BLOMBOS OCHER CROSSHATCHING, A NEW SUGGESTION OF PURPOSE:

Engraved ocher, Blombos Cave, South Africa. Image from Don Hitchcock, donsmaps.com.

A few years back (2018) I did a column about the engraved ocher fragments from Blombos Cave (see references below). The column was ostensibly about these markings being, at that time, considered possibly the oldest petroglyphs known, but in it I suggested that possibly the grooves were to improve the grip like the checkering on a rifle stock. Sylvia Stein (2025, 2026) has proposed that the engraving on the piece of ocher is actually a picture of a fishnet.

Pierced shell beads, Blombos Cave, South Africa. Internet image, public domain.

“The invention of string, thus, is the essential tool in the fishing net with shell weights (100,000 kya to 74,000 kya), preceding the invention of the bow and arrow (60,000 kya).The use-wear studies of the punctured Blombos Nassarius shells have clearly established that the shells were strung either loosely or knotted, perhaps for quick horizontally stringed shells replacement on nets for mass fishing, before the invention of the bow and arrow hunting a single prey. Thus, essential, is that use-wear studies indicate that the dull Nassarius perforated shells were strung not in a curve or loop for functions as a bracelet, or necklace, though horizontally as a string of shell weights to be affixed to the bottom of a fishing net. Our argument then heavily relies on these use-wear studies of shells horizontally on a string, essential to making fishing nets, preceding bow and arrow in brain evolution.” (Stein and Pacheco 2025:33) So, in this thesis the pierced shells found in Blombos Cave are not for ornamental use as in a necklace or a bracelet, but are pierced to be tied on to the bottom of the net as net weights.

Blombos ocher with engravings enhanced. Image from Stein and Pacheco.

Stein, Chukhman and Makhin (2026) revisit that thesis with complicated analysis and statistical studies. In the end their conclusion is that “the implications are the occupants of the MSA BBC not only had intellectual capacities to design, record, make and re-use string based nets, they had developed superior finger dexterity with refined engineering net construction capacities.” Possible, but what would statistics have to do with this question.

Stein's fishnet reproduction. Image by Sylvia Stein, ResearchGate.

Now, I suppose that this could represent the design of a fishnet, however, if I was diagramming a fishnet I believe I would have done it in larger scale – feet instead of inches. Additionally, I do not see any representations of weights at the bottom junctions of the supposed net engraving.

An online page at 'Wikipedia-Nassarius' discusses "several 75,000-year-old Nassarius kraussianus beads which were found at Blombos Cave, South Africa (including some colored with red ocher). These beads have previously been thought to be the oldest examples of jewelry." (Wikipedia) The jewelry theory has certainly been the most common interpretation of these pierced shells for quite some time.

Nassarius shells come from a species of marine snail and have a coiled shell like other snails. It seems inevitable with the coiled structure of a snail shell some air will be trapped inside when thrown into the water, thus possibly causing it to float which would not make a great net weight. Now I certainly cannot say for certain, but I must go with being a skeptic on the Stein, Chukhman and Mahkin’s theory.

But, back to the ocher itself – checkering for a better grip, or just decoration seem to be the most satisfying conclusion.

NOTE: Some images in this column were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Faris, Peter, 2018, Oldest Petroglyphs So Far?, 25 August 2018, RockArtBlog, https://rockartblog.blogspot.com/2018/08/oldest-petroglyphs-so-far.html.

Stein, Silvia F., Morris Chukhman and Sergii Makhin,2026, Establishing a Functional Use for the MSA Engraved Blombos Ochre Through Image-Based Vectorization, Use-Wear Constraints, and Experimental Reconstruction, Paper from 2026 CAA Conference. Accessed online through Academia on 22 April 2026.

Stein, Silvia and Susana Pacheco, 2025, Did fishing nets with calculated shell weights precede the bow and arrow? Applied Mathematics and Sciences: An International Journal (MathSJ), Vol. 12, no. 2. Accessed online through ResearchGate on 22 April 2026.

Wikipedia, Nassarius, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassarius. Accessed online 26 April 2026.

NEANDERTHAL FINGER FLUTINGS, EUROPE’S OLDEST INTENTIONAL MARKS?

La Roche-Cotard manor house, France. Internet image, public domain.

In the ever proceeding scramble to identify the earliest, or oldest, rock art, we have another claim, this time from Europe. In the category of finger marks may I have the envelope please? And our winner is - - finger fluting on the cave walls of La Roche-Cotard left there by Neanderthals.

La Roche-Cotard finger fluting. Image from sci.news.

