A NEW AMMOGLYPH (PLEISTOCENE SAND SCULPTURE) DISCOVERED IN SOUTH AFRICA:

The site of the discovery of the new ammoglyph. The arrow points to a human figure for scale. Illustration from Helm et al., 2024, Fig. 2.

On May 22, 2021, I wrote about what we might call a completely new kind of rock art discovered in South Africa. I wrote “It is not often I get to pass along news about a whole new kind of rock art, but it was with some excitement that I found this report of a team of South African researchers who have discovered ammoglyphs. These originated as human created designs in beach sand which was later turned to sandstone, preserving the markings in the process, voila - rock art.” (Faris 2021) Now we have a remarkable newly discovered ammoglyph from the Cape south coast of South Africa thought to be a figurative sculpture.

We have long been aware of prehistoric tracks preserved by later consolidation of the sandy or muddy surface they were left on. Preserved dinosaur track sites along with those of ancient animals are fairly common. More recently have come discoveries of ancient hominin and human track sites. “Aeolianites (cemented dune sands, sometimes also referred to as calcarenites) and cemented foreshore deposits on the Cape south coast of South Africa preserve not only the tracks that our hominin ancestors made on Pleistocene dunes and beaches but also other evidence of their activities. Consequently, the term ‘ammoglyph’ was coined to represent an anthropogenic pattern registeredin unconsolidated sand, which is now evident on a palaeosurface of rock. These reports complement the identification of several Pleistocene hominin tracksites on this coastline. To date, ammoglyphs have not been reported from any other region.” (Helm et al. 2024:58) My previous report (2021) concerned marks and geometric symbols that had been made in the sand which were later preserved by such cementing. These had been made on the flat two-dimensional sandy surface.

Upper surface of the new ammoglyph. Illustration from Helm et al., 2024, Fig. 3A.

The report herein cited (Helm et al. 2024) is for a three-dimensional object believed to have been created in the same way. “A purported cemented sand sculpture found in Pleistocene aeolianite deposits on the Cape south coast of South Africa resembles a stingray  (minus a tail) in outline. Symmetryis evident in the rock’s shape and the pattern of grooves on its surface. It is postulated that it may be a three-dimensional example of representational art of another species. Optically stimulated luminescence studies of rocks in the vicinity indicate that it dates to the MiddleStone Age, most probably during Marine Isotope Stage 5 (when high sea levels imply a nearby coastline). The correspondence in shape between the purported sand sculpture and the blue stingray (Dasyatis chrysonota) suggests that it may have been traced from a fresh specimen. Tracings on sand are postulated as a possible ‘stepping stone’ between abstract early palaeoart and representational rock art. Features of the rock suggest that the creation of a stingray sand sculpture may conceivably have been followed by symbolically wounding it and amputating its lethal end. Identification of further ammoglyphs will be important in refining the analysis of this newly identified form of early palaeoart.” (Helm et al. 2024:58) To clarify, they mean that marks on the back of the purported ammoglyph are thought to represent ritual wounds (or maybe just for fun, a game) of the sand sculpture, and the missing tail may have been cut off in the same way. It is also possible that the tail was originally there but as the thinnest part of the shape may have eroded away.

Lower surface (underside) of the new ammoglyph. Illustration from Helm et al., 2024, Fig. 3B.

“It was identified in 2018, close to the high-tide mark, at the base of coastal cliffs from which it had presumably been dislodged. It exhibited multiple examples of symmetry. It was noted that its shape resembled that of a stingray, and it was suggested that it might represent the preservation of a sand sculpture. Sensu strictu, the symmetrical grooves on its upper surface would be classified as an ‘ammoglyph’, and the whole feature would more accurately be described as an ‘ammo-sculpture’, but for convenience, we retain the term ‘ammoglyph’ throughout.” (Helm et al. 2024:59) Entirely reasonable as far as I am concerned. Ammo-sculpture would be a really awkward designation.

“The shape of the rock resembles that of a stingray. The arms of the cross feature intersect very close to the position of the eyes. The row of grooves may be associated with patterns evident on the dorsal surface of a species such as the blue stingray Dasyatis chrysonota. The lateral corners correspond to the position of the pectoral fins, and the protuberances on either side of the ‘posterior’ corner of the rock correspond to the position of the pelvic fins. Slight concavities on either side of the vestigial tail accentuate it. The symmetrical groove pattern also serves to orientate the sculpture on an ‘anteroposterior’ axis.” (Helm et al. 2024:64)

Blue Sting Ray, Illustration from Helm et al., 2024, Fig. 7 (illustration by Elaine Heemstra, reproduced from NISC – SAIAB).

The authors explain their reasoning in designating the shape as a sculpture. “The concept that the initial stage in creating the purported sand sculpture involved tracing the outline of a fresh stingray is unprovable. However, it is suggested by the near-perfect outline and proportions. The close correspondence in shape suggests that the artist was phenomenally gifted in recording such detail, or the image was traced. If it was traced, the disc width of ~30 cm implies it was a male or small immature female. Given the fact that large females enter shallow southern Cape waters to pup in summer and then mate with smaller males, the inference is that the purported sand sculpture was probably based on a small male rather than an immature female.” (Helm et al. 2024:67) This would seem to add plausibility to their argument, however, can we know that stingrays behaved the same way in the same locality back then as they do now?

Tail stub end of ammoglyph seen from top side and bottom side. Illustration from Helm et al., 2024, Fig. 5.

“The possibility that the combination of multiple symmetrical features is due to chance alone is, in our view, remote. The findings most plausibly represent a sand sculpture from the MSA, dated to MIS 5e. The close correspondence in shape between the sand sculpture and the blue stingray suggests that it may have been traced from a fresh specimen. In such an interpretation, the symmetrical pattern of surface grooves may be related to the features on the dorsal surface of the blue stingray and serves to orientate it along an anteroposterior axis. Extending this interpretation, the posterior stub would represent what remains of the tail portion, which may have been removed prior to burial in an act of symbolic wounding. The asymmetrical features may be incidental, for which an anthropogenic origin cannot be asserted, although the ‘gouge’, directed towards the tail, may also represent symbolic wounding. If such postulates are valid, the sand sculpture would qualify as the oldest known representational art of another species.” (Helm et al 2024:59-60)

3-D photogrammetry model of the upper surface of the purported sand sculpture. Illustration from Helm et al., 2024, Fig. 6.

The reference (above) to MIS 5e refers to "Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 5e, called the Eemian (Ipswichian in Britain) around 124,000 - 119,000 years ago - the last interglacial period before the present (Holocene)." (Wikipedia)

This type of sculpture reminds me first of all of the clay bison found in the cave of Tuc d’Audoubert or the clay bear sculpture in Montespan cave in France. Both of these examples were involved in some sort of rituals, so it is perhaps inevitable that Helm et al. also speculate a ritual purpose for the sand sculpture of a sting ray. Whatever the case if really is a fascinating discovery and may anticipate more such remarkable discoveries.

REFERENCE:

Faris, Peter 2021,  A Whole New Type of Rock Art – Ammoglyphs, 22 May 2021. https://rockartblog.blogspot.com.

Helm, Charles W., Andrew S. Carr, Hayley C. Cawthra, Paul D. Cowley, Jan C. De Vynck, Pieter-Jan Gräbe, Renée Rust, Willo Stear and Alan K. Whitfield, 2024, A Purported Pleistocene Sand Sculpture from South Africa, Rock Art Research 2024,  Volume 41, Number 1, pp. 58-73. Accessed online 9 April 2024.

Wikipedia, Marine Isotope Stage 5, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Isotope_Stage_5 . Accessed online 16 April 2024.