-1. Stick Figures Figure 8-2. Stick Figures Figure 8-3. Torso Figures Figure 8-4. Torso Figures Figure 8-5. Indeterminate Body Figures Figure 8-6. Heads/Faces: Circular and Triangular Heads Figure 8-7. Heads/Faces: Circular Figure 8-8. Heads/Faces: Square Figure 8-9. Heads/Faces: Square and Connected Figure 8-10. Heads/Faces: Heads with Continuous Eyebrow-Nose Line Figure 8-11. Heads/Faces: Simple Features and Complex Heads Figure 8-12. Vulva and Phallic Figures Figure 8-13. Anthropomorphic Relief Figures Figure 8-14. La Bruja Figure 8-15. Indeterminate Heads/Faces Figure 8-16. Monkeys Figure 8-17. Quadrupedal Figures Figure 8-18. Quadrupeds and Amphibians Figure 8-19. Reptiles: Caiman and Lizards Figure 8-20. Reptiles: Snakes or Snake-like Forms Figure 8-21. Birds Figure 8-22. Spirals Figure 8-23. Spirals Figure 8-24. Meanders Figure 8-25. Complex Meanders and Meanders with Loops

iv

vi vi 51 54 56 57 67 68 70 71 72 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 82 83 84 85 86 87 89 90 91 93 94 95 96

Page Figure 8-26. Figure 8-27. Figure 8-28. Figure 8-29. Figure 8-30. Figure 8-31. Figure 8-32. Figure 8-33. Figure 8-34. Figure 8-35. Figure 8-36. Figure 8-37. Figure 10-1. Figure 10-2. Figure 10-3. Figure 10-4. Figure 10-5. Figure 10-6.

Meanders with Loops and Meanders with Spirals Circles and Circle Variants Circles and Circle Variants Arcs, Concentric Arcs, and U-Shapes Grids Squares, Rectangles, and Triangles N-RIO-11, R15 Ladders and Rakes Corozal Figures Enlaced and Concentric Cruciforms Outlined and Simple Cruciforms Other Motifs Incised and Punctate Ceramic Sherds Polychrome Ceramics, N-RIO-19 Bichrome or Polychrome Ceramics, N-RIO-19 Incised and Striated Ceramics, N-RIO-19 Punctate and Appliqué Ceramics, N-RIO-19 N-RIO-12, R1

97 99 100 101 102 103 105 106 107 109 110 111 135 136 137 138 139 142

LIST OF MAPS Map 1: Map 2: Map 3: Map 4: Map 5: Map 6: Map 7: Map 8:

The Central American Isthmus Nicaragua Ometepe Island Greater Nicoya Archaeological Subarea Culture Areas in Nicaragua at the Time of European Contact Survey Areas Site Locations N-RIO-19

6 8 10 18 24 44 48 50

*All Photos and Figures are the copyright of either the author or the Ometepe Archaeological Project and are used with permission.

v

Photo 1. Volcan Maderas (facing southeast)

Photo 2. Volcan Concepción (facing north)

vi

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua 1

place in archaeology’s study of past human lives (Taçon and Chippindale 1998:2). The aim of many rock art projects is, therefore, interpretation of meanings. Finding the past meaning of rock art is, however, a particularly difficult task in the absence of information derived directly from the people who made the art. But, as contemporary rock art research shows, it is not impossible to achieve at least some understanding. Interpretations are most successful when various strands of evidence are considered together. Taçon and Chippindale (1998:6-8) have outlined three general approaches to rock art analysis—informed methods, formal methods, and analogy.

INTRODUCTION

This study stems from a volunteer archaeological survey project begun in Nicaragua in 1995. At that time the Department of Archaeology at the National Museum in Managua was interested in conducting an archaeological survey of Ometepe Island in Lake Nicaragua. Long known for its antiquities and for its beauty, the island had been declared a National Reserve because of its natural and cultural resources. In the early 1990s it had also become a magnet for increasing tourism. Little systematic survey had been conducted, so, although a few sites were known as a result of 19th and mid-20th century research, much of the island was a blank archaeologically. This was especially true for the eastern half of the island, formed by the Maderas volcano.

Informed methods are those that depend on insights passed on directly or indirectly from those who made and used the rock-art. These might include ethnography, ethnohistory, historical information, and contemporary knowledge that might have continuity with ancient traditions. Ethnographic insight is particularly important because of the variability and idiosyncratic nature of iconographic meaning (Taçon and Chippindale 1998:67).

I had previously conducted a volunteer survey with a colleague on Zapatera Island in 1986 and offered to commence an inventory on a volunteer basis. Consequently, I brought four North American colleagues to Ometepe in 1995 to begin a survey, and by 1997 we had organized and initiated the Ometepe Archaeological Project, which began a systematic survey on the northeast slopes of Maderas, using international volunteers. This work has continued through 2009 for a total of nine field seasons, utilizing as many as 10 to 15 volunteers each season to assist with survey and petroglyph recording. These included both professional archaeologists and interested avocationals.

Formal methods, which can also be used alongside of informed methods, are required when we have little or no informed knowledge; they depend on no inside knowledge. They include iconographic analysis, inferences from quantitative information and site location, and other techniques. Analogy relates to formal methods, but looks at similarities existing in other rock art or cultural traditions from which inferences might be made that are applicable to another tradition (Taçon and Chippindale 1998:8).

While we anticipated finding archaeological sites, we did not anticipate the heavy density of sites that existed within a relatively small area (~5 kilometers x 2 kilometers), and, especially, the great abundance of rock art. On Ometepe this rock art consists of petroglyphs, which are produced by a reductive technique, such as percussion or abrasion, rather than paint (IFRAO 2008). Since 1995, the Ometepe Archaeological Project, has recorded 110 archaeological sites, the vast majority of which contain petroglyphs. Almost 2000 panels have been recorded. To date, data entry and redrawings have been done for all but approximately 900 petroglyph panels. This study analyzes the rock art data for the first four years of field work, and includes the 46 sites recorded in those years. 1.1

This study must be seen as a very initial step toward interpretation. In light of the three methods described above, this work has had several aims. The first and principal aim was a formal analysis of Ometepe rock art motifs. This was done by sorting, classifying, and quantifying the numerous and varied data available. A thorough understanding of specific images and rock art patterning is essential for intra- and inter-site and regional comparisons and for a higher level of analysis— interpretation of meaning by informed methods and inferences by analogy. Secondly, and in light of the importance of informed methods for interpretation, prehistoric and ethnographic overviews were compiled, as was the most comprehensive ethnohistory—a history of the Indian population—of Ometepe Island yet prepared. Such research was essential to determine what ethnographic information about rock art was available and it was hoped that it would provide at least the context for, if not specific interpretations of, the rock art.

Aims and Rationale

The Ometepe Archaeological Survey has generated the largest collection of formally recorded rock art in Nicaragua and, at least, one of the largest in Central America. Its study is particularly important because there have been only three previous systematic analyses of Nicaraguan rock art motifs and each of these dealt with far fewer sites and numbers of petroglyphs (Rigat 1992; Navarro Genie 1996; Laurencich Minelli and di Cosimo 2000). The Ometepe materials will hopefully provide a substantial comparative base for future rock art studies.

A final goal has been to suggest the probable cultural author or authors of the rock art through a comparative regional analysis of rock art motifs. Although methodological concerns were primary for this study, over and above the classification and quantification of

Rock art is the direct material expression of human concepts and thought, and, as such, occupies an important 1

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua motif images hovers a practical question that precedes the interpretation of the images—Who created them? Since, as will be seen, there is little direct ethnographic information available about Ometepe or regional rock art manufacture, future interpretations will very likely require the use of analogy. Thus, after a thorough understanding of specific images and rock art patterning was gained through the formal analysis of the Ometepe data, intra- and inter-site and general regional comparisons of rock art motifs were made. It was anticipated that such comparisons would begin to point to local and regional associations and general direction of authorship. This is a particularly important point for interpreting Ometepe rock art through analogy, since we will need to look for the closest analogues.

“slowly and can therefore be used more reliably as archaeological proof of migration.” Thus, for example, “excavated house floors that demonstrate anomalous spatial layouts or particular assemblages of artifacts” might be indicators of particular populations (Steinbrenner 2002a:4). Although habitus was defined from an explicitly materialist position associated with production, religious practice and cosmology—“symbolically charged” and far more ephemeral and difficult to recreate archaeologically than even the almost autonomic practices discussed above—are also believed to be relatively stable and resistant to change. Cosmological and religious beliefs and strictures and rituals surely also contribute to habitus. In much of the world, rock art is believed to largely, but not exclusively, reflect cosmology/religion and/or ritual (Whitley 2005:94-95). If such is true in Nicaragua, then rock art patterns should also be relatively stable among resident populations. This is not to say that something radically new could not arise from within the culture or from a particular individual, but it is likely that idiosyncratic motifs originating from a particular individual’s experience might not be repeated or replicated by the culture as a whole unless imbued with unusual power or influence. It is likely that a culture would accept or utilize new, internally generated, motifs or styles very rarely or at least very slowly. While the dynamics of motif replacement or innovation are undoubtedly complicated and little understood, it is argued here that the appearance of distinctively new (and replicated) rock art design types probably occur more often as a result of the introduction of a new cosmology (or at least elements thereof), especially through contact with new populations or cultural influences that bring their own distinctive motifs.

The origin (or origins) of the rock art is also an important question for some of the important issues in general archaeology in Nicaragua. As Chapter 4 discusses, Nicaragua bridges regions of Mesoamerican influence to the north and of lower Central American influence, often associated with Chibchan populations, to the south. Ometepe Island is generally included within a Pacific Nicaragua zone that seems to have undergone complicated processes of independent regional development, as well as successive waves of relatively late migration of people and ideas from Mesoamerica beginning about the 9th century A.D. Theorists of migration have debated and continue to refine ideas about migration and cultural diffusion, and their appearance archaeologically (Adams et al. 1978; Anthony 1997; Burmeister 2000; Chapman and Hamerow 1997; Fowler 1989). As Steinbrenner (2002a) has noted, that process is just beginning for Nicaragua. He has outlined difficulties with interpreting migration in the archaeological record, especially when new archaeological data does not necessarily coincide with the ethnohistoric record in Nicaragua. Archaeology has, however, confirmed that migrations to Nicaragua did take place, but that “all migrations in Nicaraguan prehistory were not the same” (Steinbrenner 2002a). He has argued for the use of new, more sophisticated, migration models that take into account the possibilities of new populations integrating or co-existing with existing populations. Differentiating the two will be a subtle process dependent on “identifying the details of culture—that is, technological and functional elements that are less symbolically charged, more resistant to change, and unlikely to be adopted by other groups” (Steinbrenner 2002a:4, referencing Burmeister 2000:553). Steinbrenner’s (and Burmeister’s) reference point is explicitly Bourdieu’s (1977) concept of habitus, which consists of the individual’s conditioned “thoughts, perceptions, expressions, actions” resulting from “certain historically and socially situated conditions of production” (Bourdieu 1977:95). In other words, an individual internalizes community meanings and values and expresses their understanding of those values through action (Layton 2006:73). Steinbrenner (2002a:4, citing Burmeister 2000: 541-542) asserts that this approach implies that the practices associated with material culture, such as the use of and arrangement of artifacts of daily life within domestic structures, for example, change more

Loendorf (2007) recently discussed how the locations of particular painted and incised “shield” motifs in the intermountain region of western North America are pointing to the route of actual Athabascan movement from the Colombia Plateau southward into the Navajo area of the southwestern United States. While not wedded to diffusionist models, I believe that rock art motifs in Nicaragua may also provide an additional line of evidence, along with other archaeological data, for testing the presence or absence of certain population groups and their movement in Nicaragua. 1.2

Methodological and Analytical Approach

Motif classification and quantification have sometimes been criticized for being too subjective and for an inability to generate meaning. I believe, however, that such work is primary and agree with Smith (1995:14) that “the process of gaining a familiarity with the content and patterning contained within the art is essential.” Conkey (2001:286) has noted that others, such as Lenssen-Erz (1994), have also argued for the use of quantitative analysis as at least a heuristic means of pattern-searching. A sequence of interrelated steps was undertaken to conduct the formal analysis for this study. These include 2

Introduction classification; quantification; locational analysis; and broad geographic comparisons.

assumed at the outset. The definition of rock art styles may prove analytically useful, but only when the implications of style are identified, not assumed. Put another way, stylistic classification does not end with the definition of rock art styles but with analysis that illustrates what these styles imply in culturalhistorical and other terms.

Classification The International Federation of Rock Art Organizations (IFRAO) Rock Art Glossary defines a motif as "an anthropic mark or connected arrangement of marks on rock, perceived by contemporary humans as forming a single design" (IFRAO 2008). The key word here is "design", implying a deliberate and purposeful shape or pattern, since not all anthropic marks on a rock, such as random pecking, graffiti, or features such as cupules, are generally called motifs.m Description and classification of rock art motifs are methodological tools—the primary steps in rock art analysis.otif as “an anthropic mark or connected arrangement of marks on rock, In discussing classification schemes, it is difficult to avoid the word “style”, a term commonly used when discussing rock art. But the concept of “style” has often been attacked as a problematic classificatory and analytical category for rock art for a number of reasons. Style has historically been inextricably linked to ideas about temporality—that certain styles imply chronology (Conkey and Hastorf 1990; Francis 2001). The concept of style may also mask variability. Tratebas (1993:165) notes that regarding “styles as integral units discourages searching for temporal developments and other variability within styles.” Francis (2001:234) asserts that style is hard to define and is an art historical concept, based on a model of artistic expression and appreciation developed for and in complex societies, often based on highly subjective aesthetic appeal. Further, the concept of style presumes that “subsequent observers can discern the stylistic qualities and goals of expression which were important to the makers of the objects” (Francis 2001:234).

In this preliminary stage of analysis of the Ometepe motifs, I refer to an archaeological approach to the concept of style and classification of motifs which Francis (2001) has suggested. She turns to modern archaeological classification procedures in which categories “are dictated by explicitly defined clusters of attributes or features, which can be used for comparative analysis” (Francis 2001:235). Such classification is a basis for spatial and temporal analysis. Classification must bring order to a set of data and “maximize variation between groupings in order to examine and explain variability and change between those groupings” (Francis 2001:235, citing Plog 1974). A goal is to find a system which can be used consistently by other researchers. Francis first suggests identification of attributes, design elements, and descriptive types as components of this system. Defining attributes or characteristics of the rock art and rock art sites is primary. Attributes include technique of manufacture, type of figure (anthropomorphic, zoomorphic, abstract, etc.), body shape, size, and other features that can be described or measured. Rock art sites have such attributes as location, geomorphology, and geography (Francis 2001:235). Design elements are attributes intrinsic to rock art images. These are arbitrary and formal characteristics of a figure, including, for example, zigzag lines, circles, dot patterns, conventional renderings of zoomorphic or anthropomorphic figures. An individual figure can have one or more design elements (Francis 2001:236). A descriptive type is “a grouping of rock art figures based upon a conscious recognition of dimension of formal variation in those figures which exhibit a consistent patterning of attributes” (Francis 2001:236).

Hegemon’s (1992:517-518) review of archaeological uses of style found that archaeologists tended to agree on two tenets with regard to the meaning of style: “First, style is a way of doing something … and second, style involves a choice among alternatives.” The devil is in the details, however, and the definitions of style have varied on examination to include ideas about space-time systematics, communicative functions, and cognitive process. At the same time, debate has revolved around how style relates “to social and cultural processes“ and how it is “best analyzed and studied archaeologically” (Hegemon 1992:18). Hegemon (1992:531-532) notes that there are numerous research perspectives that could be and are incorporated into the concept of style. In this regard, Whitley (2005:52) says,

It is obvious that total objectivity cannot be achieved. There is often great variability in the small details of motifs, so the choice of attributes used and their relevance for analysis are often subjective. The classification of rock art “is something which is imposed upon the images by researchers,” and to some extent choices of attributes will depend on research goals (Francis 2001:235, citing Clegg 1991:111). What is important, however, is that categories can be explicitly described and replicated by other researchers.

It is potentially useful to define styles in rock art research, and they can be distinguished based on the types and nature of the motifs, the techniques by which the motifs are made and presented, and the patterns in their association. But what these styles imply in cultural historical terms needs to be determined through independent analysis, rather than

Francis also discusses a second analytical grouping— class—that is more generic than type. It “refers to any division of rock art figures based upon readily observable similarities and differences in a few attributes (Francis

3

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua 2001:237). For example, a class might refer to its manner of manufacture (i.e., pecked, incised, painted).

restrictions on, amongst other things, what species of animal may or may not have been painted…[A] consistent emphasis on the eland as an art object, together with an equally consistent avoidance of certain other antelope species (such as wildebeest), suggests that the artists were not individually inspired, but responding to a widely held cognitive system.”

For Francis (2001:237), types and classes form the “basic framework by which to begin initial examination of spatial and temporal variability within and between sites and geographic regions.” The repetition or recurrence of a type is key. Repetition implies organized symbology. Keyser (1992:16) defines “rock art style” “as a group of recurring motifs or designs…portrayed in typical forms…, which produce basic recognizable types of figures. Usually these various figures are associated with one another in structured relationships, leading to an overall distinctness of expression.” Francis concurs with this restricted use of the word “style.” These basic concepts will be a working framework for the analysis of the Ometepe motifs.

His analysis, in many ways, laid the basis for later successful interpretive explorations of San art. Repetition and replication were, thus, operative words in this analysis. Attributes that were repeated, as observed in quantification, indicate that these were socially meaningful in some way to the makers of the rock art and point toward the possibility that we can find an interpretive context, if not exact interpretation. Ideosyncratic and non-repeated designs were undoubtedly meaningful to the maker, but it is unlikely that we will derive much social meaning from them. Further, it seems clear that little meaningful comparative work can be done without descriptive analysis and quantification.

Ometepe Motif Classification. Rock art research in Nicaragua and in Central America generally has been limited, although not totally ignored. None of the published works, however, seemed to meet the specific needs of analysis for the Ometepe materials. There seemed no option, then, but to begin at the beginning. A motif categorization system had to be developed and refined for the materials in order to sort and organize the petroglyph data for analysis.

During the present analysis, a basic count of motif categories was conducted once classification was finalized. In addition to motif quantification, the number of incidents of superpositioning in the recorded rock art corpus was investigated.

The Ometepe rock art motifs were defined by certain attributes and design elements with the goal of ordering them into descriptive types. Since such categories are descriptive and formal and are assigned by the investigator, no assumptions were made during classification regarding temporal ordering, cultural association, or meaning. They were essentially a heuristic device. More than 40 general motif categories and variations have thus far been compiled. Organizing the numerous and highly diverse images within the Ometepe corpus was a major challenge and highly instructive. Classification became an operation in flux; some original motif attributes and categories were refined or eliminated as motifs were organized and brought together for visual comparison and as variation was recognized (see Chapter 8). The goal was to find attributes, elements, and descriptive types that could continue to be useful as data was added and could be used consistently by other researchers.

Associational Analysis It was assumed that rock art exhibits patterning in its distribution. The first order of business for the analysis of such patterning was choosing the unit of analysis to be studied. Petroglyph designs on boulders were recorded at the panel level (i.e., each side considered a panel) for convenience during this project, but the images also very often overflow from one rock side to another, so that the petroglyph panel was often an arbitrary designation and thus could not be used as a unit of analysis. Consequently the individual rock art boulder was used as the most basic unit of analysis. We know that some rock art can be accretionary— modified or added to in later periods. Individual sides of some boulders could well have petroglyphs that were created at different times, and large boulders, in particular, with many discrete images might reflect the actions of multiple individuals and creation episodes. For this study, however, it was assumed that images (and other cultural modifications) on the same boulder were most closely associated and that the large number of boulders available for analysis would yield patterning or statistically significant associations among motifs.

Quantification Basic motif quantification—the counting of image types—is also fundamental to rock art analysis. While quantification cannot necessarily generate meaning, quantification can be useful in pointing toward motifs and patterns that might have particular significance or which are idiosyncratic. Lewis-Williams (1982:429) noted, for example, that his quantitative study of San rock art in southern Africa,

Locational and Topographic Analyses

“revealed distinct numerical emphases in subject matter over extensive geographical areas; these emphases suggest social rather than idiosyncratic

Inter-site comparisons were made to determine whether different motif categories or sets of associated categories were spatially sorted between sites. Locational 4

Introduction differences in motif distribution were thought to point to some kind of social or ritual patterning, functional variations, or, possibly, temporal differences. Motif distribution was also compared to topographic elements, roughly defined by elevation, to include lakeside plain, gently inclined mid-slope locations, and steep upslope areas. Association with water sources was also considered. In addition, an important site containing numerous mounds and many artifacts is within the study area, as are a number of other presumed settlement sites with heavy scatters of ceramic. An effort was made to determine if particular site motifs were associated with such sites. Regional Geographic Comparisons Once basic categories and patterning were established for the Ometepe materials, available rock art literature for surrounding regions was reviewed to determine whether similar patterning could be discerned in other areas. Few studies in the literature could be quantitatively compared, so comparisons were necessarily visual and impressionistic. Comparisons were made with rock art found in other islands in Lake Nicaragua and in other areas of Nicaragua to suggest where else Ometepe patterns might occur. Available literature from lower Central America, as well as from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala, received particular attention. An extensive rock art bibliography was developed. 1.3

Summary

This study presents a systematic analysis of rock art from Ometepe Island, Nicaragua. Available prehistoric, ethnographic, and ethnohistoric background data are reviewed; basic motif classification, quantification, and locational comparisons of the Ometepe images are presented; and comparisons with rock art in other sites and adjacent regions are discussed. The major goal of this research has been to present a formal and baseline typology of Ometepe motifs that will be useful for future researchers. Another aim was to discover, through comparative analysis of rock art motifs, which populations may have been represented on Ometepe and which were more likely to have manufactured the rock art. Such information will be the basis for future attempts at rock art interpretation. The regional distribution of the various types of engraved images–whether some are restricted to Ometepe or constitute a part of a distinctive regional, Nicaraguan, or Central American pattern—is also of importance not only to rock art, but to wider questions in Nicaraguan archaeology. Thus a more general aim has been to determine if rock art analysis can contribute to wider archaeological goals, such as developing models of local or regional development or determining routes of migration and cultural influence. If such rock art indicators can be found, one small piece of the archaeological puzzle that is Nicaragua will have been filled.

5

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Map 1: The Central American Isthmus (adapted from Beaudry-Corbett and Leventhal 2000)

6

2

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

drained only by Rio San Juan which partially demarks Nicaragua's southern border with Costa Rica. While historically the river was an important transportation corridor, today it is navigable to the Caribbean only by canoe or shallow draft boats. Fresh water, lacustrine and ocean resources, and fertile volcanic soils in the Pacific coastal region combined to create a desirable location for relatively dense prehistoric human populations, many of which engaged in intensive agriculture at the time of European contact (Lange et al. 1992:4-5).

Ometepe is a tropical island. It is also a volcanic island. Further, it is an island in a freshwater sea. These attributes have contributed to a certain degree of isolation productive of both biological and social uniqueness and diversity. Yet it is close enough to the mainland to have been participant in and influenced by the natural and human-made environmental processes and changes of greater Nicaragua. 2.1

Topographic and Geological Setting

Lake Nicaragua contains a number of islands, with Ometepe the largest. Also noteworthy are Zapatera, the second largest island, to the northwest and within view of Ometepe; the archipelago of Solentiname at the southern end of the lake; and the isletas, numerous picturesque but tiny islands (many big enough for only one house and a pig) off the coast of the city of Granada near the northern shore of the lake.

Nicaragua lies at the geographic center of the Central American isthmus (Map 1). Its position as a bridge between north and south has created a rich ecological setting and a complex prehistory. Topographically, northwest-southeast running highlands dominate the center of the country and separate the Pacific region from the Atlantic Coastal lowlands. Elevations range from sea level along both coasts to about 2000 meters in the mountains in the far north of the country. Mountains and upland regions decline in elevation from north to south, so that the hills near Nicaragua's southern border with Costa Rica are no more than about 300 meters high (Map 2).

At its closest point, Ometepe Island lies only 7.5 km east of the Isthmus of Rivas (Haberland 1992:64). The island measures 275 square kilometers (31 kilometers long and five to ten kilometers wide). Almost hour-glass in shape, it is formed of two volcanoes, with the narrow low-lying Isthmus of Istian in between (Map 3). The northwest half of the island contains the still-active Volcan Concepción (once called Ometepec), a beautiful symmetrical cone, approximately 1700 meters high (Global Volcanism Program 2007a; see Photo 1). Concepción has had eruptions 26 times between 1883 and 2005 (Morales Enriquez 2005). These have been characterized by moderate-sized explosions of sand, ash, and lava. The most recent lava flows are basalt and recent ash is dacite (Global Volcanism Program 2007a). Since prehistoric artifacts have been found buried under fairly deep pyroclastic deposits, it is likely that Concepción’s last major violent explosion was in geologically recent times, but before the Spanish arrival (Ferry and Williams 1971:15). These eruptions have resulted in the formation of broad fertile plains, especially on Concepción’s west and northwest sides, perhaps partially due to the fact that prevailing winds are from the east. Consequently, the majority of the island’s population lives on the Concepción half of Ometepe. This was probably true in the prehistoric and historic periods as well, with the agricultural fertility of its volcanic soils outweighing the inherent risks of living on the slopes of an active volcano.

The Atlantic watershed, comprising the eastern twothirds of the country, contains most of Nicaragua's major rivers. It was and, to a large extent, is still composed of tropical rain forests and pine savannah, areas that were prehistorically the domain of sparse populations of hunter/gatherers, who exploited the floral and faunal resources of the forests, rivers, and ocean, and also engaged in small-scale slash and burn agriculture (Lange et al. 1992: 4; Baker 2003:1). The relatively flat plains of the Pacific Coastal region, by contrast, are dominated by a chain of Pleistocene and Holocene era volcanoes of which those of Ometepe Island are the southernmost in Nicaragua (Norweb 1961:2). Other major natural features of the Pacific lowlands are two great freshwater lakes—Lake Nicaragua (Cocibolca) and Lake Managua (Xolotlan)—the largest freshwater bodies between Lake Titicaca in South America and the Great Lakes of North America. Lake Nicaragua, along with Lake Managua to the north, occupies the deepest part of a geological depression lying between the Gulf of Fonseca and the mouth of the San Juan River. The lakes are “located between an ancient eroded plateau, which constitutes the central portion of Nicaragua, and a slender belt, the Isthmus of Rivas (20 km wide in its narrowest part), which separates Lake Nicaragua from the Pacific Ocean” (Incer 1976:3). Lake Nicaragua is about 160 km long and 72 km wide and is relatively shallow—averaging 10m to 14m deep with the deepest part measuring about 40 meters. Its surface is 31m above sea level and fluctuates an average of 65cm annually (Incer 1976:3). It covers 8264 square kilometers, while Lake Managua is 1049 square kilometers in area. Once connected, the lakes are now largely separated by 25 km of land. Lake Nicaragua is

The southeast half of the island is dominated by Volcan Maderas, a truncated cone, 1394 meters high and containing a crater lake at its summit (Map 3; Photo 2). It was an explosive volcano, resulting in deposition of andesitic and basaltic lavas and pyroclastics. It is believed that the older lavas on Maderas' exterior slopes were basaltic, while younger andesites and basaltic andesites are found higher on the cone. In addition, there appear to have been two minor sources of pyroclastics on the northeast flank of Maderas at Punta Gorda and at Corozal Viejo (Ferrey and Williams 1971:14). Such volcanic activity resulted in the deposition of the

7

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

(Source: University of Texas Libraries)

Map 2: Nicaragua

8

Environmental Setting numerous basalt boulders found on the slopes of Volcan Maderas.

there may have been more prior to forest clearing on its lower slopes. These waters often seem to disappear prior to reaching the lake, perhaps because of the porosity of the volcanic soils and rock. Maderas also holds considerable water in its crater lake, the probable reservoir for its springs and permanent water sources. The scarcity of permanent streams on Ometepe was (and still is) less serious for human and animal populations than it would have been in other areas, since they could always draw on the freshwater of Lake Nicaragua. Reliance on the lake must, however, have constrained settlement patterns.

There have been no reports in historic times of eruptions on Maderas (Global Volcanism Project 2007b). In September of 1996 a massive mudflow on the east flank of Maderas, destroyed the village of El Corozal, killing six people and injuring many more. A school and 36 houses were destroyed and crop land covered with thick mud and water. Two policemen who climbed the volcano two days after the mudslide reportedly “observed a small crater at the starting point of the lahar” [volcanic mud slide] and “presumed that a minor volcanic explosion could have triggered the event, but this has not been confirmed by Nicaraguan volcanologists” (Global Volcanism Program 1996). Local people believe, in fact, that deforestation combined with heavy rainfall triggered the mudslide (Lopez Centeño 1997), and this seems most likely.

2.3

Although Maderas probably was once more extensively forested (see Chapter 5), much of its limited arable land has largely been cleared for grazing and agriculture since at least the first half of the 20th century. Today, the major commercial crops produced in these lower elevations are plantain and banana. Beans, sorghum, and rice are also grown, although mainly for local consumption. At higher elevations, in the lower part of the cloud forest and under its canopy, coffee is grown extensively and is the other major cash crop of the island. Some cacao grows in the same environment, but production is very small scale and mainly for individual and local use.

Maderas has much less arable land than Concepción, with most found just above the lake, confined to a narrow band of small flats and gently rolling slopes around the circumference of the volcano. Generally, agricultural activity, except for coffee and bananas, is found below the 200 meter elevation. Even in this vicinity the land is rocky and appears to have little soil depth, but the volcanic soils are relatively fertile. 2.2

Flora and Fauna

Both dry and wet tropical forests are found on the slopes of Maderas above about 300m, with dampness increasing with elevation. There is a great diversity of flora and fauna on the island, especially in the dense cloud forest on steep upper slopes, where tropical hardwood trees dominate the canopy. These include giant ceiba, jobo, cedro madre, and others. At least 64 kinds of trees and shrubs have thus far been counted on Maderas' slopes. The forest harbors eleven and probably more species of rare and sometimes unique orchids and other epiphytes, and shelters howler and whiteface monkeys, small deer, squirrels, gorgeous birds, reptiles, and innumerable butterflies (Villarrena Castrillo 2000:27-29). Iguana are increasingly rare, but still a local delicacy. At least 130 species of migratory birds have thus far been counted on Ometepe (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2006). Many other endemic avian species are also found. There are at least 36 species of fish in the lake (Villarrena Castrillo 2000:37). Caiman once were prevalent in the waters around the island, but are rare, if they still exist. Local residents, however, tell stories of having seen caiman in the swampy, low-lying Isthmus of Istian.

Climate And Hydrology

Ometepe experiences a hot tropical climate. Average temperatures range from 26.3º C in December to 28.4º C in May with 27º C annual average. The dry season is roughly from January through April, while a rainy season in May through November brings abundant rain. October averages 778mm of precipitation. The average yearly rainfall is about 2118mm (Ferrey and Williams 1971:79). Although surrounded by freshwater, Ometepe has few year-round free flowing streams. In the 1960s Haberland (1983:82) found only four and this confirms my own experience. Two are on Maderas—Rio Tichaná on the south side and Rio Balgües on the north, the latter within the present project area. Rio Balgües has rarely if ever been known to run dry. The other two streams are Rio Istian in the lowland ismthus just northeast of the Maderas slopes and Rio Buen Suceso on the far southeast edge of Volcan Concepción. Rio Buen Suceso gushes from its spring at an incredible volume, although Ferrey and Williams (1971:7-8) say that Rio Istian is the source of the most abundant permanent year around water. It is, however, in an often swampy area, so its accessibility for human use is unclear. Although there are seasonal drainages on the slopes of both volcanos, Concepción with the largest population has the least permanent water. Since most of the known major archaeological settlement sites are within 100-150 meters from the lakeshore, this situation must have existed in prehistoric times as well (Haberland 1983:82-83). Maderas has several other major springs and waterfalls, originating on its upper slopes and

Because of its ecological and archaeological importance, much of the Maderas side of the island has been designated a natural reserve, although protection has largely been in the hands of local farmers and the municipalities. No official rangers with enforcement powers exist on the island. This may soon change. A project to train local people to protect and manage the unique biodiversity of the island was begun in 2006 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 2006; Darwin Initiative 2006).

9

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua 2.4

Settlement Today

Since at least the 17th century, the two major towns on Ometepe have been Moyogalpa on the west shore of Concepción and Alta Gracia on the northeast (see Chapter 5). Moyogalpa has long been the major landing for daily vessels from the Rivas shore to the west, which today include a ferry and smaller wooden cargo boats. The landing near Alta Gracia has more occasional traffic, especially the twice-a-week boat from Granada. Most other communities, generally smaller villages and settlements of a few houses, are found scattered around the periphery of the island. On Maderas, the main villages are Balgües on the north, La Palma on the east, and Merida on the southwest shore. Since the 1980s there has been an unpaved road all the way around the island and a three-times-a-day, very slow bus plies between Moyogalpa, Altagracia and Merida or between Altagracia, Balgües and La Palma, probably contributing to the recent growth of these villages (Map 3). Even today no buses connect the small communities on the east shore past La Palma and the southern shores of Maderas. Many small settlements are still only connected by footpaths to the main road, especially those like Las Cuchillas, on the higher slopes of Maderas. There is still no electrical or telephone service east of Balgües and Merida. Many people on Ometepe have never been off the island, and a trip to Rivas on the mainland, the nearest large town and provincial capital, is a major journey for others. Both the poor roads and lack of electricity have substantially impeded the development of the island, but have also protected it from some of the excesses of the outside world. In the last ten years, however, there has been gradually increasing tourism, which is changing economic and land owning patterns, even in small villages.

Map 3: Ometepe Island (Adapted from Haberland 1992)

10

by the Nicarao [Niquirans] because of Nahua place names and a small vocabulary and numbers that he obtained "with great difficulty." Ometepe itself is a Nahua name meaning two (ome) mountain(s) (tepec). As we shall see, others have disputed his claim.

3 HISTORY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH IN NICARAGUA Nicaragua is archaeologically one of the least known areas of Central America, although its antiquities became of interest to explorers, antiquarians, and archaeologists in the mid-19th century, and several major world museums collected Nicaraguan artifacts during the 19th and early 20th centuries. There were, however, only a handful of serious scientific excavations and no largescale surveys in Nicaragua before the 1970s, and published reports have been relatively few compared with other parts of Central America. From an early date Ometepe Island generated considerable antiquarian interest because of its numerous sites and monumental statuary, and excavations there have played an important part in development of the regional archaeological sequence. A brief history of this research with mention of some of the most important of this work is presented below.

Another early traveler and antiquarian, Englishman Frederick Boyle traveled extensively through Nicaragua in 1865 with the stated goal “to examine the antiquities of Nicaragua” (Boyle 1868:Vol.1:vi) and apparently to collect them for the British Museum. He also left an account of his journey, describing sites in the Chontales area east of Lake Nicaragua, where monumental sculptures drew his interest and where he opened a number of tombs. He also reported on Zapatera Island and on Ometepe, where he also dug for antiquities (Boyle 1868:Vol.1). Like Squier, Boyle (1868:Vol.2:86) observed cemeteries "always fenced in with a line of heavy stones. But besides these fixed cemeteries, lonely graves are found at every step, and it is a literal fact that the inhabitants dig their pottery out of the ground." The antiquities on Ometepe were "most numerous and in best preservation on the south-western slopes of Ometepec [Concepción]" (Boyle 1868:Vol. 2:90).

3.1 Previous Archaeological Research Relevant to Ometepe Island In 1849 Ephraim G. Squier, the U.S. Charge d’Affaires to Central America, was one of the first to draw the scientific world’s attention to Nicaragua’s antiquities. One of his duties was to determine whether a Central American canal was feasible in Nicaragua. During his travels through the country, Squier was drawn particularly to the monumental sculptures found on many islands in Lake Nicaragua. He collected both statuary and artifacts, especially from Zapatera Island, made a few sketches of several sites, and eventually produced a twovolume work that is still an important historical resource for archaeologists (Squier 1852; 1856). Squier seems never to have visited Ometepe, but obtained information in 1849 or 1850 from a man named Woeninger, who had resided there. Woeninger said that Ometepe previously had had idols like those on Zapatera, but these

Perhaps because of the published works of these early travelers, throughout the last quarter of the 19th century, museums in the United States and Europe took an active interest in acquiring collections of exhibit quality pieces from the region, including from Ometepe Island, with little apparent concern for how they were acquired. One early collector of some interest was Earl Flint, an American doctor from New England, who settled in Nicaragua about 1850 and lived there until the end of his life in the late 1890s, mainly in the cities of Granada and Rivas. In the 1870s he began collecting materials for the Smithsonian, but shifted his employment to the Peabody Museum at Harvard University about 1878, sending collections and letters to the museum until 1899 (Flint 1878-1899). The Peabody maintains a voluminous correspondence from Flint that makes it clear that he dug extensively in southern Nicaragua, including on Ometepe. Unfortunately, Flint apparently kept little except vague documentation on exact site locations and excavation results. His obsession with trying to prove a pre-Pleistocene origin for the antiquities of Nicaragua impaired his credibility as a serious researcher with the museum and the scientific world of the time. Some researchers, however, consulted him for his knowledge of the region and its antiquity locations (see Bransford 1881:46; Bovallius 1886:8).

"had either been broken up or buried. A group was said to exist at the foot of the Maderas volcano, but that he [a German resident of the island] had never seen them. The ancient cemeteries are the most remarkable remains of the aborigines. They generally occur upon some dry, elevated place, and are distinguished by an enclosure of flat, rough stones, set in the ground, and projecting a few inches above the surface" (Squier 1853:Vol. 2:87). He had also seen a cemetery consisting of an "enclosure of flat, rough stones, set in the ground, and projecting a few inches above the surface," within which were vases with bones and ashes and ornaments of stone and metal (Squier 1856:Vol. 2:87). He noted, "Little gold idols, well worked, articles of copper, and terra cotta figures, are also sometimes found," and he had observed shoe-shaped vessels, various pottery types, a copper mask, and a grey stone frog effigy (Squier 1856:Vol. 2:87). Squier (1990 [1853]:9) was convinced that Ometepe had been occupied

In 1887 Marco A. Lacayo, an engineer and the Director of the National Institute in Granada, gave N. W. Peake, an agent for the Bancroft collection at the University of California, Berkeley, pottery that was "dug on Ometepec Island in Lake Nicaragua on account gov't—There are eight pieces and they are the best, and in fact about the only perfect specimens out of about 1000 that I had to choose from” (Peake 1887?). Lacayo apparently had heard that Peake had been in Nicaragua looking for

11

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua contemporary ceramic analysis in the region is based. Ometepe ceramics were significantly mentioned throughout his work (Lothrop 1926).

historical material and thought it important that Peake look at the antiquities in Granada (Lacayo 1887). J.F. Bransford, a U.S. naval doctor, visited Nicaragua in 1876 and 1877, spending much of his time on Ometepe Island excavating at a number of sites (Bransford 1881). It appears that his excavations were mainly confined to the eastern half of Concepción, as he mentions digging in the communities of Los Angeles and San Francisco and at the hacienda of Don José Angel Luna, all south of Moyogalpa, as well as at St. Helena and Chilaite, north of Moyogalpa. He also reported that others were digging artifacts for sale from sites in the area (Bransford 1881:46-47). Like Squier and Boyle before him, Bransford was impressed by the numerous stone-lined tombs, and reported at least one site with earth mounds and stones encircling a burial (Bransford 1881:53, 60-61). Bransford was distinguished by his use of more scientific stratigraphic excavation, the results of which were reported in his 1881 work, which also included the first ceramic classification for the region. He first described distinctive shoe-shaped urns, covered with caps of "Luna Ware”, which has had importance in the development of the regional ceramic sequence.

Collecting and amateur archaeology in Nicaragua and on Ometepe also continued into the 20th century, but with little documentation. A French Jesuit, Andres Rongier, visited Ometepe in the mid-1920s, excavating 20 burials in seven sites on Concepción and recovering five sculptures (Arellano 1980, cited in Navarro Genie 2002). Nicaraguan David Sequeira published a short report of seven years in Nicaragua during which he devoted himself "exclusively to the study of our pre-Columbian civilizations or culture" (Sequeira 1942:123). Traveling widely throughout the country, he also visited Ometepe, where he excavated for three and a half years, collecting "two thousand pieces of pottery, etc." (Sequeira 1942:127). No locational information is found in this report, other than a note that he found a statue at Mérida on the south side of Madera (Sequeira 1942:127). The present location of Sequeira's collection is unknown. Thirty years later, the first modern scientific archaeological excavations were carried out in Nicaragua in 1959 and 1961 by the Peabody Museum. Led by Gordon Willey and Alfred Norweb, one of Willey’s graduate students at Harvard University, the project resulted in the survey and excavation of “a large number of sites,” (Healy 1980:xxvi), but a comprehensive report of this work has never been published. Among the sites excavated were several in the Rivas region, including one site on Ometepe (Healy 1980:37-38). Willey never visited Ometepe, but left the excavation to Norweb who spent only two days on the island, digging at J-RI-7, the Cruz site near Puerto Gracia (north of Alta Gracia) (Norweb 1964:555; Healy 1980:65; Willey 2001). Based on this work, Norweb (1961; 1964) first defined the idea of the Greater Nicoya subarea. This continues to be an important conceptual framework for the archaeology of the region. Fortunately, Healy (1974; 1980) used excavation data from six of Willey and Norweb's sites, including the Cruz site, to compile an important ceramic study for the region and the first comprehensive analysis of archaeology in the Rivas region.

Bransford must have visited Alta Gracia, because he commented on its population and people, but there is no indication that he worked there. He also penetrated the south shore of Maderas at least as far as 1.5 miles east of Punta San Ramon, where he mentions that he found petroglyphs (Bransford 1881:64, 82) Following Bransford, Swedish researcher Carl Bovallius (1886) excavated on Ometepe, Isla Zapatera, and Isla Ceiba (now known as Isla El Muerto) in 1882-1883. He later described with particular interest the pre-Colombian statuary at two Zapatera Island sites, Punta de las Figuras and Punta de Sapote, as well as some of the rock art at Isla Ceiba. He excavated at nine locations on Concepción, but was less successful than Bransford, since he found only a few noteworthy artifacts at three sites (Bovallius 1886:9-10); his work at the other six locations, including places on the isthmus between Maderas and Concepción (Ometepec) were "without any results worthy of note" (Bovallius 1886:10). His book, produced in 1886, and Bransford's were the major published works on Nicaragua’s archaeology until the latter half of the 20th century and are still two of the major references, especially for the lakes region.