“The oldest known engravings in Europe, discovered in a French cave sealed up for tens of thousands of years, likely weren’t crafted by modern humans but rather Neanderthals, a new study finds. Within the cave of La Roche-Cotard 150 miles (240 kilometers) southwest of Paris, the researchers analyzed a series of non-figurative markings thought to be made by ancient human fingers, according to a study published – in the journal PLOS One. The cave had been sealed up by sediments until the late 19^th century. Modern excavations at the site have yielded numerous stone tools whose style is associated with the Neanderthals, suggesting that they created the art.” (Killgrove 2023) In addition to the style of stone tools the investigators used hard dating to infer the age of the marks.

The finger marks themselves were not dated, but optical stimulated luminescence dating told the investigators when the cave became inaccessible due to sedimentation. “OSL dating indicates that the sediment deposition closed the cave > 51 ka (95% confidence) ago, or at 57 ± 3 ka (68% confidence interval). This age makes access to the cave interior by anatomically modern humans (AMH) highly unlikely, as we believe that evidence for their arrival in Western Europe prior to 45 ka - is not yet demonstrated. The non-figurative engraved marks at La Roche-Cotard are necessarily older than 57 ± 3 ka, and can be, therefore, confidently stated to be of Neanderthal origin.” (Marquet, Jean-Claude et al., 2023) This adds even more proof of the cognitive sophistication of our hominin relatives.

La Roche-Cotard finger fluting. Image from sci.news.

While the term ‘graphic productions’ may be a little overly optimistic for the collections of markings left on the cave wall, they marks were made intentionally and apparently by hominins, not cave bears or other fauna.“The graphic productions identified on the walls of La Roche-Cotard demonstrate a deliberate creative process visible in the spatial arrangement of the engraved marks on the cave wall. This is perhaps one of the most remarkable aspects evidenced by the creative ensemble at La Roche-Cotard. As discussed above, there is little graphic evidence associated with Neanderthals, and that is mainly on mobile objects (pebbles, slabs, bones…), rather than walls. In contrast, the walls of La Roche-Cotard testify to something different: the frequent repetition of thoughtful gestures, organized in space both on the wall surfaces and with respect to the cave as a whole.” (Marquet, Jean-Claude et al., 2023) I cannot go quite as far as Marquet’s last sentence in describing the marks, but I applaud his enthusiasm.

La Roche-Cotard finger fluting. Image from sci.news.

Now, of course, we have to address the question of whether finger-fluting is art and deserves to be lumped in with rock art. In the case of RockArtBlog I say yes. It is intentional modification to the cave wall in the same way that a magnificent painted animal on a cave wall is and that is the definition I am using.

NOTE: Some images in this column were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Killgrove, Kristina, 2023, Neanderthals created Europe’s oldest ‘intentional’ engravings up to 75,000 years ago, study suggests, 21 June 2023, LiveScience.com. Accessed online 10 September 2025.

Marquet, Jean-Claude et al., 2023, The earliest unambiguous Neanderthal engravings on cave walls: La Roche-Cotard, Loire Valley, France, 21 June 2023, PLOS One, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286568. Accessed online 8 September 2025.

 

 

ANOTHER CLAIM OF PALEOLITHIC WRITING:

Pictographic tablet featuring an account of 33 measures of oil, from Godin Tepe, Iran (Courtesy Dr. T. Cuyler Young, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto).

A recent paper by Christian Bentz and Ewa Dutkiewicz of the Saarland University in Saarbruken, Germany investigated deeply the human applied marks on Paleolithic carved bone and stone to attempt to gain deeper understanding toward their possible significance. “First, our analyses illustrate that these sign sequences are clearly distinguishable from modern day writing. Second, however, their statistical properties are comparable to sign sequences on the earliest protocuneiform tablets. Third, Paleolithic signs were systematically applied to yield higher information density on certain types of objects, e.g. ivory figurines compared to tools.” (Bentz and Dutkiewicz 2026:1) We need to carefully distinguish between what these authors claim and what the headline editors of reports on it have stated. Bentz and Dutkiewicz have not claimed that these marks constitute a form of writing. “However, they prove that the first hunter-gatherers arriving in Europe already applied sign sequences of comparable complexity in a deliberate, systematic, and conventional manner—several ten thousand years before the advent of genuine writing.” (Bentz and Dutkiewicz 2026:1) News outlets and others who have referred to their paper have, unfortunately, tended to use the word ‘writing’ in their descriptions.

