2023 C.R.A.P. AWARD – NEVADA SHOE PRINTS MADE MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO ACCORDING TO CREATIONISTS:

2023 C.R.A.P. (Certifiable Rock Art Prevarication) Award goes to "Creation Science."

Alleged shoe print from Nevada. Image from howandwhys.com.

The 2023 C.R.A.P. Award goes not to the people cited in the references below, but to the idea that they are pushing back against – supposed shoe tracks in Arizona that have been claimed to be many millions of years old by Creationists. Let me restate that, I am not criticizing the reports, I am criticizing the crazy ideas of fringie Creationists. These discoveries were supposedly made in the 1920s in Pershing County, Nevada. Reports are somewhat fuzzy since they state that the discoveries were found in a coal seam in Fisher Canyon yet the quote from the supposed discoverer states he found it on a hillside. I am going to visit reports on two different versions of the discovery. One individual who remains anonymous created a phony photograph of the footprint and put it up online – to him as an individual I award a special C.R.A.P. Award.

Creationists, the people who argue that human beings and dinosaurs co-existed, leap on misinterpretations and frauds such as this to try to prove their strange beliefs which they now often call ‘Creation Science.’

"Creation science rejects evolution and the common descent of all living things on Earth. Instead, it asserts that the field of evolutionarey biology is itself pseudoscientific or even a religion. Creationists argue instead for a system call baraminology, which considers the living world to be descended from uniquely created kinds or 'baramins.' Creation science incorporates the concept of catastrophism to reconcile current landforms and fossil distributions with Biblical interpretations, proposint the remains resulted from successive cataclysmic events, such as a worldwide flood and subsequent ice age. It rejects one of the fundamentral principles of modern geology (and of modern science generally), uniformitarianism, which applies the same physical and geological observed on the Earth today to interpret the Earth's geological history." (Wikipedia) They believe that early humans co-existed with dinosaurs - sort of like Alley Oop. So this quoted passage describes the fringies who believe in these things - now the the actual belief on shoeprints in Arizona many millions of years old, which is anything but science.

Another view of the alleged shoe print from Nevada. Image from anomalien.com.

A 2006 report by Glen Kuban describes in detail the supposed discovery and provides an analysis of the claim. “A number of strict creationists and "ancient anomaly" enthusiasts have claimed that a "shoe print" was found in Triassic rock near Fisher Canyon, Pershing County, Nevada. Although most of these authors state that the print was found by John Reid in 1922 (or 1927 according to some), evidently it was actually found by Albert E. Knapp, an employee of Nevada Mining Company, on or before January 15th, 1917.” (Kuban 2006)

In 2021 Vicky Verma quoted the discoverer of the supposed footprint: “He wrote: ‘In descending the hill my attention was attracted by the fossil, which lay fossil side uppermost amongst some loose rocks. I picked it upl and put it in my pocket for further examination, and on such examination came to the conclusion that it is a layer from the heel of a show which had been pulled from the balance of the heel by suction; the rock being in a plastic state at the time. I found it in limestone of the Triassic period, a belt of which runs through that section of the hills.’ Later, Reid somehow took the fossilized shoeprint to New York and had it analyzed by a competent geologist of the Rockefeller Foundation, who verified Mr. Knapp and pronounced it unquestionably Triassic limestone.” (Verma 2021) Now we have to remember that this was 100 years ago, a time when the public was less informed about science. I am, however, mystified as to how a so-called geologist could have made such a misidentification.

Drawing of alleged shoe print with the missing portion filled in. Image from Verma, 2020.

“In 1922, two reports on the alleged shoeprint were published in the New York Times and the American Weekly section of the New York Sunday American respectively. According to the second report by W. H. Ballou, John T. Reid discovered the fossil (which was obviously a mistake). The report said: ‘Some time ago, while he was prospecting for fossils in Nevada, John T. Reid, a distinguished mining engineer, and geologist stopped suddenly and looked down in utter bewilderment and amazement at a rock near his feet. For there, a part of the rock itself was what seemed to be a human footprint! Closer inspection showed that it was not a mark of a naked foot, but was, apparently, a shoe sole which had been turned into stone. The forepart was missing. But there was the outline of at least two-thirds of it, and around this outline ran a well-defined sewn thread which had, it appeared, attached the welt to the sole. Further on was another line of sewing, and in the center, where the foot would have rested had the object really been a show sole, there was an indentation, exactly such as would have been made by the bone of the heel rubbing upon and wearing down the material of which the sole had been made. Thus was found a fossil which is the foremost mystery of science today. For the rock in which it was found is at least 5 million years old.” (Verma 2021)  

Kuban is quite straightforward with his long and fair analysis and then his discounting of the claims. “The "Nevada shoe print" claims are not well supported by the available evidence. The footprint advocates have presumed that the missing portion of the object was very shoe-like in shape, whereas any number of other shapes are possible. They have not demonstrated that the supposed print was ever part of a striding sequence, or that it contains the detailed "stitching" features they assert. The present location of the object is unknown, impeding further study. Judging from the available photographs, the specimen is most likely a broken ironstone concretion, perhaps one that has suffered some erosion.” (Kuban 2006)

Fraudulent image of the Nevada shoe print. Online image, public domain.