During the 1960s only a handful of archaeological studies were conducted and results published. Of particular note is the work of Wolfgang Haberland and his graduate student Peter Schmidt of the Hamburg Museum of Ethnology and Prehistory, who conducted excavations on Ometepe in the early 1960s. Ten sites were excavated, all on the Concepción side of the island (Haberland 1992:6869). Although various aspects of their research have been published in a series of articles (e.g., Haberland 1963a; 1963b; 1968a; 1968b; 1969; 1970; 1971; 1983; 1986; 1992; Schmidt 1963; 1966), no comprehensive report has yet been issued for the Ometepe work. Haberland (1992) has, however, published a preliminary sketch of the culture history of Ometepe, providing the main chronological sequence for the island. During his research, Haberland visited the Maderas side of the

In the 20th century, there were few published archaeological studies for Nicaragua until the 1970s. An important exception was Samuel Lothrop’s massive twovolume work, The Pottery of Costa Rica and Nicaragua, published in 1926. He produced a major ceramic typology for the region, discussed the known ethnographic and archaeological data for the region, presented a chronology, and discussed possible regional and interregional cultural relations suggested by the ceramic types and their variations. Although dependent mainly on undocumented collections, this work remains the bedrock upon which later 20th century and

12

History of Archaeological Research in Nicaragua Significant archaeological work was done by two French graduate students under the auspices of the French institute, Centro De Estudios Mexicanos y Central Americanos (CEMCA), in the Chontales region east of Lake Nicaragua, an area that hitherto had been largely unknown archaeologically. Their results were published in two dissertations (Gorin 1990; Rigat 1992). In 1982 Payson Sheets and Frederick W. Lange of the University of Colorado made a one-week research visit, inspecting approximately 26 sites. Nineteen surface collections, consisting of both lithic and ceramic materials were made (Lange et al. 1992; Sheets 1983). Although none were from sites on the islands of Nicaragua’s lakes, this work eventually became the basis of another publication important for Nicaraguan archaeology, The Archaeology of Pacific Nicaragua (Lange et al. 1992), which included a summary of Haberland’s (1992) work on Ometepe and provided a new ceramic analysis and prehistoric temporal sequence for the Pacific Region of Nicaragua. Other important work during the 1980s included surveys on Zapatera Island, the second largest island of Lake Nicaragua, beginning in 1984 and continuing into the 1990s (Baker and Smith 2001; Flodin and Johannson 2001; Piedra et al. 2001).

island, for his maps show 14 site locations around the periphery of Maderas, including a number of petroglyph sites.1 He also collected a surface sample of ceramics from seven of those sites (Haberland 1992:69). The pace of archaeological research in Nicaragua began to accelerate somewhat in the 1970s, although this was a time of great revolutionary political ferment in the country. A few foreign archaeologists conducted studies of ceramics (Wyckoff 1971), monumental sculpture (Zelaya-Hildago et al. 1974), lithics (Gerstle 1976), and pre-conquest burial practices (Hughes 1980), and reported on excavations on the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua (Magnus 1974), near Managua (Wyss 1983), and in the Rivas region (Healy 1980). A brief survey of several sites was conducted on Zapatera Island in 1974 (Bruhns 1974). Nicaraguan archaeologists also excavated during the 1970s under the auspices of the Department of Archaeology of the National Geographic Institute. Projects included excavations at Acahualinca and El Retiro in Managua, at Volcán Masaya, Tepetate in Granada, and at Monkey Point on the Atlantic Coast. Unfortunately, aside from a few newspaper articles, many of these projects have never been published (Navarro Genie 1993:19). Only Paul Healy’s (1980) work dealt in any part with Ometepe. His book, Archaeology of the Rivas Region, Nicaragua, based on analysis of the previous Peabody Museum work and his own excavations, was the most significant published work on the archaeology of Pacific Nicaragua since Lothrop’s seminal study of the 1920s.

After 1990 and the end of the Contra War, the conditions for archaeological work improved and there was a gradual increase, although by no means an explosion, of archaeological work. On the one hand, foreign archaeologists began to renew an interest in Nicaragua, but, on the other hand, because of worsening domestic economic conditions, there was less support for local Nicaraguan efforts. In spite of difficulties, Nicaraguan archaeologists continued to pursue work under the auspices of the Patrimonio Cultural or independently (see, for example, Espinoza 1993; Navarro Genie 1996; 2005; 2007; Zambrana 1996; Piedra et al. 2001). Navarro Genie (2007) has recently prepared an exceptionally important study of the monumental sculpture of Nicaragua, including many pieces from Ometepe (see also Navarro Genie 2005). A few foreign archaeologists also continued to lead projects (see, for example, Fletcher and Salgado 1990; Fletcher et al. 1993:103-114). In the mid-1990s, Frederick Lange led a joint team of U.S. and Nicaraguan archaeologists in a major project investigating archaeology in the metropolitan zone of Managua (Lange 1995a; 1996a). This work provided extensive information about a relatively unknown, but important region of Nicaragua. It also contributed to a refinement of ceramic typologies, especially the ceramic sequence for the Greater Nicoya region (Lange 1995b). Also of importance for this dissertation is survey work by Italians in the Archipelago of Solentiname (Laurencich Minelli et al. 1996) and, since 2000, by archaeologists from the University of Calgary in Canada, who have conducted major excavations in the Rivas region on the mainland west of Ometepe (McCafferty 2008; McCafferty and Steinbrenner 2005; Niemel 2003; Steinbrenner 2002b; Niemel et al. 2001). Finally, the present dissertation is based on an archaeological survey on Ometepe that has

After the triumph of the Sandinista Revolution in 1979, the Nicaraguan government began to more fully encourage archaeological work, especially by local Nicaraguan archaeologists. The above-mentioned Department of Archaeology with its 16 employees was transferred to the Patrimonio Cultural in 1980 (Navarro Genie 1993:19). Renamed the Department of Archaeological Research of the National Museum of Nicaragua and operating under the Patrimonio Cultural, it sponsored local surveys and a few salvage excavations (Navarro Genie 1993:19-20; see, for example, Wilson and Martinez 1981). During the 1980s, however, financial limitations and a state of active armed conflict in the country during the counter-revolutionary war (Contra War) created great difficulties for the Patrimonio Cultural, not the least was a lack of material resources and vehicles, and only a few archaeological projects were launched. Some of these were small salvage operations or minor testing (see Navarro Genie 1993:19-20). The state of war also discouraged most foreign universities (U.S.-based universities, particularly, did little work in Nicaragua because of the U.S. economic blockade). Several foreign archaeologists, including this author, did, however, work with the Patrimonio during the 1980s. These efforts included a number of projects peripheral to, but important for, the archaeology of Ometepe. 1 Two sites were apparently placed on the map based on hearsay, since he noted that they were "not visited."

13

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua excavated about half an inch in depth and a little more in width. Human faces and spiral lines predominated. There was also a crown, a representation of a monkey, and many irregular figures” (Bransford 1881:64). His sketches show single and double spirals, simple faces, and a few other curvilinear figures. Bransford (1881:82) reported the views of a Dr. Berendt, also an early traveler and observer of Central American antiquities, and ventured the first published opinions about Maderas’ rock art:

been ongoing since 1995 (Baker 1995-2009; Baker 1996; 1997; 2000). 3.2

Rock Art Research In Nicaragua

As with Nicaragua's archaeological research generally, the scope and depth of its rock art research has been very limited and only partially parallels traditional archaeological studies. With a few notable exceptions, rock art research until the 1980s was generally confined to brief mention of petroglyphs in larger scientific or popular works. This situation slowly began to change during the last decade.

The rock inscriptions of Maderas are rude pictographs, in which the human face frequently occurs. Dr. Berendt considered the basalt blocks as somewhat after the order of tombstones, where the faces of the deceased were supposed to be represented. The wear on the hard rock, which seems to have been only the result of time and weather, is enough to impress the beholder with an idea of great antiquity. I think they long antedate the rock inscriptions and paintings near Managua, described by Squier, and those so common on the rocks of northern Mexico and some of the Territories of the United States.

European and North American explorers and naturalists who visited the Central American isthmus in the 19th century first drew the world’s attention to Nicaragua’s rock art. Ephraim G. Squier made a few sketches of pictographs from the crater walls above Lake Nihapa (also called Nejapa) near Managua. The latter were notable for a coiled, plumed or feathered serpent and a human head in red paint (Squier 1852, Vol. 2:24-27; 1856:vol. 1:402-405). He also visited a ravine near Masaya, which he called the “Quebrada de las Inscripciones” (now known as El Cailagua), the walls of which were filled with petroglyphs (Squier 1852 :22-27; 1860:434-441). Most of those illustrated are either anthropomorphs or zoomorphs.

Bovallius’ (1886) report mentions and depicts petroglyphs on the small island of La Ceiba (today called Isla el Muerto) near Zapatera. La Ceiba was rich in petroglyphs, particularly at the highest point on the island where there was a “flat mountain ridge, level as a floor” covered with carvings (Bovallius 1886:42). About 80 to 100 meters long and 10 to 15 meters wide, this ridge, called Cerro de Pantheon, “offers an extraordinary wellfit place for rock carvings. And, indeed, the ancient inhabitants of the island have made such an eager use of this opportunity that the whole crown of the ridge is densely covered with sculptures” (Bovallius 1886:43).

Frederick Boyle, although he dug for antiquities on Ometepe and Zapatera Islands and in Chontales, said nothing about rock art there. He did revisit Lake Nejapa to see the pictographs that Squier reported, but was disappointed that they were difficult to discern. He could see, however, that “[H]undreds of other hieroglyphics were faintly to be traced on the cliffs, in yellow and scarlet outline, but the wind and rain of ages had washed out their design...Formerly many more paintings had existed, and the fallen rocks were covered with intricate circles and curious lines” (Boyle 1868:Vol.2:161).

Karl Sapper, in an 1899 article dealing mainly with the Nicoya Peninsula of Costa Rica, very briefly discussed Nicaraguan petroglyphs from the Matagalpa area and from west of Masaya, noting the resemblance of at least one motif from the latter area to some in the Chorotega area of Nicoya (Sapper 2000:90-91).

Earl Flint was extremely interested in rock art, convinced that these images were "hieroglyphics" of a prePleistocene people. Consequently, there are many of Flint’s sketches of petroglyphs in the Peabody collection at Harvard University (Flint 1878-1899). Many were apparently from Isla Zapatera, Isla de los Muertos, and the cave of San Andrés (now called Montelimar) (Lothrop 1926:103; Navarro Genie 1996:22). Flint seems to have been the first to focus on petroglyphs as an important cultural manifestation worthy of study. Lothrop (1926:Vol. 1:95-96, plate viii) later published a number of Flint’s drawings.

In 1926, Samuel Lothrop mentioned two classes of “pictographs” or cuttings on boulders found in the Pacific region of Nicaragua and Costa Rica. First, there were “relatively simple patterns...which delineate human figures, monkeys, and geometric patterns” and, second, much more elaborate glyphs “based on animal figures which have become geometric complexes” (Lothrop 1926:94). Lothrop believed that the first type resembled similar glyphs found in northern South America, particularly Venezuela, and in the West Indies (Lothrop 1926:94). Lothrop used a number of Flint’s drawings as illustrations (Lothrop 1926:96 and Plate VIII).

J. F. Bransford, working on Ometepe Island in the late 1870s, briefly noted that there were petroglyphs on the southwestern shore of Volcan Maderas. He reported that on an east-facing hillside there were “...many irregular blocks of basalt with marks and figures cut on them” (Bransford 1881:64). Others were observed on the edge of the shore, which in May were partially covered with water. Bransford noted that the “markings were

Although his work on Ometepe Island focused primarily on excavations around the Concepción volcano in the northwest part of the island, Wolfgang Haberland (1968b;

14

History of Archaeological Research in Nicaragua 1970) also did some cursory survey on the slopes of Maderas, subsequently publishing two articles on Maderas petroglyphs. One described engravings at ten sites (Haberland 1970). Four of these—Om-31 (Pulman), Om-35 (El Corozal I), Om-37 (El Corozal III), Om-38 (Corozal Viejo)—are within or close to the Ometepe survey area discussed in this dissertation. Haberland (1968b) subsequently published an article solely on the important site of Corozal Viejo.

of the petroglyphs are poorly or not illustrated. Neither research team appears to have been aware of the other’s efforts, as at least two of the sites are each reported with different names. Laurencich Minelli and Di Cosimo (2000) ended their work with highly speculative interpretations. Matilló Vila (1968a) believed that the Department of Chontales, on the east side of Lake Cocibolca, could be the richest rock art area in Nicaragua. Although several locations had been briefly reported previously (Belt 1888:48, 53; Matilló Vila 1968a), Rigat's (1992:537-561) work was the first detailed recording in the area and included an analysis of five petroglyph sites with a total of 55 engravings or groups of engravings. His was the first attempt to categorize the motifs of Chontales sites. Examples of Chontales petroglyph boulders can today be seen in the Gregorio Aguilar Barea Archaeological Museum in Juigalpa. Petroglyphs have also been reported to the southeast of Chontales in the Rio San Juan Province (Matilló Vila 1968a).

The credit for first bringing modern popular attention to Nicaraguan rock art goes to Joaquin Matilló Vila (Brother Hildeberto Maria). His long interest in petroglyphs culminated in a large body of work published from the 1960s to early 1980s (Matilló Vila 1958;1965; 1968a; 1968b; 1973; 1981; Ferletti and Matilló Vila 1977). Matilló Vila believed that Nicaragua was the center of rock art in the Americas and that rock art could point to cultural connections between the different peoples of Central and South America (Matilló Vila 1968a). Of particular importance is his study of Ometepe rock art (Matilló Vila 1973). His work is significant for its broad range and because he made one of the first attempts to categorize and quantify petroglyph motifs (Matilló Vila 1965). Although his studies are sometimes difficult to use because of somewhat fanciful interpretive categories and a lack of systematic recordation, his insights and broad knowledge of Nicaraguan rock art are a starting point for any researcher. His work will be discussed in more detail later.

Rigoberto Navarro Genie (1996) during his tenure at the National Museum of Nicaragua conducted the first systematic rock art recording project in Nicaragua utilizing a rock art recording form. In an analysis of images from 22 known rock art sites from Pacific Nicaragua, Navarro Genie also attempted to classify and quantify these images and began to provide at least a preliminary comparative framework (Navarro Genie 1996). Among his findings were a number of elements similar to those utilized by the Aztecs during the period of the conquest; he believed that these were probably associated with Nahua groups that spoke a related language (Navarro 1996:41-42). Both Navarro Genie’s and Rigat’s classifications will be discussed further in Chapter 8.

Peter Thornquist’s (1981) small rock art study on Isla “El Muerto” (La Ceiba), which Bovallius first described, is worthy of note, since it records a sketch of the main and highly complex rock art panel on the great basalt platform at that site. Rock art has also been photographed and sometimes sketched, although not always recorded in detail, during surveys on Zapatera Island from 1986 to 1992 (Baker and Smith 2001; Espinoza et al. 2001; Flodín and Johannson 2001; Piedra et al. 2001), as well as during miscellaneous other surveys of the Department of Archaeological Research of the National Museum of Nicaragua.

The Ometepe Archaeological Project, discussed in this dissertation, has conducted the first major archaeological survey and petroglyph recording project on Volcan Maderas for nine seasons between 1995 and 2009. This dissertation is the first detailed analysis of the petroglyphs from the Ometepe work, although field reports have been issued (Baker 1996; 1997; 2000) and a preliminary statistical study has been produced (Baker and Shoup 2004). González (2002) utilized some of this data in a thesis for his degree as licenciado.

The Archipelago of Solentiname at the southern end of Lake Nicaragua became a focus of rock art studies in 1994-1995, when an Italian team began a program of survey, excavation, and rock art recording (Di Cosimo 1999; Laurencich Minelli and Di Cosimo 2000; Laurencich Minelli et al. 1996). They recorded 23 rock art sites, but most were only generally discussed and few illustrations were provided. Only two were relatively well reported, when Di Cosimo (1999) produced a detailed study of Cueva del Murciélago, an apparent rock shelter, and Site H, an open-air site. In 1996 Jorge Zambrana of the National Museum of Nicaragua also published the results of an archaeological survey of thirteen islands in the archipelago. Of the 93 sites recorded, 38 contained petroglyphs with a total of 146 petroglyph panels (Zambrana 1996:25-36). Zambrana’s (1996) work is well reported, consisting of site records and photographs, but there is no systematic discussion of the rock art and many

Hartmut Lettow has been informally documenting petroglyphs since the mid-1990s from an artistic perspective, including some on Ometepe (Lettow 1996; 1999). As far as is known, he has not formally recorded these engravings and their sites. The studies mentioned above are virtually all in western Nicaragua. The rock art of the Atlantic watershed of Nicaragua is largely unknown. An English naturalist Mervyn Palmer (1945:60), visiting at the turn of the 20th century, described a petroglyph on the Rio Coco (Wuancs River) on the Nicaragua-Honduran border. Conzemius (1932:44-46) very briefly mentioned petroglyphs in his

15

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua monograph on the ethnography of the Miskito and Sumu Indians. The few simple drawings included depict a concentric circle, a circle with dots divided internally into four sections, a simple anthropomorphic figure, a face, and a cruciform figure. Conzemius (1932:45) also noted that, although most are difficult to identify, many petroglyphs “appear to be animal designs: jaguar, alligators, monkeys, frogs, tortoises and serpents. Occasionally geometric figures, as spirals and scrolls, are depicted…” Conzemius (1932:45) observed petroglyphs mainly in riverine locations, including on the lower Rio Coco in the remote North Atlantic Autonomous Region and in the South Atlantic Autonomous Region along “the rivers Plátano, Patuca, Wawa, Prinsapolca, Tuma, Punta Gorda, Indio, and Maíz.” Other petroglyphs have been seen at the confluence of the Mico, Siquia, and Rama Rivers in the RAAS (Southern Atlantic Autonomous Region) (Belt 1888; Matilló Vila 1968a). Petroglyphs with meandering curvilinear designs have also been photographed on the Rio Coco north of Bilwi-Puerto Cabezas (Fagoth 2002).

3.3

Summary

The above overview makes it clear that Nicaragua has a wealth of prehistoric resources and that Ometepe's antiquities have been intimately involved in the development of Nicaraguan archaeology. After an early intense interest in Nicaragua’s archaeology in the late 19th century, however, attention by major archaeological departments lagged—with a few exceptions such as the Peabody Museum’s efforts and Haberland's work in midcentury—or was almost non-existent until the latter half of the 20th century when Nicaraguan efforts began to surge and a few foreign universities began to initiate archaeological work. Some of this can be attributed to the difficult political situation in the country in the later half of the 20th century (repressive dictatorship, revolutionary struggle, and neo-liberal regimes), but even today, when the country is calm and easy to work in, there has been only limited interest by outside academics in spite of the fact that the country is centrally placed between North and South America and should yield archaeological information of great importance relative to migration and diffusion and the dynamics of indigenous regional development. It is, however, this central location—in neither the "high culture" areas of Mesoamerica to the north nor of South America—that has perhaps contributed to the lack of archaeological interest (see Chapter 4).

Until recently the north and north central parts of the country have been particularly devoid of formal rock art research. Palmer (1945:117-118) briefly reported on petroglyphs (and excavations) near Camoapa in the Department of Boaca, and Matilló Vila (1958; 1968a) observed and photographed engravings in Jinotega, Matagalpa, and Boaca provinces. In the last few years the research group SINSLANI has recorded petroglyphs in the watershed of the Estelí River (Gámez and Cruz 2004).

The rock art of Nicaragua is clearly almost ubiquitous in the country, but, as in other areas of Central America, has been of only limited interest to many archaeological researchers. The rich rock art tradition of Nicaragua deserves more in-depth attention.

The focus of most Nicaraguan rock art reporting has been on petroglyphs because they are so ubiquitous. Six sites with pictographs (painted images) have, however, also been reported in Nicaragua. Navarro Genie’s 1996 work reports formally on three of these sites—Montelimar, Los Sanchez (previously la Gruta de los Duendes), and Cueva de los Negros, all rock shelters in the Pacific zone. Laguna Asososca (previously Lake Nejapa), near Managua, reported by Squier (1856:402-405), has been mentioned above. No contemporary recording has ever taken place at this latter site, although a recent visit ascertained that these paintings are at least still visible (Espinoza 2002). At a fifth known site, Icalupe, paintings are located in a rock shelter or on a ravine wall near Somoto in the Department of Madriz (CIERA-MIDINRA 1984:45; Navarro Genie 1996:24; Espinoza 2002). Personnel of the National Museum recently photographed Icalupe (Espinoza 2002). A sixth site, Cueva La Conga, in the Department of Jinotega near the town of Waslala and close to the Honduran border, has most recently been recorded (Baker et al. 2006). This latter site is of particular interest because it is the first limestone cave reported in Nicaragua and contains not only paintings but carved speleothems (Baker et al. 2006). While such caves are common to the north in Honduras, Guatemala, and the Yucatan Peninsula, this is the farthest south on the Mesoamerican periphery that such a cave has been found.

16

4 OVERVIEW OF THE PREHISTORY AND ETHNOHISTORY OF NICARAGUA Nicaragua's position in the center of the Central American isthmus—between the great landmasses of North and South America and between the great cultures of Mesoamerica and South America—has both influenced and colored perceptions about its prehistoric cultural identity. The land, now called Nicaragua, at the time of Spanish conquest was divided between tribal groups in the east with South American affiliations and hierarchical social groups in the western Pacific plain that appeared to be associated by language and customs with Mesoamerican cultures to the north. Nicaragua has often been regarded as the southern extent of Mesoamerica or the Mesoamerican periphery. It did not, however, have the impressive monumental architecture or societal elaboration of Mexico or the parts of Honduras and El Salvador on the Maya and Aztec periphery. Perhaps partially for this reason, Nicaragua attracted little attention from 20th century archaeologists. At the same time and throughout much of the 20th century, the country has been politically unstable, enduring tremendous political violence—a 30 year occupation of U.S. Marines in the first half of the century, the brutal Somoza dictatorship, a revolutionary struggle that finally succeeded in 1979, a bloody counter-revolution supported by the United States that finally ended in 1990, and, until 2007, a succession of neo-liberal governments that severely cut social and cultural programs, including archaeology. This political instability undoubtedly also contributed to a general lack of archaeological interest from foreign universities and impeded the opportunities for local Nicaraguan archaeologists. As a result, there has been far more archaeological work conducted in Costa Rica, Honduras and El Salvador, and Nicaragua remains one of the least known archaeological areas in Central America. Information about Nicaragua's prehistory is sparse at best, focused on southern Pacific Nicaragua, with large areas of the country totally uninvestigated. At the same time, our ethnographic information for Nicaragua is exceedingly meager, based mainly on a few 16th century Spanish chronicles about Pacific Nicaragua. Rapid decimation of the Pacific Coast populations within the first 50 years of the Spanish conquest resulted in a loss of languages, oral histories, and indigenous cultural practices in that region. There has been almost no ethnographic study in the 20th and early 21st centuries of those few groups on the Pacific Coast who continue to identify as indigenous, albeit with apparent loss of most indigenous culture. Because the Spanish did not control much of the highlands or Atlantic watershed, there is almost no information available about the Atlantic region until the late 17th and 18th centuries, when the British began trading there. Tribal groups in the Atlantic region have, however, retained at least some native languages and cultural practices until the present, and there have been a few ethnographic studies that allow some conjecture about prehistoric cultural practices there.

Ometepe Island has had the advantage of a few archaeological excavations with which a basic prehistoric chronology was constructed, but much more remains to be learned there. It seems clear that Ometepe exhibits some differences in its prehistoric development from surrounding mainland areas and, in addition, may have been a focus of specialized ceremonial use. Its prehistory, like the rest of Nicaragua's, is clearly complicated. None of the excavations on the island have been on the Maderas side where the focus of my research has been conducted. There is also little ethnographic information or published historic information available about the island. With only sparse archaeological or ethnographic data about Ometepe available, the dilemmas for rock art research and interpretation there are clear. The following cultural overviews, however, attempt to place Ometepe within known regional prehistoric, ethnographic, and historic contexts. 4.1

Prehistory

The Greater Nicoya Archaeological Subarea Ometepe Island has generally been included in the Greater Nicoya Archaeological Subarea, first defined by Albert Norweb (1964:551). It was distinguished because of similarities in artifact type, archaeological patterning, and geography (see Map 4). Norweb's assumption and those of earlier writers was that this area constituted the southern frontier of Mesoamerica at least for a few hundred years. He wrote, The Greater Nicoya archaeological subarea, which includes most of Pacific Nicaragua and regions in the northwestern part of Costa Rica adjacent to the Gulf of Nicoya, must be considered a geographical-cultural province of special significance in American prehistory, since, under existing geological and natural environmental conditions, it forms a corridor for north-south cultural movements, and, for a span of several hundred years, apparently marked the southern limit of intense Mesoamerican influence (Norweb 1964:551). There were enough regional differences within the subarea that Lange (1992:3) later "proposed characterizing Greater Nicoya in terms of (1) a northern sector, whose patterns or artifact types are essentially exclusive to Pacific Nicaragua; and (2) a southern sector, whose patterns or artifact types are essentially exclusive to northwestern Costa Rica." There were, however, sufficient artifacts types found with a "pan-regional" distribution that the concept of the Greater Nicoya Archaeological Subarea concept could still be retained (Lange 1984:167; Lange et al. 1992:3). The division of the Subarea into northern and southern sectors has helped in understanding the archaeological dynamics of the region, and an increasing number of archaeological excavations in the last 20 years has made it clear that the

17

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Cruz site on Ometepe, have, however, been particularly important in establishing the broad chronological sequence for the northern sector of Greater Nicoya. Haberland's (1992) Ometepe sequence is the longest and earliest yet defined in Nicaragua, and adds three earlier ceramic periods to Norweb’s Greater Nicoya chronology, extending dating on the island to at least ~1500 B.C.

Map 4: Greater Nicoya Archaeological Subarea (adapted from Lange et al. 1992:24)

connections between northern and southern sectors and with surrounding regions changed in intensity and types of activity over time. Lange (1994:5), in his later reevaluation of the Grand Nicoya concept, made it clear that, rather than having rigid boundaries, it should be considered flexible, an area that "contributed and received influences from all the areas that surround it," including material culture and intellectual content. In recent years and with intensifying archaeological research the emphasis has been on seeing Greater Nicoya as its own culturally constituted center between Mesoamerica to the north and the rest of Lower Central America to the south. It existed as a recognizable cultural entity for about 2000 years, during which a "long series of apparently unprogrammed and unstructured relationships occurred..." (Lange 1994:7). Until relatively recently the chronological sequences for the Greater Nicoya area were defined mainly by ceramic analysis and ceramic cross-dating. Norweb (1964:552553), using decorated ceramic types, defined four broad archaeological periods for the region: 1) Zoned Bichrome (0-400 A.D.); 2) Early Polychrome (400 A.D.800 A.D.); 3) Middle Polychrome (800-1200 A.D.); and 4) Late Polychrome (1200 A.D.-contact). The general similarity of the sequence was used to justify its application to both the northern and southern parts of the Subarea (Lange 1994:5). A bewildering number of local named phases and typologies are subsumed under these broad periods. Lange (1994:5) notes that the use of ceramic cross-dating has sometimes complicated chronological comparisons between various areas, obscuring what are actually serious differences, especially with regard to the late period. Within Greater Nicoya, there has been far more research carried out in Costa Rica—in the southern sector—than in Nicaragua. The work of Bransford (1881) and Haberland (1992) on Ometepe and Healy's (1980) Rivas synthesis, which included Norweb's material from the

As a result of later archaeological work conducted in both Nicaragua and Costa Rica and with the addition of radiocarbon dating, the chronological sequence for Greater Nicoya was broadened and redefined in the late 1980s and early 1990s to synthesize its broader characteristics and to revise the chronology for each period. It also included a new nomenclature (Lange 1995b; Vasquez L. et al. 1994; Abel-Vidor et al. 1987). This periodization, including the position of the Ometepe sequence within it, is discussed below and summarized in Table 1 (Lange 1995b; Vasquez L. et al. 1994; Haberland 1992).

Table 1.

Chronology for Greater Nicoya and Ometepe

Period

Previous Named Designation

Ometepe Period (A.D. 1350-1550) Sapoa Period (A.D. 800-1350) Bagaces Period (A.D. 300-800) Tempisque Period (500 B.C.-A.D. 300)

Late Polychrome Period

Santa Ana San Lázaro Middle Polychrome Period La Paloma Gato Early Polychrome Period San Roque

Orosí Period (2000-500 B.C.) Archaic Period (8000-2000 B.C.) Paleo-Indian Period (?10,000-8000 B.C.)

Middle Formative Period

Zoned Bichrome Period

Ometepe Phases

Manantiel Sinacapa Angeles Angeles Dinarte

Archaic Period Paleoindian Period

Recent Chronology Paleo-Indian Period (10,000?-8000 B.C.). Although sites with Pleistocene fauna have been found in Nicoya, none have yet been associated with a human presence. Evidence of a Paleoindian presence in Greater Nicoya is limited to two Clovis points, one found in Nicoya and one near Lake Arenal in Costa Rica (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:246-247). Archaic Period (8000-2000 B.C.). Although better for the Archaic than the Paleoindian Period, information is still scarce in the Greater Nicoya subarea. Several sites in Costa Rica have been radiocarbon dated to this time period (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:248-249, 251), but none have been found in Nicaragua, although deeply buried footsteps imprinted in volcanic ash at the site of Acahualinca in the city of Managua on the edge of Lake Managua probably date to this period (Wilson et al. 1981,

18

Overview of the Prehistory and Ethnohistory of Nicaragua stratigraphic column following page 2). The population at this time probably lived in small, temporary settlements related to the exploitation of diverse resources, especially wild species of plants and animals. Phytolith and pollen analysis in surrounding regions of Central America, however, indicate that this period may have seen the first development of plant cultivation, including maize, in some areas. Lithic technology included use of unifacial blades of volcanic materials, as well as minor amounts of bifacial chert and other microcrystalline tools. Projectile points and scrapers have been found in sites in Costa Rica (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:252). No ceramics have yet been found.

Dinarte Phase level indicates a period of considerable volcanic activity, which may have caused an abandonment of the island or resettlement at other locations (Haberland 1992:73-74). The Angeles Phase on Ometepe falls within the Orosí and the following Tempisque Periods (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:253). It was defined by a highly polished gray or red monochrome ceramic, often with incising and zone grooving. “Tecomates [globular clay jars] with extremely thickened rims and rounded lips [were] highly characteristic and easily distinguishable” (Haberland 1992:75). Few artifacts besides ceramics were found, but Haberland believed that agriculture, hunting, and fishing were all probable subsistence activities. He gave this phase an 800-300 B.C. dating, based on comparisons with ceramics from a Guanacaste site (Haberland 1992:74-76). In the later re-periodization of Greater Nicoya, however, it has been included within both the Orosí Period, which has a tentative end-date of 500 B.C., and the following Tempisque Period (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:253, 255). Whether the Angeles Phase is a transitional phase or an example of a longer lasting Orosí Period on Ometepe as compared to the mainland is a question that cannot be answered without future radiocarbon dating.

Orosí Period (2000-500 B.C.) [previously called the Middle Formative Period]. There is little information about the initial part of this period, but in the interval between ~1500 B.C. and 800 B.C., ceramics appear that exhibit a generalized technique and decorative patterning that are found throughout many areas of Central America and show no particular Mesoamerican or other cultural affiliation (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:252-253; Lange 1995b:104-105). It is unclear whether the particular cultural identity of Greater Nicoya began in this period. The Orosí Period probably saw a tribal structure without formal leadership and with settlement in small villages focused around the lakes, flood plains and on islands. The general economic pattern may have rested on "mixed agriculture, silviculture, hunting, and exploitation of lacustrine resources" (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:253). In some areas maize was grown, but the intensity of maize cultivation is thus far unknown. Bifacial blades and metates (flat grinding stones) were present in the tool kit. In the ceramics, incised decoration and pots with a red slip were especially common. There is no particular evidence that there was long distance exchange, even though other areas exhibited similar levels of ceramic elaboration (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:253-254). In this early period, the presence of a complex of shared ceramic forms and decorative modes distinct from others to the north and south may indicate that a cultural unit existed in the region that included and perhaps was larger than what has been defined as Greater Nicoya. Additional analysis will be needed to confirm this.

Tempisque Period (500 B.C.-300 A.D.) [Previously called the Zoned Bichrome Period]. Sites from this period have been found widely throughout northwest Costa Rica. In Nicaragua they have been found on Ometepe, in Chontales Province, and more recently in the Villa Tiscapa site in Managua (Lange 1995b:105). They are associated with areas of highly fertile soils, as well as with coastal and lake habitats. Locations suggest intensification of agriculture, as well as continued fishing and hunting, and use of forest resources. Many of the sites excavated from this period have been cemetery sites, with varied and sometimes elaborate tomb and grave configurations. Artifacts indicate a certain amount of social ranking, craft specialization, and sexual division of labor. There are no indications of regional political centers during this time period (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:255-256). The Tempisque does, however, mark a fluorescence of long-distant trade of luxury objects. These include ceramics from Honduras and El Salvador to the north, the Central Valley of Costa Rica to the south and east, and jadeite from Mesoamerica. Manos and metates and polished celts have also been found in funerary and non-funerary contexts. A variety of ceramics types were produced, and tools of locally available cryptocrystalline silicates, but not obsidian, were used (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:257-258). Lange (1995b:105) has noted, however, that Tempisque sites in the Managua Metropolitan Zone do not seem to contain such luxury items. The Ometepe phases of Angeles, Sinacapa, and Manantiel are included within the Tempisque period.

Corresponding phases on Ometepe include Dinarte and Angeles (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:253-255). The Dinarte Phase (~2000-500 B.C.) is the most tentative, based on only 104 thin grey ceramic sherds, called Ometepe Grey, found at the bottom of test pits at the Los Angeles site and underlying a 55cm thick layer of volcanic ash. The dates for this phase are derived principally from comparisons with several sites in Costa Rica that have similar materials (Haberland 1992:70-72). Whether these materials derived from southern or northern influences is unknown (although Haberland favors a south to north dispersion). In either case, Dinarte people must have had watercraft, and Haberland believes that, during this phase, the first permanent settlement by a people who practiced farming, hunting, and fishing developed on Ometepe. Whether they practiced maize agriculture is still an open question. The deep volcanic ash above the

Ometepe's Sinacapa Phase, which Haberland dated to 200 B.C.-A.D. 1, marks a relatively dense settlement pattern and the appearance of a dominant “very thin-

19

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua walled red pottery” (Haberland 1992:77). Incised (particularly a type known as Schettel Incised) and zoned engraved ceramic varieties were the most common decorated pottery (Haberland 1992:77-79). Haberland believed that manos (hand grinding stones) and molcajetes (a flat bowl with punctation that may have been used for grinding) support the supposition that maize agriculture was the main or an important subsistence base. Other authors believe that this is still an open question (Haberland 1992:79 and editors note). Faunal remains indicate that fishing and hunting, including the taking of turtles, were major components of the subsistence system. Specialized lithic tools, especially a rectangular chopper, beveled on all four sides, and bone points make their appearance. An animal tooth pendant, possible spindle whorls, and ear spools, as well as two small stone female figurines, indicate increasing complexity during this phase (Haberland 1992:79-82).1 Haberland suggested that the Sinacapa Phase may have represented a “new wave of immigrants from the mainland who introduced other pottery styles and other ideas” (Haberland 1992:77). Based on surface collections from four sites on Maderas, Haberland (1992:75) states that “the Sinacapa phase represents the oldest cultural component” on that side of the island. The Schettel Incised ceramic type was one of its hallmarks. It is of some interest, therefore, in terms of future dating of Maderas sites, that the 1994 re-periodization called Schettel Incised a diagnostic ceramic type of the prior Orosí Period (Vasquez et al. 1994:254). If so, sites on the Maderas side of Ometepe may be older than Haberland projected. On the other hand, Schettel Incised may simply have persisted longer on Ometepe than in other areas. Lange (1995b) continues to place Schettel in the Tempisque Period. As will be discussed below, a number of Schettel Incised ceramic fragments were found in sites on Maderas during the Ometepe project survey. In the Manantial Phase, dated to A.D. 1-500, direct evidence of agriculture is largely missing, but large quantities of faunal material indicate the continued significance of hunting and fishing, including an increase in turtle consumption. Flat bowls and deep dishes, often with tripodal feet, are common and plain red wares are thicker than in the preceding phase. Four-sided choppers, bone and turtle shell points, and tubular ceramic ear plugs increase in number (Haberland 1992:81-82). In general, this phase, aside from the apparent loss of certain ceramics such as Schettel Incised and an engraved ceramic type, seems to mark an intensification and continuation of Sinacapa. In certain areas, especially the southern half of the Moyogalpa Plain west of Concepción, the Manantial Phase was apparently ended by renewed volcanic activity (Haberland 1992:82-83). Bagaces Period (AD 300-800) [formerly Early Polychrome and Linear Decorated Period]. The initial dates for the Bagaces Period are more clearly established in the southern part of the Nicoya subarea than in the north, since the majority of Bagaces sites have been 1

The stone figurines may date to the later Manantial Phase.

found in northwest Costa Rica. Some evidence of this period has, however, been found on Ometepe, the Isthmus of Rivas, and as far north as Managua. The "archaeological data suggests a phenomenon of regional differentiation between northwest Costa Rica and southwest Nicaragua, in which shared elements cannot obviate the existing differences" (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:259). The underpinnings of this differentiation could be seen in the last centuries of the Tempisque Period, especially in the development of polychrome ceramics. Settlement patterns seem to vary somewhat between north and south, with extremely large sites in the north evidencing nucleation and high densities of ceramics and lithics, as well as domestic structures with or without stone foundations. In the south have been found structures with clay floors and post molds and ovens (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:261). In social structure, the northern sector exhibited "politically centralized societies, based on the existence of a hierarchically organized site configuration. For northwest Costa Rica, "a model of ranked organization but without political centralization is hypothesized" (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:262). This has been called a complex tribal model. Much more work needs to be done on settlement sites to verify these hypothesized social arrangements. Mortuary patterns, including the growth of stone tumuli and mounds, also became increasingly elaborate, although these patterns did show differences between north and south. Subsistence strategies continued to be mixed, but there appears to have been an intensification of horticulture as evidenced by metates and manos and microbotanical remains of maize and beans in both north and south. The Bagaces Period saw intensified regional differentiation of ceramic types and a transition from incised, painted pots to polychrome ceramics. The number of manos, metates and celts also increased. Long distance trade also intensified with increasing connections between Nicaragua and areas far to the north especially with the southern Maya periphery in El Salvador and Honduras. Certain ceramics and increasing amounts of obsidian were imported from those areas. Only in sites in Costa Rica have Maya artifacts from the Early Classic period been found. At the same time evidence for close connections between Nicaragua and northwest Costa Rica are presently missing (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:262-264; Lange 1995b:105-106). On Ometepe the San Roque Phase (A.D. 500-950) is included within the Bagaces Period (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:261). Wattle and daub houses may have first occurred in this phase. Large numbers of manos and metates and basin-shaped mortars point to the importance of agriculture, although numerous net sinkers and turtle bones show that fishing and turtle hunting were still important. A stone celt occurs in this phase and the numbers of four-sided choppers reached their peak. Bone points, awls, and spatulas are also numerous. Items of personal adornment include bone and clay ear ornaments, beads, and bone pendants. Polychromes, bichromes, including cream or white on red, a black on red, and a red-banded ceramic are all present; and monochrome red ware continues. Ollas and tripodal deep dish forms with 20

Overview of the Prehistory and Ethnohistory of Nicaragua hollow feet, and “often either animal-shaped or ornamented with appliqué animal heads” are common, as are zoomorphic and rhomboid-shaped vessels. Hollow clay figures and a small stone carving of a human figure may have been associated with religious activity. One extended burial, associated with specialized grave goods, dates to the San Roque Phase (Haberland 1992:83-87). This burial is believed to be that of a shaman (Haberland 1961; 1992:86). Navarro Genie (2007:220) has found that the production of monumental statuary probably began during the San Roque Phase on Ometepe.

both Bagaces and Sapoa (Early and Middle Polychrome) ceramics. Potosí Appliqué, consisting “exclusively of two-part incense burners,” is a distinctive characteristic of this phase. Large shoe-shaped vessels, with appliqué ears, eyes, and nose and incised mouth and whiskers appear. Other artifacts include flat metates, sometimes with “nubbin feet,” manos, celts, clay and turtle shell spindle whorls, and a pottery stamp. Pebble net sinkers are a new trait. Four-sided choppers disappear, as do tubular clay earplugs. Subsistence appears similar to that of the prior San Roque Phase. A formal cemetery was found at Los Angeles containing at least 59 burials, most extended and a few flexed, accompanied by very few items of personal adornment, but at least 17 individuals were associated with ceramic vessels. Several shaft burials, accompanied by specialized ceramic forms, may present evidence of status differentiation (Haberland 1992:87-105). Haberland also found surface evidence of the Gato Phase on at least one site on Maderas.

Sapoa Period (800-1350 AD) [previously Middle Polychrome Period]. The Sapoa Period is generally associated with the coming of a Mexican immigrant population, the Oto-Mangue-speaking Chorotega, who, according to ethnohistory and linguistics, were from the area of Soconusco in Chiapas. Their arrival seems to have been marked by a fluorescence of polychrome ceramics with white or red/orange slip, as well as "radical changes in funerary representations and settlement distribution" (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:265). Sapoa Period sites have been found from the Nicoya Peninsula northward to areas north of Lake Managua. These sites generally reflect an increasing elaboration of society. Although there is a paucity of data, Sapoa in Nicaragua seems to have been marked by an increase in population as well as significant settlement hierarchy, but few inferences about social organization can yet be made. It is likely that the Chorotega arrived in Costa Rica a century after their arrival in Nicaragua. Costa Rican sites do not, however, indicate a similar population rise, although archaeological work, especially in cemeteries, indicates that a "complex social organization and marked differences in rank and status" existed there (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:266). Populations were concentrated in large sites that had probable defensive and ceremonial features and complex burial patterns. Mesoamericanization of the area is reflected in the iconography of elaborate polychrome ceramics, especially the appearance of serpent motifs and the Kan cross (a Maya motif), and more obsidian from sources in Guatemala. In Nicaragua Papagayo Polychrome ceramics were especially important. Subsistence continued to be mixed with an emphasis on agriculture, but there is evidence of exploitation of a wider range of resources, perhaps because of population increase, particularly an explosion in the use of molluscs in coastal habitats (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:267-269). Little is yet known about the mechanisms at work that led to the supposed dominance of this Mesoamerican population or about its cultural impact on local people. It is unknown if local groups moved, absorbed or were absorbed by, or lived alongside the Chorotega as distinctive cultural entities. How to distinguish these processes archaeologically is one of the challenges for archaeologists in the area.

Haberland (1992:105) speculates that this phase represents a prolongation of the Early Polychrome Period on Ometepe, “…while elsewhere in Greater Nicoya the Middle Polychrome period was already initiated. This may have been related to the arrival of the Chorotega peoples to the island where, isolated in the middle of the lake, the change from Early to Middle Polychrome was more gradual and more an amalgamation of two cultures than a displacement of the old by the new. While the polychrome ceramics point to Mesoamerica, the brushed shoe-shaped vessels (Sacasa Striated) are part of a New World-wide complex of shoe-shaped vessels.” The La Paloma Phase (A.D. 1100-1300) is characterized by an ornate ceramic type called Papagayo Polychrome; three-legged and hemispherical bowls are common. Sacasa Striated continued to be the principal undecorated type, with large ollas and shoe-shaped pots typical (Haberland 1992:105-106). Hunting, including of turtles, and fishing were represented by stone projectile points and net-sinkers, but apparently had declined in emphasis, while agriculture, represented by manos, metates, and pestles, continued in importance (Haberland 1992:105). An apparent proliferation of sites on the Maderas side of the island at this time (see map, Haberland 1992:106) could indicate an increasing population moving into new (but somewhat more marginal) agricultural territory, accompanied by overall depletion of game. If a new population (the Chorotega) moved onto the island during the Sapoa Period, they might have pushed the indigenous inhabitants into the margins. Haberland (1992:106-107) speculates that the monumental stone statues found on the island date to the La Paloma phase; however another author’s study indicates that they may date to an earlier period and show both Mesoamerican and South American influences (Castillo 1989). A recent extensive study of Nicaraguan monumental sculpture found that this tradition continued on Ometepe from the San Roque

The Sapoa or Middle Polychrome on Ometepe is represented by the Gato and La Paloma Phases (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:265). The Gato Phase (A.D. 1000-1200) is poorly defined, based mainly on materials from a major cemetery at the site of Los Angeles (Om-9). It contains

21

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Phase into the Gato phase, but seems to have intensified during the la Paloma phase of the Sapoa period. Much of this sculpture evidenced strong influences from the south mixed with Mesoamerican iconography (Navarro Genie 2007:219, 423, 425). The coming of the Chorotega may have resulted in adaptation and intensification of an indigenous tradition already on the island. Navarro Genie (2007:425) believes, in fact, that Ometepe was the center of propagation of monumental sculpture and not the island of Zapatera as previously believed, and that there was diffusion of certain sculptural types from the lakes region south to Costa Rica. Ometepe Period (A.D. 1350-1550) [formerly Late Polychrome Period]. This period seems to exhibit a shrinking of the area of Greater Nicoya, at least in the south, where the Huetares, a Chibchan group, moved into parts of Guanacaste east of the Nicoya Peninsula to the east. Ometepe Period sites in Nicaragua, however, are found in a wider area than the previous Sapoa Period sites, including in Chontales Province to the east of the lake. This late period seems to be one of flux and new population movements. According to ethnohistoric information, a new group of migrants from Mexico, the Nahua-speaking Nicarao, moved into and settled around the lakes, including into the Chontales area to the east of the lakes. At about the same time, a probable Chibchan group, the Matagalpa, moved into Chontales, perhaps from the east, living there simultaneously with the Nicarao (Vasquez L. et al. 1994: 272-273; Rigat 1992). The dynamics between new and earlier migrant groups and indigenous groups in the late period is little known or understood. In general there appear to have been few changes to the earlier settlement or subsistence patterns. Some people attribute two monumental sculptural styles-one from the lakes and one from Chontales--to this period (Vasquez L. et al. 1994:273-275), although, as noted above, Navarro Genie, Haberland and others believe their origins predate the late period. Manufacture of such sculpture may well have persisted into the late prehistoric period, but there is little data available. Thus far very few Spanish contact period sites have been excavated and we have little archaeological data about the dynamics of the early post-Conquest period. On Ometepe the San Lázaro and Santa Ana phases are believed to date to the Ometepe period, but it is not altogether clear that they relate to the Nicarao presence. Haberland believes that the Ometepe or Late Polychrome Period, represented by the Santa Ana phase, indicates at least the arrival of new ideas. If it represents a new population, he does not believe they were the late-arrived Nicarao. A distinctive late Polychrome ceramic, called Luna Polychrome, may instead have derived from the south or southeast. Although there are Nicarao placenames on the island, he cites Spanish reports that a group speaking neither Chorotega nor Nicarao lived on Ometepe, and he postulates that these people may have come from the Atlantic Coast of lower Central America (Haberland 1992:110-111, 116). This is certainly open to debate.

