Sympathetic Magic in Western North American Rock Art

Society for American Archaeology
Sympathetic Magic in Western North American Rock Art

Author(s): James D. Keyser and David S. Whitley
Source: American Antiquity, Vol. 71, No. 1 (Jan., 2006), pp. 3-26
Published by: Society for American Archaeology
Stable 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 support@jstor.org.
Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Antiquity.
http://www.jstor.org
KflCTTiiwsU
SYMPATHETICMAGIC IN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

James D. Keyser and David S. Whitley
Much rock art worldwide was traditionally interpretedin terms of "huntingmagic," in part based on the related concept
of "sympatheticmagic" In the last forty years, these interpretationswere disproven in many regions and now are largely
ignored as potential explanationsfor the origin andfunction of the art. In certain cases this may be premature.Examination of the ethnographicand archaeological evidencefrom western NorthAmerica supports the origin of some art in sympathetic magic (often related to sorcery) in both California and the Plains and provides a case for huntingmagic as one of
a series of ritual reasonsfor making rockart in the ColumbiaPlateau. Both case studies emphasize the potential diversity
in origin,function, and symbolismof shamanistic rockart.
Muchoarte rupestremundialse ha interpretstradicionalmenteen terminosde "lamagia de caza, "basada en el conceptorelacionado de "la magiapor imitacion."En los ultimoscuarentaanos, esta interpretacionha sido rechazadaen muchasregiones
y ahora es ignoradaen granparte como explicacionpotencial para el origen y lafuncion del arte. En ciertos casos este rechazopuede ser prematuro.Datos etnograficosen Californiay la GrandeLlanurasostienen un origen de algun arte en magia
por imitacion, associado con brujeria,mientrasque la etnografiay la evidencia arqueologica de la Meseta de Columbia,
norteamerica,muestranun caso a favor de la importanciade la magia de caza como razonpara hacer algunos ejemplosdel
arte rupestre.Amboscasos acentuanla diversidadpotencial en el origen, lafuncion y el simbolismodel arte rupestrechamanistico.
originand meaningof NorthAmerican

rockarthavebeendiscussedfor almost300
years, at least since Cotton Mather first
investigated the petroglyphs of Dighton Rock,
Massachussetts(Molyneaux1977). Althoughthe
degreeof intellectualinterestin rockarthas varied
overthislongperiod,thelasttwo decadeshavewitnessed a revolutionin methods,techniques,and
interpretations(see Whitley 2001) accompanied
by a series of importantdiscoveries(e.g., Clottes
1998),resultingin whathas been called a "golden
age"for rockartstudies(Whitley2005). One central characteristicof this recentrock artresearch
hasbeen a widespreadagreementthatmuchof the
hunter-gathererrock art in North America is
shamanistic1in origin (e.g., Boyd 2003; Conway
and Conway 1990; Francisand Loendorf2002;
Hedges 1976, 1992;HudsonandLee 1984;Keyser
1992; KeyserandKlassen200 1; KeyserandWhitley 2000; Rajnovich1994; Turpin1994; Whitley
1992, 1994b,2000).
The idea thatmuch (butnot all) of this huntergathererrock artwas createdby shamansto portraythe visionaryimageryof theiralteredstatesof
consciousnessexperiences,orby non-shamansduring shamanisticrites,in factis not a new idea.Ethnologists such as Steward(1929), Gayton(1930,
1948) andCline (1938), to namejust a few, documentedthisfactin thefirst-halfof thetwentiethcentury,and,as Conkey(1997) has noted,it has been
the attention to and analysis of ethnographic
accountssuch as theirsthat have been the major
factorsin the resurgencein rock artresearch.But
a seriesof earlierarchaeologists(e.g., Grant1967,
1968;HeizerandBaumhoff1959, 1962;vonWerlhof 1965) also arguedfor a shamanisticoriginfor
this art, even though they overlookedthe ethnographicrecord.Based entirelyon inference,they
attributedthe art,however,to a particulartype of
shamanisticpractice,sympathetichuntingmagic.
Morerecently,researchersin NorthAmerica(e.g.,
Christenson 1993; Mundy 1981; Rector 1979,
James D. Keyser U.S.D.A. Forest Service, 1815 SW DeWitt, Portland,OR 97201 (jkeyser@fs.fed.us)
David S. Whitley 447 ThirdSt., Fillmore, CA 93015 (huitli@adelphia.net)
AmericanAntiquity,71(1), 2006, pp. 3-26
Copyright2006 by the Society for AmericanArchaeology
3
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
1985;Whitley1982a,1994b,1998b)andelsewhere
(Bahn 1991; Lewis-Williams 1981, 1983), have
rejectedsympathetichuntingmagic on empirical
andconceptualgrounds,includinga failureto find
supportfor it in the ethnographicrecord.A quick
readof therecentrockartliteraturethusmightlead
to the impressionthatsympatheticmagichas been
entirelyeliminatedas part of the potentialfunctional variabilityin shamanisticrock art, worldwide. Indeed,this might also suggest a complete
absenceof any connectionsbetween shamanistic
rock art and subsistenceconcerns and practices
moregenerally.
Ourinteresthere is to avoid a circumstancein
which the proverbialbaby is thrownout with the
bathwater.Towardthis end we reviewthe problem
of sympatheticmagic and rock art, startingfirst
with the anthropologicalliteratureon the topic.
Turningnextto ethnographicevidencefor sympathetic magic in rock art,unrelatedto hunting,we
considerethnographicevidenceforrockartrelated
to huntingbeliefs andpractices,potentiallyincluding sympathetichuntingmagic. Finally, we discuss possible ways that hunting-relatedrock art
maybe distinguishedfromsuperficiallysimilarart
createdforotherpurposes,in the absenceof ethnographicdata.
Sympathetic Magic
Intellectualconcernwith sympatheticmagichas a
long history in anthropology,where it has been
embeddedin discussions of magic, science, and
religion as contrastingmodes of knowledge and
thought (Morris 1987; Tambiah 1990). Indeed,
muchlate nineteenth-andearlytwentieth-century
cultural anthropologicalresearch was directed
towardidentifyingthe distinctionsbetween these
threelargerphenomena,withresearchersas diverse
as JamesG. Frazer(1933), EdwardTylor(1913),
Max Weber (1965) and Bronislaw Malinowski
(1948) discussingthe topic in detail.Althoughthe
argumentsof these and laterwriters(e.g., EvansPritchard1937;Firth1958)differon variouspoints,
Pyysiainen(2004) has provideda recentsynthesis
of the pointsof consensus.The primaryof theseis
a workingdistinctionbetweenreligionandmagic.
Both concernsupernatural
agency(therebydiffering from science), but magic and religion fall on
differentends of a causal spectrum."In magic,
[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006
supernatural
agentsand forces bringaboutspecified effects in the knownreality,while in religion
realnaturalactionshave effects in a supernatural
in
this
sense
2004:96-97).
Magic
ity"(Pyysiainen
is solely intendedto havea practicaloutcome(e.g.,
killing a game animal)whereasreligionhas as its
goal a more etherealproduct(e.g., appeasinga
deity),eventhoughthepurposeof thatappeasement
mayultimatelybe directedtowardreal-worldends.
Magicalrites are then mechanisticand deterministic;religiousritualsin contrastarecontingentand
uncertainin that,fundamentally,
theyinvolvenegotiationswith the supernatural.
At least two kinds of magic are also acknowledged by most writers.The first is sympathetic
magic where an effect resemblesits cause ("like
produceslike").The second is contagiousmagic
wherethingsthatonce werein contactarebelieved
to continueto act on each other,even at a distance.
In practice, these distinctions were sometimes
blurred.More importantis the fact that,as Boyer
(2001) notes, these magicalbeliefs are relatedto
realhumanthoughtprocessesthatoperatethrough
principlesof similarityor analogy,and contagion
(andits inverse,avoidancebehavior).While magical beliefs are irrationalfrom the perspectiveof
Western scientific logic and causality, in other
as productsof the
words,they areunderstandable
evolution and operation of human mental
processes,andtheyare,forthisreason,veryattractiveto allpeople."Thereis nothingmagicalin sympatheticthinkingas such";Pyysiainen(2004:104)
then observes,"itis just avoidancebehaviorgone
wild."The naturalappealof "magicalthinking,"in
this sense, explains why contemporaryWestern
athleteswill consistentlywear the same socks or
shoes on game day, in the hope that it will bring
them luck, even while they may otherwise be
entirelyrationalthinkers.Magicalthinkingis thus
a universalattributeof humancognition,not the
productof "primitivementalities."
One key implicationof the history of anthropologicalresearchon this topic is the fact thatnot
all ritualsrelatedto game animals(or otherkinds
of food-stuffs)necessarilyinvolvemagic,properly
defined.Reichel-Dolmatoff(1967), for example,
discussesthe supernatural
negotiationsconducted
at pictograph sites by South American Tukano
shamanswith an importantspirit known as the
Masterof the Game.This is intendedto guarantee
Keyser and Whitley]
SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART
successfulhuntsby tribalmembersbutit requires

the barteringof human souls for the animals,in
orderto maintaina cosmicbalancebetweenlife and
death.Although in this case depictionsof game
and the desire for huntingsuccess are linked,the
art does not involve sympathetichuntingmagic.
Instead, it represents a religious ritual that is
directed,like many such ceremonies,to the wellbeing of the tribalgroupas a whole. Shamanistic
rock artthen may be directedat one level at subsistence (just as some totemic rock art originates
in increaserituals;see Layton 1992),butthis need
not involvemagic.
Sympathetic Magic and Rock Art
Sympathetichuntingmagichaslongbeenproposed
as an explanationfor rock art (e.g., Breuil 1952;
Grant1968; Heizer and Baumhoff 1962; Kehoe
1990,1996;Nissen1994;Reinach1903).Although
very widely applied- from the 20,000-year-old
"fallinghorse"paintedin Lascaux to images of
game impaledby arrowsdrawnin westernNorth
Americaduringthelast500 years- it was (atbest)
very loosely defined, if in fact defined at all, in
termsof specificreligiousbeliefs and ritualpracdiscussionsof magic
tices.Indeed,anthropological
in generalterms and sympathetichuntingmagic
specifically,andtheirimplications,haveeffectively
been ignoredby archaeologists.The resultwas an
interpretationbased more on vague ideas about
putativeprimitivementalitiesthananthropological
fact,becauseregardlessof anyempiricalevidence
that archaeologists cited in its favor, the basic
assumptionstill was that any shamanisticritual
concernwithsubsistencenecessarilyinvolvedsympatheticmagic.
Although hunting magic interpretationsanimatedrockartresearchforthefirsthalfof thetwentieth century,they reached a state of empirical
exemplary
implausibilityby the 1960s.Particularly
herearethe worksof HeizerandBaumhoff(1959,
1962), whose thesis implied that even nongeometricmotifswerecreatedfor
representational
of
magic, and Grant,who
sympathetic
purposes
went so far as to claim that:"Wherevernaturalistic animalrockpicturesarefound,it is almostcertaintheyweremadeas huntingmagicorto increase
the supplyof game"(1967:32).
Criticalanalysesof the huntingmagicinterpre-
tationbegan to appear,worldwide,shortlythereafter(e.g., Bahn1991; ClottesandLewis-Williams

1998;Leroi-Gourhan1967;Lewis-Williams1974,
1981, 1983;Mundy1981;Rector1985;Ucko and
Rosenfeld 1967; Whitley 1982a, 1994a, 1998b).
These pointed to ethnographicdata denying any
direct connection between rock art and hunting
magic,meanwhilesupportingalternativeinterpretationsfor the originandfunctionof the art.They
also foundbetter-fitexplanationsfor motif assemblages and individualpanels in otherexplanatory
models.And they notedthe failureto findsupport
for the implications of the theory in the wider
archaeologicalrecord,such as faunalcollections
recoveredfromassociateddepositsthatmimicked
the frequencyof animalsportrayedin the rockart.
Given the lack of independentsupportfor most
huntingmagicproposals,criticsrightfullyassailed
thehypothesisas reducinghunter-gatherer
religion
and symbolismto little more thansubsistence- a
positionthatflies in the face of any understanding
of comparativereligion, or of the known comsymbolicsystems.
plexity of hunter-gatherer
The huntingmagic hypothesiswas effectively
discreditedas a resultof this criticism,especially
in westernEurope,southernAfrica, and western
NorthAmerica.One resultof the relaxationof the
intellectualstrangleholdit had held over rock art
interpretationis a developingappreciationof the
rangeof potentialoriginsfor,andfunctionsof, rock
art, especially in western North America. This
appreciation has resulted from ethnographic
research(e.g., Francisand Loendorf2002; Hann
et al. 2005;Keyser1987;KeyserandKlassen2001;
Keyser et al. 2002; Michaelis 1981; Schaafsma
1981; Sundstrom 2002; Whitley 1982b, 1992,
1994a, 1998a, 2000); carefulethnographicanalogies (e.g., Boyd 2003; Hays-Gilpin 2005); and
structuralanalyses of rock art data, per se (e.g.,
KeyserandKlassen2001:74-91; Sundstrom1989).
These studiesindicatethatwesternNorthAmerican rockartwas createdduringvision questingby
shamans and non-shamans, by both men and
women duringgroupandindividualpubertyinitiations, and to commemorateritual pilgrimages.
it mayportraysupernatural
Furthermore,
spiritsor
incidents,mythic actorsor events, clan symbols,
andthe acquisitionor documentationof individual
or groupstatus- to citejust some of the identified
possibilities.
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
Butthedevelopingpictureof variabilityin rock

artorigin and functionbegs an obvious question:
What about sympathetichuntingmagic? Critical
to this debate has been the use of ethnographic
analyses.While the initialstudiesin some regions
yielded unequivocalresultsdenying any connection between huntingmagic and rock art within
their areas of study (e.g., Lewis-Williams 1981,
1983; Whitley 1992, 1994b, 1998b), continued
ethnographicresearchin westernNorthAmerica
hasrevealedsubstantialregionalvariabilityin specificaspectsof hunter-gatherer
shamanisticrockart
Hann
et
al.
2005;
(e.g.,
Keyser1989, 1992;Keyser
et al. 2004, 2005; Whitley 1992, 2000; Whitleyet
al. 2004). One aspect of this variabilityis ethnographicevidenceforthecreationof rockartspecifically in relationto sympatheticmagic, used for
purposesof sorceryin Californiaandthe northern
Plains;anotheris supportfor sympathetichunting
magicmoregenerallyon theColumbiaPlateauand
possiblythenorthernPlains(Figure1).Wediscuss
the evidence for these two kinds of shamanistic
rock artin turn.
Sympathetic Magic and Sorcery
Californiaand the GreatBasin have particularly
rich recordsof hunter-gatherer
rock art (e.g., see
Whitley2000).Althoughthepatternis farfromperfect, Steward( 1929) firstobservedthatpictographs
tend to concentratein the mesic portionsof Californiawhereaspetroglyphsare more common in
the desert regions, including the Great Basin.
Depictionsof gameanimalsarealsomorecommon
in the desert,withthebighornsheepby farthepredominantmotif. The Coso Rangepetroglyphs,in
eastern California, are perhaps the best-known
example(Whitley1994a, 1998a, 1998b),with the
Cosos estimatedto containroughly50,000 depictionsof bighornsalone.Discussionsof sympathetic
tended
magic in this regionhave, understandably,
to emphasizethis corpusalongwith the relatedart
in easternCaliforniaandwesternNevada.
studiesin CaliforniaandtheGreat
Ethnographic
Basinhavefoundno evidenceassociatingrockart
withhuntingmagic(e.g.,Christenson1993;Mundy
1981;Rector1979, 1985;Whitley1994b,1998b),2
despitethe frequentlyrepeatedbut largelyunsupportedassertionsof Heizer and Baumhoff(1959,
1962), Grant(1967, 1968) andothers,anddespite
[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006
the existenceof substantialethnographicevidence

for antelopehuntingmagic amongNumic speakers in the GreatBasin (e.g., Park1938).3Because
of the traditionalconflationof huntingmagic as
fully equivalentto sympatheticmagic in the rock
artliterature,the rejectionof huntingmagicin this
case might be taken to imply that sympathetic
magic played no partin the rock art of this large
region. In fact, the ethnographicrecord demonstratesthat at least some rock artoriginatedfrom
ritualpracticesfoundedon this last type of magical practice,but that this had nothingto do with
hunting,game,or subsistence.Sympatheticmagic
in Native Californiainstead was tied to sorcery.
Ethnographicaccountsfrom three separatetribal
groupssupportthis inference.
The firstexamplelinkingartto sorcerythrough
the applicationof sympatheticmagic pertainsto
living along the lower Colorado
Yuman-speakers
River,withinthe southernGreatBasin.According
to anearlyaccountprovidedby Trippel( 1889:582),
"Thebewitchergenerallygoes off to a quietplace
to makehis spell. He drawsan imageof his victim
andwitha sharpenedstickpiercestheimagewhere
the heartis."
Use of rock art for sorcerywas confirmed(in
conceptat least) in this regiona few decadeslater
by John Peabody Harrington(Papers, National
Archives,SmithsonianInstitution:
Anthropological
SouthernCaliforniaand GreatBasin- Mojave.).
His unpublishedMojavenotes statethat"A fresh
pictureor image of a personwas held to be doctor's (i.e., shaman's)business,capableof causing
grief or even death."
A second exampleinvolves recentlycollected
ethnological data from the Yokuts living in the
southernSierraNevada(Whitley2000).4An informant has described a pictographof one human
shootinganotheras a paintingmade to eliminate
anenemyshaman(Figure2). Thatthisimpliessorceryis indicatedby thefactthatshamanicbewitchmentin this regionwas conceptualizedin termsof
shooting"magicalairshot,"a disease object, into
anintendedvictim.Magicalairshotwas glossedas
"doctor's arrow,"with the Yokuts and Western
Mono termstoiyoshandpohage mapaga,respectively, used interchangeablyfor "air shot" and
"arrow"
(Gayton1948:276).Theimplicationis that
actsof shamanicbewitchmentwereeffectuatedby
paintingthese same incidentsat rock artsites.
Keyser and Whitley]
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 perhapsmost dramaticexample

of sympathetic magic was collected from the
Gabrielino,from the Los Angeles basin, also by
JohnPeabodyHarrington.Accordingto his informant:
Longago,beforetherewerewhitepeoplehere,
a wizard [i.e., bewitching shaman]at San
Gabrielcauseda greatdroughtandfaminethat
Estelastedforfiveyears.Maria'sgrandfather
vanandhiswifelivedthroughthisperiod.This
sorcererhad a tablet or stone on which he
painted many figures of men and women
bleedingfromthemouthandfallingdown.He
took this out andexposedit to the sun,praying for sickness.For five yearstherewas no
rain, and many people died of hunger.. . .
Finallysomeothermenspiedon themanwho
was causingall this and saw him going into
the hills. . . . They followed the tracksand
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- presumably because of the nature of this pictograph. This image represents a full rock art panel.
foundthetabletorwhateverit waswiththeevil
figureson it, andtheythrewit into the water.
Thenthe droughtendedandit rained[Blackburn1975:276].
This accountincludesa numberof referencesthat
are easily understoodin culturalcontextbut that,
otherwise,may appearobtuse. Mention, first, of
drawingsof people "bleedingfromthe mouthand
falling down" describes individualsthrowninto
trance(mostlikelyfromsoultheft,a commonform
of bewitchment;see Whitley1994a,2000). Exposing the pictographto the sun, the source of all
power,is a referenceto enhancingits supernatural
potency.And the nullificationof its evil effects
throughimmersionrefersto the widespreadbelief
in the cleansingpowerof water(Applegate1978;
Blackburn1975). In this examplea paintedtablet
was createdto cause sickness and drought.This
misfortunewas not reverseduntil its cause- the
painted tablet- was itself cleansed by physical
action.
Keyser and Whitley]
Art(possiblyincludingrockart)was createdfor
purposes of sorcery-relatedsympathetic magic
beyond Californiaand the GreatBasin, as illustratedby Crowethnography(Lowie 1922). Some
Crowshamansdrewhumanor animalimagesthat
they then rituallydefaced to kill or incapacitate
enemies or rivalshamans(Lowie 1922:344-346).
Lowie's informantsreportedseveralinstances
of sorcerer'ssympatheticmagic.Among themare
the following:
Big Ox got angry.He drewa humanimageon
the ground,made a hole in the heart,blew
smokeon it, andeffacedthepictureaftersayonearth,
ing,"Youshallbe thepoorestcreature
finallyyou shallbe blindandhaveto crawlon
yourhandsandfeet."This cametrue[Lowie
1922:345].
OneCrowsays thatthe pictureof the enemy
is sometimesdrawnneara riverbank,withthe
thesorcerer
headnearestthewater,whereupon
smokes towardsit and burnsincense. The
watercomesto washtheimageaway,andthe
soonerit does so, the soonerthe victim will
die.Anotherinformantsaysthata rockorbaxe
weed was placedon the pictureandin order
toblindhisenemytheshamanwouldputashes
or charcoalon the eye of his image. [Lowie
1922:345].
Dung-face[ashaman]. . .wentintohistentand
badehisbrotherbringanoldbuffaloskull.On
the forehead he drew horse tracks and
announcedthatthese were the tracksof the
... He
horsesstolenby [hisrival]Jackrabbit.
told his brotherto takethe headandthrowit
into the water,saying"theseareJackrabbit's
will
horses."Dung-facesaid,"ThenJackrabbit
nothaveanyhorses.". . . TheEnemycameand
stole all of Jackrabbit's horses [Lowie
1922:346].
The motifscreatedduringsorcery- animaltracks
andhumanfigures- area stapleof rockartin Crow
territory(see Keyserand Klassen2001), suggesting that some such designs may well have been
shaman/sorcerer's
images,even if no directethnographic accounts specifically involving rock art
haveyet been identified.
In each of these ethnographiccases the implication is that the motifs have a materialitythat,
throughritualmanipulationor defacement,could
be harnessedto visit misfortuneonto others.The
motifsin this sense arenot depictionsof naturalor
even supernatural
eventsbut insteadwere thought
to be trueobjects,with the manipulationof these
materialobjectsimplicatedas the physicalcauses
for these actions,andtheirconsequences.Even in
some regionswherethereis no evidenceof hunting magic rock art, sympathetic magic was an
importantpartof nativereligious practice,and a
componentof some rock art.
Hunting Magic
The ColumbiaPlateauhas a particularlyrichrock
artrecord.It is notableboth for the total number
andwidespreaddistributionof sites, as well as for
the importantconcentrationsfoundalongthe middle and lower ColumbiaRiver,in Hell's Canyon,
in the KlamathBasin,andin the SimilkameenValley of south-centralBritish Columbia (Keyser
1992). Compositionsapparentlyshowinghunting
are common in the region's art (Corner 1968;
Keyser 1992, 1994; Keyser and Knight 1976),
occurringthroughoutthe areaas the second most
frequenttypeof composition.Onlythevisionquest
composition,showinga humanfigurejuxtaposed
with a rayedarc,an animal,or a geometricfigure,
is moreprevalent(see Keyser1992:45-^48,
61-62,
79-80; Keyseret al. 1998:22,48, 56-57; Keyseret
al. 2004:38-42, 72-73, for descriptionanddiscussion of examplecompositions).
Manyof these huntingscenes appearas elaboratecompositionsinvolvingwhatappearto be drive
lane fences and/or people and dogs channeling
quarryanimalsto waitinghunters(Figure3). Others (Figure4) are simplerdrawingsshowing animals piercedwith a spearor arrowor caughtin a
corralorsnare;orhuntersusingspear,atlatl,orbow
andarrowto shootelk, deer,mountainsheep,bison,
andeven a sturgeon.Suchhuntingimagesrangein
age fromthe lateArchaicthroughthe LatePrehistoricperiod,thoughmostdatewithinthelast 1,500
years(Keyser1992;Keyseret al. 2004). Huntingrelatedartincludesbothpaintedandpeckedexamples. Occasional scenes are drawn as isolated
panels,butmorecommonlyhuntingcompositions
arefoundat sitescontainingotherrockartimagery
10
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"in a. Both a and b are full rock art panels.
that was apparentlyproducedas vision quest art

(Keyser1992;Keyseret al. 2004, 2005). All of the
speciesin thesehuntingscenesaresignificantgame
animalsfor ColumbiaPlateautribes,andthe detail
and intricacyof many of these compositionshas
led authorsto argue that they representhunting
magic rock art (e.g., Corner1968; Keyser 1989,
1992, 1994).
Contrastingwith many other regions of the
world, where no supportfor hunting magic has
beenfound,thePlateauethnographicrecordin fact
providessupportfor this interpretationin several
forms and from a variety of tribal groups. This
starts with direct evidence for hunting magic.
Althoughthis does not immediatelylink the practice to the art,substantialadditionalevidencelinks
the acquisition of hunting powers to the vision
quest,shamanisticdreamexperiences,androckart.
In short,huntingmagic appearsto have been one
of the potentialpowersobtainedin visionsby both
shamansand pubertyinitiates, and such visions
could re-occur throughout an individual's life

(Hannet al. 2005; Keyser1992;Keyseret al. 1998;
Yorket al. 1993).
Directevidencefor sympathetichuntingmagic
was obtained from the Sanpoil and Nespelem,
whose hunt leaders made "enclosures"of small
stakeson theadviceof theirpowerfuldeerguardian
spirits.These enclosureswere thoughtto hold the
deer by magic so thatmany could be killed (Ray
1939:78-79). Thatthis magicalpracticewas conducted following the suggestions of their spirit
theconnectionbetweenhunthelpersdemonstrates
and
the vision quest,since it was
ing magicpower
vision
the
preciselyduring
questthata supplicant
communed with their spirit helper and might
receive such instructions.
Indeed, the importanceof obtaining hunting
power during the vision quest is illustrated in
numerousways,providingsubstantialindirectsupport for huntingmagic. Among the Lillooet, for
example,a youngmanon a visionquestmadesmall
Keyser and Whitley]
11
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.
deerfiguresof barkor grass5andshotat themwith

a bow and arrows
Furthermore,on the ColumbiaPlateau,unlike

in otherregionsof the far west, there
prayingthathe mightbecomeanexpertarcher.
If he mademanyhits,he wouldbecomea successful hunter.Afterwardshe suspendedthe
figures, with the arrowsin them, from the
branchof somefirtree[Teit1906:266].
was no tabuagainstkilling [or eating]one's

guardiananimal.On the contrary,the animal
expectedto be killed.A manwithdeerpower
wasalwaysa goodhunter,fordeerwouldcome
to himtobekilled.When.. .one'sguardian
was
killedit was customaryto keep some partto
insuresuccess on subsequentventures[Ray
1939:188].
Thisappearsto be a referenceto sympatheticmagic

("whatI do to the miniaturedeerI will do laterin
life to realdeer"),butit is in relationto generalhunting powerratherthana specifichuntingepisode.
We also see examples of hunters' "magical
thinking"associatedwithrockartsites.Amongthe
Thompson,Teit(1930:344)notes thatwhen passing by places associatedwith the "LandMysteries" (which frequentlyhad associated rock art)
hunters made small offerings of various items
includingshotandgunpowder,"thusinsuringgood
weatherduringtheirstay,andgoodluckwhilehunting."Almosta centurylaterAnnieYorkverifiedthat
suchofferingsweretypicallyleft atpictographsites
(Yorket al. 1993:83).Certainlyofferingsarewidely
knownto havebeenplacedatrockartsites,butthis
referenceis specificto hunters,theirweaponry,and
theirluck,providingfurthergeneralsupportforthe
plausibilityof huntingmagic.
For the Sanpoil, Nespelem, Kutenai, and

Okanogan,deer and otheranimalsgave powerto
the hunterprecisely so he could kill them (Cline
1938:134; Malouf and White 1952), and "hunt
leaders always had guardianspiritswhich aided
them in hunting,such as deer or antelope"(Ray
1939:78).The hunt leaderexercisedcontrolover
fora successfulhunt,and
theextensivepreparations
"often [he] was helped by his guardianspirit.. .
[who] appearedin a dreamand told him how he
couldturntheluckof theparty"(Ray1939:78-79).6
Teit (1906:279) indicatesfurtherthat among the
Lillooet "customsintendedto propitiateanimals
were numerous."
One of the earliest references to Columbia
Plateauhuntingdreamsis documentedby theanno-
12
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006
Figure 5. Painting by Fr. Nicolas Point, about 1842, showing Couer d'Alene chief, Ignace, obtaining hunting power in a
vision. Note the component parts of this vision: Ignace's bow and arrow, the carnivores (hunters) including the bear
immediately behind Ignace, the hunter's assistants (dog and horse), and the deer in the background. Image IX RMS C918 courtesy of Midwest Jesuit Archives, St. Louis.
tatedpaintingsof the JesuitFather,Nicolas Point,

between1842and 1847 (Peterson1993:104-105).
Missionizing to the Flathead,Pend Oreille, and
Coeurd' Alene, Pointwas madeprivyto the hunting power vision of the Coeur d' Alene chief,
Ignace,andto similardreamsby similarlyinvested
Flatheadhunterspreparingforthefallbuffalohunt.
In one Pointpainting(Figure5) we see Ignace
receivinghis medicinepower in a vision. This is
basedon Ignace'sown first-person
recollectionand
of
this
vision
to
Point,and it portrays
explanation
his
Ignaceduring visionaryexperience.Recliningin
isolationawayfromthevillage(indicatedby a house
in the background),Ignace clutcheshis bow and
arrowas he is approachedby both small (fox/coyote,weasel)andlarge(bear,cougar)carnivores,
prey
(the deer),and domesticatedanimals(horse,dog).
Thebearis showngrapplingwithIgnace,whowears
a necklaceof its claws,whilethedeerstandsfarthest
away,overlookingthe entirescene.
Based on analyses of severalof Point's other
paintings(see Keyser2000:21-24, 66-69; Peterson 1993:67-75, 106-108; Rocheford1996), we
knowhe was a faithfulrecorderof thedetailsrelated
to him by the Indians,and we have biographicart
examples(e.g., Point'spaintingof Ambrose'swar

exploits that perfectly parallelsAmbrose's own
drawingof the samesubjects[Keyser2000:22-23,
67]) thatdemonstratethathe used his artisticskill
to graphically depict his informant'sstories as
closely as possible, in their own terms,given the
switchin mediafromspokenlanguageto narrative
art. We also know that Point and his colleague,
FatherDe Smet,wereintimatelyinterestedin, and
close observersof, native religious beliefs, since
they soughtto replace(or at least augment)these
with Catholicism.We can be confidentthen that
Point's painting capturesIgnace's experience as
Ignacerecountedit.
Thesymbolismof theresultingportrayalis striking. It is clearthatIgnacereceivedpowerfromthe
huntersof the animalkingdom(carnivores)andaid
from the hunter'sdomesticatedassistants(horse,
as Peterson(1993:105)
dog).Butmostimportantly,
this
is
all
overseen
notes,
by "thedeer,a guardian
animal spirit, [who] bestows powerful hunting
medicines on Ignace." Likewise, Palmer
(1998:319) identifiesthe deer as the spirithelper
who gives Ignace"hishuntingmedicine. . . .[and]
huntingprowess."
Keyser and Whitley]
13
Figure 6. Painting by Fr. Nicolas Point, 1844, showing the "Consecrationof 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 furthersupportedby Point's artistic symbolism. In Point's

composition,the deer- painted"centerstage"at
the fully lighted meadow's edge- is the most
clearlydepictedimage,andtheonlyonewho stands
in thebeamsof lightprojectingdownwardfromthe
sun up in the heavens.Point routinelyused such
symbolism(e.g., light beams, centralposition)to
emphasizethemostsacredaspectof his religiously
oriented paintings (see Peterson 1993:93,
104-108).
The importanceof th6 deer as the mediatorof
huntingpower is underscoredby anotherPoint
painting(Figure6), which shows Salish (Flathead
and Pend Oreille) men having their weapons
blessed before the annualbuffalo hunt- a long,
dangerousexpeditionacrossthe RockyMountains
out ontothe Plainsterritoryof theirBlackfeetenemies. In this paintingthe huntersrequestthe protection and blessing of Saints Michael (for
warriors),Raphael(for travelers),andHubert(for
hunters).The focus of the depictionis a stag with
a cross betweenits antlers- the Catholicsymbol
of St. Hubert,patronof hunters.Point notes that
the Salishspecificallychose St. Hubertbecausehe

fit their own conceptions. That his symbol- a
deer- was adoptedby the Salishto representtheir
hunters'powersays as muchaboutthe symbolism
of theirnativereligionas it does aboutthe Jesuits'
effortsto substituteCatholicteachingsfor native
beliefs.7
The directconnectionbetweenhuntingpower
visions and rock art is providedby Teit (1930),
Cline (1938), and York (Yorket al. 1993). One
paintedscene in Okanogancountry,for example,
was identifiedby Teit'sinformants(Teit1930:286)
as a corralwitha manandhis guardianspiritinside
it and game animalscoming to the entrance.The
symbolismof a hunt leaderand his helperluring
game is striking(Figure7f).
Annie York (York et al. 1993:70-71, 124,
160-161, 186-189), a ThompsonCNlaka'pamux)
Teit'sinformantwhenshe idenelder,corroborates
tifiesbothanimalsin snares(orcorrals)anda depiction of a drivelane fence with associatedanimals.
Initially,she describes a pictograph(Yorket al.
1993:Fig. 86, page 124) as "Thetwo deer in the
circle is the snare they used thatsnareto catch
14
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006
Figure 7. These images, pictographs from the rock art of southern British Columbia, have all been ethnographicallyidentified as hunting imagery. They show a progression from speared animals, to a spirit being spearing or "corralling"animals beneath its wings, to animals in corrals. Note the spirit helper bird in f.
them"(Yorket al. 1993:124).Later,she says of a

similardepiction:
Deerandgoat,thethingsthatthehunterwants.
The deer and goat are [caught]8in a snare.
That'sthe way you writeit. It showshe has
caughttheminhismind[Yorket al. 1993:16 1].
Both of these images arequitesimilarstructurally
to thatidentifiedby Teit'sinformants(cf. Figures
7d ande).
Otherpaintings(Yorketal. 1993:Fig.104,pages
156-157) are said to show a distinctivehunter's
powerfigure(Yorket al. 1993:171) bothin the act
of spearingananimal(Figure7b) and"keeping[the
animals] in place" (York et al. 1993:151-157,
164)- in other words, controlling or capturing
them(Figure7c). Speakingof thisfigure,sheclaims
that:
thewingsof thishuntercreature.. . capturethe
animalin thedreamer'smind,[andlater]This
manchangeshimselfintoanowl [thehunter's
spirithelper]when he dreamsand he flies
aroundandnoticesthedeerandgoatsandanimalshe wants.. . .Youcan sendthatpowerto
findyourdeerfor you [Yorket al. 1993:156,
164].
At anothersite showinga deersnareabovea stickfiguremanwith closely associatedquadruped,she

states:
Thathuntercould easily speakto an animal.
Whenyouaretrained[,]
theanimal[s]don'trun
That's
from
away
you.
whythatpictureis like
that.Theanimalsareverycloseto them[York
etal. 1993:70].
Later,shedescribesa mountaingoatwitha lineprojecting upwardfromits back as a spearedanimal:
Besideit [a sceneof fouranimals]is the goat
that the dreamerhas speared [Yorket al.
1993:163].
And finally,she describesa therianthropicfigure
withhumanhead,body,andhandsbutdeerantlers
andhooves as Deer Man:
Whenyoudreamthat,yougoingtobe ahunter.
Thepowerof shemitz,DeerMan,is strong
This[artistresponsibleforpaintingthispictograph]wouldbe a younghuntergoing up in
thatSteinvalley,andhe'ddreamit in there
Thisis the storyof a dreamof huntingpower
[Yorketal. 1993:91-92].
Keyser and Whitley]
15
Table 1. ColumbiaPlateauEthnographicEvidence for HuntingPower and HuntingMagic.

HuntingPower
Associated with
Vision Quest
X (1)
HuntingPower
Associated with
Rock Art
Hunting
Luck
Sympathetic
Hunting
Magic
X (1)*
X (2)
? (4)
TribalGroup
Lillooet
X (2)
Sanpoil/Nespelem
X (4)
X (3, 4)
X (3)
Thompson
X (5, 6)
Coeur d'Alene
X (6)
Flathead
X (5)
X (3, 7)
Okanogan
X (2)
General
X (2)
* The sympatheticmagic in this case concerns generalhunting
prowess ratherthan specific huntingtrips.
(1) Teit 1906; (2) Ray 1939; (3) Teit 1930; (4) Yorket al. 1993; (5) Peterson 1993; (6) Palmer 1998; (7) Cline 1938.
Somewhatearlier,Clinehadconfirmedthe fact
thatmen paintedrockartimages of theirguardian
spiritas a way to announcetheir power- which
includedbothhuntingandwarpower- statingthat:
Whenone had performedsome specialfeat,
as in huntingor war, he might declarehis
powerto thosewhohadwitnessedthedeedor
benefitedby it [Cline1938:136].
As is obviousfromtheforegoing,on theColumbia Plateauthere is ethnographic,ethnohistoric,
androck artevidenceall pointingtowardan associationbetweengame animalguardiansandhunting power, along with dreams involving these
guardians(Table 1). Throughoutthe region there
is an absenceof anytabooagainstkillingor eating
one'sguardian,and,in fact,a numberof references
indicatethatdeer or antelopeguardiansappeared
in visionsto offerhuntingpower.Moreover,hunters
and hunt shamansperformedpropitiatoryrituals
bothto ensureandcommemoratehuntingsuccess.
And informantsfromtwo differentethnicgroups,
andfromthreedifferentgenerationsspanningthe
last century,9identifiedrock artimages as hunting
power or indicatedthat such images were made.
Thesevariedreferencesprovidea compellingweb
of evidence,whichdemonstratesthatat leastsome
ColumbiaPlateaurock art was linked to hunting
concernsandpractices.Further,thereis atleastone
ethnographic account of sympathetic hunting
magic,raisingthe possibilitythatsome of the rock
artitself mayhavebeenmadein huntingmagicrituals.
Unlike the case for sympatheticmagic related
to sorceryin California,the GreatBasin, and the
referencesrelatingColumPlains,theethnographic
bia Plateaurock artdirectlyto huntingmagic are

ambiguous.While they demonstratethat hunting
powerwas often obtainedfroma spirithelperduring the vision quest, none specificallystates that
the art was made to aid a particularhuntingtrip;
that is, as a magical act. Generalhuntingpower,
afterall, is not huntingmagic, but insteadis more
akinto thevariouskindsof potenciesthat,throughoutthefarwest, shamansandothervision questers
might obtain,includingthe power to heal, make
rain,findlost objects,win at gamblingor guarantee a long life. Still, four facts and circumstances
cause us to proposethat at least some Columbia
Plateaurock art probablyresultedfrom sympathetichuntingmagic.
The firstis the clearimportanceof subsistence
concernsin Plateaurock art, as expressedby the
above-describedimportanceof acquiringhunting
powers,combinedwith the documentedexistence
of sympathetic hunting magic among the Sanpoil/Nespelem(Ray 1939:78-79, detailedabove).
This providesa relevantcontextwithinwhich the
potentialimportanceof sympatheticmagicis obvious. Second, that art was createdfor purposesof
(sorcery-related)
sympatheticmagicin threeneighboring culture areas (California, Great Basin,
Plains)increasesthe plausibilitythatsympathetic
huntingmagic rock artmay have been paintedor
engravedon the Plateau.
Third,evidence for huntingmagic relatedart
also occursin the neighboringPlainsculturalarea.
Some Crowshamansdrewbuffalotracksandperformedmagic ritualson them thatwere intended
to lure bison close to hunters in times of need
(Lowie 1922:356-357). The examples cited by
Lowie were drawnon the tipi floor (or on a bison
skull) but rock art in Crow country(Keyserand
16
AMERICANANTIQUITY
[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 different directions, and/or (3) are painted with different orientations to 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).
Klassen2001:176)has severalsiteswithbisonand
deer tracksthat may representthis same activity
conductedas rock art.
Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, we
believethereis a possiblearchaeologicaltestimplicationfor the creationof huntingmagicrockart.10
Unlike sorcery,which might be a rareor unusual
event, hunting is obviously common. It follows
then that,if huntingrelatedrock artderivedfrom
individualacts of huntingmagic as opposedsimply to the acquisition of hunting powers, it too
shouldbe common. Huntingmagic rock artthen
shouldincludemultipleexamplesof game, killed

game,andhuntingscenesat specificsites andpanels, includingmotifsthatappearto be the sameage
and that, intuitivelyat least, appearto have been
createdby the sameartist.11
Huntingpowervisionin
would
art,
contrast,
ary
logicallyconsistof individual motifs or scenes, ratherthanrepeatedacts
creatingidenticalart,conductedat the same location.
A review of the publishedColumbiaPlateau
rockartliteratureprovidesseveralkey examplesof
panels and sites (Figure8) thatmeet the expecta-
Keyser and Whitley]
17
Table2. ColumbiaPlateauRock Art Sites IllustratingPotentialHuntingMagic.

Pierced
Animals
1
5
"Killed"
Tribal
Multiple
Hunting Power
Position
Examples*
Imagery
Territory
EbRk-7
1 (3)
Thompson
Seton Creek
1**
4(2-5)
Thompson
Deer Corral
1 (5)
1
Okanogan
1
PierreJohn
1 (3)
Okanogan
Dunrobin
1 (5)
Okanogan
4
Braeside(DlQv-16)
6(2-3)
Okanogan
1
1 (3)
Kutenai
Tye
1 (4)***
WashoutCreek#2
Kutenai
2 (2-5)
Pavillion Lake #2
Thompson
* The numberon the left is the numberof subjectivelyidentifiedartists(not the numberof human
figures),while the second number(in parentheses)totals the numberof differentanimalsor groups of animalsassociatedwith each artist.
** This is one of the spearedanimals.
*** The prey here are sturgeon.
EbRk-7fromYorket al 1993, all others from Corner1968.
Site
tionsof huntingmagicactsas opposedto theacquisition of hunting powers during a vision quest

(Table 2). Perhapsnot coincidentally,the great
majorityof these panelsarelocatedin the aboriginalterritoryof theLillooet,Thompson,Okanogan,
- exactlythosegroupswith
andSanpoil/Nespelem
the strongestethnographyrelatingthe vision quest
androck artto huntingpower.In southernBritish
Columbiatherearefive sites thatshow killed animals on individual panels. These are animals
impaledby spearsor arrowsin exactlythe sortof
symbolismthatTeit (1906:250) reportedto have
been generallyrecognizedas an indicatorof hunting success:
If a stickwere stuckin the [miniaturegrass]
figure[of a deer],it meanttheanimalit representedhad been killed. If [numerous]sticks
werestuckintheminiature
figures- it meant
so manyof theseanimalshadbeenkilled.
Someof theseanimalsarekilledby one weapon
buthave additionalweaponsaddedto "kill"them
againandagain(Figure8c). One mountaingoat (a
speciesfrequentlyshownhuntedat pictographsin
the mountainousregion of west-central British
Columbia)is piercedfrombehindwith one arrow,
shotfromabovewith an elaboratebow andarrow,
andshotagainwitha second,adjacent,almostidentically elaboratedbow and arrow.The elaborately
detailedbow andarrowdepictionsshow a stylistic
signaturethatstronglysuggeststhey were painted
by thesameartist.Finally,nearbyis a secondmountain goat paintedfacing a differentdirectionbut
whichis also killedby an arrow.Both the goat and

the arrowshow a stylistic signaturethat strongly
suggeststhiscompositionwas paintedby the same
artistthat paintedthe thrice-killedexample. The
similaritiesbetweenthetwo goatsandtheweapons
usedto kill themareexactlywhatone wouldexpect
from one person'sritualreuse of this site and its
images to practicehuntingmagic.
Nine sites showrepeatedoccurrencesof groups
of one to four animalsbeing pursuedor actually
killed by a hunter.These compositionsshow the
animalspiercedwith spearsor arrowsor arrayed
with humansin explicithuntingscenes. Based on
subjectivestylisticcriteria,a successfulhunterwill
oftenhave as manyas threeassociatedindividuals
or groups of animals. Probably the best site is
named Braeside (Corner1968:68-69), where at
least six differenthunterseach paintedmultiple
animals (Figure 8b). Corner (1968:68-69) also
notedthe stylisticsignaturesthatdifferentiatevarious groupsof animalsandhuntershere.Another
in two differentcomsite shows a spearfisherman
positions (almostcertainlythe same man as indicatedby bothbody style anddistinctiveheaddress)
killingsturgeon,andtwo othersturgeonanda longbodied otter-likeanimal (all apparentlydrawnin
the same hand)have been groupedbetweenthese
two scenes.An insectform,which,like the "otter"
is probablya spirithelper,is paintedat the upper
left. Corner (1968:92-93) notes that all of the
images on this panelare stylisticallyidenticaland
we concurthatthey representthe handof a single
artist.
In summary,thereare severalsites in southern
18
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
British Columbiawith obvious huntingimagery

composedof repeatedgame animals,killed game,
and huntingscenes drawnin what appearto the
styles of severalindividualartists.Each of these
sitesis exactlywhatwe wouldexpectto findif rock
artwas rituallyreusedto performacts of hunting
magic.
Othersites showingreuse of panelsto paintor
carveexamplesof killed or huntedanimalsoccur
along the lower ColumbiaRiver (Keyser 1994:5,
17; Keyseret al 2004:79-80; Loring and Loring
1982:126-127).12Oneof theseis apetroglyph(Figure 4a) that deserves special mention precisely
becauseit appearsto have been reused.This is an
elk/deer being shot by a bowman in a typical
ColumbiaPlateautraditionhuntingscene. But to
thisoriginalcompositionhasbeenaddeda second,
smaller hunterrekilling the animal. Differential
varnishingsuggests that significanttime elapsed
betweenthese two episodes,but it definitelyindicatesritualreuseof theimage,anda huntingmagic
ritualis a reasonableexplanation.
The Columbia Plateau ethnographicrecord,
then, demonstratesconclusivelythata significant
amountof its rock art was relatedto subsistence
concernsand practices(e.g., huntingpower).We
believe thatthereis quiteplausibleevidence,even
if not proof,thatsome of this hunter'sartdoes, in
fact, documentsympathetichuntingmagic.
Hunting Magic Or Not?
To propose,as we do, that some corporaof rock
artcontainingapparentgame animalsandhunters
concerns(probaoriginatedin subsistence-related
bly includinghuntingmagic), whereasothercorpora with ostensibly similar motifs were not
subsistence-relatedraises the obvious question:
how canthesetwo originsandfunctionsof rockart
be inferred?As with all archaeologicalinterpretation, an assessmentof multiplelines of independent evidence,allowingfor "inferenceto the best
hypothesis"(KelleyandHanen1988), is the basis
for analysis.This can be illustratedby comparing
the Coso Rangepetroglyphsof easternCalifornia
(Figure9), createdby Numic speakingshamans,
with a series of superficiallysimilarimages (both
pictographsand petroglyphs)from the Columbia
Plateau.
TheinferencethattheCoso corpusdidnotorig-
[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006
inate in concernswith food generallyor hunting

magic specifically startswith ethnographicevidence but also includes contextualand comparative archaeological data, along with the
iconographicattributesof the art. It requiresan
assessment not only of the evidence counting
againstthe subsistencehypothesis,butalsotheevidence supportingan alternativeinterpretation.
Withrespectto ethnography,positiveandnegative evidence must be considered.Direct ethnographic data, thematicevidence (in the form of
historicalmotifs), and chronometricand relative
datingdemonstratethatGreatBasin rock artwas
madeby Numic-speakingpeoples,andthatit continuedto be made at least into the nineteenthcentury(FrancisandLoendorf2002; Loendorf1999;
Whitley 1994a, 1998a,2000; Whitleyet al. 1999).
containssubstantialdisWhileNumicethnography
cussion of shamanistichunting magic practices
(e.g., Kelly 1932;Park1938;Steward1941;Stewart 1941), this concernsantelopecharming,with
consistentdenial of any huntingmagic relatedto
bighornsheep (e.g., Steward1933, 1941, 1943).
Directethnographicdenialof thebighornhunting magic, further,is matched by ethnographic
commentarysupportingan alternativeorigin and
functionfor the art, which involved shamanistic
practicespertainingto the acquisitionof a (usually
animalin form) spirithelper,unrelatedto acquiring game. Moreover,amongthe Numic therewas
a tabooagainsteatingone's spirithelper(see Whitley 1992, 1994a, 1998a,2000).
In addition to this ethnographic evidence,
archaeologicalassociationsandcontextsfailto support the idea that the art relates to hunting.For
example, Rector (1979, 1985) has observedthat
rockartsites areoftenassociatedwithvillages,not
animalgametrails,as HeizerandBaumhoff( 1959,
1962) originallyclaimed.Christenson(1993) has
notedthattherockartsiteslackthe associatedartifacts (huntingtools, butcheryremains)thatmight
be expectedif the artoriginatedin thekindof hunting magic suggestedby Grant(1968). Moreover,
Grant(1968) arguedthat an association existed
betweenthe artandcertainrock structures,which
he interpreted as hunting-related: blinds and
"dummyhunters."While it is true that there are
occasionalassociationsbetweenrockfeaturesand
rock artpanels,two empiricalfacts count against
theirinterpretationas huntingrelated,in addition
Keyser and Whitley]
19
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 (presumablyan 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, however the distinctly plantigrade feet, suggesting that this figure is a conflation of 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 theabsenceof theexpectedartifactassociations.
First,manyof thesefeaturesaretoo poorly(andin
somecasesimpossibly)sitedto haveservedas hunt
related;i.e., they aretrue"blinds"in the sense that
theylackthe viewshedrequiredfor effectivehunting. But second,andeven moreimportantly,by far
the largestconcentrationof these featuresoccurs
nowhereneareitherrock artor huntingareas,but
in the desolateflatsof the PanamintValley.(Partly
for these reasons, and partlyusing analogy with
substantialethnographicdata on theiruse on the
Plateauand northernPlains,Whitleyet al. [2004]
interpretthese stonefeaturesas vision queststructuresof differentkinds.)Basedon themassiveconcentrationof bighorn petroglyphsin the Cosos,
Grant (1968) furtherinferred that an intensive
bighornsheep huntingcult existed in the western
GreatBasin, tied to huntingmagic. While Hildebrandtand McGuire(2002) have emphasizedthe
importanceof intensivebig-gamehuntingduring
the Middle to Late Archaic,this occurredbefore
the majority of the art was made. As Whitley
(1994a) has noted, all of the chronologicalevidence indicatesthatthe florescenceof Coso rock
artoccurredduringa periodof diminishedhunting
importance,not duringits peak (cf. Whitleyet al.
1999).
The thirdline of evidenceinvolvesthe iconographyitself.Figure9a showsa putativeCosoarcher
wearinga bighornsheephuntingdisguise(cf. Grant
1968).Ethnographicevidenceagaindiscountsthis
interpretation, as the bighorn sheep rack was
acknowledgedas too heavy to use in this fashion
(Fowler1992;Steward1941, 1943;Stewart1941).
(Note that,while these ethnographicdataspecificallyareNumic,theypertainto physicalconstraints
that should transcendethnographicor temporal
context.)Figure9b, in contrast,appearsto depict
a sheepwhohasbeenimpaledwitha spearorarrow.
Note here the motif's plantigradefeet ratherthan
cloven hooves. Both examples, in other words,
include nonrealisticcombinationsof humanand
sheep attributesand,in this sense, arebetterinterpreted as conflationarybeings: they are neither
20
AMERICANANTIQUITY
humannor sheep,but a combinationof both.

Thisiconographicequivalencebetweenhuman
and sheep, and the nonrealisticnatureof the corpora more generally,are illustratedin additional
ways. Wellmann(1979), for example,has noteda
significantstatisticalassociationbetweenthesuperpositioningof sheep and so-calledpatternedbody
Theselastfiguresareheavilystylanthropomorphs.
izedhumanswho appearto be attiredin thepainted
ceremonialshirts that were worn by the Numic
shaman(Whitley1998a, 2000). As shownin Figure9c, in fact,someof thesheeppetroglyphsthemselvesare"patterned-bodied,"
furtheremphasizing
theequivalancebetweenhumanandanimal.Moreover,the fantastic(ratht thanrealistic)natureof
the sheepis demonstratedby examplesof doubleheadedanimalsand animalswith more thanfour
legs.
The literalist,Eurocentricinterpretation
of the
Coso petroglyphs,in otherwords,confusedidentificationwith meaning,assumedthat any concern
withgamespeciescouldonlybe relatedto diet,and
only superficiallyconsideredthedatasupportingor
counteringthe huntingmagic interpretation.An
empiricallymore detailedexaminationof the evidencesuggestsinsteadthatpetroglyphssuchas Figure9a arenot"huntersandtheirquarry"
butbighorn
intotheiranimalspirit
sheepshamanstransforming
helpers, using the most common shamanic
metaphor- death- to symbolically signal their
entryinto an alteredstate of consciousness(e.g.,
Whitley 1994c, 1998c). This identificationgains
credencefromthefactthata shamanandhis helper
were semanticallyand epistemologicallyindistinguishable.Whatis thenshownis not simplya preoccupationwith diet but instead an example of
complex symbolic thought wherein the autosacrificeof the shamanwas necessaryto enactspiritualwork,undertakenby enteringtrance.
In contrastto the Coso RangeGreatBasinrock
art, ColumbiaPlateauhuntingscenes are iconographicallydistinct.Thesecompositionsstressrealism of both human and animal participants
(includingdogs andancillaryhumanswho act out
documentedrolesas driversof the
ethnographically
game) andfrequentlyincludedrivelane fences or
corralstructures(Corner1968:59,62, 77; Keyser
1992:38, 80; Keyser and Knight 1976:6; Teit
1930:286;Yorketal. 1993:124,161).Nurseryherds
of deercomposedof does andfawnaresometimes
[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006
illustrated(Keyser1992:38,40, 55), andit wasjust

suchherdsthatwouldhavebeenthe focus of communal hunting. Other animals in these scenes
includedeer,elk, caribou,mountainsheep,mountaingoats,bison, andeven a sturgeon- all sought
aftergame species. Weapons,especiallybow and
arrows, are also frequently and very carefully
depicted (Corner 1968:38, 99; Keyser 1992:52,
79-80, 87, 115; Keyseret al. 2004:44).
Occasionallythere are clear depictionsin the
northernPlateauof spiritbeings (see Keyseret al.
1998 for detaileddiscussion of spiritbeings and
how they are readily differentiatedfrom "real"
humans) assisting in the hunt- mimicking the
ethnographicallyreportedspirithelperssoughtas
hunters'tutelaryspirits(Cline1938:133-134;Malouf and White 1952:3; Ray 1938:80;Yorket al.
1993:91). But there is only one example, out of
more than50 known,of a therianthropeshooting
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.
In short,most of these scenes (Figure4) appear
to be huntingimagery,andone (Figure4a) shows,
by virtueof differentialrevarnishing,the addition
of a latersecondhunterto an originalcomposition
showinghunterandquarry.
Among ColumbiaPlateautribeswe havegood
ethnographicevidence linking vision questing,
includingthe creationof rockart,with subsistence
concerns and practices- much of which comes
from the northernpartof the region occupiedby
theThompsonandOkanogantribes(Teit1930:286;
Yorketal. 1993:70,154, 162-163 andsummarized
above).A key question,however,is whetherthis
artwouldbe identifiableas suchwithoutthisethnographic documentation. Setting aside, for a
moment,the directethnographicreferencesidentifyingthesevariouspictographsas hunters'power,
we assembleda groupof these images (including
examplesfrom both tribes'territories)thatshows
a progressionfromspearedanimal,througha birdlike spiritbeing spearingthe same species of animal, throughthis same spirit being "corralling"
these animalsunderextendedwings, throughanimals inside corralsthat mimic the shape of the
spiritbeing's extendedwings (cf. Figure7). The
last of these "corralling"compositionsshows the
Keyser and Whitley]
humanandhis bird-likespirithelperdrivingand/or
luring game into a corral.This symbolism is so
strikingthat,withcarefulanalysis,it wouldalmost
certainlyhave been possible to interpretthis as
artbasedon theiconographyalone.
hunting-related
As in the GreatBasin case, negativeevidence
is also important.Intheentiretyof thePlateaurock
art ethnographicrecord- notably acknowledged
by Layton(2001:3 13) as therichestrockartethnographyin theworld- thereis no statementanywhere
interthatcontradictseitherthesubsistence-related
pretationof theserockartcompositionsorthepossibilitythatsomecouldhaveresultedfromhunting
magic. Perhapsequally important,there are no
known examplesof killed or corrallednon-game
animals, further emphasizing the correlation
betweentheseillustratedactivitiesandsubsistence
patterns.
Ethnographicdatain bothcases thenarea criticalaspectof theempiricalevidence,withthesetwo
cases advantaged, in this regard, in ways that
excludetrulyprehistoricarttraditions.Theseexamples nonethelessprovidesomeparametersforevaluating prehistoric rock art in the absence of
ethnographicevidence.These include:
1. The natureof the iconography,at the level of
potentialcompositionsof motif types (e.g., possible drive scenes); motif types themselves (e.g.,
gameversusnon-gamespecies);andspecificattributesof motifs(e.g., thepresenceorabsenceof nonrealistic features, such as human-animal
conflations,in the compositions);and
2. Additional relevant associated forms of
archaeologicalevidence,such as the natureof the
faunalremainsfromthe culturein question,or the
presence of possible game fetishes, such as the
split-twigfigurinesthatwere apparentlymadefor
purposesof huntingmagicon theColumbiaPlateau
andin theAmericanSouthwest(Teit1906;Wheeler
1949).
Insummary,attentionto scientificmethod,careful analysisof corporaof rock art,anda considerationof thelargerassociatedarchaeologicalrecord
shouldhelp clarifymost analyses.
21
of the recentcriticismsof huntingmagic interpretations(e.g., thoseproposedfortheEuropeanPaleolithic, South African San, and Great Basin
Shoshoneanrockart)appearto be entirelycorrect:
insofaras it is reasonableto conclude,thereis no
good evidence, archaeologicalor ethnographic,
withinthese regions,to interpretthe originof this
rock art in termsof huntingmagic. But this conclusion is not universal;it needs to be qualified
regionally.Based on the ColumbiaPlateau evidence presentedhere, this does not precludethe
possibilitythatsome rockartin otherregionsmay
have originatedin huntingmagic or, in a parallel
fashion,in sympatheticmagic more generally,as
suggestedby theNativeCalifornianandCrowdata.
Sympatheticmagic, includinghuntingmagic, are
for this reasonbest still retainedas potentialinterpretivehypothesesduringthe initialstagesof rock
artanalysis,foranydataset collectedfroma region
wherethesehypotheseshavenotalreadybeenevaluated.
of theplauSecond,however,thedetermination
sibility of either hypothesis in specific regional
cases necessarilymustbe based on criticalanalyses of empiricalevidence (e.g., Lewis-Williams
1983).Weemphasizethispointbecauseof its implicationsfor symbolicanalysisin archaeologymore
huntingmagic interpretagenerally.Traditionally,
tions were generally not based on anything
approachingcareful empirical study (as the critiques so quickly revealed). Instead they were
mostlypromotedby unsupportedassertions,themselves originatingin littlemorethanimplicitprimitivist attitudes about prehistoric peoples. Key
amongthese is the romanticandandrocentricconsocietiesin terms
ceptualizationof hunter-gatherer
of "Manthe Hunter,"contributingto simplisticliteralist interpretations:because in some specific
cases rock artportraysgame animalsandpossible
"huntingscenes,"it was assumedto necessarily
and,therefore,exclusivelysymbolizehunting.The
traditionalhunting-magic interpretations,then,
needto be understoodas the intellectualparallelto
the equationof female figurineswith a "Goddess
cult"(e.g., Gimbutas1984, 1990).This lasttheory
- amongNew Agerscertainlyhas its adherents
Hunting Magic, Sympathetic Magic, and
it
is
from
but
in
fact
far
plausible,as archaeologiRock Art Interpretation
cal analysishas shown(e.g., ConkeyandTringham
We emphasizethree final points by way of con- 1995;Meskell 1995; Russell 1993).
The problemwith thesekindsof literalistinterclusion.Thefirstinvolvesthesimplefactthatmany
22
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
pretationsis not solely the absenceof any critical

analysisof empiricalevidence.Equallyproblematic is their underlyingfailure to recognize that
symbolsareintrinsicallypolysemous;thatis, they
have multiple levels of meaning (e.g., LewisWilliams2001). The symbolismof traditionalcultures can then be expected to potentiallydepict
"identifiable"phenomenasuch as game animals
andwomen,becausetheseareobviouscomponents
of prehistoricdaily life. But to inferfromthis first
fact thatthe meaningof these ancientsymbols is
somehowimmediatelyobvious to the contemporaryWesternobserverconflatesidentificationwith
interpretation(Lewis-Williams 1990), thereby
pushing Eurocentricintellectualarroganceto an
extreme.As Price(2002:44^15)in facthas emphaof a non-Westernpast
sized,adequateapprehension
firstrequiresrecognizingtheculturalandcognitive
differencesthatthis implies, along with when and
whereWesternintellectualmodelsareappropriate,
andwhen they arenot.
We emphasize,finally,that while we feel that
thereis solidevidencelinkingColumbiaPlateauto
subsistence practices and concerns, and even a
likelycase for somehuntingmagicrelatedrockart,
we do notby this suggestionimplythatall or most
Plateaurockartoriginatedin theseritualactivities.
It is in fact clearfromthe ethnographicrecordthat
Plateaurock artwas made in at least six different
ritual contexts, by four social groups, including
shamans, puberty initiates, warriors,and those
undergoinglife crises. In additionto the acquisition of hunting powers, and probably hunting
magic, the art itself representsvision questing,
shamanicrituals,mortuaryrituals,statusacquisition throughwar honors,and mythical"witnessing" (Cash Cash 2005; Hann et al. 2005; Keyser
1992, 2000; Keyseret al. 1998, 2004, 2005). The
pervasivenessof hunting-relatedartthen remains
to be determined,witha parallelcircumstancepertaining to sympatheticmagic rock art in Native
California.The sum of bothcases, in otherwords,
emphasizesthe potentialdiversityin origin,function, and meaningof these two regionalrock art
expressions.
References Cited
Applegate,RichardB.
1978 ?Atishwin:TheDream-Helperin South-CentralCalifornia.Socorro,New Mexico, BallenaPress.
[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006
Bahn,PaulG.
1991 Where'sthe Beef? The Myth of HuntingMagic in
PaleolithicArt. In RockArt and Prehistory,edited by P.
BahnandA. Rosenfeld,pp. 1-13. OxbowMonograph10,
Exeter,England.
Blackburn,ThomasC.
1975 December's Child:A Bookof ChumashOralNarratives.Universityof CaliforniaPress,Berkeley.
Boyd, CarolynE.
2003 RockArtof theLowerPecos. TexasA&M University
Press,College Station.
Boyer,Pascal
200 1 ReligonExplained:TheEvolutionaryOriginsof Religious Thought.Basic Books, New York.
Breuil,Henri
1952 FourHundredCenturiesof CaveArt.Centred'Etudes
et de DocumentationPrehistoriques,Montignac,France.
Cain,H. Thomas
1950 Petroglyphsof Central Washington.University of
WashingtonPress,Seattle.
CashCash,Phillip
2005 Tiim'enin': IndigenousConceptionsof Columbia
PlateauRock Art. In Talkingwith the Past: TheEthnographyof RockArt, edited by J. D. Keyser,G. Poetschat
andM. W. Taylor.Portland,Oregon,in Press.
Christensen,DonaldD.
1993 RockArt andItsArchaeologicalandEnvironmental
Context:A Studyat OpalMountain,MojaveDesert,California.Pacific Coast ArchaeologicalSociety Quarterly
29(2):27-63.
Cline,Walter
1938 ReligionandWorldView.In TheSinkaietkor Southern Okanagon of Washington,edited by L. Spier, pp.
133-182. GeneralSeries in Anthropology6. Menasha,
Wisconsin.
Clottes,Jean
1998 The 'ThreeCs': FreshAvenues TowardsEuropean
PaleolithicArt.In TheArchaeologyof Rock-Art,editedby
C. Chippindaleand P. S. C. Tac.on,pp. 112-129. CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge.
Clottes,Jean,andJ. DavidLewis-Williams
1998 TheShamansof Prehistory:TranceandMagic in the
PaintedCaves.HarryN. Abrams,New York.
Conkey,MargaretW.
1997 Making a Mark: Rock Art Research. American
Anthropologist99:168-172.
Conkey,MargaretW., andRuthE. Tringham
1995 Archaeologyand the Goddess:Exploringthe Contoursof FeministArchaeology,In Feminismsin theAcademy, edited by D. C. Stanton and A. J. Stewart, pp.
197-247. Universityof MichiganPress,AnnArbor.
Conway,Thor,andJulieConway
1990 Spiritson Stone: TheAgawa Pictographs.Heritage
DiscoveriesPublication#1. San Luis Obispo,California.
Corner,John
1968 Pictographsin theInteriorof BritishColumbia.Wayside Press,Vernon,B.C.
E. E.
Evans-Pritchard,
1937 Witchcraft,Oracles and Magic among the Azande.
ClarendonPress,Oxford.
Firth,Raymond
1958 HumanTypes:An Introductionto Social Anthropology (1938). ThomasNelson and Sons, London.
Fowler,CatherineS.
1992 In the Shadowof Fox Peak:An Ethnographyof the
Cattail-EaterNorthernPaiutePeopleof StillwaterMarsh.
CulturalResourceSeries Number5. StillwaterNational
Keyser and Whitley]
WildlifeRefuge. Fallon,Nevada.
Francis,JulieE., andLawrenceL. Loendorf
2002 AncientVisions:PetroglyphsandPictographsfromthe
WindRiverandBighornCountry,WyomingandMontana.
Universityof UtahPress,Salt LakeCity.
Frazer,Sir JamesG.
1933 The GoldenBough:A Studyin Magic and Religion
(1911). Abridgededition.MacMillan,London.
Gayton,AnnaH.
1930 Yokuts-MonoChiefsandShamans.Universityof CaliforniaPublicationsin AmericanArchaeologyand Ethnology 24:361-420.
1948 YokutsandWesternMono Ethnography.University
of CaliforniaAnthropologicalRecords10:1-290.
Gimbutas,Maria
1984 TheGoddessesand Godsof OldEurope.Thamesand
Hudson,London.
1990 The Language of the Goddess. HarperRow, New
York.
Grant,Campbell
1967 RockArt of the AmericanIndian.PromotoryPress,
New York.
1968 RockDrawingsof the CosoRange,InyoCounty,California. MaturangoMuseum Publications.China Lake,

California.
Hann,Don, JamesD. Keyser,andPhillipM. CashCash
2005 ColumbiaPlateauRockArt:A Windowto the Spirit
World.In Ethnographyand North AmericanRockArt,
edited by D. S. Whitley.AltaMiraPress, WalnutCreek,
California,in press.
Hays-Gilpin,Kelley
2005 Conceptionand Birthin PuebloanRock Art, Landscape,andArchitecture.InEthnographyandNorthAmerican RockArt, edited by D. S. Whitley.AltaMiraPress,
WalnutCreek,California,in press.
Hedges,KennethE.
1976 SouthernCaliforniaRockArtAs ShamanicArt.American IndianRockArt 2:126-138.
1992 ShamanisticAspectsof CaliforniaRockArt.In CaliforniaIndianShamanism,editedby L. J. Bean,pp.67-88.
BallenaPress,Menlo Park,California.
Heizer,RobertF, andMartinA. Baumhoff
1959 GreatBasin Petroglyphsand Game Trails.Science
129:904-905.
1962 PrehistoricRockArtof Nevadaand EasternCalifornia. Universityof CaliforniaPress,Berkeley.
Hildebrandt,WilliamR., and Kelly R. McGuire
2002 The Ascendance of Huntingduring the California
MiddleArchaic:An EvolutionaryPerspective.American
Antiquity67:231-256.
Hudson,D. Travis,andGeorgiaLee
1984 FunctionandSymbolismin ChumashRockArt.Journal of New WorldArchaeology4(3):26-47.
Kehoe,ThomasF.
1990 CorrallingLife. In TheLife of Symbols,editedby M.
LeCronFosterandL. J. Botscharow,pp. 175-193. Westview Press,Boulder,Colorado.
1996 The Case for an EthnographicApproachto Understandingthe EuropeanPaleolithic.In Spurender JagdDie JagdnachSpuren,editedby I. Campen,J. Hahn,and
M. Uerpmann,pp. 193-202. TiibingerMonographienzur
Urgeschicte11, Tubingen,Germany.
Kelley,JaneH., andMarshaP. Hanen
1988 Archaeologyand the Methodologyof Science. Universityof New Mexico Press,Albuquerque.
Kelly,IsabelT.
1932 Ethnographyof the SurpriseValleyPaiutes.Univer-
23
sity of CaliforniaPublicationsin AmericanArchaeology

and Ethnology31(3):67-210. Berkeley.
Keyser,JamesD.
1987 A Lexicon for Historic Plains Indian Rock Art:
IncreasingInterpretivePotential.Plains Anthropologist
32:43-71.
1989 The Magic of the Hunt.TheLongbowVI(3):12-13.
1992 IndianRockArtof the ColumbiaPlateau.University
of WashingtonPress,Seattle.
1994 Indian Petroglyphsof the Columbia Gorge: The
JeanneHillisRubbings.J.Y.Hollingsworth,Portland,Oregon.
2000 The Five CrowsLedger:BiographicWarriorArt of
the FlatheadIndians.Universityof UtahPress,SaltLake
City.
Keyser,JamesD., andTimothyJ. Brady
1993 A WarShirtfromthe SchochCollection:Documenting IndividualArtisticExpression.Plains Anthrpologist
38:5-20.
Keyser,JamesD., andMichaelA. Klassen
2001 Plains Indian RockArt. Universityof Washington
Press,Seattle.
Keyser,JamesD., andGeorgeC. Knight
1976 The Rock Art of WesternMontana.Plains Anthropologist 21(7 1):1- 12
Keyser,JamesD., GeorgePoetschat,PhillipCashCash,andDon
Hann
1998 TheButteCreekSites:SteiwerRanchandRattlesnake
Shelter.OregonArchaeologicalSociety Publication11.
Keyser,JamesD., GeorgePoetschat,TerrenceFifield,andCarolynne Merrell
2002 PictographCave: Rock Art from SoutheastAlaska.
INORA(InternationalNewsletteron RockArt) 31:13-22
Keyser,James D., George Poetschat,and MichaelW. Taylor
(editors)
2005 Talkingwith the Past: TheEthnographyof RockArt.
Portland,Oregon,in press.
Keyser,James D., Michael W. Taylor,and George Poetschat
(editors)
2004 Echoes of the Ancients: Rock Art of the DallesDeschutesRegion.OregonArchaeologicalSociety PublicationNo. 14. Portland.
Keyser,JamesD., andDavid S. Whitley
ReferenceforColumbiaPlateau
2000 A New Ethnographic
RockArt:Documentinga Centuryof Vision QuestPractices. INORA(InternationalNewsletter On Rock Art)
25:14-20.
Layton,Robert
1992 AustralianRockArt: A New Synthesis.Cambridge
UniversityPress,Cambridge.
2001 EthnographicStudy and SymbolicAnalysis. In The
Handbookof RockArtResearch,editedby D. S. Whitley,
pp. 31 1-331. AltamiraPress,WalnutCreek,California.
Andre.
Leroi-Gourhan,
1967 Treasuresof PrehistoricArt. HarryN. Abrams,New
York.
Lewis-Williams,J. David
1974 Rethinkingthe SouthAfricanRock Paintings.Origini 68:229-256.
1981 Believingand Seeing: SymbolicMeaningsin SouthernSanRockPaintings.AcademicPress,LondonandNew
York.
1983 IntroductoryEssay: Science and Rock Art. In New
Approachesto SouthernAfricanRockArt,editedby J. D.
Lewis-Williams,pp. 2-13. The SouthAfricanArchaeological Society GoodwinSeries4.
1990 ReviewArticle:Documentation,AnalysisandInter-
24
AMERICANANTIQUITY
pretation:Dilemmasin RockArtResearch.SouthAfrican
ArchaeologicalBulletin45:126-136.
2001 Monolythismand polysemy: Scylla and Charybdis
in RockArtResearch.In TheoreticalPerspectivesin Rock
ArtResearch,editedby K. Helskog,pp. 23-39. Institute
for ComparativeResearchin Humanculture,Oslo, Norway.
Loendorf,LawrenceL.
1999 Dinwoody Tradition Petroglyphs of Northwest
Wyomingand theirRelationshipto Coso MountainPetroglyphsof EasternCalifornia.AmericanIndianRockArt
25:45-56. Phoenix,DeerValleyRockArt Center.
Loring,J. Malcolm,andLouise Loring
1982 Pictographsand Petroglyphsof the OregonCountry.
Part1: ColumbiaRiverandNorthernOregon.Instituteof
Archaeology,Universityof Californiaat Los Angeles.
Lowie, RobertH.
1922 TheReligionof theCrowIndians. AmericanMuseum
of Natural History, Anthropological Papers
XXVII):309^44.
Malinowski,Bronislaw
1948 Magic,ScienceandReligion,and OtherEssays.DoubledayAnchorBooks, GardenCity,New York.
Malouf,CarlingI., andThainWhite
1952 Recollectionsof Lasso Stasso. MontanaState UniversityAnthropologyand SociologyPapers 12.
McClure,RichardH. Jr.
1978 An ArchaeologicalSurveyof Petroglyphand Pictograph Sites in the State of Washington.The Evergreen
State College, ArchaeologicalReportsof Investigations,
1. Olympia,Washington.
Meskell,Lynn
1995 Goddess, Gimbutas,and 'New Age' Archaeology.
Antiquity69:74-86.
Michaelis,Helen
1981 Willowsprings:A Hopi PetroglyphSite. Journalof
New WorldArchaeology4(2):2-23.
Molyneaux,BrianL.
1977 Formalismand Contextualism:
AnHistoriographyof
RockArt Researchin the New World.UnpublishedM.A.
thesis,AnthropologyDepartment,TrentUniversity.
Morris,Brian
1987 AnthropologicalStudiesof Religion:AnIntroductory
Text.CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge.
Mundy,W. Joseph
1981 An Analysis of the ChalfantCanyonRock Art Site,
MonoCounty,California.InMessagesfromthePast:Studies in CaliforniaRockArt, editedby C. W. Meighan,pp.
123-140. Monograph20. Instituteof Archaeology,Universityof California,Los Angeles.
Nissen, KarenM.
1994 Prayfor Signs? PetroglyphResearchin the Western
GreatBasin of NorthAmerica.In RockArt Studiesin the
Americas, edited by J. Steinbring,pp. 67-76. Oxbow
Monograph45. Oxford.
Palmer,GaryB.
1998 Coeurd'Alene.InHandbookofNorthAmericanIndians: Volume12, Plateau. Editedby D. E. Walker,Jr.,pp.
313-326. SmithsonianInstitution,WashingtonD.C.
Park,WillardZ.
1938 Shamanismin WesternNorthAmerica:A Study in
CulturalRelationships.NorthwesternUniversityStudies
in the Social Sciences No. 2. Evanston.
Peterson,Jacqueline
1993 SacredEncounters'.FatherDeSmetand the Indians
of theRockyMountainWest.Universityof OklahomaPress,
Norman.
[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006
Price,Neil S.
2002 The VikingWay:Religionand Warin Late IronAge
Scandinavia.UppsalaUniversity,Departmentof Archaeology andAncientHistory,Aun 31, Uppsala,Sweden.
Pyysiainen,Ilkka
2004 Magic,MiraclesandReligion:A Scientist's Perspective.AltaMiraPress,WalnutCreek,California.
Rajnovich,Grace
1994 ReadingRockArt:InterpretingtheIndianRockPaintHisingsof theCanadianShield.NaturalHeritage/Natural
tory,Toronto.
Ray,VerneF.
1939 CulturalRelations in the Plateau of Northwestern
America. Publications of the Frederick Webb Hodge
AnniversaryPublicationFund3. SouthwesternMuseum,
Los Angeles.
Rector,Carol
1979 The Functionof East Mojave Rock Art.American
IndianRockArt3: 151-156. AmericanRockArtResearch
Association,Whittier,California.
1985 RockArtas HuntingMagic:AnthropologicalFactor
Fiction? San Diego Museum of Man Rock Art Papers
2:127-132.
Reichal-Dolmatoff,Gerardo
1967 Rock Paintingsof the Vaupes:An Essay of Interpretation.FolkloreAmericas27(2):107-1 13.
Reinach,Salomon
1903 L'art et la magie. A propos des peintures et des
gravuresde l'age de renne.UAnthropologie14:257-266.
Rocheford,ThomasM., S. J.
1996 FatherNicolas Point:MissionaryandArtist.Oregon
HistoricalQuarterly97(l):46-69.
Russell,Pamela
1993 The PaleolithicMother-Goddess:Factor Fiction?In
Womenand Archaeology:A FeministCritique,editedby
H. du Cross and L. Smith,pp. 93-99. OccasionalPapers
in Prehistory 23, Departmentof Prehistory,Research
Schoolof PacfificStudies.AustralianNationalUniversity,
Canberra.
Schaafsma,Polly
198 1 Kachinasin RockArt.Journalof New WorldArchaeology 4(2):24-32.
Steward,JulianH.
1929 Petroglyphsof CaliforniaandAdjoiningStates.Universityof CaliforniaPublicationsin AmericanArchaeology and Ethnology24(2). Berkeley.
1933 Ethnographyof the Owens ValleyPaiute.University
of CaliforniaPapers in AmericanArchaeologyand Ethnology 33(3):233-350. Berkeley.
1941 Culture Elements Distributions: XIII, Nevada
Shoshoni.AnthropologicalRecords4(2):209-359. Berkeley.
1943 CultureElementDistributions:XXIII,Northernand
GosiuteShoshoni.Anthropological
Records8(3):263-392.
Berkeley.
Stewart,OmerC.
194 1 CultureElementDistributions:XIV,NorthernPaiute.
AnthropologicalRecords4(3):361^-46. Berkeley.
Sundstrom,Linea
1989 ArchaicHuntingPracticesDepictedin a Northwestern Plains Rock Art Style. Plains Anthropologist
34:149-169.
2002 Steel Awls for Stone Age Plainswomen:Rock Art,
Religion,andtheHideTradeon theNorthernPlains.Plains
Anthropologist47:99-1 19.
Tacon,PaulS. C.
1983 An Analysis of DorsetArt in Relationto Prehistoric
Keyser and Whitley]
Stress.InuitStudies7(l):41-65.
Tambiah,StanleyJ.
1990 Magic, science, Religionand the Scope of Rationality. CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge.
Teit,JamesA.
1906 TheLillooetIndians.Publicationsof the JesupNorth
Pacific Expedition2(5). AmericanMuseum of Natural
History,New York.
1930 The SalishanTribesof the WesternPlateau.Bureau
of AmericanEthnologyAnnualReport45:23-396. Washington,D.C.
Trippel,E. J.
1889 The YumaIndians OverlandMonthly,2nd series.
13:561-584.
Turpin,Solveig, editor
1994 Shamanismand RockArt in NorthAmerica.Special
Publication1. RockArt Foundation,SanAntonio.
Tylor,EdwardB.
1913 PrimitiveCulture( 187 1). Murray,London.
Ucko, PeterJ., andAndreeRosenfeld
1967 PaleolithicCaveArt. McGraw-HillBook Company,
New York.
vonWerlhof,JayC.
1965 RockArtof the OwensValley,California.Reportsof
the Universityof CaliforniaArchaeologicalSurvey65.
Berkeley.
Weber,Max
1965 TheSociologyof Religion,(translatedby E. Fischoff,
editedby T. Parsons).Methuen,London.
Wellmann,Klaus
1979 A QuantitativeAnalysis of Superimpositionsin the
RockArtof the Coso Range,California.AmericanAntiquity44:546-556.
Wheeler,S. M.
1949 More About Split Twig Figurines. The Masterkey
23(5):153-158.
Whitley,David S.
1982a TheStudyof NorthAmericanRockArt:A CaseStudy
from South-CentralCalifornia.UnpublishedPh.D. dissertation,Departmentof Anthropology,Universityof California,Los Angeles.
1982b Notes on the Coso Petroglyphs, the Etiological
Mythologyof the WesternShoshone,and the Interpretation of Rock Art.Journalof Californiaand GreatBasin
Anthropology4:210-222.
1992 ShamanismandRockArtin FarWesternNorthAmerica. CambridgeArchaeologicalJournal2:89-1 13.
1994a By theHunter,fortheGatherer:
Art,SocialRelations,
and SubsistenceChangein the PrehistoricGreatBasin.
WorldArchaeology25:356-373.
1994b Ethnographyand Rock Art in the FarWest:Some
ArchaeologicalImplications.In New Light on Old Art:
RecentAdvancesin Hunter-GathererRockArtResearch,
edited by D. S. Whitley and L. L. Loendorf,pp. 81-93.
UCLAInstituteof Archaeology,Monograph36. LosAngeles.
1994c Shamanism,NaturalModelingandthe RockArt of
FarWesternNorthAmerica.In Shamanismand RockArt
in NorthAmerica,editedby S. Turpin,pp. \-A2>.Special
Publication1. SanAntonio,Texas.
1998a Meaning and Metaphorin the Coso Petroglyphs:
UnderstandingGreatBasin Rock Art. In Coso RockArt:
A New Perspective,edited by E. Younkin,pp.109-174.
MaturangoMuseum,Ridgecrest,California.
1998b FindingRainin the Desert:Landscape,Gender,and
FarWesternNorthAmericanRockArt.In TheArchaeologyofRockArt,editedby C. ChippindaleandRS.C.Tagon,
25
pp. 11-29. CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge.

1998c CognitiveNeuroscience,Shamanismandthe Rock
Art of NativeCalifornia.Anthropologyof Consciousness
9:22-36.
2000 TheArt of the Shaman:RockArt of California.Universityof UtahPress,Salt LakeCity.
2005 Introductionto RockArtResearch.Left CoastPress,
WalnutCreek,California.
Whitley,David S. (editor)
2001 TheHandbookof RockArtResearch.AltaMiraPress,
WalnutCreek,California.
Whitley,David S., Ron I. Dorn,JosephSimon,RobertRechtman,andTamaraK. Whitley
1999 Sally's RockshelterandtheArchaeologyof theVision
Quest.CambridgeArchaeologicalJournal9:221-246.
Whitley,David b., JohannesH. N. Loubser,andDon Hann
2004 Friendsin Low Places:Rock Art and Landscapeon
the Modoc Plateau.In The FiguresLandscapesof Rock
Art: Lookingat Picturesin Place, editedby C. Chippindale and G. Nash, pp. 217-238. CambridgeUniversity
Press,Cambridge.
Whitley,David S., JosephSimon,andRussell Kaldenberg
2001 Archaic(GypsumPeriod)Pictographsat Newberry
Cave. Paperpresentedat the MojaveDesertMillennium
Conference,Barstow,California.
York,Annie, RichardDaly, andChrisArnett
1993 TheyWriteTheirDreamson theRocksForever,Rock
Writingsin the Stein River Valleyof British Columbia.
Talonbooks,Vancouver,B.C.
Notes
1. FollowingTac.on(1993), we use "shamanistic"to mean
"of or pertaining to a shamanic religious system"; and
"shamanic" for "of or pertaining to a shaman, per se
Shamanisticrock artthus includes artmade by non-shamans
butwithinthe contextof ritualsandbeliefs thatareexemplary
of shamanism,as a religious system, whereas shamanicart
originatesin the activities of shamansas (at least part-time)
ritualspecialists.
2. This statement requires qualification concerning a
potential contradicting archaeological (not ethnographic)
case. Whitleyet al. (2001) arguethatthereis potentialarchaeological evidence for Archaic Period hunting magic in the
centralMojaveDesert, California.This consists of a cache of
split-twig figurines recovered from Newberry Cave,
California,and dated to approximately3000 to 4000 B.P.
Pictographsof the same age are also presentat this site, and
the possibilitythat at least some of these were createdin acts
of sympathetichuntingmagic cannot currentlybe ruled out.
This possible exception to our generalization about the
Californiacase illustratesone of our main contentions:rock
art interpretationsmust be based on critical analyses of
empiricalevidence, not on unsupportedassertions.
3. The contrastbetween the substantialethnographicevidence for antelopehuntingmagic amongNumic speakersand
the absenceof ethnographicevidence connectingany kind of
Numic hunting magic with rock art or bighorn sheep is
importantto emphasize.As is well known,the bighornsheep
is by far the dominantrepresentationalimage in the rock art
of this region,andethnographicinformantswere consistentin
theirdenialof any use of huntingmagic to obtainthis species.
26
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
In contrast,there are no examples of antelopein the art that

we know of and, even if there are a few examples, it is still
manifestlyclearthat(1) Numic informantswere quitewilling
to discuss huntingmagic practices;but (2) they denied any
connectionbetween huntingmagic and rock art;and (3) we
can findno significantevidencefor antelopehuntingmagic in
the artanyway(Whitley 1994a, 1998a, 2000). Huntingmagic
as a concept and practicethen was not foreign to the Numic;
solely any connectionbetween it and rock art.
4. These dataare believed to accuratelyreflecttraditional
knowledge about the use and meaning of rock art primarily
because, first, they independentlyconfirm (on a series of
majorpoints) the interpretationof Yokutsrock artdeveloped
from a detailedstudyof disparateethnographicand ethnohistorical sources that extend back to the 1850s (e.g., Whitley
1992, 2000). Second,they correcta minorbutkey errorin the
ethnographicrecordpertainingto the identificationof a bird
species associatedwith shamansand specific rock artmotifs:
the ethnographicrecordmisidentifiesthis as a loon or crane
whereasthe contemporaryYokutsinformantstatesthatit is a
blue heron.Loons in fact do not occurin California,andblue
herons are commonly misidentifiedas cranes (see Whitley
1994b:93).
5. This exampledoes not appearto be evidence for hunting magic, per se, in thatit involves the supplicants'requests
to the spirits to obtain huntingpower. But the creation and
manipulationof small twig or grass animalfigurinesfor purposes of huntingmagic did occur.Among theYavapaiof centralArizona,for example,Malcolm Farmernotes that
one man about35 yearsold told him thatthe stick figures were made by his people. He rememberedwhen
he was a boy the men used to make such figures
beforegoing on a hunt.Before the huntsome twigs of
mulberryor willow would be twisted into the effigies
andplaced in a cave [1948 letterfrom Farmer,quoted
in Wheeler 1949:153].
6. Following widespreadwesternNorthAmericanusage,
"dream"is the gloss for vision, and on the Plateau such
"dreams"were often commemoratedwith pictographs(Teit
1930:194).
7. The ethnographicrecordclearly shows thatseveralanimal species could give huntingpower (e.g., Cline 1938:134;
Ray 1939:78), but for many ColumbiaPlateau groups deer
gave general hunting power, rather than species-specific
power (Malouf and White 1952; Teit 1906:266; York et al.
1993:91-92). This is attestedto by the paintingitself, which
shows the Indians asking the stag to bless their weapons
before setting out on the annualbuffalohunt.
Thatthese Indianswere active but selective consumersof
Catholic ritual is documented by the lamentationsof the
Jesuitfatherswho saw theirteachingsredirectedtowardmore
traditionalbeliefs. As Peterson(1993:97) notes, "The Salish
and Coeurd' Alene. . .did not abandontheir traditionswhen
[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006]
they became Christians.. . .Christianityaddedto, but did not

replace,Indianways of thinkingaboutthe sacred."This may
be best illustrated by Father Mengarini (who was with
DeSmet and Point) who complainedthat"Theprayersof our
Indiansconsisted in asking to live a long time, to kill plenty
of animals and enemies, and to steal the greatestnumberof
horses possible" (Peterson1993:97-98). This culturalmerging of traditionalCatholic and native beliefs supportsthe
inference that appeals to St. Hubert'sstag were not merely
coincidence,but ratheran adaptationof Catholic symbolism
into Salish culture.
8. The original quote has a transcriptionerror at this
point, with "caught"mistaken for "not"by the transcriber
(see Hannet al. 2005). From the context, "caught"is clearly
whatYorkmeantin this passage.
9. Teit's (1930) informantswere interviewed between
1880 and 1910, Cline's (1938) in 1937, andAnnieYork(York
et al. 1993) providedher informationin the 1980s.
10. It is worthnoting this archaeologicaltest implication
occurred to the coauthor (Whitley) least familiar with
Columbia Plateau rock art, who proposed it to the Plateau
specialist(Keyser)as a check for the hypothesis,thinkingthat
it would actuallydisprovethe huntingmagic argument.That
the evidence instead supportsthe making of huntingmagic
rock art demonstratesthat this exercise served as a kind of
blind test of the proposition.
11. One of us (Whitley) once spent considerabletime
recording,measuring,and then statisticallyanalyzinga large
corpusof motifs, in the hopes of identifyingindividualartists.
This provedlargelyunsuccessfuland the intuitivecharacterizationof stylisticallysimilarmotifs seemedbetterable to distinguishone artistfrom the next. This generalizationhas also
been borneout in severalof Keyser's effortsto identify individual artists(Keyser 2000:61-66; Keyser and Brady 1993;
Keyserand Klassen 2001:30-32).
12. The destructionof so many sites along the Columbia
RiverfromThe Dalles, Oregonto Wenatchee,Washington,is
unfortunatein many ways, not the least of which is what data
these sites might have yielded concerningthe huntingmagic
hypothesis. From the scanty historic records documenting
sites such as Rock Island,CrescentBar, PetroglyphCanyon,
Roosevelt,Vantage,andBuffaloCave we findintriguinghints
such as "numerouselk and deer,""numerousquadrupeds..
.[that]often occurredin panels thatdepictedhuntingscenes,"
and "figuresof bison. . .at severalpoints"(Cain 1950:20-24,
27-29; Loring and Loring 1982:40-49, 116-127; McClure
1978:34, 46, 51-53, 69). Unfortunately,we will likely never
be able to document whether these sites showed the same
sortsof individualreuse as do those only a few hundredkilometersnorthin BritishColumbia.
Received February9, 2004; RevisedMay 30, 2005;

AcceptedJune 9, 2005.

Sympathetic Magic in Western North American Rock Art

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Sympathetic Magic in Western North American Rock Art

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Society for American Archaeology

Sympathetic Magic in Western North American Rock Art

SYMPATHETICMAGIC IN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

originand meaningof NorthAmerican

[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006

Keyser and Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

successfulhuntsby tribalmembersbutit requires

tationbegan to appear,worldwide,shortlythereafter(e.g., Bahn1991; ClottesandLewis-Williams

Butthedevelopingpictureof variabilityin rock

[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006

the existenceof substantialethnographicevidence

Keyser and Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

The thirdand perhapsmost dramaticexample

[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006

Keyser and Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006

that was apparentlyproducedas vision quest art

could re-occur throughout an individual's life

Keyser and Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

deerfiguresof barkor grass5andshotat themwith

Furthermore,on the ColumbiaPlateau,unlike

was no tabuagainstkilling [or eating]one's

Thisappearsto be a referenceto sympatheticmagic

For the Sanpoil, Nespelem, Kutenai, and

[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006

tatedpaintingsof the JesuitFather,Nicolas Point,

examples(e.g., Point'spaintingof Ambrose'swar

Keyser and Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

These scholars'observationsare furthersupportedby Point's artistic symbolism. In Point's

the Salishspecificallychose St. Hubertbecausehe

[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006

them"(Yorket al. 1993:124).Later,she says of a

At anothersite showinga deersnareabovea stickfiguremanwith closely associatedquadruped,she

Keyser and Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

Table 1. ColumbiaPlateauEthnographicEvidence for HuntingPower and HuntingMagic.

bia Plateaurock artdirectlyto huntingmagic are

[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006

shouldincludemultipleexamplesof game, killed

Keyser and Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

Table2. ColumbiaPlateauRock Art Sites IllustratingPotentialHuntingMagic.

tionsof huntingmagicactsas opposedto theacquisition of hunting powers during a vision quest

whichis also killedby an arrow.Both the goat and

British Columbiawith obvious huntingimagery

[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006

inate in concernswith food generallyor hunting

Keyser and Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

humannor sheep,but a combinationof both.

[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006

illustrated(Keyser1992:38,40, 55), andit wasjust

Keyser and Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

pretationsis not solely the absenceof any critical

[Vol. 71 , No. 1 , 2006

Keyser and Whitley]

SYMPATHETICMAGICIN WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN ROCK ART

1968 RockDrawingsof the CosoRange,InyoCounty,California. MaturangoMuseum Publications.China Lake,