Photos of the 1920s ‘fossil’ clearly show a broken and eroded concretion. But the claim resurfaced recently with a much more convincing photograph of a shoe or bootprint in stone. This counterfeit seems to be the product of another Creationist fringie trying to strengthen their case. The more recent image appears to be a photographic manipulation of two negatives, one of a rock surface and the other one of a footprint.  The fact it shows a tread pattern marks it a modern as prehistoric footwear did not have this typed of treads on the bottom of the sole. Online reports claiming the discovery of this second shoeprint seem to parrot the reports of the 1920s discovery but with the illustrations replaced with the newly counterfeited photograph. Of course, nowadays this second image could also have been a computer creation.

Newly created fraudulent shoe print created by DALL-E-2.

On the subject of this new photograph – the counterfeited one – as a test I went to DALL-E-2 and asked it to make a picture of the tread marks of a boot print in the rock of a cliff face. This is my version of the counterfeited photograph. With a little more time and more specific instructions I am confident that DALL-E-2 and I could have made one much like the counterfeit shoe print.

I want to reiterate that this C.R.A.P. Award is not being awarded to the authors of the reports I cite below to whom I am grateful for the information, but to the fringies who believe this sort of thing. Whether it is petroglyphs of dinosaurs or the fossilized imprint of a shoe or boot wearing foot from 15 or 200 million years ago – absurd.

NOTE: Some images in this posting 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:

Kuban, Glen J., 2006, Nevada Shoe Print?, http://paleo.cc/paluxy/nevada.htm. Accessed online 9 December 2023.

Verma, Vicky, 2021, Mystery of Alleged 200 Million-Year-Old Shoe Print Found in Nevada in 1917, https://www.howandwhys.com. Accessed online 9 December 2023.

Wikipedia, Creation Science, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_science. Accessed online 11 December 2023.

Merry Christmas 2023

 

A VERY MERRY

 CHRISTMAS 2023

FROM RockArtBlog   

Image created by DALL-E-2.

 

 Have a very Merry Christmas,

A Happy New Year's Eve, 

and all the best in 2024.

HALLEY'S COMET PICTURED IN CHACO CANYON – REVISITED:

 

Chaco Canyon, Penasco Blanco trail, San Juan county, New Mexico. Photograph Peter Faris, May 1994.

Back on 20 November 2010 I wrote a column about a pictograph along the Peñasco Blanco trail in Chaco Canyon. That trail boasts the panel which has been designated to represent the AD 1054 supernova that gave us the Crab Nebula. This particular panel consists of a red painted ten-pointed star, a crescent, and a hand print. I had visited Chaco a few times and was fascinated by the figure below the so-called Supernova panel. A white painted dot surrounded by two white concentric circles which I identify as a sun sign. This is nice enough by itself but no really big deal. In a 1997 visit I noticed what looked like very faint red paint to the right of that symbol looking somewhat like a large stylized flame. The column I wrote about that in 2010 is reprinted below.

“Archaeoastronomy is the study of the astronomical knowledge of ancient peoples. Students of archaeoastonomy have long been fascinated with the evidence for ancient astronomy found in Chaco Canyon consisting of the Fajada Butte sun calendar and the supposed supernova panel on Peñasco Blanco trail. High above Chaco Canyon’s Peñasco Blanco trail can be found a panel that has often been identified as the Supernova of AD 1054 that produced the Crab Nebula. This well known panel includes a crescent moon, a 10-pointed star which is believed to represent the supernova explosion, and a hand print.

What is not usually mentioned is that there is more rock art at that location. Right below the supposed supernova panel on the rock overhang, and painted in white on the face of the cliff is a large concentric circle symbol, often identified as an Ancestral Pueblo sun symbol. In this case, however, what appears to be a faded flame-like extension can be seen projecting to the right from the sun symbol. This extension, which also appears to be considerably obscured by dust, seems to combine with the sun symbol to represent a comet. Using the large sun symbol as the head of the comet certainly implies that it was large and bright.

Chaco Canyon was a major center of Ancestral Puebloan culture between AD 900 and AD 1150. During that period Halley’s Comet appeared in AD 912, AD 989, AD 1066, and AD 1145. Elsewhere in the world the AD 1066 appearance figured as an omen in the Norman conquest of England and, as such was also portrayed in the Bayeux Tapestry record of Duke William’s conquest. One old written reference in England mentions it as appearing four times as bright as Venus, and another likened its size and brightness to that of the moon.

I submit that the brightest and most impressive of these appearances would be the obvious candidate for reproduction above the Peñasco Blanco trail. From the information available that was probably the AD 1066 appearance of Halley’s. The proximity of that date to that of the supernova of AD 1054 also is suggestive of the AD 1066 appearance as we know that someone in that location had painted an astronomical event probably twelve years earlier. Certainly the people there at that time showed interest in the events seen in the heavens as is proved by the Fajada Butte Sun Calendar and the supernova panel. These clues suggest to me that the faded pictograph below the supernova panel is a record of the AD 1066 appearance of Halley’s Comet.” (Faris 2010)

Field sketch, Chaco Canyon, Penasco Blanco trail, San Juan county, New Mexico. Photograph Peter Faris, September 1997.

A bright heavenly object with a long flame behind it must be a comet, but which one. For the reasons outlined in the paragraphs quoted above from my 2010 column, I decided it was very likely the AD 1066 appearance of Halley’s Comet. I studied in intently and produced the field sketch illustrated above.

Chaco Canyon, Penasco Blanco trail, San Juan county, New Mexico. D-stretch by Michael Bradford, Photograph provided by Dr. Michael Fuller.

