7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

1/16

LESLEY MA YNARD Classification andterminology in Australian rock art'

One of the most informative types of rock artstudy used in Australia in recent years has beenquarititative analysis, especially wh en it revealspatterns of various kinds which might not havebeen deduced 'from simple observation of theart. Examples are Edwards' comparison of percentages of motifs at rock engraving sites inSouth and Central Australia (Edwards 1966)and Wright's analysis of proportions of humanfigures among Pilbara engravings (Wright1968). Th e . l l ~ e - ~ f _ _ q l ! : < l ! ! ~ ~ ~ < l ~ ~ e . __ n ~ l } ' s _ i ~ _ ins_tudies is dependent on the same r _ ~ _ g _ ~ ~ ~ - ~ - ~ - ~ s

~ r o q ~ f Q L ~ ~ ~ l e ~ ~ - ! ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ - b ' ? . _tYP?1?gy.})pology is also_ necessary for the useful discussion of those t.inii:S of rOck- a!! wl].ose distriJ:!J!Jjgp. in time _andspace may relate to the ~ s t o r y

{ 9 r _ p ~ ~ 4 i ~ _ t o ~ Y ) O(this art_ in u s ~ r a l i a . It may beeasy to see or state that these units (sometimescalled _-'styles'). consist ()_f ~ ~ T : l e r s of sires _and

f i g u r ~ S - _ W i l i C l i - r'OsSess- c e r t 3 i ~ - - ~ 0 ~ ~ ? ~ - - _ ; i S - l l a lc ~ a r ' i 1 c t e r t S i i c S , ~ bUtthese -tra-its h a ~ e - ~ 0 _ - b e ~ d e

~ ~ : 9 ar1d a n a l y ~ e d so ~ 9 ? _ t the V f . ! l i _ ~ i i : x _qf _ m > ~ r ficial identifiC:ations Can be examined, aP,d C_om

p a r i s O ~ s - l : i i . - ~ d e - _ h ~ _ r w e ~ n - f i g ~ r e s , ~ - i t ~ $ _ - ~ r . 11n.irs.The need foran agreed nomenclature is also

b a s i ~ .From the general nature of Australian rock

art, it.wouldseem.that-a--Simple--ty-p0logy-,---with--asmall number of discrete categories, would beeasy to construct, because the term 'rock art'does label a single phenomenon with a fewsimple subdivisions. Fo r example, among the

figurative representations found in Australianart, subjects are limited, and their outlines. afeextremely simplified and omit most fine detailsof form (e.g. muscul ature of animals and humanfigures - compare with European palaeolithicand South Mrican Bushman art): Within theoutline, there is almost no presentation of sur-face features, and no use of shading to give an illusion of perspective. Standard presentations ofeach subject are uniform throughout the wholecontinent - e.g. women's breasts are alwaysshown as projections from the sides of the chest.This lack of detail and visual effects cuts downihe number ( Q . i s _ t j _ n ~ ; : ! ! 9 _ I _ l ~ __ ? ~ ~ ~ e _ g _ i _ I l _ ' ! _ ! y _ Q _ _ q l Q g y .In the case of non-figurative art, the number ofgeometric forms which were used in Austraba,and the combinations of basic forms, is reallyvery small when compared wit h, say,South EastAsian folk art. Th e forms-foundin Australianrock ar t are generally siJiipler than ~ h ~ s e foundirr recent and historical port able and' temporaryart made by Aborigines, -sUch as Arnhem Landbaik paintings.

~ c ; t i o i _ J . _ Q [ ~ _ t y p o ! o g y j ~ t o _ s t ~ t . e , __in c_learterms, the range of phenomena preseu.t, and atthe same time, to i v i c J . ~ - ~ h _ e _ s . ~ ~ s e r v e d p _ Q ~ n o m :

~ - ~ - - ~ - ~ g - - ~ e y _ e _ r a l _ 9 l t ~ g Q r _ i . e s , _ S : ( ) _:th{!JJI . Y I > J ~ r o of

I. The system of terminology proposed in this paperhad not been critically discussed by any forumcomposed of persons experienced in rock art research prior to the 1974 conference.

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

2/16

V f t ~ i a t i o _ n S ~ _ i t h i n "the -;ange is organised. it is~ C e S S a i Y , of course, that the names_--givefl-l:othese diVisions be unaffibiguolls, well defined,

llnifCuiDl:Yunderstood and used. Typologiesare not, however, usually designed according tothese impeccable principles, by impartial andperceptive observers. Rather, they grow, likemushrooms, in the dark. In the field of Australian rock art, every worker has used the tenUswhich he likes best to describe that part of the artwhich he has recorded and published. As a-result,there is considerable confusion of terminologyin the literature. For example, certain carvingsfound in South and Central Australia have beenVariously :labelled 'iritaglios' (Davidson 1936:40), 'intagliated engravings' (Mountford 1955:345), 'pecked intaglios' (McCarthy 1967:23-27), 'fulhntaglios' (McCarthy and Macintosh 1962:288), 'rock engravings' (as distinctfrom 'rock poundings') (Mountford 1968:687)and 'petroglyphs or chipped insculpture designs' (Hossfeld 1966:69).Even i f he traits found in Australian rock ar tare few and relatively uniform, if differentwriters use different names for them, the result isinstant complexity. Mter a long period with noco-ordination between the terminologies used todescribe art in different parts of Australia,F. D.McCarthy attempted to set up a standardnomenclature. He opened the question in 1966

the General-Meeting of the Australian Insti..:t:ute of Aboriginal Studies, and-then: circulatedrwo papers tO -intereSted members of tfie Institute, setting out his own scheme for_an Austr::.tliaWide 'terminOlOgy, arid discussing commentsmade by other archaeologists (McCarthy 1966a and 1966b . The end prOduct of this process wasan article in a Manual whose Introductionstated:

The material presented here is the consideredopinion ofworkers with considerable field experience, and while it is appreciated thatrecommendations cannot be made bindingupon fieldworkers and that sets of rules can-

not be laid down, i f the suggestions of thisbook are emulated more objective recordingshould result (Mulvaney 1968:1).The main features of McCarthy's nomencla

ture were also incorporated into the site cardswhich used to be circulated by the Institute toanyone who discovered or recorded rock art.These cards are still used by the New SouthWales National P3:rks and Wildlife Service in-itsbasic catalogue of Aboriginal sites in that state.This scheme is basically the same set of termswhich McCarthy used earlier (1967) and inmany other publications.I t s_ therefore necesSary to examine Meear thy' s nomenclature and his methodology, inorder to test it for clarity and usefulness. I shallconcentrate on the final version ( 1968), althoughthe preceding, papers sometime;s hdp w showhow the scherl1e has been formulated. McCarthycommenced the article in the Manual by proposing 'major terms' for Australian rock art. Theseare 'engraving' or 'petroglyph' and 'rock painting' or 'cave painting' or 'pictograph'. The restof the article ilnplies a rigid separation of thesetwo basic rypes, which are always discussed sep

arately.Then follows a definition of style'.'Style' is the term used for the total design orpattern of a figure, whetherit be in outline,Jinear,. solid, or- bear -a -line design. It is the.final composition of the engraved, scratched,abraded,-pecked or. paint'edmarkS with Whicha figure is depicted that is, the manner inWhiCh- the niarks of the techniques are distributed in a figure (McCarthy 1968:125).He next discusses 'Regional Art', e.g. 'theKimberley paintings, western Arnhem Landpaintings and Laura paintings, or the SydneyHawkesbury petroglyphs' ( bid:126), and designates.the term 'type ' to describe these regionalgroups of rock art, in preference to 'style' and'school', which have been suggested by otherwriters.

Then he describes five 'Petroglyph Techniques': Abraded,_ E n g r a 1 . 1 _ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ c z t c b ~ ~ ~ . f - ~ c k _ r ; dand Pecked and Abraded, .irtd liSts Various subheadings under these five terms ( bid: 128): -e.g. 'Abraded: Groove : straight; Groovedoutline : made with finger; Grooved outline :made with implement; Grooved outline + in-ter!.?r surface,: ..' .. ___ . .-.-- ,'RoCk Paintings or Pictographs' are subdivided in two ways - f i r s ~ l y into four techniques: Drawing with dry pigment, Painting,Stencilling, and Paint splattered (by hand orbrush), and secondly into Monochromes,Bichromes and Polychromes. S u b ~ h e a d i n g s arelisted under the latter terms (ibid:13l-32):- e.g.'Monochromes: Stepcil; Spl_an_ered; Imprint(human hand or foot usually); Silhouette; Silhuuerre + slits . . .

From the context of the discussion in severalparts of his article, and explicit statements in thepreceding papers, it is clear that these subheadings listed under the main divisions ofEngravings and Paintings are McCarthy's'styles', that is, 'silhouette' is a style of painting,in the division Monoc_hrome.Before going on to describe methods ofrecording rock art (with which I am not concerned) McCarthy (ibid:133ff.) suggested anomenclature of 'Linear Designs', e.g. 'Circle,oval, r e c t a n g l ~ , diamond, . . _._striped,. sectioned,

s p o k t ' ! d ~ "gridded., '. $piral, Meander, Loopeddesign . . . He did not define LinearDesigns' inthe Manual article, but in the second preCeding paper (McCarthy 1966b:6), he used the termlinear 'for non-representational line designsincluding the geometric'.I shall now state my objections to this scheme.Firstly, there is a rigid i v i s i o ~ in all McCarthy'spublications between rock engravings and cavepaintings, which he always discusses separatelyin mutually exclusive sections of his publications. At no stage in the article under discussion does he make comparisons betweenthem, or use the same terms to apply to anal-

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

3/16

ogous forins in the two riiedia, Or in any way 8.dmit that they might be related. For example, afigure which is- represe_nteCt: .by. a - ~ o l i d , con..:tinuous area of engraving or painting is called byMcCarthy '.fully pecked'_ if it is-engraved, and a'silhouette' if it is painted. But obviously both

c ~ s r i $ display a common artistic intention - tocover the whole surface of the figure with mark-ing:-The lack of conunoh ternisforthese artisticdiaracteristics ignores the simple fact of availability of different types of rock surface in dif-ferent areas, and the subsequent possibility ofthis fact influencing the artists' use of differentmedia for executing the same motifs. O ne areamay haVe taveswith-large expanses of lightcoloured wall surface (e.g. south-east CapeYork), while another may -have no-caves at all,but. coni.ain exposeU oulcrops of smuulh rocksurfaces, suitable for carying (e.g. the ManundaYunta area in South Australia, which includesPanaramittee). Despite these differences in theavailability of media, many Australian motifsare fOund in- engraved and painted versionsidentical in all respects except those which aredependent on technique. In the Sydney area,where caves and suitable rock outcrops are bothavailable, the Painted art aqd the engraved art areextremely similar, with corresponding range ofmotifs, scale and style of representation (Cox,Maynard and Megaw 1968). This indicates that*ere is a-need for ~ o m p a r i s o n P t : : _ t w e ~ t h e ~ eme'dia, and terms_of reference which canbe usedto refer from one to the other, which are not ad.,.mitted-by McCarthy 's approach.

