Sympathetic Magic in Western North American Rock Art

8/16/2019 Sympathetic Magic in Western North American Rock Art

1/25

Society for American Archaeology

Sympathetic Magic in Western North American Rock ArtAuthor(s): James D. Keyser and David S. WhitleySource: American Antiquity, Vol. 71, No. 1 (Jan., 2006), pp. 3-26Published by: Society for American ArchaeologyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40035319

Accessed: 18/11/2009 13:09

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sam.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

American Antiquity.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40035319?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=samhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=samhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40035319?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/25

SYMPATHETIC

MAGIC

IN WESTERN

NORTH AMERICAN ROCK

ART

James

D.

Keyser

and David

S.

Whitley

KflCTTiiwsU

Much

rock art worldwide

was

traditionally

nterpreted

n terms

of "huntingmagic,"

in

part

based on the related

concept

of "sympathetic

magic"

In the

last

forty years,

these

interpretations

were

disproven

n

many

regions

and now are

largely

ignored

as

potential explanations

or

the

origin

and

function of

the art. In certain cases this

may

be

premature.

Examina-

tion

of

the

ethnographic

and

archaeological

evidence

rom

western North America

supports

the

origin of

some

art

in

sym-

pathetic

magic (often

related to

sorcery)

in both

California

and the Plains and

provides

a case

for huntingmagic

as one

of

a series

of

ritual reasons

or

making

rock art in the Columbia

Plateau. Both case studies

emphasize

the

potential

diversity

in

origin, function,

and

symbolismof

shamanistic rock art.

Muchoarterupestremundial e ha interprets radicionalmente n terminosde "lamagiade caza,"basada en el conceptorela-

cionado

de "la

magiapor

imitacion."En los

ultimoscuarenta

anos,

esta

interpretacion

a sido

rechazada

n muchas

regiones

y

ahora

es

ignorada

en

granparte

como

explicacion

potencial para

el

origen y lafuncion

del arte. En ciertos casos este rec-

hazopuede

ser

prematuro.

Datos

etnograficos

en

Californiay

la

Grande

Llanurasostienen

un

origen

de

algun

arte en

magia

por

imitacion,

associado

con

brujeria,

mientras

que

la

etnografiay

la evidencia

arqueologica

de la

Meseta de

Columbia,

norteamerica,

muestranun caso

a

favor

de la

importancia

de la

magia

de

caza

como

razon

para

hacer

algunos

ejemplos

del

arte

rupestre.

Ambos casos acentuan

a diver idad

potencial

en el

origen, lafuncion

y

el simbolismodel arte

rupestre

hama-

nistico.

origin

and

meaning

of NorthAmerican

rockarthave

been discussed

or almost300

years, at least since Cotton Matherfirst

investigated

the

petroglyphs

of

Dighton

Rock,

Massachussetts

Molyneaux

1977).

Although

he

degree

of

intellectual nterest

n rock

arthas varied

over

his

ong period,

he ast wo decades

havewit-

nessed

a revolution

n

methods,

techniques,

and

interpretations

see

Whitley

2001)

accompanied

by

a

series of

important

iscoveries

e.g.,

Clottes

1998),

resulting

n what

has been called

a

"golden

age"

or rock art

studies

Whitley

2005).

One

cen-

tral characteristic

f this

recent

rock art research

has been awidespread greementhatmuchof the

hunter-gatherer

rock

art in North

America

is

shamanistic1

n

origin

(e.g.,

Boyd

2003;

Conway

and

Conway

1990;

Francis

and Loendorf

2002;

Hedges

1976,

1992;

Hudson

andLee

1984;

Keyser

1

992;

Keyser

and

Klassen200

1

Keyser

andWhit-

ley

2000;

Rajnovich

1994;

Turpin

1994;

Whitley

1992,

1994b,

2000).

The idea thatmuch

(but

not

all)

of this

hunter-

gatherer

ock

art was

created

by

shamans o

por-

tray hevisionary mageryof theiraltered tatesof

consciousness

xperiences,

r

by

non-shamans ur-

ing

shamanistic

ites,

n

fact s

not

a new idea.

Eth-

nologists

such as

Steward

1929),

Gayton

(1930,

1948)

and Cline

(1938),

to name

ust

a

few,

docu-

mented

his act n thefirst-half f thetwentieth

en-

tury,

and,

as

Conkey

(1997)

has

noted,

t has been

the attention

to and

analysis

of

ethnographic

accountssuch as theirs

that have been the

major

factors

n

the

resurgence

n rock artresearch.But

a seriesof earlier

archaeologists e.g.,

Grant

1967,

1968;HeizerandBaumhoff1959, 1962;vonWerl-

hof

1965)

also

argued

or a

shamanistic

rigin

for

this

art,

even

though they

overlooked

he ethno-

graphic

record.

Based

entirely

on

inference,

hey

attributedhe

art,

however,

o a

particularype

of

shamanistic

ractice,

ympathetic

unting

magic.

More

recently,

esearchers

n NorthAmerica

e.g.,

Christenson

1993;

Mundy

1981;

Rector

1979,

James

D.

Keyser

U.S.D.A.

Forest

Service,

1815

SW

DeWitt,

Portland,

OR 97201

([email protected])

David

S.

Whitley

447 Third

St.,

Fillmore,

CA 93015

([email protected])

American

Antiquity,

71(1),

2006,

pp.

3-26

Copyright©

2006

by

the

Society

for American

Archaeology

3


3/25

4

AMERICAN

ANTIQUITY

[Vol.

71

,

No.

1

2006

1985;Whitley

982a,1994b,

1998b)

andelsewhere

(Bahn

1991;

Lewis-Williams

1981,

1983),

have

rejected

sympathetichuntingmagic

on

empirical

andconceptual rounds,ncludinga failure o find

support

or it in

the

ethnographic

ecord.A

quick

readof the

recent ockart iteraturehus

might

ead

to the

impression

hat

sympathetic

magic

has

been

entirely

eliminatedas

part

of the

potential

unc-

tional

variability

n

shamanistic

ock

art,

world-

wide.

Indeed,

this

might

also

suggest

a

complete

absence of

any

connectionsbetween

shamanistic

rock

art and

subsistence concerns and

practices

more

generally.

Our nteresthere is to avoid a circumstancen

which the

proverbial

aby

is thrownout

with the

bathwater.

oward his end

we review he

problem

of

sympathetic

magic

and

rock

art,

starting

irst

with

the

anthropological

iteratureon the

topic.

Turning

ext to

ethnographic

vidence or

sympa-

thetic

magic

in rock

art,

unrelated

o

hunting,

we

consider

thnographic

vidence orrock

artrelated

to

hunting

beliefs

and

practices,

potentially

nclud-

ing

sympathetic

huntingmagic.

Finally,

we dis-

cuss

possible

ways

that

hunting-related

ock art

maybedistinguishedromsuperficiallyimilarart

created

or other

purposes,

n the

absenceof

ethno-

graphic

data.

Sympathetic

Magic

Intellectual oncern

with

sympathetic

magic

has

a

long history

in

anthropology,

where it has been

embedded n

discussions of

magic,

science,

and

religion

as

contrasting

modes

of

knowledge

and

thought(Morris 1987; Tambiah1990). Indeed,

much

ate

nineteenth-

nd

early

twentieth-century

cultural

anthropological

research

was

directed

toward

dentifying

he

distinctions

between

these

three

arger henomena,

with

researchers s

diverse

as

James

G.

Frazer

1933),

Edward

Tylor

(1913),

Max

Weber

(1965)

and

Bronislaw

Malinowski

(1948)

discussing

he

topic

in

detail.

Although

he

arguments

f

these and

later

writers

e.g.,

Evans-

Pritchard

937;

Firth

1958)

differ

on

various

oints,

Pyysiainen

2004)

has

provided

a recent

synthesis

of thepointsof consensus.Theprimary f these is

a

working

distinction

between

religion

and

magic.