Chaco Canyon, Penasco Blanco trail, San Juan county, New Mexico. D-stretch by Meghan Murphy, Photograph provided by Dr. Michael Fuller.

Chaco Canyon, Penasco Blanco trail, San Juan county, New Mexico. D-stretch by Rob Pettengill, Photograph provided by Dr. Michael Fuller.

Since that time new developments have given us D-Stretch technology which can be used to enhance very faint traces of paint, and I recently received enhanced images of that design from Dr. Michael Fuller which confirm that the faint red field is a comet-like tail. I now have three examples produced by different people that clearly show the tail streaming behind the head of the comet. And, although my field sketch was inaccurate, especially along the top of the comet tail, I find it hugely gratifying to have been proven right in this instance.

REFERENCE:

Faris, Peter, 2010, Halley’s Comet Pictured in Chaco Canyon, 20 November 2010, https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/7760124847746733855/3107711045319457496

 

BOOK REVIEW – “COMINGS AND GOINGS: 13,000 YEARS OF MIGRATIONS IN AND AROUND ROCK ART RANCH, NORTHEASTERN ARIZONA, PARTS 1 AND 2”:

It has been quite some time since RockArtBlog did a book review, but I have one for you this week. I was recently contacted by Bill Burkett, the Series Editor for the Arizona Archaeologist Series of volumes for the Arizona Archaeological Society. Their newest publication, “Comings and Goings: 13,000 Years of Migrations In and Around Rock Art Ranch, Northeastern Arizona” is a two volume set consisting of over 540 pages which covers all aspects of the archeology of the place in question, including the rock art that the ranch was named for. It is the report of archaeological surveys and work done at Rock Art Ranch, 20 miles southeast of Winslow, Arizona between 2010 and 2016, and it was well worth waiting for.

Front cover of volume 1, “Comings and Goings: 13,000 Years of Migrations In and Around Rock Art Ranch, Northeastern Arizona”, Arizona Archaeologist Series of volumes for the Arizona Archaeological Society.

“The volume is organized into five sections: background (Chapters 1 and 2), petroglyphs (Chapters 3 and 4), survey (Chapter 5), excavations (Chapters 6 and 7), and regional patterns (Chapters 8 to 10). Chapter 2 by Karen Adams, Susan Smith, and E.C. Adams summarizes the geology and the natural environment of the ranch. Darlene L. Brinkerhoff describes the petroglyphs in Chevelon Canyon in comparison to regional styles in Chapter 3, while Mairead K. Doery focuses on a significant central panel to imagine how it was used to manipulate social power in hunting and gathering groups in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 takes on the task of summarizing the data from survey to consider the striking patterns of changing land use through time expressed through sites and objects. Chapter 6 summarizes the excavations at Multi-Kiva Site. Chapter 7 summarizes excavations at Brandy’s Pueblo on the ranch. These summaries include those of architecture and material culture. The volume wraps up with three regional studies focused on the meaning and interrelationships among clusters of pueblos (Chapter 8), projectile points—focused on the preceramic era (Chapter 9), and ceramics (Chapter 10). All three highlight the one constant for the region—population movement. Chapter 11 provides some concluding thoughts and offers recommendations for future research.” (Adams 2023:18)

While this beautiful set does not focus primarily on rock art it has over 40 pages on the rock art of that area, predominately in chapters 3 and 4. I have so-called rock art books in my library that are smaller than that, and these volumes provide all of the in-depth data that goes with the rock art to help fit it into place, from the plant and animal resources, to cultural remains of the cultures that created it.

Figure 3.2c, Owl, Chevelon Canyon, photograph by Darlene

Brinkerhoff ; enhanced on the photograph by

Richard C. Lange.

Figure 3.9. Basketmaker Majestic Style, Chevelon Canyon, Repatinated glyphs (photographs by Chris Rhoads).

Fig. 3.12, Chevelon Canyon, Cinderella Panel, human/bearprint transformation,  (photograph by Rupestrian CyberServices).

In Chapter 3, “Chevelon Canyon and ‘The Steps’ Petroglyph Site at Rock Art Ranch,” subtitled “It’s All About Water – Life’s Blood Source” (pp. 39-67) Brinkerhoff wrote an in-depth analysis of that site.

“As non-Pueblo observers, we continue to call these etchings “petroglyphs,” “sites,” and other likely inappropriate names, and can only make inferences about their meanings. However, descendant communities offer the best interpretation of these enigmatic images. By themselves or in combination these symbols may indicate territory, clans, maps, food storage, water location, vision quests, hunting, seasons, ceremonies, altars, shrines, prayers, warfare, astronomy, proper balance in the universe, and probably metaphorical meanings. Serpents in Hopi are believed to bring about renewal and fertility in nature, including rain (Parsons 1939). Water serpent symbolism is widespread and are of religious significance in Aztec and Mayan cultures (Figure 3.17). Many other water icons such as waves, lightning zigzags, clouds, water birds, rake patterns, frogs and water serpents, which can be evident or metaphysical appear to be highly represented at The Steps. What appear to be water lines leading vertically down to the water source in various locations are frequently deep and heavily worn. These types of petroglyphs allude to rain and water and may have been invoked upon by later groups who passed this way. The physical location of the stone images on the landscape in the canyon were no doubt crucial to the people who made them. No doubt their placement, size, and associations were meaningful (see following chapter by Doery). The choice to place them in the canyon with a permanent stream and associated plants and animals is most significant as a referent.” (Brinkerhoff 2023:65) To a certain extent the proximity of rock art to water in arid regions is a function of the proximity of the people in those regions. We must be careful not to overthink that relationship.