T b - ~ main weakness of McCarthy's nomenclature is that it does not have a-consistent hier; r r a ; - y ~ O f concepts, wli:h revelS of descriPtion~ h i c h _ a n o c a t e ite_ms t _ o _ m ~ T O r and minor a t e g ~~ ~ i ~ .acCOrding to stated.pdnciples. InStead it!ends to be a finite list of all the discrete combinations of different phenomena which have everbeen observed in Australian rock art - a set ofpigeon-holes. If a figure embodying a new combination ofcharacteristics were to be discovered,

MAYNARD Classijicaton and tenninology in Australian rock art 389

new category would have to be created (seeMcCa rthy 1968:128-32).The variOus categories are grouped underheadings and subheadings which reflect Me-

earthy's judgement of the most important distinctions between different ar t forms. In one ofthe papers preceding the article in the InstituteManual, he said:The use of monochrome, bichromepolychrome is now almost universal as thebasic sub-division of painting and may beadopted without hesitation (McCarthy1966b:8).All categories of painting are therefore listedunder these three headings - so the first testwhich must be applied to any painted figure iscouming rhe number of colours used in ir. Thismeans that two paintings of, say, kangaroos,identical in all respects of form, size, decorationand technique, would be classified by McCarthyinto different major groups if one of hem had aneye painted in a different colour. In the description of a large site, categorised according ro McCarthy's nomenclature, these two figures could

be pages apart.Any system which groups items according toh e a d i i i g ~ ~ E . ~ ~ - ~ . : : h ~ ! ! 9 _ ! p . ~ j ~ _ a . da_ss_it_ic;:ar_lql):, _ofa sort. But in my opinion, the _chief rest of thev.alqe_.o_fa _c;lassifica.rion system ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ _ r ; , - whether

. ~ ~ ~ - } ; r ; ~ __ w h i ~ h __are_f,laced t o g ~ t h ~ r . iQ _a $rollpreally sha,re_ a commort desigQ characteristicWhiCh--is-bas_ic tO their a t t ~ r e , and whether itemsWhich are plaCed in different-groups a"re 'fimditf 1 1 ~ I i t a n y ciiSsiin:i'lar.McCarthy's system does not pass this test.Touse the cases I have already explained - twofigures which both consist of a solid area ofmarked surface would be separated into twomutually exclusive groups if one was paintedand the other engraved. T h e r e f o r e , j n _ ~ - ~ } ' 5 - ~ ~ - mofart classification, a technical criterion (relatedt9_ the V a ~ i ? b i e _ s ~ l f < l ~ ) -overrides a design factor( r e l a ~ e d to the artist's judgement). On the other

himd, tWo paintings whose styles are quire dissimilar (e.g. one which is simple and undecorated and another which is very.intricate and embellished), would be put into the same initialcategory, Bichrome, i f hey both happened to beexecuted in two colours. In each case, a criterionwhich is important (i.e. more likely to make auseful distinction between different kinds of art)is-ignored infavoui: of a triVial one.

T h ~ _ categories listed under a sub-heading arenor defined a

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

4/16

,

houette+ outline and interior design in anothercolour .. .' are.all styles of bichrome paintings.1 These are quite ~ w c a t ~ g o r i e s , ~ . o ! _ ! f i n e d . toone aspect of _ f j g ! l f ~ ~ l : ( ) t a f a p : p e a r a n ~ e , riOt the

. 'finafCOiTIPOs.ition' p r e v i O l l ~ I Y n ~ f e ~ r t ; : . d . _ I ~ --(cick ordefimtlolls, and -unclear definitions,detract from McCarthy's nomenclature. Forexample (ibid:126-27):Petroglyph TechniquesAustralian techniques are now defined asfollows:-

1,.AQrtided. Agroovein,orareaof,arocksurface made by simple manual abrasion orrubbing with a stone, wooden or other implement.2. Engraved. With the finger(s) or other toolin a soft limestone wall (as at Koonalda), orwith a stone or other implement in harderrocks.3. Scratched. An engraving made by scoring arock surface with a stone or other implement.

4. Pecked. A groove in, or area of, a rock surface formed of pits, cuts or gashes, orformed by pounding or battering with astone or other implement . . .5. Pecked and abraded. A combination ofpecking and abrading in different parts Ofan.gure. An ip.!:iglio isan engraved design carved inthe Surface of a hard Iriate.rial. In Austf

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

5/16

....:. T ~ c h n i q u ~ , Form, o t i f ~ S i i ~ and Character.An_indiVidual figure can= d ~ s c r i b e d in termsS _ : ! ~ : ~ ~ ~ _ f ~ " o m _ a ~ ~ ~ v ~ - : I ~ _ y _ e _ f s { i e e - t a b i e s 1 ~ 5 ) .Technique(seetable I)The first important point is the separation oftechnique from those other aspects of any figurewhich could be oos_ely g r o u ~ e d ur1der the h e a d ~irig of desigii'; ThiS'is beaiuse' there' is a-basiCdifference between technique alld -deSign -techniq11e ~ s - a e t e f f f i i Q i ~ ~ ~ l i y _ __.!b,!! __QOk -andffiitei-Ials i i V a i l a . 6 i e - a ~ ~ - ch9sen, but e s i g ~ i s _ fl(;'t

! ! l r e C t e ~ hY any ~ y s l ~ a l f a _ ~ ! _ ( ) . r s __ ~ t : ~ p t _th,e S{ze-ofthe _surface used. It is easy to distinguish the .PUrely technical aspects-of a carving or a painting- it is the method by which marks are put ona rock surface, and a description of the shape,size and texture of these marks, but it excludesany statement about the way in which the marksare arranged, or the number of them.Rock carvings or rock engravin gs orpetroglyphsAll these terms refer.to marks rrutde b _ y _ ~ u b t r ~ c t : ing from a rock s u r f a c ~ i f " a ~ i ~ g ' " iS- a tefffi