Both

concern

upernatural

gency

(thereby

differ-

ing

from

science),

but

magic

and

religion

fall on

different

ends

of a

causal

spectrum.

"In

magic,

supernaturalgents

and

forces

bring

about

speci-

fied effects

in

the

known

reality,

while

in

religion

natural ctionshave effects

in

a

supernatural

eal-

ity" (Pyysiainen2004:96-97).Magicin this sense

is

solely

intended o havea

practical

utcome

e.g.,

killing

a

game

animal)

whereas

religion

has as

its

goal

a

more ethereal

product (e.g., appeasing

a

deity),

even

hough

he

purpose

f that

appeasement

mayultimately

e directed oward

eal-worldends.

Magical

rites are then mechanistic

and determin-

istic;

religious

ituals

n contrast re

contingent

nd

uncertain

n

that,

undamentally,hey

nvolve

nego-

tiationswith the

supernatural.

At least two kinds of magicarealso acknowl-

edged

by

most writers.The first is

sympathetic

magic

where an effect resembles

ts

cause

("like

produces

ike").

The second is

contagiousmagic

where

hings

hatonce were n contactarebelieved

to continue o act on each

other,

ven at a distance.

In

practice,

these distinctions were sometimes

blurred.More

important

s the fact

that,

as

Boyer

(2001)

notes,

these

magical

beliefs

are related o

real

human

houghtprocesses

hat

operate

hrough

principles

of

similarity

or

analogy,

and

contagion

(and ts inverse,avoidancebehavior).Whilemag-

ical beliefs are

irrational rom the

perspective

of

Western

scientific

logic

and

causality,

in other

words,

they

are

understandable

s

products

of

the

evolution

and

operation

of human

mental

processes,

and

hey

are,

or this

reason,

very

attrac-

tiveto all

people.

"Theres

nothingmagical

n

sym-

pathetic

hinking

as

such";

Pyysiainen

2004:104)

then

observes,

"it

s

just

avoidancebehavior

gone

wild."

The natural

ppeal

of

"magical

hinking,"

n

this sense, explains why contemporaryWestern

athleteswill

consistently

wear the same socks or

shoes on

game day,

in

the

hope

that it will

bring

them

luck,

even while

they may

otherwise be

entirely

rational

hinkers.

Magical

hinking

s thus

a

universal

attribute

f human

cognition,

not the

product

of

"primitive

mentalities."

One

key

implication

of

the

history

of anthro-

pological

research

on this

topic

is the fact

thatnot

all rituals

related o

game

animals

or

other

kinds

of

food-stuffs)

necessarily

nvolve

magic,properly

defined.Reichel-Dolmatoff1967), for example,

discusses

the

supernatural

egotiations

onducted

at

pictograph

sites

by

South

American

Tukano

shamans

with an

important

pirit

known as the

Master

of the

Game.This is

intended o

guarantee


4/25

Keyser

and

Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGIC

IN

WESTERN NORTH

AMERICAN ROCK

ART

5

successful

hunts

by

tribalmembersbut t

requires

the

bartering

f human souls for the

animals,

n

order

o maintain cosmicbalance

between ife

and

death.Althoughin this case depictionsof game

and the desire

for

hunting

success are

linked,

the

art

does not involve

sympathetichuntingmagic.

Instead,

it

represents

a

religious

ritual that is

directed,

ike

many

such

ceremonies,

o the well-

being

of

the tribal

group

as a whole. Shamanistic

rock artthen

may

be directed

at one level at sub-

sistence

(just

as some

totemic

rock art

originates

in increase

ituals;

ee

Lay

on

1992),

but

this need

not involve

magic.

Sympathetic

Magic

and Rock

Art

Sympathetic

unting

magic

has

ong

been

proposed

as an

explanation

or

rock art

(e.g.,

Breuil

1952;

Grant

1968;

Heizer and

Baumhoff

1962;

Kehoe

1990,

1996;Nissen

1994;Reinach

903).

Although

very

widely applied

from the

20,000-year-old

"falling

horse"

painted

n Lascaux

to

images

of

game

impaled

by

arrows

drawn

n western

North

America

during

he

ast 500

years

it was

(at

best)

very loosely defined,if in fact definedat all, in

terms

of

specific

religious

beliefs

and ritual

prac-

tices.

Indeed,

anthropological

iscussions

of

magic

in

general

terms

and

sympathetic

huntingmagic

specifically,

nd

heir

mplications,

ave

effectively

been

ignored

by

archaeologists.

The result

was an

interpretation

ased

more

on

vague

ideas about

putative

rimitive

mentalities

han

anthropological

fact,

because

regardless

f

any

empirical

vidence

that

archaeologists

cited

in its

favor,

the basic

assumptionstill was thatany shamanisticritual

concern

with

subsistence

ecessarily

nvolved

ym-

pathetic

magic.

Although

hunting

magic

interpretations

ni-

mated

ock

art esearch

orthe

first

halfof

thetwen-

tieth

century,

they

reached

a state

of

empirical

implausibility

y

the

1960s.

Particularly

xemplary

here

are he

works

of

Heizerand

Baumhoff

1959,

1962),

whose

thesis

implied

that

even

non-

representational

eometric

motifs

were

created

or

purposes

of

sympathetic

magic,

and

Grant,

who

wentso faras to claimthat:"Wherever aturalis-

tic animal

rock

pictures

are

found,

t is almost

cer-

tain

hey

were

made

as

hunting

magic

orto

increase

the

supply

of

game"

1967:32).

Critical

analyses

of

the

hunting

magic

nterpre-

tation

began

to

appear,

worldwide,

shortly

here-

after

e.g.,

Bahn

199

1

ClottesandLewis-

Williams

1998;

Leroi-Gourhan

967;

Lewis-Williams

1974,

1981, 1983;Mundy1981;Rector1985;Ucko and

Rosenfeld

1967;

Whitley

1982a, 1994a,

1998b).

These

pointed

to

ethnographic

data

denying any

direct connection

between rock art and

hunting

magic,

meanwhile

upporting

lternative

nterpre-

tations

or the

origin

andfunctionof the art.

They

also foundbetter-fit

xplanations

or motif assem-

blages

and individual

panels

in

other

explanatory

models.And

they

notedthe failure o find

support

for the

implications

of the

theory

in

the wider

archaeological ecord,such as faunal collections

recovered rom associated

deposits

hatmimicked

the

frequency

of animals

portrayed

n

the rock art.

Given the

lack of

independent upport

or most

hunting

magic

proposals,

ritics

rightfully

ssailed

the

hypothesis

as

reducing

hunter-gatherereligion

and

symbolism

o little more than

subsistence a

position

hat

lies in the face of

any

understanding

of

comparative

religion,

or

of

the known com-

plexity

of

hunter-gatherer

ymbolic systems.

The

hunting

magic hypothesis

was

effectively

discreditedas a resultof thiscriticism,especially

in western

Europe,

southern

Africa,

and western

North

America.One

result

of the relaxation

f the

intellectual

tranglehold

t had

held over

rock art

interpretation

s a

developing

appreciation

f the

range

of

potential

rigins

or,

and unctions

f,

rock

art,

especially

in

western

North America.

This

appreciation

has

resulted

from

ethnographic

research

e.g.,

Francis

and Loendorf

2002;

Hann

et

al.

2005;

Keyser

1987;

Keyser

andKlassen2001

;

Keyser

et al.

2002;

Michaelis

1981;

Schaafsma

1981;

Sundstrom

2002;

Whitley

1982b, 1992,

1994a, 1998a,

2000);

careful

ethnographic

nalo-

gies

(e.g., Boyd

2003;

Hays-Gilpin

2005);

and

structural

nalyses

of rock art

data,

per

se

(e.g.,

Keyser

and

Klassen2001 74-91

;

Sundstrom

989).