Figure 4.2. Hidden access “steps” to the Herd panel at the Chevelon Steps; the panel is low on the cliff face to the left,

And in Chapter 4, “Accessing the Audience: An Interpretation of Panel Seven at The Steps” (pp. 69-82) by Doery offers a detailed discussion of concealed vs. public petroglyphs.

Figure 4.1. Petroglyphs from The Herd at the Chevelon Steps, some with repecking and grinding indicated by solid fill (figures not to scale).

Figure 4.4b. Concealed petroglyphs of The Herd, left of center, on horizontal surface.

“It is notable that the concealed petroglyph assemblage of The Herd displays significantly greater amounts of spiritual iconography than is found in the panel’s more visible areas. Geometric figures like those described above and sexed/gendered anthropomorphic figures are more common among the group of concealed assemblages—those that publicity analysis indicates required more power to view. It has long been established that landscapes containing watersheds, from which they first emerged, hold religious significance for the Hopi (Eggan 1994; Fewkes 1906). Given that a higher degree of geometric water signs and other forms of spiritual iconography are found in the concealed assemblage of this central panel, it is possible that The Herd plays a spiritual role in the lives of not only its canyon-wide audience, but its elite creators and modifiers.” (Doery 2023:81) Doery concluded that the petroglyphs designated “The Herd” and others in concealed locations were placed in those sites for spiritual purposes. Doery described the location of ‘The Herd’ panel as being placed in a difficult location. “Though all those with the ability to enter the canyon may have been able to view The Herd, accessing the panel was a much more restricted task. Given its extraordinarily high placement on the canyon walls, I faced initial difficulty in determining how The Herd’s creators (both those who made the petroglyphs, and those who repecked them) would have reached the panel.” (Doery 2023:72-3) It sounds to me as if ‘The Herd’ panel is not so much concealed as it would be apparently inaccessible.

In Chapter 11, “Summary and Conclusions,” (pp. 490-506) E. Charles Adams wrote a summation of the results of the ‘Petroglyph Project’ portion of the overall study.

“With support and permission from Brantley Baird additional research was conducted at The Steps Petroglyph site in 2018 a part of master’s thesis research by Mairead Poulin (Doery); (Poulin 2019). Results are summarized in Chapter 4. Her analysis supports the argument that access to the canyon and certain panels was restricted by leaders and/or religious specialists. This supports Brinkerhoff’s (Chapter 3) overview of the glyph styles and 11: Summary and Conclusions 505 distributions among nearly 3500 documented glyphs. Certainly, the breadth of elements, styles, contexts, and associations have only just begun to be explored. And beyond The Steps are many other petroglyph sites in the middle LCR in addition to intriguing relationships with sites in the Glen Canyon region of the Utah/Arizona border (McNeil and Shaul 2018).” (Adams 2013:504-5)

I love these volumes that analyze a culture in-depth, including the rock art. It allows us to forge a much deeper understanding of the culture and individuals that produced the rock art, and puts it in a detailed context. A high quality archaeological study that includes a look at the rock art. Congratulations to all persons involved in this magnificent effort.

This volume is available for purchase on Amazon. You can view it at https://www.amazon.com/Comings-Goings-Migrations-Northeastern-Arizona/dp/B0CCZWS1CH/ref=pd_vtp_h_pd_vtp_h_sccl_2/137-4279999-8817434?pd_rd_w=3eqaw&content-id=amzn1.sym.e16c7d1a-0497-4008-b7be-636e59b1dfaf&pf_rd_p=e16c7d1a-0497-4008-b7be-636e59b1dfaf&pf_rd_r=1T6DMPZWM7S8PXB3TPE2&pd_rd_wg=N7Tw7&pd_rd_r=532dc541-498b-4cc1-96fa-5dc339fe4481&pd_rd_i=B0CCZWS1CH&psc=1 

NOTE: I have not included citations to secondary sources in my Reference listing below. For the actual sources I suggest you access the volumes being herein reviewed.

REFERENCE:

Adams, E. Charles and Richard C. Lange (Editors), 2023, Comings and Goings: 13,000 Years of Migrations In and Around Rock Art Ranch, Northeastern Arizona, Parts 1 and 2 (Color edition), Arizona Archaeological Society, Number 45, 541 pages.

ARE THERE IMAGES OF SUPERNOVAS IN ROCK ART?

 

Chaco Canyon, Penasco Blanco trail, San Juan county, New Mexico. Photograph Peter Faris, May 1994.

Everyone who is interested in archeoastronomy knows about the proposed pictographic record of the supernova of A.D. 1054 in Chaco Canyon. The triad of the handprint, starburst, and what is assumed to be a crescent moon have become famous. These claims have even proliferated. A number of other combinations of crescents and what might represent stars in the American West have been declared to be records of that supernova.

Crescent and Sun, Arroyo del Parral, Crosby, Baja California. From The Cave Paintings of Baja California, Harry W. Crosby, 1984, p. 36, Copley Press, La Jolla, CA.