; h i C h - - d ~ i y e s - f ; ~ ~ ~ ~ t a l - w o r ! < i n g . A hardmeta] tool, called a burin or giaver, is used togouge out a smooth, cont inuous channel acrossthe surface of a soft metaP. As far as I know,there are no rock carvings in Australia which

c o r r ~ s p o _ n d in appearapce .or presumed-methodof manufacruret_o.tllis kind of'engraving'. But aquick surveyof he ~ s t r a l i a n Institute ofAbor_iginal Studies sequential bibliography of thepast ten years shows that at least eleven authorshave used the term 'rock engraVings' in the titlesof at least 25 articles on Australian rock art inevery state. So there is no point .iri trying todispense with the term, even though it refers toa specific technique which is not found in Australia, although it does occur elsewhere. In2. Fo r macro-photographs of engraved lines, and adetailed discussion of these techniques in metalworking, see Loweryetal. 1971.

ass ca n an enn na ogy n us ra an roc ar

Table 1 TechniqueRock carvings or rock engravings or petroglyphs (subtractive process)A. Friction

i. scratched (single stroke)il. abraded (repea ted friction)iii. rubbed (broad sur face) - -?

B. Percussion1 pounded (direct percussion)]11 pecked (md1rect percuss1on)

C. RotatiOndnlled

makes a groove (V-shaped, U-shaped, etc.)makes a rubbed a rea

makes a pit (round, oval, deep, shallow. etc.)

Rock paintings or' cave art or pictographs (addiiive process)D. Mechanical

stencilii. imprint

E. Delineatedi. painting (wet)ii. drawing(dry) l

red, yellow, black, white, etc.)

& : used to join descriptions of different parts of one figure which are done in different techniques-e .g . Bii AiiL

j : used when one te.chnique i ~ . - ~ . u P ~ r i m p _ o s e d Ofl a"nother _-e.g. BiijAii.

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

6/16

,

South Mrica, some Bushman carvings are composed of smooth, even grooves which really doresemble incised engravings on metal plates.Willcox (1963:54) uses the term 'engraving' todistinguish these from 'peckings', which arecomposed of chipped marks, and the term 'petroglyphs' ro apply to all carvings 3 In the Aus

_ t r a l i ~ I l ~ c o n t e x t 'engravipg' s,houlclb_e desjgnateda general term, synonymous with 'rock carving'or 'petroglyph' (which is used occasionally), andthese terms used to describe any process involving subtracting from a rock surface in order tomake a design. Confusion can be avoided bynever using engraving' to refer to some specifictype of process, in contrast to others.Friction, percussion, rotation

I h . - _ e x ~ _ a r e ~ n l y _ t b r . : e . e _ b a s i c _methods of QSiog_ani Q 1 p ~ e i l 1 e n t (including fingers)J_O,.!lJ:afk rock -pushifig it horizontally_ over. the sq.rface (friction), pressure in the vertical axis by means of

p e r c u s s ! Q _ I h _ ~ Q d _ r g _ t a _ t i n g

Scratched, abr.aded, groove, rubbed,rubbed areaTh e first two subdivisions under carvings pro-duced by friction, scratching and abrading,

__must,. by: their natl,lre, p r . Q f ! l ! < c : : . ~ _ a __ ~ o n t _ i _ n p p U s~ - ~ y e . The terqi '_scratched' is .used when anengraving consists .of -shallow,-. finely-' incisedlines which are almost certainly the result ofrunning a sharp instrument once over the tocksurface. There is no difficulty in distinguishingthese from 'abraded ' grooves, which are the result of repeated friction along the same line. Th eshape of an abraded groove will vary accordingto the implement used, the type of rock and the3. Since writing this paper I have seen finely incisedengravings in the Hamersley and ChichesterRanges, West ern Australia, which resemble theSouth African examples illustrated in Willcox(1963).

technique of the operator. b r a s i o n with a sharpwol tends to produce the c o m m a ~ V-shapedg f _ Q 9 ~ _ j p _ g}QSt r _ ( ) C ~ S . Devon Downs Type Bcarvings are U-shaped in cross-section - thesoft limestone apparently allowed the artist tochisel out a broad groove, but the technique isstill basically abrasion, and should be thus designated (Hale and Tindale 1930). It is not worthcreating new categories to describe rare occurrences like Devon Downs, because -Of a slightvariation from the more common form of abrading found on hard rocks. Th e finger markings inKoonalda cave (Maynard and Edwards 1971)were- also made by friction, but as they areunique in Australia, it is hardly worth creating aformal term for them. A case like this can best behandled by a special description.

Sometimes, instead of a groove, an area ofrock surface is rubbed smooth. This technique isusually found in conjunction with others - e.g.a pecked outline with a rubbed area inside it.Pounded, pecked, drilled, pitThere are two definite cypes of percussiontreated carvings which are found in Australia.Mountford observed Aborigines in CentfalAustralia making designs by pou nding the surface of patinated rocks with lumps of stone heldin the hand. This direct percussion bruised theouter coating and produced shallow impressionswllich broke through the patination (usuallydark coloured). and exposed the unWeatheredinner surface (Mountford 1955); There are alsorhany prehistoric examples of carvings apparently made by this method, including many sitesin the Pilbara area of Western Australia (Wright1968). Th e individual pits are shallow, and distributed in a manner which suggests the lack of fine control resulting from direct percussion.Th e edges of solid figures made by pounding arerather diffused.

Th e result of this hammer dressing is quitedifferent from the ancient carvings found inCentral and South Australia (e.g. Panaramittee)

which consist of deep nicks in the rock surface(Mountford and Edwards 19()3). T l ; l e ~ t : - e n . g ~ a v - :ings are more precise than the shallOW pound.:ings, and it seems very likely that they weremade by indirect percussion, using a sharppointed tool which was deliberately placed inposition and then hit with a hammerstone. Theprecise_ -lines and.cle.an _edges of these .carvi.ngs ,seem to indicate the. increased control whichwould resu lt from indi rect per.cussion. Th e term'pecking' has often been used to describe thesedeep carvings; I propose 'pounded' and 'pecked'to diStinguish carvings apparently executed bydirect and indirect percussion, respectively.

