"Tablas" as a Writing System in Prehistoric Baja California

I had some thoughts about the use of "Tabla's" in Baja and it ended up turning into a bit of an article that I thought I'd share:


Was there any kind of a writing system in prehistoric Baja California?

There are many factors that need to converge in order for a writing system to be recognized in the archaeological record. For instance:

* A writing system must have existed in the first place.
* Something must have been written in a way that it would be preserved for many centuries, such as rock carvings or painted panels that avoid significant weathering.
* The preserved writing must by found and be made available to qualified scholars.
* These scholars must be able to recognize it as being a writing system (as opposed to other forms of expression such as rock art).

Since archaeologists appear to agree that there is no archaeological evidence of a writing system in prehistoric Baja California, one or more of the things listed above has not happened. Let's consider each one in particular:

* A written language must have existed in the first place
If there never was a writing system in the peninsula, it would certainly explain why one has never been recognized there.

* Examples of writing must be preserved for many centuries
The next reason that no evidence of a writing system has been recognized could be because people never wrote down anything using a medium and writing surface that would be preserved long enough for us to find it.

* Archaeological examples must be discovered
Another reason that no evidence of a writing system has been recognized by archaeologists might not be because the evidence doesn't exist, it might be because it simply hasn't been discovered and/or presented to scholars yet. Baja California has been dubbed "The Forgotten Peninsula" by professional archaeologists because of the lack of archaeological research that the peninsula tends to receive from scholars (although this has been getting better in recent years). There is clearly much more that we will learn from future archaeological work. It's usually a good idea to remember the old phrase: "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

* Archaeological examples of an ancient writing system must be recognizable to scholars
It is possible that scholars have evidence of a written language in hand, but have not been able to identify it as such. This is a possibility when it comes to Baja archaeology. For instance, the following engravings still defy an explanation:



Regarding these carvings, Arthur North stated:

"until some method of deciphering these petroglyphs is discovered, all that can be predicated of the earliest Californians is that they were sufficiently advanced in civilization to clothe themselves and to employ an alphabet."

Although modern scholars offer few alternative explanation's to North's description of the panel as an "alphabet", they do take time to call his statement "unsuitable", "brief", "anecdotal", "whimsical" and "just incorrect". (http://www.xaguaro.com/MemoriasCD/page3/styled-32/styled-49/...).

Other than archaeological discoveries, what evidence of writing systems might we expect early observers to recognize among the native Baja Californians at the time of historic contact?

One way we can look for evidence of a writing system in prehistoric Baja California is by studying the early accounts of European interaction with natives of Baja California. Unfortunately, the most prominent early writers were fond of mocking the intelligence of the Indians and the primitive nature of their culture. For instance, there is one humorous story in particular that is repeated by several early authors which seems to prove the absence of any concept of a writing system among the Indians:

"Shortly after the Jesuits began to establish their missions in California one missionary sent two loaves of bread by an Indian neophyte to another missionary with a letter, in which he told him about this gift. The neophyte tasted the bread on the way; and, finding it good, he ate it all. When he reached the missionary to whom he was sent he handed him the letter; and when the bread was demanded from him he denied having received it, as he could not guess who could have told that to the missionary. He was advised that the letter had told it to him. Notwithstanding this, he insisted in the negative, and so was dismissed. In a short time he was sent again to the same missionary with another gift, also accompanied by a letter. On the way he yielded to the very same temptation. But just as he had been betrayed the first time by the letter, he hid it under a stone while he devoured all that he was taking to the missionary. After he had handed him the letter, and had been newly convicted of theft, he replied with this strange simplicity: 'I confess to you Father, that the first letter told you the truth, because it really saw me eat the bread; but this other one is a liar in affirming what it certainly has not seen.'" (Clavigero, 1937, p92)

This is a fun story to read, but it sure seems to put a damper on any hopes that the natives were familiar with written records of any kind, but once you understand the nature of the peninsular writing system, you will find that there is actually evidence of their writing system in this story about the boy and the bread.

Not only was their a writing system being employed and formal training in that writing system being conducted by the natives of the peninsula, but the story we just read actually sheds light on the nature of their writing system.

To understand why early writers denied the existence of a writing system in the peninsula, it is important to understand some things about the writers, the time periods and cultures that they come from, and their reasons for writing. For instance, some of the harshest language by any Jesuit towards the native Californians comes from Johann Jacob Baegert. Baegert's extensive, first-hand ethnographic descriptions are a fantastic source for us to learn from, but he makes no pretenses about how he feels about the intelligence of the natives and the quality of their education and lives:

"As a general rule, it may be said that the California Indians are stupid, awkward, rude, unclean, insolent, ungrateful, mendacious, thievish, abominably lazy, great talkers to their end, and naive and childlike so far as intelligence and actions are concerned. They are an unreflecting people, without worries, unconcerned, a people who possess no self-control but follow, like animals in every respect, their natural instincts."

For the sake of our conversation about why early Jesuits denied the existence of a writing system, it is important to understand that most of the most acclaimed writings were written with the intent to demonstrate to the world what great hardships the Jesuit enterprise had to endure and the great accomplishments that they achieved in the peninsula and how mistreated they were by the crown when they were expelled. In most mission accounts the biases of the authors are very strong.

In many instances the authors were so preoccupied with their own concerns that they improperly characterized the culture of the Indians. In their minds, their own world-view was considered "civilized" while the culture of the Indians was consistently labeled "barbaric". It was not natural for them to conceptualize that a writing system might be substantially different than their own, nor did it serve their purposes to recognize anything other than the "barbarity" of native cultures in their publications and correspondence.

Stories like the one about the Indian boy who thought that the paper was able to see him eat the bread emphasize what the Jesuits saw as the "stupidity" of the natives. These types of stories prop-up the idea that the Jesuits were civilizing the barbarians, so it is natural for them to observe and share such stories. If we're honest with ourselves, we probably see things through a similar world-view when we first read that story ourselves, but let's take a moment now and read it from a different perspective.

Instead of looking at what the Indian boy didn't know, let's look at what he did believe. He believed that the paper that accompanied the bread, a paper which was covered with written characters, could actually talk. From his perspective, that paper had seen him eat the bread and had tattled on him.

When we ask ourselves why he thought that a piece of paper could see and talk, the simplest answer seems like a complete answer: "The missionary told him that the paper said it". But when we learn a little more about native customs and education, we find out that his belief about talking paper probably predated his experience delivering the letter.

There is a particular type of artifact that is often described in early descriptions of the natives and their cultures, and some examples of this artifact have been found in archaeological contexts. Early writers called this type of object a "Tabla", because it is a flat tablet made of wood. Although modern scholars often refer to "Tablas" as artifacts found throughout the peninsula, it has been well-known for many years that there was significant variation in the form and function of various Tablas corresponding to different geographical areas and peninsular cultures (Aschmann, Central Desert, p138).

In the northern parts of the peninsula, Tablas have been recovered that were painted in a similar way to rock art in the area. These northern Tablas had a handle at one end and were used in funerary and other ceremonies. Other Tablas in the northern areas of the central desert were strongly associated with small idols that were carried by the natives.

In the southern areas of the peninsula, Tablas have been found that were irregularly shaped and did not have handles like the northern Tablas, but had a variety holes in them and strangely-contoured edges. An example of this was published by our fellow nomad Lee Massey and has been posted here: (http://forums.bajanomad.com/viewthread.php?tid=61261&pag...)

Another type of Tabla shows up in many ethnographic descriptions is associated with the central portions of the peninsula. Although there are no known examples of this type of Tabla, the references to their existence and purpose are numerous, beginning with a description of their manufacture, the education associated with them, the story of their purpose, and their relation to religious traditions. Speaking of "Guamas", the magical or religious leaders of the natives, Clavigero wrote:

"These Guamas, or charlatans, were selected from those children who seemed to them most astute and fit for this office. After taking them to the most secret places in the woods they trained them in their mysteries, and especially to make on certain little boards some strange figures which they pretended were copies of those which (as they said) the visiting Spirit had left them on departing. These little boards were their books in which they professed to read the nature of illnesses, the remedies suitable for them, the future changes of the atmosphere, and even the destiny of men. They were so careful about the secret of such instructions, and they commended it so earnestly to their pupils that the missionaries could not find out about it until some years had passed." (Clavigero 1937, p112-113)

I want to emphasize the following points from that description:

* In a secluded educational setting, children were formally trained to be Guamas.
* They were taught to keep the education system a secret from the missionaries.
* Part of their education was to learn how to make "little boards".
* They were taught to inscribe the boards with very specific "strange figures".
* The "strange figures" were originally given to them by "the visiting Spirit".
* Part of being trained as a "Guama" was to create exact copies of these "strange figures".
* Once completed, the boards served the natives like books serve us.


At this point we need to ask ourselves three important questions:

1. Why didn't the missionaries recognize tablas as a written language?

2. If these tablas were, in fact, a writing system, why didn't the boy in the story recognize the writing system of the Missionaries?

3. If a writing system already existed in the peninsula, why would the boy ascribe supernatural powers to the missionary's letter, believing that it could see him and then tell the missionary what it saw?


I believe that the answer the first question is that the missionaries didn't recognize it as a written language because it wasn't a written "language". We have no idea what the "strange figures" on the Tablas looked like or represented, but they were not recognizable as an alphabet to the missionaries who saw them. It is probably incorrect to assume that the "strange figures" looked anything like the Great Mural rock art tradition because the natives consistently denied any knowledge of the Great Mural paintings or their significance other than to say that the paintings were created by a race of "giants" that predated their own culture.

Homer Aschmann, one of the most prominent anthropologists to write concerning the central deserts of the peninsula, reviews other references to tablas and helps us understand the significance of Tablas and how they were used:

"in the vicinity of La Purisima Cadegomo, and again at the northern edge of the Central Desert or beyond it, these tablets served in different ways. They were peculiarly the property of the shamans, and bore designs or markings carved or painted on their surfaces. Father Hostell (Stocklein, letter 763), who served at Mission Dolores del Sur, states that the designs on the tablets had a mnemonic function, enabling the shamans to reproduce long rituals, and bore a name, Tiyeicha, which is translated as 'It can speak.' Sales (I:70-71), reporting from the other end of the peninsula, also notes that the thousand signs said to be on one tablet had a mnemonic function. The tablet was used particularly in mourning ceremonies, and possessed one peculiar feature, a hole in the middle through which the shaman repeatedly thrust his tongue during recitals. This behavior may be readily interpreted as suggesting that the tablet was doing the speaking." (Aschmann, Central Desrert, p115-116)

When all the evidence is considered, it is doubtful that Tablas were inscribed with a written "language". Instead, the tablas were used in a mnemonic role. In other words, the inscriptions were meant to remind the Guama/Shaman of historical events, and to help them predict future events.

With this understanding, we can answer the second and third questions that we posed above. In fact, we can see that the answers actually lie in the story about the boy and the bread. In the same way that the missionaries looked at the inscriptions on the Tablas and saw a thousand "strange" or "ridiculous" signs and associated them with a poor concept of a "book", the boy would also have seen the missionary's letter as being inscribed with "strange figures" and would have associated the letter with a Tabla. While the missionaries were probably quite unimpressed with the literacy of the boy, the boy was probably quite impressed with the powerful shamanistic powers of the missionaries' Tabla: the letter.

North of 30 degrees latitude, there was a native tradition called "The Man Come From Heaven". This "Man Come From Heaven" was said to have visited the people in ancient times and his coming was celebrated and reenacted every year at their largest celebration. "The Man Come From Heaven" tradition might be related to the legend of the "visiting Spirit", who the natives say provided them the original "strange figures" that they copied on their Tablas from generation to generation. In both celebrations and funerals, the Tablas were used by the Guamas to help them in their orations as they narrated the history of their people and fortold future events:

"The head shaman, often with assistants, dressed in a hair cape and other ornaments and danced before the whole gathering. Using an inscribed tablet he spoke at length, either eulogizing the dead or boasting of his own relation to supernatural powers. Though the parallel is not mentioned by the missionaries, it is not difficult to see in this performance the equivalent of preaching and encouragement to adhere to the value system of the society." (Aschmann, Central Desrert, p128)

It is very possible that someday one of the Tablas from the central peninsula will be discovered with painted or inscribed "strange figures" on it. If such a Tabla ever does turn up, it will be interesting to see what we can learn about the mnemonic writing system employed in prehistoric Baja California.


[Edited on 3-9-2015 by elbeau]

[Edited on 3-9-2015 by elbeau]

Here is the tabla that was found by Massey... may be the only one not burned/ destroyed?



[Edited on 3-9-2015 by David K]

Yes, that tabla exhibits a hole that might have been used like Sales reported where the Shaman would thrust his tongue through, perhaps symbolizing that the tabla could speak.

Unlike the descriptions of tablas that the Jesuits provided, Massey's tabla is not very rectangular, and is somewhat elongated. The dimensions that were described for tablas were 30" X 15" X 1"...which of course is an approximation, but is significantly different from the one pictured.

Other tablas were discovered in the far north of the peninsula. These had handles and have been associated with La Angostura rock art (http://www.xaguaro.com/MemoriasCD/page3/styled-32/styled-49/...):







I think it is doubtful that these northern tablas are the same as those described as being painted with "a thousand ridiburrous figures". It is possible that Massey's tabla could have been painted or inscribed with the figures, but it would appear that none were apparent when he described the artifact.

Quote: Originally posted by wilderone

"The Rocks Begin to Speak" by Lavan Martineau After learning about this book here, I got this book from Alibris. OMG - it is fascinating. Not only learning about individual figures and their meaning, but interpretation of the panels and learning the ancestral puebloans' stories as told by them. The drawings are so precise in their meaning, and tell so much. Very enlightening to say the least. Thanks, Osprey, for mentioning the book here.

Cindi, can you look at photos of Baja petro sites and provide meaning to them? The circles within circles mean water, yes?

'The squarecircle' and rockart circles (Montevideo)...



and I wonder what this says??? (Petroglyph Park, east of San Quintin)...

Quote: Originally posted by wilderone

"The Rocks Begin to Speak" by Lavan Martineau After learning about this book here, I got this book from Alibris. OMG - it is fascinating. Not only learning about individual figures and their meaning, but interpretation of the panels and learning the ancestral puebloans' stories as told by them. The drawings are so precise in their meaning, and tell so much. Very enlightening to say the least. Thanks, Osprey, for mentioning the book here.

Las Pintas, billboard rock at the top of the canyon and a bit beyond.

Quote: Originally posted by wilderone

...Several Nomads should read the book - we could have an interpretation fest...

Now THAT's a great idea.

I'll kick it off with my interpretation of a panel in the Valley of Fire near Las Vegas. I know it's not a Baja panel, but it's the only one I've really tried to decipher completely.

...Of course, it's only been a little over a week since I even heard of Martineau and I'm not quite done with his book, but here's my first shot at interpreting a panel (Click for much larger version of the image):



I think it says:

"Traveler(s) can't, and should be apprehensive about crossing a place that is deep and has high walls which is a long distance to the left, uphill, on a path above the traveler(s), which leads to a river of water. Traveler(s) can't go around this river. Traveler(s) can't, and should be apprehensive about going above to the trail above the river because it comes to a point that can't be passed. The trail above the river on the hill becomes rough. Traveler(s) can't travel across the canyon by the river. No crossing exists. A trail across the canyon would lead to nothing. This is a long way from the good journey in the other direction. The river can be avoided by traveling a short, good journey to the right"

Here is how I come to this interpretation:

1. Traveler(s) can't (outstretched arms)
2. And should be apprehensive (arms angled down and away)
3. To cross a place ("crossing" symbol is inside the "place" (rectangle) symbol)
4. That is deep and has high walls
5. A long distance (long horns) to the left
6. Uphill
7. On a path above the traveler(s)
8. That leads to a river
9. Of water.

10. Traveler(s) can't go around this river (outstretched arms).

11. Traveler(s) can't (outstretched arms)
12. And should be apprehensive about (arms angled down and away)
13. Going above
14. To the trail above
15. The river.
16. It comes to a point that can't be traveled (outstretched arms)

17. The trail above the river
18. On the hill
19. Becomes rough.

20. Traveler(s) can't (outstretched arms) travel (Notice that seven travelers are represented hand-to-hand with one crossing here just like #1 above)
21. Across the canyon
22. By the river
23. No crossing exists (the crossing symbol is empty).

24. A trail
21. Across the canyon
25. Would lead to nothing (symbol of an empty container).

26. This is a long way (long horns) from the good journey (open horns) in the other direction.

9. The river
27. Can be avoided (bypassed symbol)
28. By traveling a short (short horns), good journey (open horns) to the right

Things I haven't explained:

29. Vulture head shape?
30. Water symbols again?
31. Holding/Containing symbol
32. Looking symbol (two dots = two eyes)?
33. Missed symbol?
34. Pointing to the left symbol?
35. Pecked rectangle representing a place? With something pecked inside at the bottom?


Of course, I'm sure I've got a lot of things wrong, maybe even the whole story. But it's my fist try. Thoughts?

Quote: Originally posted by Osprey

Great job, great read Elbeau. It's important to note that your newspaper is Ute or Paiute about 600 years ago and the Baja Cave paintings oldest are 7500 years old, then a lot at 3500 years old, then more recent. I have never been convinced that walkdown tribes did the cave paintings so I don't read them like they were the same rock language.

The great mural and some other peninsular styles are distinct and were separated in space and time from the petroglyphs that were familiar to Martineau. Whether or not his interpretations can be applied to them might make a good test of his theory about diverse cultures being able to communicate effectively using a common subset of Indian sign language. If there are significant correlations then it might also help us expand our understanding of the antiquity of the sign language and writing system.

There are definite similarities between Great Mural paintings and Martineau's interpretations. For Example:

Upside-down human figures represent death in Martineau's book:



Single curved horns on human heads represent "became dead" in Martineau's book:



Downturned horns represent losing power in Martineau's book:



Quadropeds seem out-of-place in a fighting scene, but Martineau says they represent human journeys, which makes plenty of sense in a fighting scene:



Martineau's "taking flight for safety" symbol in Baja paintings:



Upturned arms representing burdensome things:



There are many other examples, but you get the point. I can't say that these aren't coincidences, but investigating them seems promising.

Quote: Originally posted by David K

Quote: Originally posted by wilderone   "The Rocks Begin to Speak" by Lavan Martineau After learning about this book here, I got this book from Alibris. OMG - it is fascinating. Not only learning about individual figures and their meaning, but interpretation of the panels and learning the ancestral puebloans' stories as told by them. The drawings are so precise in their meaning, and tell so much. Very enlightening to say the least. Thanks, Osprey, for mentioning the book here. Cindi, can you look at photos of Baja petro sites and provide meaning to them? The circles within circles mean water, yes? 'The squarecircle' and rockart circles (Montevideo)... and I wonder what this says??? (Petroglyph Park, east of San Quintin)...

Quote: Originally posted by bajagrouper

Does anyone see the profile face of a man in the second picture? Look at the right corner and look up about 2" of the picture, I see the bridge of a nose coming out of the rock,nostrils, a mouth and chin going back into the rock...

Mystery Solved!



With a chin like that it can only be the fossilized head of the mad titan Thanos

Quote: Originally posted by wilderone

The circles within circles mean holding in - of people, animals, water, etc. Symbols need to read in conjunction with the other markings as a whole, as well as where they are placed (e.g., above, below, incorporating a crack or hole on the rock) to derive full meaning. In the writings on the photo just above, there is a square that is divided by vertical and horizontal lines which is identical to a symbol in Martineau's book (pg. 140) - a different location also in Mexico. That square usually denotes a house or village; I think the division might mean rooms or families or similar. On the same rock above, in the foreground, largeish: there is an oval with various lines. elbeau - what do you think: I think it might mean a person leaving a place specifically going right to do so, and to enter the place one would descend into it from above (the little triangle near the left/top. On the same panel, there is the circle with a cross and dots - I think that means "here, and the same in all directions" with hills radiating from it, as if "here" is in a valley surrounded by mountains. And near the top with the wavy lines and vertical lines in between, the wavy lines is movement (like running water) - with a "ladder" in between, possibly a directive to "walk in the river bottom". ??? For an accurate message all symbols would need to be read altogether, and it would help if the reader knew more about the surrounding topography. I've only spent a few hours on this so far, so my initial analyses are guesses.

Quote: Originally posted by elbeau

I haven't been able to ascertain the exact orientation of that panel yet, but I'm traveling to Vegas for my brother's wedding next month and I plan on checking it out. I'll bet dollars to donuts that that panel is best viewed from the west.

Quote: Originally posted by wilderone

Elbeau - I've been studying your Valley of Fire panel. How about : the three quadrupeds in 28 they show a skinny one with a flat back (flatter terrain), next a bowl shaped one (canyon), then a squared larger one (steep walls), each progressing in front of the other. As if "continue in this direction, but you'll be descending into a canyon and even deeper - don't get too low into the canyon because (5 and 6) you won't be able to continue and you'll have to backtrack to get out. Re: 31, 32 - "you're heading for, and look for, this place." 30 may represent moqui steps to a cave for shelter en route. I think the whole panel is written in relation to the top and bottom of the topography. Also, at the top with the vulture head (24), that could be a lookout point, its location in relation to the 24 arc.

I think your interpretation of 30, 31, and 32 are excellent!

I think the topography is best represented by the curved line in the upper-left. It strongly matches the canyons and rivers to the south:



The seven symbols attempting to cross that line seem to me to be correlated with the seven human figures represented by 1 & 2.

Now that I'm looking at the overlay, the "lookout point" might line up well to the Las Vegas wash, where there are extensive wetlands. It would be a very habitable area.

Let's have some fun. I've got a challenge for my fellow nomads.

I've applied Martineau's interpretations to another Valley of Fire panel. I think the story becomes pretty clear based on the interpretations, but instead of telling you the story, I'd like to post the interpretations of the individual elements to see if the story you come up with based on those interpretations is the same story that I come up with. I'll post my version in a day or so and we'll see how it compares.

The panel is called "Atlatl Rock" and is located at 36.422668, -114.549712 . You have to face northwest to see it. (These are important hints. Compare the directions in the panel to the geography of the area)

Here is the panel (click for larger version):



Another detailed view of the panel can be found at this link.

Here is what I think each element represents based on Martineau's book:

1. This figure:
* Represents people.
* Represents a journey (because it's a quadruped).
* Represents directionality (direction quadruped is facing).
* Represents an unobstructed journey (two horns parallel but not touching).
* Represents a journey through a low place (bowl shape of quadruped's body), perhaps a valley.
* Is angled with flexed legs, perhaps sitting, squatting, or rearing. This positon might indicate an enemy.

2. This figure:
* Is an atlatl thrower.
* Has a round portion that appears to be the atlatl's finger loops. This clarifies the fact that the line is an atlatl thrower. While we cannot rule out that the round portion has additional meaning(s), the fact that the round portion is necessary for clarity means that we should not assume that it has additional meaning(s) without further evidence.

3. This figure:
* Is a fletched atlatl dart.
* Is not straight. The fletched end is angled to represent "distance".

4. This figure:
* Represents people.
* Represents a journey (because it's a quadruped).
* Represents directionality (direction quadruped is facing).
* Represents a journey through a low place, perhaps a valley (shape of body).
* Is small and has short limbs and horns, perhaps indicating a short journey.
* Appears to have two semi-open horns, but a closer examination shows that the upper one is scratched, not pecked, and appears to have less varnish. It was probably done by some well-intentioned person who thought the original author did a poor job. In reality, adding the second horn changes its meaning substantially. The original single closed horn represents an obstructed journey.
* Seems associated with #5.

5. This figure:
* Has arms.
* Has legs.
* Does not have a head.
* Is shaped very similarly to the "conflict" symbol (two triangular arrowheads facing each other).
* Has a line above it, probably an atlatl or other weapon, but since there is nothing about the line that distinctly represents a weapon, we should not exclude the possibility that the line might represent "land" instead.
* Seems associated with #4 and #74. These three symbols together could mean that "people journeyed (#4) to the general area of this pictograph panel (#74) for a conflict (#5)".

6. This figure:
* Represents a place (rectangle).
* Represents many (thickly-pecked, but not solid).
* Probably indicates many people at an inhabited place.
* Is connected by #7 to #8.
* Might be associated with #74.
* Might have an extremely-lightly pecked, angled rectangle to its lower-left that is in very close proximity to #74. This second rectangle is so lightly pecked that it is hard to tell if it was intended to be part of the panel.
* If #6 represents the people in #8 and if the second rectangle is not accidental, its proximity to #74 might lend itself to the interpretation: "the general area of this pictograph panel (#74) was very sparsely inhabited (sparcely-pecked rectangle) but was associated with a place that was inhabited by many people (thickly-pecked rectangle)".
* If #6 represents the people who journeyed for conflict (#4 & #5), then an alternative interpretation might be that "a large number of people (thickly-pecked rectangle) who journeyed for conflict (#4 & #5) came to the general area of this panel (#74) or to a more inhabited place nearby".

7. This figures:
* Connect #6 to #8.
* Are slightly curved, with the middles higher than the ends.
* Probably represent two fingers pointing, but it seems unclear whether they are pointing to the right or to the left.

8. This figure:
* Represents a place (rectangle shape)
* Has a curved upper-right corner, indicating "turned aside".
* Might mean that "the people in the place represented by #8 fled (turned aside) when they saw (#7 pointing left) a large number of people (#6) who had journeyed (#4) to a nearby place (#74 & #6) prepared for conflict (#5)".

9. This figure:
* Represents something empty, or something that became empty.
* Might be a description of people emptying #8.
* Is connected via #13 to #11.
* Might be being pointed to by #17.

10. This figure:
* Has straight arms raised to an upward angle.
* Is barefoot, indicating vulnerability.
* Has triangular-shaped feet and hands. This may be significant or it may be accidental. If it is significant then it probably represents injuries or pain.
* Only has three fingers in its hands and three toes on its feet.
* Is connected via #12 to the place that "turned aside". #12 seems to connect to #10's hand, which may or may not be significant or intentional.
* Probably represents the people who fled from #8.
* Is standing above one of the rivers represented in #29.
* Might be being threatened by #14.
* Is associated by proximity to #11.

11. This figure:
* Is associated by proximity to #10.
* Has straight arms raised to an upward angle like #10, but more outward.
* Has one leg that is missing, mangled, or flexed backwards. There may be some rock incorporation involved here, with the leg failing to cross the crack in the rock, perhaps indicating that injury occurred while crossing the rivers (#68 & #29) or the hill (#28) associated with the path (#68) and the rivers (#29).
* Is smaller than #10.
* Has extremities that could be triangular, but which are significantly less triangular than #10. This may or may not be significant.
* Only has three digits on each extremity.
* Is standing above both rivers represented in #29.
* Is in close proximity to #68.
* Is connected via #13 to #9.
* This figure may be saying that "many (three digits) people fled (#9). Their path (#68) involved the two rivers (#29)".
* If #10 represents the same people as #11 then it might be saying that "the inhabitants of a place (#8, a place), who were many (3 digits of #10 & 11) fled (#8, turning aside). The path of their flight (#68) involved two rivers (#29). They were vulnerable (bare feet of #10 and #11). They were distressed and/or injured (missing leg of #11 & triangular shapes of hands and feet of #10 & #11)."
* Another possibility is that #10 represents the attackers and #11 represents those that fled. This interpretation might be something like "many people (#6) who were intent on conflict (#5) chased (#12) people out (#9) of an inhabited place (#8 turned aside from place) along a path (#68) involving two rivers (#29) to a hill (#28). Both parties were numerous (plurality represented by 3 digits on hands and feet of #10 & #11. Also light pecking of #12 & #13). The attackers were more numerous than those that fled (#10 larger than #11). Those that fled were injured (#11 missing leg) as they crossed the rivers (#11 rock incorporation).

12. This line:
* Connects the "turning aside" portion of #8 to one hand of #10.
* Crosses #16, which may or may not be significant. If #16 represents the path across the rivers then it is significant that #12 crosses it.
* Is lightly pecked, representing many.

13. This line:
* Connects #9 to the head of #11.
* Crosses #16, which may or may not be significant. If #16 represents the path across the rivers then it is significant that #13 crosses it.
* Is lightly pecked, representing many.

14. This figure:
* Is generally thick, representing something bad.
* Has a bulge which may represent atlatl finger loops or dart fletching.
* Seems associated with #15 via a filled-in circle (holding symbol?).
* Might be intentionally curved at the top, meaning a long distance.
* Might have an arrowhead (triangular) tip.
* Is pointed at an angle downward and to the left towards one of two pecked dots (eyes) and towards #11.

15. This figure:
* Has a diamond-shaped center, representing peace or the desire to end the conflict.
* Incorporates another diamond shape to the right. This diamond shape has a line pointing to it. If you keep following the path of that line you will notice a lightly-pecked zig-zag (#72) connecting it to #9 and/or #17. It crosses #16, which may or may not be significant. If #16 represents the path across the rivers then it is significant that the line crosses it. This might indicate that people represented by figure #15 were suing for peace as they fled across the river. Alternatively, it may mean that the people who attacked #9 eventually sued for peace in relation to the bloodshed of #27.
* Incorporates a diamond, circle, or other shape to the left. This shape may represent "holding" or "grasping" #14.
* Has squiggly lines below touching it. This is probably one line representing a path, but it could be two lines representing weak legs. The longer stretches across #27 and seems to very intentionally reach #22. It's possible that this line is a duplication (clarification) of the path represented by #44, #45, and #46. More likely, this might represent the path of a bad journey (#22) that involved bloodshed (#27).

16. This figure:
* Looks like a ladder, but probably isn't one.
* The fact that the space between the sides isn't open probably represents that something isn't good. Alternatively, this may represent a succession of places (rectangles) along a path.
* Is crossed by #12, #13, and the zig-zag line that connects #15 to #9 and/or #17.
* Seems closely associated with #8, #9, #15, #17, #27, and #22.
* Tends to get crossed by the party or parties that are represented crossing the river in other places (See #10, #11, #15, #20, #21, #68, etc.).
* Probably represents the bad path across two rivers.

17. This figure:
* Is pentagon-shaped with three square sides and a point beneath. This shape might represent a place (rectangle) or might represent a canyon (pointed bottom).
* Is associated with a river (#18).
* Seems very associated to #9.
* Might be associated with #16.
* Has a foot or hand print inside of it. Judging by the fact that no thumb is represented (first digit is not shorter), this seems like a foot print, but judging by the length of the digits and the fact that the second digit seems to have a line pointed to or away from it, it seems like a hand print. Hard to distinguish. If it's a foot print, then it is bare and represents "vulnerable". Overall, #17 might be saying that "people fled (finger/toe pointing to #9) a vulnerable (bare foot) place (outline, possibly a canyon) by a river (#18)". A different interpretation might be that "people in a place (#17 outline) down-river (#18 below the confluence of #59 & #60) were hostile towards (pointed finger/toe) a place where people fled (#9)."

18. This figure:
* Represents a river.
* Results from the confluence of two other rivers upstream.
* Is associated with #17.

19. This figured:
* Is bare, meaning vulnerable.
* Is angled, meaning an ending.
* Interpretations might be that "the end of being vulnerable", or "something ended in vulnerability", or "something vulnerable came to an end".

20. This figure:
* Is a path across two rivers (#59 & #60) that converge into one river (#18).
* Is associated with #23.
* Might be associated with #19. It points towards #19, but is not in proximity to #19.
* Is associated with #21, "crossing", meaning crossing the rivers.
* Is probably associated with #25.

21. This figure:
* Represents "crossing". The fact that the outline has a crossing symbol in it (as opposed to being empty) means the crossing place was good or means the crossing was successful.
* This symbol clarifies that the crossing of the rivers in #20 was completed.
* Probably associated with #22, #23, #24, #59, and #60.
* This crossing was bad (association with #24).
* Might be associated with #25 and #26.
* Might represent the same crossing as lines #12, #13, #20, #68, and #72.

22. This figure:
* Seems to represent one of three parts of a journey (#22, #23, & #24)
* Represents people on a journey (quadruped).
* Represents directionality (direction quadruped is facing).
* Represents a bad journey (thickly drawn).
* Represents a bad journey (shape of body).
* Represents a bad journey (horns not open).

23. This figure:
* Seems to represent one of three parts of a journey (#22, #23, & #24)
* Represents people on a journey (quadruped).
* Represents directionality (direction quadruped is facing).
* Represents a bad journey (thickly drawn).
* Represents a fast journey (shape of body).
* Represents a journey that was not blocked (open horns).
* Seems associated with the path (#20).
* Has a curved line (#70) associated with its mouth (yelling? crying? threatening?).

24. This figure:
* Seems to represent one of three parts of a journey (#22, #23, & #24)
* Represents people on a journey (quadruped).
* Represents directionality (direction quadruped is facing).
* Represents a bad journey (thickly drawn).
* Represents a bad journey (shape of body).
* Represents a journey that was not blocked (open horns).
* Seems to represent the part of the journey most closely associated with the crossing (#21). The fact that the horns are open is a little perplexing. It seems like the rivers would slow the journey down, but the path that crosses the rivers might not have been considered difficult, so the journey wouldn't be represented by closed horns, meaning "blocked".

25. This figure:
* Has three dots. The fact that there are three could represent plurality or "many".
* The dots have lines going away from them, meaning "departing".
* The lines from the dots connect to a long horizontal line, probably representing a path.
* The path becomes bad (#26), or alternatively, the trail involves water (#26 speckled).

26. This figure:
* Is associated with the trail in #25.
* Seems to indicate rough (shape) or wet (speckled).

27. This figure:
* Represents blood flowing in conjunction with two rivers.
* Might be closely associated to a hill (#68) by the rivers.
* Is crossed by the path associated with #15.
* Interpretation might be that "there was bloodshed as people who were suing for peace (#15 diamond-shape) crossed (#72, wet path) two rivers near a hill (#68).

28. This figure:
* Represents a hill.
* Is near two rivers (#29).
* Was led to by a path (#68).
* Was associated with bloodshed (#27).

29. This figure:
* Represents two rivers that merge into one river.
* Is associated with people (#10 and #11).
* Is associated with a hill (#28).
* Is associated with a path (#68).
* Leads to a forested area downstream (#33, #34, & #36).
* Is associated with a point of reference (#67, meaning "here").

30. This figure:
* Represents the end of something (angled).
* Represents something bad (oval shape with pointed ends).
* Represents something being surrounded or closed in upon (lines radiating inward)
* Seems to have something drawn inside of it, but it's hard to make sense of what it is.
* Seems associated with a bad journey (#22).
* Seems associated with losing power (#32, downward-turned horns).
* Seems associated with being wounded (#32, being carried away by quadruped).
* Seems associated with forested area downstream (#33).
* Might be associated with a journey that ended with fighting (#31, triangular body, angled indicating ending).

31. This figure:
* Represents people on a journey (quadruped).
* Represents directionality.
* Represents the end of the journey (angled position).
* Might be associated with fighting (triangular body).

32. This figure:
* Is a human figure riding a quadruped, representing wounded people being carried away by other people.
* The quadruped represents people.
* The quadruped represents a journey.
* The quadruped represents directionality.
* The wounded people have "lost power" (downturned horns), which is why they need to be carried away by others.
* Has something associated with the quadruped's mouth (arrowhead?).

33. This figure:
* Looks like a plant.
* Is clarified by #36, the symbol for wood.
* The fact that the number three is represented at the end of each branch might indicate plurality of "many".
* Is associated with #34 and #36.
* Seems associated with #32.

34. This figure:
* Looks like a plant.
* Is clarified by #36, the symbol for wood.
* The fact that the number three is represented at the end of each branch might indicate plurality or "many".
* Is associated with #33 and #36.
* Seems associated with #32.
* Is associated with or modified by something (#35).

35. This figure:
* Is difficult to discern.
* Might be a "close by" symbol.
* Might be a "closed" symbol.
* Doesn't look exactly like "close by" or "closed" so it probably indicates something else.

36. This figure:
* Is the symbol for wood.
* Clarifies that #34 and #35 represent plants or trees, probably a forest.

37. This figure:
* Is the symbol for "distant".
* Seems associated with #38 and #43.

38. This figure:
* Represents something empty or something becoming empty.
* Is associated with #31, #32, #37, #39, and #43.

39. This figure:
* Is an atlatl.
* Has finger loops.
* Has an atlatl dart in it.
* Represents something bad (thickly-drawn).
* Is associated with bad journeys (#22 & #23), seeing something (#69), strong vocalizations (#70), conflict (#43), the end of a journey (#31), the emptying of something (#38), and vulnerable (#42) people not fleeing (#40, "not turning aside" symbols) or not being able to flee.

40. This figure:
* Is a quadruped viewed from above. The right angles at the top of the figure represent its horns, the right angles in the middle are its forelegs, the right angles at its base are its hind legs, the extension of its body between its hind legs is its tail.
* Represents people.
* Represents a journey.
* Represents direction. By facing up it means forward from this panel as opposed to left, right, or backward.
* Is connected to an atlatl (#39).
* Has all horns and legs in the "not turning away" position.
* Is somewhat thickly drawn, representing bad. This might mean that not turning away was a bad choice, or alternatively it could mean that they were forced to not turn away, or in other words, they were unable to flee.
* Probably means that "the people pressed forward in battle and were unwilling or unable to turn away".

41. This figure:
* Shows an association between #40 and #39.

42. This figure:
* Is a bare foot (no moccasin).
* Represents the vulnerability of #40.

43. This figure:
* Has arms.
* Has legs.
* Does not have a head.
* Is shaped very similarly to the "conflict" symbol (two triangular arrowheads facing each other).
* Has a line above it, probably an atlatl or other weapon, but since there is nothing about the line that distinctly represents a weapon, we should not exclude the possibility that the line might represent "land" instead.
* Is very similar to #5.
* This figure probably does not represent the same people as #5 the direction of travel to the battle (#45) is opposite to the journey (#4) of the people represented by #5.
* Might represent the people who fled (#8 & #9) making a counter-attack, but probably represents a third group of people who also engaged in the conflict.

* Is associated with #37, #38, #39, #40, #41, and #42.
* Is connected to the "swift" symbol/path (#44).

44. This figure:
* Represents something swift.
* Is incorporated into a path.
* Connects #43 to the mouth of #45.
* Probably represents a swift path for a journey (#45).

#45. This figure:
* Represents people.
* Represents a journey (because it's a quadruped).
* Represents a bad journey (shape of body).
* Represents directionality.
* Has its legs close together as if standing still.
* Has short, closed horns representing bad.
* Has #44 coming out of its mouth.
* Has #46 coming out of its backside.
* Probably represents several aspects of a journey along the path represented by #44 and #46.

46. This figure:
* Represents a path.
* Is associated with a journey (#45).
* Connects to #47, #48, and #49.

47. This figure:
* Might represent land, but is more likely part #48, forming the "cut off" symbol.
* Is connected to #46.
* Is the place that the people represented in #43 embarked from.
* Probably means that the people represented in #43 were cut off from returning to this place. In other words, their journey was a one-way journey.
* Seems associated with #50.

48. This figure:
* Helps #47 form the "cut off" symbol.
* Might represent the Grand Canyon or the lower entrance to the canyon. The location and shape of the path in relation to the location and orientation of the pictograph panel seems to agree with this interpretation.
* Is further described by #49.

49. This figure:
* Is a bare foot (no moccasin).
* Represents the vulnerability of #48.
* Is upside down. This may simply be in relation to the path from the other direction, but it could also mean death or death of the foot. If #43 refers to the same group as #11 then this might indicate the same leg or foot injury depicted in #11, however the association of #43 and #11 seems contradicted by the shape of the path, so these are probably describing different people.

50. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.

51. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.
* Might post-date the original panel.

52. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.
* Might post-date the original panel.

53. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.
* Might post-date the original panel.

54. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.
* Might post-date the original panel.

55. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.
* Might post-date the original panel.

56. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.
* Might post-date the original panel.

57. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.
* Might post-date the original panel.

58. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.
* Might post-date the original panel.

59. This figure:
* Represents one of two rivers that converge into one.
* Is crossed by #20.
* Is associated with a completed crossing (#21).

60. This figure:
* Represents one of two rivers that converge into one.
* Is crossed by #20.
* Is associated with a completed crossing (#21).

61. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.

62. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.

63. This figure:
* Is a bare foot (no moccasin).
* Represents vulnerability.

64. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.

65. This figure:
* Represents people.
* Represents a journey.
* Represents directionality (direction quadruped is facing).
* Represents a bad journey (thickly drawn).
* Represents a fast journey (shape of body).
* Represents a journey that was not blocked (open horns).

66. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.

67. This figure:
* Is a point of reference.
* Means "here", or in other words, the location of this pictograph panel in relation to other elements.

68. This figure:
* Is a path between #11 and #28.
* Is in close proximity to the rivers (#29).

69. This figure:
* Represents looking or seeing.

70. This figure:
* Is coming out of the mouth of a quadruped (#23).
* Probably represents something spoken by people on a journey, or possibly the panting of people who are winded by the fast journey (#23).
* Might mean crying, yelling, threatening, but not normal talking.

71. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.
* Might post-date the original panel.

72. This figure:
* Is zig-zaged.
* Crosses #16.
* Is lightly-pecked, which might represent water or might represent sparceness.
* Connects the line coming from right diamond of #15 to #9 and/or #17.

73. This figure:
* Is difficult to identify.
* Might post-date the original panel.

Another post that mentioned the Montevideo rock art site prompted me to remember this discussion that we had several months ago. I want to give it a bump and add a few more comments.

I was in Las Vegas in April of this year and while I was there I took time to visit the Valley of Fire, including both of the rock art panels that I offered interpretations for in this thread.

The second panel (the one I numbered from 1 to 73 above) turned out to be just a part of a MUCH larger panel. Right now that panel is one of the most popular ones to view in the Valley of Fire and a nice staircase and viewing platform have been built right up to the panel, but the positioning of the platform makes it natural for people to see and photograph the part of the panel that you see in my post above, but when you're there you'll find that there is a LOT more to it than just that part that people tend to photograph.

The viewing platform actually sits in the way of a lot of the panel and obstructs the view enough that I had to take a lot of photos from a lot of angles to try to capture it all. I haven't taken time to piece those photos together yet, nor have I tried to interpret the panel as a whole so I'll refrain from elaborating on it before I do more work.

I do have some more comments about the first Valley of Fire panel that I attempted to interpret in this thread. Here it is again just so it's clear which panel I'm referring to:



And here is an updated interpretation of the panel based on my earlier comments combined with my own observations at the site as well as replies from Wilderone in this thread (Wilderone: please correct me if I misinterpreted your comments):

"Traveler(s) can't, and should be apprehensive about crossing a place that is deep and has high walls which is a long distance to the left, uphill, on a path above the traveler(s), which leads to a river of water (this is referring to trying to cross the Colorado River near where Hoover Dam is now located). Traveler(s) can't go around this river. Traveler(s) can't, and should be apprehensive about going above to the trail above the river because it comes to a point that can't be passed. The trail above the river on the hill becomes rough. Traveler(s) can't travel across the canyon by the river. No crossing exists. A trail across the canyon would lead to nothing. This is a long way from the good journey in the other direction. The river can be avoided by traveling a short journey on an open trail over rough terrain to the right. Continue in this direction, but you'll be descending into a canyon and even deeper - don't get too low into the canyon because you won't be able to continue and you'll have to backtrack to get out. You're heading for, and look for, a certain place (Moapa Valley which is a good settlement and a good way to get across the tributaries to the Colorado River). The path leads to shelter along this route."

(For a point-by-point description of this interpretation, see the earlier discussion in this thread)

After visiting the site I still think that the interpretation we discussed earlier this year is largely correct. In addition, when I visited the site I saw that the interpretation of the right-facing quadrupeds by Wilderone was fantastically accurate:

"Continue in this direction, but you'll be descending into a canyon and even deeper - don't get too low into the canyon because you won't be able to continue and you'll have to backtrack to get out. "

What caught me by surprise though was that I was wrong when I said:

Quote: Originally posted by elbeau

...I haven't been able to ascertain the exact orientation of that panel yet, but I'm traveling to Vegas for my brother's wedding next month and I plan on checking it out. I'll bet dollars to donuts that that panel is best viewed best viewed from the east looking west.

After visiting the panel I can say that it was clearly meant to be viewed from the west looking east. This caught me by complete surprise...but on the other hand, my original interpretation of the symbols (before comparing it to the birds-eye-view in Google Earth) was still correct. When viewing the panel from the west looking east, the path to the "bad crossing" is still "a long distance to the left" and the "easier journey" leading to Moapa Valley is still "to the right" like I originally interpreted it.

The mistake I made happened after I interpreted what was actually written in the panel and compared it with Google Earth. Doing so validated one aspect of my interpretation (it showed that the line shown as #21 was a highly-accurate trace of the path of the Colorado River), but it also led me to think that the quadruped symbols could be interpreted as birds-eye directions rather than pathway directions.

In other words, if a person viewing the panel traveled "left" from there, they would not immediately be traveling in a compass line towards the crossing. Instead, traveling "left" simply puts them on the correct trail, which starts by going northward from the panel following the course of the wash where the panel is located, then it follows a slow, but general curve to the left (represented by #24 in the photo) to the "bad crossing" point.

The course of this path matches the rest of the panel very well and shows me that I need to be careful about not letting my own paradigms regarding directions cloud my judgement about what is written in these panels.

Here's an intriguing lesson from this panel that may be more broadly applicable: Quadrupeds do NOT represent compass directions, and they don't even point towards an anticipated destination. They ONLY represent the direction of travel along the path from the viewpoint of a person reading the panel. In other words, they are not "map" indicators. They are telling someone to go right, left, forward, or backward --FROM THAT SPOT-- and do NOT indicate the direction of any final destination in respect to the panel.

On the other hand, the curved line in #21 matches the course of the Colorado River far too accurately for me to think it's just a coincidence:



^Note in that image the big loop the river takes to the left and back. That can't be seen in Google Earth because Lake Mead now covers it, but I looked into it and found a map showing that the Colorado River actually followed that exact path before Hoover Dam was built.

This means that although the quadrupeds don't represent map-like directions, the concept of a birds-eye map did exist in the writing system. It just shouldn't be confused with the "path" directions indicated by quadrupeds.

In other words, if my interpretation of this panel can be applied more broadly (which I really don't know yet), then it means that when an author wanted to indicate birds-eye directions, they traced lines (like #'s 21 and 24) but when they wanted to indicate "relative" directions like "left", "right", "forward", or "backward" that specifically related to trails or journeys, they used quadrupeds.

I also want to point out another change that I made to the interpretation. In the interpretation I gave above in this reply today, I replaced the phrase "a short, good journey to the right" with the phrase "a short journey on an open trail over rough terrain to the right". There are two reasons I made this change. First, the quadrupeds representing the various parts of this journey are VERY thickly pecked, indicating rough terrain. Second, when you visit the site you will see exactly why the author described the trail that way. The journey on the path to the right of the panel starts by going is through some fantastically beautiful rock formations. The wash you travel along is sometimes easy to traverse, but sometimes it's hard. Also, like I mentioned before, Wilderone was right when he noticed the warning the author made about going too far down the canyon on the journey to the right. Doing so would take you deep into large, terribly winding rock formations and if you went that way you would end up needing to backtrack just like Wilderone said in order to get to Moapa Valley. The short, rougher path is the right way to go rather than descending all the way down the easy-to-travel sand bed of the wash into the rock formations.

To sum up, the panel warns of a bad journey to nowhere if you take the high-road to the left. It tells you that a good place can be found by going to your right, but it warns you not to descend deep into the winding rock-formations as you go to the right. Instead, stick to the open trail that leads over rough terrain in order to reach Moapa Valley.

Quote: Originally posted by Osprey

Very important to keep your timeline clear and clean. There is very strong evidence that some of the Nevada/Arizona art you worked on here was carved by Utes, Paiutes, Shivwits and others as late as when John Wesley Powell came floating down the river. See his character as a stick figure in the "Rocks" book showing a cowboy hat and one arm. How's that for a time signal.

Quote: Originally posted by David K

...lost mission gold or not

Quote: Originally posted by elbeau

Another post that mentioned the Montevideo rock art site prompted me to remember this discussion that we had several months ago. I want to give it a bump and add a few more comments. I was in Las Vegas in April of this year and while I was there I took time to visit the Valley of Fire, including both of the rock art panels that I offered interpretations for in this thread. The second panel (the one I numbered from 1 to 73 above) turned out to be just a part of a MUCH larger panel. Right now that panel is one of the most popular ones to view in the Valley of Fire and a nice staircase and viewing platform have been built right up to the panel, but the positioning of the platform makes it natural for people to see and photograph the part of the panel that you see in my post above, but when you're there you'll find that there is a LOT more to it than just that part that people tend to photograph. The viewing platform actually sits in the way of a lot of the panel and obstructs the view enough that I had to take a lot of photos from a lot of angles to try to capture it all. I haven't taken time to piece those photos together yet, nor have I tried to interpret the panel as a whole so I'll refrain from elaborating on it before I do more work. I do have some more comments about the first Valley of Fire panel that I attempted to interpret in this thread. Here it is again just so it's clear which panel I'm referring to: And here is an updated interpretation of the panel based on my earlier comments combined with my own observations at the site as well as replies from Wilderone in this thread (Wilderone: please correct me if I misinterpreted your comments): "Traveler(s) can't, and should be apprehensive about crossing a place that is deep and has high walls which is a long distance to the left, uphill, on a path above the traveler(s), which leads to a river of water (this is referring to trying to cross the Colorado River near where Hoover Dam is now located). Traveler(s) can't go around this river. Traveler(s) can't, and should be apprehensive about going above to the trail above the river because it comes to a point that can't be passed. The trail above the river on the hill becomes rough. Traveler(s) can't travel across the canyon by the river. No crossing exists. A trail across the canyon would lead to nothing. This is a long way from the good journey in the other direction. The river can be avoided by traveling a short journey on an open trail over rough terrain to the right. Continue in this direction, but you'll be descending into a canyon and even deeper - don't get too low into the canyon because you won't be able to continue and you'll have to backtrack to get out. You're heading for, and look for, a certain place (Moapa Valley which is a good settlement and a good way to get across the tributaries to the Colorado River). The path leads to shelter along this route." (For a point-by-point description of this interpretation, see the earlier discussion in this thread) After visiting the site I still think that the interpretation we discussed earlier this year is largely correct. In addition, when I visited the site I saw that the interpretation of the right-facing quadrupeds by Wilderone was fantastically accurate: "Continue in this direction, but you'll be descending into a canyon and even deeper - don't get too low into the canyon because you won't be able to continue and you'll have to backtrack to get out. " What caught me by surprise though was that I was wrong when I said: Quote: Originally posted by elbeau   ...I haven't been able to ascertain the exact orientation of that panel yet, but I'm traveling to Vegas for my brother's wedding next month and I plan on checking it out. I'll bet dollars to donuts that that panel is best viewed best viewed from the east looking west. After visiting the panel I can say that it was clearly meant to be viewed from the west looking east. This caught me by complete surprise...but on the other hand, my original interpretation of the symbols (before comparing it to the birds-eye-view in Google Earth) was still correct. When viewing the panel from the west looking east, the path to the "bad crossing" is still "a long distance to the left" and the "easier journey" leading to Moapa Valley is still "to the right" like I originally interpreted it. The mistake I made happened after I interpreted what was actually written in the panel and compared it with Google Earth. Doing so validated one aspect of my interpretation (it showed that the line shown as #21 was a highly-accurate trace of the path of the Colorado River), but it also led me to think that the quadruped symbols could be interpreted as birds-eye directions rather than pathway directions. In other words, if a person viewing the panel traveled "left" from there, they would not immediately be traveling in a compass line towards the crossing. Instead, traveling "left" simply puts them on the correct trail, which starts by going northward from the panel following the course of the wash where the panel is located, then it follows a slow, but general curve to the left (represented by #24 in the photo) to the "bad crossing" point. The course of this path matches the rest of the panel very well and shows me that I need to be careful about not letting my own paradigms regarding directions cloud my judgement about what is written in these panels. Here's an intriguing lesson from this panel that may be more broadly applicable: Quadrupeds do NOT represent compass directions, and they don't even point towards an anticipated destination. They ONLY represent the direction of travel along the path from the viewpoint of a person reading the panel. In other words, they are not "map" indicators. They are telling someone to go right, left, forward, or backward --FROM THAT SPOT-- and do NOT indicate the direction of any final destination in respect to the panel. On the other hand, the curved line in #21 matches the course of the Colorado River far too accurately for me to think it's just a coincidence: ^Note in that image the big loop the river takes to the left and back. That can't be seen in Google Earth because Lake Mead now covers it, but I looked into it and found a map showing that the Colorado River actually followed that exact path before Hoover Dam was built. This means that although the quadrupeds don't represent map-like directions, the concept of a birds-eye map did exist in the writing system. It just shouldn't be confused with the "path" directions indicated by quadrupeds. In other words, if my interpretation of this panel can be applied more broadly (which I really don't know yet), then it means that when an author wanted to indicate birds-eye directions, they traced lines (like #'s 21 and 24) but when they wanted to indicate "relative" directions like "left", "right", "forward", or "backward" that specifically related to trails or journeys, they used quadrupeds. I also want to point out another change that I made to the interpretation. In the interpretation I gave above in this reply today, I replaced the phrase "a short, good journey to the right" with the phrase "a short journey on an open trail over rough terrain to the right". There are two reasons I made this change. First, the quadrupeds representing the various parts of this journey are VERY thickly pecked, indicating rough terrain. Second, when you visit the site you will see exactly why the author described the trail that way. The journey on the path to the right of the panel starts by going is through some fantastically beautiful rock formations. The wash you travel along is sometimes easy to traverse, but sometimes it's hard. Also, like I mentioned before, Wilderone was right when he noticed the warning the author made about going too far down the canyon on the journey to the right. Doing so would take you deep into large, terribly winding rock formations and if you went that way you would end up needing to backtrack just like Wilderone said in order to get to Moapa Valley. The short, rougher path is the right way to go rather than descending all the way down the easy-to-travel sand bed of the wash into the rock formations. To sum up, the panel warns of a bad journey to nowhere if you take the high-road to the left. It tells you that a good place can be found by going to your right, but it warns you not to descend deep into the winding rock-formations as you go to the right. Instead, stick to the open trail that leads over rough terrain in order to reach Moapa Valley.

Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666

Perhaps you are trying to attach too much meaning to things that are just doodles, eh?