These

studies

ndicate

hat western

North

Ameri-

can

rock art

was created

during

vision

questing

by

shamans

and

non-shamans,

by

both

men and

women

during

group

and ndividual

puberty

niti-

ations,

and

to commemorate

ritual

pilgrimages.

Furthermore,tmayportrayupernaturalpiritsor

incidents,

mythic

actors

or

events,

clan

symbols,

and he

acquisition

r documentation

f individual

or

group

status

to cite

just

some

of the identified

possibilities.


5/25


6/25

Keyser

and

Whitley]

SYMPATHETIC

MAGIC

IN

WESTERN

NORTH

AMERICAN

ROCK ART

7

Figure

1. Western North

America,

showing

locations and tribal

groups

referred to

in

text.

1,

Thompson ('Nlaka'pamux);

2, Lillooet; 3,

Similkameen

Valley;

4,

Okanogan;

5,

Sanpoil/Nespelem;

6, Kutenai;

7,

Coeur

d'Alene; 8,

Flathead/Pend

Oreille; 9,

Hells

Canyon;

10,

Lower

Columbia

River;

11,

Klamath

Basin; 12, Yokuts;

13,

Coso

Range;

14, Gabrielino; 15,

Mojave;

16,

Yavapai;

17,

Crow.

The thirdand

perhaps

most dramatic

xample

of

sympathetic

magic

was collected

from the

Gabrielino,

rom the Los

Angeles

basin,

also

by

John

Peabody

Harrington.

ccording

o his infor-

mant:

Long

ago,

before here

werewhite

people

here,

a wizard

[i.e.,

bewitching

shaman]

at San

Gabriel

aused

greatdrought

nd amine hat

lasted

or ive

years.

Maria's

randfather

ste-

van

and

his wife ived

hrough

his

period.

This

sorcererhad a tablet or stone on

which he

painted

many figures

of men and

women

bleeding

rom hemouth nd

alling

down.

He

took this out and

exposed

t to the

sun,

pray-

ing forsickness.For fiveyearstherewas no

rain,

and

many

people

died of

hunger.

. .

Finally

omeothermen

spied

on theman

who

was

causing

all

this and saw

him

going

into

the hills. . .

.

They

followed the tracksand


7/25

8

AMERICAN

ANTIQUITY

[Vol.

71

,

No. 1 2006

Figure

2.

An

example

of

sorcery

rock

art,

one human

shooting

another,

from the Yokuts site of

Rocky

Hill,

California.

The

top

of the

figure

on the

right

was defaced

prehistorically

or

historically

the

only example

of such

at the site

pre-

sumably

because of the nature of this

pictograph.

This

image represents

a full

rock art

panel.

found he ablet r

whatever

t

was

with heevil

figures

n

it,

and

hey

threw t into

the

water.

Then

he

drought

ndedand t rained

Black-

burn

1975:276].

This account ncludesa

number

of references hat

are

easily

understoodn culturalcontext but

that,

otherwise,

may

appear

obtuse.

Mention, first,

of

drawings

f

people

"bleeding

romthe mouthand

falling

down"

describes individualsthrown

nto

trance

most

ikely

fromsoul

theft,

a common orm

of

bewitchment;

ee

Whitley

1994a,

2000).

Expos-

ing

the

pictograph

o the

sun,

the

source of

all

power,

s a reference

o

enhancing

ts

supernatural

potency.

And the nullification

of its evil

effects

through

mmersion efers o the

widespread

elief

in the

cleansingpower

of water

(Applegate

1978;

Blackburn

1975).

Inthis

example

a

painted

ablet

was created

to cause sickness

and

drought.

This

misfortunewas

not reversed

until its cause

the

painted

tablet was itself

cleansed

by physical

action.


8/25

Keyser

and

Whitley]

SYMPATHETIC

MAGIC

IN

WESTERN

NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

9

Art

possibly ncluding

ock

art)

was created or

purposes

of

sorcery-related ympathetic magic

beyond

California

and the Great

Basin,

as illus-

tratedby CrowethnographyLowie 1922).Some

Crowshamansdrewhuman

or animal

mages

that

they

then

ritually

defaced to

kill or

incapacitate

enemies or rivalshamans

Lowie 1922:344-346).

Lowie's informants

eported

everal nstances

of sorcerer's

ympatheticmagic.

Among

them are

the

following:

Big

Ox

got angry.

He drewa human

mage

on

the

ground,

made

a

hole in the

heart,

blew

smokeon

it,

and

effaced

he

picture

fter

ay-

ing,

"You

hallbe the

poorest

reaturen

earth,

finallyyou

shallbe blindandhave o crawlon

your

handsandfeet."This came true

[Lowie

1922:345].

One Crow

says

that he

picture

of the

enemy

is sometimes

rawn eara river

bank,

with he

headnearesthe

water,

whereupon

hesorcerer

smokes

towards t and burns ncense.

The

water

omesto wash he

mageaway,

and he

sooner t does so, the sooner hevictimwill

die.

Anothernformant

ays

hat

a rockor

baxe

weed

was

placed

on the

picture

and n order

to blind

his

enemy

he

shamanwould

put

ashes

or charcoal

n the

eye

of his

image.

[Lowie

1922:345].

Dung-face

ashaman]

. .went nto

his tent

and

badehis brother

ring

anold buffalo kull.On

the forehead

he drew horse tracks

and

announced

hat these were

the tracksof the

horsesstolen

by

[his

rival]

Jackrabbit...

He

told his brother

o takethe

headandthrow t

into the

water,

aying

"these

areJackrabbit's

horses."

ung-face

aid,

"Then ackrabbit

ill

nothave

any

horses." .

. The

Enemy

ameand

stole all of

Jackrabbit's

horses

[Lowie

1922:346].

The motifs created

during orcery

animal

racks

andhuman

igures

are

a

staple

of rock

art n

Crow

territorysee Keyserand Klassen2001), suggest-

ing

that

some such

designs

may

well have been

shaman/sorcerer's

mages,

even

if

no

directethno-

graphic

accounts

specifically

involving

rock art

have

yet

been identified.

In each of

these

ethnographic

ases the

impli-

cation is

that the motifs

have a

materiality

hat,

through

itual

manipulation

r

defacement,

ould

be harnessed o visit misfortuneontoothers.The

motifs

n

this sense

arenot

depictions

of natural

r

even

supernatural

ventsbut instead

were

thought

to be true

objects,

with

the

manipulation

f

these

material

objects

mplicated

as the

physical

causes

for

these

actions,

and their

consequences.

Even

in

some

regions

where there s no

evidence of hunt-

ing magic

rock

art,

sympathetic

magic

was an

important art

of native

religious practice,

and a

component

of some rock art.

Hunting Magic

The

ColumbiaPlateauhas a

particularly

ich

rock

art

record.It is notableboth for

the total

number

and

widespread

distribution f

sites,

as well as for

the

important

oncentrationsound

along

the

mid-

dle and lower

Columbia

River,

n

Hell's

Canyon,

in the

Klamath

Basin,

and n the

SimilkameenVal-

ley

of

south-central British

Columbia

(Keyser

1992).

Compositionsapparently howing

hunting

are common in the region's art (Corner 1968;

Keyser

1992, 1994;

Keyser

and

Knight

1976),

occurring hroughout

he areaas the

second

most

frequent ype

of

composition.Only

he

vision

quest

composition,showing

a human

igure

uxtaposed

with

a

rayed

arc,

an

animal,

or a

geometric igure,

is more

prevalent

see

Keyser

1992:45-^48,

1-62,

79-80;

Keyser

et al.

1998:22,

48, 56-57;

Keyser

et

al.

