GAME BOARD PETROGLYPHS IN INDIA:

Petroglyph rock and water hole at the site. Photograph Kumar, 2021-22, Figure 1.

Over the years I have posted a number of columns about petroglyphs apparently created as game boards in various parts of the world (see the cloud index at bottom of page). This revisiting of the subject adds some petroglyphs interpreted as game boards located at Buchkewadi, Taluka Junnar, District Pune, Maharashtra India. Ajit Kumar, in a paper published in 2021 discussed new petroglyph discoveries at this site including a number of game boards.

It seems board games have been popular throughout human history. Most early games of this type are variations of moving pieces and/or possibly capturing pieces from the other player. I have previously written about game boards carved into the rock in Oman, Azerbaijan, Hawaii, Kenya, Greece, and Mexico, so we can assume that these are pretty much a world-wide phenomena.

Solah Guttiya-Guti game board (right), and possible Pallanguzhi board (left), Photograph Kumar, 2021-22, Figure 11, page 73.

 “Game boards of different nature are noticed in the Petroglyphs here. The common game board noticed is of Solah Guttiya/Guti (Sixteen soldiers or balls) which in some areas is also called Bagh Bakari.  Other game boards noticed include that of Pallanguzhi (called Mankal in some areas) and Chaupar or Pachisi. The largest Solah Guttiya board is around 70cm square. Similar game boards are also noticed on the floors of some caves at Ellora and Nasik. Though these games were prevalent in society from ancient times, the game boards in the caves were possibly engraved after they fell into disuse for religious practices. Game boards are not seen in cave sites like Ajanta or Nadsur, which remained isolated and unused for leisure activities after their abandonment. Ajanta seems to have been totally abandoned possibly around 7th - 8th CE (based on inscriptions) and Nadsur around 2nd CE (in the absence later inscriptions and Buddha sculptures).” (Kumar 2021:70-71)  Some of these game boards in Buchkewadi are considerably more complex than most of the examples we have previously seen. Particularly the Solah Gottiya board is not a simple pursue and capture type board. It has much more complicated rules suggesting a level of cultural sophistication.

Solah Guttiya-Guti Game Board. Photograph Kumar, 2021-22, Figure 13, page 74.

Solah Guttiya is played much like the game we know as checkers where pieces are moved along from node to node on the pattern on the board and can capture the opponent’s pieces by jumping over them to an empty node. The pieces should be distinguishable from the opponent’s pieces and each player starts with sixteen pieces.

Pallanguzhi game board. Photograph Kumar, 2021-22, Figure 12, page 74.

Possible pallanguzhi game board and bull petroglyphs. Photograph Kumar, 2021-22, Figure 15, page 75.

“The Pallanguzhi board has 16 cups for holding the Tamarind or similar seeds or gotis (tokens) and at times, there are also larger receptacles on the board ends or middle to keep the seeds /gotis. This game is still played in many parts of India, especially Tamil Nadu. The Solah Guttiya game board has four main squares separated in the middle and two triangular boards attached to either side. Each of these main squares are further divided into 8 segments and each player gets a total of 16 segments from the two squares. Player(s) choose differently colored gotis and arranging 16 gotis each on the board, they sit opposite to each other and make their moves. Players capturing the greatest number of gotis, thus leaving the opponent with no gotis to play with becomes the winner. This game is still vogue in some rural parts of India, though not popular with younger generations. Engraved here is also a game board of Chaupar or Pachisi. This game also has a great antiquity and continues to be still played in some pockets of India. There are also large game boards some with 40 cups, and others 24 cups and as they are close to the Solah Guttiya and other game boards, it seems that it was meant to play some modified version of the Pallanguzhi game.” (Kumar 2021:73) Pallanguzhi uses a game board much like the African Mancala game board, and the Pachisi game is known here as Parchisi, a game adopted from the Indian.

These carved game boards are associated with a considerable number of bull petroglyphs. “This is possibly for the first time that such a large number of bull figurines associated with game board(s) and Shivling/Yoni (Shiva lingam/Yoni) motif(s) have been observed on basalt rock formation(s) as petroglyphs, especially from the Maharashtra region. The motif, especially the bull(s) facing each other depicted here have similarity in style with those reported along the Western Coast. It is interesting to note that only ithyphallic bull finds (are) represented and not cows or other bovine forms. The bull represented here seems to be of the Khilar/Khilari breed, which is still vogue on this region along with other breeds like the Holstein, Friesian and others. The petroglyphs depicted here are possibly creations of shepherds who visited the area for grazing and watering livestock. From the various game boards noticed along the hillock it is apparent they also spent quality time in recreation while attending to the livestock. The Shivling/Vulva and Labyrinths/Concentric circle motifs are definitely of the religious sphere, possibly done as votive offerings.” (Kumar 2021:60)

Finding original versions of Pachisi (our modern version is Parchisi) game boards carved into rock suggests a truly immense time depth for this game. Indeed, the resemblance of the other game boards to various modern games carries the same implication of time depth. It was not until the modern addition of electronic circuitry to games that games proliferated into the huge variety we see today. For millennia, most games basically were based upon moving and/or capturing tokens. Some were more complicated than others, some were made with greater craftsmanship, or more precious materials than others, but the basic principles were the same up until the latter half of the 20^th Century.