To set the scene - “At the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic around 45,000 calibrated years before present (cal BP), modern humans arrived in Eastern and Central Europe. On their journey they encountered their distant relatives—Neanderthals. In this time of migrations and population turn-overs, modern humans produced a panoply of so-called mobile objects, such as tools and figurines made of ivory, bone, or antler. These are present right from the earliest period of the Upper Paleolithic, the so-called Aurignacian technocomplex. Especially the Dordogne region in southwestern France, the cave systems of the Swabian Jura in southwestern Germany, and a cluster of sites in Belgium have yielded hundreds of objects adorned with sequences of geometric signs.” (Bentz and Dutkiewicz 2026:1) Many explanations for these signs on the ivory, bone and antler carvings have been proposed. People have tried to make them out to be complicated mathematical or calendrical records. Many of us have suspected that some of them represent tallies.

Pendant, 41.5 kbp, Stajnia Cave, Poland. Image from Sci Rep 11, 22078, 2021.

A press release from Saarland University, where Bentz and Dutkiewicz are both employed states that “More than 40,000 years ago Ice Age humans were carving repeated patterns of dots, lines, and crosses into tools and small ivory figurines. A new computational study of more than 3,000 of these Paleolithic signs reveals that they were not random decorations but structured sequences with measurable  complexity. Surprisingly, their information density rivals that of proto-cuneiform, the earliest known writing system that emerged around 3,000 BCE.” (Saarland University) This part depended on the statistical analysis that goes way beyond my ability, and sometimes past believability.

“the people of the Swabian Aurignacian were among the first modern humans to settle in Central Europe. They inhabited the caves of the Lone and Ach Valleys around 43,000 to 34,000 calibrated years ago. They have left behind a panoply of tools and mobile artwork—testimony to their technical skills, and their rich culture. This includes a collection of several dozen ivory figurines, representing animals occurring in the environment at the time, as well as mystical figures of an imaginary world forever lost to us. A subset of these mobile artifacts carry sequences composed of overall more than 3000 signs intentionally carved into their surfaces.” (Bentz and Dutkiewicz 2026:7)

“Our analyses show that these sequences are clearly statistically distinct from those generated with modern day writing systems to represent spoken languages. However, they have a very similar “statistical fingerprint” as the earliest numeric and numeroideographic protocuneiform tablets stemming from the Uruk V period of 3500 to 3350 BC. Moreover, the Aurignacian sequences were not indiscriminately applied to different objects, rather, ivory figurines carry the sequences of highest information density—independent of material constraints such as volume and preservation.” (Bentz and Dutkiewicz 2026:7)

“The hunter-gatherers of the Swabian Aurignacian have hence developed a sign system with some incipient design features also found in writing, that is, an inventory of different sign types and their linear arrangement, but lacking other design features, e.g. productive combinatoriality of different sign types as well as the rebus principle. It remains hard—or impossible—to prove that Aurignacian sign systems served the same numero-ideographic functions as protocuneiform. Moreover, there is another stark contrast between them: Protocuneiform developed into a full-blown writing system representing the Sumerian language within the subsequent 1,000 y. The sign sequences of the Swabian Aurignacian, on the other hand, were stable in terms of information density—for 10,000 y—and then disappear.” (Bentz and Dutkiewicz 2026:7) But, what sort of information were they recording. One possibility is that they were recording details of the animals that were so important to their lives.

Marked clay envelope with tokens it contained. Image from Musee du Louvre.

This seems to be very much a descendant of the seminal 1978 article in Scientific American by Denise Schmandt-Besserat. Her breakthrough identified the beginnings of Mesopotamian hieroglyphs as being marks on the clay seals of packages and clay envelopes indicating their contents. “The earliest examples of writing in Mesopotamia may not, as many have assumed, the result of pure invention. Instead they appear to be a novel application late in the fourth millennium B.C. of a recording system that was indigenous to western Asia from early Neolithic times onward. In this view the appearance of writing in Mesopotamia represents a logical step in the evolution of a system of record keeping that originated some 11,000 years ago.” (Schmandt-Besserat 1978:59) One of the pieces of evidence presented by Bentz and Dutkiewiecz of a piece of clay with some indentations in it.

 

Ach Valley tusk fragment found in Geissenklösterle Cave, Germany. Image from www.astronomytrek.com.

One of the other examples covered in Bentz and Dutkiewiecz is a car ved piece of mammoth ivory called the Ache Tusk. Also known as the so-called ‘Adorant’ it was recovered from Geissenklosterle Cave. “Geissenklosterle is an archaeological site of significance for the central European Upper Paleolithic, located near the town of Blaubeuren in the Swabian Jura in Baden-Wurttemberg, southern Germany. First explored in 1963, the cave contains traces of early prehistoric art from between 43,000 and 30,000 years ago, including some of the oldest known musical instruments and several animal figurines.” (Wikipedia) One side of this artifact has a carved, seemingly anthropomorphic, figure, and the other side has a large number of dots. This has been proposed in the past to be a calendrical inscription.