I do not claim tha t it will always be possible todetermine the method of manufacture. of. everysingle carving in Australia. This distinction isanalogous to that between a flake and a blade instone tool typology. Indirect percussion musthave been used to make those prehist oric stoneblades which are very long and thin, bu t there areintermediate forms (between an ordinaty flakeand a good blade). Although one cannot demon-strate, in every single case, whethe r direct or in-direct percussion was used, it is still useful to dis tingUish between the. two types (flake and blilde ),because there are many more definite cases thanindefinite. An ambiguous rock carving couldstill be desCribed by the appropriate term from.the next , i g h e ~ t level _in the. hierarchy ..,.. in thiscase, 'percussion'.

It has, been sugg_ested that some carvings insoft rocks were ma:de by drilling, e.g. the punc

- tures asSociated with abraded giooves In theType C carvings at Devon Downs, and carvingsat Port Hedland which McCarthy duplicated byrotating the point of a whelk shell (1962:44) butas far as I know, no authenticated examplesclearly showing the use of this technique havebeen found to date. I propose that the term'drilled' should be used if particular circumstances are found which suggest it, or the con-tour of the pits indicate that rotatio n was used toform them.

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

7/16

' " ' ' 'A 'pi-t' is the result o f ' a ~ y : p ~ ~ C U s S i ; n - o ~ rotation. It is asmall depression in the rpcksurface,roughly circular or eUipticillJ -a_nd Aeep_ Orshallow, depending on the circumstances of itSmanufacture.Rock paintings or cave art or pictographsThese terms refer to marks made by addingsoffie-'coloured.materia:I--to rOck- surfaces. ' P i e ~tograph' has been used in America to describe allsuch figures, but it has never been popular in theAustralian literature. It is, however, difficult tothink of an alternative term which applies to thedry crayon drawings as well as to painrings don eiri mixed ochres. 'Rock Pain.ting' has been usedmost frequenrly. 'Cave Art' covers both forms,but is not specificto the technique of adding pig-ment Lll a surfar..:e, c:xt.:ept in the t : n s t Lhallhcst:figures couldonly survive for any length of imewhen they are executed in a sheltered position.Therefore, as in the caseof'engraving', I suggestthe use of all these as general terms, without rigidetymologiCal control. I regret the later use of'painring' for a specific technique, but in thiscase there is no satisfactory substitute in common use. _It is no good introducinga completelynew term, sUch as 'mural', and expecting it to beaccepted.Mechanical, delineated, stencil, imprint,painting, drawingThere b a ~ i c _ diff.erenc.e b e t w e ~ - n a i i ~ r ewhich is delineated on the surface by the_artisr-;and ari objeCt which is rePresentedby the-meCh.:.anical processes of stenciHing and imprinting.1\stencil consists of a blank space surrounded by aborder of splattered paint. Th e quality of themargin shows that some object h been heldagainst rhe waU so that a negative impression ofits shape will remain when paint is sprayedaround it. Th e mark made by pressing an objectsuch as a hand, which has been dipped in wetpaint, against a rock surface is quite characteristic.

MI\YNARD Classifit:atlon aud renninolag_y in AustraLian rock art 393

By o n t r a s t ~ delineated figures are corri.posedof coloured lines or solid areas which appear tohave. been applie d under direct manual control,without any other aids. When the ochres havebeen ground up and mixed with a liquid beforebeing applied to rhe rock surface, the paintedarea is evenly coated with colour. When dry pigmentis rubbed on the rock like a crayon, the highspots of the surface are more thickly coated thanthe low spots, giving a streaky effect to thedrawing.

It is always possible that more than one technique will be used to make up a single figure.Th e same terminology can still be used, withspecial punctuation to represent the combination of techniques. In Arnhem Land, some

, hand.stencils are decorated wi th painte d designsin.siU..: Lhe margin of i.ht: sprayeJ surruuuJ. Theywould be described asDi and Ei (see table l ). Th'epecked outlines of some carvings in the Sydneyarea have been subsequently abraded, whichcould be shown as Bii/Aii in a formal description{seetable 1).Form (see table 2)There are many words which refer to the visualorganisation of the marks which make up a figure, such as 'form', 'composition', 'treatment','design', 'pattern', 'motif' and even 'style' (as_used. by f l 4 ~ C a _ r t h y ) . Ihave_ preferr_ed_.rQe_ term'form' to describe the organisation dots, l i n ~ sand masses which comprise individual figures.The-same criteriaof orm apply to all figures, regardless of echnique.r do not intend that this section of the terminology should be capable of describing everyaspecr of the appearance of a figure. Accordingto the scheme given in the diagram, 0 and

have the same form ~ t h e y can both be described as le , 2c, 3a. Discriminating betweenthese figures is reserved for the next secrion ofthe terminology,Motif. On the other hand, Qand are different forms - the latter is dis-

. : ' ' -. ,_ ,;.-- :-.-' ,_... ,tinguis hed frOm the previous descriptiori as le,2c, 3b, 4ciii.

The arrangement of the diagram under theheading

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

8/16

394 Fonn, chronology and classification

'c:._ a n ~ h i n g i n ~ i d e iis ~ a r g i n would be infill.An infill is any mark found within the bound

ary of a figure. The term is not meant to implythe sequence in which the different parts of thefigure were executed. Close examination mightshow that the interior area was completed first,and then a line traced around its margin. However, the present object is to describe the item asit now,srailds. The-infill inay consist ofsca:tteredmarks, lines, or solid areas of colour or engraving. 'Partial solid area' is used when only part ofthe area inside the outline is thus treated. A fewsub-headings, describing common interior patterns been included. D o t s ' roug_hly cir-cular; 'dashes' are short lines; 'stfipes' are linesparallel to the long axis of he figure; 'bars' are atright angles to the long axis; 'concentric' linesfollow the course of the outline.