In 2015, astronomer E.C. Krupp wrote "Star and crescent combinations in rock art in the American Southwest were first interpreted in 1955 as eyewitness depictions of the 1054 AD Supernova explosion that produced the Crab nebula. While the Crab nebula is visible only telescopically, the event that generated it was brilliant, and for a time only the Sun and Moon were brighter. Additional Crab supernova candidates in California and Southwestern rock art were suggested 20 years later, and they included Chaco Canyon's Penasco Blanco pictograph panel, which became the poster child for Crab supernova rock art and is now called 'Supernova' on signage at the site. By 1979, a list of 21 Crab supernova rock art sites was assembled, and the inventory has continued to expand more slowly since then." (Krupp (A) 2015:167)

Possible representations of the AD 1054 supernova. Left to right: El Parral, Baja California; White Mesa, Arizona; Navajo Canyon, Arizona; Chaco Canyon, New Mexico; from "The Cave Paintings of Baja California", Harry W. Crosby, 1997, p. 227, Sunbelt Publications, San Diego, CA.

And in a second piece in 2015 Krupp wrote - “Astronomical studies of rock art began in the American Southwest, in 1955. William C. Miller, a staff member at Mount Wilson and Palomar observatories, initiated this research with a report on the pairing of a “star” symbol with a crescent at two different rock art sites in northern Arizona. He also suggested both panels might depict the Crab supernova of 1054 AD, a conspicuous event which was recorded at the time by official astronomers in China and Japan. Miller’s work was never forgotten by the astronomers, but astronomical interpretation of rock art went dormant until the 1970s, when additional examples of star/crescent combinations in California and Southwest rock art were noticed. In 1972, paintings of a “star” and crescent were reported from Fern Cave in Lava Beds National Monument, in northeast California, and a year later, the star and crescent on an overhang at Penasco Blanco in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, captured attention. In June, 1973, at a conference in Mexico City, a group of eight investigators discussed five different supernova rock art sites and mentioned the possibility of two others in the first survey of supernova rock art. Two years later, astronomers John C. Brandt and Ray A. Williamson confirmed the two provisional sites and added six more. At the same symposium, Dorothy Mayer, a rock art researcher, discussed more than a dozen sites in California and Nevada and judged that four might represent the Crab supernova. By 1979, a new review listed 19 possible supernova depictions in rock art. By 2005, however, detailed, disciplined review demonstrated some of the classic examples could not possibly represent the Crab supernova. It was also clear no one knew the locations of the two original “supernova” sites and that no one had seen them since Miller described them. When the two sites were finally recovered and reappraised, it was evident the supernova interpretation at both sites is compromised, and ongoing scrutiny of the other canonical star/crescent rock art panels may now result in a complete reassessment of the supernova record in Southwest rock art.” (Krupp (B) 2015:594-5)

Navajo Canyon (actually Binne Etteni Canyon) Arizona. From Krupp (A), 2015, Figure 2.

It has gotten to the point where every crescent in rock art that is accompanied by another object is branded the A.D. 1054 supernova. Probably the most important question we have to ask is “what would a supernova look like to an ancient naked-eye observer, and how would they draw it?” I have never seen a supernova so I do not know what it would really look like.

White Mesa, Arizona. From Krupp (A), 2015, Figure 1.

Virtually all descriptions of the event go something like the following. “Chinese astronomers noticed the sudden appearance of a star blazing in the daytime sky on July 4, 1054 CE. It likely outshone the brightest planet, Venus, and was temporarily the 3rd-brightest object in the sky, after the sun and moon. This “guest star” – the exploding supernova – remained visible in daylight for some 23 days. At night it shone near Tianguan – a star we now call Zeta Tauri, in the constellation of the Taurus the Bull – for nearly two years. Then it faded from view.” (Sessions and Gonzaga 2023)

Supernova explosion. Internet image, public domain.

The speculation then continues, usually starting with the panel from the Penasco Blanco trail in Chaco Canyon. “The ancestral puebloan people in the American Southwest may have viewed the bright new star in 1054. Also, a crescent moon was in the sky near the new star on the morning of July 5, the day following the observations by the Chinese. So the pictograph below, from Chaco Canyon in New Mexico, may depict the event. And the multi-spiked star to the left represents the supernova near the crescent moon. Furthermore, the handprint above may signify the importance of the event or may be the artist’s ‘signature.’” (Sessions and Gonzaga 2023)

Petroglyph originally designated an eclipse. I suggest it as a much better candidate for the AD 1054 Supernova. Photograph High Altitude Observatory, public domain.

I would like to nominate another candidate for the supernova of A.D. 1054. Also found in Chaco Canyon, it has been designated as a solar eclipse in the past, but, as I have written before, a total solar eclipse should not have the center pecked out like this, it should be a ring of light showing prominences. This petroglyph seems to me to be a much better candidate for early stages of an exploding supernova. There are any number of public domain photographs on the internet of supernovas in their various stages, and some of them look very much like the Chaco Canyon petroglyph in question. Can I prove any of this? No, I cannot – but I submit it makes a certain amount of sense.

NOTES: Some images in this posting 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 claims you should read the Krupp’s excellent reports listed below.

REFERENCES:

Krupp, Edwin C. (A), 2015, Crab Supernova Rock Art: A Comprehensive, Critical, and Definitive Review, August 2015, Journal of Skyscape Archeology 1(2), 167-197. DOI:10.1558/jsa.v1i2.28255.