Carved mammoth, Geissenklösterle Cave, Germany. Internet image, public domain.

Carved animal, Geissenklösterle Cave, Germany. Internet image, public domain.

Many of the carved animals from Geissenklosterle Cave are engraved with patterns of carved diamonds, Xs or Vs. These diamonds, Xs and Vs carved on ivory figurines might well represent hair. Their locations are in the same places that long hair would be found on the animals, as in the lion’s mane, the body of the wooly mammoth and the hairy line down the croup of the horse. This usage would be recording information and thus is totally compatible with the premise of Bentz and Dutkiewicz. Details of winter vs. summer pelage might be important to teaching hunting skills.

Carved ivory mammoth, Vogelherd Cave, Germany. Internet image, public domain.

Wooly mammoth. Internet image, public domain.

Recovered from Vogelherd Cave are carved horses, lions, and unknown animals dating back to ca. 40k years BCE. Anotheer example is a carved ivory mammoth from Vogelherd Cave located in the eastern Swabian Jura of southwestern Germany. Patterns of Xs and diamonds range around its body possibly represented the hair of a wooly mammoth.

Carved ivory horse, Vogelherd Cave, Germany. Image from Donsmaps.com.

Wild horse in winter pelage. Image from Wikipedia.

All of this is to bring me to my point that the press reports are unfair to Bentz and Dutkiewicz. Every article headline that used the word ‘writing’ led readers to unfound assumptions. Their primary claim was that the marks may have represented data and that is totally true, they do. The data just isn’t written. X marks representing hair on an animal is a record of data, a record of where the animals heavy winter pelage might be found for example. Dots of related marks may represent tallies. While Schmandt-Besserat came up with these concepts first, and somewhat deeper and more insightful analysis, their paper is a reasonable contribution to the literature. I have only one other criticism, they did not cite Schmandt-Besserat in their paper or list her in their references, but this was probably just an oversight.

NOTE: Some images in this column were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Bentz, Christian and Ewa Dutkiewicz, 2026, Humans 40,000 y ago developed a system of conventional signs, 14 January 2026, PNAS, Vol. 123, No. 9, https://doi.org/10/1073/pnas.2520385123. Accessed 4 February 2026.

Saarland University, 40,000-year-old signs show humans were recording information long before writing, Science Daily, 25 February 2026. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/02/2600225001301.htm. Accessed online 4 February 2025.

Schmandt-Besserat,  Denise, 1978,  The Earliest Precursor of WritingScientific American, Vol. 238, No. 6, pp. 50-59.

Wikipedia, Geissenklosterle, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geissenklosterle. Accessed 10 April 2026.

DECEBALUS AT THE IRON GATES OF THE DANUBE – THE MOUNT RUSHMORE OF ROMANIA:

Decebalus carving along the Danube River, Romania. Internet image, public domain.

Above the bank of the Danube River at the border of Romania and Serbia, on a large rock outcrop known as the Iron Gates of the Danube, is the carving of a gigantic face. This, the Romanian equivalent of our Mount Rushmore, is a portrait of Decebalus, king of Dacia and was produced from 1992 to 2001 to honor him.

Decebalus carving along the Danube River, Romania. Internet image, public domain.

Decebalus carving along the Danube River, Romania. Internet image, public domain.

“Decebalus was the last Dacian king ruling from 87 to 106 CE. He is known for fighting three wars, with varying success, against the Roman Empire. He defeated a Roman invasion in the reign of Domitian, securing a period of independence during which Decebalus consolidated his rule.” (Wikipedia – Decebalus) The conflict between Dacia and Rome was historic because of Dacia’s successful resistance.

Trajan's column celebrating the conquest of Dacia, Rome, Italy. Internet image, public domain.

Rome could not countenance successful resistance like this. It might inspire others as well to resist Roman domination. “When Trajan came to power, his armies invaded Dacia to weaken its threat to the Roman border territories. Decebalus was defeated in 102 AD. He remained in power as a client king, but continued to assert his independence, leading to a final and overwhelming Roman invasion north of the Danube in 105 AD. Trajan reduced the Dacian capital to ruins in 106 AD, absorbing some of Dacia into the Empire. Decebalus died by suicide by reportedly cutting his own throat to avoid capture.” (Wikipedia – Decebalus) The famous Trajan’s Column in Rome (106 – 113 CE) is decorated with scenes from the conquest of Dacia.

Romania was ruled by a communist government headed by Nicolae Ceausecu from 1965 to 1989. After the fall of this government Romania became a democracy with the election of Ion Iliescu as its first president in 1990. (Wikipedia - Romania) The carving of the face of Decebalus was commissioned by a private businessman to show his pride and patriotism. "The world's largest rock sculpture on a river bank was commissioned by Romanian Businessman  Iosif Constantin Drăgan and it took 10 years from 1992 to 2001, for twelve sculptors to finish it." (World Record Academy 2019) While it went somewhat faster than the sculptures on Mount Rushmore, the stories are somewhat similar.