If it is desirable to present a complete description of form as a continuous written statement,special punctuation can be used to organise theelements, as shown in table 2.However, a more convenient way of using thesystem for fieldwork or research is in a columndiagram ~ b l e 6 discussed below). This diagram o n s t i t u t ~ s a way of register ing all the features of a figure's form. I envisage that it couldbe used in any situat ion where it is necessary todescribe a group of figures- e.g. in fieldwork, aspart of the process of recording a site, or even insome -cirCumstances,-aS a substitute -for sCa'le

~ a w i n g s ; in _ s u b s e q u e ~ t _processing, part.'ofnumerical analysis; and occasionally in the finished publication, if it was desired to presentsuch a detailed description.

It is also necessary to have shortened versionsof these formal descriptions, because it is notconvenient to refer always to a 'red continuousline, encloses space, interior infill, red continuous line stripes /yellow solid area'. The obvious abbreviation, for ordinary usage, is 'redoutline with red stripes and solid yellow infill'. Itherefore propose the following list o f terms fordescribing form, which are derived from the

Table2 Form

Code no.

2

3

4

a. scatteredmarks

a. scatteredmarks

i. dotsii. dashes

b. dottedline

a. does notenclosespace

c. continuousline

b. partiallyencloses

spaceI

a. no interiorin fill

c. enclosesspace

I Ib. interior

infill

b. dottedline

c continuousline

d. bandI e. solidarea

i. stripe(s)ii. bar(s)

concentricother

, ' ,_: .--area:'

USe.-6fdifferentcolour or

te_chniquejf. partial

solidarea

, : listing the aspects of a figure0 :1c,2c,3a. ,. joining description of form to descriptionsof technique, motif and size.& . j a _ ~ n i n g .9escriptions at-different parts of a figure0 : enclosing the desCription-of one part of a figure.q :1c, 2c, 3a)& (1c, 2a).

{'''"':; . .: : Bii: )c;. 2c, 3a; NF,-cir.c.le; .10 mm. ~ - ......

I : joining elements which are present in the same part of a figuretf!!!J1/) : c. 2c. 3b. 4aijci.X : indicates multiples ofelementscomprising a single figure

395

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

9/16

FiguratiVeExamples n a r : n e ~ _o_f !igurative '!I,Otifs;

Man, worila_ri, h u m - a r i ' ( n o s . E f ~ i_ndiC.Je_q)}-_,_: ->.0>(-.--:_-_,:'-:'-- _ . ._ _ -----_,_-- , _,Kangaroo, di-ngo, flying fox, echid'na: cinimal (qU-adruped of unidentifiable speCies)Emu, scrub turkey, bird (unidentifiable species)Sawfish, eel, dugong, fish (_un)d.e_ritifial::!l.e_speci.es)Crocodile, turtle, lizard, snakeYam, plantBoomerang, spear, shield, axe, basket, canoeHuman footprint. handKangaroo track, bird track, lizard track

. . . etc.Non-figurativeExamples of names of non-figurative motifs:

Circle, ova/, rectangle, diafnondLinked circles Q:)Chain of circles ~Row of circles 0 0 0 0Connected circles ~Group of circles cf1.f/6

Une: straight, curved, wavy, looped, sinuous, zig-zagParallel lines, radiating lines, mtersecting lines, mazeSpiral, chevron, U, concentric U, cross

s'isect8d circle (])Quartered circle ffiSpoked circle Concentric circle @Spoked concentric circle

(Common nouns s e ~ . a ~ n ~ m e s of n o n ~ t ' i g u ~ a t i v e - sch.ema- ~ - ~ - i n _ t e r p . r e t a t . i _ o " n in favour 6t'tiie(eferEmt is implied):-Rake 11!11 ill\ Grid ~

e r r i n g b o n e ~ /~ LadderStarSun disc Amoeba c:::J. . . etc.

- : - 'l a r g e ~ . s y s t ~ ~ ; i ~ ' b ~ U s ~ d - i ~ - - ~ i t c u m s t a n c e s ~ - h e ~ .it is necessary to describe figures as briefly, butaccurately as possible.Group of scattered marks (la)Dotted line l b ~ 2 a )Line (le, 2a)Band (ld, 2a)

D o ~ e d outline (1 b, 29_jf with ~ n f i l l ; w. ith o t t e dOutlin e(IC, 2c) infill; with striped in-Thick outline (Id, 2c) fill; with red stripesSolid figure (e) and solid yellow infill.

These terms can be combined with techniques- 'abraded outline', 'pounded band', 'peck"'edsolid figure' tMcCarthy's 'intaglio'). The various colours of paintings and drawings can be inserted at this stage in the descriptive system.