Krupp, Edwin C. (B), 2015, Rock Art of the Greater Southwest, pp. 593-606, in Handbook of Archaeoastronomy and Ethnoastronomy, edited by Ruggles, Clive L. N., Springer Company, New York

Sessions, Larry, and Shireen Gonzaga, 2023, Meet the Crab Nebula, remnant of an exploding star, 15 January 2023, https://earthsky.org. Accessed online 21 October 2023.

 

ARE THERE PARTIAL SOLAR ECLIPSES IN ROCK ART?

Partial solar eclipse, 14 October 2023. Internet photograph, public domain.

I am writing this a little over a month after viewing the solar eclipse of 14 October 2023. Where I live the moon had covered 75-80 percent of the sun. During that viewing I tried to see if I could make out the partially obscured sun with my naked eyes – the answer is no. Even with  that much of the sun obscured the remainder is so bright that it is all that you see - no shape, just bright light. This brought me to the question are there partial eclipses in rock art? My first reaction to this question would be no. The creators of the rock art would not have had the special glasses that are required to look at an eclipse without damaging your eyes.

I have, however, come up with one situation which I believe might let one see a partial eclipse without any accessories. A cloud cover of just the right density should block enough of the light allowing a viewer to see the partial eclipsing of the sun. So, perhaps there are some images of partial eclipses after all.

And even if there were pictographs and petroglyphs of a partial eclipse how would we know it? If it existed it would be a crescent image and crescents have always been identified as lunar symbols in rock art studies.

We know that indigenous cultures knew of eclipses and had their explanations for what they were, and what they portended.

In North America, the Nootkans of Vancouver Island had their own explanation for eclipses. "The Nootkans saw evidence of spirits everywhere. They often prayed for power to the Four Chiefs of Above, Horizon, Land, and undersea. In a pleasant sky country was ka-u-c, the supreme controller of primary resources communicated with by chiefs only. Moon and Sun, husband and wife, were the highest powers for most, prayed to for food and luck, especially Moon. Swallowing of either by a great Sky Codfish caused eclipses. The Thunderbird's flapping wings made thunder, and lightning flashes were feathered serpents, his dogs." (Arima and Dewhirst 1990:404) They refer to “swallowing of either by a great Sky Codfish.” Presumably, a partial eclipse would be seen as the great Sky Codfish taking bites out of the Sun or Moon.

Mayan Eclipse Glyph. Image from Bruce Love, 2017.

In 2017, Love produced a paper on the Mayan “eclipse glyph” in which he gave examples from various codices, arguing that the so-called “eclipse glyph” only represents a real eclipse in the Dresden Codex and illustrated six examples of these. He did not, however, refer to any of them as partial eclipses. I have not seen any examples of these carved or painted on rock, but they might exist.

Aztec eclipse symbol, 

Suarez and Garcia-Acosta,

2021, Fig. 7, p. 5.

Aztec eclipse symbol, 

Suarez and Garcia-Acosta,

2021, Fig. 5, p. 4.

In 2021, Suarez and Garcia-Acosta wrote about earthquake records in the Aztec codex Telleriano-Remensis which also included a couple of illustrations of symbols that they identified as eclipse symbols. “The Codex Telleriano-Remensis, produced in sixteenth century Mexico on European paper, is one of the finest surviving examples of Aztec manuscript painting. It holds the earliest written evidence of earthquakes in the Americas. Its Latinized name comes from Charles-Maurice Le Tellier, archbishop of Reims, who had possession of the manuscript in the late 17^th century. The Codex is held at the Bibliotheaaue national de France in Paris. The Codex Telleriano-Remensis is divided into three sections. The first section, spanning the first seven pages, describes the 365-day solar calendar, called the xiuhpohualli. The second section, spanning pages 8 to 24, is a tonalamatl, describing the 260-day tonalpohualli calendar. The third section is a history, itself divided into two sections which differ stylistically. Pages 25 to 28 are an account of migrations during the 12^th and 13^th centuries, while the remaining pages of the codex record historical events, such as the ascensions and deaths or rulers, battles, earthquakes, and eclipses, from the 14^th century to the 16^th century, including events of early Colonial Mexico.” (Wikipedia) This is another one to look for on the rocks.

So, obviously my original assumption is wrong. If the Aztecs could record partial eclipses in their Codeci, there may well be many other records going unrecognized.  While the Codex Telleriano-Remensis is drawn on paper, not stone, it proves that indigenous populations of the New World knew of partial solar eclipses, so yes, it is possible that some of them are recorded on stone in rock art. This may mean that some of the so-called lunar crescents on the rocks are actually meant to record a partial solar eclipse.

Fern Cave, Lava Beds National Monument. Photograph from Armitage et al., 1997.

One well known example comes from Fern Cave in Lava Beds National Monument in northeastern California. This panel has the dubious distinction of having been branded a record of the A.D. 1054 Supernova which gave us the Crab Nebula. This explanation has proliferated to the point that virtually any rock art that includes a crescent and another spot, circle, or anything that can be believed to represent a star has by now been so branded.

 

Penasco Blanco trail, Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Photograph from Wikimedia.

The most famous example of this is the panel from the Penasco Blanco trail in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. But is this a supernova, the moon, or a partial eclipsed?

 

Buffalo Rock State Park, southern Illinois. Photograph

 by Mark J. Wagner.

Buffalo Rock State Park, southern Illinois. Photograph

 by Mark J. Wagner.

A couple from Buffalo Rock State Park in southern Illinois.