NOTE 1: In my quotations from Kumar I have made a number of spelling corrections and some grammar changes to reflect the usages of English. No meanings have been altered in this process.

NOTE 2: 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 this reports you should read the original report at the site listed below.

REFERENCES:

Kumar, Ajit, 2021, An Appraisal of Petroglyphs from Buchkewade, Taluka Junnar, District Pune, Maharashtra, Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 9, 2021-22, pp. 67-79. Accessed online 19 March 2024.

 

CAVE ART AS A REPOSITORY FOR THE SPIRITS OF HUNTED ANIMALS:

Animal frieze from Chauvet Cave, France. Online image, public domain.

An approach that turns the old idea of cave art as ‘hunting magic’ on its head imagining the art after the fact instead of before the hunt.

“During the first half of the twentieth century Abbé Breuil’s interpretation of cave paintings as simple hunting magic prevailed. His idea was that the paintings tried to bewitch the animals to ensure success in hunting. According to French archaeologist André Leroi-Gourhan, this idea originated from some extremely rare paintings depicting wounded or speared animals in European caves. Some prehistorians believed that the depicted animals were painted to encourage fertility of the game.” (Ijäs 2017:72)

Horses and rhinoceros, Chauvet Cave, France. Online image, public domain.

Many groups of indigenous hunters feel that the animals they harvest are willingly sacrificing themselves to the hunter to provide food and raw materials for his well-being, and they have customs of thanking the animal for giving itself up. For instance there are records of Inuit hunters not only thanking the dead game animal for sacrificing itself, but also pouring a little water in its mouth to give it a drink. “When Inuit kill an animal in the traditional way, they give it a drink of water or, if there is no water, they melt snow with their mouths.” (Laugrand and Oosten 2015:210) This act is a way of giving back to the animal who gave itself up to the Inuit hunter.

Such an act of giving back illustrates the attitude of honor, respect, even kinship that an indigenous hunter feels toward his quarry. “For hunter-gatherers, occupying environments where animal protein is essential to subsist, the hunt is an act of necessity. Such events, however destructive and aggressive as they tend to be, are commonly associated not with the hunter’s sense of malice, disdain, or even casual disinterest, but an abiding sense of respect and honor for his prey.” (Buckner 2020)

Horses, Chauvet Cave, France. Online image, public domain.

“Respect for animals was organized by many rules that varied for each animal. Some basic principles applied to all animals. An animal should not be abused, or ridiculed. Unnecessary suffering should be avoided.” (Laugrand and Oosten 2015:66) They did not need a local chapter of the SPCA, basic human decency was apparently enough.

Among indigenous cultures, hunting is more than just a way to procure meat. Hunting also has deeply meaningful cultural and spiritual significance governing the relationships of the hunter to the animals he is pursuing.

Horse, Axial Gallery, Lascaux, Image from Lewis-Williams, 2002, The Mind in the Cave, Fig. 23.

“Hunting is not just a means of survival for indigenous peoples; it also plays a significant role in their cultural and spiritual practices. Many hunting rituals are deeply intertwined with indigenous ceremonies and belief systems. These rituals often involve prayers, songs, and offerings to show gratitude to the animals for their sacrifice. The animals are seen as kin and are honored accordingly.” (Thomas 2023) This is pretty much at the core of their culture; their ceremonies and rites are often centered on hunting success and the relationship with the animals.

The interaction of the hunter and the hunted is seen as a reciprocal relationship. “Among the Cree Indians of northern Canada, it is believed that animals intentionally present themselves to the hunters to be killed. The hunter consumes the meat, but the soul of the animal is released to be reclothed with flesh. Hunting there, as among many northern peoples, is conceived as a rite of regeneration: consumption follows killing as birth follows intercourse, and both acts are integral to the reproductive cycles, respectively, of animals and humans. However, animals will not return to hunters who have treated them badly in the past. One treats an animal badly by failing to observe the proper, respectful procedures in the process of butchering, consumption and disposal of the bones, or by causing undue pain and suffering to the animal in killing it.” (Ingold 1994:9) So, the hunter not only has to behave correctly in respect to the animal he is hunting, the animal’s soul also has to be given due respect in order for the compact between hunter and prey to be properly fulfilled.