T h i ~ whult: ~ y ~ t e m howeVer, propuseUpurely as a basic classification ofAustralian rockar t- not as a prescription for fieldwork methodsor derailed analysis. The 'mechanical' pro-cedures described here (coding and punctuatio nsystems) are intended only as examples. Eachworker is bound to design his own methods tosuit his aims and research material, and make individual decisions about descriptive procedures.For example, in the case of partly faded orwashed out paintings, one would have to decidewhether to describe the figure exactly as it nowstands, or as one may reasonably deduce the

a r ~ i s t left it ,Motif(see rable-3)As well as being .composed of.Iines or dots orsolid areas, a figure also has a shape, i.e. the spaceoccupied by, and the configuration of, the linesor dots or whatever marks make uptMt particular figure. Shape is independent of form (as usedin the previous section of this terminology). Inany body of art, certain shapes tend to recur.It is convenient to give names to these recurring shapes. When the ar t is prehistoric, thename can only be suggested by the appearanceof

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

10/16

. ' ' t h ~ f i g ~ ~ ~ . - S o m ~ f i g u r e s ~ ~ s e m b l e o b j ~ ~ t s w.hichare familiar to the observer, and are thereforenamed for these objects. I may call a figure a'kangaroo', because the arrangement and relative size of the masses which comprise its shaperemind me of the shape of an actual kangaroo.But I cannot be certain of the original intentionof the artist who drew the figure. His subject -the entity-which heintendedto i"eprese'nt'- mayhave been a real kangaroo, or another member ofthe macropod family - Aboriginal drawing isnot usually naruralistic enough for the observerto dis tinguish the particular species. Or he mayh a ' : ' e . w i s h e ~ t o r ~ _ p r e s e n t t h e spirit ofa kangaroo,or th e totemic ancestor of all kangaroos, or ahuman ancestor who sometimes looked like akangaroo, or even a real human individual, whowas a member of the kangaroo totemic grcn.1rand was therefore symbolised by his totemanimal. Because of these alternative possibilities, the observer cannot make any assumptionbased on the identity-of the figure. It is admittedthat the artist has modelled his image on theshape of a kangaroo, but this does not affect ourinterpretation. A Sydney resident who rurns tothe sport ing pages of his evening paper, and seesa cartoon showing a rabbit playing football witha tiger, does not assume that real rabbits playfootball with real tigers. And a Melbourne resident, who may not be able to .interpret the symbolism (SoU.thsplaying Balmain) is .still nofjus

t i f i e ~ in J:Ilaking. any"" zoological_assumptionS based on the picture, because he is aware o(therole of cartoons in our culture.

This was the mistake made by Maggs in drawing conclusions from a qt.Iantitative analysis ofmotifs in Bushman rock paintings ( 1967). Fromhis conclusions it would appear that he assumedthat the paintings invariably represented realhuman beings and real animals.:

. . . in no case were both identifiable males andidentifiable females shown together (in thepaintings). An interpretation for this is that it

indicates strict division of the people concerned into groups based on sex and is probably a reflection of strict division of labourbetween the sexes (Maggs 1967:101).Interpreting all pictures ofanimals as items of

diet, he compared the numberof painted animalsof different species with two samples of actualBushman meat consumption, 3.ri archaeologicalexample and an ethnographic one. Not surprisingly, there were large discrepancies -elephants and other large animals were 'overrepresented' in the paintings, and Maggs interpreted this as 'optimism' on pan of.the artisthunters - i.e. failure to represent their trueeconomic situation (1967:102). These con-

: ~ ~ } ~ i r ~ ~ : ~ ; l ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; , f d ~ I ~example, large animals are important in Bushman mythology.My use of the name kangaroo' for a panicularfigure therefore implies only that the figure reminds me of a kangaroo. It is convenient to usethis name in order to distinguish this figure fromothers which remind me of emus, fish, humanbeings, boomerangs and other familiar objects.The term which I have used for these shapecategories is 'motif. A motif is a recurrent visualimage which has a panicular arrangement ofcOrripondits. The preCiSe shape of indivi.duaffigureswhichhaVe the sariie m6!i(cfm vary .to acertain extent, but their.basic visual organisatiOnremains constant.Gombr ich ( 1968) has studied how motifs(recurrent shapes) come to occur in any artwhich is under cultural control (i.e. almost all artexcept that of very small children and experimental primates). He postulated that we allhave mental templates of objects which differ tosome extent from the real shape of the objectsthemselves. This mental template or 'schema'affects our perception of an object, our perception of a picture of the object, and, ultimately, if

we are artists, the image which we make of theobject. Motifs are therefore the objectified ~ - : pressions o f schemata - the standardiSed #C:...torial forms which result from consis tent mentaltemplates (consistent within the cul tura l groupof the artist).

Munn used the term 'schema' to describe design elements in . o n t ~ m p m ; a r y . _ = _ W a l l ? i r i _ , art;(1966). These shOuld really be Understood as'objectified schemata' - the concrete resultsof Walbiri mental templates. This usage of'schema' may be justified in the case of ethnographic an - Munn could argue that she isdeducing mental symbolic systems from the in-formants' explanations of motifs.

In the case of prehistoric art, one assumes thatmental schemata operated to produce ~ c u " r r e n l :mutii:;. However, as one cannm study prehistoric thought processes in the way that psychologists study modern schemata, I have simplyused the term 'motif for a nameable shapecategory which includes large numbers of individual figures.

The motifs that I have been discussing, whichresemble objects familiar to the observer, aretalled 'figurative'. Another group of motifs is'non-figurative'. In the case of a non-figurativemotif, the uninformed observer cannot arrive atany helpful associations for naming the figure.Thismay be ~ c a u s e its shape is.too general) likea circle, which could be associated with any of avari"ety of circular objects ( m o ~ n , waterhole,breast, fruit, egg, etC.), or because the pfehisi:oric.artist has modelled the figure on some .specialised shape which is unfamiliar to a modern observer. The artist may never have intended a design to bear any resemblance to a natural object.The solution to the problem of naming a nonfigurative motif is to use terms from theEuropean vocabulary of geometry and designwhich best describe the shape of the figure - e.g.circle, chevron, undulating line, sun disc, grid,etc. Names given to figurative and nonfigurative motifs- e.g. 'kangaroo' and 'circle'-

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

11/16

have the sarnestatus in both c ~ s e ~ , r h - ~ r - i s ; r h e Yhave no fu.terpretive value, bu t are simply labelsfor recurrent arrangements of lines and shapes.-It is possible to observe the creation of figurative and non-figurative motifs in the art of ourtime. Although it is modelled on the form ofnarural objects) not all figurative art appears thesame. It does not correspond to a photographicrecbrd of its subject's f O r m ~ - and figu'rativerepresentations distort form in some way, bu twithout making the depictions unrecognisable.If the distortion is so great that no resemblanceremains between the subject and the representation, then it is non-figurative ar t