Fountain Bluff site, southern Illinois. Photograph

 by Mark J. Wagner.

And one from the Fountain Bluff site, also in southern Illinois.

Roche a Cri State Park, Wisconsin. Internet image, public domain.

I have included a few examples of crescents in rock art. There are countless others, you probably know of many as well. Are these the crescent moon or are a few of them partial eclipses? I cannot say, but alternative possibilities should be kept in mind.

NOTE: Some images in this posting 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:

Arima, Eugene, and John Dewhirst, 1990, Nootkans of Vancouver Island, 391-411, Sturtevant, William C. (general editor) and Suttles, Wayne (volume editor)1990  Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 7, Northwest Coast, 391-411, Smithsonian Institution, Washington.

Armitage, R.A., M. Hyman, J. Southon, C. Barat and M. W. Rowe, 1997, Rock-art image in Fern Cave, Lava Beds National Monument, California: not the AD 1054 (Crab Nebula) supernova, Antiquity 71, 715-719. Accessed 15 October 2023.

Love, Bruce, 2017, The “Eclipse Glyph” in Maya Text and Iconography: A Century of Misinterpretation, Ancient Mesoamerica, Cambridge University Press, pages 1-26. Accessed online 15 October 2023.

NASA, Eclipses: History, https://science.nasa.gov/eclipses/history/. Accessed online 14 October 2023.

Suarez, Gerardo, and Virginia Garcia-Acosta, 2021, The First Written Accounts of Pre-Hispanic Earthquakes in the Americas, November 2021, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 92, No. 6.

Wikipedia, Codex Telleriano-Remensis, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Telleriano-Remensis. Accessed online 14 October 2023.

CA. AD 1455 PAINTING ILLUSTRATES AN ACHEULIAN HANDAXE:

Melun Diptych, Jean Fouquet, Royal Museum of Fine Arts, Antwerp, by Jean Fouquet. Photo Credits Francesco Bini.

The painting is the Melun Diptych, “painted by French court painter Jean Fouquet (1420–1481) created around 1452. The name of this diptych came from its original home in the Collegiate Church of Notre-Dame in Melun. The left panel depicts Etienne Chevalier with his patron saint St. Stephen and the right panel depicts the Virgin and Christ child surrounded by cherubim. Each wooden panel measures about 93 by 85 centimeters and the two would have been hinged together at the center.” (Wikipedia) As an Art History student way back when, I of course studied this painting. At that time the rock held by Saint Stephen on his bible (for consecration) was merely identified as a rock, the instrument of martyrdom for Saint Stephen who was stoned to death. Now, a detailed analysis by a team, and published online by Cambridge University Press, has examined the image in-depth and has concluded that the particular stone held by St. Stephen is an Acheulian hand-axe.

Jean Fouquet, Madonna and Child Surrounded by Angels, right wing of the diptych, Royal Museum of Fine Arts, Antwerp. Internet image public domain.

“The two pieces, originally a diptych, are now separated. The left panel is in the Staatliche Museen in Berlin and the right panel is at the Royal Museum of Fine Arts, Belgium. A self-portrait medallion is also associated with the two panels. Measuring 6 centimeters in diameter, it would have adorned the frame, and consists of copper, enamel, and gold. The medallion is now in the Louvre in Paris, France.” (Wikipedia) I must say that this painting was never a favorite of mine. The two sides are so mismatched with Etienne Chevalier and St. Stephen looking quite naturalistic and portrayed against a realistic background, while the right panel with Mary and the Christ Child painted as if they were a marble statue with the background of bright red Cherubim. It has always been my judgment that they were painted separately at different times. I think that the right panel came first and Fouquet later (maybe many years later given the stylistic differences) turned it into the diptych when Chevalier commissioned one by painting and adding the left panel.

Jean Fouquet, St. Stephen and Etienne Chevalier, left wing of the diptych, Staatliche Museen, Berlin. Internet image public domain.

But what is of most interest to us here is the stone St. Stephen holds on his bible – an Acheulean hand-axe. “Acheulean, from the French acheuleen after the type site of Saint-Acheul, is an archaeological industry of stone tool manufacture characterized by the distinctive oval and pear-shaped ‘hand axeds’ associated with Homo erectus and derived species such a Homo heidelbergensis. Acheulean tools were produced during the Lower Paleolithic ere across Africa and much of West Asia, South Asia, East Asia and Europe, and are typically found with Homo erectus remains. It is thought that Acheulean technologies first developed about  2 million years ago, derived from the more primitive Oldowan technology associated with Homo habilis. The Acheulean includes at least the early part of the Middle PLaleolithic. Its end is not well defined, depending on whether the Sangoan (also known as ‘Epi-Acheulean’) is included, it may be taken to last as late as 130,000 years ago. In Europe and Western Asia, early Neanderthals adopted Acheulean technology, transitioning to Mousterian by about 160,000 years ago.” (Wikipedia)

Acheulean hand-axe. Photograph from www.worldhistory.org.

Historically people have always been interested in these prehistoric tools. Even when they were not recognized as human-made they were prized as unique items.