“According to Drăgan's website, the businessman purchased the rock in 1992, after which the Italian sculptor Mario Galeotti assessed the location and made an initial model. The first six years involved dynamiting the rock into the basic shape, and the remaining four years were devoted to completing the detail.” (World Record Academy 2019) This project of national pride and patriotism certainly shows that the age of large projects is not dead.

NOTE: Some images in this column were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Wikipedia, Decebalus, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decebalus. Accessed online 16 February 2026.

Wikipedia, Rock sculpture of Decebalus, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_sculpture_of_Decebalus. Accessed online 16 February 2026.

 

Wikipedia, Romania, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romania. Accessed online 1 April 2026.

World Record Academy, 2019, Largest rock sculpture on a river bank: The rock sculpture of Decebalus, 27 August 2019, https://worldrecordacademy.org. Accessed online 26 February 2026.

MACAWS IN ROCK ART – AGAIN. PART 2:

 

Macaw/parrot pens at Casas Grandes. Image from Steven Lekson, 2015, The Chaco Meridian, figure 3.15, p. 92.

Archeology has found proof that macaws were kept, and possibly bred, at many sites in the Southwest. “Humans can remove chicks from the nest at around seven weeks of age or later and feed them pre-chewed food until they wean; in captivity they require feeding 4 times a day by seven weeks of age. Scarlet macaws may begin mimicking human speech at around 7 months of age. Scarlet macaws molt about one third of their feathers one to two times per year. The birds reach sexual maturity at 3-5 years of age. They are not sexually dimorphic, so determining the sex of a macaw is impossible without DNA or seeing one lay an egg.” (Crown undated) This brings me back to images of macaws and parrots in the Southwest. Whether created as pictographs or petroglyphs, wall murals or decoration on pots, macaws and parrots were of undeniable importance to Ancestral Pueblo people (and others) and this is illustrated in remaining examples of their arts and crafts.

Macaw. Three Rivers Petroglyph Site, New Mexico. Internet image, public domain.

Petroglyph of macaws and/or parrots are found throughout much of the American southwest. From the Four Corners to Three Rivers Petroglyph Site I have seen examples and have found other images online and in references (below). “Parrots are clearly depicted at Three Rivers on the northern reaches of the ridge.” (Price 2018:189)

Mimbres bowl, figure carrying burden basket with a macaw on top. Internet photograph, public domain.

In the case of the Mimbres region the presence of macaws is addressed by Gilman et al. (2014) “Why did those receiving the macaws want them in the first place? We propose here that the macaws were part of religious quests and the reorganized or augmented religion in the Mimbres region during the Classic period.  - In the process of obtaining the scarlet macaws for transport, they gained practical and esoteric knowledge necessary to care for the macaws.” (Gilman et al. 2014:104)

Square Tower Canyon, Hovenweep National Monument, Utah. Top - the entire panel, bottom - close-up. Photograph 1988, Peter Faris.

At Square Tower Canyon in Hovenweep National Monument there is a fascinating petroglyphs panel. It shows, among other things a spiral connected to a T-shaped doorway with a macaw sitting on top of the ‘T’, and a second macaw with a squared-fret design connected to its tail. This was described by Nancy Olsen (1985:65). “At the junction of the main canyon and a side canyon is a rock point with access from all sides. On the wind-scoured, exposed bedrock of the point, approximately four feet from the ground two birds in silhouette dominate the panel, and two other identical bird shapes are less visible because of repatination and wind erosion. Prolonged use of the same location is inferred from evidence that the motif is remade in the same place several times and can be seen in different stages of repatination.”  The images that Olsen identified as simply birds are very obviously macaws (or parrots) because of the shape of their beaks.

Macaws, Cedar Mesa, Utah. Photograph by Janet Vervalen.

Gilman et al (2014) theorize a reversal of the possible role of pochteca (traders) from Mesoamerica in providing macaws. In the Mimbres region Gilman et al. write “We propose that, beginning in about the second millennium A.D., people, possibly including both women and men, made journeys of about 1100 km each way to or from the Huasteca region on Mexico’s Gulf Coast to transport scarlet macaws necessary for equinoctial rituals, sacrifice, and the distribution of red feathers tied to religious practices and ultimately horticultural success. While it is possible that people from the Huasteca region came north with the macaws and practical and ritual knowledge, it is unclear what they would have gained from such a dangerous trip.” (Gilman et al 2014:105) Theoretically, of course, they could have “gained”, but it is just as easy to argue that the turquoise could have been carried south into Mesoamerica as to have pochteca coming north to acquire it. Is this settled, I seriously doubt it? It is, however, a fascinating question, and one that well may come up again. At least it fascinates me.