Auroch, horses and deer, Lascaux Cave, France, Online image, public domain.

“The animals in the environment of the hunter do not simply go their own way, but are supposed to act with the hunter in mind. They are not just ‘there’ for the hunter to find and take as he will, rather they present themselves to him. The encounter, then, is a moment in the unfolding of a continuing – even lifelong – relationship between the hunter and the animal kind (of which every particular individual encountered is a specific instance). The hunter hopes that by being good to animals, they in turn will be good to him.” (Ingold 1994:14-15) In other words, it is a reciprocal relationship with both human society and the animals having roles to play, and if the roles are played well success is expected to follow.

“For many Native Americans, the act of hunting was about more than just acquiring food. It was a way to connect with the natural world and to show respect for the animals that were being hunted. Hunting was also a way to teach young people about the ways of their culture and to instill in them the values of their people. ‘We should be grateful for the gift of the animals because they were created to feed the Anishnaabe people, giving them strength.’ It was important for hunters to pray and express gratitude when they took the life of an animal, as taking that life would allow them to feed their own families.” (Mika 2023)

For the Anishnaabe people “They believed that the animals were created to feed the Anishnaabe people, to give us strength, and we should be thankful for that gift. It was very important for the hunter to pray and give thanks when taking the life of an animal, as taking that life meant that he could feed his own family. It was also said that if we stopped hunting and fishing, that we were no longer grateful for the gifts that the creator had given us – therefore it is an act of cultural tradition to not only hunt and fish, but to give thanks by placing sacred medicines when an animal life has been taken for the survival of the tribe.” (Tribal Trade Co. 2020)

Aurochs, horses and deer, Lascaux Cave, France, Online image, public domain.

“The Native American Hunting Practices are based on the unity of nature and humans. They recognize that nature is not only a sustainer of life, but it is also an essential part of human beings. Also, hunting is a way of life and a sacred act of honoring the animal’s spirit. However, with the encroachment of colonization, these practices were misunderstood, exploited, and became a pain point for Native Americans.The primary aim of Native American Hunting Practices was to provide food for the community while ensuring that every part of the animal was utilized to avoid wastage. The practice was done in reverence for the animal’s life and the understanding that its sacrifice would provide for the community.” (Justo 2023)

To the north Inuit beliefs were much the same. “Many Inuit believed that animals offered themselves to the hunter in order to be killed. If the animals were hunted they would multiply; if they were not hunted, they would feel neglected and disappear. - Animals were thus often described as giving themselves to the hunters who would make good use of their meat.” (Laugrand and Oosten 2015:41)

Among the Inuit again “When departing from a hunting area the heads of the caribou must always face in the direction in which the party is setting out. The soul of the animals slain will then follow the same course and good hunting will result.” (Laugrand and Oosten 2015:241)

The Inuit believe that the game animals want to give themselves to the hunter. By doing so their soul is released to be, in effect, reborn. A hunter who passes up an opportunity to harvest a game animal risks insulting it and being shunned by all game thereafter. “Killing game is not only a necessity to survive, it is also an obligation placed upon the hunter by the animals themselves. Hunting is not a matter of choice, but a moral obligation one cannot escape. Only by hunting can the Inuit as well as the animals prosper. (Laugrand and Oosten 2015:343)

While most of the examples I have cited refer to Native American or Inuit peoples, the situation is essentially the same among indigenous people worldwide. The relationship between hunter and hunted is one of respect, often even courtesy. And, if the proper attitude and rituals are maintained, the soul of the animal is freed to be reborn, to come back to the hunter again in the future. In the Inuit belief, the soul of a sea mammal such as seal or walrus that is killed returns to Sedna, the ‘Sea Woman’ to wait for its rebirth.