There have been few changes to this general sequence for the Greater Nicoya Subarea since 1994. New archaeological work is, however, beginning to raise new questions and doubts about the established chronology. Beginning in 2000 the University of Calgary worked for several seasons at the Santa Isabel site on the Rivas shore, opposite Ometepe, focusing excavations "on residential mounds in the site center where temporally diagnostic ceramics...suggested the presence of late precontact occupation" (McCafferty and Steinbrenner 2005:131). In fact, the site was hypothesized to be "Quauhcapolca, capital of the ethnohistorically documented Nicarao ruler named 'Nicaragua' when the Spanish arrived in 1522..." (McCafferty and Steinbrenner 2005:131). The excavations were intended to investigate the process of Mesoamericanization of the region. Ceramics types (Vallejo, Madeira, and Bramadero polychromes, and Castillo Engraved) associated with the Ometepe period were present in abundance. Twelve new C14 dates obtained from the excavations are, however, "consistently earlier than the 1350-1550 CE range for the Ometepe Period suggested by diagnostic artifacts," clustering between 890 CE and 1280 CE and within the proposed range of the Sapoa Period (McCafferty and Steinbrenner 2005:131). Their conclusion is that ceramic types formerly diagnostic of the Ometepe Period are more likely a late Sapoa Period manifestation, while certain others, such as Luna Polychrome, a black type featuring appliqué, and several polished monochrome types may be the diagnostic types for the Ometepe Period (McCafferty and Steinbrenner 2005:144). In fact, Haberland (1992:116) believed that Luna Polychrome and blackware were markers of the late pre-contact occupation on Ometepe. Work at Santa Isabel has also cast doubt on or at least obscured the traditional associations previously made between certain ceramic types and the arrival of the Nicarao. Although much archaeological attention in Nicaragua has been focused on the question of Mesoamerican influence, Fonseca Zamora (1994:209) pointedly notes that prior to the period of Mesoamerican influence the region was probably included within an area of Chibchoid tradition that extended south to Colombia. Even in the late period, the region still maintained many traits identified with South America, and Chibchan groups also seem to have continued to exert pressure and influence on parts of Greater Nicoya. How traditions persisted, disappeared, or changed under later Mesoamerican or lower Central American influences is a topic that has barely begun to be addressed archaeologically. Summary The developmental sequence for what is known as the Greater Nicoya Archaeological Subarea, consisting of much of Pacific Nicaragua and northwest Costa Rica and including Ometepe Island, as yet reflects almost no Paleoindian or Archaic presence. Between about 2000500 B.C., people with a tribal structure and small village settlement pattern began to produce generalized types of ceramics, common to much of the region and other areas 22

Overview of the Prehistory and Ethnohistory of Nicaragua of Central America. Although pursuing a mixed subsistence strategy of hunting, gathering, and fishing, they also apparently began to at least experiment with agriculture. People who obviously had watercraft found their way to Ometepe, although settlement was occasionally interrupted by volcanic activity.

1996b:312). Lange et al. (1992:278) have also said, "Rather than failure, the relative isolation of these less complex societies, their economic self-sufficiency, and their ability to passively resist external influences are unquestionably indications of success." As an endnote, it should be pointed out that the above outline has no mention of rock art. Rock art has rarely figured in these chronological and cultural syntheses due to a general lack of analysis and, more pertinently, because archaeologists probably find the dating problems, especially of petroglyphs, too difficult to deal with. In a 1994 compendium of 15 articles summarizing the latest work pertaining to the Greater Nicoya Subarea and its relationships with surrounding regions, only one (Hoopes 1994) even mentioned rock art as a cultural category. Hoopes (1994:74, 82) briefly noted that petroglyphs are occasionally found in Tempisque Period sites in the Late Arenal Phase (0-AD 600) of eastern Guanacaste Province in Costa Rica. These have designs varying "from simple geometric motifs to abstract anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figures" (Hoopes 1994:82). In a major synthesis of Greater Nicoya archaeology, which included recommendations for future research, Vasquez L. et al. (1994) suggested that there be additional study of iconography on such portable artifacts as ceramics and metates, and, in addition, that there was a need for more study of the monumental statuary of the lakes and Chontales regions, even though dates were uncertain and there was only sparse contextual information. They never referred to petroglyphs as a focus of study. Although dating problems are indeed daunting in virtually every area of archaeology, and especially so in the field of rock art, this does not warrant almost entirely ignoring a major archaeological category.

Within the following thousand to fifteen hundred years, sedentism and agricultural activities seem to have intensified, and the development of Greater Nicoya as a distinct cultural area developed, albeit with local variations. There was an accompanying growth of social complexity, manifested in the development of social ranking, craft specialization, increase in the numbers, diversity, and elaboration of ceramics and other artifact types, and perhaps religious specialization. Long distance trade with regions to the south, such as the General Valley of Costa Rica, and with Mesoamerica began during this time span. Ometepe's cultural sequence reflects many of these characteristics, as well as local change and development, perhaps caused by new ideas and/or new populations settling on the island. The Maderas side of Ometepe Island may have been settled during this time. After about A.D. 300 there was increasing social elaboration, manifested by growing population, settlement nucleation, regional differentiation, intensified agriculture, greater artifact densities, and increasing interregional trade. Much of this increase in complexity may be attributed to a general process of Mesoamericanization until Spanish conquest in 1522, spurred on not only by the exchange of ideas and goods, but apparently by several waves of actual migration from Mexico. Ometepe seems to have experienced this growth in social complexity, but, in the late period at least, there is some question as to which groups occupied the island. The influence of Chibchan populations originating from the south and of local indigenous development on the social complexity of the region is little understood.

The interplay between northern and southern influences must be seen as an on-going theme with regard to archaeological interpretation in Nicaragua and Greater Nicoya. Whether or how this interplay is reflected in the rock art tradition or traditions of Ometepe should also be an on-going subject of investigation.

There are clearly major gaps in our archaeological knowledge of the region and of Ometepe. Future excavations will only continue to redefine the chronological sequence for the Greater Nicoya area. What seems clear is that the Mesoamericanization of the Greater Nicoya Archaeological Subarea, including Ometepe, and of other areas of Pacific Nicaragua was a relatively late phenomenon and Greater Nicoya as a regional concept had shifting boundaries. How thoroughly a part of Mesoamerica Nicaragua and Greater Nicoya would have become without the Spanish invasion will always be an open question.

4.2

Ethnohistory

Christopher Colombus, on his fourth voyage to the New World in 1502, briefly explored the Caribbean Coast of what is now Nicaragua. It was not until 1522, however, that significant contact occurred, when an expedition, led by Gil González Dávila, explored western Nicaragua, closely followed in 1524 by competing expeditions of conquistadores determined to lay claim to the region. The Spanish who invaded Pacific Nicaragua found a dense population, fertile land, and a complex mix of populations. Spanish occupation quickly became more than a nightmare; it was an unmitigated disaster for the indigenous people and their cultures from which they were never really to recover.

The meaning of Mesoamericanization and earlier assumptions that somehow this intermediate area with its simpler social systems represented a failure to evolve has begun to shift to a more in-depth assessment of its cultural development. There is "a growing acceptance among Central American archaeologists that any assumption of a direct correlation between artifact quality and social complexity is speculative at best" (Lange

Our sparse knowledge of the indigenous population of Nicaragua comes mainly from early Spanish documents, linguistics, and archaeology. The early documentary 23

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua record varies in quality and is often sparse, but the most important single source is that of Gonzalez Fernándo de Oviedo y Valdés, who visited Pacific Nicaragua and northwestern Costa Rica in 1528, basing his monumental Historia General y Natural de las Indias, Islas y TierraFirme del Mar Océano on observations and interviews he conducted while there (Oviedo 1851; 1976). The most important contemporary source for the history of Nicaragua’s Indians is Linda Newson’s (1987) Indian Survival in Colonial Nicaragua, based on exhaustive research in archives in Nicaragua, Guatemala City, and Spain. Of necessity, I have had to draw heavily on her work for the ethnography and history that follow as many of her sources are not readily available. Pacific Cultures The geography of Nicaragua in a general way demarks the broad cultural areas of Nicaragua. In 1522 the Pacific Zone, including the Pacific coastal plains, the Rivas Peninsula, at least some of the islands of Lake Nicaragua (or Lake Cocibolca), and the Nicoya Peninsula in Costa Rica, was home to groups that largely represented multiple migrations from Mesoamerica (Map 5). The Chorotega, an Oto-Mangue-speaking group, are believed to be the earliest of these identified migratory peoples, arriving from the Chiapas area of Mexico sometime between A.D. 800 and A.D. 1200 and displacing existing groups who were probably of Chibchan-speaking origin. At the time of the Spanish conquest the Chorotega were the most widespread of these Mesoamerican linguistic groups, occupying an area from the northern coastal frontier southward to the tip of the Nicoya Peninsula (Newson 1987:28). Some believe that the Chorotega displaced a group, called the Corobicí, who had formerly lived on the lake margins (Incer 2002:241, footnote 3). The Corobicí are thought to have been an “isthmian group of southern extraction” (Stone 1972:133), and thus probable Chibchan-speakers. The Maribio or Subtiaba, thought to have originated in Cholula, Mexico, closely followed the Chorotega, settling in northwestern Nicaragua near the present city of Leon. The Nicarao, were latecomers. Although the exact date of their southern migration is not known, A.D. 1200 is believed plausible, based on ethnohistoric accounts and some ceramic indicators. The Nicarao lived on the west side of Lake Nicaragua in the area of the Rivas peninsula and, after a war, had apparently displaced a group of Chorotega, as their territory separated Chorotega groups (Newson 1987:30-32; Fowler 1989:35). Attesting to their northern origin was the fact that they startled the Spanish invaders by speaking Nahuat, a dialect of the Nahua language related to the Nahuatl dialect of the Spaniards’ Aztec Indian guides and comprehensible to some of the Spanish who had had experience in Mexico (Fowler 1989:3). The ability to understand the Nicarao probably led to a focus on collecting information from them. Our ethnographic knowledge from the Spanish chronicles is thus heavily weighted toward the culture of the Nicarao. Nahuat also appears to have become a lingua franca among the diverse groups in Nicaragua during the initial

Map 5: Culture Areas in Nicaragua at the Time of European Contact (From Newson 1987:27)

Spanish colonial period, creating occasional confusion on the part of early observers. Exact territorial boundaries have been difficult to reconstruct because of rapid cultural dislocation after the Spanish conquest (see Newson 1987:27-33). The Spanish found Pacific Nicaragua occupied by socially stratified chiefdoms with often very large populations and dense settlement. Newson (1987:48) notes that “these populations were contained in hierarchies of settlements ranging from many thousands in the major administrative, market, and religious centers down to a few hundred Indians in the small communities.” Managua had the largest recorded population, about 40,000 inhabitants. Granada, on the northernwestern edge of Lake Cocibolca, with 8000 inhabitants, and León, to the north of Lake Managua (or Lake Xolotlan), with about 15,000, were other important centers (Newson 1987:48). Such locations often became the focus of Spanish settlement because of their large populations. Subsistence in the Pacific Zone was predominantly based on agriculture with hunting, fishing, and gathering as secondary, although by no means unimportant, pursuits. Dogs were also raised for food, and eaten during festivals, “as the most precious article of food and superior to all others”; only the king could eat the head (Oviedo 1951:Vol 1, lib 12:993). Although a wide range of crops were grown, the most important for subsistence

24

Overview of the Prehistory and Ethnohistory of Nicaragua were maize, manioc, beans, and sweet potatoes. Cacao and cotton were also major cultivars. Cacao, probably introduced by the Nicarao, was not only eaten and drunk, but its beans were an important medium of exchange. Cotton was grown in enormous quantities for its fiber, used for clothing and canvas (Newson 1987:49-55).

slave or eight to ten beans a prostitute. Cacao, however, could only be drunk by the wealthy (Oviedo 1951:Vol.1, lib 8:821). Caciques were exempt from normal labor and participated in religious ceremonies. A cacique rarely, if ever, interacted with commoners and governed with the help of provincial leaders from the noble caste who communicated the cacique’s decisions and collected tribute. A council of older men also advised the cacique, especially in matters of war. Caciques, at least important ones, also had spiritual duties. Fowler (1989:195) notes,

Many crafts, especially pottery, were well developed. Chorotega pottery, in particular a black ware, was highly valued and traded into Costa Rica. Metal working was confined to gold, silver, and copper, used in pure form or in alloys. These metals were used primarily in body ornaments or decoration or construction of idols (Newson 1987:55). Stone working was also an important craft, reflected in many varieties of lithic tools, elaborate metates, and several monumental sculptural traditions. The latter were particularly well represented by sculpture from the lakes region, including from Ometepe Island. Oviedo (quoted in Incer 2002:343-344) makes tantalizing reference to the fact that Nicaraguan people (probably the Nicarao) had parchment books made of deerskin on which they painted characters in red or black. Although these were neither the equivalent of letters nor sentences, they clearly signified something and were understood by those reading them. Apparently many of them dealt with property and inheritance issues, recording the locations of roads, rivers, and mountains or woodland. Elders used the books when settling disputes.2 To my knowledge, none of these books remain.

Among the Nicarao, an important cacique entered a temple for a year of penitence and prayer on behalf of his subjects…At the end of this year, which was spent in total solitude with no communication with any person except the small boys who brought him food, the cacique emerged from the temple, and a great festival was held in his honor…The cacique’s nose was pierced as a symbol that he had spent this year of devotion…this rite probably represented the consolidation of chiefly power. Other ranked nobles included war and religious leaders and elected market officials. War leaders were chosen based on ability and could be removed. The high status of war leaders reflects the fact that warfare in Nicaragua was precipitated by boundary and resource area disputes and by the need to capture prisoners for sacrifice. The Spanish considered the Chorotega the more war-like of the groups (Newson 1987:56-58, 60).

Nicarao towns, in particular, "exhibited social and functional differentiation" (Newson 1987:49). This apparently meant residential location by social class, as well as separate religious complexes. Chorotega villages were less differentiated (Newson 1987:49, 56).

Slavery was common among the Nicarao. Slaves included war captives, people illegally found in the markets or who had committed some crime, or children who had been sold by impoverished families. The first two categories of slaves were often sacrificed and eaten. Nobles “also possessed a number of young men who were brought up from childhood to be sacrificed, but these young men had a high social status compared with that of slaves” (Newson 1987:58).

In addition, there were flourishing markets or tianguis in the Pacific Zone, and most villages seem to have had a market place, where giant ceiba trees would “furnish shade for as many as one or two thousand persons” (Oviedo 1951, Vol. 1, lib 8:888). The number of trees planted varied depending on the size of the market. Especially among the Nicarao, women conducted the market trade, and few men were allowed in the markets (Oviedo 1951, Vol.1, lib 8:888). There is more information available about Nicarao chieftainships than about the Chorotega. The Nicarao were more socially complex and hierarchical than the Chorotega, who were governed by elected councils. Nicarao chiefs, called caciques by the Spanish, were wealthy because of their ownership of cacao groves and through exaction of cacao as tribute. Oviedo (1951:Vol. 1, lib 8:820) noted that cacao trees were “most highly prized, and their treasure. The chiefs and lords who are able to have these trees on their estates are regarded as very wealthy calachunis or rulers…” Used as money, 100 cacao beans would buy a

Both the Nicarao and the Chorotega had complex religious and ideological systems, reminiscent of those in Mesoamerica. Each town contained a temple complex, usually including a temple and sacrificial mound, and both the Chorotega and Nicarao had a formal priesthood. Gods were represented as idols, and the temples held stone idols and functioned as armories. The Nicarao had a large pantheon of gods, some with wide creative powers and some with specialized powers. In addition to language, human sacrifice, and other social practices, their religious pantheon related the Nicarao to the Aztecs of Mexico. Their two main creator gods were called Tamogostad and Cipaltonal, who were sustained by the blood and hearts obtained in war and by incense. The souls of those dying in war went to these gods (Joyce 1973 [1916]:18). Joyce (1973 [1916]:18) thought that they were equivalent to the Mexican creator gods Oxomoc and Cipactonal. Other Nicarao gods perhaps

2

“…y en estos tales libros tenían pintados sus terminus y heredamientos, y lo que más les parecía que debía estar figurado, asi como los caminos, los ríos, los montes y boscajes y lo demás, para los tiempos de contiena o pleito determinarlos por allí, con parecer de los viejos, guegues…”

25

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua related to the Aztec were: lord of the underworld Miquetanteot (the Mexican Mictlantecutli), the god of rain and thunder Quiateot (rain was quiauitl in Mexico), the god of trade Mixcoa (in Mexico Mixcoatl had been the hunting god), god of the wind Chiquinau or Hecat (in Mexico Chiquinaui Eecatl was "a date sacred to the Mexican wind-god"), and others (Joyce 1973 [1916]:1819). There were gods of plants and of hunting. In particular, Macat was the god of the rabbit and Toste the god of deer, and “[t]o improve hunting, the heads of deer and rabbits were placed at the doors of hunters, and deer blood was dried and revered as the god of deer” (Newson 1987:61). The Nicarao incorporated a yearly ceremonial cycle celebrating the gods, fertility and harvest, and other special purposes (Newson 1987:62). Human sacrifice—of war captives, slaves, and young men especially reared for sacrifice—was intimately involved in many of these ceremonies. Each category of victim was treated somewhat differently. For example, the heart of the war captive “was eaten by the priests and their wives and children, the hands and feet by the cacique, the intestines by the trumpeters, and the rest by the commoners,” although commoners were not “allowed to eat the bodies of important war captives who were sacrificed” (Newson 1987:61). The Nicarao, and probably the Chorotega, also believed in witches and sorcerers. Oviedo (1851:Vol. 1, lib XLII:671) says, In this land there are many witches, of which accursed sect and school there are a large number of men and women in that province [Nicaragua], according to what is talked about among the Indians themselves, and these sorcerers are called texoxes. They consider it a well-established fact that these are able to change themselves into alligators of the large type…, or into a dog, a tiger, a lion or into the form of any other animal they may wish. The texoxes could kill persons who offended them, and certain "old women were supposed to have curative powers” (Newson 1987:63). Such practices might be viewed as a folk-level shamanism underlying or parallel to the more formal religious structures. Oviedo recorded only three gods for the Chorotega, although there may have been more. Tipotani was the most important and "Nenbithia and Nenguitamali, a man and a woman, respectively, ...were said to have created all mortal things" (Newson 1987: 63). Gods of "water, maize, fruits, and battle" are also mentioned (Newson 1987:63). In general the Chorotega seem to have had a less extensive ceremonial cycle and the details of their religion differed from the Nicarao, but were similar to them in that they also had “priests, idols, and temples and practiced human sacrifice and self-mutilation” (Newson 1987:63). The Chortega were also known to have

sacrificed victims in the Masaya Volcano (Newson 1987:63). To complicate the issue of the origins of people in western Nicaragua, early chroniclers also mention a people in the northwest mountains of Nicaragua (in today’s Departments of Estelí, Madriz, and Nueva Segovia) called the Chondal, who spoke a language unintelligible to the Nicarao or Chorotega. They were a fierce, cannibalistic people who attacked and eliminated early Spanish gold mining settlements. Werner (2000:1118) gives an extensive discussion of the confusion over the name and their origins. While some have equated them with the Matagalpa or Lenca (now mainly in Honduras) and the Chibchoide tradition, there is some evidence that at least some of the Chondal may have been Putun Maya, not Chibchoide speakers (Werner 2002:1213, 17-18; see also Fowler 1989: 57). The many similarities to Mexican practices, particularly in ideology and human sacrifice, and the lack of other Mesoamerican traits, such as monumental architecture and (so far as is known) the ballcourt and ball game, have been major reasons why archaeologists have had difficulty in deciding whether Nicaragua should be included within the Mesoamerican culture area. It seems clear that Pacific Nicaragua was heavily influenced by Mexico but does not conform to Mesoamerica’s classic traits and also incorporates many influences from South America. Archaeology is also revealing considerable independent development. Archaeologists have thus often settled for “sphere of Mesoamerican influence” to categorize these Pacific coast cultures. Atlantic Cultures The vast area east of the lakes region and Pacific coastal plain, encompassing the central highlands and Atlantic watershed, has been differentiated as an area of South American tradition and was inhabited by tribal groups (Baudez 1970:227; Newson 1987:24). Although the Spanish penetrated part way into the northern highlands because of gold deposits there, they never controlled much of this area or the Atlantic watershed, which covers more than two-thirds of present day Nicaragua. The Atlantic Coast, in fact, became a sphere of British influence beginning in the mid-seventeenth century. Consequently, there is little early documentary evidence available about these people. What is known comes mostly from archaeology, a few reports from missionaries, buccaneers, and traders dating from the 17th and 18th centuries, and a small amount of 19th and 20th century linguistic and ethnographic information. Although early accounts list a confusing array of specific and generic names for the various tribal groups in the highlands and Atlantic Coast, there were at least three main language divisions in eastern Nicaragua—the Sumu, Rama, and Matagalpa—and various dialect groups (Newson 1987:33-38). All three are believed to be Chibchan or Chibchoid languages or dialects, thus

26

Overview of the Prehistory and Ethnohistory of Nicaragua affiliating them with Chibchan languages occurring commonly in more southern parts of Central America. Another major group on the Atlantic Coast, prominent today, are the Miskito or Mosquito. Although their cultural origins are cloudy, the aboriginal antecedents of the Miskito are thought to have been a coastal Sumu subgroup situated along the northern coast of Nicaragua and southern Honduras (Conzemius 1932:17; Nietschmann 1973:26). The Miskito, who have been known since the mid-17th century and were closely associated with English traders, are believed to be an historic people, the result of an intermixing of Sumu Indians and African slaves shipwrecked on the Atlantic Coast in 1641 (Newson 1987:38-40).

Cabezas on Nicaragua’s northern coastal section), and this one only partially and recently paved. Trade was mainly by barter between inland and coastal villages, and eastern groups did not seem to have formal markets or a means of exchange. It is believed, however, that the Aztecs had a trading colony on the coast at the mouth of the San Juan River, used mainly to ship gold from Panama north to Mexico. The “presence of Mexican traders in the area would have afforded the Indians the opportunity to trade in items, such as gold and other metal goods and tools, which they did not possess…In exchange the Indian probably offered items similar to those traded with Europeans from the seventeenth century onward—dyes, wood, cordage and food—and feathers” (Newson 1987:78).

These tribal groups lived in the Atlantic region in small groups and probably lacked permanent villages (Newson 1987:26, 64). Their diet was more diverse than on the Pacific Coast. They practiced small plot, shifting agriculture, as well as hunting, gathering, and fishing, with one subsistence activity or another emphasized depending on specific environment. Agriculture was focused around root crops, especially sweet manioc on the coast, probably introduced from South America. Plaintains were the major food for some of the more interior groups and palm fruits and sweet potato were also very important. Although maize was cultivated, it played a more minor role than in the Pacific zone, perhaps because it was less suited to the ecology and climate. Hunting had an important economic role, although fishing was more important on the coast (Newson 1987:65-73). We know from archaeological evidence that shellfish must also have been an important coastal staple as large shell mounds have been found there (Magnus 1974; Matilló Villa 1993:17-18).

Leadership and social hierarchy appear to have been weak, with councils of elders the important decisionmakers. Military leaders were chosen as needed for the course of a conflict, and there seem to have been many and on-going conflicts between groups (Newson 1984:78-79). Councils of elders are today still at least nominally consulted for local decision-making, although the Nicaraguan government has imposed an outside political structure. Religion was not structurally formalized as it was in the Pacific zone. There was an “absence of idols, priests, and forms of public worship” (Newson 1984:81). Tribal groups did, however, have a religious practitioner or shaman, the sukya, who “was highly esteemed and acted as a healer, diviner, sorcerer, and adviser, even to the elders” (Newson 1984:78). Beliefs in gods and supernatural beings varied among the groups and ancestor worship did occur. Evil spirits were the source of great fear. The life cycle was commemorated with religious ceremonies and there was a belief in the afterlife. Individuals were buried with belongings and food. Although cannibalism was practiced, it was not sacrificial and did not accompany religious observance (Newson 1984:82-83). The Miskito today, and perhaps other groups, maintain a belief in spirits, as well as in supernatural animals and in a spirit "keeper" or protector of certain animals, such as the white-lipped peccary and white-tailed deer (Nietschmann1973:112).

Crafts were adapted to use and environment. Bark cloth was more common than cotton, and the fiber crafts, such as rope, cord, and hammock-making appear to have been well-developed, although basketry was not (Conzemius 1932:52). Calabashes often substituted as containers. Coiled pottery and stone working were also well represented prehistorically (Newson 1987:76-77; Conzemius 1932:50). Conzemius (1932:50) relayed reports of the discovery of ancient clay “heads, busts or entire figures,” probably found in the territory of the interior Sumu. Given the probable transitory nature of settlement in much of the eastern zone, the ostensible lack of light portable basketry is surprising as is reliance on heavy metates and fragile pottery. Much more information is needed about the development of tool kits

The boundaries between the Pacific or Mesoamerican zone and South American zone at the time of Spanish contact have been debated. Newson (1987:25, Fig. 3), based on documentary evidence, places it east of the lakes to encompass the plains of Chontales. Her linguistic and cultural boundaries are shown, however, to overlap in this zone, with the Matagalpa and Sumu and Rama groups all extending as far as Lake Nicaragua (Newson 1987:27, Fig. 4). There is evidence in Chontales for settled villages and more elaborated social structure. Extensive sites with mounds, monumental sculpture, and rock art have been found in Chontales, indicating a more complex social structure than found in tribal areas further to the east. Whether this was the result of acquisition

for this region, but there is an almost total lack of archaeological data from inland rainforest areas. Settlement of inland peoples probably focused then, as now, along the numerous west to east flowing rivers of the Atlantic watershed. Rivers were also undoubtedly the major transportation corridors through the dense rainforest. Even today there is only one road from the Pacific to the Atlantic Coast (to the town of Puerto

27

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua from and contact with the more Mesoamericanized groups or was a result of earlier in-place local development is not clear. There may also have been late period migration of both Nicarao and Matagalpa groups into Chontales. Archaeological study has shown that more than one cultural group may at times have lived side by side (Rigat 1992). Cultural Disruption Following the Spanish invasion of the Pacific Coast, there came an immediate and almost unbelievable decimation of the Indian population, especially in the Pacific lowlands. Demographers have disagreed about the native population in Central America at the time of Spanish conquest with estimates ranging from less than a million to as much as 13 million. For Nicaragua itself estimates vary, but based on 16th century accounts and other demographic information, such as land carrying capacity, Newson (1987:86-88) believes that the total population of Nicaragua at contact may have been between 825,000 and 1.6 million with 75% in the Mesoamerican zone (~609,262 in western Nicaragua and Nicoya). Werner (2000:128), using data derived from 16th century village population data, agrees with this estimate. When the Spanish arrived in Pacific Nicaragua, looking particularly for the precious metals found in Mexico and Peru, they found a region with few metals (although there was some gold in the north) but a large population. The most immediate and exploitable resource was thus the people of the region. It is generally agreed that there was a disastrous, estimated 92% reduction in the Indian population in the first half of the 16th century, especially in the 25 years between 1522 and 1548 (Newson 1987:118; Werner 2000:128). The reasons for the precipitous decline were enforced labor through the encomienda system (grants of Indians to individuals for tribute and labor services), slavery, introduced diseases, and warfare. What has been more widely debated is which was more significant. Many researchers believe that from 1522 to 1550 Indians were enslaved and exported in huge numbers to the Caribbean, Panama, and Peru where labor was in great demand. Contemporary estimates and recent demographers have put the number of slaves exported at about 500,000 (Las Casas 1812:45; Oviedo, 1851 p. 4 lib. 42 cap. 4:385; Radell 1976:71-75). Newson (1987:101105), after reviewing contemporary accounts and the analyses of other demographers, agreed that a figure between 200,000 and 500,000 was realistic. Patrick Werner (2000:128-133) in a recent study completely disagrees. After closely studying available tax records from the 1520s, when slavery was legal (it was finally banned in 1542), and reviewing 44 manifests of ships leaving Nicaragua between 1539 and 1543, he believes that there could have been nowhere near as many as 200,000 slaves shipped. Manifests show only small-scale trading. While some slaves could have been and were shipped illegally, the logistical considerations may have

militated against a large-scale slave trade—small ship sizes and small number of ships sailing at that time (Werner 2000:132). It is unclear, however, why contemporary sources such as Las Casas and Oviedo report such large numbers of exported slaves. Werner (2000:130) believes rather that disease was probably the main cause of such drastic depopulation. He cites at least four known epidemics—small pox, measles, and possibly pneumonic plague—that swept through Nicaragua and Central America between 1527 and 1533. Already by 1529 some encomienda grants were worthless because so many Indians had died from disease. The consequent loss of cultural identity and social organization as a result of depopulation and social disruption is incalculable. Continued European pressure on Indian life through missionization and adaptation to Christianity, development of European agricultural and husbandry systems, and the enforcement of tribute labor until the 18th century continued the rapid destabilization of Indian cultures, further alienation of Indian lands, and gradual acculturation (Newson 1987). Change and the degree of Indian survival and identity, of course, varied by location and circumstances, with Indian identity and languages surviving to a greater degree in the Atlantic region where there were smaller populations and lack of Spanish control (Newson 1987:339-342). While Indian populations rebounded in the 18th and 19th centuries, traditional cultures were never the same again. The complex nature of Nicaragua’s prehistory and the paucity of archaeological and ethnographic data leave many open questions relative to Ometepe Island. Not the least of these are the ethnic identity of the island's indigenous population, which group or groups manufactured the abundant rock art on the island, and how ancient that rock art is. Documentation from the historical period contributes few answers, as will be seen in the following chapter.

28

5

ETHNOHISTORY OF OMETEPE ISLAND

Spain, visited all the provinces, arriving in Nicaragua in spring of 1586. His secretary, Antonio de Ciudad Real, recounts that, while visiting Granada in May, Ponce was told that, although Mangue-speakers (Chorotega) were most numerous in Nicaragua, there were also Nahua speakers, but that on Ometepe they spoke their own language ("en la isla de la laguna se hable otra lengua particular") (Ciudad Real 1976:227). Haberland also (1975:552; 1992:116) believed that a non-Nahua people inhabited the island, based on artifacts and Ponce’s statement. Since Nahua became a common language in Nicaragua in the colonial period, it would not have been unexpected if some people on the island did later speak it, whether or not Nicarao people were the main inhabitants of the island.

Islands often carry an aura of romance, mystery, isolation, and beauty. Isla Ometepe does no less. Today when you tell a Nicaraguan that you are going to Ometepe, the response will often be "que linda" (how lovely). The island has a reputation for beauty and tranquility—both richly deserved—and there are a number of well-known legends associated with the island. It is perplexing, therefore, to be able to find little published literature or history for Ometepe. There is, perhaps, still untapped information to be gleaned from obscure Spanish colonial, Nicaraguan government, or Catholic Church archives, but I have not yet had access to such sources. The following historical summary has been pulled together from bits and pieces of available information. 5.1

Niemel (2005:3) believes that powerful legends, like those of the Nicarao, whether factual or not, "effectively legitimized Nicarao land claims to the region and signified the importance of this landscape setting for group identity." Since Ometepe Island was so intimately associated with such legitimation legends, it would be surprising if at least some Nicarao did not settle on or at least make ceremonial use of the island in the late prehistoric period, although the archaeology is thus far unclear as to this point (Niemel 2005:4). Nicaraguans still today say that Ometepe was the burial place of the great Nicarao chief Nicaragua, for whom the country was named, and whom the Spanish encountered on their arrival (Páez Andino 1999:12-13). Nicaragua's territory was in the Rivas area and his main village was thought to have been on the opposite shore from Ometepe, near the present day town of San Jorge (McCafferty and Steinbrenner 2005:131).1 In the 16th century the Spanish called Ometepe “la isla de Nicaragua,” perhaps meaning literally that the island belonged to cacique Nicaragua. The issue of who inhabited Ometepe is, of course, of particular interest in terms of rock art interpretation.

Ometepe in the 16th and 17th Centuries

Ometepe first figures prominently in a Nicarao migration myth. Torquemada, who visited Nicaragua in the 1520s, recorded a detailed account, presumably from Nicarao informants, that stated that the Nicarao originated in the Valley of Mexico, perhaps Puebla or Morelos, Mexico (Torquemada 1975:452-453; Healy 1980; Niemel 2005). The Olmeca-Xicallanca, moving into that area, conquered the Nicarao, who fled to the south passing through Guatemala and El Salvador leaving behind Nahuaspeaking settlements along the way. Arriving in Choluteca in present day Honduras, a Nicarao leader prophesied that "the Nicarao people should settle on a freshwater sea within sight of an island with two peaks" (Healy 1980:22). Although Nicarao groups pushed south into Costa Rica and perhaps further south, some eventually returned to the lakes region, settling in the Rivas region on the western shores of Lake Nicaragua within sight of Ometepe, a place that clearly fulfilled the prophetic description (Healy 1980:22). In so doing they displaced an earlier Chorotega population, probably violently (Chapman 1960; Torquemada 1975:454; Fowler 1989). At the time of Spanish contact, the Nicarao in the Rivas area were sandwiched between Chorotega groups to the south and north. Fowler's (1989) discussion of Pipil-Nicarao groups (Nahau-speaking groups in El Salvador are known as Pipil) seems to verify the broad outlines of such migration stories. There is, however, little direct historic evidence that the Nicarao populated Ometepe Island.

Whoever the inhabitants, Ometepe's mystique and importance must have been enhanced by the fact that Ometepec (Concepción) was an active volcano and a high point—a mountain. Mountains and volcanoes are often conceived of as places of power, and Schmidt (1966:5859) found 153 pieces of broken incensarios of Potosí Appliqué (~1000-1200 A.D.) near the mouth of a vent high on the slopes of Concepción (~600m elevation), indicating some ritual use. In the 1520s Oviedo (2002:258-259) wrote an account of the beliefs of the Chorotega in the town of Nindirí about Volcan Masaya, northwest of Granada. He was told that caciques (and perhaps others) would climb the mountain to consult with an old woman who lived there. She prophesized the future and was consulted on all manner of things, including war and whether to undertake truces, whether there would be rain or good crops; and what she predicted would happen. A day or two before or after this visit, a

There are many Nahua place names on the island. For example, Ometepec is a Nahua word meaning "two hills", as is Moyogalpa (Muyotl-galpa), “town of mosquitos" (Boyle 1868:70). Hamilton Silva (1995:12, uncited) says that the aboriginal name of Volcan Maderas was Coatlán, a Nahuatl name meaning “Place of the Sun” and that of Volcan Concepción was Choncoteciguatepe, signifying “Brother of the Moon.” Although Squier (1990 [1853]:9) thought that the island was the realm of the Nahua because of Nahua words that he collected, this attribution is in some dispute. Fray Alonso Ponce, who was apparently the Franciscan commissary general of New

1

Although Torquemada identifies this village as Quauhcapolca, Werner (2000:11) finds no mention of Quauhcapolca in reports by early chroniclers or in lists of encomiendas in the area.

29

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island human sacrifice would be made, apparently thrown in the volcano. At the mouth of the volcano was a large pile of broken vessel fragments and whole pots brought by the Indians when they visited. These latter were full of tasty food left for the old woman to eat in order to please and placate her when an earthquake or harsh weather occurred, as they thought that these things occurred because of her.

a lack of direct familiarity with the island (Oviedo 1976:368). It is likely that the Spanish did not have boats on the lake in the early years of the conquest, although Indian canoes would have been available. Although some island inhabitants still use canoes today and surely did prehistorically and at the time of contact, it was no easy task to cross the 7.5 kilometers from the Rivas shore to Ometepe. Even today, when taking the small boats that make the crossing, the journey in high winds is a whiteknuckle enterprise.

Schmidt (1966:62) collected a similar contemporary story on Ometepe about an old woman, called “la Mamabucha”, who lives on the hill. When there are eruptions, she is “tizando su horno.”2 (My translation is “poking or firing her oven”. This is idiomatic.) This may well be a legend that has continued from the time of the conquest. The presence of numerous ceremonial or ritual sites with monumental statuary and the island's abundant rock art on Maderas testify to Ometepe's importance, whether to the Nicarao or other inhabitants.

In the early colonial period, the Spanish founded towns as administrative and ecclesiastical centers near some of the larger Indian population centers. Important contemporary cities, like Granada and Leon, date to the 1520s (Newson 1987:93). At the same time, the Spanish instituted the encomienda system. As it was intended to work under Spanish rule, the encomienda “was not a property right per se, but was a reciprocal set of duties and privileges between the encomendero and the Indian, established to compensate soldiers and knights who were expected to conquer new lands for the crown with as little financial burden on the Crown as possible. The Knight received income for a temporary period of time and the Indians received Christian training, thus guaranteeing the entry of their souls to heaven” (Werner 2000:21).

Oviedo, who accompanied Pedrarias Dávila during the early conquest of Nicaragua in the early 16th century, apparently gave the first descriptive information about Ometepe. In discussing resources on the mainland at the northwest corner of Lake Nicaragua in the vicinity of Granada, he mentions that many small islands in the archipelago off the shore of Granada could be sources of wood and of fishing, but that islands further east in the lake were populated by Indians. The largest island was Ometepet, which was more than eight leagues in circumference (Oviedo 1976:302). He noted that the two hills were continuous or connected, the one to the east [Maderas] being lower than the westernmost [Concepción], which was higher, and so high that often the summit could not be seen because of cloud cover (Oviedo 1976:368). Torquemada (1975 [1615]:Vol. 1:451) relates that the island was very fertile, growing chiles, cotton, beans, gourds and many fruits, and had a lot of small deer and small monkeys.

Werner (2000:21) contends, however, that in Nicaragua the encomienda developed as something “very much akin to a property right in the work and personal property of others…defined by geographic location and granted and transferred by documents that very much resembled deeds of real property…Deeds of encomienda granted both the right to receive tribute in the form of goods as well as the right to exact labor from Indians of the encomienda.”

Oviedo states that there were nine or ten villages on Ometepe, although in "another time" (otro tiempo) there had been more people on the island (Oviedo 1976:368). Since Oviedo wrote at a fairly early date, this may have referred to a pre-contact depopulation of the island, but it is also likely that there had already been some population attrition through disease and Spanish militarism.

As a means of control, the encomienda system took advantage of the highly structured indigenous chiefdoms found on the Pacific Coast, which incorporated a precontact native tribute system. The Spanish crown received a substantial portion of all tribute, and tribute demands were excessively heavy, creating great hardship on individual Indians and Indian village populations. Corruption, excessive demands for tribute, and the small remaining Indian population made the encomienda system unstable and ultimately self-defeating. Its worst provisions were banned by the Spanish Crown in the 1540s, although it persisted in some form until the 18th century, much later than in other areas of Spanish control (Newson 1987:94-101, 107-108, 150).

Oviedo makes no mention of visiting the island himself, noting that he saw the "hill" [of Ometepec or Concepcion] clearly one day when he was passing the night at the estancia or ranch of Diego de Mora on the Rivas mainland. A man named Aviles told him that he had been at the estancia for two years and had only seen the summit so clearly one other time, as the summit was usually cloud-covered. In addition, when Oviedo describes the island with its two hills, he never says that Ometepec/Concepción was a volcano, perhaps indicating

Although there are few details, the island of Ometepe soon came under the encomienda system. As early as the late 1520s either Pedrarias Dávila or Diego López Salcedo, both conquistadors and early governors of Nicaragua, granted a deed of encomienda on Ometepe at Guizalnigalpa to Diego Machuca de Zuazo (Werner

2 This may be a typographical error, as tizando, means chalking. The word in this context should probably be tizoneando, “poking or stirring up a fire.”

30

The Ethnohistory of Ometepe Island 2000:78). Guizalnigalpa is the first village or settlement name that we know of on Ometepe. Its location is uncertain. Diego Machuca was in Nicaragua by 1528 or 1529. He was cousin and eventual enemy of another early governor, Rodrigo de Contreras, who took away this and another encomienda from Machuca, probably in the early 1540s. His widow, Catalina Gutierrez, sued for their return, but it is not known whether they were recovered (Werner 2000:78). Although not referenced, Matilló Vila (1973:43) says that Ometepe was given in encomienda by Emperor Carlos V to Juan de Perea on April 13, 1537, and later to Luis de la Rocha, a resident of Granada.

(5) 1 almud “de tierra de aji”, probably chilis (6) 2 arrobas of fish (7) 6 petates [grass or fiber mats] (8) 2 hamacas [hammocks] (9) 2 Indians for service during summer Moyogalpa’s tribute requirements were (Werner 2000: 263): (1) 6 fanegas of corn [maize] (2) 2 fanegas of beans (3) 0.5 fanega of cotton (4) 50 painted sheets [woven cotton sheets, apparently decorated or painted] (5) 36 chickens (6) 20 cargas (probably carguillas) of salt

In 1548 the first systematic compilation of information (tasacíon) about Nicaragua was made. This invaluable resource listed encomiendas, their population numbers, and tribute assessment at that point in time. Locations and village names are often absent, but Werner (2000) has organized and analyzed most of this information with suggested associated villages. The 1548 tasacíon lists two encomiendas on Ometepe: Isla de Nicaragua and Moyogalpa. One confirms Matilló Vila’s information: Luis de la Rocha, one of the surviving members of the original conquering army of Hernandez de Cordoba (1524), is listed as having the encomienda “Isla de Nicaragua” which had 109 tributary Indians and 447 total inhabitants in the encomienda or village (Werner 2000:104, 210, 279). The other was the encomienda of Moyogalpa, in the hands of Juan or Joan Ysquierdo, with 55 tributary Indians and 226 total inhabitants (Werner 2000:263, 298). This was probably located near the present-day town of Moyogalpa at the west end of Concepción. No other information is offered about ownership or dates of acquisition of the encomiendas. It is likely, however, that de la Rocha, a surviving conquistador, had precedence. He was apparently also quite wealthy, having another four encomiendas on the mainland and having in 1548 the largest number of tributary Indians (323) of the 61 encomenderos listed (Werner 2000:102-104). Werner (2000:78) speculates that the encomienda “Isla de Nicaragua” is the same as Guizalnigalpa, which seems likely.