2004:38-42, 72-73,

for

description

nd

discus-

sion of

example

compositions).

Many

of these

hunting

cenes

appear

as elabo-

rate

compositionsnvolving

what

appear

o be drive

lane fences and/or

people

and

dogs

channeling

quarry

nimals o

waiting

hunters

Figure

3).

Oth-

ers

(Figure

4)

are

simplerdrawings howing

ani-

mals

pierced

with a

spear

or

arrow

or

caught

n

a

corral r

snare;

rhunters

sing

spear,

tlatl,

orbow

and

arrow o shoot

elk, deer,

mountain

heep,

bison,

and

even

a

sturgeon.

Such

hunting magesrange

n

age

fromthe lateArchaic

hrough

he LatePrehis-

toric

period, hough

mostdatewithin he ast 1

500

years (Keyser1992;Keyseret al.2004).Hunting-

relatedart ncludesboth

painted

and

pecked

exam-

ples.

Occasional

scenes are drawn

as isolated

panels,

butmore

commonly

hunting ompositions

are oundat sites

containing

ther ockart

magery


9/25

1

0 AMERICAN

ANTIQUITY

[Vol.

71

,

No.

1 2006

Figure

3.

Communal

hunting

scenes occur

frequently

in

Columbia

Plateau rock art. These show a hunter

accompanied

by dogs

(with

tail arched

up

over the

back)

and other

people

acting

as "drivers."

Note the drive lane fence shown

in

b,

and the

woman

working

as a "driver" n a.

Both

a

and b are

full

rock art

panels.

that was

apparently roduced

as

vision

quest

art

(Keyser

1992;

Keyser

et

al.

2004,

2005).

All of

the

species

n

these

hunting

cenesare

significant

ame

animals

or

Columbia

Plateau

ribes,

and he detail

and

intricacy

of

many

of these

compositions

has

led authors o arguethatthey representhunting

magic

rock art

(e.g.,

Corner

1968;

Keyser

1989,

1992,

1994).

Contrasting

with

many

other

regions

of the

world,

where no

support

or

hunting

magic

has

been

found,

he Plateau

thnographic

ecord n fact

provides

support

or

this

interpretation

n

several

forms

and from a

variety

of

tribal

groups.

This

starts

with direct

evidence

for

hunting

magic.

Although

his

does not

immediately

ink the

prac-

tice to the

art,

substantial dditional

vidence

inks

the acquisitionof hunting powers to the vision

quest,

hamanistic ream

xperiences,

ndrock

art.

In

short,

hunting

magic

appears

o have

been one

of

the

potential

powers

obtained n

visions

by

both

shamans

and

puberty

nitiates,

and such

visions

could re-occur

throughout

an individual's life

(Hann

t al.

2005;

Keyser

1992;

Keyser

t al.

1998;

Yorket al.

1993).

Directevidence

or

sympathetic

untingmagic

was obtained from the

Sanpoil

and

Nespelem,

whose hunt leaders made "enclosures" f small

stakes

on the adviceof their

powerful

deer

guardian

spirits.

These

enclosures

were

thought

o

hold the

deer

by

magic

so that

many

could be

killed

(Ray

1939:78-79).

That his

magicalpractice

was con-

ducted

following

the

suggestions

of

their

spirit

helpers

demonstrateshe

connection

etweenhunt-

ing magic power

andthe vision

quest,

since it was

precisely

during

he

vision

quest

thata

supplicant

communed

with their

spirit

helper

and

might

receive such

instructions.

Indeed,the importanceof obtaininghunting

power

during

the vision

quest

is illustrated in

numerous

ways,

providing

ubstantialndirect

up-

port

for

huntingmagic. Among

the

Lillooet,

for

example,

a

young

manon a vision

quest

madesmall


10/25

Keyser

and

Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGIC

IN

WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN

ROCK

ART

1 1

Figure

4. Individual

hunting

scenes,

often

showing

elk or

deer,

are

quite

common

in

Columbia Plateau rock art. All

of

these scenes

are

petroglyphs.

The

lower,

more

lightly pecked,

bowman added to the

original composition

in

a,

suggests

that

these

images

were

reused to refresh or

reacquire power.

deer

igures

of barkor

grass5

ndshot at themwith

a bow and arrows

praying

hathe

might

becomean

expert

rcher.

If

he

made

many

hits,

he wouldbecome

a suc-

cessful

hunter.

Afterwards e

suspended

he

figures,

with the arrows

n

them,

from the

branch

f some

firtree

[Teit1906:266].

This

appears

o

be a reference

o

sympathetic

magic

("what

do to the

miniature

deer

I

will

do later

n

life to real

deer"),

ut

t is

in

relation

o

general

hunt-

ingpower

rather

hana

specifichuntingepisode.

We

also see

examples

of

hunters'

"magical

thinking"

ssociated

withrock

art ites.

Among

the

Thompson,

Teit

(1930:344)

notes thatwhen

pass-

ing

by places

associated

with

the "Land

Myster-

ies"

(which

frequently

had

associated

rock

art)

hunters

made

small

offerings

of various

items

including

hotand

gunpowder,

thus

nsuring

ood

weather

uring

heir

tay,

and

good

uck

whilehunt-

ing."

Almosta

century

ater

Annie

York erified

hat

such

offerings

were

ypically

eft at

pictograph

ites

(York t al.1993:83).Certainly fferings rewidely

known

o havebeen

placed

at rockart

sites,

but his

reference

s

specific

o

hunters,

heir

weaponry,

nd

their

uck,

providing

urther

eneral

upport

orthe

plausibility

of

huntingmagic.

Furthermore,

n the

Columbia

Plateau,

unlike

in

other

regions

of the

far

west,

there

was

no tabu

againstkilling

[or

eating]

one's

guardian

nimal.On the

contrary,

he animal

expected

o be killed.

A

manwithdeer

power

was

always

good

hunter,

ordeerwould ome

to

him

o be

killed.

When.

.one's

guardian

as

killed

t was

customary

o

keep

some

part

o

insure

success on

subsequent

entures

Ray

1939:188].

For the

Sanpoil, Nespelem, Kutenai,

and

Okanogan,

deer and otheranimals

gave power

to

the hunter

precisely

so he could

kill

them

(Cline

1938:134;

Malouf and White

1952),

and "hunt

leaders

always

had

guardian pirits

which

aided

them in

hunting,

such as

deer or

antelope"

Ray

1939:78).

The hunt leader

exercisedcontrolover

theextensive

preparations

ora successful

hunt,

and

"often

[he]

was

helped

by

his

guardian pirit.

.

[who]

appeared

n a dreamand told

him how

he

could urn he

uckof the

party"Ray

1939:78-79).6

Teit (1906:279) indicatesfurther hatamongthe

Lillooet "customs

ntended o

propitiate

animals

were numerous."

One

of the earliest references

to

Columbia

Plateau

unting

dreams s documented

y

theanno-


11/25


12/25

Keyser

and

Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGIC

IN

WESTERN

NORTH

AMERICAN ROCK

ART

13

Figure

6.

Painting by

Fr. Nicolas

Point, 1844,

showing

the "Consecration

of the

weapons

before

departing

for the

hunt."

In the

rear

center,

note the

stag

with the cross between

his antlers

the Roman Catholic

symbol

for

St.

Hubert,

patron

saint of hunters.

Image

IXRMSC9-82

courtesy

of Midwest

Jesuit

Archives,

St. Louis.

These scholars' observationsare

further

sup-

ported by

Point's artistic

symbolism.

In

Point's

composition,

he deer

painted

"center

tage"

at

the

fully

lighted

meadow's

edge

-

is the most

clearlydepicted mage,

and he

only

one who stands

in

thebeamsof

lightprojecting

ownwardrom

he

sun

up

in

the heavens. Point

routinely

used such

symbolism

e.g., light

beams,

central

position)

to

emphasize

hemost sacred

aspect

of

his

religiously

oriented

paintings

(see

Peterson

1993:93,

104-108).