So, to return to the proposition that the cave art might have been produced after the successful hunt instead of before it, there could be a couple of motives involved. The first, of course, might be bragging rights, to commemorate the success of a difficult hunt. The cave picture might have been the visual equivalent of a fisherman’s tale. The second might well have been to serve as a repository for the soul of that animal until it can be reborn. In a number of ways this would seem to make more sense than the “Increase Theory” of hunting magic, that multiplying images of a certain animal would result in the increase of the numbers of the actual animal in the landscape.  Keeping in mind that for many indigenous peoples the soul of an animal taken by a hunter will recycle, will be reborn as a new animal if treated properly and with respect. What if, after a successful hunt, the hunter returned and produced the picture of the animal on a cave or cliff wall to provide a repository for the soul of his dead prey until it could be reborn. In the same way that the soul of an Inuit hunter’s sea mammal victim returned to Sedna to await rebirth, then, the animals, knowing their souls would be provided for, would be more likely to be willing to give themselves to him in the future. The artist would then be part of the natural recycling of the soul of this animal. This could also an explanation for the palimpsests of large numbers of some animal images, each soul would need a new representation. Finally, this also might explain the spiritual and ritual nature of cave art.

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 this subject you should read the original reports at the sites listed below.

REFERENCES:

Buckner, William, 2020, The Psychic Toll of Severing the Hunter-Prey Relationship, 14 October 2020, Nautilus, https://nautil.us. Accessed online 20 April 2024.

Ijäs, Mikko, 2017, Fragments of the Hunt, Persistence Hunting, Tracking and Prehistoric Art, Doctoral Thesis, School of Arts, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.

Ingold, Tim, 1994, From Trust to Donimation, An alternative history of human-animal relations, pp.1-22, in Animals and Human Society, Changing Perspectives, Audrey Manning and James Serpell (editors), 1994 Rutledge, New York.

Justo, 2023, Exploring Traditional Native American Hunting Practices: A Cultural Legacy, 31August 2023, https://nativetribe.info. Accessed online 20 April 2024.

Laugrand, Frederic, and Jarich Oosten, 2015, Hunters, Predators and Prey, Inuit Perceptions of Animals, Berghahn Books, New York and Oxford.

Mika, 2023, The Sacredness of Hunting in Native American Culture, 1 March 2023, https://www.indiancountryextension.org. Accessed online 17 April 2024.

Thomas, Connor, 2023, Exploring Hunting Traditions of Indigenous Peoples, 11 September 2023, https://www.findahunt.com. Accessed online 15 October 2023.

Tribal Trade Co., 2020, Cultural Traditions of Native American Hunting & Gathering, April 2020, https://tribaltradeco.com. Accessed online 17 April 2024.

LIFE-SIZED SAUDI CAMEL CARVINGS REPRESENT AN EXTINCT SPECIES:

A team member above a carved camel on the cliff. Online image, Public domain.

On 10 March 2018, I published a column in RockArtBlog titled “Ancient Saudi Guest Artists-In-Residence” about life sized carvings of camels found in northern Arabia. At the time I explained my reference to guest artists-in-residence as follows: “In university art departments there is a common practice known as the artist-in-residence. This is usually a working artist brought in from outside the university for a term to provide the students a good example of a working artist as well as broaden their range of experience. At first glance, these relief carvings, apparently done by someone who came from somewhere else, reminded me of artists-in-residence.” (Faris 2018) I likened this to the carvings which were assumed to have been done by members of a camel caravan en-route to somewhere which had stopped to rest or conduct business, someone from elsewhere who appeared, stayed for a period of time while he carved the camel images, and then passed on to somewhere else.

Camel carving on rock outcrop. Online image, Public domain.

"Camel carvings have also been found at other sites in Saudi Arabia; one discovered five years ago in Al-Jalouf province has been described as a 'parade of live-sized camels.' In this new effort, the team was studying a rocky outcrop near the southern edge of the Nefud desert. The outcrop was known to researchers, but it took a closer look to discover artwork etched onto its surface by people living in the area thousands of years ago. The new team found several dozen images of a species of camel that has been extinct for thousands of years. Prior research has suggested that such camels once lived all across the Arabian Peninsula. The outcropping has been named Sahout - images were found on three of its formations." (Yirka 2023) All of the panels appear to demonstrate considerable wind erosion from blowing sand. They must have been quite difficult to record.

Camel carving on rock outcrop. Online image, Public domain.

“The life-sized, naturalistic reliefs at the Camel Site in northern Arabia have been severely damaged by erosion. This, coupled with substantial destruction of the surrounding archaeological landscape, has made a chronological assessment of the site difficult. To overcome these problems, we combined results from a wide range of methods, including analysis of surviving tool marks, assessment of weathering and erosion patterns, portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometry, and luminescence dating of fallen fragments. In addition, test excavations identified a homogenous lithic assemblage and faunal remains that were sampled for radiocarbon dating. Our results show that the reliefs were carved with stone tools and that the creation of the reliefs, as well as the main period of activity at the site, date to the Neolithic. Neolithic arrowheads and radiocarbon dates attest occupation between 5200 and 5600 BCE. This is consistent with measurements of the areal density of manganese and iron in the rock varnish. The site was likely in use over a longer period and reliefs were re-worked when erosion began to obscure detailed features. By 1000 BCE, erosion was advanced enough to cause first panels to fall, in a process that continues until today. The Camel Site is likely home to the oldest surviving large-scale (naturalistic) animal reliefs in the world.” (Gaugnin 2021) The re-working of the camels is interesting, somewhat like aboriginal Australian traditional owners of rock art sites re-painting or re-carving them to preserve them.