It is possible to drai' lip a continuum of different representations of the same subject, forexample, a human figure, which range. fromfigurative to non-figurative (see fig. l). But theremust be some stage in this sequence, at whichpoint each viewer could no longer identify anyaspect of the subject, if the figure were shownseparately. However, this point would vary fromviewer to viewer, dePending on factOrs of experience, perceptiveness and culrure. If he central figure in this diagram were separated fromthe others, an imaginative person may say tha_t itis a human figure, bu t an unimaginative Viewermight just describe it as a

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

12/16

398 Fonn, chronology and classification

AbsoluteMeasurement of longest dimension in metres and centimetres.

Relative(Optional) Applies to figurative motifs only.

s/Zi:i a t e i i O " r i e ~Lar.ger than li fe sizeLife sizeHalf life sizeMiniature

Table 5 CharacterExamples ofdisting_uishing characteristi cs

ShapeElongatedStick-figureEnlarged headEnlarged genitalsContorted posture

S h - ~ W i n g movementFt"eXible' iimbs Profile depictioriRealistic body contourWandjina, Mimi, Kurangara, X-ray, etc.Elaborately decoratedVery detailed

. . . etc.

CodeLLL

M

e.g. Human figureMore than 180 cm120-180 cm60-120 cmLess than 60 cm

AssociationWearing headdressCarrying object in handStruck by weaponStriking other figureCopulating

. . . etc.

helpful to use these relative size categories forcomparing and contrasting art in differe;nt an;as; in which case their usefulness might ciU.tWe'lgh'the lack of accuracy in some instances.Character (see table 5)Ifa grollp _of r 1 ~ s t s l ~ h e n making fig.ur:ative rep-:-.resentations of the same or similar subjects, alltend to distort its shape away from 'photographic reality' in the.same way, the resultingfigures will all appear somewhat homogeneous.They will constitute a sub-group within themotif. For example, a number of human figureswith greatly elongated limbs and torsos wouldstand out from a group which displayed more or.less normal body propOrtions. Similarly, agroup of non-figurative motifs may have characteristics which distinguish it from anothergroup- e.g. embellished versus simple.

Some figures, therefore, need something extra added to their identification by motif. It isfirst necessary to take a broad view of Australianrock art, in order to describe norms from whichsome figures deviate. As I sta ted in he .early partofthi s pa:per, "the general character of most Australian figurative art is crudely naturalistic,faithful to the general proportions of the subjects on which it is modelled, but not very re

a l i s t i r ; : ~ as European p a l ~ e o l i t h i c and Bushmanf i g u n i t i ~ e art is. Nor is it stylised,, like some ofthe Camonica Valley (see Anati Ch . 2 9 ~ thisvolume) and CalifOrnian rock ar t (SteWard1929). Some motifs vary very litt le frOm one endof the continent to the other - these includemost of he animals and birds. Most figures haveno decorative infill, or else Vtry simple formssuch as stripes and dots. The general nature ofnon-figurative motifs is analogous to the figurative art, being in all respects simple ra ther thanelaborate.

If a figure is not described in any special termsunder the heading Character, this means tha t itdoes not vary in any appreciable way from the

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

13/16

... '' - ~ ' - '' ,_-- -,-description given abOVe. In oi-der fd hitVecharacter, a figure must stand out in some way.Human figures constitute the most.,v;arj;iblemotif. I would describe any figure which has atorso with arms and legs protruding from eitherend, a roundish head and no tail (longer thanlegs) as 'human' under the heading Motif. Otherfeatures may-help to establish humani ty, such asdetails of hands, feet, face,. genital organs,- etc.(see Ucko and Rosenfeld 1972). Some of thesefeatures may be absent, if others are presentwhich dearly indicate anthropomorphic associations (see Rosenfeld, Ch. 10, this volume).Pronounced elongation of he limbs and torso isthe most common variation ori the 'normal'human motif. The most extreme version is the'stick-man', in which the limbs and body are reprcsenled by single lines- one continuous row ofpits or one stroke of paint. Some anthropomorphic figures have parrs of heir bodies exaggerated in size, usually the head or genitalorgans. Others are shown in impossibly contorted postures. Some complex variations arebest described by using a term which is Wellknown in the literature, and represents a consistentcombinati.on of special features.:.... e.g. a n ~ -jina,X-ray. Terms like Wandjina,Mimi,etc. areintended in this context to evoke only visualstereotypes, which may or may not be consistently identified by contemporary Aborigines as

s p ~ i f i c m y t h o l o g ~ q ! _ l subjects.Either figurative or 110n-fig1.1ratiye motifsmay be decorated to a greater degree than generlilly found in Australian rock ar t - with infillscomposed of a Variety of forms, multiplecolours, various appendages, etc. Many paintings in Anthem La ndhavethi s character.A variation of this is the use of more detail than usual,for example the boomerangs, shields and otherobjects at Por t Hedland, whic:h are infilled withintricate linework (Mc Carth y 1962).Another type of character is an association ofthe figure under discussion with another figurein some immediately recognisable relationship.

MAYNARO Classification and terminology in Australian rock art 399

: ._

7/29/2019 14-Maynard 1977

14/16

Letters and numbers are taken from tables 1 and 2. R red, W = white, Y = yellow, B = black, M =multiples, F = figurative, NF = non figurative.Figure Technique Form Motif

AI Aii Aiii Bl Bii c Di o,; El Eii la lb le Id le2a2b2c3a 3b4a i ii 4b4c4d i ii iii iv 4e 4t M . , . .