The

importance

f th6 deer as the mediator

of

hunting power

is underscored

by

anotherPoint

painting Figure

6),

which shows Salish

(Flathead

and

Pend

Oreille)

men

having

their

weapons

blessed before the annualbuffalo

hunt a

long,

dangerous

xpedition

across

he

Rocky

Mountains

out

ontothe Plains

erritory

f theirBlackfeet

ene-

mies.

In

this

painting

he hunters

equest

he

pro-

tection and blessing of Saints Michael (for

warriors),

Raphael

for travelers),

nd Hubert

for

hunters).

The focus of the

depiction

s a

stag

with

a cross

between its antlers

the

Catholic

symbol

of

St.

Hubert,

patron

of hunters.

Point notes that

the Salish

specifically

chose St.

Hubertbecause

he

fit

their own

conceptions.

That his

symbol

a

deer

was

adopted

by

the Salish

to

represent

heir

hunters'

power

says

as much

about

he

symbolism

of their

native

religion

as it does

about

he

Jesuits'

efforts to substitute

Catholic

teachings

for

native

beliefs.7

The

directconnection

between

huntingpower

visions

and rock art

is

providedby

Teit

(1930),

Cline

(1938),

and

York

(York

et al.

1993).

One

painted

scene

in

Okanogan

ountry,

or

example,

was identified

by

Teit's

nformants

Teit

1930:286)

as a corralwith a

manandhis

guardian

pirit

nside

it and

game

animals

coming

to

the entrance.

The

symbolism

of

a hunt leader

and his

helper

uring

game

is

striking Figure

7f).

Annie York

(York

et al.

1993:70-71, 124,

160-161,

186-189),

a

Thompson

CNlaka'pamux)

elder,

corroborates

eit's

nformant

whenshe

iden-

tifiesbothanimalsn snares orcorrals) ndadepic-

tion of

a drive ane fence

with associated

animals.

Initially,

she

describes

a

pictograph

York

et al.

1993:Fig.

86,

page

124)

as

"The two

deer

in the

circle

is the snare

they

used

thatsnare

o catch


13/25

1 4

AMERICAN

ANTIQUITY

[Vol.

71

,

No.

1

2006

Figure

7.

These

images, pictographs

from the

rock

art of southern British

Columbia,

have all been

ethnographically

den-

tified as

hunting imagery.

They

show a

progression

from

speared

animals,

to a

spirit being spearing

or

"corralling"

ani-

mals beneath

its

wings,

to animals

in

corrals. Note the

spirit helper

bird

in

f.

them"

York

et al.

1993:124).

Later,

he

says

of a

similar

depiction:

Deer

and

goat,

he

hings

hat

he

hunterwants.

The

deer and

goat

are

[caught]8

n

a snare.

That's he

way you

write t. It

shows he has

caught

hem

n

hismind

York

t al.

1

993

16 1

Both

of these

images

are

quite

similar

tructurally

to

that

dentified

by

Teit's

nformants

cf.

Figures

7d

and

e).

Other

aintings

York

tal.

1993:Fig.

104,

pages

156-157) are said to show a distinctivehunter's

power

igure

York

t al.

1993:

171)

both

n

the act

of

spearing

nanimal

Figure

b)

and

"keeping

the

animals]

in

place"

(York

et al.

1993:151-157,

164)

in

other

words,

controlling

or

capturing

them

Figure

c).

Speaking

f

this

igure,

he

claims

that:

the

wings

of

thishunter

reature..

capture

he

animal n

the

dreamer's

mind,

and

ater]

This

man

changes

himself nto

anowl

[the

hunter's

spirithelper]when he dreamsand he flies

around nd

notices he

deerand

goats

andani-

malshe

wants.

. .Youcan

send hat

power

o

find

your

deer or

you

[York

t

al.

1993:156,

164].

At another ite

showing

a

deer

snareabovea stick-

figure

manwith

closely

associated

quadruped,

he

states:

Thathunter ould

easily speak

o an

animal.

When

you

are

rained[,]

he

animal[s]

on't

un

away

rom

you.

That's

why

that

picture

s like

that.The

animals

re

very

close to them

York

etal.

1993:70].

Later,

he describes mountain

oat

witha

line

pro-

jecting upward

rom ts back as a

speared

animal:

Beside t

[a

sceneof four

animals]

s the

goat

that the dreamerhas

speared

[York

et al.

1993:163].

And

finally,

she

describesa

therianthropicigure

with

human

head,

body,

andhandsbutdeerantlers

and

hooves as Deer Man:

When

you

dream

hat,

ougoing

o be a hunter.

The

power

of

shemitz,

Deer

Man,

s

strong

This[artistesponsibleorpaintinghispicto-

graph]

wouldbe a

young

hunter

oing up

in

thatStein

valley,

andhe'ddreamt in there

This s the

story

of

a

dream f

hunting

ower

[York

tal.

1993:91-92].


14/25

Keyser

and

Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGIC

IN

WESTERN

NORTH AMERICAN

ROCK

ART

1

5

Table 1.

ColumbiaPlateau

Ethnographic

Evidence for

Hunting

Power and

HuntingMagic.

Hunting

Power

Hunting

Power

Sympathetic

Associated with

Associated with

Hunting

Hunting

TribalGroup Vision Quest Rock Art Luck Magic

Lillooet

X

(1)

X

(1)*

Sanpoil/Nespelem

X

(2)

X

(2)

Thompson

X

(4)

X

(3, 4)

X

(3)

?

(4)

Coeur

d'Alene X

(5, 6)

X

(6)

Flathead

X

(5)

Okanogan

X

(3,

7)

General

X

(2)

X

(2)

*

The

sympathetic

magic

in

this case concerns

general hunting

prowess

rather han

specific

hunting rips.

(1)

Teit

1906;

(2)

Ray

1939;

(3)

Teit

1930;

(4)

Yorket al.

1993;

(5)

Peterson

1993;

(6)

Palmer

1998;

(7)

Cline

1938.

Somewhat

arlier,

Cline

had

confirmed he fact

thatmen

painted

ock art

mages

of their

guardian

spirit

as a

way

to announce heir

power

which

included oth

hunting

ndwar

power stating

hat:

Whenone

had

performed

ome

special

eat,

as in

hunting

or

war,

he

might

declare

his

power

o thosewho hadwitnessed

he

deedor

benefited

y

it

[Cline

1938:136].

As is obvious

rom he

foregoing,

n

theColum-

bia Plateauthere is ethnographic, thnohistoric,

androck artevidence

all

pointing

owardan asso-

ciation

between

game

animal

guardians

ndhunt-

ing power,

along

with dreams

involving

these

guardians

Table

1).

Throughout

he

region

there

is an absence

of

any

taboo

against

killing

or

eating

one's

guardian,

nd,

n

fact,

a

number

f references

indicate

hatdeer or

antelopeguardians ppeared

in visions

o offer

hunting ower.

Moreover,

unters

and hunt

shamans

performedpropitiatory

ituals

both

to ensureand

commemorate

unting

uccess.

And

informants rom

two different thnic

groups,

and

from three

different

generations

panning

he

last

century,9

dentified

ock art

mages

as

hunting

power

or indicated

hat such

images

were made.

These varied

eferences

provide

a

compelling

web

of

evidence,

whichdemonstrates

hatat

least some

Columbia

Plateaurock

art was

linked to

hunting

concerns

and

practices.

Further,

here s at eastone

ethnographic

account

of

sympathetic

hunting

magic,

raising

he

possibility

hatsome

of the rock

art tselfmayhavebeenmade nhuntingmagicrit-

uals.