A carved block fallen from the cliff. Online image, Public domain.

“The data indicates that the sculptures were made with stone tools during the 6^th millennium BCE. At this time, the regional landscape was a savanna-like grassland scattered with lakes and trees where pastoralist groups herded cattle, sheep and goats. Wild camels and equids also roamed the area and were hunted for millennia.” (Max Planck 2021)

Taken altogether these camels tell us a lot about the climate at the time they were created. Also, the fact that they were done in life-size, as well as the fact that the panels were anciently re-worked suggests the high esteem that this culture held the camels in, and the importance of their images to that culture. And the re-working also tells us that esteem lasted for a long enough period that the erosion of the panels was seen as a problem.

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:

Faris, Peter, 2018, Ancient Saudi Guest Artists-in-Residence, 20 March 2018, RockArtBlog, https://www.blogger.com.

Gaugnin, Maria et al., 2021, Life-sized Neolithic camel sculptures in Arabia: A scientific assessment of the craftsmanship and age of the Camel Site reliefs, Sciencedirect.com, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.103165. Accessed online 17 October 2023.

Max Planck Society, 2021, Life-sized camel carvings in Northern Arabia date to the Neolithic period, 15 September 2021, https://phys.org/news/2021-09-life-sized-camel-northern-arbia-date.html. Accessed online 17 October 2023.

Yirka, Bob, 2023, Life-size images of extinct camel species found carved into stones in Saudi Arabia, 4 October 2023, https://phys.org/news. Accessed online 4 October 2023.

 

TWO-HEADED SERPENTS IN MESOAMERICA:

Nlaka’pamux pictograph of Klu’biist (Sisiutl). Illustration from York et al, 1993, p. 115.

Nlaka’pamux pictograph panel showing two Klu’biists (Sisiutls), upper left and lower center. Illustration from York et al, 1993, p. 156.

It is commonly assumed that there were cultural and artistic influences passing both ways from North America to Mesoamerica. Two of these shared themes commonly pointed to are Quetzalcoatl/Kulkulkan and Sotuknango/Tlaloc. This column is to point out another theme that is shared between North America and Mesoamerica – the Two-headed Serpent, known to tribes along the northwest coast as Sisiutl. On May 1, 2010, I wrote about meeting Sisiutl as a young boy at Summer Camp. “As a boy at summer camp one year in the Pacific Northwest I found an India Rubber Boa in the woods. Far from being a harbinger of death and disaster, this peaceful creature was content to be wrapped around my arm and hung on for a considerable time, probably enjoying the body warmth. Surprisingly it made no attempt to bite, or even to uncoil and drop off until I later unwrapped it from my arm and released it back in the woods.”(Faris 2010)

Northern rubber boa (Charina bottae). Photograph by Brian Hinds, 2010, from www.herpwiki.com.

In British Columbia, north of Vancouver, the ‘Nlaka’pamux people have named this mythological being Klu’biist and describe it as follows. “The ‘Nlaka’pamux people of the Stein River Valley north of Vancouver in British Columbia call it klu’biist and have recorded it in numerous pictographs at sites in their territory. In the first of the two illustrations this pictograph panel includes two images of klu'biist, one in the upper left, and a smaller one at bottom center. Many of the portrayals show klu’biist as a four-legged creature and native sources stated that it was a snake with a head at each end, but it could grow legs if it wanted to and then looked something like a lizard with a head at each end. Many of them believe that a sighting of klu’biist foretells a death. The ‘Nlaka’pamux people identify klu’biist as an actual creature that lives in their forests – the India Rubber Boa (Charina bottae) found throughout northwestern North America, and the northernmost member of the boa family. These 18“ brown snakes appear to have a head at both ends with a blunt rounded tail that is hard to distinguish from their real head end and looks amazingly like a length of rubber surgical tubing (York 1993).” (Faris 2010) Interestingly, the mythical version can sometimes have short legs as shown in the pictograph representations. The Rubber Boa (Charina bottae) is resident in the Western United States and Canada from British Columbia in the north to California in the south. A subspecies (Charina umbratica) is found in a small area of southern California. The personal encounter I described above occurred in western Oregon.