Isla de Nicaragua was the only encomienda listed in Nicaragua that was required to produce chiles (Werner 2000:110). After analyzing and comparing types of tribute produced by Chorotega and Nicarao villages, Werner (2000:117) concluded that the Chorotega were the “masters in artesanal production of vegetable fibers and pottery.” The fact that the Isla de Nicaragua encomienda was required to produce fiber mats, hammocks and hennequin, while Moyogalpa was not, might suggest that the population of Isla de Nicaragua was Chorotega. The evidence is, however, a bit flimsy. During the latter half of the 16th century and throughout the 17th century, colonialization was gradually consolidated with the growth of large agricultural estates—haciendas—and increasing trade in agricultural goods. From 1549 Indian labor services for encomenderos were no longer obligatory, but labor was then organized into the repartimiento system, in which Indian villages were required to make available certain numbers of people for particular time periods and specific wages to the haciendas (Newson 1987:12; 138). The burdens were generally onerous and excessive, with the Spanish crown also continuing its Indian tribute demands into and throughout the 18th century (Newson 1987:275). Forms of the repartimiento system continued even into the 19th century, because of "the shortage of labor and the unprofitability of economic enterprises in Nicaragua" (Newson 1987:277). After 1548 the Indians of the settlement of Nicaragua [probably in the area of Rivas, the lands of Chief Nicaragua] became a part of the repartimiento, and Matilló Vila (1973:43) suggests that Ometepe fell under this jurisdiction. For whatever reason, a later census or tasación of 1581 omits any settlements or villages on Ometepe (Werner 2000:160, 163). In 1586, Ponce mentioned that Guatusos lived on Ometepe and Solentiname (Rabella 1995:18). This must be seen as a group separate from the Chorotega and Nicarao, but which villages and where is uncertain, although Navarro Genie (2007:66) speculates that they may have had a village on Maderas.

Ometepe’s tribute requirements were substantial and probably reflect the difference in size of the two encomiendas, but also perhaps some village specialization. Isla de Nicaragua was required to furnish tribute of (Werner 2000:279-280): (1) 10 fanegas3, 5 fanegas of corn [maize] to be planted in Nicaragua, possibly meaning the mainland by San Jorge. (2) 2 fanegas of cotton (3) 100 naguas [skirts or petticoats?] (4) 50 arrobas of niacin [henequen, used for twine] 3

A fanega was either a dry measurement of about a bushel or 100 pounds or a land measurement of about 1.5 acres. The size of an almud is a bit unclear, but is believed in this case to be 1/12 of a fanega. An arroba was about 25 pounds. A carga varied in size at some encomiendas but Werner assumes it is 50 pounds and a carguilla about 5 pounds (Werner 2000:210-211).

In the tasación of was listed with 62 192 people, while and about 65 total

31

1685 the pueblo of Isla de Ometepe tributary Indians and a total of about Moyogalpa had 21 tributary Indians Indians (Werner n.d.:29). This was a

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island drop in population of ~42% and ~28% respectively from the figures given in the tasación of 1548. A third village, Cuyalingalpa, is listed between Isla de Ometepe and Moyogalpa, so is probably also on the Concepción side of the island. This village had 39 tributary Indians and about 121 total Indians (Werner n.d.:29).

generally was a shortage of secular priests because of the poverty of many Indian communities (Newson 1987:116; 190). Newson (1987:116) notes that, at least during much of the 16th century, "with the exception of the suppression of human sacrifice, Christian instruction did not fundamentally alter Indian religious beliefs and practices, and out of sight of the Spaniards they continued to hold their own religious ceremonies and to respect their own religious leaders." In the eastern or South American zone, tribal peoples had less organized religion, which at first appeared advantageous for Christian conversions, but ultimately seems to have made conversions more difficult. Indians in the Mesoamerican or Pacific Zone had at least familiarity with religious structures, an organized religion, and a priesthood, all of which were lacking among tribal groups (Newson 1987:200).

The expansion of the haciendas inevitably alienated Indian lands, gradually forcing Indians into the wage economy. Colonization and appropriation of Indian lands by land grants and direct purchase continued throughout the 17th century, with movement south and east into the grasslands of Chontales province, east of the lake, and south down the Isthmus of Rivas and Nicoya (Newson 1987:138). Such developments may have put pressure on the remaining Indians on Ometepe, since it is unlikely that such a fertile island would have been ignored. It is unclear, however, whether Ometepe was subject to or included within any private haciendas during this period. In 1701 the Spanish crown had taken over vacant encomiendas, apparently continuing to require Indian tribute to the government and in 1718 finally abolished encomiendas as personal grants to individuals (Newson 1987:152, 272). It is likely that the Spanish government maintained the Ometepe encomiendas during this period. Newson (1987:140) cites a 1709 order of the Governor of Nicaragua that the Indians of the village of Nicaragua (on the mainland of Rivas) and on Ometepe Island should "produce vanilla and achiote", which were used, respectively, for "flavoring and coloring chocolate". High prices for vanilla in Europe may have created this demand.

Late in the 16th century Spanish missionary orders, mainly Mercedarians and Franciscans, were permitted to operate in Nicaragua with the primary goal of converting Indians in areas outside of Spanish control. For the most part this activity focused on northern Nicaragua and the highlands to the east of the Pacific zone. Ciudad Real (1976:224) relates that in 1586 the Franciscans had a convent on Ometepe, where two friars were residing. How successful they were and how long they stayed is unknown. It must have been a lonely life. By the end of the 16th century, the Mercederian order had established a convent in Granada, and at least by 1663 seems to have taken over from the Franciscans on Ometepe, and were working in Indian villages there. The Franciscans, however, were once more ensconced on the island during the 18th century, but in what villages, how intensively, and how effectively is unknown (Newson 1987:167-169; 190-191; 299). It is quite likely that missionary control there, as in other areas, included enforcing tribute requirements from Indian villages.

The process of Christianization and missionization was another mechanism of Indian control, although it apparently had variable success throughout the first 200 years of Spanish domination. During the conquest, reports of mass baptism in one Indian town or another were reported, but it is likely that these were political moves on the part of the leaders or caciques and resulted in few real conversions during the early period.

"destroyed many idols and oratories and burned chapels and temples of the Indians, and he placed crosses along all the roads, in the squares, and in high places where they could be clearly seen and built churches and placed in them images of Our Lady and crucifixes and holy water; and with most of the caciques he left young ladinos to instruct the Indians in the Lord's prayer and Ave Maria" (Oviedo 1959 4 lib.42 cap 4:383, quoted in Newson 1987:115).

The effectiveness of Christian teaching was problematic. Remesal (1932:169, cited by Navarro Genie 2005:136) relates that on Easter of 1600, he observed an Indian ceremony on an island in the lake, probably Ometepe. The participants, with painted faces, danced on a beach near where an alligator was swimming. Although no one had been seen to enter the lake, a man finally emerged from the water, whom people then reverently touched on his chest and shoulders. Remesal thought this event represented a diabolical transformation. Navarro Genie (2005:136) accurately identifies this animal to man change as clearly within a shamanic tradition. It is also interesting to note the Easter date and the possibility that this traditional transformation ceremony might well have begun to incorporate or adapt portions of the Christian resurrection story.

Christian ceremonies following the Christian calendar were instituted, but conversions were often superficial, aspects of Christianity were unclear to Indians, and their poor treatment by the Spanish probably contributed to difficulties in obtaining conversions. In addition, there

It appears that idols were often hidden. There were complaints about "drunken fiestas in celebration of various saints at which the Indians reverted to their pagan practices..." (Newson 1987:177). And Newson (1987: 192) speculates,

Indian religious practices, particularly human sacrifice, were abhorrent to the Spanish, and Oviedo records how Fray Bobadillo

32

The Ethnohistory of Ometepe Island present-day Alta Gracia)5. There was a church there and several Franciscans (Zuñiga 1996:202). The pueblo had a total of 161 families, comprising 805 people who were in communion with the church. Only Moyogalpa was totally ladino (Matilló Vila 1973:45). People from Solentiname were also living on the island, but no location is given (Morel de Santa Cruz 1967, cited in Navarro Genie 2007:66). Navarro Genie (2007:66) thinks that this supports a fourth village on the island, probably that on Maderas, as mentioned above. Since figures for Moyogalpa were not given and it is likely that there were other scattered settlements on the island, the total population was undoubtedly close to 1000 people.

Thus, although Christian symbols of religious adherence dominated aboriginal ones, Indian beliefs probably remained in essence aboriginal with aspects of Christianity grafted onto them. Hence they probably added the Virgin Mary and Jesus Christ to the host of gods they already worshiped, ignoring the concept of monotheism that Christianity demanded. Boyle (1868:48) relates that in Granada even in the mid19th century, when there was a revolution or threat of one, the wide mouth of an idol, called "La Boca" was every morning found "crammed with flowers, which the watchful priests remove at daylight." In the 1870s some of the Indians on Ometepe also resisted revealing the locations of their idols (Bransford 1881:7). This may represent some retention of indigenous religious knowledge, or at least serious syncretism, until quite late.

Civil government for the indigenous people was led by a cacique (or chief), two alcaldes, and four Indian regidores (Matilló Vila 1973:114). Alcaldes (translated today as mayors) at that time were responsible for making arrests and punishing minor offenses. Both alcaldes and regidores were ostensibly elected, and collected tribute, supervised markets and maintained public buildings, among other duties, and were community contact points for the Spanish. Both of these offices had been instituted by the Spanish partially to undermine native authority (Newson 1987:114, 184). Ladinos (probably including Spanish and mestizos) were under the authority of a judge based in Rivas (Matilló Vila 1973:45).

During the mid-17th century an important religious institution came into existence called cofradías, religious brotherhoods. Newson (1987:177) relates that in 1655 "each convent and Indian parish had two cofradías and that each cofradía possessed a cattle ranch." Cofradías were found among the Spanish, mestizo, and Indian populations and were especially important in the "economic, social, and religious life of Indian villages" (Newson 1987:291). Members were charged dues and land was purchased using these funds, with work done in common. Much of the popularity of the cofradías may have come from the fact that members seem to have been exempt from work under the repartimiento (Newson 1987:177). At a time when Indians were losing their land, the ability to buy land must also have been quite important, and Newson (1987:192, 288) speculates that their rapid growth was a response to the dissolution of Indian communities and a way to maintain corporate Indian identity and economic security. This institution continued in prominence well into the 18th century. Matilló Vila (1973:43) says that there were rich cofradías on Ometepe by 1652, but gives no details about their workings or establishment. 5.2

Interestingly, Morel's report also noted that the island possessed a company of Indian archers. If the island’s Indians were under direct control of the Spanish crown, as seems likely, these may have been in service to the government. Morel also stated that there was a settlement of Indians from Solentiname living on the island. Cattle, cacao, corn or maize, vegetables, and fruit were major products of the island. In addition, the Indians made very good baúles [ ?] and baskets [papeleras] from a reed (junco) that grew in the mountains, which they sold in Granada and other towns. Indigo was also produced on the island and exported to Mexico (Matilló Vila 1973:45). Navarro Genie (2005:136, citing Romero Vargas [1977:87]) gives one of the few direct mentions of Maderas during the 18th century. It was reported that two hundred Caribes (possibly from the Caribbean coast) had been moved to Chontales on the east side of the lake in the 1730s, and in 1759 had tried to settle on Maderas. Because of violent conflicts with a neighboring village they had been forced to return to Chontales. The native inhabitants (whoever they were) must, therefore, have been fiercely resistant to occupation on the Maderas side of the island.

Ometepe in the 18th Century

By 1751 Ometepe was under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Foreign Vicariate, based in San Jorge on the Rivas coast opposite Ometepe (Matilló Vila 1973:43). This probably meant the Franciscans, because a Franciscan convent was built in the town of Alta Gracia in 1764, and lasted until 1835 (Matilló Vila 1973:44). We know that Ometepe commanded some ecclesiastical attention, for in 1752, Bishop of Nicaragua Pedro Morel de Santa Cruz visited the island (Newson 1987:286, Figure 8). Morel stated in his report that, disembarking in Moyogalpa, he went to the main pueblo, composed of two parts, Hastagalpa y Consonigalpa4 (probably the

5 Hamilton Silva (1995:17-18) states that Astagalpa and Cosonigalpa were the names of two tribes that lived adjacent to each other, divided by a road. They fought over power, with the Astagalpas displacing the Cosonigalpa or Cotziningalpas (a later name) to areas north and south of present day Altagracia. Unfortunately he gives no citation for this information.

4 This sounds much like the old encomienda of Guizalnigalpa, but so does the unknown location of Cuyalingalpa. Whether these are the same is unknown.

33

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island The world political scene also had its impact on Nicaragua during the 17th and 18th centuries. French and English corsairs, often at the service of their governments, attacked Spanish fleets and ports on the Caribbean coast of Honduras, creating a shift to ports on the Pacific Coast of Nicaragua. Granada in the 17th and 18th century was accessible via Rio San Juan, which flowed from the lake to the Caribbean. Granada thus became an important and rich shipping port with many goods from all over Central America finding their way there (Newson 1987:129-130, 148-149). It was also a continuing target of pirates. In 1665 John Davis, an English pirate, was the first to penetrate the lake via Rio San Juan, using canoes. After sacking Granada, Davis retreated with his booty and prisoners, laying over on Ometepe, where he traded the prisoners for meat (Arellano 1992:98-99; Incer 2003:4-5). Ometepe would have been in sight of any vessels coming from Rio San Juan, but how many others stopped to investigate or land is unknown.

events, Kemble captured prisoners from Spanish crafts on the San Juan River near the lake. Kemble states: I find eight of them to be Indians, and most of them of a Village on the Lake, which, by my instructions, I am ordered to endeavor to cultivate their friendship; It's called Ometepe. Two of them are Pilots Employed by the King of Spain from Granada and Back; I will therefore keep these Indians here. I told them the King of England did not send his Army to make War on the poor Indians, but to redeem them from Slavery of the Spaniards; that if they would remain quiet they should not be disturbed in their persons or property, and be protected by the Arms of England and live free of tribute. This seems to give them Spirits, but one of the Pilots seemed to agree to serve us with a good deal of Reluctance. He is one of the Indians of Ometepe Island, but lives at Granada, having a wife there (Kemble 1885:223).

The English began their settlement of the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua in the 1630s at the sites of Cabo de Gracias a Dios in the north and Bluefields in the south. Rather than colonizing, the English were primarily interested in the area because of trade, and by the early 18th century had allied themselves with the Zambo-Miskitos, a mixed race group, probably formed of Sumu Indians and black slaves shipwrecked in 1641. English control of the coast, particularly through their encouragement of Miskito dominance and acquisition of firearms, ensured that the Spanish would not be a factor there, and, indeed, the Spanish (and later Nicaraguan government) never gained a secure foothold there until the late 19th century. The Miskito were an aggressive group and became dominant on the Atlantic Coast and its hinterlands by the early 18th century. In return for trading rights, the English made the Mosquito Coast a protectorate. This would have had little impact on the Pacific Coast, except for the fact that Miskito and other Indian groups raided highland missions and mining areas, effectively stopping the Spanish expansion to the eastern highlands and Atlantic watershed, and the Miskito are known to have raided into Chontales as far as the east shore of Lake Nicaragua (Newson 1987:148, 202-205; 261).

On April 27, 1780 Kemble interviewed two of the Indians--Antonio Renomdes and Baltezar Condego. Although regrettably brief, the interview does provide a glimpse of Ometepe. Renomdes worked for the Spanish as a pilot on a boat going between Granada and Rio San Juan. Kemble asked him about Ometepe and was told that the island was "entirely Inhabited by Indians" (Kemble 1885:224). Baltazar Condego, another pilot, said that he was from Ometepe and that there were about a thousand Indians on the island, including men, women, and children, and that the only Spaniard on the island was a priest (Kemble 1885:225). In contrast to Renomdes, Condego reported that there were two towns on the island, both on the western end of the island [i.e., on the Concepción side], "One of Indians and the Other Mestizes" ... and "the Mestizes are on the Water side and near the Middle of the Island on the North side, the Indian Town inland" (Kemble 1885:226). The mestizo town on the "Water side" was undoubtedly the town of Moyogalpa, while the inland town may have been Alta Gracia, both still the major communities on the Concepción side of Ometepe. Condego was asked how many houses were on the island and he replied, "They are thatched and small, but cannot say how many" (Kemble 1885:226). He said that no Spanish soldiers had been ordered to the island (Kemble 1885:227).

English-Spanish rivalries continued to play out into the late 18th century. Another mention of Ometepe comes to us as a result of a British naval expedition to Nicaragua in 1780-1781. It was initiated by the governor of Jamaica, General John Dalling, and led by Lt. Colonel Stephen Kemble, a North American from New York, who was loyal to the British during the American Revolution. The expedition’s task was to reduce the Spanish Main and occupy Nicaragua. In particular, it was to seize control of the San Juan River and the Spanish fort on the river near its mouth on Lake Nicaragua, as well as capture Granada and Leon and the coastal port of Realejo (now called Corinto). Although the expedition was plagued by illness and shortages of rations and supplies, it did sail up the river, capturing and eventually destroying the fort, and then into Lake Nicaragua (Kemble 1885). During these

Kemble also asked Condego whether he could get the Indians to "remain Neutral" and was told that he thought "the Indians would agree to that, as they are very poor, and paying tribute Yearly without knowing for what" (Kemble 1885:226). Their subsistence was based on "Cattle, Corn or Maize, Plantains and Stock" (Kemble 1885:226). The reduction of villages from Oviedo's account of eight or nine in the early 16th century to the two or three in the

34

The Ethnohistory of Ometepe Island 1770s is striking. By the 18th century, however, the Indian population of Nicaragua had rebounded slightly from the ghastly decline of the 16th and early 17th century, although the figures appear to have varied greatly by area and an increasing mestizo (mixed Indian/Spanish) population was confusing the figures. Newson (1987:315) estimates, based on a number of sketchy population figures derived from episcopal visits in 1746 and 1752 and from tribute lists drawn up in 1759, that families averaged about 5.1 people, in which case the 1000 person estimate given by Baltazar Condego would have meant approximately 196 families living on the island at that time, a figure not far from the estimate based on Bishop Morel’s figure above.

the priest, the island must, at the same time, have been relatively isolated from day-to-day Spanish interference, although it is quite possible that the Spanish priest was responsible for accounting for tribute. Newson (1987:287-296) has discussed quite extensively the effects of the tribute system on Indian villages during the 18th century. Tributary demands for goods and labor continued and at the same time Indians lands were being alienated by increasing colonization. Because of this "many individuals abandoned their villages in search of wage labor" (Newson 1987:287). Although we do not know the life history of the two pilots whom Kemble interviewed, we do know that they were both living away from their villages and undoubtedly employed for wage labor. Whether this was a requirement of the crown, a necessity for survival, or a life choice is unknown. Ometepe Indians were probably desired as pilots because of their knowledge of currents between the mainland and the island and perhaps the east side of the lake. In the 1980s, while working on nearby Zapatera Island, I observed local islanders still paddling dugout canoes between the islands, entailing knowledge of the water's currents and great strength.

In the 1760s the Spanish crown ordered a detailed enumeration of tributary Indians and in 1776 a census, but the extant results show only summary counts and often are confusing as to jurisdiction. Using a number of these sources, however, Newson (1987:316-319) has projected as accurately as possible population figures for years from 1676 through 1816-1817. Unfortunately Newson does not give a village breakdown of population and in her comparison of populations between 1676 and 1817 has apparently included Ometepe within the count of the jurisdiction of Granada. Under the 1816-1817 number, though, she notes that Isla Ometepe is missing in that year from the Granada jurisdiction count from that period, but says that it "probably possessed 400 Indians" (Newson 1987:317). This number is much smaller than that given by Bishop Morel in 1752 and the 1000 that Baltazar Condego reported in 1780, and may be too low unless there had been a recent serious exodus or decline of the Indian population. It is likely that a large number of mestizos or ladinos had moved to the island, settling around Moyogalpa, and these may also have confused the various estimates.

Kemble (1885:map) apparently spent considerable time on the lake, mapping rivers and islands. He must not have landed or even approached Ometepe too closely, however, for his map shows "Ometepec" and "La Madera" as two separate islands. 5.3

Ometepe in the 19th Century

Nicaragua gained its independence from Spain, along with the rest of Central America in the early 1800s, but it is likely that there were few real changes on Ometepe as a result of the new political situation. Little information is available about the island until the mid-19th century.

In this regard, the captive Condego's statement that one of the villages was mestize or mestizo is of interest. Moyogalpa is the closest safe boat landing point to the Rivas mainland and is still the major point of embarcation. It would thus have been the point of greatest contact with the Spanish population, as well as the main commercial spot, perhaps resulting either in a SpanishIndian mix or attracting a mixed population. That the Indian pilot made a clear reference to its mestizo population indicates awareness of a cultural distinction and separateness from the Indian population. His statement that there was only one Spaniard on the island indicates also that he was making a distinction between the mestizo, Indian, and Spanish populations.

The California gold rush, beginning in 1849, suddenly brought thousands of international travelers to Nicaragua, who, landing on the Atlantic Coast from New York or Europe, chose to cross the isthmus rather than go the longer and perhaps more dangerous ships passage around the tip of South America. From the Atlantic Coast, many journeyed up the San Juan River by steamer into Lake Nicaragua and to Granada, and then made a land crossing by horse or cart to the port of Realejo. The trip was arduous and sometimes malaria ridden, but much shorter in time and distance than going around Cape Horn. In 1851 enterprising New York financier Cornelius Vanderbilt obtained a concession from the Nicaraguan government to run the steamship line, the Accessory Transit Company, up the San Juan River to Lake Nicaragua, essentially controlling the financial gains from this early tourism. One author says that a few sailors deserted from Vanderbilt's Transit Company and came to Ometepe, speculating that perhaps some of the blue or light green eyes and brown hair of the some of the islanders were the result (Paez 1999:15).

Although Kemble's interview with his Indian captives leaves us with more questions than answers, it does give clues to the situation on Ometepe at that historical point. It confirms that the island's Indians were still participating in the tribute system, with resulting hardship and impoverishment. The subsistence list is quite basic, and indicates a reliance on traditional foods, with the introduction of cattle one aspect of a slightly changed economic focus. If there was only one Spaniard, probably

35

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island

This mid-century contact stimulated Nicaragua's interest in the outside world and the outside world's interest in Nicaragua. An odd assortment of travelers, scientists, and adventurers came to Nicaragua—and a few of them to Ometepe.

Woeninger did give Squier some information about antiquities on the island. The most remarkable was that some form of indigenous religious practice persisted well into the 19th century: Amongst the various aboriginal relics which Mr. Woeniger had collected, on the island of Ometepec, was one of considerable interest...It is of stone, about fourteen inches in length, and eight high, and seems intended to be a representation of some animal couchant. It was carefully preserved by the Indians at the summit of a high, secluded point of rocks, where they secretly resorted to pour out libations before it, and to perform rites, the nature of which none would ever reveal. For more than fifty years the padres sought to discover this idol, but without success. Recently, however, its place had been ascertained; it was seized and would have been thrown into the lake, had not Mr. Woeniger promised, if placed in his hands, to remove it from the island forever. It is now in the Museum of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington" (Squier 1853:Vol. 2:92).

Squier's visit to Ometepe about 1850 produced comments about antiquities, but unfortunately little social information (Squier 1856:Vol. 2). While working on Zapatera Island, however, he relates, "During our absence, a weather-bound canoe, with Indians from Ometepec, discovering our boat, had put in beside us. They were loaded with fruit for Granada, and 'walked into' our good graces by liberal donations of papayas, merañons, oranges, pomegranites, zapotes, etc. They were small but well-built men, with more angular features than the Indians of Leon, and betraying a different stock. It will be seen, as we proceed, that they are of Mexican origin. All had their heads closely shaved, with the exception of a narrow fringe of hair around the forehead, extending from one ear to the other— a practice which has become very general among the people" (Squier 1853:53).

Other Germans seem to have settled on Ometepe about the same time as Woeniger. In Granada Froebel (1861:308-309) made the acquaintance of a man named Campe, from Magdebourg. Although Campe did not make derogatory remarks about the Indians, he did tell Froebel that one had to be on guard in their vicinity and that, although he had an establishment on Ometepe, he preferred to live with his family in Granada. Froebel says that Campe later abandoned his place on the island, but this is in doubt, since, as will be seen, his widow was still living on the island 20 years later. This man told Froebel that Campe was held in so much regard by the Indians of the island that they called him "the king of Ometepe" (Froebel 1861:309).

That there was an increasing number of foreigners coming to the island is indicated by the fact that Squier also met in Rivas a U.S. citizen of German origins, a Mr. Woeninger, who had lived on Ometepe for a number of years, trying to establish a cotton estate. He had cleared land and begun cultivating cotton, relying on Indian labor, and had imported machinery for cleansing and manufacturing cotton. Woeninger told Squier that "the Indians, perhaps excited by envious or evil-minded persons, grew idle and unmanageable. And one day, during his absence, a drunken party of them entered his house, violated and murdered his wife, (daughter of a professor in one of the colleges of Pennsylvania) and then set fire to the building. Some of the miscreants were taken, identified, and shot. Mr. W., notwithstanding this terrible blow, persevered in his enterprise, but with bad success, and was himself finally attacked by a number of his own laborers. He killed one or two, and escaped, abandoning his property on the island" (Squier 1853:Vol. 2:8586).

In spite of problems, a third German (Froebel does not name him) had also settled on Ometepe. This may have been a person named Mayer, as Navarro Genie (2007:93) cites a map by Sonnenstern (1859) that apparently showed a road from Moyogalpa to a Rancho Mayers, where there was a port. This was probably near Alta Gracia. This map also shows a small Indian village at the southeast end of Maderas (Navarro Genie 2007:93). In the mid-19th century Ometepe's quiet was broken by national events. William Walker, the North American "filibuster", with a small band of adventurer/ mercenaries—poorly trained as soldiers—invaded Nicaragua in 1855, first ostensibly to support the Liberal side in one of Nicaragua's many civil wars. His real agenda was to conquer the country and set up a slaveholding state sympathetic to the slave-holders in the United States. His brutal methods and marauding soldiers quickly turned the country and all of Central America against him. After four incursions between 1855 and

A few years later, a German traveller, Julius Froebel, visited Rivas and Ometepe and heard about Woeninger, who, he was told, was a native of Hamburg, Germany. Froebel also recounts the deaths of Woeninger's family, and says that the previous autumn, Woeninger himself had had his throat cut by Indians (Froebel 1861:308). Encroachment on Indian land, Woeninger’s poor treatment of his laborers, or both could have precipitated such violence.

36

The Ethnohistory of Ometepe Island 1860, the destruction of Granada by his forces, and his eventual defeat by a joint Central American army led by Costa Rican general José Maria Cañas, Walker was captured and executed in September of 1860.

article apparently referred to the men captured by Tyler. Walker executed two of the men, but not the priest. There were no reports of whether or how many other islanders had been killed.

Ometepe was directly involved in Walker's drama and there are a number of extant first-hand accounts by members of Walker's "army" that mention Ometepe. Alf DeShields was 18 years old when he first saw Lake Nicaragua. Writing many years later he clearly remembered his impressions, "The lake at first sight appeared simply and bountiful with the extinct volcano, Ometepa [sic], standing almost in the center and the many small islands scattered about covered with tropical trees, the great ugly alligators rolling in the water like so many canary logs, made the site [sic] truly grand" (DeShields 1910:1-2).

As a result of the uprising, Walker appointed a "foreigner", Charles Meyer [probably the Mayer on Sonnenstern’s map], as Governor of Police on Ometepe (Bolaños-Geyer 1991:Book 4:63). But Indian disturbances continued. On July 15, 1856, 1st Lieutenant Nicolas Trap, 28 years old, said that his company "left for Ometepe that night to quell an insurrection" (Trap interview, cited in Bolaños-Geyer 1991:Book 5:361). Trap was wounded by a rifle bullet in the skirmish. He was apparently in Company C, 1st Infantry, led by a Captain Baldwin, which was reported to have gone to Ometepe on July 16, 1856 to "quash an Indian insurrection" (Bolaños-Geyer 1991:Book 4:85). On July 21st one of the soldiers, Charles Callahan, reported, "The difficulty with the Indians in Ometepe...has been suppressed. It was owing to the machinations of one of the priests of the island, who has been arrested and brought to this city [Granada]" (quoted in Bolaños-Geyer 1991:Book 4:85). Whether it was the same priest, mentioned above, is unknown.

Ometepe was apparently not a peaceful haven, for another filibuster, James C. Jamison, stated that shortly after his arrival in Granada early in 1856 his company was "ordered to the island of Ometepe in Lake Nicaragua, to suppress a disturbance among its Indian population" (Jamison 1909:67). It appears that the disturbance died down quickly, so his company never went to Ometepe, going instead to Masaya where Jamison took command of the company and where there was no active trouble (Jamison 1909:69).

By November of 1856, Nicaraguan and Costa Rican forces were seriously pressing Walker's small army, so he decided to evacuate Granada. Walker's hospital in Granada, a nightmare of men wounded and sick from cholera, living in horrific conditions, was moved to Ometepe on November 19 (Walker 1860:313-314). Some 200 casualties were loaded on the decks of steamers San Carlos and La Virgin. One steamer picked up additional wounded in Virgin Bay, then went to Ometepe (Scroggs 1916:258). Scroggs (1916:259-260) recounts:

What precipitated that particular uprising is unknown; but Walker used steamboats on the lake (confiscated from Vanderbilt's Transit Company), which stopped at Ometepe for wood, perhaps in the Moyogalpa area, since this landing was close to Rivas. Walker must have stationed a contingent of men on the island to cut wood and/or occupy it, for when "the Costa Ricans occupied Virgin Bay [La Virgin on the Rivas mainland southwest of Ometepe] in April [1856], the Indians in Ometepe revolted against Walker and burnt about $500 worth of wood that had been cut on the island for the use of the lake steamers. They also killed a filibuster who had been left behind at Rivas and made his way over to the island after the battle [of Rivas]" (New Orleans Picayune, June 9, 1856:1, quoted in Bolaños-Geyer 1991:Book 3:375378). The April 1856 uprising was one of several uprisings led by Legitimist partisans, including in Chontales, Matagalpa, Segovia, and other areas (BolañosGeyer 1991:Book 4:93).

Ometepe was a volcanic island used as an Indian reservation and closed to white men unless the aborigines consented to their entrance. Walker disregarded the Indians' privileges and chose the little village of Muigalpa, on the western side of the island and thirteen miles from the mainland, for his hospital site...When the steamer received its gruesome cargo on November 19 and headed for the island the odor was so fearful that the attendants were driven to the hurricane deck. At the end of the trip several of the sufferers were dead, and a number were dying...No provision had been made for their coming. The village was a quarter of a mile inland, and the patients had to be laid on the beach and carried bodily, a few at a time, to the village. The natives fled at the approach of the strangers, and the sick and wounded were placed in the abandoned huts...In five days there were thirtysix deaths and a number, delirious or starving, tottered off into the woods and disappeared. The sight of these gaunt spectors, crying for food or raving with delirium, filled the natives with terror.

Early in May 1856 Walker sent a company of 25 men, led by Lieutenant Charles Tyler, to Ometepe to capture the killers and to impress Indians to cut wood. Tyler returned to Virgin Bay with three prisoners, including "an old priest from Moyogalpa, who was said to have incited the rebellion" (New Orleans Picayune, June 9, 1856:1, quoted in Bolaños-Geyer 1991:Book 3:378). On May 10 the Walker-controlled newspaper, El Nicaragüense (May 10, 1856:6, quoted in Bolaños-Geyer 1991:Book 3:379) reported that "the steamer Virgen has been plying for several days between the port and Ometepec from whence we have received provisions, horses and cattle, and a few subjects for 'tight-rope' performance." The

37

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island A mass grave was dug for the dead. Three days later the steamer returned bringing a contingent of 60 soldiers led by a Colonel Fry, along with several officers and doctors. In addition, came "fifty or sixty American women and children, the families of some German merchants, and a number of native women whose husbands still remained in Walker's service" (Scroggs 1916:260). Even with Fry's men on the island, the mood was uneasy about the situation of Walker's people there. Walker (1860:331) noted,

on the lake, was sighted; it was filled, crushingly, with men, women and children. Few were fully clothed and when Walker had taken them aboard his boat they said they had been adrift all night, without sail or rudder, hoping the wind would carry them away from the accursed island. The Indians had attacked the evening before, firing into the huts and driving the entire company into a panic. Fry's command of sixty men had driven the Indians off and remained on shore; but Walker never knew how many who had fled into the jungle died there.

It was impossible for the enemy, in any numbers, to reach the island, even if they had been able to spare the force from the position they held. But there were constant rumors of barges passing from San Jorge to Ometepe with arms for the use of the Indians on the east side of the island [apparently Maderas]. Knowing well that but few of the Indians on Ometepe could be used against the Americans, even if the Allies had been able to furnish them all with arms, Walker felt confident that no serious attack could be made on the little village where the hospital had, for the time, been fixed.

Shortly thereafter the rest of the Americans and associated hangers-on were evacuated from Ometepe (Scroggs 1916:261; Greene 1937:260). Not long after this evacuation, the allied Central American forces apparently captured Walker's steamboats and occupied the island. A reporter from the New Orleans Picayune reported in January 1857, "The allies evidently have a force stationed on the Island of Ometepe, as they keep the two steamers constantly cruising about" (cited in Bolaños-Geyer 1991:Book 4:289). Some islanders still retain oral history about Walker. One reported that his grandfather had related stories about Walker’s hospital and the attack (Vargas 2006).

Walker was wrong, for on December 1, over 100 Ometepe Indians, "led by the parish priest, Fr. Francisco Tijerino...and armed with a boatload of weapons sent by Cañas from Rivas, raided the village in the darkness" (Bolaños-Geyer 1991:Book 4:187). This may have been the same troublesome priest arrested during the April and July uprisings.

Aside from Walker's drama on Ometepe, an on-going theme in the history of Ometepe was foreign interest in its antiquities. Squier has been discussed and we know that Earl Flint was familiar with and excavated on the island. After the Walker episode, a number of brief descriptions of Ometepe come to us from other European and American gentlemen traveler/scientists who probed its antiquities, a number of whom had spoken with Flint. In the early 1860s, Englishman Frederick Boyle visited Nicaragua and left one of the more interesting and entertaining accounts of life on Ometepe. He also elaborated on the Walker expedition from a point of view sympathetic to the islanders. He relates:

The Indians are reported to have fired into the huts, "causing those who were able to leave to flee in terror out into the darkness. The Indians, however, were only after a chance to plunder the women's trunks and after satisfying themselves with looting they retired at daybreak" (Scroggs 1916:260). A separate account says that, during the attack, "Women and children fled in all directions; the hospital patients overfilled the church. When daylight arrived, the filibuster garrison counterattacked, 'killing about thirty [islanders] and driving the balance off, with the loss of only two [Americans] killed'" (Bolaños-Geyer 1991:Book 4:187). Fry's 60 men had driven the Indians off (Greene 1937:259), but one wonders where Fry's men had been during the attack, because Fry himself reported to Walker that the Indians had been rifling trunks and left at dawn (Walker 1860:332).

From the time of the Spanish Conquest, to Walker's filibustering war, Ometepec was an Indian reservation, governed by its own officers, and unapproachable to settlers of European descent, except by permission of the Indian authorities. Walker, however, with his usual recklessness, did away with those privileges, transforming the island into a hospital for his wounded and a sanctuary for the women and children; the consequence of which measure was, that one morning the Indians came down from Pueblo Grande [Alta Gracia], the principal village, and killed every wounded filibuster they could find, losing, however, three times the number of their own men. It is pleasant to add that the women and children were not harmed (Boyle 1868:Vol. 2: 69-70).

The morning after the attack, on December 2, Walker was in one of the steamboats when it encountered three men in a canoe coming from Ometepe, who reported the attack. They thought it likely that everyone had been murdered. Sometime later, however, they met a barge load of refugees who had left the island (Walker 1860:331-332). Greene (1937:259) describes the scene: Two miles from Omotepe [sic] an iron barge, one of several used by the Accessory Transit Company for lightering cargo and passengers

38

The Ethnohistory of Ometepe Island What is of particular interest in this passage, as in Scroggs' account, is the notion of Ometepe as a "reservation." This may have stemmed from the fact that the island seems to have long been a crown possession with the Indians effectively given considerable independence. Whether there were official land titles granted to the Indians by the crown or later independent Nicaraguan government is uncertain. The island’s isolation may have allowed the Indians there to maintain more of their traditional social and religious practices for a longer period than did those on the mainland. Boyle (1868:Vol. 1:75) says, however, that once the filibusters were overthrown the national government continued to ignore Indian rights, so that non-Indian colonists were beginning to settle on the island "without the old permits from the Indian authorities."

This kindly sect was called 'The Free Lovers,' and its peculiar tenets may thus be guessed...I learned that few of the ladies, and none of the gentlemen, were under forty years of age, and that the younger matrons did not seem at all anxious to return to the States, though perfectly willing to go elsewhere with anybody. Dr. Tyler swindled every one of them that had any money; and, in fact, the whole party seem to have been silly old maids, tottery old gentlemen, or young women anxious not to trouble the New York police. There is great improvement for the mind in contemplating the remains of this sect in 1865. How and why these people ended up on Ometepe may forever be unknown, but the increasing numbers of nonIndians must have made the local people seriously restive. When Boyle wished to cross to Ometepe, he tried to find a canoe to take him, but that was "not to be accomplished without some delay, for the Indians are still very jealous of foreign approach" (Boyle 1868:Vol.2:58). He also recounts (1868:Vol. 1:75):

He notes at another point: At present, however, nine-tenths of the people of Ometepec are Indians of pure blood, men of European, mixed, or negro race settle on the island where they please, and the natives are powerless to assert their just claims. Nevertheless they keep the actual soil, and although unable to hinder the settlement of men from the mainland, they are still powerful enough in their right to prevent the invader from claiming ownership of the land. When a squatter dies, or leaves the island, the ground brought under cultivation returns to the general possession of the Indians and no allowance is made to him or his heirs for the improvements he may have wrought (Boyle 1868: Vol.2:70).

"It was several times remarked to us that fears were to be entertained of serious difficulties to arise from this prolonged illegality. It is thought that the Indians are brooding in their slow, silent way, and that some day a terrible outbreak will take place on Ometepec...They are a people singularly patient, thrifty, and laborious: little inclined towards violence, but indomitable in defense when once they have taken arms.

It is clear from Froebel's and Squier's accounts that a few non-Indians (and non-Nicaraguans) had settled on the island before Walker's time. Much of Boyle's information seems to have come from a Mrs. Campe with whom he spent much time talking and who was living in Moyogalpa. She was undoubtedly the widow of the German that Froebel had met, as she had lived on the island and among the Indians for seventeen years, eight of them before the filibuster war (Boyle 1868:Vol. 2:61, 72). She must, thus, have come to the island in the late 1840s. He unfortunately does not give any indication of how Mrs. Campe made her living or what made her stay.

And, "At present,..the Indians of Rivas and Ometepec are rather celebrated for a cold ferocity which has died out among the more martial people of other provinces" (Boyle 1868:Vol. 2:99). Nevertheless, outsiders continued to visit the island, perhaps attracted by its beauty and its mystery. Boyle accepted an invitation to join a group of American miners who had been prospecting in Nicaragua and who had a large boat: After six hours of sailing we got under the lee of the mountain, where the water lay still as a mirror. After much search, and two hours' pull, we made the landing place of Muyogalpa, where, under the shade of a giant tree, we beached the boat. Leaving two of our party to light the fire, I walked...up a broad and darkening road, bordered with groves of plantain, bread-fruit, papya [sic], orange, zapoté, coyol and cocoa-nut. In the daylight we should have seen pyramids of blossom fencing in every hut, mighty trees clothed with trailing moss, and tender, lace-like vegetation. A lovely wilderness in the village of Muyogalpa--a beauty careless of her wildness,

Boyle (1868:Vol.2:71) also recounts an amusing tale of another group of foreign settlers on the island. A few years before his arrival a "sect" from the United States had settled near Moyogalpa, led by a man named Tyler.6 He had required everyone to put their property in common. Tyler had died the year before Boyle's visit, and the few people still remaining from the settlement were fighting over the property. Boyle checked out the group and reported:

6 One wonders if this could have been the same Tyler who had been in Walker's army and served on the island.

39

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island a wilderness indifferent to its beauty (Boyle 1868:Vol 2:60-61.

Baltazar, two miles from Moyogalpa, and by Don José Angel Luna, who had another hacienda south of Moyogalpa (Bransford 1881:46).

Moyogalpa was further described: "Cane huts, bare yards, fluttering palms, and piles of blossom, line the broad streets; and gold spangled orange trees embower the dwellings" (Boyle 1868:Vol. 2:72). Although fairly large in area, it had only about 250 inhabitants, mostly mestizo (Boyle 1868:Vol. 2:70). The area around Moyogalpa was filled with tobacco fields, including some owned by the local priest who was "a rascal" and was known to have killed an old Indian (Boyle 1868: Vol. 2:82-83).

Bransford visited the far southwestern edge of Maderas at a location called San Francisco where he was shown several sites and petroglyphs (Bransford 1881:59). In addition he apparently saw at least portions of the north side of Maderas close to the Isthmus of Istian: "Of the mountains, Madera has the more aged appearance, with rugged outline and ridged and shaggy sides. Dense forests cover it, except where the rock shows in a few grim patches. There is little arable land on this end of the island, the inhabitants being confined to a few favorable spots near the lake shore. There is a beautiful stream down the north side of the mountain, which, with two small ones in the level connecting slip, constitutes the only running water on the island during the dry season" (Bransford 1881:5).

Although unflattering about the physical appearance of the natives, Boyle was clearly enchanted with the island, extolling its “beauty and the sweet grandeur” (Boyle 1868:Vol. 2:80). He spent time in the jungle and gives the impression that Concepción was much more wooded at that time than it is now. Although he viewed Maderas from a distance, he apparently did not go there (Boyle 1868:Vol. 2:68, 72). He also says, The number of inhabitants is said to be declining even more than on the mainland; but no document upon this, or indeed any other subject, is published by the Government. Formerly this island was more densely populated than any part of Nicaragua, but much land is quite barren. The southern and western shores are seamed and riven in every direction, and the lava-flows of a hundred eruptions are piled-up, one bed above another. At present the twin volcanoes of Ometepec and Madera, which guard its shores, are quite still...(Boyle 1868:Vol. 2:68).

These streams are undoubtedly Rio Balgües, on the north side of Maderas, and the other two Rio Istian and Rio Buen Suceso (discussed in Chapter 2). Because of the absence of springs and streams, Bransford (1881:6) noted that most of the population lived adjacent to the lakeshore, which supplied fresh water and abundant fish. Bransford (1881:6) estimated that there were about 3000 inhabitants on the island with the majority living in the area of Alta Gracia and 500 to 600 in Moyogalpa and a few scattered in other places. It is hard to know how accurate Bransford's population estimate is, but, if relatively accurate and if we assume that Alta Gracia was mainly Indian, would indicate considerable growth of the Indian population and belie Boyle's sense that the population was decreasing. The expansion of haciendas might, however, also have brought additional people to the island.

Boyle's supposition about the formerly dense population may have come from his observations of numerous sites and antiquities during his ten days on the island. Although he does not cite a source, Matilló Vila (1973:45) also states that the population was declining in the 19th century with people leaving to try to find more well-paid work.

Bransford (1881:6-7) says, that there were only "a few families" living on Maderas, and,

Boyle apparently spent most of his time in the Moyogalpa area and the southwest side of Concepción, often in the company of Mrs. Campe looking for artifacts and excavating sites. Some of his site descriptions have been discussed previously.