Unlike

the

case for

sympathetic

magic

related

to

sorcery

n

California,

he Great

Basin,

and the

Plains,

he

ethnographic

eferences

elating

Colum-

bia

Plateaurock art

directly

o

huntingmagic

are

ambiguous.

While

they

demonstrate hat

hunting

power

was often

obtained roma

spirit

helper

dur-

ing

the vision

quest,

none

specifically

states that

the art

was made to aid a

particular

unting

rip;

that

is,

as a

magical

act.

General

huntingpower,

after

all,

is not

hunting

magic,

but instead s

more

akin o thevarious

kinds

of

potencies

hat,

hrough-

out the far

west,

shamans ndother

vision

questers

might

obtain,

ncluding

the

power

to

heal,

make

rain,

find lost

objects,

win

at

gambling

or

guaran-

tee a long life. Still, four facts andcircumstances

cause us to

propose

that at least some

Columbia

Plateau rock art

probably

resulted

from

sympa-

thetic

huntingmagic.

The first s the clear

mportance

f

subsistence

concerns

n

Plateaurock

art,

as

expressedby

the

above-described

mportance

f

acquiring

hunting

powers,

combinedwith the documented

xistence

of

sympathetic hunting

magic

among

the San-

poil/Nespelem Ray

1939:78-79,

detailed

above).

This

provides

a relevant ontextwithin which the

potential

mportance

f

sympathetic

magic

s obvi-

ous.

Second,

that

art

was created or

purposes

of

(sorcery-related)ympatheticmagic

n

three

neigh-

boring

culture areas

(California,

Great

Basin,

Plains)

ncreases he

plausibility

hat

sympathetic

huntingmagic

rock art

may

have been

painted

or

engraved

on the

Plateau.

Third,

evidence for

huntingmagic

relatedart

also occurs n the

neighboring

Plainscultural rea.

Some Crow

shamansdrewbuffalo racksand

per-

formedmagicritualson them that were intended

to

lure

bison close to hunters in

times of

need

(Lowie 1922:356-357).

The

examples

cited

by

Lowie

were drawn

on the

tipi

floor

(or

on a bison

skull)

but rock art

in

Crow

country(Keyser

and


15/25

1

6

AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.

71

,

No.

1

2006

Figure

8. British

Columbia

pictographs showing

what

appear

to be

examples

of

hunting magic,

(a)

Washout Creek

#2;

(b)

Braeside;

(c)

Seton Creek.

In

a the

sturgeon

at

top right

is

shown

with

exaggerated

dorsal shield scales.

In

b,

Corner

(1968:68)

recognizes

several mountain

sheep

above

the man in

center as

being

the

product

of a different artist

than are

other

animals

both

above and below. Note than animals in

groups

do

not

form herds because

they

(1)

include

different

species, (2)

face

differentdirections,and/or (3) are painted with different orientationsto an assumed ground

line. These

factors

suggest

that the animals are not

herds,

but are

clusters

composed

of individual animals

or small

groups, painted

at different times. All

illustrations

adopted

from

Corner

(1968:38, 69,

92).

Klassen

2001:

176)

has

several ites withbison and

deer tracks

that

may represent

his

same

activity

conductedas rock art.

Fourth,

and

perhaps

most

importantly,

we

believe

here s a

possible

archaeological

est

mpli-

cation or the

creationof

huntingmagic

rock

art.10

Unlike

sorcery,

which

might

be a rareor unusual

event, huntingis obviously common. It follows

then

that,

f

hunting

relatedrock art derived

rom

individualacts of

huntingmagic

as

opposed

sim-

ply

to the

acquisition

of

hunting powers,

it

too

should be

common.

Hunting

magic

rock artthen

should

nclude

multipleexamples

of

game,

killed

game,

and

hunting

cenes

at

specific

sites and

pan-

els,

including

motifsthat

appear

o be the same

age

and

that,

intuitively

at

least,

appear

o

have

been

created

by

the same

artist.11

untingpower

vision-

ary

art,

n

contrast,

would

ogically

consistof indi-

vidual motifs or

scenes,

rather

han

repeated

acts

creatingdenticalart,conductedat the same loca-

tion.

A

review of the

published

ColumbiaPlateau

rockart

iterature

rovides

everal

key examples

of

panels

and sites

(Figure

8)

that meet the

expecta-


16/25

Keyser

and

Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGIC

IN

WESTERN

NORTH AMERICAN

ROCK

ART

1

7

Table 2. ColumbiaPlateauRock

Art Sites

Illustrating

Potential

Hunting

Magic.

Pierced

Multiple

Hunting

Power

"Killed"

Tribal

Site

Animals

Examples*

Imagery

Position

Territory

EbRk-7 1 1 (3) Thompson

Seton Creek

5

4(2-5)

1**

Thompson

Deer

Corral

1

(5)

1

Okanogan

PierreJohn

1

1

(3)

Okanogan

Dunrobin 1

(5)

Okanogan

Braeside(DlQv-16)

4

6(2-3)

Okanogan

Tye

1 1

(3)

Kutenai

WashoutCreek

#2 1

(4)***

Kutenai

Pavillion Lake

#2

2

(2-5)

Thompson

*

The number

on the left

is

the numberof

subjectively

dentifiedartists

(not

the

numberof human

igures),

while

the sec-

ond number

in

parentheses)

otals

the

number

of different

animals or

groups

of

animals associated

with each artist.

**

This

is

one of

the

speared

animals.

***

The preyhere aresturgeon.

EbRk-7

from

Yorket al

1993,

all others

from

Corner 1968.

tionsof

huntingmagic

acts

as

opposed

o the

acqui-

sition of

hunting powers

during

a vision

quest

(Table

2).

Perhaps

not

coincidentally,

the

great

majority

f these

panels

are located

n

the

aborig-

inal

erritory

f

the

Lillooet,

Thompson,Okanogan,

and

Sanpoil/Nespelem

exactly

hose

groups

with

the

strongest

thnography elating

he vision

quest

and

rock art o

huntingpower.

In

southern

British

Columbiahereare five sites thatshow killed ani-

mals

on

individual

panels.

These are animals

impaled

by spears

or arrows

n

exactly

the sort of

symbolism

that Teit

(1906:250)

reported

o have

been

generally

ecognized

as an indicator

f hunt-

ing

success:

If

a stick

were stuck

n the

[miniature

rass]

figure

of

a

deer],

t meant he animal

t

repre-

sented

had been killed.

If

[numerous]

ticks

were tuck

n the

miniature

igures

it meant

so

many

of

theseanimals

hadbeenkilled.

Some

of theseanimals

are

killed

by

one

weapon

but

have additional

weapons

added o

"kill" hem

again

and

again

Figure

8c).

One mountain

oat

(a

species

frequently

hown

huntedat

pictographs

n

the

mountainous

region

of west-central

British

Columbia)

s

pierced

rombehind

with one

arrow,

shot

from

abovewith

an elaborate

bow and

arrow,

andshot

again

witha

second,

adjacent,

lmost

den-

ticallyelaborated ow andarrow.Theelaborately

detailed

bow

andarrow

depictions

how a

stylistic

signature

hat

strongly uggests

they

were

painted

by

thesame

artist.

Finally,

earby

s a second

moun-

tain

goat

painted

facing

a different

direction

but

which s also

killed

by

an

arrow.Both the

goat

and

the arrowshow a

stylistic signature

hat

strongly

suggests

his

composition

was

paintedby

the same

artist hat

painted

he

thrice-killed

xample.

The

similarities

etween hetwo

goats

and he

weapons

usedto kill them

are

exactly

whatone would

expect

from one

person's

ritualreuse

of this site and its

images

to

practicehuntingmagic.