NOTE: Some images in this column were retrieved from the internet with a search for public domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Crown, Patricia, The Scarlet Macaws of Arroyo Hondo Pueblo, an online report from the Arroyo Honda Pueblo Project, https://www.arroyohonda.org. Accessed 13 February 2026.

Gilman, Patricia A., Marc Thompson, and Kristina C. Wykoff, 2014, Ritual Change and the Distant Mesoamerican Iconography, Scarlet Macaws, and Great Kivas in the Membres Region of Southwest New Mexico, American Antiquity, 79 (1). 90-107. Accessed online 12 March 2026 in Academia.org.

Liwosz, Chester R., 2022, Mesoamerica, Macaws, and More: Exploring the Geospatial Relationships and Cultural Significance of Parrot, Raptor, and Related Bird Iconography at Mesa Prieta, New Mexico, American Indian Rock Art, Volume 48, edited by Amy Gilreath, Ken Hedges, and Ann McConnell, American Rock Art Research Association, 2022.

Olsen, Nancy H., 1985, Hovenweep Rock Art, An Anasazi Visual Communication System, Occasional Paper 14, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Price, Joan E., 2018, Clay and Stone: Petroglyphs at Three Rivers Petroglyph Site Compared with Mimbres Ceramic Painted Bowls, pp. 177-192, in Collected Papers from the 20^th Biennial Mogollon Archaeology Conference, October 11-13, 2018, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico, edited by Lonnie C. Ludeman. Accessed online 17 December 2025.

Schaafsma, Polly, 2022, Riders of the Rainbow, pp. 241-262, in Birds of the Sun, Macaws People in U.S. Southwest and Mexican Northwest, edited by Christofer W. Schwarts, Steven Plog, and Patricia A. Gilman, 2022, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Tedlock, Dennis, 1994, Stories of Kachinas and the Dance of Life and Death, pp. 161-174, in Kachinas in the Pueblo World, edited by Polly Schaafsma, University of New Mexico Press.

Tyler, Hamilton A., 1979, Pueblo Birds and Myths, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Waters, Frank, 1963, Book of the Hopi, Ballantine Books, New York.

Watson, Adam S. et al., 2015, Early procurement of scarlet macaws and the emergence of social complexity in Chaco Canyon, NM, 7 July 2015, PNAS, Vol. 112, no. 27, pp. 8238-8243. Accessed online.

Weiner, Robert S., 2015, A Sensory Approach to Exotica, Ritual Practice, and Cosmology at Chaco Canyon, KIVA, 81:3-4, 220-246, DOI: 10.1080/00231940.2016.1147681. Accessed online.

MACAWS IN ROCK ART – AGAIN. PART 1:

Because of the length of this column I will present it in two parts. Part two will follow this next week.

Scarlet macaw. Image from Archaeology magazine, September/October 2015, page 16.

Along with burials of parrots and macaws from the American southwest, there are many images of these beautiful birds painted and pecked by Ancestral Puebloan people. I have written columns previously on them (available through the cloud index at the bottom) but when additional material becomes available I try to update a subject.

That is the case now as I have some new images and information to add to my previous writing on the subject.

“Archaeologists have known for more than a century that the prehispanic Pueblo people of the American Southwest acquired goods from Mesoamerica. Such items included marine shell from the Gulf of California, raw copper and crafted copper bells from West Mexico, cacao from the Neotropics, and tropical birds such as scarlet and military macaws whose feathers were important in ritual. Scarlet macaws (Ara macao) are the most exotic birds recovered by archaeologists excavating settlements in the SW from southern Utah and Colorado to northern Mexico.” (Watson 2015:8238) While there are colorful birds in nature in these regions (Western tanager, Flicker, Bluebird, Goldfinch) none of the native birds can match the striking colors of the various macaws and parrots from farther south. And, in a culture where colors were pretty much limited to the colors of nature, the radiant colors of these birds would be striking.

Macaw/parrot petroglyph, Springerville Miniature Style, Apache County, Arizona. Image from Ekkehart Malotki, The Rock Art of Arizona, 2002, Kiva Publications Inc., Walnut, California, figure 276, page 134.

Whether these imports arrived on the backs of long distance traders such as the Aztec pochteca, or were traded step by step up a chain of stages from their origins in Mesoamerica is not yet certain.

Boca Negra Canyon, Petroglyph National Monument, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Photograph Peter Faris.