Most of the people [of Ometepe] are nearly pure-blood Indians with many who have a mixture of Spanish, and a few of partially African stock. Those of mixed race are most numerous at Moyogalpa, where they have come from the mainland in comparatively late years. In physique the Indians are usually rather short, low-browed, with dark copper skin and coarse thick hair. On and near Madera are a few of commanding stature, many of the men being over six feet high, and the women proportionately larger. The head is short, the features strongly marked, with heavy lower jaw and large teeth. I am inclined to believe that these are a remnant of an older tribe inhabiting the island. There are traditions pointing that way, and these people are more reticent and

What passed on Ometepe during the ensuing 10 or 12 years is unknown. J.F. Bransford (1881) then tells us more about the island, particularly about Maderas about which there is almost an historical abyss. Bransford excavated on the island during January through May 1876 (Bransford 1881). Volcan Concepción was at that time still called Ometepec. On Ometepec were growing sugar, coffee, rice, cotton, and indigo, watermelon and some tropical fruit; tobacco was also an important crop (Bransford 1881:6). We know that by this time there were several haciendas on the island, since Bransford worked on and was hosted by owners of the Hacienda de

40

The Ethnohistory of Ometepe Island decades of the 20th century (Lopez Centeño 2001). Whether such influxes displaced prior residents or were integrated into the existing population is unclear. In any case new haciendas on Maderas must have resulted in widespread forest clearing on the lower slopes, the results of which are seen today.

suspicious than the others, seeming still to have reverence for their ancient gods, and showing no disposition to guide me to the idols. Five years later, on New Years Eve of 1882-1883, Carl Bovallius came to Ometepe, spending only a month. Although most of his time was taken up with zoological investigation, he did some digging on Concepción and in the isthmus between the volcanoes. Based in Moyogalpa, he made excursions in different directions, roving on horseback and on foot, but he makes no mention of visiting Maderas (Bovallius 1886). He may have seen at least portions of it, however, as he does say that it was one of the most beautiful of volcanoes, covered with virgin forest from its base up to its summit (Bovallius 1977:238). He observed that Maderas' beach was rockier and less accessible than the northern part of the island and it was, therefore, only lightly inhabited and cultivated (Bovallius 1977:239).

5.4

The 20th Century

There has been little ethnographic work on Ometepe and I have as yet accumulated little direct information about its indigenous people or beliefs in the 20th century. There has probably been a slow process of acculturation, and today many local people still maintain some sense of indigenous identity. It is estimated that in 1920 about 90% of the population on the island was indigenous—4500 out of a total population of 5600. By 1950 that figure had dropped to about 75% (Gould 1997:233, 240). An influx of people from other parts of Nicaragua has undoubtedly diluted the original population, but approximately 90% of the people are of indigenous roots. In 2000 the total population was about 35,000 with 80% living on the Concepción side of the island (Villarreyna Castrillo 2000:39-40). Clearly Maderas still remains a bit isolated from the mainstream.

Of the islanders, Bovallius (1886:5) says only that they are "intelligent and well built Indians...They are now a laborius [sic] and peaceful race, somewhat shy of strangers; in general they speak Spanish, but may be heard occasionally to talk Indian dialect with one another; with regard to the dialect they are, however, extremely unwilling to afford any explanations, generally answering " ["It is very old"; "I don't know anything."]

Manuel Hamilton Silva (1995), an historian of Ometepe, has collected myths and superstitions from the island that reflect its indigenous roots and religious syncretism. Myths, many dealing with witches and their magic and enchantment, probably reflect the shamanistic root of many stories. Superstitions abound, many dealing with enchanted animals and a belief in duendes, pictured as bad spirits (Hamilton Silva 1995:44-52; 2002:107-114). At least one islander in Balgües told me that she believes in witches and named an old woman that she thought was a witch.

The somewhat forbidding terrain—dense forest—and the vaguely unfriendly Indians may have discouraged Bransford, Bovalliius, and others from working on the Maderas side of the island to any extent and perhaps discouraged new settlers from the mainland. It is likely, however, that transportation issues also played a part. There were no roads or even substantial tracks on Maderas until the latter half of the 20th century. With an abundance of sites on Concepción, there were few incentives to work on Maderas.

Hamilton Silva (1995) relates, as does Abel Vargas (2006), an artist from Ometepe, that a remnant of the cofradía system of the 17th century persists, largely in the organization of religious festivals (centered mainly on the patron saints of each village) and in the raising of money for special types of food and drink for these fiestas. In 1995 I witnessed a saint’s day parade in Moyogalpa in which young girls dressed as Indians. Various traditional dances and use of a cylindrical drum are also remnants of earlier traditions (Matilló Vila 1973:48-49). At least one community, Urbaite, on Concepción proclaims that it is indigenous and has Spanish land grant documents (Lopez Centeño 2001).

There is some contemporary memory on the island that there was a movement of people from the archipelago of Solentiname to Ometepe during the 19th century because of an epidemic there. Some of the island names today are similar to family names on Solentiname (Vargas 2006). Matilló Vila (1973:46), who visited the island extensively in the 1960s, stated that the majority of the present population of Maderas originated from Chontales, arriving in 1860 after a serious drought and famine. His information is uncited, so it is unclear from where it derived. Although some families may well have come from Chontales, interviews with residents of the community of Balgües, elicited the information that many of their grandparents had come from the Rivas mainland, brought to Ometepe when some of the large haciendas were opened on the Maderas side of the island for the first time at the turn of the 20th century and in the first

With regard to rock art, the last hint that some understanding of the rock art may have lasted into modern times comes from Matilló Vila (1973:63-64). He relates that in 1942 a young teacher, Carlos Bravo, interviewed Benvenuto Aguirre, who was identified as the last tribal cacique (patriarca-cacique) and the last man who could interpret the meaning of the rock art. He was reported to have interpreted some of the petroglyphs for Bravo, but would not speak about them when Bravo

41

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island wished to take notes. The story may be apocryphal, but, if not, may indicate some carry over of original indigenous knowledge about the rock art into the 20th century. Such retention would be remarkable, however, given over 400 years of cultural disruption. His interpretations or “knowledge” might, more simply, have reflected a more recent incorporation of rock art into modern belief systems. The issue is moot, however, since no one now claims knowledge of the rock art’s meaning.

religious practice and guarding of traditional sites continued until Maderas was opened to haciendas in the 20th century. With only one or two Catholic priests on Ometepe for most of its history and no easy transportation, it is unlikely that they penetrated very deeply into Maderas, whose inhabitants may have been deeply hostile. Unless some families on Maderas still guard oral histories, this story will never be told. What seems clear is that the ethnohistorical information available for Ometepe, particularly for the Maderas side of the island, gives us few clues about the cultural or linguistic identity of the island’s occupants during the historical period. It also fails to cast much light on the makers of the rock art or its meanings.

Throughout the 20th century, the island was affected by the larger political events of the country—dictatorship, revolution, counter-revolution, major land reform, and population migration—but at the same time its isolation also buffered it from the worst excesses of these events. Much ethnographic and ethnohistoric work could be done on Ometepe focused on which families and areas can trace their roots to the original inhabitants and how they have been affected by acculturation. Ometepe’s isolation and tranquility are part of its charm; but within the last 15 years there has been an exponential increase in tourism to Ometepe, bringing many new outsiders and outside influences. How this will change the island’s traditions and way of life has yet to be determined. 5.5

Summary

As an island, Ometepe Island has always been geographically isolated, but not cut off from the events that brought cosmic changes to the indigenous population in historic times. After European contact, the island’s Indians came under a long-lasting tributary relationship with the Spanish crown, but its isolation may have protected its Indian population to some extent from the worst excesses of Spanish rule. It also may have provided a measure of independence that mainland Indians did not have. And the island’s people appear to have fiercely guarded this independence into at least the latter half of the 19th century. There may have been some retention of some form of native religion and perhaps language until well after these had largely disappeared on the mainland. The Maderas side of Ometepe is almost a blank historically. We know that it was much more isolated than Concepción, without even roads until mid-20th century. It was also more densely forested than today. The lack of reports of visits to that side of the island is striking. There are hints from the 16th century that a population different from that of the Chorotega or Nicarao lived on Ometepe, and there are a few references from the 18th and mid 19th centuries to at least one village at the southeast end of Maderas, perhaps of Guatusos7, either from Solentiname or a remnant indigenous population that shared a language with Solentiname. Hints of an unfriendly population there suggest that Maderas could have been a refuge, where at least part of the original population might have retreated from the onslaught of new populations and where some traditional 7 Stone (1977:78-79) says that the Guatusos were probably formed from an amalgamation of Corobici and Voto people after the conquest. Remaining Guatuso speakers now live in Costa Rica.

42

6

SURVEY AND RECORDING METHODS

slopes, inspection was occasionally hindered or made impossible by dense vegetation, but often the survey area contained cultivated fields, which had relatively fair to good ground visibility. An advantage of the multi-year survey was that some fields, impassable one year, were in later years clear of vegetation, allowing inspection.

The Ometepe Project has been conducted in cooperation with and with the permission of the Department of Archaeology of the National Museum of Nicaragua. Its purpose has been to survey for and thoroughly inventory the archaeological sites, particularly petroglyph sites, of portions of Ometepe Island. We chose to focus on the eastern half of the island, topographically dominated by the Maderas Volcano, for a variety of reasons: Important petroglyph sites had been reported there, but in general the archaeology was virtually unknown; the area has fewer people than the western part of the island, making survey somewhat easier; and the logistics of the area were good for a survey. Members of the Cooperativa Carlos Diaz Cajina, a coffee cooperative, welcomed us and provided housing and logistical support at Finca (or Hacienda) Magdalena, the center of their operations. The finca became our home and center point for the survey. Much, although not all, of our survey area has been within a day’s walking distance of Magdalena. 6.1

The upper slopes of Maderas above about 180 meters are very steep and heavily covered in cloud forest. They are logistically and physically difficult (and sometimes impossible) to survey in any kind of systematic way. Much of our survey in these areas followed paths made by coffee workers, who also discovered and sometimes brought petroglyphs to our attention. Our survey did not include areas on the highest slopes leading to the volcanic lagoon at the top of Maderas, but local guides have told us that they have never found petroglyphs around the mouth of the crater lake at the top of the volcano. We learned from later surveys that petroglyphs may exist in areas of the deepest forests and steepest slopes, but finding them is difficult and usually fortuitous.

Site Survey Methods

Whenever possible site boundaries were defined by the presence of cultural features, such as rock and earth mounds, rock alignments, bedrock mortars, and, of course, basalt boulders or clusters of boulders with petroglyphs, and by surface artifacts—usually ceramic scatters and sometimes lithics. As a rule of thumb, artifacts, features, and clusters of petroglyph boulders within about 30 meters of each other were included within the same site. Site boundary delineation was, however, sometimes difficult. The survey area, with many undulating slopes and flatter fields, often contained widely dispersed (although within 20-30 meters of each other) individual petroglyph boulders, which created difficult site mapping conditions. For convenience sake, therefore, site boundaries were sometimes arbitrary, based on topography and distance between petroglyph clusters. Generally petroglyphs and petroglyph clusters within 30 meters of each other and on the same ridge were defined as a site. Accompanying ceramic or lithic scatters were included within these site boundaries where visible. Isolated petroglyphs (one or on one occasion two boulders with no accompanying artifacts) were generally given an isolate number, for example PAO-96-1 (Petroglifo Aislado-Ometepe-96-1; i.e., the first isolated petroglyph found in 1996).

The number of surveyors varied each year from as low as three to as many as 15 persons. During the 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001 and 2004 seasons there were rarely fewer than 12 people and as many as 15. There were normally three to six professional archaeologists in the group, with the rest avocationals who were given some field training prior to and during the surveys. All, including experienced archaeologists, were instructed beforehand about petroglyph recording methods. Survey to date has been largely concentrated in the vicinity of the historic Finca Magdalena, now the property of the Carlos Diaz Cajina Cooperative, located south and east of the community of Balgües on the north slope of Maderas. From Magdalena, our logistical base, we were able to easily access large areas within walking distance. Survey also encompassed the property of various other smaller landholders in the vicinity. Access permission was sought from all landowners. The survey areas for 1995 through 1998, discussed in this study, consisted of two almost rectangular blocs of land (see Map 6). The westernmost area (called here the BalgüesPulman area) is found from Rio Balgües, the only perennial stream in this part of the island, eastward 2.5 km to Quebrada Pulman, an intermittent stream. The Balgües-Pulman survey area extends about 3km northward in a north-south direction from approximately the 180m elevation on the south to Lake Nicaragua on the north. A few selected locations up to an elevation of about 340 meters were also inspected. The second survey bloc— the Punta Gorda-El Corozal area—includes the peninsula of Punta Gorda and extends to Punta El Corozal; this survey section was approximately 2.5km north-south by 2km east-west in area.

A general record for each site was prepared which included an individual site number, site description, location, general environmental data, brief descriptions of artifact and feature types, and a sketch map (Appendix 1). Maps were made using compass and pacing. Each site was designated by a number, such as N-RIO-01, meaning Nicaragua, Rivas (the Department of Rivas), Ometepe, #01. Each boulder with petroglyphs or other features, such as mortars, was then given a feature number (for example, Rasgo 1 or R1) and each culturally modified panel of the boulder given a panel number (for example, Panel 1 or P1). Each feature was plotted on the sketch map. A more abbreviated isolate record was generally filled out for isolated petroglyph boulders.

Survey was as systematic as possible, usually accomplished by walking in parallel transects spaced from 10 to 20 meters apart. On the lower, more gentle 43

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Map 6: Survey Areas (San Jose del Sur 1989 and La Palma 1988, 1:50,000)

44

Survey and Recording Methodology A petroglyph record for each panel was then filled out, a scale drawing made, and photographs taken. Site locations were plotted on 1:50,000 topographic maps (no larger scale maps are currently available in Nicaragua). A hand held Garmin III Plus GPS (Global Positioning System) unit was used beginning in 2001 to more accurately locate sites. Since then, there has been an ongoing effort to relocate and GPS site locations for all sites.

relatively detailed level of petroglyph recording. We hope that in future years, rock art researchers will return to these Ometepe sites and re-photograph and re-record them with what will undoubtedly be greater and greater levels of accuracy as new techniques are found. The Petroglyph Record No one standardized petroglyph record had been used previously in Nicaragua. After perusing numerous examples of petroglyph records used in Nicaragua and in other areas, I created a one-page record to accompany the over-all site record. It incorporated the information generally thought to be basic on most petroglyph forms, but reflected our need to record relatively quickly (Appendix 1). The record includes: site, feature, and panel numbers; feature location (GPS location when available); type of rock; type of petroglyph location (i.e., boulder, bedrock, cave wall, etc.); whether in situ; size of boulder; size of petroglyph area; orientation and inclination of panel; method of production if discernible (pecked, abraded, engraved, etc.); brief description of elements; average depth and width of petroglyph grooves; and description of integrity (including natural and cultural deterioration). Scale drawings and photographs accompany the record. In addition to a description of the site location, Universal Transverse Mercator Grid (UTMG) metric locational coordinates were provided. Over the years the form, although not this basic information, has evolved in format.

After fieldwork, site record and petroglyph record information are entered into a computer database (FileMaker Pro). It is under continual revision. Photographs and sketches are scanned using Adobe Photoshop software. An on-going element list has been developed from the petroglyph information and added to the database to aid motif categorization and future recordation (see Appendix 1). Clean site forms and petroglyph forms with re-drawings and photographs are then generated and submitted with field reports to the Department of Archaeological Research at the National Museum in Managua. Completed site records for 1995 through 1998 have been submitted, while this work for later field seasons is on-going. At completion, raw data, reports, and photographs in CD ROM format are submitted to the Department of Archaeological Research in Managua for archiving. 6.2

Petroglyph Recording Techniques

The Ometepe Archaeological Project was conceived principally as an initial archaeological survey intended to locate and record the variety of sites found on Ometepe. When it became clear that there was an overwhelming number of petroglyphs in the survey area, we had to make a decision about the level of recordation to be completed. We could record sites on a superficial level— mapping and photographing petroglyphs, but not drawing them. Such an approach would have allowed us to cover a much wider area in seven field seasons than we did. It was clear, however, that this might be the only opportunity in the foreseeable future to locate and intensively record a large number of petroglyphs using contemporary recording techniques. Such a large-scale petroglyph survey had not previously been undertaken in Nicaragua. Having the services of a relatively large number of volunteers would allow us to make numerous scale drawings of petroglyph panels, as well as to cover a fairly wide survey area (although not as wide as if no drawings had been made). This was the option we chose.

Photography Petroglyph panels were photographed using a 35mm camera, generally in both color and black and white. Beginning in 1998 we also began taking digital photographs. A metric photographic scale was placed in each photo. A photo record was made for each role of film or digital file. Lighting conditions were often less than ideal for photography. Depending on the time of day sites were encountered, petroglyphs could be in the glare of bright tropical sunshine or shaded by vegetation. In the forest and in banana groves, dappled light was often a problem. A photo reflector was sometimes useful to provide additional reflected light or shading. Perfect lighting was rare and less-than-perfect photographs were often the result. No chalk or other materials were used to enhance petroglyphs for photography. Such materials are unsightly and can cause permanent damage to petroglyphs through chemical action. Rock art researchers consider the use of such materials as destructive (Whitley 2005:27; Lee 1991:13; Hedges 1989:35).

As rock art investigators know, however, the level of detail of rock art recording can be exceptionally intensive. Research at one site can continue for years, allowing researchers to photograph petroglyphs in all light conditions and to minutely record petroglyph designs and manufacturing techniques. Since our research was designed to intensively survey as wide an area and locate as many sites as possible, we did not have the luxury of this level of rock art recording. We feel, however, that we have generally achieved a happy medium—a widespread baseline survey combined with a

A good photograph of a petroglyph is the ideal and is often more accurate in detail than drawings. Better photographs, especially digital photos, sometimes present more detail than was visible to the person making the

45

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua sketch, particularly when dealing with eroded petroglyphs in certain light conditions. Making good photographs of three-dimensional boulders in problematic lighting conditions was, however, extremely difficult. In many cases, photographs and scale drawings complemented each other, each technique providing a check on the other.

the size of the petroglyph, other scales were occasionally used. The degree of curvature of the boulder sometimes created some unavoidable distortion in the drawing. Making sketches was quite time consuming. The time required to complete scale drawings was the primary factor limiting the amount of land that could be surveyed in four to six weeks. In retrospect the use of string grids might have been faster, although not necessarily more accurate. The cost of string grids (US$80/grid) for as many as 15 volunteers a season was also a factor in our decision to forego their use.

Scale Drawings Because of poor light conditions scale drawings sometimes provide more detail than photographs. Drawings, however, can also vary considerably in accuracy, depending on the skill and experience of the recorders and on the type of surface and complexity of the design. It was clear that volunteer recorders gained skills over the course of a field season.

A word should also be said here about our decision to avoid making tracings or rubbings of petroglyphs, rather than scale field drawings. Although tracings on plastic are relatively fast and accurate in the field, we made a pragmatic general decision not to do tracings because of the amount of time needed to create photocopy reductions and subsequent re-drawings, as well as the difficulties in archiving large quantities of plastic at that time at the National Museum. We took advantage of our field volunteers who did most of the stippled re-drawings from their own field sketches each day after survey. In later seasons, however, we did experiment with making a limited number of plastic tracings of several important petroglyph panels that needed more accurate drawings. In retrospect, a judicious use of tracings on some of the more complicated petroglyphs would have been quicker and more accurate than some of the resulting sketches.

Scale drawings of petroglyphs on flat surfaces are easier to make than scale drawings of those on rounded surfaces. The Ometepe petroglyphs were a challenge to draw because most were on rounded boulders, which were sometimes covered on all or most sides with engravings. Although often each side of a boulder had distinctive designs and could easily be designated a panel, the designs on some rocks flowed continuously from one side to another. In these cases, panel areas were designated somewhat arbitrarily in order to facilitate drawing the design on a two-dimensional surface. No solution for drawing a petroglyph on a three-dimensional surface is completely satisfactory.

While rubbings can sometimes be made more quickly and may also be more accurate than scale drawings, rubbings can cause damage to images through abrasion and sometimes by leaving residues from the materials used to make the rubbings. The author is a member of the American Rock Art Research Association (ARARA). In general, ARARA's (1987) rock art guidelines and code of ethics discourage the making of rubbings, unless the rock art will be immediately threatened with destruction. We also did not want to establish a precedent for local residents and tourists. Consequently, no rubbings of Ometepe petroglyphs were made.

Our field survey conditions dictated a simple method for creating scale drawings. Each recorder carried a cloth dressmaker’s metric tape, a metal retracting metric tape, metric graph paper, and a clipboard. The cloth tape was affixed to the rock using masking tape (recorders avoided putting masking tape on petroglyph grooves), creating a baseline. Points along the petroglyph design were then measured with the retracting tape and, using the appropriate scale, measurements were then transferred to the metric paper to create the scale drawing. Scales of 1:5 or 1:10 were the most common, although, depending on

46

The Sites and the Petroglyphs 7

THE SITES AND THE PETROGLYPHS

Petroglyph Sites with No Observed Associated Portable Artifactual Material

This study deals with the data obtained during the four survey seasons from 1995 through 1998 for which all computer data entry had been completed. During these years, 46 sites and 55 isolated culturally modified boulders were recorded (see Map 7; Table 2). Forty-three of the sites and 50 of the isolates have petroglyphs. These sites and isolates contain a total of 806 culturally modified boulders, of which 732 have petroglyphs. Seventy-four boulders have no petroglyphs but do have other cultural modifications, including ground or pecked holes (mortars and cupules), grinding slicks (metates), areas of pecking, and evidence of probable stone quarrying. Site types and distribution in the two main survey areas and a discussion of petroglyph manufacture are presented below. 7.1

These include 17 sites (N-RIO-01, -02, -05, -12, -14, -16, -17, -27, -28, -29, -36, -38, -39, -40, -42, -44, and -46) and all remaining 50 isolates, not listed above. Of these, five sites (N-RIO-17, -28, 29, -39, -42) and five isolates (PAO-96-06, 97-07, 97-12, 98-25, 98-26) also include boulder mortars and/or grinding slicks (metates). Petroglyph Sites with Artifactual Material

Site Types

Sites could be classed in a number of ways, but are broadly organized here by the presence or absence of petroglyphs, then further subdivided by presence or absence of artifacts or particular features. Sites without Petroglyphs Only three sites and five isolates are without associated petroglyphs:

•

With heavy concentrations of ceramics and lithics (five or more per square meter). There are seven such sites with petroglyphs (Table 3).

•

With light artifact scatters. It was fairly common to find one or two eroded ceramic fragments on the surface near petroglyph groupings. Other petroglyph sites also exhibited very dispersed ceramic scatters over fairly large areas and it is tempting to see these as background “noise,” but heavy vegetation has been a major obstacle to ground visibility so real densities are an open question. Eighteen petroglyph sites were accompanied by one or a few scattered, generally undecorated, non-diagnostic ceramic fragments and/or lithics (Table 4).

There is a strong correlation between heavy artifact concentrations and relatively large numbers of petroglyphs, and between light scatters and smaller numbers of petroglyphs, but there are also exceptions (Table 5). The reality is, however, that even sites recorded without petroglyphs are not very far away from petroglyphs (Map 7).

Mound Site with Ceramics and Lithics One site, N-RIO-30, consists of three low earth mounds, each less than 0.5m high, in a 30m x 50m area. The site also has a fairly dense associated scatter of ceramics, including one non-diagnostic polychrome fragment, and grinding stone fragments (Table 3).

Historic Sites

N-RIO-24 and N-RIO-43 and four isolates (MAO-97-01, MAO-98-01, MAO-98-02, and MAO-98-03) contain boulders modified with grinding surfaces—either mortars or metates (see below). Site N-RIO-43 also has numerous associated ceramics (Table 3).

N-RIO-06 is the site of the historic Hacienda Magdalena, constructed in the late 1880s. It contains a number of structures dating to that era, as well as early 20th century machinery and a scatter of historic artifacts. There were four petroglyphs recorded within the historic site boundary (two not in situ), but no significant prehistoric artifactual deposit has been found in the vicinity.

Other Modified Boulders

Associated Site Features

Isolate PAO-98-13 is a boulder with a cut rectangular depression, measuring 13cm x 17.5cm x 3cm deep. No associated artifacts were noted.

A number of features should be mentioned because of their uniqueness or potential importance.

Sites with Grinding Features

Linear Rock Alignments

Sites with Petroglyphs

N-RIO-22 contains the major example of such features; it has a very large area of rock alignments, measuring approximately 1km north-south and 0.25 km east-west. The alignments are 1-3m wide and currently 0.25-1m high. Several form rough rectangles and others are aligned along east-west contours. These may once have been low walls that defined terraces, perhaps forming field or garden boundaries. Local residents do not have any memory of or information about their construction

Petroglyphs are a defining characteristic of most of the sites recorded during the Ometepe project. As discussed in Chapter 6, site boundaries tended to be somewhat arbitrary and built around locations of petroglyph clusters and dispersions. The number of petroglyphs in each site varied widely—from 95 in the largest site to only one in the locations of isolates.

47

x isolates

48

Map 7: Site Locations (San Jose del Sur 1989 and La Palma 1988, 1:50,000)

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island

The Sites and the Petroglyphs We believe that these are probably prehistoric, since similar terraces were found on Zapatera Island (Baker and Smith 1987). It is always possible, however, that these are forgotten historic era features. The boundaries of N-RIO-22, drawn to encompass these alignments, also enclose eleven dispersed petroglyph boulders. Several associated alignments spill over onto site N-RIO-21. NRIO-41 also has a small L-shaped rock alignment.

undoubtedly reflecting the decrease of hospitable areas for settlement with increasing slope and the lack of ready access to fresh water. Isolated petroglyphs are found scattered fairly intensively across the landscape in the Balgües-Pulman area, less so in the Punta Gorda-El Corozal vicinity. The numbers of total petroglyph boulders per site location (including isolate locations) averaged 7.9. Without isolates (one boulder each), the average number was 15.6 per site location. There was little variation between the Rio Balgües-Pulman area and the Punta Gorda-Punta Corozal areas in this regard (Table 6). These averages are slightly skewed by the presence of one site in each location with very large numbers of petroglyphs (N-RIO-19 and N-RIO-03), which together account for 174 petroglyph boulders (92 and 82 respectively or 23.7% of the total). These sites are discussed in detail below. As Table 5 shows, there is another distinctive tier of five sites that also contain large numbers of petroglyphs, ranging from 29-38 boulders each, and accounting for another 22.4% (164 boulders) of the total petroglyph boulders. All of these were in the Balgües-Pulman area. It is clear that certain sites were locations of highly focused activity.

Mounds A second important feature consists of dirt and rubble mounds, which were probably structural platforms. Two sites—N-RIO-19 and N-RIO-30—contain mounds. NRIO-30, mentioned above, with three low mounds is an unprepossessing site compared to N-RIO-19, the Pulman site. Pulman contains at least 23 large mounds constructed of earth and rock rubble. This extensive and important site will be discussed in more detail below. 7.2

Site Distribution

Most of the site survey area for 1995-1998 extended from the lake to about the 180m elevation above sea level (asl) (lake level is 30m asl) and encompassed some of the flatter areas on the flanks of Maderas, especially along the lake margin. Away from flats immediately adjacent to the lake, the terrain rises gently but steadily and is composed of rolling hills and ridges interspersed with flat benches. Although once undoubtedly more forested, most of this land has been cleared for today’s dry land rice and bean cultivation and animal pasturing. Contemporary settlement, with a few exceptions, is focused along the lake margin, where it is likely that the major prehistoric settlement of Maderas first took place. Because of our survey strategy, all sites, except one, were found below 180m (Map 7). Site N-RIO-01, shown to us by local residents, is at the 340m elevation in steep, densely forested, terrain.1

While it has often been observed that petroglyphs in the region are associated with water, especially streams, there does not seem to be any exclusive pattern of association with streams, drainages, springs, or lake front (Tables 3 and 4; Map 7). Although petroglyphs are found in these locations, just as many or more are not immediately associated with water, except in the general sense that the lake surrounds the island. And no iconography seems to be specific to water sources; for example, images like spirals, which have sometimes been cited as having a special association with water, are found just as often away from immediate water sources. The Balgües-Pulman Area Sites are particularly densely distributed in the area between Rio Balgües, the only running perennial stream on this side of the island, and Quebrada Pulman, a large intermittent drainage (see Map 7). Four of the nine sites with heavy artifact concentrations are located along the flatter lake margins in this area, and probably represent important settlement loci. Site N-RIO-33, which has an extensive artifact scatter, is adjacent to Rio Balgües and the contemporary community of Balgües. Although the town has not been systematically surveyed because of the large number of houses, scatters of ceramics have been seen throughout the town, and it is possible that a major prehistoric village once existed here.

Eight of nine sites with heavy concentrations of artifacts are found between the 40m and 80m elevations and all but two are within 200 lineal meters from the lake shore, reflecting intensive settlement on and/or use of the flatter lakeside areas (Tables 3 and 4). N-RIO-08 is the exception. Found at the ~130m elevation, it is located on a broad bench adjacent to Quebrada Pulman. The area is large enough to have allowed for a small settlement. Monochrome incised and punctate ceramics, especially Schettel, were identified from this site. The Schettel ceramics indicate site use during the Tempisque Period, Sinacapa Phase (~200 B.C.-A.D. 1). Of the eighteen petroglyph sites associated with only one or a few artifacts, ten are 80m or more in elevation, and 13 are from 300m to 1.5km lineal meters from the shore,

N-RIO-19, the Pulman site, is the most imposing and important pre-Columbian residential site yet recorded on Maderas (Map 8). It deserves special mention. Located just to the west of Quebrada Pulman and near the lake, the site measures at least 650m north-south by 300m eastwest. Its central area, approximately 100m north-south x 300m east-west in size, contains at least 23 mounds

1

Numerous other petroglyphs were found during later survey seasons at elevations as high as 380m, some in dense jungle.

49

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island

Map 8: The Pulman Site (N-RIO-19)

50

The Sites and the Petroglyphs constructed of earth and rock rubble, which undoubtedly once supported structures. The largest is 23m x 21m in size and the smallest mound about 10m x 10m. Heights of mounds range from less than 1m to over 3.5m.

Figure 7-1

Accompanying these major features is an extensive and often dense scatter of artifacts (as much as 10+ items per m2), including ceramics, flaked stone, and millingstones. The numerous ceramics include a range of pottery types—from fragments of large thick urns to thin, fragile vessels, as well as decorative pieces of molded hollowform figurines with human and zoomorphic effigies. While most surface shards were undecorated or eroded of decoration, there were also many monochrome, bichrome and polychrome fragments, utilizing mainly red and black paint. Red and cream slips, as well as a black ceramics, and several black on cream or white fragments were noted. Incised, punctate, and appliqué decorative styles were also observed. Several fragments covered with dense regular punctuates may be from colanders. Evidence of reuse of pottery fragments was noted in a grooved or notched ceramic fragment, possibly a fishnet weight.

Ome-31 (Haberland 1970)

N-RIO-19, R64

The site also contains numerous lithic tools and debitage, the majority of which are of igneous material, primarily basalt and perhaps andesite. These include utilized and retouched flakes, cores, many bifaces, and projectile points, and basalt chopping tools. A few chert flakes and a chert projectile point were noted, but no obsidian. Fragments of millingstones were common and bedrock mortars were observed. Several fragments of stone statuary were also noted.2 Petroglyphs are also a common site feature. Ninety-two basalt boulders with petroglyphs were recorded, the largest number of any of the sites considered for this analysis. A majority are found on the gentle slopes to the south of and above the main residential or activity area, but a substantial number are located amidst the mounds.

Potosi Appliqué, Schettel Incised, Sacasa Striated, Leon or Huila Punctate, Palmares or Castillo Engraved, and Luna, Banda, and Madeira Polychrome3 types, indicating a range of dates at this site from at least the Tempisque Period, Sinacapa Phase (Zoned Bichrome, 200 B.C.300A.D.) to the Ometepe Period (Late Polychrome, A.D. 1350-1550), with perhaps an emphasis on the Sapoa Period (Middle Polychrome, A.D. 800-1350). The size and complexity of N-RIO-19, unlike any of the others in the study area, makes it clear that this may have been the central political and social locus for the northeast side of the island, at least during the mound period of occupation. Its relationship to other sites in the area and its function within the greater region have yet to be established by excavations.

Haberland obtained a surface collection from Om-31, which he named the Pulman site, and reported that it had only one petroglyph (Haberland 1970:105). His mapped location for Ometepe 31 coincides with the northern portion of N-RIO-19 (Haberland 1992:69).We believe that we have relocated his petroglyph, approximately 100m north of the central mound area (our R64 of site NRIO-19; see Figure 7-1). The mound area was probably covered with vegetation in the 1960s, so that he did not see the areas of densest artifact and petroglyph concentration or the mounds. Haberland believed that Om-31, based on ceramics, dated to the Zoned Bichrome Period (Sinacapa Phase—200 B.C.-A.D. 1) and the Early Polychrome Period (Gato Phase—A.D. 1000-1200). Ceramics from the site, photographed in 1997, were independently identified by three ceramic experts (Espinoza 2007; Lange 2007; Steinbrenner 2007; see Chapter 10, Figures 10-1 through 10-5). These included

Punta Gorda to Punta El Corozal Area Sites in this vicinity are somewhat less densely distributed, perhaps because of the nature of the terrain (see Map 7). The peninsula of Punta Gorda dominates most of this area. The northern shore of the peninsula drops precipitously to the lake and much of its point is hilly, rocky, and overgrown with vegetation. Most of the southern end is lowland that floods seasonally. Sites are located on the hills and ridges above this lowland. At Punta Gorda are found several sites that are somewhat different from those in the Pulman-Balgües area. For one thing, five out of six sites on the peninsula contain mortars, with site N-RIO-35 having ten boulders with

2 A well-preserved statue head from the site can be found in the house of the adjacent landowner.

3 One researcher has recently included Banda Polychrome within the Madeira series (Steinbrenner 2007).

51

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island mortars only, indicating utilitarian use. Three of these sites also include considerable amounts of ceramics and/or lithics. The only projectile point found during the survey was in site N-RIO-34. N-RIO-37, on a small eastwest running ridge, had evidence of quarrying. At that site, amid the petroglyph cluster, were boulders of fine basalt and some associated basalt cores. Somewhat further to the south and east was the extraordinary site of N-RIO-42, which appears to be a specialized stone quarry, although 22 petroglyph boulders were also noted. This site will be discussed further below. Another site, NRIO-41, to the south of Punta Gorda, also has a scatter of ceramics. The ceramics noted in these sites tend to be undecorated or rather plain incised wear, including probable Schettel Incised (~200 B.C.-A.D. 1). If such dates hold true upon excavation, this may be a relatively early area of settlement.

surfaces vary from smooth to rough. The porosity of the rock did seem to make some difference in choice of boulder. The roughest surfaces were generally avoided, perhaps because they provided a poor design surface and/or were more difficult to work. The roundedness of a boulder was not necessarily a hindrance to manufacture or design planning as some, especially abstract curvilinear lines, wander over more than one side of the rock. Petroglyphs are made by the removal of rock mass generally by abrasion, percussion or scratching (IFRAO 2008). In terms of manufacture, the vast majority of Ometepe rock art was made by percussion. Percussive techniques are either direct or indirect. Direct percussion involves pounding a handheld tool directly on the rock, “creating a small crushed area or ‘dint’ which shows up as a lighter grey or white against the normally darker rock surface” and “typically shows a pattern of slightly unevenly distributed peck marks” (Keyser and Rabiega 1999:125). Indirect percussion requires the use of a chisel-like implement held in one hand, which is then struck by a hammer in the other hand to etch the design, and is used to “produce carefully controlled line engravings (Keyser and Rabiega 1999:125). Many of the simpler Ometepe designs, especially shallow simple marks, and those with ragged edges could have been quickly pecked using direct percussion. A large proportion, however, were almost certainly made using indirect percussion. Many petroglyphs made in this relatively hard basalt medium exhibit impressive sharpness and regularity of line and, often, considerable depth. Although many petroglyphs are highly eroded, therefore shallow and difficult to see, the depths and careful carving of numerous engravings are striking. Groove depths are commonly 0.5-1cm and often as much as 2-3cm deep and 1-3cm wide. Curiously, however, no hammerstones have thus far been found. Some of the deep petroglyphs are fairly smooth and it is possible that abrasion was also used in some instances, although exposure to the elements, especially heavy rainfall, could have created smoothing of grooves. We did not have time during this survey to do an intensive study of manufacturing techniques.

Site N-RIO-03, the El Corozal site, located just south and east of Punta Gorda, also deserves special mention. It is on the slopes and top of a steep hill near the lakeshore, and measures approximately 175 meters x 175 meters in size. It contains at least 85 modified boulders, 82 of them with petroglyphs, the second largest number found in one site in the first four years of survey. Six mortars and two metates or grinding slicks were also observed on the flat top of the hill, as were a few fragments of grinding stones, probably fragments of broken or unshaped metates. A light surface scatter of ceramics (generally non-diagnostic) and chert lithics was also noted. If grinding stones, ceramics, and lithics are indicators of settlement, there may have been some residential activity here, but the suitable flat area at the top of the hill is too small to have supported much population. Intensive ritual support activities may be a more likely explanation. Haberland (1968b) first found this site, which he called Om-38, although he found only six petroglyph boulders, probably because the site was very overgrown. Most of his petroglyphs were found again during our 1995 season. Haberland (1968b:48) felt that this might have been a hunting “cult” site because of the number of animal images observed. Whether hunting or not, the large numbers of petroglyphs on this hill indicate that this was a site with some special social significance. This will be discussed more fully later in this study. 7.3

Skill levels varied as witnessed by many simple, sometimes ragged and relatively easily made petroglyphs. There are, however, a striking number of highly intricate and often deeply cut designs that must have needed considerable time and skill to manufacture. Many of the complicated designs required considerable compositional planning in order to fit the design to the often irregular and restricted boulder surfaces. Complexity of design and depth of groove speak of intentionality, large quantities of labor, and serious purpose. Such characteristics may indicate the development of specialist stoneworking skills. The monumental sculpture and beautifully formed and decorated metates that have also been found on the island attest to these abilities. Such skills could have been acquired first, or partially, through a long history of petroglyph engraving. The degree of erosion of some petroglyphs indicates considerable time depth.

Petroglyph Characteristics

Seven hundred and thirty-two boulders with petroglyphs were recorded during the four field seasons from 1995 through 1998. These were found scattered throughout the landscape on the northeast slopes of Volcan Maderas—in isolation, in tight clusters, and dispersed along ridgelines. Maderas was an explosive volcano, so that ejecta in the form of basalt or andesite boulders are a characteristic of the landscape. Northeast running ridgelines with boulder clusters are common, indicating main direction of eruption, but isolated boulders are also scattered here and there, even in flatter areas. The petroglyphs on Ometepe are found on these boulders of grey vesicular basalt (some may be andesite), although 52

The Sites and the Petroglyphs In a few cases, petroglyphs were carved in relief to provide a sense of three-dimensionality. Several boulders were carved in the round, creating a sculptural effect, although not severed from their boulder bases. The line between petroglyph and sculpture is sometimes a fine one (see Figures 8-13 and 8-14).

increase in the removal of small petroglyphs, probably for sale. 7.4 Other Cultural Modifications Associated with Petroglyphs There are a number of cultural modifications to boulders that are not considered “rock art” per se, but that often co-occur with petroglyphs.

Of particular interest is the fact that the Ometepe petroglyphs exhibit almost no readily discernible superimpositioning. There were only three clear cases of superimposition and three or four possible instances. Most petroglyphs on a boulder were either made in single episodes or care was taken to avoid impacting earlier designs if they were made in several episodes of manufacture.

Grinding Features Many of the prehistoric sites include grinding features, mentioned briefly above, which, while not abundant, are also not rare. Some probably have utilitarian functions, such as seed or nut pounding and grinding. Others may have had ritual associations, such as pigment grinding or use as offertories.

As a whole, the Ometepe petroglyphs are impressive and sometimes subjectively breathtaking. The broad-scale search for patterning and the quantification of motifs, on which the following chapter focuses, does not do justice to some of the more spectacular and complex designs, a number of which could themselves be the main subject of an analysis.

Grinding Slicks These are fairly large, flat surfaces on a boulder or bedrock produced by back and forth grinding action. These could be called boulder metates, although in Central America most metates are thought of as discrete formed grinding artifacts. Only those found on boulders are considered here. Grinding slicks seem to have been a utilitarian feature associated with food processing, probably of maize.

The boulders and their petroglyphs are subject to heavy seasonal tropical rains and bright sunshine. Some of the eroded, difficult-to-see petroglyphs were sometimes hard to accurately draw and photograph. It is likely that the degree of erosion is largely a function of age and exposure, but some were probably originally more shallowly cut than others. Detailed correlation between degree of erosion and designs has not been made, but impressionistically it can be said that the many of the most eroded engravings are very often some of the simpler designs.

Mortars and Cupules

Other factors affecting the integrity of the petroglyphs are human-caused. Contemporary farmers have traditionally burned their fields to clear rice stubble and often overwhelmingly dense weeds. Petroglyph boulders in these areas are subjected to quick, hot fires and often exhibit grey to red mottling, cracking, and exfoliation due to heat. If not directly affected by fire, boulders exhibit a grayish patination caused by smoke, humidity, and probable lichen growth. We have noted scratched boulders that within five years have repatinated to the point that scratching is no longer visually evident. If radiocarbon or other dating of petroglyphs is ever perfected, the impacts of such field burning may be a significantly negative factor.

Mortars and cupules are artificial circular or near circular depressions in rocks, produced by grinding and/or pounding and sometimes by pecking (Figure 7-2). Elsewhere mortars have not been considered “rock art”, while cupules, by contrast, are in some circumstances considered a special category of rock art (e.g. Fentress 1996; Taçon et al. 1997; Van Hoek 2003). Cupules are usually defined as being smaller than mortars. Van Hoek (2003:5), following Taçon et al. (1997:943), says that true cupules are non-utilitarian and created by pecking or pounding. In addition, some cupules are often found on the sides of rocks and probably would not have been used for food processing or liquid retention. Although Van Hoek (2003:5) and Taçon et al. (1997) define cupules as pecked or pounded into a rock surface, some of the Ometepe cupules on the sides of rocks appear ground (although water wear might have created a smoothing effect similar to grinding).

Other human impacts to boulders include scratching and removal. Much of the scratching on petroglyphs (evident in some photos shown below) has resulted from farmers and other passersby casually tracing designs with machetes, which are a ubiquitous tool. Since beginning the project, educational efforts have resulted in a reduction of such scratching, although it still happens. Local people have sometimes removed small petroglyph boulders as curiosities for garden decoration, but, as tourism has increased on the island, there has been an

Van Hoek (2003:5), in an attempt to distinguish mortars (or tacitas) from cupules, defines mortars as being “grinding hollows” formed by abrasion which measure 10cm or more in diameter. He notes that cupules are pecked and “normally average 5cm in diameter, but there are also smaller and shallower cupules of around 2cm, as well as larger ones measuring up to 10cm.” They are usually circular, but can also be oval or kidney-shaped. Van Hoek (2003:5-6) assumes that mortars have utilitarian function, such as “for processing food, dyes, or

53

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island Figure 7-2. Mortars and Cupules

a. Mortars: N-RIO-24, BRM 2

b. Mortars: N-RIO-38, R6

c. Mortars and Cupules: N-RIO-26, R1, p2

e. Mortar/Cupule: N-RIO-25, R7

d. Cupules: N-RIO-42, R17, p4

f. Cupule: N-RIO-37, R1*

*Scratched with machete

54

The Sites and the Petroglyphs

other material, whereas the meaning of cupules often remains obscure.” There is a tendency in the literature, however, to treat cupules as non-utilitarian.

Quarry Features These are boulders that appear to have been modified as a result of quarrying activities. At least two types of quarrying were found. First, N-RIO-37 contains some fine-grained basalt boulders that were undoubtedly quarried for flaked stone tools; shatter and basalt cores were noted in the vicinity.

There are several difficulties with this definition. First, ground depressions formed by utilitarian activities can be smaller than 10cm. Mortar sizes are clearly on a continuum, since such depressions may begin small but, with constant use, become larger and deeper. Secondly, quite small depressions, produced by pecking or pounding can sometimes have a specific utilitarian use. In California, for example, some small pecked depressions, especially those associated with deeper and larger mortars, are often thought to have been created by nut, especially acorn, cracking. Grinding might also have been required for preparation of food, pigment, and other substances used during ritual activities. There are thus problems with size and in making utilitarian/ritual distinctions when trying to define mortars versus cupules.