Nine sites showrepeated ccurrences f groups

of

one to four animals

being pursued

or

actually

killed

by

a hunter.These

compositions

show the

animals

pierced

with

spears

or arrowsor

arrayed

with humans

n

explicit hunting

scenes. Based on

subjective tylistic

criteria,

successfulhunterwill

often have as

many

as threeassociated ndividuals

or

groups

of animals.

Probably

the best site is

named Braeside

(Corner

1968:68-69),

where at

least six differenthunterseach

painted

multiple

animals

(Figure8b).

Corner

(1968:68-69)

also

noted

the

stylisticsignatures

hat

differentiate ar-

ious

groups

of animalsand huntershere.Another

site shows a

spearfisherman

n

two

different

om-

positions

(almost

certainly

he same man as indi-

cated

by

both

body style

and

distinctive

headdress)

killingsturgeon,

nd

wo

other

turgeon

nda

long-

bodied otter-likeanimal

(all

apparently

rawn n

the same

hand)

have been

grouped

betweenthese

two scenes.

An insect

form,which,

ike the "otter"

is

probably

a

spirithelper,

s

painted

at the

upper

left. Corner(1968:92-93) notes that all of the

images

on this

panel

are

stylistically

denticaland

we

concur hat

hey represent

he handof a

single

artist.

In

summary,

hereare severalsites

in

southern


17/25

1

8

AMERICAN

ANTIQUITY

[Vol.

71

,

No.

1

2006

British Columbiawith obvious

hunting magery

composed

of

repeated

ame

animals,

killed

game,

and

hunting

scenes drawn

n

what

appear

o the

styles of several ndividualartists.Each of these

sites s

exactly

whatwe would

expect

o

find f rock

art

was

ritually

reused

to

perform

acts of

hunting

magic.

Other

sites

showing

reuse of

panels

to

paint

or

carve

examples

of killed or huntedanimals

occur

along

the

lower Columbia

River

(Keyser

1994:5,

17;

Keyser

et al

2004:79-80;

Loring

and

Loring

1982:

126-127).12One

f these s

apetroglyph Fig-

ure

4a)

that deserves

special

mention

precisely

because t appearso have been reused.This is an

elk/deer

being

shot

by

a bowman

in

a

typical

Columbia

Plateau

radition

hunting

scene.

But to

this

original omposition

has been addeda

second,

smaller hunter

rekilling

the animal. Differential

varnishing uggests

that

significant

ime

elapsed

between

these two

episodes,

but it

definitely

ndi-

catesritual euseof

the

mage,

and

a

huntingmagic

ritual s a reasonable

xplanation.

The Columbia Plateau

ethnographic

record,

then,

demonstrates

onclusively

that

a

significant

amountof its rock art was related o subsistence

concerns

and

practices

e.g., huntingpower).

We

believe that

here s

quiteplausible

evidence,

even

if

not

proof,

thatsome

of this hunter'sart

does,

in

fact,

document

ympathetic unting

magic.

Hunting

Magic

Or Not?

To

propose,

as

we

do,

that

some

corpora

of rock

art

containing

apparent ame

animalsand hunters

originatedn subsistence-relatedoncerns proba-

bly

includinghunting

magic),

whereasothercor-

pora

with

ostensibly

similar motifs

were not

subsistence-related

aises the

obvious

question:

how can these

two

origins

and

unctionsof rockart

be

inferred?As

with all

archaeological

nterpreta-

tion,

an

assessmentof

multiple

ines of

indepen-

dent

evidence,

allowing

for

"inference

o the best

hypothesis"

Kelley

andHanen

1988),

is the

basis

for

analysis.

This

can

be

illustrated

y

comparing

the

Coso

Range

petroglyphs

f

eastern

California

(Figure9), createdby Numic speakingshamans,

with

a series

of

superficially

imilar

mages

(both

pictographs

nd

petroglyphs)

rom

the

Columbia

Plateau.

The

nference hat he

Coso

corpus

did not

orig-

inate

in

concerns

with

food

generally

or

hunting

magic specifically

starts

with

ethnographic

vi-

dence but

also includes contextual

and

compara-

tive archaeological data, along with the

iconographic

attributes

of the

art. It

requires

an

assessment not

only

of

the evidence

counting

against

he subsistence

ypothesis,

butalso

theevi-

dence

supporting

n alternative

nterpretation.

With

respect

o

ethnography,

ositive

and

neg-

ative

evidence must

be considered.

Direct

ethno-

graphic

data,

thematic

evidence

(in

the form

of

historical

motifs),

and

chronometric

nd

relative

dating

demonstrate

hat Great

Basin rock

art was

madebyNumic- peakingpeoples,and hat t con-

tinued o be made at least

into the

nineteenth en-

tury

(Francis

and Loendorf

2002;

Loendorf

1999;

Whitley

1994a, 1998a,

2000;

Whitley

et al.

1999).

WhileNumic

ethnography

ontains ubstantial

is-

cussion

of shamanistic

hunting

magic practices

(e.g., Kelly

1932;

Park

1938;

Steward

1941;

Stew-

art

1941),

this concerns

antelope

charming,

with

consistent

denial of

any

huntingmagic

related

o

bighorn heep (e.g.,

Steward

1933, 1941,

1943).

Direct

ethnographic

enial

of the

bighorn

hunt-

ing magic, further, s matchedby ethnographic

commentary upporting

n alternative

rigin

and

function

for

the

art,

which involved shamanistic

practicespertaining

o the

acquisition

f a

(usually

animal

n

form)

spirithelper,

unrelated

o

acquir-

ing game.

Moreover,

mong

the Numic therewas

a taboo

against ating

one's

spirithelper

see

Whit-

ley

1992, 1994a, 1998a,

2000).

In

addition to this

ethnographic

evidence,

archaeological

ssociations nd

contexts ail

to

sup-

portthe idea thatthe art relates to hunting.For

example,

Rector

(1979,

1985)

has observedthat

rockart

sites

are

often associatedwith

villages,

not

animal

game

trails,

as HeizerandBaumhoff

1

959,

1962)

originally

claimed.

Christenson

1993)

has

noted

hat he rockartsites ack the associatedarti-

facts

(hunting

ools,

butchery

emains)

hat

might

be

expected

f

the art

originated

n

the

kindof hunt-

ing magic suggestedby

Grant

1968).

Moreover,

Grant

(1968)

argued

that an association existed

betweenthe art

and certain ock

structures,

which

he interpreted as

hunting-related:

blinds and

"dummy

hunters."While it is true that there are

occasionalassociations

betweenrockfeaturesand

rock

art

panels,

two

empirical

acts count

against

their

nterpretation

s

hunting

related,

n addition


18/25

Keyser

and

Whitley]

SYMPATHETIC

MAGIC

IN

WESTERN

NORTH AMERICAN ROCK

ART

1

9

Figure

9.

Images

from

the

Coso

Range

that can be identified as

shamanic,

despite

their

superficial

similarity

to

hunting

imagery,

(a)

Based

in

part

on the

ethnographic

denial of the use of

sheep

horn

hunting disguises

(because

of their

weight),

this so-called "hunter

and

sheep" petroglyph

from

Sheep Canyon

is better seen as a death

metaphor

for the

bighorn

shaman's

entry

into trance,

(b)

The

straight

line

(presumably

an arrow or

spear), bleeding

from the

mouth,

and

upraised

tail

(a

rigor

mortis

posture

for the

bighorn)

all indicate that this

bighorn sheep

from

Big

Petroglyph Canyon

has been

killed. Note, howeverthe distinctly plantigradefeet, suggestingthat this figure is a conflationof a sheep and human, (c)

The internal

body patterning

on this

"patterned-body"bighorn sheep

from Little

Petroglyph Canyon

is similar to

the

kind of

internal

body

designs

on

many

of the human

figures

from the

region, indicating

an

equivalence

between

human

and

sheep.