“Along with cacao, shell, and copper, these birds signal the type of long-distance transport of goods often argued to have been an important dimension of emergent sociopolitical complexity in prehistoric societies. Like cacao, to which access was probably restricted to high status individuals or groups, the acquisition and control of scarlet macaws was likely the province of social and religious elites.” (Watson 2015:8238)

In the words of the Billie Holiday song God Bless the Child, “them that’s got shall get, them that’s not shall lose.” You would have had to possess great status and importance to own a macaw, and owning a macaw would reinforce your status and importance. This importance would be a major factor in the creation of images of macaws and parrots in rock art of the American southwest.

Two Macaws facing in upper left,  Petroglyph National Monument, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Photograph by Paul and Joy Foster.

Polly Schaafsma said in 2022 “Macaws and other parrots are portrayed in the ancient pictorial records of farming communities throughout much of the U.S. Southwest and adjacent regions. Their immediate sources of procurement, patterns of trade, management issues, ritual use, and wider connections to politics and social hierarchy are among the subjects concerning these colorful tropical birds in the north of their native habitat.” (Schaafsma 2022:241) We need to remember that the people only had what nature provided at that time, no artificial colors and dyes. And, although some minerals, animals, and plants were quite colorful much of their surrounding would have been quite drab by today’s standards.

Painted kiva mural. Pottery Mound Pueblo, New Mexico. Internet image, public domain.

The descendants of Ancestral Puebloans tend to be culturally somewhat conservative, holding on to their practices and adapting their ceremonies into today’s circumstances. The ceremonial importance of these continues to this day. “Today, these members of the Psittacidae family continue to be highly valued for their cosmological symbolism by the Pueblo people in New Mexico and Arizona. - - Parrots and macaws appear in Ancestral Pueblo imagery possibly around1000 CE. The pictorial evidence from the Pueblo past indicates that first and foremost the members of the parrot family, and most notably the scarlet macaws, were associated with the sun, just as they are today. Accordingly, they are linked to summer and the growing season, while their red, blue, and yellow feathers echo the hues of rainbow and the many colors of maize (Tyler 1979:13-38). Their directional symbolism, due to their red color and place of origin is in the south.” (Schaafsma 2022:241) One interesting question would be if the importance of color and direction existed in Ancestral Pueblo belief before the availability of macaws and parrots, or can the color and directional significance be attributed to association with the arrival of the first birds traded north.

The association of macaws and parrots with the Sun, warmth and the south is echoed by Frank Waters (1963:67) who wrote that the Parrot Clan symbolized the south in Hopi belief because they arrived at Hopi from the south after their migrations. Dennis Tedlock (1993:165) also makes the association with the south “which is where parrots and macaws now come from.”

Macaw/parrot petroglyph. Image from Ekkehart Malotki, The Rock Art of Arizona, 2002, Kiva Publications Inc., Walnut, California, figure 192, page 101.

Hamilton Tyler (1979:26-7) discusses modern pueblo ceremonial dances in which people wear headdresses of macaw feathers on their head instead of tablitas. As a tablita’s stepped-fret design represents clouds this reinforces the sky and weather implications of macaws and parrots – sky; cloud; rain; rainbow; macaw/parrot. Weiner (2015:232-3) agrees with the weather implications and adds that a parrot or macaw can learn to speak words, a talent that would make them doubly exotic and impressive. The striking visual impact of a macaw is generally recognized, but here Crown reminds us of an aspect of the parrots and macaws that would have been seen as even more remarkable – they could speak, and in your language. This would guarantee the social status of the owner of one. A bird that speaks human words would seem magical, so not only were they kept for their feathers, but as amazing companions and ceremonial participants.

Part 2 of this column will be posted next week.

3D IMAGES ON ROCK PROJECTIONS:

Large and small faces on projecting corners of rock, Three Rivers Petroglyph Site, New Mexico. Photograph by Peter Faris.

We are used to thinking about rock art as being created on the flat face of a cliff, boulder or cave wall. There are many examples, however, where the image is carved or painted on an uneven surface, not just rough, but over or around a projection of the rock face. In many instances this seems to be an attempt to create a three-dimensional image.

Closeup of the small face on a projecting corner of rock, Three Rivers Petroglyph Site, New Mexico. Photograph by Peter Faris.

At the Three Rivers petroglyphs site in New Mexico there are a number of human face petroglyphs. They are not as ornate as many from the Rio Grande area so it is not clear whether they are intended to represent masks or not. Some of them, however, have been carved around the corner of a boulder in a seemingly intentional effort at three-dimensional imagery. These images were carved by the Jornada Mogollon people between about 900 and 1300 CE.