The second type is an enigmatic feature found in many petroglyph sites, consisting of pecked elongated, almost rectangular, depressions (Fig. 7-4a-b). These are sometimes single, but more often multiple, creating a “washboard” effect. They may share a boulder with a petroglyph or be found separately. No other reports of this feature have thus far been found in the available literature. A small number of such features were found associated with petroglyphs beginning in 1996. Site NRIO-42, in which this feature predominates, was found in 1998. The site contains 29 such boulders, including one very large one, having many methodically prepared parallel depressions (Figure 7-4a). We were uncertain what these might be until 1999, when we found another site with numerous similar features, including a large rock with these depressions and with a very well-cut rectangular bar-like feature intact (see Figure 7-4b). When such bars were undercut and removed, washboardlike depressions would have been left. Lengths of these “bars” vary, but widths are usually between 5cm to 10cm. The pecked areas around them are larger. What such pieces of stone might have been used for is unknown, although it is possible this was the source for the foursided beveled rectangular chopper that Haberland (1992:79) notes in the Sinacapa Phase of the Tempisque Period (~200 B.C.-A.D.1). Celts, narrow adzes or small manos (hand stones) are all possible candidates for such quarrying. Other boulders in site N-RIO-42 had large shelf-like areas removed. Large blocks might have been removed to make big items such as metates or stone bowls. These features have thus far been found in sites that also have petroglyphs, but whether they are ritually associated is unclear.

Ultimately mortar/cupule distinctions are arbitrary and definitions need to be confined to local occurrence. My own categories ignore the ritual versus utilitarian distinction. As used here mortars and cupules are defined based largely on a size continuum. Following Van Hoek (2003:5), I have used the term mortar for depressions 10cm and larger produced by grinding. To account for gradations in mortar size, I have called depressions measuring 6cm to 9.9cm “mortars/cupules”, and defined cupules as small depressions measuring between 5.9cm and 2cm. Mortars/cupules can be a product of either pounding or grinding, while cupules are usually produced by pounding. Small Pecked Holes/Dots These consist of very small pecked holes or dots measuring less than 2cm. Van Hoek (2003:5) supports the view that holes smaller than 2cm should not be called cupules. Although they may be on a size continuum with small cupules, they are really not large enough to be called cup-shaped. On Ometepe these are always pecked and always associated with petroglyphs and almost never with mortars and/or cupules. Pecked dots are usually pecked outside of a design, but are also sometimes part of curvilinear designs, such as pecked holes deliberated pounded on the line of a meander. These often do not appear to be superposition, but rather integration into the design during manufacture; but later pecking over the design cannot be discounted as a possibility. Rectangular or Square Pecked Depressions Most of these are well-shaped and have neatly cut edges and sides (Fig. 7-3). They vary in size from 15cm x 8cm (largest) to 8cm x 8cm (smallest) and from 2-5cm deep. Since all but one are on the sides of boulders, they may have served the same function as those circular cupules also found on near-perpendicular rock faces.

55

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island

Figure 7-3. Rectangular and Square Pecked Depressions

a. PAO-98-13

b. N-RIO-09, R8

c. N-RIO-07, R6

d. N-RIO-47, R2

e. N-RIO-07, R14, p2

56

The Sites and the Petroglyphs Figure 7-4: Quarry Features

a. N-RIO-42, R33

b. N-RIO-49, R88

57

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island

Table 2. Site Attributes Rio Balgües to Quebrada Pulman Area

Site No.

Culturally Modified Boulders

Boulders w/ petroglyphs

Quarry features present

Mortars Cupules present

present

Other features present

Ceramics present

Lithics present

Mounds present

Elevation (above sea level)

N-RIO-01

2

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

340m

N-RIO-05

3

3

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

150m

N-RIO-06

4

4

0

0

0

Historic

x

0

0

150m

N-RIO-07

36

35

0

x

x

0

x

0

0

~150m

N-RIO-08

33

30

x

x

0

0

x

x

0

~130m

N-RIO-09

37

37

0

0

x

x

x

0

0

90-110m

N-RIO-10

13

13

0

0

0

x

x

x

0

80m

N-RIO-11

14

14

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

160-180m

N-RIO-12

18

18

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

130m

N-RIO-13

15

15

0

0

x

0

x

0

0

140-160m

N-RIO-14

9

9

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~110m

N-RIO-15

4

4

0

0

0

0

x

x

0

~115m

N-RIO-16

3

3

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

110m

N-RIO-17

33

33

x

0

x

0

0

0

0

110-140m

N-RIO-18

3

3

0

0

0

0

x

0

0

~90m

N-RIO-19

95

92

0

x

x

x

x

x

x (23)

80m

N-RIO-20

7

7

0

0

0

0

x

0

0

~80m

N-RIO-21

18

17

0

0

x

0

x

x

0

~50-60m

N-RIO-22

11

11

0

0

0

x

0

x

0

~50-100m

N-RIO-23

29

29

0

0

0

0

x

0

0

~60m

N-RIO-24

2

0

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

30m

N-RIO-25

19

19

0

0

x

0

x

0

0

60-80m

N-RIO-26

5

4

0

x

x

0

x

x

0

40m

N-RIO-27

3

3

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~30m

N-RIO-28

6

5

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

~40m

N-RIO-29

6

5

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

50m

N-RIO-30

0

0

0

0

0

0

x

x

x (2)

40m

N-RIO-31

2

2

0

0

x

0

x

0

0

80m

N-RIO-32

13

12

0

0

x

0

x

0

0

~70-80m

N-RIO-33

21

17

x

0

x

0

x

x

0

~50m

PAO-96-01

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~80m

PAO-96-02

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~110m

PAO-96-03

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~130m

PAO-96-04

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~125m

PAO-96-06

1

1

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

~130m

PAO-96-07

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~130m

PAO-97-01

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~100m ~100m

PAO-97-02

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

PAO-97-03

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

PAO-97-04

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

PAO-97-05

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

PAO-97-06

1

1

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

PAO-97-07

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

PAO-97-08

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

58

~100m

~65m

The Sites and the Petroglyphs

Table 2. Site Attributes (Continued) Rio Balgües to Quebrada Pulman Area

Site No.

Culturally Modified Boulders

Boulders w/ petroglyphs

Quarry features present

Cupules present

Mortars

Other features present

present

PAO-97-09

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

PAO-97-10

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Ceramics present

Lithics present

Mounds present

Elevation (above sea level)

PAO-97-11

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

85m

PAO-97-12

1

1

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

~110m

PAO-97-13

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~70m

MAO-97-1

1

0

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-01

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~30m

PAO-98-02

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~40m

PAO-98-03

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-04

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~65m

PAO-98-08

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~100m

PAO-98-09

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~90m

PAO-98-10

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~80m

PAO-98-11

2

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~80m

PAO-98-12

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-13

1

0

0

0

0

x

0

0

0

~40m

PAO-98-15

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

PAO-98-16

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~40m ~120m

PAO-98-17

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

PAO-98-18

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

PAO-98-19

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~140m

PAO-98-20

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~140m

MAO-98-02

1

0

0

0

0

x

0

0

0

~80m

59

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island Table 2. Site Attributes (Continued) Punta Gorda-Punta El Corozal Area

Site No.

Culturally Modified Boulders

Boulders with petroglyphs

Quarry features present

Cupules present

Mortars present

Other features present

Ceramics present

Lithics present

Mounds present

Elevation (asl)

N-RIO-02

11

11

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~30m

N-RIO-03

85

82

0

0

x

0

x

x

0

75-80m

N-RIO-34

2

2

0

0

x

0

x

x

0

~70m

N-RIO-35

33

23

x

x

x

0

x

x

0

40-60m

N-RIO-36

6

6

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~30m

N-RIO-37

26

24

x

x

x

0

0

x

0

~50-60m

N-RIO-38

6

5

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

~60m

N-RIO-39

13

12

0

x

x

0

0

x

0

~100-110 ~110m

N-RIO-40

19

18

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

N-RIO-41

10

10

0

0

0

0

x

0

0

~100m

N-RIO-42

53

22

x

x

x

0

0

0

0

~50-60m

N-RIO-43

2

0

0

0

x

0

x

x

0

~60-80m

N-RIO-44

3

3

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~60m

N-RIO-45

5

5

0

0

0

0

x

x

0

40m

N-RIO-46

6

6

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

60-80m

N-RIO-47

7

7

0

0

0

0

x

0

0

~90m

PAO-98-05

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~70m

PAO-98-06

1

1

0

x

0

0

0

0

0

~90m

PAO-98-07

1

1

0

x

0

0

0

0

0

~80m

PAO-98-14

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-21

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-22

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-23

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-24

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-25

1

1

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-26

1

1

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-27

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-28

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~50m

PAO-98-29

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~100m ~70m

PAO-98-30

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

PAO-98-31

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~50m

MAO-98-01

1

0

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

~80m

MAO-98-03 Total Boulders

1

0

0

0

x

0

0

0

0

~60m

806

732

60

The Sites and the Petroglyphs

Table 3. Sites with Heavy Artifact Concentrations Site no.

Elevation

Distance from lake

Distance from other water source

Ceramics

Lithics

Petroglyphs Boulders (No.)

N-RIO-03

~60-80m

~30m

na

x

x

x (82)

N-RIO-08

~130m

~1.3km

seasonal drainage, 30m

x

x

x (30)

N-RIO-19

~40-70

~100m

seasonal drainage, adjacent

x

x

x (92)

N-RIO-23

~60m

~420m

na

x

o

x (29)

N-RIO-30

~40m

~120m

Rio Balgües, ~200m

x

x

0

N-RIO-33

~50m

~150m

Rio Balgües, adjacent

x

x

x (17)

N-RIO-34

~70m

~180m

na

x

x

x (2)

N-RIO-35

~40-60m

~100m

na

x

x

x (23)

N-RIO-43

~60-80m

~100m

na

x

x

0

Table 4. Sites with Light Artifact Concentrations Site no.

Elevation

Distance from lake

Distance from other water source

Ceramics

Lithics

Petroglyphs boulders

N-RIO-07

~150m

~1km

na

x

o

x (35)

N-RIO-09

~90-110m

~1km

Seasonal drainage, 40m

x

o

x (37)

N-RIO-10

~90m

~900m

Seasonal drainage, 30m

x

x

x (13)

N-RIO-11

~160-180m

~1.3km

na

x

o

x (14)

N-RIO-13

~140-160m

~1.55km

Seasonal drainage, 100m

x

o

x (18)

N-RIO-15

~110m

~1.1km

Seasonal drainage, 7m

x

o

x (4)

N-RIO-18

~90m

~900m

Seasonal drainage, 300m

x

o

x (3)

N-RIO-20

~80m

~500m

Seasonal drainage, 30m

x

o

x (7)

N-RIO-21

~50-60m

~100m

na

x

x

x (17)

N-RIO-22

~50-100m

~200m

na

x

o

x (11)

N-RIO-25

~60-80m

~600m

Seasonal drainage, 70m

x

x

x (19)

N-RIO-26

~50m

~300m

na

x

x

x (4)

N-RIO-31

~80m

~550m

Rio Balgües, 150m

x

x

x (2)

N-RIO-32

~70-80m

~150m

Rio Balgües, 40m

x

0

x (12)

N-RIO-37

~50-60m

~200m

na

0

x

x (24)

N-RIO-41

~100m

~900m

Seasonal drainage, 40m

x

x

x (10)

N-RIO-45

~40m

~80m

na

x

x

x (5)

N-RIO-47

~90m

~550m

Seasonal drainage, 30m

x

0

x (7)

61

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island

Table 5. Petroglyph Boulder Numbers and Artifact Concentrations Number of Petroglyph Boulders per Site 1 2-5 6-10

11-15

17-19

22-24

29-38

82-92

49 isolates

N-RIO-01

N-RIO-14

N-RIO-02

N-RIO-12

N-RIO-35**

N-RIO-07*

N-RIO-03**

N-RIO-05

N-RIO-20*

N-RIO-10*

N-RIO-21*

N-RIO-37*

N-RIO-08**

N-RIO-19**

N-RIO-06

N-RIO-36

N-RIO-11*

N-RIO-25*

N-RIO-42

N-RIO-09*

N-RIO-15*

N-RIO-41*

N-RIO-13*

N-RIO-33**

N-RIO-17

N-RIO-16

N-RIO-46

N-RIO-22*

N-RIO-40

N-RIO-23**

N-RIO-18*

N-RIO-47*

N-RIO-32*

N-RIO-26*

N-RIO-39

N-RIO-27 N-RIO-28 N-RIO-29 N-RIO-31* N-RIO-34** N-RIO-38 N-RIO-44 N-RIO-45* PAO-98-11

* With light artifact concentrations. ** With heavy artifact concentrations. All others have no observed associated artifacts.

Table 6. Petroglyph Numbers and Averages per Site Location All site and isolate locations (93)

All site locations (no isolates) (44)

Rio BalgüePulman Area site & isolates locations (63)

Rio BalgüePulman Area site locations (no isolates) (29)

P. Gorda-Corozal Area site & isolate locations (30)

P. Gorda-Corozal Area site locations (no isolates) (15)

Total No. Petroglyph Boulders

733

684

482

448

251

236

Average Number per location

7.9

15.6

7.7

15.5

8.4

15.7

62

8

MOTIF CLASSIFICATION

and analyses.” What is important is to know the difference.

This chapter presents an attempt to construct a useful motif classification for the Ometepe petroglyphs. I have made liberal use of illustrations to present a wide spectrum of images and image variations. After classification, the results of quantification and relational analyses of motif categories are further discussed. 8.1

In rock art, motif classification has, however, often been criticized as being highly subjective and etic, rather than proceeding from emic knowledge; in other words, contrived from western-based schemes, rather than from categories recognized by the culture itself. Both perspectives may, however, have validity and the “intent is neither to convert etics to emics nor emics to etics, but rather to describe both and if possible to explain one in terms of the other” (Harris 1979:36). In fortunate areas where rock art is still made or for which there is considerable ethnographic information, inductive descriptive classifications and native knowledge can be complementary—the observer and observed can both bring different perspectives to interpretive pursuits.

Developing the Classification

The construction of a motif classification is not an easy business. Over at least the last four decades, an extensive body of archaeological literature has been produced that deals with the methodology of artifact classification and its interpretive possibilities (see, for example, Gifford [1960], Rouse [1960], Dunnell [1986], Whittaker et al. [1998], Francis [2001]). Although much of this work has involved classification of and typological development for portable artifacts, especially ceramics, many issues in the field also apply to rock art motifs. Much of the early debate about typology and classification revolved around such basic questions as whether types are “real” and basic data; whether artifact variability is continuous or whether there are non-random clusters of attributes that determine types; what the best divisions of artifact domains are; whether standard types can be formulated; how many types do we need; and what do types mean (Hill and Evans 1972:231). Underlying much of the early work on typology construction was the assumption that such classification was a “means whereby cultural processes are described and elucidated” (Gifford 1960:346), and that regularities can be discerned amid much variation (Gifford 1960: 341).

In the present case, there was very little alternative to an etic descriptive approach, since there are no known native interpreters of the Ometepe petroglyphs and little ethnographic material available on Ometepe or in Nicaragua generally related to petroglyphs. What is important to acknowledge, however, is the subjectivity of classification. As Whittaker et al. (1998:130) stated, the archaeological “consensus now seems to have arrived at the sensible middle ground that typologies are at least partly arbitrary but, nevertheless, can be used to solve problems—to describe a body of data, to communicate that description, and to answer interpretive questions. The attributes used and the form of the typology should vary according to the problem being solved.” They further noted, however, that, although standard typologies can be important communicative devices and heuristic tools for discerning patterning and are starting points for hypotheses and arguments, questions of consistency of application, as well as observer bias, also need to be considered (Whittaker et al. 1998:134-136).

Classification has been one of the building blocks of science. In a social science such as archaeology, descriptive typologies have been used to elucidate cultural-historical patterns, but sometimes without resolving many ambiguities associated with the resulting temporal-spatial units (Dunnell 1986:194). What attributes to use, what cultural or behavioral assumptions were implied in attribute selection, and whether types are historically significant or have interpretive power have all been contentious issues with often subtle arguments. It has rarely, if ever, been argued, however, that ordering data through some type of empirical classification is not needed (Dunnell 1986). Whether one’s interest lies in classificatory schemes in themselves or in the interpretation derived therefrom, description is a primary step.

In grappling with the Ometepe classification, the issue of consistency was quite important. It was clear to me that previous attempts at classifying Nicaraguan petroglyphs, although useful, fell short of the needs of a collection as extensive as Ometepe’s, especially in consistent attribute description. A goal of this work, therefore, was to begin to construct a useful basic classification that other researchers could use consistently, while recognizing that such constructions will always be somewhat in flux depending on new finds and new definitions of type variations. Only future work will determine how successful this effort has been.

The later behavioralist shift from empirical description to an emphasis on interpretation eventually clarified an important distinction—that of emic versus etic types—in the construction of typologies. Harris (1979:32) defined emic operations as “the elevation of the native informant to the status of ultimate judge of the adequacy of the observer’s descriptions and analysis” and etic operations as the “elevation of observers to the status of ultimate judges of the categories and concepts used in descriptions

Description and classification have been especially challenging in view of the degree of variation in the Ometepe motif collection. The overwhelming majority of petroglyphs in the corpus of Ometepe rock art contain non-representative, abstract images that are often highly idiosyncratic. As a consequence, precision of descriptive language, how to classify, and quantification have been thorny issues. Even acknowledged etic approaches are 63

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua often handicapped by a lack of precise descriptive vocabulary. Deciding what attributes and elements should be emphasized in discussing descriptive types has been difficult. When perusing the prior literature, one can find some categories that are interpretive, rather than descriptive, such “magicians”, “priests”, and “dancers”. Occasionally categories have been invented with obscure and almost absurdist nomenclature. Various attempts at motif classification often use interchangeably words such as “non-representational”, “geometric”, and “abstract” or they differentiate between geometric and abstract types, with only vague description of what constitutes the difference.

fairly simple to pick out certain easily recognizable individual motifs, such as anthropomorphic or zoomorphic images, or certain geometric shapes, such as circles or rectangles, it was another thing altogether to decide what to do with extremely complex curvilinear panels with meandering lines that occasionally incorporated or linked those same geometric shapes and anthropomorphic images. At this level other questions arose: What if an image can fit in more than one category? And how does one differentiate a complex from a not so complex panel? How does one characterize the similarities or differences in such abstract designs? In such cases and also in description of representative motifs, variation could result in the temptation to create ever more detailed subcategories, with fewer and fewer examples of such subcategories represented. In many cases subtle variation could have been a function of individual imagination or skill in working rock, rather than meaningful in either an ideological or stylistic way.

A basic definition of “geometric” is “utilizing rectilinear or simple curvilinear motifs or outlines in design” (Merriam-Webster Online 2008); another source defines the term as “using straight lines and simple shapes, for example, circles and squares” (Encarta 1999). The IFRAO Glossary (2008) notes that a geometric motif has a “simple geometrical form or design, such as circle, line, cupule, CLM [convergent lines motif], barred lines.” Note the emphasis on simple forms. But, if defined at all, some analyses have often included in the “geometric” category forms other than the polygons, simple squares, rectangles, triangles, circles, ovals, and spirals that are generally considered geometric. Many simple curvilinear and rectilinear shapes are not geometric in the strict sense of the word.

Classification has been complicated also by the fact that certain abstract elements, especially rectilinear forms, such as right-angled lines, are sometimes integrated into designs that are predominantly curvilinear. The significance and importance of such elements in terms of “style” or meaningful comparison is often doubtful. And some petroglyph designs are so complicated and abstracted and unrepeated that it is difficult to classify them beyond a general “complex curvilinear design” category. Within some of these designs, though, there are common elements that can be discussed and quantified, as can common ways of rendering certain complex curvilinears.

The IFRAO glossary (2008) defines an abstract motif as offering “no iconic information elements.” Standard dictionaries define “abstract” as “[h]aving intrinsic form with little or no attempt at pictorial representation” (Merriam-Webster 2008) or “not relating to concrete objects but expressing something that can only be appreciated intellectually” (Encarta 1999). Where, then, do we place motifs that may well represent something pictorial or concrete or an idea, such as a cosmological concept or its attributes, but we have no idea what? How do we verbally describe and categorize highly complex abstract designs and how should simple geometric images be counted when they are incorporated into more complex designs? And what is to be done when there are many almost inchoate lines that make description and motif placement difficult?

With regard to classification one can be a “lumper” or a “splitter”. In most cases, I have tried to take a common sense approach and opted for simplicity wherever possible, resisting the urge to split categories unless it was quite clear that such sub-types recur in significant numbers on Ometepe or are found in other sites and regions. As more petroglyphs are added to the database, more sub-types may be recognized as significant descriptive types. The element list developed for our rock art recording project has undergone significant revision over time and will undoubtedly continue to be modified (see Appendix 1).

I have tried to take a practical, descriptive approach, using wherever possible commonly recognized terminology and definitions, such as those found in sources like the International Federation of Rock Art Organizations (IFRAO) rock art glossary (http:// mc2.vicnet.net.au/home/glossar/web/glossary.html. As discussed in Chapter 1 and following Francis (2001), motif classification or typology has been focused on recognition of attributes, design elements, and descriptive types. Important to this was a focus on consistent or recurring elements within the Ometepe corpus and/or those commonly found within other nearby regional petroglyph collections, although this was easier said than done because of the high degree of abstraction and idiosyncrasy in the Ometepe collection. While it was

Any classification is inherently subjective, but the level of abstraction in Ometepe images also requires fighting the imagination. Some sinuous lines could easily be seen as snakes, dots within circles might be interpreted as eyes, without any particular justification. On the other hand, the art of Central America and Mesoamerica clearly thrived on stylization and abstraction of images—as witnessed, for example, by some animal images in pottery designs (see, for example, Lothrop 1926: Vol.1:201-206)—often to such a degree that the average person might have a hard time seeing a representation of an animal in a series of increasingly abstract designs. I have tried to resist identifications based on impressions about abstract images unless there is some clear basis for doing so. Consequently, there may well be meaningful 64

Motif Classification images that I have missed, simply for lack of comparative interpretive information or because of a lack of expertise in Mesoamerican or Central American design elements.

that some of his motifs could have been classified differently. Navarro Genie’s (1996) work is organized and relatively well illustrated by site. His classification is appealing for its relative simplicity. He divides his motifs into five basic groups:

The motif classification discussed below is clearly one derived from my own judgment, but there have been helpful predecessors, who have attempted meaningful classification and, sometimes, quantification in previous studies. Lee and Stasack’s 1999 Hawaiian typology was particularly influential in its approach. Other sources in Latin American rock art include, for example, Troncoso (2003) and Taboada Tellez and Strecker (2000). The three most important Nicaraguan sources are Matilló Villa (1973); Rigat (1992); and Navarro Genie (1996). None of these have been entirely satisfactory for my purposes, but all have been useful. As examples, I will discuss in detail here only the Nicaraguan sources.

Naturalistic. This includes humans, animals, masks, and indeterminate categories. Humans are defined as having a bipedal body, a head and defined limbs. Although the figure might be missing a head or limbs, it should not possess a tail. Masks are facial features without a body or limbs. The indeterminate category includes figures that may have animal and/or human features but which cannot be definitively grouped in one of the other categories. The animal group is further divided into snakes, monkeys, birds, and other animals. Other animals are further subdivided into turtles, deer, bats, tapirs, and armadillos (Navarro Genie 1996:105-106).

Matilló Vila (1973:189-190) developed the first motif classification of Nicaraguan petroglyphs, a list of 81 “símbolos principales”, used in his Ometepe analysis. His list of abstract symbols was of particular interest, but representative symbols, especially those of anthropomorphic types, were largely interpretive and imaginative, rather than descriptive. Included, for example, were victims (“Victimas”), magicians and sorcerers (“Magos y hechiceros”), leaders and chiefs (“Jefes y Caciques”), and groups of dancers (“Grupos de danzantes”), among others. Particular symbols were neither illustrated nor described. For comparative purposes, Matilló Vila’s work is generally useful, but his quantification apparently enumerated individual symbols, but not the numbers of boulders counted, and there is no indication of which symbols were associated with each other (Matilló Villa 1973:193-197).

Geometric Figures. These are defined as imaginary forms that can only be described using terms taken from geometry. They include dots, squares, crosses, spirals, circles, “V”, semi-circles, parallel lines and circles with dots in the center (Navarro Genie 1996:106). Other. These are graphic elements that occur infrequently and include Nahuat symbols, recognizable artifacts, such as weapons, and interlaced lines (Navarro Genie 1996:106). Abstract. These are figures that do not represent a known reality (“no representan una realidad conocida”). They are not organized into a classification category because each form is different and without a point of reference (Navarro Genie 1996:106).

Rigat (1992:535-561) analyzed five sites in the Department of Chontales on the east side of Lake Nicaragua. Although he admittedly had too little time to thoroughly record the petroglyphs, photos were taken of all of the petroglyphs that he observed. He reported on 55 engravings or groups of engravings, but did not indicate the number of boulders included. His classification included five groups: anthropomorphic figures, zoomorphic figures, geometric figures, signs and groups or sets of signs (ensemble de signes), and abstract figures. None of the first three categories had subgroups, except that anthropomorphic figures included masks or other stylized and abstract forms (“forme de masque, ou de manière stylizée ou abstraite”) (Rigat 1992:538). Geometric figures were defined only as those that require the use of words normally found in geometry. The description of signs and sets of signs was more fulsome, reflecting the difficulty in describing abstract and complex designs. It included a list of 14 features or elements. Some of these, such as the spiral, could have been included within the geometric category. Finally, the abstract figure category included those without characteristics that would permit their inclusion in one of the other categories. The difference between “abstract” figures and his signs and symbols category is elusive. Rigat (1992:538) acknowledged the difficulties and notes

Incomplete. These are figures that are missing portions of the design or are so eroded they cannot be classified (Navarro Genie 1996:106). Navarro Genie’s categories, prepared for a study of 21 diverse sites in two petroglyph “zones” (none on Ometepe), are a useful departure, but not detailed enough for analyzing the numerous abstract images in the Ometepe corpus. At the same time, some of his specific animal identifications appear to me to be too specific and somewhat problematic. One could argue, too, whether crosses, dots, Vs, and parallel lines are actually “geometric” forms. His study is useful for crosscomparisons, since he provides numbers and percentages of various categories across sites, but here, again, quantities are based on individual elements and it is unclear how many boulders or panels are involved. The work of all three authors discussed above has been significant in preparation of the motif classification found below. I have used a number of their categories where appropriate. Ultimately, my motif classification was decided by the requirements of the Ometepe catalogue. I am not completely satisfied by it and its weaknesses are

65

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua all my own. It has, however, proved useful for providing a basis for the quantification and analysis of the Ometepe petroglyphs. This motif list will undoubtedly be a work in progress as new petroglyphs designs are recorded and categories reconsidered and added. 8.2

one of the most intriguing figures in that it seems to represent a copulating couple, the only such design found. They are attached in the pelvic area, with heads facing in opposite directions. The upper figure appears to be female with a circle and dot in the vaginal area, probably a vulva. A line, probably representing a penis, connects the vulva to a second, undoubtedly male, figure. The upper figure also has ears or earrings attached to either side of the head.

The Classification

Because rock art is a visual art, I have made liberal use of illustrations to present a wide spectrum of images and image variations. Motifs were first divided into two broad classes: representative and non-representative motifs (see Appendix 2). Quantification of each motif type and subtype is found in Chapter 9, Tables 7-11, 13-21.

There are other variations among the splay-legged figures. Figure 8-1d, is unusual in that the lower part of the splayed legs are turned upward. Figure 8-1e has arms emerging from its head, Figures 8-1f and 8-1g have no arms, and 8-1h and 8-1i have no heads. Three images (Figs. 8-1a, 8-1c, 8-1e) have finger and/or foot digits. Figure 8-1j has digits on its right hand and foot, but small spirals where a left hand and foot should be, giving a taillike appearance. It is possible that this may represent a human/monkey transformation, but this is unclear.

Representative Figures Representative figures are defined here as those images that have an origin in life or animate forms, even if abstracted and often highly imaginative (see Table 7). Although some non-animate symbols (cruciforms, for example) can also “represent” an idea or concrete object, “representative” seems to be the most commonly used word to designate zoomorphic and anthropomorphic forms. I have also added an indeterminate classification that includes stylized renderings of probable animate beings that do not allow specific identification as either anthropomorphic or zoomorphic. No images of vegetal species or phytomorphs were recognized.

Another group of stick figures have V-shaped legs (Figs. 8-2b-g). Several figures in a grouping on one boulder (Figs. 8-2b) and another on an adjacent boulder (Fig. 82c) in the Corozal Viejo site (N-RIO-03) illustrate this form. These are stylistically similar and quite charming. Arms emerge from the head, and three figures appear to have antenna-like appendages on their heads, perhaps representing a feathered headdress. The large figure in Figure 8-2b has a u-shaped nose and no body, but legs and arms emerge from the head. Three of the heads are vaguely heart-shaped.

Anthropomorphs An anthropomorph is here broadly defined as a design that has sufficient elements to provide resemblance to human form. Anthropomorphs include bipedal figures of several types, as well as disembodied body parts, such as heads or hands or genitalia. They are differentiated from images of other primates, such as monkeys, by the lack of a tail. Anthropomorphs have been organized into several general sub-types: stick figures, torso figures, disembodied body parts, and relief figures. An indeterminate body category has been quantified with the anthropomorphic figures (see Table 8).

Other stick figures are relatively idiosyncratic. The stick figure in Figure 8-2e has v-shaped legs, like those above (although one leg has a “foot”), but two sets of arms emerging from the body. Figure 8-2f is unusual in having small circles where feet and one hand should be. In the figure’s left arm is a circular, shield-like element. All stick figures with heads except Figure 8-1a, 8-2e, and 8-2f have facial features formed of pecked dots. Aside from the “copulating couple” (Fig. 8-2a), sexual characteristics are undefined. Figures 8-1c and 8-1g each have a line extending from the torso that might be an indicator of a phallus, but this is not definitive.

Stick Figures Stick figures are simple anthropomorphic forms in which single straight lines indicate torso, arms, and legs. These may or may not have a head. Figures 8-1 and 8-2 present all of the stick figures found in the sites discussed. There is considerable variety. The most prototypical stick figures are those with a circular head and a vertical line for a body. Angled lines, representing arms and legs, run outward from the body (see particularly Figs. 8-1a, -b, -c, and Figure 8-2a). Splayed legs are at right angles to the vertical body line. Two have arms up, and two have arms down.

Several other features accompanying these stick figures should be noted. Figures 8-1a, 8-1c, and 8-1g all have small circles pecked adjacent to the heads, while Figures 8-2d and 8-2g, as well as the upper figure in 8-2a, have small circles attached to the end of an arm. Figure 8-2f, if this is indeed an anthropomorph, has circles in place of an arm and feet. Figures 8-1c, 8-1d, 8-1g and one element in Figure 8-2b all have lines extending from an arm or hand; Figure 8-1b has lines running from the legs. In most cases these lines extend upward and sometimes encircle the head.

Figure 8-2a has two morphologically similar stick figures, but the overall motif is far more complex and is

66

Motif Classification

Figure 8-1. Stick Figures

a. N-RIO-35, R1

d. N-RIO-17, R16

b. N-RIO-35, R16

e. N-RIO-03, R52

c. N-RIO-36, R1

f. N-RIO-03, R50

g. N-RIO-36, R2

-RIOi. N-RIO-03, R8

j. N-RIO-19, R 49

67

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Figure 8-2. Stick Figures

a. N-RIO-17, R26

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

b. N-RIO-03, R29

c. N-RIO-03, R30, p1

d. PAO-98-08, p1

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

e. N-RIO-12, R3

f. N-RIO-12, R6

68

g. N-RIO-19, R68

Torso Figures

Few figures have body adornment. One image (Fig. 8-4e) seems to have a headdress of three circles; another (Fig. 8-4m) has three lines radiating from its head, perhaps feathers; and another, 8-3h, has concentric semi-circles above its head. Three engravings (Figs. 8-3h, 8-4i and 84j) have a square or circle drawn below the chin, perhaps representing pectorals. Several motifs (Figs. 8-3f, 8-3g, 84g) have dots pecked into the torso, probably indications of belly buttons. The X-in-torso element was mentioned above.

Torso figures are defined here as anthropomorphs with outlined bodies that face forward (Figs. 8-3 and 8-4). Torsos may be roughly rectangular, circular, or triangular. Appendages vary in configuration and sometimes are absent. The torso images among Ometepe petroglyphs are highly individualistic. Most are schematically drawn, and only Figure 8-3b is rendered with a realistic treatment of arms, legs, and digits, and in a squatting position. Most torso figures are upright, although five are prone (Figs. 8-3d, 83i, 8-4b, one figure in 8-4f, and 8-4j).

There are four images with facial features pecked in their torsos (Figs. 8-4a, 8-4b and 8-4n, and 8-4o). The latter two panels have similar, double headed figures with legs and/or arms. Similar images without limbs are discussed below (see Fig. 8-9g).

Arm positions vary. Eleven figures have upturned arms, eight have down turned arms, and two have arms outstretched from the torso. The others are either missing arms or have unclear positioning. Two images—8-4l and 8-4o—each have two sets of “arms”, and Figure 8-4b has arms that encircle its head. Two images (Figs. 8-3j, 8-3k) from the Corozal Viejo site (N-RIO-03) are stylistically similar to several of the stick figures from that site in that arms emerge from the head (see Figs. 8-1e, 8-2b-c). Figure 8-4h is a legless torso with a left arm and a triangular wing-like appendage on its right. This could represent a human to bird transformation. The X drawn from corner to corner in its square body is of interest, since a similar X-in-torso element is found on an indeterminate body figure motif, pictured in Figure 8-5a. This may have some special esoteric meaning.

Figure 8-3h is unusual in that it has an appendage to its right arm, possibly a sword or knife. It is bow-legged, has a line circling each leg’s upper “thigh”, and concentric arcs above its head. Although the figure could be jumping, it is tempting to suggest that this might be an image of a Spanish soldier—bow legged as if riding a horse and wearing thigh high boots and helmet, and with a sword in hand. This is highly speculative because no other engravings thus far found indicate any contact period event or association. Figure 8-4f presents two torso figures in an unusual tableau. A zoomorphic figure with an open mouth seems to be aggressively approaching a recoiling anthropomorph. A second anthropomorph is horizontal or prone above the animal. This is the only engraving thus far found among the Ometepe petroglyphs that shows images in seemingly realistic narrative.

Sexual characteristics are found on six images. Two have a simple line between the legs, probably representing a penis (Figs. 8-3g and m). Indicators of female gender are found in four engravings: The left image in Figure 8-3f has a rectangular torso with a vulva-like circle and line below the torso. (It should also be noted that this and its companion image are the only paired body figures aside from the “copulating couple”, Figure 8-2a, discussed above). The highly stylized figure in Figure 8-3n has a similar vulva element. The latter also has a circle and dot in its “stomach”, which might indicate pregnancy. The left-most image in Figure 8-3e has two vulva-like elements on either side of its torso. A fourth image (NRIO-19, R78) is not pictured because of the difficulty of showing it in two dimensions. This has an upside down head/face on the side of the rock with two lines extending from the head over the top of the boulder and down the other side, forming a torso and ending in a similar vulva element. The realistic Figure 8-3b is also interesting in that there are two circular dots pecked in the vaginal area, but whether the figure is male or female is unclear. The squatting position, similar to one taken in childbirth, may indicate that it is meant to be female. Similar squatting positions are, however, also seen in stone and pottery figurines from Nicoya and other areas of Costa Rica, but the arms are generally folded, rather than in the air. These are often thought to represent shamans (Abel-Vidor et al. 1981:191, 194, 216, 218, Plate 54).

Indeterminate Body Figures The indeterminate category includes a few enigmatic figures that do not fit into the above categories (Fig. 8-5; Tables 7-8). Although these could generally be considered anthropomorphic because of certain features, such as facial pecking, they tend to be very abstracted and identifying them as anthropomorphic is tenuous. They have, however, been included in the anthropomorphic count on Tables 7 and 8. Figure 8-5a has pecked indentations resembling facial features. Its square torso with an X, similar to that of Figure 8-4h, has been previously mentioned. The radiating lines around its torso outline are of particular interest. Two striking figures from adjacent rocks in the Corozal Viejo site (N-RIO-03) each have rayed or spoked headdresses and “bodies” with wing-like elements (Figs. 8-5b and right hand element of Fig. 8-5c),

69

Figure 8-3. Torso Figures

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

a. N-RIO-02, R3, p1

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

b. N-RIO-02, R5

e. N-RIO-03, R16, p1

h. N-RIO-03, R34, p2

m. N-RIO-06, R2

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

c. N-RIO-03, R33

f. N-RIO-03, R34, p1

i. N-RIO-03, R50p3

j. N-RIO-03, R72

n. N-RIO-09, R36

d. N-RIO-02, R11

g. N-RIO-09, R32

k. N-RIO-03, R32

o. N-RIO-25, R4

70

l. N-RIO-10, R11

Motif Classification

Figure 8-4. Torso Figures

a. N-RIO-11, R1

d. N-RIO-12, R5, p1

h. N-RIO-21, R7

l. N-RIO-40, R15

b. N-RIO-11, R2

e. N-RIO-12, R7

c. N-RIO-11, R4, p1

f. N-RIO-17, R2, p1

i. N-RIO-25, R5

j. N-RIO-32, R7, p1

m. PAO-98-04

n. PAO-98-21, p1

71

g. N-RIO-19, R76

k. N-RIO-37, R14, p1

o. PAO-98-21, p2

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Figure 8-5. Indeterminate Body Figures

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

a. N-RIO-01, R1, p1

b. N-RIO-03, R40

d. N-RIO-03, R43

h. N-RIO-40, R6, p1

c. N-RIO-03, R41, p1

e. N-RIO-03, R73

f. N-RIO-05, R2

i. PAO-96-01

j. PAO-98-30

72

g. N-RIO-23, R5

k. PAO-98-3

Motif Classification although Figure 8-5b is more elaborate. Figure 8-5d has dots for facial features and four lines above the head, perhaps representing feathers or a headdress, similar to Figure 8-4n. Figure 8-5k may be a running figure portrayed in profile or a splay-legged figure but this is uncertain.

connected heads as discussed below (Figures 8-8e and 89g-h). Multiple connected heads. These are multiple heads with no bodies or torsos attached, usually presented as side-by-side heads. There are five boulders with sets of connected heads (Figs. 8-8e, 8-9g, 8-9h, 8-9i, 8-9j). Two have one square head and one round; one has heads endto-end; and another has side-by-side heads (Figs. 8-9g and 8-9h). It is conceivable that square/round may indicate sexual differentiation within the set, but more such combinations would need to be found to indicate whether there is a pattern in such sets. Two other figures are connected circular heads (Figs. 8-9i, 8-9j). Finally, a grid-like set of three side-by-side square heads is a part of a complex design of squares, circles and meanders (Figure 8-8e).

Disembodied Body Parts Disembodied body parts are elements that probably relate to the human body, but are unattached to a torso or other body part. Heads/faces are overwhelmingly the most common, while other body parts, such as eyes, vulvas, phalluses, and hands are rare (Figs. 8-6, 8-7, 8-8, 8-9; Tables 9 and 10). Heads/Faces. The majority of head/face motifs are fairly simple although several sub-categories are represented. Most have three (and sometimes four) areas of pecking representing eyes and mouth and/or nose. There are 92 boulders with one or more anthropomorphic heads or faces (Table 10).

Head/face with continuous eyebrow-nose line. This is another consistent stylistic convention for delineating a simple head and face—a continuous undulating line extending from a point near the side of the head, running over a pecked eye (forming a kind of eyebrow), then downward to delineate a long nose, then back up over the other eye. The lower part of the face is sometimes not defined and some are more schematic than others (Fig. 8-10).

Circular or near circular. These heads are the most numerous (on 67 boulders); they have a simple circular or near circular outline, usually enclosing pecked dots to delineate features. A sample of this motif is shown in Figures 8-6 and 8-7.

Face features only. This subcategory consists of simple faces delineated only with pecked dots or holes, generally three in number. The mouth is occasionally a pecked elongation (Figs. 8-9f, 8-10g, 8-11a). They often stand alone, but sometimes occur with simple heads (see Fig. 8-11a) and in two cases with abstract figures. One interesting petroglyph has three such motifs with deep pecking (the lower one is actually a double face that shares an eye), but they have been placed on natural contours of the boulder in such a way as to appear in low relief (Fig. 8-11b).

Triangular heads. There are only two triangular disembodied heads (one shown in Figure 8-6j). Another triangular head occurs on a stick figure (Figure 8-2d). These are probably casual variants of circular heads. Square or rectangular heads. These have a square or rectangular outline with pecked facial features (Figures 8-8 and 8-9). Most are simple and found with other fairly simple designs. Two (Figures 8-8b and 8-9a) are framed within another square. Three other more complicated square heads are pictured in Figures 8-3e, a very complex design containing three square heads associated with torso figures, round heads, and curvilinear meanders. In this case, the rectangular heads are unusual, with two of them having a v-shaped protuberance at the bottom of the face. Other more complex square heads are shown in Figures 8-8d and 8-9c, f-g. Figure 8-8d contains a pecked X and three deeply pecked cupule-like “eyes” representing eyes and a mouth. A fourth smaller pecked cupule is in the forehead area. The X within a square format also occurs in association with other anthropomorphs (see Figs. 8-4i and 8-5a), as well as in various rectilinear designs (Fig. 8-30d; 8-31b), perhaps indicating some special meaning. In Figure 8-9c, the head is surrounded by a rectilinear design making up a single complex motif. Finally, one boulder contains an interesting, complex petroglyph with a square head, found in association with a double-headed figure, one of which is square and one rounded, as well as with a simple face and two sets of double spirals (Figure 8-9f-g). An additional two square heads are found in sets of multiple

Complex heads. These are heads that are somewhat more elaborated than those discussed above, having some type of headdress added (Figure 8-11c-g; see also Figure 8-3e, second figure from left). Hands. Although hands are sometimes found in Nicaraguan pictograph sites (Navarro Genie 1996:54; Baker et al. 2006), pecked hands appear to be quite unusual. N-RIO-12 has a boulder with a pecked right hand, clustered with a number of geometric elements and a stick figure (Figure 8-2e). Vulva Forms. As discussed above, vulva forms have been noted on four torso figures. What appears to be another vulva form is found by itself in site N-RIO-19 (Figure 8-12a). The figure is deeply engraved. Its similarity to the vulva of a torso figure on an adjoining boulder justifies this identification. Two u-shaped figures enclosing a line (Fig. 8-29e-f) may also be vulva elements.

73

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Figure 8-6. Heads/Faces: Circular and Triangular Heads

a. N-RIO-14, R4

b. N-RIO-32, R11

d. N-RIO-47, R7, p1

e. N-RIO-07, R18

c. N-RIO-38, R4

f. N-RIO-41, R2

g. N-RIO-19, R23

h. N-RIO-34, R1

i. N-RIO-40, R10

j. N-RIO-39, R10, p1

74

Motif Classification Figure 8-7. Heads/Faces: Circular

a. N-RIO-23, R29

b. N-RIO-09, R5, p1

c. N-RIO-09, R5, p2

75

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Figure 8-8. Heads/Faces: Square

a. N-RIO-19, R65

b. N-RIO-14, R6, p2

c. N-RIO-39, R10, p1

d. N-RIO-19, R77

e. N-RIO-40, R11

76

Motif Classification Figure 8-9. Heads/Faces: Square and Connected

a. N-RIO-14, R1

b. N-RIO-09, R34

d. N-RIO-19, R45

e. N-RIO-35, R20

f.

h. N-RIO-23, R1

c. N-RIO-07, R9

g.

i. N-RIO-42, R4, p3

77

j. N-RIO-41, R6

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Figure 8-10. Heads/Faces: Heads with Continuous Eyebrow-Nose Line

a. N-RIO-02, R7, p2

b. N-RIO-19, R33*

d. N-RIO-37, R8

c. N-RIO-03, R75, p2

e. N-RIO-09, R15, p2

f. N-RIO-37, R23

g. N-RIO-07, R14, p2

* Scratched with machete.

78

Motif Classification Figure 8-11. Simple Features and Complex Heads Simple Features

a. N-RIO-41, R3

b. N-RIO-40, R6, P3

Complex Heads

c. N-RIO-09, R23, P2*

d. N-RIO-03, R39, P1*

f. N-RIO-25, R10

e. N-RIO-14, R7

g. N-RIO-35, R7

*Scratched with machete

79

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Figure 8-12. Vulva and Phallic Figures

a. N-RIO-19, R79,p2

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

b. N-RIO-37, R18

80

Phallic Forms. Although simple schematic phalluses occur on several of the stick and torso figures, as discussed above, only one isolated motif may represent a phallus (Figure 8-12b). Its segmentation and the lack of replication elsewhere may, however, call into question this identification.

unknown, but the consistency of representation is interesting. Alternatively, in Figure 8-15c the two large bulging eyes carved in low relief and antennae-like appendages give the figure an owl-like effect. It could represent an owl effigy, perhaps of a tropical screech owl, which has ear tufts that become prominent when the owl is alarmed (Janzen 1983:592-593).

High Relief or Three-Dimensional Figures These are anthropomorphic figures carved in high relief or 3-dimensionally, creating almost sculpture-like images. Three were recorded during the 1995 through 1998 field seasons.

Zoomorphic Figures Zoomorphic figures are defined as having animal-like characteristics. There are only a small number of zoomorphic figures in the corpus of Ometepe petroglyphs and, among these, only a few categories. Monkeys, a few other quadrupedal mammals, reptiles, birds, and amphibians dominate the zoomorphic category (Figs. 8-16, 8-17, 8-18; see also Table 11).

The first is quite unusual (Fig. 8-13a). The natural contours of the rock have been opportunistically enhanced to form a naturalistic human head. A natural line forms the chin and the bridge of the nose is a natural ridge. Nostrils, mouth, eyes, and a line delineating the face are all pecked. No other petroglyph is as realistically drawn.

Monkeys Nine probable monkey images have been identified (see Figure 8-16). They are generally depicted in profile with a rotund stomach, often standing erect, and with a long curling tail. Five figures exhibit finger digits. Four have pecked facial features, similar to those on anthropomorphic figures. A combination of traits usually defines these figures as monkeys. Figure 8-16g is the most problematic of these identifications, but has been placed in this category because of its long tail and finger digits. Monkeys are usually found alone, except in three cases where they either share a panel or boulder with other elements (Figure 8-16a, b, f). One unusual image is a head that is identified as a monkey because of its large ears and v-shaped line defining the prominent nasal area of a monkey (Figure 8-16h). It is of some interest that this is viewed in an upside down position on the boulder, although it is possible that the boulder has rolled from its original position. Both howler and white-faced monkeys are still abundant on Maderas.

Figure 8-13b is also extraordinary. It is carved in high relief and measures approximately 22cm x 24cm. It is an eerie baby- or fetus-like carving with hands and legs drawn up close to the body. The head is skull-like. A protruding circle above the legs in the abdominal area may be a penis or an umbilical attachment. On the top of the rock above the figure is a small 5cm diameter cupule. A 3-dimensional engraving, called La Bruja (the witch), is another striking figure (Fig. 8-14a, b). A natural, upright protuberance of the rock is carved in relief around its entire circumference. One side has bulging eyes and a pecked mouth. The top and rear of the figure are elaborately engraved with simple faces and curvilinear lines. The lower sides of the rock also have been carved with petroglyphs. Indeterminate Heads/Faces

Quadrupedal Figures Eight head-like images cannot be categorized and have been put into an “indeterminate” category. Admittedly the line between some of the anthropomorphic figures and the indeterminate head category is a bit tenuous. A number of these figures are shown in Figure 8-15. These are often complex and fantastic looking. Such heads have sometimes been called “masks,” but this would attribute a function for such motifs that may not be warranted. The prominent ring-like or goggle eyes found in 8-15b, c, d, e, and g do, however, recall Mesoamerican Tlaloc figures. Tlaloc was the ancient rain god of Mexico, an important and powerful figure, variations of whose image can be found from the American Southwest to Central America (Schaafsma 1980:236; Stone 2007). Tlaloc, however, is usually portrayed as a fanged figure. It is of interest that all but Figure 8-15g have variations of antenna-like elements rising from the top of the head or face. Whether this is actually a local variation of a Tlaloc figure is

This is a general category for other mammal motifs. All are etched in profile with tail and limbs curving outward, these latter often drawn as parallel lines to indicate four limbs (Figs. 8-17, 8-18; also Fig. 8-4g). As Table 11 shows, most were found in the Corozal site (N-RIO-03). Figure 8-17a from that site is the most striking of the panels; it is covered with four zoomorphic figures (three quadrupeds and a probable bird). Four images have spots on the body, likely representing deer (Fig. 8-17a-d). Two images in Figure 8-17a exhibit antler-like rays coming from the head. Figure 8-18h has a line curving backward from the head, perhaps representing an antler rack. The ears and upright tail of Figure 8-18c are also deer-like. A small variety of spotted deer still lives on the island. It will also be remembered that the Nicarao venerated Toste, the god of deer, but whether this extended to rock art manufacture is unknown (see Chapter 4 above;

81

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Figure 8-13: Anthropomorphic Relief Figures

a. N-RIO-02, R1

b. N-RIO-19, R28, p2

82

Motif Classification Figure 8-14. La Bruja (PAO-97-01)

a: front

b. rear

83

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Figure 8-15. Indeterminate Heads/Faces

a. N-RIO-21, R12, P1

b. N-RIO-23, R4*

c. N-RIO-23, R15*

d. N-RIO-23, R13

f. N-RIO-11, R3

e. N-RIO-23, R21

g. N-RIO-10, R56

*Scratched with machete

84

Motif Classification Figure 8-16. Monkeys

a. N-RIO-2, R5, p2

d. N-RIO-36, R6

b. N-RIO-17, R14

e. N-RIO-35, R18

g. N-RIO-37, R12

c. N-RIO-33, R9

f. N-RIO-37, R13,p2

h. N-RIO-19, R26, p1 (upside down view)

85

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Fig. 8-17. Quadrupedal Figures

a

b. N-RIO-03, R28, p1

c. N-RIO-03, R77, p1

e. N-RIO-03, R63

h. N-RIO-11, R1, P1

f. N-RIO-07, R15, p1*

i. N-RIO-39, R4

j. N-RIO-03, R38, p1

*Scratched with machete

86

d. N-RIO-13, R8

g. N-RIO-03, R16, p2

k. N-RIO-02, R8

Motif Classification Figure 8-18. Quadrupeds and Amphibians Quadrupeds

a. N-RIO-03, R60

b. N-RIO-03, R66

d. PAO-97-08

c. N-RIO-03, R59

e. N-RIO-35, R14, p3

Amphibians

f. N-RIO-07, R33, p1

g. N-RIO-11, R7

87

h. N-RIO-11, R6Newson

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua 1987:61). Although jaguars are often represented with spots in Mesoamerican iconography, none of the Ometepe figures are particularly cat-like.

which simple undulating lines should be considered snakes. I have chosen to be conservative in this regard and have identified ten snakes where their characteristics seem fairly obvious (Figs. 8-20, 8-21). A motif category called “simple snake-like meanders” is also listed under curvilinear motifs below. One site, N-RIO-07, stands out because of the presence of at least five snakes.

Figure 8-17e has two triangular appendages hanging from its stomach, perhaps indicating a female animal. The rest of the quadrupeds are highly schematic. Figure 8-17k’s curving tail and round head and facial features are similar to some of the monkeys, but its flat-footed stance is similar to other quadrupeds. Aside from deer, there are a number of small mammals on the island, but identification of most of the quadrupedal mammal images is problematic (see Fig. 8-18a-e).

None of the images are rendered in a consistent way. Figure 8-20a shows an impressive snake in the middle of a complicated and beautiful curvilinear design. Figure 820b has been identified as a snake’s head because of its shape and protruding tongue. Figure 8-20f is striped with a rather large head. The body striping could also indicate a segmented body such as scorpions have, but the absence of legs makes it more likely that this is a snake and not a scorpion. Figure 8-20e has been identified as a snake because of a pecked dot where the eye should be. In addition, the parallel curving lines making up the snake’s body are similar to the way the snake is rendered in Figures 8-20c, d, i, j.

Amphibians There are three probable frogs or toads among the Ometepe images (Figs. 8-18f-h). They all have upturned arms and splayed, jumping stance. Figure 8-18g’s bulbous eyes and splayed stance clearly indicate a frog or toad. Large toads or sapos and other types of frogs and toads are numerous on Ometepe and some are spotted (Figure 8-18f). Frogs are often associated with rain in Mesoamerican iconography.

Birds Eight images have been identified as birds (Fig. 8-21). Figures 8-21a and c have large elongated beaks that may be a realistic rendering of pelicans or herons, species of which are found on the lakes of Nicaragua. Figure 8-21a has a crest or plumage. This could represent the American White Pelican, one of the largest migrating water birds, which overwinters as far south as Nicaragua. It has white plumage prior to first breeding (Cornell Lab of Ornithology 2006; Montana 2006; Oiseaux.net 2006 a; Oisseaux.net 2006b).

Reptiles Two main types of reptiles have been identified as motifs in the Ometepe petroglyphs. These are saurians figures, including probable caiman or lizards, and serpents (Figure 8-19 and 8-20). Caiman and Lizards. Both caiman and numerous types of lizards, including iguana, are present or have been present on Ometepe Island. Differentiating the two in the more schematic drawings is difficult, thus they have been grouped together (Fig. 8-19). Caiman were once more ubiquitous, but even today local people say that they have seen this small crocodilian in the low-lying area of the Rio Istian. Figure 8-19a can be identified by anatomically correct features, including two raised areas on its head, which undoubtedly represent the raised nasal area and prominent eye ridge. The lines in the tail may represent scale patterning that can be distinctive in certain caiman. The concentric circles in the stomach are not, however, a recognizable anatomical feature.

Figure 8-21d has a crest and distinctive down-turned beak. This is probably a raptor, particularly an eagle such as the Harpy Eagle, which has characteristic first-year plumage (Peregrine Fund 2006; National Geographic News 2006). Although endangered in Central America, significant populations of Harpy Eagles have recently been found in the jungles of tropical lowland forests in the Bosawas Biosphere Reserve in northern Nicaragua and they may once have been much more widespread (Nature Conservancy 2006). Tillett (1988:61) notes, “Birds such as the King Vulture and Harpy Eagle also are frequently represented on the pendants [from northern Costa Rica]. In many Middle American and Costa Rican mythologies, these and other species express the idea of freedom to enter and reenter any of the three regions of the universe. As a consequence, they occupy the role of messenger to the world of supernatural spirits.”

Figures 8-19b-c are identified as probable caiman because of their larger bodies and elongated heads. Figures 8-19e-f are sufficiently schematic and simple that they could represent any type of lizard, while Figure 819g is clearly a realistic rendering of a lizard. The problems with identifying zoomorphic figures that are highly stylized can be seen in Figure 8-19d; a head, eyes, and a curving spiral-like “tail” within a complicated curvilinear design may or may not be a stylized lizard. It has been placed in this category on a largely impressionistic basis.

Other birds are simple and schematic (Figs. 8-21e-f). Figure 8-21g is identified as a highly stylized bird because of its two bird-like feet and apparent tail. There are also three likely examples of stylized bird heads each with a large eye and beak (Figs. 8-21h-j 3d, e, f, j; see also Fig. 8-5b). These bear a resemblance to

Snakes or Snake-like Forms. Snakes are a problematic category because of difficulties in identifying snakes in sometimes complicated curvilinear designs and deciding 88

Motif Classification Figure 8-19. Reptiles: Caiman/Lizards

a. N-RIO-35, R19

b. N-RIO-19, R38, p2

c. N-RIO-17, R17

d. N-RIO-23, R17

e. N-RIO-26, R3

89

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Figure 8-20. Reptiles: Snakes or Snake-like Forms

a. N-RIO-05, R1, p1*

c. N-RIO-17, R8

b. N-RIO-07, R17, p1*

d. N-RIO-02, R6, p1

f. N-RIO-07, R2, p1

h. N-RIO-07, R23, p1

e. N-RIO-17, R11

g. N-RIO-07, R2, p2

i. N-RIO-07, R12, p1

*Scratched with machete

90

j. N-RIO-40, R17

Motif Classification Figures 8-21. Birds

a. N-RIO-33, R2*

b. N-RIO-33, R1

e. N-RIO-03, R40

h.

Portion of N-RIO-3, R40

c. N-RIO-03, R1**

f. Portion of N-RIO-03, R56

i. Portion of N-RIO-05, R1, P1

*Scratched with machete ** Chalked

91

d. N-RIO-37, R13, p1

g. N-RIO-07, R16

j. Portion of N-RIO-12, R1

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua stylized Mesoamerican bird figures found to the north. All three are found embedded within complex panels (see Figs. 8-5b; 8-20a). As discussed above, one indeterminate figure (Fig. 8-15c) might be an owl image.

There are only two boulders with rectilineal spirals, probably an individualized variation (Fig. 8-22h-i). One spider web-like spiral (Fig. 8-22g) is unique. The spiral is a naturally graceful form, and the many ways that it was rendered could indicate not only some cosmological meaning, but also an aesthetic appreciation of the form itself.

Possible Zoomorphs There are other figures that may be zoomorphic, but are highly stylized in rendering. The lack of certain realistic identifiers makes this category problematic. Nevertheless, seven figures were counted in this category (not illustrated).

Meanders Amid the plethora of convoluted designs, meanders stand out as another of the signature elements of the Ometepe collection, found on over 35% of all petroglyph boulders (at least 260 boulders) (Table 14). Meanders are defined generally here as winding sinuous curvilinear lines. It is hard to do justice here to the range of meanders and very hard to categorize them in any systematic way. No two are alike. They range from quite simple to extremely complex and often cover entire boulders (Figs. 8-24, 825, 8-26). Subjectively, meandering designs are generally very graceful and often quite beautiful.

Non-Representative Motifs This class of motifs encompasses categories other than life forms and that are often called abstract or geometric. Given the complexities of categorizing such motifs (discussed above), I have opted for three broad descriptive classes: curvilinear, rectilinear, and other. Each includes elements that may stand alone as a subtype and/or can be associated with or incorporated into other design types discussed below.

The vast majority of boulders with meandering designs are fairly complex (Figs. 8-23g, 8-24h-j, 8-25, 8-26, 827h). Figure 8-25a and b are two beautiful examples at the far end of the complexity continuum. These are on large boulders and were cut in tightly packed designs that cover almost the entire boulder. Some very complicated and elaborate meandering designs include other discrete elements, such as grids and/or cruciforms. Figure 8-35i is an unusual and particularly lovely example. Meanders usually can be considered discrete designs, but sometimes they seem to be only an ancillary part of a more complex design, associated with and connected to other very different elements (see, for example, Fig. 8-16b, righthand figure).

Curvilinears Non-representative curvilinear forms make up the vast majority of Ometepe petroglyphs (Tables 13-15 and 17). As can be seen from many of the following illustrations, there is a broad range—from fairly simple individual elements and motifs to highly complex abstract designs. Numerous boulders are pecked with associations of convoluted lines, some of which defy categorization on their own beyond generalized terms, such as “complex curvilinear” or “simple lines”. In the following discussion, and in the quantification and analysis in Chapter 9, I have, therefore, out of necessity, had to focus more specifically on categorization of repeated and distinctive elements. I have, for example, generally ignored miscellaneous simple or eccentric lines that may not be consequential or at least are not replicated in any systematic way. On the database, these are sometimes simply entered as miscellaneous lines.

A small number of meanders (64) have a short, fairly simple undulating line; some of these are rather snakelike (Fig. 8-24a-c). Other short sinuous lines, however, are minor design features that simply connect two motifs. In this case, these have not been considered or counted as discrete elements. Meanders with loops. This is a very discrete recurring sub-type comprising complex undulating lines that incorporate a few to many small loops. Almost half of the meandering designs are meanders with loops (Figs. 823g; 8-24j; 8-25c-h, 8-26a-e, Table 14).

Spirals Spirals are one of the motifs so ubiquitous (found on over 30% of petroglyph boulders) on Ometepe that Matilló Villa (1973) famously called it the “Island of Circles and Spirals” (Table 13). Figures 8-22 and 8-23 show the range of spiral design and association, from simple to extremely complex. There are simple spirals (Fig. 8-22ad), spirals with tails (Fig. 8-22e-f), double spirals incurving toward each other and in opposite directions (Fig. 8-22j-n, 8-23a), multiple spirals (8-23b-d), and those embedded in complicated designs, especially within meanders (8-23e-g). In a few cases spirals are apparent decorative elements attached to other figures, such as a spiral tail on a monkey (see Fig. 8-16c, f).

Meanders with spirals. As mentioned above, spirals are sometimes incorporated into meanders, usually at the ends (Figs. 8-24d-e, g; 8-26; Table 13). There are 54 boulders with meanders and incorporated spirals. Of these, more than half are within looping meanders (Fig. 8-26). In two cases, spirals appear to almost replace most loops, forming an elaboration of the meander/loop type (see Figure 8-2gh).

92

Motif Classification Figure 8-22. Spirals

a. N-RIO-10, R13

d. N-RIO-03, R79

h. N-RIO-19, R4

k. N-RIO-37, R4

b. PAO-98-12

c. N-RIO-18, R2

e. N-RIO-39, R5

f. N-RIO-37, R3

i. N-RIO-19, R32

l. N-RIO-38, R4

m. N-RIO-39, R9, p1

93

g. N-RIO-42, R10

j. N-RIO-10, R3

n. N-RIO-39, R6

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Figure 8-23. Spirals

a. N-RIO-39, R8

d. N-RIO-8, R19

b. N-RIO-19, R66

e. N-RIO-10, R1, p2

g. N-RIO-09, R28

94

c. N-RIO-12, R15

f. N-RIO-07, R8

Motif Classification Figure 8-24. Meanders

a. PAO-98-25

e. N-RIO-42, R20

h. N-RIO-10, R6, p1

b. PAO-98-20, p1

c. N-RIO-08, R10

f. N-RIO-07, R18

d. N-RIO-29, R5

g. N-RIO-10, R8

i. N-RIO-37, R10, p1

95

j. PAO-98-01

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Figure 8-25. Complex Meanders and Meanders with Loops

a. N-RIO-19, R82

b. N-RIO-08, R26, p1

c. N-RIO-01, R2

f. PAO-98-10

d. N-RIO-37, R1

g. N-RIO-13, R9

96

e. PAO-98-02

h. PAO-98-12

Motif Classification Figure 8-26. Meanders with Loops and Meanders with Spirals

a. N-RIO-17, R21, p1

d. N-RIO-45, R1

b. N-RIO-31, R1

c. N-RIO-19, R16

e. N-RIO-42, R1

g. PAO-98-17

f. N-RIO-29, R1

h. PAO-98-05

97

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Circles and Circle Variants

Circles with other external lines (3 boulders). This category includes circles with a few, less regularly spaced exterior straight lines around their periphery. These seem more casually drawn than circles with radiating lines (Fig. 8-28e-f).

Circles and circle variants constitute another major curvilinear motif category (Fig. 8-27; 8-28; Table 15). Variations include: Simple circles (50 boulders). These are sometimes found alone (Fig. 8-27a), but more often than not accompany other design elements (Fig. 8-27c). As mentioned above, several anthropomorphs have small circles engraved near their heads (see Fig. 8-1a, c).

Circles with tail (53 boulders). These are simple circles attached to a line, generally curving or meandering. They may occur singly (Fig. 8-28g-h) or, more often, with other figures (see Fig. 8-28a). Ovals (9 boulders). Ovals are an obvious variant of circles, but whether they were meaningful on their own is unknown. Rather than being simply lopsided or ill-drawn circles, the few recorded seem to have been intentionally rendered as ovals and most are the main or only figure on the boulder (Fig. 8-28i). There was also one set of concentric ovals (Fig. 8-17k).

Filled circles (14 boulders). These are circles completely filled with pecking (not illustrated). They are distinct from cupules because of a lack of depth. Concentric circles (48 boulders). This is a very distinctive motif, occurring 11 times as the sole or major motif (Fig. 8-27d-e), but more generally accompanying other elements or incorporated within a more complex design (Fig. 8-18a).

Arcs, Concentric Arcs, and U-Shapes Arcs, concentric arcs, and U-shapes may be variations on the same motif (Fig. 8-29). There are very few of these elements (Table 17). Although arcs and u-shapes are sometimes found incorporated into complex designs (Fig. 8-29g), they are occasionally a major element on some panels (see Fig. 8-29a-f). There are nine concentric arcs (Figs. 8-1c, 8-18a, 8-29f). Two figures have a line within and parallel to the legs of the arc and may well be vulva figures (Fig. 8-29e-f).

Circle and dot (36 boulders). Sometimes called a ring and dot motif, this consists of a circle with a dot in the center. These can be found alone (Fig. 8-27b, f-g) or associated with other design elements (Figs. 8-27h-k). Figure 8-27b is of interest because it is the only circle carved in relief. Some of these images can look very eyelike when found in pairs (Fig. 8-27i). The circle and dot motif, when used in some complex designs, occasionally suggest some type of fantasmagoric figure and several have been included in the Indeterminate Head category discussed above (Fig. 8-15d, e, g). Circle and dot or ring and dot motifs are very common in Mesoamerica and are also seen on Costa Rican jade items (Stone 2007; Easby 1981:146, 148).

Rectilinears Overall, there are very few rectilinears elements among the Ometepe petroglyphs (see Table 18; Figs. 8-30, 8-31, 8-32). There are even fewer complex designs that might be categorized as rectilinear in overall plan and many of these also incorporate curvilinear elements. While there are numerous boulders that contain simple straight line elements of various sorts (vertical, horizontal, parallel lines, etc.) and zigzagging lines in various configurations, most of these are associated with or attached to other figures, including curvilinear forms, or appear to be variations of a curvilinear form (as, for example, a square spiral; Fig. 8-22h-i). Very occasionally a simple straight line may be found singly as the principal motif on a boulder, but it is difficult to see these lines as being particularly diagnostic. Some simple angular forms for convenience have been categorized by resemblance to common shapes—V (5 boulders), Z (2 boulders), L (2 boulders), and X (2 boulders). The more commonly recurring rectilinear shapes are categorized below by shape.

Chains of circles. Chains of circles occur on 19 boulders (Circles Fig. 8-27j-l; see also Fig. 8-16b). Three of these also have dots inside the circles, as in Figures 8-27j-k. Other attached circles (14 boulders). These are circles that are connected to each other in other ways, generally by a wavering line or attached in groups of circles (Fig. 8-28a). Internally divided circles (9 boulders). There are nine circular elements sectioned internally by various lines. These include an x or cross, parallel lines, or an internal grid within the circle (see Fig. 8-28b-c). Circles with radiating lines (3 boulders). This category includes circles with regularly spaced radiating lines (Fig. 8-2e; this is partially exfoliated; also 8-18a). These are often described in the literature as solar images because of their sun-like appearance. A rayed circle that encloses a pecked face is included in this category (Fig. 8-28d), and may be related to other anthropomorphs with headdresses with radiating lines (Fig. 8-5b-c).

Grids The most significant single category of rectilineal forms is grid-like designs—complex associations of multiple attached squares or rectangles (Fig. 8-30). These are found in 14 sites on 23 boulders (3% of total boulders), with one or two found in each site. The most

98

Motif Classification Figure 8-27: Circles and Circle Variants

a. N-RIO-09, R25

d. N-RIO-27, R2

g. N-RIO-42, R32

j. N-RIO-08, R17

b. N-RIO-08, R31

c. N-RIO-07, R4

e. N-RIO-42, R7

f. N-RIO-08, R33

h. N-RIO-19, R82

i. N-RIO-23, R7

k. N-RIO-09, R9, p1

99

l. N-RIO-19, R31, p1

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Figure 8-28: Circles and Circle Variants

a. N-RIO-40, R5, P1

d. N-RIO-07, R7

g. N-RIO-21, R17

b. N-RIO-42, R5

e. N-RIO-42, R31

h. N-RIO-40, R5, p1

100

c. N-RIO-11, R2, p1

f. N-RIO-40, R5, p5

i. N-RIO-07, R21

Motif Classification Figure 8-29. Arcs, Concentric Arcs, and U-Shapes

a. N-RIO-35, R15

d. N-RIO-45, R2

b. N-RIO-42, R27

c. N-RIO-23, R8

e. N-RIO-13, R11

f. N-RIO-42, R8, p1

g. PAO-98-24, p1

101

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Figure 8-30. Grids

a. N-RIO-03, R37, p1

d. N-RIO-17, R18, p1

b. N-RIO-33, R13

e. N-RIO-37, R17, p2

c. N-RIO-40, R5, p2

f. N-RIO-09, R21

g. N-RIO-21, R3

102

Motif Classification Figure 8-31. Squares, Rectangles, and Triangles

a. N-RIO-07, R32

b. N-RIO-11, R10

d. N-RIO-19, R59, p1

e. N-RIO-03, R34

g. N-RIO-03, R68

h. N-RIO-29, R3

j. N-RIO-17, R2, p4

k. N-RIO-10, R4

103

c. N-RIO-12, R5,p3

f. N-RIO-11, R9

i. N-RIO-26, R1, p1

l. N-RIO-26, R1, p2

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua notable exceptions are N-RIO-40, which has four, and NRIO-03, which has three. Grids range from relatively simple to extremely complex, and they are often integrated into complex curvilinear forms or associated with other figures (Fig. 8-30). One grid also forms the body of a bird, but this may have been intended merely as decoration (Fig. 8-21a).

Ladders A line with two or more perpendicular lines across the axial line is, for convenience, called a ladder. There are three of these figures, all associated with curvilinears (see Fig. 8-33a-b). Rakes

Squares and Rectangles An element with a line attached to three or more perpendicular lines that do not cross the axial line is called a rake, for lack of a better descriptive word (Fig. 833c-e).

In addition to squares or rectangles making up grids, there are squares and a few rectangles that occur as single elements or attached to other elements (Fig. 8-31a-k). Table 19 provides a numerical breakdown of variations on the form. These include simple squares or rectangles, attached squares, squares with attached lines, squares or rectangles with internal dots (possibly a variation on the circle and dot element), concentric squares or rectangles, squares or rectangles internally filled with pecking, and rectangles with an interior X.

Rakes may be found as discrete designs or attached to other figures as in Fig. 8-16b. These are found on five boulders. One of these (N-RIO-13, R6) has two similar rakes on two different faces of the rock (Fig. 8-33d-e). Corozal Figures

One petroglyph with square or rectangular designs is unique among the Ometepe petroglyphs. This is Feature 15 of N-RIO-11 (Fig. 8-32a). The rock has or had four side-by-side glyph-like elements in a line. From left to right there is a rectangular split grid element and two concentric squares. Adjacent on the right is another square element that has been deliberately obliterated. The petroglyph is on the side of a boulder at an approximately 90º angle. The general resemblance to Maya glyphs is hard to avoid and comparisons can be made with similar glyph-like elements in an engraved panel from the Cenote Tancah in the Maya area of Quintana Roo on the Yucatan peninsula (Rissolo 2003:93). Concentric squares and, especially, the rectangular split grid can be seen at that site as well (Fig. 8-32b).

A rare, but distinctive motif, has, for want of a better appellation, been called the Corozal figure, named for its major location. It has thus far been found almost exclusively in the site of El Corozal Viejo (N-RIO-3). The typical form generally has a set of two or three concentric circles in the center with two outward curving antenna-like appendages at the top and two leg-like appendages at the bottom, as well as one or two horizontal lines jutting from each side. These are generally rendered as double parallel lines, sometimes closed on the ends or as straight lines. A semicircular line is sometimes also attached to the top of the concentric circles between the two “antennae” (Fig. 8-34a-c). Variations occur, consisting of less precisely cut lines, single line “legs” and a spiral instead of concentric circles (Fig. 8-34d), and apparently missing appendages (Fig. 834e-f, j). Figure 8-34h has similar attributes, but is more elaborated. The left hand motif in Figure 8-34e has attenuated “legs” and appears more flower-like. Two figures (Fig. 8-34k-l) are included within this group as variations—Figure 8-34k because of its concentric circles and “legs” and Figure 8-34l because its closed circles resemble the “antennae” of the other figures—but these may simply be incomplete.

Triangles There are only eight examples of triangles (Fig. 8-31d, l). Several are attached to other designs. V, X, Z, and L Elements These are almost negligible as individual elements (not pictured; see Table 18). The V is found 4 times, a Z twice, and an L once. The X is found on its own only once. The occurrences of X found within other motifs have been noted above.

At the El Corozal Viejo site there are fifteen of these figures on ten boulders (1.4% of all boulders). Feature 50, with some of the most beautifully cut of these figures, has five such images on three of its four panels. Its unusual repetition and exclusivity to the Corozal Viejo site indicate a particular meaning or activity associated with this site.

Other Motifs There are certain specific, but usually rare, motifs that do not easily fit into other descriptive categories. For lack of another word, I have placed these in an “other” category. The specificity with which the following motifs are drawn creates the appearance of a motif with particular meaning.

Cruciform Figures There are very few cruciform figures—only 23 on 17 boulders—among the Ometepe petroglyphs (Fig. 8-35 and 8-36; Tables 20 and 21). There are four basic

104

Motif Classification

Figure 8-32.

a. N-RIO-11, R15

b. Engravings from Cenote Tancah, Quintana Roo (from Rissolo 2003:93, after Miller 1982)

105

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Figure 8-33. Ladders and Rakes

Ladders

a. N-RIO-46, R6, p1

b. N-RIO-12, R4

Rakes

c. N-RIO-03, R2, p1

d. N-RIO-13, R6, p1

106

e. N-RIO-13, R6, p2

Motif Classification Figure 8-34. Corozal Figures

a. N-RIO-03, R50, P1

c. N-RIO-03, R34, P2*

f. N-RIO-03, R50, R2

i. N-RIO-03, R49*

b. N-RIO-03, 51, p1

d. N-RIO-03, R82

e. N-RIO-03, R35*

g. N-RIO-03, R36

j. N-RIO-03, R76

*Chalked or scratched by vandals

107

h. N-RIO-03, R55

k. N-RIO-03, R50, p4

l. N-RIO-03, R71

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua types, which have been designated interlaced, concentric, outlined, and simple.

Outlined. There are six outlined cruciforms, shown in Figure 8-36a-d (see also Tables 20-21).

Interlaced. These are striking figures of enlaced double lines. The five found thus far on Ometepe are pictured in Figure 8-35a-e. Figure 8-35e is apparently incomplete or eroded and missing the bottom of the figure. Only one interlaced cruciform (Fig. 8-35b) occurs with other petroglyph motifs on the same boulder.

Simple. Simple cruciforms consist only of two crossed lines (Fig. 8-36e-g; Tables 20-21). There are three examples, with two of the three attached to a larger design. Figure 8-35i is a particularly beautiful example of a very complex petroglyph incorporating cruciforms. Both Figures 8-35g and i are of particular interest because both have multiple cruciforms.

Navarro Genie (1996:42, 152) has identified the enlaced cruciform motif as an Aztec symbol associated with gold and the sun god. While this seems to be the case, its distribution is apparently more complicated, for the motif may have been derived from the pop, the interwoven Maya mat symbol. Robicsek (1975:292) in a major work on this symbol, says

Cruciforms are ubiquitous motifs found throughout the Americas. Sanchez’s (2006) study found that outlined and concentric cruciforms (see Fig. 8-35f-j and Fig. 836a-d) are often identified cross-culturally as a symbol of Venus (Sanchez 2006:5; see also Schaafsma 1980:238 and Spinden 1957:92-93). He contends that, at least in the North American Southwest, Mesoamerica, Central America, Venezuela, and perhaps the Caribbean, many ethnographically known groups attach great importance to Venus as a star. The Maya, in particular, not only observed the planet, but studied it intensely (Sanchez 2006:3). He notes also, “Venus was associated with the rain god Chaac. And also this planet was linked by the Maya to Kukulcan, the feathered serpent. The Aztecs also related Venus with Quetzalcoatl, which is also in relation [sic] with the rain god Ehécatl” (Sanchez 2006:4). Since there are very few of the type found so far on Ometepe, it is likely that they were brought by occasional visitors with origins in Mexico, such as the Chorotega or Nahuaspeaking Nicarao.

“..the mat-design was one of the most important power-symbols among the ancient Maya. The honor of being distinguished with this sign was reserved for those with noble birth, high office and supreme authority. It is also highly probable that the mat-symbol was not entirely monopolized by the worldly rulers, but that it also transcended from its secular, mundane application into religious use and was also applied to ornament and distinguish the masters of the Maya Olympus and their servants and high priests.” The mat design is generally portrayed as hatchwork or as intertwined strands or guilloché, but Robicsek also shows two intertwined cruciforms, almost identical to those on Ometepe, from Stela 1 at Tikal and from Stela 7 from Piedras Negras in the Maya region.

Figure 8 Four boulders have Figure 8 elements. Although two of these are very simple, two are fairly elaborate and finely cut (Fig. 8-37a-b). A similar motif is found on the base of a monumental statue from Punta de las Figuras on Zapatera Island accompanied by a guilloché element (Navarro Genie 2007: 325, 515).

This motif is also found on figurines at least as far south as Guanacaste-Nicoya (Snarskis 1981:35). A well-known female ceramic figurine from Nicoya is also lavishly decorated with several versions of the mat symbol, including linear intertwining, as well as the enlaced cruciform (Day and Tillett 1996:225; Tillett 1988:55). The figure is of Carrillo Polychrome, which is thought to date to A.D. 500-800 (Abel-Vidor et al. 1987:117). Lothrop (1926, Vol. 1:175, 177, Plates XL, XLIa) also shows several such motifs on other polychrome ceramic figures from Nicoya. Given that there was considerable interchange between the Classic Maya and Costa Rica, such a symbol could have diffused even prior to Chorotega entry. The Aztec or Nahuat people generally may have also absorbed this sign because of its connotations of power, with the Nicarao bringing it to Nicaragua.

Line or Double Line with Incurving Ends There are four of these distinctive figures from three different sites (Fig. 8-37c-f). One double figure is within a rectangle (Fig. 8-37c). There are a few other simple lines with incurving lines, but these appear to be variations on simple meandering lines.

Concentric. There are nine boulders with concentric cruciforms (Fig. 8-35f-j; Tables 20-21). In most cases the concentric cruciforms are very finally drawn.

108

Motif Classification Figure 8-35. Enlaced and Concentric Cruciforms

a. N-RIO-03, R78

b. N-RIO-02, R5, p1

d. N-RIO-08, R32

c. N-RIO-02, R4

e. N-RIO-33, R8

f. N-RIO-40, R14, p2

g. N-RIO-40, R13

i. N-RIO-22, R9

h. N-RIO-40, R4

j. N-RIO-17, R31

Figure 8-36. Outlined and Simple Cruciforms

109

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

a. N-RIO-40, R3

b. N-RIO-03, R47, p1

c. N-RIO-25, R4

e. N-RIO-25, R15

d. N-RIO-17, R6

f. N-RIO-08, R2

110

g. N-RIO-19, R83

Motif Classification

Figure 8-37. Other Motifs

Figure 8

a. N-RIO-7, R24

b. N-RIO-12, R5, p2

Parallel lines with incurved ends

` c. N-RIO-01, R1, p2

d. N-RIO-03, R11, p1

e. N-RIO-11, R13

f. N-RIO-11, R13

111

9

sites), followed by simple pecked face features (12 boulders spread among nine sites and one isolate) and the head/face with eyebrow-nose line motif (ten boulders in six sites). Other types of heads and body part motifs are numerically almost negligible: six complex heads distributed among five sites, one triangular head in each of two sites, one multiple connected head element in each of five sites; one pecked hand, one possible phallic motif, and one vulva form (separate from vulva elements on body forms) (Tables 9 and 10).

QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS

The results of quantification of the motif categories presented in Chapter 8 are discussed below. Tables showing quantification are found at the back of this chapter. 9.1 Representative Figures: Anthropomorphs and Zoomorphs

The full body categories of torso figures (n=30) and stick figures (n=19) are far fewer in number and more restricted in location than heads/faces. Torso figures are found in 14 sites and two isolates, but three sites (N-RIO02, -03, and -11) are of particular interest because they account for a little more than a third of torso figures. In N-RIO-11 100% of its anthropomorphic figures (4 of 4 boulders) are torso figures, followed by N-RIO-02 with 60% (3 of 5 boulders); and N-RIO-03 with 24% (6 of 26 boulders).

There are surprisingly few anthropomorphic figures and even fewer zoomorphs in the Ometepe rock art corpus as a whole. Anthropomorphic motifs occur on 152 petroglyph boulders in the study area (20.8%), and in 33 of 43 petroglyph sites. Only nine of 51 isolated boulders have anthropomorphs (Table 7). In terms of percentages of anthropomorphs per site, seven sites (N-RIO-01, -02, 12, -14, -34, -38, and -44) stand out in the positive frequency of anthropomorphic images (over one standard deviation from the mean). N-RIO-44 is over two standard deviations, but this latter has only three boulders. Only N-RIO-02 (n=11) and N-RIO-14 (n=9) have more than five petroglyph boulders. Anthropomorphs are thus thinly, but fairly evenly spread.

Stick figures are found in only six sites and on one isolate, but are heavily concentrated in N-RIO-03 (n=6) (Table 8). The others are distributed in N-RIO-12 (on four boulders), N-RIO-17 and N-RIO-19 (three boulders each), N-RIO-35 and N-RIO-36 (two each), and PAO-9808 (n=1). Stick figures often co-occur with torso figures in the same sites, especially in N-RIO-03, but also in sites N-RIO-12, -17, and -19. They also co-occur on three boulders. The two motifs are, thus, probably part of the same, but limited, tradition of images representing the full human body. Whole body figures—torso and stick figures—have much more severely restricted distribution in the Ometepe corpus than heads. They, thus, may have had either a different iconographic function and/or relate to separate cultural influences.

Ten sites have no anthropomorphs and, of these, only NRIO-33 has a significant number of boulders (17), the rest have between two and six boulders. There is thus a strong tendency for small clusters and isolates to have few if any anthropomorphic images. Tables 8, 9, and 10 show the distribution of major anthropomorphic categories. The most common anthropomorphic category consists of heads/faces on 97 of 152 (63.8%) boulders with anthropomorphs. Of these, simple circular heads are the overwhelming majority (81 individual elements distributed among 64 boulders) (see Tables 9 and 10). Thus, while some form of anthropomorph occurs in 20.8% of all petroglyph boulders, when simple circular heads—the most widespread and common of anthropomorphic forms—are subtracted, other anthropomorphs are found on only 12% of total boulders. Simple circular heads are thinly distributed in 22 sites, but over 43% (27 boulders) are in two of the largest sites, N-RIO-03 (N=12) and N-RIO-19 (N=10), as well as in N-RIO-17 (n=5). Generally, circular heads are found in association with a variety of other motifs on their individual panel, ranging from simple lines or other shapes to extremely complex designs; only ten boulders have no other motif associations. Of particular note is that, on at least 25 boulders, these circular heads are integrated into very complex abstract curvilinear designs, usually with meandering lines and other abstract curvilinear motifs that cover entire panels or rocks (see Figures 8-6e, h-i, 8-7a-c, 8-9j).

There are only three anthropomorphic figures carved in relief or 3-dimensionally. They constitute an unusual category. Their sophistication and sculptural quality may associate them with the monumental sculptural tradition found on the island or they may be a precursor artistic form leading to this tradition. Finally, indeterminate anthropomorphic body figures are found on eleven different boulders in seven sites and two isolates. N-RIO-03 has three of these figures; the others are found one to a site. Indeterminate heads or faces are eight in number with four complex examples grouped in N-RIO-23. The number of zoomorphic figures is quite small (n=58), occurring on only 7.9% of petroglyph boulders, and lightly distributed among 18 sites and on only one isolate (Table 11). In eight sites (N-RIO-02, -05, -07, -11, -17, -26, -28, -35), the frequency of zoomorphs exceeds one standard deviation of the mean. Only N-RIO-05 and -28 exceed two standard deviations, but these have only three and five boulders respectively per site (Table 7). Sites N-

The square or rectangular head variety is second in number (18 individual elements on 14 boulders in nine

112

Quantitative Analysis RIO-03 and -07 have the largest total numbers of zoomorphic images (14 and 8 respectively), while site NRIO-17 follows with seven.

are associated with Group 1 sites (the exception is one quadruped in N-RIO-13, a Group 2 site, but this is the only zoomorph in the site).

Table 11 presents seven categories of zoomorphic images; none are very numerous and generally their distribution is fairly even, aside from quadrupedal images. Quadrupedal images stand out, as they are most numerous, found on eighteen boulders in eight sites and on one isolated boulder. More than half (n=10) with this motif are concentrated in the Corozal Viejo site (N-RIO03). Almost half (n=4) of the bird images (n=10) are also in that site. The only other significant cluster of images consists of five snakes found in site N-RIO-07, half of all identified snake images. Nine monkeys are distributed among five sites. Sites N-RIO-07 is particularly inclusive of zoomorphic types with five of six recognized zoomorphs present (the monkey image is missing). No other particular patterning stands out, but the sample is small.

There seems to be a clear correlation by site between torso and stick figures and zoomorphic images. All sites with stick figures contain zoomorphic images, while eight of 14 sites (57%) with torso figures also contain zoomorphic images. Zoomorphs are associated less frequently with simple circular heads by site (in 10 of 22 sites, 45.5%) and are found together on only eight boulders. Circular heads, one of the simplest of all anthropomorphic depictions, as well as the most numerous, occur with the same frequency (72.7%) in both Group 1 (eight of 11 sites) and Group 2 sites (15 of 22 sites), and are thus widely distributed. In sum, representative figures form a relatively small number of overall petroglyphs motifs within the Ometepe collection. While certain anthropomorphs and zoomorphs often share a similar distribution and probable artistic tradition, as evidenced particularly in Group 1, zoomorphs are more restricted. Circular heads, by contrast, are widely distributed, closely associated with complex abstract forms, and may be a category of anthropomorph in an artistic tradition separate from that in which torso and stick figures (and zoomorphs) belong, although they may occasionally overlap within site clusters and even more rarely on individual boulders.

Different types of zoomorphs are very rarely found on the same boulder. There are two cases of a bird-monkey occurrence, one bird/snake combination, one quadruped/ bird, and four quadruped/other zoomorph combinations. Anthropomorphs and zoomorphs co-occur only infrequently on the same rocks—on only 2.2% of boulders (n=16). On the site level (excluding isolates), the differences are less marked; 36 sites have either anthropomorphic or zoomorphic images, but in only 15 sites do they co-occur (Table 7). Of interest, however, is the strong co-occurrence of anthropomorphs and zoomorphs in ten sites (N-RIO-02, -03, -05, -07, -11, -17, -23, -35, -36, and -37). Some of these are sites with the largest numbers of petroglyphs, including six with more than 20 petroglyph boulders each.

9.2

Non-Representative Figures

Non-representative abstract motifs are overwhelmingly predominant in the Ometepe collection, with spirals, curvilinear meanders, and circular elements the most common.

A comparison of the two sites with the largest numbers of petroglyph boulders is particularly interesting. N-RIO-03, the Corozal site, with 82 petroglyph boulders, contains somewhat less than a 2:1 ratio (45.5% to 27.3%) of anthropomorphs (n=25) to zoomorphs (n=14), while NRIO-19, the Pulman site, with 92 boulders has 23 boulders with anthropomorphs versus two with zoomorphs (25% to 2.2%). There is clearly a significant difference between these two numerically comparable sites.

Curvilinear Designs Spirals Spirals occur alone and in combination with other abstract elements in simple to extremely complex designs (Table 13). Overall, of 732 boulders with petroglyphs, 223 or 30.5% contain spirals. They are found in 37 sites (86%) and on 14 isolates (29.2%).

Table 12 presents a grouping of sites by the occurrence of anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figures. Group 1 sites (n=11) exhibit a strong correlation between anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figures. Group 2 sites (n=22) are those with anthropomorphic motifs, but no or very few zoomorphs, especially compared to the number of boulders per site. Group 3 sites (n=4) have zoomorphic but no anthropomorphic figures. Group 4 sites (n=8) have no representative figures. While numbers are too few to draw major conclusions, it appears that only quadrupeds are significantly restricted in distribution. All except one

Almost half of the boulders with spirals (108) have spirals or combinations of spirals as the only or main motif; 54 others have single spirals associated with other, separate individual elements. Another 54 boulders have spirals integrated into meandering or other complex designs (discussed below), and another seven are found as apparent decorative elements, such as a tail on a zoomorphic monkey form.

113

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Meanders

Circles and Circle Variants

There are 260 boulders with what I have characterized as meanders (35.5% of all petroglyph boulders) (Table 14). Sixty-four of these have fairly simple short undulating lines. Another 196 boulders have a range of more complex meandering designs. Only four petroglyph sites contain no meanders at all (N-RIO-14, -27, -28, -44). All of these are small sites with only three to nine petroglyph boulders each. Fifty-one percent (26 of 51) of isolated petroglyphs have meandering designs.

A total of 200 petroglyph boulders or 27.3% of all petroglyph boulders are found with engravings of circles or circle variants, and in 32 of 43 petroglyph sites and on seven isolates (Table 15). Boulders with simple circles (n=50, sites=19), circles with attached tails (n=52, sites=19), and concentric circles (n=48, sites=19) are almost equally common; the circle and dot motif (n=36, sites=20) follows in number. Other variants occur in much smaller numbers. Some of these motifs are found alone, but many others are associated with other motifs either as prominent or minor motifs in the overall panel. Only three sites—N-RIO-36, -38, and -41—exceed two standard deviations from the mean in terms of percentage of circles and variants in their sites, and none of these have large numbers of petroglyphs. The eleven sites with no circles or variants also have only small numbers of boulders (1 to 9 each, average 4).

There are twelve sites that have particularly high percentages of boulders with meanders to total petroglyph boulders (more than half) (see Table 14), and, of these, four sites (N-RIO-47, -45, -34, -06) are all over two standard deviations from the mean. These have relatively small numbers of petroglyphs (from two to seven) boulders. The meander with loops sub-type forms a majority of meandering designs. There are 128 boulders with the meander with loops motif (49.2% of complex meander designs and 17.5% of all petroglyph boulders). On isolated boulders, almost half of those with meandering designs have the meander with loop subtype (14 of 26 or 27.5% of all isolated petroglyphs). A few meanders with loops also incorporate spirals, generally at the tail end of the meander (Fig. 8-23g and 8-26). The meander with loops form rarely incorporates any other design elements except for spirals and almost never shares a boulder with other designs. Although very occasionally—on 27 boulders—simple heads are found adjacent to or attached to meandering lines or embedded in meandering designs, in only three cases are they associated with looping meanders. In all of these, N-RIO-03, R16, N-RIO-41, R6, N-RIO-17, R14 (Figs. 8-3e; 8-9j and 8-16b), the meanders and loops are minor elements of a more complicated design panel and not discrete motifs as discussed above and as seen in Figures 8-25 and 8-26. Aside from one boulder (N-RIO-03, R16), other types of anthropomorphs are never associated with meanders with loops on the same panel or boulder, and the only zoomorphs associated with this motif are on two of the above boulders—N-RIO-03, R16 and N-RIO-41, R6 (on the latter site the zoomorph is on a separate panel). Given their numbers and consistency, the meander with loops design should thus be considered a discrete recurring motif type.

Simple circles and circles with tails are fairly evenly distributed and are in the background of many complex designs. Concentric circles, chains, and circle and dot motifs are the most distinctive of the variants that occur fairly often. While circle and dot and chain motifs are both relatively numerous in terms of circle variants, it is of interest that in only three cases do they co-occur on the same boulder, all in very complex designs, and only five sites have both motifs. There is little association of these three elements with representative figures. Circular heads are the most frequent anthropomorph associated with these nonrepresentative designs. Chains, which occur on 19 boulders, are the least likely to be found with representative figures—only twice with anthropomorphs and never with zoomorphs on the same boulder. Circle and dot motifs on 36 boulders are found with zoomorphs five times and five times with anthropomorphs (two boulders have both anthropomorphs and zoomorphs). Concentric circles (n=48) are associated on the same boulder with anthropomorphs seven times and with zoomorphs four times (of these, three boulders have both anthropomorphs and zoomorphs). Only one site, N-RIO44, with three boulders, has none of these three motifs, and in this case two out of three boulders have anthropomorphic images. Circles, meanders, and spirals share boulders only a small number of times (both circles and spirals are found on the same boulder only 44 times or 6% of all boulders and, as mentioned above, 54 boulders or 7% of all boulders have spirals and meanders co-occurring), but spirals, meanders, and circles appear to share very similar site distributions in that all three occur in 28 of 43 sites (65%). Meandering designs, however, appear to be more common on isolated boulders (26 of 51) than either spirals (14) or circles (7). There is no apparent pattern with regard to areal distribution, and sites with all three

Thirty-two of the 54 boulders with meanders and integrated spirals are looping meanders (Fig. 8-26). In two cases, spirals replace most loops, forming an elaboration of the meander/loop type (see Fig. 8-26g-h). Meanders with loops and meanders with spirals appear to be integrally related variations.

114

Quantitative Analysis In sum, only grids and squares/rectangles are numerically significant rectilinear motifs. Most of the others are simple and generalized. Rectilinear designs cannot be said to represent a significantly distinct class of petroglyphs in the same way that the curvilinear forms are, but certain distinctive rectilinear elements, such as the framed X, may have importance on their own as cultural or symbolic markers.

motifs are found from near Balgües eastward to El Corozal, south of Punta Gorda (Table 16). It seems clear that circles, spirals and meanders are all widely distributed and seem to share the same artistic tradition, although there are subtle differences in occurrence. Spirals and meanders appear somewhat more closely linked to each other than are circles to either of the other two motifs. Seven sites have spirals and meanders, but not circles. Circles and spirals occur without meanders in only one site, and circles and meanders without spirals in only two sites.

Other Motifs Other distinctive motifs, such as Corozal figures and cruciforms, occur in small numbers, and have rather restricted distribution (Table 20). The Corozal figure is thus far found exclusively in site N-RIO-03, perhaps implying a particular ritual and/or cultural association connected with this site.

Arcs, Concentric Arcs, and U-shapes These are found on only 32 boulders (4.4% of total), spread out among 18 sites and one isolate (Table 17). Boulders with arcs and U-shapes are equal in number (16 each). No particular recurrent associations with other motifs were discerned.

Cruciform images also have a limited distribution, found on 17 boulders (2.3% of all petroglyph boulders) in only nine sites (Tables 20 and 21). Little areal patterning can be discerned. Three sites (8 boulders) are in the Punta Gorda-Corozal area and six (9 boulders) in the BalgüesPulman area. Most of these sites have either one or two cruciforms, but site N-RIO-40 is notable for having four boulders with this motif, two of which are similar elaborate concentric cruciforms (Figure 8-35f-g). Cruciforms, especially concentrics, are on 22% of the petroglyph boulders at N-RIO-40 and may have had some special association for people who used this site. Cruciforms are found as often as single motifs as they are as part of a larger curvilinear design (see especially Fig. 8-35i).

Other In addition to boulders with the above motifs, there are 35 boulders with miscellaneous arrangements of curvilinear or straight lines that have none of the above elements listed. Most, but not all, are fairly simple. They all fit within a non-representative abstract category and will not be discussed further. Rectilinear Designs Rectilinear designs are almost negligible as an overall class of petroglyph and in terms of the overall range of Ometepe motifs (Table 18), and most are associated with or integrated into curvilinear designs. Rectilinear elements are found in 26 sites distributed among 77 boulders. No site has more than 12 boulders with rectilinears elements and they average only two to a site. Only two of 51 isolated boulders have rectilinear shapes.

Other distinctive symbols, such as the Figure 8 and lines with incurved ends, numbering only four boulders each, are so thinly distributed that little can be said about them, aside from the fact that two of the latter images are found in site N-RIO-03. The few ladders (n=3) and rakes (n=5) are elements associated with or attached to abstract curvilinear designs.

Squares or rectangles are the most numerous of rectilinear elements (Tables 18 and 19). They are found on 46 boulders, distributed fairly evenly among 19 sites and one isolate. Although found in only three instances, the square with an internal X may be of some special significance because similar framed X elements are also found three times in anthropomorphic designs—within a square face (Fig. 8-8d) and twice within the body of an anthropomorph (Figs. 8-4i, 8-5a).1

9.3

Other Culturally Modified Boulders

Grinding Slicks There are six grinding slicks in just three sites and on one isolated rock—N-RIO-03, -28, -42 and MAO-98-03. Although all three sites contain petroglyphs, no grinding slicks are found associated with petroglyphs on the same boulder, although they are associated with large mortars (see Table 23 below). Grinding slicks seem to have been a utilitarian feature associated with food processing, probably of maize. If grinding slicks were used for processing maize, their small number may be due to the fact that most maize processing was more commonly done on portable metates, fragments of which were found in most of the sites containing abundant artifacts.

Grids, found on 25 boulders in 14 sites, are the second most numerous of rectilinear designs. These are virtually all part of larger curvilinear designs or incorporate curvilinear elements and must be seen as forming part of the abstract curvilinear tradition. Like grids, all but two of the eight examples of triangles are associated with curvilinear designs. 1 Another such X was found within the body of a monkey motif recorded in 1999.

115

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua was a residential site where considerable food processing took place. The people who lived at this site may have focused more on hunting and gathering of wild seeds than on agriculture, since mortar use indicates more seed and nut processing than maize processing. Punctate and incised fragments, including a possible Schettel Incised sherd, argue for a relatively early date for this site (~200 B.C.-A.D. 1). The Pulman site (N-RIO-19), by contrast, had no large mortars, but many metate fragments indicating maize processing. Its numerous polychrome ceramics date to at least the Sapoa or Middle Polychrome Period (800-1350 A.D.). Use of large mortars may thus also be one marker of the earlier period or periods on Ometepe.

Mortars and Cupules Nine percent (n=72) of 806 culturally modified boulders have ground or pecked mortars or cupules, although these are fairly widely distributed. Slightly more than half (n=38) are accompanied by petroglyphs on the same rock. Twenty-two of 46 sites (48%) and four isolates have mortars and/or cupules as well as petroglyphs. Two sites—N-RIO-24 and N-RIO-43—and three isolates have mortars or cupules, but no petroglyphs (Table 22). These latter sites have two mortar boulders each and the isolates one each. On all seven boulders mortars are over 10cm in diameter (See Fig. 8-37a). These likely were utilitarian food processing sites. The remaining 65 boulders with mortars and cupules are thinly distributed among the 22 petroglyph sites (most with one to four per site). Only two sites—N-RIO-35 and -42—have substantial numbers of mortars (Table 22). Forty-one (63.1%) of the 65 boulders with mortars have large mortars (over 10cm diameter), and 26 of these have no petroglyphs directly associated on the same rock. These latter are also likely food processing stations (Fig. 7-2b).

Small Pecked Holes/Dots There are forty-seven boulders with very small pecked holes or dots measuring less than 2cm, only four of which have associated mortars and/or cupules.2 These are always associated with petroglyphs (Fig. 8-24h; Table 23). Generally, one or two dots are pecked outside of a design in no apparent pattern, and these almost always accompany an abstract curvilinear design. In ten cases, pecked dots or very small holes are pecked directly on a meandering line. In three instances such pecking is found adjacent to anthropomorphic heads.

Table 24 shows that the smaller the diameter of the depression, the greater the likelihood of association with petroglyphs. Even within petroglyph sites, larger mortars unaccompanied by petroglyphs may have had a utilitarian food processing function, especially in residential sites, although ritual use cannot be discounted. Smaller mortars and smaller cupules that co-occur with petroglyphs on the same rock (see Fig. 7-2d-f) were more likely, however, to have been used ritually in a number of ways—for processing of ceremonial food, grinding of pigments or other ritual substances, as offertories, for burning incense, or use of the removed rock for some purpose. In most cases, the makers seem to have taken care not to superimpose one feature upon the other.

Rectangular or Square Pecked and Cut Depressions There are five boulders with rectangular or square pecked depressions. Only one of these—PAO-98-13—is found on top of a boulder and without an associated petroglyph (Fig. 7-3a). This is a rectangular depression, measuring 13cm x 17.5cm x 3 deep. It is worked to a consistent depth and purposefully shaped. The purpose of this feature is unknown and it is unclear if it should be considered a petroglyph or a utilitarian feature. The other four boulders have associated petroglyphs. One of these, N-RIO-09, R8, also has a cleanly cut rectangle on the side of the rock (Fig. 7-3b). This is adjacent to one of the few rectilinear designs. N-RIO-07, R6 and N-RIO47, R2 have rectangles with less clean cut edges, but are also on the sides of each rock (Fig. 7-3c-d). It is unlikely that any of these were receptacles. N-RIO-07, R14 is an intriguing petroglyph—a complex curvilinear design (possibly a zoomorph) with two large squares attached (Fig. 7-3e). The lower one is deeper than the other and may well have served as an offering receptacle.

One indicator of utilitarian versus ritual use may be the depth of large mortars. Large mortars unaccompanied by petroglyphs have a greater average depth, as well as a greater range of depths (see Table 24), indicating more intensive use, probably recurring food processing. There is some differentiation of mortar use by area. It is striking that in the Balgües-Pulman vicinity there are very few (only 10) mortars without associated petroglyphs as compared with the Punta Gorda area, which has fewer sites, but where more large mortars without petroglyph associations are found (24 boulders). Seventeen of these, however, are found in just two sites—N-RIO-35 and -42. These are the only sites in which large numbers of mortars and mortar/cupules were found. At N-RIO-35, in particular, over one-third of the mortars (12 of 33 boulders) had no petroglyphs directly associated. A dense scatter of ceramics and basalt and chert flakes was observed there (this was one of the few sites where a heavy lithic scatter was seen), and it is assumed that this

Quarry Features There are 39 boulders with evidence of probable quarrying or deliberate removal of large pieces of stone. These are distributed among seven petroglyph sites 2 In Table 23, pecked holes that are an obvious part of a specific design, such as eyes in a simple face, the dot in a circle and dot motif, or decorative elements of zoomorphs, are not included in the count of pecked dots.

116

Quantitative Analysis (Table 25). These sites usually have only one or, at most four, boulders with such features, except for N-RIO-42, which has 29 and appears to be a highly specialized site (Fig. 7-4a). Only five boulders of the 39 (12.8%) occur with petroglyphs on the same boulder. All but one are curvilinear abstract designs; the exception is a stick figure anthropomorph (Fig. 8-2a). There is no evidence of superpositioning. On only one boulder does a petroglyph even abut the quarry feature. In this case it appears that the quarry pecking took place after the petroglyph was made. While it is possible that cutting activities may have obscured petroglyphs in some instances, there is nothing obvious to indicate this, and care seems to have been taken to avoid damaging adjacent petroglyphs. Whether such features are ritually associated is difficult to say; perhaps selection of suitable stones was the primary factor in their location. 9.4

interest in depicting the human body. Body figures— including torso and stick figures—were only minor elements in the overall Ometepe corpus constituting only about 9% of total petroglyphs. These may represent a separate and, perhaps, overlying tradition and indicate at least very different cultural influences and expression. These figures are also much more restricted in range than simple heads, focused particularly in sites with large aggregations of petroglyph boulders, such as the Corozal Viejo site (N-RIO-03) and site N-RIO-02 (located very near and possibly an extension of the Corozal Viejo site), as well as in site N-RIO-11. Zoomorphic images are even fewer in number than anthropomorphs, found on approximately 8% of boulders. Because of the small number of zoomorphs, it is difficult to make definitive statements. Zoomorphs are largely restricted to only six recognized image categories. Their repetition argues for special cultural meaning for each type, but their expression on so few boulders, thinly distributed among many sites, indicates only occasional use—perhaps each important to the maker’s particular personal experience. Two sites do, however, have significant aggregates of zoomorphic types and each has a focus on a different type—N-RIO-07 has five boulders with snakes (and one rock each with other types except monkeys), while N-RIO-03 has 56% of all quadrupeds (10 of 18) and 40% of all birds (4 of 10). These concentrations argue for a different cosmological or cultural focus at each site.

Discussion

A pecked, abstract curvilinear tradition is overwhelmingly manifested in the Ometepe petroglyphs. The most important broad division in descriptive categories is between abstract curvilinears, especially meandering curvilinear designs, and anthropomorphic and zoomorphic representative figures. Rectilinear designs are so few and appear so often incorporated within curvilinears designs that these generally appear to be almost incidental as a mode of expression and most may be individualized variations of curvilinear themes. Certain rectilinear design elements, such as squares, rectangles, and complex grids are distinctive enough, however, that they may have had a particular expressive role.

It is of some interest that most isolated boulders (40 of 51) lack representative figures and the majority contain only complex meanders and/or spirals. Of the 19 small sites—those containing seven or fewer petroglyph boulders—seven sites (37%) have no representative images at all. In the remaining 12 small sites (51 boulders total), only 13 rocks have anthropomorphs and five have zoomorphs. If, as seems likely, isolates and small sites were more probably the result of individual activities, then abstract non-representative images seem most closely associated with these activities.

Meandering lines, spirals, and circular variants are almost ubiquitous, usually appearing in the same sites, if not on the same boulder. They appear to form a common complex of abstract elements. Among the plethora of designs with complex groups of lines, the meander with loops form is a sufficiently repeated and common motif that it must have had particular cultural resonance, created over the years by many individuals. Discrete motifs that either stand alone or are incorporated within larger complex designs, such as spirals, concentric circles, and circles or rings with dots, also have sufficient repetition that, although they are relatively simple elements, they appear to have been purposely used to express some specific cultural or ideological meaning.

Matilló Vila’s (1973) study is the only other significant study of Ometepe petroglyph motifs to date. A large proportion of his study area coincides with that of the present study—especially the Balgües-Hacienda Magdalena vicinity. We have re-recorded many of the petroglyphs that he illustrates.3 Comparisons with his enumerated results are difficult because our approaches to element description are so very different. His enumeration of 2002 figures is apparently based on an element, rather than boulder, count. His combined count of geometric, symbolic, and abstract elements amounts to approximately 61% of all elements, while zoomorphs account for about 5%, and anthropomorphs 31%. On the surface, these proportions are not so different from my results. Where we differ especially is in classification of

Representative elements are numerically a relatively minor part of the Ometepe imagery. Human-like images, found on about 22% of petroglyph boulders, can be divided into two classes, only one of which is numerically important. The simple anthropomorphic head element—simple heads and other head/face elements— constitute almost 60% of the human-like images, and it appears that simple heads are associated largely with abstract curvilinear imagery. Other than this category of anthropomorph, there seems to have been little overall

3 It is also apparent that we did not find all of the petroglyphs he illustrates and found many others that he did not encounter.

117

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua human figures. Although many of what Matilló Vila identifies as “masks” are what I term heads or faces, his other identifications are often wildly imaginative. He has identified a great many, abstract linear designs (especially curvilinear meanders) as anthropomorphs—using categories such as stylized and decorated anthropomorphs, or “dancers”, “chiefs”, “magicians”, etc. Such identifications constitute almost three quarters of his anthropomorphs, and are perplexing to say the least. Thus about 22% of all elements are identified as anthropomorphs (other than masks or heads), a much

larger figure than the 9% of body images found in the present study. Although it may be a failure of my imagination, I cannot accept a high proportion of his anthropomorphic identifications. (I also doubt some of his zoomorphic identifications for the same reasons). The discrepancy is important when considering complexes of motifs. Matilló Vila simply made anthropomorphs more important in the Ometepe collection than I have found them to be.

118

Quantitative Analysis Table 7. Quantification of Representative Figures Site No.

Total No. Boulders w/ Petroglyphs

No. of Boulders w/ Anthropomorphs (% in site)

No. Boulders w/Zoomorphs (% in site)

No. Boulders w/ Indeterminates (% in site)

N-RIO-01

2

1 (50.0%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-02

11

5 (45.5%)

3 (27.3%)

0

N-RIO-03

82

25 (30.5%)

14 (17.1%

0

N-RIO-05

3

1 (33.3%)

1 (33.3%)

0

N-RIO-06

4

1 (25.0%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-07

35

5 (14.3%)

8 (22.9%)

0

N-RIO-08

30

2 (6.7%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-09

37

7 (14.3%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-10

13

1 (7.7%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-11

14

4 (28.6%)

3 (21.4%)

1 (7.1%)

N-RIO-12

18

7 (38.9%)

1 (5.6%)

0

N-RIO-13

15

2 (13.3%

1 (6.7%)

0

N-RIO-14

9

4 (44.4%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-15

4

0 (0%)

0 (0)

0

N-RIO-16

3

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-17

33

10 (30.3%)

7 (21.2%)

0

N-RIO-18

3

1 (33.3%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-19

92

23 (25.0%)

2 (2.2%)

2 (2.2%)

N-RIO-20

7

1 (14.3%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-21

17

3 (17.7%)

0 (0%)

1 (5.9%)

N-RIO-22

11

2 (18.2%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-23

29

4 (13.8%)

2 (6.9)

4 (13.8%)

N-RIO-25

19

3 (15.8%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-26

4

0 (0%)

1 (25%)

0

N-RIO-27

3

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-28

5

0 (0%)

2 (40%)

0

N-RIO-29

5

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-31

2

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-32

12

2 (16.7%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-33

17

0 (0%)

3 (17.7%)

0

N-RIO-34

2

1 (50.0%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-35

22

6 (27.3%)

4 (18.2%)

0

N-RIO-36

6

2 (33.3%)

1 (16.7%)

0

N-RIO-37

24

4 (16.7%)

2 (8.3%)

0

N-RIO-38

5

2 (40.0%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-39

12

1 (8.3%)

1 (8.3%)

0

N-RIO-40

18

6 (33.3%)

1 (5.6%)

0

N-RIO-41

10

3 (30%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-42

22

1 (4.6%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-44

3

2 (66.7%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-45

5

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-46

6

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

0

N-RIO-47

7

1 (14.3%)

0 (0%)

0

Isolates

51

9 (15.7%)

1 (2.0%)

0

Total

732

152

58

8

Mean

20.0

7.1

Std

17.0

10.7 Table 8: Anthropomorphic Categories

119

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Site Number

N-RIO-01 N-RIO-02 N-RIO-03 N-RIO-05 N-RIO-06 N-RO-07 N-RIO-08 N-RIO-09 N-RIO-10 N-RIO-11 N-RIO-12 N-RIO-13 N-RIO-14 N-RIO-15 N-RIO-16 N-RIO-17 N-RIO-18 N-RIO-19 N-RIO-20 N-RIO-21 N-RIO-22 N-RIO-23 N-RIO-24 N-RIO-25 N-RIO-26 N-RIO-27 N-RIO-28 N-RIO-29 N-RIO-30 N-RIO-31 N-RIO-32 N-RIO-33 N-RIO-34 N-RIO-35 N-RIO-36 N-RIO-37 N-RIO-38 N-RIO-39 N-RIO-40 N-RIO-41 N-RIO-42 N-RIO-43 N-RIO-44 N-RIO-45 N-RIO-46 N-RIO-47 PAO-96-01 PAO-97-01 PAO-97-09 PAO-98-04 PAO-98-06 PAO-98-08 PAO-98-21 PAO-98-30 PAO-98-31 Other isos Total Boulders

Total Petroglyph Boulders In Site 2 11 82 3 4 35 30 37 13 14 18 15 9 4 3 33 3 92 7 17 11 29 0 19 4 3 5 5 0 2 12 17 2 22 6 24 5 12 18 10 22 0 3 5 6 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 42 732

No. Boulders No. Boulders No. Boulders Total Boulders With Disembodied with Torso with Stick with Body Parts* Figures Anthropomorphs Figures

No. 3-D/Relief Figures

No. Boulders with Indeterminate Figures

1 5 25 1 1 5 2 7 1 4 7 2 4 0 0 10 1 23 1 3 2 4 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 6 2 4 2 1 6 3 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 152**

0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

1 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 11

0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 199

0 3 6 0 1 0 0 2 1 4 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 30

*See Table 9. **Some boulders have more than one category.

120

0 2 14 0 0 5 2 5 0 1 4 2 4 0 0 6 1 18 1 2 2 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 3 2 1 5 3 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 98

Quantitative Analysis Table 9. Disembodied Body Parts Site No.

No. Boulders with Heads/Faces*

N-RIO-02

2

N-RIO-03

14

N-RIO-07

5

N-RIO-08

2

N-RIO-09

5

N-RIO-11

1

N-RIO-12

3

N-RIO-13

2

N-RIO-14

4

N-RIO-17

6

N-RIO-18

1

N-RIO-19

17

N-RIO-20

1

N-RIO-21

2

N-RIO-22

2

N-RIO-23

3

N-RIO-25

1

N-RIO-32

1

N-RIO-34

1

N-RIO-35

4

N-RIO-37

2

N-RIO-38

2

N-RIO-39

1

N-RIO-40

5

N-RIO-41

3

N-RIO-42

1

N-RIO-44

2

N-RIO-47

1

PAO-97-09

1

PAO-98-06

1

PAO-98-08

1

Total

97

No. Boulders with Hands

No. Boulders with Vulvas

No. Boulders with Phalluses

1

1

1

1

1

*See Table 10

121

1

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Table 10. Anthropomorphic Heads/Faces No. Boulders No. Boulders No. Boulders No. Boulders Complex Features Line/ Connected Heads Only Eyebrow Heads

1 12 2 0 2 0 3 2 1 5 1 10 1 2 2 2 0 1 1 2 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 1 1 1 1

No. Boulders No. Boulders Square/ Triangular Rectangular Heads Heads 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1

0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

64

2

5

10

13

6

Site No.

No. Total Boulders w/ Heads

No. Boulders Circular Heads

N-RIO-02 N-RIO-03 N-RIO-07 N-RIO-08 N-RIO-09 N-RIO-11 N-RIO-12 N-RIO-13 N-RIO-14 N-RIO-17 N-RIO-18 N-RIO-19 N-RIO-20 N-RIO-21 N-RIO-22 N-RIO-23 N-RIO-25 N-RIO-32 N-RIO-34 N-RIO-35 N-RIO-37 N-RIO-38 N-RIO-39 N-RIO-40 N-RIO-41 N-RIO-42 N-RIO-44 N-RIO-47 PAO-97-09 PAO-98-06 PAO-98-08

2 14 5 2 5 1 3 2 4 6 1 17 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 4 2 2 1 5 3 1 2 1 1 1 1

Total

97*

14

*Some boulders have more than one category.

122

Quantitative Analysis

Table 11. Zoomorphic Types and Distribution Site No.

N-RIO-02 N-RIO-03 N-RIO-05 N-RIO-07 N-RIO-11 N-RIO-12 N-RIO-13 N-RIO-17 N-RIO-19 N-RIO-23 N-RIO-26 N-RIO-28 N-RIO-33 N-RIO-35 N-RIO-36 N-RIO-37 N-RIO-39 N-RIO-40 PAO-97-08

Total Petro. Total Boulders Boulders in site w/ zoomorphs 11 3 82 14 3 1 35 8 14 3 18 1 15 1 33 7 92 2 29 2 4 1 5 2 17 3 22 4 6 1 24 2 12 1 18 1 1 1

Total

58*

No. with monkeys

No. with No. with quadrupeds birds

No. with No. with No. with snakes lizards/ amphibians caiman

No. with other zoomorphs

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 0 0

1 10 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1

0 4 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0

1 0 1 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

9

18

10

10

7

3

8

*Some boulders have more than one category. Table 12. Sites Grouped by Anthropomorphic and Zoomorphic Figures Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

N-RIO-02 N-RIO-03 N-RIO-05 N-RIO-07 N-RIO-11 N-RIO-17 N-RIO-23 N-RIO-35 N-RIO-36 N-RIO-37 N-RIO-39

N-RIO-01 N-RIO-06 N-RIO-08 N-RIO-09 N-RIO-10 N-RIO-12* N-RIO-13* N-RIO-14 N-RIO-18 N-RIO-19** N-RIO-20 N-RIO-21 N-RIO-22 N-RIO-25 N-RIO-32 N-RIO-34 N-RIO-38 N-RIO-40* N-RIO-41 N-RIO-42 N-RIO-44 N-RIO-47 9 isolates

N-RIO-26 N-RIO-28 N-RIO-33 1 isolate

N-RIO-15 N-RIO-16 N-RIO-27 N-RIO-29 N-RIO-31 N-RIO-45 N-RIO-46

Group 1: Sites with strong co-occurrence of zoomorphs and anthropomorphs Group 2: Sites with anthropomorphs and no or almost no presence of zoomorphs Group 3: Sites with zoomorphs and no anthropomorphs Group 4: Sites with no representative figures * 1 zoomorph in site ** 2 zoomorphs in site

123

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Table 13. Spirals Site Number

# Total Petroglyph Boulders in site

# Boulders w/spirals (%)

#Main or only motif

#With other individual motifs

# As decorative or minor element of panel

# w/ spiral integrated in meander

N-RIO-01 N-RIO-03 N-RIO-05 N-RIO-06 N-RIO-07 N-RIO-08 N-RIO-09 N-RIO-10 N-RIO-11 N-RIO-12 N-RIO-13 N-RIO-14 N-RIO-15 N-RIO-17 N-RIO-18 N-RIO-19 N-RIO-20 N-RIO-21 N-RIO-22 N-RIO-23 N-RIO-25 N-RIO-26 N-RIO-28 N-RIO-29 N-RIO-31 N-RIO-32 N-RIO-33 N-RIO-35 N-RIO-37 N-RIO-38 N-RIO-39 N-RIO-40 N-RIO-41 N-RIO-42 N-RIO-45 N-RIO-46 N-RIO-47 PAO-96-03 PAO-96-04 PAO-96-07 PAO-97-02 PAO-97-06 PAO-98-06 PAO-98-11 PAO-98-12 PAO-98-17 PAO-98-18 PAO-98-19 PAO-98-22 PAO-98-23 PAO-98-29

2 82 3 4 35 30 37 13 14 18 15 9 4 33 3 92 7 17 11 29 19 4 6 5 2 12 17 22 26 5 12 18 10 22 5 6 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 (50%) 15 (18.3%) 1 (33.3%) 3 (75%) 9 (25.7%) 16 (53.3%) 15 (40.5%) 6 (46.2%) 1 (7.1%) 5 (27.8%) 4 (26.7%) 4 (44.4%) 2 (50%) 13 (42.4%) 1 (33.3%) 27 (29.3%) 2 (28.6%) 8 (47.1%) 3 (27.3%) 10 (34.5%) 2 (10.5%) 1 (25%) 1 (16.7%) 4 (80%) 1 (50%) 5 (41.7%) 3 (17.7%) 2 (9.1%) 8 (30.8%) 3 (60%) 7 (58.3%) 5 (27.8%) 4 (40%) 7 (31.8%) 4 (80%) 2 (33.3%) 4 (57.1%) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (50%) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

0 8 0 1 4 8 7 3 1 2 2 3 2 5 1 17 1 3 2 4 1 1 1 1 0 4 2 1 5 1 3 0 0 4 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0

0 2 1 0 1 5 5 1 0 3 2 1 0 5 0 3 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 1 3 4 4 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 4 0 2 4 3 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 1 3 1 4 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

223

108

54

7

54

TOTAL

124

Quantitative Analysis

Table 14. Meanders

Site

Total boulders with petroglyphs in site

Total boulders with meanders

% of total petroglyph boulders

No. Boulders with complex meanders with loops

% of meanders: total petroglyphs

% meanders with loops: % of total meanders

N-RIO-01

2

1

50%

1

50%

100%

N-RIO-02

11

2

18.20%

0

0%

0%

N-RIO-03

82

18

23.20%

5

6.10%

27.8%

N-RIO-05

3

2

66.70%

2

33.30%

100%

N-RIO-06

4

3

75.00%

2

50.00%

67% 35.3%

N-RIO-07

35

17

48.60%

6

17.14%

N-RIO-08

30

5

16.70%

0

0%

0%

N-RIO-09

37

11

29.70%

3

8.10%

27.30%

N-RIO-10

13

6

46.20%

2

15.40%

33.30%

N-RIO-11

14

3

21.40%

1

7.10%

33.30%

N-RIO-12

18

4

22.20%

4

22.20%

100.00%

N-RIO-13

15

3

20.00%

3

13%

100%

N-RIO-14

9

0

00.00%

0

0%

0%

N-RIO-15

4

1

25.00%

1

25%

100%

N-RIO-16

3

2

66.70%

1

33.30%

50%

N-RIO-17

33

11

33.30%

7

21.20%

64%

N-RIO-18

3

1

33.30%

0

0%

0% 40%

N-RIO-19

92

30

32.6%

12

13.00%

N-RIO-20

7

4

57.10%

3

42.90%

75%

N-RIO-21

17

10

58.80%

6

35.30%

60%

N-RIO-22

11

5

45.50%

4

36.40%

80%

N-RIO-23

29

11

37.90%

2

6.90%

18%

N-RIO-25

19

9

47.40%

6

31.60%

67%

N-RIO-26

4

1

25.00%

1

25.50%

100%

N-RIO-27

3

0

0.00%

0

0.00%

0%

N-RIO-28

5

0

0.00%

0

0.00%

0%

N-RIO-29

5

3

60%

0

0%

0%

N-RIO-31

2

1

50%

1

50%

100%

N-RIO-32

12

4

33.30%

4

33%

100%

N-RIO-33

17

4

23.50%

2

11.80%

50%

N-RIO-34

2

2

N-RIO-35

22

10

100%

1

50%

50%

45.50%

5

22.70%

50.00%

N-RIO-36

6

3

50.00%

2

33.30%

67%

N-RIO-37

24

10

41.70%

8

33%

80%

N-RIO-38

5

2

60.00%

0

20%

33%

N-RIO-39

12

8

66.70%

7

58.30%

87.50%

N-RIO-40

18

5

27.80%

2

11.10%

40.00%

N-RIO-41

10

3

30.00%

2

20%

33.3

N-RIO-42

22

8

36.40%

2

9.10%

25%

N-RIO-44

3

0

0.00%

0

0.00%

0%

N-RIO-45

5

4

80%

2

40%

25%

N-RIO-46

6

2

33%

0

0.00%

0.00%

N-RIO-47

7

5

71.40%

4

42.90%

60%

Isolates

51

27

52.9%

14

27.50%

51.90%

Total

732

261

128

125

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

126

Quantitative Analysis Table 16. Association of Spirals, Meanders, and Circles Site #

No. Boulders with petroglyphs in site

No. Boulders with spirals and variants

No. Boulders with meanders

No. Boulders with circles and variants

N-RIO-01

2

1

1

0

N-RIO-02

11

0

2

3

N-RIO-03

82

15

18

24

N-RIO-05

3

1

2

0

N-RIO-06

4

3

3

2

N-RIO-07

35

9

17

12

N-RIO-08

30

16

5

12

N-RIO-09

37

15

11

11

N-RIO-10

13

6

6

4

N-RIO-11

14

1

3

4

N-RIO-12

18

5

4

6

N-RIO-13

15

4

3

4

N-RIO-14

9

4

0

0

N-RIO-15

4

2

1

0

N-RIO-16

4

0

2

0

N-RIO-17

33

13

11

8

N-RIO-18

3

1

1

0

N-RIO-19

92

27

30

27

N-RIO-20

7

2

4

1

N-RIO-21

17

8

10

4

N-RIO-22

11

3

5

4

N-RIO-23

29

10

11

7

N-RIO-25

19

2

9

5

N-RIO-26

4

1

1

0

N-RIO-27

3

0

0

1

N-RIO-28

5

1

0

1

N-RIO-29

5

4

3

0

N-RIO-31

2

1

1

1

N-RIO-32

12

5

4

3

N-RIO-33

17

3

4

2

N-RIO-34

2

0

2

0

N-RIO-35

22

2

10

6

N-RIO-36

6

0

3

4

N-RIO-37

24

8

10

7

N-RIO-38

5

3

2

4

N-RIO-39

12

7

8

1

N-RIO-40

18

5

5

5

N-RIO-41

10

4

3

8

N-RIO-42

22

7

8

8

N-RIO-44

3

0

0

0

N-RIO-45

5

4

4

1

N-RIO-46

6

2

2

2

N-RIO-47

7

4

5

0

PAO-96-01

1

0

1

0

PAO-96-02

1

0

1

0

PAO-96-03

1

1

0

0

PAO-96-04

1

1

0

0

PAO-96-05

1

0

0

0

PAO-96-06

1

0

1

1

127

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Table 16 (Cont.). Association of Spirals, Meanders, and Circles Site #

No. Boulders with petroglyphs in site

No. Boulders with spirals and variants

No. Boulders with meanders

No. Boulders with circles and variants

PAO-96-07

1

1

0

0

PAO-97-01

1

0

0

0

PAO-97-02

1

1

1

0

PAO-97-03

1

0

0

1

PAO-97-04

1

0

0

1

PAO-97-05

1

0

1

1

PAO-97-06

1

1

1

1

PAO-97-07

1

0

1

0

PAO-97-08

1

0

0

0

PAO-97-09

1

0

0

0

PAO-97-10

1

0

1

0

PAO-97-11

1

0

1

0

PAO-97-12

1

0

1

0

PAO-97-13

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-01

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-02

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-03

1

0

0

0

PAO-98-04

1

0

0

0

PAO-98-05

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-06

1

1

1

1

PAO-98-07

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-08

1

0

0

1

PAO-98-09

1

0

0

1

PAO-98-10

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-11

2

1

0

0

PAO-98-12

1

1

0

0

PAO-98-14

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-15

1

0

0

0

PAO-98-16

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-17

1

1

1

0

PAO-98-18

1

1

0

0

PAO-98-19

1

1

0

0

PAO-98-20

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-21

1

0

0

0

PAO-98-22

1

1

0

0

PAO-98-23

1

1

1

0

PAO-98-24

1

0

0

0

PAO-98-25

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-26

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-27

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-28

1

0

1

0

PAO-98-29

1

1

1

0

PAO-98-30

1

0

0

0

PAO-98-31

1

0

0

0

Total Boulders

732

223

261

200

(Total Isolates)

(51)

(14)

(27)

(8)

128

Quantitative Analysis Table 17. Arcs and U-Shapes by Site

N-RIO-03 N-RIO-07 N-RIO-08 N-RIO-09 N-RIO-12 N-RIO-13 N-RIO-14 N-RIO-19 N-RIO-20 N-RIO-21 N-RIO-23 N-RIO-35 N-RIO-36 N-RIO-39 N-RIO-41 N-RIO-42 N-RIO-44 N-RIO-45 PAO-98-24

Total No. Boulders with Petroglyphs in Site 82 35 30 37 18 15 9 92 7 17 29 22 6 12 10 22 3 5 1

No. Boulders with Arcs

No. Boulders with Concentric Arcs 3 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 9

1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 8

No. Boulders with U-Shapes

Total Boulders with Arcs and UShapes per Site

Percentage of Total in Site

0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 2 1 0 0 2 2 1 1 1 16

4 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 2 1 2 4 1 1 1 32* (4.4% of total petroglyphs)

4.9% 2.9% 3.3% 2.7% 11.1% 6.7% 11.1% 3.3% 14.3% 5.9% 10.3% 4.6% 33.3% 8.3% 20% 18.2% 33.3% 20% 100%

*Some boulders have more than one category.

Table 18. Rectilinear Motifs Site #

Total Boulders with Rectilinears

Grid

Squares/ Rectangles

Triangles

V

X

Z

L

N-RIO-03 N-RIO-05 N-RIO-07 N-RIO-08 N-RIO-09 N-RIO-10 N-RIO-11 N-RIO-12 N-RIO-13 N-RIO-14 N-RIO-17 N-RIO-19 N-RIO-20 N-RIO-21 N-RIO-22 N-RIO-23 N-RIO-25 N-RIO-26 N-RIO-29 N-RIO-33 N-RIO-37 N-RIO-40 N-RIO-41 N-RIO-42 N-RIO-46 N-RIO-47 PAO-96-01 PAO-97-05 Total Boulders

10 1 8 2 7 1 5 5 1 1 5 6 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 2 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 77*

2 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 1 4 0 1 1 0 0 0 46

4 1 6 0 4 1 5 4 0 1 4 3 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 1 3 1 1 0 0 1 0 45

2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 8

0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4

0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

*Some boulders have more than one category Table 19. Squares and Rectangles

129

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Site #

Total Boulders with Squares and Rectangles

Simple Connected Square/ Squares/ Rectangle Rectangles

Square/ Square/ Square/ Square/ Rectangle Rectangle Rectangle Rectangle w/ Attached w/ Dot w/ X Concentric Lines

Square/ Rectangle w/ Internal Decoration

Square/ Rectangle Filled

N-RIO-03 N-RIO-05 N-RIO-07 N-RIO-09 N-RIO-10 N-RIO-11 N-RIO-12 N-RIO-14 N-RIO-17 N-RIO-19 N-RIO-22 N-RIO-23 N-RIO-25 N-RIO-26 N-RIO-29 N-RIO-37 N-RIO-40 N-RIO-41 N-RIO-42 PAO-96-01

4 1 6 4 1 5 4 1 4 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1

1 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1

1 0 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0

0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

Total

46*

13

12

9

5

3

9

2

2

*Some boulders have more than one category

Table 20. Other Motifs Site

N-RIO-01 N-RIO-02 N-RIO-03 N-RIO-07 N-RIO-08 N-RIO-12 N-RIO-13 N-RIO-17 N-RIO-19 N-RIO-22 N-RIO-25 N-RIO-26 N-RIO-33 N-RIO-36 N-RIO-37 N-RIO-40 N-RIO-46

Total Boulders in Site

Total Boulders Other Motifs

2 11 82 35 30 18 15 33 92 11 19 4 17 6 24 18 6

1 2 16 1 3 2 1 4 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 4 1

Total with Other Symbols

45

Corozal Figures

Cruciforms

Figure 8

Lines w/ Incurving Ends

Rakes

Ladders

0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 2 2 0 2 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 4 0

0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1

10

17

4

4

5

5

130

Quantitative Analysis

Table 21. Cruciforms Site

Total Boulders In Site

Total Boulders w/ Cruciforms

No. Boulders w/ Interlaced

No. Boulders w/ Concentric

No. Boulders No. Boulders w/ Outlined w/ Simple

N-RIO-02

11

2

2

0

0

0

N-RIO-03 N-RIO-08 N-RIO-17 N-RIO-19 N-RIO-22 N-RIO-25 N-RIO-33 N-RIO-40

82 30 33 92 11 19 17 18

2 2 2 1 1 2 1 4

1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0

0 0 1 0 3 0 0 3

1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0

17 (2.3% of total

5

7

6

3

Table 22. Mortars and Cupules

Site

Total Boulders per Site

No. of Boulders with Mortars or Cupules

No. with Associated Petroglyphs

N-RIO-03 N-RIO-07 N-RIO-08 N-RIO-11 N-RIO-13 N-RIO-16 N-RIO-17 N-RIO-19 N-RIO-21 N-RIO-24 N-RIO-25 N-RIO-26 N-RIO-28 N-RIO-31 N-RIO-32 N-RIO-33 N-RIO-34 N-RIO-35 N-RIO-37 N-RIO-38 N-RIO-39 N-RIO-40 N-RIO-42 N-RIO-43 PAO-96-06 MAO-97-01 PAO-97-12 MAO-98-01 MAO-98-03 PAO-98-25 PAO-98-26

82 36 33 14 15 3 33 95 18 2 19 5 6 2 13 21 2 33 26 6 13 19 53 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 4 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 3 2 12 4 1 2 2 10 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 3 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1

72

38

Total

131

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua

Table 23. Petroglyph Assocations with Grinding Slicks, Mortars, Cupules, and Pecked Holes Type

No. of Boulders*

No. without Petroglyphs

Percentage

No. with Petroglyphs

Percentage

Grinding slicks

6

6

100%

0

0%

Mortar 10+cm

48

26

54.2%

22

45.8%

Mortar/cupule 6-9.9cm

31

13

41.9%

18

58.1%

Cupule 5.9-2cm

22

4

18.2%

18

81.8%

Small Pecked Hole/Dot