The

sheep's

non-realistic

nature is further

emphasized by

the

multiple legs,

a, b,

are

complete panels.

to the

absenceof the

expected

artifact ssociations.

First,

many

of these

featuresare oo

poorly

(and

n

some

cases

mpossibly)

ited

o haveserved

as

hunt

related; .e.,

they

aretrue

"blinds"

n

the sense that

they

ack

the viewshed

required

or effective

hunt-

ing.

But

second,

andeven

more

mportantly, y

far

the

largest

concentration

f these featuresoccurs

nowhere

neareither

rock artor

hunting

areas,

but

in the desolate

latsof the

Panamint

Valley. Partly

for

these

reasons,

and

partlyusing analogy

with

substantial

thnographic

ata

on their use on the

Plateau

and northern

Plains,

Whitley

et al.

[2004]

interpret

hese stonefeatures

as vision

quest

struc-

tures

of different

inds.)

Basedon

the massivecon-

centration

of

bighorn petroglyphs

n

the

Cosos,

Grant

(1968)

further

nferred that an

intensive

bighorn

heep

hunting

cult

existed

in

the western

GreatBasin,tiedto huntingmagic.WhileHilde-

brandtand McGuire

2002)

have

emphasized

he

importance

f intensive

big-game

huntingduring

the Middle to

Late

Archaic,

this occurredbefore

the

majority

of

the art was made.

As

Whitley

(1994a)

has

noted,

all of the

chronological

evi-

dence indicates hatthe florescence

of Coso rock

artoccurred

uring

a

period

of diminished

hunting

importance,

ot

during

ts

peak

(cf.

Whitley

et al.

1999).

The third ine of

evidence nvolvesthe

iconog-

raphy

tself.

Figure

9a

showsa

putative

Coso archer

wearing bighorn heephunting

isguise

cf.

Grant

1968).

Ethnographic

vidence

again

discounts his

interpretation,

as the

bighorn sheep

rack was

acknowledged

as too

heavy

to use in this

fashion

(Fowler

1992;

Steward

1941,

1943;

Stewart

1941).

(Note

that,

while

these

ethnographic

ata

specifi-

cally

are

Numic,

heypertain

o

physical

onstraints

that should transcend

ethnographic

or

temporal

context.)

Figure

9b,

in

contrast,

appears

o

depict

a

sheep

who hasbeen

mpaled

witha

spear

r

arrow.

Note here the motif'splantigradeeet rather han

cloven hooves. Both

examples,

in

other

words,

include nonrealisticcombinationsof human

and

sheep

attributes

nd,

n

this

sense,

arebetter nter-

preted

as

conflationarybeings: they

are

neither


19/25

20 AMERICAN

ANTIQUITY

[Vol.

71

,

No.

1 2006

humannor

sheep,

but a combination

f

both.

This

conographic quivalence

between

human

and

sheep,

and the nonrealistic

natureof the cor-

poramoregenerally,are illustratedn additional

ways.

Wellmann

1979),

for

example,

has

noted a

significant

tatistical ssociation etween

he

super-

positioning

of

sheep

and so-called

patterned

ody

anthropomorphs.

hese ast

igures

are

heavily tyl-

ized

humans

who

appear

o

be

attired

n

the

painted

ceremonialshirts that were worn

by

the Numic

shaman

Whitley

1998a,

2000).

As shown

n

Fig-

ure

9c,

in

fact,

someof the

sheeppetroglyphs

hem-

selves are

"patterned-bodied,"

urther

mphasizing

theequivalancebetweenhumanandanimal.More-

over,

the fantastic

ratht

than

realistic)

natureof

the

sheep

s demonstrated

y examples

of double-

headedanimalsand

animals

with more

than

four

legs.

The

literalist,

Eurocentric

nterpretation

f the

Coso

petroglyphs,

n

other

words,

confused denti-

ficationwith

meaning,

assumed

hat

any

concern

with

gamespecies

could

only

be related o

diet,

and

only

superficially

onsidered hedata

upporting

r

countering

he

hunting

magic interpretation.

n

empiricallymoredetailedexamination f the evi-

dence

suggests

nstead hat

petroglyphs

uch

as

Fig-

ure

9a

arenot

"hunters nd heir

quarry"

ut

bighorn

sheep

shamans

ransforming

nto heiranimal

pirit

helpers,

using

the

most common shamanic

metaphor

death to

symbolically signal

their

entry

nto an

alteredstate of

consciousness

e.g.,

Whitley

1994c,

1998c).

This

identification

ains

credence rom

he fact

thata shaman ndhis

helper

were

semantically

nd

epistemologically

ndistin-

guishable.What s then shown s notsimplyapre-

occupation

with

diet but

instead an

example

of

complex

symbolic

thought

wherein the auto-

sacrifice f the

shaman

was

necessary

o

enact

spir-

itual

work,

undertaken

y

entering

rance.

In

contrast o

the Coso

Range

GreatBasinrock

art,

Columbia

Plateau

hunting

scenes are icono-

graphically

istinct.

These

compositions

tress eal-

ism

of both

human

and

animal

participants

(includingdogs

and

ancillary

humanswho

act out

ethnographically

ocumented oles

as drivers f

the

game)andfrequentlyncludedrive ane fencesor

corral

structures

Corner

1968:59,

62, 77;

Keyser

1992:38,

80;

Keyser

and

Knight

1976:6;

Teit

1930:286;

York

tal.

1993:124,

161).

Nursery

erds

of

deer

composed

of

does

and awn

are

sometimes

illustrated

Keyser

1992:38,40,

55),

and

t was

ust

suchherds

hatwould

havebeen

the focus

of com-

munal

hunting.

Other

animals

in

these

scenes

includedeer,elk,caribou,mountain heep,moun-

tain

goats,

bison,

and

even

a

sturgeon

all

sought

after

game

species.

Weapons,

especially

bow

and

arrows,

are also

frequently

and

very

carefully

depicted

(Corner

1968:38, 99;

Keyser

1992:52,

79-80, 87,

115;

Keyser

et al.

2004:44).

Occasionally

here are

clear

depictions

n the

northern lateau

of

spirit

beings

(see

Keyser

et al.

1998

for detailed

discussion

of

spirit

beings

and

how

they

are

readily

differentiated

rom

"real"

humans)assisting in the hunt mimicking

the

ethnographically

eported pirit

helpers

sought

as

hunters'

utelary pirits

Cline

1938:

133-134;

Mal-

ouf and White

1952:3;

Ray

1938:80;

York

et al.

1993:91).

But there

is

only

one

example,

out

of

more than

50

known,

of a

therianthrope

hooting

an animal

(see

Yorket

al.

1993:91).

While

game

animals are sometimes

shown with

antlers and

hooves

in

a twisted

perspective,

they

are never

depicted

in fantasticforms nor

with identifiable

humanattributes.

Inshort,most of thesescenes(Figure4) appear

to be

hunting magery,

andone

(Figure

4a)

shows,

by

virtueof differential

evarnishing,

he addition

of a latersecondhunter

o an

original omposition

showing

hunterand

quarry.

Among

Columbia

Plateau

ribeswe have

good

ethnographic

evidence

linking

vision

questing,

including

he

creationof rock

art,

with subsistence

concerns

and

practices

much of which comes

from the northern

art

of the

region occupiedby

theThompson ndOkanoganribes Teit1930:286;

York tal.

1993:70,

154,

162-163

andsummarized

above).

A

key question,

however,

s whether his

artwouldbe identifiable s suchwithout hisethno-

graphic

documentation.

Setting

aside,

for a

moment,

he direct

ethnographic

eferences den-

tifying

hese

various

pictographs

s hunters'

ower,

we

assembleda

group

of these

images (including

examples

rom both

Sympathetic Magic in Western North American Rock Art

Documents

Transcript of Sympathetic Magic in Western North American Rock Art