“Here, we are concerned with the pre-seventeenth-century social history of handaxes. For such information we often rely on the early oral histories of European populations. From these texts, it is widely stated that prior to the Enlightenment handaxes were often considered to be of natural origin and were thought to have been ‘shot from the clouds’ when lightning struck the ground. Sixteenth-century natural historians across Europe noted the presence of ‘ceraunia’ or ‘thunderstones’ which were ‘curiously shaped stone objects … treated as a naturall occurring geological phenomenon’ formed through lightning strikes. Pliny the Elder (Natural History 37.51) described red ‘elongated’ ceraunia ‘resembling axe-heads’, which were considered by the Magi to be found ‘only in a place that has been struck by a thunderbolt’. Ceraunia were a broad category of objects that not only included handaxes, but also included other prehistoric implements of both flaked and ground origin, and fossilized sea urchins. Descriptions of some ceraunia are, however, undeniable in their resemblance to handaxes and other later bifacial tools, being ‘a heterogeneous category of stones of varying color that are shaped like pyramids, wedges, hammers, spheres, or are sometimes triangular. Prior to 1717, handaxe-like stone ceraunia forms had already been discussed. For these early accounts, and others, it was still often the case that ceraunia – handaxes or not – originated in the sky and were deposited where lightning struck. Earlier oral accounts of ‘thunderbolts’ or ‘thunderstones’ can occasionally be traced to the eleventh to thirteenth century in northern Europe.” (Key 2023) So, when French court painter Jean Fouquet created the Melun Diptych around 1452 he had St. Stephen holding one of these miraculous “Thunder Stones”  that was prized as rare natural phenomena.

St. Stephen's stone from the left panel of the Melun Diptych. Internet image public domain.

In their analysis of the object in the painting Key et al (2023) based their analysis primarily on three factors.

"First the stone object appears to have been painted square-on to the observer, to that if it was a handaxe then the 2D outline of the tool is visible within the painting. That is, the shape profile of the potential handaxe, and therefore the shape information potentially imposed by an Acheulean hominin, has been retained. In turn, it is possible to compare the shape of this stone object to handaxe artifacts from known Acheulean assemblages. If the object is found to be within the shape space of confirmed Acheulean assemblages, particularly those from northern France, then it strengthens the inference that an Acheulean handaxe is depicted in the painting, and the social history of these artifacts can be pushed back to the fifteenth century." (Key et al. 2023)

"Second, the stone object's colouration is notable for its similarity to numerous flint handaxes recovered from Quaternary gravel and sand deposits in northwest France and eastern Britain. If the colors in the painting match those on artifacts from deposits found in northern France, where Fouquet lived and worked, then the inference that a handaxe is depicted will again be strengthened." (Key et al. 2023)

"Third, while the object is not depicted using the black ink line illustrations traditionally used in Palaeolithic studies, it nonetheless appears that flake scars have been depicted. Some appear unusually abrupt and irregular-and somewhat akin to frost-fractures found in some flint nodules or flaked flint cores-but others, particularly on the right edge, have the characteristic shallow concavity left behind by flake platforms, and the majority of ridges lead invasively toward the centre of the object. If the number of 'flake scars' visible on the painting is similar to those from northern European Acheulean examplars, then again the inference that a handaxe artifact is depicted will be strengthened." (Key et al. 2023) These larger and cruder flaking scars may signify greater age as later examples are usually much more finely shaped and flaked.

Applying their chosen criteria, Key et al. (2023) find that the stone object held by St. Stephen falls within their self-defined ranges, and is thus likely to be an Acheulean hand-axe. 

“We cannot state with absolute certainty that an Acheulean handaxe was painted by Jean Fouquet c. 1455. What we have done is demonstrate, as far as it is possible, that the stone object in the image is likely to be one. This finding pushes the evidenced social history of handaxes back to the mid fifteenth century, a century before probable instances of ‘handaxe-ceraunia’ are described and two centuries before we have secure written and illustrated evidence of handaxes.” (Key et al. 2023) To my eye the stone being held by St. Stephen is too thick to have been an effective hand-axe. It is certainly flaked like one however. Perhaps Fouquet was inspired by the appearance of a finely flaked hand-axe and made the surface appearance of St. Stephen's instrument of martyrdom resemble it.

Given this assumption, Key et al. (2023) do admit the possibility that the hand-axe does not come from the Acheulean period, but from the Middle Paleolithic period with its prepared-core technology, but they find that in either case it is very likely a hand-axe. “While we cannot rule out that a Middle Paleolithic handaxe could be represented instead, the painted object's coloration—if corresponding to flint—does suggest a heavy patination more often associated with early northern European Acheulean assemblages. This interpretation is supported by our shape and flake scar analyses, which demonstrate the object to be typical for European Acheulean assemblages. Arguably, the painting's origin in northern France, which is known for its Acheulean assemblages, is another point favoring a mid-Pleistocene age for the depicted object.” (Key et al. 2023) Although it appears to me as if the flaking is much cruder than the later and more finely-flaked Middle Paleolithic examples.

Either way, Acheulean or Middle Paleolithic, I find it to be extremely interesting that a painting from the fifteenth century includes a man-made object that could approach two million years in age, and is almost certainly hundreds of thousands of years old.

NOTE: Some images in this posting 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:

Key, Alastair, et al., 2023, Acheulian Handaxes in Medieval France: An Earlier ‘Modern’ Social History for Palaeolithic Bifaces, 11 July 2023, https://www.cambridge.org. Accessed online 18 October 2023.

Wikipedia, Melun Diptych, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melun_Diptych. Accessed online 18 October 2023.

Wikipedia, Acheulean, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acheulean. Accessed online 29 October 2023.