Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-31T10:13:03.354Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Quantitative Analysis of Superimpositions in the Rock Art of the Coso Range, California

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Klaus F. Wellmann M.D.
Klaus F. Wellmann M.D.*
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology, Beekman Downtown Hospital, 170 William Street, New York, NY 10038
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

All superimpositions encountered in a sample of 106 panels of proto-Shoshonean petroglyphs in the Coso Range (T22S-R40E). California, were quantitatively analyzed. The relative numbers of superimpositions in three of the nine subject categories (patterned-body anthropomorphs, other humans, and boat-shaped sheep) were higher than expected. Some designs (other humans, boat-shaped sheep, medicine bags) formed the overlying elements significantly more often, and others (patterned-body anthropomorphs, other elements) were seen more frequently as underlying subjects. Boat-shaped sheep and patterned-body humans constituted the most commonly encountered pairs of motifs linked in superimpositions; the high incidence of this particular linkage provides visual support for the postulated occurrence of a late intensification of ritual activities designed to help increase the supply of game animals. The data also contribute some new information about the possible iconographic roles of two controversial design motifs, the “shields” and the “medicine bags.”

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , July 1979 , pp. 546 - 556
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Grant, Campbell, Baird, James W., and Kenneth Pringle, J. 1968 Rock drawings of the Coso Range, Inyo County, California. Maturango Museum, China Lake, California, Publication 4.Google Scholar
Heizer, Robert F., and Baumhoff, Martin A. 1959 Great Basin petroglyphs and prehistoric game trails. Science 129:904–905.Google Scholar
Heizer, Robert F., and Baumhoff, Martin A. 1962 Prehistoric rock art of Nevada and eastern California. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Heizer, Robert F. and Hester, Thomas R. 1974 Two petroglyph sites in Lincoln County, Nevada. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, No. 20, pp. 1–52.Google Scholar
Langley, Russell 1971 Practical statistics simply explained (revised ed.). Dover, New York.Google Scholar
Pager, Harald 1976a The rating of superimposed rock paintings. Almogaren V/VI:205–218. Hallein, Austria.Google Scholar
Pager, Harald 1976b Quantitative analyses elucidate the motives of the South African rock painters. Almogaren V/VI:219–226. Hallein, Austria.Google Scholar
Thomas, Trudy 1976 Petroglyph distribution and the hunting hypothesis in the central Great Basin. Tebiwa 18(2): 65–74.Google Scholar
Von Werlhof, Jay C. 1965 Rock art of Owens Valley, California. Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey, No. 65. Google Scholar
Wellmann, Klaus F. 1976 Some observations on the bird motif in North American Indian rock art. In American Indian Rock Art, edited by Kay, Sutherland, Vol. 2, pp. 97–108. El Paso Archaeological Society, El Paso, Texas.Google Scholar
Wellmann, Klaus F. 1979 A survey of North American Indian rock art. Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz, Austria Google Scholar