Berezkin (2022) argued that the peopling of the New World generally emerged from eastern Asia and flowed southward from the north, taking themes and cultural motifs with them as they went. “The same motifs in ancient and ethnographic visual art in the Pacific basin testify to the common origin of these traditions. The greatest similarity can be traced between ancient China, the northwestern coast of North America and ancient Peru, but analogies They are also abundant in India, Southeast Asia, the Lower Amur, the American Arctic and throughout nuclear America.” (Berezkin 2022:170) In this way the idea of a two-headed snake could have followed the human penetration of MesoAmerica from the north. This motif, which became the two-headed Sisiutl in the northwest coastal cultures of North America may well have led to the two-headed Maquizcoatl of the later Aztecs.

Aztec man confronted by maquixcoatl (bracelet snake). Florentine codex, Bernardino de Sahagun, 16th century, book 11, folio 82.

Detail showing maquixcoatl above a bracelet. Florentine codex, Bernardino de Sahagun, 16th century, book 11, folio 82.

Book 11 of the Florentine Codex by 16^th-century ethnographic researcher by the Spanish Francisan friar Bernardino de Sahagun  shows the double-headed serpent known to the Aztecs as Maquizcoatl (or bracelet snake).

“Sahagun provides a wealth of information on the metaphorical significance of the double-headed serpent. In the illustration accompanying the text (figure 7.8A) a man encounters a maquixcoatl (‘literally bracelet snake’) A beaded bracelet in the foreground translates the first part of the name (‘bracelet’), and Sahagun describes the serpent as small and colored with black, yellow and red stripes as well as having two heads. He explains that if the serpent wrapped itself around a person's arm like a bracelet and stayed there, it was an omen of death.” (Umberger and Aguilera 2023:191)

“Book 11’s Nahua artist depicts the maquizcoatl as a double-headed, double-clawed serpent-like creature. It rests on the ground before a standing male figure. This double-headed creature, save the two set of claws, mirrors the depictions of the pectorals on the Rain God (above). The tlacuilo also labelled the animal pictographically by placing a three-piece jade bracelet on a tied red cord in the grass beside the “bracelet” snake. In the scene, the man reaches out with his right hand to indicate the maquizcoatl, and the blue speech glyph emanating from his mouth indicates that the man is speaking about (or with) the animal.” (Fitzgerald 2022) In both the ‘Nlaka’pamux version from British Columbia and the Nahuatl version from the Aztecs the two-headed serpent can have small clawed feet, although the living serpents that they are believed to have been based on do not. I find it to be significant that this detail is found at both north and south extremes of this belief.

Aztec Maquizcoatl, turquoise and coral on wood. Illustration from Pinterest.

Note that the translation of the name of the two-headed serpent of the Aztecs, Maquizcoatl, literally translates as ‘bracelet snake.’ Having worn a Sisiutl around my wrist like a bracelet for much of an afternoon as a young boy, as I related above, that passage jumped out at me. Not much of an omen of death as I write this approximately 70 years after the event.

So, here we have another likely example of a mythological figure that migrated from the north to the south. Could this belief be old enough to have arrived with the original populating of the Americas from north to south, or did the idea later cross from Asian belief in two-headed dragons and get passed southward. At this time it would be hard to say.

 

NOTE 1: The double-headed serpent of the Aztecs is spelled variously as Maquizcoatl and Maquixcoatl in the quotations above. The spelling using the "z" is more phonetic, approximating the pronunciation of the name more closely.

NOTE 2: 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:

Berezkin Yuri Evgenievich, 2022, Sisiutl, in Cabinet of curiosities 3(17), pp. 170-188., doi 10.31250/2618-8619-2022-3(17)-170-188. Accessed online 17 April 2024, Translated from Russian to English by Yandex.com.

Faris, Peter, 2010, Sisiutl – The Two-Headed Serpent, 1 May 2010, https://rockartblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Sisiutl

Fitzgerald, Joshua Dr., 2022, Rethinking the Double-Headed Serpent at the British Museum, 12 July 2022, mexicolore.co.uk. Accessed online 25 April 2024.

Sahagun, Bernardo Fray, 1545-1590, General History of the Things of New Spain by Fray Bernardino de Sahagún: The Florentine Codex. Book XI: Natural Things, Library of Congress, World Digital Library, https://www.loc.gov/item/2021667856/. Accessed online 25 April 2024.

Umberger, Emily, and Elizabeth Aguilera, 2023, Coyolxauhqui’s Serpents, in Birds and Beasts of Ancient Mesoamerica, edited by Susan Milbrath and Elizabeth Baquedano, pp. 180-199, University Press of Colorado, Denver.

York, Annie, R. Daly, and C. Arnett, 1993, They Write Their Dream on the Rock Forever: Rock Writings of the Stein River Valley of British Columbia, Talonbooks, Vancouver.

BRAZILIAN PETROGLYPHS RECORDED NEAR DINOSAUR TRACKS:

 

Caatinga landscape. Illustration from Wikipedia.

Two of my favorite things in the natural world are rock art (which readers of RockArtBlog will have recognized by now), and fossilized dinosaur tracks. Any report of finding them in conjunction in the same site is positively exciting, and now we have a report of just such an occurrence in Brazil.

Aerial view of Outcrop 1. Illustration Troiana et al., 2024.

Leonardo Troiano wrote in the 2024 paper describing this discovery: “The Serrote do Letreiro Site, found on the northwest periphery of the Sousa Basin, Brazil, presents a remarkable convergence of paleontological and archaeological elements. It is constituted of subhorizontal "lajeiros", or rock outcrops, intermingled with endemic Caatinga vegetation. The three prominent outcrops feature fossilized footprints of theropod, sauropod, and iguanodontian dinosaurs from the Early Cretaceous Period. Adjacent to these dinosaur tracks, indigenous petroglyphs adorn the surface. The petroglyphs, mainly characterized by circular motifs, maintain a striking resemblance to other petroglyphs found in the states of Paraíba and Rio Grande do Norte.” (Troiano et al. 2024) Caatinga is a type of semi-arid tropical vegetation, and an ecoregion characterized by this vegetation in interior northeastern Brazil (Wikipedia). Rock outcroppings in this forest have been found to contain not only three different types of dinosaur footprints, but petroglyphs as well, and it is herein postulated that the dinosaur tracks themselves were one reason for the subsequent placement of petroglyphs on those rock faces. 

Outcrop 1, dinosaur tracks (enhanced) and petroglyphs (dotted circles). Illustration from Scientific Reports, 2024.

"The lithological support on which petroglyphs and dinosaur tracks are located are sub-horizontal sandstone and comglomerate sandstone strata situated on a small hill, known as 'Serrote'. There is evident displacement of sizable surface portions due to rainwater runoff on the inclined support. The makers' preference for such type of sandstone is commonly observed in the Northeast region of Brazil, where many of these rock formations were used as support for petroglyphs. Additionally, the site in question is positioned near a water source, specifically a small lake and a temporary stream, which is likewise a recurring factor is similar sites in the region. The process of creating the petroglyphs involved the use of mixed techniques. The petroglyphs were first carved by scraping with light contact between an abrasive instrument and the rock surface. Irregularities are observed on the inner endes of the rock grooves, a result of fast movement, causing friction between the instrument and the surface. Many of the petroglyphs underwest subsequent pecking so that the ingraving line was refined by a series of continuous impacts using a sharp instrument. This complementary process resulted in small and repeated concavities of greater depth than those observed in petroglyphs made only through scraping. The preference in some instances for the scraping technique often produces shallow petroglyphs, with renders them more vulnerable to erosion, resulting in the current low visibility and legibility of many petroglyphs." (Troiano et al. 2024) Note, they report that some of the petroglyphs had been renewed or repecked. When I carefully read the authors' description of how these petroglyphs were produced I found myself in disagreement. Carving stone with "scraping with light contact" and then "fast movement, causing friction" is not a practical way to remove stone. One either grinds or pecks the surface with a harder stone. The comment about "subsequent pecking", however appears to be right on. No real blame though, kunless a person has actually worked stone they can be forgiven for not totally understanding the process.

Outcrop 1, Dinosaur footprints and petroglyphs. Illustration Troiana et al., Figure 4, 2024.

 “Concerning the morphology of the identified petroglyphs, the presence of tetrapartite or pentapartite circumferences stands out. Nevertheless, there are notable exceptions to this trend, including engravings comprised of rectangular grid structures and others resembling stars. Despite the profusion of identified petroglyphs, no overlap was observed between these inscriptions and the fossilized footprints. In none of the cases was it found that the creation of a petroglyph resulted in damage to the existing footprints, suggesting thoughtfulness by the makers. In some cases, there is an extreme proximity between petroglyphs and footprints, with some occurring immediately adjacent to the fossilized tracks. This only highlights and establishes a more profound relationship between the archaeological and paleontological records. Concerning the graphic identity, or the "set of characteristics that allow attributing a set of graphisms to a particular social authorship, it was determined that the Serrote do Letreiro site belongs to a broad set of archaeological rock art sites in the Brazilian Northeast region that present an identical repertoire of motifs, either pure or abstract, and of similar or identical execution techniques. In the first rock outcrop, located further north, it is possible to identify a higher concentration of dinosaur tracks. Reports from previous visitors to the site from the past twenty years, as well as statements from residents, indicate that until not long ago, there were a minimum of thirty such petroglyphs that were discernible on outcrop 1. The legible petroglyphs found on this outcrop consist predominantly of circles internally divided by lines and are positioned close to the footprints, in some cases as close as a distance of 10 cm.” (Troiano et al. 2024) It would appear to be important that “no overlap was observed between these inscriptions and the fossilized footprints.” This implies to me that the makers of these images carefully avoided overlapping any of the dinosaur footprints, suggesting that they were recognized as being of import.

        

Outcrop 1, Dinosaur footprints and petroglyphs. Illustration Troiana et al., Figure 5, 2024.

No culture leaves basic questions unanswered. I have written elsewhere that one thing that the indigenous inhabitants of the Americas knew well was animal tracks. So many of the tribes depended upon hunting for sustenance would have made reading tracks a priority. Finding these tracks in stone would have presented a conundrum to them – animal tracks in stone that they did not recognize. Something made those tracks, and they did not fit any of the contemporary animals that they knew. I have speculated that this would be one of the factors that led to beliefs in supernatural creatures that could have made the tracks, and once the idea of supernatural is involved such a site probably acquires ritual and spiritual importance. In the past I have referred to this as Native American Paleontology. They had their answers, just not the same ones that we had come up with. This spiritual importance led to the production of the petroglyphs, carefully avoiding the tracks.

Outcrop 3, Dinosaur footprints and petroglyphs. Illustration Troiana et al., Figure 7, 2024.

Here, the authors refer to the eloquent writings of Adrienne Mayor. “Overall, the systematic examination of interactions between humans and the fossil record, such as fossil discoveries in the pre-Columbian era, is a relatively recent scholarly endeavor. Adrienne Mayor played an important role in highlighting the evolution of this research in two significant publications: "The First Fossil Hunters: Paleontology in Greek and Roman Times" (2000) and "Fossil Legends of the First Americans" (2013). As early as 1935, there was recognition that the discipline of paleontology is indebted to Native Americans, considering their relevant discoveries, as described by Edward M. Kindle in his notes in the Journal of Paleontology. Despite this, some prominent paleontologists, such as G. Gaylord Simpson, held the opposite view, exemplifying the paradigm that prevailed for most of that time. According to him, pre-Columbian fossil findings were occasional events and are not to be considered in the history of paleontology. Furthermore, he claimed that Native American reports were untrustworthy, being of little ethnological and no paleontological value. This hegemonic conception disregarded native contributions, arguing that fossil discoveries made by indigenous people were the mere result of chance finds, devoid of any scientific continuity (see page 26 in Mayor). Nonetheless, today, it is indisputable that Native American thought represents a distinct and valuable form of scientific reflection and inquiry. This knowledge, developed over generations, is often referred to as “Native Science”. It is important to highlight that, despite the differences between the Western Scientific Method and Native Science or Traditional Knowledge, both represent equally valid efforts to grasp, describe, and understand the reality that surrounds humans. The integration of Native science knowledge provides a valuable opportunity for academic exchange while at the same time contributing to the empowerment and inclusion of Native American voices in this sphere.” (Troiano et al. 2024)

Therapod track. Illustration Troiana et al., Figure 13A, 2024.

Petroglyph resembling a therapod track. Illustration Troiana et al., Figure 13C, 2024.

These last few lines once again provide a well presented view of what I have called Native American Paleontology. Our science might not have agreed with their conclusions, but their conclusions were valid for their world view and belief systems, and worked for them.

NOTE: Previous RockArtBlog columns on the concurrence of rock art and dinosaur tracks can be accessed through “dinosaur tracks” in the cloud index at the bottom of this column. For much more thorough descriptions of the three sites read the original paper by Troiano et al. (2024).

PRIMARY REFERENCE:

Troiano, Leonardo P., Heloísa B. dos Santos, Tito Aureliano, Aline M. Ghilardi, 2024, A remarkable assemblage of petroglyphs and Dinosaur footprints in Northeast Brazil, Nature/Scientific Reports 14:6528, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-56479-3. Accessed 22 March 2024.

SECONDARY REFERENCES:

Mayor, Adrienne, 2000, The First Fossil Hunters: Paleontology in Greek and Roman Times, Princeton University Press.

Mayor, Adrienne, 2013, Fossil Legends of the First Americans. Princeton University Press.

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.