By its very nature rock art is produced on generally uneven surfaces so there is some depth variation in most examples. This seems different, however, this looks very much like the corners of boulders were sought out to carve the faces on to produce the three-dimensional effect.

'Corner Mask', 3D face on a rock projection. Photograph provided by Margaret Berrier.

DStretch enhancement of the 'Corner Mask', 3D face on a rock projection. Photograph provided by Margaret Berrier.

Margaret Berrier (personal communication 2026) described these faces as “corner masks” and provided me with pictures of one that she has in her possession, adding she knows of another one. I am not completely comfortable with designating many of the faces at Three Rivers as masks. They lack much of the decorative detail found in acknowledge mask images from elsewhere in the southwest. I rather think that some of them are simply meant to be faces, perhaps portraits. Of course, if they have the added details they can and will, of course, be defined as masks. 

Face on a projecting corner of rock, Three Rivers Petroglyph Site, New Mexico. Photograph from pinterest.

At the Three Rivers Site government signage identifies the makers of the imagery as Mogollon people, various other references use the phrase Jornada. In fact the people of the region of the Tularosa Basin, which the Three Rives Petroglyph Site is on the edge of, are referred to as Jornada Mogollon so the terms seem to be used almost interchangeably.

Face on a projecting corner of rock, Three Rivers Petroglyph Site, New Mexico. Photograph by Peter Faris.

In his 1998 book ‘Signs of Life: rock art of the Upper Rio Grande’, Dennis Slifer calls the petroglyphs of faces found in the Upper Rio Grand ‘masks.’ “Apparently the masks represented ancestral spirits, similar to the kachinas of the modern Pueblo people. Consequently, the meanings must have been similar to those of Hopi, Zuni, and other pueblos in the Upper Rio Grande region.” (Slifer 1998:188) As I said above, however, Slifer’s masks usually have more detail and decorative elements than the faces at Three Rivers.

Face on a projecting corner of rock, Three Rivers Petroglyph Site, New Mexico. Photograph by Peter Faris.

Polly Schaafsma (1992) somewhat splits the difference as she refers to “Masks and faces are featured in both Jornada Style paintings and petroglyphs. These elements are only occasional in western Jornada Style sites, including the Mimbres Valley, but figure more prominently in the rock art of the Rio Grande Valley and the Tularosa Basin” (p.67). Schaafsma has also recognized the phenomenon of faces on rock corner and projections, stating “Variations on the mask themes are faces lacking outlines and masks carved on rock angles. The latter, in which the corner becomes the nose region or the most prominent part of the face, are not unusual.” (p.67) Polly’s description here is right on, when the faces are produced around the corner of the rock the nose is generally right on the angle.

Face on a projecting corner of rock, Three Rivers Petroglyph Site, New Mexico. Photograph by Peter Faris.

Joan Price (2018:185) presented a couple of interesting theories about the possible reason for these corner depictions at Three Rivers. “Innumerable glyphs of faces and maps span smooth or sharp corners of single stones with facial directional orientation or continual lines, chains of simple visual elements, feet, animal tracks and more. These wrap around stones were termed ‘animated canvas’. Concave or convex surfaces selected for glyphs take into consideration the play of light and/or dark over the course of a day suggesting a core   concept in Puebloan and other indigenous languages of balance between opposing forces within a person and a stone that emphasizes that idea.” (Price 2018:185) First she suggests that they were produced to emphasize the effects of light on the differing angles of the rock, and second that this is related to the concept of opposition between dark and light, winter and summer, etc. that is so prevalent in the beliefs of people in the American southwest.

I wish I could present numerous examples of these faces from many other sites, but alas, I cannot. Although I have found records of some outside of this area there do not seem to be any locations with anywhere near this large a concentration.  In this case it seems to have been primarily a local idea that came and went with the Jornada people in the area of the Three Rivers Petroglyph Site (either that, or there are just a whole lot of them that I have not been able to find records for). And anyone who does have this information please let me know. In either case, the prevalence of them at this location lead me to conclude that the carvers of these faces were purposely giving them three dimensions in their portrayals in an attempt to make them more lifelike.

REFERENCES:

Berrier, Margaret, personal communication, February 2026.

Price, Joan E., 2018, Clay and Stone: Petroglyphs at Three Rivers Petroglyph Site Compared with Mimbres Ceramic Painted Bowls, pp. 177-192, in Collected Papers from the 20^th Biennial Mogollon Archaeology Conference, October 11-13, 2018, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico, edited by Lonnie C. Ludeman. Accessed online 17 December 2025.

Schaafsma, Polly, 1992, Rock Art in New Mexico, Museum of New Mexico Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Slifer, Dennis, 1998, Signs of Life: rock art of the Upper Rio Grande, Ancient City Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico.